Temecula City Council
August 23, 2022

Applicant Filing Notice of Determination.

APPLICANTACTION REQUIRED:

The applicant/developer is responsible for filing the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075 within 48 hours of the project approval. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has not filed the Notice of Determination as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void due to failure of this condition Failure to submit the Notice of Determination will also result in an extended period of time for legal challenges.

FEES:

Fees for the Notice of Determination are Two Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety -Eight Dollars ($2,598.00) which includes the Two Thousand Five Hundred and Forty- Eight Dollars ($2,548.00) fee, required by Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Fifty Dollars ($50.00) County administrative fee. The County of Riverside charges additional fees for credit card transactions.

FILING:

The City shall provide the applicant with a Notice of Determination within 24 hours of approval via email. If the applicant/developer has not received the Notice of Determination within 24 hours of approval, they shall contact the case Planner immediately. All CEQA documents must be filed online with the Riverside County Assessor — County Clerk- Recorder. A direct link to the CEQA filings page is available at TemeculaCA.gov/CEQA.

COPY OF FILINGS:

The applicant shall provide the City with a digital copy of the required filings within 48 hours.

General Requirements

2. Indemnification of the City. Indemnity, Duty to Defend and Obligation to Pay Judgments and Defense Costs, Including Attorneys' Fees, Incurred by the City. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers, agents, and those City agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials (collectively "Indemnitees") from and against any claims, damages, actions, causes of actions, lawsuits, suits, proceedings, losses, judgments, costs, and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys' fees or court costs) in any manner arising out of or incident to the Planning Commission's actions, this approval and the City Council's actions, related entitlements, or the City's environmental review thereof. The Applicant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or the other Indemnitees in any such suit, action, or other legal proceeding. The City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding, or if the City fails to reasonably cooperate in the defense, the Applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City or the Indemnitees. The City shall have the right to select counsel of its choice. The Applicant shall reimburse the City, and the other Indemnitees, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Nothing in this condition shall be construed to require the Applicant to indemnify Indemnitees for any claim arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees. In the event such a legal action is filed challenging the City's determinations herein or the issuance of the approval, the City shall estimate its expenses for the litigation. The Applicant shall deposit said amount with the City or, at the discretion of the City, enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due.

Expiration. This approval shall be used within three years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. Use means the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the three year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit.

A modification made to an approved Development Plan does not affect the original approval date of a development plan.

4. Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to five extensions of time, one year at a time.

A modification made to an approved Development Plan does not affect the original approval date of a development plan.

Consistency with Planned Development Overlay. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay (PDO-5)

6. Conformance with Approved Plans. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Division.

7. Signage Permits. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage.

8. Landscape Maintenance. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Director of Community Development shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest.

9. Graffiti. All graffiti shall be removed within 24 hours on telecommunication towers, equipment, walls, or other structures.

10. Burrowing Owl Study Submittal. A Burrowing Owl Study shall be submitted prior to plan check approval for the grading permit. If construction is delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the survey, the area shall be resurveyed.

11. Water Quality and Drainage. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. To ensure compliance with this Condition of Approval:
a. Spills and leaks shall be cleaned up immediately.
b. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles onsite.
c. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. d. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. e. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times.

12. Materials and Colors. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by City staffs prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision.

Material
Color
Stucco
Dusty Dream (DE6312)
Stucco
Handwoven (DE6200)
Garage Door
Northern Territory (DEA158)
Stucco
Soft Ivory (DE6155)
Stucco
Vanilla Shake (DEW325)
Stucco
Clouded Vision (DE6380)
Stucco
Creme Fraiche (DET654)
Stucco
Drifting Downstream (DET605)
Stucco
Grain Mill (DET665)
French Limestone
French White
Storefront
Dark Bronze
Clay Roof S Tile
Barcelona
Colosseum Travertine
Roman
Chiseled Limestone
Cayenne
San Canyon Flagstone
Cream
Chiseled Limestone
Sunriver Blend

13. Modifications or Revisions. The developer shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project.

14. Trash Enclosures. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as regular solid waste containers.

Trash enclosures shall have working locking mechanisms on all access gates, including pedestrian access gates, that shall remain locked and accessible only to authorized users (residents, commercial tenants, etc.) during times when pick up service is not scheduled.

Trash enclosures shall have anti -dumping design features incorporated into the design of the trash enclosure, which prevent the transfer of materials over or around the trash enclosure.

Anti -dumping features must be designed in complimentary design manner to the existing or proposed building, and shall not include chain link fence, razor wire, or barbed wire." The area between the top of the wall and the top of the enclosure shall not remain open and available for dumping or other activities.

15. Trash Enclosures. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on the site plan.

16. Covered Trash Enclosures. All trash enclosures on site shall include a solid cover and the construction plans shall include all details of the trash enclosures, including the solid cover.

17. Construction and Demolition Debris. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris and shall provide the Planning Division verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris.

18. Public Art Ordinance. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's Public Art Ordinance as defined in Chapter 5.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code.

19. Property Maintenance. All parkways, including within the right-of-way, entryway median, landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities, and on -site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association.

20. Fiscal Impact Analysis Compliance. The Project is required to address impacts to the City's budget as a result of the increased costs to the City of providing public safety and other municipal services to the Project area substantially exceeding the municipal revenue generated from the Project ("City Services Deficit"). The City has received a Fiscal Impact Analysis, dated June 9, 2022 ("FIA"), documenting the City Services Deficit. The owners of the property within the Project, and their successors in interest, shall pay the City a minimum sum as described in the June 9, 2022 Final FIA per Occupied Residential Property each year as mitigation for the City Services Deficit, with an increase in such payment each fiscal year in an amount as described in the June 9, 2022 Final FIA, as such increase may be adjusted as part of the yearly assessment or special tax levy as provided in a funding mechanism that may be approved by the City. "Occupied Residential Property" means an assessor's parcel within the project for which building permits for residential construction have been issued, and a certificate of occupancy or final inspection has been issued, or as may be further defined in the City approved funding mechanism. Five years after the date of the first certificate of occupancy or final inspection is issued for a home in the Project and every five years after that, the owners of the properties may request that the City re evaluate the yearly payments for the City Services Deficit and prepare an updated FIA to analyze the continuing impacts of the Project to the City's budget. The cost of the updated FIA shall be paid for by the owners of the properties within the Project.

Owner and its successors to the property within the Project may fulfill this recurring financial obligation to the City through a community facilities district established by the City pursuant to the Mello Roos Community Facilities District Act of 1982, Government Code Section 53311, et seq., or other appropriated financing mechanism approved by the City; provided, however, the obligation of each owner and their successors to pay the City Services Deficit payment under this Condition remains an obligation of the owner and its successors regardless of the financing mechanism used to pay it and regardless of whether there is a financing mechanism to pay it.

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit

21. Placement of Transformer. Provide the Planning Division with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check valves prior to final agreement with the utility companies.

22. Placement of Double Detector Check Valves. Double detector check valves shall be installed at locations that minimize their visibility from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development.

23. Discovery of Cultural Resources. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If cultural resources are discovered during the project construction (inadvertent discoveries), all work in the area of the find shall cease, and the qualified archaeologist and the Pechanga monitor shall investigate the find, and make recommendations as to treatment."

24. Burrowing Owl Grading Note. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "No grubbing/clearing of the site shall occur prior to scheduling the pre -grading meeting with Public Works. All project sites containing suitable habitat for burrowing owls, whether owls were found or not, require a 30-day preconstruction survey that shall be conducted within 30 days prior to ground disturbance to avoid direct take of burrowing owls. If the results of the survey indicate that no burrowing owls are present on -site, then the project may move forward with grading, upon Planning Division approval. If burrowing owls are found to be present or nesting on -site during the preconstruction survey, then the following recommendations must be adhered to: Exclusion and relocation activities may not occur during the breeding season, which is defined as March 1 through August 31, with the following exception: From March 1 through March 15 and from August 1 through August 31 exclusion and relocation activities may take place if it is proven to the City and appropriate regulatory agencies (if any) that egg laying or chick rearing is not taking place. This determination must be made by a qualified biologist." If construction is delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the survey, the area shall be resurveyed.

25. Human Remains. If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the "most likely descendant(s)" of receiving notification of the discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described in these conditions.

Prior to Issuance of Building Permit

26. Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The Western Riverside County of Governments administers and collects the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance (paid to WRCOG). The fees are subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Additional information on payment, fees, and points of contact can be found at http://www.wrcog.cog.ca.us/174/TUMF

27. Development Impact Fee (DIF). The developer shall comply with the provisions of Title 15, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all its resolutions by paying the appropriate City fee.

28. Photometric Plan. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot, to the Planning Division, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Riverside County Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655. All exterior LED light fixtures shall be 3,000 kelvin or below. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely affect the growth potential of the parking lot trees.

29. Construction Landscaping and Irriqation Plans. Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. These plans shall be submitted as a separate submittal, not as part of the building plans or other plan set. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, height and spread, water usage or KC value, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance and Water Storage Contingency Plan per the Rancho California Water District. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan.

30. Landscaping Site Inspections. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections.

31. Agronomic Soils Report. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating, "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection."

32. Water Usage Calculations. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). Applicant shall use evapotranspiration (ETo) factor of 0.70 for calculating the maximum allowable water budget.

33. Landscape Maintenance Program. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted to the Planning Division for approval. The landscape maintenance program shall detail the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program.

34. Specifications of Landscape Maintenance Program. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate, "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verify that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Division to schedule inspections.

35. Irrigation. The landscaping plans shall include automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property for private common areas; front yards and slopes within individual lots; shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to 66 feet or larger; and, all landscaping excluding City maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to, private slopes and common areas.

36. Hardscaping. The landscape plans shall include all hardscaping for pedestrian trails within private common areas.

37. Wall and Fence Plans. Wall and fence plans shall be consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences:
• Tubular steel fencing around the pool area and northern, eastern, and western boundaries.
- Geogrid retaining wall in front of Building 11

38. Precise Grading Plans. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements.

39. Building Construction Plans for Outdoor Areas. Building Construction Plans shall include detailed outdoor areas (including but not limited to trellises, decorative furniture, fountains, hardscape, etc.) to match the style of the building subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development.

40. WQMP Landscape Compliance. The construction landscape plans shall be consistent with Appendix A, Table 31 of the Low Impact Development (LID) Manual for Southern California for plant materials and treatment facilities, and shall reference the approved precise grading plan for WQMP features.

41. Utility Screening. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction drawings shall show and label all utilities and provide appropriate screening. Provide a three-foot clear zone around fire check detectors as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after -thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all light poles on plans and ensure that there are no conflicts with trees.

42. Smoking in Residential Units. Per Municipal Code Chapter 17.30, "Smoking in Multi -Unit Residences," the developer shall submit a site plan to the City for review and approval, designating a minimum of 25 percent of the units within the project as non-smoking units.

43. Community Wide Public Benefit. The applicant shall provide a cash payment in the amount of $500,000.00 to the City of Temecula prior to issuance of the first residential multi family or commercial building permit. This payment will fulfill the requirements of the Growth Management Plan for the proposed project.

44. Fiscal Impact Analysis Covenant. The owner of record shall record a covenant, in a form satisfactory to the city attorney, which shall place future buyers of the residential dwelling units on notice of their obligation to pay the City the sum as provided in the Fiscal Impact Analysis on file with the City of Temecula. The covenant shall be recorded in the official records of the County of Riverside prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit, and a copy of the covenant shall be filed with the office of the city clerk.

Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit

45. Letter of Substantial Conformance. The applicant shall submit a letter of substantial conformance, subject to field verification by the Director of Community Development or his/her designee. Said letter of substantial conformance shall be prepared by the project designer and shall indicate that all plant materials and irrigation system components have been installed in accordance with the approved final landscape and irrigation plans. Such letter of substantial conformance shall be submitted prior to scheduling for the final inspection.

46. Screening of Loadinq Areas. The applicant shall be required to screen all loading areas and roof mounted mechanical equipment from view of public right-of-ways. If upon final inspection it is determined that any mechanical equipment, roof equipment or backs of building parapet walls are visible from any portion of the public right-of-way adjacent to the project site, the developer shall provide screening by constructing a sloping tile covered mansard roof element or other screening reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development.

47. Landscape Installation Consistent with Construction Plans. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Director of Community Development. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order.

48. Performance Securities. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Director of Community Development, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Planning Division for a period of one year from final Certificate of Occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Director of Community Development, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant.

49. Installation of Site Improvements. All site improvements, including but not limited to, parking areas and striping shall be installed.

50. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this approval.

Prior to Recordation of the Final Map

51. Quimby Requirements. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (Quimby) requirement through the payment of in -lieu fees equivalent to 1.63 acres of parkland, based upon the City's then current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 8.7% credit for private recreational opportunities provided.

Outside Agencies

52. Flood Protection. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control Districts transmittal dated December 16, 2020, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashier's check or money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee.

53. Compliance with Dept. of Environmental Health. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated January 22, 2021, a copy of which is attached.

54. Compliance with EMWD. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Eastern Municipal Water District's transmittal dated December 21, 2020, a copy of which is attached.

55. Compliance with RCWD. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated December 22, 2020, a copy of which is attached.

56. Compliance with Geotechnical. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Leighton Consulting, Inc. transmittal dated February 4, 2021, a copy of which is attached.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General Requirements

57. Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval, the Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any governmental agency.

58. Entitlement Approval. The developer shall comply with the approved site plan, the conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and other relevant documents approved during entitlement. Any significant omission to the representation of site conditions may require the plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision.

59. Precise Grading Permit. A precise grading permit for on site improvements (outside of public right-of-way) shall be obtained from Public Works.

60. Haul Route Permit. A haul route permit may be required when soils are moved on public roadways to or from a grading site. The developer/contractor is to verify if the permit is required. If so, he shall comply with all conditions and requirements per the City's Engineering and Construction Manual and as directed by Public Works.

61. Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction, encroachment permit(s) are required and shall be obtained from Public Works for public offsite improvements.

62. Storm Drain Improvement Plans. The developer shall submit storm drain improvement plans if the street storm flows exceeds top of curb for the 10-year storm event and/or is not contained within the street right-of-way for the 100-year storm event. A manhole shall be constructed at right-of-way where a private and public storm drain systems connect. The plans shall be approved by Public Works.

63. Private Drainage Facilities. All onsite drainage and water quality facilities shall be privately maintained.

64. Parkway Landscaping. All parkway landscaping areas shall be privately maintained.

Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit

65. Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS). The developer shall comply with all constraints per the recorded ECS with any underlying maps related to the subject property.

66. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion & sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. The approved plan shall include all construction -phase pollution -prevention controls to adequately address non -permitted runoff. Refer to the City's Engineering & Construction Manual at: www.TemeculaCA.gov/ECM

67. Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 18, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security and entering into an agreement to guarantee the erosion & sediment control improvements.

68. NPDES General Permit Compliance. The developer shall obtain project coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities and shall provide the following:
a. A copy of the Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB);
b. The project's Risk Level (RL) determination number; and c. The name, contact information and certification number of the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD)
Pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements and City's storm water ordinance, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be generated and submitted to the Board. Throughout the project duration, the SWPPP shall be routinely updated and readily available (onsite) to the State and City. Review www.cabmphandbooks.com for SWPPP guidelines. Refer to the following link:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/stormwater/construction.shtml

69. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement. The developer shall submit a final WQMP (prepared by a registered professional engineer) with the initial grading plan submittal, based on the conceptual WQMP from the entitlement process. It must receive acceptance by Public Works. A copy of the final project -specific WQMP must be kept onsite at all times. In addition, a completed WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement shall be submitted for review and approval. Upon approval from City staff, the applicant shall record the O&M agreement at the County Recorder's Office in Temecula. Refer to the WQMP template and agreement link: www.TemeculaCA.gov/WQMP . As part of the WQMP approval, the Engineer of Record shall report and certify BMP construction per City of Temecula NPDES requirements. Should the project require Alternative Compliance, the developer is responsible for execution of an approved Alternative Compliance Agreement.

70. Drainage. All applicable drainage shall be depicted on the grading plan and properly accommodated with onsite drainage improvements and water quality facilities, which shall be privately maintained. Alterations to existing drainage patterns or concentration and/or diverting flows is not allowed unless the developer constructs adequate drainage improvements and obtains the necessary permissions from the downstream property owners.

All drainage leaving the site shall be conveyed into a public storm drain system, if possible.

The creation of new cross lot drainage is not permitted.

71. Drainage Study. A drainage study shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan check in accordance with City, Riverside County and engineering standards. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities (to mitigate the 10 and 100-year storm event for 24 hour storm duration peak flow) from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed offsite or onsite, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project.

72. RCFC&WCD Encroachment Permit. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations, shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval.

73. Soils Report. A soils report, prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site's soil conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections.

74. Letter of Permission/Easement. The developer shall obtain documents (letters of permission or easements) for any offsite work performed on adjoining properties. The document's format is as directed by, and shall be submitted to, Public Works for acceptance. The document information shall be noted on the approved grading plan.

75. American Disability Act. The developer shall ensure that all frontage areas to the proposed development within the public right of way are ADA compliant. Any sidewalk within the public right of way found to be non -compliant shall be the responsibility of the property owner to be removed and replaced with ADA compliant sidewalk per the Streets and Highway Code Section 5610.

Prior to Issuance of Encroachment Permit(s)

76. Public Utility Agency Work. The developer shall submit all relevant documentation due to encroaching within City right-of-way; and is responsible for any associated costs and for making arrangements with each applicable public utility agency.

77. Traffic Control Plans. A construction area traffic control plan (TCP) will be required for lane closures and detours or other disruptions to traffic circulation; and shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. The TCP shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer in conformance with the latest edition of the Caltrans Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and City standards.

78. Improvement Plans. All improvement plans (including but not limited to street, storm drain, traffic) shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works.

79. Street Trenching. All street trenches shall conform to City Standard No. 407; refer to the City's Paving Notes.

Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)

80. Final Map. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Tract Map Number 38043 shall be approved and recorded.

81. Certifications. Certifications are required from the registered civil engineer -of -record certifying the building pad elevation(s) per the approved plans and from the soil's engineer -of -record certifying compaction of the building pad(s).

Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy

82. Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all on site work (including water quality facilities), public improvements and the executed WQMP Operation and Maintenance agreement.

83. Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearance from applicable utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.) for the completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works.

84. Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section 8771.

85. Certifications. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by Public Works.

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION
General Requirements

86. Final Building and Safety Conditions. Final Building and Safety conditions will be addressed when building construction plans are submitted to Building and Safety for review. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), and related codes which are enforced at the time of building plan submittal.

87. Compliance with Code. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the most current edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy Code, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, and Temecula Municipal Code as identified in Title 15 of the Temecula Municipal Code.

88. ADA Access. Applicant shall provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans to include:
a. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. b. Van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entrance of the building. c. Accessible path of travel from parking to the furthest point of improvement. d. Path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. e. Accessible path of travel from public right-of-way to all public areas on site, such as trash enclosures, clubhouses, and picnic areas.

89. County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance. Applicant shall submit, at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with County of Riverside Mount Palomar Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Building and Safety Division. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights -of -way. All exterior LED light fixtures shall be 3,000 kelvin or below. all
91 ",

93. Street Addressing. Applicant must obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings by requesting street addressing and submitting a site plan for commercial or multi -family residential projects or a recorded final map for single-family residential projects.

Clearance from TVUSD. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley Unified School District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees.

Obtain Approvals Prior to Construction. Applicant must obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work.

Obtaining Separate Approvals and Permits. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. Solid covers are required over new and existing trash enclosures.

Sewer and Water Plan Approvals. On -site sewer and water plans will require separate approvals and permits.

95. Hours of Construction. Signage shall be prominently posted at the entrance to the project, indicating the hours of construction, as allowed by the City of Temecula Municipal Code Section 9.20.060, for any site within one -quarter mile of an occupied residence. The permitted hours of construction are Monday through Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized Government Holidays.

96. House Electrical Meter. Provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site.

Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is not specifically proposed.

97. Protection of drains and penetration. Protection of joints and penetrations in fire resistance -rated assemblies shall not be concealed from view until inspected for all designed fire protection. Required fire seals/fire barriers in fire assemblies at fire resistant penetrations shall be installed by individuals with classification or certification covering the installation of these systems. Provide certification for the installation of each area and certification of compliance for Building Official's approval.

98. Garage Dimensions. Parking spaces within enclosed garages shall have an interior dimension of at least ten feet wide and twenty feet long. All measurements shall be made from the interior walls and any obstructions (including stem walls) shall not satisfy this requirement.

The interior wall dimensions shall be on the plans for each garage.

The following notes are required on the plans:
-Two car garages shall note, "20' x 20' clear with no obstructions (including stem walls)" -Single car garages shall note, "10' x 20' clear with no obstructions (including stem walls)"

FIRE PREVENTION
General Requirements

99. Fire Hydrants. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x (2) 2'/2" outlets) shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent public streets. For all multi -family projects hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The fire line may be required to be a looped system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required (CFC Appendix C and Temecula Municipal Code Section 15.16.020).
100. Fire Dept. Plan Review. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 101. Fire Flow. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial and residential buildings per CFC Appendix B. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2,500 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure for a 4-hour duration for multi -family projects. The fire flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC Appendix B and Temecula Municipal Code Section 15.16.020).

Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s)
102. Access Road Widths. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula Municipal Code Section15.16.020).

103. All Weather Access Roads. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 60,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 3310.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads. (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula Municipal Code Section 15.16.020).
104. Gradient of Access Roads. The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed 15 percent (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula Municipal Code Section 15.16.020). 105. Turning Radius. Dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula Municipal Code Section 15.16.020).

Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)
106. Required Submittals (Fire Underground Water). The developer shall furnish three copies of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all private water systems pertaining to the fire service loop. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block, and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. Hydraulic calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements are being met for the on -site hydrants. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building permit being issued (CFC Chapter 33 and Chapter 5).
107. Required Submittals (Fire Sprinkler Systems). Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. A set of plans and hydraulic calculations are required for each building structure. A permit will be required for each structure, not model type. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. 108. Required Submittals (Fire Alarm Systems). Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. A set of plans and permits are required for each structure, not model type. The fire alarm system is required to have a dedicated circuit from the house panel. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit.

Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy
109. Address Directory (Multi -Family). A directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex.

Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation.
110. Gates and Access. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel (CFC Chapter 5). 111. Hydrant Verification. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots) (Temecula Municipal Code Section 15.16.020).

112. Knox Box. A "Knox -Box" shall be provided. The Knox -Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room (CFC Chapter 5). 113. Addressing. New buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background.

Multi -family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum of 12-inch numbers with suite numbers being a minimum of six inches in size. (CFC Chapter 5 and Temecula Municipal Code Section 15.16.020).

POLICE DEPARTMENT
General Requirements
114. Landscape Height. The applicant shall ensure all landscaping surrounding all buildings are kept at a height of no more than three feet or below the ground floor window sills. Plants, hedges and shrubbery shall be defensible plants to deter would-be intruders from breaking into the buildings utilizing lower level windows.
115. Tree Pruning. The applicant shall ensure all trees surrounding all building rooftops be kept at a distance to deter roof accessibility by "would-be burglars." Since trees also act as a natural ladder, the branches must be pruned to have a six-foot clearance from the buildings. 116. Berm Height. Berms shall not exceed three feet in height. 117. Knox Box. Knox boxes with Police access are required at each gate leading into the property.

Where access to or within a structure or an area is restricted because of secured opening or where immediate access is necessary for life-saving purposes, the Temecula Police Department is authorized to require a key box to be installed in an approved location. The key box shall be of an approved type and shall contain keys to gain necessary access. 118. Parkinq Lot Lighting. All parking lot lighting shall be energy saving and minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. 119. Exterior Door Lightinq. All exterior doors shall have a vandal resistant light fixture installed above the door. The doors shall be illuminated with a minimum one -foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed.
120. Exterior Building Lighting. All lighting affixed to the exterior of buildings shall be wall mounted light fixtures to provide sufficient lighting during hours of darkness. 121. Outdoor Lighting During Non -Business Hours. The applicant shall comply with the Governor's order to address the power crisis. This order became effective March 18, 2001 calling for a substantial reduction from businesses to cut usage during non -business hours. The order, in part, states, "All California retail establishments, including, but not limited to, shopping centers, auto malls and dealerships, shall substantially reduce maximum outdoor lighting capability during non -business hours except as necessary for the health and safety of the public, employees or property." Failure to comply with this order following a warning by law enforcement officials shall be punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine not to exceed $1,000 in accordance with Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. 122. Commercial or Institutional Grade Hardware. All doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade.

123. Graffiti Removal. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the buildings must be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being discovered. Report all such crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch Center at (951) 696-HELP.
124. Alarm System. Upon completion of construction, the buildings shall have a monitored alarm system installed and monitored 24 hours a day by a designated private alarm company to notify the Temecula Police Department of any intrusion. All multi -tenant offices/suites/businesses located within a specific building shall have their own alarm system.

This condition is not applicable if the business is opened 24/7. 125. Roof Hatches. All roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." 126. Rooftop Addressinq. The construction plans shall indicate the application of painted rooftop addressing plotted on a nine -inch grid pattern with 45-inch tall numerals spaced nine inches apart. The numerals shall be painted with a standard nine -inch paint roller using fluorescent yellow paint applied over a contrasting background. The address shall be oriented to the street and placed as closely as possible to the edge of the building closest to the street. 127. ADA Parking. All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with Section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code.

128. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Crime prevention through environmental design as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) supports the concept that "the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life." The nine primary strategies that support this concept are included as conditions below:
a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery or signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of identifying controlled space. b. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. c. Gathering or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control.
d. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention.
e. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer.
f. Redesign the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. g. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and intervention. h. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be aware of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clear lines -of -sight serve to provide such a perception of surveillance.
i. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building.
129. Business Security Survey. Businesses desiring a business security survey of their location can contact the Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department at (951) 695-2773.
130. Questions Regarding Conditions. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 695-2773.

235635
JASON E. UHLEY
General Manager -Chief Engineer
City of Temecula
W�yQt4puNTY FLpdprp��
a
Y
V

RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL

AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Community Development Department
41000 Main Street,
Temecula CA 92590
Attention: Scott Cooper
December 16, 2020
1995 MARKET STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
951.955.1200
951.788.9965 FAX
www.rcflood.org
Re: PA 20-1325 and Tract 38043
The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use 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 comments/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's review is based on the above -referenced project transmittal, received November 23, 2020.

The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail, and the following comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety, or any other such issue:
© This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities, nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed.
❑ This project involves District proposed Master Drainage Plan facilities, namely, The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request of the City. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection, and administrative fees will be required.
❑ This project proposes channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature and/or a logical extension of the adopted Murrieta Creek 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.

