Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout112508 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title 11] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE NOVEMBER 25, 2008 - 7:00 PM At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 P.M. Next in Order: Ordinance: 08-13 Resolution: 08-103 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mike Naggar Prelude Music: Schuylar Day Invocation: Pastor Bob Branch of Springs Community Church Flag Salute: Council Member Roberts ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Edwards, Roberts, Washington, Naggar PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item. There is a five minute (5) time limit for individual speakers CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the test of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 3 General Liability Insurance Renewal RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Approve the insurance policy renewal for general and excess liability insurance with St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company, in the amount $207,403, for the period of December 1, 2008 through December 1, 2009. 4 Proposed Southern California Edison's Triton Substation (at the request of Council Member Roberts RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Receive and file the information presented. 5 Second Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services Between the City of Temecula and Environmental Science Associates for Preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Dealership (PA07-0335) RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the Second Amendment to the Agreement with Environmental Science Associates in the amount of $14,000 for the completion of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Automobile Dealership, Planning Application Number PA07-0335. 6 Procurement of ShoreTel Phone System - Civic Center RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the purchase of ShoreTel Phone equipment for the total amount of $128,906, which includes shipping and applicable sales tax; 6.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $12,890, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 7 Approve an Amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Transportation Expenditure Plan (TIP) RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN 8 Southern California Edision and Time Warner Cable Easements within Margarita Park RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Grant an Easement to Southern California Edison for construction, operation, and maintenance of facilities within Margarita Park; 8.2 Grant an Easement to Time Warner Cable for construction, operation, and maintenance of facilities within Margarita Park. 9 Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) - Cooperative Work Agreement (CIA) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE THE COOPERATIVE WORK AGREEMENT EXTENSION REQUEST OF THE LOCAL AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT FOR THE 2006/2007 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT PROJECT KNOWN AS THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT 10 Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman, Inc., for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/ Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect -Project No. PW08-04 RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve the Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman, Inc., for an Alignment Study and Design for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/ Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect, Project No. PW08-04, in the amount of $246,865; 10.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve Extra Work Authorizations not to exceed the contingency amount of $24,686.50, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. 11 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 08-12 RECOMMENDATION: 11.l Adopt an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 08-12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REVISING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO MASSAGE SERVICES, AND AMENDING TITLE 5 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record CSD CONSENT CALENDAR 12 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve the minutes of November 18, 2008. 13 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading, Protect No. PW06-05 Phase 1 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Accept the Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading, Project No. PW06-05 as complete; 13.2 Direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; 13.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 14 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12 RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Accept the Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12 as complete; 14.2 Direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; 14.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT CSD GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS CSD ADJOURNMENT TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING RDA PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record RDA CONSENT CALENDAR 15 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Approve the minutes of November 18, 2008. RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT 16 Redevelopment Department Monthly Report RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Receive and file. RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS RDA ADJOURNMENT RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing 17 Proposed Development Code Amendment to define full service hotels, revise the intensity bonus justification requirements, add new parking standards for full service hotels, and allow for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full service hotel RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 08- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE FULL SERVICE HOTELS, REVISE THE INTENSITY BONUS JUSTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHOSE INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS THE TARGET FLOOR AREA RATIO ALLOWED IN THE ZONE, ADD NEW PARKING STANDARDS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS, AND ADD PROVISIONS TO ALLOW FOR TANDEM PARKING SPACES FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHEN VALET SERVICE IS PROVIDED (LONG RANGE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. LR08-0045) 18 AB 1600 Financial Reports RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Approve the AB 1600 Financial Reports. CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 19 Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements - Environmental Mitigation (Project No. PVV99-11 EM) RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Consider the following Resolution, which is a Resolution of Necessity of the City of Temecula: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION 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 STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION (PROJECT NO. PW99-11 EM) 19.2 Open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Resolution of Necessity, receive from staff the evidence stated and referred to in this Agenda Report ("Report"), take testimony from any person wishing to be heard on issues A, B, C, and D below, and consider all evidence to determine whether to adopt the proposed Resolution of Necessity. If the City Council finds, based on the evidence contained and referred to in this Report, the testimony and comments received at this hearing, and all written testimony submitted to the City Council, that the evidence warrants the necessary findings with respect to the proposed Resolution of Necessity, then City staff recommends, that the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion: 19.3 Adopt proposed Resolution No. 08-_ (which requires a 4/5ths vote of the entire Council) and authorize the City Attorney's office to file eminent domain proceedings to acquire the following real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located along the northern side of Temecula Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-076: An approximate 74,251 square foot (1.70 acre) permanent conservation easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel A Conservation Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Conservation Easement"; An approximate 25,007 (0.58 acre) square foot grading easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel B Grading Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "C" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Grading Easement"; An approximate 22,648 (0.52 acre) square foot access/water line easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel C Access and Water Line Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "D" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Access and Water Line Easement". These real property interests are referred to below collectively as "Subject Property Interests" and are described more particularly in the Exhibits attached to the Resolution of Necessity. The Resolution of Necessity and its Exhibits "A", "B", "C" and "D" are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; 19.4 Authorize the City Attorney's office and City staff to file and prosecute eminent domain proceedings and to take all necessary steps to deposit $30,250 with the Court, the amount of probable compensation, as required by law for issuance of an Order for Prejudgment Possession; 19.5 Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents. 20 Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway - Dual Turn Lanes From Temecula Parkway (Project No. PVV06-11) RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Consider the following Resolution, which is a Resolution of Necessity of the City of Temecula: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION 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 - DUAL TURN LANES FROM TEMECULA PARKWAY (PROJECT NO. PW06-11) 20.2 Open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Resolution of Necessity, receive from staff the evidence stated and referred to in this Agenda Report ("Report"), take testimony from any person wishing to be heard on issues A, B, C, and D below, and consider all evidence to determine whether to adopt the proposed Resolution of Necessity. If the City Council finds, based on the evidence contained and referred to in this Report, the testimony and comments received at this hearing, and all written testimony submitted to the City Council, that the evidence warrants the necessary findings with respect to the proposed Resolution of Necessity, then City staff recommends that the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion: 20.3 Adopt proposed Resolution No. 08-_ (which requires a 4/5ths vote of the entire Council) and authorize the City Attorney's office to file eminent domain proceedings to acquire the following real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located at the southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-073: An approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street purposes, which is described on Exhibit "A" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Dedication of Right-Of-Way" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" labeled "Dedication of Right of Way"; An approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent public roadway that will revert back to the property owner after construction of the Project in the manner proposed, which is described on Exhibit "A-1" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Slope Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "13-1" labeled "Slope Easement"; An approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a term of eighteen (18) months to facilitate construction of the Project, which is described on Exhibit "A-2" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Temporary Construction Easement" and depicted on Exhibit "B-2" labeled "Temporary Construction Easement". These real property interests are referred to below collectively as "Subject Property Interests" and are described more particularly in the Exhibits attached to the Resolution of Necessity. The proposed Resolution of Necessity and its Exhibits "A", "B", "A-1 "B-1 "A-2" and "B-2" are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 20.4 Authorize the City Attorney's office and City staff to file and prosecute eminent domain proceedings and to take all necessary steps to deposit $120,000 with the Court, the amount of probable compensation, as required by law for issuance of an Order for Prejudgment Possession; 20.5 Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS 21 City Council Travel/Conference Report - October 2008 22 Planning Department Monthly Report 23 Public Works Department Monthly Report 24 Police Department Monthly Report CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: City Council Regular, Tuesday, December 9, 2008, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session with regular session commencing at 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The entire agenda packet (including staff reports) may be available for viewing at City Hall- 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula-and at the Temecula Library- 30600 Pauba Road, Temecula- during normal business hours. The packet will be available for viewing the Friday before the City Council meeting after 4:00 PM. You may access the packet on the City's website- cityoftemecula.org- which as well will be available the Friday before the City Council meeting after 4:00 PM. 10 CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 1 ITEM NO. 2 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: List of Demands PREPARED BY: Pascale Brown, Accounting Manager Jada Yonker, Accounting Specialist RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A BACKGROUND: All claims and demands are reported and summarized for review and approval by the City Council on a routine basis at each City Council meeting. The attached claims represent the paid claims and demands since the last City Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: All claims and demands were paid from appropriated funds or authorized resources of the City and have been recorded in accordance with the City's policies and procedures. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution List of Demands RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the office of the City Clerk, has been reviewed by the City Manager's Office and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $2,056,536.36. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [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. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 11/13/2008 TOTAL CHECK RUN $ 1,549,727.24 11/13/2008 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 506,809.12 TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 11/25/2008 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 2,056,536.36 DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND CHECKS: 001 GENERAL FUND $ 1,186,587.52 165 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 9,473.30 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 212,627.41 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 127.51 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE 25,469.64 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 1,184.55 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 7,534.27 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 1,508.45 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND 42,160.74 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT 5,408.57 300 INSURANCE FUND 12,545.35 310 VEHICLES FUND 4,557.99 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 28,196.60 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 3,519.06 340 FACILITIES 8,826.28 001 GENERAL FUND $ 332,413.64 165 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 8,015.39 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 110,020.40 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 132.23 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE 4,881.41 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 1,149.60 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 1,432.24 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 722.21 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT 5,194.26 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,726.62 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 28,908.17 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 3,584.48 340 FACILITIES 8,628.47 $ 1,549,727.24 506,809.12 TOTAL BY FUND: $ 2,056,536.36 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 1111312008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description 1149 11113/2008 000245 PERS - HEALTH INSUR PREMIUM PERS Health Admin Cost Payment Blue Shield HMO Payment 1150 11113/2008 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) State Disability Ins Payment 1151 11113/2008 000283 INSTATAX(IRS) Federal Income Taxes Payment 1152 11113/2008 000389 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT OBRA- Project Retirement Payment 1153 11113/2008 1154 11113/2008 1155 11113/2008 127788 11113/2008 127789 11113/2008 127790 11113/2008 127791 11113/2008 127792 11113/2008 001065 000246 000642 003552 004973 012245 003951 006915 SOLUTION NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION PERS(EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT) TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE AFLAC ABACHERLI, LINDI ALEGRIA, GLENDA FAY ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT ALLIE'S PARTY EQUIPMENT Nationwide Retirement Payment Amount Paid 78,764.62 0.00 24,175.16 95,959.17 3,888.42 22,353.92 PERS ER Paid Member Contr Payment 130,134.32 Child Care Reimbursement Payment Child Care Reimbursement Payment AFLAC Cancer Payment TCSD instructor earnings Support Payment Rel Retention w/h PW08-02 Equip Rental:Theater Encore Event 127793 11113/2008 012554 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF HVAC & ASHRAE Handboooks: B&S 127794 11113/2008 000101 APPLE ON E INC temp help ppe 10125: Ortiz, V temp help ppe 10111: Ortiz, V temp help ppe 10118: Ortiz, V temp help ppe 10125: Wilson, L 127795 11113/2008 011961 AT&T MOBILITY Oct 4070/3465 cellular usage 127796 11113/2008 002648 AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN Membership: 65120445 DD CALIF 9,585.35 0.00 3,241.82 920.00 1,091.00 47,204.02 514.71 409.50 597.87 294.84 368.55 1,359.40 361.20 47.00 Check Total 78,764.62 24,175.16 95,959.17 3,888.42 22,353.92 130,134.32 9,585.35 3,241.82 920.00 1,091.00 47,204.02 514.71 409.50 2,620.66 361.20 47.00 Page:1 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 127797 11113/2008 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRVS Vallejo Channel repairs: PW 8,375.00 8,375.00 INC 127798 11113/2008 004040 BIG FOOT GRAPHICS TCSD instructor earnings 315.00 TCSD instructor earnings 770.00 1,085.00 127799 11113/2008 011230 BONILLA, GERMAN performance:Hot Summer Ngts 500.00 500.00 127800 11113/2008 010964 C R V P Data Conversion: Records 2,224.56 2,224.56 127801 11113/2008 003138 CAL MAT PW patch truck materials 246.66 PW patch truck materials 201.86 PW patch truck materials 331.29 779.81 127802 11113/2008 010349 CALIF DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT Support Payment Case # 94P6594 159.69 159.69 127803 11113/2008 010349 CALIF DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT Support Payment Case # Df099118 25.00 25.00 127804 11113/2008 000790 CALIF DEPT OF PESTICIDE Cert 18713 Renewal: Pesticide DC 60.00 60.00 127805 11113/2008 003775 CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL 08109 Ad CHS Basketball Pgrm 100.00 100.00 127806 11113/2008 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES Community Health Charities Payment 136.00 136.00 127807 11113/2008 009524 CREATIVE HANDS ART SCHOOL TCSD instructor earnings 819.00 TCSD instructor earnings 756.00 1,575.00 127808 11113/2008 003962 DAVID NEAULT ASSOCIATES INC Oct Idscp insp svcs:Pechanga Ph II 6,080.00 6,080.00 127809 11113/2008 012296 DIRECT ELECTRIC COMPANY light installation: Loma Linda park 425.00 425.00 127810 11113/2008 002701 DIVERSIFIED RISK/HUB INT'L Oct'08 special events premiums 11,698.51 11,698.51 Paget apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 127811 11113/2008 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE mainline repairs:Saddlwood/Pavilion Pt 274.75 mainline repairs: Sad dlwcod/PaviIlion Pt 216.01 mainline valve repair:villages 518.94 irrigation upgrades:crowne hill 351.04 valve repairs:Vail Ranch Pkwy 727.95 backflow repair:Crowne Hill 1,267.01 mainline repairs:Temeku Hills 247.73 mainline repairs:Villages 346.79 backflow repair:Signet Series 890.67 backflow repair:La Mirada 790.69 backflow repair:Ridgeview 960.59 6,592.17 127812 11113/2008 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER ONTARIO AIRPORT RR Prkg:SCAG regional mtg 68.00 HILTON RR HtI:SCAG regional mtg:1011108 121.00 VALET AIR PARK RR Parking Fee: Metrolink- 10111-16 74.53 COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT JC Htl:NLCC & Econ Dev Cnf 9124-27 436.43 HERTZ RENT-A-CAR JC car rental:NLCC cnf 9124-30 409.08 SEAL FURNITURE HP parts to repair cubicles CSD 215.50 PALUMBOS RISTORANTE GR refreshments:interview panel 71.74 PAYPAL GR Payflow Pro Transaction 59.95 BUYONLINENOW.COM GYname plate- S. Cammarota 103.80 C S M F O GY recruitment ad/Asst. Fin Director 225.00 GOVERNMENT FINANCE GY recruitment ad/Asst. Fin Director 150.00 OFFICERS JOHNSTONE SUPPLY HP maint supplies:mpsc 96.49 TIGERDIRECT.COM HP equip maint supplies:theater 140.34 2,171.86 127813 11113/2008 010325 FORT DEARBORN LIFE Voluntary Supp Life Insurance Payment 912.80 912.80 127814 11113/2008 011145 FOSTER, JILL C. TCSD instructor earnings 350.00 350.00 127815 11113/2008 011967 FULL VALUE ENTERTAINMENT sttlmnt: Battle of the Bands 52.50 52.50 127816 11113/2008 004514 G T S I