Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
071393 CC Agenda
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER - 28816 PUJOL STREET JULY 13, 1993 - 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER: Invocation Flag Salute ROLL CALL: PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS PUBLIC FORUM At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 PM 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 PM III $ • c 1=-TT-1Mn-7Mff-1W1C;q Mayor J. Sal Mulioz presiding Pastor Harris Mullen, Seventh Day Adventist Councilmember Stone Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Mufioz Special Achievement Award - Jayson Ashton This is a portion of the City Council meeting unique to the City of Temecula. At the meeting held on the second Tuesday of each month, the City Council will devote a period of time (not to exceed 30 minutes) for the purpose of providing the public with an opportunity to discuss topics of interest with the Council. The members of the City Council will respond to questions and may give direction to City staff. The Council is prohibited, by the provisions of the Brown Act, from taking any official action on any matter which is not on the agenda. If you desire to speak on any matter which is = listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. ApwWaM71393 07107lY3 For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. 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. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 —Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of June 8, 1993; 2.2 Approve the minutes of June 15, 1993; 2.3 Approve the minutes of July 1, 1993. 3 Resolution Approvina List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 City Treasurer's Report RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of May 31, 1993. Agwidal071993 2 07p7/Y7 i c • • 1 : • 1 1 • l l • • • • • 1 ' 11 • RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF -THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FY 1993-94 • . 1- _•: :11:1I • �•:1••1:• RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT AND IMPOSITION OF A FEE Solicitation of •1 •1 Bids for1:Storm Drain Imorovements •1 Jeffers Avenue at I1 1= Road • • RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the construction plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for storm drain improvements on Jefferson Avenue at Winchester Road. (PW93- 01) 8 Solicitation of Construction Bids for P ujol Street and First St Street Widening Project (PW92-09) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the construction plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for Project No. PW92-09, Pujol St. and First St. Street Widening Ap•ndaM71399 07/07N3 Solicitation of • •n Bids for• : • • - ll = on • i side of Rancho Vista Road between Mira Lomaand the CommunityRecreation RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve the construction plans and specification and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for sidewalk improvements on the south side of Rancho Vista Road between Mira Loma Drive and the Community Recreation Center (PW92- 12). • . iw7rMl T.-TT"T"TON-1 RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING STATE -LOCAL ENTITY MASTER AGREEMENT NO. SLTPP-5459, BETWEEN THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ESTABLISH STATE -LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FUNDING PROVISIONS 11 Program Supplement No 001 to State -Local Entity Master Agreement No SLTPP 5459 - Ynez Road Widening Project. (PW92-05) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 001 TO STATE -LOCAL ENTITY MASTER AGREEMENT NO. SLTPP-5459 BETWEEN THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ESTABLISH FUNDING FOR THE STREET WIDENING ON YNEZ ROAD FROM SOUTH OF ROUTE 79N TO RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD 07107A13 12 Completion and Acceptance of •nal Construction at Winchester Road and Margarita Road. Pro*ect No. PW92-08 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Accept the Traffic Signal Construction at Winchester Road and Margarita Road, Project No. PW92-08, as complete and direct the City Clerk to: • File the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a six (6) month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 13 Budoet Amendments for Graffiti and Street Stenciling Program RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve the budget amendments as outlined in the staff report. 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 hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. Aa•rxta*7 19•i B 071071•3 • • • i•Kaiis • _ • • , • • •_ _ ••7 •i • 1- • • • • r • • • : - • • • • is • • r • i (Continued from the meeting of May 25, 1993) RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONE NO.22 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM R-A- 5 TO R-A-2% FOR PORTIONS OF LOTS 8, 9, 12, 13, 17, 18, 26, 27 AND 28 AND A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-A-2% TO R-A-5 FOR A PORTION OF LOTS 4 AND 10 FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 26941, AND TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 26941, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A 133 ACRE PARCEL INTO 28 CUSTOM SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD AND 1800 FEET WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD 15 Plot Plan No.-243 Amendment No 4 (Wal-Mart): Environmental Impact Report No 340 (Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Report): Planning Application No PA93 0043 (Chanae of Zone): and Tentative Parcel Man No 27323 Amendment No 4 Located at the Southeast Corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.340 WITH ADDENDUM, ADOPTION OF THE STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOW 910-130-046, 047; 921-090- 001, 002, 003, 004, 005 AND 006 A"w•ro71393 e o7ro7na 15.2 Read by title only and introduce an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 93- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY FOR THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA93- 0043, CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO C-P-S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS, AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130- 047 15.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO CONSTRUCT 340,034 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/RETAIL SPACE TO INCLUDE A 125,584 SQUARE FOOT WAL-MART AND A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE WAL-MART ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 35.6 GROSS ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047 15.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27323, AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO SUBDIVIDE 58.1 ACRES INTO 13 COMMERCIAL AND 2 REMAINDER PARCELS AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047 AgwWmM71393 07/07Hi 16 Reclevelooment AaencyAssistance • the Construction of • 1 Cornerof • Winchester Roads (Continued from the meeting of June 22, 1993) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CONSENTING TO THE EXPENDITURE OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS BY THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SO AS TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WAL-MART DEPARTMENT STORE AT THE CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS 17 Appeal of 1 • Commission Denial of • No. 249. Amendment, • Variance • • Mail Marauee RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO. 2, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO.2, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SEVENTY-THREE (73) FOOT HIGH SIGN WITH ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD LOCATED AT 26631 YNEZ ROAD (ON THE REAR PORTION OF TOYOTA OF TEMECULA), AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-080-039; 17.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF VARIANCE NO. 13, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY VARIANCE NO. 13, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SEVENTY-THREE (73) FOOT HIGH SIGN WITH ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD LOCATED AT 26631 YNEZ ROAD (ON THE REAR PORTION OF TOYOTA OF TEMECULA), AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921- 080-039 AOMWMM71393 o7ro7na Development Agreement No. 92-1. Change of Zone No. 21—Tentative Parcel man No. 2-7314. Amendment► •. 3 - Linfield School (Continued from the meeting of June 8, 1993) RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Continue this item to the meeting of July 27, 1993, at the request of the applicant. COUNCIL BUSINESS (Continued from the meeting of June 8, 1993) RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 93- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING ORDINANCE 91-37 SETTING FORTH PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITY OPERATIONAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS 20 Friendshio Baseball Tournament (Continued from the meeting of June 8, 1993) RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Receive and file report. 21 Discussion of Murrieta Creek/Army Corps Correspondence (Placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Parks.) 22 City Council Business Liais n (Placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Birdsall.) ApwW@M71 "3 y 07/07M3 CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT CITY COUNCIL REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: July 27, 1993, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California Ap WaM713G3 10 0710Y/Y3 CALL TO ORDER: President Patricia H. Birdsall ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Munoz, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record CONSENT CALENDAR 1Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Minutes of June 8, 1993; 2 Muni Financial Services --Contract RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve contract with Muni Financial Services to provide assessment administration services related to the TCSD rates and charges. DISTRICT BUSINESS 3 Rancho Del Sol Landscape Improvements RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Receive and file report on the Rancho Del Sol/Margarita Road slope landscaping. 4 Namino of the Senior Center RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Consider, and if desired, approve the official name of the Senior Center. o7p7roa GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Dixon DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting: July 27, 1993, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California Ao"&M71399 12 o7ro7as CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Murioz, Roberts, Stone, Parks PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to address the Agency, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name aand address for the record. AGENCY BUSINESS Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of June 8, 1993; 2 Development and Disposition Agreement - WalMart (Continued from the meeting of June 22, 1993) RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the Development and Disposition Agreement between the Agency, Wal-Mart and the agreement between the Agency and Rancho Regional Shopping Center providing for the $90,000 reimbursement to the Agency and authorize the Agency Chairman to execute the same. 3 Reconsider the Conditions of the StiOulated Judoement Robert Dawes Save Historic Old Temecula. an Unincoroorated Association vs The Redevelopment Agency of the County of Riverside. at at (Placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Birdsall) AaWWOM71903 13 o7a7na EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting: July 27, 1993, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California A"W&M71393 14 o7A7na PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS City of Temecula Special Achievement Award The City Council of the City of Temecula, commends the outstanding achievement of Jayson Glen Ashton and joins with Taekwondo USA in congratulating him for attaining the Junior Black Belt Division World Championship for Taekwondo. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this 13th day of July, 1993 J. Sal Munoz, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk ITEM 1 ITEM NO. 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD JUNE 8, 1993 A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council 1993, 7:20 P.M. at the Temecula Community California. Mayor J. Sal Murioz presiding. PRESENT: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: was called to order on Tuesday, June 8, Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson, City Attorney Scott F. Field, City Clerk June S. Greek and Recording Secretary Gail Zigler. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Sofia Sadler, Harvester Church of Temecula. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the flag salute by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts. PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS None PUBLIC COMMENTS Pat Keller, P.O. Box 521, Temecula, California, addressed the Council expressing her concern for the need for alternative transportation sources in the valley and suggested that the proposed Western Bypass Corridor should be used for a light rail corridor. Mayor Mufloz suggested that Pat Keller be appointed to the Transportation NOW Committee which has an objective to get volunteers from the different local communities who can offer new ideas to those people who are dealing with the transportation issues and to encourage the communities to take advantage of alternative transportation. CCMIN06/08/93 _1 6/11 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ,TUNE S. 1993 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Pro Tern Roberts requested Item No. 7 be removed from Consent Calendar for discussion. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve Consent Calendar Items No. 1 - 6, and 8 - 10 as follows: 1. Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of May 11, 1993; 2.2 Approve the minutes of May 25, 1993; 3. Resolution AoarovIna List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93-44 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4. City Treasurer's Report RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file report. CCMIN06/08/93 .2_ 8/11/93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 8. 1993 5. Budget Adiustment for Microfilm Purchase and Insurance Internal Fund RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve a residual equity transfer of $69,520,00 from General Fund Un- designated Fund Balance to the Copy Center Internal Service Fund Account for the purchase of microfilm reproductive equipment. 5.2 Appropriate $40,000 from the Insurance Internal Service Fund to Account No. 300-199-999-5207 - Claims. 6. Resolution Desianatina City's Agent for Obtaining Federal Disaster Assistance RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93-45 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DESIGNATING AN AGENT TO ACT IN THE CITY'S BEHALF FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING CERTAIN FEDERAL ASSISTANCE 8. Award of Weed Abatement Services RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Award a contract for weed abatement services on an as -needed basis to: Smith Tractor Services (Primary Contractor) and Rory Rieck (Secondary Contractor) 8.2 Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the appropriate agreements. 9. Cooperative Agreement with County of Riverside for the Community Development Block Grant Program RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve the three-year cooperative agreement with the County of Riverside for the administration of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. CCMIN06/08/93 .3 6/11 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE B. 1993 SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 10. Temporary Sign Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 93-12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING PORTIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 348 AND 92-16 PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF TEMPORARY SIGNS The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 7. General Plan Contract Amendment for Supplemental Work Performed in Conjunction with Completion of the General Plan Mayor Pro Tern Roberts questioned why the Council continues to be asked to approve additional funds for contracts that have been awarded. Planning Director Gary Thornhill explained that additional meetings have been required to complete the public hearing process. Director Thornhill stated that staff has verified the amendments to the contract and all funds are justified. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 7.1 Amend the General Plan Contract by $27,750. for the completion of the Work Program. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz CCMIN06106/93 -4- 6/11 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None PUBLIC HEARINGS 11. Development Processing Fees Mary Jane McLarney presented the staff report. Mayor MuAoz questioned the fee schedule for Item No. 43 Minor Events and Item No. 44 Major Events shown on Page 29. Planning Director Gary Thornhill advised that the fees were reversed in error. Mayor Murioz opened the public hearing at 7:45 P.M. Russell Rumansoff, 27349 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula, representing the Economic Development Corporation Expediting Committee, stated that the Committee applauds the City for the decreases in fees, however, expressed opposition to an increase in fees based on the current economic environment. Director Thornhill advised the Council that Page 61 should be amended to read Commercial/Industrial "Parcel Map". It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to approve staff recommendation correcting the fee schedule for minor and major events shown on Page 29 and a correction under "Application" on Page 61 to read Commercial/Industrial Parcel Map, as follows: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93-46 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING FEE STRUCTURE FOR PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND BUILDING SAFETY SERVICES AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 90-81 The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Murioz CCMIN06/08/93 _5 8/11/93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE S. 1993 NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 12. Aooeal of Planning Commission -Decision - PA-93 0038 Minor CUP Councilmember Birdsall stepped down due to a conflict of interest. Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. Mayor MuRoz opened the public hearing at 7:55 P.M. Charles Bell, 113 E. Bay Avenue, Newport Beach, California, one of the property owners, questioned the Planning Commission denial of the use, based on its proximity to the skating rink and the Teen Recreation Center, when the Teen Recreation Center is within 200 feet of an off -site sale of liquor establishment. Mr. Bell stated that he feels the applicant is providing adequate provisions for control and that he has had no complaints from any of the other business owners in the business park. Stosan Mitich, 28822 Front Street, Temecula, asked for the Council's approval of the CUP. Mr. Mitich stated that he is unclear as to the reason behind the Planning Commission denial based on the club's close proximity to the skating rink and the Teen Center, when a country western night club for ages 21 and over will be opening within 200 feet north of the Teen Center. Mr. Mitich stated that most of the night club attendees would be arriving and leaving after the close of business at the Teen Center and skating rink. Charles Mitich, 28822 Front Street, Temecula, advised the Council that because the teen night club was not successful, he is pursuing a permit to sell alcohol and will operate as an adult night club. Councilmember Parks expressed a concern that the location of the club is affecting its success. Mayor MuRoz stated that he feels the proposed project is a valid consideration. Mayor Murioz stated that the Teen Center will be moving into the CRC building upon completion of construction and will no longer present a concern. Mayor MuRoz stated that he feels more economic activity is needed on South Front Street and added that the applicant has always been cooperative and worked closely with the City and the Police Department to address any concerns or situations that have arisen. Councilmember Stone suggested that the applicant be given a six month trial period to monitor their progress and/or any problems they may have. CCMIN06/08/93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 8. 1993 City Attorney Scott Field advised the Council that if they apply a six month renewal to the CUP they will need to establish more of a track record upon which to base a recommendation for denial. Director Thornhill suggested that an automatic renewal be applied to the CUP, however if problems arise, the CUP would then require Council approval for renewal. Councilmember Stone stated that the Conditions of Approval should address noise levels. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tern Ron Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Stone to continue PA-93-0038 Minor CUP for two weeks to allow staff to prepare the necessary conditions of approval. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall 17. Boys and Girls Club Funding RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Approve loan agreement of $374,846 with the Boys and Girls Club for construction of the Boys and Girls Club Facility. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to continue Item No. 17 to the meeting of June 22, 1993, at the request of the applicant. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks, Roberts, Stone, Muiioz NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Birdsall I- CCMIN06/08/93 7- 6/11 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE B 1993 19. Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Re -guest for Grant Tourism Adverti ina RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Consider the request of the Tourism Council of the temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce for $5,000 to be used in an advertising campaign which will be coordinated with the Vintner's Association. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to continue Item No. 19 to the meeting of June 22, 1993, at the request of the applicant. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks, Roberts, Stone, Mu►ioz NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall Mayor Munoz declared a recess at 8:25 P.M. The meeting was reconvened at 9:15 P.M. following the scheduled Community Services District and Redevelopment Agency meetings. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to add agenda Item No. 21, Appointment of Citizen Representative to Murrieta Creek Advisory Committee. ADDED TO THE AGENDA BASED ON EMERGENCY NEED 21. Appointment of Citizen Repr _sentative to Murrieta Creek Advisory Committee - Mayor Munoz asked that the Council appoint a citizen to serve on the Murrieta Creek Advisory Committee and suggested Lou Kashmere to the Council. Lou Kashmere accepted the appointment. It was moved by Mayor Munoz, seconded by Councilmember Parks to appoint Lou Kashmere to the Murrieta Creek Advisory Committee. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz None —1 CCMIN06/08/93 & '� 6/11 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE S. 1993 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 13. Five-year Approval Period for Plot Plans Public Use Permits and Conditional Use Permits Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. Mayor Munoz opened the public hearing at 9:25 P.M. Richard Alvarez, 27510 Senna Court, Temecula, advised the Council that upon submitting a Plot Plan for a parcel located at Calle Cortez and Las Haciendas, he was notified of water contamination on the parcel as a result of problems from a neighboring project. Mr. Alvarez asked that the Council, approve the establishment of a grace period for projects which have expired. City Attorney Scott Field suggested that a remedy may be to establish a period of time which a property owner can revive an expired plot plan for the same fee as applying for a permit. Russell Rumansoff, 27349 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula, representing the Economic Development Corporation Expediting Committee, expressed support of the recommendation. Mayor Munoz declared a recess at 9:37 P.M. to change the tape. The meeting reconvened at 9:40 P.M. 16. No Smoking Ordinance - City Parks It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to continue Agenda Item No. 16 to the meeting of July 13, 1993. The motion was unanimously carried. 13. Five-year Approval Period for Plot Plans Public Use Permitsand Conditional —Use Permits - Continued It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to approve staff recommendation as follows: 13.1 Direct staff to prepare an Ordinance allowing for two additional one-year extensions of time for plot plans, public use permits and conditional use permits. CCMIN06108/93 .g B/11l83 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz None None 14. Development Agreement No 91-01 Change of Zone No 21 Tentative Par elMan No 27314 - (Lmfield School) Gary Thorhill advised the Council that the applicant was not present and recommended that the Item be continued to the meeting of July 13, 1993. Mayor Murioz opened the public hearing at 9:45 P.M. Carmine Latrecchia, 31533 Corte Pacheco, Temecula, asked the Council to review proposed access to the project and suggested that access to the Linfield School athletic fields and the proposed project be at Rancho Vista Road and Via El Greco. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to continue Agenda Item No. 14 to the meeting of July 13, 1993. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCIL BUSINESS COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz None None 15. Temecula -Shuttle - General Public Dial -A -Ride Proposal Public Works Director Tim Serlet presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to extend the meeting at 10:00 P.M. to 11:00 P.M. The motion was unanimously carried. Mayor Munoz opened the public hearing at 10:00 P.M. CWHY06/08/93 -1 a 6/11 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE S. 1993 Ed Dool, Vice President of Temecula Shuttle, 28657 Front Street, Suite A, Temecula, presented the General Public Dial -A -Ride proposal. Mayor Pro Tem Roberts asked if the two Dial -A -Ride vans would be registered to the City. Mr. Dool stated that the vans could be registered to the City and leased by the operator. He added that the insurance would be provided by the operator. Director Serlet advised that he has received three phone calls from individuals who are interested in bidding on this program. Cathy Bechtel, representing the RCTC, advised the Council that this proposal must be presented to the Transportation Commission by the City. Ms. Bechtel explained the transportation funding programs available. Bill Harker, 31130 General Kearney Road, Temecula, speaking on behalf of the Temecula Town Association, expressed their support of the plan but advised they had not considered the financial feasibility of the plan. Lou Kashmere, 29915 Front Street, Temecula, expressed support of the proposal by Mr. Dool. Mike Thesing, 30291 Via Brisa, Temecula, expressed support of the proposal by Mr. Dool. Robert L. Mobley, 21376 Austin Street, Wildomar, owner of a taxi business servicing the Temecula and Lake Elsinore area, spoke in opposition to Mr. Dool's request for City funds to start and operate a Dial -A -Ride business. Councilmember Stone expressed concern that Mr. Dool has not presented information which reflects the necessity for this program in Temecula. Councilmember Stone stated he would like to see staff research the issue of- need and investigate the availability of funding programs to provide the vans. Mayor Pro Tern Roberts stated he is concerned with approving an exclusive contract without allowing for competitive bidding. He also said he would prefer the Council consider this as small business loan rather than a grant. Councilmember Parks stated that he is not ready to endorse the proposal however, since Mr. Dool has spent a considerable amount of time preparing the proposal. He would like staff to address the issues expressed by the Council. Mayor MuRoz stated he feels that proof of the need for the program is a very important issue. CCMIN06/08/93 11 6/11 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DUNE S. 1993 City Manager David Dixon advised the Council that the RTA is planning a Dial -A -Ride for Temecula in 1994-1995 and suggested the applicant discuss his proposal with RTA. City Manager Dixon stated that if the Council wants to go out to bid on the proposal, staff can prepare the necessary reports, however if the Council is considering an exclusive contract, the work should be done by the applicant. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to - directed staff to work with the applicant in assessing the needs, ridership potentials and possible methods for securing funding. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz None None It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Stone to extend the meeting at 11:05 P.M. to 11:30 P.M. 20. Settlement of Claim - Community Lutheran Church City Attorney Scott Field presented the staff report. Mr. Field advised that an additional Section (Section 8) should be added to the Settlement Agreement requiring the applicant to apply for and obtain an extension of the Tentative Parcel Map currently in place at the church property on Ynez and Santiago. He advised that under the fiscal impact, Item B, the City will only be paying for that portion adjacent to the property on Pauba and Item C, the crib wall, is not adjacent to the City property. Chris Winther, 4180 La Jolla Village Drive, La Jolla, attorney representing the applicant, concurred with the modifications outlined by the City Attorney. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation with the recommended addition of Section 8 to require an extension of the Tentative Parcel Map on the church property located at Ynez and Santiago Roads. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz CCMIN06/08/93 -12- 8/11 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 8, 1993 NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 18. A000intments to Development Advisory Committee Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts to appoint Vince Di Donato and Kevin McKenzie to serve as members of the Development Advisory Committee. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager David Dixon advised the Council that he would be sending the Councilmembers a memo covering his conference attendance and comments on the Council League workshop held recently. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT None CITY COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Stone requested that staff look into alternative sites to hold the City Council meetings. Mayor Munoz requested that staff look into the proposal for community services funds submitted by the Temecula Senior Citizen Center. CCMIN08/08193 -13- 8/11/93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ADJOURNMENT JUNE 8, 1993 -11 It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts to adjourn at 1 1:20 P.M. A Temecula City Council General Plan Public Hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 15; 1993, 7:00 PM, General Plan Public Hearing, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula California. A Temecula City Council CIP Workshop will be held on Wednesday June 16, 1993, 7:00 PM, Main Conference Room, City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The next regular meeting of the Temecula City Council will be held on Tuesday, June 22, 1993, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Mayor J. Sal Mufloz June S. Greek, City Clerk CCMIN06/08/93 -14 8/11 /93 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD JUNE 15, 1993 A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order on Tuesday, July 15, 1993, 7:00 P.M. at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Pro Tern Roberts called the meeting to order. Councilmember Stone led the flag salute. PRESENT: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Murioz Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson, City Attorney Scott F. Field, City Clerk June S. Greek and Recording Secretary Gail Zigler. PUBLIC COMMENTS None COUNCIL BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. City of Temecula General Plan Implementation Program Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program Group III Urban Core Mayor Pro Tern Roberts opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M. Councilmember Birdsall stepped down due to a possible conflict of interest created by the close proximity of her residence to Map No. 58. It was noted that Mayor Muhoz also had a conflict of interest on the same basis. Kevin McKenzie, 40550 La Colima Road, Temecula, representing Walt Dixon, owner of Map No. 58, asked for Council's support in re -instituting the higher density designation on the property which the Planning Commission has recommended as medium density. Chris Martinelli, 30255 Corte Cantana, Temecula, speaking with regard to Map No. 58, advised the Council that the Planning Commission and the City Council previously denied the property owner's request for higher density, at a public hearing with 130 residents in attendance opposing the request for higher density and 650 signatures of opposition were presented. Ms. Martinelli requested that the Council uphold the CCMIN06/15/93 -1- 06/21/93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 15, 1993 Planning Commission decision of 7 - 12 D.U. per acre. Ms. Martinelli stated the surrounding property owners would like a low -medium land use designation, they are supportive of the Planning Commission recommendation of medium density. Rob VanKirk, 42105 Humber Drive, Temecula, addressed the Council regarding the intensity of high density housing along Margarita. Mr. VanKirk made referenced to the higher incident of crime in this area and asked that the Council deny the applicant's request for a high density designation. He also stated he felt the low to medium density would provide the proper buffer zone from high density to residential. Mayor Munoz arrived at 7:20 P.M. Planning Director Gary Thornhill stated that he feels transition is the problem and not the request for higher density. The overall consensus of the Council was to approve a medium density designation Councilmember Stone addressed his concern regarding Map 30 and suggested to the Council that there is an abundance of commercial centers proposed in this location, which is directly across from the proposed high school and bus barn facility, and stated that he feels an industrial center may be a more appropriate facility. Karen Gully, representing the Planning Center, concurred with the concerns expressed by Councilmember Stone. Councilmember Birdsall requested that this matter be considered at another time, when the property owner has been notified of a considered change in land use designation. Councilmember Stone expressed his concern regarding the concentration of high density housing in the vicinity of Map 31. Councilmember Stone asked for staff's comments regarding the number of apartment developments in this area. Karen Gully stated that the parcel is adjacent to a business park designation. The overall consensus of the Council is as follows: Parcel # 58, the consensus direction was that this be designated for medium density (3-0-0-2, Mayor Munoz & Councilmember Birdsall abstained). Parcel # 30, is to be reconsidered when the owner has been notified of consideration of a change by the Council, Parcel # 30 was referred to staff to prepare definitions of the three types of land use designations that could be considered for this property. Approved the staff and Planning Commission recommendations for all of the remaining parcels in this group. Mayor Munoz declared a recess at 8:15 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:30 P.M. CCMIN06/16/93 -2- 06/21 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Group II - Chaparral JUNE 15, 1993 It was noted that Maps 11, 17, 18, 24, 38 and 60 were a potential conflict of interest for Councilmember Stone and Councilmember Parks, due to the close proximity of their residences. Senior Planner John Meyer presented the staff report. Mr. Meyer advised the Council that staff is in agreement with the recommendations and proposed policies offered by Larry Markham of Markham and Associates, for the Chaparral Special Study Area, however, they do not support any changes to the land use designation. Karen Gully stated that the Nicolas Valley and Chaparral areas were discussed in a joint workshop and it was decided that these areas require a much more comprehensive study than what can be provided in the General Plan. She advised that within the General Plan it is noted that these areas require a more detailed study and therefore the designation of very low density would be applicable. John Meyer advised that the land use designation for Maps 18, 25 and 38 was changed at the Planning Commission level to low density. Paul Silverstone, 28828 Via Roja, Murrieta, requested the Council's support for a commercial designation on Map 4. Mr. Silverstone stated that the property is negatively impacted by the Sports Park and is unsuitable for residential development. Councilmember Birdsall stated the property may be adjacent to a proposed fire station and would be negatively impacted by lighting at the Sports Park and the high school. Councilmember Stone stated that he also concurs with the negative impacts to the property and suggested that a professional office designation would be more appropriate for the this area. Councilmember Parks recommended that Map 4 be included in the study of the Chaparral policies. The overall consensus of the Council was to approve staff recommendation as previously determined by the Council and include Map 4 in the Chaparral Study area. John Meyer advised that the parcel is mapped as very low and the property owner is requesting a designation of low. John Meyer advised that Map 25 has existing entitlement and staff would recommend approval of the low density designation. Staff recommends Map 14 and Map 19 remain very low density. Bev Stone, 43136 John Warner Road, Temecula, representing the Chaparral Area property owners, requesting 2 1 /2 acre minimum zoning. CCMIN06/15/93 -3- 06/21/03 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DUNE 15, 1993 "'`� Larry Markham, 41750 Winchester Road, Temecula, California, representing the Paine Family, Mr. Sussman and Mr. Meyler, property owners in the Chaparral area, supporting the change to a low density land use designation, explained the purpose of the special study area. Mr. Markham advised the Council that the property owners have paid for the study and the study addresses all issues. Director Thornhill stated that while staff concurs with the comments made by Mr. Markham regarding the special study, there may be areas within the zone that need specific language addressing the transition from 1 /2 acre to 2 1 /2 acre. Director Thornhill suggested that policies be included in the General Plan that are very specific to this area and that indicate no additional cost will be incurred by applicants for applications for zone change submitted to the City as long as they are consistent with the criteria that is being developed. Director Thornhill suggested that staff prepare draft criteria on sub -dividing the properties in this area. The overall consensus of the Council is as follows: Parcel #17 by unanimous consensus is to remain very low density per staff recommendation, Parcel #25 by unanimous consensus is to be designated low density, based on existing entitlement, all of the remaining parcels that had not been acted upon previously, staff was directed to develop the criteria necessary for proper transitioning from 112 to 2 1 /2 or greater acres. -� Councilmember Birdsall and Mayor Pro Tern Roberts indicated their possible conflict of interest regarding Map 53.1. Ann Barae, 40249 Starling Street, Temecula, expressed her concern with the high density designation on the Campos Verde project. Ms. Barea asked the Council to consider medium density condominiums rather than high density apartments. Director Thornhill advised that staff has some concerns regarding the buffering of this project and the adjacent development and those concerns have been expressed to Bedford Properties. Councilmember Stone asked that staff work with the applicant to mitigate the transition between Roripaugh Hills and the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. Director Thornhill stated that staff feels they can address the concerns without reducing densities. Gary Sullivan, 27591 Dandelion Court, Temecula, advised that a petition of 400 signatures of Roripaugh Hills homeowners, regarding the Campos Verdes project was presented to the Planning Commission. Mr. Sullivan stated that the residents feel it CCMIN06/15/93 -4- 06/21 /93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 15. 1993 is poor planning to have high density and commercial abutting the Roripaugh Hills residential development. Dick Bacon, 39721 Barberry Court, Temecula, expressed a concern that the Campos Verdes project and the possible opening of Starling Street to through traffic will have a negative impact on the Roripaugh Hills property values and asked that the Council deny an application for high density housing. Sanford Edward, 110 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, representing Roripaugh Ranch, Inc., advised the Council that the purpose for the request of high/medium density designation is because the underlying tax base is at the commercial rate which is three times the residential rate. Director Thornhill stated that the applicant is proposing a change from high density to medium density on approximately 20 acres, retaining high density on approximately 12 remaining acreas, which staff feels this is an adequate transition from the adjacent proposed projects. The overall consensus of the Council was approve staff recommendation. Councilmember Stone expressed concern regarding the commercial designation on Map 41, which he feels is in an area of excessive commercial development. David James of James & Associates, 41877 Enterprise Circle North, Temecula, representing the applicant, stated that immediately following the Planning Commission hearing, Cal Trans was approached abbout the concerns expressed by the Commission regarding access. He said there is a proposed four-way intersection with a primary driveway into the development which has been approved by Cal Trans for a signalized intersection, and an additional secondary access, right-in/right-out only, which has been approved by Cal Trans. The overall consensus of the Council is as follows: Approved Parcel #53.1 as open space by consensus with Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and Councilmember Birdsall abstaining. Staff was directed to address redistributing the density in the Campos Verdes Specific Plan to assure proper buffering adjacent to the existing Roripaugh Hills subdivision. Parcel #41 was designated neighborhood/commercial by consensus. Council approved staff recommendation by consensus on Parcel #53.2 with Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and Councilmember Birdsall abstaining - Group u V It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to continue the General Plan Public Hearing to the meeting of July 20, 1993, 7:00 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried. CCMINO6/15/93 -5- 06/21/93 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES CITY MANAGER REPORT None CITY ATTORNEY REPORT None CITY COUNCIL REPORTS None ADJOURNMENT ,TUNE 15, 1993 ^. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts to adjourn at 10:35 P.M. The next meeting of the Temecula City Council, will be on Wednesday, June 16, 7:00 PM, Temecula City Hall, Main Conference Room, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Secretary CCMIN06/15/93 -a- Mayor J. Sal Mumoz 06/21 /93 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD JULY 1, 1993 A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 6:39 PM, in the Main Conference Room, Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Mayor J. Sal Munoz presiding. PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Munoz ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Planning Director Gary Thornhill, and City Clerk June S. Greek. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIAN E The audience was led in the pledge of allegiance by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts. PUBLIC COMMENTS No public comments were offered on non -agenda items. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. Workshop with Supervisor Kay Ceniceros reoardina French Valley Airport Mayor Munoz turned the meeting over to County Supervisor Kay Ceniceros who stated the purpose of the workshop is to provide the City with an update on the current status of the French Valley Airport and specifically the progress to date of the Airport Master Plan. Supervisor Ceniceros introduced David McElroy, Director of the Riverside County Economic Development Agency and Ron Sullivan, 3rd District Airport and Land Use Commissioner. She also recognized Bill Harker of the Temecula Town Association who was an original founder of the airport. Supervisor Ceniceros outlined for the Council and audience the make-up of the Master Plan Committee. David McElroy stated there will be a round of public workshops held during the remainder of the year on the Airport Master Plan and the land use plan and that the first Public Hearing on the plan is expected to take place in March of 1994. Ron Sullivan advised that the draft of the Master Plan is expected to be completed for review by the committee within the next two to three weeks. Minutes\2\ 1 1 %92 _1 o7ros/sa City Council Minutes Februsry 11. 1992 Councilmember Parks asked if the County is looking at a full instrumentation system for French Valley Airport at this time. He suggested that a "used" system might be available through the U.S. government, in light of all of the proposed military base closures. Supervisor Ceniceros responded that the Master Plan need to be completed before the determination can be made regarding an ILS (Instrumentation Landing System). Mayor Munoz asked if the altitude requirements and the take -off and landing patterns can be conditioned to provide noise mitigation over adjoining residential areas. Councilmember Roberts stated he does not find the noise from the airport traffic to be disturbing in the Meadowview area where his residence is located even though it is one of the areas in fairly close proximity to the airport. Councilmember Stone stated he feels an expansion of the airport can be accomplished without inconvenience to the neighboring community as long as reasonable mitigation measures are instituted from the outset. Supervisor Ceniceros responded that she agrees, but that it is not practical to expect to satisfy every complaint that will be registered during the hearing process. Planning Director Gary Thornhill asked if the master plan will contain noise contours and land use designations. Ron Sullivan stated the master plan will contain a series of performance levels. Borre Winkel, a resident and property owner stated that the County's required avigation easement agreements are altogether too general and all -encompassing. He said that under the current provisions of the easements no mitigation is required of the airport. City Manager David Dixon asked if some of the hearings on the airport master plan will be held in the Temecula area. Supervisor Ceniceros replied that the hearings will be held by the Aviation Commission in Riverside, but that it is possible some of the public workshops can be scheduled to be held in Temecula. Ray Glanton, 33120 Vino Way, asked if he could speak to the matter of the Hiser Helicopter lease request. Supervisor Ceniceros advised that the County Board of Supervisors public hearing on that matter had been continued and as a result she could not hear further testimony until the date of the continued hearing. Supervisor Ceniceros addressed the County's participation in the special Gnatcatcher studies and the conditions required for enrollment in the joint studies. She invited the City to review and comment on the process. The City Council expressed their thanks to Supervisor Ceniceros for taking the time to meet with the Council and with the residents of Temecula. Minutes12111 \92 2 07/06/93 City Council Minutes February 11, 1992 CITY MANAGER REPORTS No report given. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS No report given. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS No reports were given. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Roberts to adjourn at 8:00 PM to the next regular meeting to be held on July 13, 1993 at 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, CA. The motion was unanimously carried. ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk Minutes12111 \92 -3- J. Sal Munoz, Mayor 07/06/93 ITEM NO. 3 lk- �- RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCEL 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 have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $1,325,588.89 Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 13th day of July, 1993. J. Sal Munoz, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] /` Resom 322 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 93-_ was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 13th day of July, 1993 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCII.MEMBERS: NOE: COUNCE .AMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCHIAEM13ERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk Resos 322 '� CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS wi17193 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 06/24/93 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 07/01 /93 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 07/13/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 06/17/93 TOTAL PAYROLL: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 07/13/93 COUNCIL MEETING DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 GENERAL 100 GAS TAX FUND 165 RDA DEV-LOW/MOD 190 TCSD 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 250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CIP INSURANCE FUND 310 VEHICLE FUND 320 INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS 330 COPY CENTER FUND 340 FACILITIES PAYROLL: 001 GENERAL (PAYROLL) 100 GAS TAX FUND (PAYROLL) 190 TCSD (PAYROLL) 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A (PAYROLL) 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B (PAYROLL) 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C (PAYROLL) 300 INSURANCE FUND (PAYROLL) 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS (PAYROLL) 330 COPY CENTER FUND (PAYROLL) PREPARED BY KARMA MCINTYRE I, MARY ANE C�NEY,NANC TOTAL BY FUND: $157,990.98 $54,875.43 $11,100.53 $45,886.62 $21,225.06 364.00 $7.09.12 $805,998.92 $135,720.58 559,762.53 $36,949.36 $16,547.28 $83.30 $20,060.49 $24,578.74 $30,048.32 $65,284.42 $11,151.01 $15,797.59 5395.10 $451.35 $1,462.39 $550.65 $1,157.66 $1,447.46 CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. If 1, • V , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. D,,-'--`IXON, CITY MANAGER $33,296.62 $714,960.23 $110,166.91 $369,467.50 $97,697.63 $1,325,588.89 $1.227,891.26 $97,697.63 $1,325,588.89 VOUCNRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/17/93 16:10 P• 6 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE AMOUNT 001 GENERAL FUND 16,352.47 100 GAS TAX FUND 103.35 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 495.58 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 4,874.65 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 795.78 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 734.00 250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 7,757.20 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 83.59 330 COPY CENTER FUND 2,100.00 TOTAL 33,296.62 VOUCHRE2 06/17/93 16:10 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAGE 2 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10803 06/11/93 001000 DROVER, CHRIS MITIGATION OF IMPACTS 0 001-161-999-5248 5,000.00 5,000.00 10843 06/17/93 O'ROURKE, AMABA O'ROURKE/REFUND 190-183-4972 36.00 36.00 10844 06/17/93 ALODIE KIDDIE MART ALODIE KIDDIE MART/REFU 001-199-4056 35.00 35.00 10845 06/17/93 BAUER, ROBERT BAUER/REFUND/BUSINESS L 001-199-4056 35.00 35.00 10846 10846 10846 10846 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 000127 CALIFORNIAN - 000127 CALIFORNIAN - 000127 CALIFORNIAN - 000127 CALIFORNIAN - LEGAL LEGAL LEGAL LEGAL T00004OTP/8257TP/3032TW LEGAL ADVERTISING FY 92 CORRECTION NOTICE PROP SENIOR ACCOUNTANT 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-150-999-5254 29.04 183.13 8.91 28.80 249.88 10847 10847 06/17/93 06/17/93 000155 000155 DAVLIN DAVLIN JUNE 7 AUDIO/VIDEO OF CC 06/08 001-161-999-5250 001-100-999-5250 154.20 761.67 915.87 10848 06/17/93 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS MAIL/PLANNING 001-161-999-5230 12.00 12.00 10849 06/17/93 10849 06/17/93 10849 06/17/93 10849 06/17/93 10:$9-46/17/93 10 6/17/93 1084�, 06/17/93 000170 000170 000170 000170 000170 000170 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST FRANKLIN QUEST FRANKLIN QUEST FRANKLIN QUEST FRANKLIN QUEST FRANKLIN QUEST FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY COMPANY COMPANY COMPANY COMPANY COMPANY COMPANY MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES BINDER REPLACEMENT FILLER -COMP REPLACEMENT FILLER-CLAS BINDER FREIGHT TAX 001-163-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 455.84 4.95 17.95 39.90 13.90 7.95 6.56 547.05 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 10850 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES F7-ER17A FILE INDEX PE-R206MB-A BLK PE-R206MB-B RED PE-R206MB-C BLUE Q9-1017-8 SCISSOR R-8 1224 SCOTCH TAPE C9-48008 C9-48208 BOX OF 100 H1-902PY 5-STEP SECTION H2-411006 K7-MN150084 BATTERY DISCOUNT TAX OFFICE SUPPLIES HANGING BINDERS OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES CREDIT/SCRAP BOOK/REFIL 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-110-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 295.24 28.02 61.78 11.13 4.45 4.45 4.45 3. 99 2.16 23.06 23.37 44.00 17.84 3.99 14.32- 9.96 1. 666 . 228 4 3.7 7 62.74- 50.03- 483.51 10851 10851 06/17/93 06/17/93 000184 000184 GTE GTE 909-699-8632 MAY BILL CREDIT MEMO/LONG DIST C 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 22.05 6.46- 15.59 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/17/93 16:10 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 3 ---� VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10852 06/17/93 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INV 219958 & 222841 190-180-999-5212 100.28 100.28 10853 06/17/93 000216 MAGIC KINGDOM CLUB MEMB RENEW MEMBERSHIP 001-150-999-5226 135.00 135.00 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 1D854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 10854 06/17/93 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH/CITY PETTY CASH/CITY PETTY CASH/CITY PETTY CASH/CITY PETTY CASH/CITY PETTY CASH/CITY PETTY CASH/CITY PETTY CASH/CITY PETTY CASH/TCSD PETTY CASH/TCSD PETTY CASH/TCSD PETTY CASH/TCSD PETTY CASH/TCSD 001-100-999-5258 001-163-999-5220 001-163-999-5258 001-150-999-5260 001-150-999-5220 001-110-999-5258 001-161-999-5230 001-161-999-5260 190-183-819-5300 190-183-938-5300 190-183-809-5300 190-181-999-5300 250-190-129-5804 20.00 6.20 34.27 47.13 2.25 28.00 50.31 20.00 79.53 10.00 9.48 8.69 31.20 347.06 10855 06/17/93 000253 POSTMASTER ACCT 924462 EXPRESS MAI 001-140-999-5230 79.70 79.70 10856 06/17/93 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE GENERAL PLAN DISPLAY AD 001-161-999-5256 169.26 169.26 10857 06/17/93 000262 RANCHO WATER 6/09/93 BILLING 193-180-999-5240 746.07 74t 10858 06/17/93 000266 RIGHTWAY SERV. 5/28-6/24 100-164-999-5238 57.39 57.39 10859 10859 10859 10859 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 000280 000280 000280 000280 SC SIGNS SC SIGNS SC SIGNS SC SIGNS PUBLIC NOTICES/PLANNING PUBLIC NOTICES/CITY COU PUBLIC NOTICE SIGNS; CI PUBLIC NOTICES 001-161-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 135.00 45.00 225.00 495.00 900.00 10860 10860 06/17/93 06/17/93 000285 000285 SIR SPEEDY SIR SPEEDY GOLD FOIL BUSINESS CARD TAX 001-150-999-5220 001-150-999-5220 36.00 2.79 38.79 10861 10861 06/17/93 06/17/93 000326 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE KIRT & CURALL UNIFORMS REED & STERLING 100-164-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 12.50 13.60 26.10 10862 06/17/93 000340 WHITE CAP SEE ATTACHED LIST FOR T 100-164-999-5218 33.46 33.46 10863 10863 06/17/93 06/17/93 000358 000358 DIXON, DAVID F. DIXON, DAVID F. CONFERENCE MAY 22-26 CONFERENCE/ 6/2-6/4 001-110-999-5258 001-110-999-5258 505.03 8.01 513.04 10864 06/17/93 000370 BIRDSALL, PATRICIA CONF. 4/22-4/24 001-100-999-5258 97.75 97.75 10865 10865 10865 10865 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 06/17/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 4/30-6/02 4/30-6/02 5/03-6/02 4/13-5/12 190-180-999-5240 191-180-999-5 19500 -180-999-5 190-180-999-5240 14.19 14.19 116. .8585 145.64 10866 06/17/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 10866 06/17/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4756 TH/MAY 909-202-4757 MAY/JG 001-110-999-5208 001-120-999-5208 43.17 43.72 ^` VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/j'^'t3 16:10 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAGE 4 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10866 06/17/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4758/RR 001-100-999-5208 63.77 10866 06/17/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4760 MAY 001-100-999-5208 35.04 10866 06/17/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4761/SM 001-100-999-5208 169.06 10866 06/17/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4769/JS 001-100-99975208 62.37 10866 06/17/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4770 DD MAY 001-110-999-5208. 177.03 597.16 10867 06/17/93 000377 STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPOR MATERIAL TESTING 210-165-611-5804 367.00 10867 06/17/93 000377 STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPOR MATERIAL TESTING 210-165-611-5804 367.00 734.00 10868 06/17/93 000434 SIERRA COMPUTER SYSTEMS PROGRAMING ASSISTANCE 320-199-999-5250 68.00 68.00 10869 06/17/93 000471 IGOE & COMPANY ADMIN FEE FOR MAY 001-150-999-5250 337.50 337.50 10870 06/17/93 000482 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES PROF. SERV. 250-190-129-5804 508.50 10870 06/17/93 000482 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES 250-190-129-5804 740.00 10870 06/17/93 000482 LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES PROFF. SERV. 250-190-129-5804 6,477.50 7,726.00 10871 06/17/93 000512 CADET UNIFORM ENTRY RUG SERVICE; CITY 001-199-999-5250 34.25 34,25 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 36.19 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 42.03 108 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 18.91 1 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 20." 10d._ 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 5/01-5/31 191-180-999-5500 8.76 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 35.90 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 39.08 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 39.08 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 41.02 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 38.85 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 39.56 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 41.80 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 33.18 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 36.13 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 34.89 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 37.42 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 129.86 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 32.29 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 27.87 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 38.08 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 5/01-5/31 191-180-999-5500 3,890.23 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 25.51 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 38.50 10872 06/17/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 4/30-5/31 191-180-999-5500 32.66 4,758.24 10873 06/17/93 000649 MUNOZ, SAL J. CONF. 6/2-6/4 001-100-999-5258 2.00 2.00 10874 06/17/93 000680 AMS-TMS RESUPPLY POSTAGE 330-199-999-5230 2,100.00 2,100.00 10875 06/17/93 000706 A-1 SIGNS INSTALL "K" AT WINCHEST 193-180-999-5510 50.00 10875 06/17/93 000706 A-1 SIGNS CREDIT MEMO 193-180-999-5510 .29- 49.71 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/17/93 16:10 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER Py-,,5 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10876 06/17/93 000754 ELLIOTT GROUP, THE CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE RE 001-161-999-5250 600.00 600.00 10877 06/17/93 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. CONF/JUNE 2-4 001-100-999-5258 33.03 1D877 06/17/93 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. CONF./NEW YORK 001-100-999-5258 177.84 210.87 10878 06/17/93 000916 BANK OF AMERICA - CC LATE CHARGE 001-100-999-5258 10.00 10.00 10879 06/17/93 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED CUSTODIAL SERVICES 190-182-999-5300 165.00 165.00 10880 06/17/93 000965 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA Cl CONF. JUNE 23 001-100-999-5258 36.00 36.00 10881 06/17/93 000993 FREEDOM COFFEE, INC. COFFEE SERVICE 001-199-999-5250 95.26 10881 06/17/93 000993 FREEDOM COFFEE, INC. COFFEE SUPPLIES 001-199-999-5250 134.25 229.51 10882 06/17/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 54736966403910065/SM 001-100-999-5258 122.27 10882 06/17/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473666403910024/DD 001-110-999-5258 1,805.47 10882 06/17/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473666403910081/RR 001-100-999-5258 1,010.48 2,938.22 10883 06/17/93 001032 RIVERSIDE CO. DISTRICT CONFERENCE/SEPT 29/STON 001-100-999-5258 30.00 30.00 10884 06/17/93 001033 INN AT THE PARK HOTEL, HOTEL/CONF/GANG VIOLENC 001-170-999-5258 162.72 162� 10885 06/17/93 001034 TOGO'S EATERY LUNCH FOR TRAFFIC CONTR 001-163-999-5260 54.00 54. 10886 06/17/93 001036 KEMPER REAL ESTATE MANA REFUND FOR EXTENSION OF 001-161-4104 1,608.00 10886 06/17/93 001036 KEMPER REAL ESTATE MANA REFUND FOR EXTENSION OF 001-163-4388 126.00 1,734.00 TOTAL CHECKS 33,296.62 -IN VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/?!"`= 14:38 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE AMOUNT 001 GENERAL FUND 39,026.70 100 GAS TAX FUND 7,915.03 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 12,387.50 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 14,738.68 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL 8 64.00 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 5,337.09 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 605,998.92 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 24,593.19 250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 48.99 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 449.94 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,188.21 310 VEHICLES FUND 41.84 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 2,737.35 330 COPY CENTER FUND 432.79 TOTAL 714,960.23 PAGE 8 VOUCHRE2 06/24/93 14:38 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 0004" FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 0004" FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 0004" FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 206746 06/17/93 0004" FIRSTAX (EDD) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 244689 06/17/93 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 10893 06/24/93 PINO, MIKE 10894 06/24/93 O'ROURKE, AMABA 10895 06/24/93 PISK, NEIL 10896 06/24/93 MCGAUGH, PAULA 10897 06/24/93 GREMARD, TAMARA 10898 06/24/93 000101 APPLE ONE 10898 06/24/93 000101 APPLE ONE 10899 06/24/93 000127 CALIFORNIAN - LEGAL 10899 06/24/93 000127 CALIFORNIAN - LEGAL CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PO"*-N2 FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 0004" CAIT 001-2070 2,655.65 0004" CAIT 100-2070 466.58 000444 CAIT 190-2070 460.58 0004" CAIT 191-2070 16.46 0004" CAIT 193-2070 33.26 000444 CAIT 300-2070 19.57 0004" CAIT 320-2070 52.62 0004" CAIT 330-2070 15.59 000444 SDI 001-2070 933.19 0004" SDI 100-2070 152.91 0004" SDI 190-2070 224.52 000444 SDI 191-2070 6.40 000444 SDI 192-2070 6.03 0004" SDI 193-2070 22.52 0004" SDI 300-2070 8.72 000444 SDI 320-2070 19.35 0004" SDI 330-2070 20.64 5,114.59 000283 F1CA/MED 001-2070 2,341.30 000283 FICA/MED 100-2070 416.98 000283 FICA/MED 190-2070 551.94 000283 FICA/MED 191-2070 14.27 000283 FICA/MED 192-2070 13.46 000283 FICA/MED 193-2070 50.23 000283 FICA/MED 300-2070 19.16 000283 FICA/MED 320-2070 43.18 000283 FICA/MED 330-2070 46.02 000283 USIT 001-2070 10,370.90 000283 USIT 100-2070 2,097.56 000283 USIT 190-2070 2,092.64 000283 USIT 191-2070 67.11 000283 USIT 193-2070 188.71 000283 USIT 300-2070 81.12 000283 USIT 320-2070 237.55 000283 USIT 330-2070 80.61 18,712.74 REIMB FOR GLOVES/PING, 001-170-999-5299 20.42 20.42 TCSD REFUND/01ROURKE, A 190=183-944-5300 22.00 22.00 TCSD REFUND/PISK, NEIL 190-183-4818 100.00 100.00 TCSD REFUND/MCGAUGH 190-183-4950 3.00 3.00 TCSD REFUND/GREMARD 190-183-4809 60.00 60.00 LITTRELL, SANDEE / WE 6 001-140-999-5118 326.62 LITTRELL, SANDEE/ WE 06 001-140-999-5118 390.00 716.62 NOTICES RAN IN MAY 1993 001-161-999-5256 226.89 -. NOTICES RUN IN MAY 1993 001-120-999-5256 126.22 VOUCHRE2 06/2,k`4Z 14:38 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAGE 3 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10899 06/24/93 000127 CALIFORNIAN - LEGAL GENERAL PLAN ADVERTISEM 001-161-999-5256 258.18 611.29 10900 06/24/93 000136 CHESHERS' CUSTOM EMBROI T SHIRTS FOR SISTER CIT 001-100-999-5220 59.26 59.26 10901 06/24/93 000175 GFOA PUBLIC INVESTOR NEWSLET 001-140-999-5228 55.00 55.00 10902 10902 10902 06/24/93 000177 06/24/93 000177 06/24/93 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES OVER WALL LTR FILE 001-161-999-5220 001-110-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 425.44 187.00 40.40 652.84 10903 10903 10903 10903 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 000178 000178 000178 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO 1MB SIMMS MEMORY CHIPS SERIAL CABLE POWER SUPPLY TAX 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 140.00 12.00 45.00 15.27 212.27 10904 06/24/93 000184 GTE 909-699-2475 PW PHONE 001-163-999-5208 18.81 18.81 10905 06/24/93 000186 HANKS HARDWARE MISC HARDWARE CITY ACCO 001-199-999-5242 80.19 80.19 10906 06/24/93 10906 06/24/93 10906 06/24/93 000192 000192 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE C1969SB - GLOBAL 3-1/2" C1941B - BASF 5-1/411 DS TAX 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 535.00 69.00 46.81 650.81 109, 10907 10907 10907 10907 10907 10907 10907 J6/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 000194 000194 000194 000194 000194 000194 000194 000194 ICMA RETIREMENT ICMA RETIREMENT ICMA RETIREMENT ICMA RETIREMENT ICMA RETIREMENT ICMA RETIREMENT ICMA RETIREMENT ICMA RETIREMENT 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 000194 DEF COMP 001-2080 100-2080 190-2080 191-2080 193-2080 300-2080 320-2080 330-2080 3,351.50 1,748.87 582.19 31.19 38.12 12.99 281.01 50.00 6,095.87 10908 06/24/93 000214 LUNCH & STUFF CATERING CITY COUNCIL MEETING 001-100-999-5260 80.00 80.00 109D9 10909 06/24/93 06/24/93 000219 000219 MARTIN 1-HOUR PHOTO MARTIN 1-HOUR PHOTO FILM DEVELOPING, PURCHA FILM DEVELOPING, PURCHA 001-163-999-5250 001-163-999-5250 11.05 99.34 110.39 10910 10910 10910 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 000239 000239 000239 OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERVIC OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERVIC OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERVIC CHAVEZ/SPARGO WEEK END CHAVEZ, M WEEK END 05/3 CHAVEZ, M WEEK END 06/0 001-163-999-5118 001-163-999-5118 001-163-999-5118 260.09 335.60 268.48 864.17 10911 06/24/93 000243 PAYLESS DRUG STORE 2 PACKS OF 35MM FILM 190-180-999-5250 26.92 26.92 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912,,.k/24/93 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PER REDE 000246 PER REDE 000246 PERS RET 000246 PERS RET 000246 PERS RET 000246 PERS RET 000246 PERS RET 000246 PERS RET 001-2130 100-2130 001-2390 100-2390 190-2390 191-2390 192-2390 193-2390 42.93 171.77 11,017.37 1,728.81 2,147.74 71.06 43.58 247.85 VOUCHRE2 06/24/93 14:38 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PA�4 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NUMBER VENDOR NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 10912 06/24/93 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM 000246 PERS RET 000246 PERS RET 000246 PERS RET 000246 SURVIVOR 000246 SURVIVOR 000246 SURVIVOR 000246 SURVIVOR 000246 SURVIVOR 0002" SURVIVOR 000246 SURVIVOR 000246 SURVIVOR 0002" SURVIVOR 300-2390 320-2390 330-2390 001-2390 100-2390 190-2390 191-2390 192-2390 193-2390 300-2390 320-2390 330-2390 84.78 219.15 218.07 49.27 8.02 12.09 .42 .42 .93 1.44 .37 ,93 1.86 16,068.44 10913 10913 06/24/93 06/24/93 000248 000248 PETROLANE PETROLANE FUEL FOR BUILDING & SAF FUEL 001-162-999-5263 100-164-999-5242 185,66 1.62 187.28 10914 10914 10914 10914 10914 10914 10914 10914 D6/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 001-163-999-5258 001-163-999-5220 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5220 001-100-999-5258 001-140-999-5260 001-163-999-5220 001-150-999-5260 39.00 2.69 43.08 20.45 15.25 8.88 7.34 15.00 ^� J 151.69 10915 10915 10915 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 000262 000262 000262 RANCHO WATER RANCHO WATER RANCHO WATER INSPECTION OF IMPROVEME JUNE .TUNE 210-165-607-5802 190-180-999-5240 193-180-999-5240 829.98 231.14 4,407.41 5,468.53 10916 10916 06/24/93 06/24/93 000277 000277 S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS MISC RECREATION SUPPLIE MONTH BY MONTH CRAFT BO 190-180-999-5300 190-180-999-5300 880.19 22.47 902.66 10917 06/24/93 000291 SPEE DEE OIL CHANGE & T OIL CHANGE & FILTER 310-162-999-5214 22.49 22.49 10918 06/24/93 000299 STRACHOTA INSURANCE EARTHQUAKE INSURANCE AD 300-199-999-5204 961.00 961.00 10919 06/24/93 000305 TARGET STORE RADIO FOR WATER AEROBIC 190-183-810-5300 141.00 141.00 10920 06/24/93 000320 TOWN CENTER STATIONERS MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5220 45.76 45.76 10921 10921 06/24/93 06/24/93 000322 000322 UNIGLOSE BUTTERFIELD TR UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/RR LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/PB 001-100-999-5258 001-100-999-5258 141.00 136.00 277.00 10922 10922 10922 10922 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW 000325 U11 000325 UW 000325 UW 001-2120 100-2120 190-2120 300-2120 77.25 9.25 17.50 .50 104.50 10923 10923 06/24/93 06/24/93 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE KIRK & CURALL UNIFORMS KIRT & CURALL UNIFORMS 100-164-999-5243 100-164-999-5243 12.50 12.50 25.0a-., VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 06/?(J 14:38 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAGE 5 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER CHECK AMOUNT AMOUNT 10924 06/24/93 000340 WHITE CAP MILW. 500 RPM 1/2" REV 100-164-999-5242 178.13 10924 06/24/93 000340 WHITE CAP TAX 100-164-999-5242 13.81 191.94 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 03/30-04/29/93 191-180-999-5500 40.25 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 4/29-5/29 191-180-999-5500. 38.15 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 4/30-6/01 191-180-999-5500 165.93 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/04-6/02 191-180-999-5500 193.02 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/04-6/02 190-180-999-5240 12.47 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/03-6/02 191-180-999-5500 147.32 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/03-6/02 190-180-999-5240 1,046.88 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/03-6/02 190-180-999-5240 1,138.85 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/03-6/02 191-180-999-5500 116.76 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/03-6/02 191-180-999-5500 127.25 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/03-6/02 191-180-999-5500 132.25 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/04-6/03 193-180-999-5240 13.47 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/04-6/03 193-180-999-5240 12.90 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/05-6/03 193-180-999-5240 12.47 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/05-6/03 193-180-999-5240 12.58 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/05-6/03 193-180-999-5240 16.62 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/05-6/03 193-180-999-5240 12.47 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON' 5/05-6/03 193-180-999-5240 12.47 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/05-6/07 190-180-999-5240 14.19 10<16/24/93 10�. 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/05-6/07 193-180-999-5240 14.19 J6/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/05-6/07 193-180-999-5240 14.19 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/06-6/07 191-180-999-5500 134.81 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/07-6/09 190-180-999-5240 14.53 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/07-6/09 193-180-999-5240 14.19 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/07-6/09 193-180-999-5240 14.19 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/07-6/09 193-180-999-5240 14.19 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/07-6/08 193-180-999-5240 13.76 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/07-6/08 193-180-999-5240 13.76 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/10 191-180-999-5500 115.10 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/10 191-180-999-5500 123.33 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/10 191-180-999-5500 166.41 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/11-6/10 193-180-999-5240 12.90 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/11-6/10 193-180-999-5240 13.01 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/11-6/10 193-180-999-5240 12.90 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/11-6/10 193-180-999-5240 11.94 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/11-6/10 193-180-999-5240 13.59 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/10 193-180-999-5240 13.50 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/11-6/11 193-180-999-5240 13.33 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/11-6/11 193-180-999-5240 t3.33 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/11 193-180-999-5240 12.90 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/11 190-180-999-5240 12.90 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/11 193-180-999-5240 12.90 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/11 193-180-999-5240 12.90 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/11 193-180-999-5240 12.90 10925 06/24/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/11 190-180-999-5240 12.90 4,100.85 10926 06/24/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON CELLULAR TELEPHONE BATT 320-199-999-5215 38.00 10926,,04/24/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON TAX 320-199-999-5215 2.95 VOUCHRE2 06/24/93 14:38 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAP-"�6 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE VENDOR NUMBER VENDOR NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10926 06/24/93 10926 06/24/93 10926 06/24/93 10926 06/24/93 10926 06/24/93 10926 06/24/93 10926 06/24/93 10926 06/24/93 000375 000375 000375 000375 000375 000375 000375 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4204 WE MAY 909-202-4762 RP MAY 909-202-4765 JH MAY 909-202-4765 BB MAY 9092024751-TS 69092024753 SH 9092024754SN 9092024755 CV 001-110-999-5208 001-100-999-5208 001-163-999-5208 001-163-999-5208 001-163-999-5208 190-180-999-5208 190-180-999-5208 190-180-999-5208 57.77 75.61 46.90 50. 62 86.73 E 6040 . . 4229 41.7575 503.02 10927 06/24/93 000380 LAIDLAW TRANSIT BUS TRIP TO LAKE GREGOR 190-183-809-5300 342.00 342.00 10928 06/24/93 10928 06/24/93 10928 06/24/93 000389 000389 000389 USCM USCM USCM 000389 PT RETIR 000389 PT RETIR 000389 PT RETIR 001-2160 100-2160 190-2160 63.66 132.00 269.24 464.90 10929 06/24/93 000423 H & H CRAFT & FLORAL SU POSTER BOARD & STEMS 190-180-999-5300 14.97 14.97 10930 06/24/93 10930 06/24/93 10930 06/24/93 10930 06/24/93 10930 06/24/93 10930 06/24/93 10930 06/24/93 000426 000426 000426 000426 000426 000426 000426 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL CLEANING SUPPLIES; CITY JANITORIAL SUPPLIES CREDIT FOR RETURNED DIS JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 15 GALLON TRASH LINERS TAX JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 001-199-999-5212 001-199-999-5212 001-199-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 200.00 95.01 77- 24.35 39.08 3.3 .03 16.98 � 353.68 10931 06/24/93 000428 HORIZON WATER WATER/CUPS/COOLER CHARG 190-182-999-5240 49.55 49.55 10932 06/24/93 000434 SIERRA COMPUTER SYSTEMS INSTALLATION ASSISTANCE 320-199-999-5250 867.00 867.00 10933 06/24/93 000461 PINKY'S BOWL WEST/TEMEC INSTRUCTORS FEE FOR CLA 190-183-844-5300 77.60 77.60 10934 06/24/93 000489 COBB GROUP INSIDE QUATTRO PRO RENE 320-199-999-5228 49.00 49.00 10935 06/24/93 000512 CADET UNIFORM ENTRY RUG SERVICE; CITY 001-199-999-5250 34.25 34.25 10936 06/24/93 000518 DEL RID CARE ANIMAL HOS YET SERVICES AS NEEDED 001-170-999-5285 24.95 24.95 10937 06/24/93 10937 06/24/93 000537 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 5/01-5/31 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDT 4/01-4/30 191-180-999-5500 191-180-999-5500 , 0. 96 3,890.23 13,031.19 10938 06/24/93 000539 WIMMER YAMADA ASSOCIATE LDSCP ARCHITECTURAL SVC 210-190-120-5802 23,763.21 23,763.21 10939 06/24/93 000554 SMITH BROS. TEAM SPORTS OPEN PURCHASE ORDER FOR 10939 06/24/93 000554 SMITH BROS. TEAM SPORTS FREIGHT 10939 06/24/93 000554 SMITH BROS. TEAM SPORTS TAX 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 141. 00 83 10.9393 155.76 10940 06/24/93 000587 MUNOZ, MARIO CARPET CLEANING FOR OLD 001-199-999-5212 150.00 150.00 10941 06/24/93 000602 DEAN'S PHOTO 1 DP424 001-162-999-5250 9.46 9.46 10942 06/24/93 000607 JONES, SUSAN TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 001-150-999-5259 400.00 400. --IN VOUCHRE2 06/;;'g 14:38 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAGE 7 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NUMBER VENDOR NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10943 10943 10943 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 000648 000648 000648 BANANA BLUEPRINT BANANA BLUEPRINT BANANA BLUEPRINT BLUELINE & DELIVERY 250-190-129-5802 DELIVERY ONLY 250-190-129-5802 BLUELINE FOR CABLE SUBM 250-190-129-5802 16.35 16.43 16.21 48.99 10944 06/24/93 000653 LUCKY STORE SNACKS FOR DAY CAMP 190-183-809-5300 . 200.00 200.00 10945 10945 06/24/93 06/24/93 000702 000702 CADDY GRAPHICS CADDY GRAPHICS ARTWORK FOR SUMMER DAY ARTWORK FOR JULY 4TH C 190-183-809-5300 190-183-965-5300 142.50 142.50 285.00 10946 10946 10946 06/24/93 06/24/93 06/24/93 000704 000704 000704 SKS, INC./INLAND OIL SKS, INC./INLAND OIL SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL CHARGES FUEL CHARGES FUEL CHARGES 100-164-999-5263 190-180-999-5263 001-162-999-5263 263.72 122.36 78.15 464.23 10947 06/24/93 000745 AT & T - CELLULAR 619-987-1828 MAY CELLUL 001-140-999-5208 5.21 5.21 10948 06/24/93 000796 ICBO - SAN DIEGO CHAPTE 5 /RESID DISABLED ACCES 001-162-999-5258 100.00 100.00 10949 06/24/93 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING RE -HANG STORM DRAINAGE 100-164-999-5402 500.00 500.00 10950 06/24/93 000907 TEMECULA CAR WASH OIL CHANGES AND CAR WAS 310-180-999-5214 19.35 19.35 10951 , 06/24/93 000950 CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY SUMMER DAY CAMP ADVERTI 190-180-999-5254 218.44 218.44 109- J6/24/93 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473666403910057 MAY SN 190-180-999-5228 6.30 6.30 10953 06/24/93 001020 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S 0 15 BOOKLETS/CAL FACTS 001-140-999-5228 75.00 75.00 10954 06/24/93 001026 TEMECULA/MURRIETA TOUGH COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDI 001-100-999-5267 2,000.00 2,000.00 10955 06/24/93 001035 TEMECULA ENVIRONMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REFUSE JAN- 194-180-999-5535 605,998.92 605,998.92 10956 06/24/93 001040 BANNER AMERICAN PRODUCT LAMINATION POUCHES FOR 001-150-999-5222 75.43 75.43 10957 06/24/93 001041 ARMSTRONG, DENNIS TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 001-150-999-5259 232.00 232.00 10958 06/24/93 001043 LAKE GREGORY SUMMER DAY CAMP EXCURSI 190-183-809-5300 544.00 544.00 10959 06/24/93 001044 BAILY WINE COUNTRY CAFE LUNCHES FOR SISTER CITY 001-100-999-5260 163.55 163.55 10960 06/24/93 001045 AMERICAN INDEPENDENT MAILING SERVICES/TEM FI 280-199-999-5264 449.94 449.94 10961 06/24/93 001046 REXON, FREEDMAN, KLEPET PROF SERVICES MAY 1993 001-130-999-5247 368.00 368.00 TOTAL CHECKS 714,960.23 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 07/01/93 11:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER P6 FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE AMOUNT 001 GENERAL FUND 25,177.31 100 GAS TAX FUND 992.50 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 11,100.53 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 12,910.22 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 1,051.73 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 27.00 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 1,784.00 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 23,564.39 300 INSURANCE FUND 550.93 310 VEHICLES FUND 41.46 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 2,418.52 330 COPY CENTER FUND 500.00 340 FACILITIES 30,048.32 TOTAL 110,166.91 VOUCHRE2 / 11:22 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAGE 2 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10889 06/24/93 000954 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK CASHIER CK/RESOLUTION T 165-1652 11,100.53 11,100.53 10968 07/01/93 TUCKER, MARY **CLA1M#0049/TUCKER 300-199-999-5207 146.43 146.43 10969 07/01/93 SANDOVAL, MICHA REFUND/RAGING WTR/SANDO 190-183-4954 18.00 18.00 10970 07/01/93 VIARS, CARRIE REFUND/DAYCAMP/VIARS 190-183-4809 180.00 180.00 10971 07/01/93 RIFE, CHARLES A. REFUND PERMIT/RIFE 001-162-4285 60.00 60.00 10972 07/01/93 000100 ALLIED BARRICADE COMPAN VESTS FOR PARADE MARSHA 190-180-999-5300 58.19 58.19 10973 07/01/93 000127 CALIFORNIAN - LEGAL LEGAL ADVERTISING FY 92 001-120-999-5256 86.73 86.73 10974 07/01/93 10974 07/01/93 000131 000131 CARL WARREN & CO. CARL WARREN & CO. RANCON COMMERCE CTR TERRAZAS MICHELE 300-199-999-5205 300-199-999-5205 245.75 158.75 404.50 10975 07/01/93 000152 CALIFORNIA PARK & RECRE MHA 019941 SHAWN NELSON 190-180-999-5226 375.00 375.00 10976 07/01/93 000155 DAVLIN JUNE 21 PLANNING MEETIN 001-161-999-5250 119.94 119.94 10907/01/93 /'71..,, 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS POSTAGE 001-110-999-5230 28.50 28.50 109t- 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 10978 07/01/93 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT MISC. ITEMS FOR FINANCE TAX SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 9 1/2 X 12 1/2 BROWN EN TAX MISC. ITEMS FOR FINANCE TAX 9 1/2 X 12 1/2 BROWN EN TAX 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-150-999-5220 001-150-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 164.83 . 77 7070.35 2.58 6. 60 .51 159.40 12.35 6. 60 .51 436.50 10979 07/01/93 000184 GTE 909-699-0128 320-199-999-5208 173.61 173.61 10980 07/01/93 10980 07/01/93 10980 07/01/93 10980 07/01/93 10980 07/01/93 10980 07/01/93 10980 07/01/93 10980 07/01/93 10980 07/01/93 000192 000192 000192 000192 000192 000192 000192 000192 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE C3661 - 4MM DL90M DATA FREIGHT TAX C6449 - 10BASET (UTP) A FREIGHT TAX C7326 PARALLEL SWITCH FREIGHT TAX 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 179.90 7. 14.33 279. 00 9.37 22.07 7 00 6..47 6.44 603.87 10981 07/01/93 10981 07/01/93 000206 000206 KINKOIS COPIES KINKOIS COPIES PRINTS PRINTS 001-161-999-5222 001-161-999-5222 . 173.69 260.54 10982 07/01/93 �- 000224 MELAD & ASSOCIATES PLAN CHECK 001-162-999-5248 360.00 360.00 VOUCHRE2 07/01/93 11:22 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PA-N FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 10983 07/01/93 000238 FINAL TOUCH MARKETING 10983 07/01/93 000238 FINAL TOUCH MARKETING 10983 07/01/93 000238 FINAL TOUCH MARKETING 10983 07/01/93 000238 FINAL TOUCH MARKETING AUGUST MEDIA JULY SERVICES TRADESHOW-WESCON 93 CONTRACT CONTINGENCY; 280-199-999-5264 280-199-999-5264 T 280-199-999-5264 809500 12,666.67 1 ,500.00 ,. 79.20 22,340.87 10984 07/01/93 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOODS 10984 07/01/93 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOODS 10984 07/01/93 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOODS 10984 07/01/93 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOODS 10984 07/01/93 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOODS DE BEER TC 12 SOFTBALLS 190-183-905-5300 DE BEER TC 12 SOFTBALLS 190-183-907-5300 TAX 190-183 TAX -905-5300 190-183-905-5300 TAX 138.50 . 74 9.08 5.08 5 .08 248.90 10985 07/01/93 000243 PAYLESS DRUG STORE FILM PROCESSING SERVICE 190-180-999-5250 10.80 10.80 10986 07/01/93 000248 PETROLANE 10986 07/01/93 000248 PETROLANE PROPANE PETROLANE/B&S 190-180-999-5263 001-162-999-5263 6033 . 14242.6262 202.95 10987 07/01/93 000253 POSTMASTER ACCT #924462 330-199-999-5230 500.00 500.00 10988 07/01/93 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE SUBSCRIPTION/1633708 001-140-999-5228 87.28 87.28 10989 07/01/93 000302 SYSTEM SOURCE PANELS 001-163-999-5600 122.50 5p� 10990 07/01/93 000303 SYSTEM 2/90 10990 07/01/93 000303 SYSTEM 2/90 10990 07/01/93 000303 SYSTEM 2/90 10990 07/01/93 000303 SYSTEM 2/90 10990 07/01/93 000303 SYSTEM 2/90 10990 07/01/93 000303 SYSTEM 2/90 TITLE CHANGE ON DOOR SI NAMEPLATE; 2X8A; TASHA FREIGHT FREIGHT TAX TAX 001-150-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-150-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-150-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 13. 21.60 60 1.50 1.50 1.21 1.54 41.21 10991 07/01/93 000309 TEMECULA COPIERS 10991 07/01/93 000309 TEMECULA COPIERS REPLACEMENT DRUM FOR RI TAX 001-171-999-5217 001-171-999-5217 195. 00 15.1111 210.11 10992 07/01/93 000314 TEMECULA MUSEUM FOUNDAT INTERIM ASSISTANCE 001-100-999-5267 15,000.00 15,000.00 10993 07/01/93 000322 UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR SEPT 18-22 CONE. DD 001-110-999-5258 226.00 226.00 10994 07/01/93 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 10994 07/01/93 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 10994 07/01/93 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 10994 07/01/93 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 2-SETS OF UNIFORMS; CLE UNIFORM RENTAL UNIFORM RENTAL UNIFORM RENTAL 100-164-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 12.50 13.60 13.60 13.60 53.30 10995 07/01/93 000333 WALL STREET JOURNAL RENEWAL 001-110-999-5228 256.45 256.45 10996 07/01/93 000340 WHITE CAP 10996 07/01/93 000340 WHITE CAP CASE OF CAUTION TAPE (1 TAX 190-180-999-5300 190-180-999-5300 172.20 13.35 185.55 10997 07/01/93 000342 WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC 10997 07/01/93 000342 WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC 10997 07/01/93 000342 WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC 10998 07/01/93 000360 GREEK, HAROLD F. ADJUSTMENTS/DEBIT MEMO RENT INCREASE JULY RENT LANDSCAPE SERV. 001-199-999-5234 340-199-999-5234 340-199-999-5234 190-180-999-5250 4, 49981 621.18 . 29,427.14 815.00 34,548.13 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 07/?' -`3 11:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER 10998 07/01/93 000360 GREEK, HAROLD F. WORKERS COMP/JUNE 001-1182 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/07-6/08 193-180-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/12-6/11 193-180-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/19-6/21 191-180-999-5500 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/19-6/21 191-180-999-5500 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 001-199-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 001-199-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 001-199-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 001-199-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 001-199-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 001-199-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/21-6/21 191-180-999-5500 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 191-180-999-5500 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 191-180-999-5500 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 190-182-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 190-182-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 190-182-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 190-180-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 191-180-999-5240 10999 07/01/93 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5/20-6/22 191-180-999-5500 11('� 17/01/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4752 SN 190-180-999-5208 110, 07/01/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909-202-4763/PB 001-100-999-5208 11001 07/01/93 000377 STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPOR ENERGY COST 191-180-999-5500 11002 07/01/93 000489 COBB GROUP SUBSCRIPTION/WORDPERFEC 320-199-999-5228 11003 07/01/93 000596 LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/LAF JULY 21-24 CONF. 001-100-999-5258 11003 07/01/93 000596 LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/LAF JULY 21-24 CONF. 001-110-999-5258 11004 07/01/93 000603 CABLE & WIRELESS COMMUN MAY 16-JUNE 15 320-199-999-5208 11005 07/01/93 000645 SMART & FINAL FUND RAISER/TEEN CENTER 190-183-819-5300 11006 07/01/93 000668 TIMMY D. PRODUCTIONS WIRE PARADE ROUTE 190-183-965-5300 11006 07/01/93 000668 TIMMY D. PRODUCTIONS BAND/P.A SYSTM/4TH OF J 190-180-999-5300 11007 07/01/93 000702 CADDY GRAPHICS GRAPHICS 4TH JULY PARAD 190-183-965-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI 4TH OF JULY T-SHIRTS 190-183-965-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI SCREEN SET-UP 190-183-965-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI TAX 190-183-965-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI 72; DAY CAMP T-SHIRTS; 190-183-809-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI SCREEN SET-UP 190-183-809-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI TAX 190-183-809-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI T-SHIRTS (8)L, (45)XL 190-183-905-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI T-SHIRTS XXL 190-183-905-5300 11008 07/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI T-SHIRTS (4)L, (9)XL 190-183-907-5300 11008,1-°7/01/93 000724 A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI T-SHIRT XXL 190-183-907-5300 PAGE 4 ITEM CHECK AMOUNT AMOUNT 48.50- 766.50 13.76 13.24 119.52 155.91 75.54 87.25 198.51 113.60 122.70 505.06 138.56 145.07 138.24 181.76 230.46 70.89 25.24 41.25 176.46 117.94 44.26 136.72 69.00 590.00 285.00 1,572.04 68.30 750.00 850.00 20.00 444.00 25.00 36.35 521.28 25.00 42.34 344.50 37.50 84.50 7.50 2,553.02 162.20 136.72 69.00 875.00 11572.04 68.30 1,600.00 20.00 VOUCHRE2 07/01/93 11:22 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAP-,%5 1 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NUMBER VENDOR NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 11008 11008 07/01/93 07/01/93 000724 000724 A 4 R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI A 8 R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI TAX TAX 190-183-905-5300 190-183-907-5300 29.39 7.35 1,604.71 11009 07/01/93 000731 NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP SEMINAR/DU 001-161-999-5258 108.55 108.55 11010 11010 07/01/93 07/01/93 000752 000752 STONE, JEFFREY E. STONE, JEFFREY E. REIMB/MEDICAL DESIGN CO REIMB/TEAM WORKSHOP 280-199-999-5258 001-100-999-5258 1,223.52 131.41 1,354.93 11011 07/01/93 000843 McDANIEL ENGINEERING CO SENIOR BOX CULVERT 210-199-801-5804 156.00 156.00 11012 11012 11012 07/01/93 07/01/93 07/01/93 000907 000907 000907 TEMECULA CAR WASH TEMECULA CAR WASH TEMECULA CAR WASH OIL CHANGES AND CAR WAS OIL CHANGES AND CAR WAS OIL CHANGES AND CAR WAS 310-162-999-5214 310-162-999-5214 310-162-999-5214 18.73 22.03 .70 41.46 11013 07/01/93 000910 MARY MITCHELL TRUST, TH JULY RENT 190-182-999-5234 3,374.95 3,374.95 11014 07/01/93 000912 CITY CLERKS ASSOC. OF C MEMBERSHIP 001-120-999-5226 100.00 100.00 11015 11015 07/01/93 07/01/93 000928 000928 LEKOS ELECTRIC, INC. LEKOS ELECTRIC, INC. REPAIR INTERCONNECT RETENTION 210-165-611-5804 210-2035 1,000.00 100.00- 900.00 11016 11016 11016 07/01/93 07/01/93 07/01/93 000943 000943 000943 GRAYNOR ENGINEERING GRAYNOR ENGINEERING GRAYNOR ENGINEERING ENGINEERING SERVICES OP ENGINEERING SERVICES CH ENGINEERING SERVICES CH 210-199-801-5802 210-199-801-5802 210-199-801-5802 152.00 336.00 240.00 728.00 11017 11017 07/01/93 07/01/93 000947 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C MAY 1993 MISC. BLUEPRINTS, ETC. 001-1280 001-163-999-5268 267.20 216.00 483.20 11018 07/01/93 000958 ROBERT CARAN PRODUCTION DESIGN AND CONDUCT JULY 190-180-999-5250 3,500.00 3,500.00 11019 07/01/93 001001 VAN GAALE CONSTRUCTION, R.O.W. WEED MOWING NEED 100-164-999-5402 980.00 980.00 11020 11020 07/01/93 07/01/93 001002 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - FIRST INTERSTATE BANK - 5473-6664-0391-0032 NJ 5473-6664-0391-0032 NJ 001-140-999-5258 001-150-999-5260 248.75 43.79 292.54 11021 07/01/93 001042 OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLE YEAR END AUDIT 001-140-999-5250 100.00 100.00 11022 07/01/93 001048 ROSA'S CANTINA BREAKFAST VIP/PARADE 190-183-965-5300 123.40 123.40 11023 07/01/93 001049 DOUBLE D PIPELINE, INC. REPAIR WATER LINE 001-1280 50.00 50.00 TOTAL CHECKS 110,166.91 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 07/9 "' 13:27 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE AMOUNT 001 GENERAL FUND 77,434.50 100 GAS TAX FUND 45,864.55 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 20,093.32 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 560.00 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 1,839.25 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 108,609.39 250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 51,956.34 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 12,935.03 300 INSURANCE FUND 13,808.14 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 14,821.03 330 COPY CENTER FUND 21,545.95 TOTAL 369,467.50 PAGE 5 VOUCHRE2 07/01/93 13:27 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PAI-,� FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 11027 07/13/93 000123 BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS LEGAL/MARCH SERV. LEGAL SERV/MARCH LEGAL SERV/MARCH LEGAL SERV/MARCH LEGAL SERV/MARCH LEGAL/APRIL SERV. LEGAL SERV. 4/30/93 LEGAL SERV. 4/30/93 LEGAL SERV. 4/30/93 LEGAL SERV. 4/30/93 LEGAL SERV. 4/30/93 LEGAL SVCS MODAFFARE VS 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 001-1280 190-180-999-5246 300-199-999-5205 300-199-999-5205 190-180-999-5246 300-199-999-5207 001-1280 001-130-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 300-199-999-5205 3,150.00 18,994.74 681.25 2,006.98 53.30 923.58 1,297.33 9,578.64 22.95 11.50 15,112.30 3,252.62 55,085.19 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 11028 07/13/93 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE PROVIDE LABOR AND MATER PROVIDE LABOR AND HATER FLATS MIXED BEGONIAS IN INSTALL TWO 15-GALLON T APPLICATION OF SOIL SUL AERIFICATION OF RANCHO REMOVE AND REPLACE DEAD REMOVAL OF EXISTING THE LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATIO THE SUMMIT - LANDSCAPIN MARTINIQUE - LANDSCAPIN IRRIGATION REPAIR TO Cl IRRIGATION REPAIR TO Cl LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS CONNECT IRRIGATION SYST 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 191-180-999-5510 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5510 193-180-999-5510 193-180-999-5510 193-180-999-5510 193-180-999-5510 193-180-999-5510 190-180-999-5212 139.35 118.00 60.00 590.00 1,140.00 1,080.00 2 .00 50.00 13.60 359.00 654.2 .0 1486 35. 37878.00 .00 5,609.60 11029 07/13/93 11029 07/13/93 11029 07/13/93 11029 07/13/93 11029 07/13/93 000135 000135 000135 000135 000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER SIGNS SIGNS SIGNS SIGNS TAX 100-164-999-5244 100-164-999-5244 100-164-999-5244 100-164-999-5244 100-164-999-5244 44797 129. 30 10.78 5.00 1,. 138 138.3434 2,511.39 11030 07/13/93 11030 07/13/93 11030 07/13/93 11030 07/13/93 000178 000178 000178 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO 80386SX 25MHZ W/2M MEN TAX 486DX-50MHZ VESA W/256K TAX 320-1970 320-1970 320-'19T0 000 2,209.25 2 585.00 ,. 200200.34 5,694.59 11031 07/13/93 000202 J.F. DAVIDSON ENGRING SERVICES /PW92- 100-164-999-5248 2,550.00 2,550.00 11032 07/13/93 11032 07/13/93 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS QUICK COVERS FOR FY 1993-94; 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS QUICK TAX 001-140-999-5222 001-140-999-5 1,11222 86.00 6.03 1,196.03 11033 07/13/93 000230 MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES CSD ADMINISTRATION SERV 190-180-999-5525 1,500.00 1,500.00 11034 07/13/93 000240 ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING STRIPPING 11034 07/13/93 000240 ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING CITYWIDE STRIPING & STE 11034 07/13/93 000240 ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING STRIPING 100-164-999-5410 100-164-999-5410 100-164-999-5410 55065 1,413. 293 3,. 3,53939.06 28,503.,'^,, VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3 07/01�' 13:27 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 11035 07/13/93 000271 ROBERT REIN, WM FROST & PROF. ENGINEERING APRIL 100-164-999-5248 4,130.62 4,130.62 11036 07/13/93 000285 SIR SPEEDY 4-PART;CONTIN000S FORMS 001-140-999-5222 514.75 11036 07/13/93 000285 SIR SPEEDY TAX 001-140-999-5222 39.89 11036 07/13/93 000285 SIR SPEEDY TO PURCHASE CASE OF PAP 001-150-999-5222 85.76 11036 07/13/93 000285 SIR SPEEDY PERFORATION OF PAPER FO 001-150-999-5222 150.00 11036 07/13/93 000285 SIR SPEEDY TAX 001-150-999-5222 18.27 11036 07/13/93 000285 SIR SPEEDY PRINTING FOR EMPLOYMENT 001-150-999-5222 188.50 11036 07/13/93 000285 SIR SPEEDY TAX 001-150-999-5222 14.61 1,011.78 11037 07/13/93 000332 VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATI PLAN CHECKS FOR MAY 199 001-162-999-5248 1,731.60 1,731.60 11038 07/13/93 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI METER USAGE FOR 5100 XE 330-199-999-5582 1,011.27 11038 07/13/93 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI 7032; IMAGING TONER CAR 330-199-999-5583 369.00 11038 07/13/93 000345 XEROX CORPORATION BILLI TAX 330-199-999-5583 28.60 1,408.87 11039 07/13/93 000395 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CO MEMBERSHIPS 93-94 280-199-999-5264 10,000.00 10,000.00 11040 07/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET SPS320TSX; UNIDEN 1/5W 001-170-999-5610 1,878.20 11040 07/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET APX-115; UNIDEN DESK TO 001-170-999-5610 160.20 11040 07/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET APX181A; UNIDEN LEATHER 001-170-999-5610 106.20 1104 07/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET APX-1100; UNIDEN SPARE 001-170-999-5610 135.00 110 7/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET APX-185; UNIDEN CASE ST 001-170-999-5610 21.60 1104, j7/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET TK-930HDK; KENWOOD 35 W 001-170-999-5610 1,789.20 11040 07/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET SMLNCP; MAXRAD SS LOW L 001-170-999-5610 51.06 11040 07/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET MAX-8053; MAXRAD 3DB GA 001-170-999-5610 37.26 11040 07/13/93 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET TAX 001-170-999-5610 323.85 4,502.57 11041 07/13/93 000481 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONM SERVICES THROUGH MAY 28 210-199-801-5804 1,050.00 11041 07/13/93 000481 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONM GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES F 210-165-611-5804 392.00 11041 07/13/93 000481 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONM FOOTING INSPECTION 250-190-129-5804 1,200.82 2,642.82 11042 07/13/93 000539 WIMMER YAMADA ASSOCIATE PERMIT RESEARCH 210-190-120-5802 2,587.50 2,587.50 11043 07/13/93 000606 RIVERSIDE COUNTY ADMIN. ACIIS THIRD FOURTH QTR 001-170-999-5325 19,028.00 19,028.00 11044 07/13/93 000660 R.W. CASH CONSTRUCTION RETENTION 250-2035 48,099.52 48,099.52 11045 07/13/93 000711 GRAPHICS UNLIMITED DEVELOP SUMMER/FALL 199 190-180-999-5222 10,853.66 10,853.66 11046 07/13/93 000749 GOLDEN STATE FENCE CO. VIA LOBO CHANNEL FENCE 100-164-999-5402 5,654.90 5,654.90 11047 07/13/93 000757 CONCISE CONSTRUCTION BUILDING PORTION OF PRO 210-199-801-5804 65,775.00 11047 07/13/93 000757 CONCISE CONSTRUCTION RETENTION 210-2035 6,577.50- 59,197.50 11048 07/13/93 000818 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC PW92-D6 TRAFFIC SIGNAL 210-165-611-5804 49,035.99 11048 07/13/93 000818 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC RETENTION 210-2035 4,903.60- 44,132.39 11049 07/13/93 000820 WINCHAK, KRIS WORKERS COMP FOR JUNE 9 001-1182 8.72- 11049 07/13/93 000820 WINCHAK, KRIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 190-180-999-5250 1,225.00 11049 ,-z/13/93 000820 WINCHAK, KRIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 001-163-999-5249 600.00 1,816.28 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 07/01/93 13:27 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER PF-S�4 FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 11050 07/13/93 000824 SOUTHERN CALIF. ASSOC. MEMBERSHIP 001-100-999-5226 1,928.00 1,928.00 11051 07/13/93 000884 LARUE PAINTING GRAFFITI REMOVAL/APRIL 001-170-999-5293 3,692.50 3,692.50 11052 07/13/93 000927 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, MATERIAL TESTING 250-190-129-5804 2,656.00 2,656.00 11053 07/13/93 000937 C.M. ENGINEERING PRELIM DEVELOPMENT REVI 210-190-119-5802 1,250.00 1,250.00 11054 07/13/93 000968 CREATIVE PROMOTION PRODUCTION GUIDE/TEN FI 280-199-999-5264 2,935.03 2,935.03 11055 07/13/93 001006 BURTRONICS BUSINESS SYS MICROFILMING EQUIP. 330-1940 19,175.37 11055 07/13/93 001006 BURTRONICS BUSINESS SYS MICROFILMING EQUIP. 330-1940 961.71 20,137.08 11056 07/13/93 001007 NELSON PAVING & SEALING OVERLAYS & EXTRA WORK 001-166-999-5402 5,780.00 5,780.00 11057 07/13/93 001009 DBX, INC. TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICA 100-164-999-5405 2,514.00 2,514.00 11058 07/13/93 001015 PROGRAMED FOR SUCCESS, ACTIVITY REGISTRATION S 320-1980 4,990.00 11058 07/13/93 001015 PROGRAMED FOR SUCCESS, LEAGUE SCHEDULING SYSTE 320-1980 990.00 11058 07/13/93 001015 PROGRAMED FOR SUCCESS, FACILITY MANAGEMENT SYS 320-1980 2,490.00 11058 07/13/93 001015 PROGRAMMED FOR SUCCESS, TAX 320-1980 656.44 9,126._44,� TOTAL CHECKS 369,467.50 ITEM NO. 4 ML APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFIC_ER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: City Treasurer's Report as of May 31, 1993 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of May 31, 1993. 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 the Code Sections as of May 31, 1993. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENT: City Treasurer's Report as of May 31, 1993 r— City of Temecula City Treasurer's Report As of May 31, 1993 Cash Activity for the Month of May: Cash and Investments as of May 1, 1993 $ 39,669,817 Cash Receipts 4,398,336 Cash Disbursements (1,825,280) Cash and Investments as of May 31, 1993 $ 42,242,873 Cash and Investments Portfolio: Type of Investment Institution Yield Balance p. mash City Hall $ 800 General Checking First Interstate 152,767 (1) Interest Checking Bank of America 2.500% 16,148 (1) Benefit demand deposits First Interstate 12,241 (1) Benefit demand deposits Bank of America 1.100% 165 (1) Local Agency Investment Fund State Treasurer 4.427% 19,895,657 Deferred Comp. Fund ICMA Trust accounts-TCSD bonds Bank of America 2.705% 320,173 4,588,585 Trust accounts -RDA bonds Bank of America 2.705% 17,256,337 $ 42,242,873 (1)-This amount includes outstanding checks. Per Government Code Requirements, this Treasurer's Report is in compliance with the City of Temecula's Investment Policy and there are adequate funds available to meet budgeted and actual expenditures for the next thirty days of the City of Temecula. Prepared by Tim McDermott, Senior Accountant H O N N Y) n b a p o z N R M $ Y� LL N N N W o M O O N N $ N w ego a> O Z; U V LL N A N N a U. >' to R N Z o N a� 2{ N 4 M o w _U U. ZZW Z 52 N N N ♦p O 8 pp O O O a o o yN QQ M 2S N v! N B $ S �y N U fV CIFO y1N1�� N Ea < i i $ f1 I N N N X 1=l Ocr LL — f f f Y 1 U < W W ¢ o <LL` to 0 0 i ui R r n r > i U N N N N N Y 0 m U LL B n r; (L o pp M N o tl3 M R N j WLL .... 0 N O N n r3 N e W O N N I' N n O M A U N= D O N mpO O o pO 0 0 0 — H< Z p N N q N N w ^ O M N O fV to N J 0 •� N n n O N cy p N lle7 8� WLL 8w o l7 V_i ^ywi lei W N V 'V i W ddd W O U. 0 W gi o Z ~ r aa~ 2 = 7 U < ul > < S N N ~ co F 2 U W Z y0j f U i y W N < W W W 2 W W H J W W 5 vi < 1- < J` �- Li O O O G W W uj N>> LL Q J` < N ma LU w M ~¢ Val f0 !A F Louwwwc� < O ° 7 tu� O M11 0 o < < W N co j ;� N f D W a o ¢ x U 08 W LL < LL = W Z N V1 0 W W << ~ W W U U > U W � O < W IU J2 S J J 1p� LL W S < 1U ] Z N < w H a m W W m U U < Q 2 � f- O Z U F Z N 2 0 0 Z TjTd. U vi F N a m W O 3] < < U W m U Z uj 7 w 4 LU m W Z 2 O 8 W � 2 Z W LL W to Q = Q Lu a o �J k E k k ■ f § ` k @ r § q ; � ■ B § K @ k § § § k $ § at % ° § @ 2 k R q k k « § © A ! ■ § # - 0 , ■ k 2 � $ . § ci k $ LJI_ M_ ui \ k ��/Z§/ � (.) z Lu § a Ir L k E � } § § F U. ®§ LL >> a`« : § §%Q§��) § 2§ 2LL §� kƒ §j $ § f gIL p U) c \ \ \ @ E t § R§�N to 46 o§o $qI - ` § o - k ( _ �§� a & ¢� A A $\ C �� _ b 46 " ` o ! I - § \ Z 7 ■ $ 7 )z§� § § . C $ R - k CC m z ® S ® b §�` � - § § 7 K 2 ( - o m ° f � f - / e § / Lq « . 40 of § 44 k % A \ " E r to c , � ƒ a \ § Z k m ( § b E � E % owl LU 2 k ■ k � � z 2 k / § K E ° « _ � 2 § £ 2 cli ® ( k 40 ° all � &2 § k § & f § § « § 7 �2 § z § ®f ! * \ - -11 ` %ƒ - � - A &§- k k 40 � A ° § � k ) � § toll § ° R k k ll § kk` ■ ■ 2 9 � \ i k § ■ CD K k § 7 E % - ■ & P � - B- � k B � § _ § � E b § . § _ § ) � $ § _ § § 2 § �. —1�1 �� ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Resolution Establishing City's Gann Appropriations Limit for the Fiscal Year 1993-94 Prepared by: Grant M. Yates, Financial Service Administrator RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution 93- entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FY 1993-94. DISCUSSION: In accordance with the Government Code, the City is required to recompute the Gann limit on an annual basis. Using cost of living data provided by the State of California and population data provided by the US Census and State Department of Finance, the City's Appropriations Limit for FY 1993-94 has been computed to be $11,191, 671. This computation considers the effect of Proposition 111. Appropriations subject to the limitation in the FY 1993-94 Budget total $8,022,698 which is $3,168,973 less than the computed limit. Additional appropriations to the budget funded by nontax sources such as service charges, restricted revenues from other agencies, grants or beginning fund balances would be unaffected by the Appropriations Limit. However, any supplemental appropriations funded through increased tax sources would be subject to the Appropriations Limit and could not exceed the $3,168,973 variance indicated above. Further, any overall actual receipts from tax sources greater than $8,022,698 from budget estimates will result in proceeds from taxes in excess of the City's Appropriations Limits, requiring refunds of the excess within the next two fiscal years or voter approval of an increase in the City's Appropriations Limit. FISCAL IMPACT: As indicated in the attached schedule, the City's appropriations subject to limitation as proposed in the FY 1993-94 Budget are $3,168,973 less than the computed limit. Any supplemental appropriations funded through nontax sources would be unaffected by the Appropriations Limit. However, supplemental appropriations funded by tax revenues in excess of budget projections would be subject to limitation and could not exceed the $3,168,973 margin indicated above. Further, any overall increases in tax sources greater than $3,168,973 from budget estimates will result in proceeds from taxes in excess if the City's Temporary Appropriations Limit, requiring refunds of the excess within the next two fiscal years of voter approval of an increase in the City's Temporary Appropriations Limit. In implementing the provisions of SB 1352 as they relate to the Gann Initiative, it is recommended the City Council adopt the attached Resolution establishing the City's Appropriations Limit for FY 1993-94 of $11,191, 671. ATTACHMENTS: Schedule "1 " - Classification of Revenue Sources and Calculation of Limit Margin Resolution No. 93- Establishing City's Gann Appropriations Limit for FY 1993-94 Exhibit "A" Computation of Gann Appropriations Limit �— Classification of Revenue Sources and Calculation of Limit Margin FY 1993-94 Property tax Sales and use tax Property transfer tax Transient occupancy tax Business license fee Franchise fees Licenses & permits Fines & forfeitures Motor vehicle in lieu Gas tax Overhead reimbursement - TCSD Overhead reimbursement - RDA Overhead reimbursement - Capital Projects Miscellaneous ivestment interest Appropriations subject to limitation before Prop, 111 exclusions Prop. 111 exclusions: Federal mandates (Medicare) Qualified capital outlay Appropriations subject to limitation Gann limit Margin Non -tax Proceeds 680,000 1,820,000 54,000 567,358 324,608 75,000 266,301 20,000 88,000 $ 3,895,267 Schedule 1 Tax Proceeds $ 824,040 51600,000 130,000 450,000 70,000 1,061,026 187,000 8,322,066 (47,277) (252,091) 8,022,698 11,191,671 $ 3,168,973 EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF TEMECULA COMPUTATION OF GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT Base Appropriations Limit Based Upon Actual FY 1990-91 Revenues $7,346,506 FY 1990-91 Population Change ............................... N/A FY 1990-91 California Consumer Price Index Change ............... 5.0% Cumulative Compound (1.05 X 1.0) .................:......... 5.0% FY 1990-91 Appropriations Limit ........................ $7,713,831 FY 1991-92 Population Change .............................. 1.9% FY 1991-92 California Consumer Price Index Change ............... 5.9% Cumulative Compound (1.059 X 1.019) ...... 7.9% FY 1991-92 Appropriations Limit ........................ $8,324,157 FY 1992-93 Population Change ............................ 14.47% FY 1992-93 California Consumer Price Index Change ............... 6.1 % Cumulative Compound (1.061 X 1.1447) ..................... 21.45% FY 1992-93 Appropriations Limit ....................... $10,109,91, FY 1993-94 Population Change .............................. 3.5% FY 1993-94 California Consumer Price Index Change .............. 3.41 % Cumulative Compound (1.035 x 1.0341) ...................... 10.70% FY 1993-94 Appropriations Limit ....................... $11,191,671 *Source: State of California Department of Finance * *Source: State of California, Department of Industrial Relations. �-, RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LEWT FOR FY 1993-94 WHEREAS, the voters approved the Gann Spending -Limitation Initiative (Proposition 4) on November 6, 1979, adding Article X M B to the Constitution of the State of California to establish and define annual appropriation limits on state and local governmental entities; WHEREAS, SB 1352 provides for the implementation of Article XIII B by defining various terms used in this article and prescribing procedures to be used in implementing specific provisions of the article, including the establishment by resolution each year by the governing body of each local jurisdiction of its appropriations limits; WHEREAS, the required computations to determine the Appropriations Limit for FY1993-94 have been performed by the Department of Finance and are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, and available for public review; WHEREAS, these computations are provided on the two pages of Schedule 1 and 2 which is herein incorporated by reference and attached hereto. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Appropriations Limit for the City of Temecula for FY1993-94. SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the Office of the City Clerk. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 1993. J. Sal Munoz, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] Resos1321 A- 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 13th day of July, 1993, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk Resos1321 _2_ ITEM NO. 6 APPROVAL: CITY ATTORNEYW �- FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Official -12r- DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Service Authority for the Abatement of Abandoned Vehicles RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT AND IMPOSITION OF A FEE DISCUSSION: In 1990, Assembly Bill 4114 was enacted into law. This Bill repealed and amended California Vehicle Code (CVC) Sections 9250.7, 22665 and 22710 as they relate to an Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program (AVA). A copy of AB 4114 is attached identified as Exhibit No. 1. Assembly Bill 4114 states that a service authority for the abatement of abandoned vehicles may be established in any county if the Board of Supervisors in that county, by two-thirds vote, and a majority of the cities having a majority of the incorporated population within the county have adopted resolutions providing for the establishment of the Authority. The membership of the Authority shall be determined by concurrence of the Board of Supervisors and a majority vote of the cities within the county having a majority of the incorporated population. The authority shall be staffed by existing county and city personnel. The Assembly Bill further states that a service authority may impose a service fee of one -dollar per vehicle registered to an owner with an address in the county which has established SERVICE AUTHORITY. The fee shall be paid to the Department of Motor CCCMVeh1c19Abt.713 Agenda Report July 13, 1993 Page 2 Vehicles at the time of registration, or renewal of registration, or when renewal becomes delinquent on or after January 1, 1994, except for vehicles expressly exempted from payment of registration fees. It is important to note that regardless of the City participating in the AVA program or not, if a Service Authority is established, citizens of the City will be assessed the additional one (1) dollar per vehicle registered, with the funds being set aside in the City's name with the Service Authority. This legislation is effective for a five (5) year period and will be evaluated at that time for its effectiveness. City Ordinance No. 90-24 pertaining to Nuisance Abatement provides for the abatement of abandoned vehicles with cost recovery by means of a recorded lien against the property. The Service Authority Agreement provides for direct quarterly reimbursement of abandoned vehicle abatement costs. To date, twenty-two (22) incorporated cities within the County have filed interest in the AVA program. On June 22, 1993, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors approved Resolution 93-260 (Exhibit No. 2 attached) and an accompanying agreement for creating a County/City joint AVA Service Authority. Upon receipt of an adopted City Resolution and a signed Service Authority Resolution from all interested cities, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors will consider the AVA package for final approval on July 20, 1993. The approved AVA package will then be forward to the Department of the California Highway Patrol for acceptance. FISCAL IMPACT: It is estimated that the City of Temecula will be eligible to recover abandoned vehicle abatement costs up to a maximum of $21,459 per year during the period this legislation is in effect, or until all respective appropriated funds are depleted. VAWMCCCMASATE. VEHICLE RESOLUTION NO. 93-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT AND IMPOSITION OF A FEE WHEREAS, Section 22710 of the California Vehicle Code was amended in 1990 to provide for the establishment of a Service Authority for Abandoned Vehicle Abatement (AVA) if the Board of Supervisors of the county and a majority of the cities within the county having a majority of the population adopt resolutions providing for the establishment of the authority; and, WHEREAS, Section 22710 and 9250.7 of the California Vehicle Code provide for the imposition of a one -dollar ($1.00) fee by the Service Authority on vehicles registered to an owner with an address in the County which established the Service Authority; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula finds that abandoned, inoperable, wrecked, dismantled vehicles or parts thereof pose a health and safety hazard and are found to be public nuisances; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted Ordinance 90-24 which provides for abatement and removal as public nuisances of abandoned, wrecked, disintegrated or inoperative vehicles from private or public property; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula finds that an abandoned vehicle abatement program is needed to provide for the proper removal and disposal of abandoned vehicles and assist law enforcement and code enforcement personnel in abatement of abandoned vehicles; and, WHEREAS, the Riverside County AVA Service Authority will have responsibility for implementing an abandoned vehicle removal program in Riverside County region; NOW THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AND ORDERED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby requests that a Service Authority for Abandoned Vehicles be established in the City of Temecula pursuant to the provisions of Section 22710 of the California Vehicle Code. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula directs that the County of Riverside shall serve as the Service Authority for Abandoned Vehicles in the City of Temecula. �� 5/resos/abet BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula approves the vehicle abatement program and plan of the AVA Service Authority of the County of Riverside and a one dollar ($1) vehicle registration fee be imposed. The fee imposed by the Service Authority shall remain in effect only for a period of five years. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, on this day of , 1993, by the following vote: J. Sal Munoz, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk S/rcsos/abat I '� I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 93-_ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the _ day of _, 1993, by the following vote: APES: - COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: - COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: - COUNCILMEMBERS: 5/rcsos/abat Assembly Bill No. 4114 CHA=, R 1684 An act to amend Section 22665 of, and to repeal and add Sections 9250.7 and 22710 of, the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles, and mak- ing an appropriation therefor. (Approved by Covernor SelF)teinber 30, 1990. Filed with Secretory of State September 30, 1990.1 LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 4114, Clute. Motor vehicles: abandonment. Existing law imposed a $1 vehicle registration fee for deposit in the Abandoned Vehicle 'Trust Fund which is continuously appropriated for costs -of the Contzoller, Department of the California I-Iighway Patrol, and specified local abandoned vehicle nuisance abatement programs. This bill would delete those provisions and would provide for the establishment and termination of service authorities for the abatement of abandoned vehicles and funding of local abandoned vehicle abatement programs, as specified. The bill would authorize a service authority, for a specified period, to impose a fee of $1 on vehicles registered in the county which established the service authority. Those fees would be deposited in the Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund which this bill would create and would be continuously appropriated for allocation by the Controller to fund local vehicle abatement programs after deduction of certain administrative costs. Appropriation: yes. . The people of the Slate of C-ilifornia do enact as follows. SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares that the problem of abandoned vehicles is continuing to grow and recognizes that local governments have insufficient resources to adequately address the problem. The Legislature further finds that the increase in abandoned vehicles is not only a public nuisance, but a danger to the public's health and safety. Therefore, in order to ensure the abatement of abandoned vehicles, the Legislature finds it necessary to provide for the establishment of local service authorities for the purpose of abating abandoned vehicles. SEC. 2. Section 9250.7 of the Vehicle Code is repealed. SEC. 3. Section 9250.7 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read: 9250.7. (a) A service authority established under Section 22710 may impose a service fee of one dollar ($I) on vehicles registered to an owner with an address in the county which established the service authority. The fee shall be paid to the department at the time of registration, or renewal of registration, or when renewal becomes 96 50 EXHIBIT 1 Ch. 1684 — 2 — delinquent, on or after January 1, 1992, except vehicles that are • expressly exempted under this code from the payment of registration fees. (b) The department, after deducting its administrative costs, shall transmit, at least quarterly, the net amount collected pursuant to subdivision (a) to the Treasurer for deposit in the Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund which is hereby created. All money in the fund is continuously appropriated to the Controller for allocation to a service authority which has an approved abandoned vehicle abatement program pursuant to Section 22710, and for payment of the administrative costs of the Controller. After deduction of its administrative costs, the Controller shall allocate the money in the Abandoned Vehicle Trust Fund to each service authority in proportion to the revenues received from the fee imposed by that authority pursuant to subdivision (a). (c) The fee imposed by a service authority shall remain in effect only for a period of five years after the date on which the authority is established. 'SEC. 4. Section 22665 of the Vehicle Code is amended to read: 22665. Notwithstanding Section 22710 or any other provision of law, the department may, at the request of a local authority, other than a service authority, administer on behalf of the authority its abandoned vehicle abatement and removal program established pursuant to Section 22660. SEC. 5. Section 22710 of the Vehicle Code is repealed. SEC. 6. Section 22710 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read: 22710. (a) A service authority for the abatement of abandoned vehicles may be established, and a one dollar ($1) vehicle registration fee imposed, in any county if the board of supervisors of the county, by a two-thirds vote, and a majority of the cities having a majority of the incorporated population within the county have adopted resolutions providing for the establishment of the authority and imposition of the fee. The membership of the authority shall be determined by concurrence of the board of supervisors and a -majority vote of the majority of the cities within the county having a majority of the incorporated population. (b) The authority may contract and may undertake any act convenient or necessary to carry out any law relating to the authority. The authority shall be staffed by existing county and city personnel. (c) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a service authority may adopt an ordinance establishing procedures for the abatement, removal, and disposal as public nuisances, of abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof from private or public jroperty; and for the recovery, pursuant to Section 25845 or 38773.5 of the Government Code, or assumption by the service authority, of costs of administration and that removal and disposal. The actual removal and disposal of vehicles shall be 96 80 — 3 — Ch. 1684 undertaken by an entity which may be a county or city or the department, pursuant to contract with the service authority as provided in this section. (2) The money received by an authority pursuant to Section 9250.7 and this section shall be used only for the abatement; removal, and disposal as public nuisances of any abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof from private or public property. (d) (1) An abandoned vehicle abatement program and plan of a service authority shall be implemented only with the approval of the county and a majority of the cities having a majority of the incorporated population. (2) The department shall provide guidelines for abandoned vehicle abatement programs. An authority's abandoned vehicle abatement plan and program shall be consistent with those guidelines, and shall provide for, but not be limited to, an estimate of the number of abandoned vehicles, a disposal and enforcement strategy including contractual agreements, and appropriate fiscal controls. (3) The approved plan shall be submitted to the department by August 1, 1991. The department shall review the plan and make recommendations for revision, if any, of the plan by October 1,1991. The service authority shall submit the plan, as revised, to the department and, if determined by the department to be consistent with the guidelines, shall submit the plan to the Controller by the following January 1. Except as provided in subdivision (e), the Controller shall make no allocations for a calendar year to a service authority for which an approved plan was not received on or before January 1 of that year. (e) Any approved plan which was adopted by the authority pursuant to subdivision (d) may be revised pursuant to the procedure prescribed in subdivision (d), including compliance with any dates described therein for submission to the department and the Controller, respectively, in the year in which the revisions are proposed. Compliance with that procedure shall only be required if the revisions are substantial. A service authority which is newt formed and has not complied with subdivision (d) may so comply after the dates specified in subdivision (d) by submitting an approved plan on or before those dates in the year in which the plan is submitted. (f) A service authority shall cease to exist on the date that all revenues received by the authority pursuant to this section and Section 9250.7 have been expended. SEC. 7. The Department of the California Highway Patrol shall report to the Legislature by January 1, 1996, on the effectiveness of the abandoned vehicle abatement programs conducted pursuant to Sections 9250.7 and 22710 of the Vehicle Code. Upon request of the Deparment of the California Highway Patrol, a service authority 96 100 Ch. 1684 _ 4 _ created pursuant to.Section 22710 shall submit data relative to the operation of its abandoned vehicle abatement program. to the department. 96 100 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN COUNTY COUNSEL SUITE 300 3535 10TH STREET RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA I Board of Supervisors County of Riverside RESOLUTION NO. 93-260 PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT SERVICE AUTHORITY AND AUTHORIZING IMPOSITION OF VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE WHEREAS, Vehicle Code Section 22710, subdivision (a), provides for the establishment of a service authority for the abatement of abandoned vehicles and the imposition of a one dollar ($1.00) vehicle registration fee in any county where the Board of Supervisors of the county by a two-thirds vote, and a majority of the cities having a majority of the incorporated population within the county, have adopted resolutions providing for the establishment of the authority and imposition of the fee; and WHEREAS, the proliferation of abandoned vehicles remains a continuing public nuisance within the unincorporated areas of Riverside County; and WHEREAS, the attached Agreement for Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority establishes a service authority for the abatement of abandoned vehicles in Riverside County pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 22710 and Government Code Section 6500. In accordance with Vehicle Code Section 9250.7, the Agreement requires the imposition of a service fee of one dollar ($1.00) on vehicles registered to an owner with an address in the county; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County o= Riverside, State of California, in regular session assembled on Juns 22, 1993, that this board hereby authorizes its Chairman to esecut=_ EXHIBIT 2 1 Jul 2 2 1"3 03. y3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN COUNTY COUNSEL SURE 300 3535 ' IOTH STREET RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA the attached Agreement For Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority on behalf of the County of Rivers _. Roll Call: Ayes: Buster, Dunlap, Ceniceros, Younglove Noes: None Absent: Larson 7...' = • • —1.19 is certified eo be a tww MSCSL241-71 .:ty adWed by said anmd visors on the date therm F:\JFITZCOO\PJA\RLS\93-260 6/15/93 a 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN COUNTY COUNSEL SUITE 300 353S IOTM STREET RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA AGREEMENT FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT SERVICE AUTHORITY Section 1. PARTIES. The parties to this Agreement are the County of Riverside and those cities within the County that have elected to create and participate in the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority as provided herein. Section 2. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish a service authority for the abatement of abandoned vehicles in Riverside County pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 22710 and Government Code Section'6500, et seq. Section 3. CREATION. Upon the effective date of this Agreement, there is hereby created the Riverside County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority ("Authority") as a separate public entity and distinct from the member jurisdictions to implement this Agreement in accordance with Vehicle Code Section 22710. Section 4. BOARD OF DIRECTORS. The Authority shall be governed by the Board of Directors, to be appointed as follows: one (1) representative from each jurisdiction in the County electing to become a member of the Authority. Section 5. POWERS AND DUTIE A. Contracts and Acts. Pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 22710(b), the Authority may contract and may undertake any act convenient or necessary to carry out any law relating to the Authority, including acts necessary to ensure that the vehicle registration fee authorized by Vehicle Code Section 9250.7 is used in accordance with the requirements of Vehicle Code Section 22710. B. Ordinance. Pursuant to Vehicle CodE Section 22710(c)(1), the Authority shall adopt ar ordinance establishing procedures for the abatement, removal, and disposal, as public nuisances, of abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof, from.private or public property; and for the recovery, pursuant to Section 25845 or 38773.5 of the Government Code, or assumption by the Service Authority, of costs of administration and of that removal anc disposal. The actual removal and disposal of vehicle= shall be undertaken by either the County, a city, or the Department of the California Highway Patrol ("CHP"), pursuant to the contract with the Authority. C. Procrram and Plan. Pursuant to Vehicle CodE Section 22710(d), the authority shall implement ai abandoned vehicle abatement program and plan followinc approval of the program and plan y the County of RiversidIF and a majority of the cities having a majority of th= 1 JUN 2 2 1993 -f 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN COUNTY COUNSEL SUITE 300 3535 IOTH STREET RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA incorporated population and participating as members of the Authority. The program and plan shall be consi�nt with guidelines prepared by the CHP. D. Fee. Pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 9250.7, the Authority shall impose a service fee of one dollar ($1.00) on vehicles registered to an owner with an address in the County, including the incorporated cities. E. Restriction. The manner of exercisinc powers granted by the Authority by this Agreement shall be subject to the same restrictions as are imposed upon the County of Riverside and participating member agencies in their exercise of similar powers. Section 6. STAFF. Pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 22710(c), the Authority shall be staffed by each member agency. Section 7. AUDIT. There shall be strict accountability of all Authority funds. The County Auditor shall be the auditor for the Authority. The Auditor shall report all receipts and an annual audit of the Authority pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 6505. The Authority shall compensate the County Auditor for reasonable charges incurred in the performance of said audit. Section 8. FUNDS. The funds received by the Authority frorr. the one dollar ($1.00) registration fee shall be used in accord--,ce with Vehicle Code Section 22710(c)(2), and shall be distribute :c the cities and the County for their use in accordance with Vehicle Code Section 22710(c)(2). Section 9. DEBTS AND LIABILITIES. The debts, liabilities and obligations of the Authority shall not be the debts, liabilities, and obligations of the member jurisdictions, or any o them. Section 10. AMENDMENT. This Agreement may be amended upor the approval of a majority of the member agencies having a majorit_ of the population. For purposes of this section, the population o: the County is defined as all of the population residing within th<_ unincorporated areas of the County of Riverside. Section 11. TERMINATION BY MEMBERS. Subject to Vehicle CodE Section 22710, this Agreement may be terminated by membe_ jurisdictions as follows: A. Individual Member Jurisdictions. A member jurisdiction may terminate its participation in this Agreement and the Authority effective on the first day o: any fiscal year provided that such jurisdiction shall giv= one year's prior written notice of such termination to th, Authority and the other member jurisdictions. The Notic= of Termination may be rescinded upon written notice to-k-�I- Authority and the other member jurisdictions at any l- 2 1 2 3' 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WILLIAM C KATZENSTEIN COUNTY COUNSEL SUITE 300 3535 . 'OTH STREET RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA before the effective date of termination. B.. Majority. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by a majority of the member jurisdictions voting to dissolve Authority. Section 12. TERMINATION. The Authority shall cease to exist on the date that all revenue received by the Authority pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 9250.7 has been expended. Section 13. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Agreement becomes effective upon approval of the County Board of Supervisors by two- thirds vote, and a majority of the cities having a majority of the incorporated population within the County. Dated: JUN 22 W ATTEST: GERALD A. MALONEY Clerk of the Boar Deputy Dated: ATTEST: By Deputy Dated: ATTEST: By Deputy 3 COUNTY OF RRIVERSIDE Chairman, Board of Supe-rvisors- CITY OF By Title CITY OF By Title 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN COUNTY COUNSEL SUITE 300 3535 ' 10TH STREET RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA Dated: ATTEST: By Deputy Dated: ATTEST: By Deputy I Dated: I ATTEST: CITY OF By Title CITY OF By Title CITY OF By Title By Deputy Dated: CITY OF ATTEST: By Title By Deputy F:\...\JFITZCO0\PJA\RES\93-260 6/15/93 4 ORDINANCE NO. 90.24 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY -COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING PORTIONS OF THE NON -CODIFIED RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCES AND ADD0iG CHAPTER 6.14 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO NUISANCE ABATEMENT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CTTy OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. City Ordinance No. 90.04 adopted by reference portions of the non -codified Riverside County Ordinances. On the effective date of this Ordinance, the following provisions of the non -codified Riverside County Ordinances, which City Ordinance No. 90-04 adopted, are hereby repealed: (a) Ordinance No. 520 relating to abandoned vehicles; (b) Ordinance No. 541 relating to removal of rubbish; bees. (c) Sections 9 through 15, inclusive of Ordinance No. 551 relating to SECTION 2. Chapter 6.14 is hereby added to the Temecula Municipal Code, which shall read as follows: Divisions: 2/O"VW24 I. "Chapter 6.14 Division 1 Public Nuisance Division 2 Abandoned Vehicles Division 3 Violations Noven"r 28, 1 "0 6,14,001 { n-' ICI j Public Nu.in=s Desi9n 6,14,003 Co tt mencement • Abnit= proceedi 6,14,004 t.•ry Abatement of t 6-14,005 Involunia- -Abatement 6,14,006 Form of 1 Hearing 1J • 1 1 Notice of • •a �� : • t 6,14,011 Abatementof 6-14,012 Cost..• t t •1 1 •r 1 •t ' 111 Assessment Lien 1 Om 1Altexnate Actions 6.14.001 PuM� (a) In order to further the stated goals of the City of Temecula and tc protect its citizens and their property from conditions which are offensive or annoying to the senses, detrimental to property values and community appearance, or hazardous or injurious to the health, safety or welfare of the general public, the City Council has determined that an Ordinance is necessary to effectively abate or prevent the development of such conditions in the City of Temecula. (b) It is the intention of the City Council, in adopting the Ordinance codified herein, to set forth guidelines for determining what conditions constitute a public nuisance; to establish a method for giving notice of the conditions and an opportunity to correct them; and finally in the event the public nuisance is not abated or corrected, to provide a procedure for a hearing and determination of the facts and manner in which the conditions shall be corrected or removed. (c) It is the purpose of this Ordinance to provide a just, equitable and Practical method, in addition to any other remedy available at law, whereby lands or buildings which are dilapidated, unsafe, dangerous, unsanitary, cluttered with weeds, debris, abandoned vehicles, machinery or equipment, or are a menace, or hazard to life, limb, safety, health, morals, property values, aesthetic standards or the general welfare vorV9a24 November 23, 1M r-- of the City of Temecula, may be required to be repaired, renovated, vacated, demolished, made safe, or cleaned up by removal of offensive conditions. (d) It is the purpose of this Ordinance to provide a program for the removal and/or abatement as public nuisances of abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof from private or public property. (e) In addition to the abatement procedures provided herein, this Ordinance declares certain conditions to be public nuisances and that maintenance of such conditions shall be a misdemeanor. M This Ordinance is not intended to enforce Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) on property, nor to supersede them. This Ordinance will be enforced uniformly within the City regardless of CC&R's. Therefore, this Ordinance does not abrogate the right of any homeowners association or private citizen to take action, legal or as otherwise provided in the CC&R's, to force compliance with the , CC&R's applicable to their tract or association even though the CC&R provisions may ' Y' be the same, more restrictive or may not be covered by this Ordinance. 6.14.002 Public Nuisances peQ: it is hereby declared to be a public nuisance for ane��' It shall be unlawful and or havingcharge of an residential y person owning, leasing, occupying g Y , agricultural, commercial, industrial, business park, office, educational, religious, vacant or other property within the City of Temecula, to maintain such property in such a manner that any of the following conditions are found to exist thereon: (a) Any violation of any Section of the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 90-04, which adopted by reference portions of the non -codified Riverside County Ordinance including, but not limited to: (1) Ordinance No. 190 relating to accumulation of limbs, branches, trimmings and parts of domestic and cultivated fruit trees; (2) Ordinance No. 369 relating to the deposit or discharge of sewage and other waste matter; ranches; (3) Ordinance No. 431 relating to location and operation of hog 2/ordtW24 3 November 2!. im (4) Ordinance No. 523 and 527 relating to the control of flies; of bees; (5) Sections 1 through 8 of Ordinance No. 551 relating to control (6) Ordinance No. 627 relating to regulation of picture arcades; (7) Ordinance No. 650 relating to sewage discharge; pollution; (8) Ordinance No. 655 relating to the regulation of light (9) Ordinance No. 657 relating to regulation of collection and removal of solid waste; (10) Ordinance Nos. 348 and 348.3078 relating to planning, including zoning restrictions, related to structures on property, signs restrictions, site development standards, and parking standards; (11) Ordinance No. 457.73, as amended, relating to building, housing and electrical; (b) Land, the topography or configuration of which, in any man-made state, whether as a result of grading operations, excavations, fill, or other alteration, interferes with the established drainage pattern over the m r property or from adjoining or other properties which does or may result in erosion, subsidence or surface water drainage programs of such magnitude as to be injurious to public health, safety and welfare or to neighboring properties; (c) Buildings or structures which are partially destroyed, abandoned or Pernutted to remain in a state of partial construction for more than six (6) months, or during any period of extension, after the issuance of a building permit; (d) The failure to secure and maintain from public access all doorways, windows and other openings into vacant or abandoned (not occupied or in use for any Purpose, no maintenance applied to the structure or grounds) buildings or structures; (e) Painted buildings that require re -painting, and walls, retaining walls, fences or structures, or building, walls, fences or structures upon which the condition of the paint has become so deteriorated as to permit decay, excessive checking, cracking, peeling, chalking, dry rot, warping or termite infestation; von V90.24 4 November 23, 1"0 '^ M Any building or structure, wall, fence, pavement, or walkway upon which any graffiti, including paint, ink, chalk, dye or other similar marling substances, is allowed to remain for more than twenty-four (24) hours; (g) Broken windows; (h) Overgrown, dead, decayed or hazardous vegetation which: (1) May harbor rats, vermin or other -disease carriers; (2) Is maintained so as to cause an obstruction to the vision of motorists or a hazardous condition to pedestrians or vehicle traffic; (3) Constitutes an unsightly appearance; (4) Creates a danger or attractive nuisance to the public; (i) Building exterior, roofs, landscaping, grounds, walls, retaining and crib walls, fences, driveways, parking lots, sidewalks or walkways which are maintained in such condition so as to become defective, unsightly or no longer viable; 6) The accumulation of dirt, litter, feces, or debris in doorways, �- adjoining sidewalks, parking lots, landscaped or other areas; (k) Except where construction is occurring under a valid permit, lumber, junk, trash, garbage, salvage materials, rubbish, hazardous waste, refuse, rubble, broken asphalt or concrete, containers, broken or neglected machinery, furniture, appliances, sinks, fixtures or equipment, scrap metals, machinery parts, or other such material stored or deposited on property such that they are visible from a public street, alley or neighboring property; (1) Deteriorated private streets, easements and parking lots, including those containing pot holes, or cracks; (m) Abandoned, broken or neglected equipment and machinery, pools, ponds, excavations, abandoned wells, shafts, basements or other holes, abandoned refrigerators or other appliances, abandoned motor vehicles, any unsound structure, skateboard ramps, or accumulated lumber, trash, garbage, debris or vegetation which may reasonably attract children to such abandoned or neglected conditions; 2/onVW24 Novondw 28, 1990 (n) (1) Construction equipment, buses, tow trucks, dump trucks, flatbed trucks, grading equipment, tractors, tractor trailers, truck trailers, or any other commercial vehicle over twenty-five (25) feet long or eight (8) feet in height or ninety (90) inches wide, supplies, materials, or machinery of any type or description, parked or stored upon any street or property within a residential zone. (2) Commercial vehicle, for the purposes of this section, shall be defined as any motorized or non -motorized vehicle used or maintained to transport property or goods for profit, or persons for hire or compensation. Any commercial vehicle, when used as the primary source of transportation by the person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge of any such vehicle, shall be excluded from the provisions of this subsection; (o) Construction debris storage bins stored in excess of fifteen (15) days on a public street or any front or sideyard setback area without the express approval of the City Engineer; (p) Any property with accumulations of grease, oil or other hazardous = = material on paved or unpaved surfaces, driveways, buildings, walls, or fences, or from which any such material flows or seeps on to any public street or other public or private property; (q) Any front yard, parkway, or landscaped setback area which lacks turf, other planted material, decorative rock, bark or planted ground cover or covering, so as to cause excessive dust or allow the accumulation of debris; (r) Any condition of vegetation overgrowth which encroaches into, over or upon any public right-of-way including, but not limited to, streets, alleys, or sidewalks, so as to constitute either a danger to the public safety or property or any impediment to public travel; (s) Any habitation which is overcrowded, as defined by the Uniform Housing Code, as adopted by reference by the City of Temecula ordinance No. 90-04, or which lacks adequate ventilation, sanitation or plumbing facilities, or which constitutes a fire hazard; (t) (1) The dumping of any waste matter in or upon any public or private highway or road, including any portion of the right-of-way thereof, or in or upon any private property into or upon which the public is admitted by easement or license, or upon any private property without the consent of the owner, or in or upon any public 2 0nU9424 6 Nave=ber 28, 1990 park of any public property other then property designated or set aside for that purpose by the governing board or body having charge of that property. (2) Also, any placing, depositing or dumping of any rocks or dirt in or upon any private highway or road, including any portion of the right-of-way thereof, or any private property, without the consent of the owner, or in or upon any public work or other public property, without the consent of the state or local agency having jurisdiction over the highway, road, or property, (u) Any other condition declared by any State, County, or City statute, code or regulation to be a public nuisance. 6.14.003 Commencement of Abatement '" -a", Whenever the Director of Building and Safety (hereinafter "Director") or his duly authorized agent or representative reasonably believes a public nuisance exists, he shall commence abatement proceedings. The Director shall have responsibility for abating such nuisances on any private property and cause a written notice to be issued to abate such nuisance. (a) The notice shall contain- a description of the property in general ' - terms reasonably sufficient to identify the location of the property. It shall refer to this section and the violation(s) of City Ordinance or the Municipal Code at issue, and shall direct compliance by removal or correction of the condition which is in violation of the provisions of this Code within a minimum of seven days and a maximum of thirty (30) calendar days from the date of the notice. The notice calendar shall further describe the consequences of failure to comply as prescribed in this section. (b) The notice shall be served on the owner or his agent and the person in possession of the property by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested. Delivery by first class mail shall be used when delivery by registered or certified mail is refused. Such notice by mail shall be sufficient for purposes of this Chapter, (c) Failure of any person to receive a notice shall not affect the validity of any proceedings under this Chapter. 6.14.004 Voluntary Abatement of Public Nuic :nr�, The owner, lease holder, tenant, or occupant having charge of any building, structure, or property alleged to be a public nuisance as set forth above, may abate said nuisance at any time within the abatement period by rehabilitation, repair, removal or demolition. The Director/Designee shall be advised of the abatement and shall inspect the premises to ensure that the nuisance has in fact been abated. voW9o.24 7 November 2E, 1990 6.14.005 Involuntary Abatement Upon failure of the owner or his agent or the person in possession of the property to remove or correct the conditions described in the notice by the date specified, the Director shall cause a hearing to be held to determine whether said building, structure, or property is being maintained in such a manner so as to constitute a public nuisance. The Director shall give not less than seven (7) days written notice of the hearing to the owner(s) of the affected properties as shown on the latest equalized tax assessment roll by mailing the same to the addresses as indicated thereon, to any persons holding permits to the applicable property, building or structure, and further, within the same time period, and by conspicuously posting on the affected property, building, or structure a copy of the notice. Notice may also be served on the holder of any mortgage or deed of trust or other lien or encumbrance of record; the owner or holder of any lease of record; and the holder of any other state of legal interest of record of the building or structure, or the land on which it is located. (a) The notice shall indicate the nature of the alleged public nuisance, a description of the property involved, and the designation of the time and place of the hearing to determine whether the same constitutes a public nuisance, and the manner of the proposed abatement if the same is found to be a public nuisance. (b) The notice and order of abatement shall be served on every party by registered or certified mail. Delivery by first class mail shall be used when delivery by registered or certified mail is refused. (c) The failure of any person to receive this notice shall not affect the validity of any proceedings under this Chapter. (d) Nothing hereby shall prevent any property owner or other interested person from abating the nuisance prior to the time of the hearing and notifying the City of the same. Upon confirmation by the City that the nuisance has been abated, the need for the hearing shall be deemed terminated. 6.14.006 Form of Notice. The notice given shall be provided in substantially the following format: 2/Ord/W24 'NOTICE OF HEARING ON ABATEMENT OF PUBLIC NUISANCE A hearing will be held at Temecula before the City of Temecula Hearing Officer, to determine whether the premises at constitutes a public nuisance. November 2E. 1990 The conditions asserted to constitute a public nuisance include the following: A hearing may be avoided if the following corrections are made at least two (2) calendar days before the date set for the hearing: If it is determined that the conditions on the property constitute a public nuisance, the following abatement action may be taken by the City if the owner has not taken corrective action within five (5) days after the hearing officer's determination: If abatement action is taken by the City, all costs of the abatement will be assessed against the � property and will attach as a lien until paid. All persons having an interest in this matter may attend the hearing and give testimony and evidence, which will be given due consideration by the hearing officer. Call (714) for questions regarding this notice.' 6.14.007 Hominy. (a) The hearing to determine whether a public nuisance exists shall be conducted by the hearing officer. The hearing officer shall be determined by Resolution by the City Council. The hearing officer is authorized to take testimony and in the course of so doing, is authorized to administer oaths or affirmations pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 2093(a). (b) At the hearing, the hearing officer shall consider all relevant evidence, including but not limited to applicable Staff Reports. He shall give any interested person the reasonable opportunity to be heard in conjunction therewith. Based upon the evidence so presented, the hearing officer shall determine whether a public nuisance within the meaning of this Chapter exists. vaa/W2s 9 Noven"r 28, IM (a) The decision of the hearing officer shall be final and conclusive in the absence of appeal as provided in this Chapter. (b) The hearing officer shall, within five (5) working days of the date of the hearing, cause to be sent a copy of the written notice of decision by certified or registered mail to the owner, all other persons and entities who received notice of the original hearing and to any other person requesting the same. The notice shall contain an order of abatement, if a public nuisance is determined to exist, directed to the owner of the affected property or the person in control and/or charge of the property, and shall set forth the nature of the nuisance, its location and the time and manner for its abatement. (c) Where an appeal is filed as provided in this Chapter, the order of abatement shall be suspended pending the review of the determination in the manner set forth in this Chapter. 6.14.009 A92W. Any peen entitled to notice of hearing, who has participated in that hearing and who is dissatisfied by the order of the hearing officer, may appeal that order by filing an appeal with the City Clerk within five (5) days of the date of the order and by paying the appeal fee set by Resolution. The notice of appeal shall specify: (a) A description of the property; (b) The abatement proceedings appealed; Property, (c) The owner, or appealing party's, legal or equitable interest in the (d) A statement of disputed and undisputed facts; (e) A statement specifying which portion of the proceedings that are being appealed, together with any evidentiary or supporting materials that would support the appeal; and 2/Oed W24 (f) A verification of the truth of all matters asserted. 10 November 28. 1990 --1- Upon the timely filing of a notice of appeal in the proper form, the City Clerk shall place said appeal upon the next regular meeting to the City Council scheduled to be held not less than five (S) business days after said appeal is received. The City Clerk shall provide written notice of the appeal, including the time, place, and date of the hearing on the appeal, to the appellant and any other person to whom notice of the hearing officer's order was sent. Said notice shall be sent in the same manner as notice of the hearing officer's order. The City Council may limit the issues on appeal to those in substantially the same form as that sent by the hearing officer and shall be sent to all notice of the hearing officer's order was sent as well as to all eons to whom notice, in writing, at the time the appeal is heard.Persons requesting such 6.14.010 Notice of Council Decision order shall be mailed by certified or registered mail to the owner, all other pethersons, s Council's a d entities who received notice of the original hearing and to another eons, and the same, by the City Clerk within five Y person requesting Council's decision shall be final and conclusive n purse Cif Civil the adoption arrfe rocedu Section 1094.6, any action to review the decision of the Council shall be compmenot re later than the nineteenth day after the date the Council's order is adopted. 6.14.011 Abatement of Nui n b ,ry completely abated b the date x�•�+-• If the nuisance is not Y specified in the hearing officer's order, or in the City Council's determination, as appropriate, the City Manager may immediately cause the same to be abated by City personnel or under private contract. The hearing officer and/or City Council are authorized to grant reasonable extensions on the time period for abatement based on a proper showing by the property owner of extenuating circumstances, made before the date of City abatement. The owner of the premises shall be liable to the City for all costs of such abatement. 6.14.012 Cost Arco �ndng• Notification (a) City personnel, or any private contractor authorized to abate the nuisance, shall keep an account of the cost, including incidental abatement work expenses, of all performed on each separate lot or parcel of land where work is done and shall render an itemized report in writing to the City Council showing the total cost of abatement by rehabilitation, demolition, or repair of the including any salvage value relating the to. A p rty, buildings, or structure, Hall or other official location for posting City notice for at leastthe rt five (� be Sys beforeted at i it is considered by the City Council. Proof of posting shall be made by affidavit of the vord/o.24 it xowmb.:2E. 1990 CityClerk or +• Deputy City Clerk. The term incidental expenses' includes but is not limited to all actual expenses and costs of the City in the commencement of abatement proceedings, including preparation of notices, specifications and contracts, inspection of the work, and the cost of printing and mailings required under this Chapter, and any attorney fees expended in the abatement of the nuisance, through civil action or otherwise. The City Attorney shall be responsible for keeping an accounting of attorney fees and costs and transmitting the same to the Director. (b) Costs shall be assessed at the conclusion of the abatement; in the case of an abatement by any method which takes more than six (6 ) months, costs may be assessed at any time after six (6) months, but in no event more than two (2) times a year. (c) The Director shall submit his itemized statement of costs to the City and shall set the same for a hearing before the City Council. (d) The Director shall cause notice of the time and place of the hearing to be given to the owners of the property to which the same ate, and to any other interested person requesting the same by United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed - to the person at his/her last known address at leas hearing. t five (S) days in advance of the . (e) Notice may also be served on the holder of any mortgage or deed of trust or other lien or encumbrance of record; the owner or holder oany lease of records; and the holder of any other estate or legal interest of record in or to the building or structure, or the land in which it is located. 6.14.013 Assessment Lien. The total cost for abatement of the nuisance, as confirmed by the City Council, shall constitute a special assessment against the lot or parcel of land to which it relates and, upon recordation in the office ffice of the amount of the assessss County Recorder a Notice of Lien, shall constitute a lien on the property for the ment. After confirmation and recordation, a copy of the Notice of Lien may be turned over to the tax collector to add the amounts of the assessments to the next regular tax bill levied against the respective lots and parcels of land. Thereafter the assessment amounts shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as o taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same rdinary property foreclosure and sale in case of delinquency as ro�dedefornord'nary e same procedure for After recordation, the lien may be foreclosed by judicial or other sal the manner and 210rd/90-24 12 Novsmbsr 2E. 1990 means provided by law. The Notice of Lien for recordation shall be in a form substantially as follows: 'NOTICE OF LIEN Claim of the City of Temecula Pursuant to the authority vested by Chapter 6.14 of the Temecula Municipal Code, the City of Temecula hearing officer [City Council] did on or about the _ day of _, 19_, cause the property hereinafter described to be declared a public nuisance and order the same abated. The City Council of the City of Temecula, did on the _ day of 19_, assess the cost of such abatement upon the property and the same has not been paid nor any part thereof. The City of Temecula does hereby claim a lien for such abatement in the amount of the assessment, to wit: the sum of $, and the same shall be a lien upon the real property until paid in full and discharged of record. The real property hereinabove mentioned, and upon which a lien is claimed, is that certain parcel of land lying and being entirely within the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, particularly described as follows: (legal description) Dated: This day of , 19_. City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA 6.14.014 der Resoonsibilit_v. The owner of any premises within the City has the primary responsibility for keeping said premises free of public nuisances. Tenants and occupants of the premises, for the purposes of this Chapter, shall be deemed to be the agents of the owner. VO"UW24 13 November 28, 1990 6.14.015 Alternate Actions. Nothing in this Chapter shall be deemed to prevent the City from commencing a civil or criminal proceeding to abate a public nuisance or from pursuing any other means available to it under provisions of applicable ordinances or state law to correct hazards or deficiencies in real property in addition to or as alternatives to the proceedings set forth herein. •t • 1_M-MME151; _• 6-14,101 { M 6,14,102 Excations 6,14,103I • 11 I 04 Notice of Intentto Abate and Remove 6,14,105 H=uest for Hearing 6,14,106 *. r+ 6-14,107M •r 6,14,108 Decision to I ! ove Vehicle 6,14,109 1 Franchises • Notice111 • Pti•. l of • • 6,14,113 No City Liability 6-14,114 Altemate Actions 6.14.101 PHIM , In addition to and in accordance with the authority granted to the City by the State under Section 22660 of the Vehicle Code to remove abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof as Public nuisances, the City Council makes the following findings and declarations: The accumulation and storage of abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof on private or public property is found to create a condition tending to reduce the value of private property, to promote blight and deterioration, to invite plundering, to create fire hazards, to constitute a nuisance creating a hazard to the health and safety of minors, to create a harborage for rodents and insects and to be injurious to the health, safety and general welfare. Therefore, the presence of 2/oraVW24 14 November 2:. IM an abandoned, wrecked, dismantled or inoperative vehicle or r part thereof, on private or public property except as expressly permitted in this Division, is declared. to constitute a public nuisance which may be abated as such in accordance with the provisions of this Division. 6.14.102 Exceptions. (a) This Division shall not apply to: (1) A vehicle or part thereof which is completely enclosed within a building in a lawful manner where it is not visible from the street or other public or private property; or (2) A vehicle or part thereof which is stored or parked in a lawful manner on private property in connection with the business of a licensed dismantler, Icensed vehicle dealer, junk dealer, or when such storage or parking is necessary to the operation of a lawfully conducted business or commercial enterprise; (b) Nothing in this section shall authorize the maintenance of a public or private nuisance as defined under provisions of law other than Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 22650) of Division 11 of the Vehicle Code and this Chapter. 6.14.103 Enforcement. Except as otherwise provided in this Division, the provisions of this Division shall be administered and enforced by the Police Chief, or his designee. (a) A ten (10) day notice of intention to abate and remove a vehicle or part thereof as a public nuisance shall be issued, unless the property owner and the owner of the vehicle have signed releases authorizing removal and waiving further interest in the vehicle or part thereof; (b) For inoperable vehicles or parts thereof located on property which is (a) zoned for agricultural use or (b) not improved with a residential structure containing one or more dwelling units, the notice of intention shall not be required for removal of a vehicle or part thereof which is inoperable due to the absence of a motor, transmission, or wheels and incapable of being towed, is valued at less than two hundred dollars ($200) by any person designated pursuant to the Vehicle Code to make such appraisals, and is determined by the Police Chief to be a public nuisance presenting an immediate threat to public health or safety; provided that the property owner has signed 2/aaV90-2+ 15 Novsu"r 2s. 1"o a release authorizing removal and waiving further interest in the vehicle or Prior to final disposition of such a low -valued vehicle or part thChief ereof. shall provide notice to the registered and legal owners of intent to dispose of the poli�vehicle or part, and if the vehicle or part is not claimed and removed within twelve (12) days after notice is mailed, from a location specified in Vehicle Code Section 22662, final disposition may proceed; (c) The notice of intention to abate shall contain a statement of the hearing rights of the owner of the property on which the vehicle is located and of the owner of the vehicle. The statement shall include notice.to the property owner that the owner may appear in person at a hearing or may submit a sworn written statement denying responsibility for the presence of the vehicle on the land, and the owner's reasons for such denial, in lieu of appearing. The notice shall be mailed, by registered or certified mail, to the owner of the land as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the last registered and legal owner of record of the vehicle unless the vehicle is in such condition that identification numbers are not available to determine ownership. The service is complete at the time of such deposit. 2vord/90.24 (d) The notice shall be substantially in the following form: 'Notice of Intent To Abate and Remove Date: Notice Is Hereby Given that you are required at your expense to remove the vehicle identified as and located on property commonly ]mown as , Temecula, California, within ten (10) days after the date appearing on the notice. Said vehicle is in such a condition to constitute a public nuisance. If you fail to comply with this order, City employees or private City contractors will enter upon your property and abate the public nuisance by removal of the vehicle or part thereof. The cost of the abatement incurred by the City or its private contractor will be assessed against your property and such costs will constitute a lien upon the land until paid. "All persons having an interest in the property on which the vehicle or part thereof is located and/or of the vehicle or part thereof are hereby notified that such interested parties may request a hearing within ten (10) days of the date of this notice to be held at 16 Noven6w 28, 1990 to determine whether the vehicle meec�ula, before a hearing officer condition to constitute a Public nuisance. or y ou May is m such a p y appear in person at the hearing or you may submit a sworn written statement denying responsibility for the presence of the vehicle or part thereof on the land, and the reasons for such denial, in lieu of appearing. If such a request is not received within such period, the City shall remove the vehicle or part thereof. Call (714) for questions regarding this notice., (a) A hearing shall be held before the hearing officer upon request for such hearing by the owner of the vehicle or the owner of vehicle is located. This request shall be the land upon which the made in writing to the police Chief within ten (10) days after the mailing of notice of intent to abate and remove the vehicle, or at the time of signing a release pursuant to Subsection 1 or 2 of Section 6.14.104. (b) If the owner of the land on which the vehicle is located submits a sworn statement denying responsibility for the presence of the vehicle on his/her land within such time period, this statement shall be construed as a request for hearing which does not require the presence of the owner submittingsuch request. If such a request is not received within such period, the City shall have the authority to remove the vehicle. (a) All hearings under this Division shall be held before the hearing Officer, which hearing officer shall hear all facts and testimony deemed pertinent. The facts and testimony may include testimony on the condition of the vehicle or part thereof and the circumstances concerning its location on the private or public technical rules of evidence shall not apply. The owner of the land on whicpe a vehicle Ile is located may appear in peen at the hearing or present a sworn written statement denying responsibility for the presence of the vehicle on the land, with the owner's reasons for such denial; (b) At the conclusion of the hearing the hearing officer may find that a vehicle or part thereof has been abandoned, wrecked, dismantled, or is inoperative on Private or public property and order the same removed from the property as a public nuisance and disposed of as provided in this Division; 2/on!/9O-24 17 November 28, 1990 (c) If it is determined by the hearing officer that the vehicle was placed on the land without the consent of the landowner and that the owner has not subsequently acquiesced to its presence, the hearing officer shall not assess costs of administration or removal of the vehicle against the property upon which the vehicle is located or otherwise attempt to collect such costs from such landowner; (d) If an interested party makes a written presentation to the hearing officer, but does not appear, said party shall be notified in writing of the decision within five (5) days of such decision by the hearing officer by certified or registered mail. 6.14.107. AM2W. Any interested pay may appeal the decision of the hearing officer by filing a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after the decision and by paying the appeal fee set by Resolution. Such appeal shall be heard by the City Council which may affirm, amend or reverse the order or take any other action deemed appropriate. The City Clerk shall give written notice of the time and place of the hearing to the appellant and those persons specified in Section 6.14.106. In conducting the hearing, the City Council shall not be limited by the technical rules of evidence. The decision of the City Council shall be final. • 0: (a) An order for abatement and removal of a vehicle, made pursuant to this Division, shall include a description of the vehicle or part thereof and the correct identification number and license number of the vehicle, if available. (b) The hearing officer, or the City Council on appeal, may impose such conditions and take such actions as are deemed appropriate and justified under the circumstances to carry out removal of the vehicle or part thereof; (c) Five (5) days after adoption of the order, five (5) days from the date of mailing of notice of the decision if such notice is required, or fifteen (15) days after such action of the City Council authorizing removal following appeal, the vehicle or parts thereof may be disposed of by removal to a scrapyard or automobile dismantler's yard; (d) After a vehicle has been removed, it shall not thereafter be reconstructed or made operable, unless it is a vehicle which qualifies for either horseless carriage license plates or historical vehicle license plates, pursuant to Section 5004 of the Vehicle Code, in which case the vehicle may be reconstructed or made operable. 210raroo.24 1: November 2E. 1990 `^ 6.14.109 Ste=. The hearing officer, or the City Council on appeal, shall determine the administrative costs and cost of removal to be charged. If the administrative costs and the cost of removal are charged against the owner or a parcel of land pursuant to this Division and are not paid within thirty (30) days of the date of the order, or the final disposition of an appeal therefrom, such costs shall be assessed against the parcel of land pursuant to Section 38773.5 of the Government Code and shall be transmitted to the tax collector for collection. The assessment shall have the same priority as other taxes. 6.14.110 Franchifig, When the City Council has contracted with or granted a franchise to any person or persons, such person or persons shall be authorized to enter upon private property or public property to remove or cause the removal of a vehicle or part thereof declared to be a nuisance pursuant to this Division. 6.14.111 Notice to Deea�tment of Motor Vehicles. Within five (5) days after the date of removal of the vehicle or part thereof, notice shall be given to the Department of Motor Vehicles identifying the vehicle or = the same time, there shall be transmitted to the P� thereof removed. At evidence of registration available, including registration certificates, certificates of title 6.14.112 Removal ft fired. No person shall fail or refuse to remove an abandoned, wrecked, dismantled or inoperative vehicle or refuse to abate such nuisance when thereof or ordered to do so in accordance with the abatement provisions of this Division or state law where such state law is applicable. 6.14.113 No City Liab� i1 ly, Neither the City nor any contractor thereof shall be liable for damage caused to a vehicle or part thereof by removal pursuant to this Division. 6.14.114 mate Actions. This Division is not the exclusive regulation of abandoned, wrecked, dismantled or inoperative vehicles within the City. It shall supplement and be in addition to the other regulatory codes, statutes, and ordinances heretofore or hereafter enacted by the City, the State, or any other legal entity or agency having appropriate jurisdiction. 2IonV90-24 19 November 22, 1"0 1 Misdemeanors ' If 1•t� • . 1 ••n '�•_�. t 6.14.201 Misdem Fors. The owner, or any other person having charge or control of any building or property, who maintains any public nuisance as defined in this Chapter or who violates any order of abatement made pursuant to this Chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor. Any unauthorized person who removes any notice or order posted as required in this Chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor. No person shall obstruct, impede or interfere with an = q,_ City engaged in vacating,Y representative of the repairing, rehabilitating or demolishing and removing any Property pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter or in performing any necessary act preliminary to or incidental to such work as authorized or directed pursuant hereto. Any person violating or failing to comply with any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished in accordance with Section 1.01.200 to 1.01.240 of this Code. A criminal prosecution may be initiated without a nuisance hearing, as provided in this Chapter, or upon a violating of any order resulting from such a hearing. Each person shall be guilty, of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of the provisions of this Chapter is committed or permitted to continue. 6.14.202 Authori totoArrest. 'The followingdesignated and employees shall have the power to arrest g��d officers anor violations of this Chapter whenever the officer or employee has reasonable cause to believe that the person has committed the offense in said officer's or employee's presence: the Building Official; the Senior Planner; and, Code Enforcement Officers voraroa24 20 Hoven6*r 2E, 19m W10 6.14.203 Citation Procedure, All designated officers and employees exercising their authority to arrest under this Chapter shall comply with the procedures regarding the making of arrests set forth in Section 833 C1 M. of the California Penal Code, and the procedures regarding misdemeanor citations set forth in Section 853.6 cl M. of the California Penal Code.' SECTION 3. SEVERAB . 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 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. SECTION s. EFFECTIVE DATE, 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 and cause copies of this Ordinance to be published and posted as required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of December, 1990. Ronald J. Parks Mayor ATTEST: Ju S . Greek Deputy City Clerk vonar9a24 21 November 28. 1990 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SIDE ) ss. CITY OF TEMECULA )' I, June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 90-24 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 27th day of November, 1990, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted any passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 4th day of December, 1990, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: 4 COUNCELNMM 3ERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCII,MEMBERS: Munoz Y June V Greek Deputy City Clerk v0ni/W24 22 Dumber 7, 1990 ITEM NO. 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFIC: CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: zo Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Solicitation of Construction Bids for the Storm Drain Improvements on Jefferson Ave. at Winchester Rd. (PW93-01) PREPARED BY: Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: r'1 That the City Council approve the construction plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for storm drain improvements on Jefferson Ave. at Winchester Rd. (PW93-01). BACKGROUND: This construction project will provide a storm drain system on the east side of Jefferson Ave. both north and south of Winchester Rd. This system will pick up the existing excessive surface storm water flows from the area north of Winchester Rd. and will divert these flows through an underground pipe system to the approximately 200' south of Winchester Rd. Also, this project will be eliminating the existing concrete cross gutter on the east side of Jefferson Ave. at Winchester Rd. With this storm drain in place, it will reduce the surface water flow through the intersection, which will provide a safer condition during the raining seasons. The existing dip section will be eliminated by the removal of the existing cross gutter for a smoother transition for both east and west bound traffic on Winchester Rd. throughout the year. The construction will be staged for off peak hours to reduce the impact to traffic in the intersection. The engineer's estimate for the project is $48,000. FISCAL IMPACT: This project is being funded from Measure A. pw04%nWrpt193107131bred.bid 0701 ITEM NO. 8 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFIC: CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: 4v3 Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works\City Engineer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Solicitation of Construction Bids for Pujol St. & First St. Street Widening Project (PW92-09) PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the construction plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for Project No. PW92-09, Pujol St. & First St. Street Widening. BACKGROUND: The plans, specifications and contract documents have been completed and the project is ready to be advertised for construction bids. The project includes the street improvements including curb & gutter and sidewalks for the street widening on the east side of Pujol Street from the Town Association to First Street and on the south side of First Street adjacent to the new Boys and Girls Club. The engineer's estimate for the project is $93,000. This project is being funded by the Federal Government with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and will be administrated by the Riverside County Economic Development Agency (EDA). The EDA has reviewed and accepted the bid documents for this project and has authorized us to advertise for bid. In addition to the City's standard advertising process, the Federal Government requires the City to fulfill the minority and women business enterprise participation. To meet this requirement the City will send a Notice Of Inviting Bids to minority publications, business information centers, and local minority newspapers. FISCAL IMPACT: The project will be funded by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. pw04\agdrptX93\0713\pw92-09.bid 0701 ITEM NO. 9 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFIC: CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: 45 Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works\City Engineer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Solicitation of Construction Bids for Sidewalk Improvements on the south side of Rancho Vista Road between Mira Loma Drive and the Community Recreation Center (PW92-12) PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the construction plans and specification and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for sidewalk improvements on the south side of Rancho Vista Road between Mira Loma Drive and the Community Recreation Center (PW92-12). BACKGROUND: On April 21, 1993, staff sent out a Request for Proposal No. 12 - Rancho Vista Road Sidewalk Improvements. After reviewing the proposals, J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. was selected to provide engineering services for this project. The plans, specifications and contract documents have been completed and the project is ready to be advertised for construction bids. The project includes the construction of sidewalk on the south side of Rancho Vista Road from the traffic signal at Mira Loma Drive to the Community Recreation Center. This sidewalk project will provide a continuous pedestrian link from Vail Elementary to Temecula Valley High. Senate Bill 821 Funds for FY 1992-93 will provide $18,000 towards this project. The engineer's estimate for the project is $38,000. FISCAL IMPACT: The project will receive $18,000 in SB 821 funds which are administrated by the Riverside County Transportation Commission with the balance of the construction in the amount of $20,000 to be funded through Development Impact Fees. pw04\agd►pt\93\0713\pw92-12.bid 0701 ITEM NO, 10 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: 4TJ Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: State -Local Entity Master Agreement No. SLTPP-5459 PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING STATE -LOCAL ENTITY MASTER AGREEMENT NO. SLTPP-5459, BETWEEN THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ESTABLISH STATE -LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FUNDING PROVISIONS BACKGROUND: To utilize State -Local Transportation Partnership Program funding, the State requires that the Local Agency and State enter into an agreement for the construction and maintenance of proposed projects before State -aid will be made available. This agreement becomes a master agreement between the Local Agency/State to establish contract administration, right-of-way, engineering, and miscellaneous provisions. A supplemental agreement will later be adopted by the Council for each individual project utilizing SLTPP funds. -1- pw041a9drpt193107131mastagre.res 0624 FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact is anticipated from approving State -Local Entity Master Agreement No. SLTPP-5459. Attachments: Resolution State -Local Entity Master Agreement No. SLTPP-5459 -2- pw04%agdrpt%93%0713%mastagre.res 0624 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING STATE -LOCAL ENTITY MASTER AGREEMENT NO. SLTPP-5459, BETWEEN THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ESTABLISH STATE -LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FUNDING PROVISIONS The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows: WHEREAS, before State -Local Transportation Partnership Program will be made available for projects, the LOCAL AGENCY and STATE are required to enter into an agreement. WHEREAS, this Agreement No. SLTPP-5459 establishes the contract administration, right-of-way, engineering, and miscellaneous provisions. WHEREAS, additional supplemental agreements will be adopted by the Council for each individual project which utilize State -Local Transportation Partnership Program funds. NOW, THEREFOR, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula, as follows: Section 1. That the City Council approve and authorize execution of Agreement No. SLTPP-5459 between State Department of Transportation and the City of Temecula. Section Z. Authorize the Mayor to execute said Agreement. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 13th of July, 1993. ATTEST: June S. Greek City Clerk J. Sal Munoz, Mayor .1. P%"1.PdgXW3W131mm.9@pe.M [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, 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 13th day of July, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: - COUNCELMEMBERS: NOES: - COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: - COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: - COUNCILMEMBERS: 'y P%04Vid+P W3W131mrups.wr 3Rf!t:;1NA1. :s/90 STATE -LOCAL ENTITY MASTER AGREEMENT NO. SLTPP-5459 STATE -LOCAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM ' (Pursuant to S&H Code Section 2600 et seq) 08 CITY OF TEMECULA DISTRICT LOCAL ENTITY THIS AGREEMENT, made in duplicate this day of 199_, by and between CITY OF TEMECULA a City, County, or LOCAL ENTITY, as defined in Streets and Highways Code Section 2601(a), hereinafter referred to as "LOCAL ENTITY", and the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation, herein referred to as "STATE". WITNESSTH WHEREAS, as provided by Section 2600 et seq. of the Streets and Highways Code, LOCAL ENTITY, has applied for State Share funds to be used for an "Eligible Project" as defined, herein referred to as "PROJECT" selected by LOCAL ENTITY. WHEREAS, STATE is required to enter into an agreement with LOCAL ENTITY to delineate certain responsibilities relative to prosecution of the said PROJECT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE I - Contract Administration 1.-Projects shall be constructed in accordance with this agreement and as described in the Project Termini and Type of Work of the Program Supplemental Agreement. 2. Unless otherwise provided in the Program Supplement the LOCAL ENTITY shall advertise, award and administer the construction contract for the PROJECT. 3. The construction work for PROJECT shall be performed by contract. As a condition of acceptance of the State Share Funds provided for this PROJECT, LOCAL ENTITY will abide by the State/Local Partnership Program policies, procedures, guidelines and any special covenants in the Program 1 Supplement which is :Wade part of this agreement by this reference. 4. The estimated cost and scope of PROJECT will be as shown in the approved Project Application which, by reference herein, is made part of this agreement. A contract for an amount in excess of said estimate may be awarded and expenditures may exceed said estimate provided LOCAL ENTITY will provide the additional funding and that sufficient LOCAL ENTITY money is available to finance same. 5. If the total State Share for all eligible PROJECTS exceeds the amount specified in subdivision (b) of Section 2600 of the Street and Highways Code, the STATE shall compute the pro rate -share of State Share'funds to be available so that each eligible PROJECT will receive the same ratio of State Share to local share funding. 6. The LOCAL ENTITY agrees that the payment.of State Share Funds will be limited to the lesser of the product of multiplying the calculated pro rata percentage as determined by the STATE by either: (a) the Total eligible State/Local Partnership Project Cost in the approved State/Local Partnership Program Application. * (b) the award amount. * "__1 (c) the Final Cost amount. * and accepts any consequent increase in LOCAL ENTITY funding requirements. * Includes contract items plus a maximum of 10% for contingencies and construction engineering. 7. Subsequent to the Legislature appropriating the State Share funds and after the LOCAL ENTITY has entered into: a) this State -Local Entity Master Agreement; b) a project specific Program Supplement; and c) awarded the contract for a eligible project, the LOCAL ENTITY may request and shall receive payment for eligible work as follows: (a) STATE will pay it's proportionate "Slate's Share" of the eligible participating costs upon LOCAL ENTITY submittal of acceptable monthly progress pay estimates for expenditures. Initial progress billings should cover completed or underway contract work. (b) If PROJECT is a cooperative project and includes work on a STATE highway, PROJECT shall be the subject of a separate cooperative agreement between the STATE and LOCAL ENTITY. 2 S. The Legislature of the State of California and the Governor of the State of California, each within their respective jurisdictions, have prescribed certain employment practices with respect to contract and other work financed with-state funds. LOCAL ENTITY shall ensure that work Performed under this agreement is done in conformance with the rules and regulations embodying such requirements where they are applicable. 9. After completion of all work under this agreement and after all costs are known, LOCAL ENTITY shall contract for a financial audit of the project costs. accomplished at the LOCAL ENTITY'S expense,The Final Audit, to be individual project basis, or ma be includmay be done on an ENTITY's annual Single Audit. -If -any included in the LOCAL is done, the auditor must individual project audit the LOCAL ENTITY chooses theSingleAudit Option, are a Final Audit Report. If Management Letter will be required for the State Share funding. In either case, the audit will include compliance tests required by the Single Audit Act and its implementing directive, OMB Circular A-128. The compliance testing shou ensure controls are in place to assure that: ld (a) Reimbursement claims submitted to the State for the project are supported by payment vouchers and �- canceled checks. (b) Charges for the various categories costs incurred by the LOCAL ENTITY are fullY Supported. (c) Ineligible costs were not claimed as reimbursable on the project. (d) Construction Engineering and contingencies do not exceed log of contract items. (e) Local match funds were from an approved source. 10. The Final Project Expenditure Report must be completed format described inpVolume ect completion and should be in the the Local Pr Section 19, Exhibit 19-la of Programs t Manual. The Final Audit must be completed by December 30th following the fiscal year of project co: Pleticn. ProjeCt completion is defined identified in the approved State/Local PartnPoshi as when all work Apal icatior, and Program gram Supplement Agreement has been eted and final costs are known. ( Fina i Dr oD ect Expenditure Report andThe report documents Will be to Final Audit r the appropriate Report) Transportation Dist-' Office. State Department of 'Porting requirements Failure to comply with these ng -equirements may result in withholding of future 3 allocations by the Co^..irission. 11. The State reserves the right to conduct separate ^� technical and financial audits if it.is determined necessary. lifter the financial audit, LOCAL ENTITY shall refund any excess State Share funds reimbursed to LOCAL ENTITY beyond its entitlement. 12. Should the LOCAL ENTITY fail to pay STATE claims within 30 days of demand, the STATE, acting through State Controller, may withhold an equal amount from future apportionments due the LOCAL ENTITY from the Highway Users Tar. Fund. The STATE may, at its option, intercept and apply any monies otherwise due the LOCAL ENTITY to pay these claims. 13. When THE PROJECT includes work to be performed by a railroad, the contract for such work shall be entered into by LOCAL ENTITY. LOCAL ENTITY shall enter into an agreement with the railroad providing for maintenance of the protective devices or other facilities installed under the service contract and for Railroad Protective Insurance during construction as necessary. ARTICLE II - Right -of -Way 1. All related rights -of -way as are necessary for the construction PROJECT shall be acquired by LOCAL ENTITY at its own expense and no contract for construction of PROJECT, or any portion thereof, shall be advertised until the necessary rights -of -way have been secured. 2. The furnishing of rights -of -way as provided for herein includes but may not be limited to: (a) all real property required for THEE PROJECT free and clear of obstructions and encumbrances. (b) the payment of damages to real prcaerty not actually taken but injuriously affected by the proposed improvement. (c) the cost of relocating owners and occupants pursuant to Government Code Sections 7260-7277. (d) the cost of demolition and sale of all improvements on the right of way. (e) the cost of all utility relocation, protection or 4 ORIG7NA C removal legally ENTITY. obligated to be done �-- by the LOCAL (f) the cost of clean up not reiall hazardous mbursable b materials and waste (9) the costs w Y prior owners: contractor hick arise out removed because Ise Of.delays to the or relocated y facilities have not been made available r because not been orderly prosecution of to the cont actor -Of-way have the work. actor for the 3. Should LOCAL AL ENTITY, . acquiring operationdlsplace an individuright_of_ Provide relocation nonprofit organization family business for Provide Payments the LOCAL farm rnia Government and services ENTITY shall Code, Sections 7 as required by 260-7277. ARTICLE III Engineering l' "Pre limina Statery h othere Engineering', albcosts may not be financed }funds and sources of financed b lOCAced with funding available to the LOCAL ENTITY 2' t� LOCAL ruction inspection and superv1e Engineering" as used her the ENTITY. staking, laborato 2On °f construction }• herein includes actual processing of field red field g c`l°n work, construction testis , preparation and Ports, and allowablepe its and records activities and XPenses of a estimateS, Established and may be financed employees engaged n final' approved pROJ£CThisd for employees working Share funds. In such ENTITY shall contribute gse for king directly on overhead a cost sharingan ve an, contributions. nse and general administat The LOCAL not bill that cost as part employeeslocal 3. Unless the al ENTITY'S Parties shall i responsiblepfore l or gineerin con in writing, enherwiagree engineering all engineering wo=knsultant shall be LOCAL include g is Performed by STATE When construction with an assessment laborarges therefore shall Section 875$• °n direct Portion of such chargesthe State Administrs in accordance Paid from not financed at ative dance funds of LOCAL State Manual. The ENTITY. cost shall be ARTICLE IV - l Miscellaneous Provision, � slons cost Of maintenance Performed by LOCAL ENTITY forces 5 of the work or at any other dur: g an temporary suspension dLmenmay not be charged to the PROJECT. officer or employee thereof b 2. Neither STATE nor any damage or liability occurring y responsible for any LOCAL ENTITY shall be thing done or omitted to be done authority, or reason of any connection with any WOr}•' or in reement. under delegated to LOCAL ENTITY under this agreement deleg that, pursuant to Governmen CAL ENTITY shall fully indemnify It is also understood�nd agree imposed for injury (as Code Section 895.4► liability impo n reason hold STATE harmless from any occurring Y defined by Government Code Section one b LOCAL ENTITY under thing done or omitted to be done or jurisdiction of any work, or in connection with any agreement* delegated to ��'L ENTITY under this officer or employee thereof, r LOCAL ENTITY nor any a or liability occurring by 3. Neither damag STATE under shall be responsible for any in done or omitted to be dor.Jurisdiction reasons of anything work, .authority, or in connection with any agreement- It is also delegated to STATE under thisagree en Government Code understood.and agreed that pursuant indemnify and hold LOCAL Section 895.4► STATE from shall fully imposed for injury (as liability imP occurring by reason ENTITY harmless from tacode Section 810.8) STATE under or in defined by Governor of anything done or omitted to-be hori don orb by connection with any work' authority, delegated to STATE under agreement. of STATE shall be given access to LOCAL ENTITY'S 4. Auditorsiv of verifying costs and pro aid. All project documents will be books and records for the purpose personnel at any rata share to be P authorized state P veaz period available for inspection by time during project development anent under d for at hree°r one year from date of final Pacompleted or waived by the STATE, after the audit is completed a State au whichever isIf dit is conducted, the longer. � local match funds will be checked to determine if source of complies with the program requirements. the source comp_1 ARTICLE V - ACCommodatior, Of Utilities the F lit facilities may be accommodated ont_cf-wayhdoes not Utility Y anc of the rig provided such use and occupancy �. .-� with the free and safe flow of traffic ° provided aotherwise interfere - or its scenic appearance; and �h roadway } ' forth the te^,rs undo: impair a setting Use and Occupancy Acreement' h v and OWNER - the occupy which the utility facility is to cross or o �. the LOCALENTITY t`�e right-of-way is executed nt t _or`h the te=-,rs under is to cross or otherwise occupy The Use and Occupancy Agreement setting which the utility facility 6 O?�-l�fN'41 the right-of-w Volume I Secti n must include the by the STATE 12 of the Provisions set unless Otherwise CAL PROGRAMS forth in 2. approved by t�UAL Published required y Protect' STATE. within STAT',relocation o Perform within E s right -of- r removal LOCAL ENTITY accordance with way, such of utilities relocation work require any policy and work shall be is Encroachment in the STATE.Y utility com Procedure. rellocated w°rkrmA2nt Prior to the right-of-waYato Performing and identif ed relocated d uti it i� snce hal of sa d obtain a state as -built plans.l be correctly ARTICLE VI - Condition of Acceptance As a condition o Stateded for this acceptance of the Policies, Protect, LOCAL State Share State/LocalProceduresENTITY Funds Partnership o and guidelines �11 abide by the Program. Pertaining to the WITNESS I heir duWh7R£OF, the Y Prt authoriaedofficees ave axecut ed this 1E OF CA LIFO Department of TrIA ansportat ion By District Dire ,. to+ °f c Transportation Date CITY OF TEMECULA LOCAL ENTITY By Date agreement 7 ITEM NO. 11 _APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: ,,(v5 Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Program Supplement No. 001 to the State -Local Entity Master Agreement No. SLTPP-5459 - Ynez Road Widening Project, (PW92-05) PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 001 TO STATE -LOCAL ENTITY MASTER AGREEMENT NO. SLTPP-5459 BETWEEN THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ESTABLISH FUNDING FOR THE STREET WIDENING ON YNEZ ROAD FROM SOUTH OF ROUTE 79N TO RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BACKGROUND: On January 26, 1993, the City Council awarded and authorized a contract for the construction of Ynez Road Widening from Palm Plaza to Rancho California Road, Project No. PW92-05, to Vance Corporation for $2,612,811.29. The City applied for partial funding for this project in the amount of $563,584 from the State -Local Transportation Partnership Program. The funds will be allocated through Program Supplement No. 001 to the State -Local Entity Master Agreement No. SLTPP-5459. After this Program Supplement No. 001 is signed by both parties, the funds will be administered through Caltrans. The balance for this project will be funded from the first series of bonds which have been sold for Community Facilities District 88-12. -1- pw041agdrpt193107131supp001.res 0624 FISCAL IMPACT: State -Local Transportation Partnership Program (SLTPP) funds will be allocated in the amount of $563,584 for this project and the balance will be funded from the Community Facilities District 88-12. Attachments: Resolution Supplement Agreement No. 001 -2- pw041agdrpt\9310713ksupp001.res 0624 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 001 TO STATE -LOCAL ENTITY MASTER AGREEMENT NO. SLTPP 5459 BETWEEN THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO ESTABLISH FUNDING FOR THE STREET WIDENING OF YNEZ ROAD SOUTH OF ROUTE 79N TO RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows: WHEREAS, before State -Local Transportation Partnership Program will be made available for Project No. PW92-05, Ynez Road from south of Route 79N to Rancho California Road, the LOCAL AGENCY and STATE are required to enter into a Program Supplement Agreement. WHEREAS, Program Supplement No. 001 allocates funding in the amount of $563,584 for the street widening project on Ynez Road south of Route 79N and Rancho California Road. NOW, THEREFOR, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula, as follows: Section 1. That the City Council approve and authorize execution of Program Supplement Agreement No. 001 between State Department of Transportation and the City of Temecula. Section 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute said Agreement. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 13th of July, 1993. ATTEST: June S. Greek City Clerk J. Sal Munoz, Mayor 4- n.o+reara%93\0713001im [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 93- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 13th day of July, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: - COUNCILMEM 3ERS: NOES: - COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: - I COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: - COUNCILMEMBERS: '.1 ORIGINAL Date: March 12, 1993 PROGRAM SUPPLEMENT NO. 001 Location: 08-RIV-0-TMCA to Project Number: SB93-5459(100) STATE -LOCAL TRANSPORTATION E.A. Number: 08-955486 _kARTNERSHIP PROGRAM AGREEMENT NO. SLTPP-5459 .,nis Program Supplement is hereby incorporated into the State -Local Trans- portation Partnership Program Agreement for State Share Funds which was entered into between the Local Entity and the State on / / and is subject to all the terms and conditions thereof. This Program Supplement is adopted in accordance with Paragraph 3 of Article I of the aforemen- tioned Master Agreement under authority of Resolution No. approved by the Local Entity on (See copy attached). The Local Entity further stipulates that as a condition to payment of funds obligated to this project, it accepts and will comply with any covenants or remarks setforth on the following pages. PROJECT TERMINI: YNEZ ROAD FROM S/O RTE 79 TO RANCHO CALIF. RD. TYPE OF WORK: WIDENING LENGTH: 0.0 (MILES) PROJECT CLASSIFICATION OR PHASE(S) OF WORK [X] Construction Estimated Cost State Share Funds Matching Funds FY93 $ 563584 Local OTHER OTHER $ 2612812 FY94 $ 0 $ 2049228 $ 0 $ 0 FY95 $ 0 CITY OF TEMECULA STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Transportation By Date Attest By DISTRICT DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8 Date Title I hereby Certify upon my personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for this encumbrance: Accounting Offic Chapter Statutes 587 1992 n m Year 2660-101-042 92-93 Date 3 1 Z - 53 $ 563584.00 Program 18C1 Fund Source I AMOUNT 20.25.010.100 C 258010 042-T 563584.00 Page 1 of 2 08-RIV-0-TMCA 0R!V f N AL SB93-5459(100) DATE: 03/12/93 SPECIAL COVENANTS OR REMARKS 1. It is mutually understood between the parties that this contract may have been written before ascertaining the availability of legislative appropriation of funds, for the mutual benefit of both parties, in order to avoid program and fiscal delays that would occur if the agreement were executed after that determination was made. The total amount of State -Local Transportation Partnership funds payable by the State shall not exceed $563584 to be encumbered and reimbursed as follows: FY 92-93 $ 563584 FY 93-94 0 FY 94-95 0 Any increase in State Partnership funds will require a revised program supplement. Any decrease in State Partnership funds will require a revised finance letter. 2. The State Funds Share is calculated based on the lower of the approved eligible application amount or the eligible award amount. 3. Within 120 days of project completion a Final Report of Expenditures must be transmitted to the Caltran's District Local Streets and Roads Engineer. 4. The Reimbursement Ratio for this Cycle 3 (92/93) project is 21.57%. 5. In accordance with the State and Local Transportation Partnership Program Guidelines dated April 1992, Section IV, Project Eligibility, the 10% allowance for construction engineering and contingencies is not eligible after Cycle 2. Only state/agency 'furnished materials can be added to the contract item cost for State Partnership funds eligibility. Page 2 of 2 ITEM NO. 12 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: "fps Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Completion and Acceptance of Traffic Signal Construction at Winchester Road and Margarita Road, Project No. PW92-08 PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council accept the Traffic Signal Construction at Winchester Road and Margarita Road, Project No. PW92-08, as complete and direct the City Clerk to: File the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a six (6) month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract, and 2. Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On March 23, 1993, the City Council awarded and authorized a contract for the Traffic Signal Installation at Winchester Road (HWY. 79N) & Margarita Road, Project No. PW92-08 to Lekos Electric, Inc. The contract amount for this project was $101,999.99 with a contingency of $10,200. Contract Change Order Nos. 001 and 002 were approved in the amount of $5,780. Bringing the total project cost to $107,779.99. The Contractor has satisfactory completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications within the allotted contract time. The construction retention will be released thirty-five (35) days after filing of the Notice of Completion. FISCAL IMPACT: The project was constructed within the contract amount plus contingency in the amount of $107,779.99. The project is being 100% funded through the Federal FY91 /92 Surface Transportation Program (STP). pw041agdrpt193107131pw92-08.acc 0624 ITEM NO. 13 APPROVAL n / CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Budget Amendments for Graffiti and Street Stenciling Program Prepared by: Grant M. Yates, Financial Services Administrator RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the budget amendments as set forth in Exhibit "A". DISCUSSION: On June 22, 1993, the City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 1993-94 Operating Budget. In addition, P 9 9 the City Council directed staff to move the Graffiti removal and street stenciling program out of Service Level A and into the Public Works Department Budget (General Fund). In order to accomplish this move, reductions in certain line items were required to offset the cost of including the graffiti and street stenciling program in the Public Works Budget. The total cost of funding the graffiti and street stenciling program is $150,000, which includes the cost of two new employees, and is broken down as follows: Account Number Description cos 5100 (Various) Salaries (benefits) g 64,289 5218 Maintenance Supplies 15,000 5242 Small Tools/Equipment 13,000 5263 Fuel 7,511 5608 Vehicle 45,000 5610 Equipment/Sandblaster 5,200 Total $ 15, 0,00Q The following represents a breakdown of the various line items in the Engineering and r-- Public Works Budget that were reduced in order to facilitate moving the program from Service Level A. Account Amount of Number Reduction Description Impact of Reduction 5249 $25,000 Engineering This account, for overflow Development Review Engineering plan checking, was originally funded at $ 50,000. The City has hired staff for this service and the level of activity has not increased to warrant sending out plans to -be checked, therefore, this 50% decrease is possible. 5402 50,000 Routine Street This account is being reduced Maintenance because the Winchester right turn lane project was moved from this account and placed in the CIP budget. 5204 50,000 Drainage This reduction is possible because Maintenance the Jefferson Ave. storm drain project was moved from this account and placed in the CIP budget. 5406 25,000 Traffic This reduction is possible because Engineering Public Works recently hired a City Traffic Engineer, therefore, the funds allocated for a contract service is available to fund the graffiti and street stenciling programs. Total Amount of Reduction Attachment $150,000 ATTACHMENT A BUDGET TRANSFERS TRANSFER FROM: TRANSFER TO . . A/C No. Descrip. Amount A/C No. Descrip. Amount 163-5249 Dev. $25,000 164-5100 Salaries $64,289 Review 164-5402 Street $50,000 164-5218 Supplies $15,000 Maint. 164-5404 Drainage $50,000 164-5242 Small Tools $13,000 Maint. 164-5406 Traffic $25,000 164-5263 Fuel $7,511 Engineer 164-5608 Vehicles $45,000 164-5610 Equipment $5,200 TOTAL $150,000 $150,000 ITEM NO, 14 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manger ,(. al FROM: Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Vesting Tentative Tract Map 26941 (Crowns Hill Estates, a subdivision of a 133 acres into 28 residential lots) and Change of Zone No. 22 (to change a portion of the project from R-A-5 TO R-A-2 % and to change a portion of the project R-A-2 % TO R-A-5) Prepared by: Craig D. Ruiz, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: It is requested that the City Council: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 22 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM R-A- 5 TO R-A-2'A FOR PORTIONS OF LOTS 8, 9, 12, 13, 17, 18, 26, 27 AND 28 AND A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-A-2% TO R-A-5 FOR A PORTION OF LOTS 4 AND 10 FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 26941, AND TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 26941, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A 133 ACRE PARCEL INTO 28 CUSTOM SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD AND 1800 FEET WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD. BACKGROUND At their May 25, 1993, the City Council held a public : hearing for the above referenced project. However, because of concerns relating to the use of septic systems and the total number of lots being approved, the item was continued to July 13, 1993. Staff has reviewed the matter fully and offers the following for Council consideration. DISCUSSION Septic Systems The Riverside County Health Department and the Public Works Department had previously conditioned the project to provide a sewer system. However, the Health Department has since revised the condition to allow for the use of septic systems (see Attachment No. 4). RAS%STAFFRPT126841TM.CC 7/1/83 klb The Health Department is requiring the applicant to amend the notation under the "Utilities" section of the map. The notation "Eastern Municipal Water District" will be required to state "Septic". Second, the applicant is required to provide the Health Department with a soils percolation investigation. The applicant has amended the sewer notation and provided percolation investigation to the satisfaction of staff. In light of the Health Department revised conditions, staff recommends that the project be allowed to provide a septic tank sewage disposal system. Total Number of Lots When the Planning Commission recommended approval of this project, the recommendation was for the project to contain 27 lots rather than the applicants proposal for 28 lots. The proposal before the Commission included lots along the eastern property boundary of less than 5 acres in size (see Attachment No. 3). The Commission determined that by reducing the project by one lot, the project would be able to provide 5 acre lots along the entire eastern project boundary. The Commission felt that 5 acre lots would provide a sufficient buffer between the subject project and the large lot development to the east. When the project was before the Council on May 25, 1993, the applicant submitted an exhibit that contained 28 lots. The applicant has revised the map to provide for 5 acre lots along the entire eastern property boundary. Staff believes that the current 28 lot exhibit with 5 acre lots along the eastern property boundary adequately addresses the Commission's concern relating to buffering and meets all City regulations and ordinances. Staff recommends the Council approve the applicant's current request as shown in Exhibit "A". FISCAL IMPACT None Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 93- - Page 3 2. Conditions of Approval - Page 9 3. VTTM 26941 Planning Commission Exhibit - Page 25 4. Riverside County Health Department Letter Dated March 30, 1993 - Page 26 5. Development Fee Checklist - Page 27 RASISTAFFRPT126941TM.CC 7n193 klb 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S\STAFFRPT\2B941 TM.CC 7/1 /93 klb ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONE NO.22 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM R-A-5 TO R-A-21h FOR PORTIONS OF LOTS 8, 9, 12, 13, 17, 18, 26, 27 AND 28 AND A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-A-21h TO R-A-5 FOR A PORTION OF LOTS 4 AND 10 FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 26941, AND TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 26941, A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A 133 ACRE PARCEL INTO 28 CUSTOM SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF PAUBA ROAD AND 1800 FEET WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD. WHEREAS, Taylor Woodrow Homes filed Change of Zone No. 22 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26941 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said applications were processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said applications on January 4, 1993 and February 1, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said applications; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Applications on May 25, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Application; WHEREAS, the City Council continued said application to their July 13, 1993 meeting, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Application; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the RAS\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 4 requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan. 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The City Council in recommending approving of said applications makes the following findings, to wit: Change of Zone No. 22 1. There is a reasonable probability that Change of Zone No. 22 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State Law, due to the fact that the density of the project, .21 dwelling units/acre, is consistent with the Very Low Density Residential Land Use designation of the future General Plan. Furthermore, the proposed R-A-21/2 and R-A-5 zones will be consistent with the Very Low Density Residential Zoning District. 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference, with the future General Plan if Change of Zone No. 22 is ultimately inconsistent with the Plan, due to the fact that the project is consistent with the existing large lot custom single family developments in the immediate vicinity and their underlying zones. 3. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses since the proposed large lot custom single family dwellings are consistent with the existing large lot custom single family dwellings and the vacant land surrounding the project. RASISTAFFRPT126941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb CJ 4. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on the environment since mitigation measures of Environmental Impact Report No. 230 and the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 230 have been incorporated to the project design and Conditions of Approval have been prepared for Vesting Tentative Map 26941 to reduce the impacts to a level of insignificance. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26941 1. There is a reasonable probability that Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26941 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State Law. The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing applicable city zoning ordinances and development standards. Furthermore, the proposed density of the project, .21 dwelling units per acre, is consistent with the future General Plan Land Use Designation of Very Low Density Residential. 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with the City's future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the Plan, since the surrounding land uses are large lot custom single family dwellings and vacant land. 3. The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State planning and zoning laws, local Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460; and California Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law). 4. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare since all impacts have been mitigated to a level of insignificance. 5. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses since the proposed large lot custom single family dwellings are consistent with the existing large lot custom single family dwellings and the vacant land surrounding the project. 6. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in Environmental Impact Report No. 230, the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 230, and the conditions of approval for this project. 7. Said Findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental Impact Report, and Conditions of Approval. 8. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Gov. Code Section 66412.3) and finds that the project density is consistent with SWAP and the future General Plan. Additionally, it will provide more diversity in the housing type available to the residents of the City of Temecula. R:5SISTAFFRFR26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 6 9. The proposed project will not result in discharge of waste into the existing --., sewer system that is in violation of the requirements as set out in Section 13000 et seq. of the California Water Code by requiring the project to. comply with Eastern Municipal Water District's requirements. 10. The design of the subdivision provides to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision (Gov. Code Section 66473.1) by limiting the height of the future structures to 32 feet and requiring setbacks according to the Residential Agriculture (R-A) standards. 11. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way and has been conditioned to have secondary access from Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23143, Amendment No. 5 for the necessary right-of-way for secondary access. 12. The project will not have a significant adverse affect on the environment. The County of Riverside Board of Supervisors certified EIR No. 230 in conjunction with the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23143 Amended No. 3 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 22430. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26941 and Change of Zone No. 22 will not result in any new or substantially increased environmental impacts. F. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Vesting Tract Map proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 230 was prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment with the incorporation of the mitigation measures into the project design. Section 3. Conditions. The City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Change of Zone No. 22 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26941, a request to subdivide a 133 acre parcel into 28 large lot custom single family lots located south of Pauba Road, north of De Portola Road, east of Via Norte and west of Butterfield Stage Road subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto. R:1SISTAFFRPT126941 TM.CC 7/1 /93 klb 7 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 1993. J. SAL MUNOZ MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, FIEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No.93- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 13th day of April, 1993, 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 day of April, 1993, by the following roll call vote: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: JUKE S. GREEK CITY CLERK RAS\STAFFRPn26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 8 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:1SISTAFFRPT126941TM.CC 7/1/93 kib CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26941 Project Description: To subdivide 133 acres into 28 Custom Single Family Residential Estate Lots. Assessor's Parcel No.: 952-030-002, 952-030-003, 952-030-007, 952-030-010 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of this project the applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Nine Hundred Dollars ($900.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty Dollar ($850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 71 1.4(d)(3) plus the Twenty -Five Dollar ($50.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21 152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 71 1.4(c). 2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460 unless modified by the conditions listed below. This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the approval date. 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 subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26941, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. . 2-6-: (deleted by Planning Commission January 4, 1993) RASISTAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1193 klb 10 5. The development of this project shall be consistent with the Design Guidelines prepared by Planning Design Solutions. 6. All walls and fences shall be consistent with the approved Design Guidelines for location and materials. 7. All monumentation within the project shall be consistent with the Planning Design Solutions Design Guidelines for location and materials. 8. A biological assessment of the Gnatcatcher shall be required prior to issuance of grading permits, if the species is listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and/or the California Department of Fish and Game. Necessary mitigation measures acceptable to these agencies shall be implemented prior to issuance of grading permits. 9. Rough and precise grading plans shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Vesting Tentative Map Grading and Drainage Plan. 10. Street trees shall be provided at approximately 60 foot intervals or a minimum of one tree per lot frontage as required in Section 13.1 or Ordinance 460. 11. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) A. CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space, 100-year flood plain, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, and exterior of all buildings. (amended by staff February 1, 1993) 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 right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. C. Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including parkways, shall be provided for in the CC&R's. D. The CC&R's shall state that the developer of each individual lot shall develop in conformance with the building pad area as shown on the approved rough and precise grading plans. R:\S\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 711193 klb 11 E. Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) as, share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association, owning the common areas and facilities. F. The CC&R's shall state that portions of lots 4,5,6,7,8 and 10 are located within the 100-year flood plain and may not be disturb in any manner and no structures or structures shall be constructed. An exhibit shall accompany the CC&R's to delineate this area. (amended by Planning Commission January 4, 1993) G. The CC&R's shall provide for equestrian access to the 100-year flood plain from the 14' equestrian easement that runs along easterly property boundary of the project. The corporation, association, property owner's group, or similar entity shall maintain said access. (added by Planning Commission February 1, 1993) 12. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following: A. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the Residential Agriculture (R-A-5 and R-A-2 %) zone. B. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed -free condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Director of Building and Safety. 13. The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes, landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director. 14. The applicant, their assignees and successors shall provide and distribute an airport disclosure statement to all potential home buyers of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 26941. Said disclosure shall be distributed separately and in addition to the public report prepared for the Department of Real Estate. Said disclosure shall be presented to and signed by the potential home buyer, prior to entering into any contract for purchase. Said disclosure shall be approved by the Planning Director as to form, and shall advise of potential airport impacts, and the potential requirement of an avigation easement. (amended by Planning Commission January 4, 1993) PRIOR TO RECORDATION: 15. An avigation easement to the Pauba Ranchos Airstrip shall be granted. Said easement shall be approved by the Planning Director and City Attorney as to form and content. (Amended by Planning Commission January 4, 1993) 16. An easement for maintenance of the 100-year flood plain shall be granted to the Home Owners Association. (Amended by Planning Commission January 4, 1993) 17. Subdivision phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department approval. 18. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. R:\S\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 12 19. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map. 20. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the Department of Building and Safety. The following notes shall be placed on the ECS: A. "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy." B. "EIR No. 230 and an Addendum to this EIR was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department." C. "A portion of lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10 are located within the 100-year flood plain and shall be maintained as permanent open space. This area shall not be disturbed in any manner and no structures or obstructions shall be allowed." This area is to be identified on the ECS sheet. (amended by Planning Commission January 4, 1993) D. An avigation easement to the Pauba Ranchos Airstrip shall be granted. Said easement shall be approved by the Planning Director and City Attorney as to form and content. (amended by Planning Commission January 4, 1993) 21. A mitigation monitoring program shall be submitted to identify all environmental mitigation measures contained in the Conditions of Approval, Environmental Impact Report No. 230 and Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 230. This program shall identify the impacts, the mitigation measures, the stage of the development the mitigation measures are to be enforced and the responsible party for monitoring the mitigation measures. All costs necessary to implement this program shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 22. The applicant shall delete all references to the Regional Biological Enhancement Area that are presently shown on the Tentative Map. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 23. Necessary mitigation measures acceptable to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and/or the California Department of Fish and Game shall be implemented prior to issuance of grading permits to reduce the impact of the project on K-Rats to a level of insignificance. If mitigation measures are unavailable, grading permits shall not be issued. A new K-Rat study may be required if deemed necessary by the Planning Director. 24. A qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. —� Should the paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, R:\S\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 711193 klb 13 a pre -grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. 25. An overall conceptual landscape plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of any grading permits. This plan shall highlight all the areas which will be landscaped including slopes within individual lots, common area slopes/open space, street trees, medians, tall tree planting for birds of prey within the 100-year flood plain, etc. Construction landscape plans for each phase shall be submitted for approval to the Planning Department prior to issuance of any building permits for that phase. All common area landscaping for each phase shall be installed prior to issuance of the final for any house in that phase. All private parks within each individual phase shall be developed prior to issuance of the final for the first house on that phase. All graded slopes over three feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated according to the City Development Code. (amended by the Planning Commission January 4, 1993) 26. An overall fencing plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of any grading permits which shall contain the following: A. A block, wrought iron, or a combination block and wrought iron wall shall be constructed along the westerly boundary of the project unless it has been previously constructed. B. For the easterly portion of the project that runs along the City boundary, the developer shall provide a block or wrought iron wall. At the applicants discretion, other materials, as approved by the Planning Director, can be provided along the property line. C. For the northerly area that borders the park site and the southerly area that borders the school and park site the developer shall provide a block, wrought iron, or a combination block and wrought iron wall. D. The placement of rear or side yard fencing on each individual lot is optional and is to be at the discretion of each individual home owner. If there is to be rear or side yard fencing, materials are to be approved by the Planning Director. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 27. Individual homes on individual lots shall require Planning Department approval. 28. A detailed landscaping and irrigation plan, prepared by a licensed landscape architect, shall be submitted to the City Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 29. No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within the project boundary until the developer or its successor's -in -interest provides evidence of compliance with public facility financing measures. A cash sum of one -hundred dollars RAS\STAFFRPT\28941 TM.CC 7/1 /93 klb 14 ($100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library --1 development. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 30. All landscaping and irrigation within each individual lot shall be installed in accordance with approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permit for that lot. If seasonal conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. 31. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection. 32. All landscaping and irrigation outside individual lots shall be completed prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit. 33. Prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit, the equestrian trail along the entire easterly boundary shall be completed. The trail shall be consistent with that shown in the Tentative Map and the design guidelines prepared by Planning and Design Solutions. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: 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. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map or site plan all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 34. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all onsite flat work and improvements) construction shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained road right- of-way. 35. 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. 36. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. R:\S\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 15 37. 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 ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 38. The final grading plan shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. 39. All pad drainage shall be directed to appropriate drainage swales or devices. Nc concentrated drainage shall be conveyed over slopes except within concrete brow ditches or other approved drainage devices. 40. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 41. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality; • Riverside County Flood Control District; • Planning Department; • Department of Public Works; and • U. S. Army Corps of Engineers; 42. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 43. An erosion control plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 44. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures Ps approved by the Department of Public Works. 45. A permit from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers is required prior to pulling any permits for construction, as outlined in the Department of the Army letter, dated December 4, 1991. 46. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. R:\S\STAFFRPT\26941 TM.CC 7/1 /93 klb 16 47. The developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any --� offsite work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 48. A hydrology/hydraulic study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: A. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. B. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. C. The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard map and any necessary mitigation to protect the site. D. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. E. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. F. Minimum flowline grade in earthen swales shall be 1.0% unless otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. 49. The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off -site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 50. Concrete lined drainage swales with energy dissipators will be required to protect all slopes and structures. Runoff to streets or to storm drains shall be kept substantially free of all rocks and debris. 51. The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities. 52. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the grading plan. 53. Prior to issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed grading with respect to RAS\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 17 potential paleontological impacts. Should the paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, a pre -grade meeting between the paleontologist and the excavation and grading contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 54. All necessary grading permit requirements shall have been submitted /accomplished to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 55. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, utilities, street lights, driveways and drainage facilities shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles for improvements within public right of way) shall show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. 56. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: A. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. B. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula standards 207 and 401 (curb and sidewalk). C. Street lights shall be installed along Via Del Monte, Cee Cee Lane and Castell Way adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. D. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City standard 400 and 401. E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. F. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City standard 113 or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. G. Private driveways from street to residence shall be a minimum width of 16 feet of A.C. Paving or P.C.C. Concrete. H. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. I. All fire truck turnarounds shall be fully paved with material consistent with the driveway improvements. J. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. RAS\STAFFRPT\28941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 18 K. A minimum of 150 feet of tFeffie vehicle stacking area shall be provided --� between the access control box of any gated entry and the right of way of intersecting public streets. A Turnaround with a minimum 38-foot radius shall be provided before the gated entry. (amended by Public Works staff February 1, 1993) All concentrated drainage directed towards the public street shall be conveyed through undersidewalk drains. 57. The minimum centerline grade for streets shall be 0.50 percent or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. 58. Improvement plans per City Standards for the private streets shall be required for review and approval by the Department of Public Works. 59. All driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula standards and shall be shown on the street improvement plans. 60. All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the side property line 61. 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. 62. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 63. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 64. A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for any lane closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF FINAL MAP: 65. The developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. A. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Erosion control and slope protection. RASISTAFFRPT126941 TM.CC 7/1 /93 klb 19 E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. G. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 66. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: - Rancho California Water District; - Eastern Municipal Water District; - Riverside County Flood Control District; - City of Temecula Fire Bureau; - Planning Department; - Department of Public Works; - Riverside County Health Department; - CAN Franchise; - Parks and Recreation Department; - General Telephone; - Southern California Edison Company; - Southern California Gas Company; and - U. S. Army Corps of Engineers 67. Legal all-weather primary and secondary access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a paved City maintained road. (amended by Public Works staff February 1, 1993) 68. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. 69. Cee Cee Lane from Orlinda Drive to Lisa Road and Via Del Monte shall be improved with 20 feet of asphalt concrete pavement plus one 12-foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. 104, Section A (60'/40'). 70. Castell Way shall be improved with 22 feet of asphalt concrete pavement plus one 12- foot lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. :103, Section A (66'/44'). A cul-de- sac shall be provided at the terminus per City Standards. (Amended by Planning Commission February 1, 1993) 71. All interior private streets shall be improved with 40 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated easements in accordance with Ordinance 460 and City Standard No. 104, Section A (60'/40'). Sidewalks shall be constructed on a minimum of one side of the street as directed by the Department of Public Works. RAS\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 20 72. McMahon Drive shall be fully improved with 44 feet of asphalt concrete pavement from the tract boundary to Crowne Hill Drive, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. 103, Section A (66'/44'). 73. Castell Way shall be improved with a minimum of 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement from the tract boundary to Crowne Hill Drive, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within a 60-foot minimum right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. 106, Section B (60'/32'). 74. In the event that Crowne Hill Drive is not constructed by Assessment District No. 159 prior to the final map recordation, the developer shall construct or bond for the improvements to provide for a minimum of 32' of street improvements within a 60- foot right-of-way per City Standard No. 106, Section B (60'/32'). The improvements shall be constructed prior to the first occupancy. (amended by the Planning Commission January 4, 1993) 75. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off -site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall, prior to submittal of the final map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off -site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. 76. A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Castell Way and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 77. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the design requirements. 78. A 60 foot easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets. 79. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 80. Private drainage easements for cross -lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 81. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated where sidewalks meander through private property. 82. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On -site R:\S\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1193 klb 21 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." 83. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: A. The delineation of the area within the 100 - year floodplain. B. Special Study Zones. C. "This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy." 84. 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. 85. Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit. 86. Prior to recording the final map, the subdivider shall,notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street improvements. PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT: 87. 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. 88. 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. 89. Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the R:\S\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 22 developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of --� which has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 90. All improvements shall be completed and in place per the approved plans, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all public streets. 91. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan. 92. The subdivider shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 93. Landscaping shall be installed in place in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. OTHER AGENCIES: 94. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated October 31, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 95. The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated February 22, 1988, 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 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits. 96. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated August 31, 1992, a copy of which is attached. 97. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated October 31, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 98. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Army Corps of Engineers transmittal dated December 2, 1991, a copy of which is attached. —� RAS\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 23 99. Applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Temecula Valley Unified School District transmittal dated December 3, 1992. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT . Deleted by the City Council at the May 25, 1993 meeting). 101. Exterior slopes (as defined as: Those slopes contiguous to residential streets that have a width of 66' or greater), shall be offered for dedication to the City of Temecula for maintenance purposes following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the application process. All other slopes and open space shall be maintained by an established Home Owners' Association (HOA). 102. All proposed slopes and open space intended for dedication to the City of Temecula shall be identified on the Final Map by numbered lot, with the square footage of said lot number indexed as proposed City Maintenance area. 103. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be executed, guaranteeing the construction of all' proposed TCSD landscape maintenance areas. Landscape construction drawings for project areas identified as TCSD maintenance areas shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD ,-- staff. 104. Construction of proposed TCSD landscape maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a pre -job meeting with the developer and City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review process will preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. 105. It shall be the developer's or assignee's responsibility to disclose the existence of the Temecula Community Services District and its service level assessments to all prospective purchasers. This disclosure shall be in the form acceptable to the TCSD and made available to staff for their review, as set forth acceptable to the TCSD and made available to staff for their review, as set forth in Section 2795.1 of the regulations of the Real Estate Commissioner. 106. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the developer shall submit the current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APN) to the assigned tract. RASISTAFFRPn26941TM.CC 7/1/93 klb 24 /'1 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 26941 FOR THE FEBRUARY 1, 1993 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING R:\S\STAFFRPT\28941TM.CC 7/1/93 k1b 25 o- ATTACHMENT NO. 4 RIVERSIDE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT LETTER DATED MARCH 30, 1993 R:IS\STAFFRPT\26941TM.CC 7/2/93 klb 26 JUN 2 .93 lo:,� -- T(r. FROM RE: (r . county of Riverside HEALTH SERY)CES AGENCY 03-30-93 TRhN PACIFIC coNsULTATs DATE: • Richard Valdez Z+niEZ, n ironmental Health_SpEcialist Iv TRp,CT X&P NO, 2594.1 We are unable to amend our conditions letter of io-31-91- �Xhibit indicates in the utilities portion that The n1aP a disposal and we have a sewer will be the metbod of sewag { 1 water District "will -serve" letter frCm swaynweucould amend our letter is concerning sewer. The only to have the map changed and alsoVe that the individual to Provide us with a soils percolation invest+gation to p� parcels could support a s$ptic tank system. should you have any rurther questions, please contact this office at (909) 275-8980. SH:dr (909) 275-8990 ** TOTAL PAGE.002 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 26941 RASISTAFFPJM28841TM.CC 7/7/83 kib 27 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 26941 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. Fee Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat) Parks and Recreation (Quimby) Public Facility (Traffic Mitigation) Public Facility (Traffic Signal Mitigation) Public Facility (Library) Fire Protection Flood Control (ADP) Consistent with Specific Plan Consistent with Future General Plan R:1S%STAFFRPT126841TM.CC 7/7/83 klb 28 Condition of Aooroval Condition No. 23 Condition No. 99 Condition No. 88 Condition No. 84 Condition No. 29 Condition No. 95 Condition No. 45 N/A YES ITEM NO. 15 APPROV CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City anagg( I). FROM: Gary Thornhi , Dir ctor of Planning DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 (Wal-Mart); Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring Report); Planning Application No. PA93-0043 (Change of Zone); and Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 - located at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Adopt a Resolution entitled; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 340 WITH ADDENDUM, ADOPTION OF THE STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO(S) 910-130- 046, 047; 921-090-001, 002, 003, 004, 005 AND 006. Read by title only and introduce an Ordinance entitled; ORDINANCE NO. 93- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY FOR THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA93-0043, CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO C-P-S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS, AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047. R:1S%STAFFRPT%243PP.CC 711193 1ft Adopt a Resolution entitled; A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO CONSTRUCT 340,034 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL/RETAIL SPACE TO INCLUDE A 125,584 SQUARE FOOT WAL-MART AND A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE WAL-MART ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 35.6 GROSS ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130- 047. Adopt a Resolution entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.27323, AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO SUBDIVIDE 58.1 ACRES INTO 13 COMMERCIAL AND 2 REMAINDER PARCELS AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047. BACKGROUND Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 is a proposal for a 340,034 square foot commercial/retail development which includes a 155,584 square foot Wal-Mart (30,000 of which is for a future expansion), 59,500 square feet of commercial area, 69,700 square feet of shops area and 55,250 square feet of freestanding pad area. This item was originally heard by the Planning Commission at their June 7, 1993 meeting. At the conclusion of this meeting, Staff was directed to further analyze issues relative to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the Plot Plan and the Tentative Parcel Map. The Commission requested clarification on the following issues in the EIR: cumulative impacts associated with seismic, flooding, cultural resources, and public utilities and services. In addition, the Commission requested the following be addressed relative to the Plot Plan: the impact of the twenty-five (25) foot wide transportation corridor (along Winchester Road) on the site, a re -design of the site plan and landscape plan to include additional landscaping on the project, and drive lane lengths and circulation conflicts. Additionally, the Commission requested an artists rendering of the Wal-Mart project and clarification of the Conditions of Approval for the Plot Plan and Tentative Parcel Map. This project was continued from the Planning Commission hearing on June 7, 1993 to the Planning Commission meeting on June 21, 1993. The impacts identified in the EIR were addressed to the satisfaction of the Commission with the exception of schools, libraries, and sheriff services. Commissioner Hoagland concurred with the Statements of Overriding Considerations necessary for cumulative impacts with the exception of schools and libraries. Commissioner Blair felt that sheriff's services would remain a significant impact even with mitigation. Commissioner Chiniaeff, in his motion for adoption of the Statements of Overriding Considerations, recommended that schools and libraries be included, but stated RAS%STAFFWn243PP.CC 7/1/93 Wb 2 that he felt there would not be a significant impact based on the amount of revenues generated by the Regional Center which could be used to pay for additional services. With respect to sheriff services, Commissioner Chiniaeff felt that the revenues generated by the Regional Center could also be used to pay for additional police service at the discretion of the City Council. The issues pertaining to the site plan and landscape plan were also addressed to the satisfaction of the Commission. In the re -submittal, the site plan and landscape plan were modified to include additional landscaping on the project. Expanded landscape islands (approximately 9 feet wide by 36 feet long with two deciduous accent trees on each extended landscape island) were included in the center of the parking lot in front of Wal-Mart. This landscaping serves to break up the expanse of parking. Five additional evergreen shade trees have been included at the rear of the site to screen the loading area. The Commission had previously requested an artists' rendering of the Wal-Mart project; however, due to the short turn -around time between Planning Commission meetings, the applicant was unable to provide the rendering. Data pertaining to drive lane lengths and circulation conflicts was requested; however, according to the applicant such data does not exist. Staff was informed by the applicant that Wal-Mart is currently experiencing increased automobile and pedestrian conflicts on their other sites which utilize cross drive aisles. At the June 7, 1993 meeting, the Planning Commission requested clarification of certain Conditions of Approval. These clarifications were amended to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, however additional clarifications were made at the June 21, 1993 meeting. The Conditions of Approval as amended by the Planning Commission for Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 are included as Attachments No. 4 and 5 of this Agenda Report. As a matter of note, the Findings of Fact and Statements of Overriding Considerations for Final Environmental Impact Report 340 inadvertently omitted schools as a significant cumulative impact. However, the staff report prepared for the June 21, 1993 Planning Commission meeting does list schools as a cumulative significant impact. This mention in the staff report is sufficient for the record. The Planning Commission recommended by a 5-0 vote that the City Council certify Environmental Impact Report No. 340 with findings attached to the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approve Planning Application No. PA93-0043 (Change of Zone); Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4; and Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4. FISCAL IMPACT None. R:1SISTAFFf n243PP.CC 711/93 Ib 3 Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 93- - Page 5 2. Ordinance No. 93- - Page 11 3. Resolution No. 93- - Page 15 4. Resolution No. 93- - Page 21 5. Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 - Page 28 6. Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 - Page 45 7. Planning Commission Minutes (June 7, 1993) - Page 60. 8. Planning Commission Minutes (June 21, 1993) - Page 61 9. Refined Traffic Study - Page 62 10. Planning Commission Staff Report for Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (June 7, 1993) - Page 63 11. Planning Commission Staff Report for Change of Zone No. PA93-0043; Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4; and Variance No. 9 (June 7, 1993) - Page 64 12. Planning Commission Staff Report for Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 (June 7, 1993) - Page 65 13. Planning Commission Staff Report (June 21, 1993) - Page 66 14. Exhibits - Page 67 15. Development Fee Checklist for Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 - Page 68 16. Development Fee Checklist for Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 - Page 70 FtASISTAFFRPT1243W.CC 7n193 bb 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- RASISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/93 kib ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO.93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.340 WITH ADDENDUM, ADOPTION OF THE STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO(S) 910- 130-046, 047; 921-090-001, 002, 003, 004, 005 AND 006. WHEREAS, Douglas Woods and Associates completed Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (EIR No. 340) in accordance with the Riverside County and State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, said EiR application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said EIR on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, said project was continued at the June 7, 1993 public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said EIR on June 21, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended Certification of said EIR with Addendum, Adoption of Statements of Overriding Consideration and Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program; WHEREAS, the City Council considered said EIR on July 13, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the City Council Certified said EIR with Addendum, Adoption of Statements of Overriding Consideration and Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program; NOW, 'THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Fin in That the City of Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall R:%SISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/83 Wb 6 adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The City Council in recommending Certification of the proposed FEIR, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. Seismic Safety The site does not contain any known active faults, but it is affected by the nearby Wildomar Fault and lies within a potential liquefaction zone and the Lake Skinner Dam Inundation Area. Mitigation measures proposed for the project will lessen potential impacts, although with concurrent development of other proposed projects, seismic safety is considered a cumulative significant impact. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration is required for Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 2. Agricultural 'Ands Implementation of the Specific Plan will remove existing dry farmed cropland from production. It will also result in the loss of future agricultural lands designated as "Local Important Farmland " and "Prime Farmland " as indicated in the City's Draft General Plan, agricultural resources. There are no practical mitigations for this impact, except no development, even though the impact is considered a significant impact. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted for this impact with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. -� RAS%STAFFRPTx243pp,CC 7/1/93 bb 7 3. Climate and Air Ouaft Although impacts to air quality will occur during the grading and construction phase of the project, the major impact to air quality will come from vehicle exhaust after build out of the project. Mitigation measures have been added to the project to lessen the impacts to air quality. While these measures provide feasible mitigations for the increased traffic, the impact to air quality will still be a significant impact. The total number of vehicle trips generated from the project and surrounding projects cannot be reduced sufficiently to enable the impact to be considered insignificant. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 4. Noise Noise impacts will occur during grading and construction of the project, although the major impact to noise will be from the cumulative effect of increased traffic on the roadways from this project and additional development in the area. Impacts during construction will be lessened by controlling the time construction activities are allowed to take place. Even after implementation of feasible mitigation measures, the cumulative noise impact cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted concerning the noise impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 5. This ect Traffic study included in the appendix of the IIR details the impacts tcts both on and off -site o roadways. cu The pa circulation system and contains mitigation measures and timing requirements for the completion of necessary improvements. ' These mitigations have been included in the Mitigation Monitoring program and the Conditions of Approval for the project. The cumulative impacts to circulation will remain significant although the impacts will be lessened by adherence to the Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted for this impact in conjunction with the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project. 6. Nildllfe/ EMItado A biological study was completed on the site and no rare or endangered plants or animals were observed or are expected to occur on the site. The site is within the historic range of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat and is subject to the mitigation fees established for protection of appropriate Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat. Although the site is not habitat for any rare or endangered species, the loss of the habitat will add to the cumulative loss of wildlife habitat in the area. This cumulative loss is considered significant even though the individual project impact is not considered significant. The cumulative significant impact will require a Statement of Overriding Consideration be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project. 7. Flood/Dra'n9�.p A hydrology study was completed for the project which determined the type of infrastructure necessary tohandle an anticipated 100 year storm for the Project. The drainage study contains required mitigation measures for lessening the impacts of the project. Cumulative impacts are still considered significant and a Statement of Overriding Consideration needs to be adopted in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. R:1SISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 711/93 Mb 8 8. Erosion Erosion control measures are being required and proposed that will comply with all National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. These measure will include watering of the site during grading, street sweeping existing surrounding roadways, landscaping of graded slopes, berming, and sand bagging where necessary. The impact, due to erosion, will not be significant with compliance to the Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Monitoring program. 9. Public Fac'litieS The project impacts public facilities due to the increased demand for services from new development. The impacts of the project will be reduced to a level of non- ~a$ aY PaYnkent Of appropriate fees and construction of required infrastnretum• The cumulative impacts are considered to be significant and a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 10. Utilities The utility providers for the area have determined that they can provide the electricity, gas, and phone services to the site if the proper infiastructure is installed. With construction of buildings in compliance with Title 24 standards and the installation of appliances which conform to Title 20 standards, the impacts to utilities will be reduced but the cumulative effect will still be considered significant. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration is required for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 11. Parks and RecreatiORM29 SDM The project proposes increased landscaping areas along the major streets. The project will be conditioned to comply with the City, s Quimby Ordinance to provide park requirements, which will reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 12. Cultural and Scientific Resources No cultural resources are anticipated to occur on the site according to Christopher E. Drover Ph.D. (see Appendix D, Technical Appendices). However, if any cultural resources are encountered as a result of grading, a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted and a mitigation program will be adopted. There is a possibility that paleontology resources could be discovered on the site. Grading of the site shall conform to a mitigation program provided by a qualified paleontologist. Adherence to the paleontologists mitigation program and the conditions of approval will reduce the potential impact to a level of non -significance. 13. Mitigation Mo it ring Prog am The Draft Environmental Impact Report includes the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. The Mitigation Monitoring Program is included as a Condition of Approval for the projects as a whole with several of the mitigations being separate Conditions of Approval for the project. R:%SISTAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 mb 9 3. Climate and Air Oua ity Although impacts to air quality will occur during the grading and construction phase of the project, the major impact to air quality will come from vehicle exhaust after build out of the project. Mitigation measures have been added to the project to lessen the impacts to air quality. While these measures provide feasible mitigations for the increased traffic, the impact to air quality will still be a significant impact. The total number of vehicle trips generated from the project and surrounding projects cannot be reduced sufficiently to enable the impact to be considered insignificant. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 4. Noise Noise impacts will occur during grading and construction of the project, although the major impact to noise will be from the cumulative effect of increased traffic on the roadways from this project and additional development in the area. Impacts during construction will be lessened by controlling the time construction activities are allowed to take Place, Even after implementation of feasible mitigation measures, the cumulative noise impact cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted concerning the noise impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 5. ' u i n This Project impacts both on and off -site roadways. The Traffic study included in the technical appendix of the EIR details the impacts to the circulation system and contains mitigation measures and timing requirements for the completion of necessary improvements. 'These mitigations have been included in the Mitigation Monitoring program and the Conditions of Approval for the project. The cumulative impacts to circulation will remain significant although the impacts will be lessened by adherence to the Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted for this impact in conjunction with the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project. 6. W lif MIffetation A biological study was completed on the site and no rare or endangered plants or animals were observed or are expected to occur on the site. The site is within the historic range of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat and is subject to the mitigation fees established for protection of appropriate Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat. Although the site is not habitat for any rare or endangered species, the loss of the habitat will add to the cumulative loss of wildlife habitat in the area. This cumulative loss is considered significant even though the individual project impact is not considered significant. The cumulative significant impact will require a Statement of Overriding Consideration be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project. 7. Flood/Drainage A hydrology study was completed for the project which determined the type of infrastructure necessary to handle an anticipated 100 year storm for the Project' The drainage study contains required mitigation measures for lessening the impacts of the project. Cumulative impacts are still considered significant and a Statement of Overriding Consideration needs to be adopted in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 klb 8 Section 2. nditi n . That the City of Temecula City Council hereby certifies FEIR No. 340 with Addendum, adoption of Statements of Overriding Consideration and approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program on 201.6 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No(s) 910-130-046, 047; 921-090- 001, 002, 003, 004, 005 and 006. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 1993. J. SAL MUNOZ MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, 1993 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCHIv EMBERS : NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS : was duly adopted by the City held on the 13th day of July 13, 04 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 93- C R:\S\STAFMPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 bb 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 93- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY FOR THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINM INPLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA93-0043, CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO C-P S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COD/AMCL4,L) ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS, AND KNOWN AS PORTIONS OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047. 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 district as shown on the attached exhibit is hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official Zoning 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 effect the zone or zones as described in Planning Application No. PA93-0043 (Change of Zone) and in the above title, and as shown on zoning map attached hereto and incorporated herein. 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 adoption. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Ordinance. RAS%STAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/93 Mb 12 Section S. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 1993. J. SAL MUNOZ MAYOR ATTEST: June S . Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTiFy that the foregoing Ordinance No. 93-_ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 13th day of July, 1993, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed a regular meeting of the City Council on the 13th day of July, 1993 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCELMEABERS: NOES: COUNCHIA0vfBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: JUKE S . GREEK CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: SCOTT F. FIELD CITY ATTORNEY R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 1b 13 CITY OF TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL MAP NO.: CHANGE OF ZONE NO.: PA93-0043 EFFECTIVE: ORDINANCE NO.: R:\S\STAFFRFT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 bb 14 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:1SISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/93 Mb 15 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO CONSTRUCT 340,034 SQUARE FEET OF COM %JERCIAL/RETAEL SPACE TO INCLUDE A 125,584 SQUARE FOOT WAL-MART AND A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE WAI MART ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 35.6 GROSS ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS PORTIONS OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047. WHEREAS, Kemper Real Estate Management Company filed Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Plot Plan on June 7, 1993 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, said project was continued at the June 7, 1993 public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Plot Plan on June 21, 1993 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Plot Plan; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Plot Plan on July 13, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff Report regarding the Plot Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF T0%4ECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section I. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: RASISTAFFRPT%243PP.CC 7/1/93 Mb 16 A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: plan. 1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: a. There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 as proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. RASISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 711/93 kb 17 C. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be approved unless the following findings can be made: 1. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. E. The City Council, in approving the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion in the preparation of the General Plan. The General Plan is being prepared in accordance with the timelines established under State Law. 2. There is a reasonable probability that the land use proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered because the proposed use is consistent with the proposed Scenic highway Commercial (C-P-S) zoning and the recommended Draft Land Use Designation of Community Commercial. Community Commercial uses usually comprise 10 to 50 acres of land and include buildings in excess of 100,000 square feet. As proposed, the project encompasses 35.6 gross acres in land area and proposes approximately 340,034 square feet of floor area. 3. There little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, because the proposed uses are consistent with those which are found within proximity of the site. The Draft Land Use Plan identifies Community Commercial uses to the east of the site, Business Park uses to the north of the site, and Professional Office uses to the south of the site. Community Commercial uses exist to the west of the site (Palm Plaza). 4. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of State Law and local ordinances because the proposed use complies with California Governmental Code Section 65360, Sections 9.53 (Development Standards for the C-P-S Zone), and 18.30 (Plot Plans) of Ordinance No. 348. 5. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, access, and intensity of use, because the proposed plot plan, as conditioned complies with the standards of Ordinance No. 348. 6. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, because the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures for impacts identified in the Environmental Impact Report for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. RASISTAFFRPT1243pp,CC 7n/93 Mb 18 7. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in --, scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, because the proposed uses are consistent with the draft General Plan and Ordinance No. 348. 8. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access to the project site is from publicly maintained roads (Ynez and Winchester Roads). 9. The project as designed and conditioned may not adversely affect the built or natural environment, however, it is a component of the Temecula Regional Center which will adversely impact the built or natural environment as determined in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. 10. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. 11. Said fmdings are supported by maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. F. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future -- development of the surrounding property. Section 2. Enviromnental Compliance Environmental Impact Report No. 340 was completed for Specific Plan No. 263. Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the development proposals and standards of Specific Plan No. 263. The potential environmental impacts of this project were analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 340 in that the proposed development is a portion of the proposed 1,375,000 square foot Retail Commercial Core area as analyzed for Specific Plan No. 263 and EIR No. 340. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 at the southeast comer of Ynez and Winchester Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No(s). 910-130-046 and 910-130-047 subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 4, attached hereto. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. FtAS%STAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/83 Mb 19 Section S. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 1993. J. SAL MUNOZ MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEM ECULA) 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 13th day of July 13, 1993 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCII. MABERS: • iLMEM E• JUNE S. GREEK CITY CLERK R:ISISTAFFRPT\243pp.CC 7/1/93 Wb 20 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 93- RASISTAFFRPr�243PP.CC 7/1/83 bb 21 r- ATTACHMENT NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 273239 AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO SUBDIVIDE 58.1 ACRES INTO 13 COMWIFRCIAL AND 2 REMAINDER PARCELS AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130- 047. WHEREAS, Kemper Real Estate Management Company filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel Map on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, said project was continued at the June 7, 1993 public hearing; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel Map on June 219 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Tentative Parcel Map; WHEREAS, the City Council considered said Tentative Parcel Map on July 13, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the Council approved said Tentative Parcel Map; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. BDdin-&L That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newlyincorporated adopt a general plan within rporated city shall thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month RAS%TAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 Mb 22 period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the -- requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The Planning Commission finds, in recommending approval of projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: a. There is reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 as proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable RAS\STAFMPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 Idb 23 requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: specific plans. 1. That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. 4. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. S. That 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 wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. 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. E. The Council in approving of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 will be consistent with the City of Temeicula's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State Law. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 conforms with existing applicable city zoning ordinances, development standards, and Specific Plan No. 263. 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with the City's future General Plan, since the project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 and surrounding developments to the north and west. � Reference loc3. The al Ordinance No 3�48,u�Ordinance No. 460 and Californiavision complies with State lammng and Zoning laws. Governmental Code RASISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/93 Wb 24 Section(s) 65,000-66,009 (Planning and zoning Law). 4. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the proposed Specific Plan No. 263 in that the project is an commercial subdivision which is consistent with the land use designation of RCC (Retail Commercial Core) and the zoning for Planning Area 2 contained within the Specific Plan. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the proposed zoning for the site (C-P-S) which has no minimum lot size requirement. 5. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Government Code Section 66412.3) and find that the project is consistent with SWAP and the future General Plan. Additionally, since the project is a commercial subdivision, it will provide possible job opportunities which will benefit the job/housing balance in the City. 6. The proposed project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 and Environmental Impact Report No. 340. EIR No. 340 indicated that even after feasible mitigation measures were incorporated into the project, substantial impacts would remain. The City Council in certifying EIR No. 340 will have to adopt Statements of Overriding Consideration establishing the benefits of the project over the remaining unmitigatable impacts. 7. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way. The project as designed and conditioned provides access to all buildable lots. 8. The design of the subdivision provides to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities (Government Code Section 66473.1) by providing design and zoning standards for natural heating and cooling within Specific Plan No. 263. 9. The site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for this type of project in that the development of the site will not create major slope conditions and that access and infrastructure can be provided to the site as shown in Specific Plan No. 263, EIR no. 340 and as conditioned. 10. The design of the proposed subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 and EIR No. 340 which did not indicate any serious public health problem would result from the proposed development. F. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Tentative Parcel Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. R:ISISTAFFRPTI243PP.CC 711/93 Wb 2.5 Section 2. Environmental Compliance Environmental Impact completed for S P Report No. 340 was com p Specific Plan No. 263. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the development proposals and standards of Specific Plan No. 263. The potential environmental impacts of this project were analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 340 in that the proposed development is a portion of the proposed 1,375,000 square foot Retail Commercial Core area as analyzed for Specific Plan No. 263 and EIR No. 340. R:1S%STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 kb 26 Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves —� Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 for the subdivision of a 58.1 acres into 13 commercial and 2 remainder parcels at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No(s). 910-130-0456 and 910-130-047 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 13, 1993. J. SAL MUNOZ MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, 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 13th day of July, 1993 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCELAJEMBERS: NOES: COUNCII.M RIMERS: ABSENT: COUNCH24EMBERS: JUNE S. GREEK CITY CLERK RASISTAFFRPT1243pp,CC 7/1/83 bb 27 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 RASISTAFFRP11243PP.CC 7/1/93 kb 28 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 Project Description: A Plot Plan for approximately 340,034 square feet of commercial/retail space to include a 125,584 square foot Wal-Mart (and a 30,000 square foot expansion to the Wal-Mart), approximately 59,500 square feet of commercial space, approximately 69,700 square feet of shops space and approximately 55,250 square feet of pad space. Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-1304046 and 910-130-047 Approval Date: Expiration Date - PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTE: Conditions of Approval which follow pertain to the Wal-Mart Building and the remainder buildings on site. The following are the numbers of the Planning Department Conditions of Approval which apply exclusively to the Wal-Mart: 6, 7, 13, 21, 23, 25.A., 25.B., and 25.C. Any uncertainty as to whether a Condition of Approval applies to Wal-Mart, will be addressed by the Director of Planning. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 is a proposal for approximately 340,034 square feet of commercial/retail space to include a an approximately 125,584 square foot Wal-Mart (and a 30,000 square foot expansion to the Wal-Mart), approximately 59,500 square feet of commercial space, approximately 69,700 square feet of shops space and approximately 55,250 square feet of pad space (Exhibit D). (Amended at Planning Commission meeting June 21, 1993). 2. The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. 3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. R;\S\STAFFF9YT\243PP.CC 711M Wb 29 4. The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 marked Exhibit D, and as amended by these conditions. 5. Landscaping of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Exhibit N, and as amended by these conditions. A. Conceptual landscape plans for Pad 5 or 6 (whichever applies for a plot plan first) shall show the courtyard between these two pads. B. All ground mounted equipment shall be screened form view by landscaping. C. The developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaped areas within the site and within the right-of-way for Ynez Road and Winchester Road. D. Landscaped diamonds (approximately thirty-six square feet in area) shall be located within the parking lot, at intervals no greater than one diamond per every five (5) parking spaces. E. Trees planted in front of the Wal-Mart shall be a minimum of 48" box. Trees planted at the rear portion of Wal-Mart and along both Ynez and Winchester Road landscape corridors should be a minimum of 24" box. 6. Building elevations for the Wal-Mart only shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E, and as amended by these conditions. 7. Colors and materials used in the construction of the Wal-Mart only shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E (color elevations) and Exhibit H (material board) and as amended by these conditions. LOCATION MATERIAL COLOR Main Building Stucco Frazee 4360 W Accents Stucco Frazee 4350 W Accents Stucco Frazee 4342 M Cap Trim Stucco Frazee 5423 M Grille, Awning and Trim Metal Frazee 4995 A Accent Tile Frazee 4115 N Base of Pilasters Sandblasted Concrete Block Sandblasted - Orco Med. Weight, Black #100 Sandblasted - Orco Med. Weight, Greys MCA Peach Buff F-47 Base of Pilaster Sandblasted Concrete Block Roof Clay Tile R:\S\STAFFRPTU43PP.CC 7/1/83 Mb 30 8. A minimum of 1,871 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. All parking spaces shall be double striped. 9. Handicapped parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12 of Ordinance No. 348. 10. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12 of Ordinance No. 348. 11. The applicant shall submit development plans for all commercial, shops and pads with the appropriate filing fee to the Planning Department for approval. Staff will review all future projects of the commercial,shops and pads if the square footage of these projects are within ten (10) percent of this approval, there are no alterations the footprints on the site plan nor any alterations to the approved uses. Approvals for all other proposals which are not within this ten 0 0) percent margin, including alterations to the building footprints on the site plan or resulting in alterations of the approved uses at the discretion of the Planning Director shall be approved by the Planning Commission. 12. At the time of approval of each development plan, the Director of Planning shall determine the extent of parking lot improvements and associated landscaping required for each plan. 13. No more than a maximum of seven (7) loading vehicles or portions thereof which are servicing the Wal-Mart may be on the Wal-Mart parcel at one time. Loading and standing areas shall be striped on the site in accordance with the loading and standing areas demarcated on Exhibit D. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST BUILDING PERMIT AFTER WAL-MART: 14. The applicant will submit design guidelines for the remainder of the site to the Planning Department. These design guidelines shall include but not be limited to architectural guidelines, guidelines for signage, pedestrian amenities (types), and a color palette for exterior of buildings within the center. The design guidelines will be approved by the Planning Commission. WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT: 15. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Nine Hundred Dollars ($900.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty Dollar ($850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Fifty Dollar ($50.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c). R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 1& 31 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 16. Construction landscape plans shall be submitted for approval along with the appropriate filing fee for landscaping within the right-of-way for Winchester Road and Ynez Road. 17. The applicant shall comply with Ordinance No. 663 (SKR Mitigation) by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on (the gross acreage of the parcels proposed for development). Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. 18. The developer or his successor's interest shall submit a mitigation monitoring program which shall describe how compliance with required mitigation measures will be met and the appropriate monitoring timing of the mitigation. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with review of the program, as well as, all monitoring activities. 19. 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 THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 20. Development plans and appropriate filing fee(s) for the Wal-Mart expansion, Pads 1 through 9, Shops 1 through 3 and Commercial 1 and 2 shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. All development plans shall call out areas for bike racks, street furniture, lighting and pedestrian amenities identified in the design guidelines for the center. 21. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval for Wal-Mart and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Said landscape plans shall be consistent with the underlying Plot Plan and shall utilize drought tolerant materials. 22. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval for each development for the Wal- Mart expansion, Pads 1 through 9, Shops 1 through 3 and Commercial 1 and 2 and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Said landscape plans shall be consistent with the underlying Plot Plan and shall utilize drought tolerant materials. 23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for Wal-Mart, the applicant shall submit a construction phasing plan to the Planning and Public Works Department for review and approval. 24. 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. RAS18TAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/83 Ib 32 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 25. Prior to the occupancy of Wal-Mart: A. All perimeter improvements along Ynez (approximately 37 feet from curb) and Winchester (approximately 37 feet from curb) Roads shall be fully installed and completed in conformance with the site plan marked Exhibit D and landscape plans marked Exhibit N and in conformance with Exhibit N-2. B. All major entries shall be installed and completed. C. The water feature shall be installed and operational. within six (6) Fnenth . The applicant shall submit plans for the water feature along with appropriate filing fee to the Planning for review and approval. (Amended at Planning Commission meeting June 21, 1993). 26. An Administrative Plot Plan application for signage or a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. 27. The courtyard between Pads 5 and 6 shall be completed prior to issuance of the occupancy permit for Pad 5 or 6 (whichever requests occurs first), or as approved by the Planning Director. 28. Roof -mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view. 29. All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape, irrigation, and shading plans. 30. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 31. A maintenance bond, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shall be filed with the Department of Planning. Said bond shall be accompanied by a landscape maintenance agreement. 32. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: R:1SISTAFFRPT1243W.CC 7/1/W bb 33 "Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at or by telephone " In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 33. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 34. 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. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY 35. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical; 1990 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula Code. 36. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan in compliance with Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. 37. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. DEPARTMENT OF -PUBLIC WORKS 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. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative site plan 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. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 38. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all onsite flat work and improvements) 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. 39. 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. RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1193 Mb 34 40. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency ) with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 41. 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 has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 42. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality; • Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; • Planning Department; • Department of Public Works; • Riverside County Health Department; • Caltrans; • Community Services District; • General Telephone; • Southern California Edison Company; and • Southern California Gas Company. 43. A Grading Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, City Standards, and as additionally required in these Conditions of Approval. 44. A Soils Report prepared by a registered Soils Engineer shall be 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 pavement sections. 45. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the. impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 46. An erosion control plan in accordance with City Standards shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works. 47. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review. 48. 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. RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1193 Mb 35 49. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. 50. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of any permit. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 51. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for offsite work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 52. A drainage study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: A. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Onsite runoff shall be conveyed into the public right-of-way to the extent practicable. B. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. C. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. D. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway. E. The existing drainage facilities for conveyance and mitigation of the runoff cannot exceed 1900 cfs. Additional drainage facilities shall be provided to mitigate any additional runoff due to this development; i.e. construction of the retention basin as proposed by the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. 53. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the precise grading plan. 54. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 55. Private roads and Precise Grading Plans MUST be designed, reviewed, and approved by the Department of Public Works to meet City Public Road Standards or otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. This should include but may not be limited to: R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1/93 Wb 36 A. Minimum paved road widths shall be 32 feet. B. Knuckles being required at 900 'bends' in the road. C. Separation between on -site intersections shall meet current City Standards. D. Minimum safe horizontal centerline radii shall be required. E. 900 parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. F. At entrances to the project, identify configuration, stacking distance, and turn- around ability for review and approval by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. G. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90°). H. Concrete sidewalks shall be provided per City Standards as required. 56. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off -site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 57. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. 58. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the grading plan. 59. An Encroachment Permit shall be required by Caltrans for any work within their right- of-way. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 60. Improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works shall be required for all public streets prior to issuance of an Encroachment Permit. Final plans and profiles shall show the location of exiting utility facilities, street lights, and parkway trees within the right-of-way as directed by the Department of Public Works. 61. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans and/or precise grading plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: RASISTAFFRPT\243pp.CC 7/1/93 Mb 37 A. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. B. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207/207A and 401 (curb and sidewalk). C. Street lights shall be designed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. D. Meandering concrete sidewalks and associated parkway.improvements shall be designed and approved by the Planning Department and the Community Services District along Ynez and Winchester Roads in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. F. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. G. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan profiles showing existing topography and utilities, and proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades as directed by the Department of Public Works. H. 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. I. All concentrated drainage from the site shall be directed to an underground storm drain system. 62. A Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, and approved by the Department of Public Works. Where construction on existing City streets is required, traffic shall remain open at all times and the traffic control plan shall provide for adequate detour during construction. 63. A signing and striping plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Winchester Road and Ynez Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 64. Plans for traffic signals and associated street improvements shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, and approved by the Department of Public Works for the following intersections and shall be included in the street improvement plans; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the project on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance R:\S\STAFFRPT\243W.CC 7/1193 Wb 38 65. Traffic signal interconnection plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer to show 2" rigid metal conduit with pull rope, and #5 pull boxes on 200-foot centers along Winchester Road and Ynez Road. This design shall be shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works. 66. Bus bays and shelters shall be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by the Department of Public Works. 67. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 68. All required fees shall be paid. 69. The Developer shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. A. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Sewer and domestic water systems. E. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. G. Erosion control and slope protection. 70. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be undergrounded, 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. 71. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 72. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 73. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT: 74. Apricot Road shall be vacated. R:1S%STAFFRPT1243PP.CC 711/93 M 39 75. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Riverside County Fire Department; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 76. All necessary construction or encroachment permits have been submitted/accomplished to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 77. All building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 78. The Developer shall deposit with the Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for traffic signal impact. 79. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV standards. 80. The Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which The Developer requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to the Developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY: 81. A Transportation Demand Management program will be required. 82. All Conditions of Approval as part of the underlying Parcel Map 27323 shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 83. All necessary onsite improvements shall be provided. Future proposed construction phasing, upon submittal, shall be reviewed to adequately mitigate circulation and drainage concerns to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. RASISTAFFRPn243PP.CC 7/1/93 Mb 40 84. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • 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 • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company • Fish & Game • Army Corps of Engineers 85. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the Public 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. 86. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for the proposed deceleration lane at the right in driveway along Winchester Road. These improvements are subject to Caltrans' approval. 87. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 88. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 89. Adequate signing and striping shall be provided for Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 90. Traffic signals and associated street improvements shall be installed for the following intersections; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the site on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance RASISTAFFRPT\243PP,CC 7/1193 Mb 41 91. Traffic signal interconnection shall be installed along Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 92. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided as shown on the site plan wit the exact location to be approved by Riverside Transit Authority (RTA).at all ^ stiR d futwe (Amended at Planning Commission meeting June 21, 1993). 93. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 94. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be recorded if they are located within the site 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; drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions. 95. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions: A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. B. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem reasonably necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. C. The CC&R's are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permit. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. D. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and related facilities. E. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. F. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. RASISTAFFRPTU43PP.CC 7/1/93 bb 42 (1) All parkways, open areas, on -site slopes and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the Developer or a manager designated by the Developer and/or other owners subject to the CC&R's or other means reasonably acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permit. (2) Reciprocal access easement and parking and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas, private storm drain, sewer, water facilities and all other utilities shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permit. 96. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans, and City standards, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets, signing, striping, traffic signal interconnect, traffic signals, median reconstruction, and existing facilities. 97. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local and private streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 98. 32 foot private interior circulation roads shall be constructed as approved by the Department of Public Works. 99. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT TCSD 100. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to commercial development shall be maintained by an established Commercial Property Owner's Association. OTHER AGENCIES 101. Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated April 5, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 102. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control District's transmittal dated April 26, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 103. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section of Ordinance No. 546 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated March 23, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:1SISTAFFRPrQ43PP.CC 711/93 bb 43 104. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Information Center, Department of Anthropology, University of California transmittal dated November 21, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 105. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside Transit Agency transmittal dated November 19, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 106. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the State of California Department of Transportation transmittal dated April 13, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:1SlSTAFFRPTU43M.CC 7/1/83 1& 44 Countyof RiversideREcHEALTH SERVICES AGENCY E I V E D APR 1 31993 TO: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT. DATE: Steve Jiannino FROM: 12CMAR E �iron�mental Health Specialist IV Ans'd,.. 04-05-93"""• C `-P C � RE: PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDED NO. 2 The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Plot Plan No. 243, Amended No. 2 and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. PRIOR TO ANY BUILDING PLAN REVIEW for health clearance, the following items are required: 1. "Will -serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. 2. Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (714) 358-5172. 3. A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch 358-5055. will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for: a. Underground storage tanks b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services c. Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185) d. Waste reduction management SM:dr (909) 275-8980 NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance. DOHGw4)02 (Rev AN2) t n " CL VV^nU� 1996 NAAKET STREET GENERAL NANAGERCHIEF ENGINEER F.O. FICK 1033 TELEPHONE (r14)2Ts.12M RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND FAX NO. (714) rlt OM WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT RrVERSIOE. CALMMU" *Z= CITY OF TEt1ECUL R - Pi_aw l t►.�a bTcP . 4'5114 $�stuEss Pa.fzrc Dt;�VE RECEIVED TEMtzauLA � A 425g o ""� � R 1993 Attention: P' J- yASVJ 1 A; 3A�t l Ansd............ Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: _ PP Zf¢3 TK 27 32'5 The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land the cases in incorporated cities. The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District corrrnents/recommendations for such cases are normally limited to items of specific interest to the District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail acid the following checked conrnents do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such issue: This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed. This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. F7This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature arid/or a logical extension of the adopted Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider accepting ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan Check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. This project is located within the limits of the District's Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted; applicable fees should be paid to the Flood Control District or City prior to final approval of the project, or in the case of a parcel map or subdivision prior to recordation of the final map. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of recordation, or if deferred, at the time of issuance of the actual permit. This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval, should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain. then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans and other information required to most FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the Califomia Department of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Caps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 404 Water Quality Certification may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit. Very truly yours, DUSTY WILLIAMS Senior Civil Engineer Date: 4— ZG— 9 3 FORe:txsTvrrA- GLEN 1. NEWMAN FIRE CNIEp TUi CITY OF TEMECULA ATTNi PLANNING DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMEENT 210 WEST SAN JACINM AVENUE • P (714) 657.3183�5� CALIFORNIA 92370 March 23, 1993. RE: PLOT PLAN 24Z AMENDED #2 (PM 27323) With respect to the conditions of approval for the above refer- enced plot plant the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: I. The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flour for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings using the procedure established in Ordinance 546. 2. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 4500 GpM for a 3 hOUr duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. �• A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hy- drants, an a looped system (6"x4"x2 1/241x2 1/2"), will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 fact from any portion of the building As measured along approved Vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant1s) in the system. 4. The requirep in the permit struction type, measures. ❑ 1I�1p 0"1" 79-733 ,'3" 0"-- Sail F. ladro CA 92201 (t .42MU • FAX (619) 7752072 d firm flow may be adjusted process to reflect changes area sQparation or built-in U RIVFRS1M OFMCE 3760 12th S--Ik Rir Mc. CA 92301 (714) 27U777 • FAX (714) .369.7451 At a later point in design, con - fire protection 41002 Coco O 7�ULA COFT-ICE C-nm 0"-- S' 225, T— u h. CA 92190 (714) 694-SO70 0 FAX (714) 694•5076 0 D+inred on recycled wom PLOT PLAN 243 AMENDED #i (PM 27323) PAGE 5- Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Flans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/appraved by a registerad civil engineer and the local water company with the following certifications "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance With the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department". b. Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all build- ings. The post indicator valva and fire departmamt connec- tion shall be located to the front, within 30 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 23 fest from the building(s). A statement that the building(s) will be automatically sprinkled must be included on the title page Of the builfire ding plans. 7. Install a supervised watarflow monitoring fire alarm system. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation, as per UBC. Q. A statement that the building will be automatically firm sprinklered must apprear on the title page of the building plans. 9. Certain designated areas will be required to be main- tained as fire lanou. 10. Prior to tho "Quance of building permits, the developer equaling depositp with the City of Temecula the or money order rqaling , a check sum of S-25 per square foot as mitigation for Mira protection impacts. This amount must be submitted SsP ara� te1y from the plan check fees. il. Walmart shall be responsible to install a Tire alarm System. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. 12. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the building and Safety. Office. All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be re- ferred to the Planning and Engineering Staff. RAYMOND H. REOIS Chief Fire Department Planner by Michael E. Gray, Fire Captain Specialist California Archaeological Inventory Eastern Information r.anf zi, November 21, 1991 City of Temecula Development Review Committee City Hall 43180 Business Park Drive, Suite 200 Temecula, CA 92390 Dear Mr. Rhoades: Eastern Information Center Department of Anthropology INYO University of California MONO Riverside, CA 92521 RIVERSIDE (714) 787-5745 Please find enclosed our comments for one project transmittal as requested by the Development Review Committee. This transmittal, which is listed below, is scheduled for review at the November 21, 1991 meeting. If you have any specify the transmittal number and the date on which we submitted our comm questions; please contact the Eastern Information Center at (714) 787-5745 and ents. TPM 27323/PP 243 AP4 910-013-023 Sin ely, Sharon Rushing Information Officer ed Enclosure, v0J1JU11IIn Archaeological Inventory CdSle; Information riuntar Eastern Information Center Department of Anthropology INTO University of California MONO Riverside, CA 92521 RIVERSIOE (714) 787-5745 CULTURAL RESOURCE REVIEW FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Date: TO: City of Temecula Development Review Committee RE: Case Transmittal Reference Designation: 7,0M Records at the Eastern Information Center of the California Archaeological Inventory 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 cultursl 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- 28 2 `j) 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 hatted or diverted in the immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendations. 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 or those report guidelines adapted by Riverside County. Phase I - Survey. — Phase 11 - Testing [Evaluate resource significance and integrity of known resources and/or resources identified from a field survey.) Phase III - [Propose additional investigations if required, evaluate project impacts, and propose measures to mitigate potential adverse effects.] COMMENTS: If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, Eastern Information 64wter 1,wV 2 l_ 199,E RTARIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 1825 THIRD STREET • RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-3484 • BUS. (7141 684-0850 FAX' (7141 684-1007 November 19, 1991 Mr. Mark Rhoades Temecula Planning Department City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: PM 27323 Dear Mark: We currently provide service to the site mentioned above via Route 23 and we are requesting that a bus turnout or a pad f or a bus stop be incorporated into the general design as the size of the planned project will negatively impact our level of service unless this amenity is constructed. Ideal sites for the bus turnouts would be at the following locations: a. Eastside corner of Ynez Road nearside entrance to main parking lot. b. Southside corner of Winchester Road nearside entrance to Wal- Mart building If possible, we would also like to request that pedestrian walkways and wheelchair curbs be constructed near the turnout locations specified above. I can indicate the exact locations for the turnouts as the project progresses. Thank you fur t:1C Ji:pGL tuilii:y to �BViC:w a21ti :.Omani- CIi t:liS project. Your efforts to keep us updated on the status of this request will be very much appreciated. Please let us know when this project will be completed. Should you require additional information or specifications, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely,_--r� arbara Bray % Transit Planner BB: jsc PDEV#129 Countyof Riverside DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO: CITY OF TEMECULA DATE: 11-21-91 ATT14: Matthew Fagan FRO SAM �NE , Environmental Health Specialist IV RE: PLOT PLAN NO. 243 The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No. 243, and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior to any building plan review for health clearance, the following items are required: I. "Will -serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. 2. Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (714) 358-5172. 3. A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (Jon Mohoroski, 358-5055). will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for: a. Underground storage tanks b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services C. Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185) d. Waste reduction management: SM:dr cc: Jon Mohoroski, Hazardous Materials Branch NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Environmental Health Service clearance. DOMGA.4)02 (4M) STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON. Governer DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231 SaN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92402 _ TDD383.5959 fix% April 13, 1993 Planning Department Attention Mr. Steve Jiannino City of Temecula City Hall 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Mr. Steve Jiannino: Development Review 08-Riv-79-R2.498 Your Reference: TPM 27323 PP 243 RECEIVED IPIR 7. 01993 Ans'd............ ' Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Tentative Parcel Map 27323 and it Plot Plan 243 located on this southerly side of Highway 79 (Winchester Road) and easterly of Ynez Road in Temecula. Please refer to the attached material on which our comments ave been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items _,oted under additional comments. If any work is necessary within the State highway right of way, the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work. Please be advised that this is a conceptual review only. Final approval of street improvements, grading and drainage will be determined during the Encroachment Permit process. If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Ahmad Salah of our Development Review Section at.(714) 383-5908. Very truly yours,, _ G. A. LUNT Branch Chief Development Review 6�tachment n . `ROVIDE TO APPLICANT TPiyt z ?32� _ y-i3.93 YCUR REFERENCE DATE STEVEN WISNIEWSKI PLAN CHECXER ( Co RTE PM) WE REQUEST THAT THE ITEMS CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS C APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT: NORMAL RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION TO PROVIDE HALF —WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. t/ NORMAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE _ao5.!r HALF —WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. CURB AND GUTTER, STATE STANDARD A87 , TYPE A2-8 ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY. PARKING SHALL BE PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY BY THE PROPER 'PLACEMENT OF NO PARKING SIGNS. 33 FT RADIUS =8 RETURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT INTERSECTIONS WITH THE STATE HIGHWAY. STATE STANDARD NSP A88, CASE— A WHEELCHAIR RAMPS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURB RETURNS AS DEFINED IN THE HIGHW: DESIGN MANUAL, SECTION 105.4 (2) . A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LIMIT PHYSICAL ACCESS TO T: STATE HIGHWAY. VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE DEVELOPED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED By EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD CONNECTIONS. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY STANDARD DRIVEWAYS. VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL. NOT BE PROVIDED WITHIN OF THE INTERSECTION AT VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A ROAD —TYPE CONNECTION. VEHICULAR ACCESS CONNECTIONS SHALL BE PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY. ACCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE FOR MPH ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY. LANDSCAPING ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL PROVIDE FOR SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE, COMPLY WITH FIXED OBJECT SET BA AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS. A LEFT —TURN LANE, INCLUDING SHOULDERS AND ANY NECESSARY WIDENING, SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE STATE HIGHWAY A TRAFFIC STUDY INDICATING ON AND OFF —SITE FLOW PATTERNS AND VOLUMES, PROBABLE IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATI. MEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED. PARKING SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHICULAR MOVEMENT CONFLICTS, INCLUDING PARKI: STALL ENTRANCE AND EXIT, WITHIN OF THE ENTRANCE FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY. CARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY TO PRESERVE AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTE' OF THE STATE HIGHWAY. PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO CUMILATIVE INCREASED STORM RUNOFF TO INSU: THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT CREATED. V/ PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW ONLY FINAL APPROVAL WIT BE DETERMINED DURING THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT PROCESS. ............ ..... .. .. . Tea Y#Y;ZOWaI�...>ITEM3 ARE LPL?C1.41�ZtE"'rO f.ACAI;=>gGEMCY 'P�SM!£�t�TNE$i23 CONSTRUCTION/ Dam I TION WITHIN PRESENT OR PROPOSED STATE RIGHT OF WAY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE ( I-.E.ASBESTOS, PETROCHEMICALS, ETC. ) AND MITIGATED AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF REGULATORY AGENCIES. WHEN PLANS ARE SUBMITTED, PLEASE CONFORM TQ THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ATTACHED "HANDOUT" - THIS WILL EXPEDITE THE REVIEW PROCESS AND TIME REQUIRED FOR PLAN CHECX. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT. ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM, CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE CLMULATIVE EFFECT OF CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA. ANY MEASURES NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE CIUMULATIVE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC ANDIOR DRAINAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA THAT NECESSITATES THEM. CONSIDERATION SMALL BE GIVEN TO THE PROVISION, OR FUTURE PROVISION, OF SIGHILIZATION AND LIGHTING OF THE INTERSECTICN OF AND THE STATE HIGHWAY WHEN WARRANTS ARE WT. t/ IT APPEARS THAT THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL COULD MAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM OF THE AREA. ANY MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC ANDIOR DRAINAGE IMPACTS SMALL BE INCLUDED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY IS INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA MASTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHWAYS ELIGIBLE FOR OFFICIAL SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY MAY WISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY. THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY, /GAD DEVELOPMENT IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCENIC HIGHWAY CONCEPT. IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE LEVELS ADJACENT TO HEAVILY TRAVELLED HIGHWAYS. LAND DEVELOPMENT, IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS CONCERN, MAY REWIRE SPECIAL NOISE ATTENUATION MEASURES. DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANY NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION. PLEASE S%Ni? THE :ZfiEMB..CFiECKEB�Y B&I�O�i`:'>;I'0--' CALTRANS DISTRICT 8 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BRANCH P.O. Box 231 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402 / A COPY OF ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR REVISED APPROVAL. IL A COPY OF ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATE HIGHWAY :RIGHT OF WAY UPON RECORDATION OF THE MAP. ANY PROPOSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY. / A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY. Y A CHECz PRINT OF THE PARCEL OR TRACT MAP. v A c HECU: PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY. A CHECx PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WHEN AVAILABLE. Date: April 13, 1993 Riv-79-R2.498 (Co-Rte-PM) TPM 27323 (Your Reference) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was developed for Highway 79 (Winchester Road) in this area and was signed by representatives of both Caltrans and the City of Temecula in 1991. The MOU-called for 1/4 mile intersection spacing for both sides of Highway 79 from I-15 to Margarita Road. Limited access driveways (i.e. right -in, right -out only) at 1/8 mile spacing were to be allowed on the north side only, unless previously approved. The proposed right -in only drive for this proposal does not meet the requirements of the MOU. Caltrans would like some correspondence from the City of Temecula, supporting and justifying this access before we consider the opening. ATTACHMENT NO. 6 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27323, AMENDMENT NO. 4 FtASISTAFFPPT1243PP.CC 7/1/83 Ub 45 CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 Project Description: A 13 parcel commercial subdivision with two remainder parcels of 58.1 acres at the southeast corner Ynez and Winchester Roads. Assessor's Parcel No(s): 910-130-046, 047 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 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. 2. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in defence. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify or hold harmless the City of Temecula. 3. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing olan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. 4. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 263. 5. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 340 and the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved for EIR No. 340. 6. The developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaped areas within the site and within the right-of-way for Ynez Road and Winchester Road. RASISTAFFfW7U43PP_CC 7/1/93 bb 46 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 7. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. 8. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. 9. A qualified vertebrate paleontologist shall resurvey the site and develop a Paleontologic Resource Impact Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to issuance of grading permits. The qualified Paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of excavations and, if necessary, salvage exposed fossils. The frequency of inspections will depend on the rate of excavation, the materials being excavated, and the abundance of fossils. The Program shall be consistent with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340. 10. A soil sampling and chemical analysis program shall be completed to determine if near surface soil contains hazardous substances in excess of EPA limits. In the event that any hazardous materials are found on -site, qualified authorities shall be immediately contacted to determine the proper disposal of the hazardous materials. 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 Director: 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. (2) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 340 was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department. (3) This project is within a 100 year flood hazard zone. (4) This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone. R:\S\STAFFR"%243FP.CC 7/1/93 Idb 47 (5) This project is within a Subsidence Zone. D. A copy of the Recorded Easement Agreements (REA's) (1) REA's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The REA's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. The REA shall provide for shared parking, shared ingress and egress, and master drainage and flood control. (2) No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded REA'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 REA'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. (3) 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. 13. 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 14. 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 15. 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. RASISTAFFRPM43PP.CC 7/1/83 Wb 48 16. 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. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 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: 17. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map or site plan all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 18. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all on -site flat work and improvements) 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. 19. 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. 20. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. 21. 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 ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 22. The final grading plan shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Puhlin Wnrkm 23. 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. 24. The Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District • Planning Department • Department of Public Works RASISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/83 bb 49 • Riverside County Health Department • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company 25. A Soils Report prepared by a registered Soils Engineer shall be submitted to Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 26. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plans. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 27. An erosion control plan in accordance with City Standards shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 28. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed free condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. 29. 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. 30. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 31. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any off - site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works at no cost to any agency. 32. A Drainage Study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: A. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Onsite runoff shall be conveyed into the public right-of-way to the extent practicable. B. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. RAS\STAFFRK\243PP.CC 7/1193 Mb 50 C. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. D. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. E. The existing drainage facilities for conveyance and mitigation of the runoff cannot exceed 1900 cfs. Additional drainage facilities shall be provided to mitigate any additional runoff due to this development; i.e. construction of the retention basin as proposed by the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. 33. Private roads and Precise Grading Plans MUST be designed, reviewed, and approved by the Department of Public Works to meet City Public Road Standards or otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. This should include but may not be limited to: A. Minimum paved road widths shall be 32 feet. B. Knuckles being required at 900 'bends' in the road. C. Separation between on -site intersections shall meet current City Standards. D. Minimum safe horizontal centerline radii shall be required. E. 90' parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. F. At entrances to project, identify configuration, stacking distance, and turn- around ability for review and approval by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. G. All intersections shall be perpendicular (900). H. Concrete sidewalks shall be provided per City Standards as required. 34. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off -site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 35. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. R:1S\STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 711/93 1& 51 36. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the grading plan. 37. An Encroachment Permit shall be required by Caltrans for any work within their right- of-way. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 38. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street lights, driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles on streets) shall show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. 39. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: A. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. B. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A, 208, and 401 (curb and sidewalk). C. Street lights shall be designed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance No. 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. D. Meandering concrete sidewalks and associated parkway improvements shall be designed and approved by the Planning Department and the Community Services District along Ynez and Winchester Roads in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. F. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. G. Public street improvement plans shall include plan profiles showing existing topography and utilities, and proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades as directed by the Department of Public Works. H. 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. RASISTAFFRPTl243M.CC 7/1/93 Mb 52 I. All concentrated drainage from the site shall be directed to an underground --� storm drain system. 40. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be undergrounded, 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. 41. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 42. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 43. 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. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF FINAL MAP: 44. Apricot Road shall be vacated on the final Map. 45. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 46. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public/private improvements within 18 months in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. A. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, traffic signals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Erosion control and slope protection. E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. G. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 47. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • Rancho California Water District • Eastern Municipal Water District RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 711M kb 53 • 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 • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company Fish & Game • Army Corps of Engineers 48. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public 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. 49. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off -site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the final map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off -site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. 50. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 51. A signing and striping plan shall be prepared a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Winchester Road and Ynez Road shall be included in the street improvement plans. 52. Plans for traffic signals and associated street improvements shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the following intersections and shall be included in the street improvement plans; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the project on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance R:\S\STAFFRPT\Y43PP.CC 7/1/93 Mb 54 53. Traffic signal interconnection plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer to show 2" rigid metal conduit with pull rope, and #5 pull boxes on 200-foot centers along Winchester Road and Ynez Road. This design shall be shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works. 54. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. 55. Bus bays and shelters shall be designed and approved at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works.. 56. An agreement to secure the implementation of a Transportation Demand Management program shall be executed. 57. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 58. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 59. 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. " 60. 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. 61. The Developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per acre, as mitigation towards traffic signal impacts. Should the Developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit. 62. 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. 63. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions: A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. '-1 RASISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/83 Mb 55 S. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem reasonably necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. C. The CC&R's are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. D. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and related facilities. E. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. F. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. (1) All parkways, open areas, on -site slopes and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the Developer or a manager designated by the Developer and/or other owners subject to the CC&R's or other means reasonably acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permits. (2) Reciprocal access easements and parking and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas, private storm drain, sewer, water facilities and all other utilities shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 64. 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. 65. 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. RAS\STAFFRPT\243FP.CC 7/1/83 ab 56 66. The Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities ^, imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which the Developer requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to Developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 67. A Transportation Demand Management program will be required. 68. All necessary onsite improvements shall be provided. Future proposed construction phasing, upon submittal, shall be reviewed to adequately mitigate circulation and drainage concerns to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 69. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • 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 • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company • Fish & Game • Army Corps of Engineers 70. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public 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. R:1SISTAFFRPrU43PP.CC 7/1/93 bb 57 71. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 72. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 73. Adequate signing and striping shall be provided for Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 74. Traffic signals and associated street improvements shall be installed for the following intersections; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the site on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance 75. Traffic signal interconnection with shall be installed along Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 76. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided as shown on the site plan wit the exact location to be approved by Riverside Transit Authority (RTA). (Amended at Planning Commission meeting June 21, 1993). 77. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 78. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be recorded if they are located within the site 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; drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions. 79. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans, and City standards, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets, signing, striping, traffic signal interconnect, traffic signals, median reconstruction, and existing facilities. 80. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local and private streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 81. 32 foot private interior circulation roads shall be constructed as approved by the Department of Public Works. RASISTAFFRPT1243PP.CC 711/93 Wb 58 82. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (TCSD) 83. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to commercial development shall be maintained by an established Commercial Property Owner's Association. OTHER AGENCIES 84. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittals dated April 7, 1993 and November 21, 1991, copies of which is attached. 85. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated March 23, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 86. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated March 23, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 87. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside Transit Agency transmittal dated November 19, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 88. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the California Department of Transportation transmittal dated November 14, 1991, a copy of which is attached. RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.cc 7/1/93 bb 59 Countyof Riverside DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO: CITY OF TEMECULA DATE: 11-21-91 ATTN: Matthew Fagan FRO : SAM NE . Environmental Health Specialist IV RE: PLOT PLAN NO. 243 The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No. 243, and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior to any building plan review for health clearance. the following items are required: 1. "Will -serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. 2. Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a Plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (714) 358-5172. 3. A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (Jon Mohoroski, 358-5055), will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for: a. Underground storage tanks b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services C. Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185) d. Waste reduction management SM:dr cc: Jon Mohoroski, Hazardous Materials Branch NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Environmental Health Service clearance. DOHGA.W2 (4M) COOXrr RIVERSIDE ,,, GLEN 3. NEWMAN FIRE CHItF TO: CITY OF TLMEC'UU Arm PLANNING DEPT RE: PARCEL MAP 27323 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPA}rMENT 210 WEST SA.*f IACIIYTn AVEA'UE • ?]!MS. CALIFOMIA 92370 (714) 637-3193 March 23, 1993 With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced lard division, the Fire Department recommends the follows ng measures be provided in accordance with Riverside Countyire Ordinancesland/or recognized fire protection standards: Fire protection mnssures will be addressed With the related Plot Plan #243. All questions regarding the meaning of conditioao shall be referred to the Planning and Eagineering staff. MEG/ tm O Dnxo ones 79 73) Cooney Club Dim s k. F L-&, CA 92201 (619) 342a" • FAX (6I9) 771.2072 RAYMOND H. RE -,IS Chief Fire Department Planner r. By Micheal E. Gray PLANNING DIVISION 41W2 Coup a TmaCLAA OFF= q C emer Dei"% Suits 1'aS, Teo. ask. CA 92390 O JUMSIM OFFICE (714) 694S070 • FAX (714) 6945070 3760'2L4 -3"� CA 92301 (714) 273.4?77 . FAX (714) 369-745I Pdnnd on•L"CYded paper 11 GLEN I. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF RIVERSIDE COUN TY FIRE DEPARTMTNT 210 WEST SAN JACINM AVENUE • PERRIS (714) 657--3133 � ��RMA 9?37p March 23, 1993 TOi CITY OF TEMECULA ATTN: PLANNING DEPT RE: PLOT PLAN 243 AMENDED ¢2 (PM 27323) With respect to the conditions of approval th enced plot for plan, the Fire Department recommends fire protection measures be provided in accordance County Ordinances and/or recognized lire protection I. The Fire Department is required to set flow for the remodel or con%truction of buildings using the procedure established in Provides or show there exists del ive,-ing 4500 GPM for a S hour operating pressure, which must combustible material is placed on e above refer - the following with Riverside standards: a minimum fire all commercial Ordinance 546. A water system duration at 20 be available the job site. capable of PSI residual before any �. H Combination of _ drams, loappd systemt(6ix4"x?fi/`te super fire on a hy_ located not less than 25 x2 1/2 ), will be feet or more than 165 f8at from any portion of the building as measured alonga traveIways. The required fire flow approved vehicular any adjacent hydrants) in the S, shall be available from system. 4- Thv required fire flow may in the permit process to reilectchanec in adeaten adjusted point measures. type, area separation or built-in fire r con - measures. Protection O IND1O OFI•.ICE T G MSIoN 7JJ C.a..t/"•„b Defoe• &"" F• Indio. CA 92201 (614 386 • FAX (619) 7752072 ❑ RAFR,-WE OFFICE 3760 12tfi Serve, Ri.enidq CA 92301 (714) 2734777 • FAX (714) 369-7/s1 41002 Coup TFa(ECUU ofncE of C__ CHvc' Sviee 225, T=1i1 , CA 923W (714) 694•5070 • FAX (714) 694.5076 aimed on recycled plpry PLOT FLAN 243 AMENDED #1 (PM 27323) PAGE 2 5. Applicant/developer shall furnish one Co PY system plans to the Fire Department for review.oFl$ny water conform to the firta hydrant types, location and s a shall the system shall meet the fire p cin9, and shall be si ned�a flow requirements. Plans 9 pprovmd by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification; certify that the design of the water s I With the requirements Ystem is in aecardance prescribed Fire Department". ed by the Riverside County 6. Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all ings. The post indicator valve and firm department build_ tion shall be located to the front conne c- hydrant, and a minimum of 23 feet from 30 feet of a statement that the building(s) will be the buticaliy ), A sprinkled must be included on the title automatically fire plans, Pa9Q of the building 7• Install a supervssed waterflow monitoring fire alarm system. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for APproval prior to instaliationp as per UHC. a. A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered must apprear on the plans. title peso of the building 9• Certain designated areas tained as firm lanoa, will be required to be main- 10. Prior to the ismuanc& of bui.ldino shall deposit, with the Citypermit$, the developer order eq"aling the sum of s-,of Temecula, a, check or money for ire protecr SqUare tion impactsThis amount foot as mitigation . =eparat- ely from the plan check fetes, must be submitted 11. Walmart shall be responsible to install a system. Plans mutt bQ SUbfiittedfire alarm. to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Final conditions will arre reviewed be addressed when buildin In the building and Safety Office. 9 Plans All 4uestions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be re- ferred to the Planning and Engineering Staff. RAYMOPlD H . REGI S Chieeff Fire Department Planner by Michael E. Bray, Fire Captain Specialist (P RECEIVED '- MAR 2 6 1993 Rancho March 23, 1993 Ans'd............ Warr C� t,�. Steve Fiannino Board ofDireetors: City of Temecula Doug Kulber= Planning Department President 43180 Business Park Drive Sr. Vice Presidenti+ey re Menitler Temecula, CA 92590 Sr. Ralph H. Daily Nancy K Hushes �p SUBJECT. Water Availability Cuba F. Ko Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 2 Lias D. Peterson Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 2 Richard D. Steffey PA93-0043 Change of Zone Palm Plaza Phase II Officers: John F. Hanni Dear Mr. Fiannino: nagersar General Manaser Phillip L Forbes Duectar of Finance. Treasurer Please be advised that the above -referenced property is located within the Lemons boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, �te�.1E therefore, would be available upon completion of -financial arrangements !Eh C. Dealt' between RCWD and the property owner. ..or er operations e,a int@nance Perry R. Louck Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an `... miter Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. Linda X Freeoeo Dotntt Secreury Jenntnits. EnRstrand If you have any questions, please contact Senga Doherty. & Hennkson Lrsal counsel Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P. E. Development Engineering Manager S8:eb14-1\F186 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician Rancho CaMemia Water District 2MO61 Dmz Rnad • Pnst Ofriee Bnr 94)1' . Trmecuwa. Calilnrroa 91589-9f117 • 190916 4-.t10t • FAX,9091676-MIS rARI VERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 1825 THIRD STRE` F • RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-3484 • BUS. [714) 684-0850 FAX (714) 684-1007 Novefaber 19, 1991 Mr. Mark Rhoades Temecula Planning Department City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: PM 27323 Dear Mark: We currently provide service to the site mentioned above via Route 23 and we are requesting that a bus turnout or a pad for a bus stop be incorporated into the general design as the size of the planned project will negatively impact our level of service unless this amenity is constructed. Ideal sites for the bus turnouts would be at the following locations: a. Eastside corner of Ynez Road nearside entrance to main parking lot. --� b• southside corner of Winchester Road nearside entrance to Wal- Mart building If possible, we would also like to request that pedestrian walkways and wheelchair curbs be constructed near the turnout locations specified above. I can indicate the exact locations for the turnouts as the project progresses. Thank you: fur the oL?po,—U1:4i-y to- and or. t:liS project. Your efforts to keep us updated on the status of this request will be very much appreciated. Please let us know when this project will be completed. Should you require additional information or specifications, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely x4 �3arbara Bray , Transit Planner BB:jsc PDEV# 12 9 ^11 STATE OF.CAUFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PETS WILSON, Gowmor DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231 _ SAN BERNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 92402 TDD'Z,14) 383-4609 November 14, 1991 0.8.vR-1v-7 9 -R2.4 9 8 'TPM 2723� Planning Department City of Temecula City Hall Attention Mr. Mark Rhoades 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Mr. Rhoades: Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 27232 located at the northeast corner of Ynez Road and Winchester Road. Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items noted under additional comments. If any work is necessary within the State highway right of — way, the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the Zaltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work. Please be advised that this is a conceptual review only. Final approval of street improvements, grading and drainage will be determined during the Encroachment Permit process. If additional information is desired, please call Ms. Minerva Rodriguez of our Development Review Section at (714) 383- 4384. Very truly yours, l AHMAD SALAH Development Review Engineer Riverside County Attachment YOUR REFERENCE DATE M ineryhod ri e►_!