235635
City of Temecula - 2 - December 16, 2020
Re: PA 20-1325 and Tract 38043
® This project is located within the limits of the District's Murrieta Creek (❑Murrieta Valley ❑x Temecula Valley ❑ Santa Gertrudis Valley ❑Warm Springs Valley) Area Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted. If the project is proposing to create additional impervious surface area, applicable fees should be paid by cashier's check or money order only to the Flood Control District or City prior to issuance of grading or building permits. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of the actual permit. ® An encroachment permit shall be obtained for any construction related activities occurring within District right of way or facilities, namely, Temecula Valley — Rancho California Road Storm Drain. For further information, contact the District's Encroachment Permit Section at 951.955.1266.
❑ The District's previous comments are still valid.

GENERAL INFORMATION
This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt.

If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped floodplain, the City should require the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans, and other information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require 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 floodplain is impacted by this project, the City should require the applicant to obtain a Section 1602 Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and a Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agencies indicating the project is exempt from these requirements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification may be required from the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to issuance of the Corps 404 permit.

Very truly yours,

DEBORAH DE CHAMBEAU
Engineering Project Manager
ec: Riverside County Planning Department
Attn: John Hildebrand
SLJ:blm:mc

County of Riverside

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
P.O. BOX 7909 • RIVERSIDE, CA 92513-7909

KEITH JONES, DIRECTOR
ftwwg People and th, E-rmo w
January 22, 2021
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Attn: Scott Cooper
41000 Main Street
Temecula CA 92590
SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA — PA20-1325 TEMECULA VILLAGE PHASE II DP: APN:944-370-001
Dear Mr. Cooper:

The project listed in the subject heading is proposing a development plan to allow for the construction of 134 unit apartment community located within the existing PDO-5 on the south side of Rancho California Road, 150 feet west of Cosmic Drive, in the city of Temecula.

In accordance with the agreement between the County of Riverside, Department of Environmental Health (DEH) and the City of Temecula, DEH offers the following comments for the project(s) listed in the subject heading of this letter:

POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER
This project is is proposing to receive potable water from Rancho California Water District (RCWD) and sanitary sewer service from Eastern Municipal Water District(EMWD). It is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that all requirements to obtain potable water and sanitary sewer service are met with EMWD, as well as, all other applicable agencies.

As the agency providing sewer service, EMWD shall also have the responsibility to implement any grease interceptor requirements, including sizing capacity and other structural specifications if necessary.

All existing septic systems and/or wells shall be properly removed or abandoned under permit with DEH.

Office Locations • Blythe • Corona • Hemet • Indio • Murrieta • Palm Springs • Riverside Phone (888)722-4234
www.rivcoeh.org

ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP PROGRAM
Based on the information provided in the environmental assessment document previously submitted for the first phase of this project and did include this APN, and with the provision that the information was accurate and representative of site conditions, RCDEH-ECP (Riverside County Department of Environmental Health — Environmental Cleanup Program) concludes no further environmental assessment is required for this project.

If previously unidentified contamination or the presence of a naturally occurring hazardous material is discovered at the site, assessment, investigation, and/or cleanup may be required.

Contact Riverside County Environmental Health - Environmental Cleanup Programs at (951) 955-8980, for further information.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT BRANCH (HMMB)
Prior to conducting a building permit final, the facility shall require a business emergency plan for the storage of any hazardous materials, greater than 55 gallons, 200 cubic feet or 500 pounds, or any acutely hazardous materials or extremely hazardous substances. If further review of the site indicates additional environmental health issues, HMMB reserves the right to regulate the business in accordance with applicable County Ordinances. Please contact HMMB at (951) 358- 5055 to obtain information regarding any additional requirements.

DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES — PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC FOOD/POOL

FACILITY
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall be required to contact DEH District Environmental Services to determine the appropriate pood plan check and/or permitting requirements. For further information, please call (951) 461-0284.

County of Riverside, Department of Environmental Health District Environmental Services - Murrieta Office
38740 Sky Canyon Drive, Suite "A"
Murrieta CA 92563
Please contact your local DES office located in Murrieta at (951)461-0284.

Should you have any further questions or require further assistance, please contact me by email at kakim&rivco.org or by phone at (951) 955-8980.

Sincerely,
Kristine Kim, Supervising REHS
Department of Environmental Health

12/21/2020
DRC ENGINEERING, INC.
160 S. Old Springs Rd. # 210
Anaheim, CA 92808
'4W`

EASTERN

WATER MUNICIPAL
WATER

DISTRICT
Subject: SAN 53 — WS 20200001179 Will Serve — APNS: 944-370-001, 005 thru 008, 010, 012 and 013 (PM 31023)
Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) is willing to provide sewer services to the subject project. The provisions of service are contingent upon the developer completing the necessary arrangements in accordance with EMWD rules and regulations. EMWD expects the developer to coordinate with the approving agency for the proper notification. Further arrangements for service from EMWD may also include plan check, facility construction, inspection, jurisdictional annexation, and payment of financial participation charges. The developer is advised to contact EMWD's Development Services Department early in the entitlement process to determine the necessary arrangements for service, and to receive direction on the preparation of facility Design Conditions, which is required prior to final engineering.

EMWD's ability to serve is subject to limiting conditions, such as regulatory requirements, legal issues, or conditions beyond EMWD's control.

Expiration — one year from date of issue
Thank you for your cooperation in serving our mutual customers. If you have any questions, please call me at (951) 928-3777, extension 4467.

Sincerely,
6, a' '
Brian A. Raines, MPA, PE
Associate Civil Engineer 11
Development Services Department
Eastern Municipal Water District
BAR/bd
Board of directors
David J. Slawson. President Ronald W. Sullivan, Vice Presider; Stephen J Corona Philip E. Pau4e Ran8y A Record 2270 Trumble Road - P.O. Box 8300 - Perris, CA 92572-8300 T 951.928.3777 0 F 951.928.6177 www.emwd.org

o
§ | . ! $ § § £ c 0 k $
tm
) \ \ 6 ! J \ ! kCD
■ I c \## k a J t 2 — k
ƒ 2 K ) 2■] ) to
■ a 8 A 2 2$) j $/
k k : ; i i i k to k\\$\\\
� 0 i | i �■ ® �
70 �
�
�
■
�
�
c4Ak-).§
22 kkk2)
[ §■o
77//k
a T5
232
2 , PL
% §Eg
�§§g£
CD
���■I
�■.
/ ��
®�2
EtU1]
)am
28((
f �k@
2§ ®
c$e
\r,
ns.2
k2§ƒ
� $
§ w
g
§
k
LU
§ co
G
§
�
�
o �

December 22, 2020
Case Planner
Rancho
County of Riverside
Department of Environmental Health
water
Post Office Box 7909
Riverside, CA 92513-7909
SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY
Board of Directors
PARCEL NOS. 1 THROUGH 8 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 31023
APNS 944-370-001, 944-370-005, 944-370-006, 944-370-007, Bill Wilson
President
944-370-008, 944-370-010, AND 944-370-012
Carol Lee Gonzales -Brady
[RENDEZVOUS MULTI -FAMILY, LP]
Senior Vice President
Dear Case Planner:

Brian Brady
Angel Garcia
Please be advised that the above -referenced project/property is located within John E. Hoagland
the Service boundaries of Rancho California Water District (Rancho Water/District). The subject project/property fronts an existing 12-inch diameter William E. Plummer
water pipeline (1380 Pressure Zone) within Rancho California Road. Please refer John V. Rossi
to the enclosed exhibit map.

Officers
Water service to the subject project/property exists under Account No. 3095910, Eva PlantGeneral Manager P.E.

Assistant G
Location No. 2046417 and Account No. 3095911, Location No. 2046418 (Fire Engineering and Operations
Service exists under Account No. 3095793, Location No. 2046412 and Account No.

Richard R. Aragon, CPFO
3095794, Location No. 2046413 and Landscape Service exists under Account No.

Assistant General Manager
3095897, Location No. 2046416 and Account No. 3099303, Location No.

CFO/Treasurer
2046511). Additions or modifications to water service arrangements are subject Jason A. Martin
Director of Administration
to the Rules and Regulations (governing) Water System Facilities and Service, as well as the completion of financial arrangements between Rancho Water and the Eileen Dienzo
Director of Human Resources
property owner.

Kell! E. Garcia
District Secretary Water service to individual lots will require the extension of water facilities within Distr
James B. Gilpin dedicated public and/or private right-of-ways. Individual water meters will be Best Best & Krieger LLP required for each lot and/or project unit, including separate water General Counsel services/meters for domestic service, fire service, and landscape irrigation service, as applicable. Beginning in 2018, newly constructed multi -unit residential structures are required to measure the quantity of water supplied to each individual residential dwelling unit.

Where private on -site water facilities (for water service, fire service, irrigation, or other purpose) will cross or will be shared amongst multiple lots/project units (only by special variance of the Rules and Regulations), and/or where such 'common' facilities will be owned and maintained by a Property Owners' Association, Rancho Water requires execution and recordation of a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement or equivalent document of covenants, codes, and restrictions.
20\KC:hab064\F450\FEG
a ncho California Water
42135 Winchester Road - Post Office Box 9017 - Temecula, California 92589-9017 - (951) 296-6900 - FAX (951) 296-6860 - www.ranchowater.com

Case Planner/County of Riverside
December 22, 2020
Page Two
Water availability is contingent upon the property owner(s) destroying all on -site wells and signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to Rancho Water. In addition, water availability is subject to water supply shortage contingency measures in effect (pursuant to Rancho Water's Water Shortage Contingency Plan or other applicable ordinances and policy), and/or the adoption of a required Water Supply Assessment for the development, as determined by the Lead Agency.

There is no recycled water currently available within the limits established by Resolution 2007- 10-5. Should recycled water become available in the future, the project/property may be required to retrofit its facilities to make use of this availability in accordance with Resolution 2007-10-5. Recycled water service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on -site and/or off -site recycled water facilities and the completion of financial arrangements between Rancho Water and the property owner. Requirements for the use of recycled water are available from Rancho Water.

As soon as feasible, and prior to the preparation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents, the project proponent should contact Rancho Water for a determination of existing water system capability, based upon project -specific demands and/or fire flow requirements, as well as a determination of proposed water facilities configuration. If new facilities are required for service, fire protection, or other purposes, the project proponent should contact Rancho Water for an assessment of project -specific fees and requirements.

Sewer service to the subject project/property, if available, would be provided by Eastern Municipal Water District. If no sewer service is currently available to the subject project/property, all proposed waste discharge systems must comply with the State Water Resources Control Board, health department, and/or other requirements as they relate to the protection of groundwater quality, pursuant to Rancho Water's Groundwater Protection Policy.

If you should have any questions or need additional information, please contact an Engineering Technician at the District office at (951) 296-6900.

Sincerely,

RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Krisma Crowell
Engineering Technician
Enclosure: Exhibit Map
cc: Jeff Kirshberg, Water Resources Manager
Corry Smith, Engineering Services Supervisor
20\KC:hab064\F450\FEG
Rancho California Water District
42135 Winchester Road • Post Office Box 9017 • Temecula, California 92589-9017 • (951) 296-6900 • FAX (951) 296-6860 • www ranchowater com

A
ar.. I M,
if
�r�
1 1
.. _..a'FO. i�'�iC�
NZ
I,

4 Leighton Consulting, Inc.

A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
February 4, 2021
Project No. 11760.020
City of Temecula, Planning Department
4100 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
Attention: Mr. Scott Cooper, Associate Planner
Subject: Geotechnical Peer Review #3
Proposed Temecula Village Apartments — Phase 2 (PA20-1325) Rancho California Road, Temecula, California
Reference: EEI, Response to Geotechnical Peer Review, Proposed Temecula Village Apartments — Phase 2 (PA20-1325), Rancho California Road, Temecula, California, Project No 11760.020, dated January 21, 2021, EEI Project PWD-72988.4b,
In accordance with your request, we reviewed the above referenced report by EER in response to our Peer Review Comments #2 dated January 21, 2021. It is our opinion that EEI has substantially addressed our comments. Although not explicitly stated in the above response, we expect EEI to further verify the potential for expansive soils on this site and make the structural engineer aware of such condition so any slab -on -grade foundations are designed accordingly and comply with requirements of 2019 Building Code. Otherwise, no further action is required from our peer review viewpoint with the regard to the submitted report.

We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to City and please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any question.

Respectfully submitted,
LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC.

Alp c `c��ONAL �Nc�
0 �iT F, �� r �� \SON i S,q�i 2�
o .
+ $�W1421 VT
CERTIFIED 2641

ENGINEERING

GEOLOGIST
Robert F. Riha, CEG 1921 Simon I. Saiid, PE, GE 2641
Senior Principal Geologist Principal Engineer �FoF CAL�FO� Distribution: (1) Addressee (PDF copy via email)
41715 Enterprise Circle N., Suite 103 ■ Temecula, CA 92590-5661 951.296.0530 ■ Fax 951.296.0534

RESOLUTION NO.2022-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
38043 TO COMBINE EIGHT (8) EXISTING CONTIGUOUS

PARCELS INTO A SINGLE PARCEL ON THE SOUTH SIDE
OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150
FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN: 944-370-001, 005,
006, 007, 008, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1326)

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that:

A. On November 12, 2020, Pacific West Development filed Planning Application Nos. PA20-1323, a General Plan Amendment; PA20-1324, a Planned Development Overlay Amendment; PA20-1325, a Development Plan; and PA20-1326, a Tentative Tract Map. These applications (collectively "the Project") were filed in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code.

B. The Project was processed including, but not limited to, a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act.

C. A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA"). The Draft ND was prepared under staff's direction by Environmental Science Associates (ESA). Thereafter, City staff filed a Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse, and circulated a Notice of Intent with the Draft ND and Appendices to the public and other interested parties, for a 30-day public review and comment period for the Draft ND commenced on May 27, 2021 and concluded on June 27, 2021. Signs were placed on the property and a notice was placed in the local paper. The City of Temecula received two (2) written comments and responded to each comment in the Final ND, which includes all timely received written comments and responses thereto. Comments were received by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Temecula Valley Unified School District. The Final ND was provided to commenting agencies in compliance with State Law. The "Final ND" consists of the Draft ND and all of its appendices and the comments and responses to comments on the Draft ND. The Final ND was made available to the public and to all commenting agencies in accordance with the law.

D. On July 20, 2022 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Negative Declaration and proposed Project at which time all persons interested in these actions had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission.

E. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-19 "A RESOLUTION OF THE

PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE RENDEZVOUS PHASE II PROJECT CONSISTING OF A 134

UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013)."
F. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-23 "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 38043 TO COMBINE EIGHT (8) EXISTING

CONTIGUOUS PARCELS INTO A SINGLE PARCEL ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPRXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN'S: 944- 370-001, 005, 006, 007, 008, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1326)".

G. On August 23, 2022 the City Council of the City of Temecula considered the Project and the Final ND for the Project, at a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. The Council considered all the testimony and any comments received regarding the Project and the Final ND prior to and at the public hearing.

H. Following the public hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022- "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING

THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE RENDEZVOUS PHASE II PROJECT CONSISTING OF A 134 UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN'S: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013)". Resolution No. 2022- and the findings therein are hereby incorporated by this reference as set forth in full.

I. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

Section 2. The City Council in approving the Tentative Parcel Map hereby makes the following findings as required by Temecula Municipal Code Section 16.09.140:

A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code.

Tentative Tract Map No. 38043 has been designed in a manner that is consistent with and meets all development and design standards of the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Municipal Code, and the Rendezvous Planned Development Overlay.

B. The Tentative Map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use.

The subject parcel does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. The subject property has not been designated for conservation or agricultural land and is not subject to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965.

C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map.

The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map. The proposed Tentative Map is in accordance with what is allowed by the Development Code, General Plan, and Rendezvous Planned Development Overlay.

The proposed Tentative Tract Map combines eight (8) existing contiguous parcels into a single parcel for residential development. As such, the site is suitable for this development proposed.

D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

The project has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and based on an Initial Study, it has been determined the project could not have a significant impact on the environment; therefore, a Draft Negative Declaration (ND) (SCH# 2021050549) was prepared.

E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems.

The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because the proposed development is consistent with all applicable building, development and fire codes, which include provisions to safeguard public health, and will be further reviewed and inspected by City staff for compliance with all applicable building, development and fire codes prior to issuance of any grading, building, or occupancy permits.

F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible.

The project consists of a Tentative Tract Map on developed and vacant property and does not propose any grading or construction. Any future development on the project site will be in accordance with the requirements of the California Building Code in effect at that time as it relates to heating and cooling.

G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided.

The subdivision design and the improvements being proposed including the residential lots will not conflict with existing or future easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The project is being conditioned to grant all required easements and dedications.

H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby Act).

The subdivision is consistent with the City s parkland dedication requirements (Quimby Act) because payment of Quimby fees has been included as a condition of approval of the project prior to the recordation of a Final Tentative Map.

Section 3. Conditions of Approval. Thi
approves Planning Application No. PA20-1326,
existing contiguous parcels into a single parce
approximately 150 ft west of Cosmic Drive. (A:
013), subject to the Conditions of Approval
incorporated herein by this reference.

City Council of the City of Temecula hereby
Tentative Tract Map 38043 to combine eight (8)
on the south side of Rancho California Road,
'Ns: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 008, 010, 012,
set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and
Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon the effective date of Ordinance No. "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA APPROVING A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AMENDMENT TO THE TEMECULA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-5)

GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 008, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1324)."
Section 5. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 23rd day of August, 2022.

Matt Rahn, Mayor
ATTEST:

Randi Johl, City Clerk
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2022- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of August, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Randi Johl, City Clerk

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF TEMECULA

DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Application No.: PA20-1326
Project Description: ATentative Tract Map to combine eight (8) existing contiguous parcels into a single parcel under TTM 38043
Assessor's Parcel No.: 944-370-001
944-370-005
944-370-006
944-370-007
944-370-008
944-370-010
944-370-012
944-370-013
MSHCP Category: Residential (Greater Than 14.1 du/ac)
DIF Category: Residential -Attached
TUMF Category: Residential -Multi -Family
Quimby Category: Multi -Family Attached (5 or More Units) New Street In -lieu of Fee: N/A (Project not located in Uptown Temecula Specific Plan area) Approval Date: August 23, 2022
Expiration Date: August 23, 2025

PLANNING DIVISION
General Requirements

Indemnification of the City. Indemnity, Duty to Defend and Obligation to Pay Judgments and Defense Costs, Including Attorneys' Fees, Incurred by the City. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, employees, volunteers, agents, and those City agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials (collectively "Indemnitees") from and against any claims, damages, actions, causes of actions, lawsuits, suits, proceedings, losses, judgments, costs, and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys' fees or court costs) in any manner arising out of or incident to the Planning Commission's actions, this approval and the City Council's actions, related entitlements, or the City's environmental review thereof. The Applicant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or the other Indemnitees in any such suit, action, or other legal proceeding. The City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding, or if the City fails to reasonably cooperate in the defense, the Applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City or the Indemnitees. The City shall have the right to select counsel of its choice. The Applicant shall reimburse the City, and the other Indemnitees, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Nothing in this condition shall be construed to require the Applicant to indemnify Indemnitees for any claim arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees. In the event such a legal action is filed challenging the City's determinations herein or the issuance of the approval, the City shall estimate its expenses for the litigation. The Applicant shall deposit said amount with the City or, at the discretion of the City, enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due.

2. Expiration. This approval shall be used within three years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. Use means the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the three year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval, or use of a property in conformance with a Conditional Use Permit.

A modification made to an approved Tentative Map does not affect the original approval date of a development plan.

Time Extension. The Director of Community Development may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to five (5) extensions of time, one year at a time.

A modification made to an approved development plan does not affect the original approval date of a development plan

4. Consistency with Planned Development Overlay. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay (PDO-5)
Modifications or Revisions. The developer shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project.

Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit

6. TCSD Service Levels. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of the Temecula Community Service District (TCSD) and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers.

7. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this approval.

Prior to Recordation of the Final Map

8. Final Map. A copy of the Final Map shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Division.

9. Environmental Constraint Sheet. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Planning Division with the following notes:
a. This property is located within 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.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
General Requirements

10. Subdivision Map. The developer shall submit a complete Tract Map submittal for review and approval. Any omission to the representation of the site conditions may require the plans to be resubmitted for further review and revision.

11. Grading Permit. A grading permit for rough and/or precise grading shall be obtained from Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within private property. Grading shall be in accordance with the approved grading plan, grading permit conditions and City codes/standards.

12. Encroachment Permits. Prior to commencement of any applicable construction, encroachment permit(s) are required and shall be obtained from Public Works for public offsite improvements.

13. Private Drainage Facilities. All onsite drainage and water quality facilities shall be privately maintained.

14. Parkway Landscaping. All parkway landscaping areas shall be privately maintained.

Prior to Recordation of the Final Map

15. Conditions of Approval. The developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval, the Engineering and Construction Manual and all City codes/standards at no cost to any governmental agency.

16. Plans, Agreements & Securities. The developer shall have executed subdivision monumentation agreement and posted securities.

17. Right -of -Way Dedications. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by Public Works.

18. Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS). The developer shall prepare and record an ECS with the Tract Map to delineate identified environmental concerns. The developer shall comply with all constraints per the recorded ECS along with any underlying maps related to the property.

19. Required Clearances. As deemed necessary by Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
a. Rancho California Water District;
b. Southern California Edison Company or other affected agencies

20. Right of Access. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Rancho California Road on the Tract Map with the exception of one opening as delineated on the approved Tentative Tract Map.

21. Easements. Note the following:
a. An easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and emergency vehicle access for all private streets and drives.
b. Easements (when required for roadway slopes, landscape, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.) shall be shown on the Tract 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 Public Works. Onsite drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the Tract Map. A note shall be added to the Tract Map stating: "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions."

22. Property Taxes. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid.

Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit

23. Grading/Erosion & Sediment Control Plan. The developer shall submit a grading/erosion & sediment control plan(s) to be reviewed and approved by Public Works. All plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site. The approved plan shall include all final WQMP water quality facilities and all construction -phase pollution -prevention controls to adequately address non -permitted runoff.

Refer to the City's Engineering & Construction Manual at:
www.TemeculaCA.gov/ECM

24. Erosion & Sediment Control Securities. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 18, Section 18.24.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code by posting security and entering into an agreement to guarantee the erosion & sediment control improvements.

25. NPDES General Permit Compliance. The developer shall obtain project coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities and shall provide the following:
a. A copy of the Waste Discharge Identification number (WDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB);
b. The project's Risk Level (RL) determination number; and c. The name, contact information and certification number of the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD).

Pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requirements and City's storm water ordinance, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be generated and submitted to the Board. Throughout the project duration, the SWPPP shall be routinely updated and readily available (onsite) to the State and City. Review www.cabmphandbooks.com for SWPPP guidelines. Refer to the following link:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water issues/programs/stormwater/construction.shtml

26. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and O&M Agreement.. The developer shall submit a final WQMP (prepared by a registered professional engineer) with the initial grading plan submittal, based on the conceptual WQMP from the entitlement process. It must receive acceptance by Public Works. A copy of the final project -specific WQMP must be kept onsite at all times. In addition, a completed WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement shall be submitted for review and approval. Upon approval from City staff, the applicant shall record the O&M agreement at the County Recorder's Office in Temecula. Refer to the WQMP template and agreement link: www.TemeculaCA.gov/WQMP . As part of the WQMP approval, the Engineer of Record shall report and certify BMP construction per City of Temecula NPDES requirements. Should the project require Alternative Compliance, the developer is responsible for execution of an approved Alternative Compliance Agreement.

27. Area Drainage Plan (ADP) Fee to RCFC&WCD. The developer shall demonstrate to the City that the flood mitigation charge (ADP fee) has been paid to RCFC&WCD. If the full ADP fee has already been credited to this property, no new charge will be required.

28. Drainage Study. A drainage study shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan check in accordance with City, Riverside County and engineering standards. The study shall identify storm water runoff quantities (to mitigate the 10 and 100-year storm event for 24 hour storm duration peak flow) from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify all existing or proposed offsite or onsite, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. Any upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project.

29. RCFC&WCD Encroachment Permit. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations, shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval.

30. Soils Report. A soils report, prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer, shall be submitted to Public Works with the initial grading plan submittal. The report shall address the site's soil conditions and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections.

31. Geological Report. The developer shall comply with the recommendations and/or proposed Conditions of Approval as identified during entitlement.

32. Letter of Permission/Easement. The developer shall obtain documents (letters of permission or easements) for any offsite work performed on adjoining properties. The document's format is as directed by, and shall be submitted to, Public Works for acceptance. The document information shall be noted on the approved grading plan.

33. Habitat Conservation Fee. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in the ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid.

34. American Disability Act. The developer shall ensure that all frontage areas to the proposed development within the public right of way are ADA compliant. Any sidewalk within the public right of way found to be non -compliant shall be the responsibility of the property owner to be removed and replaced with ADA compliant sidewalk per the Streets and Highway Code Section 5610.

Prior to Issuance of Encroachment Permit(s)

35. Public Utility Agency Work. The developer shall submit all relevant documentation due to encroaching within City right-of-way; and is responsible for any associated costs and for making arrangements with each applicable public utility agency.

36. Traffic Control Plans. A construction area traffic control plan (TCP) will be required for lane closures and detours or other disruptions to traffic circulation; and shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works. The TCP shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer in conformance with the latest edition of the Caltrans Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and City standards.

37. Improvement Plans. All improvement plans (including but not limited to street, storm drain, traffic) shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works.

38. Street Trenching. All street trenches shall conform to City Standard No. 407; refer to the City's Paving Notes.

Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s)

39. Final Map. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, Tract Map Number 38043 shall be approved and recorded.

40. Precise Grading Plan. The building pad(s) 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.

Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy

41. Completion of Improvements. The developer shall complete all work per the approved plans and Conditions of Approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This includes all on site work (including water quality facilities), public improvements and the executed WQMP Operation and Maintenance agreement.

42. Utility Agency Clearances. The developer shall receive written clearance from applicable utility agencies (i.e., Rancho California and Eastern Municipal Water Districts, etc.) for the completion of their respective facilities and provide to Public Works.

43. Replacement of Damaged Improvements/Monuments. Any appurtenance damaged or broken during development shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of Public Works. Any survey monuments damaged or destroyed shall be reset per City Standards by a qualified professional pursuant to the California Business and Professional Code Section 8771.

44. Certifications. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by Public Works.

PC RESOLUTION NO.2022-19

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF

THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA ADOPTING THE FINAL NEGATIVE

DECLARATION FOR THE RENDEZVOUS PHASE II
PROJECT CONSISTING OF A 134 UNIT APARTMENT

COMMUNITY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH

SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD,
APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE
(APN: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013)"
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that:

A. On November 12, 2020, Pacific West Development filed Planning Application Nos. PA20-1323, a General Plan Amendment; PA20-1324, a Planned Development Overlay Amendment; PA20-1325, a Development Plan; and PA20-1326, a Tentative Tract Map. These applications (collectively "the Project") were filed in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code.