CORP Panasonic Computer Equip: PD 173.78 Panasonic Toughbook PC: PD 4,384.21 4,557.99 Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 127817 11113/2008 000177 GLENN IES OFFICE PRODUCTS Office Supplies: Info Sys 165.69 INC Office Supplies: Finance 142.65 Office Supplies: PW CIP1Admin 843.63 Office Supplies: Theater 256.53 Office Supplies: City Clerk 177.67 Office Supplies: TV Museum 174.45 Office Supplies: Econ Dev 26.37 Office Supplies: HR 596.53 Office Supplies: Econ Dev 19.38 Office Supplies: Planning 831.97 Office Supplies: B&SlCode Enf 283.37 Office Supplies: MPSC 201.06 Office Supplies: CRC 93.08 3,812.38 127818 11113/2008 004890 GOLDEN STATE FIRE Fire Sprinkler Insp: TV Museum 500.00 PROTECTION Fire Sprinkler Insp: City Hall 500.00 Fire Sprinkler Insp: TCC 500.00 Fire Sprinkler Insp: Mpsc 500.00 Fire Sprinkler Insp: Maint Facility 500.00 Fire Sprinkler Insp: Ch Museum 500.00 Fire Sprinkler Insp: CRC 500.00 3,500.00 127819 11113/2008 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC Hardware supplies: City Hall 204.05 Hardware supplies: Library 170.40 Hardware supplies: Ch Museum 15.86 Hardware supplies: MPSC 26.46 Hardware supplies: TCC 58.16 Hardware supplies: Theater 111.38 Hardware supplies: TV Museum 3.86 Hardware supplies: B&S 277.95 Hardware supplies: TCSD Parks 640.71 Hardware supplies: Maint Facility 4.31 Hardware supplies: CRC/Skate Pk 271.37 Hardware supplies: Fire 983.16 Hardware supplies: PW Maint 1,015.86 Hardware supplies: PWTraffic 326.45 Hardware supplies: CRC 88.95 4,198.93 127820 11113/2008 003543 HERMAN WEISSKER INC Oct Const:Old Town Infrastructure 15,151.50 15,151.50 127821 11113/2008 007792 HINTON, BEVERLY L. TCSD instructor earnings 188.30 188.30 127822 11113/2008 005748 HODSON, CHERYL A. Support Payment 7.25 7.25 Page-.4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 127823 11113/2008 000963 HOGAN, DAVID Retirement Medical Payment 703.00 703.00 127824 11113/2008 000194 1 C M A RETIREMENT-PLAN I C M A Retirement Trust 457 Payment 11,082.62 11,082.62 303355 127825 11113/2008 001123 INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION misc maint supplies: PW Maint 413.89 413.89 GROUP 127826 11113/2008 001186 IRWIN, JOHN TCSD instructor earnings 78.40 TCSD instructor earnings 68.60 TCSD instructor earnings 196.00 TCSD instructor earnings 333.20 676.20 127827 11113/2008 007671 JONES, MARYLYN TCSD instructor earnings 604.80 604.80 127828 11113/2008 007188 LAERDAL MEDICAL CORP. CPR supplies: Fire 220.84 220.84 127829 11113/2008 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS Misc. street signs:pw maint div 155.16 155.16 127830 11113/2008 004141 MAINTEX INC Custodial Supplies:TCC 260.13 Custodial Supplies:Theater 194.10 Custodial Supplies:C. Museum 221.93 Custodial Supplies: Library 295.62 Custodial Supplies:CRC 493.34 Custodial Supplies:MPSC 260.13 Custodial Supplies:T. Museum 260.13 1,985.38 127831 11113/2008 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC 2008 cafr report coversAnance 974.06 2008 cafr tab dividersAnance 499.96 1,474.02 127832 1111312008 006571 MELODY'S AD WORKS INC. reimb expense:O.T. Holiday 1,085.00 1,085.00 127833 11113/2008 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMPAN Y MetLife Dental Insurance Payment 8,625.42 8,625.42 127834 11113/2008 007210 MIDORI GARDENS Oct Idscp srvcs: Parks 70,105.00 70,105.00 127835 11113/2008 011440 MILLMORE'S WAX CREW City vehicle detailing srvcs: PW Depts 100.00 100.00 127836 11113/2008 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 10,000 window envelopes:finance 790.94 790.94 127837 11113/2008 001868 MIYAMOTO-JURKOSKY, SUSAN TCSD Instructor Earnings 415.80 A. TCSD Instructor Earnings 420.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 453.60 1,289.40 Pagea apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 127838 11113/2008 008820 NEIGHBORS NEWSPAPER Nov advertising: ESG/Old Town Holiday 500.00 500.00 127839 11113/2008 000233 NELSON, SHAWN reimb: Sep/Oct'08 internet services 89.98 89.98 127840 11113/2008 009337 NOLTE ASSOCIATES INC Engineering Srvcs:Bridge Realign Study 13,976.61 13,976.61 127841 11113/2008 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Misc office supplies:pd mall 99.54 DIV Misc office supplies:pd mall 21.12 120.66 127842 11113/2008 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs:TCSD 91.27 City Vehicle Maint Svcs: Planning 363.19 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:City Mgr 208.88 663.34 127843 11113/2008 009694 ONSTAGE MUSICALS "Get Your Kicks" performance 11/9108 7,354.61 7,354.61 127844 11113/2008 012547 PARKS & OBERHANSLEY filing fees:Tem.Foundation/Higher Educ. 154.69 154.69 127845 11113/2008 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PERS Long Term Care Payment 377.54 377.54 PROGRAM 127846 11113/2008 009796 PERVO PAINT COMPANY Misc supplies:pw traffic div 1,125.99 1,125.99 127847 11113/2008 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 621.52 621.52 127848 11113/2008 012251 PORTRAIT PRODUCTIONS TCSD Instructor Earnings 94.50 94.50 127849 11113/2008 002185 POSTMASTER 11 /08-11109 rental box 892050: Police 374.00 374.00 127850 11113/2008 005820 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC PrePaid Legal Services Payment 450.40 450.40 127851 11113/2008 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPANY Oct recruitment ads: Human Resources 2,205.82 2,205.82 INC 127852 11113/2008 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DISTRIC T Oct Various Water Meters 975.24 Oct 01-04-47210-OT.E.S. Pool 642.46 Oct Various Water Meters 33,216.07 Oct Various Water Meters 46.17 34,879.94 127853 11113/2008 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING electrical supplies:mpsc/c.museum 74.99 74.99 Page6 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 127854 11113/2008 004498 REPUBLIC INTELLIGENT Conduit repair:mercedes & main 4,564.66 4,564.66 127855 11113/2008 012148 RICHARDSON TECHNOLOGIES Oct HVAC prev maint:t.c.c. 278.00 INC Oct HVAC prev maint:fire stn 84 278.00 Oct HVAC prev maint:c. museum 278.00 Oct HVAC prev maint:foc 478.00 Oct HVAC prev maint:west wing 324.00 Oct HVAC prev maint:tcc 185.00 Oct HVAC prev maint:library 934.00 Oct HVAC prevmaint:crc 1,116.00 Oct HVAC prev maint:theater 371.00 new compressor unit #4:crc 2,425.99 Oct HVAC prev maint:fire stn 73 120.00 6,787.99 127856 11113/2008 000411 RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CONTRO L permit fees:Murr.CrkTrail pw0l-27 1,568.94 1,568.94 127857 11113/2008 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEPT 0711-16/08 law enforcement 777,397.01 777,397.01 127858 11113/2008 000815 ROWLEY, CATHY TCSD Instructor Earnings 532.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 420.00 952.00 127859 11113/2008 002226 RUSSO, MARY ANNE TCSD Instructor Earnings 875.00 875.00 127860 11113/2008 010518 SAFE KIDS WORLDWIDE car seat re-cert.: D. Perry T638581 40.00 40.00 127861 11113/2008 007582 SAFEGUARD DENTAL & VISION SafeGuard Vision Plan Payment 1,056.85 1,056.85 127862 11113/2008 000278 SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE Oct recruitment ads: Human Resources 1,600.80 1,600.80 127863 11113/2008 006815 SAN DIEGO, COUNTY OF Support Payment Account # 581095025 12.50 12.50 127864 11113/2008 009980 SANBORN, GWYN Country @ the Merc 1118108 570.00 570.00 127865 11113/2008 008529 SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL Support Payment LO File # 08-59437 786.80 786.80 127866 11113/2008 008529 SHERI FPS CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL Support Payment LO File # 08-59437 357.25 357.25 127867 11113/2008 008529 SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV- CENTRAL Sup Pmt LO FILE# 2007052618 100.00 100.00 Page:? apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 127868 11113/2008 008529 SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL Support Payment LO File # 08-59437 100.00 100.00 127869 1111312008 009213 SHERRY BERRY MUSIC Jazz @ the Merc 1116108 241.50 241.50 127870 11113/2008 000645 SMART & FINAL INC Misc supplies:childrens museum 63.96 63.96 127871 11113/2008 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 2-29-657-2563 Various TCSD Meters 144.47 Nov 2-30-066-2889 Rancho Vista PED 18.65 Oct 2-20-798-3248 C. Museum 1,020.02 Oct 2-29-479-2981 Temecula Pkwy 107.96 Oct 2-05-791-8807 various mtrs 10,355.42 11,646.52 127872 11113/2008 007762 STANDARD INSURANCE Mandatory Life Insurance Payment 11,202.32 11,202.32 COMPANY 127873 11113/2008 003000 STATE WATER RESOURCES 10/1108-9130/09 permit:O.T. Infrstr 433.00 433.00 127874 11113/2008 003000 STATE WATER RESOURCES 10/1108-9130109 permit:Murr.Crk Trail 375.00 375.00 127875 11113/2008 003840 STRONGS PAINTING apply graffiti proof coating: pbsp bldgs 12,900.00 12,900.00 127876 11113/2008 012537 SUN CITY BICYCLES Police bicycle repair parts 57.09 57.09 127877 1111312008 000305 TARGET BANK BUS CARD SRVCS Misc Teen Room Supplies 69.98 Misc supplies:teen dance 133.36 203.34 127878 11113/2008 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 Union Dues Payment 5,480.00 5,480.00 127879 11113/2008 010046 TEMECULA VALLEY Sept'08 Bus. Imprv District Asmnts 43,838.79 43,838.79 CONVENTION & 127880 11113/2008 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & irrigation/plumbing supplies: parks 108.13 108.13 SUPPLY 127881 11113/2008 000316 THORNHILL, GARY Retirement Medical Payment 703.00 703.00 127882 11113/2008 006918 THORSON, TIM Reimb:MISAC conf 10118-10119108 21.66 21.66 127883 11113/2008 000668 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC DJ srvcs:fall skate park competition 525.00 525.00 Page:B apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 127884 11113/2008 010276 TW TELECOM Aug high speed internet City Hall 183.38 183.38 127885 11113/2008 007766 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT Oct undrgrnd svcs alert tickets:PW 313.50 313.50 127886 11113/2008 004981 UNISOURCE SCREENING & 10/16-31108 bckgmd investigations:hr 10.50 10.50 127887 11113/2008 000199 UNITED STATE TREASURY Support Payment Case # 614788413 250.00 250.00 127888 11113/2008 000325 UNITED WAY United Way Charities Payment 63.00 63.00 127889 11113/2008 004794 VALLEY WINDS COMMUNITY Valley Winds performance 1115108 381.71 381.71 127890 11113/2008 004261 VERIZON Oct xxx-1540 Old Town Prk Lot 87.94 Oct xxx-6620 general usage 32.87 Oct xxx-5180 79S Irrg Cntr 36.92 Oct xxx-7530 GIS Library 417.62 Oct xxx-8900 GIS Library 843.37 Oct xxx-4200 general usage 866.84 2,285.56 127891 11113/2008 004279 VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. Oct access-C. Mus.phone line 591.40 Oct access-CRC phone line 320.00 911.40 127892 11113/2008 008669 VONS recogn.awards:human resources 584.70 584.70 127893 11113/2008 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC Tree trimming srvcs:rncho highland 1,808.00 1,808.00 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 1,549,727.24 Page9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA 113 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 1,549,727.24 Page:10 ITEM NO. 3 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: General Liability Insurance Renewal PREPARED BY: Roberto Cardenas, Fiscal Services Manager RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the insurance policy renewal for general and excess liability insurance with St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company, in the amount $207,403, for the period of December 1, 2008 through December 1, 2009. BACKGROUND: In preparation for the expiration of the liability insurance policywith St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company on December 1, 2008, staff requested that the City's insurance broker, Brown & Brown, Inc., market the City's application for general liability insurance. In response, Brown & Brown, Inc. obtained proposals from the companies listed below (in the order of responsiveness as determined by the insurance broker). These premiums were quoted with a minimum self-insured retention (SIR) of $150,000 and range up to $250,000. In addition, each quote had an Aggregate of $5,000,000 and an Occurrence of 5,000,000. GENERAL LIABILITY Company Premium Self-Insured Retention St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. $159,965 $150,000 Lexington Insurance Company $187,000 $150,000 Munich American Insurance $200,000 $150,000 Illinois Union Insurance Company $219,000 $150,000 Genesis Insurance Company $300,000 $200,000 Everest National Insurance $160,000 $250,000 EXCESS LIABILITY Company Premium Princeton Excess & Sur p. Lines Ins. Co. $47,438 Markel/Evanston Insurance Company $56,719 New Market Insurance Company $49,500 St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. has an "A+" rating with a financial size category of "W" Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company has an "A+" rating, with a financial size category of "W" The proposal by St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company provides coverage of $10 million per event and $10 million aggregate, for a premium of $207,403 (general liability of $159,965 and excess liability of $47,438) with a self-insured retention of $150,000. Considering the City's increasing exposure associated with growth and increased activities, staff recommends the City accept the proposals of St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company, in the amounts noted, for coverage from December 1, 2008 through December 1, 2009. The schedule below reflects general and excess liability insurance premiums for the past seven years (with $10 million coverage). The liability premium forthis year represents a premium reduction over the previous years: Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Premium $268 217 $279 984 $274 063 $278 901 $252 779 $221 445 $207 403 Limits , , , , , , , As reflected above, although the City has continued to grow, the premiums have continued to decrease. FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds have been budgeted in the fiscal year 2008-2009 insurance fund. ATTACHMENTS: Proposal from St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company. PROPOSAL FROM ST. PAUL TRAVELERS PRINCETON EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY TERM: December 1, 2008 - December 1, 2009 FORMAT: Event/Occurrence NAMED INSURED: City of Temecula Temecula Community Services District Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula Temecula Public Financing Authority Industrial Development Authority SELF-INSURED RETENTION (SIR): $150,000 TOTAL LI MITSICOVE RAGE: $10,000,000 (per occurrence) ST. PAUL TRAVELERS PRIMARY COVERAGE AND PREMIUM $159,965 PUBLIC ENTITY GENERAL LIABILITY ....................INCLUDED MANAGEMENT LIABILITY .......................INCLUDED PUBLIC ENTITY LAW ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY ...........................INCLUDED PUBLIC ENTITY EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY ................INCLUDED PUBLIC ENTITY AUTO LIABILITY .....................................................INCLUDED PUBLIC ENTITY EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN ADMINISTRATION LIABILITY ............................................................INCLUDED PUBLIC ENTITY UMBRELLA I EXCESS LIABILITY .........................INCLUDED TERRORISM RISK INSURANCE ACT LIABILITY ....INCLUDED $5,000,000 Per Event or Wrongful Act or Combination of Event and Wrongful Act Excess Over Self-Insured Retention (SIR) Public Entity General (Including Bodily Injury, Property Damage, Personal Injury, Advertising Injury, Products & Completed Work Liability), Law Enforcement, Employment Practices, Management, Automobile, and Umbrella Liability $1,000,000 Per Wrongful Act Public Entity Employee Benefit Plan Administration Liability $1,000,000 Per Occurrence Health Care Professional (EMT's, Nurses, Social Services Professionals) $5,000,000 Total Limit (Aggregate) Management Liability $5,000,000 Total Limit (Aggregate) Employment Practices Liability $3,000,000 Total Limit (Aggregate) Employee Benefit Plan Administration Liability $5,000,000 Total Limit (Aggregate) General and Law Enforcement 1 PRINCETON EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY EXCESS FOLLOWING FORM OVER THE ABOVE $5,000,000 Occurrence/Aggregate $47,438 TOTAL COMBINED ANNUAL PREMIUM COST .................$207,403 2 ITEM NO. 4 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Proposed Southern California Edison's Triton Substation (at the request of Council Member Roberts) PREPARED BY: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the information presented (at the request of Council Member Roberts). BACKGROUND: In April 2008, Southern California Edison (SCE) presented to the community its plans for a new substation project (Triton substation). The project consists of constructing a new 115/12 kilovolt substation that would serve the cities of Temecula, Murrieta and unincorporated Riverside County. The purpose of this project is to strengthen SCE's network to maintain reliability and ensure that the region's electrical demands continue to be met based on population growth. When first presented to the community, SCE had identified a preferred site located in Temecula at the southwest corner of Nicolas Road and Los Choras Ranch Road. Following the presentation, and as a result of changes in the real estate market, SCE was able to research and identify other available sites that might meet their needs. SCE has now identified a new preferred site located at the southeast corner of Nicolas Road and Calle Medusa also in the City of Temecula (exhibit attached). The project at this new preferred site will require the construction of a new subtransmission line segment which is approximately 1,300 feet in length. The line will run east along the south side of Nicolas Road within existing SCE right-of-way. SCE will replace nine wood poles (each 55 feet in height) with seven engineered tubular steel poles. Each tubular steel pole is approximately 85 feet in height. The new substation will be an unattended, low profile substation. Landscaping around the four walls of the substation will be consistent with the surrounding landscaping to the extent practicable. As part of the project review and approval process, SCE must submit a Permit to Construct application to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for approval. In addition, the permit requires an environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The CPUC will review the application to ensure the project's compliance with all applicable laws and will seek public comment on the project. Once the process is complete, the CPUC will approve the project as presented, approve it with modifications or deny the project. Staff is currently working with Nicolas Valley residents on the development of a Community Plan for the Nicolas Valley area to enhance the rural character of the community through development of community design standards for improvements such as community entry signs, street signage, fencing, and trails. The proposed substation location raises concerns regarding the potential visual impact of this facility on the rural character of the area which the residents and City are trying to maintain. Staff has met with an Edison representative to discuss screening of the substation and staff is having on-going discussions regarding how best to landscape the site to provide adequate screening. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Site Plan Photographs City Comment Letter dated October 29, 2008 Simulation of view facing south on Nicolas Road and the corner of Calle Medusa towards the proposed site. Existing view facing south on Nicolas Road and the corner of Calle Medusa towards the proposed site. City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive • Temecula, CA 92590 • Mailing Address: P.0. Box 9033 • Temecula, CA 92589-9033 (951) 694-6400 • FAX (951) 694-6477 October 29, 2008 Mr. Viet Tran Region Manger Southern California Edison 26100 Menifee Road Romoland, CA 92585-9752 Subject: Triton Substation, 115/12KV Distribution Substation Dear Mr. Tran: The City of Temecula understands that the Southern California Edison Company has plans to file an application with the California Public Utilities Commission for authorization to build the Triton Substation located near the intersection of Calle Medusa and Nicolas Road within the City of Temecula. We understand that this will be a distribution station that will take a 115 KV line and step it down to 12KV for distribution to the Cities of Temecula, Murrieta and the southwest County of Riverside. We further understand that this will bean unmanned facility. The project site is in a rural area of the City and consequently will be highly visible. Both the substation proper and the proposed 85 foot high tubular steel suspension poles will create an aesthetic impact. The City has concerns over the height and color of these poles since they will be located at the gateway to the Nicolas Valley area which is currently undergoing a community planning effort to visually enhance the area. The project information for the physical substation states only that there will be landscaping but there are no existing landscape plans for the City to review or comment on. The City is also concerned about the environmental aspects of the proposed substation. Transformers and certain types of breakers contain oil which is necessary for both insulation and cooling. Our concern is that the transformers and breakers could contain mineral oil or worse, Polychlorinated Biphenyls. Further, Sulfur Hexafluoride, a powerful greenhouse gas, is another possible insulating gas that could be used in this substation. The City has not been in receipt of any information regarding this aspect of the substation. We would request information on this matter as well as the proposed containment for these potential contaminants. We assume that the substation yard will be gravel in order not to compromise the grounding of equipment. Herbicides will need to be applied in order to prevent the ground grid from being affected by vegetation. We would request information regarding the schedule and type of herbicides that will be used for this function. C:1Program Files (x86)1Neevia.ComlDocument Converterltemp1897844.doc Lastly, this substation will use transformers, circuit switches, and breakers which all produce noise. An operating substation produces sounds that can affect the local community from the constant hum produced by the stepping down of the high voltage electricity from the transmission line to the distribution level voltage. Noise is also emitted from the transformer cooling systems. The operation of other kinds of substation equipment produces noise that is infrequent and lasts only a few seconds. The City is requesting information on what efforts have been extended to insure noise attenuation and compatibility with the existing and future uses surrounding the proposed Triton Substation. The City appreciates the opportunity to comment on your proposed new substation. Please feel free to contact me at (951) 694-6400 should you have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Debbie Ubnoske Director of Planning cc City Council Shawn Nelson, City Manager Aaron Adams, Assistant City Manager Grant Yates, Deputy City Manager CAProgram Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converter\temp\897844.doc 2 ITEM NO. 5 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Second Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services Between the City of Temecula and Environmental Science Associates for Preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Dealership (PA07-0335) PREPARED BY: Katie Innes, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approved the Second Amendment to the Agreement with Environmental Science Associates in the amount of $14,000 for the completion of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Automobile Dealership, Planning Application Number PA07-0335. BACKGROUND: On January 22, 2008, the City Manager administratively approved a consultant services agreement with Environmental Science Associates (ESA) in the amount of $22,500 to start the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Mercedes Benz Automobile dealership. An amendment to this agreement was requested and approved by City Council on February 12, 2008, for an amount of $126,200. The maximum cost of this contract was $148,700. Since the approval of this original agreement it was determined that additional funds were required to bring the Supplemental EIR to completion, as several unanticipated issues were not included in the original scope of work. The cost of this additional work did not exceed $14,000. The total cost for the original and amended scope of work totals $162,700. FISCAL IMPACT: The maximum cost of the second amendment would be $14,000. Sufficient funds were received by the applicant September 4, 2008. ATTACHMENTS: Second Contract Amendment Attachment "A" - Scope of Work/Cost CC Staff Report dated February 12, 2008 with exhibits SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES (ESA) PREPARATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR MERCEDES BENZ DEALERSHIP THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of November 18, 2008 by and between the City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation, and ESA ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with the respect to the following facts and purposes: a. On January 7, 2008, the City and Consultant entered into that certain Agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consulting Services, in the amount of $22,500; b. On February 12, 2008, the Agreement was Amended to increase the payment in the amount of $126,200; C. The parties now desire to increase the payment for Consulting Services in the amount of $14,000 and amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 5.a. PAYMENT. Section 5a., Payment, of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and schedules and terms set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. The Second Amendment amount shall not exceed Fourteen Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($14,000.00) for additional Consulting Services for a total Agreement amount of One Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($162,700.00). 3. Exhibit "A" and "B" to the Agreement are hereby amended by adding thereto the items set forth on Attachment "A" to this Amendment, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Note: Title must be in bold type By: Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Environmental Science Associates Attn: Eric Ruby, Vice President/Regional Director 9191 Towne Center Drive, Suite 340 San Diego, Ca 92122 Phone: 858-638-0900 Fax: 858-638-0920 BY: (Signature) NAME: (Printed Named) TITLE: BY: (Signature) NAME: (Printed Named) TITLE: TWO SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR CORPORATIONS 2 ATTACHMENT A Attached hereto and incorporated herein is the additional scope of work and associated cost as provided by the Consultant. • The transportation analysis was more complicated than anticipated, which required meetings with, the City attorneys, City staff, and the transportation sub consultant. • Overall project delays due to the complexity of the transportation report and coordination with the City staff and the City attorneys regarding the incorporation of the French Valley Interchange and eventual connection of Ynez Road to Jackson Ave. to determine potential future impacts have also required more time to be spent on project management/coordination. • A separate Global Warming/Climate Change (Section 3.3) was required by the City and City attorneys. This separate section was not anticipated in the original scope of work. • Overall project delays and additional meetings/project management/coordination resulting from comments received from the City attorneys extended the originally anticipated administrative DSEIR review and editing phase. • Additional Spring 2008 bio survey of the Fletcher Jones Mercedes project site to verify that the site had no significant biological resources and that site vegetation was typical of disturbed areas and did not have any sensitive plant or animal species. • Additional unused copies of the DSEIR submittal were produced by the printers prior to public review of the document. These copies were produced to meet the City's scheduled deadline, but discontinued and unused as a result of additional comments received from the City's attorneys. • Substantial additional alternative scenarios and associated analyses were required by the City attorneys within Chapter 5 (Alternatives Analysis). These additional alternatives were not originally anticipated by City staff or ESA. • Attendance of an additional community meeting with residents of the Harveston Specific Plan area. • Numerous revisions and changes to the architecture plans by Gensler, updates to the landscape architecture plans by David Neault Associates and engineering plans by Fuscoe required corresponding changes and analyses within the environmental documents and technical reports. The following tasks/cost estimate outlines what we will need to complete the CEQA documentation process for the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Fletcher Jones Mercedes-Benz Dealership project. The cost for this additional work is not to exceed $14,000. The total cost for the original and amended scopes of work now totals $162,700. FLETCHER JONES MERCEDES-BENZ DEALERSHIP SEIR TASK COST Project Management Coordination $1,000 Draft SEIR Preparation $99,500 Final SEIR/Response to Comments /Mitigation Monitoring Program $1,500 Total - Contract Amendment Not to Exceed $94.000 a Document reproduction costs are variable, but can be reduced if copies of all documents are provided by the applicant's reproduction supplier which eliminates ESA's standard mark up on printing expenses. 3 Approvals A-Ir City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning DATE: February 12, 2008 SUBJECT: First Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services Between the City of Temecula and Environmental Science Associates for Preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for Planning Application PA07-0335 PREPARED BY: Christine Damko, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: Thatthe City Council approve the First Amendment to theAgreement with Environmental Science Associates in the amount of $126,200 for the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Automobile Dealership, Planning Application Number PA07-0335. BACKGROUND: On January 22, 2008, the City Manager administratively approved a consultant services agreement with Environmental Science Associates in the amount of $22,500 to start the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Mercedes Benz Automobile dealership. An amendment to this agreement is requested to complete the Supplemental EIR for an amount of $126,200. The total maximum cost of this contract would be $148,700. Environmental Science Associate's proposal consists of weekly meetings with staff, attendance of community meetings and public hearings, the preparation and research of project related studies, and the preparation of a Supplemental EIR and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the original agreement is $22,500. The First Amendment is for an amount not to exceed $126,200, for a total agreement amount not to exceed $148,700. Sufficient funds were received by the applicant and were deposited into TrustAccount# 13000 on January 7, 2008. ATTACHMENTS: First Amendment Attachment "A" - Description of Schedule/Scope of Work Attachment "B" - Cost 08-O% FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES ("ESA") PREPARATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE MERCEDES BENZ AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP (PA07-0335) THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of February 12, 2008 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("Agency") and Environmental Science Associates ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On January 7, 2008 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled Consultant Agreement between the City of Temecula and Consultant for project management/coordination/preliminary environmental consulting services in the amount of Twenty Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($22,500.00). B. The parties now desire to increase the payment for additional consulting services in the amount of One Hundred Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($126,200.00) and amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 5.a. Payment of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, for services described in Section B of Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit A or B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. The first amendment shall not exceed One Hundred Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($126,200.00) for additional consulting services for a total agreement amount of One Hundred Forty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($148,700.00). 3. "Exhibit "A" and "B" to the Agreement are hereby amended by adding the items set forth on Attachment "A" to this Amendment, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full." 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 1 GAPlanning@007 A07-0335 Mercedes Benz of Temecula CDPA%PIanninGlESA conedVimendmenl Cenlrad.reised.d00 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan WY. J¢nes, MMC, CAy Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT: Environmental Science Association Eric Ruby, Vice President/Regional Director 9191 Towne Center Drive, Suite 340 (858)638-0900 4,6~ Name: ~~1~ J 12t1J3~1 Title: j.{~ Name: '1, 0A7T EI Title: I aS I DZ^' (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) z GARannin9VD0APADI-0335 Memedas Benz of Temecula CDPA1PIamiig ESA wn1mcMmendmenl Contact-mvis .dw ATTACHMENT "A" DESCRIPTION OF SCHEDULE / SCOPE OF WORK AMENDMENT TO THE SCOPE OF WORK Scope of Work will now include: Task 2 - Draft Supplemental EIR ESA will prepare an Administrative Draft Supplemental EIR for review by the City of Temecula and the project team. The Administrative Draft SEIR will be prepared in accordance with the provisions of Sections 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines. It will include the above outlined specific CEQA-required sections and will incorporate the balance of the CEQA sections contained in the original EIR by reference. Notice of Preparation / Initial Study / Scoping The City of Temecula will prepare a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study for the proposed project to solicit input into the content of the SEIR, Based on our preliminary knowledge of the project the following environmental issues will be identified in the Initial Study/NOP as being evaluated in the SEIR: aesthetics, air quality, noise traffic and biological resources. The City of Temecula is responsible for all CEQA and public hearing noticing and advertising costs. The following outline summarizes the proposed organization of the Draft SEIR: Executive Summary: The executive summary is intended to encapsulate the entire Draft SEIR in order to provide a quick understanding of the project's potential impacts. It will identify, in an overview fashion, the proposed project under consideration and its objectives including any design features of the project which will be implemented. The executive summary will briefly discuss the environmental impacts associated with project implementation (whether beneficial or adverse, significant as well as insignificant), and will contain a summary analysis of the alternatives to the proposed project. In addition the executive summary will provide an overview of the courts action and how each writ of mandate issues will be addressed in the SEIR. Section 1.0 - Introduction: The introduction will include the purpose of an SEIR and procedural information. A detailed discussion of the Writ of Mandate and SEIR structure will be included in the introduction as well as a summary of the incorporation by reference process. In addition the introduction will summarize all of the impact analysis contained in the original Draft EIR. Section 2.0 -Project Description: The project description will be based on existing information and include the project location and setting, site characteristics, project objectives and the characteristics of the project. This section will also include the requested permits and approvals for the proposed project. In addition, this section will include a discussion of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects and activities in the surrounding areas that will serve as the basis for the cumulative impact analysis. Section 3.0 - Environmental Impact Analysis: For each potentially significant issue identified in the NOP/Initial Study, this section of the SEIR will include a discussion of the environmental setting, project impacts, cumulative impacts, project design features, level of significance before mitigation, mitigation measures, and the level of significance after mitigation. The assessment of impacts will be consistent with CEQA requirements and will utilize defined thresholds of significance to determine the impacts of the proposed project. ESA will be responsible for the preparation of the technical analysis with regard to the environmental issues identified in Task 3 below. Section 4.0 - Alternatives: An alternative site will be evaluated in the draft SEIR. Alternative site plan design schemes will be developed for the project, and will be incorporated into the draft SEIR. For the purposes of this proposal, a total of one alternative site in addition to the mandatory no project alternative will be considered in this section of the SEIR. For each alternative, a description of the alternative, consideration of the alternative's feasibility in relation to the basic objectives of the project (established by the applicant and the City), and a comparative analysis of the environmental impacts attributable to the alternative versus those associated with the proposed project for each of the environmental categories discussed above will be provided. Consideration of any further alternatives which may be required will result in modifications to the project budget. Section 5.0 - Long-term Implications of the Proposed Project: ESA will prepare the following CEQA-required analysis sections: significant irreversible environmental changes and growth-inducing impacts. Section 6.0 - Persons and Organizations Consulted/References: ESA will prepare this section of the SEIR to document all persons and sources that contributed to the environmental analysis. ESA will email individual EIR sections to the city as they are completed to expedite document review. Subsequent to review by City and the project team of the Screencheck Draft SEIR, ESA will prepare the Draft SEIR which incorporates final changes. We assume that changes will be minimal due to early consultation with the City, previous approval of technical reports by City personnel, and submittal of the Screencheck Draft SEIR. This scope of work assumes two rounds of screen check Draft SEIR review. Copies of the Draft SEIR, including technical appendices, will be provided for distribution. ESA will prepare the Notice of Completion prior to public circulation of the Draft SEIR and will assist the City in transmitting the required copies to the State Clearinghouse and required agencies. Task 3 - Final SEIR/Findings/Mitigation Monitoring At the conclusion of the public review period, ESA will work with City to obtain all comments received on the Draft SEIR. An Administrative Final SEIR containing proposed responses to comments and revisions to the Draft SEIR, where required, will be prepared once all comments are received. It is assumed that if required, the applicant's technical consultants will provide any and all necessary input to the responses to comment letters that may be required. It is difficult to predict public reaction to.the Draft SEIR at this time. For the purposes of this proposal, it is assumed that public reaction to the document will be limited to a maximum of 20 comment letters. In the event that the public comments on the Draft SEIR are greater than expected, ESA will meet with the city to adjust the work program/budget as necessary. An Administrative Final SEIR will be submitted to the City for review. Upon incorporation of comments on -the Administrative Final SEIR, ESA will prepare a Screencheck Final SEIR for submittal to the City and project team. ESA assumes that comments on the Screencheck Final SEIR will be minimal, due to early consultation with the City and the applicant when comments were received. This scope of work assumes two rounds of screen check Final SEIR review. Subsequent to City review of the Screencheck Final SEIR, ESA will prepare the Final SEIR, including findings. It is understood that ESA would only prepare the Statement of Overriding Considerations, which incorporates final changes, as an optional task. ESA will assist the City in transmitting the required copies to the State Clearinghouse, required agencies and commentators. ESA will prepare a detailed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) in accordance with Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines in response to any significant environmental impacts that may be identified to result from the proposed development. The MMRP will be submitted with the Draft SEIR and will be finalized once the FEIR is certified. Environmental Issues Based on the knowledge of the project, the following specific issues will be evaluated and addressed in the SEIR: Landform and Aesthetics The proposed project includes the construction of a new automobile dealership and may result in substantial visual changes to the project area. Tasks Review the architectural and site plans design prepared for the proposed project. Analyze the existing visual character of the project site. Compare the height and massing of the proposed project with surrounding land uses and structures. Discuss consistency of the proposed project with visual quality and design policies and guidelines of the City General Plan and Adopted Harveston Specific Plan and other plans and studies, as appropriate. Evaluate the project site for potential nighttime light and glare impacts on nearby uses. Prepare a visual simulation of the proposed project from adjacent residential areas Discuss measures included in the proposed project to mitigate potentially significant visual impacts. As appropriate, identify additional or alternative measures to avoid or reduce any potentially significant effects to a less-than-significant level. Determine the significance of potential project impacts on the existing character of the area. Air Quality Analysis Site preparation and construction activities, as well as operational characteristics, could generate substantial short term temporary and long term operational emissions of particulates and other criteria air pollutants that may exceed significance thresholds. Stationary and mobile source emissions associated with the project may result in project emissions that exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds of significance. These new emissions, added to existing sources of air pollution and cumulative development planned for the area, could contribute to the degraded air quality within the Air Basin. Tasks Review the local and regional climate, meteorology, and topography as they affect the accumulation. or dispersion of pollutants Identify federal, state, and local regulatory agencies responsible for air quality management, and briefly summarize pertinent federal, state, and local air quality policies, regulations and standards as they pertain to the proposed project site. Summarize current air quality conditions and recent trends (last three years) in the project area on the basis of the annual air quality monitoring data summaries published by the Air Resources Board (ARB). Discuss SCAQMD projections of future air quality trends over the life of the project as presented in the most recent Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), and the