HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-088 CC Resolution
I
I
I
RESOLUTION NO. 07-88
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA DECLARING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES AND
AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION THEREOF IN
CONNECTION WITH THE PECHANGA PARKWAY
IMPROVEMENTS - PHASE II PROJECT, CITY PROJECT
NO. PW99-11 (APNs 961-010-009 & -047)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Temecula is a municipal corporation, in the County of
Riverside, State of California.
Section 2. The real property interest described in Section 3 of this Resolution
is to be taken for a public use, namely for public street and drainage purposes and all
uses necessary or convenient thereto in connection with the Pechanga Parkway
Improvements Project ("Project"), pursuant to the authority conferred upon the City of
Temecula to acquire property by eminent domain by California Constitution Article 1,
Section 19, California Government Code Sections 37350, 37350.5, 37351, 40401 and
40404 and California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010 et seq. (Eminent
Domain Law), including, but not limited to Sections 1240.010, 1240.020, 1240.110,
1240.120, 1240.510, 1240.610, 1240.650 and other provisions of law.
Section 3. The real property interest the City seeks to acquire is an
approximate 3,529 square foot permanent easement for public street and drainage
purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto on the real property commonly
known as 44618 and 44700 Pechanga Parkway, and identified respectively as
Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-009 and 961-010-047 ("Subject Property
Interest"). The Subject Property Interest is located on the southerly portion of
Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-009. The portion of Assessor's Parcel Number
961-010-047 needed for the Project was dedicated to the City at the time of
development of the storage facility on said parcel.
The Subject Property Interest is described on Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit
"B" to this Resolution. Exhibits "A" and "B" are incorporated herein by this reference.
The Subject Property Interest is required for the construction, widening of, and
improvements to Pechanga Parkway, which is a public use.
Section 4. The Project is consistent with the City's Circulation Element of the
General Plan. The Project would widen a 2.7-mile portion of the existing Pechanga
Parkway and Temecula Parkway (formerly known as State Highway 79 South)
("Temecula Parkway"), extending south to the intersection of Pechanga Parkway and
Pechanga Road. Specifically, the Project would construct full-width street improvements
on Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway to Pechanga Road consistent with the
R:/Resos 2007/Resos 07-88
I
I
I
Circulation Element of the General Plan. Full width is 134 feet from Temecula Parkway
to Via Gilberto and 110 feet from Via Gilberto to Pechanga Road. The Project would
install road improvements, including curb, gutter, and storm drain facilities on Pechanga
Parkway from Temecula Parkway to Pechanga Road. At the conclusion of the Project,
Pechanga Parkway would have varying widths from four (4) to six (6) lanes. The City
would construct the Project in cooperation with the California Department of
Transportation ("Caltrans") and the Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA").
The Project would also install traffic signals, crosswalks, landscape medians,
guardrails, streetlights, curbs and gutters, catch basins with connector pipes and a
Class 2 bicycle lane in each direction along Pechanga Parkway. In addition, the Project
would install a retaining wall southeast for approximately 125 feet along the north side
of Pechanga Parkway beginning at the intersection of Rainbow Canyon Road and
Pechanga Parkway. The Project would repave existing areas at the intersections of
Temecula Parkway, Cupeno Lane, Rainbow Canyon Road, Muirfield Drive, Loma Linda
Road, Wolf Creek Drive North (Future) adjacent to Via Consuelo, Wolf Valley Road,
Wolf Creek Drive South (Future) northwest of Deer Hollow Way, Deer Hollow Way and
Pechanga Road. As mentioned above, the Project, as planned and designed, would
install Class 2 bicycle lanes and thus provide alternate modes of transportation for the
City's residents. Further, the Project, as planned and designed, would improve safety
for pedestrians by ensuring that all intersections within the Project area comply with
ADA standards for pedestrian crossing.