B. Collectively, the Project consists of a General Plan Amendment to amend the underlying General Plan Land Use designation of the Project site from Professional Office (PO) to Medium Density Residential (M); a Planned Development Overlay Amendment for PDO-5; a Development Plan for a 134 unit apartment community built on 7.60 acres; and a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 38043) to combine eight (8) existing contiguous parcels into a single parcel.

C. The Project was processed, including but not limited to all public notices, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code 21000, et seq. and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs 15000 et seq. (collectively referred to as "CEQA").

D. Pursuant to CEQA, the City is the lead agency for the Project.

E. The City contracted with Ascent Environmental Inc. for the independent preparation of an Initial Study to analyze the potential environmental effects of the Project. Based on the information contained in the Initial Study, Ascent Environmental Inc. and City staff concluded the project could not have a significant impact on the environment. Based upon this determination, Ascent Environmental Inc. prepared, and City staff concurred in, a Draft Negative Declaration ("Draft ND") in accordance with CEQA Section 21080(c) and Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.

F. The City circulated a Notice of Intent to Adopt the Draft ND, along with the Draft ND and its Appendices, to the public and other interested parties for a 30-day comment period from May 27, 2021 through June 27, 2021. The City published a Notice of Intent to Adopt for the Draft ND in the Press Enterprise, a newspaper of general circulation within the City. Copies of

the documents were made available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590 and on the City of Temecula website.

G. During the comment period, the City received two (2) written comments on the Draft ND from various agencies, individuals, and organizations and a response to all the comments made therein was prepared, submitted to the Planning Commission, and incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings.

H. On July 20, 2022, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Final ND and the Project, at which time the Planning Commission heard and considered information presented by City staff on the Project and its environmental review. In addition, all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify regarding this matter.

Section 2. Findings. After due consideration of the Final ND and the Project and in the exercise of its independent judgment, the Planning Commission hereby finds and resolves that:

A. All of the above recitals are true and correct, and are hereby incorporated into this section as though set forth in full.

B. That the Initial Study/ND has been prepared and circulated in compliance with the provisions of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the procedures set forth in the ordinances of the City.

C. Agencies and interested members of the public have been afforded ample notice and opportunity to comment on the Draft ND, the Final ND, and on the Project. The Project has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines.

D. The Planning Commission has independently considered the administrative record before it, which is hereby incorporated by reference and which includes the Final ND, the written and oral comments on the Draft ND, the Draft ND and its Appendices, staff reports and presentations, and all oral and written testimony.

E. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Final ND and all comments received regarding the Final ND prior to and at the July 20, 2022 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it finds that: (1) the Final ND was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) the Final ND reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission.

F. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Final ND attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 20th day of July, 2022.
ary Watts, Chairperson
ATT T:

Luke Watson
Secretary
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 2022-19 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Hagel, Ruiz, Turley-Trejo, Watts NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS None
ABSTAIN: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS None
ABSENT: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Telesio
Luke Watson
Secretary

PC RESOLUTION NO.2022-20

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF

THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

TEMECULA APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN

AMENDMENT APPLICATION TO REVISE THE GENERAL

PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE PARCELS OF

THE RENDEZVOUS PHASE II PROJECT FROM

PROFESSIONAL OFFICE TO A MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE (APN: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 0079
010, 012, 013) (PA20-1323)"
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that:

A. On November 12, 2020, Pacific West Development filed Planning Application Nos. PA20-1323, a General Plan Amendment; PA20-1324, a Planned Development Overlay Amendment; PA20-1325, a Development Plan; and PA20-1326, a Tentative Tract Map. These applications (collectively "the Project") were filed in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code.

B. The Project was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law.

C. A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA"). The Draft ND was prepared under staff's direction by Environmental Science Associates (ESA). Thereafter, City staff filed a Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse, and circulated a Notice of Intent with the Draft ND and Appendices to the public and other interested parties, for a 30-day public review and comment period for the Draft ND commenced on May 27, 2021 and concluded on June 27, 2021. Signs were placed on the property and a notice was placed in the local paper. The City of Temecula received two (2) written comments and responded to each comment in the Final ND, which includes all timely received written comments and responses thereto. Comments were received by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Temecula Valley Unified School District. The Final ND was provided to commenting agencies in compliance with State Law. The "Final ND" consists of the Draft ND and all of its appendices and the comments and responses to comments on the Draft ND. The Final ND was made available to the public and to all commenting agencies in accordance with the law.

D. On July 20, 2022 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Negative Declaration and proposed Project at which time all persons interested in these actions had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission.

E. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-22, "A RESOLUTION OF THE

PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A 134 UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN'S: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1325)". Resolution No. 2022- _ is hereby incorporated by this reference as set forth in full.

F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the General Plan Amendment Application No. PA20-1323, consistent with Government Code section 65358, hereby finds, determines and declares that:

A. The General Plan Amendment is in the public interest.

The current General Plan designation for the project site is a Professional Office (PO) land use as specified in the City of Temecula General Plan. The General Plan Amendment is in the public interest because it allows for high -quality residential development in an area surrounded by residential development that would help to fulfill the City's regional housing needs, including the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) requirement. This General Plan amendment allows for residential use where it otherwise would not be permitted Section 3. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE

PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED `A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT

APPLICATION TO REVISE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE

PARCELS OF THE RENDEZVOUS PHASE II PROJECT FROM PROFESSIONAL OFFICE TO A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE (APN'S: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1323)"' in the substantially the same form attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 20th day of July, 2022. 4
Gary Watts, Chairman
a
�47
e tson
Secretary
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 2022-20 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Hagel, Ruiz, Turley-Trejo, Watts NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Telesio
�r
Luke Watson
Secretary

PC RESOLUTION NO.2022-21

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF

THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT

THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A PLANNED

DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AMENDMENT TO THE

TEMECULA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY (PDO-5) GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE

SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD,
APPROXIMATELY 150 FT WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE.
(APN: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 008, 010, 012, 013) (PA20- 1324)"
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that:

A. The Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay was approved by the City Council on October 22, 2002 by the adoption of Resolution No. 02-05. The Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay as approved shall be referred to in this Resolution as the "PDO".

B. On November 12, 2020, Pacific West Development filed Planning Application Nos. PA20-1323, a General Plan Amendment; PA20-1324, a Planned Development Overlay Amendment; PA20-1325, a Development Plan; and PA20-1326, a Tentative Tract Map. These applications (collectively "the Project") were filed in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code.

C. Collectively, the Project consists of a General Plan Amendment to amend the underlying General Plan Land Use designation of the project site from Professional Office (PO) to Medium Density Residential (M); a Planned Development Overlay Amendment for PDO-5; a Development Plan for a 134 unit apartment community built on 7.60 acres; and a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 38043) to combine eight (8) existing contiguous parcels into a single parcel.

D. The Project was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act.

E. A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA"). The Draft ND was prepared under staff s direction by Environmental Science Associates (ESA). Thereafter, City staff filed a Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse, and circulated a Notice of Intent with the Draft ND and Appendices to the public and other interested parties, for a 30-day public review and comment period for the Draft ND commenced on May 27, 2021 and concluded on June 27, 2021. Signs were placed on the property and a notice was placed in the local paper. The City of Temecula received two (2) written comments and responded to each comment in the Final ND, which includes all timely

received written comments and responses thereto. Comments were received by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Temecula Valley Unified School District. The Final ND was provided to commenting agencies in compliance with State Law.

The "Final ND" consists of the Draft ND and all of its appendices and the comments and responses to comments on the Draft ND. The Final ND was made available to the public and to all commenting agencies in accordance with the law.

F. On July 20, 2022 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Negative Declaration and proposed Project at which time all persons interested in these actions had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission,
G. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022- "A RESOLUTION OF

THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPT THE FINAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE RENDEZVOUS PHASE II PROJECT CONSISTING OF A 134

UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN'S: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-134)." Resolution No. 2022- and the findings therein are hereby incorporated by this reference as set forth in full.

H. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

Section 2. Provisions for Fiscal Impact Payments
A. The City and owner estimate that the increased costs to the City of providing public safety and other municipal services to the area resulting from the General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Overlay Amendment for the Project will substantially exceed the municipal revenue from the Project ("City Services Deficit"). The City has received a Fiscal Impact Analysis, dated as of June, 2022 ("FIA"), documenting the City Services Deficit.

The owners of the property within the Project, and their successors in interest, shall pay the City the sum of sum of Forty Four Dollars ($44.00) per Occupied Residential Property each year as mitigation for the City Services Deficit, with an increase in such payment each fiscal year in an amount of seventeen point forty four percent (17.44%) of the previous year's payment, as such increase may be adjusted as part of the yearly assessment or special tax levy as provided in a funding mechanism that may be approved by the City. "Occupied Residential Property" means an assessor's parcel in the Planned Development Overlay area for which building permits for residential construction have been issued, and a certificate of occupancy or final inspection has been issued, or as may be further defined in the City approved funding mechanism. Owner and its successors to the property within the Project may fulfill this obligation through a community facilities district established by the City pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities District Act of 1982, Government Code Section 53311, et seq., or other appropriated financing mechanism approved by the City; provided, however, the obligation of each owner and their successors to pay the City Services Deficit payment under this obligation remains an obligation of the owner and its successors regardless of the financing mechanism used to pay it and regardless of whether there is a financing mechanism to pay it. Five years after the date of the

first certificate of occupancy or final inspection is issued for a home in the Project and every five years after that, the owners of the properties may request that the City re-evaluate the yearly payments for the City Services Deficit and prepare an updated FIA to analyze the continuing impacts of the Project to the City's budget. The cost of the updated FIA shall be paid for by the owners of the properties within the Project.

Section 3. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval the Zone Change/Planned Development Overlay Amendment Application No. PA20-1324, hereby finds, determines and declares that: Zone Change/Planned Development Overlay Amendment Planning Application No. PA20-1324 is consistent with the General Plan for the City of Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City:

A. The proposed Ordinance is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; The proposed Zone Change/Planned Development Overlay Amendment Ordinance conforms to the City of Temecula General Plan Land Use Element. Furthermore, the proposed Zone Change/Planned Development Overlay Amendment Ordinance directly responds to Goal I Policy LU-1.1 and LU-1.2 of the General Plan Land Use Element.

The proposed project is also consistent with the above General Plan Land Use Element goal and policy in that it is contributing to the development of housing that is suitable for the community's labor force in the form of an apartment community and has been designed to minimize impacts on surrounding land uses and infrastructure through required and proposed design guidelines and development standards, building orientation and location, circulation and access, and other features and requirements of the proposed Planned Development Overlay Amendment. Additionally, mitigation measures were not required as part of the Negative Declaration as the potential for impacts to surrounding uses and infrastructure were determined not to be significant.

Section 4. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula recommends that the City Council adopt an Ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A PLANNED

DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AMENDMENT TO THE TEMECULA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-5) GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FT WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE. (APN: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 008, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1324)" in substantially the same form attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 201h day of July, 2022.

Gary Watts, Chairman
A
Luke Watson
Secretary
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 2022-21 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Hagel, Ruiz, Turley-Trejo, Watts NOES:
0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:

None
ABSENT:
0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:

None
ABSTAIN: I PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Telesio
Luke Watson
Secretary

PC RESOLUTION NO.2022-22

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF

THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT

THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR A 134 UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY

GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150
FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN: 944-370-001, 005,
006, 007, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1325)"
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that:

A. On November 12, 2020, Pacific West Development filed Planning Application Nos. PA20-1323, a General Plan Amendment; PA20-1324, a Planned Development Overlay Amendment; PA20-1325, a Development Plan; and PA20-1326, a Tentative Tract Map. These applications (collectively "the Project") were filed in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code.

B. Collectively, the Project consists of a General Plan Amendment to amend the underlying General Plan Land Use designation of the Project site from Professional Office (PO) to Medium Density Residential (M); a Planned Development Overlay Amendment for PDO-5; a Development Plan for a 134 unit apartment community built on 7.60 acres; and a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 38043) to combine eight (8) existing contiguous parcels into a single parcel.

C. The Project was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act.

D. A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA"). The Draft ND was prepared under staff's direction by Environmental Science Associates (ESA). Thereafter, City staff filed a Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse, and circulated a Notice of Intent with the Draft ND and Appendices to the public and other interested parties, for a 30-day public review and comment period for the Draft ND commenced on May 27, 2021 and concluded on June 27, 2021. Signs were placed on the property and a notice was placed in the local paper. The City of Temecula received two (2) written comments and responded to each comment in the Final ND, which includes all timely received written comments and responses thereto. Comments were received by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Temecula Valley Unified School District. The Final ND was provided to commenting agencies in compliance with State Law.

The "Final ND" consists of the Draft ND and all of its appendices and the comments and responses to comments on the Draft ND. The Final ND was made available to the public and to all commenting agencies in accordance with the law.

E. On July 20, 2022 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Negative Declaration and proposed Project at which time all persons interested in these actions had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission.

F. Following consideration of the entire record before it at the public hearing and due consideration of the Project the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 22-22, "A

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A 134 UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY GENERALLY

LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN'S: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1325)."
G. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Development Plan application PA20-1325, pursuant to Temecula Municipal Code section

17.05.010 hereby finds, determines and declares that Development Plan application No. PA20- 1325 is consistent with the General Plan for the City of Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City:

A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; The proposed project consists of the construction of a multifamily residential community.

With the approval of the General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Overlay Amendment the project site will allow for a multifamily residential community.

Therefore, the project is consistent with the General Plan for Temecula and the Proposed Rendezvous Planned Development Overlay Amendment. The project, as conditioned, is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local Ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Citywide Design Guidelines, and Fire and Building codes.

B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare;
The overall design of the project, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health and safety of those working and living in an around the site as the Project is consistent with the General Plan, City Wide Design Guidelines, Proposed Rendezvous Planned Development Overlay Amendment, and Development Code. The Project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare.

Section 3. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE

PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A 134 UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE" (APN'S: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1325)" in substantially the same form attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 20th day of July, 2022.
/Ky'Watts, Chairman
ATTES
Lu e atson
Secretary
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 2022-22 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:

NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSTAIN: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
Hagel, Ruiz, Turley-Trejo, Watts
None
None
Teles'
�k
Luke Watson
Secretary

PC RESOLUTION NO.2022-23

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF

THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT

THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
38043 TO COMBINE EIGHT (8) EXISTING CONTIGUOUS

PARCELS INTO A SINGLE PARCEL ON THE SOUTH

SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD,
APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE
(APN: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 008, 010, 012, 013) (PA20- 1326)"
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that:

A. On November 12, 2020, Pacific West Development filed Planning Application Nos. PA20-1323, a General Plan Amendment; PA20-1324, a Planned Development Overlay Amendment; PA20-1325, a Development Plan; and PA20-1326, a Tentative Tract Map. These applications (collectively "the Project") were filed in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code.

B. The Project was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act.

C. A Negative Declaration (ND) was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA"). The Draft ND was prepared under staff's direction by Environmental Science Associates (ESA). Thereafter, City staff filed a Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse, and circulated a Notice of Intent with the Draft ND and Appendices to the public and other interested parties, for a 30-day public review and comment period for the Draft ND commenced on May 27, 2021 and concluded on June 27, 2021. Signs were placed on the property and a notice was placed in the local paper. The City of Temecula received two (2) written comments and responded to each comment in the Final ND, which includes all timely received written comments and responses thereto. Comments were received by the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Temecula Valley Unified School District. The Final ND was provided to commenting agencies in compliance with State Law.

The "Final ND" consists of the Draft ND and all of its appendices and the comments and responses to comments on the Draft ND. The Final ND was made available to the public and to all commenting agencies in accordance with the law.

D. On July 20, 2022 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Negative Declaration and proposed Project at which time all persons interested in these actions had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission.

E. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2022-22, "A RESOLUTION OF

THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION ENTITLED "A RESOLUTION OF THE

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A 134 UNIT APARTMENT COMMUNITY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN'S: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 010, 012, 013) (PA20-1325)." Resolution No. 2022- and the findings therein are hereby incorporated by this reference as set forth in full.

F. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

Section 2. Further Findings. The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map application PA22-1326, makes the following findings as required by Temecula Municipal Code Section 16.09.140:

A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code.

Tentative Tract Map No. 38043 has been designed in a manner that is consistent with and meets all development and design standards of the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Municipal Code, and the Rendezvous Planned Development Overlay.

B. The Tentative Map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use.

The subject parcel does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. The subject property has not been designated for conservation or agricultural land and is not subject to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965.

C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map.

The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the Tentative Map. The proposed Tentative Map is in accordance with what is allowed by the Development Code, General Plan, and Rendezvous Planned Development Overlay. The proposed Tentative Tract Map combines eight (8) existing contiguous parcels into a single parcel for residential development. As such, the site is suitable for this development proposed.

D. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with Conditions of Approval are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

The project has been reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and based on an Initial Study, it has been determined the project could not have a significant impact on the environment; therefore, a Draft Negative Declaration (ND) (SCH# 2021050549) was prepared.

E. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems.

The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because the proposed development is consistent with all applicable building, development and fire codes, which include provisions to safeguard public health, and will be further reviewed and inspected by City staff for compliance with all applicable building, development and f re codes prior to issuance of any grading, building, or occupancy permits.

F. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible.

The project consists of a Tentative Tract Map on developed and vacant property and does not propose any grading or construction. Any future development on the project site will be in accordance with the requirements of the California Building Code in effect at that time as it relates to heating and cooling.

G. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided.

The subdivision design and the improvements being proposed including the residential lots will not conflict with existing or future easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The project is being conditioned to grant all required easements and dedications.

H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby Act).

The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby Act) because payment of Quimby fees has been included as a condition of approval of the project prior to the recordation of a Final Tentative Map.

Section 3. Recommendation. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 38043 TO COMBINE EIGHT (8) EXISTING CONTIGUOUS PARCELS INTO A SINGLE PARCEL ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET WEST OF COSMIC DRIVE (APN'S: 944-370-001, 005, 006, 007, 008, 010, 012, 013) (PA20- 1326)" in substantially the same form attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this 20th day of July, 2022.

Gary Watts, Chairman
a
Luke Watson
Secretary
[SEAL]

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss

CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Luke Watson, Secretary of the Temecula Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the forgoing PC Resolution No. 2022-23 was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 201h day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: 4 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Hagel, Ruiz, Turley-Trejo, Watts NOES: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS None
ABSENT: 0 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS None
ABSTAIN: 1 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Telesio
2 /' tk
Luke Watson
Secretary

OWNER/APPLICANT LANDSCIPE ARCNITCCi
- V ♦Ssta.3rt�vG
leM1°�ainiiNA � lwsl)wa° uss°cart mu

ARCHITECT M
ERGItlEE6 n a 'a
SOIL ENGINEER �D� Mf ssTR
uasxa. n" cR m.u« « nIM I - 1

TOPOGRAPHY J '
xo n[verlws vRow[ rl lr }f 61dg 1I PARCEL 0
as I -p II I` T -
_""R""RK ,
PROJECT DESCRIPTIDN fTs II u \° •, z r fYld A
iw°sxPs°wnxoncwim[is us� �� I i� uncov nIF U. vJ V
ryxw;o[ol. YK OfY ao ugh i� 2 I I I - e
C3 II p PARCEL
Bldg 12
neon w:avc°uli`v
cawxD.an xxefx I I I
«rox:rzm, fxnR.amsl za z°°a I I I
II I I
SiR[ET ADDRESSES I ^•� �-•^
E%ISTING+ZONING DESIGNATIDN \ r / '� rf«
°�[wnv°ual wiw3r lP o-sl
E%ISTING DESIGNAMN
jp)x[Pxa[sswWtliN 1>-i] a%%arc)

GENERAL )
FNIeTIN � AND IS �r� "' •^ r
xuxl/tame / ' IM� r
PRDPOSED IAND DSE � � r �II
ry) HDIn axm IUL 0-ID
Site Plan Information Cross Rcicrcncc
Al-
In°I�� z.arM1.nl
nN rer,c.,.• r Ma . aml.y.JaWiaax all Jin nV•IHIn f.+Wlrri u.r .r lns.ra f..e.rn.r� ICI ..a
.111.IIPUIe¢.r let nl malJ I nJur n4nax
°I�I.�fry «Ixl¢.11,Y •cl;xk ur.Wx
I.f Un+rU Jlnnxiwr of xil xx:L eM frn'ea
1Tl.l l.� .x Nlw r. yl•. rvlAl•I¢
x+ry I na xUNw.W Inl of Urr n• mxr a(,M
r\x.1,.N11:1 ¢ Ncunrn¢NnJ u.ca Mln �ut�) 9
N
3A 3A
Did
g 13 II - T wM1 i Ell
15 CAI ^ Bldg waPARCFI z� 14 al.\xnit
1 3 r
------
a w y
rP
�ND�
��—_
I �
SHEET
ixal�xR°rfoic�[PxRlm sn=z
SYMBOL LEGCND:

V
--------- -..°..,Ix
IIt3 �3 ,�i
—__—ProP[RI�Jx[nPlnxs
vavxxc s,ul cwxl
( � �
I I

ABBREVIATIONS
of [ Hxai s,xu • xlnR[f marl
I
(
Ex
I
'F
o-«[mxl mx� n Plx wax a J� rtt13 PMx
(I
I ,
MIR: nTl> n s [qsM
psR Ha-wl
(wlax-f«r

EASEMENTS AND DEDICATION NOTES
O ° nRx°xa vm xsvwlxl x0. •«», a[mm¢ xvsa H.

O x �xKr Hrla[a vu¢�°r�IWAxvut¢s�4axs 0/a-H
© [0r�x1%' visa¢ Aw .�snuvi�i r n+ac � Ptl13, v �:xH`x°a� uro 0 R[Rctps, vm vuml xV i,ma Pua[[s\ni-4 vs'e tu/Rel ,�

RANCHOCALIFORNIAROAO RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAO ` II
� R O
0 © ��Lxwv lRia � I
EXISTING• SITE

IHOR LEGEND
ro no. L—
NO. nw L——.11—�xsir wRxG
NO" pc. LOO-C xuMRLr MN sNmREST cwxu
L--
Prwro n,� Laowc w[sYAr uwc xaRm Rnr
Moro n+: Lowwo �s nr�rxu w-srz xuR
Mo,o n>: Lowwc usrRLr rRN swmw:sr cwxu
NOW pv: L=. 1-1 uwc scum
NOW p LOORwo sNMRLv FRN s0umus, CONER
I•
vxo,0 pLowac swNM'n w-vrt x[AR q�FRN
,o P. Laowrw m R/R
NOW nA LOOxwO [ASYRLr FRN IOR—ST OONER
.R
Pxmo no. LYonw rxa -a,E xEAR
p II
TO As: Lowwc —1.11— sNmREsr cwxu
NOW pi: Lm«yxc � m�r uwc swm
NOW s LOwwc swmmr ALoxc rxwm RAW
.xoro n•: Lowwc swMA. uN xamREs, aMu
MRro m LR�wR RAN w-R E K R
.xoro IRs: Lower � sr�Rlr uwo mum
NOW pa LOOK.x-a-xwx we mum
I
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER IAPN):
ro ns: Laanw scums. rRw xwmResr cwxu
wrwo ,:,: LRww x r FRN mRMLERr �w
M0,0 RI. L�uxr.a wOM we mUm
NOW p —,.0 —., uwc — uxn-a-sasx
PA20-1325
Z
0 u
- K 0
0 u
�V

RENDEZVOUS APARTMENT COMMUNITY PHASE II
Vicinity M "61j c �,,VV°j
gpQSj y Pv/b
5 �oPs
0 8 R�c' Now
Lary V.1" Ul
W'4�
CdIWIA°?� (Wb'i1a U'
�Y`e s'
knvelWa A 1g T%
TI`\y N' bClw
111666fff `
Y
G cPr
µC.yf�bty
4 .• �e M �q°
4 o � �.

S
Ad acent
Land Uses
u : wi mi m n W p3L.nmre
e w n w• .w II
Y.invxd ti.11
% W, 1wwY. P5
I
54 W'<n A c A-.1 Swe P
Sams 54- CA 931R5
ILS)569A'314
LYrJ Eryin
1W UfiYl5dd$
Y4UJIU
-.cA-1
pI.)
SVJv Baru
W N., R-
I Cuut Swr< I I I
'-CA Y1UIU
_31.3]a7
_la C-1-
«uJlren.PW3
fi%ly'klhw Way
(m Bwba. cn 9nn
ImJ949.1a1
John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
A0.1

Phase I AND Phase 2 Project
Unit Distribution & Sizes and Parkin Demand
""""• '" '" . W •' " "" '",......

John W a t s o n
Are itcc ts, Inc.
"'•
726 Chclharn Way
`"
Santa Barbara
'^•
CA 93108
(805)-969-7280
_o> A
F' Q
g
Unit Distribution & Sizes and Parking Demand
o
o
c U
cd
v d v d
it:m
d
PA20-1325
F
II
4 Copyright
na•n I.J. .... :�

PROJECT

STATISTICS
A0.2
Area Statistics
I:.n1Mr CI
a town „ranw�u w tmnll
ii+wW")
aaurec:

L sintRn�ltopo�p
11,G90,r tl G9N111,101 -ESY.

Emur sru rusug vW Ifnve"
w uWGan 9olur Cor ye
Apwnex, a.l SA
U Tsp<SHH 1-IIO
11'L'•
tn°��aD9m H rq . Tn I It.t

Ima
V,
ig.
of
Sidewalk Plan
n
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelbam Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
'o
�J
It,
< j 0 i
PA20-1325
Copyright
0 SIDEWALK
PLAN
Exhibit B

1 r
Lower
Site Plan
John Watson
Architects, Inc.
j 726 Chelham Way
i Santa Barbara
CA 93108
(805)-969-7280
l
I �
1 g�g
O T A
ao�A
�D
_.c3E
PA20-1325
LOWER

SITE PLAN
A-1.2

a -Ell 4i
-------
---
Al'
J r
John Wasson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
........... _ 26 ih N 126 15 COV 10 / /
.. y^'•"• _ y -� �y _- Un 11 (905)-969-7280
r�
mw
ASPH -_' ;�_:^•=��� _� --�- - � - I x' UrtCOV $ � 1,111 '- 1,16 t, '�. ii % i CS
2 Cov 1 .
uls 9 w , en s ws UnCov 1 .rY Q
_ S• E
11)1 •'iH Hy W 91 93 9] _1 .S +rye _ r r I51:: 11
-c Ills i � 1�It)1 IL 1 SN
" lulu_ i. ,� 0" Il:zi •' )n � ___ ~� ' S� Ip6 ISN. I 1 �� / .. uneov � � i\ 7 a - Plll � "'���'• dl : �- B I © � : � n° \\ . loc. 2' w 9 1 u Ix _ .,.$ r _ ra• Ins 1)z, c ie)w i ni ins Y ° �.;. \\ �-� "lanw y �` �. --= 3l, wn" wxa ela lsx'• - o - wl
�
'':� 15,1•'': = Ilnl)I•�ii.V'ijl _ _ �" L U - n° In 11 _ �� 1 �
1 1i2=1 1)1P l '. }•I la Zt �_ Illli I .I _ 4-^&_ l a" � � Illll,'.'.
�lv
tV
UnCov 9 �
co _ r 11911W 19J � m d
0 O O o a�i
O r J '181iln O F
y O gti12jr Y'11,8119t1
1 0 p 0 o �1 ?'1� `.\ n ball„� g o o O O O PA2 25

John Wal son
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
Bed Rm al n 11 `•1EA _ `� L—--- C A 9 3 1 0 8
O Bed R. al O -- -- i (805)-969-7 ° 280
- e uW Kitchen ; gy
2 ® ® ® ° F
OIO i _
Hg 00 O
1 C
} { f. Low
. MEw
O Y "
Low cl�ul
' ;wox CJ
.. Clo al " I _--
— —�_ �
�.,.