assumptions upon which the projections are based. Identify any policies or goals embodied in the AQMP that would apply to the proposed project site. Identify air pollutant-sensitive land uses or activities in the vicinity of the project site or along roads providing access to the project site. Describe the SCAQMD air quality impact significance thresholds for new developments. Discuss, at an appropriate level of detail, the potential for short-term emissions of criteria air pollutants (those for which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has established ambient air quality standards) generated by construction activities. Use URBEMIS 2007, version 9.2 air quality model to prepare a daily inventory of criteria air pollutant and carbon dioxide emissions for the proposed project. Discuss the potential for air pollutant emissions from development in the project area to adversely affect sensitive land uses or activities, or to impede attainment of state or federal air quality goals. Discuss conformance of the project with the AQMP, and determine whether identified air quality impacts would meet any SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Summarize statewide planning efforts relative to climate change and the generation of greenhouse gas emissions, including Assembly Bill 32, Executive order S-01-07, and the reporting and recommendations to date of the California EPA Climate Action Team. Present discussion about how the California Code of Regulations Title 24 requires the construction of new energy efficient buildings that result in less greenhouse gas emissions. Identify the greenhouse gas analysis recommendations of the Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) as presented in its Alternative Approaches to Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Climate Change in CEQA Documents, recently finalized on June 29, 2007. Recommend AEP endorsed feasible mitigation measures to help the proposed dealership reduce greenhouse gas without any major project redesigns, such as encouraging recycling, landscaping recommendations, increased building efficiency, use of energy efficient appliances, use of highly efficient compact fluorescent lighting, worker carpooling, and pedestrian friendly design features, to reduce the project's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. Identify cumulative development in the area (i.e., development that has been approved or is in-process) and discuss the potential for cumulative development to adversely affect air quality or impede attainment of air quality goals. Identify practical, feasible and clear measures to mitigate the adverse impacts of the project on air quality that are identified in the analysis. Mitigation measures will be developed in consultation with the Authority as appropriate. Quantify project impacts and evaluate whether mitigation measures would reduce the impacts below a level of significance. Identify the parties responsible for implementing each measure. Incorporate standard mitigations provided by the City, as appropriate. ESA has been listed by the California Climate Registry as a firm qualified to perform baseline emission inventories for greenhouse gases. ESA has been implementing greenhouse gas emissions analyses for the past eight months and has responded to comments from local air districts and the state attorney general. Acoustical Analysis Noise generated by construction activities and operational noise from the completed project would increase noise levels as a result of an increase in local traffic and operational activities. This analysis will be based on the traffic report and construction equipment mix. Tasks Briefly describe and discuss existing major noise sources at the project site, particularly the noise from adjacent roadways. Describe the existing noise environment on the basis of up to four short-term measurements carried out by ESA staff. Briefly summarize state and local noise policies, regulations, and standards as they pertain to the proposed project. Identify noise-sensitive land uses or activities in the vicinity of the project site, and along roads providing access to the project site, that would be affected by development of the proposed project. Discuss the potential for on-site construction activities to affect nearby residences and other sensitive receptors. This discussion will be based upon proposed construction activities and scheduling information provided by the applicant. Otherwise, this discussion will be based upon peak noise levels generated by an assumed standard mix of construction equipment and activities. Using the Federal Highway Administration's Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108), ESA will calculate existing, future base case (i.e., without the project), future project case (i.e., with the project), roadside noise levels along road segments that would be affected by motor vehicle traffic generated by the project, to determine whether project vehicular traffic would adversely affect adjacent land uses. Identify cumulative development in the project area (i.e., development that is under formal consideration or has been approved, and discuss the potential for cumulative development to adversely affect noise-sensitive land uses. Identify practical, feasible and clear measures to mitigate the adverse impacts of the projecton noise. Mitigation measures will be developed in consultation with the lead agency and responsible agencies as appropriate. Develop and discuss measures to mitigate potentially significant noise impacts. Biological Assessment I MSHCP Conformance Report ESA will use available information sources, maps, habitat conversation plans and existing project region to document existing biological site. ESA will utilize the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California to develop a list of threatened and endangered and other sensitive species with potential to occur within, or in habitats adjacent to, the project area. ESA will also obtain official special status species lists for the project area from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. including aerial photographs, topographic biological and planning documents in the resources onsite and in the vicinity of the Tasks ESA will conduct a field survey to detail vegetation and wildlife habitat in the project area to identify the potential for special-status species, jurisdictional waters/wetlands and other sensitive biological resources; including wildlife movement corridors, to be present onsite. Potential special-status species that may be associated with habitats on, or adjacent to, the project site include: burrowing owl, California Gnatcatcher, Quino checker spot butterfly and other riparian bird species. For each special-status species for which suitable habitat has been identified in the project area, the following specific information will be collected or estimated: Distribution and abundance onsite - observed or expected; Historic and recent status within the area; Habitat quality; Ecology, behavior, and habitat requirements; and Aspects of biology of each species which could be relevant to the proposed uses of the project site Once the above biological resources assessment is completed, it will be incorporated into an MSHCP conformance report / HANS application for submittal to the RCA. Traffic and Circulation ESA will coordinate the traffic study to be prepared by DKS and will summarize findings in the SEIR document. The traffic impact analysis will include an evaluation of construction related and operational effects. Tasks DKS Associates (DKS) will prepare a traffic impact analysis (TIA) of the potential traffic and circulation impacts related to the development of a new car full-service dealership (proposed project). Based on a cursory trip generation analysis using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation, 7" Edition, the proposed 65,561 square foot Mercedes Benz dealership would generate approximately 2,186 daily trips, 134 a.m. peak hour trips, and 173 p.m. peak hour trips on a typical weekday. For a typical Saturday, the proposed project would generate approximately 1,379 daily trips and 195 peak hour trips. The TIA will be prepared consistent with the requirements of the City of Temecula's General Plan Circulation Element and the County of Riverside's current Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation Guide. DKS will conduct a scoping session with the City's Traffic Engineer prior to initiating the TIA to ensure that potential on-site circulation impacts, off-site traffic impacts, and parking impacts are adequately addressed in the TIA. For purposes of this scope of work, it is assumed that all new roadway and intersection traffic counts will need to be collected. DKS will contract with a qualified traffic count firm to collect 24-hour machine counts for up to four (4) roadway segments; and weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic counts at up to eight (8) intersections. Due to the upcoming holidays, traffic counts will not be collected until the second week of January 2008. The on-site circulation analysis will be based on the City's development standards and will ensure that vehicles would have adequate and efficient circulation on-site. The parking analysis will focus on the ability for the proposed project to meet the parking requirements called for in the City's Municipal Code. For any significant traffic or parking impacts created by the proposed project, DKS will work with the City and the project development team to determine appropriate and feasible mitigation measures. In addition, DKS will attend up to three (3) meetings in support of the TIA. These meetings may include project team meetings, or public hearings. Summarize the traffic analysis which is anticipated to include a description of project area roadways, existing traffic volumes and intersection conditions, applicable plans and policies, construction and operational impacts, and mitigation measures, if required. Cumulative Impacts Implementation of the proposed project could contribute to cumulative impacts in the region. 'Cumulative impacts and mitigation measures will be documented and will be easily differentiated from project specific impacts and mitigation measures. Tasks Compile a list of projects in the project vicinity in cooperation with the City and county and based on information provided in the traffic report. Address the cumulative impacts of the proposed project in conjunction with other uses, existing and proposed, in the surrounding area. Identify measures that would reduce cumulative impacts of the project to the City. Alternative Site Analysis Pursuant to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, an alternative site or alternative location to the currently proposed site/location will be identified, evaluated and compared and contrasted with the impacts associated with the proposed project site. Tasks Clearly identify the process employed for selection of the alternative site and document impacts associated with the alternative site for each environmental factor contained in the original Draft EIR. Document the environmental setting, and impacts associated with implementation of the project at the alternative site. Identify any required mitigation measures. Determine if implementation of the project at the alternative site will reduce or eliminate impacts associated with the proposed project at its currently proposed location. If the alternative site does not reduce identified environmental effects and/or is not feasible, provide the basis for rejection of the alternative. Schedule We understand that an aggressive schedule is required for this project and that certification of the SEIR by the City will be the critical path for project scheduling purposes. The Administrative Draft SEIR can be completed within two weeks of receipt of the final land plan and all technical studies, if the applicant and ESA are confident that no substantial changes to technical studies would occur in response to City comments. The start to finish CEQA process for the SEIR is approximately 6 months. The following schedule (Table 1) supports achievement of the major milestones of the project, and the certification of the environmental documentation. TABLE 7 SCHEDULE - FLETCHER JONES MERCEDES BENZ DEALERSHIP SEIR TASK DURATION Task 2-Draft SEIR Preparation Prepare Administrative Draft SEIR and Technical Studies 8 weeks' City/Project Team Review 2 week ° Prepare Screencheck Draft SEIR 2 week City/Project Team Review 2 week ° Prepare Draft SEIR 1 weeks Draft SEIR Public Review Period 45 days Task 3 -Final SEIRIResponse to Comments Prepare Administrative Final SEIR 3weeks City/Project Team Review 1 week ° - Prepare Screencheck Final SEIR 0 week City/Project Team Review 1 week ° Prepare Final SEIR D week Submit Final SEIR For Certification 1 day ' This preparation period is dependent on receipt of all documents and electronic information. Preparation of the document may overlap with other tasks and sections will be submitted prior to completion of entire document, in order to meet schedule requirements. ° This review period is just an estimate, dependent on City schedule. ` Assumes that technical report authors will provide responses to comments on respective technical issues within two weeks. ° Initial work on technical reports will begin during the NOP process in order to save time. Technical reports will be completed within about a week of receipt of traffic report. ATTACHMENT "B" COST Cost Estimate The following cost estimate (Table 2) has been prepared to outline estimated costs to complete the above outlined tasks. Reimbursable expenses, including travel/parking, etc. will be invoiced in accordance with ESA standard rate schedule. Our services will be billed monthly on a time-and-materials basis. Should the need arise for additional professional services beyond those set forth in the scope of services due to revisions to the project, the regulatory environment, requirements exceeding our specified budget allowances, ESA will only undertake such additional services upon receipt of authorization by the City of Temecula. TABLE 2 COST ESTIMATE - FLETCHER JONES MERCEDES BENZ DEALERSHIP SEIR TASK COST Task 2 - Draft SEIR a $ 37,500 Air Quality Assessment $ 6,500 Acoustical Assessment $ 5,500 Biological Assessment/ MSHCP Conformance Report $ 13,500 Traffic Report $ 29,200 Visual Simulation $ 7,500 Task 3 - Final SEIR/Response to Comments / Mitigation Monitoring Program $ 15,500 Reimbursable Expenses (in-house copying, mileage, postage, etc.) a $ 1,250 Document Reproduction - Assumes 75 Copies of DSEIR & 25 copies of the $ 9,750 Final SEIR & misc. reproduction Total $126,200 Cost Estimate assumes that the following will be provided by the city or applicant : topography, aerial imagery, land plan, market study, grading and earthwork, preliminary hydrology, and Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment and hazardous materials assessment. Document reproduction. costs are variable, but can be reduced if copies of all documents are provided by the. city's reproduction supplier which eliminates ESA's standard mark up on printing expenses. ITEM NO. 6 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Tim Thorson, Director of Information Systems DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Procurement of ShoreTel Phone System - Civic Center RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize 1. The purchase of ShoreTel Phone equipment for the total amount of $ 128,906.00, which includes shipping and applicable sales tax. 2. The City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $12,890.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: The City has been migrating from the existing legacy NEC PBX telephone system to the ultra modern ShoreTel Voice over Internet Protocol (IP) (VOIP) system. Remote City facilities, e.g., CRC, History Museum, Senior Center, etc. have already been scheduled to receive the new phone system through the operating budget process. This purchase completes the citywide phone upgrade, by procuring the phone system for the new Old Town Civic Center now. Procuring and installing the phone system upgrade in the current City Hall this fiscal year will allow the IS department to train staff on the new system well in advance of the move to the new Civic Center and ensures a smooth transition when relocating City services to the new Civic Center. The City's primary phone numbers will remain the same and the entire phone system will simply be relocated to the new Civic Center when the new facility is ready. ShoreTel VOI P phone equipment is available on the PEPPM Multistate Purchasing Contract. These competitively, quoted prices are provided by Conduit Networks an authorized PEPPM contractor. Under this agreement, it would be within the City's discretion to take advantage of the pricing on another governmental entity contract. The contract is made available for use by State of California agencies and any city, county or local governmental agency empowered to expend public funds. Therefore, this purchase would be exempt from competitive bidding requirements. Staff's research has determined that the PEPPM pricing is the most competitive. Also, it has been determined that the PEPPM program is consistent with the City's procurement policies and regulations and that it is used by many cities as an industry standard. FISCAL IMPACT: This purchase is included in the Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E) budget for the new Civic Center. The Civic Center project is included in the FY2009-2013 Cl P and is funded with Capital Project Reserves and Certificates of Participation (COP's). Adequate funds are available in the project account, No. 210-165-751-5601, for this request. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Quote from the PEPPM Public Sector Schedule 2. Project Location 3. Project Description City of Temecula Shoretel Professional Services for City Hall ~M 2, 0Etarn IWIF", .1 etwo*5 SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS Provided for: Tim Thorson City of Temecula Customer Account Attn: Accounts Payable P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Guy Reams Conduit Networks Inc. 27247 Madison Ave, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92590 www.conduitnetworks.com main: 951.693.3000 fax: 951.296.0239 EPPH Technology Bidding and Purchasing Program w .pePWn.org Summary City of Temecula needs to upgrade current phone system to Shoretel through a Pre-Bid multistate bidding contract. This quotation is provided under the PEPPM pre-bid contract for Shoretel Enterprise Phone Systems. Proposed Objectives for City of Temecula Shoretel System for City Hall Obiective 1: Provide ShoreGear Switches Investment. $17,329.50 Strategies: ■ ShoreGear 24A - 1 U full width, Max Capacities - 24 Analog extensions. No IP Phone or trunk support. (requires Shore Tel 8 or later) ■ (2) ShoreGear T1 k - I U half width, Max Capacities - 1 T1, 0 IP phones, 0 Analog exts, 0 LS only trunks, 0 Universal ports. Digital trunk support only. Requires one Tray (SKU 10223) for every two units. (requires Shore Tel 8 or later) ■ (3) ShoreGear 90 - 1 U half width, Max Capacities - 90 IP phones, 4 Analog exts, 8 LS trunks, 0 Universal ports. Not all maximum capacities can be reached at the same time. Requires one Tray (SKU 10223) for every two units. ■ (3) Kit, rack mounting tray, for ShoreGear Switch 1 U half width, holds two 1 U half width switches Measure: Supply ShoreGear Switching Products to accomdate added users, and analog devices 10/28/08 Breams greams@concluitnetworks.com Objective 2: Provide ShorePhones Investment: $44,460.00 Strategies: ■ (5) ShorePhone IP565 - Black (Version 7.5 build 12.13.1328 or later) ■ (12) ShorePhone IP560 - Black ■ (163) ShorePhone IP230 -Black (6.1 or later) Measure: Supply phones to accomodate added users Objective 3: Provide Shoretel Licensina Investment: $39,803.08 Strategies: ■ ShoreWare Remote Web Reporting License (License to enable generation of CDR reports via the web at remote locations) ■ (180) Extension & Mailbox License ■ (25) Extension-only License (requires Shore Tel 5.2 or higher) ■ Shoretel Warranty and Software Support Measure: Supply software keys with shipment of product Total Investment for City of Temecula Shoretel System for City Hall Total: $109,466.00 (includes all applicable taxes and shipping) As per PEPPM 2008 - www.peppm.org Orders can be placed through PEPPM via: www.epylon.org or FAX to 800-636-3779 Orders should be addressed to: Archer Technology Group c/o Conduit Networks Inc. 27247 Madision Ave Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92590 10/28/08 greams greams@conduitnetworks.com 1SPEPPAl' Technology Bidding and Purohaaing Program viw "PPm.org Summary City of Temecula requires professional services for implementaiton of the Shoretel Phone System through a Pre-Bid multistate bidding contract. This quotation is provided under the PEPPM pre-bid contract for Shoretel Enterprise Phone Systems. Proposed Objectives for City of Temecula Shoretel Professional Services for City Hall Investment. $19,440.00 Strategies: ■ (12) Full Day - PLUS T&E (92010) Measure: Provide documentation, training, and system that meets IS department approval upon completion of professional services Total Investment for City of Temecula Shoretel Professional Services for City Hall Total: $19,440.00 (includes all applicable takes and shipping) 10/28/08 greams greams9conduitnetworks.com ITEM NO. 7 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Aaron Adams, Assistant City Manager DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Approving an Amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A Transportation Expenditure Plan (TIP) PREPARED BY: Tamra Middlecamp, Senior Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN BACKGROUND: The Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance was approved by 78.9 percent of voters in Riverside County in November of 1988. The purpose of Measure A is to help relieve traffic congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, provide funds to match developers' fees and State and local moneys for transportation and plan adequately for traffic by providing essential countywide transportation improvements. The Transportation Expenditure Plan (TIP) identifies State Highway 111 from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State highway and major regional road project funds are to be appropriated and expended. However, since the passage of Measure A, the designation of Highway 111 has been changed as portions have been relinquished by the State and are now maintained by local jurisdictions. Additionally, Highway 111 was realigned in the City of Palm Springs. These changes have created the necessity for the adoption of an amendment to the TI P, as the TI P is no longer current as it applies to Highway 111. Furthermore, in order for Measure A Highway Funds to be effectively expended to carry out the voter intent for highway and roadway improvements, an amendment to the TIP is necessary. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) recently adopted a resolution initiating an amendment to the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan. Following such action, it was determined that one of the descriptions for the new segments to be included within the Coachella Valley portion of the TIP was incomplete. Specifically, the description provided in Section 2(A)(1) of the resolution inadvertently left out the segment of Gene Autry Trail between East Palm Canyon Drive and Ramon Road. Therefore, a revised resolution was adopted by RCTC on October 8, 2008. In order for the amendment to the TIP to become effective, the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County and a majorityof the cities within Riverside County constituting a majority of the incorporated population must approve the proposed amendment. RCTC has requested that the City of Temecula approve this amendment. This amendment will add the segment of Gene Autry Trail to the TIP. It is not approving any projects. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: Map. RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance, Ordinance No. 88-1 ("Measure A") was approved by 78.9 percent of the voters in Riverside County in November of 1988; and WHEREAS, the purpose of Measure A is to help relieve traffic congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, provide funds to match developers' fees and State and local moneys for transportation and plan adequately for traffic by providing essential countywide transportation improvements; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Expenditure Plan, also referred to as the Transportation Improvement Plan ("TIP"), was attached as Exhibit B to Measure A and was incorporated therein by reference; and WHEREAS, the TIP identifies State Highway 111 from Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State highway and major regional road project funds are to be appropriated and expended ("Measure A Highway Funds"). A map depicting the then-current Highway 111 designation between Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard (the "Original Alignment") was part of the TIP; and WHEREAS, since the passage of Measure A, the designation of Highway 111 has been changed as portions of the Original Alignment have been relinquished by the State and are now maintained by local jurisdictions. Additionally, Highway 111 was realigned in the City of Palm Springs and now is located on Vista Chino Drive between Indian Canyon Drive and Gene Autry Trail, as well as the segment of Gene Autry Trail from Vista Chino Drive to East Palm Canyon Drive; and WHEREAS, changes to the alignment of Highway 111 has raised questions regarding the eligibility of segments relinquished by the State to local agencies for Measure A Highway Funds. Furthermore, additional segments of Highway 111 not included in the Original Alignment have been requested to be eligible for receipt of Measure A Highway Funds; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 240302(d), the TIP may only be amended by the following process: (1 } Initiation of amendment by the commission, reciting findings of necessity for the amendment. (2) Approval by the Board of Supervisors. (3) Approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the incorporated population. WHEREAS, the changes to the designation of Highway 111 have created the necessity for the adoption of an amendment to the TIP, as the TIP is no longer current as it applies to Highway 111. Furthermore, in order for Measure A Highway Funds to be effectively expended to carry out the voter intent for highway and roadway improvements, an amendment to the TIP is necessary; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on October 8, 2008, the Board of Directors of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission Board") adopted a resolution initiating an amendment to the TIP, including the required findings of necessity for the amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula ("City Council") has considered the proposed amendment, and approves said amendment to the TIP; and WHEREAS, the Public Utilities Code section 240302, under which Measure A and the TIP were adopted, states that generated tax revenues may be expended "for the planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of- way acquisition;" and WHEREAS, the TIP states that the "scope of highway and commuter rail projects to be implemented is to be determined through required environmental analysis and full consideration of alternatives" including "public participation during the environmental analysis process;" and WHEREAS, the amendment to the TIP does not approve construction of any transportation improvements but amends the TIP to reflect current conditions in the Coachella Valley; and WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15378(b)(4), the amendment of the TIP is not a "project" subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the amendment merely creates a government funding mechanism and is not a commitment to any specific project; and WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15004, the amendment of the TIP is not subject to CEQA because there is insufficient information about the transportation improvements to conduct meaningful environmental review at this time; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the TIP, all appropriate environmental review will be completed prior to any future approval of a specific transportation improvement; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by reference as though fully set forth herein. Section 2. Approval of Amendment to the TIP. The City Council hereby approves the following amendment to the TIP, as initiated by the Commission Board: A. Inclusion of Segments to Coachella Valley Portion of TIP. That portion of the TIP entitled "Coachella Valley" Section 1, entitled "State Highways and Major Regional Road Project," of the aforementioned portion of the TIP, shall be amended to include the segments of highway, and/or roadway described below and as shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. The total amount of funding allocated to the Coachella Valley shall not be changed. 1. In Palm Springs, from the intersection of East Palm Canyon Drive and Gene Autry Trail, north on Gene Autry Trail to Vista Chino Drive, thence west on Vista Chino Drive to North Palm Canyon Drive, thence northerly on the existing Highway 111 alignment to Interstate 10; 2. In Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to Interstate 10; and 3. In Indio, from the intersection of Highway 111 and Indio Boulevard, southeasterly on Indio Boulevard and Grapefruit Boulevard, the existing and former Highway 111 alignment, through the City of Coachella and Riverside County to the intersection of State Route 195 (Avenue 66). B. Revision to Map Included as Part of TIP. The map attached as part of the TIP shall be amended to include those segments of highway and/or roadway as shown in the map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit "A.71 Section 3. Approval of Findings. The City Council hereby approves the findings of the Commission Board related to adoption of the amendment to the TIP. Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective on the date of its adoption. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendment to the TIP set forth herein shall not be effective unless and until approved by the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County, and a majority of the cities within Riverside County. Section 5. Notice of Exemption. The City Council hereby finds that adoption of this Resolution is not subject to CEQA and authorizes and directs City staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of Riverside County and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) days following adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [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. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Exhibit A Vlap depicting new segments of highway and/or roadway to be included in the TIP DESERT HOT SPRINGS ;et Dillon Rd A v 4 4 1 3 ~ s m 1 Ga CATHEDRAL - z CITY a' Ysta Chino. E E Ramon Rtl A 8 Geraltl Fortl Dry a I ' ei m c PALM SPRINGS Fr ank Sinatra Dr 3 8 rv cwhDm PALM C & DESERT ' RANCHO a - MIRAGE -d . .d.. D, I -IO INDIAN "TLLS m ` Av....5A 3 COACHELLA Ae.es LA QIHNTA Aimort Diva Mecca 66th Ave SALTON SEA Miles 0 1.5 3 6 9 12 Legend Original Highway 111 -Alignment - 1988 Highway 111 Ramon Rd to Indio Blvd Highway 111 1-10 to Ramon Rd Indio Blvd to 1-10 Highway 111 Indio Blvd to State Highway 195 Highway Routes Major Roads N W +E S Map by Nicholas Peihl, Coachella Valley Association of Governments Disdaimen Maps and data are to be used for reference purposes only. Map features are approximate, and are not necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering standards. CVAG makes no warranty or guarantee as to the content (the source is often third party), accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any of the data provided, and assumes no legal responsibility for the informafion contained on this map. Any use of this product with respect to accuracy and precision shall be the sole responsibility of the user. ITEM NO. 8 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Southern California Edision and Time Warner Cable Easements within Margarita Park PREPARED BY: Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Grant an Easement to Southern California Edison for construction, operation and maintenance of facilities within Margarita Park; 2. Grant an Easement to Time Warner Cable for construction, operation and maintenance of facilities within Margarita Park. BACKGROUND: The City Council approved a Ground Lease Agreement for the YMCA of Riverside City and County, Inc. on January 14, 2003. The first amendment to this agreement was approved January 8, 2008. The Ground Lease Agreement and the First Amendment allows the YMCA to construct a recreational facility within Margarita Park. The development plan for the YMCA facility was approved by the Planning Commission on April 4, 2007. Grading began in January. The approval of this easement will allow Southern California Edison and Time Warner Cable access to construct and maintain service to the YMCA building. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Southern California Edison Grant of Easement Time Warner Cable Grant of Easement RECORDING REQUESTED BY SOUnl[RN CALnORMA EDISON WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY Corporate Real Estate 14799 Chestnut Street Westminster, CA 92683-5240 Attn: Distribution/TRES NON- EXCLUSIVE GRANT OF EASEMENT ABOVE DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX$NONE (VALUE AND CONSIDERATION LESS THAN $100.00) San Jacinto Valley 6477.2000 8-2247 6777.2590 74526 SCE Company SIG. OF DECIARANT OR AGENT DETERMINING TA% FIRM. NAME EIM 490-1725-1 APN : 921-300006 APPROVED: CORPORATE REAL ESTATE SLS/BT By 10/O6/08 - 77 - CITY OF TEMECULA, a general law city (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), hereby grants to SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, a corporation, its successors and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"), a non- exclusive easement and right of way to construct, use, maintain, operate, alter, add to, repair, replace, reconstruct, inspect and remove at any time and from time to time underground electrical supply systems and communication systems (hereinafter referred to as "systems"), consisting of wires, underground conduits, cables, vaults, manholes, handholes, and including above- ground enclosures, markers and concrete pads and other appurtenant fixtures and equipment necessary or useful for distributing electrical energy and for transmitting intelligence by electrical means, in, on, over, under, across and along that certain real property in the County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows: FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE EXHIBIT "A°ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. FOR SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. This legal description was prepared pursuant to Sec. 8730(c) of the Business & Professions Code. Grantor agrees for himself, his heirs and assigns, not to erect, place or maintain, nor to permit the erection, placement or maintenance of any building, planter boxes, earth fill or other structures except walls and fences on the above described real property. The Grantee, and its contractors, agents and employees, shall have the right to trim or cut tree roots as may endanger or interfere with said systems and shall have free access to said systems and every part thereof, at all times, for the purpose of exercising the rights herein granted; provided, however, that in making any excavation on said property of the Grantor, the Grantee shall make the same in such a manner as will cause the least injury to the surface of the ground around such excavation, and shall replace the earth so removed by it and restore the surface of the ground to as near the same condition as it was prior to such excavation as is practicable. EXECUTED this day of , 2008. GRANTOR: CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation Michael S. Naggar Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney October 06, 2008 Sheet I of 1 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION EASEMENTS IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON BEING A CERTAIN PORTION OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING THE PORTION OF LOT 14 AS SHOWN ON TRACT MAP NO. 3334, FILED IN BOOK 54, PAGES 25 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER, OF SAID COUNTY, INCLUDED WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 12.00 FEET WIDE, 6.00 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY AND 6.00 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF THE REFERENCE LINE WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 14, ALSO BEING A POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARGARITA ROAD (88.00 FEET WIDE); THENCE LEAVING SAID CORNER SOUTH 34054'52" WEST A DISTANCE OF 273.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 14; THENCE LEAVING SAID POINT SOUTH 55005'08" EAST A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A"; THENCE SOUTH 55005'08" EAST A DISTANCE OF 16.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINATION. ALSO A STRIP OF LAND 6.00 FEET WIDE, THE CENTERLINE OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE AFORE DESCRIBED POINT "A"; THENCE NORTH 34°54'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 6.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; "THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT SOUTH 55°05'08" EAST 5.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 34°35'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT NORTH 81003'37" EAST A DISTANCE OF 150.53 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT NORTH 37°43'20" EAST A DISTANCE OF 13.40 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINATION. THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP ARE TO BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED TO JOIN AT THE ANGLE POINTS. CONTAINS: 2,375.58 SQ. FT. 0.055 ACRES, MORE OR LESS SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD. EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED AND HERETO BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. THIS WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. Dated: ne, 2008 Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E,#18619 Exp. 6-30-09 O QQ,OFESS/~~Q No. G-18616 n Exp - -6,~ s~gTF C'/ V 1 ~ O DSE08213353 6477-2000/8-2247 6777-2590/7-2526 SCALE: 1" = 200' EXHIBIT "B" Pao aqF < No, 0-1866119 Exp...--.ua~sfr \F 0/v OF CF~~\F . r - A OARIT AD C7 A RO S1 TE I VICINITY MAP I EXISTING Nor ro / L BUILDING 1 i DETAIL AREA SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 / Iz i L oIOO 7 LEASE PROPERTY BOUNDARY YMCA p ci / PER MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE 111.. RECORDED 07/11/2008 ~If DOC. #2008-0380475, O.R. ham/ RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOT 14 TRACT NO. 3334 M.B. 54 / 25-30 i / RIVERSIDE COUNTY i i / PROPERTY BOUNDARY i N88'23'it"E LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L1 123.00' N81-55'10"W CURVE TABLE kEji~ LENGTH RADIUS DELTA 270.00' 2044.00' 07'34'06" LEGEND r-l DENOTES L~J SCE EASEMENT AREA APPROX. AREA = 2375.58 SQ. FT. P.O.C. = POINT OF COMMENCEMENT T.P.O.B. = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING SHEET 1 OF 2 Dated: ,2008 Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09 \ nB EXHIBIT n SHEET 2 OF 2 ~70G°~~i Cpl ~ ~ ~ SCALE: 1" = 50' Ll R R 17' li 0 NW COR. LOT 14 (P.O.C.) . N37 43 20"E PROPERTY 13 40': BOUNDARY 53' 37 __15053~J_- v--'/ //It 00/~ i hs• ,.S\ ry00~ j / a 4 LOT 14 41 TRACT NO. 3334 h`1' / M.B. 54 / 25-30 a~ RIVERSIDE COUNTY i i S55'05'08"E ~ss3s \ 4 T.P.O.B. as 8F S55'05'08"E ~QFCSSjp 16.00' //POINT "A, No. 13-18619 ~ / C LEASE PROPERTY BOUNDARY YMCA E x p ~ - PER MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE ,e / \ \ RECORDED 07/11/2008 J' \ DOC. #2008-0380475, O.R. \ \ RIVERSIDE COUNTY ~TF 0 \06~~ \ C Ei~ -EXISTING BUILDING A A V Dated: ~ ,2008 III' \ r7 DENOTES G_J SCE EASEMENT AREA APPROX. AREA = 2375.58 SQ. FT. P.O.C. =POINT OF COMMENCEMENT T.P.O.S. = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09 RECORDING REQUESTED BY ! TIME WARNER CABLE 44 THE POWER OF YOU- WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO TIME WARNER CABLE Time Warner Cable Business Services 3430. E. Miraloma Avenue Anaheim, CA 92806 IHI1 LlNhtux GRANT OF EASEMENT CITY OF TEMECULA, a general law city (hereinafter referred to as Grantor"), hereby grants to TIME WARNER CABLE Inc., a Corporation, its successors and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"), a non-exclusive easement and right of way to construct, use, maintain, operate, alter, add to, repair, replace, reconstruct, inspect, and remove at any time and from time to time underground communication systems (hereinafter referred to as "systems"), consisting of wires, underground conduits, cables, vaults, manholes, handholes, and including above-ground enclosures, markers and concrete pads and other appurtenant fixtures and equipment necessary or useful for said communication systems, in, on, under, across and along that certain real property in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows: SEE LEGAL DESCRIPTION ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "A" and EXHIBIT "B" Grantor agrees for himself, his heirs and assigns, not to erect, place or maintain, nor to permit the erection, placement or maintenance of any building, planter box, earth fill, or other structures except walls and fences on the above described real property. The Grantee, and its contractors, agents and employees, shall have the right to trim or cut tree roots as may endanger or interfere with said systems and shall have free access to said systems and every part thereof, at all times, for the purpose of exercising the rights herein granted; provided, however, that in making any excavation of said property of the Grantor, the Grantee shall make the same in such a manner as will cause the least injury to the surface of the ground around such excavation, and shall replace the earth so removed by it and restore the surface of the ground to as near the same condition as it was prior to such excavation as is practicable. It is understood and agreed that the above description is approximate only, including the intention of the Grantor(s) to grant an easement for said systems as constructed. The centerline of the easement shall be coincidental with the centerline of said systems as constructed in, on, over, under, across and along the Grantor(s) property. EXECUTED the day of 2008. GRANTOR: CITY OF TEMECULA, A municipal corporation Michael S. Naggar Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Approved As to Form; Peter M. Thorson City Attorney October 06, 2008 Sheet 1 of 1 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION EASEMENTS IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON BEING A CERTAIN PORTION OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING THE PORTION OF LOT 14 AS SHOWN ON TRACT MAP NO. 3334, FILED IN BOOK 54, PAGES 25 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER, OF SAID COUNTY, INCLUDED WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 12.00 FEET WIDE, 6.00 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY AND 6.00 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF THE REFERENCE LINE WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 14, ALSO BEING A POINT IN THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARGARITA ROAD (88.00 FEET WIDE); THENCE LEAVING SAID CORNER SOUTH 34054'52" WEST A DISTANCE OF 273.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 14; THENCE LEAVING SAID POINT SOUTH 55°05'08" EAST A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A"; THENCE SOUTH 55°05'08" EAST A DISTANCE OF 16.