The Project is needed to improve traffic circulation and efficiency in this area of
the City. Increased development in this area of the City and an increase in patrons of
the Pechanga Casino have resulted in increased traffic congestion on Pechanga
Parkway. The addition of a traffic lane in each direction will improve traffic conditions
and improve the level of service ("LOS") at the intersections of Pechanga Parkway and
Temecula Parkway, Rainbow Canyon Road, Muirfield Drive, Loma Linda Road and Wolf
Valley Road. Absent the Project, the LOS at the intersections of Pechanga Parkway
and Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway and Rainbow Canyon Road and
Pechanga Parkway and Wolf Valley Road would continue to operate at LOS F during
peak hour traffic, which is below the LOS D goal set forth in the Circulation Element of
the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Circulation Element is to "strive to maintain a LOS D or
better at all intersections within the City during peak hours and LOS C or better during
non-peak hours." The construction of the Project helps to achieve this goal.
By improving the efficiency of traffic circulation as set forth above, the Project
would also help to adequately and efficiently accommodate regional travel demand.
Goal 2 of the Circulation Element is to create a regional transportation system that
accommodates the safe and efficient movement of people and goods to and from the
community. The Project also would help achieve the policies of Goal 3 of the
Circulation Element, which is to create an efficient City circulation system through the
use of transportation system management and travel demand management services.
For example, the Project would provide a comprehensive system of Class 2 bicycle
lanes to meet the needs of cyclists traveling to and from work and other destinations
R:/Resos 2007/Resos 07-88
2
I
I
I
within the City consistent with Policy 3.3 of Goal 3 of the Circulation Element. These
bicycle lanes would also help meet Goal 5 of the Circulation Element, which is to
provide safe and efficient alternatives to motorized travel throughout the City. Further,
Pechanga Parkway, as a Principal and Major arterial, would not allow for on-street
(curbside) parking to minimize traffic conflicts and increase carrying capacity, consistent
with Policy 3.2 of Goal 3 of the Circulation Element.
The above improvements would further the public health and safety by ensuring
adequate traffic circulation in this area of the City and, thus, would prevent
unacceptable traffic congestion and unsafe conditions. The Project is also necessary
for the public health and safety because it would improve efficiency and the level of
service along Pechanga Parkway. The Project is needed to meet the demands of
increased traffic volumes in this area of the City. The increase in traffic has the
potential of increasing traffic delays and increasing the risk of traffic accidents. The
improvement of traffic circulation and reduction in traffic congestion along Pechanga
Parkway may also consequentially have a beneficial effect on the access and response
times of emergency vehicles vital to the public health and safety, and thus, benefit the
community as a whole.
Section 5. The environmental effects of the Project were studied and analyzed
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code
Section 21000 et seq., the CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs. ~ 15000 et seq.
("CEQA Guidelines") and the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"). The
environmental effects of the Project were studied in connection with several initial
studies pursuant to the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and a
Categorical Exclusion ("CE") pursuant to NEPA. The acquisitions of the Subject
Property Interests were studied as an integral part of the Initial Studies, Negative
Declarations, Environmental Impact Reports and the CE prepared in connection with
the Project. The City is the lead agency for approval under CEQA and FHWA is the
lead agency for approval under NEPA.
On April 11, 2006 the City prepared a Notice of Determination, which was duly
filed on April 20, 2006 with the County Clerk and Recorder's Office in accordance with
CEQA. The Notice of Determination noted that the City approved the Project on March
14, 2006, and made the following determinations:
(a) The Project will not have a significant effect on the environment.
(b) A Negative Declaration was previously prepared and adopted for the
Project pursuant to CEQA. The following environmental determinations have
been made in the past which have evaluated the Project, or interim
improvements to Pechanga Parkway:
. Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City of Temecula City
Council on February 13, 2001.
. City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR, certified
by the Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005.
R:/Resos 2007/Resos 07-88
3
I
I
I
. EA 71, a Notice of Exemption adopted by the City of Temecula on
August 11, 2000 for interim road widening on Pechanga Parkway.
· EA 74, a Negative Declaration adopted by the City of Temecula on
October 4, 2000 for the widening of a portion of Pechanga Parkway to
four lanes.
. EA89 a Negative Declaration adopted by the City Council on January
8, 2002 for interim widening improvements and the construction of a
sound wall along the west side of Pechanga Parkway.
(c) Mitigation measures were not made a condition of the approval of the
Project.
(d) A Statement of Overriding Consideration was not adopted for the Project.
(e) Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
Concurrently, with the Notice of Determination, the City prepared on April 11,
2006 a Certificate of Fee Exemption (De Minimus Impact Finding) for the Project, which
is incorporated herein by this reference.