Ian
_ �I t — 0 O y
�r 'J -� 5 Ent
e Kiichcn itc en 5 ;,I Bcd Rm al
Ball 0
OHO Ntil 0 gal-
V � J
LUJ Cs� c__ —J � E ____ -1_ _ _ _— a •a
.'. . �' «:h- .. • ;. -1y. 1-m. � i,r�. i a15'�..ixYr u.+y- G ,d

1.14 w
o '� :r
Unit IA Unit I Unit 1C
Area = 651 Area = 726 Area = 779 w w
G O 'vV�" N
a
a w�. Qw"a°OF.
°®° ..i---AA A PA20-1325
u O O
R �` �/ Bea Rm az
� [led R,n n I i
Kitchcn •� ® • Y , ' O
2B
4b'Rg Low s
ox
a'
5 auvox
v ,
' AHF—
O O ----- s ®. �+ Copyright
% ,o s _O _______
]f B�2 e
I' 2A. �� ° s Fl.,F
F/1-�, J
�CLo qL__ LO a MNHR ioBNI ...%r. O,
ti Ned Rm a2 -
Bat „ a�°ew3 ((O�� O - - Op r !. _
Entry . : 1'
�.y
4Y
O t �..
»a,. ,��. ., ,.

UNIT PLANS
Unit 2A Unit 2B
Arca = 1163 Area = 1202
91 A-2.1
5' 20'
RNDV2 WaIIT cs
.�
II r��oa"`. W
a.aaa o.a nvi
ry
N�tl• N-Nam�ai.tll

NO COLOR
' J
w
H Q
W.��E.��..,..„'
=,q
ye55
o 0 �
•O Q
Ex �
�y
aE x.uinB WJI
� �JI<•�r•„ve
�� �
CG L
nk�mLoa. pox-n.�m,
;o s
I'I a�u.ra.�o �a,
N
no cup
93 E
Ilzaw.o��ltl•ert„ °
�a n
� P
ni ni unli In
^
wIc•oe uao
-ao
r�--�`
Etyy
�
F8 w�cma
.ary le•oc use
Env
x w.n�IF•xuro
N
.•r�n. r.
rmnr�am«
rn �
to wni,.�m iwo sn<,r r.«I,
A
U
noel i nSu?1

I n
Hl!v 1
OI
Y'
John Watson
A rchitcc ls, Inc.

O 726 Chelhatn Way
Santa Barbara
� C A 9 3 1 0 8
w
-- _r_ I� - 'I (805)-969-7280
KitchcnEntry
BNI CIo NI
Low _
k O Bcd R. N2 O O
O
e
,r
s�
ohx
O
MBa
y
R
r I
o
I Bcd R..:u
,
10 o
o
Unit 2C RNDV2WallTes Unit 3A
Area= 1257 Area= 1341 w
I/4„=1-0„ Im„ = 1, AoO -31
F.
.01ornFQ
WOOOmonEntry CIoNI: PA20-13213a�
�i5
O
, BN)
9 12
Hall 3B
rCopyright
LI
MBR
BcdmN3
�8

UNIT PLAN
S
Unit 3B
Area= 1431
1/4" = I-0"
5 0-
o
s��ohSl�.FrI
.
.Ivis"elR,n,'u
mr)�
nF
ne,'w^�ui�ll.yorae
)'nA„�u`ao,'
eb�mNcRnloru
hWc

.... ........................... ................................ .............. ........ Piz
John Watson
I (D
F—rm
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelharn Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
Q
EA
(805 969-7280
Typc2B
I*ypc 2H
Type 2C
0 ❑In.
'3
Type IC
Unit
El
2 .22
LO L I
it# 12
Uni
UL
I
L❑1 227
0 Unit#
121��
Type 1C
0 0
127
O Type 2B
Type 2C
A A
mEl
Typc2B (D
.............. - . ..............
....................
.
................................

U T is
Building G
Middle Floor Plan
rn
...... ............
...............
....... ...
nwrrv.c op
..................
.....
. ..
. ... ................................

A
n 3E
0 F-r-M
PA20-1325
ED
Type 2B
e 8
Ty e2B
Type 2C
nits O
nil 1213
upe IC
ni
2 unit
Copyright
'THZE111 ZEE
o-c
nit
ME]
l�� U)
12 lype I C
L;-I [3
121 EP
0 2
Typc2C
0 Type2B
CD
C)
C3
Type 2B
(0
(DEM
D..

BUILDING G
..........
licitin
.......... ...
........
.........
.................................

FLOOR PLA
Building G
Lower Floor Plan
A3-G]
it

. .
.

Top
ove
E-1
John Watson
Archilccts, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa to
(805)-969-7280
L 6
4 I
dge-7-
LP-�
72, A
El
2-1/212
2-112":
2 4
F-a-
E —
F.-
Uottom 0
U
Building G
v a 0
Roof Plan
Top
0 0, al
5 El
0 PA20-1325
o�
o
o �
o�
2 Unit 2B
Unh2('
Unit
0 j
i'm —
G
[j ni(N c
[0 23I
In
233
Unit IC
nit
Urii
12 Eno
Copyright
J­ 29, 2022
rit#
1237
Unit#
12 Unit IC
Uni
123 El
0 23r�
0 unit 2C
G
Unit 2B
e e
Unit 2B
o

BUILDING G

FLOOR PLAN
A3-G2
Building G
Upper Floor Plan

If
John Watson
Arch11-ts, Inc.
726 Chelha. Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
ON
w ) W N
J/ � a
Building G E E
End Elevation E a 3
3/ 16" = I'-0" U T U
E o
47 QUU
�0Y,4
� N N
c 3 E
PA20-1325
d
® ;0�
® ® 7 ® ... Copyright
rn�s
.r:e, ion
7� 30063 30063
07M r T77M 4L 1 &M
FNI
7FMM-1 E
W-- -- --- -- -®- -- -- -- - -- -0- -- --- -- --

BUILDING G
Building G
l ELEVATIONS
Side Elevation
3/16" = I'-0" A3 -G4
�— � I -I_ 0— �— 0 II_I- 0 _I■
Illllli�ll
���
���
I,
Illlfl��l
....
....
....
....
....
....
........
........
........
........
........
........

Patio Area 524 + 499 = 1023
Building H
Middle Floor Plan
1/8.. = 1'-0.,
G2
Building H
Lower Floor Plan
John Watson
Archi tccis, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
w a
� a
G A
C
U w
•TU
E r�
Q d U
c o .=' 'd
:D N a
Q P4 .07 F
PA20-1325
Copyright

BUILDING H
A3-H1

If
John Watson
Architccts, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
of in
101 ® 101 101 101 101
® 0
30063
w
y A
o .°a
E E
v
Building H
North Elevation
rn
3/16" = 1'1" Q U U
C
.....................

PA20-1325
._... .... ...... ..._......._.�.._._._.:�t.-.i....
101 11 0
30063 ® 30063
-- Copyright

BUILDING H
Building H ELEVATIONS
West Elevation
3/16" = 1'-0"
A3-H4.1

11 John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
I]
® ® ® ® ® ®11
fi T ®...w ® 0 ® ® �...
^••• 30063
I
I
w
x
ftfl
E°a
o_
Building H " 4. N
South Elevation a o
3/16" = 1'_0" ¢ U V
ti��
o r �
> T o
a � p 6
- - - ...._. PA20-1325
30063 m 30063
F
-- ^ Copyright
n�wn+e.:o:•
1 BUILDING H
Building H ELEVATIONS
East Elevation
3116" = P.O..

A3-H4.2

a�nv: au,r
John Walaon
y Arc hitccts, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Eavc Santa Barbara
Eare Eavc Eavc Eavc C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969_7280
Io
�4:12 130m alttl
!� Rid c i
Z.

Eave Eavc Eave
Building I Building I Building I
Section A Section B West Elevation (East Flipped)
3/16" - I'-0" 3/16" = 1'-0" 3/16" = 1'.0"
Building I
Roof Plan
1/8" - P-0"
jok, 101® ® ro
2;4
I � �
Typc IU Typn IU �. .� c o ,d
a v a
unua
FF-
Unit#
o aE
1622 1621 C, .4 F
Building I
North Elevation PA20-1325
a" 3/16" - P-0"
Building I
Upper Floor Plan
1/8" = 1'-0"
(D
®101 101® Copyright
5ti ❑
Alt
sE,9toGamgeGarage Garage Garage Garage Garage Garage Sto T4 I Building I BUILDING I
South Elevation
3/16" = 1'-0"
Building I A341
Lower Floor Plan

John Wasson
❑
_
� Oil
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
`
ee'ype3A
A
(805969I9280
XX
v
ypIit
Type 'T
T [A
e[M2
Uni1A
XX23 O 0
Uni1#
XX26
IJnit#
28 U n,
Unit# 0 0
O XX�21 ®
-:-
Unn#
XX24 0
Ur'"
XX27
.22
®
lye IA
Type I
El
�
Type 2A
e2
99 w,
99 13
2 a
.... .... ........................... .......................................... ..................................................
0 n w
U ?v
Building J
y s°
Middle Floor Plan
N
I/8„
EOA!d
N 7
"
............T°...........
"
�c3E
- 0
¢
PA20-1325
C )ypc
❑ E
`s
3A
Typc IA
T pc IA
,e
Typc3A
I
w,
I
7 I u
Copyright
00 In
o
�e
O
Type
T pe IA
Ar
Type IA
Typ❑�
L. J�'
Ele�
e e reu, ��Kr, e e
93 mw
............ .... ... .._.......
ottom
...........
--

BUILDING J
Building J
Lower Floor Plan
A341

�l
m
dl 112
12 �I llII Ir
iiii .I. lip �

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII, IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
NONE
00 No
0 No
�I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII. (IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
30063
`l
End Elevation
Building J
qw,, tM
Building J
"Short Side" Elevation
3/16" = 1'-0"
Building J
"Long Side" Elevation
3/16" = 1'-0"
M.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
soon Ms.

John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
0 G N
° E
� � w
o TU
E o
a
Q UU
7YU
x 0
PA20-1325
(0 —
Copyright

BUILDING J

ELEVATIONS
A344

- ----
TJ I John Watson
ArcMtccIs, Inc.
726 Chetham Way
— Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
S.`c 4124`12 Slone4,12�,
W d
� a
E Ea o
caw
t .T
0 h
Q,
a. 30107 v
o A 'd
m o a�
nn
.p
— _ - — — — — — — — — - w�ovz ....�....� �, Q
':"aN�cnu,Nv�n�baeJf °mnPA20-1325
lv]Sglid^nf
n.00k,.l s, 11 A'tt Aiu Roof I.—Slo0u6 �+�
Copyright
-- - - - - - - - - - - - -- ---------------.4�
A3-K1

Paul Bathrooms East Elevation
e
Su S- A0.9 for 0.9go6d MLu--,vv,n Boa MuLvuin aL—iu on, Pool Bathrooms RaoCPlans
1/4" = 1'.0"
Pool Bathrooms Foundation Plans
'o John Wa(son
hita as, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barh.

C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
w
2' d
G A
7 �a °
0 U
U
E 0
N
O
G O of
¢ a" 2 F.

PA20-1325
Copyright
POOL

BATHROOMS
A3-L 1

Garage 2
5 Ca,
Gangs 33,41,42
7 Cur Garasrc
G,,,gc 39,4
8 CLGLugc
22 Car "Doubts Garagc
6 Spacc Carport
R-2 WAIT—
8 Car "Doubts Rc
TYPT
LAEnclosure
III117�71171
G—gc 3
4 Ca` G�ragc
G.- 4 4 Car C—gc \ ltNmsh Enclosurc
Garagc 43
6 Car Garage
5 C., G!,.gc I IC Sp.5c and NNI R...
9 low" 1 7�4.

John Watson
A 'c hi t - is, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805) -969-7280
O
u
O.t� cd
0 I Copyright I
Plans
A3—M1

i A.
1 3' John Watson
e'yr " s -rvu rw�r
Arc Meccas, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
-- Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
Ttpical 2 Car Dccp —ge Secdon I Car Dccp Cangc (a) I IC T I Car Dccn Gangc Section 4 Car Garage Rear Elcvauon Tvpmal 1 Car Deep 4 Car Garage Fmnr Elcvauon e re. + 1 fp (805)-969-7280
Side F.lo�auon risr�"
3'
1 Car Dccp Garage Widr'I'nsh Enclosure r.... 7_vpiol 1 Car Dccn Cangc \Y/nh'I'nsh 1 Car Dccp Gangc W1hh NC ParkingPront Elevaunn Attached Rear Illaauon flndosure Auached Fn,nt P.levation w m
JM F-1 F11
�aW
- 1 Lj L� L�
U
Y � N
8 Car C rage 2 Car Dccp Garage 22 Car Garage
Front and Rear Elcvauon Sidc RIc-dr, Fmm and Rear wt4 a m v a m d v
Q w 0 F
PA20-1325
I � AIInnnnF , -.w� ........ v t
Gangc W/ Tash Enclosure Accessible Stall Garage W/Tnsh Enclosure, Accessible Stall, Garege W/'Trash Enclosure, Accessible Slall, Garage W/Trash Enclosure, Accessible Slall, Copyright Mailroom, and Pool Equip North Elcvauon Mailroom and Pool Equip South Elevation Mailroom, Pool Equip Wa1 Elcvauon Mailroom, and Pool Equip East Elevation .r aF. man
6 Car C,rpnn 6 Car Carport 6 Car (.arpnrt Free Standing'I'rash Enclosure Elevation Re,r rle Orion Sidc EIc Ydon Eron, t+.le�rrinn '" -"" Garage Plan A3-M2

If
John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chetham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7290
EY_tea — GarageNotes
INTERIOR FDIIS11M
All G.,W,In end C'.iling, Shill a. Dry W.11W, T,pcd, T. —d, And `r,-. r U
Color Specification �o
EMB
N
N 7 �
¢UU
c o "
N U
^ N N
c 3 E
¢ x-11H
PA20-1325
l�
Copyright
TR
215.2022
e d •
\ \\\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\ Id 1 i TRASH

ENCLOSURE
la //\\// \//\\//\ • GATE/

SCHEDULE
U \ ( 1 \ Trash Enclosure Gate Elevation \/\ Ld
A3-M4

Color 1: Omega #20
(Similar to DE 6155
Soft Ivory)
Color 2: Omega #2-1/2 A948
(Similar to DE 6312
Dusty Dream)
Color 3: Omega #413
(Similar to DET654
Creme Fraische)
Color 4: Omega #A 560
(Similar to DET605
Drifting Downstream)
Color 6: Omega #1/2 A 865
(Similar to DET665
Grain Mill)
Color 7: Omega #418
(Similar to DE6200
Handwoven)
Roof Tile:

Tesoro Blend
Barcelona 900
Boral Roofing
t
j White Vinyl
Window
Color 8: Omega #18
_
(Similar to DEW325
Vanilla Shake)
I
Colosseum
Travertine
"Roman"
Chiseled Limestone
Cayenne
Color 10: DEA158
-- -- ``- ---�'`
Northern Territory)
:`I U Q kj41--
�_N40
Color 5: Omega #414�
_��_ /
McNichols Grecian
(Similar to DE6380
^4►�41►�4►17840032
Clouded Vision)
�0.074
Used at Gas Meter Doors
Sand Canyon
y Flagstone "Cream"
' J
French Limestone
"French White"
Chiseled Limestone
"Sunriver Blend"
Exhibit F
John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
w
a
a r"
a o°e
U
c, U
� o
N V) ?
3 ^ E
N 00
0 dxar.,t-�
n
LJ
MA
A6.1

Building #12 (Type G)
End Elevation
3116" = F-0"
Building 912 (Type G)
Side Elevation
Color Scheme 2
3/ 16" = I'41"
Rendezvous Phase 11 Color Schemes and Materials
Color
Scheme #I
Scheme N2
Scheme #3
Scheme #4
Scheme #5 Scheme #6 Scheme#7
Scheme #8
Integral Plaster Color Similar To:

Description
I Omcge #20
Body Color I
Body Color 2
Body Clr
Body C'Ir
DE6155 Soft Ivory
Light Cream
2 Omega 112-1/2 A 948
Body Color 2
Body Color 3
DE6312 Dusty Dream
Medium Tone Grcy/Green
3 Omega #413
Body Color 1
Body Color 2
DET654 Creme Fraiche
Light/Medium Cream
4 Omega #A 560
Body Color 2
Body Color 3
DET605 Drilling Downstream
Dark "Dull" Green
5 Omega #414
Body Color I
Body Or
DE6380 Clouded Vision
Light Gray
6 Omega # 1/2 A 865
Body Color I
DET665 Grain Mill
Medium Crcam/Orange
7 Omega P418
Body Clr
DE6200 Handwoven
Medium Brown
8 Omcga#I8
'trim
Trim
Trim
Trim
EntryTrm Trim Trim
Trim
DEW325 Vanilla Shake
Whilish
9 Boral Tcsoro Blend
Root'Tilc
Roof Tile
Roof Tile
Roof Tile
Root'Tlle RoofTIIC Roof Tile
Roof Tile
B-317-R Roof Bundle
Taupe -Appm Same Color
0 1DE 158 NorthernTerritory
All Doors All Doors
All Doors
DEA 158 Northern Territory
Dark Brown - Semi -Gloss
11 French Limestone "Ryland Buff'
hall Tile I
Wall Tile 1
hall TIIe I
Wall Tile I
Wall Tile 1
12 Chiseled Limestonc "Cayenne"
Wall Tile 2
Wall Tile 2
Wali Tile 2
Wall "file 2
13 Sand Canyon Flagstone "Cream"
Wall Tile 3
Wall Tile 3
Wall Tne 3
Wall Tile 3
14 French Limestone "French White"
Base Tile
Base Tile
Base Tile
Base Tile
Base Tile
15 Chiseled Limestone "Sunriver Bind"
Bast Tilc Alt
Base Tile All
Base Tile Alt
Bme Tile Alt
Note: Color Scheme #1 not used on Phase

11. Exhibit E-1
John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
0 COLOR
SCHEME

BUILDING G
A6.2

-1
. W.
llllilillilllll!!lIII
'llllllllllllllllullll
IIIIIII!lIIIIIIIII!!II

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
an
H. no
0 F7m..
■■i6
.ki.i■
■■■■
Long Side Elevation
Color
r---•...--t.:..�-•-�;,r"•jgirir
-sue..,
_ _.._. _
..; _ ._y.
00I1I
Illiui_
'uullliulluli IIIIIII�IIIIIII�

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
1111111111�
Illlllllllllllf 111
.
::::6
_
:on
I�I�I�I
:::

ON
IIIIIIII111111
,I��
1 ii
1F1111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1
ni::
u::r

lj
101 101 hI 101 Iv a
®❑ t11
lff�
3006:

Buildings #14 and it17 (Type J)
End Elevation
rm., Cr6rmr d
Buildings #14 and #17 (Type J)
Long Side Elevation
Color Scheme 4
3/32" = 1'-0"
rP-MR
MON,
n :Im :
:: �i :::: o M-11 nol
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Illlllllllllllllllllllllf; IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII FP1181-1111111
_

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
_r

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
':.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII4,
�b-
John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
w 0
C N
a
�a
U > V
E o
is E
a v
PA20.1325
COLOR
g SCHEME
BUILDING 1
SCHEME 4
A6-4
Exhibit E-3

.wow,
Building #11 (Type H)
End Elevation
3/32" = 1'-0"
now mm Him
pm] FRFMI
.... .... E.... ■. ■.

Buildings
Color Scheme 4
Long Side Elevation
Exhibit E-4
John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
w m
E �
w o
oa
U U
a E o
U 4O U cir,
7 7 m
❑ o -: a
C
N N U
�'e3E
PA20-1325
f
(m�
COLOR
SCHEME

BUILDING H
A6-5

Typical Garage With Trash Enclosure
Typical Garage With Trash Enclosure
Typical Garage With Trash Enclosure
calms h17
—
Typical Garage With Trash Enclosure
Typical Garage W ith Trash Enclosure Gara a Color Scheme Assignments Typleel Garage With Trash Enclosure In
Bldg #16/Garage 38
Driveway Side Elevation
1/8" =1.-0..

Bldg #16/Garage 38
Hill Side Elevation
1/8'. = I'-0"
Bldg #16/Garage 38
End Elevation
1/8" - P-0"
L ---------- 1i
F—cisc Room
East Elevation
T/8" = Ir-2Pr
Color Scheme 05
Exercise Room
South Elevation
Fc se Room
North and Wcst Elevation
Color Scheme /15
e
Pool Eathr118" 11-0 C•Icvation
_7
Pool Bathrooms East Elcvelion
Bathroom Shower Elevation Elevation AlongAlong Eni.Walk 1/8" - 1'-0 1/8" - 1'-0
Garage #35 with Mail Room
North Elevation
1/8" = I'-0"
----------------------------------------------
•iii — � -
Garage #35 with Mail Room
It �°it`°°"'• South Elevation
Garage #35 with Mail Room Garage #35 with Mail room
West Elevation East Elevation
va" = r-o" us" = r-o"
Exhibit E-5
John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
�(s
COLOR
SCHEME

SMALLER
A6.6

-
I�i
� + 40R
t`+JL
wl-Is��ifi.

Two Story Colonnade
These Three Images Each Use a One Story Arcade/Loggia to Bring Variety, Texture, and Shadow to the Lower Floor of a Two Story Building. While The Two Story Building Proposed for This Project Patterned Alier the Barchessa Loredan,'Ihese Images Are Provided to Illustrate How Different Column Types, Spacing. and Even Diflerent Opening"Type" (Square and Arched) Can Be Used And Still Retain the Beauty, Grace, and Elegance of The Original Prototype.

Entablature
Entablature's Exist at the Intersection of Wall
And Roof In Some Classical Buildings. The
Degree of Detail of the Entablature Varies
From Architectural Period To Architectural
Period, But Is Always Used To Provide A
Sophisticated Wall To Roof Transition. On
the Proposed Building, The Entablature Adds
Elegance and I Ielps The Transition From The
Slightly Higher End Pieces To The Lower
Center Span.

Barchessa Loredan
Attributed to Andrea Palladio
Facade Composed of a 2 Story Arched
Loggia With Pilasters Restingon Raised
Bases. Facade Completed Using Unadorned
Window Treatments Throughout
'll,c6dldn,gcm v.d,. c.rdvv.nl,k.�ao e,.Jurr,nd Fcmd
1"Pt . fI)­c W., .,,pp,ermuu,I4 ,v„Idd..Vd,
.n1.cdkcm.cgo.,r,J ll............. ­k. ngk,,u Al-
.......... I
,IhLc Lr,..gq. nnd�nlvm d,y;ofdlk..,r.,.

Building Type 3A
Patterned After the More Ornate Barchessa Loredan (See Left), This Facade is Composed of a 2 Story Loggia (Used 1 Iere for Private Open Space) With the Supporting Columns Resting on Tiled Bases. The Building's Facade is Completed With Unadorned Windows. While Barchessa Loredan Uses a Simple Single Span Hip Roof, a More Articulated Hip is Provided Here to Lower the Overall Height of the Building and to Create Greater Visual Interest for the Residents and Neighbors Alike. t
v r
Building Type G
Building Type G is a Variation of Type 3A Using the Same Vocabulary, Materials and Forms. �I�o
ol�ol�o
7, 0_
■■li�l
-- i:litth!11:1 I'ilallliJlIII III!!I'lllill IF'RR,MIII John Watson
Arehl l cc l,, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
C A 9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
Building Type I Building Type H
Budding Type I is a Minuet of the other Buildings on the Site. Building Type G is a Variation of Type 3A Using the Same Vocabulary, Materials and Forms. 'r� • �� i zr
�j
Copyright

CORNICE
I�
FRIEZE
m
Q
Chiselled Limestone

ARCHITRAVE
W
The Photograph to the Right Shows Chiselled Limestone Tile Surrounding an Arched Openings, A Decorative Molding
Separating the Chiselled Limestone From the Cement Plaster (Stucco) Arch. 'Ilia Chiselled Limestone Does Not Extend to the Ground, It Rests on a Decorative Molding Which Defines the Boundary for the Un-Chiselled Limestone Base Below.
r
STYLE
SHEET
A-7

- I
Top of Upper Retaining Wall.

Foundation of both walls will be
planted with medium to high shrubs and
ground covers.
• Cascading vines will be planted at the top of
both walls.

Geogrid -Anchor Retaining Wall
Color to match phase 1 Rendezvous "Tuscany"
RETAINING WALL ELEVATION FOR:

RENDEZVOUS - PHASE II

RENDEZVOUS MULTI -FAMILY LP
APN IPS Development Plan # PA3 20-1325
944-370-601 944-370-006 944-370-008 944-370-012
944-370-005 944-370-007 944-370-010 944-370-013
0 a' 16' 32'
CITY OF TEMECULA .«Olm.
z9e

VICINITY MAP /ryylRlsB
E

PROJECT
LOC:ANON
THOM RRO% 100A � PAGP 955 Sh1-110H x-6 N TS.

DIRECTORY
OWNER / APPLICANT!

TEMECULA VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT, LP
AARK C� 91JUJ
uien
ARCHITECT:

JOHN WATSON C RCHIFECS. WC.

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:

DAVID NEAULI ASSOCIATES. INC.

Ivsll b]OLIF f11VD
xvD
CIVIL ENGINEER:

DRC ENGINEERING. INC.

CONIACT REND VM1A

GENERAL CONTRACTOR
PACIFIC WE51 DEVELOPMENT. INC.
321174 T—CYIA PARAW AY, lIRE A
1EMECUTA.CA11-
'CONUCT.IDANO0s90N
------- -- -
-w 1

CONCEPTUAL PLANT LEGEND
.QTANN AL
xA NAIAMAM eIOODca
�ACCENT
PALMS
C e9A0toxU
ARwNG IREFS cONM I t
OR
IIIIIIIA I..