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINATION. ALSO A STRIP OF LAND 6.00 FEET WIDE, THE CENTERLINE OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE AFORE DESCRIBED POINT "A"; THENCE NORTH 34054'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 6.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT SOUTH 55°05'08" EAST 5.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 34035'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT NORTH 81003'37" EAST A DISTANCE OF 150.53 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT NORTH 37°43'20" EAST A DISTANCE OF 13.40 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINATION. THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP ARE TO BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED TO JOIN AT THE ANGLE POINTS. CONTAINS: 2,375.58 SQ. FT. 0.055 ACRES, MORE OR LESS SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD. EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED AND HERETO BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. THIS WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. Dated: 2008 z Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09 N M eq~~~~~ 2 No. C-18619 m a * Expfn_ 09 Nq- \F of DSE08213353 6477-2000/8-2247 6777-2590/7-2526 mcgN~um SCALE: 1" = 200' EXHIBIT "B" SHEET 1 OF 2 VAOARITA ROAD I \ 'c" r L1 ~1 SITE I x I ~ I I EXISTING I t / LBUILDING - - J VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE I DETAIL AREA I 5 SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 iZ °1000 LEASE PROPERTY BOUNDARY YMCA 9 Eli PER MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE -4N RECORDED 07/11/2008 1f DOC. #2008-0380475, O.R. I RIVERSIDE COUNTY a ~ 1 LOT 14 i TRACT NO. 3334 M.B. 54 If 25-30 / RIVERSIDE COUNTY t i I i / PROPERTY t BOUNDARY 1 N88'_23'11"E ---~I LLL _ - - - 1207.4s; LINE TABLE UNE LENGTH BEARING L1 123.00' N81.55'10"W CURVE TABLE CURVE LENGTH RADIUS DELTA ANGLE C1 270.00' 2044.00' 07'34'06" I EGEND DENOTES ® SCE EASEMENT AREA APPROX. AREA = 2375.58 SO. FT. P.O.C. = POINT OF COMMENCEMENT T.P.O.B. = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING Q`<v~Q1 M. No. C-18619 a * Exp~i7 rt sT CIV1~- 4F OF CA6\ Dated: 0df i,4.2008 Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09 \ \ EXHIBIT "Bn SHEET 2 OF 2 U Q Lr-t um ` \ \ SCALE: 1 ° = 50' \ NIARGA~ ~ A - ROAD > NW CDR. LOT 14 (P.O.C.) - ' N37'43'20"E PROPERTY 13 40 > BOUNDARY N81 03'3-7"E --5 yrJ, L' y kY 0~v f>~ ~ ^j~// r4> 1' 1 a' LOT 14 ,i TRACT NO. 3334 M.B. 54 / 25-30 RIVERSIDE COUNTY ?boo o [ p.> S55'OS'OS°E 5.00' /'Sbs ooh T.P.O.B. CoD5'08'E oQROFESS/pN9C ~F T 5 16 //POINT °A" M. @ F No. C-1861 9 LEASE PROPERTY BOUNDARY YMCA Exp PER MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE RECORDED 07/11/2008 DOC. #2008-0380475, O.R. V 1L RIVERSIDE COUNTY pF CANG ING \ - \ Dated: 4 ,2008 . \ LEGEND I?7 DENOTES / EZ SCE EASEMENT AREA / APPROX. AREA = 2375.58 SO. FT. P.O.C. = POINT OF COMMENCEMENT / T.P.O.B. = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING / Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09 7"'~ ITEM NO. 9 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) - Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA) PREPARED BY: Julie Dauer, Sr. CIP Specialist RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE THE COOPERATIVE WORK AGREEMENT EXTENSION REQUEST OF THE LOCAL AGENCY- STATE AGREEMENT FOR THE 2006/2007 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT PROJECT KNOWN AS THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula was approved for 2006/2007 Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) funding for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect project. On September 12, 2006 the City Council adopted a resolution approving the Local Agency-State Agreement for the 2006/2007 Bicycle Transportation Account for the planning and preliminary engineering of the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect project and authorized William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works to execute the agreement. The original State Agreement required that all work be completed, a final accounting of actual project costs and a written request for payment be submitted by April 1, 2009. The State shall in turn pay the local agency the BTA share of the actual costs of the project prior to June 30, 2009, the expiration date of the BTA funds awarded to this project. The Department of Public Works is in the process of procuring a consultant agreement for the planning and preliminary engineering of this project, however it is unlikely that services can be rendered and completed and actual costs of work performed submitted for reimbursement prior to the BTA deadlines. Therefore, we are requesting a Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA) to extend the terms of the original Local Agency-State Agreement for the 2006/2007 Bicycle Transportation Account, Cycle 6. Government Code Section 16304.3 requires that the extension of budget authority beyond the normal appropriation period be accomplished through Cooperative Work Agreements (CWA's) approved by the Department of Finance. The process requires involvement from local agencies, Department of Finance, State Controller's Office and the California Department of Transportation (Accounting, Budgets and Local Assistance). FISCAL IMPACT: There is no change to our original commitment as originally stated in our approval of the Local Agency-State Agreement for the 2006/2007 Bicycle Transportation Account project. The City has been awarded a total of $395,000 in BTA funds and has committed a minimum of $75,000 in local funds for the implementation of project planning and preliminary engineering for this project. The total estimated project costs remain at $470,000 according to our Capital Improvement Program for FY2009-2013. If the project costs exceed the original estimate it will be the responsibility of the city to provide sufficient local funds to finance the excess. In the event the final costs are less than the estimate the BTA funds will be decreased in relationship to the percent funded by the BTA program. According to our project application and local agency-state agreement the project funding percentages are as follows: BTA funds $395,000 (84.04%) and local funds $75,000 (15.96%). ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2008 - Cooperative Work Agreement Spreadsheet - Cycle 6 RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE THE COOPERATIVE WORK AGREEMENT EXTENSION REQUEST OF THE LOCAL AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT FOR THE 2006/2007 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT PROJECT KNOWN AS THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, under the provisions of Streets and Highways Code Section 2106 (b) and Sections 890 through 894.2, as implemented by regulations in Title 21, Divisions 2, Chapter 10 of the California Administrative Code, funds have been allocated to the City of Temecula for the project planning and preliminary engineering of a Bicycle Transportation Account project known as the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect, and WHEREAS, under provisions of the California Administrative Code, the State (Department of Transportation) is required to enter into an agreement with the local agency (City of Temecula) relative to design standards, the handling and accounting of funds, time for completion, and all other phases of the project; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 16304.3 requires that the extension of budget authority beyond the normal appropriation period be accomplished through Cooperative Work Agreements (CWA's) approved by the Department of Finance (DOF). This process requires involvement from Local Agencies, DOF, and State Controller's Office (SCO) and the Department (Accounting, Budgets and Local Assistance). WHEREAS, The City of Temecula is required to submit a Cooperative Work Agreement requesting an extension for unspent encumbered budget authority be completed and submitted to the Department of Transportation by November 17, 2008, attention District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE). NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows: Section 1. Approves the Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA) extension request for the Local Agency-State Agreement Bicycle Transportation Account, Agreement No. BTA 06/07-08-RIV-04 for the project planning and preliminary engineering for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect project. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [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. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Local Assistance Projects Bicycle Transportation Account CWA Cycle 6 Budget Aullwrlty Lapsing June 30, 2008 (As of July 31, 2008) Dist 8-Temecula Y rA no. Xst gency Nate roton, Ttle tDex ar noal Peet Amain (n FYI - E.ntnda- lJmunt fafl u4iqudatec E-b-, ea'eme (for FYI Nit, Balame ud: be bled to Caltrm egi a CvIAI 1s p,olert annum w/worw scope Rv,x of 7 elay Code mson for Bela Identify any Impe-,us roc C v6N Rroyrr be Car0cm Ydthm Ext"W7 ano of Leal Agency ProA*nd IMO daGmul CCmnents 200607 BTA 06107-08-RIV-04 08 City of Temecula Santa Gertrudis Preliminary engineering of a Class I $395,000 $0 $395,000 06130/2010 Yes Yes 9 The location of our trail project is directly influenced by a new None anticipated Yes William G. Hughes We have completed an RFP Creek Bicycle Trail Extension Bikeway along Santa Gertrudis Creek from Diaz Road to Yner interchange along Interstate 15. The new interchange could have created significant conflicts and uncertainties relative to the trail Director of Public Works process review and have selected a consultant for the planning and and Interconn Road. location. The interchange is subject to Federal Highway preliminary engineering of this Administration (FHWA) approvals which are out of the City's project, We are prepared to awardi control. We have recently resolved the new interchange design the consultant agreement at our issues and we anticipate FHWA approval within the next few regular City Council Meeting of months which will allow us to complete the trail design. We November 25, 2008. therefore request an extension of our agreement so that we may fulfill our obligation to commit to the planning and preliminary Our signed CWA will be forwarded engineering of our Santa Gertrudls Creek Bicycle Trail Extension to the attention of the DIAE upon and Interconnect project. approval from our Council on November 25, 2008. TOTAL # OF BTA PROJECrs: 1 TOTALS: E395 000 D 5395 000 Signature of Approving Agency's Board or Council: Michael S. Naggar Print Name: Mayhr Date: nM.mM.x au,x Susan W.2ones • MMC, Peter M. Thorson City Clerk City Attorney ITEM NO. 1 0 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman, Inc. for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect; Project No. PW08-04 PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works - CIP Kendra Hannah-Meistrell, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Approve the Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman, Inc. for an Alignment Study and Design for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect, Project No. PW08-04, in the amount of $246,865.00; 2. Authorize the City Manager to approve Extra Work Authorizations not to exceed the contingency amount of $24,686.50, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. BACKGROUND: In December 2005, the Public Works Department applied for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) grant funds to perform planning and preliminary engineering of the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle/Trail Extension and Interconnect Project. On July 31, 2006, the State funds were approved in the amount of $395,000 with a City contribution of $75,000 (15.96%). On September 12, 2006, the City Council adopted resolution no. 06-79 entitled, "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula approving the Local Agency-State Agreement for the 2006/2007 Bicycle Transportation Account project known as the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect'. The project will extend the existing Class I Bike Lane/Multipurpose Trail within Santa Gertrudis Creek from Ynez Road to Diaz Road, thereby closing a 5,500' gap in the City's bike/trail system. The attached agreement includes preliminary/final engineering and environmental professional services in accordance with BTA guidelines and the Local Agency-State Agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: The Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect, Project No. PW08-04, is a Capital Improvement Project funded with a Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) Grant and Capital Project Reserves. Sufficient funds are available in the project account (Account No. 210-165-739-5802) for this $271,551.50 request, which includes the agreement amount of $246,865.00 plus a 10% contingency of $24,686.50. ATTACHMENTS: Location Map Project Description Professional Engineer Services Agreement 0 z a z c Z w F- x w J Q W J U U m Z Q N w 0 w a w w U N D F- ~U ~w ~z wz ~O Q~ w Z N NZ F- 0 L. CL o~ a~ c ~ v~ 0 a b x Q O O 0 0 O N N O O O v v, O U ~ py O as 0 c4f) H a to ~ 5 .5 4 P 71 ~ . O N O rq r.l N rj cd W ri ~,vj N O rI N O ~ ~ ~ ~ 64 64 W N . ~C U ~ N U . s ~ rl U to fq cf) o 0 4 . Cos 4 N U N 0 Q ~ O r c~ A Cd W o ~ c O .--a CA N O O 0 0 O U O O C O O ~ N ~ ? . N N O O N O C/ ~ cd O z O Ri ' 7 ON M C D- r- ' O" a N n5 j r V j ~ U ~ as 94 O + b9 b9 64 b4 b9 W W ° F-I L ~ , y ~ N ~r a p o o o w co~ v H! o ~ o ~ CL L6 U c D CL C y m . i ~ L ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ N O ~ .Ur U a3 O ~ a a o o m a Q N ~ ¢ h a r AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND HALL & FOREMAN, INC. SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT, PW08-04 THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of November 25, 2008, between the City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation, and Hall & Foreman, Inc. ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on November 25, 2008, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than December 31, 2009, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The City may, upon mutual agreement, extend the Agreement for three (3) year additional term(s). In no event shall the Agreement be extended beyond three (3) years. If Agreement is extended beyond the original term, the Agreement price shall be adjusted at the beginning of each calendar year in accordance with the changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all Urban Consumers in the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside Area, published monthly by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all time faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages, and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Agreement from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Copies may be obtained from the California Department of Industrial Relations internet website at http://www.dir.ca.gov. Consultant shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or sub-contractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Consultant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Consultant shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $50.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Agreement, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Agreement. 5. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B, other than the payment rates and schedule of payment, are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Two Hundred Forty Six Thousand, Eight Hundred Sixty Five Dollars and No Cents ($246,865.00) for the total term of the Agreement, unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consulant for the performance of said services. C. The City Manager may approve additional work up to ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall the total sum of the Agreement exceed thirty thousand dollars and no cents, ($30,000.00), or the amount approved by City Council. Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council. d. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of Consultant's fees, it shall give written notice to Consulant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. For all reimbursements authorized by this Agreement, Consultant shall provide receipts for all reimbursable expenses in excess of fifty dollars ($50) in such form as approved by the Director of Finance. 6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant, at least ten (10) days prior, written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement, such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City, pursuant to Section 5 above. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the 2 performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager, or his delegate, determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts, and other such information required by the City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of the City, or its designees, at reasonable times, to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts there from as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City, and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. C. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A, without the written consent of the Consultant. 9. INDEMNIFICATION. a. Indemnity for Professional Services. In the connection with its professional services, Consultant shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify City, District, and/or Agency, and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants, designated volunteers, and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City, District, or Agency officials, (collectively, "Indemnitees"), from any claim, demand, damage, liability, loss, cost or expense (collectively, "claims"), including but not limited to death or injury to any person and injury to any property, arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant or any of its officers, employees, sub-consultants, or agents in the performance of its professional services under this Agreement. Consultant shall defend the Indemnities in any action or actions filed in connection with any such claims with counsel of City, 3 District and/or Agency's choice, and shall pay all costs and expenses, including actual attorney's fees, incurred in connection with such defense. b. Other Indemnities. In connection with all claims not covered by Paragraph A, Consultant shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify the City, District, and/or Agency, and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants, designated volunteers, and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City, District or Agency officials, (collectively, "Indemnitees"), from any claim, demand, damage, liability, loss, cost or expense (collectively, "claims"), including but not limited to death or injury to any person and injury to any property, arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall defend Indemnitees in any action or actions filed in connection with any such claims with counsel of City, District and/or Agency's choice, and shall pay all costs and expenses, including actual attorney's fees, incurred in connection with such defense. 10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. 2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. 3) Workers' Compensation Insurance as required by the State of California, and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, Workers' Compensation Insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. 4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant profession. than: b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less 1) General Liability: One million ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2) Automobile Liability: One million ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3) Workers' Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4) Professional Liability Coverage: One million ($1,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. 4 C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. 2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. 4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 5) Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed to state: "Should the policy be canceled before the expiration date, the issuing insurer will endeavor to mail thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the City, insurer will provide 10 days notice for non-payment." 6) If insurance coverage is canceled or reduced in coverage or in limits, the Consultant shall within two (2) business days of notice from insurer phone, fax, and/or notify the City, via certified mail, return receipt requested, of the changes to or cancellation of the policy. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer 5 may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant, shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 13. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager, or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement, or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 14. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) 6 delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: Martina Address. City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attention: City Manager -or- Physical Address. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Consultant: Hall & Foreman, Inc. Three BetterWorld Circle Temecula, CA 92590 Gavin Powell 15. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 16. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 17. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 18. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No officer, or employee of the City of Temecula shall have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the Consultant, or Consultant's sub-contractors for this project, during his/her tenure, or for one year thereafter. The Consultant hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Consultant or Consultant's 7 sub-contractors on this project. Consultant further agrees to notify the City in the event any such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 20. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: By: Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Hall & Foreman, Inc. Three BetterWorld Circle Temecula, CA 92590 Attention: Gavin Powell Phone (951) 294-9300 Fax (951) 294-9301 BY: (Signature) NAME: (Printed Named) TITLE: BY: (Signature) NAME: (Printed Named) TITLE: TWO SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR CORPORATIONS 9 EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED The specific elements (scope of work) of this service include: SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT, PROJECT NO. PW08-04 10 EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE 11 ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 SECTION 3: SCOPE OF SERVICES HFI understands the City's desire to connect and extend the Santa Gertrudis Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail to the existing trails at Ynez Road and Diaz Road. To help the City achieve their goal, HFI's team is prepared to provide the required technical studies, alignment study and subsequent final design for the pedestrian/bicycle trail. The proposed Class I bicycle trail will contribute to making a comprehensive network of trails by joining the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail at Ynez Road to the Murrieta Creek Multi-Purpose Trail at Diaz Road. The proposed location will utilize the existing Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) maintenance access road along the top of Santa Gertrudis Creek. Access points at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, Diaz Road and possibly Winchester Road make the trail ideal for those commuting to the surrounding businesses. Likewise, anticipated under crossings at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, the I-15 Freeway and possibly Winchester Road will create a safe environment for users to avoid vehicular traffic. Total length of the project is approximately 5,500 linear feet. The location of the project will subject it to approval from a number of permitting agencies and utility providers. Permitting agencies include the RCFC&WCD, Caltrans, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Utility purveyors include the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), the Rancho California Water District (RCWD), Southern California Edison (SCE) and The Gas Company. Coordination and communication with these entities is critical for the project to acquire all needed permits, to satisfy the needs of all interested parties, and to keep the project within budget and schedule. Because the project is funded primarily through the State of California's Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), the project must adhere to all applicable regulations, requirements, and standards of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM). HFI understands the BTA funding is set to expire and the City's February 28th completion date is critical to ensure funding of the project. HFI recognizes the submittal requirements requested by the City. As such, HFI pledges to make all requested submittals in the required formats as outlined in the Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 162. Further, HFI understands that all designs shall conform to the requirements and standards specified by the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the City of Temecula, the RCFC&WCD, the FHWA and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Critical to this project is the City's ability to obtain funding from the State of California. Recognizing this, HFI's approach will emphasize keeping the City's aggressive schedule in mind. Early involvement with the permitting agencies will be necessary to ensure all concerns are accounted for. In particular, HFI feels early involvement by Caltrans will be critical, as history has shown us that Caltrans review periods can be lengthy. HFI's approach will emphasize open communication with all parties involved with the project. These parties include the project team, the client, permitting agencies, utility purveyors, and impacted property owners. HFI will communicate internally and with our sub-consultants to review progress, discuss project related issues, and ensure team members are well informed of the projects goals, schedules and expectations. HFI sees this date as a significant challenge due to processing time with the approving agencies, in working on other projects that received state funding, the funding was able to be encumbered for the designs contract effectively extending the expiration date of the funding. This process is recommended for the project as well. 090085-0000 19 ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 HFI believes in Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC). This will be assured by utilizing HFI's established and proven QA/QC program. Through this program, HFI will ensure all reports, designs and technical work are reviewed throughout the design process and prior to submittal of any deliverables. All deliverables will undergo a peer review by a qualified senior staff member. The reviews will emphasize value engineering and superior design while maintaining clarity, accuracy and completeness. The reviews will confirm appropriate design standards are used. HFI's QA/QC program also implements budget and schedule control procedures to ensure the project is run efficiently. Specific to this project, HFI will approach the project with a three phased approach. The phases would be Technical Studies, Preliminary Engineering, and Final Engineering. A detailed description of tasks involved with these phases is included in the following scope of services. SCOPE OF SERVICES PHASE A- PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING Task 1- Meetings, Coordination, and Project Management Upon receiving a notice to proceed, HFI will meet with the City to discuss the parameters and establish the specific goals of the project. At this meeting, HFI will obtain copies of the City's project records and establish the project communication guidelines. This task also includes project management and administration for the life of the project. This includes invoice preparation, coordination with subconsultants, and City and Agency coordination. Task 2 - Data Collection and Review HFI will gather and review all available material relevant to the project. Applicable documents will be obtained from Caltrans, RCFC&WCD, and the City. These documents may include existing reports and studies, as-built plans, mapping controls, right-of-way and easement documents, cooperative agreements and applicable design standards. Task 3 - Utility Coordination The City will contact affected utility purveyors to notify them of the project and to obtain record atlas maps and available cover depths for facilities in the project area. HFI will utilize the information gathered by the City in our design and will show existing utilities on our base map. HFI will continue to work with the City and the utility agencies to determine and resolve any conflicts encountered during design of the project. Task 4 - Site Assessment HFI will conduct a thorough site visit to become familiar with the site, evaluate existing conditions, and identify potential constraints. Task 5 - Right-of-Way Research /Mapping Control HFI will conduct the necessary research through City, RCFC&WCD and Caltrans records to determine existing property limits, public right-of-way and easement boundaries. From the records, HFI will prepare a boundary showing existing property, right-of-way and easements. Through this research and development of a preliminary design, HFI will be able to identify right-of-way acquisitions, easement dedications and cooperative agreements necessary for completion of the project. Task 6 - Aerial Topography and Field Survey HFI will set aerial targets and provide aerial topography at two foot {2'} contour intervals one-hundred feet {1001 beyond the project limits. HFI's survey crew will supplement the aerial survey by conducting a field survey. The field survey will identify and verify all existing facilities and topographical features within the project area. Under crossing locations will identify all abutments, pillars, columns, deck height, flowline and other critical information at the bridges. Cross sections showing the maintenance 090085-0000 20 ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 access road, top of channel, bottom of channel and approximately fifty feet (50') within the channel will be taken at fifty foot (50') intervals where ramps are anticipated. Cross sections will also be taken at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, Diaz Road and Winchester Road to assist in determining points of access and to ensure ADA compliance can be provided. Additional sections will be taken along the channel as necessary to establish line and grade. HFI will establish temporary benchmarks for use during construction and will tie out all survey monuments so damaged monuments can be restored after construction. All survey information will be documented and provided to the City. Electronic files and a plot of all control coordinates will be provided to the City for use during construction. Task 7 - Preliminary Hydrology/ Hydraulics Analysis HFI will perform a hydrology and hydraulics analysis to identify impacts to the Santa Gertrudis Creek and other impacted drainage facilities. The analysis will be used to determine adequacy of flood protection levels and existing drainage facilities resulting from the proposed alignments. Task 8 - Alignment Study Based on the information gained during the preceding tasks, HFI will develop a minimum of 3 alternative alignments for the proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail. For each alternative, HFI will prepare a preliminary plan, cost estimate and completion schedule. The preliminary plan will utilize the aerial topography as a base and show property boundaries and ownership, existing utilities and structures, proposed right-of-way and easements, and all proposed improvements in concept. Proposed under crossings and possible pedestrian bicycle bridges will be indicated on the plans. The completion schedules will include design tasks, environmental clearance and permitting, right-of-way acquisition, and construction tasks. Cost estimates will include costs for completion of design, environmental permitting and mitigation, right-of-way acquisition, and construction tasks. The alternatives will be evaluated and presented in the form of a report comparing each alternative. HFI will provide preferred alignment recommendations in the report. In evaluating the alternative alignments, HFI will work with the Chambers Group to identify and address environmental impacts. The work performed by Chambers Group will be the initial steps of preparing the environmental document described under Phase C. PHASE B - FINAL ENGINEERING After a preferred alternative is determined by the City, HFI will proceed to prepare complete construction documents, including plans, specifications and cost estimates. Individual tasks under Phase B will not begin until HFI receives a Notice to Proceed from the City, for each task. Task 1- Geotechnical Evaluation HFI will team with Geocon Inland Empire, Inc. to provide geotechnical services for this project. This proposal includes the following items: • Review published geologic maps, aerial photographs, and other literature pertaining to the site to aid in evaluating geologic hazards that may be present. • Perform laboratory tests on selected soil samples to evaluate soil properties, for example: in situ density, maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, expansive characteristics, direct shear, RValue, corrosion, collapse, and consolidation characteristics of the prevailing soil conditions encountered. • Mark boring locations at the site 48 hours prior to excavation and notify Underground Service Alert prior to drilling. • Excavate approximately 14 exploratory excavations with a drill rig to assess subsurface 090085-0000 21 ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 conditions and obtain samples for laboratory testing. The borings will extend to a maximum depth of 50 feet. • Submit application package and obtain permits from Caltrans and RCFC&WCD to perform work within their right-of-way. • Prepare a written report presenting the findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of developing the site with respect to design features including, but not limited to: structural foundation conditions and recommendations including any overexcavation and recompaction areas or surcharges, liquefaction analysis, and pavement design. The reports will include design alternates for various types of access to the under crossings including, ramps, retaining walls and berms. Task 2 - Final Hydrology/Hydraulics Report A final hydrology/hydraulics report will be prepared in accordance with the City, RCFC&WCD, FHWA and Caltrans standards. The report will be based on the final design of the channel improvements. The report will include a project summary, methodology, calculations, conclusions and recommendations. This item includes making revisions resulting from Agency review. Task 3 - Plats and Legal Descriptions The selected alignment alternative will determine what easements and right-of-way acquisitions are necessary for the project. Upon this determination, HFI will prepare the necessary plats and legal descriptions for the City's use in obtaining the required property. It is anticipated that five (5) easement documents will be required. Task 4 - Pedestrian /Bicycle Trail Plan HFI will prepare pedestrian/bicycle trail plans to join the existing Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/ Bicycle Trail at Ynez Road and the Murrieta Creek Multi-Purpose Trail at Diaz Road. The plan will include the following items: • Plan view of pedestrian/bicycle trail indicating stations, bearings, quantities, finished surface elevations, horizontal grades, cross slopes and critical locations such as beginning/end of curve, grade breaks and at points of access. • Plan and profile at ramps and under crossing locations. Vertical clearances, grades and finished surface elevations will be shown. • Grading limits will be shown on the plans. Grading will be minimized as much possible to minimize construction costs and impacts to surrounding properties. Earthwork quantities will be shown on the plans. • Existing and proposed right-of-way, property lines, easements, centerline and existing and proposed utilities will be shown. Dimensions will be shown for horizontal control and to verify minimum trail widths. • Existing utilities will be indicated on the plans showing approximate location, type, size, material and utility owner. • Construction items including pavement limits, fencing, drainage structures, water quality features, proposed utilities, access ramps, channel improvements, pedestrian/bicycle over crossings, necessary construction details, and all other improvements will be called out on the plans. Structural calculations for retaining walls will not be included. Task 5 - Street Improvement Plans Street improvement plans will be prepared detailing the access points from both sides of the existing 090085-0000 22 ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 roadways. This proposal is based on assumed points of access at Ynez Road, Jefferson Avenue, Diaz Road, and Winchester Road. Task 6A -Signing and Striping Plans Signing and striping plans will be prepared in accordance with applicable portions of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The plans will include signage and striping of the pedestrian/ bicycle trail to ensure safety to trail users. Not included are signing, signalization and striping to accommodate at grade crossings of the roadway. Task 6B - Signing and Striping Plans (Winchester Road) The anticipated method of crossing Murrieta Creek at Winchester Road is to utilize the existing bridge and re-stripe the existing roadway to allow for bicycle and pedestrian traffic. If the alignment study determines that this is the preferred method for crossing Murrieta Creek, HFI will prepare the required signing and striping plans for Winchester Road. Plans will be prepared in accordance with applicable portions of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Task 7 - Erosion Control Plans Erosion control plans will be prepared to accompany the pedestrian/bicycle trail improvement plans and will be consistent with the water quality measures outlined in the projects Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). Task 8 - WQMP / Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) HFI will prepare and submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to conduct construction activities for the project as well as prepare the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for incorporation into the contract bid documents. The SWPPP will meet the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements and will be submitted to the City for review. A Water Quality management Plan (WQMP) will be prepared including Best Management Practices (BMP's) to be implemented and maintained during the post construction life of the project. First submittal of these documents is anticipated at 90% of PS&E completion. Task 9 - Final Construction Cost Estimate Based on the items shown on the construction drawings, HFI will prepare a cost estimate for construction of the project. Quantity estimate calculations will be detailed and provided as back-up to the construction cost estimate. Two independent quantity estimate calculations will be performed to ensure accuracy. Earthwork calculations will be included for excavation, structural backfill and unclassified excavation. Task 14 - Special Provisions and Bid Schedule HFI will prepare the special provisions and bid schedule to be included with the bid package. Submitted documents will be based on the City's standard documents, edited for application to this project. Task 11- Project Coordination and Plan Permit Processing Because of the number of permitting agencies involved with this project, HFI anticipates a significant coordination and processing effort in order to get approval from the permitting agencies. This effort includes coordination of project elements, discussions of project status, meetings with permitting agencies, and other issues related to obtaining necessary permits. Processing of fact sheets required by Caltrans is not included with the task. 090085-0000 23 ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 Phase G-Technical Studies and Environmental Documents Individual tasks under Phase C will not begin until HFI receives a Notice to Proceed from the City, for each task. Task 1- Preliminary Environmental Study Chambers Group will prepare a Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) based on the requirements outlined in the Caltrans General Guidelines for Compliance. This task includes a reconnaissance-level field visit by an environmental planner. Three copies of the PES will be submitted to the City for review and signature. The PES will then be submitted to Caltrans for review. Two sets of revisions to the PES, will be prepared per the receipt of two sets of integrated comments from the City and Caltrans. Task 2 - Biological Resources Assessment and Report After conducting the literature search, a habitat assessment of the biological resources will be performed during a field visit to the proposed project area. All plant communities on the project site will be surveyed and mapped. Presence of common and sensitive biological resources on the project site will be documented. A report will be prepared following the most recent version of a Caltrans Natural Environmental Survey for a project with Minimal Impacts (i.e. NES MI) report. The report will evaluate the requirements from the Western Riverside Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan. In addition, biologists will assess the project area(s) for potential waters that may be jurisdictional to the Army Corps of Engineers or other regulatory agency. For the purpose of identifying potential jurisdictional waterways, Chambers Group will review existing maps and documents including the U.S.G.S. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle of the site, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Survey general soils map, previous vegetation maps and biological surveys prepared for the site, and aerial photographs of the area prior to surveying the site. A field survey will identify and delineate areas of the project site that fall under the regulatory jurisdiction of the USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and CDFG jurisdiction pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. The results of the jurisdictional delineation survey will be provided in a Jurisdictional Delineation Report. The report will include text describing the limits of jurisdiction pursuant to USACE and CDFG regulations. Following completion of the Jurisdictional Delineation report. Chambers Group will process the following permits unless it is determined that they are not needed: • United States Army Corps of Engineers 2007, 404 Nationwide Permit Program • Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) 401 Permit • California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) 1602 Streambed Alteration Permit This proposal does not include the following items. If the preliminary biological study determines that any of the following may be necessary, Chambers Group can provide the City with a separate scope of work and cost estimate for these items. • United States Army Corps of Engineers Informal Section 7 consultation with United States Fish and Wildlife Service • United States Army Corps of Engineers 404, Individual Permit • Focused Biological Surveys Three copies of the Biological Resources Study will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and comment. 