In accordance with the requirements of NEPA, Caltrans and FHWA approved a
Categorical Exclusion ("CE") for the Project. The Caltrans Environmental Chief Officer
and the Caltrans Project ManagerlDLA Engineer approved the CE on March 29, 2007
and on April 3, 2007, respectively. FHWA approved the CE on April 19, 2007. In
approving the CE, Caltrans determined that a CE was proper because the Project would
not individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental effect and that the
Project was excluded from the requirements to prepare an Environmental Assessment
(EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Caltrans' determination was based on
the following findings:
(a) The Project does not have a significant impact on the environment as
defined by NEPA;
(b) The Project does not involve substantial controversy on environmental
grounds;
(c) The Project does not involve significant impacts on properties protected by
Section 4(f) of the DOT Act or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act;
(d) In non-attainment or maintenance areas for Federal air quality standards:
the Project comes from a currently conforming plan and Transportation
Improvement Program or is exempt from regional conformity; and
R:/Resos 2007/Resos 07-88
4
I
I
I
(e) The Project is consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws,
requirements or administrative determinations relating to the environmental
aspects of this action.
Based on the evaluation of the Project and statements made in the CE, FHWA
determined on April 19, 2007 in accordance with NEPA that the Project meets the
criteria of and is properly classified as aCE.
On October 2, 2007, City staff reviewed all of the environmental documentation
prepared in connection with the Project in connection with the Resolution of Necessity,
including the Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City of Temecula City
Council on February 13, 2001; the City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan
Update EIR, certified by the Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005; EA 71, a Notice of
Exemption adopted by the City of Temecula on August 11, 2000 for interim road
widening on Pechanga Parkway; EA 74, a Negative Declaration adopted by the City of
Temecula on October 4, 2000 for the widening of a portion of Pechanga Parkway to four
lanes; EA 89, a Negative Declaration adopted by the City Council on January 8, 2002
for interim widening improvements and the construction of a sound wall along the west
side of Pechanga Parkway, the Traffic Studies prepared in connection with said EIRs,
the Noise Study Report for Pechanga Parkway Phase II Street Improvements revised
March 12, 2007 and all other technical studies prepared in connection with said
documents, the CE and its Continuation Sheet, and the Agenda Reports prepared in
connection with these environmental documents. Pursuant to the criteria of Section
15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code, City
staff concluded that no substantial changes have occurred in the Project that the City
has obtained no new information of substantial importance that would require further
environmental analysis. These environmental findings are the appropriate findings with
respect to the proposed acquisition of the Subject Property Interest. All of the above-
referenced environmental documents are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2, the City obtained a
fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interest, set just compensation in
accordance with the fair market value and extended a written offer on June 14, 2007 to
the record owner. The City's offer letter also offered to pay to the property owner the
reasonable costs, up to $5,000.00 (Five Thousand Dollars) for an independent appraisal
of the Subject Property Interest pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025.
Section 7. The City provided notice to the record owners pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 of its decision to consider the adoption of a
Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition by eminent domain of the Subject Property
Interest.
Section 8. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject
Property Interest, namely public street and drainage purposes and all uses necessary or
convenient thereto, is a more necessary public use within the meaning of Code of Civil
Procedure Section 1240.650 than the uses to which public utility easement holders
R:/Resos 2007/Resos 07-88
5
I
I
I
have appropriated those utility easements, which are located in the Subject Property
Interest and are affected by the Project.
Section 9. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing regarding the Project,
including the Agenda Report and documents referenced therein, the City Council
hereby finds and determines that:
A. The public interest and necessity require the Project;
B. The Project is planned and located in the manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury;
C. The Subject Property Interest described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on
Exhibit "8" hereto is necessary for the Project; and
D. The City has made the offer required by Government Code Section
7267.2 to the owner of record of the Subject Property Interest it seeks to
acquire.