NOSCAPE TRFEs
!� c11IRA rAeWIORA
- fOUNOAPANSHRU83 I9II
ON
IT ICA ON Alln
- ACCENT SHRUBS/PERENNIAIS

SCAT TRIM
I CA
nWAUILAT MTU I0w I —A comtxxw24 cOtPIxYOccA 1LApnx Roc mw wAlxwnY3 vnxMwc AVlAs.eUSOwcS All NxCls, vNtMsxMIIL OISIcuI.l0 rvtvfxl OvI ISPIAY DNIO ORNAMENTAS GRASSES ,I AN IRIIIIIIAu el MwAIUMUOI41IalAMu wfANRAvu/aRNoswc9owwc iwts NUN e[NNISIA xs xl All uxOfcAII Ap ASUILNCINT 3I UWNIIIIIIIIIIAxxevx,'C'I[puRIMIx1i GROUNOCOVERS St AUIRxII9iNUII et s[Rlluto MlTl Arr9oreult riAul NAN9uI x1MB I'EA "1111C T.
4 All111AUTT ARIBAs O IIAVE MOBwI S-111INTIMH0InlxiWe 11.1MANxsnl 1-1. INYO x19. Cu051 N nC lEULHT Nl9us nx0 ce00N0 COw9NUII eI INCDIID9ABI III IAMUSCAANDPIANS. TAUAUM OLO
ox'NscAllou svl AcarueN lOR storlN. SITE CALCULATIONS 1e.appwlw-u.xwr.pas MA 1-1 NAI53111 Et SHRUBS ILAIION IIIANIID DIx311Y 10 A[le[v[ Im IJ9[Ex1 Cpwenc[ w axl TIAN, 91 ORR sunk MS NIau0 It UND IN ARIAS Ixclw Ill PI—Ax All iMAU IINAMIxIM r1AMINL PROPOSED PLANTING AREA 115,1826F IT 6 ACRES) VUES III I xNCSwRI xoIN 191Ixtw NUx MS AOMCixl Nll.IxBINc RASIWRIOSWALE AREA USE 519UCIlnt3 Ax01xAIIKsxAlllwls, TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA 115.1825FI?.ACRES) 14 1
MN I"SIDIx Dx,M lx w I1'1xtxYpII_ ULA3 IY-wplolS. N.IS aRIA�'DSLA N SHEET I OF 5 DDWNRADRxMAIgNBAllpwmwlxx„DIAIIDN,IR9MLLJ IA" LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN METER.GAS METER. OR EWER IAT SERALSMINIMUM M OFIIUAWAY FROM POWER PC —MINIMUM OF BAWAY FROM FIRENYDRANib AND FIRE DEPARTMENT

SPRINKLER AND STANDPIPE CONNECTIONS
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN FOR:

RENDEZVOUS - PHASE 11 APN 70- Development 94 - 70-Pla0 ft 944 37 _o15 so 944-370.001 944-370-006 944-370-008 944-370-012 scDl9: r=M). N o a1 H 944-370-005 944-370-007 944-370.010 944-370-013
RENDEZVOUS MULTI -FAMILY LP CITY OF TEMECULA ASS.wlg T

PETWASI

STATION

BIKE RAC

DRINKING FOUNTAIN,

PET DRINKING FOUNT/
POOL / RECREATION AREA ENLARGEMENT 1"=10'
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN FOR:

RENDEZVOUS - PHASE II

RENDEZVOUS MULTI -FAMILY LP
101 LOT. SHADE SAIL.

RUBBERIZED SURFACE
APN A" S Development Plan p PA3 20.1325
944-370-001 944-370-006 944-370-006 944-370.012
944-370-005 944-370-007 944-370-010 944-370-013
SHEET 3 OF 5

ENLARGEMENT
rn-rmmm�
o to m m'
Scde: I"=1n'
a faq
NORTH

CITY OF TEMECULA
«NA°Kl

A PA DTkArKIT
AP/
BUIL

CONCEPTUAL PLANT LEGEND -TYPICAL PLANTING
10TAIIIA1 IAI &2W29_q_1LAy.L BtUn g&Q'A
A111"I I—
GUJ
All 121
"A
"O 1PEES ­..
1"1111AII" 121 1:21" 11
A, I IAI=1.11111 I A I" �11
I-01
A
■
1,Lu
1 A
"DZE'2. A::...—
O
VE011CALACUNN
O —A.- =`Z­ ...... A I.-
11A
A I
:A I
'y" AIT A I I A�=
-A
10—OU11 SHROS I PEREN.— f R
OB A A=- -rob
�
A... c:

A
V..A .1
CA
11A
"1..TA1V.=-R1 1.2
I =EI
LOW AID 1E01U1 11fl— -0—OVERS
A:,�0.1'. I
D.

R011R01E I 1A111N & 0 G I.CW
IA1­ 10.24' 1 ..

I Al
T­ .1.1 - 11—DO.A1.1 0.11
= —1--l—AL oWA.1 TAII —E
SHEET 4 OF 5

TYPICAL PLANTING
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN FOR: rlrmmm�
APN WS Development Plan # PA3 20-1325 ' lo, 20 �o
RENDEZVOUS - PHASE 11 944-370 001 944-370-006 944- 70-008 944-370-012 sc,l,: V•- 10 1 0 R T H < 0 .o 5
944-37D' 0 944-370.007 944-370-010 944.370-013 al
RENDEZVOUS MULTI -FAMILY LP CITY OF TEMECULA -g-,

EXISTING

PER PHASE I

RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD

EXISTING
r-PER PHASE I
I
1 1 t
RET. WALL -

PER CIVIL

EXISTING PHASE T
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN FOR:

RENDEZVOUS - PHASE II

RENDEZVOUS MULTI -FAMILY LP
RET. WALL

EXISTING PER CIVIL

PER PHASEI
Kf'e
J

WALL AND FENCE LEGEND
TUBE STEEL VIEW FENCE] lHIGH TUBE STEEL - COLOR 'BLACK- PILASTER5-8'-6 J/B" HIGH CMU SQUARE PILASTER

CUSTOM PILASTER CAP WITH CULTURE STONE VENEER
TUBE STEEL VIEW FENCE: 6' HIGH TUBE STEEL -COLOR BLACK- J L— TUBESTEELGATE:6' HIGHTUBESTEELMIN.30' OPENING
tOLOR'BLACK
® PROJECT ENTRY MONUMENT/FRONTAGE WALLS/PILASTERS-

CMU BLOCK WITH STUCCO FINISHES TO COMPLIMENT BUILDINGS
/ COLORED CONCRETE CAPS / TUBE STEEL GATE: 6' - ]' HIGH 1 D ECORA THE TU BE 5 TEEL
�11 / PROJECT

BOUFIOARY
IO

TUBE STEEL VIEW FENCE OR SLUMP BLOCK

PERETER WALL
METER
ExI51IFIG

PER PHASE I
O
FR AM WIDE TUBULAR STEEL GATE W/ 2" SO
_
......

FRAME AND I/4"PICKETS, COLOR TO BE
BLACK
OI TUBULAR STEEL POST' A^ 8'-0"O.C. MAX.

O2 TUBULAR STEEL PICKETS

TUBE STEEL FENCE AT POOL AREA
SHEET 5 OF 5

WALL AND FENCE PLAN
APN WS Development Plan p PA3 20-1325 0 " 60 Im
944-370-001 944-370-006 944-370.008 944-370.012 Sc de: I'=m' NORTH 944-370-005 944-370-007 944-370-010 944-370-013
CITY OF TEMECULA «wAI,T
951 613430

➢WNE APPIJCANTP GNDBCAPE ARCHITECT
L;°t�.>.PI.,•ral `wlvow'�ussvwrtsmr
R NIt -T
A.
(M... [I.
cDauuce R
aNAn.w N�
::`X
Srx'�a wam
MIX,—
,[[ en n,n

TOPOGR PHA
MasYn Oa'cgl,xu[I"Ibt � [Ilp
]ne �sw A.u�,'�iI91rIXY n
�ROJE�TRe GBunIPss l,rt5
il➢OD LONE
mETorlo]I os[eur Ireo-s)
Po) v[[w n�uNnu�lt-n w/Xa[I
, vxw[ss N a
v�isnuc uuD usE

PROPOSED GNO USE
TO v[wx nsaxllN nan a/,rr%

CITY OF TEMECULA

CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 38043

RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD
- i - — - - — - — - — - ---- L-11 >i -t------ - ------f-- -- -z5`i.' i
1 `----~
eS+Yv'w
hn,.l#1
-�—„L
.�e`xe1
BLDG 11
i
� �
�3 1111 111 I.•
-
II 1 il' BLDG 12 I'.I'LId
/ 1• LI__�I
r/
1 -_ -
---------- e
I �

NOT A PART
/
II
tll1
.f. _ t,
_ Sitc PlnnPInformation cross RcrBrcncc—
Aal ... rxrrn•nn,l Y�n,�nN .

An Yon sF.+a. fxxYbk $[xk P1A IW &nkaN 9nrN Mnx.

I �^nr al�rlrr«�n Lrw.mrnal nnn�e.�na,w.,nn..YeJ
Er�lwns•
h I:I lac> xx:. nN Jws>avxr xl all..xerY ww YrW�+wl nrnxa. sll.-I ]b la�,xl br l�n.cwOJxrxr..nv HyIIxNA..

IAluxa�euN NMI i4�n.rumx.nu+W la 4nn Nl n•Y.'xf anv
A I.I In rxNraanxxn xf�Nl [5 NreJlnNx,wJsw.'wes. .rld^C ]udMaow LI 4xuan r4Jn r Inf.11rl>nJuhurd aw YnL'ansr l„.P I.Iw.-JI
AI. ..J,rMx>IJ,nannanarJn,n>hM.I. Ja],xarx.aJ
r r..,a�.dam rvonwaanx:e wxl:a,lr
AL - .oral rJJn«r.wnnrwlrn.b xal.>r,nlaxnxx wa
LI' Ni ....xa:e.nlMrxxJl
UU-:�ll-1 ally Ilu il� rx+u
x'ax.r +nl.l rc>
Sul W,n
T,. d•I v NA V ro a
h•n nl 11 I,arv•�+ur>)urrx rtv lw-+aJ as hxle�ne.

W'At 1n. xa�raN4x Tr>Jil:ulx.w.,-,.1
el.l..l ] war• �m n r.�pmxx�.r,n un., f,.[.e.ro Mexn>x
I _lua n,�n„arrxx een nn,x«.lurcu.u.... x,unn wrxf
x>) fiver Inr n,�wlne
CN-I,I U-) 4Vnixm xl �wr `xl>A*„rd ParlWx-w�x Vxa.•
5U•'.111.I IAWM Jxlmrr rne:1 rnaY. tx Brc Im. L.abn.
fux Inxuarw • rxae wen• alxvn.N.law.r l a'nan.auna>I
x11.liMW xtllnlwl aann.xarUNwlunaey rWa. �I�uhnuw[rnn 5 I .>I.Ir. f�v ail:iuxl �y.Ybak R\�+,
1a f. IxxlbW !oven
.11l•I 1 . Nl aa' a�[inu
n`�AYO
Ab.l, 511: I . xM ru.aaXNN u« ul NYx,I rvhel>
ry afro lvuMlaflvyn Al
>ll-I ntr IAlxnb llndl�ie•lAlw[cuiNclwl.: i>
Limns \;•hxNlL.ryu.>1•w�nllnyn«rl �. fxunl
bLa I�..rx.nxren r.nr�.w Yx,ixwox+mp,r,lLa.:xr wh

DATA TABLE
:xnw. c . erw.6ns. aw Y . v n
.exJ Dn a Iy/vro-.l
ra me[�ry..Yn..�
uNINI
N: Eayrr.n...� Irw u•w
u'BWAryAruW-tle
v)YV-`fw'YnWMxr
nmm srA f
`I551 oX�ly�imulm) �JyYe -+sx
�urY.0 romw- Iw Una Ynwwewme]
`wN na(w»rvpv:Nl
y
Urva
.vxA V�A.ua
.v..LV 1p-n
unLn
n.IThrPipn.11
a. wr �n h r Ibsl
r,Rs>a
.xx.,.x Re.w II m.sA .r I
xn�,ls)I' eI, 5P5'[
Iw� eM [ � �•�, — —
-- BLDG 17 _
�-- _ t_______`
L
L.

BLDG 13' BLDG 151 iI '--- --
i
1 BLDG 14
t.

I
# = SHEET NUMBER NOT A PART
it ,-
BABIB Or BGRINCS u
°RMua,Yi ea�tl'cif°x�"Imno"`[Y
I qd"4 n[¢Y6
�I a�i[s esa
a✓A V �v
r
BI XreP
SH[E�T[IINDE% �1 IP a-r
SYMBOL LEGEND•

ABBREVIATIONS
�� "ws. a yjsm w rzX asm[I
urtR (nN ream
Inl=—
us WaiwR [mrur
Ravxord lilrr ],1-uro �s
ienin]Y trn
In�rt]„�eCeime1�f°5
rA.[ n N+ROL'[�liw.
le,x-

GSEYENTS A
O �.enA e
�° N m[xi Uloalli im raama,u%"uesi ,P'xo arsi[ia
xaxn \sNa[s vA.ut xu vw>, rums I -a vxe ne/ee-el
© `R.�iuo,Lm"x'suH�' v °mi uo .0 usa`i vO1,ea°`i wv`Ya`"rA`Ri m�w10nw' uo n ne/eP-el ss [ e ma vuau I -a
O 0(rtCSaK�PfA'G Mm vl � ma YM`u`¢tSU-4 vM ni/YT l�
bWL

SEE CONCEPTUAL
EARTHWORK OIIANTITIES oslj[[sar�s UTILITY PLANS FOR
rm s.sn] cv " PROPOSED UTILITIES
T.

PA20-1325

A B
- - - —r---- -- - - - - j—;-7--.----

RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD
.,.o,
IxN, rr
n
rs
Ix-av I
(�1� rsrr Ay e' " _ n,v,.•Mw.sv�� N wxI � '«
�1 'I s
1 FF=1109.3
.bs q PAD=1108.8
' e
M IF
a 1•.
wee"�. e Ic
i§ _. f x yWw1
.`li S99 I III 433 �� — — vl R,. �, rs
-z' 1
O Irs gl aal, ..

I _
„ r�l enrre nn wo.e®I �..,D.rt...wa Da rA
ACEY NTS ANp D DICITNIN NOT c
O M "rw awd1ew'm09o"�"'wa vnur rlmrsllu n`'�0sa'"`s,a
`ter M uul a Nws'ss'.wo nuaxcr `
n.;eN-n el'�
ara. R,`aN�, rt,—n
xprz I' Ira .0 rvlw[
a.1 .

N
Gage TU -
PA20-1325
Q
u

C «�annorro coNsrmicrarr mores: a e 0
-- -- — ----- -- _ om].�r wB.]n,.�NBx]aaa.wm N12
RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD pmx.". s li°B, Is B xfB] I I m' —L]�Y ��I ss'-j [x BI......._.. d � �1•t rs� ml i � ' �� \ I tunr��a n�.•� CX I gl%_�_ I i � sE��rou o-0 01 �nI1 �I oa,

1. , , I B I ,I¢ I] ,�.,2r • .

FF=1110.0 H
nmB ID �� FF=1112.0
D! I PAD=1109.5 J �I `ilL� ¢^" w``) �r P PAD=1111.5
D I ,
IT
Ic
FF=1111.0 II
=I a PAD=1110.5 B
u -1
-` �� � - �����'`°r�•i I IE ` j Ir
rig •� � —"�` I x ml ! L - `� a
u�,,l� a um
j W ...........
wr
----........\ % O
aSls �mm 8yYI8rt _ FF
I J
i
on] B][ m
r x.B BB�N ». n'or A PART
T
♦sEYENTS AND OEDIO;TION NOTES 4y
r _ _ wmrx,u nroa; ey
uc¢ x1Iq o ;1- r-; wB n6/BB-BI IhC ww¢];
© 9 M a-/.tI u]4
PA20-1325

tl
0 nIPN E
—ELLS
ELL

PLAN VIEW
EXTERIOR LIGHT POLLUTION MUST COMPLY WITH ®FLIfSH RILL aox, rYP CGC SECTION 5.106.8
ALL LIGHT FIXTURES ARE DARK SKY COMPLIANT John Wasson
Architects, Inc.
726 ChelhChclham Way
Santa Barbara
C A
mA 93108
�N'l
M°. (805)-969-7280
e+ags 4—
«,°.»•.mxw. a,« ' Y _ I,•I DECDRnrIVE _ O. eCO
16 BOLLARD LI6NT
U
1 t Pni
Copyright
��— 2l LIEI�i ttPlr LAL ( l tl „V l], �• 1",
--A
IJ TYPILAL NGE � / '' 13 S ��� � -� �•
PE

SITE LIGHTING
PLAN

SITE LIGHTING NORTH
PLAN
J=
E1.1

.T
� . .........

PARKING LOT Pd.E LIGNT

DSAP SERIES LED

DSAP SERIES -LED
a. ....... .
0 TIT;
In
­10
oz
9-s A—P I
4-
SS b
-­T­HE1- 'I­TF­­TLE F
L-1 . "I" IIIIE5-
­

DSAP SERIES - LED
=P- :c tz. ta
- - �_._ = . - �.. — - - p r
------- - ----

7. John Watson
Architects, Inc.
726 Chelham Way
Santa Barbara
CA
9 3 1 0 8
(805)-969-7280
C,,.,Y LED
® PARKING LAHOPY LIGHT
LED
PARK HARBOR' me
jl;llli,.�'TT Ti! �V-
ROO-

EMMUMMEMW
e-- WE WALL--c
R' —r— —T. FULL —OFF
&q- WILL— •­ —1—
­­ HEIGHT, — —OFF
u
u
P
CA
e BOLLARD LIGHT, ttPILAL
Fo

SITE LIGHTING

FIXTURE

CUT SHEETS
LE3F"_
�e E1.3

GENERAL NO TES:

1. PARCEL OWNERS WILL RESERVE A

RECIPROCAL EASEMENT FOR INGRESS,

EGRESS, PARKING AND EMERGENCY ACCESS

OVER THE COMMON AREAS WITHIN THIS
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP.

2. EXISTING LAND USE: VACANT

3. PROPOSED LAND USE: MULTI -FAMILY

4. EXISTING & PROPOSED ZONING: PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO) 5

5. EXISTING ZONING: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAY (PDO) 5

6. SURROUNDING ZONING: H, M & LM

7. METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL: GRAVITY
SEWER

8. THE ENTIRE TENTATIVE MAP AREA IS UNDER

ONE OWNERSHIP

9. ALL EXISTING POWERPOLES AND ELECTRICAL

VAULTS TO REMAIN

10. LAND IS NOT SUBJECT TO NATURAL FAULT
LINES

11. LAND HAS A LOW PROBABILITY OF

LIQUEFACTION, SEISMICALLY INDUCED

SETTLEMENT AND LATERAL SPREADING

12. THE LAND SHOWN ON THIS TENTATIVE MAP
LIES ENTIRELY WITHIN FLOOD ZONE "X",
BEING DESCRIBED AS "MINIMAL FLOOD
HAZARD" PER FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
(FIRM) - COMMUNITY PANEL NO.
06065C2720G, DATED AUGUST 28, 20058

13. ALL PROPOSED INTERNAL STREET WIDTHS
ARE 24" MINIMUM

14. ALL INTERNAL CURVE RADII ARE A MINIMUM
OF 21'

15. PROJECT IS ONE PHASE
PROPERTY /NFORMA T/ON.•
OWNER/APPLICANT) SOILS ENGINEER:

RENDEZVOUS MULTI -FAMILY LP ED ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS
7210 JORDAN AVE., #67 3146 TIGER RUN COURT, SUITE 118
CANOGA PARK, CA 91303 CARLSBAD, CA 92010
CONTACT: BART BUCHALTER CONTACT: MOHAMMED JOOLAZADEH, GE #2199 (818) 266-7871 (760) 431-3747
[email protected] REPORTS DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2019
REPORT NO.: PWD-72988.4B
ENGINEER:

DRC ENGINEERING, INC
160 S OLD SPRINGS ROAD, SUITE 210
ANAHEIM HILLS, CA 92808
CONTACT: RENE VARGA
(714) 685-6860 X337
(714) 685-6801
[email protected]
ARCHITECT:

JOHN WATSON ARCHITECTS, INC.
726 CHELHAM WAY
SANTA BARBARA, CA 93108
CONTACT: JOHN WATSON
(805) 69-7280
[email protected]

MAP PREPARA T/ON DA TE
NOVEMBER 06, 2020

SCHOOL D/STR/CT

TEMECULA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
31350 RANCHO VISTA RD
TEMECULA, CA 92592-6202
(951) 676-2661

DA TA TABLE /NFORMA TION
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS:
944-370-006, 944-370-005, 944-370-013, 944-370-001,
944-370-007, 944-370-012, 944-370-010, 944-370-008
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

PARCEL 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 OF PARCEL MAP 31023, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 216, PAGES 80 & 81, IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY

OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
EXISTING & PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION:

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (PDO-5)
NUMBER OF LOTS: 1
NUMBER OF OPEN SPACE LOTS: 0
LOT SIZE: 22.82 ACRES
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:

EXISTING: PO (A&B), MULTI -FAMILY (C)
PROPOSED: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M)
EXISTING LAND USE/PROPOSED LAND USE:

VACANT/MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
TOTAL GROSS AREA: 1,000,374 SF 22.97 ACRES
TOTAL NET AREA: 994,091 SF 22.82 ACRES
APPROXIMATE EARTHWORK QUANTITIES: 27,322 CY (CUT), 3,562 CY (FILL), 23,716 CY (NET EXPORT)
NAME OF UTILITY PURVEYORS AND TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL:
- SEWER EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
2270 TRUMBLE RD
PERRIS, CA 92570
951-928-3777
- WATER RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER
41235 WINCHESTER RD
TEMECULA, CA 92590
951-296-6900
- GAS SO CAL GAS COMPANY
1981 W LUGONIA
REDLANDS, CA 92374
213-244-1200
- TELEPHONE FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS
9 S 4TH ST
REDLANDS, CA 92373
855-295-7926
- ELECTRIC SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
24487 PRIELIPP DR
WILDOMAR, CA 92595
951-249-8301
- CABLE SPECTRUM
7337 CENTRAL AVE
RIVERSIDE, CA 92504
833-267-6097

OWNER'S STA TEMENT

WE HEREBY STATE WE ARE THE OWNERS OF THE LAND INCLUDED WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION SHOWN HEREON; THAT WE ARE THE ONLY PERSONS WHOSE CONSENT IS NECESSARY TO PASS A A CLEAR TITLE TO SAID LAND: THAT WE CONSENT TO

THE MAKING AND RECORDING OF THIS SUBDIVISION MAP AS SHOWN WITHIN THE DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINE.

BASIS OF BEARING

THE BASIS OF BEARING FOR THIS MAP IS THE CENTERLINE OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD (FORMERLY LONG VALLEY ROAD) BEING NORTH 81'16'06" EAST PER TRACT 12189-1, RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 134, PAGES 91 THROUGH 93,

INCLUSIVE RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
EA SEMEN NO TES:

OA

AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY AND

CALIFORNIA WATER AND TELEPHONE COMPANY FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, PER INSTRUMENT NO. 40992, RECORDED APRIL 19, 1966 - TO REMAIN
O

EASEMENT DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR PUBLIC UTILITY

PURPOSES, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT OF INGRESS AND EGRESS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES, PARCEL MAP 31023, PARCELS 1-8, PMB 216/80-81 - TO BE VACATED
O

EASEMENT RETAINED FOR PRIVATE USE FOR THE SOLE BENEFIT OF LOT OWNERS,

SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNEES FOR THE RECIPROCAL DRAINAGE AND RECIPROCAL INGRESS AND EGRESS, PER PARCEL MAP 31023, PARCELS 1-8, PMB 216/80-1 - TO BE VACATED
Op

EASEMENT DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL LOOP DETECTORS, PER PARCEL MAP 31023, PARCELS 1-8, PMB 216/80-81 - TO REMAIN
OE

EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT FOR WATER AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, PER INSTRUMENT NO. 2005-0286945, RECORDED APRIL 12, 2005
- TO BE VACATED
O

EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT FOR PIPELINES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES PER INSTRUMENT NO. 2019-0235421, RECORDED JUNE 5, 2019
- TO REMAIN
O

EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, PER INSTRUMENT NO. 2007-0091906, RECORDED FEBRUARY 07, 2007
- TO REMAIN
OH

EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, PER INSTRUMENT NO. 2007-0767317, RECORDED DECEMBER 27, 2007
- TO BE VACATED
O

EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, PER INSTRUMENT NO. 2019-0380030, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
- TO REMAIN
O

EASEMENT DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR PRIVATE DRIVEWAY AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, PER PARCEL MAP 31023, PARCELS 1-8, PMB 216/80-81 - TO REMAIN

ABUTTER'S RIGHTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS TO OR FROM RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, PER PARCEL MAP 31023 OF BOOK 216, PAGES 80 & 81
- TO REMAIN

CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA

TENTATIVE TRACT VIA
P NO 3843
BEND A SUBDIVISION OF PARCELS 1, 59 69 7 AND 8 OF PARCEL MAP 31023 AS PER MAP N BOOK 261, PAGES 80 AND 81 OF PARCEL MAPS, TOGETHER WITH PARCEL "A, B 8c C" OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N0. PA06-0264, RECORDED MARCH 28, 2007 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 2007-0208998 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, BOTH RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY.