�� n � iv - 7- — ' ` I PLAN CHECKER ' CO RTE WE REQUEST THAT THE ITEMS CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT: NORMAL RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION TO PROVIDE HALF -WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. NORMAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE HALF -WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. CURB AND GUTTER, STATE STANDARD N8-A , TYPE AZ-8, ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY. PARKING SHALL BE PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY BY THE PROPER PLACEMENT OF NO PARKING SIGNS. 35 FT RADIUS CURB RETURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT INTERSECTIONS WITH THE STATE HIGHWAY. STATE STANDARD N8 - B , CASE -A WHEELCHAIR RAMPS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURB RETURNS AS DEFINED IN THE HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL, SECTION 105.4 (2) . A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LIMIT PHYSICAL ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY. VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE DEVELOPED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD CONNECTIONS. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY STANDARD DRIVEWAYS. VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE PROVIDED WITHIN OF THE INTERSECTION AT ^, VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A ROAD -TYPE CONNECTION. VEHICULAR ACCESS CONNECTIONS SHALL BE PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY. ACCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE FOR MPH ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY. V ' LANDSCAPING ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL PROVIDE FOR -SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE, COMPLY WITH FIXED OBJECT AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS. SET BACK A LEFT -TURN LANE, INCLUDING SHOULDERS AND ANY NECESSARY WIDENING, SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. A TRAFFIC STUDY INDICATING ON AND OFF -SITE FLOW PATTERNS AND VOLUMES, PROBABLE IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED. PARKING SHALL 8E DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHICULAR MOVEMENT CONFLICTS, INCLUDING PARKING STALL ENTRANCE AMC) EXIT, WITHIN OF THE ENTRANCE FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY. CARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY TO PRESERVE AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE STATE HIGHWAY. PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO CUMULATIVE INCREASED STORM RUNOFF TO INSURE THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT CREATED. 2 PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW ONLY. FINAL APPROVAL WILL BE DETERMINED DURING THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT PROCESS. T� CONSTRUCTION/ DEMOLITION WITHIN PRESENT OR PROPOSED STATE RIGHT OF WAY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE I.E. ASBESTOS, PETROCHEMICALS, ETC. ) AND MITIGATED AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF REGULATORY AGENCIES. WHEN PLANS ARE SUBMITTED, PLEASE CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ATTACHED "HANDOUT" THE REVIEW PROCESS AND TIME REQUIRED FOR PLAN CHECK. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT THIS Wlll EXPEDITE ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM, CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA. ANY MEASURES NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA THAT NECESSITATES THEM. CONSIDERATION SMALL BE GIVEN TO THE PROVISION, OR FUTURE PROVISION, OF SIGNILIZATION AND LIGHTING OF THE / INTERSECTION OF AND THE STATE HIGHWAY WHEN WARRANTS ARE MET. IT APPEARS THAT THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM OF THE AREA. ANY MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE IMPACTS SMALL BBE1 INCLUDED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY 1S INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA MASTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHWAYS ELIGIBLE FOR OFFICIAL SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY MAY WISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY. THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC MIGHWAY, AND DEVELOPMENT IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCENIC HIGHWAY CONCEPT. IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE 1S CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE LEVELS ADJACENT TO �- HEAVILY HIGHWAYS. LAND DEVELOPMENT, IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS CONCERN, MAY REQUIRE SPECIAL NOISEATTENUATION MEASURES. DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANY NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION. PI;EASE'"SI;NF)'THg ITEMS ,CHECRSD :BELOW ?TO CALTRANS DISTRICT 8 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BRANCH P . O . Box 231 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402 A COPY OF ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR REVISED APPROVAL. V A COPY OF ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY UPON RECORDATION OF THE MAP. / ANY PROPOSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY. A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY. A CHECK PRINT OF THE PARCEL OR TRACT MAP. A CHECK PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY. �' A CHECK PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WHEN AVAILABLE. Date: November 14, 1991 RIV-79-R2.498 (Co-Rte-PM) TPM 27232 (Your Reference) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 1. The driveway shown approximately 660 feet northeasterly of Ynez Road will not be allowed. Per the construction drawings by Assessment District 161 and the Memorandum of Understanding between the city and state, access to the State Highway along the southerly side shall be at 1/4 mile spacing. 2. The project transmittal sheet from the City of Temecula indicates this case number is Parcel Map No. 27232. The Tentative Parcel Map submitted to this office indicates a map number of 27323. These documents must agree and must be revised to meet that requirement. 3. The Hydraulics Engineering Department requires a Hydrology Study that outlines how on -site and off -site flows approaching the property are to be handled. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE • HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY .�zsk . DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH April.07, 1993 RECEIVED CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT . APR 1 4 1993 43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 ATTN: Steve Jiannino: RE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27323, AMENDED NO. 2: THAT CERTAIN PARCEL, OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING A PORTION OF LOTS 115 AND 117, TOGETHER WITH ADJOINING STREETS, AS SHOWN ON A MAP OF THE "TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY,, ON FILE IN BOOK 8, PAGE 359 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. (10 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Parcel Map NO. 27323, Amended No. 2 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Tentative Parcel Map NO. 27323 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel Mapil . 4065 CountyCircle Drive . John M. Fanning, Director Riverside, CA 92503 • Phone (909) 358-5316 • FAX (909) 358-5017 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 • Riverside, CA 92513-7600) City of Temecula Planning Dept. Page Two Attn: Steve Jiannino April 07, 1993 This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Parcel Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose". This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula's Office to review at least_ two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final man. This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the recordation of the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the City of Temecula and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map No. 27323 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans'of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Parcel Map." City of Temecula Planning Dept. Page Three Attn: Steve Jiannino April 07, 1993 The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula/ Office to r-view at 1 ast two weeks n ,or to the request for the recordation of the final map. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized prior to recordation of the final map. Sincerely, am Martinez, H.S. Iv Department of Environmental Health SM:dr (909) 275-8980 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 7, 1993 R:1SISTAFFRPT1243F'P.CC 7/1/83 M 60 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ,TUNE 7. 1993 AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Planning Director Gary Thornhill thanked and recognized the following members of the Old Town Specific Plan Ad -Hoc Committee: Helga Berger Susan Bridges Carlene Danielsen Linda Fahey Christina Grina Bill Harker O Larry Markham Former City Councilmember Peg Moore Laverne Parker Bonnie Reed Steve Sander The staff reports for Items No. 7, 8 and 9 were presented in consecutive order. Environmental Impact Report No 340 Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan No. 263, A Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot commercial core, 298,000 square feet of general retail, 810,000 square feet of office/industrial and possible multi -family residential uses on 201.3 acres. Located on the southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez Roads. Planner Steve Jiannino presented the staff report. Mr. Jiannino advised the Commission that after mitigation of the project specific impacts, significant impacts remain to noise, climate and air quality, agriculture and circulation. Mr. Jiannino stated that on a cumlative basis, the two other specific plans proposed in the area and the ultimate build -out for the year 2000 on all three projects and other City projects will have a significant impact on 13 items. 8. Change of Zone No 93-0043 Plot Plan No 243 Amd No 4 and Variance No 9 Change of Zone from R-R (Rural Residential) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial), a 340,400 square foot commercial center (Wal-mart) and a Variance to reduce the number of loading zones from 7 to 2. Located on the southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez Roads. -PCMIN06/07/93 .7- 6113193 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 7, 1993 Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. 9. Parcel Map No. 27323. Amd. No. 4 Environmental Impact Report No. 340. Located on the southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez Roads. Planner Steve Jiannino presented the staff report. Planning Director Gary Thornhill advised the Commission that subsequent to the staff reports being mailed out, staff met with the applicant with respect to assigning off -site improvements to the mitigation monitoring program. Director Thornhill suggested to the Chairman that the public hearing be opened to allow for public testimony and the item continued to a date specific to allow staff to resolve this issue. Commissioner Hoagland stated that he was very concerned about the staff analysis of the commulative impacts. Commissioner Hoagland stated that the E.I.R. for the regional center specific plan is satisfactory regarding the significant impacts of this project, however, the staff report also refers to thirteen areas which cannot be mitigated. Douglas Wood, Douglas Wood & Associates, responsible for preparing the E.I.R. on the regional center, Winchester Hills and Campos Verdes. The cumlative significant impacts that Commissioner Hoagland brought up were a result of the later of the analysis of the Campos Verdes specific plan. Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 8:55 P.M. Douglas Wood, principal of Douglas Wood & Associates, the firm responsible for the preparation of the E.I.R. for the regional center, Winchester Hills and Campos Verdes, said that continuing the item will allow time to address the concerns expressed about the E.I.R. Greg Erickson, 43164 Corte Colanda, Temecula, representing Bedford, asked for modification to the following conditions of approval: Plot Plan Condition 13/Parcel Map Condition 56 Ray Casey advised that a letter was received from the applicant's traffic engineer supporting deletion of these condition. Plot Plan Condition 12 (d), 100/Parcel Map Condition 64 - there is a memo to staff correcting all these and should be made consistent. PCMIN06107/93 -a- 6113/93 '�.. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT JUNE 7, 1993 Plot Plan Condition 90/Parcel Map Condition 73 - request for deletion of these condition. Plot Plan Condition 89/Parcel Map 79 - request for deletion of these condition. Plot Plan 88, 89, 90 - request for deletion of these conditions. Commissioner Chiniaeff asked that staff look at alternatives trees for the parking lot. Commissioner Chiniaeff stated that he would like to see more canopy type trees. Vince DiDonato of the Alhambra Group, 27412 Enterprise Circle West, representing the applicant as the landscape architect, advised the Commission that there was not a good selection of canopy trees suitable for Temecula's climate. Mr. DiDonato agreed that he would offer some alternatives to the tree scape. Commissioner Chiniaeff asked if the applicant is required to provide seven loading docks or parking for seven trucks and suggested that if the applicant is only required to provide parking for seven trucks, that the Variance be deleted. Planning Director Gary Thornhill stated the seven truck parking spaces are sufficient and concurred with deletion of the Variance. Commissioner Ford questioned the recommendation regarding the cross drive isles. Bob Davis of Wilbur Smith Associates, 43103 Corte Colanta, Temecula, representing the applicant as the traffic engineer, advised the Commission that in terms of cross isles, it was determined that introduction of a cross isle would result in a lot of turning movement and vehicle vs. vehicle and vehicle vs. pedistrian movements. Planning Director Thornhill suggested that landscape islands could be spaced every five parking spaces. Commissioner Fahey expressed a concern that the parking lot needed to be shielded more and suggested that the landscape around the perimeter be enlarged. Barry Burnell of T & B Planning Consultants, 3242 Haloday Street, Santa Ana, representing the applicant, advised the Commission that there is currently 30' landscaping streets proposed for the perimeter of the project. Commissioner Hoagland asked that staff address the impacts of the future transportation corridor along Winchester Road when the item is brought back to the Commission. Commissioner Blair requested that the Commission be provided a rendering of the Wal Mart building. PCMIN06/07/93 9 6/13/83 ^, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT JUNE 7. 1993 It was the overall consensus of the Commission to have staff address their concerns regarding dividing the parking lot with the use of trees, landscape islands, etc.; and eliminate the request for Variance. Additionally, Commissioner Blair asked that staff investigate the possibility of double stripping the parking lot. Russell Rumansoff, architect for the applicant, reviewed the proposed construction materials. Commissioner Blair asked that staff monitor the use of quality products in the construction of this project. It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff to continue Items No. 7, 8 and 9 for two weeks to allow staff to address the concerns expressed by the Commissionn and continue the public hearing. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Planning Director Gary Thornhill advised that he has had several property owners on the northeast end of Temecula request to be annexed in to the City. Director Thornhill asked if the Commission preferred to have the projects brought forward for Commission review or appoint to Commissioners to serve on an ad -hoc committee. Commissioner Chiniaeff and Commissioner Hoagland volunteered. Planning Director Gary Thornhill advised the Commission that the Old Town Specific Plan has received the Inland Empire Design Institute Award of Distinction. Director Thornhill added that the design has also been submitted for an APA award PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS None OTHER BUSINESS None PCMIN06/07/93 -10- 6/13/93 "1 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 1993 R:1SISTAFFRPT\243PP.CC 7/1/83 kb 61 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, JUNE 21, 1993 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission was called to order on Monday, June 21, 1993, at 6:00 P.M., 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Linda Fahey. PRESENT: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Also present were Planning Director Gary Thornhill, Assistant City Attorney John Cavanaugh, Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske and Recording Secretary Gail Zigler. PUBLIC COMMENT None COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Approval of Agenda It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff to approve the agenda as mailed. The motion was carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 2. Environmental Impact Report No. 340 Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske presented the staff report. Commissioner Hoagland stated that he did not understand how a commercial project has a negative impact on schools and libraries as shown in the E.I.R. Debbie Ubnoske explained that the impacts to schools and libraries are a cumulative result of the three projects. PCMIN06/21 /93 -1- 07/01/93 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 1993. Commissioner Blair questioned the E.I.R.'s reference to insignificant impacts on police services. Planner Ubnoske explained that the additional revenues generated by the Regional Center will provide funds for required police protection services. Chairman Fahey re -opened the public hearing at 7:25 P.M. Barry Burnell, T & B Planning Consultants, 3242 Halladay Street, Suite 100, Santa Ana, representing the applicant, had the following concerns regarding the Conditions of Approval: 1. Plot Plan Condition No. 1 refers to 125,584 square feet for the We[ Mart store and should read "approximate square footage". 2. Plot Plan Condition No. 2, requested it be amended to reflect the condition would apply except for claims or action caused by the negligence of the City of Temecula. 3. Plot Plan Condition No. 92, referring to bus bays, requested it be amended to read "....shall be provided as shown on the site plan, the exact location being subject to approval by the Riverside Transit Authority." 4. Plot Plan Condition No. 95, he stated their attorneys are not certain about some of the language for this Condition and are currently working with the City Attorney on these conditions. It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Hoagland to 1.) Adopt Resolution No. 93-12, Adopting Environmental Impact Report No. 340 and recommend Adoption of The Statement of Overriding Considerations proposed, including statements to the effect that, in terms of libraries and school facilities, the Plannning Commission feels there may not be significant impacts on schools and libraries due to the revenues generated by this type of facility. 2.) Further, relating to Sheriff services, revenues generated by this type of facility will be available to provide for the services at the discretion of the City Council and 3.) Approve the Mitigation Monitoring Program. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PCMIN06121 /93 -2- 07101 /93 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 1993 Change Of Zone No 93-0043 Plot Plan No 243 Amd No 4 and Variance No 9 Director Thornhill stated that staff feels the Variance is no longer required and requested that the applicant withdraw the request. Barry Brunell concurred with withdrawal of the Variance on behalf of the applicant. Commissioner Ford suggested that Condition 25 (c), Page 17, be moved to "Prior To Occupancy". The Commission and the applicant's representative concurred with the modification. It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Ford to 1.) Recommend to the City Council Adoption of Resolution No. 93-14 approving Change of Zone No. 93-0043, subject to modification of Condition No. 25 (c) and subject to the addition of the Alhambra Group's recommendations on the landscape plan, and modifications to Conditions No. 1, No. 2 and No. 95 (see page 2 of these minutes) as requested by the applicant; and 2.) To recommend to the City Council Adoption of Resolution No. 93-13 approving Plot Plan No. 243 and the attached Conditions of Approval. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Parcel Map No. 27323. Amd. No. 4 It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Ford to recommend to the City Council Adoption of Resolution No. 93-15 approving Parcel Map 27343, Amendment No. 4, subject to the change of any condition so that they agree with the Change of Zone and Plot Plan conditions and to close the public hearing at 7:00 P.M. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PCMIN06/21193 -3- 07/01 /93 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 21, 1993 PLANNING DIRECTORS REPORT None PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT Commissioner Chiniaeff stated that after reviewing this project, he feels that there should be a stated policy regarding street trees and suggested that staff bring the issue forward to the City Council. Director Thornhill advised that staff is currently working on a RFQ for design guidelines. Commissiner Blair asked for discussion of agenda package materials provided by applicant, placed on the next agenda for discussion. OTHER BUSINESS None '" ADJOURNMENT Chairman Fahey declared the meeting adjourned at 7:10 P.M. The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Planning Commission will be held on Monday, July 19, 1993, 6:00 P.M., at Vail Elementary School, 29915 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula, California. Chairman Linda Fahey Secretary PCMIN06/21 /93 -4- 07/01 /93 ATTACHMENT NO. 9 REFINED TRAFFIC STUDY R:ISISTAFFRPT\243pp,CC 7/1/93 Mb 62 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS . PLANNERS 3600 Lime Street, Suite 226 . Riverside, CA 92501 . (714) 274-0566 . FAX (714) 274-9220 June 16, 1993 Mr. Raymond A. Casey, P.E. Principal Engineer/Land Development Department of Public Works City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Regional Center Phase One/Wal-Mart Center Off -site Impacts and Mitigation Dear Mr. Casey: Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) has prepared the following summary of our off -site impact analysis for the Wal-Mart Center portion of the Regional Center. This project is also referred to as Regional Center Phase One. Prior to presenting our finding, it is important to clarify that the earlier -developed Temecula Regional Center Roadway needs, identified for Phase One (implementation period 1993 to 1994), do not apply to the Wal-Mart Center project for several reasons: 1. The earlier conceived roadway implementation schedule assumed concurrent development of the other two Urban Core Projects (e.g., Winchester Hills and Campos Verde). Based on Kemper's current expectations these projects will not be developed during the time frame (1993 to 1995) designated for the Wal-Mart Center. 2. The earlier conceived roadway improvement plan reflected improvements which were programmed for this period (1993 to 1995). While most of these improvement projects are either completed or well underway, one is not proceeding according to schedule. Specifically, this relates to the A.D. 161 Winchester Road widening project between. Margarita Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. 3. Phase One. of the Regional Center (Plot Plan 243) has been redefined to include a different square footage of leasable area than previously assumed. _BANY. NY - ALLIANCE, OH - CAIRO, EGYPT - CHARLESTON, SC - COLUMBIA, SC - COLUMBUS. OH - DES MOINES, IA - FALLS CHURCH; -... DNG KONG - HOUSTON, TX - KNOXVILLE. TN - LEXINGTON. KY - LONDON, ENGLAND - LOS ANGELES. CA - MIAMI. FL - NEENAH. WI =W HAVEN, CT - OAKLAND, CA - ORLANDO, FL - PITTSBURGH, PA - PORTSMOUTH, NH - PROVIDENCE, RI . RALEIGH, NC ;HMOND, VA - RIVERSIDE, CA - ROSELLE. IL - SAN FRANCISCO. CA - SAN JOSE, CA - SINGAPORE - TORONTO. CANADA - WASHINGTON. DC EMPLOYEE -OWNED COMPANY It should be noted that the inclusion of the Winchester Road widening, Ynez Road widening, and Margarita Road two-lane interim extension in the 1993 to 1994 roadway improvement schedule was based primarily on known programming (at that time) and not on specific mitigation needs due to the individual Urban Core Projects. The Margarita Road two-lane interim extension is already in place, and the Ynez Road widening (to six lanes) is currently under construction by Community Facilities District 88-12. These improvements as well as the Winchester Road widening had been identified primarily to mitigate existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the Urban Core Projects. The purpose of our analysis of the Wal-Mart off -site traffic impacts is to define the actual level of impact and re -define mitigation needs to maintain an acceptable traffic Level of Service at build -out of this project (as presently defined). The findings and mitigation recommendations presented herein supersede our previous traffic study assessments regarding off -site area roadway implementation requirements for Phase One of the Regional Center. The earlier off -site roadway mitigation assessments which are superseded by'this current analysis are referenced in the EIR 340 Addenda material (WSA October 15, 1992 letter to Mr. Robert Righetti). Although project impacts and mitigation are discussed in the following sections for Ynez Road, Margarita Road, and Winchester Road, the traffic analysis focuses on the Winchester Road segment, between Margarita Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road, since the programmed A.D. -- 161 improvement of this segment has fallen behind schedule. Ynez Road Phase One of the Regional Center would utilize Ynez Road as primary access to and from the site. The most significant site -related traffic impacts would occur immediately adjacent to the projects frontage where site traffic would be concentrated around the site access driveways. This segment of Ynez Road has already been improved to its ultimate six -lane Urban Arterial cross- section. Assuming that modifications: are made to the existing signal opposite the site's main access, the added project traffic would be well within the Level of Service C capacity offered by Ynez Road. Immediately south of the site, the project would add a maximum of 428 vehicles per hour during the evening peak. South of Solana Way, the increment of project traffic would reduce to about 286 vehicles per hour during the evening peak. The segment of Ynez Road between the site and Solana Way is already improved to a six -lane cross section and would have sufficient reserve capacity to accommodate the site traffic and still maintain Level of Service C or better during peak periods. 2 The segment of Ynez south of Solana Way is currently under re -construction and will provide six lanes once the C.F.D. 88-12 improvement is complete. The improvement will essentially triple the existing capacity and would provide a peak period Level of Service C or better with the added project traffic. No additional mitigation would be required. Margarita Road The analysis of project impacts on the recently completed two-lane interim extension of Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road has already been addressed in our April 15, 1993 letter to Mr. Csaba Ko.of Kemper. A copy of this letter is attached for your review. The analysis findings presented in this earlier letter indicated that the project -related traffic using the Margarita Road extension would be insignificantly low. Winchester Road WSA has analyzed the two critical intersections along this segment of Winchester Road (Winchester Road/Nicolas Road and Winchester Road/Murrieta Hot Springs Road) for the following peak hour traffic condition scenarios: Existing; 1995 without project; and 1995 with project. The analysis assumes full development of the Wal-Mart Center, which will include approximately 340,000 square feet of leasable floor area. Build -out of the project is expected to occur by 1995. The results of the traffic analysis are summarized below by traffic scenario. Existing Conditions ■ Existing peak hour traffic conditions at both the Nicolas Road/ Winchester Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road/Winchester Road intersections were found to warrant signalization. 1995 without Project ■ Traffic growth between 1993 and 1995 will further reinforce the signal warrants at the Nicolas Road/Winchester Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road/Winchester Road intersections. 3 ■ Provision of interim signals at these locations (with minor intersection widening) would mitigate the anticipated service levels and safety concerns. 1995 with Project ■ The Wal-Mart project would add an incremental amount of peak hour traffic to the Nicolas Road/Winchester Road and Mundeta Hot Springs Road/Winchester Road intersections and would further reinforce the need for signalization. ■ With signalization of the Nicolas Road/Winchester Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road/Winchester Road intersections, peak hour service levels would be "C" or better. Y Based on the results of our analysis, WSA recommends the off -site mitigation measures presented in Attachment "A". These off -site mitigation measures would address the cumulative needs of the 1995 Background traffic and Wal-Mart traffic (at build -out) and would improve peak period traffic conditions to Level of Service C or better. Traffic conditions at the Winchester/Nicolas and Winchester/Murrieta Hot Springs intersections would be better than experienced under existing conditions. I trust this supplemental analysis will assist you in your review of the Wal-Mart Center project Respectfully submitted, Wilbur Smith Associates Robert A. Davis Associate 4 Attachment "A" Recommended Off -site Mitigation Measures Temecula Regional Center Phase One / Wal-Mart Center Measures Provided by Regional Center Phase One ■ Signalization of the Winchester Road/Wal-Mart access drive intersection. ■ Modification of the existing Ynez Road/Palm Plaza signal to accommodate the Wal- Mart main access drive. ■ Signalization of the Ynez Road/southerly Site Access Drive. Measures Provided by Other Entities (including the Applicant)* ■ Signalization of the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection. ■ Signalization of the Winchester Road/Murrieta Hot Springs Road intersection. * Note that Kemper has been a participant in A.D. 161 for several years and that the signalization/improvement of the Winchester/Murrieta Hot Springs intersection is programmed as part of the assessment district improvements and the signal. installation would be paid for by Riverside County Signal Mitigation funds. The signalization/ improvement of the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection is currently programmed in the City's CIP and is funded by signal mitigation fees which have been collected from area developers, including Kemper. 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 340 JUNE 7, 1993 RAMSTAFFRPT1243W.CC 7/l/W Mb 63 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION June 7, 1993 Case No.: Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (EIR No. 340) Temecula Regional Center Prepared By: Steve R. Jiannino RECOMMENDATION: ADAPT Resolution No. 93- recommending Certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 340 and Addendum, Adoption of Statements of Overriding Consideration and Aooroval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Kemper Real Estate Management Company REPRESENTATIVE: Douglas Wood and Associates PROPOSAL: Certification of an Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan No. 263. The. project is a proposal for mixed use development on 201.30 acres consisting of 1,673,000 square feet of Commercial Retail Development, 810,000 square feet of Office/Institutional uses, possible Multiple Family Residential development of up to 300 units and a 375 room hotel. LOCATION: Southeast corner of the intersection of Ynez and Winchester Roads. EXISTING ZONING: R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural, 20 acre minimum lot size) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) South: M-SC (Manufacturing Service Commercial) East: A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural, 20 Acre Minimum Lot Size) West: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) PROPOSED ZONING: Specific Plan No. 263 and C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant RAS\STAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6/29/93 tie 1 SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Commercial Development (Costco Wholesale) South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Commercial Development (Palm Plaza) BACKGROUND Specific Plan No. 263 and Change of Zone No. 5589 were submitted to the Riverside County Planning Department on September 8, 1989. After completion of an initial environmental study, the Riverside County Planning Department determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required for the project and processed a Notice of Preparation for the Environmental Impact Report in November of 1989. The cases were transferred to the City of Temecula in April of 1990. The City of Temecula held a Scoping Meeting for EIR No. 340 on July 26, 1990. The Draft EIR was transmitted for review and comment on June 7, 1991 with the review period ending July 26, 1991. With the processing of a nearby project, Specific Plan No. 1 (Campos Verdes) and EIR No. 348, additional information was received which required revised or updated studies to be completed for this area. These studies have been included as addendum to Draft EIR No. 340. The mitigation measures proposed in the addendum have been included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340. ANALYSIS Table A is a listing of all the impacts identified in EIR No. 340 associated with the Regional Center Specific Plan. The table further provides information on which impacts remain significant after mitigation and refined Statements of Overriding Conditions. RAMSTAFFRM340EIR.PC 6/29193 tie 2 TABLE A Impact Project Impact After Mitigations Cumulative Impact After Mitigation Requires Statement of Overriding Consideration Noise Significant Significant Yes Climate and Air Quality Significant Significant Yes Agriculture Significant Significant Yes Seismic Safety Insignificant Significant Yes Slopes and Erosion Insignificant Insignificant No Wind Erosion and Blowsand Insignificant Insignificant No Flooding Insignificant Significant Yes Water Quality Insignificant Insignificant No Toxic Substances Insignificant Insignificant No Open Space and Conservation Insignificant Insignificant No Wildlife and Vegetation Insignificant Significant Yes Energy Resources Insignificant Insignificant No Scenic Highway Insignificant Insignificant No Cultural and Scientific Resources Insignificant Significant No Circulation Insignificant Significant Yes Water and Sewer Insignificant Significant Yes Fire Services Insignificant Significant Yes Sheriff Services Insignificant Significant Yes Schools Insignificant Significant Yes Parks and Recreation Insignificant Insignificant No Utilities Insignificant Significant Yes Solid Waste Insignificant Insignificant No Health Services Libraries Light and Glare Insignificant Insignificant Insignificant Insignificant Significant Insignificant No Yes No RASISTAFFRPT1340EIR.PC a/28/83 tjs Environmental Impact Report No. 340 was prepared by the applicant's consultant, Douglas Wood and Associates, Inc. The Draft Environmental Impact Report was widely circulated for public comment in accordance with CEQA Guidelines. During the processing of the Environmental Impact Report, Assembly Bill 471 (AB 471) and Assembly Bill 1791 (AB 1791) were passed in conjunction with Proposition 1 1 1, Gas Tax Increase and Congestion Management Program. AB 471 and AB 1791 required the establishment of a Congestion Management Program (CMP) for counties which was implemented by Riverside County, January 1, 1992. The program requires all developments which generate more than 200 peak hour trips to be reviewed for possible impacts on the CMP roadway system. Therefore, a CMP analysis needed to be completed for this project. The designated CMP roadways within the City of Temecula are Interstate 15 (1-15) and State Highway 79 (Winchester Road). The developer has completed a CMP analysis which is currently being reviewed by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC). The CMP analysis is included as an addendum to the EIR with all recommended mitigations being included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340. Several additional comments, some of which required additional studies be performed, were received during the review period of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. These studies involved traffic and drainage issues and have been included in the addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Report. The proposed mitigations contained with the studies have been included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. All comments and the consultants responses to the comments along with the Draft Environmental Impact Report and Addendum will be incorporated into the Final Environmental Impact Report. The Environmental Impact Report indicates that even after implementing the proposed mitigations, several significant impacts will remain. The remaining significant impacts will be to Noise, Climate and Air Quality, and Agriculture. Several other cumulatively significant impacts will occur if the other proposed Specific Plans for the region, Specific Plan No. 1 (Campos Verdes) and Specific Plan No. 255 (Winchester Hills), are developed. These additional areas of significant impact will be Seismic Safety, Flooding, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Traffic, Fire Services, Sheriff Services, Schools, Utilities and Libraries. The Planning Commission and City Council will have to adopt Statements of Overriding Considerations for these impacts in conjunction with Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The Environmental Impact Report analyzed the significance of all the major impacts. Following is a summary of impacts: 1. Seismic Safety The site does not contain any known active faults, but it is affected by the nearby Wildomar Fault. Therefore, the site is subject to possible ground shaking hazards. Construction of any improvements will have to incorporate building techniques to mitigate for possible ground shaking. A portion of the site lies within a potential liquefaction zone. As a mitigation measure, any development within this area will have to comply with recommendations made within detailed geology reports provided orior to issuanna of radin f site. RAS\STAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6129193 tie 4 g g permits or the In addition, a portion of the site also lies within the Dam Inundation Area for Lake Skinner. Therefore, an evacuation route shall be developed for the area prior to recordation of any final maps and a notice of the possible hazard shall be included in all deeds recorded on the property. Completion of the proposed Assessment District No. 161 improvements to the Santa Gertrudis Creek Channel could remove the site from the Dam Inundation Area for Lake Skinner. Seismic Safety is considered a cumulative significant impact, therefore a Statement of Overriding Consideration is required for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 2. Agricultural Lands Implementation of the Specific Plan will remove existing dry farmed cropland from production. It will also result in the loss of future agricultural lands designated as 'Local Important Farmland' and "Prime Farmland' as indicated in the City's Draft General Plan, agricultural resources. Development of the property could theoretically hasten the conversion of other agricultural areas to urban uses by creating economic pressures and increasing land value for development. However, from a practical standpoint, this project is surrounded by urbanizing or planned urban development. There are no practical mitigations for this impact, with the exception of no development, even though the impact is considered a significant impact. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted for this impact with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 3. Climate and Air Quality Although impacts to air quality will occur during the grading and construction phase of the project, the major impact to air quality will come from vehicle exhaust after build out of the project. Mitigation measures have been added to the project to lessen the impacts to the air quality. Some of these mitigation measures include: watering graded surfaces and providing interim landscaping (groundcover) of graded areas for dust emission control to lower impacts during construction. Additional mitigations include: providing bike paths, completing required on- and off -site road improvements, complying with Congestion Management Programs and providing a job housing balance. While these measures provide feasible mitigations for the increased traffic, the impact to air quality will still be significant. The total number of vehicle trips generated from the project and surrounding projects cannot be reduced sufficiently to enable the impact to be considered insignificant. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 4. N ise Noise impacts will occur during grading and construction of the although the major impact to noise will be from the cumulative effect of increased traffic on the roadways from this project and additional development in the area. Impacts during construction will be lessened by controlling the time construction activities are allowed to take place. Even after implementation of feasible mitigation measures, the cumulative noise impact cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 5. it ul ' n This project impacts both on and off -site roadways. The size of the project generates sufficient traffic to require the project to comply with the State Congestion Management Program. The circulation pattern connects with proposed RAS\STAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6129193 tie 5 roadways that run through the City of Murrieta and the County of Riverside. The Traffic Study included in the technical appendix of the EIR details the impacts to the circulation system of all three jurisdictions. The analysis contains mitigation measures and timing requirements for the completion of the improvements. These mitigations have been included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and the Conditions of Approval for the project. The cumulative impacts to circulation will remain significant although the impacts will be lessened by adherence to the Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted for this impact in conjunction with the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project. 6. Wildlife/Vegetation A biological study was completed for the site and no rare or endangered plants or animals were observed or are expected to occur on the site. The site is within the historic range of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat and is subject to the mitigation fees established for protection of appropriate Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat. Although the site is not habitat for any rare or endangered species, the loss of the habitat will add to the cumulative loss of wildlife habitat in the area. This cumulative loss is considered significant even though the individual project impact is not considered significant. The cumulative significant impact will require a Statement of Overriding Consideration be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project. 7. Flood/Drainage A hydrology study was completed for the project which determined the type of infrastructure necessary to handle an anticipated 100 year storm for the Project. Drainage will be carried through a system of drainage lines and parking lots to existing culverts under Interstate 15 (1-15). An off -site detention basin is planned to be constructed east of Margarita Road. Drainage analysis provided with proposed development projects will determine when the detention basin must be constructed. The drainage study indicates that the existing system under 1-15 and further downstream can handle the drainage being proposed by this project. Compliance with the proposed mitigation measures and Conditions of Approval will reduce the impacts of the project but the cumulative impacts are still considered significant and a Statement of Overriding Consideration needs to be adopted in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 8. Erosion Erosion control measures are being required and proposed that will comply with all National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. These measures will include watering of the site during grading, street sweeping existing surrounding roadways, landscaping of graded slopes, berming, and sand bagging where necessary. The Mitigation Monitoring Program discourages any grading of sites prior to development being proposed for the site. The site will not be allowed to be mass graded which will help lessen erosion problems. Detailed erosion control plans must be submitted and approved with issuance of grading permits. The erosion control measures must comply with City and NPDES standards. The impact, due to erosion, will not be significant with compliance to the Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Monitoring program. RASISTAFFRPT1340EIR.PC 6/29/93 tis 6 9. Public Facilities The project impacts public facilities due to the increased demand for services from new development. These impacts will be reduced to a level of non - significance by payment of appropriate fees and construction of required infrastructure. The cumulative impacts are still considered to be significant and a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 10. Utilities The utility providers for the area have determined that they can provide the electricity, gas, and phone services to the site if the proper infrastructure is installed. The utility companies will be providing information on conservation of energy to encourage all users to conserve as much energy as possible. With construction of buildings in compliance with Title 24 standards and the installation of appliances which conform to Title 20 standards, the impacts to utilities will be reduced but the cumulative effect will still be considered significant. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration is required for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 11. Parks and Recreation/Oven Space The project proposes increased landscaping areas along the major streets. The majority of the project is for commercial or office development with a possibility of multiple family residential units being constructed above the other uses. The maximum number of multiple family residential units is proposed to be 300 units. The project will be conditioned to comply with the City's Quimby Ordinance to provide for the park requirements which will reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 12. Cultural and Scientific RM"D rres No cultural resources are anticipated to occur on the site according to Christopher E. Drover Ph.D., (see EIR No. 340, Appendix D, Technical Appendices). However, if any cultural resources are encountered as a result of grading, a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted and a mitigation program will be adopted. There is a possibility that paleontology resources could be discovered on the site. Grading of the site shall conform to a mitigation program provided by a qualified Paleontologist. Adherence to the paleontologists mitigation program and the conditions of approval will reduce the potential impact to a level of non -significance. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Pursuant to Section 15093 of CEQA decision makers must balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable adverse impacts in determining whether to approved a project. If the benefits outweigh the unavoidable impacts the adverse impacts may be considered acceptable. The benefits of the proposed project outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts based on the following overriding considerations: A. Construction of the proposed project will create the opportunity for a new Town Center for the City of Temecula. R:\S\STAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6/29193 tje 7 B. Construction of the proposed project will provide commercial uses that will —. accommodate a share of the projected community and regional workforce by creating 7,289 to 8,126 long-term employment opportunities thereby enhancing the jobs/housing balance for the area. Additional short-term construction - related jobs will also be created. C. Construction of the proposed project responds to the rapidly growing retail and shopping center market demand by proposing the development of commercial and office opportunities, major regional shopping, highway, mixed use and community shopping ares, as well as a hotel and restaurants which will service the local and visiting population. D. Construction of the proposed project will bring a wide range of shopping opportunities and commercial services closer to the heart of the Temecula community thereby reducing traffic, noise and air quality impacts associated with automobile trips headed for similar commercial destinations at a farther distance. E. The addition of major anchor tenants and smaller retail outlets will create commercial competition which will provide shoppers with diverse and competitive commercial and retail opportunities. F. High density, affordable housing opportunities within the proposed commercial/retail center may be created thereby responding to local housing needs. G. Provision of traffic mitigation measures will provide overall mitigation to address the circulation impacts which are directly attributable to the proposed project and which are indirectly attributable to the proposed project's incremental contribution to cumulative traffic impacts and will therefore benefit the region by adding capacity to critical intersections and roadways. The proposed project contributes to the implementation of key portions of the City's Master Plan of Highways. H. Drainage facilities will be constructed to better contain and direct the flow of stormwater runoff through and downstream of the project site. I. The proposed project will provide funding for various regional infrastructure elements through the City's Mitigation Fee Program. J. Approval of a Specific Plan provides the necessary master planning to insure provision of necessary infrastructure, desired amenities, and common landscape and design elements which would not be possible if the property were developed using a "piecemeal" approach. R:1SISTAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6/29/93 tie 8 K. Depending upon which project alternative is ultimately constructed, the "Regional Center" or "Power Center", total project sales tax revenues are anticipated to range between $13.7 to $15.4 million dollars over the first ten years, and $2.3 to $2.8 million dollars annually thereafter, according to the Fiscal Impact Report contained in the DEIR. There will also be additional financial benefits to the City due to higher property tax collections. Mitigation Monitorina Program The Draft Environmental Impact Report includes the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. The Mitigation Monitoring Program will be included as a Condition of Approval for projects as a whole with several of the mitigations being included as separate Conditions of Approval. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The Specific Plan is consistent with the intent of the Draft General Plan to create a Village Center in this area. Even though several significant impacts will remain after implementation of all the mitigation measures, the benefits of the project outweigh these impacts as reflected in the Statements of Overriding Consideration. The project related unavoidable significant impacts are in the areas of noise, climate, air quality and agriculture. The cumulative unavoidable significant impacts, from development of Specific Plan No. 255 and Specific Plan No. 1 concurrently with Specific Plan No. 263, are in the areas of seismic safety, flooding, wildlife and vegetation, circulation and traffic, fire services, sheriff services, schools, utilities and libraries. With adoption of the Statements of Overriding Consideration, the Environmental Impact Report will be consistent with the City's Draft General Plan and State Law. Attachments: 1. PC Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 10 2. Exhibits - Blue Page 16 A. Vicinity Map B. Draft General Plan Designation C. Zoning Designation D. Site Plan R:\S\STAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6/29193 tie 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\SISTAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6/29/93 tje 10 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 340 WITH ADDENDUM, ADOPTION OF THE STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO(S) 910- 130-046, 047; 921-090-001, 002, 0039 004, 005 AND 006. WHEREAS, Douglas Woods and Associates completed Environmental Impact Report No. 340 (EIR No. 340) in accordance with the Riverside County and State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, said EIR application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said EIR on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended Certification of said EIR with Addendum, Adoption of Statements of Overriding Consideration and Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TENiECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2 • The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: RAS\STAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6/29/93 tjo 11 a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission in recommending Certification of the proposed FEIR, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. Seismic Safetv The site does not contain any known active faults, but it is affected by the nearby Wildomar Fault and lies within a potential liquefaction zone and the Lake Skinner Dam Inundation Area. Mitigation measures proposed for the project will lessen potential impacts, although with concurrent development of other proposed projects, seismic safety is considered a cumulative significant impact. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration is required for Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 2. Aaricultural Lands Implementation of the Specific Plan will remove existing dry farmed cropland from production. It will also result in the loss of future agricultural lands designated as "Local Important Farmland " and "Prime Farmland " as indicated in the City's Draft General Plan, agricultural resources. There are no practical mitigations for this impact, except no development, even though the impact is considered a significant impact. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted for this impact with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 3. C irate and Air Qua'tv Although impacts to air quality will occur during the grading and construction phase of the project, the major impact to air quality will come from vehicle exhaust after build out of the project. Mitigation measures have been added to the project to lessen the impacts to air quality. While these measures provide feasible mitigations for the increased traffic, the impact to air quality will still be a significant impact. The total number of vehicle trips generated from the project and surrounding projects cannot be reduced sufficiently to enable the impact to be considered insignificant. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. RAS\STAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6/29/93 tje 12 4. Noise Noise impacts will occur during grading and construction of the Project, although the major impact to noise will be from the cumulative effect of increased traffic on the roadways from this project and additional development in the area. Impacts during construction will be lessened by controlling the time construction activities are allowed to take place. Even after implementation of feasible mitigation measures, the cumulative noise impact cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration will have to be adopted concerning the noise impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 5. ulati n This project impacts both on and off -site roadways. The Traffic study included in the technical appendix of the EIR details the impacts to the circulation system and contains mitigation measures and timing requirements for the completion of necessary improvements. These mitigations have been included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and the Conditions of Approval for the project. The cumulative impacts to circulation will remain significant although the impacts will be lessened by adherence to the Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted for this impact in conjunction with the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project. 6. Wildlife/Vegetation A biological study was completed on the site and no rare or endangered plants or animals were observed or are expected to occur on the site. The site is within the historic range of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat and is subject to the mitigation fees established for protection of appropriate Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat. Although the site is not habitat for any rare or endangered species, the loss of the habitat will add to the cumulative loss of wildlife habitat in the area. This cumulative loss is considered significant even though the individual project impact is not considered significant. The cumulative significant impact will require a Statement of Overriding Consideration be adopted for this impact in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project. 7. Flood/Drainage A hydrology study was completed for the project which determined the type of infrastructure necessary to handle an anticipated 100 year storm for the project. The drainage study contains required mitigation measures for lessening the impacts of the project. Cumulative impacts are still considered significant and a Statement of Overriding Consideration needs to be adopted in conjunction with certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 8. Erosion Erosion control measures are being required and proposed that will comply with all National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. These measure will include watering of the site during grading, street sweeping existing surrounding roadways, landscaping of graded slopes, berming, and sand bagging where necessary. The impact, due to erosion, will not be significant with compliance to the Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Monitoring program. R:\SISTAFFRPT1340EIR.PC 6/29/93 tje 13 9. Public EK Iities The project impacts public facilities due to the increased demand for services from new development. The impacts of the project will be reduced to a level of non -significance by payment of appropriate fees and construction of required infrastructure. The cumulative impacts are considered to be significant and a Statement of Overriding Consideration must be adopted for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 10. Utilities The utility providers for the area have determined that they can provide the electricity, gas, and phone services to the site if the proper infrastructure is installed. With construction of buildings in compliance with Title 24 standards and the installation of appliances which conform to Title 20 standards, the impacts to utilities will be reduced but the cumulative effect will still be considered significant. Therefore, a Statement of Overriding Consideration is required for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. 11. Parks and Recreation/Open SSpace The project proposes increased landscaping areas along the major streets. The project will be conditioned to comply with the City's Quimby Ordinance to provide park requirements, which will reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 12. cultural and ide ffic Resou w No cultural resources are anticipated to occur on the site according to Christopher E. Drover Ph.D. (see Appendix D, Technical Appendices). However, if any cultural resources are encountered as a result of grading, a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted and a mitigation program will be adopted. There is a possibility that paleontology resources could be discovered on the site. Grading of the site shall conform to a mitigation program provided by a qualified paleontologist. Adherence to the paleontologists mitigation program and the conditions of approval will reduce the potential impact to a level of non -significance. 13. Mitigation Monitoring Program The Draft Environmental Impact Report includes the proposed Mitigation Monitoringprogram Pro for the project. The Mitigation Monitoring gram is included as a Condition of Approval for the projects as a whole with several of the mitigations being separate Conditions of Approval for the project. Section 2, CknAifignL. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends certification of FEIR No. 340 with Addendum, adoption of Statements of Overriding Consideration and approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program on 201.6 acres Of land located at the southeast comer of Ynez and Winchester Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No(s) 910-130-046, 047; 921-090-0019 0029 003, 004, 005 and 006. R:1SISTAFFRPT1340EIR.PC 6/29/93 tie 14 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 1993. LINDA L. FAHEY 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 7th day of June, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY RAS\STAFFRPT\340EIR.PC 6129/93 tjs 15 ATTACHMENT NO. 11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CHANGE OF ZONE NO. PA93-0043 PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 VARIANCE NO. 9 JUNE 7, 1993 RAS\STAFFRPT\243pp,CC 7/1/83 Mb 64 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION June 7, 1993 Case No.: Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4, Planning Application No. PA93-0043 (Change of Zone), Variance No. 9 Prepared By: Matthew Fagan RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT Resolution No. 93- recommending Anoroval of Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4, based on the Findings and Analysis contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. ADOPT Resolution No. 93- recommending Anoroval of Planning Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone), based on the Findings and Analysis contained in the Staff Report. ADOPT Resolution No. 93- recommending Anoroval of Variance No. 9, based on the Findings and Analysis contained in the Staff Report. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Kemper Real Estate Management Company REPRESENTATIVE: T & B Planning Consultants PROPOSAL: Change of Zone: A re -designation of a 35.6 acre site from R-R (Rural Residential) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial). Plot Plan: A proposal for approximately 340,034 square feet of commercial/retail space to include a 125,584 square foot Wal-Mart (and a 30,000 square foot expansion to the Wal-Mart). The Wal-Mart elevations are being considered with the proposal, with elevations for the remainder to be addressed through subsequent development plan submittals. Variance: From Section 18.13 of Ordinance No. 348 from seven (7) to two (2) loading spaces for the Wal- Mart component of the Plot Plan. LOCATION: Southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 ktb 1 EXISTING ZONING: R-R (Rural Residential) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) South: A-2-20 (Heavy Agriculture) East: A-2-20 (Heavy Agriculture) West: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) PROPOSED ZONING: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Commercial Shopping Center (Palm Plaza) PROJECT STATISTICS Wal-Mart: 125,584 square feet Wal-Mart Expansion: 30,000 square feet Commercial: 59,500 square feet Shops: 69,700 square feet Pads (Retail shops): 31,000 square feet Pads (Restaurant): 20,250 square feet Pads (Financial): 4,000 square feet Total: 340,034 square feet Parking Spaces Required Under Ordinance No. 348: 1,871 Parking Spaces Provided On Site Plan: 2,013 Site Acreage: 35.6 BACKGROUND Plot Plan No. 243 was submitted to the Planning Department on November 4, 1991. Plot Plan No. 243 was a proposal for 273,584 square feet of commercial/retail space which included a 125,584 square foot Wal-Mart. Accompanying this Plot Plan was an application for a fifteen (15) parcel subdivision (Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323). A Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on November 21, 1991. Staff raised the following issues (reference Attachment No. 6): the site was over parked by 579 spaces; there were vehicular circulation conflicts; greater pedestrian circulation linkages were needed; an additional drive aisle was needed to break up the expanse of parking in front of Wal-Mart; and, the landscape plan was inconsistent with the site plan. Site design concerns included clustering of Pads 1, 2 and 3, orienting Shops 2, Commercial 2 and Shops 3 in an east/west fashion, and bringing the parking closer to the source of the uses. Subsequent to the DRC meeting, the application was deemed incomplete. RAS%STAFFRPn243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 2 Amendment No. 1 to Plot Plan No. 243 was submitted to the Planning Department on December 24, 1991. Amendment No. 1 was a proposal for 320,309 square feet of Outside of the addition of one Pad site and the expansion area for the We commercial/retail space which included a 30,000 square foot expansion to the Wal-Mart, t l-Mart. substantive changes were made to the site plan in relation to the original submittal. Staff discussed Amendment No. 1 with the applicant on January 3, 1992 (reference Attachment No. 7). Staff informed the applicant that the width of the one-way drive aisles in front of Wal-Mart were inconsistent with Ordinance No. 348. The applicant submitted a request for a variance for the width of the proposed one-way drive aisle on January 21, 1992. A DRC meeting was held on February 13, 1992 to further discuss Amendment No. 1. At that time, Staff's original concerns regarding the site design were re -iterated. The Planning Commission gave input to the applicant regarding the design of the project at a workshop on May 4, 1992. This input was given as part of their review of the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. The Commission identified the southeast intersection of Ynez and Winchester Roads as a major entry to the City and stated that something "special" should occur at this corner (reference Attachment No. 8). They also discussed the aesthetic impact to the community of siting the Wal-Mart in its current configuration and mention was made to relocate the Wal-Mart off the corner. Staff has conveyed this direction to the applicant on numerous occasions during the review process. Subsequent to the May 14, 1992 workshop, no contact was made with Planning Department Staff by the applicant until March 8, 1993. At this time, the applicant decided to seek approval for the Plot Plan ahead of the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan (S.P. 263), which was also in process. Prior to this point, it was the applicant's intent to seek approval ,-- of the project concurrently with the Specific Plan. The applicant submitted a Change of Zone application on March 8, 1993 (Planning Application No. 93-0043) requesting a re -designation of the project site (35.6 acres) from R-R (Rural Residential) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial). Amendment No. 2 to Plot Plan No. 243 was submitted to the Planning Department on March 8, 1993. Amendment No. 2 was a proposal for 340,434 square feet of commercial/retail space. A sixth pad site was included on the site plan as well as a water feature at the corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads. Pads 4 and 5 were clustered around the water feature (relocated from Amendment No. 1). The Wal-Mart was moved approximately 160 feet south, with Shops 1 and Commercial 1 located in the area previously occupied by the Wal-Mart. The alignment of the main drive aisle off of Ynez Road was also changed. A service station, with associated car wash was included at the southwest portion of the site. An in-house Staff meeting regarding the project was held on March 16, 1993 and a DRC meeting (Amendment No. 2) was held on March 24. Staff raised issues pertinent to the site plan, elevations, landscape plan, tentative map, variance request and change of zone request at this meeting. Staff's original concerns were once again re -iterated to the applicant: the site was overparked, there were conflicts between trucks and autos, there were other circulation conflicts, greater pedestrian circulation linkages were needed, an additional drive aisle was needed to break up the expanse of parking in front of Wal-Mart, and the landscape plan was inconsistent with the site plan. In addition, the following items were discussed: consistency with the General Plan, consistency with the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan, and consistency with Ordinance No. 348. A letter was mailed to the applicant on March 24, 1993 enumerating all of Staff's concerns (reference Attachment No. 9). RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 3 Variance No. 9 was modified subsequent to the March 24, 1993 DRC meeting. The Department of Public Works concluded that the width of the one-way drive aisles were sufficient to meet City standards and therefore a variance was not required. However, staff determined that the issue of loading spaces for the Wal-Mart had not been resolved. The applicant is proposing two (2) loading spaces for Wal-Mart. Section 18.13 of Ordinance No. 348 requires seven (7) spaces for a building the size of Wal-Mart. Variance No. 9 was modified to reflect a request for a reduction in the number of loading spaces required per Ordinance No. 348. At the March 24, 1993 DRC meeting, the applicant requested Staff to place the project on the next available Planning Commission agenda. The project was scheduled and notice of public hearing was made for the Planning Commission meeting on May 3, 1993. Staff requested changes to the site plan, elevations, landscape plan, tentative map, variance request and change of zone request. Amendment No. 3 was submitted to the Planning Department on April 2, 1993. Orientation of structures on -site remained the same as Amendment No. 2; however, total square footage of the project was reduced to 338,784. Amendment No. 3 addressed some of Planning Staff's concerns; however, many outstanding issues still remained (reference Attachment No. 11: all highlighted items still remained unresolved). Staff informed the applicant they would be unable to support the project, and the applicant requested that the items be continued off -calendar until all of the outstanding issues could be addressed (reference Attachment No. 12). Staff subsequently met with the applicant on two occasions to further discuss Planning Department concerns. Amendment No. 4 was submitted to the Planning Department on May 17, 1993. The project proposes 340,034 square feet of commercial/retail area. The Wal- Mart building footprint was changed to reflect their new store layout; however these changes are not substantive in contrast to Amendment No. 3. Nine (9) pads are included on the site plan (in contrast to 6 which were on Amendment No. 3). Four pads are clustered around the water feature at the corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads. The remaining pads are located adjacent to the entryways for the site. The plans which are before the Planning Commission (Amendment No. 4) have addressed most of Planning Staff's concerns. Staff has included Conditions of Approval for the project to address any additional outstanding concerns. These Conditions of Approval will be discussed throughout the Analysis section of this Agenda Report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Plot Plan No 243 Amendment No 4 Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 is a proposal for a 340, commercial/retail development which includes a 155, 034 square foot 8 ,000 of which is for a future expansion), 59,500 square feet of commercial area, 69,700 squuare feet of shops area and 55,250 square feet of freestanding pad area. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider the entire site plan and the Wal-Mart elevations at this time. Elevations for the remaining structures shall be approved on a case by case basis after the Planning Commission approves design guidelines for the project. Staff has conditioned the Plot Plan for the applicant to submit the design guidelines prior to the issuance of the first building permit after the Wal-Mart. Staff will review all future projects of the commercial, shops and pads if the square footage of these projects are within ten (10) percent of the square footage of the original approval. All other proposals which are not within ten (10) R:ISISTAFFRM243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 4 percent of the approved square footage have been conditioned to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. In addition, if the applicant chooses to alter the footprints on the site plan or alter the approved uses, those modifications must be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Variance No 9 Variance No. 9 was filed on January 21, 1992 and is a request for a reduction in the number of loading spaces required under Section 18.13 of Ordinance No. 348 for the Wal-Mart facility from seven (7) to two (2). Planning ADDlication No 93-0043 (Change of Zone) Planning Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone) was submitted on March 8, 1993, and is a proposal to redesignate portions of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 910-013-046 and 910- 013-047 from R-R (Rural Residential) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial). Although these two parcels comprise approximately 149.39 acres, the total amount of area to be redesignated from this request is 35.6 gross acres. The applicant has chosen to redesignate this site to accommodate the proposed commercial development. ANALYSIS SITE PLAN The Planning Commission and City Council have both expressed concerns that the intersection of Ynez and Winchester Roads is a significant gateway to the City and that something "special" should occur at this site. Both bodies further expressed a concern with a Wal-Mart situated in this location. Of primary concern is the scale of the building and associated signage and the visual impact on people coming off of the freeway. The Planning Commissioners indicated alternative locations for the Wal-Mart: directly across from COSTCO (along Winchester Road) or just to the east of K-Mart. Staff conveyed these concerns to the applicant; however, they were not addressed in the site design re -submittals. As an alternative to mitigating visual impacts, the applicant proposes to utilize landscaping and enhanced architectural features on the Wal-Mart. Landscaping is included adjacent to the Wal-Mart, in the parking lot and along the perimeter of the project. Architectural features which have been incorporated in the Wal-Mart elevation include: awnings, pilasters, tile insets and wall projections. The plan includes the siting of four pads and a plaza area around a water feature at the corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads. The pads comprise 22,250 square feet in area. Amendment No. 4 of Plot Plan No. 243 is currently before the Planning Commission for consideration. Previous site designs were reviewed by Staff for consistency with Planning Commission/City Council direction, consistency with the draft General Plan, consistency with the draft Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan, and consistency with Ordinance No. 348. The Wal-Mart building has been moved approximately 160 feet to the south (since the first submittal); however, it is still located fairly close to the corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads. The current design contains features which have been incorporated into the site through the Development Review Committee meeting process. Because the site lies within a Village RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 5 Center Overlay, Staff has requested that the applicant incorporate designs which would be in conformance with the Goals and Policies contained within the Land Use and Community Design Elements of the draft General Plan. The applicant has accomplished many items which meet the intent of the Village Center Overlay. However, the vast expanse of parking existing in front of the Wal-Mart still remains and is inconsistent with the Village Center Overlay policies. Staff has conditioned the project to break up this expanse with an additional north - south, landscaped drive lane. Elements which attain the intent of the Village Center Overlay include: a land use pattern and intensity that encourages alternative modes of transportation (including transit, bicycling and walking); architecture; landscape design and site planning which emphasizes a pedestrian scale; safe and convenient access between uses; and adequate public gathering areas or plazas. Pedestrian Amenities The applicant has provided some pedestrian amenities on the site plan. Pedestrian linkages have been provided within the site and to the perimeter of the site. Throughout the site, landscaping and benches have been incorporated to provide pedestrians the opportunity to rest. In addition, a Condition of Approval has been added to the project to insure that further pedestrian amenities are added to each individual project as they are submitted for approval. Parkins Ordinance No. 348 requires 5.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area (for regional shopping centers). The proposed Specific Plan requires five (5) parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. One thousand eight hundred seventy-one (1,871) parking spaces are required for the site under Ordinance No. 348 and 1,701 parking spaces are required per the draft Regional Center Specific Plan. The applicant proposes to provide two thousand thirteen (2,013) parking spaces for the overall project. The applicant has included that number of parking spaces due to the perceived needs of retailers on the site. The site is over -parked by 142 parking spaces (in relation to Ordinance No. 348 standards) by 312 parking spaces (in relation to the draft Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan standards) and by 136 parking spaces in relation to the standards utilized for the Plot Plan. Relating to the screening of the parking lots, Staff requested that the perimeter parking spaces be deleted to provide more of a "buffer" between the site and Ynez and Winchester Roads. Deletion of these parking spaces would soften potential visual impacts of the development and provide additional areas for pedestrians. This would result in the elimination of approximately sixty-six (66) parking spaces. In addition, Staff requested that a north -south drive aisle be placed mid -way in the parking lot located in front of the Wal-Mart site. This request was made in order to enhance public safety, improve circulation, and address aesthetic concerns (to break up the expanse of asphalt). The applicant has not accommodated this request; therefore, Staff has included a Condition of Approval which requires that the drive aisle be constructed. It is estimated that approximately eighty-four (84) parking spaces would be eliminated from the site plan if this drive aisle is constructed. This is in addition to the sixty- six spaces which are on the perimeter. Based upon Staff's recommendations, one hundred and fifty 0 50) parking spaces would be eliminated; however, the site will still be overparked. Due to the nature of the uses on the R:%SISTAFFRM243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 6 site (which have the potential to be off -set from one another), and since a reciprocal parking and access agreement is required as a Condition of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 23737, Amendment No. 4, this will not present a significant impact to the parking needs on the site. Automobile Truck and Pedestrian Circulation As mentioned in the parking section of this Analysis, Staff has requested that a north -south drive aisle be placed mid -way in the parking lot located in front of the Wal-Mart. The applicant has supplied a letter from Nasland Engineering (reference Attachment No. 13) which provides a rationale for uninterrupted drive aisles in front of Wal-Mart. Nasland stated two main reasons in support of unbroken drive aisles. First, they state: "The longer aisles tend to cause shoppers to park sooner and not traverse the parking lot unnecessarily." Secondly, they assert: "the cross drive approach causes an increase in the number of auto versus auto confrontations in the parking lot along with vision problems cause by required landscaping that would increase the probability of accidents." Staff does not concur with the rationale contained in the letter. Public safety, as well as adequate circulation is a concern for the site. The parking aisles in front of Wal-Mart range in length from four hundred (400) to five hundred (500) feet. A north -south drive aisle will provide motorists and emergency vehicles the ability to move between parking aisles without cutting across vacant parking spaces. The current configuration will create a scenario whereby cutting across vacant parking spaces is the only alternative to changing parking lanes. Staff has also requested that turning movements for automobiles and trucks be illustrated on the site plan. Of particular concern are automobile movements at the entry points and at intersections within the site. These movements are illustrated on the site plan at various intersections. The project has been conditioned to provide for striping on the site to clearly demarcate the turning movements permitted at these points. Truck turning radii have been provided on the site plan and Staff has determined that the areas provided for maneuvering of trucks are adequate. To provide a greater buffer between the pedestrian and the street, staff requested that the sidewalk along Ynez Road be moved back approximately eight (8) feet from the street. The applicant has relocated the sidewalk. Bus turnouts have been provided on the site plan. One turnout has been located along Ynez Road and one has been provided adjacent to Winchester Road. Both of these locations meet the intent of the recommendations contained in a transmittal received from the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). Phasing of Improvements According to the applicant, the project will be constructed in three phases. Phase 1 improvements include the Wal-Mart and Commercial 1. Under Phase 1, the project is conditioned to install all perimeter landscaping and street improvements along Ynez and Winchester Roads. The parking lot associated with the two above mentioned buildings will be constructed with the Wal-Mart project. In addition, plans for the water feature have been conditioned to be submitted to the Planning Department prior to occupancy of Wal-Mart and constructed within six (6) months after occupancy. Phase 2 improvements include Pads 3 through 9, Shops 1, 2 and 3 and Commercial 2. A future service station (which requires a RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 7 conditional use permit with the concurrent sale of beer and wine) is also included in Phase 2. Pads 1 through 3 comprise Phase 3. Staff has included a Condition of A --� requires the applicant to submit a detailed construction phasing Approval which p g plan for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit for Wal-Mart. This will serve to help clarify the improvements required at each phase of development in order to meet City standards. LANDSCAPE PLAN Landscaping on the site utilizes the recommendations contained in the draft Regional Center Specific Plan as well as the criteria required under Ordinance No. 348. Staff has requested additional landscaping for a variety of reasons. First, various elements on the site needed to be screened to minimize visual impacts. A row of Eucalyptus sideroxylon 'Rosea' (Red Iron Bark) have been utilized at the rear portion of the Wal-Mart to minimize visual impacts associated with the east elevation of the project, and are conditioned to be installed with the Wal-Mart project. The trees are located off the site and are to be planted "temporarily" until the rest of the Specific Plan area is developed. The entire site has also been screened through approximately thirty-seven (37) foot wide landscaped parkways along Ynez and Winchester Roads. Deciduous trees have been included along the west elevation of the Wal-Mart. These trees will provide cooling and shade in the summer. In addition, they will also afford sunlight in the winter months. During the review process, the entry features along Ynez and Winchester Roads were found to be inconsistent with the draft Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. The Plan calls for -� seventy-five (75) wide radius treatments at the major entry ways and forty-five (45) wide radius treatments at minor entry ways. As proposed, the major entry features include Phoenix Dactylifera (Arabian Date Palms) and "boulevard theme and common area shrub masses" to include shrubs, sub -shrubs, groundcover and vines. The radius treatments of major entryways are approximately forty-five (45) feet. Minor entry statements include Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle) trees, along with the above mentioned "boulevard theme and common area shrub masses." The radius treatments of minor entryways are approximately thirty-eight (38) feet. Enhanced paving areas have been included at both the major and minor entryways. The applicant has chosen to modify the Specific Plan in order for the entry statements to be consistent with the site plan/landscape plan. Shading requirements prescribed under Ordinance No. 348 have been met. Fifty (50) percent of all spaces are required to be shaded (overall, 54.4 % of the parking area is shaded). Tree coverage is determined by the appropriate crown diameter of each tree at fifteen (15) years. Staff has requested additional trees be included in the parking area. This is due to the fact that trees in shopping centers are routinely pruned in such a manner such that the fifteen (15) year canopy is never realized. Staff has included a Condition of Approval which requires landscaped diamonds within the parking lot to be spaced at intervals no greater than one per every five (5) parking spaces. ELEVATIONS /ARCHITECTURE Staff has met with the architect for the project on several occasions to discuss concerns relative to elevations and building massing. A color reduction of the color and material board has been included as Exhibit H. The precise location of these colors and material on the R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 8 building are included on the color elevations (reference Exhibit E). Staff requested wrought iron fencing be used at the garden center; however, the applicant has chosen to provide tubular metal fence instead. For base elements on the Wal-Mart, the applicant originally proposed to use Split face veneer, then changed this to Split face concrete and ultimately ended up with sandblasted block. Tile embellishments have also been included along the west elevation of Wal-Mart. Because the Wal-Mart application is moving ahead of the rest of the center, Staff has conditioned the project to require that design guidelines be prepared for the remainder commercial, shops, and pads. This will give the Planning Commission and Planning Staff the opportunity to address the ultimate design of the site and its relationship to the Wal-Mart project in greater detail. Building facades will be required to be differentiated at the human level. This will be accomplished by including similar architectural elements of the center. Floor Plan The applicant has provided Staff with a copy of the floor plan for the proposed Wal-Mart (reference Exhibit F). The exhibit is a mirror image of the floor plan of the proposed Wal-Mart. Variance Reauest Variance No. 9 is a request for a reduction in the number of loading spaces required under Section 18.13 of Ordinance No. 348 for the Wal-Mart facility from seven (7) to two (2). Staff has determined that due to the configuration of the Wal-Mart parcel, special circumstances exist which deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity that are under the same zoning classification. Under a strict interpretation of Section 18.13 of Ordinance 348, seven loading and standing spaces are required for the Wal-Mart. The shape of the parcel provides for parking in the front of Wal-Mart, with the structure situated at the rear portion of the parcel. Additionally, the future expansion of the Wal-Mart will be located at the rear portion of the parcel. This provides area for two (2) loading spaces and three (3) standing spaces. The applicant has submitted a letter from Wal-Mart dated February 19, 1992. In his letter, the applicant states: "Wal-Mart utilizes a unique computerized distribution control center. This centralized distribution system allows Wal-Mart deliveries to be scheduled in a more efficient manner, making use of off-peak hours, averting stacking problems and fewer deliveries overall compared to other retailers." A Condition of Approval has been included to insure that a maximum of five (5) loading vehicles be allowed on the Wal-Mart Parcel at one time. The Wal-Mart parcel will be able to accommodate the trucks while they are stacking without any conflict with motorists and pedestrians on the remainder of the site. Therefore, the general health, safety and general welfare of the community is maintained. ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY Current zoning for the site is Rural Residential (R-R). The applicant has submitted a change of zone request concurrently with the Plot Plan, requesting a redesignation of the site from Rural -Residential (R-R) to Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S). The project as proposed is consistent with the development standards and criteria contained in Article Ixb of Ordinance No. 348 (C-P-S zone). Currently, the Land Use designation contained in the draft General Plan is Professional Office ,_kP-O). Staff is requesting that the City's Draft General Plan Land Use Map show the project RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 9 area as C-C (Community Commercial). The draft General Plan also shows this area to be in Village Center and Specific Plan Overlay zones. The applicant is processing The Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan for the area which includes the project site. The Specific Plan will be modified upon adoption of the Plot Plan so that any and all inconsistencies will be rectified. Therefore, the project as proposed will ultimately be consistent with the Specific Plan. The project as conditioned is consistent with Village Center Overlay concepts contained within the General Plan. Goal 5 in the Land Use Element calls for: "a land use pattern and intensity that encourages alternative modes of transportation, including transit, bicycling and walking." Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element states: "...architecture, landscape design and site planning which emphasizes a pedestrian scale and safe and convenient access between uses." Policy 5.6 further calls for: "adequate public gathering areas -or plazas." Village Center Concepts (Chapter 10, Section III.C. of the draft General Plan) state: "in a Village Center, the parking facilities should not be the dominant visual image of the project." Although there are no specific design guidelines contained within the General Plan, the project as conditioned meets the goals and policies of the General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4, Planning Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone), and Variance No. 9 are consistent with Environmental Impact Report No. 340 and Specific Plan No. 263. The EIR analyzed the potential impacts of a retail development at this location. The analysis indicates that several significant impacts for development of Specific Plan No. 263 will remain after all the proposed mitigation measures are incorporated in the project. Therefore, the City Council will have to adopt Statements of Overriding Considerations for certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 340. The Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340 will be included as a Condition of Approval for the underlying map (Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4) which is being considered concurrently with the development proposal. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 is a proposal for a 340, commercial/retail development which includes a 155, 034 square foot 8 ,000 of which is for a future expansion), 59,500 square feet of commercial area, 69,700 squuare feet of shops area and 55,250 square feet of freestanding pad area. Variance No. 9 was filed along with Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 and is a request for a reduction in the number of loading spaces for the Wal-Mart facility from seven (7) to two (2). Planning Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone) was submitted to redesignate the project site from R-R (Rural Residential) to C-P-S'(Scenic Highway Commercial). In addition, Tentative Parcel Map. No. 27323, Amendment No.4 was filed along with the Plot Plan. Issues which were addressed during the Development Review Committee (DRC) process centered on site design, pedestrian amenities, parking, site circulation, phasing of improvements, landscaping and elevations/architecture. There is a reasonable probability that the project as proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered at this time. Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4, Planning Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone), and Variance No. 9 are consistent with Environmental Impact Report No. 340 and Specific Plan No. 263. RA%STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 8/2/93 klb 10 FINDINGS Plot Plan No. 243 Amendment No 4 1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion in the preparation of the General Plan. The General Plan is being prepared in accordance with the timelines established under State Law. 2. There is a reasonable probability that the land use proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered because the proposed use is consistent with the proposed Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) zoning and the recommended Draft Land Use Designation of Community Commercial. Community Commercial uses usually comprise 10 to 50 acres of land and include buildings in excess of 100,000 square feet. As proposed, the project encompasses 35.6 gross acres in land area and proposes approximately 340,034 square feet of floor area. 3. There little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, because the proposed uses are consistent with those which are found within proximity of the site. The Draft Land Use Plan identifies Community Commercial uses to the east of the site, Business Park uses to the north of the site, and Professional Office uses to the south of the site. Community Commercial uses exist to the west of the site (Palm Plaza). 4. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of State Law and local ordinances because the proposed use complies with California Governmental Code Section 65360, Sections 9.53 (Development Standards for the C-P-S Zone), and 18.30 (Plot Plans) of Ordinance No. 348. 5. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, access, and intensity of use, because the proposed plot plan, as conditioned complies with the standards of Ordinance No. 348. 6. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, because the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures for impacts identified in the Environmental Impact Report for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. 7. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, because the proposed uses are consistent with the draft General Plan and Ordinance No. 348. 8. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access to the project site is from publicly maintained roads (Ynez and Winchester Roads). 9. The project as designed and conditioned may not adversely affect the built or natural environment, however, it is a component of the Temecula Regional Center which will adversely impact the built or natural environment as determined in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. RA%STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 11 10. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in --� conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. 11. Said findings are supported by maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. Planning Application No 93-004 (Chanae of Zone) 1. There is a reasonable probability that the zone change from R-R (Rural Residential) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) will be consistent with the future General Plan. The recommended Land Use designation in the draft General Plan for the site is Community Commercial. It is likely that C-P-S uses will be similar in function to those recommended in the Community Commercial land use designation. 2. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan being considered if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, because the proposed uses are consistent with those which are found within proximity of the site. The Draft Land Use Plan identifies Community Commercial uses to the east of the site, Business Park uses to the north of the site, and Professional Office uses to the south of the site. Community Commercial uses exist to the west of the site (Palm Plaza). While the C-P-S zoning will ultimately be inconsistent with the City's General Plan upon its adoption (it will be an interim zoning designation), this inconsistency will be rectified upon the adoption of the City's zoning map. Variance No 9 1. There are exceptional circumstances applicable to the existing size and configuration of the subject property. The configuration of the Wal-Mart parcel creates special circumstances. The shape of the parcel provides for parking in the front of Wal-Mart, with the structure situated at the rear portion of the parcel. Additionally, the future expansion of the Wal-Mart will be located at the rear portion of the parcel. This provides area for two (2) loading spaces and three (3) standing spaces. The strict application of Ordinance No. 348 will deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity that are under the same zoning classification. Under a strict interpretation of Section 18. 13 of Ordinance 348, seven (7) loading and standing spaces are required for the Wal-Mart. Due to the shape of the parcel and the future expansion of Wal-Mart insufficient area for exists for seven (7) loading spaces. This creates a hardship for the applicant. 2. The granting of this variance will be compatible with the general welfare of the public. Although the applicant proposes to provide two (2) loading spaces (Ordinance No. 348 requires seven loading spaces), adequate area is proposed on the site for vehicles to stand as to avoid undue interference with the public use of streets and alleys. Stacking areas have been included on site for additional trucks. The Wal-Mart parcel will be able to accommodate the trucks while they are stacking without any conflict with motorists and pedestrians on the remainder of the site. The project as proposed meets the intent of Section 18.13 of Ordinance No. 348. RAS%STAFFRM243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 12 Attachments: 1. PC Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 14 2. PC Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 20 3. PC Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 25 4. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 28 5. Exhibits - Blue Page 45 6. DRC Comments (November 21, 1991) - Blue Page 46 7. Letter Dated January 6, 1992 - Blue Page 47 8. Minutes from Planning Commission Workshop (May 4, 1992) - Blue Page 48 9. DRC Comments (May 24, 1993) - Blue Page 49 10. Letter regarding Loading Docks (February 19, 1992) - Blue Page .50 11. Staff Concerns/Issues Outstanding for Amendment No. 3 - Blue Page 51 12. Continuance Request (April 23, 1993) - Blue Page 52 13. Drive Aisle Letter from Nasland Engineering (April 8, 1992) - Blue Page 53 14. Correspondence - Blue Page 54 RASISTAFFRPTR243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 13 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 14 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO CONSTRUCT 3409034 SQUARE FEET OF COMV IERCIAL/RETAIL SPACE TO INCLUDE A 125,584 SQUARE FOOT WAL-MART AND A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE WAL-MART ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 35.6 GROSS ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO'S. 130-046 AND 910-130-047 WHEREAS, Kemper Real Estate Management Company Amendment No. 4 in accordance with the Riverside County LanUse Zofiled ning ot Plan ning2and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing Plan on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had o pertaining y said Plot ° support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and tit3' to testify either in WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Plot Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEhECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. EindiflM That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. I. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the R:\SISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 15 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted General Plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: plan. 1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The Planning Commission finds, in recommending approval of projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: a. There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be approved unless the following findings can be made: 1. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. R:1S\STAFFPJM243PP.PC 6/2/83 kib 16 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. E. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion in the preparation of the General Plan. The General Plan is being prepared in accordance with the timelines established under State Law. 2. There is a reasonable probability that the land use proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered because the proposed use is consistent with the proposed Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) zoning and the recommended Draft Land Use Designation of Community Commercial. Community Commercial uses usually comprise 10 to 50 acres of land and include buildings in excess of 100,000 square feet. As proposed, the project encompasses 35.6 gross acres in land area and proposes approximately 340,034 square feet of floor area. 3. There little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if the proposed Proposed uses are consistent with those use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, because the which are found within proximity of the site. The Draft Land Use Plan identifies Community Commercial uses to the east of the site, Business Park uses to the north of the site, and Professional Office uses to the south of the site. Community Commercial uses exist to the west of the site (Palm Plaza). 4. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements Of State Law and local ordinances because the Governmental Code Section 65360, Sections 9.53 proposed use complies with California and 18.30 (Plot Plans) of Ordinance No. 348. (Development Standards for the C-P-S Zone), 5. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and shape of the lot configuration, access, and intensity of use, because the proposed plot plan, as conditioned complies with the standards of Ordinance Nos 348. 6• The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, because the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures for impacts identified in the Environmental Impact Report for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. 7. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, intensity, and coverage creates a compatible physical relationship with adjoining properties, because the proposed uses are consistent with the draft General Plan and Ordinance No. 348. 8. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, because access to the project site is from publicly iaintained roads (Ynez and Winchester Roads). RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 17 9. The project as designed and conditioned may not adversely affect the built or natural environment, however, it is a component of the Temecula Regional Center which will --� adversely impact the built or natural environment as determined in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. 10. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. 11. Said findings are supported by maps, exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. F. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. Section 2. EnVirOnniffltal Comas Uan p,. Environmental Impact Report No. 340 was ,,.,,�,� completed for Specific Plan No. 263. Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the development proposals and standards of Specific Plan No. 263. The potential environmental impacts of this project were analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 340 in that the proposed development is a portion of the proposed 1,375,000 square foot Retail Commercial Core area as analyzed for Specific Plan No. 263 and EIR No. 340. Section 3. C&DAWOL That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No(s). 910-130-046 and 910-130-047 subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 4, attached hereto. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 1993. LRgDA L. FAHEY CHAIRMAN R:%SISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 18 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 7th day of June, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COADUSSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMIMIISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY R:ISISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 19 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- RASISTAFFRM243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 20 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 93-0043 (CHANGE OF ZONE), CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL, RESIDENTIAL) TO C-P-S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ ,AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047 WHEREAS, Kemper Real Estate Management Company filed planting Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone) in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Change of Zone; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TEM[ECULA PLANNING COMNIISSION DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1 • The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 21 a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. A. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. B. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Change of Zone, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. There is a reasonable probability that the zone change from R-R (Rural Residential) to C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) will be consistent with the future General Plan. The recommended Land Use designation in the draft General Plan for the site is Community Commercial. It is likely that C-P-S uses will be similar in function to those recommended in the Community Commercial land use designation. 2. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan being considered if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, because the proposed uses are consistent with those which are found within proximity of the site. The Draft Land Use Plan identifies Community Commercial uses to the east of the site, Business Park uses to the north of the site, and Professional Office uses to the south of the site. Community Commercial uses exist to the west of the site (Palm Plaza). While the C-P-S zoning will ultimately be inconsistent with the City's General Plan upon its adoption (it will be an interim zoning designation), this inconsistency will be rectified upon the adoption of the City's zoning map. C. The Change of Zone is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Section 2. Environmental C=gfiMg.Q. Environmental impact Report completed for Specific Plan No. 263. Planning Application No. 93-0043 is co sist nt with the development proposals and standards of Specific Plan No. 263. The potential environmental impacts of this project were analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 340 in that the Proposed development is a portion of the proposed 1,375,000 square foot Retail Commercial Core area as analyzed for Specific Plan No. 263 and EIR No. 340. RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 8l2J83 klb 22 Section 3. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Planning Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone) to change the zoning on 35.6 acres of land from Rural -Residential (R-R) to Scenic Highway Commercial C-P-S on property southeastern comer of Ynez and Winchester Roads and Im wn as) P locate at the Numbers 910-130-046 and 910-130-047. Portions of Assessor's Parcel Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 1993. LINDA L. FAHEY 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 7th day of June, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING CMMUSSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING C011' HSSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY R:%SISTAFFRPT1243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 23 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 24 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VARIANCE NO. 91 REDUCING THE LOADING SPACE REQUIREMENTS AS PRESCRIBED UNDER ORDINANCE NO. 348 FROM SEVEN (7) SPACES TO TWO (2) SPACES FOR WAIrMART ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 35.6 GROSS ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL, NO'S. 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047 WHEREAS, Kemper Real Estate Management Company filed Variance No. 9 M accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Variance application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Variance on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Variance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. 0-mnth period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement tt ageneral planhbeat 3 do ted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, ipf all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1 • The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The Planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building Permits, each of the following: R:ISISTAFFRPTU43PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 25 a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Variance makes the following findings, to wit: 1. There are exceptional circumstances applicable to the existing size and configuration of the subject property. The configuration of the Wal-Mart parcel creates special circumstances. The shape of the parcel provides for parking in the front of Wal-Mart, with the structure situated at the rear portion of the parcel. Additionally, the future expansion of the Wal-Mart will be located at the rear portion of the parcel. This provides area for two (2) loading spaces and three (3) standing spaces. The strict application of Ordinance No. 348 will deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity that are under the same zoning classification. Under a strict interpretation of Section 18. 13 of Ordinance 348, seven (7) loading and standing spaces are required for the Wal-Mart. Due to the shape of the parcel and the future expansion of Wal-Mart insufficient area for exists for seven (7) loading spaces. This creates a hardship for the applicant. 2. The granting of this variance will be compatible with the general welfare of the public. Although the applicant proposes to provide two (2) loading spaces (Ordinance No. 348 requires seven loading spaces), adequate area is proposed on the site for vehicles to stand as to avoid undue interference with the public use of streets and alleys. Stacking areas have been included on site for additional trucks. The Wal-Mart parcel will be able to accommodate the trucks while they are stacking without any conflict with motorists and pedestrians on the remainder of the site. The project as proposed meets the intent of Section 18.13 of Ordinance No. 348. Section 2. The City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Variance No. 9 to reduce the loading space requirements as prescribed under Ordinance No. 348 from seven (7) spaces to two (2) spaces for the Wal-Mart on a parcel containing 35.6 gross acres located at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 910-130-046 and 910-130-047. RASISTAFFRPT1243PP.PC 9;/2/83 klb 26 Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 1993. LINDA L. FAHEY 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 7th day of June, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY RASISTAFFRM243PP,PC 6/2/83 klb 27 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 Idb 28 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 Project Description: A Plot Plan for approximately 340,034 square feet of commercial/retail space to include a 125.584 square foot Wal-Mart (and a 30,000 square foot expansion to the Wal-Mart), approximately 59,500 square feet of commercial space, approximately 69,700 square feet of. shops space and approximately 55,250 square feet of pad space. Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-130-046 and 910-130-047 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTE: Conditions of Approval which follow pertain to the Wal-Mart Building and the remainder buildings on site. The following are the numbers of the Planning Department Conditions of Approval which apply exclusively to the Wal-Mart: 5.E, 6, 7, 13, 14, 22, 24, 26.A., 26.B., and 26.C. Any uncertainty as to whether a Condition of Approval applies to Wal-Mart, will be addressed by the Director of Planning. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 is a proposal for approximately 340,034 square feet of commercial/retail space to include a 125,584 square foot Wal-Mart (and a 30,000 square foot expansion to the Wal-Mart), approximately 59,500 square feet of commercial space, approximately 69,700 square feet of shops space and approximately 55,250 square feet of pad space (Exhibit D). 2. The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. 3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 29 4. The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 marked Exhibit D, and as amended by these conditions. 5. Landscaping of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Exhibit N, and as amended by these conditions. A. Conceptual landscape plans for Pad 5 or 6 (whichever applies for a plot plan first) shall show the courtyard between these two pads. B. All ground mounted equipment shall be screened form view by landscaping. C. The developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaped areas within the site and within the right-of-way for Ynez Road and Winchester Road. D. Landscaped diamonds (approximately thirty-six square feet in area) shall be located within the parking lot, at intervals no greater than one diamond per every five (5) parking spaces. E. Trees planted in front of the Wal-Mart shall be a minimum of 48" box. 6. Building elevations for the Wal-Mart only shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E, and as amended by these conditions. 7. Colors and materials used in the construction of the Wal-Mart only shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E (color elevations) and Exhibit H (material board) and as amended by these conditions. LOCATION "MATERIAL COLOR Main Building Stucco Frazee 4360 W Accents Stucco Frazee 4350 W Accents Stucco Frazee 4342 M Cap Trim Stucco Frazee 5423 M Grille, Awning and Trim Metal Frazee 4995 A Accent Tile Frazee 4115 N Base of Pilasters Sandblasted Concrete Sandblasted - Orco Med. Block Weight, Black #100 Base of Pilaster Sandblasted Concrete Sandblasted - Orco Med. Block Weight, Greys Roof Clay Tile MCA Peach Buff F-47 8. A minimum of 1871 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. R:ISISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 612193 klb 30 9. Handicapped parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12 of Ordinance No. 348. 10. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12 of Ordinance No. 348. 11. The applicant shall submit development plans for all commercial, shops and pads with the appropriate filing fee to the Planning Department for approval. Staff will review all future projects of the commercial,shops and pads if the square footage of these projects are within ten (10) percent of this approval, there are no alterations the footprints on the site plan nor any alterations to the approved uses. Approvals for all other proposals which are not within this ten (10) percent margin, including alterations to the building footprints on the site plan or resulting in alterations of the approved uses at the discretion of the Planning Director shall be approved by the Planning Commission. 12. At the time of approval of each development plan, the Director of Planning shall determine the extent of parking lot improvements and associated landscaping required for each plan. 13. An additional twenty-four (24) foot wide, two-way, north -south trending drive aisle shall be added to the site plan. Said drive aisle shall meet all of the requirements under Ordinance No. 348 and all City of Temecula standards pertaining to parking lot safety. 14. No more than a maximum of five (5) loading vehicles which are servicing the Wal-Mart may be on the Wal-Mart parcel at one time. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST BUILDING PERMIT AFTER WAL-MART: 15. The applicant will submit design guidelines for the remainder of the site to the Planning Department. These design guidelines shall include but not be limited to architectural guidelines, guidelines for signage, pedestrian amenities (types), and a color palette for exterior of buildings within the center. The design guidelines will be approved by the Planning Commission. WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT: 16. The applicant/developer'shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Nine Hundred Dollars ($900.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty Dollar ($850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 71 1.4(d)(3) plus the Fifty Dollar ($50.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21 152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the checkrequired above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c). RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 31 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 17. Construction landscape plans shall be submitted for approval along with the appropriate filing fee for landscaping within the right-of-way for Winchester Road and Ynez Road. 18. The applicant shall comply with Ordinance No. 663 (SKR Mitigation) by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on (the gross acreage of the parcels proposed for development). Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. 19. The developer or his successor's interest shall submit a mitigation monitoring program which shall describe how compliance with required mitigation measures will be met and the appropriate monitoring timing of the mitigation. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with review of the program, as well as, all monitoring activities. 20. 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 THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 21. Development plans and appropriate filing fee(s) for Pads 1 through 9, Shops 1 through 3 and Commercial 1 and 2 shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. All development plans shall call out areas for bike racks, street furniture, lighting and pedestrian amenities identified in the design guidelines for the center. 22. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval for Wal-Mart and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Said landscape plans shall be consistent with the underlying Plot Plan and shall utilize drought tolerant materials. 23. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval for each development for Pads 1 through 9, Shops 1 through 3 and Commercial 1 and 2 and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Said landscape plans shall be consistent with the underlying Plot Plan and shall utilize drought tolerant materials. 24. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for Wal-Mart, the applicant shall submit a construction phasing plan to the Planning and Public Works Department for review and approval. 25. 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. RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 612/93 klb 32 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 26. Prior to the occupancy of Wal-Mart: -. A. All perimeter improvements along Ynez (approximately 37 feet from curb) and Winchester (approximately 37 feet from curb) Roads shall be fully installed and completed in conformance with the site plan marked Exhibit D and landscape plans marked Exhibit N. B. All major entries shall be installed and completed. C. The applicant shall submit plans for the water feature along with appropriate filing fee to the Planning for review and approval. The water feature shall be installed and operational within six (6) months of occupancy of Wal-Mart. 27. An Administrative Plot Plan application for signage or a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. 28. The courtyard between Pads 5 and 6 shall be completed prior to issuance of the occupancy permit for Pad 5 or 6 (whichever requests occurs first), or as approved by the Planning Director. 29. Roof -mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view. 30. All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape, irrigation, and shading plans. 31. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 32. A maintenance bond, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shall be filed with the Department of Planning. Said bond shall be accompanied by a landscape maintenance agreement. 33. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped affixed reflectorized sign constructed of Porcelain shall onbst steel, beaded d t e permanently displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be mallee than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 8/2/83 Wb 33 "Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at or by telephone " In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 34. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 35. 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. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY 36. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical; 1990 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula Code. 37. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan in compliance with Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. 38. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 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. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative site plan 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. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 39. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all onsite flat work and improvements) construction shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained road right- of-way. 40. 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. RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 34 coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing im41. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be provem contiguous to the site. ents PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 42. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 43. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality; Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; • Planning Department; • Department of Public Works; • Riverside County Health Department; • Caltrans; • Community Services District; • General Telephone; • Southern California Edison Company; and • Southern California Gas Company. 44. A Grading Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, City Standards, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions of Approval. 45. A Soils Report prepared by a registered Soils Engineer shall be 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 pavement sections. 46. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 47. An erosion control plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works. 48. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review. 49. 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. RAS\STAFFPJM243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 35 50. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. 51. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 52. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for offsite work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 53. A drainage study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: A. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Onsite runoff shall be conveyed into the public right-of-way to the extent practicable. B. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. C. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. D. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway. E. The existing drainage facilities for conveyance and mitigation of the runoff cannot exceed 1900 cfs. Additional drainage facilities shall be provided to mitigate any additional runoff due to this development; ie. construction of the retention basin as proposed by the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. 54. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the precise grading plan. 55. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 56. The long drive aisles in front of Wal-Mart, in the parking lot, shall be split with at least one additional north/south drive aisle as approved by the Department of Public Works. RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 kIb 36 57. Private roads and Precise Grading Plans MUST be designed, reviewed, and approved by the Department of Public Works to meet City Public Road Standards or otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. This should include but may not be limited to: A. Minimum paved road widths shall be 32 feet. B. Knuckles being required at 90° 'bends' in the road. C. Separation between on -site intersections shall meet current City Standards. D. Minimum safe horizontal centerline radii shall be required. E. 90' parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. F. At entrances to the project, identify configuration, stacking distance, and turn- around ability for review and approval by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. G. All intersections shall be perpendicular (900). H. Concrete sidewalks shall be provided per City Standards as required. 58. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off -site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 59. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. 60. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the grading plan. 61. An Encroachment Permit shall be required from Caltrans for any work within their right-of-way. RASISTAFFRM243PP,PC 6/2/93 klb 37 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 62. Improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil En ineer and approved streets prioro ssu nc Department of Public Works shall be required for all publc of an Encroachment Permit. Final plans and profiles shall show the location of exie ting utility facilities, street lights, and parkway trees within the right-of-way as directed by the Department of Public Works. 63. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans and/or precise grading plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: A. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. B. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207/207A and 401 (curb and sidewalk). C. Street lights shall be designed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. designed and approved by the Planning Department and the D. Meandering concrete sidewalks and associated parkway improvements shall be Community Services District along Ynez and Winchester Roads in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. F. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. G. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan profiles showing existing topography and utilities, and proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades as directed by the Department of Public Works. H. 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. I. All concentrated drainage from the site shall be directed to an underground storm drain system. 64. A Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, and approved by the Department of Public Works. Where construction on existing City streets is required, traffic shall remain open at all times and the traffic control plan shall provide for adequate detour during construction. 65. A signing and striping plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Winchester Road and Ynez Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans. R:\SISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 38 66. Plans for traffic signals shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, and approved by the Department of Public Works for the following intersections and shall be included in the street improvement plans; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the project on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance 67. Traffic signal interconnection shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer to show 2" rigid metal conduit with pull rope, and #5 pull boxes on 200-foot centers along Winchester Road, Margarita Road, and Ynez Road. This design shall be shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works. 68. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. 69. Bus bays and shelters shall be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by the Department of Public Works. 70. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 71. All required fees shall be paid. 72. The Developer shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. b. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (streets and parks). d. Sewer and domestic water systems. e. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. f. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 9• Erosion control and slope protection. RASISTAFFRM243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 39 73. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be undergrounded, 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. 74. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 75. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 76. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT: 77. Apricot Road shall be vacated. 78. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Riverside County Fire Department; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 79. All necessary construction or encroachment ts have been submitted/accomplished to the satisfaction of the Department of (Public Works. 80. All building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 81. The Developer shall deposit with the Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for traffic signal impact. 82. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV standards. 83. The Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which The Developer requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to the Developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive RAS\STAFFRPTt243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 40 any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation --� of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY: 84. A Transportation Demand Management program will be required. 85. All Conditions of Approval as part of the underlying Parcel. Map 27323 shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 86. All necessary onsite improvements shall be provided. Future proposed construction phasing, upon submittal, shall be reviewed to adequately mitigate circulation and drainage concerns to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 87. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • 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 • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company • Fish & Game • Army Corps of Engineers 88. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public 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. 89. Winchester Road, from Margarita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road, shall be fully improved within a 134 foot full width dedicated right-of-way as per the Assessment District 161 plans including a 14 foot wide raised median in accordance with City Standard No.100A. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for the proposed deceleration lane at the right in driveway. These improvements are subject to Caltrans' approval. RAS\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 41 90. Ynez Road, from Overland Drive to Rancho California Road, shall be fully improved within a 134 foot full width dedicated right-of-way as per Community Facilities District 88-12 plans including a 14 foot wide raised, landscaped median, in accordance with City Standard No. 100A and as approved by the Planning Department, the Community Services District, and the Department of Public Works. 91. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 92. The Developer shall reimburse the City for the existing improvements along Margarita Road for the portion between from Winchester Road to Solana Way, since these improvements mitigate the traffic requirements of the proposed project. These improvements were recently provided by the City's Capital Improvement Project. 93. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 94. Adequate signing and striping shall be provided for Winchester Road and Ynez Road, as approved by the Department of Public Works. 95. Traffic signals shall be installed for the following intersections; Winchester Road and Nicholas Road Winchester Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the site on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance 96. Traffic signal interconnection with shall be installed along Winchester Road, Margarita Road, and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 97. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. 98. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 99. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be recorded if they are located within the site 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; drainage R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.PC B/2/83 klb 42 easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions 100. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions: A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. B. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. C. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permit. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. D. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and related facilities. E. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. F. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. (1) All parkways, open areas, on -site slopes and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permit. (2) Reciprocal access easement and parking and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas, private storm drain, sewer, water facilities and all other utilities shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permit. RASISTAFFRPT\243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 43 101. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved , and City standards, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, ssidewalk, ,-- drive ap proaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets, signing, striping, traffic signal interconnect, traffic signals, median reconstruction, and existing facilities. 102. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local and private streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 103. 32 foot private interior circulation roads shall be constructed as approved by the Department of Public Works. 104. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (TCSD) 105. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to commercial development shall be maintained by an established Commercial Property Owner's Association. OTHER AGENCIES 106. Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated April 5, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 107. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control District's transmittal dated April 26, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 108. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section of Ordinance No. 546 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated March 23, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 109. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Information Center, Department of Anthropology, University of California transmittal dated November 21, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 110. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside Transit Agency transmittal dated November 19, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 111. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the State of California Department of Transportation transmittal dated April 13, 1993, a copy of which is attached. RASISTAFFRM243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 44 Countyof 'diverside R HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY E C E E p TO: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT. DATE: T Steve Jiannino FROM: MAR E ironmental Health Specialist Iv APR 1 31993 Ans'd... 04-05-9.J**`-- C � RE: PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDED NO. 2 The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Plot Plan No. 243, Amended No. 2 and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. PRIOR TO ANY BUILDING PLAN REVIEW for health clearance, the following items are required: 1. "Will -serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. 2. Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (714) 358-5172. 3. A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch 358-5055. will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for: a. Underground storage tanks b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services c. Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185) d. Waste reduction management SM:dr (909) 275-8980 NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Department of Environmental Health clearance. —_. DONGA-002 (Rev 4M K=NNETH L EDWARDS loft MAPKETSTREET eENERAL MANMiERL^NIEF ENGINEER P.O. am I WO TELEPHONE (714) 27S1200 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND FAX NO, (714)?U49a WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT "FISH, CALIFORN A u+2sa¢ C►, ( OF TEM7✓CULN - Ph�,w►l.iCtD P� . RECEIVED 431-14- $ostgEn PA,2Wc v twr f c►ILA A. .0 g259 O P `," ? 9 1993 �L . Attention: M*TTt•ksyi ;Ai;t-j Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: _PP Z43 TR. 27 323 The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in hzirporated cities. The District also does not plan check pry land use cases, or prwde State Division of Real Estate letters or other flood hazard reports for such cases. District cis/ for such cases we normally limited to items of specific interest to the District Inducing District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master pion system, and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is provided. The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way oonstitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety or any other such'36 This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed. This project involves District Master Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acoeptanos. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. L—T`-s Project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature or a logical extension of the adopted Master Drainage Plan. The District would consider aoospting ownership of such facilities an written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acoeptance. Plan Check, inspection and administrative fees will be required. ERfTNs project is located within the limits of the District's Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted; applicable fees should be paid to the Flood Control District or City prior to final approval of the project. or in the lose of a parcel map or subdivision prior to recordation of the final map. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of recordation, or if deferred, at the time of issuance of the actual permit. This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Pemnit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grating, recordation, or other final approval, should not be given Until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans and other information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation or other final approval of the project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy. If a natural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted by this project the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1601/1603 Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clears Water Act Section 404 Water O uality Certification may be required from the local Califomia Regional Water Ouality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit. Very truly yours, DUSTY WILLIAMS Senior Civil Engineer Date: 4— 2(6- _I 3 FORM: OISTINrA- GLEN 1. NFWMAN FIRE CHIEF TOe CITY OF TEMECULA ATTN: PLANNING DEPT RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMINT --� 21() WEST SAN IACINTp AVENUE PEMS, CALIFORNIA 923M (714) 657-3193 March 23. 1993. RE: PLOT PLAN 243 AMENDED #2 (PM 27323) With respect to the conditions of approval fired plot plan, for the above refer_ fire the Fire Department recommends the following protection measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire r p otection standards; I. The Fire Department is required to set a flow for the remodel minimum fire or construction all buildings using the procedure establishedoin Ordinancecommercial 2. Provide or show there exists a water system capable delivering 4500 GPM for a 3 hOur duration at 20 PSI r*of operating pressure, which al must be available before ide cambusti,bls material is Placed on the fob site. itany e. 3. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hy- drants. on a loapad system (b"x4"x2 be located not 1fSs than . 1J2 x2 i/2"), Will be portion of 25 set or more than 165 feet from any the building as measured along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available any adJacent hydrant1s) in the system. from 4. The require in the permit struction type! measures. O IN= ODWE 79.733 ca,nt,r Qb prim Salle F in& cA 92201 (619) 3424M 9 FAX (619) 7752072 d fire flow may be process to reflect area separation or adjusted at a later point changes in design, con - built -in fire protection O R]vmtsM OFFJL" h 3760 12th Sweet, Rlreaik CA 92301 (714) 2734777 • FAX (714) 369-7/51 O TOaCUI.A OR1a 41002 calory corner Dire. 3"ft 223, TO-alk, CA 92390 (714) 694•9070 • PAX (714) 6A1.50% 0 mind On rKye/ed paajw PLOT PLAN 243 AMENDED #.t (PM 27-321) PAGE 2 " 5- Applicant/developer shall furnish one co PY sthe water ystem plans to the Fire Department for review.oplan. conform to the fire hydrant types, shall location and s acin g the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water co,npany with the following cartifications "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the regLtirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department". b. Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all build- ings. The post indicator valve and fire depnrtrne�nt connec- tion shall be located to the front, within rthe 50 feat nn a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from statement that the building(s) will be tautomaticallbuilding(s�� A sprinkled must be included on the title y fire plans. page of the building 7• Install a supervised waterflow System. monitoring fire alarm Plansmonitoringmust be submitted to a Approval prior to installation, as perU9Cre Department for. g. A statement that the building will be automatically firs sprinklered must a,pprear on the title page of the building plans. 4• Certain designated areas will be required to be tained as firm lanes, main- 10. Prior to the issuance of building Shall deposit, with the Cit permits, the developer order equalin Y of Temecula, a check or money far t the sum of S.215 per squares foot .as mitigation c fire protection impacts. This ,amount must a submitted _aaarate� from the plan check foss. 11. Walmart shall be responsible to lSystem. Plans must be submitted to th.. `n6 Firtale re1 a fire alarm SPProvaprior to installation. Department for 12. Final conditions will be addressed when buildin Are ravivwed in the building and Safety Office. 9 plans All questions regarding ferred the meaning of conditions shall be re - to the Planning and Engineering Staff. RAYMOND H . REGsI S Chief Fire Department Planner by Michael E. Gray, Firm Captain specialist California Archaeological Inventory Eastern Information f':anf ar November 21, 1991 City of Temecula Development Review Committee City Hall 43180 Business Park Drive, Suite 200 Temecula, CA 92390 Dear Mr. Rhoades: --11,. RIVERSIDE (714) 787.5745 INYO MONO Eastern Information Center Department of Anthropology University of California Riverside, CA 92521 Please find enclosed our comments for one project transmittal as requested by the Development Review Committee. This transmittal, which is listed below, is scheduled for review at the November 21, 1991 meeting. If you have any questions, please contact the Eastern Information Center at (714) 787-5745 and specify the transmittal number and the date on which we submitted our comments. TPM 27323/PP 243 AP# 910-013-023 Sinc ely, 112 Sharon Rushing Information Officer ed EnclosureX %..alliornia Eastei Eastern Information Center Archaeological Information Department of Anthropology Inventory -�_ Center IMro University of California MONORiverside, CA 92521 RIVERSIDE (714) 787-5745 CULTURAL RESOURCE REVIEW FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Date: TO: City of Temecula Development Review Committee RE: Case Transmittal Reference Des.ignation: TPAI 2.,7L3 Z 3 Records at the Eastern Information Center of the California Archaeological Inventory 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 cultursl resource study (MF- 28 2 rj) 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 finds and makes recommendatfons. The submission of a cultural resource management report is recommended followfng gufdelines for Archaeological Resource Management Report s Preservation, Preservation Planning Butllin 4(a),eDecembered r 1989 or thosethe rreportfguidelfice �nesHistoric adapted by Riverside County. Phase I - survey. — Phase 11 - Testing [Evaivate resource significance and integrity of known resources and/or resources identified from a field survey.] Phase III - [Propose additional investigations if required, evaluate project impacts, and propose measures to mitigate potential adverse effects.] COMMENTS: If you have any questions, please give us a call. Sincerely, Eastern Information 6awter i:uv 2 l 199L RrARIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 1825 THIRD STREET • RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-3484 • BUS. (7141 684-0850 FAX (7141 684-1007 November 19, 1991 Mr. Mark Rhoades Temecula Planning Department City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: PM 27323 Dear Mark: We currently provide service to the site mentioned above via Route 23 and we are requesting that a bus turnout or a pad for a bus stop be incorporated into the general design as the size of the planned project will negatively impact our level of service unless this amenity is constructed. Ideal sites for the bus turnouts would be at the following locations: a. Eastside corner of Ynez Road nearside entrance to main parking lot. b. Southside corner of Winchester Road nearside entrance to Wal- Mart building If possible, we would also like to request that pedestrian walkways and wheelchair curbs be constructed near the turnout locations specified above. I can indicate the exact locations for the turnouts as the project progresses. Thank you fur the opPai ull i tY tO red ew and :-O ru'uE.nt on t:lis project. Your efforts to keep us updated on the status of this request will be very much appreciated. Please let us know when this project will be completed. Should you require additional information or specifications, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely;.-, Barbara Bray / Transit Planner BB: jsc PDEV#129 Countyof Riverside DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO: CITY OF TEMECULA DATE: 11-21-91 ATTIC: Matthew Fagan FRO SAM �NE,Environmental Health Specialist Iv RE: PLOT PLAN NO. 243 The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No. 243. and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior to any building plan review for health clearance, the following items are required: 1. "Will -serve" letters from the appropriate water and severing agencies. 2. Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted. including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (714) 358-5172. 3. A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (Jon Mohoroski. 358-5055). will be required indicating that the project has been cleared for: a. Underground storage tanks b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services C. Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185) d. Waste reduction management SM:dr cc: Jon Mohoroski, Hazardous Materials Branch NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Environmental Health Service clearance. DOH-G,4 = (4MM CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27323, AMENDMENT NO. 4 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. Fee Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat) Parks and Recreation (Quimby) Public Facility (Traffic Mitigation) Public Facility (Traffic Signal Mitigation) Public Facility (Library) Fire Protection Flood Control (ADP) Consistent with Specific Plan Consistent with Future General Plan R:IS%STAFFRPrU43PP.CC 7n193 ub 71 Condition of Aooroval Condition No. 8 N/A Condition No. 66 Condition No. 61 N/A Condition No. 85 Condition No. 30 N/A YES ATTACHMENT NO. 16 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27323, AMENDMENT NO. 4 R:\S\STAFffl"43pp.CC MIN kb 70 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. Fee Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat) Parks and Recreation (Quimby) Public Facility (Traffic Mitigation) Public Facility (Traffic Signal Mitigation) Public Facility (Library) Fire Protection Flood Control (ADP) Consistent with Specific Plan Consistent with Future General Plan R:ISISTAFFPJM243PP.CC 7n/93 bb 69 Condition of Approval Condition No. 17 N/A Condition No. 80 Condition No. 78 N/A Condition No. 103 Condition No. 50 N/A YES ATTACHMENT NO. 15 DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 R:%S%STAFFWT1243PP.CC 7n193 kb 68 PIT" ut) .()-I I CITY OF TEMECULA SAME MAERSW It A. F. T LAND lo� Ap. -,.m I-L-ALA Si;DPPINrs cEiq-rEf? CASE NO.: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27323, AMD. NO. 4 EY'SIT: M P.L. DATE: JUNE 7, 1993 CASE NO.: El" -BIT: L P.C. DATE: CITY OF TEMECULA PA93-0043 JUNE 7, 1993 CHANGE OF ZONE Sc CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMD. NO. 4 Er'!Bir: J VILLAGE CENTER OVERLAY P.C. DATE: JUNE 7, 1993 CITY OF TEMECULA ILI ITEs � r 7 o r j.16Z Legend Mixed Use S ` 71.97 AC. n Retail Commercial Core/ Support Retail 97.80 AC. �4w Retail / Office 5.49 AC. Subtotal 175.26 AC. ® Roads 26.04 AC. PROJECT TOTAL 201.3 AC. CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMD. NO. 4 VIBIT: I TEMECULA REGIONAL CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE PLAN P.V. DATE: JUNE 7, 1993 = I I ReaL eSTaTe aonacemiw I 1 REGIONAL CENTER PHASE ONE 1 BUILDING STIF= COLOR 2 STUCCO ACCENT COLOR METAL GRILLE, METAL AWNING, TRIM COLOR COLOR SCHEDULE 1 FRAZEE 4360 W 2 FRAZEE 4350 W 3 FRAZEE 4342 M 4 FRAZEE 5423 M S FRAZEE 499S A 6 FRAZEE 4115 N 7 SANDBLASTED - ORCO MED. WEIGHT. BLACK 010 6 SANDBLASTED - ORCO MED. WEIGHT. GREY 9 CLAY TILE ROOF - MCA PEACH BUFF F-47 STUCCO ACCENT COLOR DLOR SANI DBLASTED T —BLOCK COLOR 7 SANDBLAST &COLOR 8 JOB# . -14-9-F MAY 21.1993 _ archtects._m. 530 St. khrs Pbce Hemet. Cok rroo 92343 714 652 443 - CITY OF TEMECULA Ii " s9a • x i a� n=i I I 434 I; I . Aeo' ISA . c 3 • sn. a 99.9oX � •� 'W � � _ I � 99.0 ' I Iw m I wTuan r 99. so Y 49.90 x Ir( !' . _ I /9.90 • Q 9mM SIM a \40•..0• D4OfpJT`i99.0.1'��97 CECmIGIL • A.' "AD Fi E'S.sz; LL 97 ------------------------- OIS�aiOw 1o•.x• [awc. Pao ------ n ..� ., v - a ALT, fFi111 Dln�� 6' SJ ---- -- .2 i9.93X R. L V. 11 1H1 91.00• ®tISIIK Y411, Fp1 � +�� R. CEV. rro T90 . Y7.00' STOOOIOOnrSALE9P1001 �I rn. - f0'-a'z P-0' ALT. GAS Ei31Y SCE •^"•Tt�w�Y7TTW/s�aTp � x99.90' GAM TION 1 Twit © Tw[S LOCATICi KwEw TIOw M is "s. LL.OT. i [00 i9 GA9 rn, AMOR T90 t3 GA3. • ;N © rLEL 57tR �ALT. FlG]vT f%lILE7. 6' SS R. CEV. r! TEO. 9z.00• -� 1T90 OURET fOrLTI 9' R. �••/. V!O T!0 . 92. ae•I 1 •_I L Ida. .: �.-... _: �_� � 'A709'�•tAiL�-19T�,t6ZGATTETIT q � ' - • A 1ML71ON fY[Tw T901 I�i} /"�� �I tAytwG - : ALT. Ffl[!TT LiiITET, 6' ss ^ ALT. GAS SCE � ESM I mod•'•: •.. " IF . f.Ey. Y/0 RO . n2.00 •! © 7wIS•IOCt TICMSyls-7. 100.0' 9'4' T 10'-0• STT- (PC:EAK IIfIK� E zlilla9l PIt� Guam GATE !01 ALT. $a: mm GAtta! CSlf, x 99.90' :g _ IA' WrAL CNWT IrIOMI a K I 7-4 sLtPE Sz LEVTL A !' S71 A0 Pc 9- / F!AS Iv/ >6' Srlp POP © ALi. 7bfT C.tfLl�- 5•ro. I701I4TI011 fmfliQ9 R. �H. YI T90 92.00' SLOPE 0AYDC FAOK TOP OF R. wry. v/0 iEl a SZ.00' CLOG TO FICO rAViwG. 9'-9• a L101�-IOM STTIE :'UOE wyf, SLOPE 1:20 PtC10;T SLiOUA GATE 11 52S SLOPE rAvpfEwl 9 :20 SPECIAL AGA ►AViwi - FrOw 510EYAtx LIoa,R t� im = == :: I I I I II l u l l I.+ I ,45 X t PVC f."T j r A A 11 Alf ICI 11 . © r -- Li^S�'L 1 l I IL X ESA i7.pw rr S+iL _ I� X93.50' I I I ^ I f l l III $10 ' i"� 29.20' x _ !�tsTSIAw 99•fll me I _ 49.T0y f! n.20 _ z0 c.ossuc sr.IrS ,JI IrtOTw .atni J "" � CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMD. NO. 4 EY"'BIT: F P.C. DATE: JUNE 7, 1993 FLOOR PLAN 01; If. O EXHIBIT-,.E CITY OF TEMECULA 7i d 8 _ WAL • MARL_ SDil�11LRG1A ! ='ice •• • � ~ � ::�: sdwy�l,i : IL a � _ e � iro s v jjj��� � � � � V `_ � 1 P r.•..r I■ d� ` ... � � � �....,,•.+ ...•...f j wry .. .•.... ■ _ _ '1. �F■ �_-)1 � � _1 � it • .•.... �. q.', �^'� AWL 40 i -- ---- N E Z R O A D ..-•- � CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMD. NO. 4 ET" --'BIT: D SITE PLAN P.C. DATE: JUNE 7, 1993 (�tMa — CITY OF TEMECULA I� EXHIBIT B: FUTURE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (P-O) B F EXHIBIT C: EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION: RURAL RESIDENTIAL (R-R) CAP-r-NO.: PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMD. 4; PA93-0043 (CHANGE OF ZONE); VARIANCE NO. 9 P.C. DATE: JUNE 7, 1993 CASE NO.: E, ,BIT: A P.C. DATE: CITY OF TEMECULA PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMD. 4; PA93-0043 (CHANGE OF ZONE); VARIANCE 9 JUNE 7, 1993 VICINITY MAP ATTACHMENT NO. 14 EXHIBITS I R:\S\STAFFRPT\243PP.CC 711/93 I16 67 Recommended Off -Site Mitigation Measures Temecula Regional Center Phase One/Wal-Mart Center Measures Provided by Regional Center Phase One ■ Signalization of the Winchester Road/Wal-Mart access drive intersection. ■ Modificafion of the existing Ynez Road/Palm Plaza signal to accommodate the Wal-Mart main access drive. ■ Signalization of the Ynez Road/southerly Site Access Drive. Measures Provided by Other Entities (including the AlMlicant) ■ Signalization of the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection. ■ Signalization of the Winchester Road/Murrieta Hot Springs Road intersection. * Note that Kemper has been a participant in A.D. 161 for several years and that the signalization/improvement of the Winchester/Murrieta Hot Springs intersection of programmed as part of the assessment district improvements and the signal installation would be paid for by Riverside County Signal Mitigation funds. The signalization/improvement of the Winchester Road/Nicolas Road intersection is currently programmed in the City's CIP and is funded by signal mitigation fees which have been collected from the area developers, including Kemper. The developer is required to provide for the appropriate on -site improvements with project development. R:MSTAFFRYMOPP.MEM 6/16193 vgw 80 r- ATTACIDIENT 7 Mitigation Monitoring Program EIR No. 340, Specific Plan No. 263 The Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan has been assigned by the Traffic Engineer the following percentage utilization of a percentage implementation responsibility for the off -site circulation improvements noted below. This implementation responsibility for the provision of off -site roadway improvements is intended to mitigate the project's portion of cumulative traffic impacts. These improvements and the project's implementation responsibility are listed below: Implementation Responsibility Assigned to Improvement Temecula Regional Center 1. Construction of Jackson Avenue from the 5.00 % Temecula/Murrieta City Limits to Murrieta Hot Springs Road 2. Winchester Road interchange overpass 22.40 % widening and currently planned ramp widenings 3. Overland Drive overpass improvement 3.00 % (Jefferson Avenue to Ynez Road) 4. Ynez Road widening from Overland Drive to 10.50 % Rancho California Road 5. Winchester Road widening from Margarita 16.94 % Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road 6. Four -lane Margarita Road improvement from 16.25 % Solana Way to Winchester Road 7. Four -lane Margarita Road improvement from 5.25 % Winchester Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road 8. Four -lane Ynez Road improvement from its 5.00 % present terminus at Equity Drive to the Temecula/Murrieta City limits 9. Four -lane Overland Drive improvement from 20.00 % Ynez Road to Margarita Road 10. Four -lane improvement of General Kearny 9.00% Road from Margarita Road to the easterly Campos Verdes project boundary 11. General Kearny from easterly project limit to 12.75 % Nicolas Road UMSTAFFRM243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vjw 78 Implementation Responsibility Assigned to Improvement Temecula Regional Center 12. Widening of Solana Way from Ynez Road to 4.50 % Margarita Road 13. Widening of Murrieta Hot Springs Road from 1.50 % Date Street to Canyon Drive 14. Project perimeter access signals on Winchester 100.00% Road, Overland Drive, the Palm Plaza access and Costco Center access 15. Signals at the intersections of: Margarita 50.00 % * Road/Winchester Road, Margarita ' Road/Overland Drive and Ynez Road/Overland Drive 16. Signals at the intersections of Jackson 25.00 % * Avenue/Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Margarita Road/Solana Road * This percentage implementation responsibility relates to all three Urban Core projects. Specific percentage responsibility by project is not available. RASk.STAFFRFM43PP.MEM 6116/93 nw 79 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM RAS\STAFFRPT1243PP.ME_M 6/16/93 vry 77 ALHAMBRA GROUP Landscape Architecture lic. #1569 lic. #2017 June 11, 1993 City of Temecula 43714 Business park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Attn: Debbie Ubnoske, Senior Planner Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner RE: P.P. NO#. 243, Amendment #4 Job #93-008 Dear Debbie and Matthew: The following is a summary of tree selections for the above referenced project per your request. All trees selected are hardy and will adapt well to the Temecula climate. 1) Deciduous Canopy Trees All of the selections are fast growing and hardy for the area. They will provide shade for the parking area and a visual buffer between the street and the store fronts. Another choice for this category is Alnus rhombifolia / White Alder. 2) Evergreen Canopy Trees We substituted Quercus virginiana / Southern Live Oak for Quercus ilex / Holly Oak. The Southern Live Oak is a faster growing tree. We also added Ulmus parvifolia 'True Green' / True Green Chinese Elm. This tree is a very fast grower but may be briefly deciduous. Any of these trees will.provide an evergreen screen and will help provide a visual promenade through either side of the drive isles. 3) Parkway Flowering Tree The Crepe myrtle trees were selected for three reasons. First, on Winchester Road Caltrans has a requirement that only small trees be planted within 30' of the drive isle. Second, this tree is already planted across the street on Ynez Road and planting this tree will help unify the streetscape. Third, the Crepe myrtle is a summer flowering tree that is drought tolerant. We recommend all Crepe myrtles be planted as 24" box size and alternate planting Rhus lances / African Sumac to allow a deciduous and evergreen combination for the foreground tree planting. 27412 Enterprise Circle West. Suite 200, Temecula. CA 92590 (7141 676-0225 FAX (7141 694-1567 All other trees were selected to maintain continuity.with adjacent established landscapes and to provide a variety of textures, colors and sizes of planting throughout the project. We hope this clarifies any questions regarding this matter. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact our office @ (909) 676-0226. Sincerely, Vincent Di Donato Landscape Architect #2017 VD/ry cc: Darice Roesner @ R.R.D.C. r�. ATTACHMENT NO. 6 LETTER FROM ALHAMBRA GROUP JUNE 11, 1993 RASWAFFRP11243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vry 76 71. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 72. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 73. Adequate signing and striping shall be provided for Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 74. Traffic signals and associated street improvements shall be installed for the following intersections; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the site on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance 75. Traffic signal interconnection with shall be installed along Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 76. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. 77. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 78. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be recorded if they are located within the site 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; drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions. 79. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans, and City standards, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets, signing, striping, traffic signal interconnect, traffic signals, median reconstruction, and existing facilities. 80. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local and private streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 81. 32 foot private interior circulation roads shall be constructed as approved by the Department of Public Works. R:1SISTAFFRP11243PP.MEM 6/16M vgw 42 82. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform ^� to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (TCSD) 83. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to commercial development shall be maintained by an established Commercial Property Owner's Association. OTHER AGENCIES 84. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittals dated April 7, 1993 and November 21, 1991, copies of which is attached. 85. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated March 23, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 86. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California Water District transmittal dated March 23, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 87. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside Transit Agency transmittal dated November 19, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 88. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the California Department of Transportation transmittal dated November 14, 1991, a copy of which is attached. R:MSTAFFRPT1243PP.MEM 6116/93 vgw 43 B. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem reasonably necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. C. The CC&R's are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. D. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and related facilities. E. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. F. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. (1) All parkways, open areas, on -site slopes and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the Developer or a manager designated by the Developer and/or other owners subject to the CC&R's or other means reasonably acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permits. (2) Reciprocal access easements and parking and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas, private storm drain, sewer, water facilities and all other utilities shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 64. 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. 65. 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. R:5SXSTAFFRPT%243PP.MEM 6116/93 v`w 40 66. The Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which the Developer requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to Developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY: 67. A Transportation Demand Management program will be required. 68. All necessary onsite improvements shall be provided. Future proposed construction phasing, upon submittal, shall be reviewed to adequately mitigate circulation and drainage concerns to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 69. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • Rancho California Water District • Eastern Municipal Water District • Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District • City of Temecula Fire Bureau • Planning Department • Department of Public Works • Riverside County Health Department • Cable TV Franchise • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company • Fish & Game • Army Corps of Engineers 70. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. R:ISISTAFFRFn243PP.MEM 6/16193 v$w 41 • 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 • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company • Fish & Game • Army Corps of Engineers 48. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public 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. 49. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off -site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the final map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off -site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. 50. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 51. A signing and striping plan shall be prepared a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Winchester Road and Ynez Road shall be included in the street improvement plans. 52. Plans for traffic signals and associated street improvements shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the following intersections and shall be included in the street improvement plans; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the project on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance RAMSTAFFRFMOPP.ME,M 6/16N3 vgw 38 53. Traffic signal interconnection plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer to show 2" rigid metal conduit with pull rope, and #5 pull boxes on 200-foot centers along Winchester Road and Ynez Road. This design shall be shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works. - 54. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. 55. Bus bays and shelters shall be designed and approved at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. 56. An agreement to secure the implementation of a Transportation Demand Management program shall be executed. 57. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 58. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 59. 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. " 60. 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. 61. The Developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per acre, as mitigation towards traffic signal impacts. Should the Developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit. 62. 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. 63. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions: A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. RASWAFFRFMOPP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 39 36. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the grading plan. 37. An Encroachment Permit shall be required by Caltrans for any work within their right- of-way. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 38. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street lights, driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles on streets) shall show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. 39. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: A. Flowline grades shall be 0.50A minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. B. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A, 208, and 401 (curb and sidewalk). C. Street lights shall be designed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance No. 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. D. Meandering concrete sidewalks and associated parkway improvements shall be designed and approved by the Planning Department and the Community Services District along Ynez and Winchester Roads in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. F. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. G. Public street improvement plans shall include plan profiles showing existing topography and utilities, and proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades as directed by the Department of Public Works. H. 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. MS=AFFRMN3PP.MEM 6/16M vgw 36 I. All concentrated drainage from the site shall be directed to an underground storm drain system. 40. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be undergrounded, 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. 41. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 42. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 43. 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. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF FINAL MAP: 44. Apricot Road shall be vacated on the final Map. 45. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 46. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public/private improvements within 18 months in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. A. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, traffic signals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Erosion control and slope protection. E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. G. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 47. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • Rancho California Water District • Eastern Municipal Water District R:1S%TAFFRPT1243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 37 • Riverside County Health Department • Caltrans '^ • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company 25. A Soils Report prepared by a registered Soils Engineer shall be submitted to Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. 26. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plans. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 27. An erosion control plan in accordance with City Standards shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 28. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed free condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. 29. 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. 30. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 31. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any off - site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works at no cost to any agency. 32. A Drainage Study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: A. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Onsite runoff shall be conveyed into the public right-of-way to the extent practicable. B. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. R:%%TAFFRVn243PP.MSM 6/16/93 v=w 34 C. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. D. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. E. The existing drainage facilities for conveyance and mitigation of the runoff cannot exceed 1900 cfs. Additional drainage facilities shall be provided to mitigate any additional runoff due to this development; i.e. construction of the retention basin as proposed by the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. 33. Private roads and Precise Grading Plans MUST be designed, reviewed, and approved by the Department of Public Works to meet City Public Road Standards or otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. This should include but may not be limited to: A. Minimum paved road widths shall be 32 feet. B. Knuckles being required at 90° 'bends' in the road. C. Separation between on -site intersections shall meet current City Standards. D. Minimum safe horizontal centerline radii shall be required. E. 90' parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. F. At entrances to project, identify configuration, stacking distance, and turn- around ability for review and approval by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. G. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90°). H. Concrete sidewalks shall be provided per City Standards as required 34. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off -site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 35. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. RAMSTAFFRPTUOpp.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 35 (5) This project is within a Subsidence Zone. D. A copy of the Recorded Easement Agreements (REA's) (1) REA's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The REA's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. The REA shall provide for shared parking, shared ingress and egress, and master drainage and flood control. (2) No lot or dwelling unit in the development' shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded REA'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 REA'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. (3) 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. 13. 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 14. 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 15. 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. RASISTAFFRFn243PP.MEM 61IW93 vgw 32 16. 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. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 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: 17. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map or site plan all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 18. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all on -site flat work and improvements) 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. 19. 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. 20. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. 21. 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 ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 22. The final grading plan shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. 23. 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 (NO1) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 24. The Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District • Planning Department • Department of Public Works RASWAFFRPTU43PP.MEM 6116M vgw 33 CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 Project Description: A 13 parcel commercial subdivision with two remainder parcels of 58.1 acres at the southeast corner Ynez and Winchester Roads. Assessor's Parcel No(s): 910-130-046, 047 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. 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. 2. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in defence. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify or hold harmless the City of Temecula. 3. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a phasing plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. 4. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 263. 5. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 340 and the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved for EIR No. 340. 6. The developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaped areas within the site and within the right-of-way for Ynez Road and Winchester Road. R: SWrAFFRPMAMPMPM 6/16M v=w 30 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 7. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. S. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. 9. A qualified vertebrate paleontologist shall resurvey the site and develop a Paleontologic Resource Impact Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to issuance of grading permits. The qualified Paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of excavations and, if necessary, salvage exposed fossils. The frequency of inspections will depend on the rate of excavation, the materials being excavated, and the abundance of fossils. The Program shall be consistent with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340. 10. A soil sampling and chemical analysis program shall be completed to determine if near surface soil contains hazardous substances in excess of EPA limits. In the event that any hazardous materials are found on -site, qualified authorities shall be immediately contacted to determine the proper disposal of the hazardous materials. 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 Director: 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. (2) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 340 was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department. (3) This project is within a 100 year flood hazard zone. (4) This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone. RASISTAFFRPT1243PP.MEM 6/16/93 v`w 31 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27323, AMENDMENT NO. 4 RASISTAFFRFn243PP.MEM &16M v=w 29 F. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition .- required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. (1) All parkways, open areas, on -site slopes and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the Developer or a manager designated by the Developer and/or other owners subject to the CC&R's or other means reasonably acceptable to the City.. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permit. (2) Reciprocal access easement and parking and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas, private storm drain, sewer, water facilities and all other utilities shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permit. 96. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans, and City standards, including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lights on all interior public streets, signing, striping, traffic signal interconnect, traffic signals, median reconstruction, and existing facilities. 97. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local and private streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works. 98. 32 foot private interior circulation roads shall be constructed as approved by the Department of Public Works. 99. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (TCSD) 100. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to commercial development shall be maintained by an established Commercial Property Owner's Association. OTHER AGENCIES 101. Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittal dated April 5, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 102. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control District's transmittal dated April 26, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:MSTAFFRFM43PP.MEM 6/16/93 v=w 27 103. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the appropriate section of Ordinance No. 546 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated March 23, 1993, -� a copy of which is attached. 104. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Information Center, Department of Anthropology, University of California transmittal dated November 21, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 105. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Riverside Transit Agency transmittal dated November 19, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 106. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the State of California Department of Transportation transmittal dated April 13, 1993, a copy of which is attached. R:1S%TAFFR n243PP.MEM 6/16193 v;w 28 83. All necessary onsite improvements shall be provided. Future proposed construction phasing, upon submittal, shall be reviewed to adequately mitigate circulation and drainage concerns to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 84. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • 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 • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company • Fish & Game • Army Corps of Engineers 85. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public 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. 86. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for the proposed deceleration lane at the right in driveway along Winchester Road. These improvements are subject to Caltrans' approval. 87. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 88. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 89. Adequate signing and striping shall be provided for Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 90. Traffic signals and associated street improvements shall be installed for the following intersections; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road RASISTAFFRM243PP.MEM 6/16M v=w 25 Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the site on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance 91. Traffic signal interconnection shall be installed along Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 92. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. 93. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 94. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be recorded if they are located within the site 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; drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions. 95. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following -- Engineering conditions: A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. B. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem reasonably necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. C. The CC&R's are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permit. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. D. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and related facilities. E. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. RASISTAFFRPT%243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 26 65. Traffic signal interconnection plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer to show 2" rigid metal conduit with pull rope, and #5 pull boxes on 200-foot centers along Winchester Road and Ynez Road. This design shall be shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works. 66. Bus bays and shelters shall be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by the Department of Public Works. 67. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 68. All required fees shall be paid. 69. The Developer shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. A. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). D. Sewer and domestic water systems. E. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. F. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. G. Erosion control and slope protection. 70. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be undergrounded, 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. 71. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 72. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 73. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. R:%SS,STAFFRFM43PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 23 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT: 74. Apricot Road shall be vacated. 75. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: Riverside County Fire Department; Planning Department; Department of Public Works; and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. 76. All necessary construction or encroachment permits have been submitted/accomplished to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 77. All building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 78. The Developer shall deposit with the Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for traffic signal impact. 79. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the intent to develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV standards. 80. The Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which The Developer requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to the Developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY: 81. A Transportation Demand Management program will be required. 82. All Conditions of Approval as part of the underlying Parcel Map 27323 shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. RAMSTAFFRM243MMEM 6/16/93 -gw 24 A. Minimum paved road widths shall be 32 feet. B. Knuckles being required at 900 'bends' in the road. C. Separation between on -site intersections shall meet current City Standards. D. Minimum safe horizontal centerline radii shall be required. E. 90° parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. F. At entrances to the project, identify configuration, stacking distance, and turn- around ability for review and approval by the Fire Department and the Department of Public Works. G. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90°). H. Concrete sidewalks shall be provided per City Standards as required. 56. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off -site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 57. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. 58. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the grading plan. 59. An Encroachment Permit shall be required by Caltrans for any work within their right- of-way. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACHMENT PERMITS: 60. Improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works shall be required for all public streets prior to issuance of an Encroachment Permit. Final plans and profiles shall show the location of exiting utility facilities, street lights, and parkway trees within the right-of-way as directed by the Department of Public Works. 61. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans and/or precise grading plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: R:WSTAFFRPTUOPP.MEM 6/16M vjw 21 A. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over -� A.C. paving or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. B. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207/207A and 401 (curb and sidewalk). C. Street lights shall be designed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with Ordinance 461 and shall be shown on the improvement plans as directed by the Department of Public Works. D. Meandering concrete sidewalks and associated parkway improvements shall be designed and approved by the Planning Department and the Community Services District along Ynez and Winchester Roads in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. F. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. G. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan profiles showing existing topography and utilities, and proposed centerline, top of curb and fowline grades as directed by the Department of Public Works. H. 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. I. All concentrated drainage from the site shall be directed to an underground storm drain system. 62. A Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, and approved by the Department of Public Works. Where construction on existing City streets is required, traffic shall remain open at all times and the traffic control plan shall provide for adequate detour during construction. 63. A signing and striping plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Winchester Road and Ynez Road and shall be included in the street improvement plans. 64. Plans for traffic signals and associated street improvements shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer, and approved by the Department of Public Works for the following intersections and shall be included in the street improvement plans; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the project on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance RA=TAFFRM243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 22 40. All improvement plans, grading coordinated for consistency with contiguous to the site. plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be adjacent projects and existing improvements PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 41. 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 has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 42. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality; • Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; • Planning Department; • Department of Public Works; • Riverside County Health Department; • Caltrans; • Community Services District; • General Telephone; • Southern California Edison Company; and • Southern California Gas Company. 43. A Grading Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, City Standards, and as additionally required in these Conditions of Approval. 44. A Soils Report prepared by a registered Soils Engineer shall be 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 pavement sections. 45. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 46. An erosion control plan in accordance with City Standards shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works. 47. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review. 48. 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. RAMSTAFFRM243PP.MEM 6/16M vga 19 49. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weedfree condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. 50. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of any permit. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has been already credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 51. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for offsite work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 52. A drainage study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The drainage study shall include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: A. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Onsite runoff shall be conveyed into the public right-of-way to the extent practicable. B. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. C. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. D. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway. E. The existing drainage facilities for conveyance and mitigation of the runoff cannot exceed 1900 cfs. Additional drainage facilities shall be provided to mitigate any additional runoff due to this development; i.e. construction of the retention basin as proposed by the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. 53. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy of the drainage easement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review prior to recordation. The location of the recorded easement shall be delineated on the precise grading plan. 54. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 55. Private roads and Precise Grading Plans MUST be designed, reviewed, and approved by the Department of Public Works to meet City Public Road Standards or otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. This should include but may not be limited to: R:MSTAFFRM43PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 20 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS: 25. Prior to the occupancy of Wal-Mart: A. All perimeter improvements along Ynez (approximately 37 feet from curb) and Winchester (approximately 37 feet from curb) Roads shall be fully installed and completed in conformance with the site plan marked Exhibit D and landscape plans marked Exhibit N and in conformance with Exhibit N-2. B. All major entries shall be installed and completed. C. The applicant shall submit plans for the water feature along with appropriate filing fee to the Planning for review and approval. The water feature shall be installed and operational within six (6) months of occupancy of Wal-Mart. 26. An Administrative Plot Plan application for signage or a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. 27. The courtyard between Pads 5 and 6 shall be completed prior to issuance of the occupancy permit for Pad 5 or 6 (whichever requests occurs first), or as approved by the Planning Director. 28. Roof -mounted equipment shall be inspected to ensure it is shielded from ground view. 29. All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape, irrigation, and shading plans. 30. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed and be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 31. A maintenance bond, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Planning, to guarantee adequate maintenance of the Planting for one year, shall be filed with the Department of Planning. Said bond shall be accompanied by a landscape maintenance agreement. 32. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: RAMSTAFFRPT12OMMEM 6/16193 vgw 17 "Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed at or by telephone " In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least 3 square feet in size. 33. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. 34. 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. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY 35. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical; 1990 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code Title 24 Energy and Handicapped Regulations and the Temecula Code. 36. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan in compliance with Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. 37. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 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. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative site plan 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. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 38. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all onsite flat work and improvements) 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. 39. 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. USISTAFFR M43PP.MEM 6/16/93 vLw 18 8. A minimum of 1,871 parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. All parking spaces shall be double striped. 9. Handicapped parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12 of Ordinance No. 348. 10. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.12 of Ordinance No. 348. 11. The applicant shall submit development plans for all commercial, shops and pads with the appropriate filing fee to the Planning Department for approval. Staff will review all future projects of the commercial,shops and pads if the square footage of these projects are within ten (10) percent of this approval, there are no alterations the footprints on the site plan nor any alterations to the approved uses. Approvals for all other proposals which are not within this ten (10) percent margin, including alterations to the building footprints on the site plan or resulting in alterations of the approved uses at the discretion of the Planning Director shall be approved by the Planning Commission. 12. At the time of approval of each development plan, the Director of Planning shall determine the extent of parking lot improvements and associated landscaping required for each plan. 13. No more than a maximum of seven (7) loading vehicles or portions thereof which are servicing the Wal-Mart may be on the Wal-Mart parcel at one time. Loading and standing areas shall be striped on the site in accordance with the loading and standing areas demarcated on Exhibit D-1. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST BUILDING PERMIT AFTER WAL-MART: 14. The applicant will submit design guidelines for the remainder of the site to the Planning Department. These design guidelines shall include but not be limited to architectural guidelines, guidelines for signage, pedestrian amenities (types), and a color palette for exterior of buildings within the center. The design guidelines will be approved by the Planning Commission. WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT 15. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Nine Hundred Dollars ($900.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty Dollar ($850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Fifty Dollar ($50.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15094. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c). R:ISISTAFFRPM43PP.MPM 6116/93 vgw 15 PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS: 16. Construction landscape plans shall be submitted for approval along with the appropriate filing fee for landscaping within the right-of-way for Winchester Road and Ynez Road. 17. The applicant shall comply with Ordinance No. 663 (SKR Mitigation) by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on (the gross acreage of the parcels proposed for development). Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. 18. The developer or his successor's interest shall submit a mitigation monitoring program which shall describe how compliance with required mitigation measures will be met and the appropriate monitoring timing of the mitigation. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with review of the program, as well as, all monitoring activities. 19. 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 THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 20. Development plans and appropriate filing fee(s) for the Wal-Mart expansion, Pads 1 through 9, Shops 1 through 3 and Commercial 1 and 2 shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. All development plans shall call out areas for bike racks, street furniture, lighting and pedestrian amenities identified in the design guidelines for the center. 21. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval for Wal-Mart and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Said landscape plans shall be consistent with the underlying Plot Plan and shall utilize drought tolerant materials. 22. Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval for each development for the Wal- Mart expansion, Pads 1 through 9, Shops 1 through 3 and Commercial 1 and 2 and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. Said landscape plans shall be consistent with the underlying Plot Plan and shall utilize drought tolerant materials. 23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for Wal-Mart, the applicant shall submit a construction phasing plan to the Planning and Public Works Department for review and approval. 24. 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. R:\S\STAFFR7n243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 16 CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 Project Description: A Plot Plan for approximately 340,034 square feet of commercial/retail space to include a 125,584 square foot Wal-Mart (and a 30,000 square foot expansion to the Wal-Mart), approximately 59,500 square feet of commercial space, approximately 69,700 square feet of shops space and approximately 55,250 square feet of pad space. Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-130-046 and 910-130-047 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTE: Conditions of Approval which follow pertain to the Wal-Mart Building and the remainder buildings on site. The following are the numbers of the Planning Department Conditions of Approval which apply exclusively to the Wal-Mart: 6, 7, 13, 21, 23, 25.A., 25.8., and 25.C. Any uncertainty as to whether a Condition of Approval applies to Wal-Mart, will be addressed by the Director of Planning. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 is a proposal for approximately 340,034 square feet of commercial/retail space to include a 125,584 square foot Wal-Mart (and a 30,000 square foot expansion to the Wal-Mart), approximately 59,500 square feet of commercial space, approximately 69,700 square feet of shops space and approximately 55,250 square feet of pad space (Exhibit D). 2. The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. 3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. RASISTAFFRM43PP.MEM 6116M3 vjww 13 4. The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4 marked Exhibit D, and as amended by these conditions. 5. Landscaping of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Exhibit N, and as amended by these conditions. A. Conceptual landscape plans for Pad 5 or 6 (whichever applies for a plot plan first) shall show the courtyard between these two pads. B. All ground mounted equipment shall be screened form view by landscaping. C. The developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaped areas within the site and within the right-of-way for Ynez Road and Winchester Road. D. Landscaped diamonds (approximately thirty-six square feet in area) shall be located within the parking lot, at intervals no greater than one diamond per every five (5) parking spaces. E. Trees planted in front of the Wal-Mart shall be a minimum of 48" box. Trees planted at the rear portion of Wal-Mart and along both Ynez and Winchester Road landscape corridors should be a minimum of 24" box. 6. Building elevations for the Wal-Mart only shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E, and as amended by these conditions. 7. Colors and materials used in the construction of the Wal-Mart only shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E (color elevations) and Exhibit H (material board) and as amended by these conditions. Main Building Stucco Frazee 4360 W Accents Stucco Frazee 4350 W Accents Stucco Frazee 4342 M Cap Trim Stucco Frazee 5423 M Grille, Awning and Trim Metal Frazee 4995 A Accent Tile Frazee 4115 N Base of Pilasters Sandblasted Concrete Sandblasted - Orco Med. Block Weight, Black #100 Base of Pilaster Sandblasted Concrete Sandblasted - Orco Med. Block Weight, Greys Roof Clay Tile MCA Peach Buff F-47 RAMSTAFFRPT OPP.MEM 6/1(,M vgw 14 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLOT PLAN NO. 243, AMENDMENT NO. 4 RAMSTAFFRPT1243PP.MEM 6/16M vgw 12 AMENDED TABLE A impact: Project mpact After MiU sti g , Cumufatrve Im act After p Mitigadon equues Statement of Overnding Considerartion ;, Noise Significant Significant Yes Climate and Air Quality Significant Significant Yes Agriculture Significant Significant Yes Seismic Safety Insignificant Insignificant No Slopes and Erosion Insignificant Insignificant No Wind Erosion and Blowsand Insignificant Insignificant No Flooding Insignificant Insignificant No Water Quality Insignificant Insignificant No Toxic Substances Insignificant Insignificant No Open Space and Conservation Insignificant Insignificant No Wildlife and Vegetation Insignificant Significant Yes Energy Resources Insignificant Insignificant No Scenic Highway Insignificant Insignificant No Cultural and Scientific Resources Insignificant Insignificant No Circulation Significant Significant Yes Water and Sewer Insignificant Insignificant No Fire Services Insignificant Insignificant No Sheriff Services Insignificant Insignificant No Schools Insignificant Significant Yes Parks and Recreation Insignificant Insignificant No Utilities Insignificant Insignificant No Solid Waste Insignificant Insignificant No Health Services Insignificant Insignificant No Libraries Insignificant Significant Yes Light and Glare Insignificant Insignificant No RAMSTAFFRPTUOPP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 AMENDED TABLE A RASWAFFRFM43PP.MEM 6/16/93 vjw 10 I -- Attachments: 1. Amended Table A - Blue Page 10 2. Amended Conditions of Approval (Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4) - Blue Page 12 3. Amended Conditions of Approval (Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4) - Blue Page 29 4. Original Conditions of Approval (Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4) - Blue Page 44 5. Original Conditions of Approval (Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4) - Blue Page 61 6. Letter from Alhambra Group dated June 11, 1993 - Blue Page 76 7. Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 77 R:1S\,STAFFRPT\243PP.MEM 6116/93 v=w 9 F. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any --maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. All parkways, open areas, on -site slopes and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the asseeie ieR the Developer or a manager designated by the Developer and/or other owners subject to the CC&R's or other means reasonably acceptable to'the.City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permit. 2. Reciprocal access easement and parking and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas, private storm drain, sewer, water facilities and all other utilities shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permit. Former Conditions No. 109 and 110 (Amended Conditions No. 104 and 105) should reference transmittal dates of 1991, not 1993. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO 27323 AMENDMENT NO 4 Changes to Conditions of Approval The following changes are recommended to be incorporated into the Conditions of Approval (reference Attachment No. 3). Previous conditions requiring offsite improvements were simply implementing the Mitigation Monitoring Program of the Temecula Regional Center Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the project Traffic Study as submitted to Staff. The Applicant then provided a refined Traffic Study to support revisions to the Mitigation Monitoring Program of the EIR and the associated Conditions of Approval relative to this project specifically. The requirements for provision of additional offsite improvements were therefore amended as requested by the Applicant. Former Condition No. 49 shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 54 (Amended Condition No. 53). "Margarita Road" shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 64 (Amended Condition No. 63) shall read as follows: A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions: G. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. R:IS%STAFFRFM43PP.MP,M 6116/93 vgw 7 H. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem reasonably necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. I. The CC&R's are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permit. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. J. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and related facilities. K. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. L. The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed. 1. All parkways, open areas, on -site slopes and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the asseeiatieA the Developer or a manager designated by the Developer and/or other owners subject to the CC&R's or other means reasonably acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permit. 2. Reciprocal access easement and parking and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking areas, private storm drain, sewer, water facilities and -all other - utilities shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permit. Former Condition No. 72 shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 73 shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 75 shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 78 (Amended Condition No. 74). Signals are not required at "Winchester Road and Nicholas Road" and "Winchester Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road" and shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 79 (Amended Condition No. 75). "Margarita Road" shall be deleted. US=AFFRFn243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 8 Artists Rendering of the Wal-Mart Due to the short turn -around time between Planning Commission meetings, the applicant has advised staff that they will be unable to provide an artists rendering of the Wal-Mart building. Data Pertaining to Drive Lane Lengths and Circulation Conflicts The applicant has informed Staff that "hard" data which analyzes circulation conflicts from additional cross drive aisles does not exist. They also informed Staff that Wal-Mart is currently experiencing increased automobile and pedestrian conflicts on the sites which utilize the cross drive aisle. Changes to Conditions of Approval The following changes are recommended to be incorporated into the Conditions of Approval (reference Attachment No. 2). Previous conditions requiring offsite improvements were simply implementing the Mitigation Monitoring Program of the Temecula Regional Center Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the project Traffic Study as submitted to Staff. The Applicant then provided a refined Traffic Study to support revisions to the Mitigation Monitoring Program of the EIR (Attachment 7) and the associated Conditions of Approval relative to this project specifically. The requirements for provision of additional offsite improvements were therefore amended as requested by the Applicant. Former Condition No. 5. E. should be expanded to include 24" box trees at the rear portion of Wal-Mart and along both Ynez and Winchester Road landscape corridors. This will assure that screening will be more effective from the outset of the project. Former Condition No. 8 should be amended to include the following statement: "All parking spaces shall be double striped." Former Condition No. 13, referencing the cross drive aisle, should be deleted. The Department of Public Works has determined that safety concerns have been addressed. In addition, aesthetic concerns voiced by the Planning Department have been mitigated through the additional landscaping included in the center of the parking lot in front of Wal-Mart. Former Condition No. 14 (Amended Condition No. 13) should be amended to read "seven (7) loading vehicles or portions thereof," not five (5). This will assure that no more than the maximum number of vehicles (or portions thereof) will be permitted on the Wal-Mart parcel at one time, thereby eliminating the possibility of using the trailer portion of the loading vehicles for on -site storage. Loading and standing areas shall be striped on the site in accordance with the loading and standing areas demarcated on Exhibit D-1. Former Conditions No. 21 and 23 (Amended Conditions No. 20 and 22) should be amended to include the expansion of Wal-Mart. This will assure that the subsequent development of Wal-Mart will be subject to Planning Department review to assure that any concerns are addressed at that time. Former Condition No. 26.A. (Amended Condition No. 25.A.) should be amended to include "in conformance with Exhibit N-2." RASWAFFRM243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw 5 Former Condition No. 67 (Amended Condition No. 65) "Margarita Road" shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 89 (Amended Condition No. 86). The requirement for improvements to Winchester Road shall be deleted and the condition shall read as follows: Additional right- of-way shall be dedicated to provide for the proposed deceleration lane at the right in driveway along Winchester Road. These improvements are subject to Caltrans' approval. Former Condition No. 90 shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 92 shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 95 (Amended Condition No. 90). Signals are not required at "Winchester Road and Nicholas Road" and "Winchester Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road" and shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 96 (Amended Condition No. 91). "Margarita Road" shall be deleted. Former Condition No. 100 (Amended Condition No. 95) shall read as follows: A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed, shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following Engineering conditions: A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. B. The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem reasonably necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. C. The CC&R's are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permit. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. D. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and related facilities. E. The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. R:MSTAFFRFn243PP.MEM 6/16M viw 6 Cultural and Scientific Resources An on -site archaeological study was completed for the site in 1988. No cultural resources were found on site. No mitigation measures have been proposed. Should resources be uncovered during grading, grading will be halted and a qualified archaeologist will be consulted to evaluate the resources. A paleontological study was also completed in 1988. Again, no resources were found, however, the site has a moderate to high paleontological sensitivity. Mitigations proposed in the EIR will mitigate impacts to a level of insignificance. Water and Sewer While development of the Temecula Regional Center will not impact water and sewer facilities, Eastern Municipal Water District estimates that development of the Regional Center, Winchester Hills, and Campos Verdes will generate an average daily demand of 24 million gallons per day (mgd) for domestic water and 13.4 mgd of sewage flow. Current capacity of the Temecula Valley Regional Water Reclamation Facility is 6.25 mgd. Cumulatively these projects will result in the need for a 12.0 mgd expansion of this facility. Costs associated with this expansion will be borne by individual developers. No significant impacts are anticipated to remain after mitigation. Electricity and Natural Gas While the Temecula Regional Center will generate the need for additional electric and gas services, both Edison and the Gas Company have indicated they will serve the site. No significant impacts are anticipated to remain after mitigation. Fire Services Development of the Regional Center will result in increased demand for fire protection services. The annual costs associated with this increased level of service are only partially offset by mitigation fees of $.25 per square foot of commercial and industrial and would require an increase in the Fire Department's annual operating budget. The mitigation fee is sufficient to mitigate the need for additional stations and equipment. In most cases, this fee is not sufficient to handle on -going operating costs. However, the Fiscal Impact Study prepared for the Regional Center indicates that this commercial development will generate sufficient revenue to cover on -going Fire Department operating costs. No significant impacts are anticipated to remain after mitigation. Sheriff Services Build -out of the Regional Center will potentially generate an additional 900 people. The EIR states that the current level of service for the Police Department is inadequate. However, the City's draft General Plan, prepared subsequent to the Regional Center EIR, states that the current level of service is adequate. Mitigation of future impacts will occur through the collection of property taxes. No significant impacts are anticipated to remain after mitigation. R:1S%STAFFRPT1M43PP.MBM 6/16M vsw 3 Statements of Overriding Consideration While Statements of Overriding Considerations are necessary for Agriculture, Wildlife and Biology, Circulation, Noise, Air Quality and Libraries, the remainder of the impacts can be reduced to levels of insignificance. The Temecula Regional Center will be a revenue generator for the City of Temecula. According to the Fiscal Impact Study prepared for The Regional Center, the Center is estimated to provide a net surplus to the City of Temecula of approximately $21.1 million during the ten-year development period, and $3.6 million annually thereafter. These revenues will assist in providing needed future services for the City of Temecula. PLOT PLAN NO 243 AMENDMENT NO 4 Impact of the Twenty-five (25) Foot Wide Transportation Corridor The following is background information and conceptual criteria on the 25 foot wide Transportation Corridor. In compliance with the Circulation Element of the proposed General Plan, a 25 foot wide easement is required along both sides of Winchester Road to accommodate the Transit Corridor. This component was first established by Riverside County's Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) and adopted in 1989. A network will eventually be necessary to accommodate the anticipated increase in traffic flows generated at build -out of the designated land uses in the City's General Plan. Different modes of transport that may be considered are as follows; A light rail system - According to Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB), the most feasible solution is to provide for a double track electric powered rail system which would require a 35 foot wide right-of-way. The tracks may be separated to either side of the road but then each side would have to be powered individually and a 20 foot wide right-of-way would be needed, which would allow for a minimum of 17 feet of landscaping. Additional drive through lanes - Adequate width for a drive through lane is 12 feet and therefore two lanes on either side can be provided as necessary. Landscape Plan As per the direction of the Planning Commission, additional landscaping is now incorporated into the overall project. This is reflected on both the landscape plan and site plan (reference Exhibits D-1 & N-1 respectively). The additional landscaping is included at the center of the parking lot in front of Wal-Mart. This will serve to break up this expanse of parking. Two (2) deciduous accent trees are provided on each of the extended landscape islands. Five (5) additional evergreen shade trees have been included at the rear of the site to screen the loading area. The plant palette has been expanded to include White Alder as a Deciduous Canopy Tree in the parking lot, Southern Live Oak has replaced Holly Oak as an Evergreen Canopy Tree, True Green Chinese Elm has also been added as an Evergreen Canopy Tree, and Rhus Lancea has been added as a Parkway Flowering Tree. The landscape architect for the project has provided rationale for the plant choices (reference Attachment No. 6). R:\S4STAFFRPT1243PP.MEM 6116/93 V9W 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Planning Department DATE: June 21, 1993 SUBJECT: Staff Report Format Please find enclosed the Staff Report for Environmental Impact Report 340, Planning Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone), Plot Plan No. 243, Amended No. 4, Variance No. 9, and Parcel Map 27323, Amended No. 4. This memorandum has been enclosed with your packet to facilitate your understanding of the Staff Report. The Staff Report begins with a discussion of the Environmental Impact Report, and those items the Commission felt should be re -looked at with respect to significant impacts. The Report then addresses concerns the Commission had with respect to the Plot Plan and Landscape Plan. As a part of this analysis, the Report identifies Conditions of Approval that staff recommends be either amended or deleted based on the Commission's comments and a Refined Traffic Study. With respect to these Conditions of Approval, they are identified as Former and Amended. Attachments 2, 3, 4, and 5 are the Amended Conditions of Approval and the Original Conditions of Approval. Both are provided in an effort to facilitate the Commission's understanding of how these conditions have changed. RASWAFFRPn243PP.MEM 6/16/93 vgw MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Planning Department DATE: June 21, 1993 SUBJECT: Environmental Impact Report No. 340; Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 4; Planning Application No. 93-0043 (Change of Zone); Variance No. 9, Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 Prepared by: Debbie Ubnoske, Senior Planner Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner BACKGROUND This item was continued from the Planning Commission hearing on June 7, 1993. Staff was directed to further analyze issues relative to the EIR, the Plot Plan and the Tentative Parcel Map. The Commission requested clarification on the following issues in the EIR: cumulative impacts associated with seismic, flooding, cultural resources, and public utilities and services. In addition, the Commission requested the following be addressed: the impact of the twenty- five (25) foot wide transportation corridor (along Winchester Road) on the site, re -design of the site plan and landscape plan to include additional landscaping on the project, an artists rendering of the Wal-Mart project, data pertaining to drive lane lengths and circulation conflicts, and clarification of the Conditions of Approval for the project. Clarification of the Conditions of Approval was requested for the EIR, Plot Plan and Tentative Parcel Map. Staff met with the applicant on June 8, 1993 to discuss the Commission's concerns. The Analysis portion of this report will address the Commission's concerns. ANALYSIS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO 340 Seismic and Flooding Both of these issues related to the potential for flooding associated with the failure of Skinner Dam during a seismic event. Subsequent information received after preparation of the Temecula Regional Center EIR states that proposed channel improvements to Santa Gertrudis Creek and the requirement for Dam Inundation Evacuation Plans will result in no significant impacts after mitigation. RAMSTAFFRP11243PP.MEM 6116/93 vtw 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JUNE 21, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\243pp.CC 7/1/93 Mb 66 City of Temecula Planning Dept. Page Three Attn: Steve Jiannino April 07, 1993 The plans must be submitted to th C'tv .,f Temec la's Offick-t-0--r-eview at least the recordat, r,n of t�+o two weeks Prior to the reau final map, It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized prior to recordation of the final map. Sincerely, am Martinez, H.S. IV Department of Environmental Health SM:dr (909) 275-8980 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE • HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH April.07, 1993 CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING DEPT. 43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92590 ATTN: Steve Jiannino: RECEIVED APR 1 4 1993 Ans'd....... oo AF RE: TENTATIVE PARCEL NAP NO. 27323, AMENDED NO. 2: THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING A PORTION OF LOTS 115 AND 117, TOGETHER WITH ADJOINING STREETS, AS SHOWN A NAP OF THE BOO TEMECOLA LAND AND WATER COMPANY" ON FILE IN OK 8, PAGE 359 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. (10 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Parcel Map NO. 27323, Amended No. 2 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Tentative Parcel Map NO. 27323 is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Parcel Map it . 4065 CountyCircle Drive . John M. Fanning, Director Riverside, CA 92503 • Phone (909) 358-5316 • FAX (909) 358-5017 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 7600 • Riverside, CA 92513-7600) pne..J •.e .�erid p,p. City of Temecula Planning Dept. Page Two Attn: Steve Jiannino April 07, 1993 This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Parcel Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any other purpose". This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. The Dlans must be submitted to the City of Temecula's Office to review at least two weeks Drior to the rg—gUgst for the reco rtat-; on o the final man This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the recordation of the final map. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed_ according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the City of Temecula and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the sewer system in Parcel Map No. 27323 is in accordance with the sewer system expansion plans'of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Parcel Map." v CONSTRUCTION/ DEMOLITION WITHIN PRESENT OR PROPOSED STATE RIGHT OF WAY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR ENTIAL T- HAZARDOUS WASTE I.E.ASBESTOS, PETROCHEMICALS, ETC. ) AND MITIGATED AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF REGULATORYENCIES. WHEN PLANS ARE SUBMITTED, PLEASE CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ATTACHED "HANDOUT". THE REVIEW PROCESS AND TIME REQUIRED FOR PLAN CHECK. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT, THIS PILL EXPEDITE ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM, CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA. ANY MEASURES NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE CUMJLATIVE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC AND�OR DRAINAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA THAT NECESSITATES THEM. CONSIDERATION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE PROVISION, OR FUTURE PROVISION, OF SIGHILIZATION AND LIGHTING OF THE INTERSECTION OF / AND THE STATE HIGHWAY WHEN WQXWTS ARE MET. IT APPEARS THAT THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL COULD HAVE A SI CANTTHE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM OF THE AREA. ANY MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGEIIMPACTSESHALL ON 8 FFECT INCLUDED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY IS INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA MASTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHWAYS ELIGIBLE FOR OFFICIAL SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY MAY WISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY. THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY, AND DEVELOPMENT IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCENIC HIGHWAY CONCEPT. IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE ENT TO HIGHWAYS. LAND DEVEIOPMENTY TRAVELLED � IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS CONCERNMAY REQUIRE LS CSPECIAL NOISE HEAVIL ATTENUATION 4EASURES. DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANY NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION. PLEASE SENi� TiIE: ITEM6 :CHECKED BELOW `:T� CALTRANS DISTRICT 8 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BRANCH P•0. Box 231 SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402 A COPY OF ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR REVISED APPROVAL. y A COPY OF ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY UPON RECORDATION OF THE MAP. / ANY PRO POSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP T141S PROPERTY. A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY. A CHECK PRINT OF THE PARCEL OR TRACT MAP. A CHECK PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT Of WT. `� A CHECK PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WHEN AVAILABLE. Date: November 14, 1991 RIV-79-R2.498 --� (Co-Rte-PM) TPM 27232 (Your Reference) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: 1. The driveway shown approximately 660 feet northeasterly of Ynez Road will not be allowed. Per the construction drawings by Assessment District 161 and the Memorandum of Understanding between the.city and state, access to the State Highway along the southerly side shall be at 1/4 mile spacing. 2. The project transmittal sheet from the City of Temecula indicates this case number is Parcel Map No. 27232. The Tentative Parcel Map submitted to this office indicates a map number of 27323. These documents must agree and must be revised to meet that requirement. 3. The Hydraulics Engineering Department requires a Hydrology Study that outlines how on -site and off -site flows approaching the property are to be handled. STATE OF. CAUFORNIA-BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PETS wlLsoN, G„""°` DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231 SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92402 TDD 214) 383-4609 November 14, 1991 98 TPM 2723��. Planning Department City of Temecula City Hall Attention Mr. Mark Rhoades 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Mr. Rhoades: Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 27232 located at the northeast corner of Ynez Road and Winchester Road. Please refer to the attached material on which our comments have been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items noted under additional comments. If any work is necessary within the State highway right of ,—way, the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the :altrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work. Please be advised that this is a conceptual review only. Final approval of street improvements, grading and drainage will be determined during the Encroachment Permit process. If additional information is desired, please call Ms. Minerva Rodriquez of our Development Review Section at (714) .383- 4384. very truly yours, l AHMAD SALAH Development Review Engineer Riverside County Attachment TPM L7i 3i YOUR REFERENCE Mineruo_� Codrrarv,- PLAN CHECKER DATE niv ( Co RTE PM) WE REQUEST THAT THE ITEMS CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT: NORMAL RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION TO PROVIDE HALF -WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. NORMAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE HALF -WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY . CURB AND GUTTER, STATE STANDARD NS-A , TYPE AA -8, ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY. PARKING SHALL BE PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY BY THE PROPER PLACEMENT OF NO PARKING SIGNS. 35 FT RADIUS CURB RETURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT INTERSECTIONS WITH THE STATE HIGHWAY. STATE STANDARD N8-B, CASE -A WHEELCHAIR RAMPS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURB RETURNS AS DEFINED IN THE HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL, SECTION 105.4 (2) . A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LIMIT PHYSICAL ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY. VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE DEVELOPED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD CONNECTIONS. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY STANDARD DRIVEWAYS. VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE PROVIDED WITHIN OF THE INTERSECTION AT V VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A ROAD -TYPE CONNECTION. VEHICULAR ACCESS CONNECTIONS SHALL BE PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY. ACCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE FOR MPH ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY. l LANDSCAPING ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL PROVIDE FOR -SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE, COMPLY WITH FIXED OBJECT SET BACK AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS. A LEFT -TURN LANE, INCLUDING SHOULDERS AND ANY NECESSARY WIDENING, SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. A TRAFFIC STUDY INDICATING ON AND OFF -SITE FLOW PATTERNS AND VOLUMES, PROBABLE IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED. PARKING SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHICULAR MOVEMENT CONFLICTS, INCLUDING PARKING STALL ENTRANCE AND EXIT, WITHIN OF THE ENTRANCE FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY. CARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY TO PRESERVE AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTERN OF THE STATE HIGHWAY. PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO CUMULATIVE INCREASED STORM RUNOFF TO INSURE THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT CREATED. PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW ONLY. FINAL APPROVAL WILL BE DETERMINED DURING THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT PROCESS. Board of Directors: Doug Kulber` Prand.nt JeCYaey L Minks Sr. Vice President Ralph !L Daily March 23, 1993 t,-4. Steve Fiannino City of Temecula Planning Department 43180 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Nancy K. Hughes SUBMCT: Water Availability CAMM F. Ko Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 2 Lisa D. Peterson Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 2 Richard D. Steffey PA93-0043 Change of Zone orrttrs: Palm Plaza Phase II RECEIVED MAR 2 6 1993 Ansfd............ John F. Hettnigar Genenl Manger Dear Mr, Fiannino: Phillip L. Forbes Dtraaro pp, or.fFinanee- Please be advised that the above -referenced e Is located within the Tmreeattrer boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water serviceDirmor , Eng m therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements th C. Daily between RCWD and the property owner. .r of op.nnons At +tamtenanm Perry R. Louck Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an ControUer Agency Agreement which assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. Linda X Fregoso District Secretan Jennings. Engstrand If you have any questions, please contact Senga Doherty. & Herrikson L<ad Co--, Sincerely, r-- RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P. E. Development Engineering Manager SB:ebl4-1\F186 cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician 2806I Din, Read Pm, Offitt &ta 901 ; Rancho California Water District • Temecurr.Callforrua925S9.901, • t90916:6.4101 • FA•\1909,671i-0615 RrA RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY 1825 THIRD STREET • RIVERSIDE. CA 92507-3484 • BUS. (714) 684-0850 FAX (714) 684.1007 ', Noveiaber 19, 1991 Mr. Mark Rhoades Temecula Planning Department City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: PM 27323 Dear Mark: We currently provide service to the site mentioned above via Route 23 and we are requesting that a bus turnout or a pad for a bus stop be incorporated into the general design as the size of the planned project will negatively impact our level of service unless this amenity is constructed. Ideal sites for the bus turnouts would be at the following locations: a. Eastside corner of Ynez Road nearside entrance to main parking lot. b. Southside corner of Winchester Road nearside entrance to Wal- Mart building If possible, we would also like to request that pedestrian walkways and wheelchair curbs be constructed near the turnout locations specified above. I can indicate the exact locations for the turnouts as the project progresses. Thank you; £c:r t:]e Oppc..t:.u1, cy to project. d Ccrlarient on this Your efforts to keep usupdatedLL.. onthestatus of this request will be very much appreciated. Please let us know when this project will be completed. Should you require additional information or specifications, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely.— .— � 1 `�3arbara Bray Transit Planner BB: jsc PDEV#129 PLOT PLAN 243 AMENDED #1 (PM 27323) PAGE 5• Applicant/developer shall furnish one system plans to the Fire De Copy of the water conform Department for review. Flans shall to the fire hydrant typos, location and spacing, the system shall meet the fire P cing, and shall be si nod/a i flow requir:ments. Plans the local water company by a registered civil engineer and certify that the p y with the following Certification: �,I with the requirgmentb of the water system is in accordance Fire Department,,.prescribed by the Riverside County b. Install a complete fire sprinkler system in all build- ings. The post indicator valve and fire debartment tion shall be located to the front connec- hydrant, and a minimum of , within S0 feet of a statement that the buildine(Ds)ewillrbe the buildino($), A sprinkled must be includa�d an the title automatically fire Plans. Page of the building 7. Install a supervised watarflow monitoring fire alarm a%prom. Plans must be submitted to approval prior to the Fire Department for installation, as per UHC. 8• A statement that the building will be automaticall sprinklered must gpprear on the title Y fire Plans. page of the building 9• Certain designated areas will be req�iired to be tained as f.ira lanos. main- 10. Prior tc, the icsuOnce of building shall deposit, with the Citypermits, the developer order equAling the sum of s•of Temecula, a check or for fire r per money b square foot as mitigation P otec�jon impacts. This amount.must be =eaarat�Y from the plan check fees submitted 11. Walmart shall pystem. Plans must be cepp on6ible to install a fire alarm approval be .,ubmitted. to the Fire Department prior to installation. for 12• Fina1 cenditicns will be addressed when buildin are revir.�wed in the building and Safety Office. g Plans All questions regarding ferred the meaningof to the Planning and Engineering staff1ticns shall be re- RAYMOtlD H . PEGI S Chief Fire Department Planner b Y Michael E. Gray, Fire Captain specialist GLEN 3, NEWMAN FIRE CHICF TO: CITY OF T ., ErULA ATTN: PLANNING DEPT RE: PARCEL MAP 27323 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST S&N IACINTp AVENUE PEMS. CALIFOJLNIA 92370 (714) 637--3193 March 23, 1993 With respect to the division conditions of approval for the above the Fire Department recommends the oreferenced lard vi measures be provided in accorda.-Ice with RiversideCountfire protection recognized fire protection standards: Y Ordinances and/or Fire protection measurer will be addrstssad With the related Plot plan #243. All questions regarding the meaningof the Planning and Ea Engineering staff. conditiona shall be referred to RAYMOND H . 1zG IS Chief Fire Department Planner A I BY Micheal E. Gray MEG/tm 79.733 Pam` C) 2QX0 O�yCP-4NNING DrWSN IO DpiM Sulte B,dio In, CA 92201 12M" • FAX (619 77S2an O MVERyWE OFFICE 3760 12t6 Sno k A1..v.W.% CA 92301 (714) 273 4:77 . FAX (714) 369.7451 41WI Cou"(3 TOaCULA t� " C "a+-% Suile 225. ee TaJ-. CA 92390 (714) 6945070 • FAX (?14) 694-3076 Arsrrud on wyci d pops F co o!vr! RIof VER Sly GLEN 1. NEwmAN FIRE CMIEF RIVERSIDE COUN TY FT" DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINM AVENUE • PEMS' C4LIVORNIA k370 (714) 657.3183 March 23, 1993 TOI CITY OF TEMECULA ATTN: PLANNING DEPT RE.- PLOT PLAN 243 AMENDED Q2 (PM 27323) With respect to the conditions of approval for th lire plot plan, the Fire for recOmMends fire protection measures be provided in accordance County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection I• The Fire Department is required to set flow for the remodel or construction of buildings using the procQdu �. Provid delivering Operating combustible re established in e or show there exists 4500 GF•M for a Z hour pressure, which must material is placed on e above refer - the following with Riverside standards; a minimum fire a 1 1 commercial Ordinance 546. a water system duration at 2q be available the job site capable of PSI residual before any 7' A combination of on -sit _ drants. looped System(6jx4"�?fi on r site2 super fire hy- located not less than 25 feet or more than 1bS�fraet fwill rom any portion of the building as measured aloe a travelways. The re 9 Pproved vehicular any adjacent h� t(s) - fire flow shall be available from ?drant(s) in the system. 4. The require in the permit struction type} measures. 13 INDIO OFFICi: 733 Ca.nvy Cl" Drl,,' Si,,.F. WO. CA 92201 (617) 343d686 9 FAX (619) 7752072 d fire flow May be adjusted Process to reflect changes area Separation or built-in C3 RN8 URDg pFM`h 3761 12lh Sete; Rirenid.. CA 92301 (714) 273.1771 • FAX (714) 369-74$1 at a later point in design, con - fire protection 41003 ❑ TEMECULA OFFICE Co�ory Cents DNre, wile 225. T_.ec„i, CA 92191► (714) 694'i070 • FAX (714) 694.5076 0 aimed on recyckd~" 83. All improvements shall be constructed and completed th standards, including but not limited to, curb and gutter qr C e approved plans' and City approaches, drainage facilities, parkway trees and street lightson all sidewalk, ior bhp streets, signing, striping, traffic signal interconnect, traffic signals, median reconstruction, and existing facilities. 84. The Developer shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local and private streets with arterial streets as directed by the Department of public Works. 85. 32 foot private interior circulation roads shall be constructed as approved by the Department of public Works. 86. Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied only as directed by the Department of Public Works at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the State Standard S to emulsion shall conform pecifications. TF.MECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARIWEENT 87. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to commercial development shall be maintained by an established Commercial Property Owner's Association. OTHER AGENCIES 88. The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Health Department's transmittals dated April 7, 1993 and November 21, 1991, copies of which is attached. 89. The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the County of Riverside Fire Department's letter dated March 23, 1993, a copy of which is attached. 90. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Californi Water District transmittal dated March 23, 1993, a copy of which is attached. a 91. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Riverside Transit Agency transmittal dated November 19, 1991, a copy of which is attached. 92• The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the California Department of Transportation transmittal dated November 14, 1991, a copy of which is attached. .AS\STAFFRPTU7323TPM.PC 6/2/93 t @ 28 Count o f Riversidey DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO: CITY OF TEMECULA DATE: 11-21-91 ATTN: Matthew Faqan FRO SAM NE Environmental Health Specialist IV RE: PLOT PLAN NO. 243 The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No. 243, and has no objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior to any building plan review for health clearance, the following items are required: 1. "Will -serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies. 2. Three complete sets of plans for each food establishment will be submitted, including a fixture schedule, a finish schedule, and a plumbing schedule in order to ensure compliance with the California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law. For specific reference, please contact Food Facility Plan examiners at (714) 358-5172. 3. A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch (Jon Mohoroski, 358-5055). will be required indicating that the Project has been cleared for: a. Underground storage tanks b. Hazardous Waste Generator Services C. Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2165) d. Waste reduction management: SM:dr cc: Jon Mohoroski, Hazardous Materials Branch NOTE: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of Building Plan review for final Environmental Health Service clearance. DOM GA.00z (.90) PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCy 68. A Transportation Demand ro Management g program will be required. 69. All necessary onsite improvements shall be provided. Future proposed Phasing, upon submittal, shall be reviewconstruction ed to adequately mitigate circulation and drainage concerns to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 70. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • 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 • Caltrans • Community Services District General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company Southern California Gas Company • Fish & Game Army Corps of Engineers 71. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department All of Public Works. 72. Winchester Road, from Margarita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road, shall be fully improved within a 134 foot full width dedicated right-of-way as per the Assessment District 161 plans including a 14 foot wide raised median in accordance with City Standard No.100A. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for the proposed deceleration lane at the right in driveway. These improvements are subject to Caltrans' approval. 73. Ynez Road, from Overland Drive to Rancho California Road, shall be fully improved within a 134 foot full width dedicated right-of-way as per Community Facilities District 88-12 plans including a 14 foot wide raised, landscapemedian, in accordance with City Standard No.100A and as approved by the Planning Services District, and the Department of Public WorksDepartment, the Community R:ISISTAFFRPT\27323TPM,pC 6/2/93 0, 26 74. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersection and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance as directed by the Department of Public Works. 75. The Developer shall reimburse the City for the existing improvements along Margarita Road for the portion between from Winchester Road to Solana Way, since these improvements mitigate the traffic requirements of the proposed improvements were recently provided by the City's Capital Improvement Project These o 76. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 77. Adequate signing and striping shall be provided for Winchester Road and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 78. Traffic signals shall be installed for the following intersections; Winchester Road and Nicholas Road Winchester Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the site on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance 79. Traffic signal interconnection with shall be installed along Winchester Road, Margarita Road, and Ynez Road as approved by the Department of Public Works. 80. Bus bays and shelters shall be provided at allexisting and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. 81. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. utilities, etc., shall be recorded if they are located within the site boundary. 82. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facAll offers ilities, 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; drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions. R:1S1STAFFRPT\27323TPM.Pc 6/2/93 tja 27 easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions. " 61. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to ihesubject Property. 62• The Developer shall deposit with the Department of Public Works a cash sum as established, per acre, as mitigation towards traff c signal choose to defer the time of payment of traffic si impacts. Should the Developer written agreement with the City deferring said�a mitigation fee, he may enter into a building permit. Payment to the time of issuance of a 63. 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. 64• A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared by the Developer and submitted to the Director of planning, attorney. ty The CC&R's shall be signed and acknowledged by all parties ty rhaving aand ny record title interest in the property to be develo ped, shall make the City a and shall be enforceable by the City. The CC&.R's shall be reviewed and ap rotved by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be submitted to the following En y conditions: g Engineering A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the Developer's sole cost and expense. B• The CC&R's shall be in the form and content approved by the Director of Planning, City Engineer, and the City Attorney, and shall include such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials deem necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents. C. The CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and -the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. - A recorded copy shall be provided to the City. D. The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and related facilities. E. The CC&R's shall provide that the property maintained so as not to create a public nuisance. be developed, operated and F. The CC&R's shall provide that if the required by the CC&R's, then the City, afterimakins not g e dmandand given reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the Owner' sole expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City ordinances. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure n:IS\STAFFRM27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tjs 24 any such expense not promptly reimbursed. (1) All parkways, open areas, on -site slopes and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permits. (2) Reciprocal access easements and parking and maintenance agreements ensuring access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or Parking areas, private storm drain, sewer, water facilities and all other utilities shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrent with the map. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERNMS 65. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the and approval. or review The building pad shall be certified by aeregis registered Cnt of b c ivilrEnks gineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 66. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the din and accepted grading Permit, City Grading Standards ep grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. 67• The Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EWNegative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which the Developer requests its building permits for the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to Developer. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the provisions Of this Condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; rovided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. RASISTAFFRPT\27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tip 25 C. Landscaping (slopes and parkways). ,^ D. Erosion control and slope protection. E. Sewer and domestic water systems. F. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans. G. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines. 47. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: • San Diego Regional Water Quality • 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 • Caltrans • Community Services District ,-- General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company • Fish & Game Army Corps of Engineers 48. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department All of Public Works. 49. The Developer shall reimburse the City for the existing improvements along Margarita Road for the portion between Winchester Road to Solana Way, since these improvements mitigate the traffic requirements of the proposed development. These improvements were recently provided by the City's Capital Improvement Project. 50. 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 pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Sectio6462 Land Sectiono complete 66462.5 he Vements 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 11:%S%STAFFRPT127323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tin 22 given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. --� 51. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Winchester Road and Ynez Road and so noted on the final map with the exception of access as shown on the approved site plan or as approved by the Department of Public Works. 52. A signing and striping plan shall be prepared a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for Winchester Road and Ynez Road shall be included in the street improvement plans. 53. Plans for traffic signals shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Department of Public Works for the following intersections and shall be included in the street improvement plans; Southerly access to the project from Ynez Road Easterly access to the project from Winchester Road Upgrade the existing traffic signal at the northerly access to the project on Ynez Road aligned with Palm Plaza entrance 54. Traffic signal interconnection shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer to show 2" rigid metal conduit with pull rope, and #5 pull boxes on 200-foot centers along Winchester Road, Margarita Road, and Ynez Road. This design shall be shown on the street improvement plans and must be approved by the Department of Public Works. 55. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact the Department of Public Works for the design requirements. 56. Bus bays and shelters shall be designed and approved at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. 57. An agreement to secure the implementation bf a Transportation Demand Management program shall be executed. 58. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 59. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 60. 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 RASISTAFFRPTI27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tie 23 34. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off -site drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works Permits the use of streets �-- for drainage purposes, the provisions of Section M of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the Developer shall provide adequate facilities as approved by the Department of Public Works. 35. The Developer shall protect downstrr Properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement. 36. A drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A c drainage easement shall be submitted to the copy of the to recordation. The location of the recorded eaeasem nt shall be delineatedonon he graor review ding prior plan. gra g 37. An Encroachment Permit shall be required from Caltrans for any work within their right- of-way. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ENCROACEMIENT PERMITS 38. Improvement plans, including but not limited to, streets, parkway trees, street lights, driveways, drive aisles, parking lot lighting, drainage facilities and paving shall be prepared by -a Registered Civil Engineer on 24" x 36" mylar sheets and approved by the Department of Public Works. Final plans (and profiles on streets) shall show the location of existing utility facilities and easements as directed by the Department of Public Works. 39. The following criteria shall be observed in the design of the improvement plans to be submitted to the Department of Public Works: A. Flowline grades shall be 0.5 % minimum over P. C. C. and 1.00 % minimum over A.C. paving or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. B. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A, 208, and 401 (curb and sidewalk). C. Street lights shall be designed along the public sts adoining the site in accordance with Ordinance No. 461 and shall be shown on the�improvement plans as directed by he Department of Public Works. D. Meandering concrete sidewalks and associated parkway improvements shall be designed and approved by the Planning Department and the Community Services District along Ynez and Winchester Roads in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. K:1S1STAFFRM27323TPM.PC 6/2193 tic 20 E. Improvement plans shall extend 300 feet beyond the project boundaries or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. -� F. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the Department of Public Works. G. Public street improvement plans shall include plan profiles showing existing topography and utilities, and proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades as directed by the Department of Public Works. H. 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. I• All concentrated drainage from the site shall be directed to an underground storm drain system. 40. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be undergrounded, 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. 41. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground. 42. All conditions of the grading permit and encroachment permit shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 43. 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. PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF FINAL MAP 44. Apricot Road shall be vacated on the final Map. 45. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 46. The Developer shall construct or post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the construction of the following public/private improvements within 18 months in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. A. Street improvements, which may include, but are not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, traffic signals and other traffic control devices as appropriate. B. Storm drain facilities. AAS%STAFFRPT\27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tj, 21 24. The Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: r- San Diego Regional Water Quality • Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Planning Department ' Department of Public Works • Riverside County Health Department • Caltrans • Community Services District • General Telephone • Southern California Edison Company • Southern California Gas Company 25. A Soils Report prepared by a registered Soils Engineer shall be submitted to of Public Works with the initial Department conditions of the site, and provide�r�ecommendati� ns•forthe cO stniction ofengineered liall allds structures and pavement sections. 26. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a quaHfred en to the Department of Public Works with the initial engineer or geologist and submitted report shall address special study zones and the geological conditionsofthe sding ate, andshallprovide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 27. An erosion control plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 28. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed free condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Department of Public Works. 29. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the din and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 30. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 31. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or easements for any off -site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works at no cost to any agency. I, - ..,SISTAFFRPT%27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tie 18 32. A Drainage Study shall be submitted to the Department Works for approval. The drainage study shall include, but no be limited to, he following vcriteria: A. Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to approved storm drain facilities as directed by the Department of Public Works. Onsite runoff shall be conveyed into the public right-of-way to the extent practicable. B. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. C. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. D. The location of existing and post development 100- ear fl shall be shown on the improvement plan y °Odp and floodway E. The existing drainage facilities for conveyance and mitigation of the runoff cannot exceed 1900 cfs. Additional drainage facilities shall be provided to mitigate any additional runoff due to this development; ie. construction of he retention basin as proposed by the Campos Verdes Specific Plan. 33. Private roads and Precise Grading Plans MUST be designed, reviewed, and approved by the Department of Public Works to meet City Public Road Standards or otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. This should include but may not be limited to: A• Minimum paved road widths shall be 32 feet. B. Knuckles being required at 90' 'bends' in the road. C. Separation between on -site intersections shall meet current City Standards. D. Minimum safe horizontal centerline radii shall be required. E 900 parking immediately adjacent to the private streets shall be located a minimum safe distance from intersections. F. At entrances to project, identify configuration, stacking distance, and turn -around ability for review and approval by the Fire Department and he Department of Public Works. G. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90°). H. Concrete sidewalks shall be provided per City Standards as required. RASISTAFFRPT127323TPM.PC 6/2/93 ti, 19 (4) This project is within a liquefaction hazard zone. (5) This Project is within a Subsidence Zone. D. A copy of the Recorded Easement Agreements (REA's) (1) REA's shall be reviewed and approved by the PIanning Director. The REA's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. The REA shall Provide for shared parking, shared ingress and egress, and master drainage and flood control. (2) No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, Property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded REA,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 REA'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. (3) 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. 13. 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. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 14. 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. -,AM5TAFFRPT%27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tin 16 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS 15. 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. 16. 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. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL REQUMEWENTS 17. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map or site plan all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 18. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise (including all on -site flat work and improvements) construction shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained road right-of-way. 19. 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. 20. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. 21. 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 ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS 22• The final grading plan shall be prepared by'a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. 23. 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. R:\S\STAFFRFn27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tie 17 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map No.: 27323, Amendment No. 4 Project Description: A 13 parcel commercial subdivision with two remainder parcels Of 58.1 acres at the southeast corner Ynez and Winchester Roads. Assessor's Parcel No(s): 910-130-046, 047 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1 • 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. 2. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceedinga �— of Temecula, its advisory agencies, against the City Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. boards, which action isbrought concerning the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in defence. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify or hold harmless the City of Temecula. 3. If Subdivision phasing is proposed, a nhasin plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. 4. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent w' Plan No. 263. with Specific 5. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all gation for EIR No. 340. miti measures identified within E R No. 340 and the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved 6• The developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of all landscaped areas within the site and within the right-of-way for Ynez Road and Winchester Road. 'AS%STAFFRPn27323TPM.Pc 6/2/93 tin 14 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS 7. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Director. 8. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. 9. A qualified vertebrate paleontologist shall resurvey the site and develop a Paleontologic Resource Impact Mitigation Monitoring Program prior to issuance of din The qualified Paleontologist shall be retained to perform g Permits. excavations and, if necessary,P periodic inspections of salvage exposed fossils. The frequency of inspections will depend on the rate of excavation, the materials being excavated, and the abundance of fossils. The Program shall be consistent with the Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340. 10. A soil sampling and chemical analysis program shall be completed to determine if near surface soil contains hazardous substances in excess of EPA limits. In the event that any hazardous materials are found on -site, qualified authorities shall be immediately contacted to determine the proper disposal of the hazardous materials. 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 Director: 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. (2) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 340 was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Planning Department. (3) This project is within a 100 year flood hazard zone. RAS\STAFFRPn27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tis 15 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of June, 1993. LINDA L. FAHEY CHAIRMAN I EOEREBY CERTEF'I' that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 7th day of June, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMIVIISSIONER& NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COASUSSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY .\STAFFRPT\27323TPM.PC 6/2/83 to 12 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RAS%STAFFRPT%27323TPM.PC 612/93 tjs 13 4. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. 5. That 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 wildlife or their habitat. 6. That the design of the proposed land division or the t ype are not likely to cause serious public health problems. °f improvements 7. 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. E. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit: Tentative Parcel Man No 27323 Amendment No 4 1 • There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 will be consistent with the City of Temecula's future General PIan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State Law. Tentative Parcel Ma No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 conforms with existing applicable city zoning ordinances, development standards, and Specific Plan No. 263. 2• There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with the City's future General Plan, since the project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 and surrounding developments to the north and west. 3. The proposed subdivision complies with State Planning and Zoning laws. Reference local Ordinance No. 348, Ordinance No. 460 and California Governmental Code Section(s) 65,000-66,009 (Planning and Zoning Law). 4• Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the Proposed Specific Plan No. 263 in that the project is an commercial subdivision which is consistent with the land use designation of RCC Planning Area 2 contained within the Specific Plan. CTentative Parcel Map ial Core) and hNo. zoning7323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the proposed zoning for the site (C-P-S) which has no minimum lot size requirement. 5. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Government Code Section 66412.3) F %SISTAFFRPn27323TPM.PC 612/93 tie 10 and find that the project is consistent with SWAP and the future General Plan. Additionally, since the project is a commercial subdivision, it will provide possible job opportunities which will benefit the job/housing balance in the City. 6. The proposed project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 and Environmental Impact Report No. 340. EIR No. 340 indicated that even after feasible mitigation measures were incorporated into the project, substantial impacts would remain. The City Council in certifying EIR No. 340 will have to adopt Statements of Overriding Consideration establishing the benefits of the project over the remaining unmitigatable impacts. 7. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way. The project as designed and conditioned provides access to all buildable lots. 8. The design of the subdivision provides to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities (Government Code Section 66473.1) by providing design and zoning standards for natural heating and cooling within Specific plan No. 263. 9• The site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for this type Of project in that the development of the site will not create major slope conditions and that access and infrastructure can be provided to the site as shown in Specific Plan No. 263, EIR no. 340 and as conditioned. 10. The design of the proposed subdivision and type of improvements are not -� likely to cause serious public health problems. The project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 and EIR No. 340 which did not indicate any serious public health problem would result from the proposed development. F. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Tentative Parcel Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Section 2. Environmental Compliance Environmental Impact Report No. 340 was completed for Specific Plan No. 263. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the development proposals and standards of Specific Plan No. 263. The potential environmental impacts of this project were analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 340 in that the proposed development is a portion of the proposed 1,375,000 square foot Retail Commercial Core area as analyzed for Specific Plan No. 263 and EIR No. 340. Section 3. nditi n . That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 for the subdivision of a 58.1 acres into 13 commercial and 2 remainder parcels at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No(s). 910-130-0456 and 910- 130-047 subject to the following conditions: A. Exhibit A, attached hereto. R:MSTAFFRPT\27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tjs 11 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEIIECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.27323, AMENDMENT NO.4 TO SUBDIVIDE 5S.1 ACRES INTO 13 COMMERCL AI AND 2 REMAINDER PARCELS AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO(S). 910-130-046 AND 910-130-047 WHEREAS, KRDC, Inc. filed Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel Map on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportu Opposition; nity to testify either in support or WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended Approval of said Tentative Parcel Map; NOW ' TEMECULA DO TEOER��RE' THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Finding§ That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1 • The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2• The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action Proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. .51STAFFRPn27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tjs b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The Planning Commission finds, in recommending approval of the project and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: a. There is reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action does comply with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are made: 1 • That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 2 • That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. 3. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of development. R:1S\STAFFRPTU7323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tip 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 93- •:1SISTAFFRPTR27323TPM,pC 6/2/83 tie 3. The proposed subdivision complies with State Planning and Zoning laws. Reference local Ordinance No. 460 and California Governmental Code Section(s) 65, (Planning and Zoning Law). 000-66,009 4. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the proposed Specific Plan No. 263 in that the project is an commercial subdivision which is consistent with the land use designation of RCC (Retail Commercial Core) and the zoning for Planning Area 2 contained within the Specific Plan. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the proposed zoning for the site (C-P- S) which has no minimum lot size requirement. 5. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its action upon the housing needs of the region and has balanced these needs against the public service needs of the residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Government Code Section 66412.3) and finds that the project is consistent with SWAP and the future General Plan. Additionally, since the project is a commercial subdivision, it will provide Possible job opportunities which will benefit the job/housing balance in the City. 6• The proposed project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 and Environmental Impact Report No. 340. EiR No. 340 indicated that even after feasible mitigation measures were incorporated into the project, substantial impacts would remain. The City Council in certifying EiR No. 340 will have to adopt Statements of Overriding Consideration establishing the benefits of the project over the remaining unmitigatable impacts. 7. The project has acceptable access by means of dedicated right-of-way. The project �— as designed and conditioned provides access to all buildable lots. 8. The design of the subdivision provides to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities (Government Code Section 66473.1) by providing design and zoning standards for natural heating and cooling within Specific Plan No. 263. 9. The site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for this type of project in that the development of the site will not create major slope conditions and that access and infrastructure can be provided to the site as shown in Specific Plan No. 263, EIR No. 340, and as conditioned. 10. The design of the proposed subdivision and type of improvements are notto cause serious public health problems. The project is consistent with Specific P and No. 263 and EIR No. 340 which did not indicate any serious public health problem would result from the proposed development. t4ASkSTAFFRPn27323TPM.PC 612193 tip 5 Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 7 2. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 13 3. Exhibits - Blue Page 29 A. Vicinity Map B. Draft General Plan Designation C. Zoning Designation D. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 R:1S%STAFFRPT\27323TPM.PC 612193 tie 6 Parcel No. Parcel Size Pad Building (Acreage) Square Footage U3e Type 1 .8 1 6,000 Retail 2 2 3,000 Restaurant 3 .8 3 5,000 Retail 4 •6 4 5,000 Retail 5 1.5 5 61500 Restaurant 6 1.6 6 8,550 Restaurant 7 .5 7 2,200 Restaurant 8 .7 8 4,000 Financial 9 2.1 9 15,000 Retail 10 4.5 Shops 1 & 50,700 Retail Commercial 1 11 13.0 Wal-Mart 155,584 Retail 12 7.5 Shops 2 & 3 78,500 Retail Commercial 2 --� 13 1.1 Future Pad ----- ----- Remainder 22.5 Parcels Remainder Parcels A twenty-five (25) foot easement for a transportation corridor is being provided along the south side of Winchester Road. This easement is for the possible development of a future transportation system. ANALYSIS The parcel map is consistent with the proposed C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) zoning for the site and Plot Plan No. 243. The parcel conforms to the proposed building pad areas Of Plot Plan No. 243. The project proposes the subdivision of 35.6 acres of a 58.1 acre site into 13 commercial parcels with two remainder parcels of 22.5 acres. The project will provide for the ultimate street improvements for the southeast corner of Winchester and Ynez Roads. The only public roadways within the project are Ynez and Winchester Roads with access to the interior parcels being provided by private driveways and a Reciprocal Easement Agreement. The access points along Ynez Road into the project align with the driveways into Palm Plaza to the west side of Ynez Road. Prior to providing a full access driveway north of Parcel 13 a traffic signal will have to be installed. The access points along Winchester Road will have h;%S%STAFFRPTN27323TPM.Pc 6/2/83 tjo 3 to be approved by CalTrans. The access point furthest east conforms with the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between CalTrans and the City of Temecula. The —� right -in -only access with the deceleration lane does not comply with the MOU and therefore may not be approved by CalTrans. The project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263, Plot Plan No. 243, and the environmental analysis completed in Environmental Impact Report No. 340 for Specific Plan No. 263. The project must comply with the mitigation measures proposed within Environmental Impact Report No. 340 and the Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for Environmental Impact Report No. 340. FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the future General Plan in that the area is designated for Specific Plan. The City's Draft General Plan Land Use Map shows the project area with Village Core and Specific Plan overlays. Specific Plan No. 263 is being processed for the site in conformance with the Specific Plan overlay requirement. The proposed project is also consistent with Specific Plan No. 263. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with Environmental Impact Report No. 340 and Specific Plan No. 263. The EIR analyzed the potential impacts of a retail development at this location. The analysis indicates that several significant impacts for development of Specific Plan No. 263 will remain after all the proposed mitigation measures are incorporated in the project. Therefore, the City Council will have to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations for certification of Environmental Impact Report No. 340. The Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340 will be included as a Condition of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the City's Draft General Plan in that the project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 which is currently being reviewed and processed by City staff. The proposed zoning is compatible with current zoning to the north and west of the site. FINDINGS Tentative Parcel M w No. 27323 Amendment No. 4 1. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 will be consistent with the City of Temecula's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State Law. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 conforms with existing applicable, development standards and Specific Plan No. 263. 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with the City's future General Plan, since the project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 and surrounding developments to the north and west. RAS\STAFFRPT\27323TPM.PC 6/2/93 tis 4 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION June 7, 1993 Case No.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 Prepared By: Steve Jiannino RECOMMENDATION: ADOPT Resolution No. 93- recommending AoDroval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 based on the Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: KRDC, Inc. REPRESENTATIVE: Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates PROPOSAL: A 13 parcel commercial subdivision with two remainder parcels of 58.1 acres. LOCATION: Southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads EXISTING ZONING: R-R (Rural Residential) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: C-P-S South: A-2-20 East: A-2-20 West: C-P-S PROPOSED ZONING: C-P-S EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant South: Vacant East: Vacant West: Commercial Shopping Center PROJECT STATISTICS GROSS ACREAGE: 58.1 acres NUMBER OF PARCELS: 13 ,MSTAFFRPTR27323TPM.PC 8/2/93 tie 1 REMAINDER PARCELS: 2 RANGE OF LOT SIZES: .5 acres to 13.0 acres BACKGROUND Parcel Map No. 27323 was submitted to the City on November 4, 1991 in conjunction with Plot Plan No. 243 (Wal-Mart). The site is included as a portion of Specific Plan No. 263 which is currently being reviewed by the City. Environmental Impact Report No. 340 was prepared and circulated for comment in conjunction with Specific Plan No. 263. Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 and Plot Plan No. 243 are consistent with Environmental Impact Report No. 340. The developer has chosen to move forward with Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 and Plot Plan No. 243 prior to completion of Specific Plan No. 263 which has necessitated the submittal of a Change of Zone request to process the Environmental Impact Report No. 340 has evaluated the impacts of the overall projects. Specific Plan No. 263, which includes review of the impacts associated with this project, project at this location. type of PROJECT DESCRIPTION Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 4 is a request for a 13 parcel commercial subdivision with two remainder parcels at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads. The parcels are designed to be consistent with the proposed building areas for Plot Plan No. 243. The size of the parcels and the proposed building areas are as follows: RASISTAFFRPTX27323TPM.PC 012/93 tip 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 12 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT r- TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27323, AMENDMENT NO. 4 JUNE 7, 1993 RAS\STAFFRPT1243PP.CC 7/1/83 Wb 65 February 8,1993 Karrie Anderson 39731 Barberry Temecula, Ca. 92591 Dear Pfamthg Commission, RECEIVED Fr 9 1 0 1993 dns'd,........... I am writing to you in regards to the proposed Plan for WAIMART coming to Temecuila I have been told that there am a few council members who are opposed to this . bring. nmg I urge You to consider the bener6ls that WALMART being in Temecula would bring WALMART is the number 1 retailer in America right now. Nordst rom's is vay close behind. Think of the tart revenues WALMART would bring to this city. At least sae million dollars m texas would be collected from 1hem m a years times Studies show that 30% of the shoppers coming to Tenreada'a palm Plaza are Mumeta resideaba. Just tmmk of how many other surrounding cam's would come to spend their dollars in Temecula.(Hemet; Fallbrook, Menifee, Wildomar, Rainbow CaM an, Lake Elsinore etc.) If WALMART is declined permits to start building ng in T you can bet Murrieta will be more than happy to accommodate their puns to build Would we want to push away a major anchor in our community? I would think not Also, with tla land of to x revenue WALMART would bring to our city, we could finaUy get fire overpass we so any need. We an know it takes money to get anyding done, epecislIbr nowr with the economy just starting to pall sit of its slmmp. Think of the jobs an overpm could create for the struggling construction workers. Not to mention the many jobs WALMART would create for the many unemployed people in our area. I really believe that WALMART coming to Temecula would be a great asset to our community and make our fair city financially strottge . Karrie Anderson I. - RECEIVED —11 FEB 1 g 1993 Ans'd............ February 8,1993 Mr.& Mrs. Jack Anderson 39731 Barberry Temecula, Ca 92591 Dear P km2iog Commission, We are writing to You in regards to the proposed plan for WALMART Coming to Temecula We have ben told that there are a few eons members who are opposed to wool We urge You to a oaider the beneft that WALMART being in Temecula WALMART is the number I retarder in America right now. Nees is vay dose behind Think of the tax revenues WALMART would bring to thin city. At least one mil ion dollars in taxes would be collected fivm them m a years time. Studies show that 30% of the shoppers coming to Tcmocxrla's pWm p1m are MWneta residents. Just think of how many other suz=mdmg city's would come to spend $your dollars m TemeculL(Hemet; Fatlbrook, Manrf % Wildomar, Rainbow Canyon, Lake Elsinore etc.) If WALMART is declined permits to start building in Temecula, you can bet Monists will be more lion happy to accommodate their plans to build. Would we want to push away a major anchor m our community? We would thmk not: ' Aieo, wilh the kind of tax revenue WALMART would bring to our city, we could finally gat the overpass v a so desperately need We all know it takes money to get saydiing done, eapeeiany now with gle eoaaomy just sbrtmg to Pull out of its slump. Thin k of the jobs an overpass could cxeate for the *ugghng oanstrrrctim workers. Not to mentim the many jobs WALMART would mate for $re many unemployed people in our area We really believe that WALMART coming to Temeaila, would be a community and make our fair city financially, t suet our stronger. Sincerely, nNO,2, 4ac� Mr. Mrs. J. Andersen RECEIVED FEB 1 01993 February 8,1993 Kerrie Anderson 39731 Barberry Temea* Ca 92591 Dear Mr. Thornhill, I am writing to you in regards to the proposed plan for WALMART coming to Temecula. I have been told that Isre are a few council members who are opposed to this hpPeMIzY� I urge you to consider the benefit that WALMART being in Temecula would bring. WALMART is the number 1 retmlar in America right now. Nadarom's is very close behind Think of the taco revenues WAL ART would bring to this city. At least one million dollars in tames would be collected from them in a years time Studies show that 30% of the shoppers coming to Temecsila.'s palm Plaza are Mmnefa residents. Just think of how many o&er• surrounding cMft would come to spend their dollars in Temeaila.Mmet, Fallbrook, Mee fee, Wildomar, Rainbow Canyao, Lake Elsinore str.) N WALMART is declined permits to start building in Temecula, you can bat Miarieta will be more than happy to acoanr nodate their plans to build Would we want to push away a major anchor in our community? I would think not: Also, with the kind of trot revenue WALMART would bring to our city, we could finally get the overpass we so desperately need We all know it !aloes money to get anylbing done, esPecialfj, now with the economy just starting to Pullout of its slump. Think of tt►e jobs an overpm could create for the struggling caastruction wartms. Not to manticn the many jobs WALMART would ca sate for the manY dyed People in our area I realty believe that WMALART coming to Temecula would be a great asset to our caammtmity and make our h it city financially stronger: Kerrie Anderson RECEIVED FEB 1 p 1993 A n s' d ............ .... . February 8,1993 Stephanie Bra2lk 26431 Ynez Rd # B Tememk Ca. 92591 Dear Planning Commission, I am writing to You m regards to the proposed plan for WALMART coming to Temecula I have been told that theca are a few council members who ffie opp�ed to this ing I urge you to consider the benefit$ that WALMART being in Temecula would WALMART is the number 1 mailer in America right now. Nmhft m's is very close behind Thigh of the tax revenues WALMART would bring to thin city. At least one million dollars in taaas would be collected from them in a years time. Studies show that 30% of &e shoppers coming to Temecula's Film Plaza are Murneta reudeats. Just think of how many o&er surrounding c[Ws would come tom &w dollars in TemeaAaMemek avfe Fallbrook, Mee, Wildomer, Rainbow Canyon, Flsinare etc.) If WALMART is declined pew to start building in Temecula, you can best Mmnetz will be more than hqW to accommodate &emir plans to build Would we want to push away a major anchor m our community? I would think not. Also, with the kind of tax revenue WAI.MART would bring to our city, we could finally get the overpass we so daWd* need. We an know it takes money to get anything done, especially now wi& the PUB out of its dump. Tbinkc of the jobs an e00nO� 8 to J ov+erpaas could create for the straggling construction wickets. Not to mention the many jobs WALMART would create for the many unemployed people in our area. I really behm"a that WALWART coming to Temeaila would be a great asset to our and make our lair city fiaancisity► strougm. February 8,1993 Mr.dt Mrs. Jack Andersen 39731 Barberry Temecula, Ca 92591 Dear Mr. Thornhill, RECEIVED F tB 1 61993 Ass d..... We KC are writ» ag to you in tegarch to the proposed plan for WALMART Coming to Temecula. We have been told that there are a few CourA members who are opposed to this whappening. We urge you to Consider the bene�tb that WALMART being in Temecula WALMART is the number 1 retailer in America tight now. Nordatrom s is very close behind Thick of the tax revenues WAIMMT would bring to this City. At least one million dollars m taxes would be collected fiom them m a years time. Studies show that 30% of the shoppers coming to Temecula's Palm Plaza am Mmn to residents. Just think of how many other surrounding Ws would Corse to spend their dollars m Temeaila (Hemet; Fallbro* Mmifee, Wddomar, RaWmw Canyon, Lake Elsinore etc.) If WALMART is declined perrm to stet budding in Temecula, you can bet Munieta will be more than happy to accommodate their plans to build Would we want too push away a major anchor in our community? We would think not Also, with the kind of tea revenue WALMART would bring to our City, we could f ashy get the overpm we so desperstely need We an know it takes money to get anythng done, eqx caslly now with the ecm xny just starting to Pull out of its slump. Think of the jobs an overpass Could create for the struggling fiction workacs. Not to mention the many jobs WALMART would c.+eate for the many unemployed people in our area. We really believe that WALMART coming to Temecula would be a groat asset to our Community and maim our fair city financially stranger. Sincerely, Mr. dt Mrs. J. Anderson RECEIVED FEB 1 C 1993 Ans'd,........... February 8,1993 Stephanie Bn glia 26431 Ynez Rd. #B Temecula, Ca 92591 Dear Mr Thornhill, I am writing to you m regards to the proposed plan for WALMART doming to Temecula I have been told that thane are a few council mambas who are opposed to this b ing I urge you to consider the benefs that WAT24ART being in Temecula would WM.MART is the number 1 retailer is America right now. Nordstrom's is vary close behind. Think of the tax revenues WALMART would bring to this city. At least coo million dollars m tamme would be collected fimm them m a yaws time. Studies show that 30% of the shoppers coming to Temeculas palm Plaza am Mmn to residents. Just think of how many other sua=oumding cWx would ame to spy their dollars is TommA , Fallbrook, Memfe% Wildomar, Rainbow Canyon, Lake Els ina�m etc. If W k decimed permits to start building m Temecula, you can bet Mumeta will be � �T is happy to W - - amn date their pl ms to bmld Would we want to push away a major anchor m our community? I would d mk not: Also, with the kind of tax revmue WAIMART would bring to our city, we could finally get the overpass one so desperately need We all know it takes money to get anything done, exPe.;ally now with the Pull out of its sharp. Think of the jobs an ovacpam could m, ode struggling to crostruction workers. Not to meatian the many jobs WALMART would cxnate for the many unemplayed people in our area I rally believe that WAIMART oomiog to Temecula would be a great asset to our oammunity, and make our fair city fiaancia1ly sbmgm ATTACHMENT NO. 14 CORRESPONDENCE R:1SISTAFFRM243PP.PC 612193 klb 54 COMA! Y Zkwoo rAw sT!+ �I WO w► ♦ a s � w � — f NASLAND ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEERING - SURVEYING - LAND PLANNING 393-002.1 April 8, 1992 Kemper Real Estate Management 28765 Single Oak Drive Suite 100 Temecula, CA 92590 Attn: Darice Roesner Dear Darice: Nasland Engineering has reviewed the Wal-Mart portion of your Conceptual Site Plan for the Palm Plaza II shopping development, as requested by representatives from Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. The parking and drive aisle configurations maximize the use of available space for parking, while providing the most efficient traffic flow pattern around the Wal-Mart parking lot. However, it has come to our attention that the City of Temecula staff has requested that your engineering consultant add a cross -driveway to shorten the overall unbroken length of the drive aisles. Nasland Engineering has discussed this option with Bruce Kemmet, Engineering Manager with Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and must advise against the cross -driveway for two reasons. First, in our experience, this approach tends to increase the number of trips each automobile makes around the parking area near the front of the store as shoppers tend to search several aisles for a parking stall near the front of the store. This area has a high concentration of pedestrians as well as the required handi-cap parking stalls and the unnecessary increase in traffic will increase the possibility of an injury to shoppers as they attempt to enter and exit the store. The longer aisles tend to cause shoppers to park sooner and not traverse the parking lot unnecessarily. Second, the cross drive approach causes an increase in the number of "auto verses auto" confrontations in the parking lot along with vision problems caused by required landscaping that would increase the possibility of accidents. Also, this configuration would cause confusion to drivers at to which direction the traffic should flow. These situations result in a lower level of safety than would be advisable and the cross driveway should be avoided. Sincerely, 4Z� S4:� Arthur Scott ," AS/jr Sr. Design Engineer 3359 Chicago Avenue. Riverside, Calitornia 02507 9 000-784-34u0 • FAX 000-784-33o8 ATTACHMENT NO. 13 DRIVE AISLE LETTER FROM NASLAND ENGINEERING (APRIL 8, 1992) R:MSTAFFRPTX243PP.PC 6/2/93 Wb 53 Kemper Real Estate Management Company 3 Ynez Road, Suite 200, Temecula, California 92591 • 714/676-7290 • Fax: 7141694-5687 April 23, 1993 Mr. Matthew Fagan Assistant Planner City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 RE: EIR #340, C.Z. #93-0043, TENTATIVE MAP #27323 PLOT PLAN #243, AND VARIANCE #9 Dear Mr. Fagan: I Real 2ST7M L RECEIVED APR 2 3 1993 M/■ OF ,LUi.i We respectfully request that you remove the above referenced cases from the May 3, 1993 Planning Commission agenda and notify the previously noticed property owners accordingly. The reason for this request is to allow us more time to work with City staff to further refine several elements of the plot plan. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Si ely, Csaba F. Ko Vice President CFK:mdf ATTACHMENT NO. 12 CONTINUANCE REQUEST (APRIL 23, 1993) RAS%STAFFRM243PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 52 a. b. C. Include tree/shrub choices which are listed in the future Regional Center Specific Plan (SP 263). d. Provide a number of parking spaces which are consistent with site plan. Revise the shading percentages. e. f. h. i. Include a walkway for people to enter the rear of Shops 1. 4. Amended elevations which incorporate the following: a. Enhance the east elevation of Wal-Mart (the rear of the site). Provide more articulation to break up the blank expanse of wall. I:..:..:..::.......... h.:::....: C. Include doors on the west elevation if the tire center is a drive through. d. Change the words "metal fence" to read "wrought iron" fence. ,—R:ISISTAFFRMU3PP-2.LTR 4MM kb e. Call out which stucco accent/trim colors will be used and where. Provide a color rendering for the Wal-Mart. f. Specify the material(s) used at the entrance ways (below and adjacent to the doors). g- h. Remove the gap behind the grill feature on the pilaster. i. Provide a roof plan. All roof -mounted equipment will need to be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of one thousand three - hundred twenty (1,320) feet. J • Furnish greater detail of what will occur in the space between the tire and garden centers. 5. The following additional items need to be addressed: a. Provide details of all enhanced paving treatments. b. Provide details of all architectural features on the site. C. Provide details of comer of Ynez and Winchester Roads (water feature, etc.). Include a rendering for this site. d. Provide details of entry monumentation. e. Provide detail of how trash enclosure will be screened. RAMSTAFFRM243PP-2.LTR 4121193 k1b Planning Department 1. An amended site plan which incorporates the following items: a. +p.e�:::: cer h.:::.:.,..:..:....:.:...::::...:..:.......:.:. :;::::.:...:......::.:.:...... 1.1 C. H e. f. 9- requre::.edeletion of..v.:.:..h::::::.:.,.A,.:::.:::;.:::> Parking spaces along the perimeter. No structures or Parking may encroach into this area with the exception of overhangs, trellises, patios, etc. Delete one (1) monument sign per street frontage, only one sign is permitted per street frontage for centers as per Section 19.4 of Ordinance No. 348. dimensions. h. Add pedestrian linkages as follows: from the individual pads to perimeter sidewalk, Pad 1 to Shops 1, Ynez Road to Shops 3 Amy :. ♦... n�.�:.i.r�:'�.ic�___!•_:.::.:;.ilY:i::.:r:: ... .. ..__.--__ , ,......:. .. _ ::'•.{/�F2L�1' .1.'}.i .. ::•iff i• Demarcate areas where shopping carts will be stored, both in the parking lot and location during the day/night. J.' Specify the location of bike racks for Pads 1,2,3,and 6, plus Shops 1 and 3. k. Demarcate a two hundred (200) foot stacking from the order box for Pad No. 2. 1• Specify the location of benches, li ht standards an furniture. ;;,:.;::::<::;;::::::::::.. g d other tt:III M. —. R-kMSTAFFRFM43PP-2.LTR V21/93 klb n. Place a note on the site plan describing what will be located where the future expansion area is until it is ultimately developed. o. Specify how the main entrance off of Winchester Road functions. Illustrate movements of autos, trucks, etc. p. Reduce the one-way entrance off of Winchester Road from twenty-eight (28) feet to a lesser width which is acceptable to both the Department of Public Works and the Riverside County Fire Department. mx.. s..,... s«: ......++:..�:.t..ixu:a-.•r.:zcv:;a.::•:.•:F?,ixsrSar::4.,::t-rvi•:.•:::4x: S: r•a.•;a:i::x::ta .. .;. .. .. . :: •:a: r. Place a vicinity map on the site plan. S. Indicate overall dimensions of the property. t. Specify dimensions of setbacks and dimension of buildings. U. Specify lighting system (street, outdoor). V. Enumerate all revisions in the revision block. w. Place the words "Amendment No. 3" in a conspicuous area on the site plan. 2. An amended tentative map which incorporates the following: a. Gross and net acreage of all of the parcels. b. Grading which is consistent with the proposed grading for Specific Plan No. 263. C. The 25 foot Transportation Corridor shown as an easement. d. A lot line, shown about 300 feet east of Ynez Road; the current eastern boundary of Lot 115. e. Enumerate all revisions in the revision block. f. Place the words "Amendment No. 3" in a conspicuous area on the map. 3. An amended conceptual landscape plan which incorporates the following: R:MSTAFFRPr1243PP-2.LTR 4121/93 kib _1\ ATTACHMENT NO. 11 STAFF CONCERNS/ISSUES OUTSTANDING FOR AMENDMENT NO. 3 RASISTAFFPJM243PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 51 WAL=MARY 0 LFEB 2 B 1999 WAL-MART STORES, INC. • 701 SOUTH WALTON BLVD. • BENTONVILLE, AR 72716 • 501-273-4000 Direct Dial No. (501) 273-4262 February 19, 1992 Debbie Ubnoske, Sr. Planner CITY OF TEMECULA 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: Wal-Mart Loading Docks Plot Plan 243, TPM 27323 Dear Ms. Ubnoske: Direct Zip Code 72716-0480 Greg Erickson of Bedford Properties has conveyed your concerns about the City ordinance loading dock requirements for our store. Apparently, your ordinance is based on square footage. Wal-Mart has over 1700 stores nationwide; 20 in California of the same size proposed for Temecula. Unlike other retailers who receive from several distributors, Wal-Mart utilizes a unique computerized distribution control center. This centralized distribution system allows Wal-Mart deliveries to be scheduled in a more efficient manner, making use of off-peak hours, averting stacking problems and fewer deliveries overall compared to other retailers. While Wal-Mart has not conducted studies, through experience we have found this system to work. Our goal is to have truck deliveries made quickly, without waiting since this reduces operating costs. We have noted that Bedford has allowed for over -flow truck parking on the site plan. While this is unnecessary with our distribution system, back-up alternatives are always welcome. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Very truly yours, WAL-MART STORES, INC. V't-A . V"/ Robert M. Bedard Real Estate Manager RMB:mjb cc: Greg Erickson I- ATTACHMENT NO. 10 LETTER REGARDING LOADING DOCKS (FEBRUARY 19, 1992) R:1SISTAFFRM243PP.PC 6/2/93 W1, 50 If you have any questions or comments, please contact Matthew Fagan at (909) 694-6400. Debbie Ubnoske Senior Planner cc: Ray Casey, Department of Public Works Greg Ericson, Kemper Real Estate R:IS=AFFRPn243PP-2.LTR 3n5/93 kb 6. The following additional items need to be addressed: a. Provide details of all enhanced paving treatments. b. Provide details of all architectural features on the site. C. Provide details of corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads (water feature, etc.). Include a rendering for this site. d. Provide details of entry monumentation. e. Provide detail of how trash enclosure will be screened. Public Works Department 7. The Plot Plan shall be revised to indicate the following: a. More dimensions shall be shown e.g., street radii, street widths (32'), parking lots typical dimensions, etc. b. Stacking distance at entrances to Ynez and Winchester shall be identified and analyzed in the site specific traffic study addendum. C. It is recommended that the long drive aisles in front of Walmart be split with at least one additional north/south drive aisle. d. Separate truck receiving area from through vehicular traffic behind Shop 2, per our discussion in the DRC meeting. e. An adequate turning radius or knuckle is required for truck turning movements behind Shop 3. f. Need to redesign skewed intersection of through drive with parking aisle near Pad 3. g.. Verify adequacy of truck turning radius in the street behind Walmart pad. h. Drive aisle immediately north of 48' main interior street shall be a minimum of 24' wide and striped (arrows) for two-way traffic. L Show all proposed interior stop sign locations. J• Eliminate direct access to the easterly parking area north of Shop 1 from the entrance. k. Increase stacking distance in the drive through for Pad 1. R:%SXSTAFFRFn243PP-2.LTR 3M/93 k1b 1. Dedicate additional right-of-way for deceleration lane along Winchester Road or reduce width if adequate. Access and configuration to be approved by Caltrans. In. Adequate right-of-way shall be dedicated for sidewalk behind the deceleration lane. n. Sidewalks shall be provided, within the site and public rights of way to incorporate for a pedestrian friendly environment. o. Stacking distance at the drive through shall be indicated. p. The Traffic Study shall be updated to specify the extent of required off site improvements considering this plot plan proposal only per Applicant's request. 8. The following comments shall be complied with on the tentative parcel map. a. Apricot shall be vacated prior to recordation of the map. b. A drainage study and Preliminary Soils Report shall be submitted. C. Bus Bay locations shall be determined upon RTA's approval. d. Provision for off site improvements shall be conditioned per the requirements of the Environmental Impact Report and the Urban Core Projects traffic studies indicating the required first year or 18 % of the development of The Regional Center. e. Reciprocal access, parking and drainage agreements shall be approved and recorded prior to map recordation. Staff will be expediting the processing of the above referenced plans. The Wal-Mart elevations will be addressed at this time; all other Commercial, Shops and Pads (location and size) will be recommended for conceptual approval. Design guidelines will be required for the remainder Commercial, Shop and Pad sites. Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 2, Variance No. 9, Change of Zone No. PA93-0043, Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 2 are deemed to be incomplete at this time. Please submit ten (10) copies of the amended site plan, three (3) copies of the amended conceptual landscape plan, five (5) copies of elevations and floor plans and five (5) copies of amended grading plans along with the other requested materials to the Planning Department. Upon submittal of these items, Staff will conduct its review and prepare the item for a Planning Commission hearing. RASISTAFFRFM43PP-2.LTR 3/25/93 klb 2. An amended tentative map which incorporates the following: a. Gross and net acreage of all of the parcels. b. Grading which is consistent with the proposed grading for Specific Plan No. 263. C. The 25 foot Transportation Corridor shown as an easement. d. A lot line, shown about 300 feet east of Ynez Road; the current eastern boundary Of Lot 115. e. Enumerate all revisions in the revision block. f. Place the words "Amendment No. 3" in a conspicuous area on the map. 3. An amended conceptual landscape plan which incorporates the following: a. All elements must be consistent with the site plan and Specific Plan No. 263. b. Driveway entrance landscape designs which are consistent with Specific Plan No. 263 - ie. seventy-five (75) foot radius cut for main entrances and forty-five (45) foot radius cuts for minor entrances. C. Include tree/shrub choices which are listed in the future Regional Center Specific Plan (SP 263). d. Provide a number of parking spaces which are consistent with site plan. Revise the shading percentages. e. Enhance areas in front of Shops 1, Commercial 1, Wal-Mart, Shops 2, Commercial 2, Shops 3 and Pads 1-6 with shrubs, trees, planters, etc. Include a greater variety of plant types. f. Enhance all Pedestrian walkways with more trees to provide a shade canopy, and planters to make these areas distinctive. Allow for pedestrian entrance/exit at suitable intervals (if these areas are enclosed by curbing). g. Provide more trees/tree wells in parking lot (more than 1 per 60', 1 per 30' is recommended). h. Include a walkway for people to enter the rear of Shops 1. L Enhance the perimeter of the site with more landscaping treatment. This applies to the area where the parking spaces were deleted from the site plan. R:1S=AFFRFrU43PP-2.LTR 3l25/93 kib 4. 5. Amended elevations which incorporate the following: a. Enhance the east elevation of Wal-Mart (the rear of the site). Provide more articulation to break up the blank expanse of wall. b. Use of split face veneer. Demarcate where Split face No.1 and No. 2 will be used. c. Include doors on the west elevation if the tire center is a drive through. d. Change the words "metal fence" to read "wrought iron" fence. e. Call out which stucco accent/trim colors will be used and where. Provide a color rendering for the Wal-Mart. f. Specify the material(s) used at the entrance ways (below and adjacent to the doors). g. Include a four (4) inch tile feature at five (5) foot high level along the west elevation of Wal-Mart at a maximum of ten (10) foot intervals. h. Remove the gap behind the grill feature on the pilaster. i. Provide a roof plan. All roof -mounted equipment will need to be screened from the ground elevation view to a minimum sight distance of one thousand three - hundred twenty (1,320) feet. j. Furnish greater detail of what will occur in the space between the tire and garden centers. An Amended Change of Zone exhibit which incorporates the following: Delete the reference to Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323. Demarcate the precise Change of Zone location. Include a legal description for the Change of Zone request which is consistent with the area depicted on the exhibit. Call out existing land use and proposed land use. Add the date that the exhibit was prepared. Demarcate the area which is R-R and the area which is A-2-20. UMSTAFFRM243PP-2.LTR 3n5/93 klb Citof. Temecula Y 43174 Business Park Drive March 24, 1993 Mr. Barry Burnell T & B Planning Consultants 3242 Halladay, Suite 100 Santa Ana, CA 92705 '-�Cd 312.Lipf A3 8=6" • Temecula. California 92590 (909) 694-1989 • FAX (909) 694-1999 SUBJECT: Development Review Committee (DRC) Meeting Comments For Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 2, Variance No. 9, Change of Zone No. PA93-0043, and Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, Amendment No. 2 located at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads Dear Mr. Burnell: This letter shall serve to provide comments relative to Plot Plan No. 243, Amendment No. 2, Variance No. 9, Change of Zone No. PA93-0043, Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323, —,kmendment No. 2. As a result of the Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting on .larch 24, 1993, the following items need to be submitted to the Planning Department in order for Staff to continue its review of the subject project: Planning Department 1. An amended site plan which incorporates the following items: a. Provide sidewalks adjacent to the streets on the southern and eastern borders. b. Increase the landscape area along Winchester and Ynez by at least 10'. This will require the deletion of parking spaces along the perimeter. No structures or Parking may encroach into this area with the. exception of overhangs, trellises, patios, etc. C. Relocate the sidewalk (at least 8' from curb) on Winchester and along Ynez from Overland to Winchester (North). d. Create a north/south drive aisle separating the expanse of parking (east/west) in front of the Wal-Mart. e. Stagger the building footprints for Shops 1, Commercial 1, Shops 2, Commercial 2, and Shops 3 to create depth and interest for the motorist and pedestrian. RAMSTAFFRFMOPP-2.LTR 3/25M kib f. 'Delete one (1) monument sign per street frontage. Only one sign is permitted per street frontage for centers as per Section 19.4 of Ordinance No. 348. g. Increase the number of parking lot landscaping diamonds (more than every 60'). Provide typical dimensions. h. Add pedestrian linkages as follows: from the individual pads to perimeter sidewalk, Pad 1 to Shops 1, Ynez Road to Shops 3, through the center (west to east between Wal-Martand Shops 2) and behind the center along the street. i. Demarcate areas where shopping carts will be stored, both in the parking lot and location during the day/night. j . Specify the location of bike racks for Pads 1, 2, 3, and 6, plus Shops 1 and 3. k. Demarcate a two hundred (200) foot stacking from the order box for Pad No. 2. 1. Specify the location of benches, trash receptacles, light standards and other furniture. M. Provide a phasing plan for development and improvements. n. Place a note on the site plan describing what will be located where the future expansion area is until it is ultimately developed. o. Specify how the main entrance off of Winchester Road functions. Illustrate movements of autos, trucks, etc. P. Reduce the one-way entrance off of Winchester Road from twenty-eight (28) feet to a lesser width which is acceptable to both the Department of Public Works and the Riverside County Fire Department. q. Delete any reference of a service station at the southwest corner. r. Place a vicinity map on the site plan. S. Indicate overall dimensions of the property. t. Specify dimensions of setbacks and dimension of buildings. U. Specify lighting system (street, outdoor). V. Enumerate all. revisions in the revision block. W. Place the words "Amendment No. 3" in a conspicuous area on the site plan. RAMSTAFFRFI1243PP-2.LTR 3/25/93 klb ATTACHMENT NO. 9 DRC COMMENTS (MARCH 24, 1993) R:\SISTAFFRPT\243PP,PC 6/2/93 klb 49 Linda Fahey: Question, does all of them have to be designed with parking in front and box in back? Gary, is there a way to put box in front and parking in back. Gary, they are around 140,000 square feet users, very large buildings, the closer to the front the more imposing it becomes. It's a design problem, they require a Fwy Access. It probably should be on side by Costco. Beef up corner entry treatment. Dennis Chiniaeff: Bigger issue is not Wal-Mart or proposed use here, what do we intend for Specific Plan for this area. Is it as it says, a Regional Center? There are many concepts of Malls. That is the basic decision. Do we want to have an additional power center on the other side of the street, and something special behind it, or as you enter the Community, something special. That is where we are headed. I hope the Specific Plan addresses both kinds of issues. Something special for the Community. Linda Fahey: Interesting that Site plans are going through at same time as SP. Gary: Plot Plan cannot proceed until the Specific Plan is approved. Dennis: Can SP be approved without the General Plan? Yes, per Gary, you make a finding that it is likely to be consistent with GP. Billie: Two other possibilities that would work equally as well. Turn plan and put Wal-Mart at upper corner it would be of some value across from Costco, or flip it so Wal-Mart would be at back of plan. Either one of those options would seem to make a far more agreeable approach to the City. Steve Ford: Major entry points to the City, People need to have a favorable image as your coming off freeway, it is the entrance to City. Alternate without Wal-Mart, bringing the amenity from the back to the front, moving the things that are not the amenity to the sides and the rear. Dennis, To have something special as the entry to the City. Barry, would this function, If shifted? Closer to residential section. Billie, Bedford has done a fine job with Rancho California with the Hotel, and the office building as an entrance to the City, and it would seem to do just as fine a job at this intersection, and so far that hasn't happened. Does not want to see big blue sign as your enter City. Gary, I was insistent on trying to create a pedestrian core that was relatively away from the major corridor, so that you could create a sense of place, not on a major road. I directed them to create that kind of setting. It's difficult, with large right of way median on Ynez Road, corner was mayor concern, we would like to move big box uses away from that corner and reserve it for something a little more special but I don't know what that is, and some of that direction is going to have to come from the :ommission. RAWIMBERVGW1NUTESW1NWHCVR 5127193 klb 5 Linda Fahey: Way to design big box users, need more creativity. Need to screen with landscaping, berms, hills, a lot more than on other side of street. Barry, landscaping and trees would mitigate. Billie, big users need big signs and you can't mitigate those signs. When you enter the City, it is not what you should see first. On a large structure, you a large will have a large sign. Barry, you will not have a giant pole sign. Dennis: The hardest part of this project is how to determine how to handle the boxes, My opinion, the hardest part is to have the wherewithal to say no to the first guy who wants set to the tone. That is why the issue of looking at what the Regional Center is really going to be, in the Temecula Community, is the issue to look at. General Plan is setting the Community's policies about how this property is going to be developed, setting the tone of what the community is looking for, This is one of the most major properties, at that point in time you have to make that decision, then everything else follows on behind. To prematurely judge what it is going to be, through the adoption of the Specific Plan, before you adopted the GP, may well short circuit the approval of Community. CV: Provide recreational activities in where the people are, rather than the edge, which tend to be more community oriented. Park is in flood basin. Don't see that park as a major offset as a provision of recreational activities for that project. Move some of that out into the residential areas. WH: Make sure transportation and circulation ties together with everyone else. Land Use compatible. Linda Fahey, High density along Margarita, redistribute where high density is located, Puts additional apartments along Margarita. This concern has been mentioned on everything Commission has done so far. SP high density. Design some different types of design, be more creative, alternative products. We already have quite a few plain complexes. Cavanaugh: I would like to add something on a conceptual basis. Adding something on the GP. Although there is a requirement that the SP has to be consistent with the GP, a more broader investigation analysis is that the SP is basically just that, it's a SP, and what it does is, it implements the General Plan. We don't have a General Plan, we have guidelines that we have with SWAP, which may or may not, be our future GP, but conceptually, I think the commission needs to be aware that when you are looking at SP, you are looking at well, how's that going to implement the general, big picture. I hear some of the Commissioners say, what is it going to look like, what do we really want to see in all these specific areas. The first question is, what does your general plan want to be like, first. Then, is this going to implement and carry out the Policies of that GP? If your answer to that questions is yes, the SP goes forward, RAWIMBERVGW1NUTESWWWHCVR 55/27/83 k!b 6 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 4, 199 �- - the possible necessity for a school site. urban form. the location of the specific plan to the Murrieta City boundaries. • concurrent processing of tentative maps with the specific plan. John Meyer presented a update on the general plan process. Gary King briefly commented on TCSD's concerns with the proposed park site in the Campos Verde specific plan. Chairman Hoagland declared a recess at 7:00 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 7:10 P.M. Barry Brunnell, T&B Planning Consultants, 3242 Halliday Street, Santa Ana, representing Bedford Properties, provided the project summary on the three separate Specific Plan applications. Bob Davis, Wilbur Smith Associates, traffic engineer for all three projects, addressed the traffic aspects of the three Specific Plans and how they tie into the City's general plan effort. The following concerns were expressed by the Commission: Commissioner Blair expressed a concern that the potential location of the WalMart store is at a major intersection (gateway) into the community and suggested that staff try to reposition that store within the development area for less visual impact. Gary Thornhill advised that staff continues to address the location of the "big box" users within the development area. Commissioner Chiniaeff expressed the following concerns: that the location of the recreational amenities in the Campos Verde specific plan in closer to the residential development. transportation and circulation in the Winchester Hills development ties together with the entire specific plan. Commissioner Fahey expressed the following concerns: Potential impact of the location of high density housing in the area of Margarita which already has abundant high density housing. detail on alternative designs for high density housing. PCMINS/4/92 .6- 6/12/92 Barry, County plan shows Commercial. You reassess when project is being built. Ford, Did you model trips on General Kearney, what impact it does have to North and No. West by not allowing those trips to go up through that area. Please do that, and next presentation, have those trips. Bob Davis, Mass Transit and vacancy rate were not included and this is worst traffic situation. Fahey, did not like design, looks like a giant parking lot. Concept works, design doesn't appeal to her. Barry said uses and structures could be shifted around. Large site and long period of build out. Landscape plans appear smaller than they are. 20 year time frame. Hoagland, WH three parcels, not a part. Why? Barry, not owned by Mesa or Bedford. County said to plan these parcel as they were a part owned, we will provide adequate access to those parcels. They have been contacted and they do not want to sell to Bedford. Billie Blair, Address times and phasing, Barry, individual projects would be assessed when major tenants came in. Demographics would set time table. Billie, This is a window to City, and the project, Wal-Mart, would be in the Regional Center, how does it make sense, at what location? At Corner of Winchester and Ynez corner. Major arterial. Mega foods, signs, and doesn't feel that is what she would like that representation of the City to be. Barry, wide landscape zones, significant entry treatments at this location. Created opportunities for theme buildings. Usually big box users are at front. A lot of shading landscaping to mitigate view. Billie, Wal-Mart would not be a good candidate for corner view. Gary: Difficult design problem. Big Box user uses tend to congregate around one another. We were, and are, concerned with Wal-Mart because of future views, however; I do think because of the pattern of development along this corridor, that this is probably the most logical place to continue that kind of pattern, big box users. That is just an opinion. Make this Center a pedestrian oriented project. Most likely the place for big box users. It is a good looking design so far, but we still have some concerns on the view impact. Billie: Does a Wal Mart require that kind of visibility, Gary? Do they require that kind of visibility? Gary, I can't answer for the corporation, but it doesn't hurt. RAWIMSERVGIMWUTESIMINWHCVR 5/27/93 Wb 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 MINUTES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP (MAY 4, 1992) RAS%STAFFPJM243PP.PC 6/2/93 Mb 48 Plot Plan No. 243 Page 3 Landscape Plan 1. Tree wells in interior parking lot cannot be treated as minimum landscape area requirement. Provide calculation M of landscaping on site. 2. How will vacant land(s) to Southwest and to the East (the rear portion of the site) be treated? 3. Pink flowering locust has "aggressive roots", and may not be an acceptable parking lot tree. Site Design 1. Cluster pads 1, 2, and 3 to the northerly portion of the site. 2. Orient shops 2, Circuit City, and shops 3 in an east/west fashion. 3. Bring parking closer to source of the uses. 4. Provide pedestrian corridors, live w/specimen trees from intersection to Wal- mart which accentuates the view. SIPLANNINGX27323.TPM ATTACHMENT "B" PLANNING STAFFS COMMENTS FOR JANUARY 3, 1992 The City of Temecula Planning Department has reviewed the amended plans for Plot Plan No. 243 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323 and has the following comments: Plot Plan No 43 1. Site Plan a. A revision block needs to be included on the site plan. b. Amendment numbers shall be listed on the site plan. C. A 25 foot transportation corridor easement does not need to be included along Ynez Road. d. Bicycle racks must be shown on the site plan per Ordinance No. 348. e. Trash bin enclosures need to be indicated on the site plan. f. 24 foot wide drive aisles are required per Ordinance No. 348 (Section 18.12(7)). 9. Check setbacks for pads 1, 2 and 3 (they must be consistent with the Specific Plan). h. Delineate proposed property lines on the site plan. i. Site Plan and elevations are not consistent. j. Parking conflicts exist as a result of the proposed configuration. k. Create additional internal traffic route. Circulation layout is not acceptable to the Public Works Department. I. Entry point west of "shops 2" is not permitted and shall be removed from the site plan. M. Delineate loading spaces for pads 1-5. n. Loading space requirements: 1. Wal-Mart 7 2. Circuit City 3 3. Shops 1 1 4. Shops 2 4 5. Shops 3 1 6. Pad 1 1 7. Pad 2 1 8. Pad 3 1 9. Pad 4 1 10. Pad 5 2 51PLANN1NG127323.TPM Plot Plan No. 243 Page 2 o. Entry on Winchester is a major entry, must be consistent with entry on Ynez Road per Specific Plan. 1. Landscape Plan a. Accent trees along major drive aisles should create a path -a sense of "enclosure". b. Entry monument wall on landscape plan. C. Provide landscaping along east elevation of Circuit City. Tentative Parcel Man No 1. A revision block must be included on the map. 2. Amendment number's shall be listed on the map. 3. Show future 25 foot transportation corridor along Winchester Road. 4. The entrance on Ynez Road shall be shown and wholly constructed as a portion of phase I development. Previous D.R.C. Comments The following numbered comments from the previous D.R.C. meeting have not been addressed relative to the project resubmittal: Site Plan 1. Parking spaces 1837 required, 2094 provided. 2. Identify existing uses which are adjacent to the site. 3. All required drive aisles are required to be minimum 24 feet wide. 4. Backing movements are not permitted into major drive aisles. 5. Delineate method of transition from parking spaces to future development on the south side of the site. 6. Concern with circulation conflicts at carious intersections, especially lane adj. to main drive aisle to the north. 7. Check loading areas for pads 1-5. 8. Providing pedestrian circulation to the uses and, between the uses. Provide a sidewalk the length of the drive aisle directly in front of Wal-Mart. 9. Provide North/South and East/West drive aisle within the parking lot. 10. Denote handicapped spaces, bicycle racks, trash enclosures and shopping cart bins. S\PLANNINGU7323.TPM A Ronald J. Parks Mayor Patricia H. Birdsall Mayor Pro Tem Karel F. Llndemans Councilmember Peg Moore Councilmember J. Sal Munoz Counalmember David F. Dixon City Manager (714) 694-1989 FAX (714) 694-1999 January 6, 1992 Mr. Greg Erickson Bedford Development Company 28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 200 Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: Plot Plan No. 243/Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323 Dear Greg: This letter will serve to provide direction relative to Plot Plan No. 243/Tentative Parcel Map No. 27323. As a result of our meeting on January 3, 1992, the following materials will need to be supplied to staff in order to continue our review of the subject project: 1. Three copies of the conceptual site plan, tentative parcel map and landscape plan, which incorporate the changes requested by staff. These changes were enumerated in the meeting and have been included as Attachment "A" to this letter. In addition, you noted changes requested by staff on a site plan. It is requested that you return this site plan with your resubmittal. Upon resubmittal, staff shall utilize these items as a "checklist" in reviewing the plans. 2. A justified rationale for the number of loading spaces that are requested by individual users on the site which differ from the number of spaces required per Ordinance No. 348. This rationale should include quantifiable data from the users which would warrant any deviation from the ordinance. 3. An application required width addition, you request. submittal and payment of fees for a variance of the of one way drive aisles from 24 feet to 18 feet. In must supply adequate justification for the variance CID! p%wokin%7e8oe," These applications a- a still deemed to be incomplete. Upon resubmittal, staff shall conduct a review of the amended conceptual site plan, tentative parcel map and landscape plan and arrange a meeting with you to discuss any concerns. Should you have any questions, please call Matthew Fagan at (714) 694-6400. Sincerely, atthew: a n Assistant Planner Gary Thornhill Director of Planning klb Enclosure S%OLANNINr%?43PPITP ATTACHMENT NO. 7 LETTER DATED JANUARY 6, 1992 R:%SISTAFFPJM243PP.PC 8/2/83 Wb 47 ATTACHMENT "A" DRC COMMENTS FOR NOVEMBER 21, 1991 Plot Plan No. 243 and Parcel Map No. 27323 Comments and Concerns 1. Parking spaces 1648 required, 2227 provided. 2. How will truck access be provided to the rear of the site? 3. Identify existing uses which are adjacent to the site. 4. Provide clarification for activities at rear of the development (adjacent). 5. Show a 25 foot wide transportation corridor easement on Winchester Road. 6. Loading spaces behind shops 2 and 3 are inadequate, utilizing required drive aisle for ingress and egress. 7. All required drive aisles are required to be minimum 24 feet wide. 8. Backing movements are not permitted into major drive aisles. 9. Delineate method of transition from parking spaces to future development on the south side of the site. 10. Concern with circulation conflicts at carious intersections, especially lane adj. to main drive aisle to the north. 11. Check loading areas. 12. Providing pedestrian circulation to the uses and between the uses. Provide a sidewalk the length of the drive aisle directly in front of Wal-Mart. 13. Prove North/South and East/West drive aisle within the parking lot. 14. Denote handicapped spaces, bicycle racks, trash enclosures and shopping cart bins. Landscape Plan 1. Landscape plan and site plan are inconsistent. 2. Tree wells in interior parking lot cannot be treated as minimum landscape area requirement. 3. How will vacant land(s) to Southwest and to the East (the rear portion of the site) be treated? 4. Pink flowering locust has "aggressive roots", and may not be an acceptable parking lot tree. 5. What are the vacant areas around pads 3. 6. Landscape finger is needed west of pad 3. 7. Landscape plan should delineate parking on north side of pad 4. 8. Minimum planter dimension shall be 5 feet (per ordinance). MPLANNINW43COMM.PP Page 2 DRC Comments Site Desion 1. Cluster pads 1, 2, and 3 to the northerly portion of the site. 2. Orient shops 2, Circuit City, and shops 3 in an east/west fashion. 3. Bring parking closer to source of the uses. 4. Provide pedestrian corridors, live w/specimen trees from intersection to Wal-mart which accentuates the view. Other 1. Provide Staff with AQMD ride -share plan. SIPLANNINGI243COMM. PP ATTACHMENT NO. 6 DRC COMMENTS (NOVEMBER 21, 1991) R:%SISTAFFPJM243PP.PC 6/2/83 Wb 46 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 EXHIBITS R:%SISTAFFRFn243PP.PC 6/2/93 Wb 45 BIrE''i'C! LOCAL gG$MCaC �E%TG2NBBRS ............... CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION WITHIN PRESENT OR PROPOSED STATE RIGHT OF WAY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR POTENTIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE ( I.E.ASBESTOS, PETROCHEMICALS, ETC.) AND MITIGATED AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF REGULATORY AGENCIES. WHEN PLANS ARE SUBMITTED, PLEASE CONFORM TQ THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ATTACHED "HANDOUT". THIS WILL EXPEDITE THE REVIEW PROCESS AND TIME REQUIRED FOR PLAN CHECK. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT. ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL 00 NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM, CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA. ANY MEASURES NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA THAT NECESSITATES THEM. CONSIDERATION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE PROVISION, OR FUTURE PROVISION, OF SIGHILIZATION AND LIGHTING OF THE INTERSECTION OF AND THE STATE HIGHWAY WHEN 1MRRANTS ARE MET. IT APPEARS THAT THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM OF THE AREA. ANY MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE IMPACTS SHALL BE INCLUDED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY IS INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA MASTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHWAYS ELIGIBLE FOR OFFICIAL SCENIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY MAY WISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY. THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY, AND DEVELOPMENT IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCENIC HIGHWAY CONCEPT. IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE LEVELS ADJACENT TO HEAVILY TRAVELLED HIGHWAYS. LAND DEVELOPMENT, IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS CONCERN, MAY REQUIRE SPECIAL NOISE ATTENUATION MEASURES. DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANY NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION. PLEASE STNI?`:'.THE ` =TENS <'CHECII3 BS�OWpf'1'O' CALTRANS DISTRICT 8 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BRANCH P.O. Box 231 ' / SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92402 r A COPY OF ANY CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR REVISED APPROVAL. _to/ A COPY OF ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY UPON RECORDATION OF THE MAP. ANY PROPOSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY. A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY. V A CHECK PRINT OF THE PARCEL OR TRACT MAP. A CHECK PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY. ---it/,,A CHECK PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WHEN AVAILABLE. Date: April 13, 1993 Riv-79-R2 498 (Co-Rte-PM) TPM 27323 (Your Reference) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was developed for Highway 79 (Winchester Road) in this area and was signed by representatives of both Caltrans and the City of Temecula in 1991. The MOU called for 1/4 mile intersection spacing for both sides of Highway 79 from I-15 to Margarita Road. Limited access driveways (i.e. right -in, right -out only) at 1/8 mile spacing were to be allowed on the north side only, unless previously approved. The proposed right -in only drive for this proposal does not meet the requirements of the MOU. Caltrans would like some correspondence from the City of Temecula, supporting and justifying this access before we consider the opening. ".1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Gover"r DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8, P.O. BOX 231 SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92402 TO9-*f) 383-5959 i April 13, 1993 Planning Department Attention Mr. Steve Jiannino City of Temecula City Hall 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Mr. Steve Jiannino: Development Review 08-Riv-79-R2.498 Your Reference: TPM 27323 PP 243 . RECEIVED onq 7. 01993 Ans'd............ Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Tentative Parcel Map 27323 and it Plot Plan 243 located on this southerly side of Highway 79 (Winchester Road) and easterly of Ynez Road in Temecula. �- Please refer to the attached material on which our comments ave been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items noted under additional comments. If any work is necessary within the State highway right of way, the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work. Please be advised that this is a conceptual review only. Final approval of street improvements, grading and drainage will be determined during the Encroachment Perrit process. If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Ahmad Salah of our Development Review Section at:(714) 383-5908. Very truly yours,, _ G. A. LUNT Branch Chief Development Review ,A-ktachment ""'"c�� ut��LuuPMEtvj' R W FORM `ROVIDE TO APPLICANT _ Tpiyt �32� y- 3• 3 BUR REFERENCE DATE 9TEPEN WISNIEWSKI / - %f- R Z. 7 ` PLAN CHECKER ( CO RTE PM) WE REQUEST THAT THE ITEMB CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS O: APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT: NORMAL RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION TO PROVIDE / NAIf-WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. NORMAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO PROVIDE HALF -WIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAY. CURB AND GUTTER, STATE STANDARD A87 , TYPE A2-8 ALONG. THE STATE HIGHWAY. PARKING SHALL BE PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY BY THE PROPER PLACEMENT OF NO PARKING SIGNS. ._3._FT RADIUS CAIB RETUURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT INTERSECTIONS WITH THE STATE HIGHWAY. STATE STANDARD NSP ASS, CA E-A WHEELCHAIR RAMPS SMALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURB RETURNS AS DEFINED IN THE HIGHW: DESIGN MANUAL, SECTION 105.4 (2) . A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LIMIT PHYSICAL ACCESS TO TF STATE HIGHWAY. VEHICULAR ACCESS SMALL NOT BE DEVELOPED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD CONNECTIONS. VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY STANDARD DRIVEWAYS. VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE PROVIDED WITHIN OF THE INTERSECTIOi AT VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A ROAD -TYPE CONNECTION. VEHICULAR ACCESS CONNECTIONS SHALL BE PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY. ACCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE FOR MPH ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY. LANDSCAPING ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL PROVIDE FOR SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE, COMPLY WITH FIXED OBJECT SET BA AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS. A LEFT -TURN LANE, INCLUDING SHOULDERS AND ANY NECESSARY WIDENING, SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE STATE HIGHWAY A TRAFFIC STUDY INDICATING ON AND OFF -SITE FLOW PATTERNS AND VOLUMES, PROBABLE IMPACTS AND PROPOSED MITIGATI. MEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED. PARKING SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A MANNER THAT WILL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHICULAR MOVEMENT CONFLICTS, INCLUDING PARKI: STALL ENTRANCE AND EXIT, WITHIN OF THE ENTRANCE FROM THE STATE HIGHWAY. ___4/CARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY TO PRESERVE AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAGE PATTEF OF THE STATE HIGHWAY. PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO CUMULATIVE INCREASED STORM RUNOFF TO itl THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEM IS NOT CREATED. V PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. PROVIDE 'TO APPLICANT. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW ONLY, FINAL APPROVAL WII BE DETERMINED DURING THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT PROCE39. ITEM 16 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Scott F. Field/City Attorney DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Redevelopment Agency Assistance for the construction of Wal-Mart at the Southeast Corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CONSENTING TO EXPENDITURE OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS BY THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WAL-MART STORE AT THE CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS DISCUSSION: At its March 23, 1993 Council Meeting, the City Council directed the City Attorney to prepare the necessary and appropriate documents in order to provide Redevelopment Agency assistance for the construction of a Wal-Mart store. To that end, the attached Development and Disposition Agreement between the Temecula Redevelopment Agency and Wal-Mart, has been negotiated between the parties. The Agreement provides that Wal-Mart will purchase the southeast corners of Ynez and Winchester Roads from Rancho Regional Shopping Center, Inc. and develop it with a store of approximately one hundred twenty-five thousand 0 25,000) square feet in the first phase and with the ability to expand the Store to approximately one hundred fifty thousand (150,000) square feet. It is believed that the store will produce annual retail sales of $35,000,000, yielding $350,000 of sales tax revenues to the City per year. (However, Wal-Mart is not assuming responsibility for this level of taxable sales.) In order to induce these benefits to the City, the Agency would pay for the following on behalf of Wal-Mart: Various Development Impact Fees (e.g., drainage fee, school fee, public facilities fee, water primary facility fee, sewer fee, earthquake strong motion fee and mitigation monitoring fee) at approximately fifty cents (.50) per square foot -- $63,000.00 City Council Agenda Report Construction Assistance - Wal-Mart July 13, 1993 Page 2. Traffic Signal Mitigation Fees -- Approximately $30,000.00 Fire Mitigation Fees -- Approximately $31,000.00 Flood Mitigation Fees -- Approximately $26,000.00 City Permits and Inspection Fees -- Approximately $40,000.00 Kangaroo Rat Fees -- Approximately $25,000.00 Assessment District 161 Debt Assumption (Winchester Road Improvements) (includes any presently authorized bond sales but exclusive of any supplemental assessments) -- $237,000.00 The total cost of the Agency Assistance, excluding Assessment District payments, will not exceed $215,000 In addition the City will install one and one-half traffic signals to serve the shopping center (approximately $150,000). It is anticipated that the traffic signal mitigation fees from the surrounding shopping center will generate more than sufficient fees to pay for the signal -� improvements. It should be noted that the permits and inspection fees are to pay City administrative costs and are not for construction of public facilities. As a condition of the Agreement, Rancho Regional Shopping Center, Inc. will reimburse the City $90,000.00. This money would more than offset the $40,000 the Agency will reimburse Wal-Mart for City fees for permits and inspections. Consequently, the Agency will only be spending tax increment for installation of public facilities. The Agency obligation to reimburse Wal-Mart for building permit, plan check, Kangaroo Rat and impact fees, and to build the traffic signals is conditioned upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the store, and a grand opening. The Agency obligation to reimburse Wal-Mart for Assessment District 161 debt service is subject to the store continuing to operate as a retailer of goods and services. By way of example, if Wal-Mart (or a subsequent owner) closed the store after two years, the Agency will have reimbursed $215,000 in fees, plus $150,000 for two traffic signals. The Agency will no longer pay Assessment District 161 debt service, (except for two years of payments already made). And, the Agency will have been paid $90,000 from Rancho Regional Shopping Center, Inc. The Community Redevelopment Act provides a rather detailed procedure for approving such assistance. Specifically, the City Council must grant prior consent before the Agency may use its funds to provide streets, sidewalks, utilities or other improvements City Council Agenda Report !'^ Construction Assistance - Wal-Mart July 13, 1993 Page 3. which the owner of a commercial or industrial site would otherwise be obliged to provide in order to develop that site. (Health and Safety Code § 33421.1). In giving such consent, the City Council must make a finding that the provision of such improvements is "necessary to effectuate the proposes of the Redevelopment Plan." Also, while Section 33421 authorizes streets, sidewalks, utilities and related construction, it does not authorize public buildings to be constructed. Some of the public facility fees to be reimbursed, including the Fire Mitigation Fee, are for the construction of buildings. Consequently, this reimbursement is authorized under a different code section, Section 33445. This Section also requires the consent of the City Council. In addition, it also requires that a public hearing be held, and that the Council make the following findings: 1. That the public improvements are of benefit to the project area or the immediate neighborhood of the project area. 2. That no other reasonable means of financing such public improvements are available to the community. In this case, it is recommended that the City Council make all three findings as reflected in the attached Resolution. The basis for these findings is as follows: 1. As reflected in the substantial evidence provided at the March 23, 1993 meeting, Agency assistance is necessary to induce the location of a Wal- Mart in the City. 2. Location of the Wal-Mart will encourage the development of adjacent property which is necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Redevelopment Plan. 3. The sales tax generated from Wal-Mart is necessary to support the sales tax reimbursement agreement for CFD 88-12. In turn, CFD 88-12 will install the core public facilities necessary for the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project Area. These improvements are: Ynez Road widening, Overland Bridge, and 1-15 freeway loops. 4. The fees to be paid by the Agency will fund construction of public improvements serving the project area. 5. The store will create new jobs for the jobless, underemployed and low income persons. /I^ FISCAL IMPACT: Net expense to the Agency - $362,000 City Council Agenda Report Construction Assistance - Wal-Mart July 13, 1993 Page 4. ATTACHMENTS: Wal-Mart Incentive Summary Resolution of Approval Development and Disposition Agreement between Agency and Wal- Mart Agreement between Agency and Rancho Regional Shopping Center, Inca City of Temecula wal-Mart Incentive Summary July 13, 1993 City Permit & Inspection Fees Traffic Signal Mitigation Fees City Development Impact Fees (.50 per sq. foot) K-rat Fees Fire Mitigation Fees Flood Mitigation Fees AD 161 - current assessment AD 161 - potential future assessment Total Fees & Assessments eimbursement to Agency Net Incentive Agenda Report July 13 March 23 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 30,000 30,000 63,000 63,000 $ 133.000 25,000 25,000 31,000 31,000 26,000 26,000 $ 215,000 70,000 70,000 152,000 167,000 167,000 237,000 167,000 The summary above is provided to illustrate that the terms included in the attached Development and Disposition Agreement are those approved by the City Council on March 23, 1993. 452,000 452,000 (90,000) (90,000) $ 362,000 $ 362,000 7/7/93 Prepared by M.J. McLarney and approved by Dave Dixon RESOLUTION NO.93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CONSENTING TO THE EXPENDITURE OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS BY THE TENS ECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AS TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WAL- MART DEPARTMENT STORE AT THE CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. KRDC, Inc., is the owner of the property located at the corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads. This property is located within the Temecula Redevelopment Project Area, and within the center of the Winchester/Ynez Village Center Area. Redevelopment of this area is critical to the development of the entire Winchester/Ynez Village Center Area, by providing the impetus for the development of the surrounding area. B. CFD 88-12 was previously established to use tax exempt bonds to finance the construction of the core traffic facilities serving the Project Area, including the widening of Ynez Road, building Overland Bridge, and installing traffic loops at I-15/Winchester Road and I-15 Rancho California Road. Repayment of these bonds is to be assisted through sales tax generated from retail stores with CFD-88-12 is necessary to insure the construction of said core traffic facilities. C. It is anticipated that, at build -out the proposed Wal-Mart department store will comprise 150,000 square feet, generating $35,000,000 in taxable annual sales. The City will receive $350,000 per year in sales tax from this project, contributing $87,500 per year towards debt service on CFD 88-12. In this manner, the public facilities necessary for redeveloping the entire Project Area will be installed. D. The cost of developing the proposed site for the Wal-Mart department store are significantly greater than that for Assessment District 161 ("AD 161") which will install the Winchester Road improvements. Nearby competitors are not within AD 161. E. In order to induce Wal-Mart to redevelop the property, it is necessary for the Temecula Redevelopment Agency to reimburse the following fees to Wal-Mart: L Development Impact Fees -- $63,000.00 54re.o.\319 , 2. Traffic Signal Mitigation Fees — $30,000.00 3. Fire Mitigation Fees — $31.000.00 4. Flood Mitigation Fees -- $26,000.00 5. Kangaroo Rat Fees — $25,000.00 6. Assessment District 161 Debt Assumption (Winchester Road Improvements) (includes any presently authorized bond sales but exclusive of any supplemental assessments) — $237,000.00 7. City Permits and Inspection Fees -- $40,000.00 The total cost of the Agency Assistance, excluding Assessment District payments, will not exceed $215,000.00. In addition, the City will install one and one-half traffic signals to serve the shopping center. F. The Wal-Mart department store is of benefit to the Project Area in that it will induce redevelopment of the surrounding area and expand employment opportunities for the jobless, underemployment and low income persons. G. If tax increment funds are not used to help finance the cost of fees for the Wal- Mart department store, the project will not occur because no other reasonable means are available to cause the project to be constructed. H. The redevelopment plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1-1988 redevelopment area provides for the installation or construction of public facilities which benefit the area. The construction of public facilities which benefit the area. The Wal-Mart Department store will provide vital sales tax revenue necessary to finance public facilities for the benefits of the Project Area. I. A public hearing in substantial compliance with the requirements of California Health and Safety Code Section 33679 has been held, a notice has been published in a newspaper of general circulation in the community for at least two successive weeks prior to the Public Hearing. Section 2. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby determines that the Development and Disposition Agreement providing Agency assistance to Wal-Mart is necessary for the benefit of and to effectuate the Redevelopment contribution is the only reasonable means available to insure completion of the department store. The City Council does hereby approve contribution of tax increment funding to construction of a Wal-Mart department store in the Redevelopment Project No. 1-1988 redevelopment area. 51�raw� 19 Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of , 1993. J. Sal Munoz, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] 5lrawd319 _ `1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 93- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the _ day of , 1993, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCH MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCH MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCH MEMBERS: 5\mws1319 June S. Greekk, City Clerk AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula (the "Agency") and Rancho Regional Shopping Center, Inc., a California corporation ("Owner"). WHEREAS, Agency has or will concurrently herewith enter into that certain "Disposition and Development Agreement" (the "DDA") a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A", with Wal-Mart, a California corporation ("Developer"). WHEREAS, owner, in order to facilitate the project effected by the DDA, has offered voluntarily to commit itself to the additional contractual terms set forth in this Agreement. WHEREAS, Owner shall pay to Agency the sum of Ninety Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($90,000.00) as an inducement for Agency to enter into the DDA. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Agency's agreement to the DDA, the Agency and Owner agree: 1. Within thirty (30) days after the later to occur of (i) acquisition of fee title by Developer to the "Site" described in the DDA (as evidenced by the recordation of a grant deed from Owner to Developer), or (ii) the receipt of a building permit by Developer, Owner will pay to the Agency the sum of $90,000.00. 