Section 10. The findings and declarations contained in this Resolution are
based upon the record before the City Council, including the Agenda Report and all
documents referenced therein, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference,
and any testimony and/or comments submitted to the City by the record owner and or
its representative(s). These documents include, but are not limited to, the General Plan;
the Circulation Element; the street plans for the Project, the environmental documents
referenced above and in the Agenda Report, including the Notice of Determination and
Categorical Exclusion approved by the Federal Highway Administration and the
California Department of Transportation pursuant to NEPA; the offer letter sent to the
property owner pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235; the revised offer
letter sent to the property owner; and the notice to the record owner pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 of the City's intent to consider the adoption of the
Resolution of Necessity.
Section 11. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby authorizes and
directs the City Attorney's office to take all steps necessary to commence and prosecute
legal proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction to acquire by eminent domain the
property described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "8" attached hereto and to take
all steps necessary to deposit with the Court the amount of probable compensation
required by law for the issuance of an Order for Prejudgment Possession.
Section 12. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby authorizes the City
Manager to execute all necessary documents in connection with the eminent domain
proceeding.
R:lResos 2007/Resos 07-88
6
I
I
I
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 23rd day of October, 2007.
ATTEST:
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 07-88 was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of October, 2007, by the
following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Roberts,
Washington
NOES: 0
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
None
ABSENT: 0
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
None
ABSTAIN: 0
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
None
. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
R:/Resos 2007/Resos 07-88
7
,
I
EXHIBIT "A"
Being a portion of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. 11984, in the City ofTemecula, County of
Riverside, Stale of California, as filed in Book 67, Page 87, of Parcel Maps in the office of the
County Recorder of said County, being.more particularly descn'bed as follows:
BEQINNING at the southwest parcel comer of said Parcel 3, said comer being distant 55.00 feet
measured at a right angle to the, centerline ofPechanga Parkway (formerly known as Pala Road);
thence North 420 15' 24" East a distance of 24.00 feet to a point being distant 79.00 feet
measured at a right angle froin said centerline;
thence South 47044' 36" East a distance of 147.12 feet, said course being parallel and distant
79.00 feet measured at a: right angle from said centerline, to a point in the easterly parcel line of
said Parcel 3;
I
thence South 420 31' 55" West along said parcel line a distance of24.00 feet to the southeast
comer of said Parcel 3, said point also being in the northeasterly right-of-way line of said
Pechanga Parkway (formerly known as Pala Road); ,
thenCe North 470 44' 36" West along said right-of-way line and southerly parcel line of said
Parcel 3 being parallel and distant 55.00 fed measured ata right angle from said centerline, a
distanCe of 147.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. '
Contains 3,529 square feet, more or less.
See EXHIBIT "B", attached.
I
EXHIBIT
liB II
CURVE DATA TABLE
NO RADIUS DELTA LENGTH
1 1975.00' 5' 08' 03" 176.97'
2 2055.00' 4' 1 0' 56~' 150.00'
N
N
en
'"
'"
,
\
\
,
..)
,I
"'f
::'"f
01-1
.,<
:g,o
zl~
,
,
1
1 cr>
"', '"
~ I ..&
Vii ~
;nl
-I....
o/~
-,e:.
~,~
TANGENT
88.55'
75. 03'
Lu
N
o
i:-
N
.
CD
o
:z
PARCEL 3
PARCEL MAP NO. 11984
P.M.B. 67 I 87
NOTE:
PARCEL DIMENSIONS SHOWN
PER PARCEL MAP NO. 11984
P.M.B. 67/87.
POINT OF BEGIN
.4'-,
~~-'-~ .
'h _ ,,0).
7A'. h
A>. ~~.-, ~ /9'
Doe ""'" " r
~~oe YA" '00.
'f,. '7A ,+
10 _',9'->,
"(.,"f~''':9''".J..
4l ...,.~, 6'.
0"4) ..., ~:,_~
"4~
\L
PREPARED BT'
DNLJA
'l\.
~
.<-i
.->'
~
c.,
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE
;s
,
'0
lee
!O
!a:
I
t
j:
'l-
i-
i:e
icn
,
\:
lee
,-
\0
lUl
to
'W
55' !..,
\
\
,
\
,
\
,
\
.
\
,
\
;;.,
o
".,
.
".,
o
z
,
\ .
SCALE: 1"= 100'
AREA OF TAKE
Oanlel. MOm. Johnson" uenGenhOll
999 Town.. Country Rood
Or'anoe. COI Tfornlo 92868
C11-t) 245.9660