RANCHO CA L IFORN/A ROAD
N81'16'06"E
0 0

LO G LO

LO LO LO LO
- - - - - N81 °16'06"E 106.91'� `D L22 L24 N81 °16'06"E 239.30' - - I /%/T/ C1 L15��C2 L16 N81 °16'06"E 154.55' ��� L1 L23 /??/7 I J� I /T7ii'77TT/T/T/7177Ti l>> L19 L20 %%? I J I
IJ L18 I 15.0' y 15.0' E F 10.0' I
E D
0 a;
ICD40.5111 I (311
F I(6 I ICI
II
cc.)IZ A P G r 40.5' CD o' I I
�� P B cl.� Noy
C14 CO Of 0
t00
oIZIIkZ
I o z I C6 iJ
JI ,
B G
I I
®I
C7-- L28 L25
N81'16 37 E 174.92 N81 °637E 12.8 , J N81°17'19"E 117.43' C8- - - - - - - L
L3 6 4 b L26
4&116'-3u.u----------- o6 C3 C14 N8116'_7'1�22.04'�
L29
17 L8
�
o
N o
C� rn J L7 _
Iy
I �% P 1II �I!
�� I; 00 �J
00 - I' z C)}4 , _ - --�-- - L11 , L L12 , i N81°16'06"E 146.15'L27 N81 07 38 E 164.16 14 I I �L4 '�N OF)
/ Q/ H I I \`�\�I HCD
14 NJ oo
r // //�
/ / _� I I I ��, ,\ I L2 N81 °07'38"E 335.63'
/ 1 i H
---
7%- -�--- I H '1 4"
'" �
I I /
�� z
Lp
/ /
A 10.0' I
// 160, 60, _-__-_-____
- --- _ ------
__7 - - --------
/ V J

15.22 AC I I N
L i
/ / I
___----------------------------------�
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

L-- - - - - - - - - - - - -
-N 79!+3 +2&0.30-
23 I 22 I
26 / I 39 37 36 27 I I 100
/ 43 III 41 I 4u I I I \ I ®®
I
.I -- 0 O z I I I
EXISTING ZONI \ °" \ '
Q
LEVANDE PL - 50 °'
T
60' 0' 60' 120' 180'
GRAPHIC SCALE: 1 "=60'

66.0'

33.0' 33.0'
1\
SHEET INDEX:

LOTS & EASEMENTS 1
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT & SECTIONS 2
Line Table
Line #
Length
Direction
L1

55.06'
N81°16'05.64"E
L2

45.54'
N81'07'38.40"E
L3

52.08'
N47'03'42.62"W
L4

11.65'
N8'42'40.69"W
L5

29.78'
N38'21'12.35"W
L6

75.55'
N19'10'16.80"W
L7

13.88'
N81'17'19.31"E
L8

23.59'
N81 *17'19.31 "E
L9

33.99'
N1'54'39.00"E
L10

27.38'
N8'55'40.00"W
L11

61.30'
N72'51'00.40"E
L12

50.99'
N77'50'22.00"E
L13

56.42'
N85'20'54.00"E
L14

39.98'
N81'15'16.00"E
L15

31.05'
N89'17'01.91 "W
L16

39.71'
N81'16'05.64"E
L17

32.80'
N53'42'50.00"W
L18

40.50'
N81'18'14.38"E
L19

10.45'
N8'20'20.27"W
L20

40.50'
N81 °18'14.36"E
L21

32.25'
N36'17'10.00"E
L22

26.13'
N76°13'54.36"W
L23

62.51'
N81'16'05.64"E
L24

26.13'
N58'46'05.64"E
L25

14.00'
N8'43'33.65"W
L26

56.40'
N81'16'37.01 "E
L27

39.64'
N81'16'05.64"E
L28

5.11'
N81'16'37.01 "E
L29

4.58'
N8'42'40.69"W
L30

27.20'
N1'23'54.71"W
L31

18.11'
N1'23'54.71"W
L32

26.77'
N71'24'37.26"E
L33

33.73'
N71'54'18.00"E
Curve Table
Curve #
Length
Radius
Delta
C1

27.83'
168.75'

9.45'
C2

31.78'
192.75'

9.45'
C3

42.92'
150.00'

16.40'
C4

9.90'
100.00'

5.67'
C5

12.76'
100.00'

7.31'
C6

12.11'
100.00'

6.94'
C7

35.94'
100.00'

20.59'
C8

25.83'
150.00'

9.87'
EX. BOUNDARY
--
PROP. BOUNDARY
--
EX. LOT LINE
- -

EASEMENT
-

RETAINING WAL

FIRE HYDRANT
AC
ACRES
BLDG

BUILDING
DU

DWELLING UNITS
ESMT

EASEMENT
EX.

EXISTING
EV#

FUTURE ELECTRIC VEHICLE STALL & NUMBER COUNT
FF

FINISH FLOOR
FH

FIRE HYDRANT
LM

LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
PA

PROPERTY LINE
PR.

PROPOSED
R/W

RIGHT -A -WAY
SCE

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
SD

STORM DRAIN
TR
TRACT

1. SEE CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLANS FOR THE PROJECT'S PROPOSED STORM

DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS

2. SEE CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLANS FOR THE PROJECT'S PROPOSED

GRADING DESIGNS

.
•
r
I
4il I
IAy/GIz/.".

C mWW/j I/. 1 A'//' �. I Ill I /.
u^ pp� • ,i% lip � a e N d\�`�1PUMA
lip
��11�
-31
/%/ 601rLSI INN
_'mill
C�r WO
IWI-M SEA � :::_II��E�
*�MW ii1� .. �� � \� `Ilr r• I�I�� � 'n� II �II��=� k ,� I�� SD
�1►1�i::
uN A -A
OJI'//l
UI V E
THAGT
MAP
3t304

EXHIBIT
"A"
OJAW ff:
001

ADVISORS IN:

REAL ESTATE

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

BERKELEY
A.JERRY KEYSER
TIMOTHYC. KELLY
DEBBIE M. KERN

DAVID DOEZEMA

KEVIN FEENEY
Los ANGELES
KATHLEEN H. HEAD
JAM Ls A. RAPE
GREGORY D. SOOT Ioo
KEVIN F. ENGSTROM
JULIE L. ROMEY
Tim BRETZ

SAN DIEGO
PAUL C. MARRA
> IL-2fl.

KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES.

ADVISORS IN PUBLIC/PRIVATE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT

MEMORANDUM
To: Scott Cooper, Associate Planner II
City of Temecula
From: KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.

Date: June 9, 2022
Subject: Rendezvous —Final Fiscal Impact Analysis

INTRODUCTION
A. Objective
In accordance with Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.'s (KMA's) agreement for consulting services with the City of Temecula (City), KMA has undertaken a Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) for the Rendezvous project (Project) proposed by Rendezvous Multi -Family LP (Applicant). The Project is planned to include 134 rental apartment units. The Project will be located at the southwest quadrant of Rancho California Road and Cosmic Drive (Project Site). The Project Site is located in a Planned Development Overlay with an underlying land use of Professional Office (PO). The Applicant is proposing a General Plan Amendment to develop Medium Density Residential (M).

This FIA prepared by KMA evaluated the recurring General Fund revenues and expenditures generated by the proposed Project over a 20-year period. The 20-year period begins at the completion and occupancy of the Project's first residential units, which is assumed to be Fiscal Year (FY) 2024.

B. Methodology
In completing this assignment, KMA undertook the following principal work tasks:
• Reviewed background materials and planning/zoning documents relevant to the Project and the Site.
555 W. BEECH STREET, SUITE 460 , SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101 r PHONE: 619 718 9500 , FAX: 619 718 9508 22059kal
W W W. KEYS E RMARSTO N. COM 19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis
June 9, 2022

• Reviewed the City's FY 2021 General Fund Operating Budget to understand the City's fiscal condition and revenue/expenditure parameters.
• Interviewed key City staff regarding cost -of -service structure and approach to provide services to the Project.
• Collected and reviewed demographic and economic trends for the Temecula area. • Collected and reviewed residential market data to substantiate inputs provided by the Applicant. • Responded to follow-up comments and additional market data provided by the Applicant. • Estimated recurring annual revenues and municipal service expenditures as a result of the Project.

C. Report Organization
Following this introduction:
• Section II presents a summary of the KMA key findings. • Section III provides a projection of the fiscal impact of the Project on the City's General Fund over the 20-year period.
• Finally, Section IV presents limiting conditions pertaining to this report.

II. KEY FINDINGS
A. Project — 20-Year Fiscal Impact
• The Project is estimated to yield a negative net fiscal impact to the City's General Fund, each year, over the projected 20-year period.
• The major revenue categories generated by the Project during this 20-year period include indirect (off -site) sales tax, Measure S revenues, property tax, property tax in -lieu of vehicle license fee (VLF), and franchise fees.
• The major expenditure categories generated by the Project during this 20-year period include Police, Fire, Public Works, Community Development, and Community Development. 22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
June 9, 2022
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 3 • The Project's fiscal impact is estimated at negative $6,000, or negative $44 per unit, in stabilized Year 1 (FY 2024 dollars) and is projected to reach negative $124,000, or negative $928 per unit, in Year 20 (FY 2043 dollars), as shown in Table II-1 below.

ImpactTable 11-1: Fiscal
FY 2024
FY 2043
General Fund Revenues
$164,000
$260,000
General Fund Expenditures
170 000
384 000
Annual Net Fiscal Impact to City
($6,000)
($124,000)
Deficit per Unit per Year
($44)
($928)
Revenue to Expense Ratio

0.96 0.68
III. 20-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT OF PROJECT
A. Overview of Methodology
This section presents the KMA methodology used to estimate the fiscal impact on the City's General Fund resulting from the development of the proposed Project. The detailed KMA 20-year fiscal impact model is provided in Appendices A and B of this report and summarized below.

Demographic and Economic Overview
Table III-1 presents the findings of the KMA review of demographic and economic factors for the City.

The data consist of population, number of housing units, and total jobs. More detail is presented in Appendix A, Table A-1.

Table 111-1: Demographic Overview,
City of Temecula
2020 Estimate
Population
111,970
Housing Units
36,550
Jobs
54,313
22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula June 9, 2022
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 4 Overview of City General Fund Budget
Table III-2 below provides an overview of the City's FY 2021 Revised General Fund budget. A more detailed analysis can be found in Appendix A, Table A-2. As shown, the City was operating at a net surplus of $218,000 in FY 2021.

General Fund Revenues $79,536,000
General Fund Expenditures ($79,318,000)
Net Surplus/(Deficit) $218,000
Revenues to Expenditures Ratio 1.00
Appendix A, Tables A-3 and A-4 also show the department revenues and expenditures used to calculate the per capita impacts to the General Fund from the development of the proposed Project. The revenues shown are strictly departmental revenues and exclude such revenues as property and sales tax, which are estimated based on projected increases in assessed value and taxable sales as a result of development of the Project, respectively. The expenditures used in this analysis reflect a deduction for citizen/user payments in the form of Charges for Services to yield net (unreimbursed) expenditures.

B. Key Assumptions — Project
As shown in Table III-3 below, the Project will include 134 rental apartment units. A more detailed description of the Project can be found in Appendix B, Table B-2.

Site Area
Apartments — Rental
Density

7.60 Net Acres
134 Units
18 Units/Net Acre
Table III-4 presents the assumed absorption schedule for the Project. It is anticipated that for each product type, the first occupancy and stabilized occupancy will occur by FY 2024. A more detailed analysis of the projected annual absorption of the Project can be found in Appendix B, Table B-3. 22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis
June 9, 2022

FY 2024 FY 2025 Total
Apartments — Rental 134 0 134
(1) Assumes construction begins 7/1/22 with an opening date of 1/1/24.

C. Key Assumptions to Fiscal Impact Projection
General Approach
Assumptions used in the FIA are based on an assessment of future circumstances regarding population, employment, property valuation, and taxable sales. Table III-5 below provides a summary of the key assumptions used in this analysis.

Population 2.00 Persons per Unit
Resident Equivalents 0.33 Employees per Resident
Residential Value $350,000 Per Unit (FY 2021) (1)
(1) KMA estimate. Based on review of recent multi -family residential building sales in Temecula and North San Diego County.

The FIA also estimates other General Fund revenues and expenditures based on a modified per capita measure known as "resident equivalents." The approach combines residents and employees to form a single service population. As summarized below, the resident equivalent approach weighs an employee as 0.33 residents, such that three employees are viewed as having the same impact as one resident.

Table 111-6: Total Resident Equivalents
Total
Total Total Total Resident
Population Employment Population Equivalents (1)
+ Jobs
City of Temecula 111,970 54,313 166,283 129,893
Rendezvous Project 255 0 255 255
(1) Assumes a resident equivalent factor of 0.33 (three employees have approximately the same impact as one resident).
22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis
General Fund Revenues
June 9, 2022

This section discusses the recurring General Fund revenue assumptions utilized to estimate the impact of the proposed Project. Annual recurring revenues generated by the Project, such as Property Tax and Sales and Use Tax, were estimated based on assumed real estate market factors such as market values/rents for the residential units. One-time revenues, such as Development Impact Fees and building permits used to offset one-time City costs, were not evaluated in this FIA.

To reflect pre-COVID-19 pandemic operating levels, Franchise Fees; Licenses and Permits; Fines and Forfeitures; and other revenues were estimated by using a three (3)-year historical average of actual revenue received from FY 2018 to FY 2020. The historical average figure was then divided by the applicable service population to estimate a per capita or "per resident equivalent" factor. This factor was then applied to the number of new residents anticipated for the Project.

As shown in Table III-7 below, KMA applied the following escalation factors to estimate the annual General Fund revenues to the City over a 20-year period. The annual escalation factors were based on KMA's review of recent historical valuation trends in the City, as well as discussions with the City's Finance Department.

Table 111-7: Annual Revenue Escalation Factors
Escalation
Factor
Assessed Value (1)
Pre -Build -out

5.0%
Post -Build -out

2.0%
Sales Tax

3.0%
Measure S (2)

3.0%
Special Tax (Measure C) (3)

0.0%
Franchise Fees

1.5%
Other General Fund Revenues

2.5%
(1) Reflects assumed market escalation.
(2) Measure S is an additional 1.0% sales tax utilized to fund general City services. (3) Measure C authorized the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) to assess and collect the Parks and Lighting Special Tax. All property owners pay this tax.

General Fund Expenditures
This section discusses the recurring annual General Fund expenditure assumptions utilized to estimate the impact of the Project at build -out.
22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis
June 9, 2022

Annual recurring expenditures, including Fire, Public Works, and City Council, were estimated by applying a per capita or "per resident equivalent" cost estimate to the number of new residents anticipated from build -out of the Project, with the exception of Police. To estimate Police expenditures, KMA applied the Project's pro rata share of one (1) new police officer, at an approximate annual cost of $352,000, per 1,000 population added to the City.

The City's Asset Management Fund, a direct interfund transfer from the Measure S Fund into four (4) separate Asset Management Funds (Street Replacement Fund, Vehicles/Equipment Fleet Replacement Fund, Facilities Replacement Fund, and Technology Replacement Fund), was also included in addition to the General Fund expenditure analysis.

Annual escalation factors for each major expenditure category were estimated by KMA based on five- year financial projections for the General Fund presented in the City's Budget. As shown in Table III-8, General Fund expenditures are anticipated to increase at escalation rates ranging between 2.0% and

5.0% per year.

KMA also applied a marginal cost adjustment to each expenditure category to reflect that General Fund expenditures do not typically have a 1:1 relationship between projected population growth and demand for municipal services, such as overhead and administrative functions within City government. As shown in Table III-8, the marginal cost adjustments assumed by KMA ranged between 0% (no adjustment to per capita assumptions) to 100% (expenditures not impacted by the Project). 22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis
June 9, 2022

Table 111-8: Annual Expenditure Escalation Factors
Escalation
Factor
Marginal Cost Impact
Adjustment (1)
Police

5.00%

5.0%
Public Works — Land Development, Public Works, etc.

2.50%

10.0%
Fire

5.00%

5.0%
Public Works — Parks & Maintenance

2.50%

10.0%
Community Development

2.75%

20.0%
Finance

2.75%

30.0%
City Clerk

3.00%

30.0%
Retiree Medical Contribution

3.00%

90.0%
City Attorney

2.00%

40.0%
City Council

2.75%

40.0%
Community Support

2.00%

80.0%
PERS Replacement Benefit

3.00%
100.0%
Property Tax Administration

2.00%

30.0%
Asset Management Fund

2.50%

0.0%
General Government

2.50%

40.0%
(1) Reflects adjustment to expenditure categories that do not typically have a 1:1 relationship between population growth and demand for municipal services. For example, an increase in population will demand 95% of Police municipal services expenditures per net new resident equivalent.

D. Annual Fiscal Impact to General Fund
General Fund Revenues
Table III-9 summarizes the KMA estimate of recurring General Fund revenues during the Project's build - out year (FY 2024). As shown, Sales Tax and Measure S revenues, in the form of off -site resident spending captured within the City, represent the largest components of General Fund revenues as a result of the Project. The Project's 255 new residents are expected to generate $80,200 of net new revenues (in the form of Sales Tax/Measure S revenues) to the City in FY 2024. This represents about

48.8% of total revenues generated by the Project.

Property Tax and Property Tax In -Lieu of Vehicle License Fee (VLF) revenues are the next largest source of General Fund revenues to be generated by the Project's 134 residential units. In FY 2024, the Project is projected to generate approximately $27,000 in Property Tax and $30,600 in Property Tax In -Lieu of VLF revenues. In combination, these sources represent 35.1% of the total General Fund revenues to be generated by the Project.
22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
June 9, 2022
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 9 The other sources, including Franchise Fees, Property Transfer Tax, Measure C, Franchise Fees, and all other revenue sources, are anticipated to account for the remaining 16.1% of General Fund revenues generated by the Project.
2024Table 111-9: General Fund Revenues in FY
Total
% of Total
Property Tax
$27,000

16.4%
Property Tax In -Lieu of VLF
$30,600

18.6%
Property Transfer Tax
$3,000

1.8%
Sales Tax — Resident Spending
$41,600

25.3%
Measure S — Resident Spending (1)
$38,600

23.5%
Measure C (2)
$7,500

4.6%
Franchise Fees
$7,700

4.7%
Business Licenses
$600

0.4%
Fines and Forfeitures
$1,500

0.9%
Vehicle License Fees
$200

0.1%
Operating Transfers In — Gas Tax/SLESF
$5,400

3.3%
Miscellaneous Revenue
500

0.3%
Total Revenues (Rounded)
$164,000
100.0%
(1) Measure S is an additional 1.0% sales tax utilized to fund general City services. (2) Measure C authorized the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) to assess and collect the Parks and Lighting Special Tax. All property owners pay this tax.

General Fund Expenditures
As shown in Table III-10, the total annual General Fund expenditures to provide services to the Project are estimated at $170,000 in FY 2024. Major expenditure categories were estimated based on projections from current service levels. As shown, the Project's pro rats cost for Police represents the largest of the Project -generated expenditures at $98,800, or 58.2% of total expenditures.

Fire services represent the second largest expenditure at $20,800, or 12.2% of the total Project - generated expenditures.

The remaining departmental expenditures, including, but not limited to, Public Works, Asset Management Fund, and General Government, account for a combined $50,300, or 29.6% of total expenditures.
22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis
Table 111-10: General Fund Expenditures in
FY 2024
of
Total
Total
Police
$98,800

58.2%
City Council
$800

0.5%
Community Support
$100

0.1%
General Government
$6,200

3.6%
City Clerk
$2,000

1.2%
City Attorney
$1,200

0.7%
Finance
$4,500

2.6%
Community Development
$6,700

3.9%
Public Works — Land Development, etc.
$13,400

7.9%
Public Works — Park Maintenance
$8,800

5.2%
Fire (1)
$20,800

12.2%
Property Tax Administration
$100

0.1%
Retiree Medical Contribution
$200

0.1%
PERS Replacement Benefit
$0

0.0%
Asset Management Fund
$6,300

3.7%
Total Expenditures (Rounded)
$170,000
100.0%
(1) Expenditures are net of the County Structure Fire Protection Tax.

Annual Fiscal Impact
June 9, 2022

Comparison of the annual revenues and annual expenditures generated by the Project indicates that it will yield a negative net fiscal impact to the City's General Fund each year over the 20-year period. As shown in Table III-11, the Project's net fiscal impact is estimated at negative $6,000, or negative $44 per unit, at build -out in Year 1 (FY 2024). The Project's net fiscal impact reaches negative $124,000, or negative $928 per unit, by Year 20 (FY 2043). A more detailed analysis is presented in Appendix B. 22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
Subject: Rendezvous - Final Fiscal Impact Analysis
June 9, 2022

111-11:

Annual General
General
ImpactTable
Fund
Revenues to
General Fund
Recurring
Per Unit Per
Fiscal
Fund
Expenditures
Expenditures
Surplus/(Deficit)
Year (2)
Year
Revenues (1)
Ratio
2024
$164,000
$170,000
($6,000)
($44)

0.96 2025
$168,000
$177,000
($9,000)
($69)

0.95 2026
$172,000
$185,000
($13,000)
($96)

0.93 2027
$176,000
$193,000
($17,000)
($124)

0.91 2028
$180,000
$201,000
($21,000)
($154)

0.90 2029
$185,000
$210,000
($25,000)
($187)

0.88 2030
$189,000
$219,000
($30,000)
($221)

0.86 2031
$194,000
$229,000
($35,000)
($258)

0.85 2032
$199,000
$238,000
($39,000)
($297)

0.84 2033
$204,000
$249,000
($45,000)
($338)

0.82 2034
$208,000
$260,000
($52,000)
($383)

0.80 2035
$214,000
$271,000
($57,000)
($430)

0.79 2036
$219,000
$283,000
($64,000)
($480)

0.77 2037
$224,000
$296,000
($72,000)
($533)

0.76 2038
$230,000
$309,000
($79,000)
($590)

0.74 2039
$235,000
$322,000
($87,000)
($649)

0.73 2040
$241,000
$337,000
($96,000)
($712)

0.72 2041
$247,000
$352,000
($105,000)
($780)

0.70 2042
$253,000
$367,000
($114,000)
($852)

0.69 2043
$260,000
$384,000
($124,000)
($928)

0.68 (1) Includes Project -generated Measure S revenues. (2) Represents annual General Fund impact per unit based on anticipated annual absorption for the Project. Full build -out of the Project occurs in FY 2024.

IV. LIMITING CONDITONS

1. The KMA analysis is based, in part, on data provided by secondary sources, such as state and local governments, planning agencies, real estate brokers, and other third parties. While KMA believes that these sources are reliable, we cannot guarantee their accuracy.

2. A projection of economic impacts is inherently based on judgment. While KMA considers these projections reasonable for planning purposes, it is the nature of forecasting that some assumptions may not materialize, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Such changes may be material to the projections and conclusions herein and, if they occur, may require review or revision of this report.
22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
June 9, 2022
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 12

3. The projections of future economic impact do not consider the potential adverse impacts of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and national recession that is likely to follow.

4. The accompanying projections and analyses are based on estimates and assumptions which were developed using currently available economic data, Project -specific data, and other relevant information. It is the nature of forecasting, however, that some assumptions may not materialize, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Such changes are likely to be material to the projections and conclusions herein and, if they occur, require review or revision of this document.

5. Any estimates of revenue or cost projections are based on the best Project -specific and fiscal data available at this time as well as experience with comparable projects. They are not intended to be projections of actual future performance of any specific project.

6. Revenue estimates are based on the assumption that sufficient market support exists for the proposed uses and that the Project will achieve industry standard productivity levels.

7. KMA assumes that all applicable laws and governmental regulations in place as of the date of this document will remain unchanged throughout the projection period of our analysis. In the event that this does not hold true, i.e., if any tax rates change, the analysis would need to be revised.

8. Value estimates assume that any necessary entitlements or zoning changes for development can be obtained in a reasonable time frame.

9. Value estimates assume that property titles are good and marketable; no title search has been made, nor has KMA attempted to determine property ownership. The value estimates are given without regard to any questions of boundaries, encumbrances, liens, or encroachments.

10. Property tax projections reflect KMA's understanding of the assessment and tax apportionment procedures employed by the County. The County procedures are subject to change as a reflection of policy revisions or legislative mandate. While we believe our estimates to be reasonable, taxable values resulting from actual appraisals may vary from the amounts assumed in the projections.

11. No assurances are provided by KMA as to the certainty of the projected tax revenues shown in this document. Actual revenues may be higher or lower than what has been projected and are subject to valuation changes resulting from new developments or transfers of ownership not specifically 22059 ka I
19454.051.001

To: Scott Cooper, City of Temecula
June 9, 2022
Subject: Rendezvous — Final Fiscal Impact Analysis Page 13 identified herein, actual resolution of outstanding appeals, future filing of appeals, or the non- payment of taxes due.

12. KMA is not advising or recommending any action be taken by the City with respect to any prospective, new, or existing municipal financial products or issuance of municipal securities (including with respect to the structure, timing, terms, and other similar matters concerning such financial products or issues).

13. KMA is not acting as a municipal advisor to the City and does not assume any fiduciary duty hereunder, including, without limitation, a fiduciary duty to the City pursuant to Section 15B of the Exchange Act with respect to the services provided hereunder and any information and material contained in KMA's work product.

14. The City shall discuss any such information and material contained in KMA's work product with any and all internal and/or external advisors and experts, including its own municipal advisors, that it deems appropriate before acting on the information and material. attachments
22059 ka I
19454.051.001

APPENDIX A

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

RENDEZVOUS
Demographic Profile and
City of Temecula General Fund Budget

DEMOGRAPHICS
TABLE A-1
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE - CITY OF TEMECULA, 2020 ESTIMATES (1)

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
2020 Estimates
I. Population
Population 111,970
Average Household Size 3.24
Jobs (2) 54,313
II. Housing Units
Single -Family
30,001

82.1%
Multi -Family
6,387

17.5%
Mobile Homes
162

0.4%
Total
36,550
100.0%
III. Occupied Units
34,511
IV. Percent Vacant

5.6%
(1) Source: California Department of Finance, January 1, 2020. (2) U.S. Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin -Destination Employment Statistics (Beginning of Quarter Employment, 2nd Quarter of 2002-2018).