2. The Agency shall use said $90,000.00 to reimburse the Agency for those fees the Agency will pay on behalf of the Developer, as more particularly set forth in the DDA. 3. In the event the Agency should recover from Developer any Agency assistance as a consequence of default of Developer, Agency shall refund to Owner such portion of $90,000.00 as may be left under a declining five (5) year amortization. 4. Pursuant to Section 2.3D of the DDA, Owner hereby waives any right to an owner -participation agreement with respect to the project which is the subject of the DDA. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency and Owner have signed this Agreement as of the dates written below. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEE ECULA By: Date: Ronald J. Parks, Chairman Attest: June S. Greek, City Clerk/Agency Secretary Approved as to form: Scott F. Field Agency Counsel RANCHO REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER, INC., a California corporation By: Date: RECORDED AT REQUEST OF AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Ms. June Greek City Clerk City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 EXEMPT FROM RECORDER'S FEES pursuant to Government Code Sections 6103 and 27383 DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT by and between the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA and WAL-MART STORES, INC., a Delaware corporation DATED: July 13, 1993 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA (the "Agency"), and Wal-Mart, Stores, Inc, a Delaware corporation (the "Developer") and is dated and effective as of July 13, 1993. In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained Herein, the Agency and the Developer hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE I. SUBJECT OF AGREEMENT Section A. PuMQse of Agreement 1. The purpose of this Agreement is to effectuate the Redevelopment Plan (hereinafter "Plan") for the Temecula Redevelopment Project Area (hereinafter "project Area") by providing for the redevelopment of certain property, hereafter described, located in the Project Area, in accordance with the Plan. 2. The real property to be redeveloped pursuant to this Agreement (the "Site") is generally described as the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads, and is specifically described and depicted on Exhibit No. 1 and Exhibit No. 2. 3. This Agreement is entered into for the purpose of redeveloping the Site and not for speculation in land holding. 4. Completing the redevelopment of the Site pursuant to this Agreement is in the vital and best interest of the City of Temecula, California (the "City") and the health, safety, and welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable state and local laws. 5. This Agreement pertains to and affects the ability of the Agency to finance its statutory obligations and for all parties to finance and carry out the purposes of this Agreement and the goals of the Plan and is intended to be a Contract within the meaning of Government Code Section 53511. Section B. The Redevelopment Plan The Redevelopment Plan was approved by Ordinance No. 658 of the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County on July 12, 1988 prior to incorporation of the City of Temecula. Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 91-11, which became effective May 9, 1991, and City Ordinance No. 91-15, which became effective April 9, 1991, the City approved the Plan. Said Ordinances had the effect of adopting the Plan and transferring jurisdiction over -1 said Plan to the Agency, as of July 1, 1991. Section C. The Site/Owner's Parcel The Site is shown on the Site Map and described in the "Legal Description", which are attached hereto as Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2, respectively. Rancho Regional Shopping Center, Inc., a California corporation (the "Owner") holds fee title to the Site. The Developer intends to acquire the Site from Owner. Section D. Parties to t_ a Agreement 1. The Agency The Agency is a public body, corporate and politic, exercising governmental functions and powers and organized and existing under the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Section 33000, et seq., Health and Safety Code; hereafter "Act"). The principal office of the Agency is located at City of Temecula, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The Developer is a Delaware corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware. The principal office and mailing address of the Developer is: 702 Southwest Eight Street, Bentonville, Arkansas, 72716, Attention: President and Property Manager. Section E. Prohibition Against ChanU in OwnershiR The qualifications and identity of Developer are of particular concern to Agency, and it is because of these qualifications and identity that Agency has entered into this Agreement with Developer. Prior to the issuance by Agency of a Certificate of Completion for Developer's improvements on the Site pursuant to Section 3.15 of this Agreement, Developer shall not make any total or partial sale or ground lease of the whole or any part of the Site without prior written approval of Agency, which approval shall not :be unreasonably withheld or delayed. This prohibition shall not be deemed to prevent the granting of temporary or permanent easements or permits to facilitate the development of the Site, or the granting of mortgages or deeds of trust in connection with any financing for the Site and the improvements. This Section shall be inapplicable following the issuance by Agency of a Certificate of Completion for the Developer's improvements on the Site and, thereafter, Developer may sell, transfer, convey, assign or lease the whole or any part of the Site or any building or structure on the Site. "� r-� Section F. Contract Documents The Contract Documents which are part of this Agreement, and each of which are incorporated herein by this reference, are as follows: Exhibit No. i Site Map Exhibit No. 2 Legal Description of Site Exhibit No. 3 Schedule of Performance Exhibit No. 4 Scope of Development ARTICLE H. ACQUISMON OF THE SITE AND SALE TO DEVELOPER Section A. Developer Acquisition of site 1. The parties agree that Developer shall, in good faith negotiate with the Owner in order to attempt to acquire the fee interest of said Site. 2. The parties agree that if Developer does not acquire fee title to the Site within sixty (60) days of the date on which: (i) City has approved all plans for the Site, such that Developer could obtain building permits; (ii) the Site has been legally subdivided in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and all local ordinances; and (iii) Owner is in a position to convey legal title to the Site in a condition acceptable to Developer in its sole discretion, Agency may terminate this Agreement as provided herein. Section B. Agency Assistance The Agency shall reimburse to the Developer the following fees and assessments: 1. Building permit fees, all plan check fees, development impact fees, all inspection fees, zone change and plot plan application fees, Stephen's Kangaroo Rat fees, fire mitigation fees, traffic signal mitigation fees and flood mitigation fees paid to the City of Temecula in order to redevelop the Site, in an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($215,000.00). 2. Debt service on County of Riverside Assessment District 161, including any presently authorized but unsold bond series, but excluding debt service on any supplemental assessments of said District. Notwithstanding the above, the total Agency assistance relative to the District, including principal and interest payments, shall not exceed Two Hundred Thirty Seven Thousand Dollars ($237,000.00). C. The reimbursement shall be disbursed by the Executive Director of the Agency to Developer within thirty (30) days of a written request to the Director when the following conditions precedent have been fully satisfied to the satisfaction of the Executive Director: 1. Developer presents to Agency satisfactory evidence that Developer has paid said fees and assessments; 2. All conditions precedent described at Section 2.3 has been satisfied; and 3. Developer is not in default on this Agreement. Section C. Conditions Precedent to Agency Assistance Agency shall not be obligated to provide the assistance described in Section 2.2 unless and until the Developer satisfies each of the following conditions precedent: 1. Owner or Developer obtains all land use entitlements, building permits, and certificates of occupancy from the City necessary for development of the Site pursuant to this Agreement; 2. Owner paying Agency Ninety Thousand Dollars ($90,000.00) within thirty (30) days of the later to occur of. (i) Acquisition of fee title to the Site by Developer; or (ii) Receipt of a building permit by Developer. Owner and Agency shall enter into a separate agreement concerning such payment to Agency, acceptable to Developer in its sole discretion, and Developer shall be deemed to be a third party beneficiary of such agreement. Said amount is intended to reimburse the Agency in full for the cost of reimbursing the Developer for the cost of building permit fees, engineering plan check fees, zone change and plot plan application fees, and Stephen's Kangaroo Rat fees, provided for at Section 2.2A, and to reimburse the City in part for the public facility -related fees provided for at Section 2.2A. 3. Developer has acquired fee title to the Site. 4. Owner stating in writing to Agency that it waives any right to an owner - participation agreement. 5. Developer shall have obtained a final certificate of occupancy and held the "grand opening" of the Project described at Section 3.1. 6. The debt service assistance for Assessment District 161 described at Section 2.2 shall be conditioned on the Project continuously operating as a retail store. (The term "retail store" shall mean a store engaged predominantly in the retail sale of goods and services.) If and when the Project is no longer operated as a retail store, -1, the Agency obligation to provide debt service assistance shall simultaneously !� terminate. ARTICLE M. DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE Section A. Scone of Develo ment The Site shall be redeveloped with an approximately 125,000 square foot store (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). The Project shall be developed within the general controls established in the Scope of Development, the approvals of Agency described herein and of the City as required by the ordinances and regulations of the City of Temecula, and related laws governing municipal planning, zoning and subdivision. Section B. Basic Concen rawines The Developer shall prepare the Basic Concept Drawings and related documents for the development to be constructed in accordance with the Schedule of Performance. The Site shall be developed as established in the Basic Concept Drawings and related documents except as changes may be mutually agreed upon between the Developer and the City. As to any approval requested or required pursuant to -this Agreement, approval by the City shall be deemed approval by the Agency, inasmuch as the Agency shall give its input with respect to such approvals directly to the City. Section C. Construction Drawings and Related Documents The Developer shall prepare and submit construction drawings, specifications and related documents for the entire Site to the City for review pursuant to the City Zoning Ordinances. Section D. City Approval of Plans Drawings and Related Documents Failure by the City to either approve or disapprove the plans, drawings, and related documents referred to in Section 3.2 and 3.3 of this Agreement within the times established in the Schedule of Performance shall be deemed an approval provided City is notified of this provision in a cover letter accompanying the plans. Any disapproval shall state in writing the reasons for disapproval. The Developer upon receipt of a disapproval shall revise the portions of the plans and drawings which are disapproved and related documents and resubmit to the City within a reasonable time after receipt of the notice of disapproval. In the event Developer's plans are disapproved by City for any reason, or approval delayed for any reason, all dates for completion of any work or other performances by Developer shall be extended by the number of days between such disapproval or delay and the eventual approval of such plans by City. If the Developer desires to make any substantial change in the construction plans after -IN their approval by the City, the Developer shall submit the proposed change to the City for its approval pursuant to this Section. The cost of developing the Site and constructing all improvements on the Site shall be borne by the Developer, except for work expressly set forth in the Agreement to be performed by the Agency or others. Section F. Agency Obligations Agency agrees to construct and install the following off -site Site improvements at its sole expense: 1. Agency shall perform all studies related to, bear all costs related to design and engineering of, obtain at Agency's cost all necessary permits for and: (i) install a traffic signal on Winchester Road adjacent to the Site at the entrances to the Site, as shown on the Site Map (Exhibit No. 1); and (ii) improve the traffic signal currently located on Ynez Road adjacent to the Site, as shown on the Site Map (Exhibit No. 1) to a four-way signal, within the time required by the Schedule of Performance. In the event that such traffic signals are not complete as and when Developer otherwise would be able to obtain a certificate of occupancy for its improvements on the Site, Agency shall provide temporary signals sufficient to allow Developer to obtain a certificate of occupancy. Section G. Indemnity and Insurance 1. The Developer shall defend, indemnify, assume all responsibility for and hold the Agency and the City, and their respective elected and appointed officers and employees, harmless from all costs (including attorneys fees and costs), claims, demands or liabilities, judgments for injury or damage to property and injuries to persons, including death, which may be caused by any of the Developer's activities under this Agreement, whether such activities or performance thereof be by the Developer or anyone directly or indirectly employed or contracted with by the Developer and whether such damage shall accrue or be discovered before or after termination of this Agreement. This indemnity includes, but is not limited to, any repair, cleanup, remediation, detoxification, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure or other plan (regardless of whether undertaken due to governmental action) concerning any hazardous substance or hazardous wastes including petroleum and its fractions as defined in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ["CERCLA"; 42 U.S.C. Section 9601, g1 =.], the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ["RCRA"; 42 U.S.C. Section 6901 et seal and California Health and Safety Code Section Code Section 25280 et sea, at any place where Developer owns or has control of real property pursuant to any of Developer's activities under this Agreement. The forego- ing indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant to Section 107 (e) of CERCLA and California Health and Safety Code Section 25364 to assure, protect, hold harmless and indemnify Agency from liability. 2. Not in derogation of the indemnity provisions of subsection A of this Section, the Developer shall take out and maintain during the period set forth in Subsection E, a comprehensive liability policy in the amount of at least Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) for any person, Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) for any occurrence, and One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) property damage naming the City and Agency as additional insureds. 3. The Developer shall furnish a certificate of insurance signed by an authorized agent of the insurance carrier setting forth the general provisions of the insurance coverage. This certificate of insurance shall name the City and the Agency and their respective officers, agents, and employees as additional insureds under the policy. The certificate of insurance shall contain a statement of obligation on the part of the carrier to notify the Agency by certified mail of any modification, cancellation or termination of the coverage at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of any such modification, cancellation or termination. Coverage provided hereunder by the Developer shall be primary insurance and not contributing with any insurance maintained by the Agency or City, and the policy shall contain such an endorsement. The required certificate shall be filed with the Agency prior to commencement of construction. 4. The Developer shall also furnish or cause to be furnished to the Agency evidence satisfactory to the Agency that any contractor with whom it has contracted for the performance of work on the Site or otherwise pursuant to this Agreement carries workers' compensation insurance as required by law. 5. The insurance obligations set forth in this Section shall remain in effect only until a final Certificate of Completion has been furnished for all of the improvements as hereafter provided in this Agreement. Developer may self -insure its insurance obligations set forth in this Section. Section H. City and Other vernmental Agency Permits 1. Before commencement of construction or development of any buildings, structures or other work of improvement the Developer shall, at its own expense, subject to reimbursement as provided herein, secure or cause to be secured any and all permits which may be required by the City and any other governmental agency having jurisdiction as to such construction, development or work. The Agency shall provide all proper assistance to ---� the Developer in securing these permits. 2. The Developer assumes all responsibility for taking all actions necessary to comply with the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code § 66410, et seq.) and local subdivision enactments related thereto in order to comply with the scope of development. Section I. Rights of Access For the purpose of assuring compliance with this Agreement, representatives of the Agency shall have the right of access to the Site, without charges or fees, at normal construction hours during the period of construction for the purposes of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the inspection of the work being performed in constructing the improvements, so long as they comply with all safety rules. Such representatives of the Agency shall be those who are so identified in writing by the Executive Director of the Agency. Agency agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Developer from all costs, claims, demands, or liabilities arising from the exercise by Agency or its representative of such right of access. Section J. local. State and Fed ral Laws The Developer shall carry out the provisions of this Agreement in conformity with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations. Section K. Antidiscrimination During Construction The Developer, for itself and its successors and assigns, agrees that in the construction of the improvements provided for in this Agreement, the Developer shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, marital status, handicap, national origin or ancestry. Section L. Taxes and Assessments The Developer shall pay when due, subject to reimbursement as provided herein, all real estate taxes and assessments on the Site and levied subsequent to a conveyance of title to the Site. Section M. Prohibition Against Transfer of the Site the Buildings or Stn�ctures Therein and As ignment of Agreement Prior to the issuance by Agency of a Certificate of Completion for the Developer's improvements on the Site pursuant to Section 3.14 of this Agreement, Developer shall not make any total or partial sale or ground lease of the whole or any part of the Site without prior written approval of Agency, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. This prohibition shall not be deemed to prevent the granting of temporary or permanent easements or permits to facilitate the development of the Site, or the granting of mortgages or deeds of trust in connection with any financing for the Site and the improvements. This Section shall be inapplicable following the issuance by Agency of a Certificate of Completion for the Developer's improvements on Site and, thereafter, Developer may sell, transfer, convey; assign or lease the whole or any part of the Site or any building or structure on the Site. Section N. Certificate of Comple inn 1. Promptly after completion of all construction and development of the Site in the manner required by this Agreement, the Agency shall furnish the Developer with a Certificate of Completion upon written request therefor by the Developer. The Agency shall not unreasonably withhold any such Certificate of Completion. Such Certificate of Completion shall be a conclusive determination of satisfactory completion of the construction required by this Agreement upon the Site and the Certificate of Completion shall so state. After recordation of such Certificate of Completion, any party then owning or thereafter purchasing, leasing or otherwise acquiring any interest therein shall not (because of such ownership, purchase, lease or acquisition), incur any obligation pursuant to this Agreement. 2. A Certificate of Completion shall be in such form as to permit it to be recorded in the Recorder's Office of Riverside County. 3. If the Agency refuses or fails to furnish a Certificate of Completion for the Site, or part thereof, after written request from the Developer, the Agency shall, within twenty (20) days of written request therefor, provide the Developer with a written statement of the reasons the Agency refused or failed to furnish a Certificate of Completion. The statement shall also contain Agency's opinion of the actions the Developer must take to obtain a Certificate of Completion. If the reason for such refusal is confined to the immediate availability of specific items of materials for landscaping, the Agency shall issue its Certificate of Completion upon the posting of a bond by the Developer with the Agency in an amount representing a fair value of the work not yet completed. If the Agency shall have failed to provide such written statement within said twenty (20) day period, the Developer shall be deemed entitled to the Certificate of Completion. 4. Such Certificate of Completion shall not constitute evidence of compliance with or satisfaction of any obligation of the Developer to any holder of any deed of trust securing money loaned to finance the improvements, or any part thereof. Such Certificate of Completion is not a notice of completion as referred to in the California Civil Code, Section 3093. ARTICLE IV. USE OF THE SITE Section A. ILM The Developer covenants and agrees for itself, its successors, its assigns, and every successor in interest to the Site or any part thereof, that during construction and thereafter, the Developer, and such successors and such assignees, shall not use the Site in violation of any City ordinance in effect as of the date hereof. Section• for Non -Discrimination 1. The Developer covenants by and for itself and any successors in interest that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, age, handicap, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the Site, nor shall the Developer itself or any person claiming under or through it establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees of the Site. "1 2. The Developer shall refrain from restricting the rental, sale or lease of the Site -1 on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, handicap, national origin or ancestry of any person. All such deeds, leases or contracts shall contain or be subject to substantially the following nondiscrimination or nonsegregation clauses: a. In deeds: "The grantee herein covenants by and for himself or herself, his or her heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, handicap, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the land herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee himself or herself or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees in the land herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land." b. In leases: "The lessee herein covenants by and for himself or herself, his or her heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through him or her, and this lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the following conditions: "There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, handicap, ancestry or national ori- gin in the leasing, subleasing, transferring, use, occupancy, ten- ure or enjoyment of the premises herein leased nor shall the les- see himself or herself, or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, sublessees, subtenants or vendees in the premises herein leased." C. In contracts: "There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person, or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, handicap, ancestry or national origin, in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the premises, nor shall the transferee himself or herself or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees of the premises." 3. The covenants established in this Section and the deeds shall, without regard to technical classification and designation, be binding for the benefit and in favor of the Agency, its successors and assigns, the City and any successor in interest to the Site or any part thereof. The covenants contained in this Section shall remain in perpetuity. Section C. Maintenance Covenants Subsequent to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion, the Developer, and all successors and assigns in interest to the Site, shall be obligated to maintain the Site, and all improvements and landscaping situated thereon, in a clean and neat condition and in a continuous state of good repair. Section D. Effect of Violation of the Terms and provisions of this Ag mPnr After Completion of Construction The Agency is deemed the beneficiary of the terms and provisions of this Agreement and of the covenants running with the land, for and in its own rights and for the purposes of protecting the interests of the community and other parties, public or private, in whose favor and for whose benefit this Agreement and the covenants running with the land have been provided. The Agreement and the covenants shall run in favor of the Agency, without regard to whether the Agency has been, remains or is an owner of any land or interest therein in the Site or in the Project Area. The Agency shall have the right, if the Agreement or covenants are breached, to exercise all rights and remedies, and to maintain any actions or suits at law or in equity or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of such breaches to which it or any other beneficiaries of this Agreement and covenants may be entitled. Section E. Continuation of Covenants 1. Of the covenants which have been established pursuant to this Agreement, the same shall be deemed to be covenants running with the land for the benefit of the Project Area and the Agency in carrying out its statutory responsibilities under California Redevelopment Act (Health and Safety Code Sections 33000 et seq.) to implement the Redevelopment Plan. 2. The covenants relating to maintenance in this Agreement and against discrimination contained in this Agreement shall remain in perpetuity. 3. The Agency, in the event of any breach of any such covenants, shall have the right to exercise all of the rights and remedies, and to maintain any actions at law or suits in equity or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of such breach. The covenants contained in this Agreement shall be for the benefit of and shall be enforceable only by the Agency and its successors. ARTICLE V. GENERAL PROVISIONS DemandsSection A. Notices. --.mm�•L.aizoirsA 11�i1i3�%1��i�.� Written notices, demands and communications among the Agency, and the Developer, shall be sufficiently given by personal service or dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the principal offices of the Agency or the Developer described in Section 1.4. Such written notices, demands and communications may be sent in the same manner to such other addresses as either party may from time to time designate by mail as provided in this Section. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, notice personally served shall be deemed to have been received as of the date of such service. Section 13. Conflicts of Interest The Developer warrants that it has not paid or given and will not pay or give any officer, employee or agent of the City or Agency any money or other consideration for obtaining this Agreement. Section C. Enforced Del ay• Extension of Times of Performance 1. In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, performance by either party hereunder shall not be deemed to be in default, and all performance and other dates specified in this Agreement shall be extended, where the party seeking the extension has acted diligently and delays or defaults are due to events beyond the reasonable control of the party such as but not limited to: war; insurrection; strikes; lockouts; riots; floods; earthquakes; fires; casualties; supernatural causes; acts of God; acts of the public enemy; epidemics; quarantine restrictions; freight embargoes; intergalactic invasion, lack of transportation; or any other causes beyond the control or without the fault of the party claiming an extension of time to perform. 2. In the event of such delay, the party delayed shall continue to exercise reasonable diligence to minimize the period of the enforced delay. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, an extension of time for any such cause shall be for the period of the enforced delay and shall commence to run from the time the party claiming such extension gives notice to the other party. 3. Times of performance under this Agreement may also be extended in writing by the mutual agreement of Agency and the Developer. The Executive Director of Agency shall have the authority on behalf of Agency to approve extensions of time for performance by Developer. Section D. Non -liability of Officials and Emplg=s of theAeencv No member, official or employee of the Agency or the City shall be personally liable -� to the Developer or the Owner, or any successor in interest, pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, nor for any default or breach by the Agency or the City. ARTICLE VI. DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES Section A. Defaults -- General 1. Subject to the extensions of time set forth in Section 5.3, failure or delay by either party to perform any term or provision of this Agreement constitutes a default under this Agreement. A party claiming a default (claimant) shall give written notice of default to the other party, specifying the default complained of. 2. The claimant shall not terminate this Agreement, institute proceedings against the other party nor be entitled to damages if the other party within fourteen (14) days from receipt of such notice immediately, with due diligence, commences to cure, correct or remedy such failure or delay and shall complete such cure, correction or remedy within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of such notice or if such cure, correction or remedy by its nature cannot be effected within such thirty (30) day period, such cure, correction or remedy is diligently and continuously prosecuted until completion thereof. Such cure, correction and remedy shall include payment of any costs, expenses (including attorney fees) -� or damages incurred by the non -defaulting party resulting from the default or during the period of default. Section B. Legal Actions 1. Institution of Legal Actions Any legal actions related to or arising out of this Agreement must be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, in an appropriate municipal court in that county, or, if federal jurisdiction exists, in the Federal District Court in the Central District of California. 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 judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 2. Applicable Law The laws of the State of California shall govern the interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement. I Acceptance of Service of Process a. In the event that any legal action is commenced by the Developer against the Agency, service of process on the Agency shall be made by personal service upon the Secretary of the Agency or in such other manner as may be provided by law. b. In the event that any legal action is commenced by the Agency against the Developer, service of process on the Developer shall be made by personal service or United States Certified mail, return receipt requested upon Developer's agency for service of process. Section C. Rights and Remedies Are Cumulative Except as otherwise expressly stated in this Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative, and the exercise by either party of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by the other party. !" Section D. Inaction Not a Waiver of Default Any failures or delays by either party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies, or deprive either such party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. Section E. Damages If a default is not fully cured by the defaulting party as provided in Section 6.1, the defaulting party shall be liable to the other party for any damages caused by such default, and the nondefaulting party may thereafter (but not before) commence an action for damages against the defaulting party with respect to such default. Section F. Specific Performance If a default under this Agreement is not fully cured by the defaulting party as provided in Section 6.1, the nondefaulting party at its option may thereafter (but not before) commence an action for specific performance of terms of this Agreement. ARTICLE VII SPECIAL PROVISIONS Section 7.1 Submission of Documents to the City for Ap rP, oval Whenever this Agreement requires the Developer to submit plans, drawings or other documents to the City for approval, which shall be deemed approved if not acted on by the City within the specified time, said plans, drawings or other documents shall be accompanied by a letter stating that they are being submitted and will be deemed approved unless rejected by the City within the stated time. If there is no time specified herein for such City action, the Developer may submit a letter requiring City approval or rejection of documents within thirty (30) days after submission to the City or such documents shall be deemed approved. Section 7.2 Amendments to this Agreement The Developer and the Agency agree to mutually consider reasonable requests for amendments to this Agreement which may be made by lending institutions, or Agency's counsel or financial consultants, provided said requests are consistent with this Agreement and would not substantially alter the basic business terms included herein. The Executive Director of Agency is authorized to approve and execute amendments to this Agreement which are not of a material nature, including, but not limited to, the granting of extensions of time to Developer. Section 7.3 Entire Agreement Waivers & General 1. This Agreement is executed in duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. This Agreement includes pages 1 through 19 and Exhibits 1 through 4, which constitutes the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. 2. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto, and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements between the parties or their predecessors in interest with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. 3. All amendments hereto must be in writing executed by the appropriate authorities of the Agency and the Developer. 4. Both Parties are sophisticated buyers and sellers of real property and have participated in the drafting of this Agreement. Section 7.4 Time For Acceptance Of Agreement By Agencx This Agreement, when executed by the Developer and delivered to the Agency, must be authorized, executed and delivered by the Agency on or before thirty (30) days after signing and delivery of this Agreement by the Agency or this Agreement shall be void, except to the extent that the Agency and the Developer shall agree in writing to a further extension of time for the authorization, execution and delivery of this Agreement. The date of this Agreement shall be the date when it shall have been signed by the Agency. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency and the Developer have signed this Agreement as of the date first written above. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TE AECULA By: Ronald J. Parks Chairman ATTEST: June S. Greek City Clerk/Agency Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Dated: Dated: Scott F. Field Dated: Counsel to the Agency WAL-MART STORES, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION By: Its: Dated: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) On , 19_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said state, personally appeared and , proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument as Chairman and Secretary, respectively, of the REDEVELOPMENT Agency OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, the public agency therein named, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Name (typed or printed) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) On , 19_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same in his/her authorized capacity, and that by his/her signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Name (typed or printed) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) � ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. On , 19_, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared SCOTT F. FIELD, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Name (typed or printed) EXHIBIT NO. 1 SITE MAP [TO BE INSERTED BY DEVELOPER] EXHIBIT NO. 2 � IJY • ► • YY [TO BE INSERTED BY DEVELOPER] EXHIBIT NO. 3 �Y&I-M907-ItNue am�. 1. Execution of Agreement. On or before Agreement shall be authorized, mutually executed and delivered by Developer and Agency. 2. Submission - Planning Review. On or before Developer shall submit, under applicable City Codes, to City a completed application for all required planning and zoning approvals for the Project. 3. Basic Concept Drawings. On or before Developer shall prepare and submit to City Basic Concept Drawings for the Project. 4. Insurance On or before Developer shall submit, all insurance certificates and endorsements or notice of self insurance pursuant to Section ME, to Agency. Annroval - Basic Conccpt Drawings and Agreemen . City shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove the Basic Concept Drawings. Within fifteen (15) days of receipt of Basic Concept Drawings. . Final Drawings and `-.Developer shall submit final drawings and plans to City for issuance of building permits. Within one hundred eighty (80) days of approval by City of Basic Concept Drawings. Convevan&e of Title or PossesMa Interest. Developer shall acquire fee title to the Site - Within sixty (60) days of the date on which: i Ci has approved all plans for the Site, such that Developer could obtain building() ty permits; (ii) the Site has been legally subdivided in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and all local ordinances; and (iii) Owner is in the position to convey legal title to the Site in a condition acceptable to Developer in its sole discretion. Issuance of Buil ing Permit . Subject to fulfillment of this Agreement, and subject to all applicable City Codes, City shall issue building permits with respect to the project. Upon acquisition by Developer of the Site. Public Improvements. Agency shall complete off -site traffic signal improvements. In coordination with the Developer's construction, but no later than issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the project. 2 EXHIBIT NO. 4 SCOPE OF DEVELOPMENT I. GENERAL DESCRIPTION The Site is approximately 13 acres. It is generally located at the southeast corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads. Developer shall construct on the site an approximately 125,000 square foot store ("Phase 1 "). Developer may but shall not be required to expand the store to 150,000 square feet ("Phase 2"). H. DEVELOPMENT The store shall be constructed of masonry, concrete or concrete block, steel, or other such materials. Prefabricated metal panels or components shall not be utilized for exterior walls, unless specifically approved by the City. A. Architecture and Design requirements. The improvements shall conform to the applicable City zoning B. & n Signs shall conform to the Temecula Zoning Code and General Plan. C. Building Setbacks Plan. Building setbacks shall conform to the Temecula Zoning Code and General D. Building Height Building heights shall not exceed that permitted by the applicable zoning. E. Access Vehicular access shall conform to the applicable zoning requirements subject to any variance granted by City for the development of the Site. 1 �' F. Loadins! Adequate loading and unloading space shall be provided as required by the Temecula Zoning Code subject to any variance granted by City for the development of the Site. G. ScreeninL, All outdoor storage of materials or equipment shall be enclosed or screened by walls, landscaping or enclosure to the extent and in the manner required by the applicable zoning requirements. H. LandKvinz Developer shall maintain landscaping within the public rights -of -way and within setback area along all street frontages and within all parking areas consistent with applicable zoning requirements. Utilitie All utilities on the Site to serve the development shall be underground or enclosed at Developer's expense whenever physically and economically feasible, or when not feasible, all above -ground utilities shall be placed at the rear of the Site. J. P rkin On -site Parcel parking shall be as required by the Temecula Zoning Code. III. CONTROLS AND RESTRICTIONS - MISCELLANEOUS Controls and restrictions consistent with this Agreement including but not limited to minimum size parking spaces and minimum loading facilities shall be consistent with the Temecula Zoning Code. IV. IMPROVEMENT, FACILITIES, UTILITIES, DEMOLITION, SITE CLEARANCE, AND ON AND OFF -SITE PARCEL WORK Except as otherwise provided in Section 3.7, Developer shall provide or cause to be provided at its cost and expense, the on -site and off -site improvements required for the Site. The plans and specifications, when approved by the parties and the City as provided in the Agreement, shall embody the work which is the obligation of Developer. 2 All improvements to be constructed by Developer shall be constructed or installed --1 in accordance with the technical specifications, standards and practices of the City and in accordance with approved plans and specifications. Developer plans for such public improvements shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to advertising for bids. All such activities shall be completed in accordance with high architectural standards at a time and in a manner consistent with Developer design and construction efforts. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ARTICLE I SUBJECT OF AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ........... 1 Section 1.1 Purpose of Agreement ..... Section 1.2 The Redevelopment Plan 1 Section 1.3 The Site/Owner's Parcel Section 1.4 . Parties to the Agreement ............................. 2 2 A. The Agency B. ..................... . The Developer ................................... 2 2 Section 1.5 Prohibition Against Change in Ownership, Management and Control of Developer ..... Section 1.6 Contract Documents 2 ................................ 3 ARTICLE H ACQUISITION OF THE SITE ......................... 3 Section 2.1 Developer Acquisition of Site 3 Section 2.2 Agency Assistance 3 Section 2.3 Conditions Precedent to Agency Assistance .................. 4 ARTICLE III DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE ... , , . , Section 3.1 Scope of Development .... Section 3.2 Basic Concept Drawings ... ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 5 Section 3.3 , . Construction Drawings and Related Documents 5 Section 3.4 Agency Approval of Plans, Drawings, and Related ' 5 Documents Section 3.5 . , , , . � � � � � � ' ' Cost Construction 5 Section 3.6 of ...... .Construction Schedule � ' � ' � � ' ' ' 6 Section 3.7 ............................... Agency Obligations ..... 6 Section 3.8 Indemnity and Insurance ' ' ' ' ' 6 Section 3.9 City and Other Governmental Agency Permits 7 Section 3.10 Rights of Access ' ' ' ' 8 Section 3.11 .... Local, State and Fed ........................... eral Laws 8 Section 3.12 Antidiscrimination During Construction ' 8 Section 3.13 Taxes and Assessments 9 Section 3.14 Prohibition Against Transfer of •the Site, the Buildings 9 or Structures Therein and Assignment of Agreement ............ 9 Section 3.15 Certificate of Completion ............................. 9 ARTICLE IV USE OF THE SITE ............................... 10 Section 4.1 Uses 10 Section 4.2 Covenants for Non -Discrimination ...................... 10 Section 4.3 Maintenance Covenants .12 Section 4.4 Effect of Violation of the Terms and Provisions �of this Agreement After Completion of Construction ................ 12 Section 4.5 Continuation of Covenants ................. 12 ARTICLE V GENERAL PROVISIONS ........................... 13 Section 5.1 Notices, Demands and Communications Among the Parties 13 Section 5.2 Conflicts of Interest •13 Section 5.3 Enforced Delay; Extension of Times of Performance 13 Section 5.4 Non -liability of Officials and Employees of the Agency .......... 14 ARTICLE VI DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES ........................ 14 Section 6.1 Defaults General Section 6.2 ........ Legal Actions ................................... 14 15 A. Institution of Legal Actions B. ..... Applicable Law 15 C. .................................. Acceptance of Service of Process 15 ....................... 15 Section 6.3 Rights and Remedies Are Cumulative Section 6.4 w Inaction Not a Waiver of Default 15 Section 6.5 ....................... Damages 15 Section 6.6 ....... Specific Performance 16 .............................. 16 ARTICLE VII SPECIAL PROVISIONS ............................ 16 Section 7.1 Submission of Documents to the Agency for Approval Section 7.2 .......... Amendments 16 Section 7.3 to this Agreement Entire Agreement, Waivers & General 16 Section 7.4 Time For Acceptance 16 Of Agreement By Agency .............. 17 ii ITEM 17 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: Gary Thornh lil ; Dirctor 1of Planning DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2; Variance No. 13 - Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO. 2, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO. 2, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION A SEVENTY-THREE (73) FOOT HIGH SIGN WITH ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD LOCATED AT 26631 YNEZ ROAD (ON THE REAR PORTION OF TOYOTA OF TEMECULA), AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921- 080-039. Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF VARIANCE NO. 13, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY VARIANCE NO. 13, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SEVENTY-THREE (73) FOOT HIGH SIGN WITH ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD LOCATED AT 26631 YNEZ ROAD (ON THE REAR PORTION OF TOYOTA OF TEMECULA), AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-080-039. R 131ST"FWnU9PP.CC 7/1M kb BACKGROUND The Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee is an approved project within the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 1993-1997). Classified as a Priority I, total City funding for the project is $280,000. This was approved by the City Council (5-0 vote) at the September 22, 1992 meeting. The source of the funds is the Redevelopment Agency. The auto dealerships will be responsible for the purchase, installation, operation and maintenance of the sign. The Planning Commission, at their meeting of June 7, 1993 denied Plot Plan No, 249, Amendment No. 2 and Variance No. 13 by a 3-2 vote. The following comments/concerns were voiced by the Planning Commission: the height of the sign was excessive; the proposed height (73-75 feet high) would have a negative impact upon the built environment; the balloon logo did not fit the image of the City of Temecula and would not be a lasting image for the City; logo's already used to identify the City were not considered; a sign of this magnitude was not necessary to attract potential auto purchasers; the sign did not meet the intent of Ordinance No. 655 (Palomar Observatory Lighting Ordinance) relative to light pollution; and the necessary findings to approve a variance for the height and size of the sign could not be clearly established. The Commissioners were in concurrence regarding the above mentioned concerns. The applicant stated that they had researched various logos for the sign and felt that the balloon was an image which depicted the Temecula Valley. They also expressed that the sign was aesthetically pleasing in relation to other signs of this type located in other cities. They stated that the increased visibility provided to the Temecula Valley Auto Mall from the sign —� would be a benefit to their businesses as well as to the City of Temecula in terms of revenues. Attachment No. 6 contains four (4) letters received by Planning Staff subsequent to the July 13, 1993 City Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACT The Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee is an approved project within the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 1993-1997). Classified as a Priority I, total City funding for the project is $280,000. The source of the funds is the Redevelopment Agency. Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 93-_ - Page 3 2. Resolution No. 93 _ - Page 8 3. Planning Commission Minutes, June 7, 1993 - Page 13 4. Planning Commission Staff Report, June 7, 1993 - Page 14 5. Initial Study - Page 15 6. Correspondence - Page 16 7. Exhibits - Page 17 RAMSTAFFRPTU49PP.CC 7/1/93 k1b 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- RASISTAFFRPT1249PP.CC 7/1/93 klb ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO. 29, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMIVIISSION'S DECISION TO DENY PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO. 2, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION A SEVENTY-THREE (73) FOOT HIGH SIGN WITH ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD LOCATED AT 26631 YNEZ ROAD (ON THE REAR PORTION OF TOYOTA OF M%IECULA, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-080-039. WHEREAS, Ad Art Signs, Incorporated filed Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Plot Plan on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission denied said Plot Plan; WHEREAS, Ad Art Signs, Inc. filed and Appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Appeal application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Appeal on July 13, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Appeal; and WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Appeal. R:1SISTAFFRPT1249PP.CC 711M Ub 4 NOW, TSEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: ^' Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be approved unless the following findings can be made: 1. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. R:MSTAFFRFr%249PP.CC 711/93 M 5 D. The City Council, in denying proposed Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The project as designed and conditioned will adversely affect the public health or welfare. The Plot Plan as proposed does not conform to the logical development of its proposed site, and is not compatible with the present and future development of the surrounding property. Current heights of existing free-standing, freeway -oriented signage along Interstate 15 range from 25 feet to 40 feet in height. 2. The scale of the sign in terms of size and intensity will create a negative impact upon the environment. The project creates excessive light which while meeting the letter of Ordinance No. 655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance) does not meet the intent of Ordinance No. 655. The sign would be responsible for emitting a considerable amount of light into the sky which would have a negative effect on the Mt. Palomar Observatory. RASISTAFFRPTkU9PP.CC 7/1193 k% 6 Section 2. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 1993. J. SAL MUNOZ MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAT-] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No.93- was duly introduced and placed upon the agenda of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 13th day of July, 1993, and that thereafter, said Resolution was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 13th day of July, 1993, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCH ME IBERS: NOES: COUNCII.MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCII.MENIBERS: JUNE S. GREEK CITY CLERK RASISTAFFRPrV49PP.CC WIM M 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 93- RASISTAFFRPT1249PP.CC 7/1/93 klb ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING THE APPEAL OF VARIANCE NO. 13, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMIVIISSION'S DECISION TO DENY VARIANCE NO. 13, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION A SEVENTY-THREE (73) FOOT HIGH SIGN WITH ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD LOCATED AT 26631 YNEZ ROAD (ON THE REAR PORTION OF TOYOTA OF TEMECULA, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-080-039. WHEREAS, Ad Art Signs, Incorporated filed Variance No. 13 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Variance application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Variance on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission denied said Variance; WHEREAS, Ad Art Signs, Inc. filed and Appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny Variance No. 13 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Appeal application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Appeal on July 13, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Appeal; and WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Appeal; 1R:1SISTAFFRPT1249PP.CC 7/1/93 Ub 9 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Finding That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. Pursuant to Section 18.27.d. of Ordinance No. 348, no Variance may be approved unless the applicant demonstrates the adjustment does not constitute a grant of special privileges that is inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated, and the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. R:\S\STAFFRPT\249PP.Cc 7/1/93 k% 10 D. The City Council, in denying the proposed Variance, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The adjustment does constitute a grant of special privileges that is inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. All of the automobile dealerships have already received approval for six (6) foot high free-standing signs which identify their businesses. 2. The proposed use will be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community because the project creates excessive light, which while meeting the letter of Ordinance No. 655 (Mt. Palomar Lighting Ordinance) does not meet the intent of Ordinance No. 655. The project will therefore have a negative effect on the Mt. Palomar Observatory. RAMSTAFFRM249MCC 711/93 ki 11 Section 2. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of July, 1993. J. SAL MUNOZ MAYOR ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF IIMWULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No.93- was placed upon the agenda of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 13th day of July, 1993, and that thereafter, said Resolution was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 13th day of July, 1993, by the following roll call vote: Ate: COUNCELM ABERS: NOES: COUNCILMEl1MERS: ABSENT: COUNCHAfEMBERS: JUNE S. GREEK CITY CLERK RAS\STAFFRM249PP.CC 7/1/93 Wb 12 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 7, 1993 R:1SISTAFFRFr%249PP.CC 7/1/93 k1b 13 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JUNE 7. 1993 - Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. Commissioner Chiniaeff stated that he feels an additional four to five fifteen gallon trees should be placed along the southerly boundary of the applicant's property, in between the trees of the abutting property. Commissioner Hoagland stated that he feels that the additional trees are necessary along the southerly and northerly boundary of the property. The overall concensus of the Commission is to require the applicant to plant an additional four to five trees along the northerly and southerly property lines. Commissioner Blair stated that she would like to see additional trees along the back of the property adjacent to the freeway. It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by Commissioner Hoagland to approve the Landscape Plan for the Ynez Car Care Center (Conditional Use Permit No. 2) with an additional twelve to fifteen, fifteen gallon trees to be placed along the northerly and southerly, and rear property lines. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS DRAFT 5. Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No 2 Variance No 13 Proposed Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee - A seventy-three (73) foot high sign with a three hundred -ten (310) square foot electronic message board. Located at 26631 Ynez Road, the rear portion of Toyota of Temecula. Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. Mr. Fagan advised the Commission of a modification to Condition No. 9 of the Conditions of Approval as follows: 9. All members of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall who choose to advertise on the electronic message board portion of the sigh shall submit an agreement with the City of Temecula which will be recorded with the County Recorder. The agreement shall stipulate that all members and future members will forego PCMIN06/07/93 -3- 6/13193 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT TUNE 7. 1993 requesting any additional free standing freeway oriented signage as long as the Temecula Valley Atuo Mall Marquee is erected. The addition of any future advertisers on the electronic message board of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee will cause the agreement to be amended. No additional advertisers will be permitted to be displayed upon the Marquee until the amended agreement is recorded. Commissioner Chiniaeff expressed a concern regarding the height of the sign and questioned why the applicant was proposing a 75' high sign. Mr. Fagan explained that inorder for the top portion of the sign; the hot air balloon, to have proper dimensions, it was necessary for the sign to be 75' in height. Assistant City Attorney John Cavanaugh Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 6:50 P.M. Duane Contento, Ad & Art Signs, Inc., 19603 Figuoroa Street, Los Angeles, explained the design concept of the sign. Steve Palmer, representing the Temecula Valley Auto Dealers Association, provided a summary of the proposal for the auto mall marquee. Dan Atwood, 26631 Ynez Road, Temecula, General Manager of Toyota of Temecula, expressed his support for the auto mall marquee. Phyllis Barton, 42031 Main Street, Temecula, questioned the use of Redevelopment Fund for the sign and asked if funds were available for a similar sign advertising Old Town Temecula. Bonnie Corbin, 225 Avenue D, Redondo Beach, Old Town property owner, stated she is in support of anything that will assist the local business economy. Commissioner Blair questioned why the sign was designed with a reader board and stated she felt that a Cal Trans sign advertising the auto mall would be sufficient. Commissioner Blair also questioned how many cities, which had these types of auto mall marquees, funded the signs. Planning Director Gary Thornhill stated the idea is that the individual dealerships would advertise on this one sign as opposed to having individual free-standing signs along the freeway. Commissioner Hoagland stated he feels the size of the sign will have a negative impact on the community and will be aesthetically displeasing. PCMIN06/07193 .4- 6113193 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DRAFT JUNE 7, 1993 ,-- Commissioner Chiniaeff stated he feels the auto mall marquee is warranted however, he questioned the need the 75' height and the longevity of the hot air balloon as a image for the City of Temecula. Chairman Fahey expressed concern that there is not sufficient evidence to grant a variance and the City may be setting a precedent by approving the sign. Commissioner Ford stated he is concerned with the height of the sign and suggested that the proposal be sent back to staff to investigate whether the Cal Trans sign could be moved and if the sign could be decreased in height and dimension. It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Blair to close the public hearing at 7:15 P.M. and recommend Denial of Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2; and Deny Resolution No. 93-Ingxty recommending Approval of Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2, and Deny Resolution No. 93-(next) recommending Approval of Variance No. 13, based on the findings that the sign is too large and is aesthetically displeasing and will have a negative impact on the community because of its size, bulk and intensity. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Hoagland, Fahey NOES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None 6. Old Town Specific Plan Proposal to adopt a Specific Plan adopting Land Use standards and design guidelines in and around the Old Town area. Senior Planner John Meyer and Associate Planner David Hogan presented the staff report. Mark Brodeur, owner and principal of Urban Design Studios, land use and design consultant, provided an overview of the Old Town Specific Plan process, highlighting the circulation element and the Shoot -Out Zone. Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 7:50 P.M. John Moramarco, P.O. Box 906, Temecula, expressed his support of the Old Town Specific Plan. Mr. Moramarco suggested that the proposed wood plank boardwalks are not the most practical and an alternative design should be considered. PCMIN06/07/93 5- 6/13/93 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JUNE 7, 1993 R.\S\STAFFRPT\249PP.CC 7/1/93 kj 14 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION June 7, 1993 Case No.: Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2; Variance No. 13 Prepared By: Matthew Fagan RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMEND Adoption of the Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2; ADOPT Resolution No. 93- recommending Aooroval of Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2, based on the Findings and Analysis contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; and ADOPT Resolution No. 93- recommending Aooroval of Variance No. 13, based on the Findings and Analysis contained in the Staff Report. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Temecula Automobile Dealers Association/Ad Art Signs, Inc. REPRESENTATIVE: Duane Contento, Ad Art Signs, Inc. PROPOSAL: To erect a free-standing sign for the Temecula Valley Auto Mall which includes a three hundred -ten (310) square foot electronic message board. LOCATION: Western portion of the Toyota of Temecula site, approximately ninety-eight (98) feet north of the southern property line (26631 Ynez Road) EXISTING ZONING: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: M-M (Manufacturing - Medium) South: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) East: C-1 /C-P (General Commercial) West: Interstate 15 PROPOSED ZONING: Not requested EXISTING LAND USE: Toyota of Temecula Auto Dealership RAS\STAFFRPT\249PP.Pc 6/2/93 klb 1 SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. (ACS) South: Ynez Car Care Center East: Toyota of Temecula West: Interstate 15 PROJECT STATISTICS Sign Height: Height at Top of Message Board: Square footage of "Balloon" portion of sign: Square footage of electronic message board: Total square footage of sign: BACKGROUND Option No. 1: Seventy-three (73) feet Options No. 2 & 3: Seventy-five (75) feet Approximately forty-three (43) feet Approximately five -hundred eighty-eight (588) square feet Three hundred ten (310) square feet Eight hundred ninety-eight (898) square feet The Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee is a project in the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 1993-1997). Classified as a Priority I, total City funding for the project is $280,000. This project was approved in concept by the City Council (5-0 vote) at the September 22, 1992 meeting. Staff is processing the application at the direction of the City Council. Plot Plan No. 249 (Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee) was submitted to the Planning Department on September 15, 1992. This was a proposal for a seventy-three (73) foot high sign (Option No. 1 of the sign). Prior to the Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting, Staff determined that a Variance request must accompany the Plot Plan application for the total square footage of the sign (the balloon portion plus the electronic message board) and the height of the sign. The sign as proposed is eight hundred ninety-eight (898) square feet. Section 19.4 of Ordinance No. 348 (On -site Advertising Structures and Signs) states: "the maximum surface area of a sign located within 660 feet of the nearest edge of a freeway shall not exceed 150 square feet and shall not exceed a maximum height of 45 feet." A flag test was conducted on April 1, 1993 to determine the appropriate height for the sign. The results of the flag test are discussed below in the Analysis section of this report. Staff requested that the applicant submit two (2) additional designs and color renderings of the sign for the Planning Commission to consider. Staff requested this on order to give the Planning Commission the opportunity to view different designs of the sign. The applicant submitted two (2) additional renderings which were seventy-five (75) feet in height (Options No. 2 and 3). RASISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 612193 klb 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION As mentioned above, three options for the proposed sign were submitted to the Planning Department (these options focused primarily for the design of the balloon portion of the sign). Option No. 1 (reference Attachment No. 4.E.1) of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee is seventy-three (73) feet high and Options No. 2 and 3 (reference Attachment No. 4.E.2 and Attachment No. 4.E.3 respectively) are seventy-five (75) feet high. The sign faces northbound and southbound traffic along Interstate 15. The faces of the sign are the same for both elevations. Square footage for the balloon portion of the sign is approximately five - hundred eighty-eight (588) square feet and three hundred ten (310) square feet for the electronic message board. The dimensions of the electronic message board is ten (10) feet high by thirty-one (31) feet wide. The top of the message board is approximately forty-three (43) feet from grade. ANALYSIS The Sign As A Capital Improvement Proiect As mentioned above, the Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee is a City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 1993-1997). Classified as a Priority I, total City funding for the project is $280,000. This was approved by the City Council (5-0 vote) at the September 22, 1992 meeting. The source of the funds is the Redevelopment Agency. The auto dealerships will be responsible for the purchase, installation, operation and maintenance of the sign. Justification For Seventy -Three (73)/Seventy-Five (75) Foot High Sign Staff originally requested that the applicant provide justification for a 73 foot high sign. The applicant submitted a letter to Staff (reference Attachment No. 6), stating four (4) reasons for a 73 foot high sign. First, the applicant states the Overland Road overpass will be installed, ultimately blocking views of the sign if the sign was lower in height. Preliminary height estimates place the top of the overpass between 22 and 25 feet above the grade of the freeway. Secondly, the entire sign (balloon and electronic message board) needs to be visible and seventy-three (73) feet will accomplish this. Third, vegetation along the Interstate 15 freeway will obscure the electronic message board portion of the sign at heights lower than 33 feet above grade, and lastly, due to the elevation of the site itself (in relation to the other auto dealerships), the sign will need to be 73 feet high. Upon submittal of Option No. 1, Staff requested that the balloon portion of the sign be reshaped to more closely resemble the shape of an actual hot air balloon. Due to this request, the height of the balloon was increased two (2) feet, to a total of seventy-five (75) feet. Variance For Sign Area Parameters contained within Section 19.4.a. (On -Site Advertising Structures and Signs) of Ordinance No. 348 allow signs located within 660 feet of the nearest edge of a freeway right of way line to a maximum height of forty-five (45) feet, with a surface area not to exceed one hundred fifty feet (150). The proposed Temecula Valley Auto Mall sign options are seventy- three (73) feet and seventy-five (75) feet high, with total sign area of eight hundred ninety- eight (898) square feet. A variance request is necessary for the increase in total sign area and height. Currently, there are eight (8) auto dealerships contained within the auto mall R:%S\STAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 Wb 3 (Temecula Acura, Griffin Oldsmobile-Cadillac-GMC Trucks -Pontiac, Paradise Chevrolet, Temecula Dodge Chrysler, Temecula Jeep -Eagle, Temecula Mazda, Nissan of Temecula, and --� Toyota of Temecula Valley) and more are anticipated within the area. The auto mall is located approximately mid way between Rancho California and Winchester Roads. Access to the individual auto dealerships is primarily off of Ynez Road, with two dealerships taking access off of Motor Car Parkway. Due to the location of the auto mall and the limited visibility of the dealerships along Interstate 15, Staff could make findings to support individual freestanding signs along the freeway. Cumulatively, maximum freeway -oriented signage permitted for each individual dealership under Ordinance No. 348 would exceed the amount of signage for the proposed auto mall marquee. Visual impacts are minimized by permitting one sign for the auto mall, as opposed to individual signs for each automobile dealership. A Condition of Approval has been included which requires an agreement be recorded by the existing dealerships and amended to include any future dealerships who would be utilizing the Temecula Valley Auto Mall marquee. This agreement would restrict the dealerships from applying for freeway oriented signage. Variance for Sian Height Based upon the flag test (discussed below), the maximum height of the sign should be approximately seventy-three (73) feet (if Option No. 1 is selected for approval) or seventy-five (75) feet (if either Options No. 2 or 3 are selected for approval). The top of the sign would not be visible southbound on Interstate 15 (north of Winchester Road) and northbound on Interstate 15 (south of Rancho California Road), therefore, any increase in height of the sign would not be warranted. Within the expanse of Interstate 15 between Winchester and Rancho California Roads, the top of the sign (at 73/75 feet in height) will be visible to passing motorists. A Variance is necessary due to the fact that the balloon portion of the sign would not resemble an actual hot air balloon if it were smaller in height. Siting of the Sign/Results of the Flag Test Selecting a final location for the sign posed one of the greatest constraints on this project. Not only were there physical constraints (an existing EMWD easement, an underground sewer line and liquefaction potential), but also constraints raised by the concerns of the adjacent property owners. The proposed sign location satisfies both adjacent property owners (reference Attachment No. 9 and No. 10). Staff requested that the applicant conduct a flag test and the test was executed on April 1, 1993. The flag was observed at three locations, and at heights of seventy-three (73), sixty- eight (68), sixty-three (63), forty (40) and thirty-five (35) feet. The first three heights were utilized to represent the top of the "balloon" section of the sign. The last two heights represented the top of the electronic message board. The flag was first observed three -tenths (3/10)of a mile north of the Winchester Road off ramp on southbound Interstate 15. The top of the sign was visible over the overpass, however, it was too far away to be distinguishable. The second observation point was 3/10 of a mile south of the Winchester Road off -ramp on northbound Interstate 15. This proved to be within immediate proximity of the sign, therefore, all elements of the sign would be visible to passing motorists. The third site to observe the flag test was immediately off of the exit ramp at Rancho California Road and northbound Interstate 15. The flag was clearly visible at seventy-three (73) feet (the top of the balloon portion of the sign). The electronic message board was visible at forty (40) feet, R:\SISTAFFRPT\249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 4 however, a CALTRANS sign would obscure portions of the message board as motorists drew closer to the sign. Based upon the flag test, the following conclusions have been reached: The maximum height of the sign should be approximately those requested at seventy-three (73) feet or seventy-five (75) feet (depending upon the design of sign chosen). Due to the lack of visibility of the top of the sign southbound on Interstate 15 (north of Winchester Road) and northbound on Interstate 15 (south of Rancho California Road), any increase in height of the sign would not prove to be effective in attracting motorists. Within the expanse of Interstate 15 between Winchester and Rancho California Roads, the top of the sign (at 73/75 feet in height) will be visible to passing motorists. A maximum height of approximately forty-three (43) feet from grade for the electronic message board will also provide effective visibility to motorists within this portion of the freeway. Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) Easement The proposed sign is located directly on an existing EMWD easement and above a sewer line. This issue was raised at the initial DRC meeting and the applicant was informed that some form of clearance must be obtained from EMWD prior to the project being scheduled for a Planning Commission meeting. The applicant conducted a preliminary geotechnical study for the site and forwarded this information along with footing designs for the sign to EMWD for their review and approval. Staff received a letter dated May 18, 1993 (reference Attachment No. 8) which states: "The District cannot approve the present design," however, the letter further states: "We will allow you to continue the review process of the project but request that you hold off on issuing the construction permit until the District has accepted the design." Liauefaction/Seismic Hazards Based upon information contained in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report (prepared by Geotechnical & Environmental Engineers, Inc.) for this project, the potential for seismically induced settlement is low. In addition, the report concludes the potential for compromise of the site caused by subsidence appears to be low and the potential for compromise to the ground surface and/or proposed structure, in the unlikely event of liquefaction is low. Although the subject project site lies within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone, the report concludes that "no active faults are known to traverse the site." Consistency With Ordinance No 655 (Palomar Observatory) Liahtina Ordinance The City of Temecula is within Zone "B" as identified in Ordinance No. 655. Zone "B' is between fifteen (15) and forty-five (45) miles from the Palomar Observatory. The exterior illumination of the balloon portion of the sign and the electronic message board are considered Class I lighting under Ordinance No. 655. This type of lighting is utilized for signs when color rendition is important. The applicant proposes to utilize lamps which are above 4050 Lumens. These types of lamps are allowed if they are fully shielded. The sign as proposed meets these requirements. Staff transmitted the project to The California Institute of Technology for comments regarding consistency of the project with Ordinance No. 655. Dr. Robert Brucatto responded to Staff regarding the project stating that the project met the letter of the Ordinance; however, it did not meet the "intent" of the Ordinance, which is to limit the amount of light emitted into the sky. RAS\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 8/2/93 $db 5 CALTRANS Approval Approval from CALTRANS is required for all advertising displays which are within 660 feet from the edge of the right-of-way where the copy is visible from interstate highways. The applicant has submitted the proposed sign to CALTRANS for review and has received their approval (reference Attachment No. 11). Electronic Message Board The electronic message board is approximately thirty-one (31) feet wide and ten (10) feet tall. The message board will be in operation from sunrise until 11:00 pm. It is anticipated that the sign will display the names of the automobile dealerships which have signed the agreement discussed in the Variance section of this report, the products which they sell, and events which are occurring at the auto mall. No moving objects are permitted on the sign. EXISTING ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The proposed sign is consistent with the existing Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) zoning. Signage (on -site) is a permitted use provided a plot plan has been approved. The proposed sign is not consistent with Section 19.4 of Ordinance No. 348 (On -Site Advertising Structures and Signs) and therefore a Variance request has been made concurrently with the Plot Plan application. The Draft Land Use Designation for the project site is Service Commercial (SC). Section IV. A.2.d. of the Land Use Element includes auto dealerships as a "typical use" for the zone, and signage is a necessary component associated with this use. It is likely that the signage will be consistent with the future General Plan due to the fact that it is consistent with existing zoning and the typical uses permitted in the Service Commercial land use designation. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), 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 will not be considered to be significant due to mitigation measures contained in the project design and in the Conditions of Approval added to the project. These will mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and therefore a Negative Declaration should be adopted. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS The Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee is a project :in the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 1993-1997). Staff is processing the application at the direction of the City Council. Plot Plan No. 249 (Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee) was submitted to the Planning Department on September 15, 1992. This was a proposal for a seventy-three (73) foot high sign (Option No. 1 of the sign). Prior to the Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting, Staff determined that a Variance request must accompany the Plot Plan application for the total square footage of the sign (the balloon portion plus the electronic message board) and the overall height of the sign. A DRC meeting was held on October 15, 1992. A flag test was conducted on April 1, 1993 to determine the appropriate height for the sign. Staff R:\S\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 6 requested that the applicant submit two (2) additional designs and color renderings of the sign for the Planning Commission to consider. The applicant submitted two (2) additional renderings which were seventy-five (75) feet in height (Options No. 2 and 3). The sign faces both northbound and southbound traffic along Interstate 15. Square footage for the balloon portion of the sign is approximately five -hundred eighty-eight (588) square feet and three hundred ten (310) square feet for the electronic message board. A variance request is necessary for the increase in total sign area. The dimensions of the electronic message board are ten (10) feet high by thirty-one (31) feet wide. The top of the message board is approximately forty-three (43) feet from grade. The proposed sign is located directly on an existing EMWD Easement and above a sewer line. Staff received a letter from EMWD which states: "The District cannot approve the present design," however, the letter further states: "We will allow you to continue the review process of the project but request that you hold off on issuing the construction permit until the District has accepted the design." A Preliminary Geotechnical Report was prepared for this project and the report concluded the potential for seismically induced settlement is low, the potential for compromise of the site caused by subsidence appears to be low and the potential for compromise to the ground surface and/or proposed structure, in the unlikely event of liquefaction is low, and although the subject project site lies within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone, no active faults are known to traverse the site. Staff transmitted the project to The California Institute of Technology for comments regarding consistency of the project with Ordinance No. 655 (Palomar Observatory Lighting Ordinance). Dr. Robert Brucatto responded to Staff regarding the project stating that the project met the letter of the Ordinance, however, it did not meet the "intent" of the Ordinance, which is to limit the amount of light emitted into the sky. CALTRANS reviews all advertising displays which are within 660 feet from the edge of the right-of-way where the copy is visible from interstate highways. The applicant has submitted the proposed sign to CALTRANS for review and has received their approval. FINDINGS Plot Plan No. 249. Amendment No. 2 1. There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State, law due to the fact that the proposed sign is consistent with the existing Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) zoning. Signage (on - site) is a permitted use provided a plot plan has been approved. The Draft Land Use Designation for the project site is Service Commercial (SC). Section IV. A.2.d. of the Land Use Element includes auto dealerships as a "typical use" for the zone, and signage is a necessary component associated with this use. It is likely that the signage will be consistent with the future General Plan due to the fact that it is consistent with existing zoning and the typical uses permitted in the Service Commercial land use designation. RASISTAFFRM249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 7 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that the proposed signage is consistent with the existing (Scenic Highway Commercial) zoning, the Draft Land Use Designation of Service Commercial and the permitted uses of the surrounding area. It is likely that the signage will be consistent with the future General Plan due to the fact that it is consistent with existing zoning and the typical uses permitted in the Service Commercial land use designation. Commercial uses exist within proximity of the site and are also proposed to be located within the subject project area, each of which include on -site signage. 3. The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws, due to the fact that the proposed use complies with Sections 9.53 (Development Standards for the C-P-S Zone), 18.27 (Variances), and 18.30 (Plot Plans) of Ordinance No. 348. 4. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures for impacts identified in the initial study for the project. 5. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Surrounding property owners have expressed their satisfaction with the proposed signage. In addition, potential signage for each individual dealership along Interstate 15 could equal or exceed the amount of signage proposed for the auto mall marquee. 6. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the Initial Study prepared for Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2. 7. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed project. The proposed sign is located over an existing Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) easement. EMWD has reviewed the proposal and has given their approval for the City to continue processing Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2. 8. Said findings are supported by exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. Variance No. 13 1. The adjustment does not constitute a grant of special privileges that is inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. The sign is considered on -site due to the fact that it is located within the Temecula Valley Auto Mall. Currently, there are eight (8) auto dealerships contained within the auto mall and more are anticipated within the area. Cumulatively, signage permitted for each individual dealership under Ordinance No. 348 could equal and possibly exceed the amount of signage proposed for the auto mall marquee. Freeway exposure of the auto mall is limited due to the location of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall (approximately mid -way between Rancho California and Winchester Roads). The marquee will serve to identify the approximate site of the auto mall to passing motorists. RASISTAFFRPTU49PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 8 2. The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws, due to the fact that the proposed use complies with Section 18.27 (Variances) of Ordinance No. 348. The use is expressly authorized in the C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) zone. 3. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health safety and welfare of the community. An initial study was conducted for the project and a Negative Declaration with mitigation measures is recommended for the project. In addition, the cumulative impact of individual signage will be mitigated through the utilization of one collective sign for all automobile dealerships. R:1SISTAFFRPn249PP.Pc 6/2/93 klb 9 Attachments: 1. Resolution No. 93 - - Blue Page 11 2. Resolution No. 93 - - Blue Page 17 3. Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 22 4. Initial Study - Blue Page 26 5. Exhibits - Blue Page 43 6. Letter from ACS dated October 12, 1993 - Blue Page 44 7. Letter from Ad Art Justifying Height of Sign dated November 9, 1992 - Blue Page 45 8. Letter from Eastern Municipal Water District dated May 18, 1993 - Blue Page 46 9. Letter from ACS dated April 16, 1993 - Blue Page 47 10. Letter from J. Larry Gabele dated May 12, 1993 - Blue Page 48 11. CALTRANS permit dated May 17, 1993 - Blue Page 49 RAS\STAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93 - R:\S\STAFFRM249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONSTRUCT A SEVENTY-THREE FOOT SIGN WITH AN ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD ON A PARCEL CONTAINING 5.07 ACRES LOCATED AT 26631 YNEZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921- 080-039 WHEREAS, Ad Art Signs, Incorporated filed Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Plot Plan application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said plot Plan on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Plot Plan; and SAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Plot Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: RASISTAFFRM249PP.PC 6/2/93 kib 12 a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which --� will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. C. The proposed Plot Plan is consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: 1. plan. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The Planning Commission finds, in recommending approval of projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: a. There is reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 as proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. D. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no plot plan may be approved unless the following findings can be made: 1. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances. RASISTAFFRPn249PP.PC 612193 klb 13 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. E. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the proposed Plot Plan, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. There is a reasonable probability that Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance with State, law due to the fact that the proposed sign is consistent with the existing Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) zoning. Signage (on -site) is a permitted use provided a plot plan has been approved. The Draft Land Use Designation for the project site is Service Commercial (SC). Section IV. A.2.d. of the Land Use Element includes auto dealerships as a "typical use" for the zone, and signage is a necessary component associated with this use. It is likely that the signage will be consistent with the future General Plan due to the fact that it is consistent with existing zoning and the typical uses permitted in the Service Commercial land use designation. 2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that the proposed signage is consistent with the existing (Scenic Highway Commercial) zoning, the Draft Land Use Designation of Service Commercial and the permitted uses of the surrounding area. It is likely that the signage will be consistent with the future General Plan due to the fact that it is consistent with existing zoning and the typical uses permitted in the Service Commercial land use designation. Commercial uses exist within proximity of the site and are also proposed to be located within the subject project area, each of which include on -site signage. 3. The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws, due to the fact that the proposed use complies with Sections 9.53 (Development Standards for the C-P-S Zone), 18.27 (Variances), and 18.30 (Plot Plans) of Ordinance No. 348. 4. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or welfare, due to the fact that the Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures for impacts identified in the initial study for the project. 5. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Surrounding property owners have expressed their satisfaction with the proposed signage. In addition, potential signage for each individual dealership along Interstate 15 could equal or exceed the amount of signage proposed for the auto mall marquee. 6. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural environment as determined in the Initial Study prepared for Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2. RAS\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 6/2/93 kib 14 7. The design of the project and the type of improvements are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the property within the proposed --�, project. The proposed sign is located over an existing Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) easement. EMWD has reviewed the proposal and has given their approval for the City to continue processing Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2. 8. Said findings are supported by exhibits and environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference. F. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Plot Plan proposed conforms to the logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the. present and future development of the surrounding property. Section 2. Environmental Compliance An Initial Study prepared for this project 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 Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 to erect a seventy-three (73) foot high sign with electronic message board located at 26631 Ynez Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 921- 080-039 subject to the following conditions: A. Attachment No. 3, attached hereto. RASISTAFFRPn249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 15 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day June, 1993. IINDA L. FAHEY 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 7th day of June, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY RASISTAFFRPT%249PP.PC 6/2/93 kib 16 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 93- R:1S\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 612193 Wb 17 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 93- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMIVIISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VARIANCE NO. 13 TO PERMIT A SEVENTY-THREE FOOT HIGH SIGN IN THE SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (C-P S) ZONE LOCATED AT THE WESTERN PORTION OF 26631 YNEZ ROAD * . WHEREAS, Ad Art Signs, Incorporated filed Variance No. 13 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Variance application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Variance on June 7, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said Variance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMVIISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the following requirements are met: general plan. 1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the 2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, each of the following: a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. RAS\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 612193 klb 18 b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. A. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General Plan. B. The proposed Variance is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit: 1. plan. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general 2. The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following: a. There is reasonable probability that Variance No. 13 as proposed ^� will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan. C. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. C. Pursuant to Section 18.27.d. of Ordinance No. 348, no Variance may be approved unless the applicant demonstrates the adjustment does not constitute a grant of special privileges that is inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated, and the proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. D. The Planning Commission, in approving the proposed Variance, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The adjustment does not constitute a grant of special privileges that is inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the Property is situated. The sign is considered on -site due to the fact that it is located within the --. Temecula Valley Auto Mall. Currently, there are eight (8) auto dealerships contained within RAS\STAFFRP'T\249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 19 the auto mall and more are anticipated within the area. Cumulatively, signage permitted for each individual dealership under Ordinance No. 348 could equal and possibly exceed the amount of signage proposed for the auto mall marquee. Freeway exposure of the auto mall is limited due to the location of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall (approximately mid -way between Rancho California and Winchester Roads). The marquee will serve to identify the approximate site of the auto mall to passing motorists. 2. The proposed use or action complies with State planning and zoning laws, due to the fact that the proposed use complies with Section 18.27 (Variances) of Ordinance No. 348. The use is expressly authorized in the C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) zone. 3. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. An initial study was conducted for the project and a Negative Declaration with mitigation measures is recommended for the project. In addition, the cumulative impact of individual signage will be mitigated through the utilization of one collective sign for all automobile dealerships. E. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Variance proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. Section 2. Environmental Compliance An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment, and a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Variance No. 13 for the erection of a seventy-three (73) foot high sign with electronic message board, located in the Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) Zone, at the western portion of Toyota of Temecula (26631 Ynez Road). R:ISISTAFFRPTU49PP.PC 6/2/93 kib 20 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of June 1993. LINDA L. FAHEY 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 7th day of June, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: NOES: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY FtASISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 21 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RASISTAFFRPn249PP.PC 6/2/93 k16 22 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 Project Description: A two (2) sided, seventy-three (73) foot high sign with electronic message board for the Temecula Valley Auto Mall located at the rear portion of Toyota of Temecula (26631 Ynez Road) Assessor's Parcel No.: 921-080-039 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT GENERAL Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 is a proposal for a two (2) sided seventy-three (73) foot high sign with electronic message board for the Temecula Valley Auto Mall. Hours of Operation shall be limited to between sunrise and 11:00 pm daily. Only those dealerships contained within the Temecula Valley Auto Mall may advertise on the electronic message board. 2. The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attach, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the permittee shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. 3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 4. The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as shown on Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2 marked Exhibit D, or as amended by these conditions. 5. Elevations shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E. R:\S\STAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 23 6. Colors used in the construction of the sign shall be in substantial conformance with that shown on Exhibit E (color rendering). Balloon Colors: Burgundy (3630-49) Raspberry (3630-133) Vivid Rose (3630-78) Vermillion (VT 0421) Indigo (VT 1920) Deep Blue (VT 1207) Blue (VT 1317) Lt. Blue Violet (3630-319) Electronic Message Board: Dark Terra Cotta Balloon Basket: Tan w/Black detailing, Gold Neon Outlining Sign Supports: Two toned: Ivory and Peach "Auto Mall" portion: White letters, Terra Cotta background Letters and Stripes: Lemon yellow (3630-1 15) 7. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any use allowed by this permit. WITHIN FORTY-EIGHT (48) HOURS OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT: 8. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of One Thousand, Three Hundred Dollars ($1,300.00), which includes the One Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 71 1.4(d)(2) plus the Fifty Dollar ($50.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 71 1.4(c). PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 9. All members of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall who chose to advertise on the electronic message board portion of the sign shall submit an agreement with the City of Temecula which will be recorded with the County Recorder. The agreement shall stipulate that all members and future members will forego requesting any additional freeway oriented signage as long as the Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee is erected. The addition of any future advertisers on the electronic message board of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee will cause the agreement to be amended. No additional advertisers will be permitted to be displayed upon the Marquee until the amended agreement is recorded. 011 R:1S%STAFFRPT1249PP.PC 612193 klb 24 /I - BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 10. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights -of -way. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No. 655. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 11. Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) shall approve the footing design allowing for the continuing operation and maintenance of the sewer facility in the proposed sign location. 12. The applicant shall record an agreement with EMWD regarding operation and maintenance of the sewer facility. Said agreement shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works. OTHER AGENCIES 13. The applicant shall comply with the provisions set forth in the Eastern Municipal Water District's transmittal dated June 2, 1993, a copy of which is attached. RASISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 25 astern MunicipalWate-rDistrict Gre.er+Wegn J. Atxkvw add.ep Lead C48"d Y.dwift "A Sherry U-sw q/ 7,6w Xrj A%&w Jr wr DOWN o/ d.rv.re Ckweta Do* 7"Mw Ae Vn N. Cm June 2, 1993 Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: P.P. 249, Amendment No. 2/Variance No. 13 Temecula Auto Mall Marques Dear Mr. Fagan; tea► ewwr a Cabam rM W, , s ft a AM#+dp. vK. pant Cp....r � D.� scum W07 G wwIR The District Is $ngineerinq Department has been in contact with Adart signs no.. regarding design revisions to the marques. The District objects to the subject Project the marques would intrude into the District ss sewer sasementates and Present definite maintenance related problems to the District. Therefore, the Districtis conditions of approval for the subject project include marques design revisions to the satisfaction of the District. Very Truly Yours, EASTERN MUNICIP4L Water District David G. , Crosley Senior.Znginser AB 93-SS8 DGC/rh cc: Jos Van sickle John Pendar ✓ Victor Barreto Carl Drucka Mail To: Pose Office &u 8300 . Ssa)seiato, California Maio, Off=: 2045 S. Sin jseineo Avenue, yen sd... Ttlephone (909) 925-7676 . FIX (909) 929-0257 - - _ --- 3 wtomes 92382-B300 . sei,►ice/BnBinxsio8 Annec 4e E. Oalr1aed Ague, Hsr w U, ------- ^, ATTACHMENT NO. 4 INITIAL STUDY R:ISISTAFFRFn249PP.PC 612193 kib 26 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 R:1SISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 Wb 43 ATTACERW ENT NO. 6 LETTER FROM ACS DATED OCTOBER 12, 1992 R:1SISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 44 Advancad Cardiovascular SyMMS, Inc. 28531 Yr•ez Road Temec-ila. r.A 92591-4625 (714) 694.2400 October 12, 1992 Mr. Gregory Erikson Kemper Real Estate Management Company 28765 Sina_le Oak Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Temecula Valley Anita ]loll Sign Dear Greg: Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. (ACS) does not object to the appropriate use of signage in the area. The subject sign is to be constructed on the northwest comer of the Toyota dealership. This location is not acceptable to ACS since it places the sign between our manufacturing campus and the dealership. We recommend the southwest corner of the Toyota property to construct the sign. This would more properly identify the location of the retail businesses associated with the auto dealers.* �— The seventy foot sign is outside the guidelines of the CC&R restrictions. Approval would represent a challenge in how to analyze a future request. our concern in this area is not a "show stopper" and we defer to your judgement concerning the design. Please keep ACS appraised of the decision. Thank you for asking for our input. Best regar s, David S. Olson Facilities Manager cc S. Johnson, ACS D.Dixon, City of Temecula B.Butler, Mesa homes autosign ,1 /�QOF ATTACUAIENT NO. 7 LETTER FROM AD ART JUSTIFYING HEIGHT OF SIGN DATED NOVEMBER 9, 1992 R:1SISTAFFRPTR249PP.PC 612193 klb 45 November 9, 1992 RECEIVED '- Ms. Debbie Ubnuske, Senior Planner Mr. Matthew Fagen, Assistant Planner CITY OF TEMECULA 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 NO V 19 1992 RE: JUSTIFICATION/RATIONAL FOR A 73' FOOT HIGH SIGN Dear Ms. Ubnuske and Mr. Fagan: The pylon sign proposed at the Northwest corner of the Temecula Valley Toyota Dealership in the Temecula Valley Auto Mall was designed at 73'-0" over all height for the following reasons: 1. In the near future, a freeway overpass will be installed blocking a substantial portion of the view to the Auto Mall where the proposed sign is to be located. The bottom portion of the display (electronic message sign) will just about clear the height of the new freeway overpass at 24'0" from the grade. 2. The overall design of this display depicts a realistic pictorial of a hot air balloon that is elongated 28'-0" X 24'-0" hovering over the 10' X 30' electronic message sign. The entire display should be seen by the "passer-by" prior to approaching an off ramp to exit the freeway. 3. There are a considerable amount of trees and vegetation that are existing in front of the sign. Due to normal growth over a period of five years, we believe that if the sign is under 73' feet the vegetation will obscure vision of our sign. 4. Ad Art tried to find other locations that had higher land elevations so we could make the sign shorter. Unfortunately, the other locations were not possible for sign use. Due to the low elevation of this sign location, we need a tall sign to make this sign visible from a considerable distance before potential customers pass the off ramp to the auto mall. Hopefully, you will find these adequate reasons as to why the sign needs to be 73' feet high. Sincerely, AD ART SIGNS, INC. � c� Alex Horowitz, Account Executive AH:sg AD-ART/INCORPORATED 19603 S. FIGUEROA ST. CARSON. CALIFORNIA 90745 PHONE (310) 523-95M FAX (310) 538-1215 ATTACI[IENT NO. 8 LETTER FROM EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT DATED MAY 18, 1993 R:\MSTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 kib 46 Eastern Municipal Water District General,llanaver �1 J. Andrew Schlange eoantel Redwine and Sherrill Director of The Metropolitan pater Dirtnct of .Soathern Calilornia Doyle F. Boen Treararer Rogers M. Cox i^ May 18, 1993 City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Attention;. Matthew Fagan Regarding: Plot +Plan No. 249/Variance No. 13 Dear Mr. Fagan: Board of Directorr Chester C. Gilbert. President Wm. G. Aldridge. Vice President Craig A. Weaver Marion V. Ashley Rodger D. Siems Secretary Mary C. White As requested, District staff is currently reviewing the subject project. The issues needing to be resolved are: (1) Operating and maintenance of the sewer in the proposed sign location area. (2) The footing design with respect to the sewer soil bedding surrounding the pipe. The District cannot approve the present design until the above are considered. Therefore, we offer the following recommendations in your work with Adart Sign, Inc. We will allow you to continue the review process of the project but request that you hold off on issuing the construction permit until the District has formally accepted the design. Thank you for your cooperation in this.matter. Any further questions concerning the proposed project, may be directed to me at (909) 766-1860, extension 409. Very truly yours, Carl Drucke Project Engineer Concurrence by: V�k 3 - 9 —� Victor J. Barreto C. E. p� Subdivisions cc: Jack Gray, Adart Signs, Inc., Carson, CA 90745 Mail To: Post Office Box 8300 a San Jacinto, California 92581-8300 . Telephone (909) 925-7676 • Fax (909) 929-0257 Xfnin Offire- ?n45 S. Can Tacinto Avenue. San Jacinto a Customer Service/ Engineering Annex: 440 E. Oakland Avenue, Hemet. CA ATTACIU ENT NO. 9 LETTER FROM ACS DATED APRIL 16, 1993 8:1SISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 kib 47 Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. 26531 Ynez Road Temecula, CA 92591-4628 (714)694-2400 RECEIVED APR 2 0 1993 April 16, 1993 Ans'd---- --..---- Mr. Matthew Fagen City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Auto Mall Sign Dear Mr. Fagen: We here at Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. agree on the location in which you plan to place the Auto Mall Sign. This location has been designated to the property of the Toyota Dealership on the West corner facing Interstate 15. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Dave Olson at 909-694-2262. Sincere Steven E. Johnson Vice President of Manufacturing cc:. Dan Atwood, Toyota Greg Erickson, Kemper Real Estate Steve Palmer, Nissan Dwayne Contento, Ad Art Dave Olson, ACS ATTACIEWENT NO. 10 LETTER FROM J. LARRY GABELE DATED MAY 12, 1993 R;1SISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 612193 klb 48 GABELE & HUFFMAN, CPA'S A PARTNERSWIP OF PRCFUNCNAL CORPORATIONS May 17, 1993 Matthew Fagan Temecula Planning Department P. 0. Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92390 VIA FAX# (909) 694-1999 RE: Auto Center Signage Dear Matthew: This letter is to confirm my support of the proposed seventy foot auto center sign. I understand that the planned location ror this sign is the west end of the Toyota site approximately midway between their north and south property line. please call me at (619) 587-1985 if you have any further questions. VeL tr ly you s, Gard----- �/. r Gabele }� rtn Yne2 Car Care Center _ 75 EXECUTIVE SQUARE, SUITE 1040, LA JOLLA, CALIFORNIA 92037 (619) 587-1985 • FAX (649) 587-0120 Z 0.d C 0 0 NVWJ- frH I 273aVE) O Z 10 C B S 67.9 61 : 1 1 'c I —S O—C G6 ATTACEMONT NO. 11 CALTRANS PERMIT DATED MAY 17, 1993 R:\S\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 49 0 � k wm k U / �i m �� 2 LU 0 � § § \ _-a&Pca LU g � « s &L r * f § . 2 § xuj0 !o 370 �§@ -a KS e §■� . > §CL § J 2 [ § �. . ® Q § 4 m CL § k ¢§ ©§ \ © Q LU %2 $ - » / m(n2 $§® e c e i \ \\LU \ /$2 ? � 2 7 7 nIK 2'K �§ k 0 �z s ` 2 � � cc � � J � 2 � \ Lb_5 / u`I Z. §#a ■ g«� 0 )%§ z 'wl § 'K LU zR§JE o§$m. 08igj \ )jta2 o-�§§ >b�/� § LU2 H , 0 k-0 E{K�o z&�=2 __»%■ ' 0 C., o�LuIta � £a■» E;i■3 $ §a � � ij} § ATTACHMENT NO. 5 INITIAL STUDY R:ISISTAFFRFnU9PP.CC 7/1/93 M 15 City of Temecula Planning Department Initial Environmental Study I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. Name of Project: Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee 2. Case Numbers: Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2, Variance No. 13 3. Location of Project: Western boundary of Toyota of Temecula (26631 Ynez Road), approximately ninety-eight (98) feet north of the southern property line. 4. Description of Project: Seventy-five (75) foot high sign, with a three -hundred ten (310) square foot electronic message board. 5. Date of Environmental Assessment: May 11, 1993 6. Name of Proponent: Ad Art Signs, Incorporated 7. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 19603 Figueroa Street �— Los Angeles, CA 90745 (310) 523-9500 H. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations to all the answers are provided in Section III) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes Mae No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes geologic substructures? _ _ X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or over covering of the soil? X C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? _ _ X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? _ _ X f. Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion? _ _ X g. The modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake? _ _ X RAS\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 27 Yes Maw No h. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, liquefaction, ground failure, or similar hazards? X i. Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone? X 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X C. Alteration of air movement, temperature, or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? _ _ X I Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? _ _ X b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? _ _ X C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? _ _ X d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? _ _ X e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? _ _ X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? _ _ X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions, withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? _ _ X h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? _ _ X i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? X 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? _ _ X R:MSTAFFRM248PP.PC 6/2193 klb 28 Yes Maw No b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of plants? _ _ X C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _ _ X d. Reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop? _ _ X 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (animals includes all land animals, birds, reptiles, fish, amphibians, shellfish, benthic organisms, and/or insects)? _ _ X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals? _ _ X C. The introduction of new wildlife species into an area? _ _ X d. A barrier to the migration or movement of animals? _ _ X e. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? _ _ X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? _ _ X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X C. Exposure of people to severe vibrations? _ _ X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in light or glare? X 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in: a. Alteration of the present land use of an area? _ _ X b. Alteration to the future planned land use of an area as described in a community or general plan? _ _ X 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X R:\SISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 29 Yes Maybe No 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes, but is not limited to, pesticides, chemicals, oil or radiation)? X b. The use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? _ _ X C. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? _ _ X 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? _ _ X 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? _ _ X 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? _ _ X b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? _ _ X C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation? _ _ X d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? _ _ X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? _ _ X f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? _ _ X b. Police protection? _ _ X C. Schools? _ _ X d. Parks or other recreational facilities? _ _ X RASISTAFFRPT\248PP.PC 6/2/83 klb 30 Yes Maybe No e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? _ _ X f. Other governmental services: _ _ X 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? _ _ X b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to any of the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? _ _ X b. Communications systems? _ _ X C. Water systems? _ _ X d. Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks? _ _ X e. Storm water drainage systems? _ _ X f. Solid waste disposal systems? _ _ X g. Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above? _ _ X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? _ _ X b. The exposure of people to potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive receptors (such as hospitals and schools) to toxic pollutant emissions? _ _ X 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public? _ _ X b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? _ X _ C. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area? _ X 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities? _ _ X RAS\STAFFRPT\248PP.PC 6/2/83 kib 31 Yes Maybe No 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archaeological or historic site? b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? C. Any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? R:%S\STAFFRPT%249PP.PC 8!2/93 klb 32 X — X X X ^< M. DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL r"ACTS i'" Earth La. No. The proposal will not result in unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures. Based upon information contained in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report (prepared by Geotechnical & Environmental Engineers, Inc.) for this project, the proposed sign location is "underlain by engineered fill placed during the construction of the underlying sewer line. Outside the sewer trench backfill the site is underlain by engineered fill placed during the grading of the Toyota dealership." The report additionally concludes: "A moderate potential for ground rupture during a seismic event exists within the site," however, "the potential for seismically induced settlement is low." In addition, the report states "the potential for compromise of the site caused by subsidence appears to be low," and "the potential for compromise to the ground surface and/or proposed structure, in the unlikely event of liquefaction is low." Although the subject project site lies within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone, the report concludes that "no active faults are known to traverse the site." No impacts are foreseen as a result of this project. l.b. Yes. The proposal will result in the disruption, displacement, compaction, or overcovering of the soil. All grading activity requires disruptions, displacements, compaction and overcovering of the soil. Impacts are not considered significant due to the fact that the site has previously been graded and paved, and the amount of disruption, displacement, compaction and overcovering of the soil will be minimal (reference response La.). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. I.C. Yes. As mentioned in response l.b., the topography of the site has already been modified into its current configuration, and therefore minimum changes to the topography will be required for the actualization of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Ld. No. Reference response La. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project in this area. Le. No. The proposed sign will be located in an area which already has already been improved (the rear of the Toyota site). In addition, the construction activities on the site will be minimal for the realization of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project in this area. l.f. No. Reference response Le. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. l .g. No. The proposal will not result in modifications to any wash, channel, creek, river or lake. None exist on the project site, nor are proximate to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. l .h. Yes. The project will expose people who are working at the Toyota of Temecula site and property to earthquake hazards since the project is located within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone (the Wildomar Fault), as well as being located within Southern California (an area which is seismically active), however any potential impacts are not considered significant (reference response La). Any potential impacts will be mitigated through design and construction of the sign which is consistent with the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report and Uniform Building RAS\STAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 33 Code standards. The project will not expose people or property to geologic hazards such as landslides, mudslides, ground failure or liquefaction. No known landslides are located on the site, and the potential for exposure of people to landslides is low due to the topography of the site and the location of the sign. The same is true for mudslides. The above mentioned assumptions are based upon information contained in the City of Temecula General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (dated August 12, 1992) and the Southwest Area Community Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (adopted May, 1989). The potential for ground failure and liquefaction is also low at site based upon information contained in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report. As a result of the mitigation included in the project design, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 1. L Yes. The proposal includes development within an Alquist-Priolo . Special Studies Zone as identified by the State of California, Resource Agency Department of Conservation Special Studies Zone Map. As mentioned in response La., although the subject project site lies within an Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone, the Preliminary Geotechnical Report concludes that "no active faults are known to traverse the site." The Report also states: "the potential for seismically induced settlement is low" and "the potential for compromise of the site caused by subsidence appears to be low." The Report finally concludes: "the potential for compromise to the ground surface and/or proposed structure, in the unlikely event of liquefaction is low." Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Air 2.a,b. Yes. The sign itself will not result in any air emissions, nor in the deterioration of ambient air quality, however, objectionable odors will occur during the construction phase of the project. These impacts will be of short duration and are not considered significant. No impacts are foreseen in the long -run, therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 2.c. No. The project will not result in alterations of air movement, temperature, or moisture, or in any change in climate either locally or regionally. Due to the nature of the project (a sign), no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Water 3.a. No. The proposal will not result in changes to currents, to the course or direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters. The project site is not located adjacent to either marine or fresh water sources. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.b. No. The proposal not will result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns and the rate and amount of surface runoff. The sign is proposed to be located in an area which has previously been rendered impervious by the construction of a driveway and other hardscape. Existing drainage conveyances currently accommodate runoff which is created by the previous project at this site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.c. No. The proposal will not result in alterations to the course or flow of flood waters. The project is not located within or adjacent to an identified floodway. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. RASISTAFFRPT\249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 34 —� 3.d. No. The proposal will not result in a change in the amount of surface water in any waterbody. No major waterbodies are located in the subject project area, therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.e. No. The proposal will not result in any discharge into surface waters or in any alteration of surface water quality. No significant impacts are anticipated. 3.f. No. The proposal will not result in an alteration of the direction or rate of flow of groundwaters. Construction on the site will not be at depths sufficient to have a significant impact on ground waters. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.g. No. The proposal will not result in a change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions, withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations. Reference response 3.f. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.h. No. The sign will not result in the reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies. No water service is required for the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 3.i. No. The proposal will not expose people or property to water related hazards such as flooding. Reference response 3.c. Plant Lire 4. a. No. The proposal will not result in any change to the diversity of species, or number of any native �— species of plants. The site has been previously modified with a driveway and hardscape. The project is considered "infill" with development existing to the north, south, east and west. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4.b. No. The proposal will not result in a reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of plants. There are no unique or rare plants on the site, therefore, threatened or endangered species will not be significantly affected (Reference response 4.a.). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4.c. No. The sign will not result in the introduction of new species to the site. No significant native vegetation exists on the site, therefore, no significant impacts are expected from this project. Development of the site will not result in the creation of a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species due to the fact that the project is considered "in -fill" and is surrounded by existing development to the north, south, east and west. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4.d. No. The proposal will not result in a reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project since no prime farmland, farmland of statewide or local importance, or unique farmland is located within the project site. �� R:1SISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 35 Animal Life 5.a-e No. Although the project site lies within the Riverside County Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat �* Conservation Plan Preliminary Study Area, the project itself will not impact the habitat of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat. There is no potential for the change in the diversity and number (reduction) of the species, or in producing a barrier to the migration of Stephens Kangaroo Rat as well as the deterioration of its habitat exists within the project area. A Stephens Kangaroo Rat Fee was imposed as a Condition of Approval for the Toyota of Temecula project which exists at this site. No other sensitive species have been identified upon the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Noise 6.a. No. The proposal will not result in increases to existing noise levels. The project is not a noise generating use. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.b. Yes. The project may expose people to severe noise levels during the development/construction phase. 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. Due to the proximity of the project site to the freeway and its location within the Scenic Highway Commercial (C-P-S) zone, no significant impacts are anticipated either in the short- or long -run. 6.c. No. The proposal will not result in the exposure of people to severe vibrations. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Light and Glare 7. Yes. The proposal will produce and result in light/glare, due to the fact that the balloon portion of the sign will be internally illuminated and in addition, it will have an electronic message board. The project as designed is consistent with Ordinance No. 655 (Palomar Observatory Lighting Ordinance). The type of lighting utilized for the electronic message board is allowed under Ordinance No. 655 due to the fact that the lighting is fully shielded. Hours of operation of the sign will be between daylight and midnight. CALTRANS has reviewed the proposal and has determined that the sign meets their criteria for signage along an interstate. Due to these factors, no impacts are foreseen from light and glare as a result of this project. Land Use 8.a. No. The proposal will not alter the present land use of the. area, due to the fact that the project is "in -fill" in nature. It is likely that the proposal will be consistent with the future General Plan land use designation of Service Commercial (SC) for the site and is compatible with other development in the area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b. No. The proposal will not result in an alteration to the future planned land use of the site as described in the City's future General Plan. As mentioned in response 8.a., there is likely probability that the proposal will be consistent with the future General Plan. The future General RAS%STAFFRPT1249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 36 -� Plan land use designation for the site is Service Commercial (SC). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Natural Resources 9.a,b. Yes. The proposal will result in an increase in the rate of use of a natural resource or the depletion of any nonrenewable resource (electricity). The sign will be internally illuminated and includes an electronic message board. However, due to the limited scale of the project, these impacts are not seen as significant. Risk of VMet 10.a,b. No. The proposal will not result in a risk of explosion, or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions. The same is true for the use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or toxic materials. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 10.c. No. The project 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 and emergency response plan. Although the structure has the potential to fall during an extremely severe earthquake, this will not affect any of the above mentioned emergency response plans. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Population No. The project will not result in altering the location, distribution, density or growth rate of the human population of the area. This project will not cause people to relocate. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Housing 12. No. Reference response 11. Projects of this nature do not cause people to relocate, and therefore, additional housing needs will not be created. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Transportation/Circulation 13.a. No. The proposal will not result in the generation of substantial additional vehicular movement. The sign is intended to increase the visibility of the Temecula Valley Automobile dealerships which are located on Ynez Road. Ynez Road will be widened to it's ultimate right-of-way prior to the realization of the project. No significant impacts are expected from development of the site. 13.b. No. The project will not result in an increased demand for new parking. As mentioned in response 13.a., the purpose of the sign is to increase visibility of the automobile dealerships along Ynez Road. Existing parking facilities at these sites were established based upon the need generated by these uses. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. �, R:%SISTAFFRPT1249PP.PC 8/2/93 klb 37 13.c. No. The proposal will not create impacts upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation. Reference response 13.a. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this ^� project. 13.d. No. The proposal will not result in alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods. Reference response 13.a. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. ' 13.e. No. The proposal will not result in alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic since none exists currently in the proximity of the site and none are proposed. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 13.f. Yes. The proposal will indirectly result in an increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians. The sign is intended to increase the visibility of the automobile dealerships along Ynez Road. Although increases to in traffic hazards are anticipated from increased activity in the area (from the enhanced visibility of the auto mall), these impacts are not seen as significant. Potential impacts will can be mitigated through the widening of Ynez Road. Public Services 14.a,b. No. The proposal will not have a substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire or police protection. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 14.c. No. The proposal will not have a substantial. effect upon or result in a need for new or altered school facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 14.d. No. The proposal will not have a substantial effect upon or result in a need for new or altered parks or other recreational facilities. Projects of this nature do not cause people to relocate into the area or require additional housing. Therefore additional recreational facilities above those provided on site will not be needed. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 14.e. No. The proposal will not result in a need for the maintenance of public facilities, including roads. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 14.f. No. The proposal will not have a substantial affect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental services. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. EneMy 15.a. No. The proposal will not result in the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy. As mentioned in responses 9.a. and 9.b., energy will be utilized for the lighting of the sign. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.b. Yes. The project will result in a subsequent increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, however, the project will not require the development of new sources of energy. As mentioned in responses 9.a. and 9.b., energy will be utilized for the lighting of the sign. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. RAS\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 38 "^�, Utilities 16.a No. The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to power or natural gas. The project site is within proximity of existing facilities. The project is seen as an "in -fill" project with existing uses to the north, south, east and west. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.b. No. The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to communication systems (reference response No. 16.a.). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.c. No. The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to water systems. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.d. No. The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to sanitary sewer systems (reference response No. 16.a.). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.e. No. The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to storm water drainage systems (reference response No. 3.b,c.). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 16.f. No. The proposal will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to solid waste disposal systems. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. ,�,16.g. No. The proposal will not result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above. (reference response No. 16.a.). No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Human Health 17.a,b. No. The proposal will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Aesthetics 18.a. No. The proposal will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public. The project is considered in -fill, with development located to the north, south, east and west. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 18.b. Maybe. The proposal may result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. Some people may take exception to the scale and size of the sign. The applicant has provided rational which illustrates that the size and scale of the sign as proposed is the minimum necessary for the signage to be. The Overland Road Overpass will obscure the visibility of the sign to motorists southbound on Interstate 15. A CALTRANS road sign will obscure the electronic message to motorists northbound on Interstate 15 if the sign was to be any lower in height. Other potential visual impacts have been mitigated through the use of earth -tones for the sign structure, the use of "Terra-cotta" screens for the reader board will also provide visual relief. The balloon �, RASISTAFFRPR249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 39 portion of the sign has been designed utilizing actual hot-air balloons as models. Colors for the balloon portion of the sign also reflect those used for hot-air balloons. Due to these design and color choices, visual impacts have been mitigated to a level less than significant. 18.c. Maybe. Reference response 18.b. Potential visual impacts have been mitigated to a level less than significant. Recreation 19. No. The proposal will not result in impacts to the quality or quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities. The project site is at the rear of Toyota of Temecula, and is not being used for either passive or active recreational purposes. Projects of this nature do not cause people to relocate into the area or require additional housing. Therefore additional recreational facilities will not be needed. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Cultural Resources 20.a. No. The proposal will not result in the alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archaeological or historic site. The sign will be located in an area which has already been graded and covered with hardscape. The project site has been identified as having a low sensitivity for archaeological resources and has not been identified as an area of sensitive paleontological resources. This determination was based upon information contained in the City of Temecula General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report dated August 12, 1993. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 20.b. No. The proposal will not result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object. Reference response 20.b. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 20.c. No. The will not have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values. No "unique" ethnic cultural values exist on -site or in proximity to the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 20.d. No. The proposal will not result in restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area. None currently exist on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. RAS\STAFFRM249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 40 --_111 11V. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Yes Maybe No 1. Does the project have the potential to either: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish, wildlife or bird species, cause a fish, wildlife or bird population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant, bird or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? _ _ X 2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short term, to the disadvantage of long term, environmental goals? (A short term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long term impacts will endure well into the future.) X 3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project's impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) _ _ X 4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ _ X V. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME "DE MIM MUS" EUPACT FINDINGS Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect, Yes No either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife is defined as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued viability" (Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code). _ X /I-- RAS\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 6/2/93 klb 41 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERM NATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on • the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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 the attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the project will mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Prepared by: 14 AW ame and Title RAS\STAFFRPT\249PP.PC 612193 kib 42 -IN ATTACHMENT NO. 6 CORRESPONDENCE R:1SISTAFFRPT1249PP.CC 711/93 k% 16 EC U� � 9� .� Y0y01rA �GALLE� June 10, 1993 Gary Thornhill Planning Director City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Gary: On June 7th I was not only disappointed with the outcome but very surprised at the attitudes of our Planning Commissioners. I left this meeting very angry, not at the outcome, but at the way the decision was arrived at. Some found humor in our request and I wonder if they ever considered that with the increase in business the sign would create, jobs and tax dollars would also be created. This is not to mention the fact that community events would also .)ecome more successful. I feel they disapproved the request to avoid wrestling with the complicated issues, knowing that we would appeal their decision to the City Council. Mat Fagan, yourself and the Auto Dealers have spent many hours on this project and it is very important to us because it will help make our business profitable. Most of the Commissioners don't seem to be aware of the enormous windfall the city has been blessed with: 300 jobs, over $500,000 in monthly payroll, and a sales tax based on $10,000,000 in monthly sales. Not to mention $100,000 annually donated to local charities and community events. I believe the Dealers have served the community well and have never as far as I know tried to use muscle to get our way, but we would at least like to be taken seriously when it comes to issues that affect our livelihood. I feel you and your staff are doing a with you have been impressive. I hope the Commission and maybe next time we without the side show. Sincerely, 6;4111 TemeCu�a, fine job and all of my dealings you will share my opinions to can resolve issues like this _0575 cc: D. Dixon G. Thornhill E!aVONCorporaflon Telephone: (619) 489-0123 JFax: (619) 489-58455845 P.O. Box 2159, Escondido, California 92033.2159 613 West Valley Parkway, Suite 270, Escondido, California 92025 June 24, 1993 The Temecula City Council CITY OF TEMECULA 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2; Variance No. 13 (Aooeal for Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marguee) Dear Councilpersons: As a relatively major property owner in the area in and around the Temecula Auto Park, I want to express my total support for the Auto Mall Marquee. If the Auto Park is to prosper, it must have much better freeway identification and signage. The Temecula Auto Park is positioned well to become a truly regional attraction and, again, if this is to happen, the area needs much better freeway identification and "presence." The purposed Auto Mall Marquee would provide this. It is good for the Auto Park -- It is good for the City -- It is good for the region. I urge the City Council to approve the application for immediate construction and installation of the Auto Mall Marquee freeway sign. Thank you very much. Sincerely, John C. Raymond President JCR/nlm XaAfeen Place Osborne Catified Up[ Anumm Affda t Manb. of cahf— ,and Tide Anma m 26489 I%= Ro24 Na C139 • Tmweafa, Caafo nia 92991 T&phone and FAX (909) 676-7605 June 23, 1993 Matthew Fagan City of Temecula, Planning Dept. 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Re: Plot Plan No. 249, Amendment No. 2, Variance No. 13 (Appeal for Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee) Dear Mr. Fagan, RECEIVED JUN Z 5 1993 REC"1.ar� i Aw'd............ I was never so glad to see a Notice from the City as the one concerning the above appeal, which told me that the application had been denied pursuant to the June 7 hearing. Hearings like that usually don't make any difference to me, but that one I had wanted to attend because I could think of nothing more alien to this beautiful city than that kind of marquee. In spite of my plans, circumstances prevented my attendance, so to whomever was instrumental in denying the application, THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!! Needless to say, perhaps, but I would like to register my opinion for the record, there is no reason the appeal should succeed either. If someone wants to be in Temecula and do business in Temecula, let them accept the standards of Temecula, as well. If that kind of sign, and the money it represents, is so important, let them go somewhere that it would fit in. That sign would be monstrous in Temecula! We don't need to sacrifice the beauty of Temecula just for extra profits for a business, even if the financial success of that business also represents tax dollars to the City; it isn't worth it. I am sure such a sign is not essential to the success of the Auto Mall, since it is located right next to the freeway and between the two main exits! Thank you for considering my opinion. Very truly yours, Kathleen Pace Osborne (PLEASE NOTE THAT, ALTHOUGH I AM USING MY BUSINESS LETTERHEAD, I AM A RESIDENT. MY HOME ADDRESS IS 29564 COURTNEY PLACE, TEMECULA, 92591) RECEI VrED Planning Department Mathew Fagen City of Temecula re. Plot Plan #249 Amendment No. 2 Variance No. 13 Mr. Fagen, JUN 3 ti 1993 CITY OF TEMECULA June 28, 1993 We would like to express our disagreement with the erection of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall electronic marquee. Having denied placement of billboards along Interstate 15 because of it being designated as a scenic highway, how can the city condone placement of a 75 foot electronic sign in that same general area? Having such a sign will have a negative impact on the community and be aesthetically displeasing. With dwindling revenues from the state of California how can you consider funding to the tune of $280,000 a sign that by all rights should be paid for by the private industry it will benefit. We thought that R.D.A. money, (public monies), is spent for the benefit of the entire community. Surely there are more pressing needs in Temecula that would warrant spending these funds that would benefit all in the community. Maybe all the Temecula businesses should get in line for advertising money. Richard and Donna Dietrich 39233 Rising Hill Dr. Temecula, Ca. 92591 677-1523 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 EXHIBITS R:\S\STAFFRPT\249PP.CC 711/93 )a 17 CITY OF TEMECULA J., CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN NO.249, AMENDMENT NO. 2, VARIANCE NO. 13 EXH BIT: A VICIMTY MAP P.C. DATE: JUKE 7, 1993 R:1S1STAFFRFn249PP.EXH 5/11/93 1db CITY OF TEMECULA pDIT B: DRAFT GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SERVICE -COMMERCIAL (S-C) I fus jii EXHIBIT C: ZONING DESIGNATION: SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (C P-S) CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO. 2, VARIANCE NO. 13 P.C. DATE: JUKE 7, 1993 R:\=AFFRPTU49PP.EXH 5/26M Mb CITY OF TEMECULA =uy� T t. tn•�va«tD D:!::a sA LLB hi;K zo. CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN NO.249, AMENDMENT NO.2, VARIANCE NO. 13 EXHIBIT: D SITE PLAN P.C. DATE: JUKE 7, 1993 r RAWTAFFRM249PP.EXH 5/11/93 IS CITY OF TEMECULA M N wu0cNM1✓" •^^7�1TI' OF PUM PI..E'Cotort yjWj-- _ API VUmoN9 aq wting . 5F-PAwTfF mcr.I: L; 0=4 3 et1a1S a--"Te161=p OF 5 - Gotac MM M1dCA71J11$, • WjR't1Li' GPTM1161 LILAC- - -'•O" WHIM Mui (A¢AI�T YvIAG1111E' I'GIT ). �54MULA71 p la►tCEUN TILL Aw,wTy, CTufap.� TeKlel4tfTA). MtWT&W^rl�M- TAH wl r,IncK D1:TAWNdj.1 "M . Wj (low VA14 wnmI►e,, -- ..5-WRr- Q +W j:AC WNIT co"6'VI G of= 3KIo 3(6" Mowl-1j. MAmX mf1 l P- TD W. 795MA-607A, 'MI) MTt- dA*'''fWd:Y W Uk TEpItA-=A SAW-61Or4) . '- 2'lo°GtAH ►ham R�r'1� �MtT>: i-ILIdrM•Wf 9/TWHIT�NEoN. rw. up Ftr'n "-nlEs" >3ETw�I.t r� tan . • MTL M13 Y2WIU5 '(121M rwr'D Ivow CTo wr6pE/)jIT). rAr, MT7- 6UPjMr CovP41h uTrwCtrrED"2•Tg4E 1vo►y -� mmH 6t- r - Dm To rnrMON AbO)I= her CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN NO. 2499 AMENDMENT NO.29 VARIANCE NO. 13 EX HIT: E TYPICAL ELEVATION P.C. DATE: JUNE 79 1993 il RASWAFFRPTUOPP.M 5/26/93 Idb rl. -3*0, - ...,-.,EMECU VALLEY",.. lima 1 e 2in UTQ L VALL ^T7. r • yyr'\V ' - - :`F � • � - '- _ .•fill J ��tl; a! 1 �f ft 'r ice_ OPTION • NO EXHIBIT , ��JS�`-" �<-Sri:-�-� ,J SY�i�:.z.r�'L.��+'� �:•!lir�[� � !' �i"'��1ti��i �� .%�'r� ,�`Y�'. _ u 4: .4 tfa�ta �• . . r ll • �E`MEC.0 f. � � •�- '�r9it . t 1LL - art _ � � • ���� \ �� VA E t a� �•• ti �i bi {{EF, �6".. {4nnNNJ�E[`F jj/ SO— v -dew -K•� ' - - �. 9,,••a�� c�,, .. _ 3 ;� ] � .,Lh^;.ti'..i�a0.'S'zh'v �.,.'*"�i ,� 4.-�'.i'`� , 1 �iiy''�'tit • -Y'f - � .. of >i_ -:,:.� }'-_. - a - ^�fi, OT :�- _ '�•'p is °:; � ��= { E" • v _ � r :��~ �; ,fir`' }t� •���� . 'T " ` _ _ �; . ,` ,. � �,� � i � \�^ � . ��' a" + e � M,� •�.�.rL"J`uJ+-�'ar�'.+` i'rya �' f Y, � r_,�♦ • _ 'k x .4•s L- ..h .,.« r•` - - .eta<� s � ti` -• rr � 1 f i� t � _ - - • � y t t -'1 5 i` � t � -e � z- '-'t rid �. "� •'- '7 iL r 7Y k [ 7 (2^ r•' a'� � , ��.�, mot, • � 'X • 4 - . � ." ��''ss�� '�,.• b �,--(" '`�-��i�?Y�� S�,-rti"T-irtiY -`R ,t.."�� r r '-V -t. t,.ta��?�v �a .Q,52�" s ' i - ice-• ,1•s�•`�z t -_ 2 1 - ti' � i-�4�,:."d.Y £, i�. d'„- r:.• xr�7+4Y� •1 i��df�.,�"i4.,+`,l _ Ak, Okkv- S' �. =ti ,Ac�r �: �, fit. ��►�,,, `�L •�''• + _ _ � ..i'�S i �;A � :�;s=rE�-« •�' " .+. {:,� - J. > ,gin ITEM NO. 18 APPROV CITY ATTORNEY G FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: Gary Thornhill, DirbctorJtof Planning DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Development Agreement No. 92-1, Change of Zone No. 21, Tentative Parcel Map No. 27314, Amendment No. 3 - Linfield School Prepared By: Saied Naaseh, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: It is requested that the City Council: Continue this item to the July 27, 1993 City Council meeting at the request of the applicant. BACKGROUND Development Agreement No. 92-1, Change of Zone No. 21, and Tentative Parcel Map No. 27314, Amendment No. 3 were on the Council's agenda June 8, 1993. The applicant was not present at the June 8th meeting, and the Council continued the items to the July 13, 1993 City Council meeting. Subsequent to this continuance, the applicant requested a further continuance to the July 27, 1993 City Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACT None. RAS%STAPPRVr=14.0C 7/1M k1b ITEM NO. 19 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY jVZVAI FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER DATE: JULY 13, 1993 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE AMENDING PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITY OPERATIONAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS - SMOKING POLICY FOR CITY PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES PREPARED BY: SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council introduce and approve the first reading of the Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 93- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING ORDINANCE 91-37 SETTING FORTH PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITY OPERATIONAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS DISCUSSION: On April 12, 1993, the Community Services Commission approved and recommended to the City Council to amend Ordinance No. 91-37 to require individuals smoking any tobacco products in outdoor City parks, recreation facilities, and trails to maintain a distance of twenty (20) feet from all non-smokers. It was further recommended that the Northwest Sports Complex be INCLUDED in this Policy because it is less restrictive than banning smoking completely and compliance of this policy should not create a negative impact on existing leases associated with this facility. The Commission cited that the intent of this smoking policy is to protect the health and welfare of the citizens of Temecula who utilize city parks, trails, and recreation facilities from the negative affects of secondary smoke. In addition to requiring smokers to maintain a twenty (20) feet cushion to all non- smokers, the Commission also recommended that smoking be prohibited within twenty (20) feet of the following outdoor park areas: 1. Public events including but not limited to sports events, entertainment, speaking performances, ceremonies, pageants, and fairs where people congregate. 2. Seating in dugouts and bleacher areas. 3. Within enclosed outdoor areas where air circulation may be impeded by architectural, landscaping, or other barriers such as amphitheaters and swimming pool areas. 4. Any place where food and/or drink is offered for sale. 5. Children's playground areas. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ORDINANCE NO. 93- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING ORDINANCE 91-37 SETTING FORTH PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITY OPERATIONAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula has authority over the public parks and recreational facilities within the jurisdiction of the City of Temecula; and WHEREAS, The Community Services Commission of the City of Temecula has recommended that the City Council adopt regulations which would provide limitations for smoking in outdoor City Parks and Recreational Facilities; and WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula finds the smoking of tobacco and any other weed or plant is a positive danger of health and a material annoyance, inconvenience, discomfort and a health hazard to those who are present in confined spaces or in close proximity to the source of said smoke, and in order to serve public health, safety and welfare, the declared purpose of this ordinance is to protect nonsmokers to the maximum extent possible, particularly children, from secondhand smoke in all places stated and required in this ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. General Policy-: is hereby amended to add the following subsections: Q. Smoking Policy: It is the intent of this policy to protect the health and welfare of the citizens of Temecula who utilize city parks, trails, and recreation facilities from the negative affects of secondary smoke. Therefore, individuals who choose to smoke in outdoor park areas shall maintain at all times a twenty (20) foot distance from all non smokers. Further, smoking shall be prohibited within twenty (20) feet of the following outdoor park areas: Public events including but not limited to sports events, entertainment, speaking performances, ceremonies,: pageants, and fairs where people congregate. 2. Seating in dugouts and bleacher areas. 3. Within enclosed outdoor areas where air circulation may be impeded by architectural, landscaping, or other barriers such as amphitheaters and -� swimming pool areas. 4. Any place where food and/or drink is offered for sale. 5. Children's playground areas. Section 2. Penalties: Violation of any provision or failure to comply with any requirement of this ordinance is an infraction. ORDINANCE NO. 91-37 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TEE CITY OF TEAIECLTIA ADOMING PARK AND RECREATIONAL FACILITY OPERATIONAL POLICIES AND REGULATIONS WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Temecula has authority Aver the public parks and recreational facilities within the jurisdiction boundaries of the City of Temecula; and WS, The Board of Directors may adopt regulations binding upon all persons governing the use of City parks and recreational facilities and property, and may deem a violation of any such'regulation and misdemeanor. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOW: SECTION 1. General Polio A. Equal Qpp nily: Any and all individuals shall be provided equal opportunity for use of any recreational facility and any recreational program without regard to physical limitation, age, race, color, national origin, religion, political beliefs or sex. B. Reserved Use: Reserved use (defined as exclusive, permitted use for one or more occasions) of community, neighborhood and other recreational facilities shall require obtaining a "Use Permit" in a form established by the City of Temecula Community Services District (TCSD). The TCSD may establish use fees by Resolution. C. Community Park (Unreserved) Use: Use of all community park facilities (defined as a site that serves the City's residential areas) will be based on first come first serve basis. No "Use Permit" is required for this purpose. If a user group wishes. to reserve the use of a community park facility, a "Use Permit" shall be required, with all applicable fees, rules, regulations, terms and conditions enforced. D. Multil2le Facility Reservations: If more than one recreational facility is reserved (e.g. two sports fields), applicable fees and deposits shall be charged for each facility reserved. E.• Sponsored Uses: Any use of recreational facilities scheduled for TCSD sponsored or co -sponsored uses shall be deemed a use for TCSD purposes, and shall be exempt from fees, deposits and permit requirements listed herein. Such determination shall be made by the Director of Community Services. 510rds91-37 4- F. User Groups: User groups are established and defined as follows to categorize groups using certain recreational facilities. User groups designations form the basis for variable fee schedules for certain recreational facilities as provided elsewhere herein. Group 1 - TCSD-sponsored or co -sponsored leisure and recreational activities. Group II - Youth groups conducting non-profit youth oriented sports activities, and non-profit athletic/civic organizations conducting community oriented leisure or sports activities. Group III - Base standard rate for community users on a non- profit basis. Group IV - Profit malting, commercial businesses or non-resident organizations conducting activities that are for profit and are either open or closed to the public. G. Recurring Use: Recurring use is generally defined as uses of recreational facilities on a regularly scheduled basis for more than one occasion (Le. leagues, etc.) H. Nonrecurring Use: Nonrecurring use is generally defined as uses of recreational facilities on a one time only or special event basis (i.e., annual picnic, parties or company sponsored events). A fee and permit is required only when reserved use by an organization is requested. I. Exemption: Due to special or unusual circumstances, the Parks and Recreation Commission may exempt user groups II, III and IV from fees for the use of recreational facilities. It is the responsibility of the specific user group to formally request exemption from the Parks and Recreation Commission. The request should stipulate the special or unusual circumstances that necessitate exemption. J. Scheduling Priorities: Scheduling priorities shall be by user groups as indicated previously with Group I having precedence over II, Group II over III, etc. In the event of conflict, the Director of Community Services ("Director") reserves the right to schedule any group. Scheduling of reserved uses will be carried out by the Director or his/her designee in a fair and equitable manner, to serve the leisure and recreation needs of the citizens of the Temecula Community Services District. K. Snorts Field and Facility= It is recognized that recreational facilities and sports fields vary in type and location. However, fee schedules shall generally apply equally to all sports fields and facilities depending on the level of service required for an individual facility. L. Fee Payment: The fees applicable to the use of facilities are due and payable at the City of Temecula offices 72 hours prior to the use of that facility. Charges assessed for damages and grounds cleanup shall include only City's actual cost and are due and payable upon demand to the user. When fees are due and payable at the time a permit is issued, 5/Ocds91-37 -2- refunds are permitted if sufficient notice is given to the City upon cancellation with five (5) working days notice for nonrecurring groups. M. Sales and Uses: Authorized user groups, as described herein, which desire to use facilities for fund-raising purposes shall be allowed to do so subject to policies and fees contained herein. Food concessionaires and other uses which are determined by the TCSD to be solely a commercial undertaking, 'and without educational, recreational or cultural benefit to the community, shall be selected pursuant to City public bidding procedures. N. Inclement Weather: Inclement weather is generally defined as weather which, in the judgement of the Director, has left recreational facilities in a condition which, if the facilities are used, presents a risk of damage to facilities or injury to users. The Director shall have the authority to deny use of all or any portion of a facility to a user based on inclement weather. The Director reserves the exclusive right to determine that a use of TCSD facilities is precluded by inclement weather, and no refund of fees shall be made on grounds of bad weather or field condition unless the Director makes such determination. O. Denial of Facility Use: The TCSD shall have the authority based on cause to deny use of all or any portion of a facility to any group or individual who has abused the privilege of facility use as included in but not limited to these general policies and general rules governing the use of community and neighborhood park. P. . Liability Insurance: All user groups conducting reserved sporting or special event activities, that will attract fifty (50) or more patrons (i.e. tournaments, clinics, fairs, festivals concerts, performances, camps, etc.) will be required to provide the Director with a certificate of insurance in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) naming the City of Temecula and the TCSD as additionally insured. SECTION 2. Parks & Recreation Facilities Regulations: Definitions: The following words shall have the meaning indicated when used in these regulations: A. "Park" means any community park, neighborhood park, or any other recreational facility maintained by the City,of Temecula. B. - "Board" means the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District, or any other person authorized by the Board, pursuant to law, to act in its stead. of Temecula. C. "Commission" means the Parks and Recreation Commission for the City 5/0rds91-37 -3- s D. "Amplified - sound" means music, sound wave, vibration, or speech projected or transmitted by electronic equipment, including amplifiers. E. "Knife or dagger" means any knife, or dagger having a blade of three inches or more in length; any ice pick or similar sharp stabbing tool; any straight -edge razor blade fitted to a handle. F. "Vehicle" means any device by which any person or property may be propelled, moved, or drawn, excepting a device moved by human power. G. "Vehicular travel" means travel by a vehicle. SECTION 3. Duty to Comply: No person shall enter, be, or remain in any park unless he complies at all times with all of the City ordinances and regulations applicable to such park and with all other applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. SECTION 4. Rules and Regulations Applicable in City Parks• The following rules and regulations apply in all City parks unless expressly stated otherwise elsewhere in these regulations. SECTIONS. Qperation of Vehicles: A. Roads for Public Use: The provisions of the California Vehicle Code are applicable in the City parks upon any way or place of whatever nature which is publicly maintained and open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel. All violations of said Vehicle Code shall be enforced and prosecuted in accordance with the provisions thereof. B. Surfaces Other than Roads for Public Use-, Skateboards: No person shall drive or otherwise operate a vehicle in a park upon surfaces other than those maintained and open to the public for purposes of vehicular travel, except upon temporary parking areas as may be designated from time to time by the Commission, and further excepting vehicles in the service of the City, animal control vehicles, law enforcement vehicles, and motorized wheelchairs. No person shall ride or operate a skateboard in any park, except in designated areas. SECTION b. Solicitation Prohibited: No person shall practice, carry on, conduct or solicit for any occupation, business, or profession in any City park, or sell or offer for sale any food, beverage, merchandise, article, or anything whatsoever in any City park. This section shall not apply to any person acting pursuant to a contract with the City of Temecula or the Temecula Community Services District, or under a permit granted by the Commission. SECTION_7. Prohibition of Animals in Park: No person shall cause, permit, or allow any animal owned or possessed by him, or any animal in his care, custody, or control to be present in any City park except: 5/0rds91-37 -4- (A) Equine animals being led or ridden under reasonable control upon any bridle paths or trails provided for such purposes. (B) Equine or other animals which are hitched or fastened at a place expressly designated for such purpose. (C) Dogs or cats when led by a cord or chain not more than six (6) feet long, or when confined within the interior of a vehicle. (D) Dogs which have been specially trained and are being used by blind or disabled persons to aid and guide them in their movements. (E) Small pets which are kept on the person of the possessor at all times. (F) In connection with activities authorized in writing by the Commission. (G) Fowls or animals turned loose at the direction of the Commission. SECTION 8. Duty to Care for Animals: It shall be the mandatory duty of all persons owning, possessing, in control of, or otherwise responsible for a dog, cat, or an equine animal in a park to promptly" collect, pick up; and remove all fecal matter left behind by said animal in or upon any park; provided, however, that this subsection shall not apply to guide dogs for blind or disabled persons or to equine animals on bridle paths. SECTION 9. Amplified Sound in Parks: (A) Purpose: The City Council enacts this legislation for the sole purpose of securing and promoting the public health, comfort, safety, and welfare of its citizenry. While recognizing that certain uses of sound amplifying equipment are protected by constitutional rights of free speech and assembly, the City Council nevertheless feels obligated to reasonably regulate the use of sound amplifying equipment in order to protect the correlative constitutional rights of the citizens of this community to privacy and freedom from the public nuisance of loud and unnecessary sound. (B) Permit Required for Amg fi iers: It shall be unlawful for any person to install, use, and operate within a park a loudspeaker or any sound amplifying equipment for the purposes of giving instruction, directions, talks, addresses, or lectures, or of transmitting music to any persons or groups of persons in any park, or: in the vicinity thereof, except when installed, used, or operated in compliance with one of the following provisions: 1. By authorized law enforcement or.park and recreation personnel or 2. Under a reservation or permit issued by the Director, and when operated in accordance with terms of said reservation or permit. 510rds91-37 _S_ (C) Granting and Denial of Permit: In determining whether to grant or deny a permit, the Director shall be guided by the following considerations: 1. The constitutional free speech and assembly rights of all persons, including the applicant; 2. The possible effects upon the peaceable passage or presence of persons in the park; 3. The potential for disorder or unlawful injury to persons or property; 4. The potential invasion of others persons' rights of privacy; 5. The possible unlawful breach or disturbance of the peace; and 6. Any actual conflict with other scheduled park uses or events. The Director shall not deny a permit on the basis of any dislike for or disagreement with the content of any proposed talks, addresses, lectures, or musical presentations. The Director may, however, deny a permit for any such events which are designed for the purpose of advocating imminent lawless conduct. (D) Power Source for Amplifiers: Amplifiers permitted in parks shall be operated only through a power source provided by the City, a battery, or a generator. SECTION 10. Prohibition of Firearms. Fireworks,- ireworks and Toy Wea ons• No person shall carry or discharge firearms, firecrackers, rockets, torpedoes, or other types of explosives, or carry or discharge any gun, or pistol, or any sling shot or similar device, or any bows and arrows, or any other object capable of propelling a projectile, or carry or use any object calculated to make a noise sufficient to disturb the peace or quiet of the park, or bring into any park any of the above objects or articles. Fireworks may be permitted for special events only with formal approval from the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Fire Department. SECTION 11. Prohibition of Dangerous Weapons• The provisions of the California Dangerous Weapons' Control Law are applicable in City parks and shall be enforced and prosecuted in accordance with the provisions thereof. No person shall carry on his person, in plain view, any knife with a blade in access of 3 inches. Dagger are strictly prohibited. SECTION 12. Exceptions to Applicability• The provisions of Section 10 shall not be deemed to prohibit the carrying of ordinary tools or equipment for use in a lawful occupation or for the purpose of lawful recreation. SECTION 13. Damaging Propgrty: No person shall cut, break, injure, deface, or disturb any tree, shrub, plant, rock, building, cage, pen, monument, fence, bench, or other 5/0rds91-37 �_ structure, apparatus, or property, or pluck, pull up, cut, take, or remove any shrub, bush, plant, or flower, or mark or write upon, paint, or deface in any. manner any building, monument, �- fence, bench, or other structure. SECTION 14. Damaging Land: No person shall cut, dig, or remove any wood, turf, grass, soil, rock, sand, gravel, or fertilizer, except park maintenance personnel. SECTION 15. fzg-IL- No person shall play or practice the game of golf, including chipping, putting, driving or any other type of play or practice which includes the hitting of golf or similar type ball with a golf or similar type club. SECTION 16. Water: No person shall swim, fish in, bathe, wade in, release pet animals in, or pollute the water of any fountain, pond, lake, stream, or reservoir except by permission of the Commission. SECTION 17. Fires and Fireplaces: No person shall kindle a fire except in fireplaces provided for that purpose or in barbecues approved by the Commission, except by permission of the Director. SECTION 18. Waste Liquids and Refuse: No person shall wash dishes, or empty salt water or other waste liquids, or leave garbage, cans, bottles, papers, or other refuse anywhere other than in the receptacles provided therefor. SECTION 19. Loitering at Night: No person shall be or remain in any City park - between the hours of eleven (11:00) o'clock p.m. and six (6:00) o'clock a.m. of the following day without permission of the Director. The provisions of Section 9 (c) shall govern the granting or denial of such permission. SECTION 20. Meetings: No person shall hold any meeting, service, sporting event, concert, exercise, parade or exhibition in any public park without first obtaining a permit from the Director. The provisions of Section 9 (c) shall govern the issuance or denial of a permit under this Section. SECTION 21. Alcoholic Beverages No person shall consume any .alcoholic beverage within any park, unless formally approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission. SECTION 22. Controlled Substances: The provisions of the California Uniform Controlled Substances Act are applicable in district parks and shall be enforced and prosecuted in accordance with the provisions thereof. SECTION 23. Glass Containers: No person shall possess any glass container in City parks. 42 5/0sds91-37 . -7- SECTION 24. Flying Balloons or Planes: No person shall use any City park as a primary launch site for hot air balloons unless formally approved by the Park and Recreation Commission. Motorized airplanes, and gliders are prohibited on City park site. SECTION 25. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause the same to be posted in the manner prescribed by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of October, 1991. ATTEST: une �—SGr City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) Ronald J. Parks, Mayor I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance 91-37 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 24th day of September, 1991, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 8th day of October, 1991, by the following roll call vote. AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: 5/Ords91-37 _& Moore, Lindemans, Munoz, Birdsall None Parks June S. Greek, City Clerk ITEM 20 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER DATE: JULY 13, 1993 SUBJECT: FRIENDSHIP BASEBALL TOURNAMENT REQUEST 4L'/ PREPARED BY: SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file report. That the City Council: DISCUSSION: Staff received a request for the City to provide a grant of $1, 700 for a "Tournament Team" of eleven and twelve year old boys from Temecula Valley and Temecula National Little Leagues to participate in a Friendship Baseball Tournament in Danvers, Massachusetts on August 12 through 19, 1993. The City Council continued this request to July 13, 1993 to allow Mayor Pro Tern Ron Roberts the opportunity to solicit funds from the community for this request. With the assistance of Mayor Pro Tern Roberts and John Hunneman of KRTM radio, Terry Gilmore of Paradise Chevrolet agreed to provide the entire amount of $1,700 needed to provide the uniforms and equipment necessary to participate in the tournament. ITEM NO. 21 Patricia H. Birdsall Councilmember (909) 694-1989 FAX (909) 694-1999 of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive - Temecula, California 92590 VIA FACSIMILE ORIGINAL VIA U.S. MAIL Colonel Robert L. VanAntwerp District Engineer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 2711 Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325 Ref: CESPL-CO-R-92-724-RS. Dear Colonel VanAntwerp: I am compelled to write you on the issue of Murrieta Creek due to the significant efforts on the part of business proponents to impose the Riverside Flood Control's plan for Murrieta Creek on the communities of Temecula and Murrieta. First, let me say that I've been on the Temecula City Council since Temecula was incorporated in December 1989. I'm as informed as any of the proponents, and more than most, on what has or has not transpired with respect to this issue. On April 6, 1993 this item was on the City Council Agenda to consider sending "the Corps" a letter of support for Flood Control's plan. The motion to do so failed on a 3 to 2 vote. I believe, and thus I do not speak for the Council, that the reasons this motion failed are as follows: 1. Neither Flood Control, nor the proponents, have seriously considered the alternatives suggested by the community -based group called U.R.G.E. Furthermore, Flood Control and the people supporting them apparently feel that they know what is best for the people of this valley and thus, differing points of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers April 8, 1993 Page 2 view are only artificially "considered" with little intention of finding merit. In spite of claims to the contrary, community input has not been sought by Flood Control or its proponents. That input has had to be imposed in the form of U.R.G.E.'s efforts. 2. The Riverside Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RFCWCD) has a poor history of creativity when it comes to both flood control and water conservation. in our city alone, the only handiwork produced thus far by RFCWCD consists of what is least desirable, i.e. concrete channels. I asked one of the proponents recently if he was aware of any place in Riverside County where Flood Control had done anything creative other than concrete ditches. The answer, not surprisingly, was no. 3. 1 am in tune with the average citizen in Temecula and I was re- elected to the City Council in November 1992 with the highest vote count of any of the three seats filled. I am convinced that the vast majority of citizens, when properly informed, want a flood control project on Murrieta Creek that is a natural resource, environmentally sensitive, with passive recreational uses, and utilitarian value 365 days per year not just when the 100 year storm arrives. 4. Many of the same people who are proponents for Flood Control's plan are those who should take responsibility for misusing the creek, failing to properly maintain it, and building in the flood plain for over 10 years thus leading to the serious flooding we had in January. Now these people, with the same wisdom, are using the fear of further flooding as leverage to hasten Flood Control's plan through "the system" without seriously allowing for diversity of ideas. It is my belief that had it not been for the vocal efforts of U.R.G.E. (which has only been organized about a year), the current flood control plan would have fewer environmental features than it now has. 5. In the 3-1/2 years of my involvement in Temecula local government, I have never heard of or seen a proposal by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers April 8, 1993 Page 3 RFCWCD that deals with the last part of their name - water g-onservation and therein lies a significant difference between U.R.G.E.'s plan and Flood Control's plan. Water detention and retention should be a part of the modern day management of our significant watershed. Flood Control's plan appears to ignore this. I've only touched the surface because the subject is too complex to address in a letter, but I needed to share with you that those who have the fewest resources to conduct a public relations campaign, those who are the least organized to be adequately heard, and those who are the least well connected to political circles -- namely the people of this community -- are suspect of Flood Control's plan and the people who are promoting it. They want a truly environmentally sensitive, passive recreational asset, which of course addresses protection from flooding. Sincerely, J./Sal Munoz ayor JSM:ss P.S. I can make the video tape available to you of our April 6 City Council Meeting or be available for more in-depth discussion if you wish. bcc: The Honorable Bob Buster, Supervisor The Honorable Joe Perry, Mayor - Murrieta Temecula City Council David F. Dixon, City Manager - Temecula awammofte 4kostuth1v STATIICANTOL P.a Maas , I`xlt COFIVA M sA�Ar>•rM wsrMo�o CA t �hn��t» Kl�i�i tt a iolattartAGNOLUM wA�'Aiaaa :RAYMONb N. HAYNL$ wILDUR owe+ao �saeiau►a exrrsar►+oMTJcr _ M" PANCND C&WONU VA"' SUM 1N11ir.Mdi :i+d Neirurr a.n Oypa C9iiewlMp�udMq Ry aMw a Ta1so" CA a I Law 6�Lon, MU T�erduM, &%" LOW, Cmon, WMK WOW amn MOM vid IsmMido. 00W& ��iMa.11t0 .. .. .._ Apr1'23, 1593 J. Sal Munoz Mayor, City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: Your April 81 1993 letter to Colonel Robert VanAntwerp Dear Mayor Munoz: I received a copy of your letter to Colonel VanAntwerp regarding the Murrieta Creek Flood Control Improvements. As I explained to you earlier, my office has been working hard on getting all the players together to work out a solution to thin problem. Your letter, sent as it was without discussions with the others involved in the process and obviously without your having reviewed the County Flood Control Plan for yourself, is counterproductive, and could hurt my efforts at the State level to protect the local citizens should future flooding occur. My understanding is that the current plan has undergone nine Years of planning, study, public hearings, many meetings and discussion accompanied by an expenditure of some $877,000 in public funds. In my discussions with you, I indicated the importance of quick action. I would hope that you and your council colleagues would take quick action in resolving the problem in the Creek, so that I can report to the Governors Office of Emergency Services that future flood aid will not be necessary. OES, as I told you, is extremely interested in solving the continuing flood problems in the Temecula/Murrista area. I would hope you are as interested in a solution. With all due respect, my experience with U.R.G.E. is that they are not interested in a real solution. The environmental solutions presented by the Control Plan are sensitive, and present a plan which in acceptable. to all at the State level. I support that plan, and ask for quick approval. ftnod M R.cy+cW Pow P. (— page 2. Quite frankly, B&fQtx is the paramount issue. The County plan is safe and environmentally appropriate. I would hope that you and Your council colleagues would move the pion. Very truly yours, Raymond N. Haynes P . S . I enclosed a letter from one of your cgnstituents . I am sure he will be contacting you soon. RNH s tkt Enclosures r -:U != ; 10-- � = = — 7 E: � i V * U1 OF-I-1 March 31, 1993 The Honorable Ray Haynes 66th State Assembly District State Capitol Building Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Assemblyman Rayner: APR - o 1gc RE: Murrieta Creek FLOOD CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS US Land & Homes was one of the numerous local business located in Temecula to sustain devistating damage as the result of the January 18, 1993 flooding of MUrrieta Creek. Over three feet of flood waters inundated the interior of my office building destroying records, furniture, equipment and structures. After being closed for over two months and the expenditure of needless funds to repair, replace and refurbish the premises, we are starting to piece our lives back togather. We most certainly appreciate your efforts to both stimulate and prod where necessary our elected public officials in ,resolving a permanent solution. perhaps most distressing is our District 1 County Supervisor, Mr. Bob Buster, whom appears more interested in gleaming personal publicity from further public hearings, than solving the problem. To date, the bureaucratic process has spanned nine years of planning, study, public hearings, meetings and the expenditure of some $ 877,000 in public funds. A reasonable plan has been formulated by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to provide permanent flood control improve- ments. There is clear and demonstrated need to implement this plan which appears only lacking in funding. Are there not federal: state or some form of emergency funding Which could resolve this problem? perhaps through the good Offices of the 66th Assembly District you could find a 2 X 4 to get the attention of these local donkeys. Any assistance you could provide would be greatly appreciated. We need effective govermental action to permanently resolve this problem and avoid further loss of millions of dollars in property damage upon re-occurance of January's flooding. Again, we appreciate your help and assitance. S, re Jack Buck, President US Land & Ranch Co., Inc. 28455 FRONT STREET • Tv mEcuLA, CA 92590 • (714) 676-2101 I CityY of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive • Temecula, California 92590 1989 J.Sal Munoz Mayor May 25, 1993 Ron Roberts Mayor Pro Tern Ronald J. Parks Councilmember The Honorable Raymond N. Haynes Jeff Stone Assemblyman, 66th District Councilmember Suite 102 Patricia H. Birdsall 29377 Rancho California Road Councilmember Temecula, California 92591 David F. Dixon City Manager Dear Assemblyman Haynes: (909) 694-1989 FAX (909) 694-1999 1 was extremely disappointed with your letter to me dated April 23, 1993 on the subject of Murrieta Creek. Let me enlighten you on a few things: 1. As an informed citizen of this community, I have a right to comment on this matter of significant importance to the Army Corps of Engineers. When I wrote my letter to the Corps, I spoke for myself and, I believe for a majority of the community, not for the rest of the City Council. That's my business - not yours. 2. 1 have never had a specific meeting or discussion with you on this subject, although we may have made some passing comments regarding the creek at a function we both attended -- I can't recall. As for your office working hard to "get all the players together," I asked Kathleen Hamilton, one of the URGE leadership, what contact they had had with you. The answer was "none" as of April 30th and I believe that's true to date. Unlike you, I have not only had discussions with both sides, 1 have reviewed various parts of the plan over the course of the last year, heard five hours of testimony at a public hearing on April 6, 1993, and met twice with John Bell (a proponent of Flood Control's plan) III prior to releasing my letter to the Colonel. Obviously, it is you who have failed to do your homework. The least you could have done to be a productive The Honorable Raymond N. Haynes May 25, 1993 Page 2 part of this discussion is to have met collectively with the leadership of this valley (e.g. Mayor Peery and me) to determine your role in a local issue instead of engaging in the political grandstanding you have demonstrated. Also, I have been engaged in protecting the local citizens a lot longer than you've been on the scene. 3. Your second paragraph is merely a recitation of the party line. My only observation is that even if the statements were totally correct (and they aren't) for that level of effort to be expended and then fail and/or refuse to get community consensus is reprehensible! 4. Again, you and I have never had "discussions" as you -- characterize them in paragraph 3. As for quick action, this Council under my leadership took the quick action necessary to remove the immediate threat to the community by securing the temporary 404 permit to clean out the creek. The creek is now by all standards the safest it's been in 13 years. The permanent solution, however, is not one to be hastily endorsed, as you seem to promote, when all viable alternatives have yet to be seriously examined by the people who not only must make the decisions but also live with the consequences. Furthermore, since the comment period of April 10 passed prior to your letter, this "urgency" you expressed is suspect at best. A project of this magnitude for which funding has yet to be identified, and which will take years to complete should be able to withstand a little more scrutiny by the very capable leadership in the cities of Temecula and Murrieta. 5. As for URGE, I know these people, you don't. Your biased conclusion of their interest only shows your ignorance and your failure to study their proposals. Obviously they don't have the resources that the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District has. Perhaps you're more --� impressed by fancy booklets than by creative concepts. The The Honorable Raymond N. Haynes May 25, 1993 Page 3 lobbyists will have a field day with you in Sacramento. And by the way, who are "all at the State level" that are enamored with the Flood Control Plan? The State Department of Fish and Game was apparently not too impressed with the plan or did you also fail to read that correspondence. I agree with you on one point, safety is the paramount issue. Too bad you don't understand it's not the oniv issue and you don't understand that safety is compatible with environmental, recreational, aesthetic, and property value issues. The bottom line, Mr. Haynes, is that you should not pretend to know local issues better than local elected officials, nor should you interject yourself into local issues without consulting with the local elected body, preferably the Mayor. Failure to do the above can only lead to further embarrassment to you. Very truly yours, c, 411 J. ;Sal Muno ayor JSM:ss P.S. I will forward this to your appropriate constituents. Sewn.mOMc. $SP1n iX STATE CAPROL (/�� �s 1.� }� t P.O. COX 942M9 (gal ifui nin —fle Isla {.ure SACRAYEMO, CA /4249-0001 (916) "s-1676 RAYMOND N. HAYNES DiseKt Ofte ASSEMBLYMAN, SIXTY-SIXTH DISTRICT 29377 RANCHO SUITE 102CALIFORNIA SMN Western Riwrsoos aM Nonh m San U&V the �ypp pt ROAD, SURE 925 Lake Elmnor , Temecula, Penis, Dme TEYECULA, CA 92591 Canyon LaMe, Corona. Hemet Vista, San Marcos and Eseatoido. (M) 699-1113 May 28, 1993 Mayor J. Sal Munoz City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Sal: Your May 25, 1993 letter disheartening to say the least. regarding Murrieta Creek Co"Irsawc AGRICULTURE EDUCATION WATER, PARKS i WILDLIFE was Sal, you have chosen to support U.R.G.E. and their ever - changing concepts for the Creek, I have not. I have accepted the expert County Flood' Control Plan as being reasonable, cost effective and would like to see it implemented without all these costly delays, political posturing and, for safety reasons, get on with it! Sal, let me make it clear, I never pretended to "know the local issue" better than you. My representative, Trudy Thomas attended all of the meetings where U.R.G.E and/or the County made their presentations and she gave me detailed reports concerning the Flood Control's Plan and U.R.G.E.'s alternatives which, interestingly enough, systematically changed depending on the audience. I simply chose the County Flood Control Plan as being reliable and rejected the ever -changing U.R.G.E. concepts as too costly and politically motivated. Sal, I stand by my selection and ask you to proceed with all prudent speed to get Murrieta Creek Flood Control completed. We are approaching a six months delay and it is very true that the Federal and the State emergency offices are not so willing to help the next time if a sound plan is not well underway. Sorry, you took my decision and commitment so personally. Give my office a call and let's have lunch. truly, Haynes RNH:lh CC: City Councils and City Managers of Murrieta and Temecula Pnnted on Recycled Paper P.1s aw Frucsoiv RE5PjRATp7RY CARE INC. June i , I M J. Sal Munoz 4� 74 BwinaaY Of s Park DrIw Temecula, CA W590 Over that; In response to your letter to Assemblyman Raymond N. Haynes dated May 25 there are numerous oomments you made that, reGora� need to be Cornie for the t address your statements In the order they are or the rated In your letter, d. I will I. You clal,n to be •an informed citizen of this Oommunity on ttra aubjew of Murr I@W Creek, FACT' YOU personally admitted to me on April g, t 909, that Wu had not yet had a Chance to read the County's Flood Control PIaM and a tt you dldnI have the time to read ft' and *that It was up to the Flood Control District to present the Plan to the City Councim ,O*MMant: How Can you claim to have been >nformsd' when You wrote to the Army Corp, MfOrs You oven read the Mun iete Crook Plan. I renal! that one of your biggest "beefs' wag that Ann Pak$ failed to k"p you and the Council abreeet of the plan and the efforts and progress Of the Cltlxens Advisory Committee. 2' =Gy when o the Army ou 'spoke Hudson R apk0tay cans tree 117I I 1 ��� '+C��17� tt a f�: �' �� /.�1 ~, it 11 ! c'!� �� :�' .. i �/,1' .1. i�%.I 1 �a7i�.• � I(:: / fir' ij%/.. 1 � =Mc: • r, e. rti r.;� KON t CA FAX 100 FAX PAGE 03 -11 2. in your May 26 letter you stated you believe you •aPoke for the majority of the community" when you wrote to the Army Corp. Does this mean that You XM believe the majority of the Community feels the same way you do? If so, you are wrong. its a. The maJorlty of the public are In favor of the county plan (refor to the Army Corps of Engineers letter dated May 14, 1903 as well as IN lbrnlan.POwspaper dated May 19, 1903). b. TemeCuia`s Resolution 93-32 states 'the plan serves the Interests of the MY of Temecula. MUrrleta's Resolution No. E3-206 states the same. o. How many organizations, business groups, govemmvnt ag+en01e6, or IOIRlolans have endorsed the ll.R.G.E. plan as opposed to the County plan' What proof do = have that the majority of this Community believes the way You do? To -� bring you up to date on the County Plan endorsement list, refer to attachment e1. The list of endorsements represent$ thousands of your constituents. 3. You state that your !after written to the Corps Is °my business - not your'so fACT.,. All oomments written to the Corps go on public record. How our elected officials respond or behave on different issues Is everybody's business. We may not haw to agree with you but it Is our business to keep abreast of poNticians like yourself, aspeclaily when h cornea to future ®lectlons and or pursing their own personal agenda. 4. You asked Kathleen Hamilton what contact the Assemblyman's oflioa has had with the 1J.R.G.E. group. Her response was "none as of April 30". �7 The Assemblyman's office staff, unlike yourself, Me represented at the following meetings where URGE was represented and/or URGE made preeentatlons of their Intentions. The J 2 P.14 _am reason I know this. for fact Is because I persanaliy had requested that the Assemblyman's representation be present at these meetings. Contact aU made with various members of URGE Including Mrs. Hamilton: A. supervisor Buster's Community Forums: 1. March 17, Murdsta City Council Chambers Q. April 6, Temecula Branch Library S. May 18, Murrieta City Council Chambers -B, Mamh 16, Temecu"urrleta EDC meeting. Nobs: Mrs. Hamilton, Mrs. Gale and Mr. Johnson of U.R.G.E. made a presentation before members of the EDC, Larry Markham, myself and Trudy Thom" of Ray Hayne's office. Questions and answers followed their presentation Including attempts to find "common ground", il March 20, Temecula Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors meeting, Chamber offloe, Temecula. URGE made their pitch before the Chamber Directors. Again Haynes's office was Present for questions and comments. Note: In addition to the above meetings and presentations, Haynes was represented, along with yourself and members Of URGE at the February 8 public forum (remember the Texas lawyer and hydrologist?), and the Joint City Council Meeting Apt 27. 5. You claim you 'had discussions with 'th sldes', and 'met with John 9e11 OfI� rel"Sing my letter to the Colonel'. FACT: The first time you met with me (at my request) was In the Into aftemoon on April 8, 1883. At our first meeting we didn"t have time to get into the nuts and boils of the plan, thus K, ws 00 up our second meeting for the following day (April 9) Our 84cond meeting did not take Puce until after 5;00 p,m,, Friday, April S. Your fetter to the Colonel was dated April & 6. You stated that athe least you could have done to be a productive part of this discussion is to have met collectively with the leadership of this +8111ey to determine your role In a local lssueo. FA r a. Refer to comment e4, In addition to the meetings and Preeentattons listed In e4 above, the Assemblyman was r@preaented and/or present at the following leadership events; 1 • Met with numerous business leaders and home owners directly affected by flooding during the pan several months. 2. Met with various leaders of the Oflios of Emergency Services (QES) here in Temecula as well as Sacramento. 3. Met with leaders of the U.S. Marine Corps at Camp Psndelton. 4. Met with the directors of the Old Town Merchants and Temecula Town Association. 6, Has been working with city staffers directly responsible with public works and city management regarding this Important issue. 8. Met and or coordinated over the phone with County Flood Control, Fish and Game, Ocvemors Office, and the Army Corps of Engineers regarding Emergency 4o4 permit as well as the County Flood Control Plan. NDTJ ;, It was Ray Haynes, who on January 19, 199% had asked Cowmor Wilson to declare Riverside County'a state 4 Of emergency"; the latter of which was officially declared on the tame day. 7. You state that the Assemblyman's statements regarding the time, effort and cost of the plan are not correct. FACT,, Mr. Haynes's statements are correct. The chronology Of the nine year flood control effort can be obtained from the County Flood Control District. It might be a good place for You to start reading. You might even gain some Insight and apprroiatbn of the flood control plan. While you are at it, you might want to ask Bob Buster to confirm the $877,00o taxpayer Investment 8 You state "tor that level of effort to be expended and then fait and/or Wu" to get crommunity Consensus Is reprehensible'. FACT11 The effort has not failed. True the plan has been revised on several occaslons due to ever -changing state and federal regulations. And no doubt the plan wUl continue to be modif ed as the two cities and government agencies continue to flnertune the options associated with recreational and environmental mitigatlon/enhancement. But for a project of this magnitude In complexity to be in the position for 404 Permit processing Is nothing short of commendable. In January of 1091, the pion was pre -viewed by members of the Army Corps, EPA, and Fish and WIldit Service. They assured our Fbod Control District that we were on the right �ketic+with respect to meeting CII, the requirements necessary for 404 permitting. As you know the 404 permit will allow this Community to mow forward by allowing funding pursuits and contract implementation. As for a community consensus, there was a oonsensua before Bob Buster extended the comment WOO, and there Is certainly a consensus now that both ones have unanimously endorsed the plan. Q. You state that 'this Council under my leadershlp took the quick action neomaryto remove the Immediate threat to the community by securing the temporary 404 permit to clean out the creek". F&c 4 The accomplishment of obtaining the emergency 404 permit was a teamwork effort between = cities and numerous county, state and federal agencies, elected officials �— a at all levels, business owners and private Individuals. The quick action you seem to b® taking crodit for wren just as much the result of the Assemblyman's dedicated Involvement In Sacramento with the Gov®mor's Office, Department of Fish and Game and OES as 4 was the dedicated involvement of the City of Temecula staffers, 10. You claim to 'know the URGE people" whereas the Assemblyman doesn't. MCT.,, You may jQ,rj&&,4 , im2w the URGE people. M you do, you also know that their attorney, James Blaokburn, had requested (on behalf of URGE) 'that any decision regarding emergency action be postponed" getter to the Corps rs. emergency 404 permit, dated 1/25/93). You may also know that URGE had requested (months ago) that the Riverside County Board of Supervisors withdraw the current 404 permit for flood protection. You may also know that URGE had requested that the Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Departmem of Fish and Game deny the current 404 request. If you, along with the Assemblyman, do know these people and their motives, but have decided to support their agenda, which Haynes has decided = to do, then vour motives "are suspect at best" Especially when you wrote to the Corps supporting URGE'S unsubstantiated claims against the county plan prior to you even reading the plan. 11. You stated "you should not pretend to know local issues better than local elected MCI&* nor should you interject yourself into loam Issues without consulting with the local siected body'. EM@ The Assemblyman 11 a local elected official. Who do you think elected him? Mr. Haynes was elected for the apeoiflc purpose of representing our community on state Issues, If you believe that the complexity of the Murrleta Creek Issue is strictly a local Issue ..... think again. If It were that simple, our community could have Issued ourselves a 404 permit years ago. In reality, however, this Jesus entails ,E,II, levels of government. The Assemblyman along with his NO person Trudy Thomas know this issue far better than you think. If you wars In touch with your city constituents as keenly as Haynes's staff Is. you would be trying to expedlte the county flood control plan with the same sense of urgency 6 that they are. As for your comment regarding "Inter)ecting Into local Issues without consulting with the loaf elected body" Why don't you try Interjecting into local issue' with the People and businesses who put y� consulting office. Hamilton of La Crests and Gale and Johnson I of Murneta hardly have a vested interest in the community you are entrusted to represent and protect. So much for my comments regarding your May 25 latter to Mr. Haynes. As you can see, your Intent to "embarrass" the Assemblyman has tur►led distribute this letter to 'your approArlate stit conuents B tbbeforinste I do there area somel further points and comments I would like to make regarding your involvemsnt on this Issue. 1 • When 1 heard that you were going to speak on behalf of the City of Temecula at the Army Corps of Engineers Public Hearfng the other day, my Cut told me not to trust you. But my trust In you to procialm the truth wlth respect to what City Resolution e93-32 specilfoaily states over -ruled my gut feeiing. "Surely our Mayor will present Temecula's offblal position on this issue'....... how wrong I was. And It was a good lesson for ..me and many other people in this community .... Including members of URGE. We will never trust you again. To give you an Idea of the damage testimony Produced, Mr, Robert Smith of the Army Corps was "convinced` that the city of Temecula was dead set against the County lan. It has taken several members of this community and two separate trriips into Los Angeles to convince the Colonel and Mr. Smith that this ally is behind this very Import plan, Thank you Mr. Mayor. 9. 1 know how much Mr. Parka and you got along (like cats and dogs). But just because he was Chairman of the Citizens Advisory Committee for this plan, don't hold h agalnst,k -.We the community are the ones who asked for flood control, we the community are the ones who have paid the gabs, provided the Input, given of our time, and have supported this effort from day one. DMI stand In the way and pretend like you am speaking on behalf of some silent majority out there somewhere. The ones that need flood Protection need It now and unless you get on the band wagon and support thin effort with every bit of help you oan muster up we could be looking at another nine years of public debate, flooded businesses and'a tarnlstned tourist attradon and place to do business. Sorry Sal but this latter is long over due. I just hope that from this point forward you wiil put as much energy Into getting flood protection as you do throwing darts at people like Mr. Haynes who really are trying to do something construotive. /1-- 7 I'm going to be in Washington D.C. the rest of this week, but I hope to pay you a vlait when I got back. Hopefully we can put all our hard feelings behind us and get on with flood control. Thank you Sal. 8 erely 65 John C. Bell ITEM NO. 22 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA MEMORANDUM Mayor J. Sal Munoz Councilmember Patricia H. Birdsall June 29, 1993 Business Assistance I read with interest the article in the newspaper regarding "City Hall offering help to businesses." As this issue was never brought before the Council for discussion, I feel you were out of line in releasing this information to the press. My understanding was that we had established a committee to review small business applications for loans from the City and that Mr. Jeff Stone and I had been appointed to that committee by the Council. I do not believe you had the authority to offer assistance to citizens of this community especially by a person who's qualifications or volunteer status had not been reviewed by the full Council. I feel strongly that this subject deserves the Council's full attention before any commitment is made. This is not to say Mr. Micheals is or is not qualified to represent our City and advise our citizens. You, as a lawyer, must be aware of the possible legal ramifications to the City if erroneous information is given by this City volunteer. PHBas (� cc: City Council Dave Dixon COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 - W- A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT HELD JUNE 8, 1993 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order on Tuesday, June 8, 1993, 8:45 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. President Patricia H. Birdsall presiding. PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Munoz, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson, City Attorney F. Scott Field, City Clerk June S. Greek and Recording Secretary Gail Zigler. PUBLIC COMMENTS None CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Pro Tem Roberts request Item No. 2 be pulled from Consent Calendar for discussion. It was moved by Director Stone, seconded by Director Parks to approve Consent Calendar Items No. 1, and No. 3 and No. 4 as follows: 1. Minutes 1.1 Approve the minutes of May 11, 1993. 1.2 Approve the minutes of May 25, 1993. 3. Acceptance of Easement Deeds for Slope Maintenance Presley Comnaniec 3.1 Accept easement deeds for the TCSD to provide slope maintenance services within Tracts 23267-0, 23267-11 23267-4 and 26861-1 within the Presley Development. 4. Teen Recreation Center Status Report 4.1 Receive and file report. CSDMIN06/08/93 _1 6/12/93 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MINUTES DUNE 8, 1993 -� The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Munoz, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None 2. Contract Amendment - Wimmer Yamada Associates - Pala Road Park Site Mayor Pro Tom Roberts asked for an explanation of the increase to the contract amount. Community Services Director Shawn Nelson stated that additional studies were required to comply with FEMA, Stephens K-Rat and the Army Corp of Engineers. Director Nelson advised that staff was previously aware that amendments to the contract would be necessary. It was moved by Director Stone, seconded by Director Parks to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 2 as follows: 2.1 Approve amendment of $21,038 to contract with Wimmer Yamada Associates (WYA) to provide additional engineering services for the Pala Road park site. 2.2 Appropriate $21,038 in the Capital Projects fund (No. 210-190-120-5802) from Development Impact Fees. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Munoz, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall NOES: * 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None DISTRICT BUSINESS 5. Naming of City Park Sites Community Services Director Shawn Nelson presented the staff report. Director Nelson advised that staff has received several requests to name a park after Deputy Kent Hindergardt and also, Allison Jacobs. CSDMIN06/08/63 .2- 6112/93 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MINUTES TUNE 8, 1993 Director Munoz suggested that a memorial monument located at the CRC might be more appropriate in remembering individuals who have have contributed to the community. Director Roberts stated that Officer Hindegardt was the first police officer to lose his life serving the City of Temecula and moved to name the Pala Road Park Site the Kent Hindegardt Memorial Park. President Birdsall seconded the motion for discussion. Director Stone stated that he was in favor of the original recommendation by the Community Services Commission and would support a memorial monument somewhere within the community. Director Parks concurred with Director Roberts stating that he feels Officer Hindergardt made the ultimate sacrifice in protecting the community however, Director Parks also was is in support of the recommendation by the Community Services Commission to recognize the Pala Indians. President Birdsall stated that she supports the recommendation by Director Roberts and suggested that another park could be named after the Pala Indians. Director Munoz suggested that Park 2, the nine acre Presley Park, be renamed and the 28.6 acre Pala park site be named as recommended by the Community Services Commission. The maker of the motion and the second concurred as follows: It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, seconded by President Birdsall to approve staff recommendations with the exception that the name of the 9 acre Park site in the Presley Development will be named the Kent Hindergardt Memorial Park. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Munoz, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT None CSDMIN08/08/93 .3 8/12/93 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MINUTES JUNE S. 1993 ^� DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT Director Nelson advised the Council that the notices of CSD Rates and Charges have been mailed out to all affected property owners and two public workshops will be held on Thursday, June 10, 1993, 6:00 P.M. and Saturday, June 12, 1993, 10:00 A.M. at the Teen Recreation Center. Director Nelson advised that the Summer/Fall Recreation brochure is complete and will be mailed by the end of the week. Director MuRoz requested that staff investigate the reasons that some of the slopes . along sections of Margarita Road are in such a poorly maintained condition. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Director MuRoz, seconded by Director Parks to adjourn at 9:10 P.M. The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District will be held on Tuesday, June 22, 1993, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. President Patricia H. Birdsall June S. Greek, City Clerk -111 CSDMWOB/OB/93 -4- 6/12/93 ITEM NO. 2 W- APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFIC: CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER DATE: JULY 13, 1993 SUBJECT: MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES CONTRACT PREPARED BY: BERYL YASINOSKY RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Approve contract with Muni Financial Services to provide assessment administration services related to the TCSD Rates and Charges. DISCUSSION: Pursuant to an agreement dated March 15, 1991, Muni Financial Services (MFS) has provided assessment administration services regarding the annual TCSD Rates and Charges. These services include the preparation of the TCSD levy report; analyzing parcel activity; updating software data; conducting field surveys; calculating the equivalent dwelling units (EDU's) per the City's rate formula; and sumitting the levy tape to the County of Riverside for inclusion on the property tax rolls. MFS also coordinates the mailing of the public hearing notices and parcel charges to all the property owners within the City. For FY 1993-94, the TCSD will administer rates and charges for five (5) service levels, which include 14,361 parcels within the City. Approximately 71,805 data entries were required to prepare the FY 1993-94 levy report. Additionally, the complexity of the formula and method of spread relating to the apportionment of the TCSD Rates and Charges requires the input of accurate parcel data to insure equity throughout the TCSD. MFS has thirty (30) full time employees and a network of computers and databases that specialize in administering assessment districts. Further, MFS monitors new legislation which may affect the TCSD and the current assessment process. Therefore, staff has negotiated with MFS to retain their economical service to provide ongoing administration of the TCSD Rates and Charges for $18,000 per year. This agreement will provide assessment administration services from July 1, 1993 to June 30, 1994, with the option to renew the contract on a yearly basis. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the assessment administration services is $18,000. This amount has already been included in the Community Services, Parks, and Recreation Budget for FY 1993-94. ATTACHMENTS: Agreement with Muni Financial Services PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This agreement was made and entered into this 1 st day of July 1993, by and between the City of Temecula (City), a municipal corporation, and Muni Financial Services Inc. (MFS), a Financial Service (Consultant). The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: 1. Services. Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A. 2. Performance. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. 3. Payment. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, at the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. The amount will not exceed $18,000.00 for the term of the Agreement. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided int he Previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. 4. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended so long as such amendment is in writing and agreed upon by both the City and Consultant. 5. Ownership of Documents. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension or abandonment of, this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes 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. 6. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement without cause so long as written notice of intent to terminate is given to Consultant at lease three (3) days prior to the termination date. In the event of termination, Consultant shall be paid for the services performed. 7. Indemnification. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense cost, 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 Consultants acts or omissions under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 8. Status of Consultant. Consultant is an independent contractor in all respects in the performance of this Agreement and shall not be considered an employee of the City for any purpose. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except 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. 9. Term. This Agreement shall commence on July 1, 1993, and shall remain and continue in effect through June 30, 1994. 10. Subcontracts. The Consultant shall not enter into any subcontracts for services to be rendered toward the completion of the Consultant's portion of this Agreement without the consent of the City. At all times, Rick Knopf shall be primarily responsible for the performance of the tasks described herein. Consultant shall provide City with fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Rick Knopf from Consultant's. employ. Upon such notice, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be for the value of service rendered to the City. 11. Default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default. default shall include not performing the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of the City. Failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder, if such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, shall not be considered a default. Any P g disputes regarding g performance, default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final. Consultant shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitrator hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1280, et sea. City and Consultant shall share the cost of the arbitration equally. 12. Liability. Except as provided in this Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages or other compensation to Consultant for performing the services set forth in this Agreement. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of all work covered by this Agreement. Consultant, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workman's compensation or undertake self insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agreement." 13. Notices. Notices shall be given pursuant to this Agreement by personal service on the party to be notified, or by written notice upon such party deposited in the custody of the United States Postal Service addressed as follows: a. City: Attention: City Manager City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 b. Consultant: MFS 28765 Single Oak Drive Second Floor Temecula, CA 92590 The notices shall be deemed to have been given as of the date of personal service, or three (3) days after the date of deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal Service. 14. Entire Aareement. This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. The parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year above written. CONSULTANT By: Title ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk CITY OF TEMECULA By: J. Sal Munoz, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Scott F. Field, City Attorney EXHIBIT A Scope of Services Section 1 of the Agreement specifies the Scope of Services to provide special district administration services itemized in the following paragraphs. Community Services District Assessment Administration Services 1. Meet with City as needed to gather information, discuss City needs and concerns, project history, services provided by the District, etc. 2. Assist City staff in preparing budgets. MFS will provide comparison studies as requested by staff to aid in the analysis of various methods of assessment, benefit to equity evaluations, EDU calculations and rates, etc. 3. Review Boundary Diagrams and on -site characteristics of the District in order to be completely familiar with the specific Service Levels within the District. 4. Review existing method of spread to address staff concerns and to ensure equity throughout the District. 5. Hold public meeting workshops prior to any public hearings to discuss the District services, budgets, and any concerns generated by property owners in order to alleviate any negative misconceptions, if so desire by City. 6. Be available as needed throughout the year to meet with City staff or property owners to discuss district administrations, budgeting, method of fee application, levy, or other related topic at the discretion of the City. 7. Coordinate with the County of Riverside to obtain all necessary information, i.e. latest secured roll, APN maps, etc. (See Fee Schedule, Special Projects). 8. Coordinate with City staff to obtain all necessary information, i.e.; boundary maps, budget information, District reports, special circumstances on particular parcel levy data, etc. 9. Prepare Preliminary Report (1 unbound copy) for review by staff which will include but not be limited to: method of spread; explanation of calculations; District budget background information; description of the District and Service Level; listing of preliminary assessment by Service Level; tables showing the number of parcels per Service Level along with their anticipated assessment land use code, etc.; description of District services; District Boundary Diagram(s) (provided by City); sample formula and calculations for each land use type; explanation of any special calculations required etc. 10. Provide computer printout to staff listing the "Noticed" levy amounts for each —, assessors parcel number; acreages; land use codes; CSD Service Levels; number of dwelling units; EDU values; situs address; owner information; along with a definition of each field provided in the printout. 11. After staff has reviewed the Preliminary Report, modify the Report or provide additional comparison scenarios as directed by staff. 12. Prepare a sample assessment for each parcel and submit to City for review. City to provide notice of public hearing that will be mailed with approved assessment amount to each parcel. Notice to include the date, time and place of the hearing, description of the District and services, parcel number, owner information, assessment amount per parcel, applicable levels of service, etc. 13. After corrections or changes have been made, prepare Final Report (one unbound copy) and accompanying printout listing "Applied" levy amounts, EDU's, parcel listing, assessments, etc. Also provide the applied levy database to the City on a computer disk compatible with the City computer system. 14. Prepare a magnetic tape and submit to the County to be used for entering individual parcel levy amounts onto the tax bills. 15. File the Collection Tape and Enabling Resolution with the County. 16. Upon receipt of a parcel exceptions list from the County, revise parcel numbers and report the remaining levy amounts to the County Assessor's Office. 17. Make all necessary adjustments for annexations into the District upon notification by the City. A revised Boundary Diagram can be prepared for an additional fee. 18. Attend all council meeting, public hearings, etc. as requested by staff. 19. Maintain communication with City staff regarding regulatory changes which may affect the District(s) and current administration procedures. 20. Provide continual administrative consulting to the City as needed. 21. MFS to conduct field verification for changes in parcel use. EXHIBIT B PAYMENT SCHEDULE The following fixed fees and schedule are proposed to accomplish the scope of services a set forth in Section 3 and 9 of the Agreement: Month Amount July $1,500.00 August $1,500.00 September $1,500.00 October $1,500.00 November $1,500.00 December $1,500.00 January $1,500.00 February $1,500.00 March $1,500.00 April $1,500.00 May $1,500.00 June $1,500.00 TOTAL: $18,000.00 The cost of all items incidental to the performance of the engineering services that are not otherwise discussed in this proposal are included in the charges, and no additional charges will be made thereof. The charges for authorized serviced outside the Scope of Services will be based on MFS's hourly rate schedule which are in effect at the time the services are rendered. Hourly Director $125.00 Associate 85.00 Senior Associate 65.00 Date Entry 40.00 Support Staff 35.00 Expenses The cost of printing, reproduction, and other "out of pocket" expenses where provided by consultant shall be Reimbursed to consultant at consultant's direct cost, said amounts not to exceed $1,500.00 based on the then current hourly rate. Expenses not included in the above production, postage and mailing of brochures, newsletters, notices, etc. These additional costs will be billed to the City at cost and are not part of the not -to -exceed amount. Proposal Assumptions The following are the approximate number of parcels and districts the proposed fees are based upon. - The District currently consists of approximately 14,200 parcels (actual assessable approximately 13,700). - The District currently consists of 6 distinct Service Levels. - The City will provide consultant with plats and legal descriptions for any annexations that effect the City Boundary. - The City will provide Tract and APN identification for any new slope areas to be maintained in Service Levels C1, C2, C3 and C4 for Fiscal Year 1993/94. Abandonment In the event that this project is abandoned prior to its completion, the Agency will pay MFS a fee equal to the reasonable value of its services. Reasonable value shall be determined by using the then current hourly rates for our services or the percentage completion of the project, whichever is lowest. The project may be abandoned at any time by the Agency. MFS may cancel its obligation under this Agreement by providing thirty (30) days notice in writing to the Agency. In the event of litigation or arbitration between the parties over the terms or performance of this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Payment Payment for the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be made within thirty (30) days of the submittal of an MFS invoice. MFS invoices for the creation, distribution, collection and follow-up of the tax installments shall be based upon the pro -rated percentage of the project as described in Attachment "A". Invoices shall be submitted to the Agency on a monthly basis. In the event of abandonment, the payment will be due within thirty (30) days of the receipt of an invoice. ITEM NO. 3 I, - APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: DAVID F. DIXON DATE: JULY 13, 1993 SUBJECT: RANCHO DEL SOL LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS PREPARED BY: Bruce A. Hartley, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Receive and file report on the Rancho Del Sol/Margarita Road slope landscaping. DISCUSSION: Community Services Department staff has conducted an investigation into the feasibility and fiscal impact of improving the slope landscaping along Margarita Road on the exterior of the Rancho Del Sol housing tract. The following information was compiled: 1. The tracts included in the investigation are Tracts 20987, 20153, and 20154. These are commonly referred to as Rancho Del Sol. There are a total of 254 lots within the three tracts. 2. For improvements to be completed and maintenance of the slope areas to be included in the TCSD, easement deeds would have to be secured from all property owners with slope areas along Margarita Road. The cost for legal services to determine survey boundaries for the easement deeds is estimated at $5,000. 3. The slope maintenance area was calculated at 2.62 acres. The estimated cost for landscaping the entire area would be approximately $115,000, including irrigation. The cost to provide design and inspection services is estimated at $20,000. The cost for installing utilities has historically been about $7,000. Therefore, the total estimated cost for design and construction is $142,000. 3b1&9wda*4de",W 7.1-93 4. Maintenance of the slopes would be included in the existing TCSD contract. The annual cost to provide maintenance for these slopes is estimated at $29,069. 5. The per lot breakdown of costs for the construction and maintenance are as follows: CONSTRUCTION & DEDICATION COSTS Design and Inspection Costs $ 20,000 Landscape Improvements 115,000 Utility Connections 7,000 Legal Fees 5.000 Total $147,000 Cost Per Lot (Divided into 254 lots) $579 MAINTENANCE COSTS Landscape Maintenance Contract $12,326 City Administration Cost 3,649 Utilities (water & electricity) 10,600 Repairs Total $30,273 Cost Per Lot Annually (Divided into 254 lots) $119.19 or $120. There are several issues that must be addressed to proceed with this process: 1. Property owners who reside adjacent to the slopes must agree to provide an easement deed to the City for maintenance purposes. A total of 46 easement deeds would have to be secured. 2. All 254 property owners must have an opportunity to agree or disagree with the proposed rate and charge for slope maintenance through the TCSD Public Hearing Process. 3. In terms of the fiscal impact, property owners would pay a one time fee of $579 for construction costs and an annual maintenance rate of $120 per lot per year. 3b%sq&-4rkd@".apn 7-1-93 4. The construction costs could be paid back to the City over a five (5) year period or $116 per lot per year plus the $120 per lot per year for maintenance. If this approach was taken, the total rate and charge for the first five years is estimated at $236 per lot. However, the City would have to provide the necessary funds up front to improve the slopes. FISCAL IMPACT: Depending on the course of action, costs per lot in the affected tracts is estimated at $120 per year for maintenance and a one time fee of $579 per lot for construction or $116 per lot per year over a five (5) year period. The fiscal impact to the TCSD would be paid by the annual rates and charges to the affected property owners. 3b%@gwvd=Vd§".W 7-t-93 ITEM NO. 4 E APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: BOARD OF DIRECTORS FROM: DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER DATE: JULY 13, 1993 SUBJECT: NAMING OF THE SENIOR CENTER PREPARED BY: SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Consider, and if desired, approve the official name of the Senior Center. '^ DISCUSSION: The new Senior Center is located in Sam Hicks Monument Park adjacent to the fire station in Old Town Temecula. On May 10, 1993, the Community Services Commission requested that staff survey the seniors currently involved with the City's senior activities to receive additional input concerning the name of this facility. A total of 52 seniors responded to the survey. The results of this survey are as follows: 1. Old Town Temecula Senior Center (23) 2. Mary Phillips Senior Center (17) 3. Temecula Senior Center (7) 4. Miscellaneous names (:7) On June 14, 1993, the Community Services Commission considered the above names and recommended the name "Old Town Temecula Senior Center" to the Board of Directors. According to existing policy, the Board of Directors may select this recommended name or choose any other name desired. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ADOPTING A POLICY FOR NAMING PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES WHEREAS, 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, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY, RESOLVE, DETERIV M 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, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of September, 1992. ATTEST: une . Greek, City AL] Resos CSD 92-08 v7& Ronald 1. Parks, President STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY 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: NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: Revs CSD 92-08 Birdsall, Moore, Lindemans, Munoz Parks, None None i Exhibit "A" TEMECULA COMMUNITY 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 ACTION Department 1. Acquires a new park or recreation facility. 2. Solicits possible names from community. 3. Forwards suggested names to the Parks and Recreation Commission for consideration. Parks and 4. Receives any additional community input. Recreation commission 5. Selects a name for the new park or recreation facility. 6. Forwards name to City Council for ratification. Department 7. Installs the appropriate naming sign or plaque. I TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGENDA REPORT TO: COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION FROM: SHAWN D. NELSON DATE: JUNE 14, 1993 SUBJECT: NAMING OF SENIOR CENTER RECOMMENDATION: That the Community Services Commission: Approve an official name to be recommended to the Board of Directors for the Senior Center. DISCUSSION: Pursuant to the City's naming policy, it is the responsibility of the Community Services Commission to forward recommendations concerning the official name of each park and recreation facility operated by the City of Temecula. Due to the near completion of the Senior Center, it is recommended that the official name of these facility be identified so proper signage can be approved as part of the development process. At the direction of the Commission, staff complied information of a survey that was completed by 52 senior citizens who are currently involved in the Community Services senior program. Also, seniors from the Temecula Valley Senior Center (Winchester Road Area) did not submit any names to the City for consideration. The survey results are as follows: 1. Old Town Temecula Senior Center (23) 2. Mary Phillips Senior Center (17) 3. Temecula Senior Center (7) 4. Miscellaneous names (7) Pursuant to the existing naming policy, the Commission may select one of the above names or choose any other name desired to recommend to the Board of Directors. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HELD JUNE 8, 1993 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order on Tuesday, June 8, 1993, 9:10 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding. PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Munoz, Roberts,Stone, Parks ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None PUBLIC COMMENT None AGENCY BUSINESS 1. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of May 11, 1993. 1.2 Approve the minutes of May 25, 1993. It was moved by Agency Member Munoz, seconded by Agency Member Birdsall to approve the minutes of May 11, 1993 and May 25, 1993. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Munoz, Roberts, Stone, Parks NOES: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT None RDA06/08/93 1 6/12/93 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS F : Agency Member Birdsall clarified a previous request to have staff place the issue of having the limitations on the RDA tax increment revenue increase placed on the agenda for Board discussion. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Murioz to adjourn at 9:15 P.M. The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency will be held Tuesday, June 22,1993, 8:00 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Chairperson Ronald J. Parks June S. Greek, City Clerk '-1 RDA06/06/93 -2- 6/12/93 ITEM NO. 2 W- APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY_ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Agency Board/Executive Director FROM: Scott F. Field/City Attorney DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Wal-Mart Department Store. RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency approve the Development and Disposition Agreement between the Agency, Wal-Mart and the agreement between the Agency and Rancho Regional Shopping Center providing for the 090,000 reimbursement to the Agency and authorize the Agency Chairman to execute the same. DISCUSSION: The terms and conditions of the Agreements and their benefits to the Temecula Project Area are discussed in the staff report and Resolution of Approval presented to the City Council in requesting its consent to the proposed assistance to Wal-Mart. Based on these materials, it is recommended that the Agency approve the Agreements. FISCAL IMPACTS: $362,000 from the Agency Revolving Fund. ATTACHMENTS: Agreement between Agency, Wal-Mart Agreement between Agency and Rancho Regional Shopping Center (attached to City Council Report) ITEM NO. 3 E APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER - CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Redevelopment Agency FROM: David F. Dixon Executive Director DATE: July 13, 1993 SUBJECT: Item No. 3 - Reconsider the Conditions of the Stipulated Judgement - Robert Dawes, Save Historic Old Temecula, an Unincorporated Association vs. the Redevelopment Agency of the County of Riverside, et al. PREPARED BY: City Clerk June S. Greek RECOMMENDATION: The staff will finalize a staff report on this item and forward it to you under separate cover. JSG DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD Ile r-Ytb�/ems f- r;mcc. /e\_ e, Oov/tC^`4 -rr c' ^cL l., h7oit ALS a Ao w r� .� i'a e2Ch rr7&- 6 e r- Q F W-s C'oo,ic;1, abco 1 mYy Coneelte-LS cc9.`� Y'P�2-ds � P r� p ] i F e v �Vy U `'0. �('2 .-�C e 9- m cc v n l t .•l tc �1 C am, -�t t 7 ,Pee o F yeLL res po,2ded Faro �4b/� .� ini✓ �cMmuy/o47)e: Qs- JVC., s Pone bz,5 %atlr.-L �rhr Time To i4orKlv!`Tltrue- ort a- -Poo 1 cir�F'� a F addlr,ens To peina.tce 90 n d i` 5 c a s 5'`A m rd ; el 4%.,t C. 3ecT-,'o 2T�m wh1,61 S U. .' // ra ie (c) It is the purpose of this Ordinance to provide a just, equitable and practical method, in addition to any other remedy available at law, whereby lands or buildings which are dilapidated, unsafe, dangerous, unsanitary, cluttered with weeds, debris, abandoned vehicles, machinery or equipment, or are a menace, or hazard to life, �• limb, safety, health, morals, property values, aesthetic standards or the general welfare o f o (r 7e mP r -may be refer re d To 6e rep reed " — - 1"e.te�`N-1`?d) v^ecc�1'�r+d,dernvt.is�Pcf� Made S'q,.F� tlxG'/ran<du brirc,"o,ral, of ADF Crt'l ✓e Lon J vvns, � P 'Tk �!©ter code �nFc/Ceir,2nIPeTAL 7Fiey o4(ilcla7?.e tre is norJeLa,egaaye w-Alt Pere'ds 76 ta4dsot+f,,'7 � V. Irv^K�'1-ri4,-Ljo > i✓ash bctY'rea/J%ot"a�L 4 o IjteYafPas T �KVsurC QPs7tLeT`� (cis , . c Clar'r ��s area ,`.l ®rdf`.ca.tc e 9b-:I,y ,S ha ✓a added de�.'.l r0ei,5 a.7d 6-0rne deEI'Alil`✓e Q.P.T?,r,'CL a cof mG aW Leak w1 f( ZPa✓e wi771Mott. �1 e, /0 if/( .Y aeD o o 1 d 4. Ke 'To / � .2 1 � Mr. �iIP eo r ALs ' iTePN5Tz 4 �SfsTgetce 9` 'To S'irPSS -7-6 each aHci ,eve )r 7 e- off- y e V- To a C-7 % n A t r J a Vera - -rri aLd d ' � 'a rt Ta ,-t C(-kr- mI ot2✓/ces �,, its 2r^P� 2S / re �co.errt� /S,