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula—Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 14

GENERAL FUND BUDGET
TABLE A-2
SUMMARY OF CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL FUND BUDGET - FY 2021 OPERATING BUDGET

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
FY 2021
Revised Budget
I. Revenues
Property Tax
$9,226,610
Sales and Use Tax
$36,177,000
(Less) Sales Tax Sharing Agreement
($1,245,053)
Franchise Fees
$3,562,656
Transient Occupancy Tax
$2,620,575
Special Tax (Measure C)
$1,880,264
Licenses, Permits, and Service Charges
$4,539,248
Fines and Forfeitures
$419,774
Use of Money and Property
$30,389
Intergovernmental Revenues
$8,857,073
Reimbursements
$3,033,843
Miscellaneous
$187,702
Subtotal - Revenues
$69,290,081
Add: Operating Transfers In - Gas Tax/SLESF/CARES Act
$4,301,409
Add: Operating Transfers In - Measure S
$5,944,780
Total Revenues
$79,536,270
II. Expenditures
City Council
$592,662
Community Support
$125,000
City Manager
$1,631,333
Economic Development
$1,672,989
Emergency Management
$421,310
City Clerk
$1,311,452
City Attorney
$961,146
Finance
$2,600,964
Human Resources
$1,160,678
Planning
$3,027,220
Building & Safety
$3,299,788
Land Development
$1,806,405
Public Works
$6,268,854
CIP Admin
$2,389,172
Parks Maintenance
$4,008,007
Police
$35,990,469
Fire
$10,406, 302
Animal Control
$450,177
Non -Departmental
$1,193,629
Total Expenditures $79,317,557
III. Total Surplus/(Deficit) $218,713
Revenues to Expenditures Ratio 1.00
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula—Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 15

GENERAL FUND BUDGET
TABLE A-3

SUMMARY OF GENERAL FUND REVENUES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
I. Revenues- Included in Analysis
A. Taxes and Franchises
Property Tax
Sales Tax (t)
Franchise Fees
Special Tax (Measure C)
Subtotal -Taxes and Franchises
B. Business Licenses
C. Fines and Forfeitures
D. Intergovernmental Revenues
Property Tax In -Lieu of VLF
Vehicle License Fees
Subtotal - Intergovernmental Revenues
E. Operating Transfers In -Gas Tax
General Fund
Revenues
FY 2021
Revised Budget Comments
$9,226,610 projected based on increase in gross assessed value $34,931,947 projected based on taxable sales generated by incremental development $3,562,656 projected based on population
$1,880,264 based on residential units and commercial acreage developed $49,601,477
$255,000 projected based on population and employment
$419,774 projected based on population and employment
$8,801,658 projected based on increase in gross assessed value 55 415 projected based on population
$8,857,073
$2,639,716 projected based on population
F. Miscellaneous $34,617 projected based on population and employment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Revenues - Included in Analysis $61,807,657
s----------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Revenues - Excluded from Analysis
A. Transient Occupancy Tax
B. Reimbursements
Capital Improvement Program
PechangalGA
Other Reimbursements
Subtotal - Reimbursements
C. Development Impact Fees
D. Use of Money and Property
Lease/Rental Income
Investment Interest
Other
Subtotal - Use of Money and Property
$2,620,575 hotel use not planned as part of Project
$2,435,827 independent of projected incremental development $356,567 independent of projected incremental development 333 449 independent of projected incremental development $3,125,843
$18,000 independent of projected incremental development $148,089 independent of projected incremental development ($117,700) independent of projected incremental development 4 941
$35,330
E. Operating Transfers In
Measure S Fund
$5,944,780
independent of incremental development
COPS
$279,185
independent of incremental development
Fire Station 73 Repayment
$0
independent of incremental development
CARES Act (State)
$1,382,508
independent of incremental development
Subtotal - Operating Transfers In
$7,606,473
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I Total Revenues _Excluded from Analysis
-------------------------
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $13,406,221
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -------------------
III. Charges for Services
A. Deducted from Community Development
Building
$1,671,009
Development Fees
$159,780
Planning
$542,722
Total Deducted from Community Development
$2,373,511
B. Deducted from Public Works
Land Development
$1,006,805
Public Works
$4,750
Parks Maintenance
$1,000
Total Deducted from Public Works
$1,012,555
C. Deducted from Police $149,557
D. Deducted from Fire $786,769
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Charges for Services $4,322,392 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV. Total General Fund Revenues $79,536,270
(1) Includes Sales Tax Sharing Agreement.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 16

GENERAL FUND BUDGET
TABLE A-4

SUMMARY OF GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
General Fund
Net After
Expenditures
Deduction of
FY 2021
Charges for Services
Revised Budget
(Table A-3)
I. Expenditures Included in Analysis
City Council
$592,662
$0
$592,662
Community Support
$125,000
$0
$125,000
General Government
City Manager
$1,631,333
Economic Development
$1,672,989
Human Resources
$1,160,678
Emergency Management
$421,310
Subtotal General Government
$4,886,310
$0
$4,886,310
City Clerk
$1,311,452
$0
$1,311,452
City Attorney
$961,146
$0
$961,146
Finance
Finance
$2,600,964
Animal Control
$450,177
Subtotal Finance
$3,051,141
$0
$3,051,141
Community Development
Planning
$3,027,220
Building & Safety
$3,299,788
Subtotal Community Development
$6,327,008
($2,373,511)
$3,953,497
Public Works
Land Development
$1,806,405
Public Works
$6,268,854
Subtotal Public Works
$8,075,259
($1,011,555)
$7,063,704
Public Works
Parks Maintenance
$4,008,007
($1,000)
$4,007,007
Fire
$10,406,302
($786,769)
$9,619,533
Non -Departmental
Retiree Medical Contribution
$1,000,000
PERS Replacement Benefit
$99,434
Property Tax Administration
$94,195
Subtotal Non -Departmental
$1,193,629
$0
$1,193,629
Add: Asset Management Fund
$3,000,000
$0
$3,000,000
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditures - Included in Analysis
----------------------
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $43,937,916
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $39,765,081
II. Expenditures -Excluded from Analysis
Police (1)
$35,990,469
($149,557)
$35,840,912
CIP Administration
$2,389,172
$0
$2,389,172
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Expenditures - Excluded from Analysis
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $38,379,641
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $38,230,084
III. Total General Fund Expenditures
$82,317,557
$77,995,165
(1) Per City; police expenditures included in analysis reflect project pro rata share of one new police officer per 1,000 population.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 17

APPENDIX B

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

RENDEZVOUS
20-Year Projection

TABLE B-1

SUMMARY OF ANNUAL GENERAL FUND IMPACT GENERATED BY PROJECT

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Fiscal
Year
General Fund
Revenues
General Fund
Expenditures
Recurring
Surplus/(Deficit)
Per Unit
Absorbed to
Date
Revenues to
Expenditures
Ratio
1 2024
$164,000
$170,000
($6,000)
($44)

0.96 2 2025
$168,000
$177,000
($9,000)
($69)

0.95 3 2026
$172,000
$185,000
($13,000)
($96)

0.93 4 2027
$176,000
$193,000
($17,000)
($124)

0.91 5 2028
$180,000
$201,000
($21,000)
($154)

0.90 6 2029
$185,000
$210,000
($25,000)
($187)

0.88 7 2030
$189,000
$219,000
($30,000)
($221)

0.86 8 2031
$194,000
$229,000
($35,000)
($258)

0.85 9 2032
$199,000
$238,000
($39,000)
($297)

0.84 10 2033
$204,000
$249,000
($45,000)
($338)

0.82 11 2034
$208,000
$260,000
($52,000)
($383)

0.80 12 2035
$214,000
$271,000
($57,000)
($430)

0.79 13 2036
$219,000
$283,000
($64,000)
($480)

0.77 14 2037
$224,000
$296,000
($72,000)
($533)

0.76 15 2038
$230,000
$309,000
($79,000)
($590)

0.74 16 2039
$235,000
$322,000
($87,000)
($649)

0.73 17 2040
$241,000
$337,000
($96,000)
($712)

0.72 18 2041
$247,000
$352,000
($105,000)
($780)

0.70 19 2042
$253,000
$367,000
($114,000)
($852)

0.69 20 2043
$260,000
$384,000
($124,000)
($928)

0.68 Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula-Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 18

TABLE B-2

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
I. Site Area
II. Density
III. Unit Mix
Apartments
IV. Parking
Type
Spaces
Parking Ratio

7.60 Net Acres
18 Units/Net Acre
134 Units
Garages/Carports
288 Spaces

2.15 Spaces/Unit
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula—Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 19

TABLE B-3
ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL ABSORPTION (1)

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Total at
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
Build -out
FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
FY 2027
FY 2028
FY 2029
FY 2030
FY 2031
FY 2032
FY 2033
I. Apartments - Rental
134 Units
134
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Cumulative
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 134
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
II. Total Cumulative Units
134 Units
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
134
(1) Assumes construction begins 7/1/22 with an opening date of 1/1/24.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula—Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 20

TABLE B-4

ESTIMATE OF TOTAL POPULATION

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Dwelling Vacancy Total Resident
I. Residential Units Factor (1) Persons/Unit (2) Population Apartments 134 Units 5.0% 2.00 255
Total Population 255
(1) KMA assumption reflecting average vacancy rate, based on typical lender underwriting criteria for residential uses. (2) KMA assumption based on industry standard household size by unit type.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula—Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 21

TABLE B-5

POPULATION ESTIMATES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Total at Vacancy Persons
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 s
9 10
Build -out Factor Per Unit
FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
FY 2027
FY 2028
FY 2029
FY 2030
FY 2031
FY 2032
FY 2033
I. Apartments -Rental 134 Units 5.0% 2.00
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
II. Total Population
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 22

TABLE B-5

POPULATION ESTIMATES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Total at Vacancy Persons
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
Build -out Factor Per Unit
FY 2034
FY 2035
FY 2036
FY 2037
FY 2038
FY 2039
FY 2040
FY 2041
FY 2042
FY 2043
I. Apartments -Rental 134 Units 5.0% 2.00
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
II. Total Population
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 23

TABLE B-6
ESTIMATE OF ASSESSED VALUE (i)

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
I. Residential
Apartments - Rental
FY 2021
Dwelling Assessed Value
Units Per Unit
134 Units $350,000
(1) Based on a review of sales of multi -family buildings apartment buildings in the City.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula—Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt

TABLE B-7
ANNUAL ASSESSED VALUE (1)

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 FY 2033 I. Apartments - Rental $54,293,000 $55,378,000 $56,486,000 $57,616,000 $58,768,000 $59,943,000 $61,142,000 $62,365,000 $63,612,000 $64,885,000 II. Total Assessed Value $54,293,000 $55,378,000 $56,486,000 $57,616,000 $58,768,000 $59,943,000 $61,142,000 $62,365,000 $63,612,000 $64,885,000 (1) Assumes an escalation rate of 5.0% per year prior to Project build -out and 2.0% per year after Project build -out.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 25

TABLE B-7
ANNUAL ASSESSED VALUE (1)

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
FY 2034 FY 2035 FY 2036 FY 2037 FY 2038 FY 2039 FY 2040 FY 2041 FY 2042 FY 2043 I. Apartments - Rental $66,182,000 $67,506,000 $68,856,000 $70,233,000 $71,638,000 $73,071,000 $74,532,000 $76,023,000 $77,543,000 $79,094,000 II. Total Assessed Value $66,182,000 $67,506,000 $68,856,000 $70,233,000 $71,638,000 $73,071,000 $74,532,000 $76,023,000 $77,543,000 $79,094,000 (1) Assumes an escalation rate of 5.0% per year prior to Project build -out and 2.0% per year after Project build -out.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 26

TABLE B-8

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES -PROPERTY TAXES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA

I----------------------------------------------
Property Tax Levy 1.0%
City Portion 4.97%;
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
FY 2027
FY 2028
FY 2029
FY 2030
FY 2031
FY 2032
FY 2033
I. Apartments - Rental
$26,984
$27,523
$28,074
$28,635
$29,208
$29,792
$30,388
$30,995
$31,615
$32,248
II. Total Property Tax Revenues
$26,984
$27,523
$28,074
$28,635
$29,208
$29,792
$30,388
$30,995
$31,615
$32,248
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 27

TABLE B-8

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES -PROPERTY TAXES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA

I----------------------------------------------
Property Tax Levy 1.0%
City Portion 4.97% 1
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
FY 2034
FY 2035
FY 2036
FY 2037
FY 2038
FY 2039
FY 2040
FY 2041
FY 2042
FY 2043
I. Apartments - Rental
$32,892
$33,550
$34,221
$34,906
$35,604
$36,316
$37,042
$37,783
$38,539
$39,310
II. Total Property Tax Revenues
$32,892
$33,550
$34,221
$34,906
$35,604
$36,316
$37,042
$37,783
$38,539
$39,310
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 28

TABLE B-9

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - PROPERTY TAXES IN -LIEU OF VEHICLE LICENSE FEE

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
---------------------------------------------•
;Vehicle License Fee $0.564
Per $1,000 in AV Growth
----------------------------------------------=
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
FY 2027
FY 2028
FY 2029
FY 2030
FY 2031
FY 2032
FY 2033
I. Apartments -Rental
$30,601
$31,213
$31,837
$32,474
$33,124
$33,786
$34,462
$35,151
$35,854
$36,571
II. Total Property Tax In -Lieu of VLF Revenues
$30,601
$31,213
$31,837
$32,474
$33,124
$33,786
$34,462
$35,151
$35,854
$36,571
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 29

TABLE B-9

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - PROPERTY TAXES IN -LIEU OF VEHICLE LICENSE FEE

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
---------------------------------------------•
;Vehicle License Fee $0.564
Per $1,000 in AV Growth
----------------------------------------------=
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
FY 2034
FY 2035
FY 2036
FY 2037
FY 2038
FY 2039
FY 2040
FY 2041
FY 2042
FY 2043
I. Apartments - Rental
$37,302
$38,049
$38,810
$39,586
$40,378
$41,185
$42,009
$42,849
$43,706
$44,580
II. Total Property Tax In -Lieu of VLF Revenues
$37,302
$38,049
$38,810
$39,586
$40,378
$41,185
$42,009
$42,849
$43,706
$44,580
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 30

TABLE B-10

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
I ------------------------------------------------------ • Transfer Tax (per $500 AV Growth) $0.550
City Share of Transfer Tax 50%
I Turnover Rate (Residential) 10%
1 2
3 4
S
6 7
8 9
10 FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
FY 2027
FY 2028
FY 2029
FY 2030
FY 2031
FY 2032
FY 2033
I. Apartments - Rental
$2,986
$3,046
$3,107
$3,169
$3,232
$3,297
$3,363
$3,430
$3,499
$3,569
II. Total Property Transfer Tax Revenues
$2,986
$3,046
$3,107
$3,169
$3,232
$3,297
$3,363
$3,430
$3,499
$3,569
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 31

TABLE B-10

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
I ------------------------------------------------------ • Transfer Tax (per $500 AV Growth) $0.550
City Share of Transfer Tax 50%
I Turnover Rate (Residential)------------------- 10%1
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
FY 2034
FY 2035
FY 2036
FY 2037
FY 2038
FY 2039
FY 2040
FY 2041
FY 2042
FY 2043
I. Apartments- Rental
$3,640
$3,713
$3,787
$3,863
$3,940
$4,019
$4,099
$4,181
$4,265
$4,350
II. Total Property Transfer Tax Revenues
$3,640
$3,713
$3,787
$3,863
$3,940
$4,019
$4,099
$4,181
$4,265
$4,350
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 32

TABLE B-11

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - SPENDING BY RESIDENTS

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
2021
Apartments -
Rental
I. Estimate of Household Income
Average Rent
$2,646 (1)
Total Annual Costs
$31,752
of Income Spent on Housing
30%
Annual Income Required
$106,000
II. Number of Households
Total Number of Residential Units
134
Occupancy Rate
95%
Total Number of Full -Time Equivalent Households 127
III. Aggregate Household Income $13,494,000
(1) Per Developer. Assumes $2.68 per SF.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename is \Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 33

TABLE B-12

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - SALES TAX, RESIDENT SPENDING

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
i---------------------------------------------------1
I Taxable Spending by Residents (1) 33.5% 1
1 Temecula Spending Capture 80% 1
City Portion of Sales Tax 1.0%
i i
IAnnualEscalation--------------------------- 3_0%J
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
FY 2027
FY 2028
FY 2029
FY 2030
FY 2031
FY 2032
FY 2033
I. Apartments -Rental
$41,600
$42,800
$44,100
$45,500
$46,800
$48,200
$49,700
$51,200
$52,700
$54,300
ll. Total Sales Tax Revenues
$41,600
$42,800
$44,100
$45,500
$46,800
$48,200
$49,700
$51,200
$52,700
$54,300
(1) KMA assumption, based on review of spending ratios in Southern California counties.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 34

TABLE B-12

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - SALES TAX, RESIDENT SPENDING

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
i---------------------------------------------------1
I Taxable Spending by Residents (1) 33.5% 1
1 Temecula Spending Capture 80% 1
City Portion of Sales Tax 1.0%
i i
IAnnualEscalation--------------------------- 3_0%J
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
FY 2034
FY 2035
FY 2036
FY 2037
FY 2038
FY 2039
FY 2040
FY 2041
FY 2042
FY 2043
I. Apartments -Rental
$55,900
$57,600
$59,300
$61,100
$62,900
$64,800
$66,800
$68,800
$70,800
$72,900
II. Total Sales Tax Revenues
$55,900
$57,600
$59,300
$61,100
$62,900
$64,800
$66,800
$68,800
$70,800
$72,900
(1) KMA assumption, based on review of spending ratios in Southern Califcfornia counties.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 35

TABLE B-13

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - MEASURE S

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
1 Taxable Spending by Residents (t)

33.5% 1
;Temecula Spending Capture
80%
Measure S - Effective Revenues

1.0%
Supporting Operations

90.0% 1
Annual Escalation
`--------------------------------------------------�

3.0% 1
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
FY 2027
FY 2028
FY 2029
FY 2030
FY 2031
FY 2032
FY 2033
I. Apartments - Rental
$38,600
$39,700
$40,900
$42,100
$43,400
$44,700
$46,000
$47,400
$48,800
$50,300
II. Total Measure 5 Revenues
$38,600
$39,700
$40,900
$42,100
$43,400
$44,700
$46,000
$47,400
$48,800
$50,300
(1) KMA assumption, based on review of spending ratios in Southern California counties.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 36

TABLE B-13

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - MEASURE S

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
1 Taxable Spending by Residents (t)

33.5% 1
;Temecula Spending Capture
80%
Measure S - Effective Revenues

1.0%
Supporting Operations

90.0% 1
Annual Escalation
`--------------------------------------------------�

3.0% 1
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
FY 2034
FY 2035
FY 2036
FY 2037
FY 2038
FY 2039
FY 2040
FY 2041
FY 2042
FY 2043
I. Apartments - Rental
$51,800
$53,400
$55,000
$56,600
$58,300
$60,100
$61,900
$63,700
$65,600
$67,600
II. Total Measure 5 Revenues
$51,800
$53,400
$55,000
$56,600
$58,300
$60,100
$61,900
$63,700
$65,600
$67,600
(1) KMA assumption, based on review of spending ratios in Southern Califfornia counties.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 37

TABLE B-14

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - OTHER REVENUES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Total Total
Total Total Population/ Resident
Demographic Profile: Population Employment Jobs Equivalents (3) City of Temecula 111,970 (1) 54,313 (2) 166,283 129,893 Rendezvous 255 0 255 255
Amount Per
City
Resident or
New Residents/
FY 2021
Service
Resident
Resident
Operating Budget (4)
Population
Equivalent
Equivalents
I. Franchise Fees
$3,229,600
P
$28.84
255
II. Business Licenses
$265,700
RE
$2.05
255
III. Fines and Forfeitures
$724,600
RE
$5.58
255
IV. Vehicle License Fees
$67,600
P
$0.60
255
V. Operating Transfers In - Gas Tax/SLESF
$2,215,900
P
$19.79
255
VI. Miscellaneous Revenue
$249,100
RE
$1.92
255
Legend:

RE - Resident Equivalent
P - Population
(1) Source: California Department of Finance, January 1, 2020. (2) U.S. Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin -Destination Employment Statistics (Beginning of Quarter Employment, 2nd Quarter of 2002- 2018).
(3) KMA assumption. Assumes that approximately three employees have the same impact as one resident. (4) Based on 3-year historical average (FY 2018 - FY 2020 Actual Revenue received).

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula—Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 40

TABLE B-15

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - OTHER REVENUES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Total Residential Population
Total Resident Equivalents
III. Other Annual General Fund Revenues (i)
Franchise Fees (2)
Business Licenses
Fines and Forfeitures
Vehicle License Fees
Operating Transfers In - Gas Tax/SLESF
Miscellaneous Revenue
FY 2021
Amount Per
Resident or
Resident Service
Equivalent Population
$28.84
$2.05
$5.58
$0.60
$19.79
$1.92
P
RE
RE
P
P
RE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 FY 2033 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255
255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255
$7,691
$7,806
$7,924
$8,042
$8,163
$8,285
$8,410
$8,536
$8,664
$8,794
$562
$576
$590
$605
$620
$636
$651
$668
$684
$702
$1,532
$1,570
$1,609
$1,650
$1,691
$1,733
$1,777
$1,821
$1,866
$1,913
$166
$170
$174
$179
$183
$188
$192
$197
$202
$207
$5,435
$5,570
$5,710
$5,852
$5,999
$6,149
$6,302
$6,460
$6,621
$6,787
527
540
553
567
581
596
611
626
642
658
IV. Total Other Revenues I $15,900 $16,200 $16,600 $16,900 $17,200 $17,600 $17,900 $18,300 $18,700 $19,1001 Legend:

RE - Resident Equivalent
P - Population
(1) Assumes escalation factor of 2.5%.
(2) Assumes escalation factor of 1.5%.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula-Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 38

TABLE B-15

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - OTHER REVENUES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Total Residential Population
Total Resident Equivalents
III. Other Annual General Fund Revenues (i)
Franchise Fees(2)
Business Licenses
Fines and Forfeitures
Vehicle License Fees
Operating Transfers In - Gas Tax/SLESF
Miscellaneous Revenue
FY 2021
Amount Per
Resident or
Resident Service
Equivalent Population
$28.84
$2.05
$5.58
$0.60
$19.79
$1.92
P
RE
RE
P
P
RE
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
FY 2034 FY 2035 FY 2036 FY 2037 FY 2038 FY 2039 FY 2040 FY 2041 FY 2042 FY 2043 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255
255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255
$8,926 $9,060 $9,196 $9,333
$719 $737 $755 $774
$1,961 $2,010 $2,060 $2,112
$212 $218 $223 $229
$6,957 $7,131 $7,309 $7,492
674 691 708 726
$9,473
$9,616
$9,760
$794
$814
$834
$2,164
$2,219
$2,274
$234
$240
$246
$7,679
$7,871
$8,068
744
763
782
$9,906 $10,055 $10,206
$855
$876
$898
$2,331
$2,389
$2,449
$252
$259
$265
$8,269
$8,476
$8,688
801
821
842
I IV. Total Other Revenues 1 $19,400 $19,800 $20,300 $20,700 $21,100 $21,500 $22,000 $22,400 $22,900 $23,3001 (1) Assumes escalation factor of 2.5%.
(2) Assumes escalation factor of 1.5%.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula-Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 39

TABLE B-16

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES -SPECIAL TAX (MEASURE C) REVENUE

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA

I --------------------------------------------------------- !Special Tax (Measure Q
Multi -Family EDU Factor 0.75
1 Special Tax Per EDU (1) $74.44 /Parcel 1
5---------------------------------------------------------� 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
FY 2024
FY 2025
FY 2026
FY 2027
FY 2028
FY 2029
FY 2030
FY 2031
FY 2032
FY 2033
I. Apartments - Rental
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
II. Total Special Tax (Measure C) Revenue
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
(1) Source: City of Temecula.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 41

TABLE B-16

ANNUAL RECURRING REVENUES - SPECIALTAX (MEASURE C)REVENUE

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA

I --------------------------------------------------------- !Special Tax (Measure Q
Multi -Family EDU Factor 0.75
1 Special Tax Per EDU (1) $74.44 /Parcel 1
5---------------------------------------------------------� 11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
FY 2034
FY 2035
FY 2036
FY 2037
FY 2038
FY 2039
FY 2040
FY 2041
FY 2042
FY 2043
I. Apartments - Rental
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
II. Total Special Tax (Measure C) Revenue
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
$7,481
(1) Source: City of Temecula.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 42

TABLE B-17

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RECURRING EXPENDITURES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Total
Total
Total Total Population/
Resident
Demographic Profile: Population Employment lobs
Equivalents (3)
City of Temecula 111,970 (t) 54,313 (2) 166,283
129,893
Rendezvous 255 0 255
255
Amount Per Net New
City Resident or New Residents/ "Marginal Cost' Residents/ FY 2021 Escalation Service Population Resident Resident Impact Resident Operating Budget (4) Factor (s) Population Tvpe Equivalent Equivalent Adjustment Equivalent I.

Police
---

5.00%
---
---
$352.36 (6)
255
5%
242
II.

City Council
$592,662

2.75%
RE
129,893
$4.56
255
40%
153
III.

Community Support
$125,000

2.00%
RE
129,893
$0.96
255
80%
51 IV.

General Government
$4,886,310

2.50%
RE
129,893
$37.62
255
40%
153
V.

City Clerk
$1,311,452

3.00%
RE
129,893
$10.10
255
30%
179
VI.

City Attorney
$961,146

2.00%
RE
129,893
$7.40
255
40%
153
VII.

Finance
$3,051,141

2.75%
RE
129,893
$23.49
255
30%
179
Vill.

Community Development
$3,953,497

2.75%
RE
129,893
$30.44
255
20%
204
IX.

Public Works - Land Development, Public Works, etc.
$7,063,704

2.50%
RE
129,893
$54.38
255
10%
230
X.

Public Works - Parks Maintenance
$4,007,007

2.50%
P
111,970
$35.79
255
10%
230
XI.

Fire
$9,619,533

5.00%
RE
129,893
$74.06
255
5%
242
XII.

Property Tax Administration
$94,195

2.00%
RE
129,893
$0.73
255
30%
179
XIII.

Retiree Medical Contribution
$1,000,000

3.00%
RE
129,893
$7.70
255
90%
26 XIV.

PERS Replacement Benefit
$99,434

3.00%
RE
129,893
$0.77
255
100%
0 XV.

Asset Management Fund
$3,000,000

2.50%
RE
129,893
$23.10
255
0%
255
XVI.

Total Annual Expenditures
$39,765,081
Legend:

RE - Resident Equivalent
P - Population
(1) Source: California Department of Finance, January 1, 2020. (2) U.S. Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin -Destination Employment Statistics (Beginning of Quarter Employment, 2nd Quarter of 2002-2018). (3) KMA assumption. Assumes that three employees have the same impact as one resident. (4) Source: See Table A-4.
(5) Source: Finance Department, City of Temecula.
(6) Based on the cost for staffing one Police Officer ($352,363) per 1,000 population per the FY 2021 Mid -Year Budget.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 43

TABLE B-18

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RECURRING EXPENDITURES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
FY 2021
Amount Per
Resident or
Annual "Marginal Cost"
Resident
Escalation Impact Service
Equivalent
Factor (1) Adjustment Pop.

Total Residential Population
Total Resident Equivalents
Annual General Fund Expenditures
Police
$352.36 )2)

5.00%
City Council
$4.56

2.75%
Community Support
$0.96

2.00%
General Government
$37.62

2.50%
City Clerk
$10.10

3.00%
City Attorney
$7.40

2.00%
Finance
$23.49

2.75%
Community Development
$30.44

2.75%
Public Works - Land Development, Public Works, etc.
$54.38

2.50%
Public Works- Parks Maintenance
$35.79

2.50%
Fire
$74.06

5.00%
Property Tax Administration
$0.73

2.00%
Retiree Medical Contribution
$7.70

3.00%
PERS Replacement Benefit
$0.77

3.00%
Asset Management Fund
$23.10

2.50%
(1) Source: Finance Department, City of Temecula.
(2) Based on the cost for staffing one Police Officer ($352,363) per 1,000 population. 5%
40%
80%
40%
30%
40%
30%
20%
10%
10%
5%
30%
90%
100%
0%
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
P
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10
FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 FY 2033 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255
255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255
$98,815 $103,756 $108,943 $114,390 $120,110 $126,116 $132,421 $139,042 $145,994 $153,294 $757 $778 $800 $821 $844 $867 $891 $916 $941 $967
$52 $53 $54 $55 $56 $58 $59 $60 $61 $62
$6,198 $6,353 $6,512 $6,675 $6,842 $7,013 $7,188 $7,368 $7,552 $7,741 $1,969 $2,028 $2,089 $2,152 $2,216 $2,283 $2,351 $2,422 $2,495 $2,570 $1,201 $1,225 $1,250 $1,275 $1,300 $1,326 $1,353 $1,380 $1,408 $1,436 $4,548 $4,673 $4,802 $4,934 $5,070 $5,209 $5,352 $5,500 $5,651 $5,806 $6,736 $6,921 $7,111 $7,307 $7,508 $7,714 $7,926 $8,144 $8,368 $8,598 $13,440 $13,776 $14,120 $14,473 $14,835 $15,206 $15,586 $15,976 $16,375 $16,785 $8,844 $9,066 $9,292 $9,525 $9,763 $10,007 $10,257 $10,513 $10,776 $11,046 $20,768 $21,807 $22,897 $24,042 $25,244 $26,506 $27,831 $29,223 $30,684 $32,218 $137 $140 $143 $146 $149 $152 $155 $158 $161 $164
$215 $221 $228 $234 $241 $249 $256 $264 $272 $280
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
6 342 $6,501 $6,663 $6,830 $7,001 $7,176 $7,355 $7,539 $7,727 $7,921 Legend:

RE - Resident Equivalent
P - Population
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 44

TABLE B-18

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RECURRING EXPENDITURES

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
FY 2021
Amount Per
Resident or
Annual
"Marginal Cost"
Resident
Escalation
Impact
Service
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
Equivalent
Factor (1)
Adjustment
Pop.

FY 2034
FY 2035
FY 2036
FY 2037
FY 2038
FY 2039
FY 2040
FY 2041
FY 2042
FY 2043
I. Total Residential Population
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
II. Total Resident Equivalents
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
255
III. Annual General Fund Expenditures
Police
$352.36 (2)

5.00%
5%
---
$160,959
$169,007
$177,457
$186,330
$195,647
$205,429
$215,700
$226,485
$237,810
$249,700
City Council
$4.56

2.75%
40%
RE
$993
$1,021
$1,049
$1,078
$1,107
$1,138
$1,169
$1,201
$1,234
$1,268
Community Support
$0.96

2.00%
80%
RE
$63
$65
$66
$67
$69
$70
$71
$73
$74
$76
General Government
$37.62

2.50%
40%
RE
$7,934
$8,132
$8,336
$8,544
$8,758
$8,977
$9,201
$9,431
$9,667
$9,909
City Clerk
$10.10

3.00%
30%
RE
$2,647
$2,726
$2,808
$2,892
$2,979
$3,068
$3,160
$3,255
$3,353
$3,453
City Attorney
$7.40

2.00%
40%
RE
$1,465
$1,494
$1,524
$1,554
$1,585
$1,617
$1,649
$1,682
$1,716
$1,750
Finance
$23.49

2.75%
30%
RE
$5,966
$6,130
$6,299
$6,472
$6,650
$6,833
$7,021
$7,214
$7,412
$7,616
Community Development
$30.44

2.75%
20%
RE
$8,835
$9,078
$9,327
$9,584
$9,847
$10,118
$10,396
$10,682
$10,976
$11,278
Public Works - Land Development, Public Works, etc.
$54.38

2.50%
10%
RE
$17,204
$17,634
$18,075
$18,527
$18,990
$19,465
$19,952
$20,451
$20,962
$21,486
Public Works- Parks Maintenance
$35.79

2.50%
10%
P
$11,322
$11,605
$11,895
$12,192
$12,497
$12,809
$13,130
$13,458
$13,794
$14,139
Fire
$74.06

5.00%
5%
RE
$33,829
$35,521
$37,297
$39,162
$41,120
$43,176
$45,334
$47,601
$49,981
$52,480
Property Tax Administration
$0.73

2.00%
30%
RE
$167
$171
$174
$178
$181
$185
$189
$192
$196
$200
Retiree Medical Contribution
$7.70

3.00%
90%
RE
$288
$297
$306
$315
$324
$334
$344
$355
$365
$376
PERS Replacement Benefit
$0.77

3.00%
100%
RE
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Asset Management Fund
$23.10

2.50%
0%
RE
$8,119
$8,322
$8,743
$8,961
$9,186
$9,415
$9,651
$9,892
$10,139
IV. Total Annual Expenditures
$259,791
$271,203
$283,143
$295,638
$308,715
$322,405
$336,731
$351,731
$367,432
$383,870
(1) Source: Finance Department, City of Temecula.
(2) Based on the cost for staffing one Police Officer ($352,363) per 1,000 population.

Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: i:/Temecula_Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 45

TABLE B-19

ANNUAL GENERAL FUND FISCAL IMPACT

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Annual General Fund Revenues
Property Tax
Property Tax In -Lieu of VLF
Property Transfer Tax
Sales Tax - Resident Spending
Measure S
Measure C
Franchise Fees
Business Licenses
Fines and Forfeitures
Vehicle License Fees
Operating Transfers In - Gas Tax/SLESF
Miscellaneous Revenue
Total Revenues
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 FY 2033 $26,984 $27,523 $28,074 $28,635 $29,208 $29,792 $30,388 $30,995 $31,615 $32,248 $30,601 $31,213 $31,837 $32,474 $33,124 $33,786 $34,462 $35,151 $35,854 $36,571 $2,986 $3,046 $3,107 $3,169 $3,232 $3,297 $3,363 $3,430 $3,499 $3,569 $41,600 $42,800 $44,100 $45,500 $46,800 $48,200 $49,700 $51,200 $52,700 $54,300 $38,600 $39,700 $40,900 $42,100 $43,400 $44,700 $46,000 $47,400 $48,800 $50,300 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,691 $7,806 $7,924 $8,042 $8,163 $8,285 $8,410 $8,536 $8,664 $8,794 $562 $576 $590 $605 $620 $636 $651 $668 $684 $702
$1,532 $1,570 $1,609 $1,650 $1,691 $1,733 $1,777 $1,821 $1,866 $1,913 $166 $170 $174 $179 $183 $188 $192 $197 $202 $207
$5,435 $5,570 $5,710 $5,852 $5,999 $6,149 $6,302 $6,460 $6,621 $6,787 527 540 553 567 581 596 611 626 642 658
$164,165 $167,995 $172,059 $176,254 $180,482 $184,843 $189,337 $193,965 $198,628 $203,530 II. Annual General Fund Expenditures
Police
$98,815
$103,756
$108,943
$114,390
$120,110
$126,116
$132,421
$139,042
$145,994
$153,294
City Council
$757
$778
$800
$821
$844
$867
$891
$916
$941
$967
Community Support
$52
$53
$54
$55
$56
$58
$59
$60
$61
$62
General Government
$6,198
$6,353
$6,512
$6,675
$6,842
$7,013
$7,188
$7,368
$7,552
$7,741
City Clerk
$1,969
$2,028
$2,089
$2,152
$2,216
$2,283
$2,351
$2,422
$2,495
$2,570
City Attorney
$1,201
$1,225
$1,250
$1,275
$1,300
$1,326
$1,353
$1,380
$1,408
$1,436
Finance
$4,548
$4,673
$4,802
$4,934
$5,070
$5,209
$5,352
$5,500
$5,651
$5,806
Community Development
$6,736
$6,921
$7,111
$7,307
$7,508
$7,714
$7,926
$8,144
$8,368
$8,598
Public Works - Land Development, Public Works, etc.
$13,440
$13,776
$14,120
$14,473
$14,835
$15,206
$15,586
$15,976
$16,375
$16,785
Public Works - Parks Maintenance
$8,844
$9,066
$9,292
$9,525
$9,763
$10,007
$10,257
$10,513
$10,776
$11,046
Fire
$20,768
$21,807
$22,897
$24,042
$25,244
$26,506
$27,831
$29,223
$30,684
$32,218
Property Tax Administration
$137
$140
$143
$146
$149
$152
$155
$158
$161
$164
Retiree Medical Contribution
$215
$221
$228
$234
$241
$249
$256
$264
$272
$280
PERS Replacement Benefit
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Asset Management Fund
$6,342
$6,501
$6,663
$6,830
$7,001
$7,176
$7,355
$7,539
$7,727
$7,921
Total Expenditures
$170,022
$177,298
$184,904
$192,859
$201,179
$209,882
$218,981
$228,505
$238,465
$248,888
III. Annual Recurring Surplus/(Deficit)
($5,857)
($9,303)
($12,845)
($16,605)
($20p697)
($25,039)
($29,644)
($34,540)
($39,837)
($45,358)
Per Unit Per Year
($44)
($69)
($96)
($124)
($154)
($187)
($221)
($258)
($297)
($338)
Revenues to Expenditure Ratio

0.97 0.95

0.93 0.91

0.90 0.88

0.86 0.85

0.83 0.82
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula-Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 46

TABLE B-19

ANNUAL GENERAL FUND FISCAL IMPACT

RENDEZVOUS

CITY OF TEMECULA
Annual General Fund Revenues
Property Tax
Property Tax In -Lieu of VLF
Property Transfer Tax
Sales Tax - Resident Spending
Measure S
Measure C
Franchise Fees
Business Licenses
Fines and Forfeitures
Vehicle License Fees
Operating Transfers In - Gas Tax/SLESF
Miscellaneous Revenue
Total Revenues
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
FY 2034 FY 2035 FY 2036 FY 2037 FY 2038 FY 2039 FY 2040 FY 2041 FY 2042 FY 2043 $32,892 $33,550 $34,221 $34,906 $35,604 $36,316 $37,042 $37,783 $38,539 $39,310 $37,302 $38,049 $38,810 $39,586 $40,378 $41,185 $42,009 $42,849 $43,706 $44,580 $3,640 $3,713 $3,787 $3,863 $3,940 $4,019 $4,099 $4,181 $4,265 $4,350 $55,900 $57,600 $59,300 $61,100 $62,900 $64,800 $66,800 $68,800 $70,800 $72,900 $51,800 $53,400 $55,000 $56,600 $58,300 $60,100 $61,900 $63,700 $65,600 $67,600 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $7,481 $8,926 $9,060 $9,196 $9,333 $9,473 $9,616 $9,760 $9,906 $10,055 $10,206 $719 $737 $755 $774 $794 $814 $834 $855 $876 $898
$1,961 $2,010 $2,060 $2,112 $2,164 $2,219 $2,274 $2,331 $2,389 $2,449 $212 $218 $223 $229 $234 $240 $246 $252 $259 $265
$6,957 $7,131 $7,309 $7,492 $7,679 $7,871 $8,068 $8,269 $8,476 $8,688 674 691 708 726 744 763 782 801 821 842
$208,464 $213,640 $218,850 $224,202 $229,691 $235,424 $241,295 $247,208 $253,267 $259,569 II. Annual General Fund Expenditures
Police
$160,959
$169,007
$177,457
$186,330
$195,647
$205,429
$215,700
$226,485
$237,810
$249,700
City Council
$993
$1,021
$1,049
$1,078
$1,107
$1,138
$1,169
$1,201
$1,234
$1,268
Community Support
$63
$65
$66
$67
$69
$70
$71
$73
$74
$76
General Government
$7,934
$8,132
$8,336
$8,544
$8,758
$8,977
$9,201
$9,431
$9,667
$9,909
City Clerk
$2,647
$2,726
$2,808
$2,892
$2,979
$3,068
$3,160
$3,255
$3,353
$3,453
City Attorney
$1,465
$1,494
$1,524
$1,554
$1,585
$1,617
$1,649
$1,682
$1,716
$1,750
Finance
$5,966
$6,130
$6,299
$6,472
$6,650
$6,833
$7,021
$7,214
$7,412
$7,616
Community Development
$8,835
$9,078
$9,327
$9,584
$9,847
$10,118
$10,396
$10,682
$10,976
$11,278
Public Works - Land Development, Public Works, etc.
$17,204
$17,634
$18,075
$18,527
$18,990
$19,465
$19,952
$20,451
$20,962
$21,486
Public Works - Parks Maintenance
$11,322
$11,605
$11,895
$12,192
$12,497
$12,809
$13,130
$13,458
$13,794
$14,139
Fire
$33,829
$35,521
$37,297
$39,162
$41,120
$43,176
$45,334
$47,601
$49,981
$52,480
Property Tax Administration
$167
$171
$174
$178
$181
$185
$189
$192
$196
$200
Retiree Medical Contribution
$288
$297
$306
$315
$324
$334
$344
$355
$365
$376
PERS Replacement Benefit
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Asset Management Fund
$8,119
$8,322
$8,530
$8,743
$8,961
$9,186
$9,415
$9,651
$9,892
$10,139
Total Expenditures
$259,791
$271,203
$283,143
$295,638
$308,715
$322,405
$336,731
$351,731
$367,432
$383,870
III. Annual Recurring Surplus/(Deficit)
($51,327)
($57,563)
($64,293)
($71,436)
($79,024)
($86,981)
($95,436)
($104,523)
($114,165)
($124,301)
Per Unit Per Year
($383)
($430)
($480)
($533)
($590)
($649)
($712)
($780)
($852)
($928)
Revenues to Expenditure Ratio

0.80 0.79

0.77 0.76

0.74 0.73

0.72 0.70

0.69 0.68
Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

Filename: is/Temecula-Rendezvous FIA_06-09-22;6/9/2022;mdt Page 47

P: (626) 314-3821
F: (626) 389-5414
E: [email protected]

VIA E-MAIL
July 19, 2022
0 Mitchell M. Tsai
Scott Cooper
Associate Planner
City of Temecula
4100 Main Street
Temecula, CA 92590
Em: scott.cooper&temeculaca.gov
I'
139 South Hudson Avenue
Supplemental Information
Received
07/20/2022 Public Hearing
Item #4 (PA20-1325)
CIRCULATION COPIES:

PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:

Chairperson Watts
Vice Chairperson Turley-Trejo
Commissioner Hagel
Commissioner Ruiz
Commissioner Telesio
City Staff:

Luke Watson (Deputy City Manager)
Stuart Fisk (Planning Manager)
Matt Peters (Senior Planner)
Patrick Thomas (Director of PW)
Ron Moreno IPnnopalEripeee]eMSurre�­)
Mariosla Marroquin (Asst. City Atty.)
Denise Jacobo (Senior Admin Asst.)
Press Binder Copy
Public Binder Copy
other(s) Scott Cooper, Senor Planner)
❑ginal to: Application Project File_
Agenda Item No. 4 City of Temecula Rendezvous Phase 11 Apartments Pro' ect
Dear Scott Cooper,
Attorney At Law
Pasadena, Cali
On behalf of the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters ("Southwest Carpenter" or "SWRCC"), my Office is submitting these comments regarding Agenda Item No. 4. The City of Temecula Rendezvous Phase 11 Apartments Project (the "Project") for the City of Temecula's (the "City's") July 20, 2022, Planning Commission meeting.

The Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing 50,000 union carpenters in six states, including California, and has a strong interest in well -ordered land use planning and addressing the environmental impacts of development projects.

Individual members of the Southwest Carpenters live, work and recreate in the City and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project's environmental impacts.

SWRCC expressly reserves the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citi.Zens for Local Control P. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante Vineyards v. Monterey rater Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121.

SWRCC incorporates by reference all comments raising issues regarding the EIR submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. Citi.Zens for Clean Energy v

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022

City of Voodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who has objected to the Project's environmental documentation may assert any issue timely raised by other parties).

Moreover, SWRCC requests that the City provide notice for any and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Cal Public Resources Code ("PRC") § 21000 et seq, and the California Planning and Zoning Law ("Planning and Zoning Law"), Cal. Gov't Code 55 65000-65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2, and 21167(� and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency's governing body.

The City should require the use of a local skilled and trained workforce to benefit the community's economic development and environment. The City should require the use of workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training program or who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California.

Community benefits such as local hire and skilled and trained workforce requirements can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive economic impact of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic benefits. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of construction -related GHG emissions, though the significance of the reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the project site.

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022

March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.

Skilled and trained workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce Development Board and the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education concluded: zas
.. labor should be considered an investment rather than a cost — and investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California's workforce can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words, well trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and moving California closer to its climate targets.'
Local skilled and trained workforce requirements and policies have significant environmental benefits since they improve an area's jobs -housing balance, decreasing the amount of and length of job commutes and their associated greenhouse gas emissions. Recently, on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that that the "[u] se of a local state -certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and trained workforce with a local hire component" can result in air pollutant reductions.2
Cities are increasingly adopting local skilled and trained workforce policies and requirements into general plans and municipal codes. For example, the City of Hayward 2040 General Plan requires the City to "promote local hiring ... to help achieve a more positive jobs -housing balance, and reduce regional commuting, gas consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions."3
California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action Plan for 2030 at p. ii, available at https: / /laborcenter.berkeley. edu/wp-content/uploads /2020 /09 /Putting-California-on-the-High-Road.pdf. 2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental Assessment and Adopt Proposed Rule 2305 — Warehouse Indirect Source Rule — Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions Program, and Proposed Rule 316 — Fees for Rule 2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve Supporting Budget Actions, available at http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/ Agendas/Governing-Board/2021 /2021-May7-027.12dPsfvrsn=10. 3 City of Hayward (2014) Hayward 2040 General Plan Policy Document at p. 3-99, available athtips:// www.haywardca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/General Plan FINAL.pdf.

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022

In fact, the City of Hayward has gone as far as to adopt a Skilled Labor Force policy into its Downtown Specific Plan and municipal code, requiring developments in its Downtown area to requiring that the City "[c]ontribute to the stabilization of regional construction markets by spurring applicants of housing and nonresidential developments to require contractors to utilize apprentices from state -approved, joint labor-management training programs,..."' In addition, the City of Hayward requires all projects 30,000 square feet or larger to "utilize apprentices from state -approved, joint labor-management training programs."'
Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits.

As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:

People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced communities and their vehicle trips would be shorter. Benefits would include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle hours traveled.'
In addition, local hire mandates as well as skill training are critical facets of a strategy to reduce vehicle miles traveled. As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael Duncan noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT reductions since the skill requirements of available local jobs must be matched to those held by local residents.' Some municipalities have tied local hire and skilled and trained workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation issues. As Cervero and Duncan note:

In nearly built -out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing." The 4 City of Hayward (2019) Hayward Downtown Specific Plan at p. 5-24, available at https: / / www.hayward-ca.gov/ sites /default/files /Hayward%20Downtown% 20S12ecific%20PIan.12df.
5 City of Hayward Municipal Code, Chapter 10, § 28.5.3.020(C). 6 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs -Housing Balance at p. 6, available at https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cprJobs- housing_pdf.
' Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs - Housing Balance or Retail -Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490, 482, available at http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Up1oads/UTCT- 825.12df

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022

city's First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents, especially for entry- and intermediate -level jobs, and sponsors vocational training to ensure residents are employment -ready. While the program is voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than 3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of approval for development permits.

The City should consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce policies and requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air quality and transportation impacts.

II. THE PROJECT WOULD BE APPROVED IN VIOLATION OF THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
A. Background Concerning the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA has two basic purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14 California Code of Regulations ("CCR" or "CEQA Guidelines") § 15002(a) (1). "Its purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus, the EIR `protects not only the environment but also informed self-government.' [Citation.]" Citizens of Goleta Valley P. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564. The EIR has been described as "an environmental `alarm bell' whose purpose it is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached ecological points of no return." Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay P. Bd. of Port Comm rs. (2001) 91 Cal.

App.4th 1344, 1354 ("Berkeley Jets'); County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal.App.3d 795, 810.

Second, CEQA directs public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage when possible by requiring alternatives or mitigation measures. CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(2) and (3). See also, Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1354; Citi_Zens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights IfnprovementAssn V.

Re
gents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 400. The EIR serves to provide public agencies and the public in general with information about the effect that a proposed project is likely to have on the environment and to "identify ways that

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022

environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced." CEQA Guidelines 5 15002(a)(2). If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the project only upon finding that it has "eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible" and that any unavoidable significant effects on the environment are "acceptable due to overriding concerns" specified in CEQA section 21081. CEQA Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A—B).

B. The City Should Prepare an EIR for the Project
A strong presumption in favor of requiring preparation of an EIR is built into CEQA.

This presumption is reflected in what is known as the "fair argument" standard, under which an agency must prepare an EIR whenever substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment. Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1602; Friends of "B" St. v City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 988, 1002.

The fair argument test stems from the statutory mandate that an EIR be prepared for any project that "may have a significant effect on the environment." PRC § 21151; No Oil, Inc. v City of Los An (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 75; Jensen v City of Santa Rosa (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 877, 884. Under this test, if a proposed project is not exempt and may cause a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare an EIR.

PRC §§ 21100(a), 21151; CEQA Guidelines § 15064(a)(1), (�(1). An EIR may be dispensed with only if the lead agency finds no substantial evidence in the initial study or elsewhere in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. Parker Shattuck Neighbors v Berkeley City Council (2013) 222 Cal.App.4th 768, 785. In such a situation, the agency must adopt a negative declaration. PRC 21080(c)(1); CEQA Guidelines §§ 15063(b)(2), 15064(I (3). "Significant effect upon the environment" is defined as "a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment." PRC § 21068; CEQA Guidelines § 15382. A project "may" have a significant effect on the environment if there is a "reasonable probability" that it will result in a significant impact. No Oil, Inc. v City of Los Angeles, 13 Cal.3d at 83 n.16; Sundstrom v County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 309. If any aspect of the project may result in a significant impact on the environment, an EIR must be prepared even if the overall effect of the project is beneficial. CEQA Guidelines §15063(b)(1). See County Sanitation Dist. No. 2 v County of Kern (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1580.

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022

This standard sets a "low threshold" for preparation of an EIR. Consolidated Inig. Dist. v City of Selma (2012) 204 Cal.AppAth 187, 207; Nelson v County of Kern (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 252; Pocket Protectors v City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.AppAth 903, 928; Bowman v City of Berkeley (2004) 122 Cal.AppAth 572, 580; Citizen Action to Serve All Students v Tbornley (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 748, 754; Sundstrom v County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 310. If substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project may have a significant environmental effect, the lead agency must prepare an EIR even if other substantial evidence before it indicates the project will have no significant effect. See Jensen v City of Santa Rosa (2018) 23 Ca1.App.5th 877, 886; Clews Land & Livestock v City of San Diego (2017) 19 Cal.App.5th 161, 183; Stanislaus Audubon Socy, Inc. v County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 150; Brentwood Assn for No Drilling Inc. v City of Los An (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 491; Friends of "B" St. v City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 988. See also CEQA Guidelines § 15064(f)(1).

As explained in full below, there is a fair argument that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment. As a result, the "low threshold" for preparation of an EIR has been met and the City must prepare an EIR.

C. CEQA Requires Revision and Recirculation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration When Substantial Changes or New Information Comes to Light
Once a negative declaration has been circulated, it may need to be recirculated for another round of review and comment if it is "substantially revised" after the public notice of the first circulation period has been given. CEQA Guidelines § 15073.5(a).

A substantial revision includes two situations CEQA Guidelines § 15073.5(b)):

A new, avoidable significant effect is identified, and to reduce that effect to a level of insignificance, mitigation measures or project revisions must be added.

The lead agency finds that the mitigation measures or project revisions originally included in the negative declaration will not reduce potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and new mitigation measures or project revisions are required.

New information will require recirculation when it amounts to a substantial revision of the negative declaration, which is defined to mean the identification of new significant environmental impacts or the addition of new mitigation that is required

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022

to avoid a significant environmental impact. CEQA Guidelines §15073.5(b). If the new information reveals a new significant impact that cannot be mitigated or avoided, then the lead agency must prepare an EIR before approving the project.

CEQA Guidelines § 15073.5(d).

Revisions to a project to mitigate potentially significant environmental effects must be included in the negative declaration that is circulated for public review. PRC § 21080(c)(2); CEQA Guidelines §5 15070(b), 15071(e).

Based on the arguments set forth below, in the alternative, Commenter requests that the City recirculate the IS/MND upon making any revisions. This is especially important considering the lack of ambient noise impact analysis.

C. The IS/MND Fails to Supbort Its Findings with Substantial Evidence When new information is brought to light showing that an impact previously discussed in the IS/MND but found to be insignificant with or without mitigation in the IS/MND's analysis has the potential for a significant environmental impact supported by substantial evidence, the IS/MND must consider and resolve the conflict in the evidence. See Visalia Retail, L.P. v. City of Visalia (2018) 20 Cal.App.5th 1, 13, 17; see also Protect the HistoricAmador Vatenvays P. Amador WlaterAgency (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 1099, 1109. While a lead agency has discretion to formulate standards for determining significance and the need for mitigation measures —the choice of any standards or thresholds of significance must be "based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data and an exercise of reasoned judgment based on substantial evidence. CEQA Guidelines § 15064(b); Cleveland Nat'l Forest Found. P. San Diego Assn of Gov'ts (2017) 3 Cal.App.5th 497, 515; Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Inv. & Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 160, 206. And when there is evidence that an impact could be significant, an EIR cannot adopt a contrary finding without providing an adequate explanation along with supporting evidence. East Sacramento Partnersbp for a Livable City v. City of Sacramento (2016) 5 Cal. App. 5th 281, 302.

In addition, a determination that regulatory compliance will be sufficient to prevent significant adverse impacts must be based on a project -specific analysis of potential impacts and the effect of regulatory compliance. In Californians forAlternatives to Toxics P. Department of Food &Agric. (2005) 136 Cal.App.4th 1, the court set aside an EIR for a statewide crop disease control plan because it did not include an evaluation of the

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022

risks to the environment and human health from the proposed program but simply presumed that no adverse impacts would occur from use of pesticides in accordance with the registration and labeling program of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. See also Ebbetts Pass Forest hatch v Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (2008) 43 Cal.App.4th 936, 956 (fact that Department of Pesticide Regulation had assessed environmental effects of certain herbicides in general did not excuse failure to assess effects of their use for specific timber harvesting project).

1. The IS/MND Fails to Support its Land Use Analysis with Substantial Evidence.

The IS/MND claims that the Project would have a less than significant impact concerning conflicts with any land use plan, policy, or regulation. (IS/MND 56).

However, the conclusion of less than significant is reached by prematurely concluding that the Project is consistent with the General Plan when it adoption is being sought in the very meeting that is seeking its adoption. This is putting the cart before the horse. The IS/MND's shortcut land use analysis is not adequate. See, e.g., Friends of Lagoon Valley P. City of Vacaville (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 807, 815 (upholding overall consistency finding even though project deviated from some plan provisions because plan allowed for balancing of competing policies). A clear and direct conflict with a mandatory provision of a general or specific plan usually amounts to an inconsistency that will preclude project approval. See Families Unafraid v. County of El Dorado (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 1332, 1341 (project must satisfy mandatory general plan policy that is fundamental and unambiguous and does not allow discretion in interpretation and application).

The IS/MND should be revised to include a more specific analysis of consistency to support its land use conclusion.

2. The ISIMND Fails to Support its Findings on Greenhouse Gas Impacts with Substantial Evidence.

CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4 allow a lead agency to determine the significance of a project's GHG impact via a qualitative analysis (e.g., extent to which a project complies with regulations or requirements of state/regional/local GHG plans), and/or a quantitative analysis (e.g., using model or methodology to estimate project emissions and compare it to a numeric threshold). So too, CEQA Guidelines allow lead agencies to select what model or methodology to estimate GHG emissions so

City of Temecula — Rendezvous Phase II Project
July 19, 2022