090085-0000 24 ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 Chambers Group will prepare two sets of revisions to the Cultural Resources Study per the receipt of integrated comments from the City and Caltrans. Task 3 - Cultural Resources Survey and Report Chambers Group will contact the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a search of their sacred lands files for the proposed project area and request a list of federally and non-federally recognized Native American groups or representatives, who may have concerns about the proposed project. Chambers Group will identify any previously recorded archaeological sites, historic structures, and properties listed on or determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) located within one mile of the project area. Additionally, Chambers Group will determine if any paleontological localities have been recorded within the study area. The project area will be closely examined for the presence of archaeological sites or features. Any newly identified cultural or paleontological resources (including both sites and isolated finds) will be mapped and recorded in detail according to standards established by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). Sufficient information will be recorded in the field for each identified site to complete the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 site forms. A technical report will be prepared documenting the methods and results of the archaeological records search and field survey. The report will include a discussion of potential impacts to cultural resources from the proposed project and will provide recommendations for additional work, as appropriate. Assumptions and items not included with this task: • No cultural resources (e.g., archaeological site, historic structure or feature) will be encountered within the project area. • Resources encountered in the project area will not require test excavation. • Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or any Native American groups or representatives beyond the initial letters of project notification. • Archival research, test excavation of archaeological sites, or formal evaluation of archaeological sites or historic resources for eligibility to the CRHR. Three copies of the Cultural Resources Study will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and comment. Chambers Group will prepare two sets of revisions to the Cultural Resources Study per the receipt of integrated comments from the City and Caltrans. Task 4 - Noise Impact Analysis and Report Chambers Group will prepare a Noise Impact Analysis Letter Report that will describe existing conditions, identify potential impacts and recommend mitigation measures for both construction and post construction activities. The report will use the most recent Caltrans Noise Impact Analysis Report Template and follow the NEPA Delegation format. In order to prepare the report, Chambers Group will evaluate existing conditions, review applicable regulations, perform an acoustical analysis for noise impacts, perform a cumulative analysis of noise impacts and conduct an alternatives analysis for each of the pedestrian/bicycle trail alternatives. Three copies of the Noise Impact Letter Report will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and comment. Chambers Group will prepare two sets of revisions to the Noise Impact Letter Report per the receipt of integrated comments from the City and Caltrans. 090085-0000 25 ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 Task 5 - Air Quality Analysis and Report Chambers Group will prepare an Air Quality Report that will describe existing conditions, identify potential impacts and recommend mitigation measures to reduce those impacts. The report will use the most recent Caltrans Air Quality Report Template and follow the NEPA Delegation format. Preparation of the report will require an evaluation of existing conditions, review of applicable regulations, calculations for air quality emissions, modeling for air quality dispersion, PM10, PM2.5 emissions analysis, and a cumulative analysis of air quality impacts. Three copies of the Air Quality Analysis and Letter Report will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and comment. Chambers Group will prepare two sets of revisions to the Air Quality Analysis and Letter Report per the receipt of integrated comments from the City and Caltrans. Task 6 - Preparation of Appropriate CEQA/NEPA Document Chambers Group will prepare a draft of an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA) and submit five (5) copies for the City's review. After comments are received from the City, Chambers Group will revise the document and prepare a Draft Findings of No Significant Impacts (FONSI). Chambers Group will submit twenty-five copies of the revised IS/EA and FONSI to the City for distribution to Caltrans and the mailing list. Chambers Group will work with the City and Caltrans on the mailing list and will distribute the document. A Notice of Intent will be prepared to adopt a Negative Declaration (ND) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for CEQA and Notice of Availability and a Notice for a Public Hearing. The Notice of Availability (NOA) will be prepared and distributed with the FONSI. Chambers Group will be responsible for mailing the notice. It is assumed that the City will pay all fees. NEPA requires a 30-day review period for a Final EA. After the 30-day review period is completed, Chambers Group will respond to comments and prepare Final Documents for approval by the City and Caltrans. Chambers Group will also prepare a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) for the proposed project and will submit a Draft MMP to the City and Caltrans for review and comment. After receipt of one set of integrated comments, Chambers Group will revise the MMP and provide five (5) printed copies of the MMP to the City. It is anticipated that 5 copies of the Draft IS/EA will be submitted to the City for review. Chambers Group will prepare two set of revisions to the IS/EA per the receipt of two sets of integrated comments from the City and Caltrans. Up to five meetings are anticipated: one kickoff meeting, one meeting to discuss the Administrative Draft EA, one Public Meeting during the Public Review Period and two meetings to discuss responses and comments. 090085-0000 26 CITY OF TEMECULA ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIANIBICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT TASK ANALYSIS TASK DESCRIPTION SUBCONSULTANT TOTAL COSTS AMOUNT PHASE A - PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING . PHASE B - FINAL ENGINEERING . PHASE C -TECHNICAL STUDIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCS Reimbursables • • TOTAL $79,500 $246,865 D9DD85.DDDD 1 ~ N O O V O' O' Q. O N ~ O, O' a 7, Q'. O O O ~ i ~ „ '$3 ~ N a 0 Z U ~ W 0 a ~ ° U W g Z Z s's 's 's ,s 0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ U W o H Z Q, D Q Z Z 0 N o Z ~ W g s > H XW J J o i N JaW ~ ~ ~ ~ o W JN W ~~U o o UW °o Wm~ H ~ 0 ~ li a a ~ S ~ o ~~w boa Vw~ aN o wW w o ~ v N_ D ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ Z W C'3 _ _ Q c~ ao ao co rn co ~ rn rn rn rn o rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn __o ~rn _rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z p ~ ~ O N (D ~ N CO ~ CO N ~ ~ C7 ~ N O C7 O O ~ N N aD ~ CO ~ r N CO O ~ N r O O ~ O N ~ CO N Q L ~ RI RI ~ N N N ~ N N ~ N ~ ~ C7 ~ ~ ~ N ~ N ~ N G1 N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ N ~ ~ N N ~ ~ N ~ cn N r r N O r r r r ~ N p N O O 3 O O .a r "O N -O CO "O "O "O O O~ N~ W~ N r r r O r 7 C C O C = O 3 3 L 7 C C~ 'O 'O 'O C y 'O O "O O N N N 'O 'O O O O "O "O "O "O N 'O O _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~~~~~~~ rn rn rn o rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn o rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL CO OD Ln Ln (D (D CO ~ C7 O f~ f~ ~ OD CO O r ~ O ~ r OD N N N N O ~ N O ~ ~ r N N N O ~ r ~ O O ~ ~ r N N N N N~ r r r ~ r N r r~ r C7 r r N r N N N N r~~~~ r r N N~ r r N C7 C7 r N 0 ~ ~ r r r r r T r r r N N N N N N •L C'7 In In C4 ~ r r r N 3 3 3 ~ In CO r r 3~~ O O~~ W W ~ r r r r r T •i N O O G1 O~~~ W •i N N 7 7 7 3 7 3 7 7 7 L L L L 7 7 3 3 L 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 ~ G1 'a 'a ~ W ~ ~ 3~~~ W ~ ~ L L L L z L L L L~~~~ L L L L ~ L L L L L L L L N H Z N cn cn cn ~ ~ ~ cn cn N cn cn cn cn cn ~ ~ cn cn cn cn N cn cn cn cn ~ ~ ~ cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn ~ ~ ~ cn cn W O ~ ~ 'O c~ ~ "O ~ ~ (d ~ "O Y ~ c~ c~ c~ (d (d ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 ~ Y Y c~ ~ c~ ~ (d (d ~ ° a -a r -a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a 3 -a -a -a -a ~ ~ ~ -a -a -a 3 ~ 3 ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ 3 3 -a ~ -a ~ ~ ~ p ~ O ~ r ~ ~ O ~ ~ o r O O N ~ N O N O ~ ~ C7 p Ln O ~ O ~ ~ ~ In ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ Z 7~ r r a1 r r r r r r p r r r r r r IR 0' ~ J a N U 0 ~ O _ Q o w ~ ca > ~ -a ~ m w ~ Z w ~ Z ~ ~ Q ~ o w 3 ~ a z ~ ~ OC ~ 3 ~ a ~ ~ O a~ -a cA 3 U ~ Z W ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ c Z > ~ ~ W a O w p ~ ~ m ~ w ~ $ a~ a ~ u) cn ~ ~ d ~ W ? ~ ~ a~ ~ C7 ~ ~ w w ° ~ w ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ c[ ~ ~ C7 ~ s W= a~i Z~ g 3 _ro c~ c~ •o o p p ca c ~ w E ~ Z ~ ~ w o ac ~ ~ ~ E w c o ~ ° d ° ~ ro ~ o ~ ~ E d ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ 9 U ~ ~ Q ~ Z ~ c a~i a ~ w ° ~ ~ o ~ o a ro ~ N ~ c ~ ~ a~i ° cn ~ > -a > -a d Z a ro ~ ~ o Z -a ~ O c~ O m O a> g ca o° w o~ 'S a~ a~ c a~ c ~ Q ~ o ~ ~ c ~ a ~ Q a~ > ~ c~ c~ ~ fl- rn ~ ~ J ~ 3 w ~ > ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ c~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ Z_ o c~~ m Z ~ w o a_ a~ _ a~ ~ CC 3 Q o c a~ d CC o~ w Q cn Q m Z~ ~ E 2 O O ~ O~ O d O V ` W O> O ~(Q 6 C W C LLJ O ~ m ~ Q ~ ~ O ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ J ~ U ~ LL ~ W ~ W ~ ~ C C Z ~ ~ ~ CC o ~ w Q c~ ~ W ~ ~ o W C ~ ~ ~ J Q E - O a~ ~ a m c c c ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ 2 •c 0 c~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ - - ~ ~ a ~ m OWC p U U ~ a ~ ~ a>i Z_ ~ ~ _ ~ a~ ~ a~ d a~ ~ Q U w ~ ~ ~ a>i c a m N c ~ ~ ~ U ~ U ~ 9 ~ ~ U ~ O~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L N `J ~ O 'J O 'J O `J O U W ' ~ O N~ O O O u1 O (SS N i H O C C (tl ~ O D U OC U OC ~ W~ U p a, E Q U Y 0~ cA CC Q d Q U m Z C7 ii c~ U~ U rn U r V~~~ U U CC U ii U ~ Z W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ N~~ T m T~ rn o z ~ Q O r N O~ W O Q O r N CO f~ W O r Q r N O~ W O r N N ~ ~2 2 2 ~ a a a _ _ 0 r N C7 ~ Ln (D f~ N O O r N P7 ~ Ln (D f~ CO O O N ~ In O ~ CO O O N ~ In O ~ OD O O N C'7 ~ In CO ai - r r I r r r r N N N N N `N N N N N C7 C7 C7 P7 P7 P7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~j ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04 SECTION 4: FEE PROPOSAL OFFICE: Principal $195.00/Hour Project Management (VP/Sr. Proj. Dir./Proj. Dir./Proj. & Survey Mgr) $165.00/Hour Senior Engr./Proj. Eng./Proj. Surveyor/Sr. Designer/Principal Planner $135.00/Hour Staff Engineer $115.00/Hour Designer/Assist. Proj. Mgr/Planner/Survey Analyst $105.00/Hour Drafter/CADD Technician/Senior Analyst $ 95.00/Hour Project Assistant/Expeditor/Assist. Engineer $ 80.00/Hour Administrative $ 65.00/Hour Expert Witness/Litigation Consultation $300.00/Hour FIELD SURVEY: 3-Person Survey Crew $245.00/Hour 2-Person Survey Crew $200.00/Hour 1-Person Survey Crew $150.00/Hour 2-Person High Definition Survey Crew $360.00/Hour CONSTRUCTION: Resident Engineer $115.00/Hour Inspector $105.00/Hour Note 1: Client shall pay the cost, plus 1511/o, for any applicable governmental fees, title company charges, well monuments, outside vendor reproduction costs, in-house reproduction cost, plotting costs, and delivery or messenger services incurred on Client's behalf. If requested, HFI will provide a computer printout, which details these costs. HFI does not typically provide any additional back up for these generally nominal expenses as part of our fee. Note 2: In the event Consultant's fee schedule changes due to any increase of costs such as the granting of wage increases and/or other employee benefits to field or office employees due to the terms of any labor agreement, or increase in the cost of living, during the lifetime of this agreement, a percentage increase shall be applied to all remaining fees and charges to reflect the increased costs. Note 3: The fee stated herein does not include any sales or use tax. In the event that a sales and/ or use tax is imposed by local, state, or federal authority, upon the services rendered hereunder, such sales and/or use tax shall be in addition to said fee herein, and shall be the full responsibility of the Client. 090085-0000 29 ITEM NO. 11 ORDINANCE NO. 08-12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REVISING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO MASSAGE SERVICES, AND AMENDING TITLE 5 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE A. Recitals. (i) The City Council finds and declares as follows: (a) The massage permitting requirements and restrictions adopted herein are reasonably necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Temecula. (b) The City of Temecula is authorized under the State Constitution and California Government Code § 51030, et seq., to regulate massage establishments by imposing reasonable standards relative to the skill and experience of massage operators and massage technicians, and reasonable conditions on the operation of the massage establishments. (c) There is a significant risk of injury to massage clients by improperly trained and/or educated massage technicians and this Chapter provides reasonable safeguards against such injuries and resulting economic loss. (d) The operation of unregulated massage establishments often results in increased criminal activities on the premises of such businesses. Such increased criminal activity presents a risk to the public health, safety and welfare. The establishment of reasonable standards for issuance of massage related permits and restrictions on massage operations will serve to reduce the risk of illegal activity. (e) The restrictions and requirements set forth in this Ordinance will serve to reduce the burdens on the Police Department and permit the deployment of the police personnel so as to more effectively provide law enforcement services throughout the City. (ii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1: The facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 SECTION 2: Chapter 5.22 of Title 5 of the Temecula Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Chapter 5.22 MASSAGE AND MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS Sections: 3.22.010 Definitions. 5.22.020 Massage Establishment permit required. 5.22.030 Application for Massage Establishment permit. 5.22.040 Massage Establishment permit issuance and denial. 3.22.050 Massage Technician permit required. 5.22.060 Application for Massage Technician permit. 5.22.070 Massage Technician permit issuance and denial. 5.22.080 Requirements applicable to the operation of Massage Establishments. 5.22.090 Requirements applicable to Massage Technicians. 5.22.100 Health certificate. 5.22.110 Transfers and changes of business. 5.22.120 Fees. 5.22.130 Exemptions. 5.22.140 Duration and renewal of permits. 5.22.150 Suspension, revocation, permit denial, and appeal. 5.22.160 Violation and penalty. 5.22.010 Definitions. Unless the particular provision of the context otherwise requires, the definitions and provisions contained in this Section shall govern the construction, meaning and application of words and phrases used in this Chapter. A. "Chief of Police" shall mean and include the Captain of the Riverside County Sheriff's Department currently designated by the Sheriff as the command officer responsible for the City of Temecula, or his or her designated representative. B. "City Manager" shall mean and include the City Manager of the City of Temecula or his or her designated representative. C. "City Council" shall mean and include the City Council of the City of Temecula. D. "Conviction" or "Convicted" shall mean and include a conviction following a plea or verdict of guilty, or plea of nolo contendre. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 2 E. "Days" shall mean and include calendar days, unless otherwise specifically stated in the text. F. "Employ" shall mean and include the act of employing employees and/or contracting with independent contractors. G. "Employee" shall mean and include every owner, partner, manager, supervisor, and any other person, whether paid or not, who renders massage services, or engages in activities that further massage services, of any nature in connection with the operation of a massage establishment, or upon the premises of a massage establishment. H. "Health Department" shall mean and include the Health Services Agency of the County of Riverside. 1. "Manager" or "On Duty Manager" shall mean and include the person(s) designated by the operator of the massage establishment, and qualified under § 5.22.0306, to act as the representative and agent of the operator in managing day-to- day operations with the same liabilities and responsibilities. Evidence of management includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the individual has power to direct or hire and dismiss employees, control hours of operation, create policy or rules or purchase supplies. A manager may also be an owner. J. "Massage" shall mean and include any method of treating the external parts of the body for remedial, hygienic, relaxation or any other reason or purpose, whether by means of pressure on, friction against or stroking, kneading, tapping, pounding, vibrating, rubbing or other manner of touching external parts of the body with the hands or with the aid of any mechanical or electrical apparatus or appliance with or without supplementary aids such as rubbing alcohol, liniment, antiseptic, oil, powders, creams, ointment or other similar preparations commonly used in this practice. Outcall massage is any massage performed by a massage technician outside of the massage establishment by which the massage technician is employed. K. "Massage Establishment" shall mean and include any business conducted within the City of Temecula at a fixed location where any person, firm, association, partnership, corporation or combination of the foregoing engages in, conducts, carries on or permits to be conducted or carried on, for money or any other consideration, administration to another person of massage, bath or treatment involving massages or baths. For purposes of this Chapter, "massage establishment" includes "acupressure" or "day spa" establishments, and any other kind of business where massage is offered. "Massage establishment" does not include any kind of business exempt under §5.22.130 or that is otherwise currently licensed, and thereby specifically authorized, under any provision of state or federal law, to provide massage, so long as such business conducts massage in strict conformance with, and only to the extent permitted by, such license. Any such exempt business shall have the burden of establishing its exemption. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 3 L. "Massage Technician" shall mean and include any individual who administers massage to another individual in exchange for anything of value. M. "Operator" shall mean and include any owner or other person who operates a massage establishment. N. "Owner" shall mean and include any person having any ownership interest in a massage establishment, and/or any person whose name appears on the City business license for a massage establishment. 0. "Person" shall mean and include any individual, or corporation, partnership, association or other group or combination of individuals acting as an entity. P. "Police Department" shall mean and include the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, acting pursuant to its law enforcement contract with the City of Temecula. Q. "Recognized school of massage" shall mean and include any school or institution of learning which (i) teaches, through State certified instructors, the theory, ethics, practice, profession, and work of massage; (ii) has been approved in writing by the State of California, pursuant to provisions of the California Education Code, including, but not limited to, Sections 94900 or 94905; and (iii) requires a resident course of study as a condition to receiving a diploma or other evidence of graduation. A school offering a correspondence course or courses not requiring attendance shall not be deemed a recognized school of massage for purposes of this Chapter. The City shall have the right to confirm that the applicant has actually attended class at a recognized school of massage. 5.22.020 Massage Establishment permit required. A. It is unlawful for any person to engage in, operate, conduct or carry on, in or upon any premises, a massage establishment within the City without first obtaining a massage establishment permit pursuant to 5.22.030 and 5.22.040 of this Chapter, securing the necessary business license as required by this code and complying with Title 5 of this code. A separate permit shall be obtained for each separate massage establishment operated by such person. A permit to operate a massage establishment shall be valid for a period of one year, commencing at the date of issuance. 5.22.030 Application for Massage Establishment permit. A. Any person desiring a permit for a massage establishment shall file a written application on the required form with the Chief of Police who shall conduct an investigation. The application, to be signed under penalty of perjury, shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee established by resolution of the City Council. The application shall be completed and signed by the operator of the proposed massage establishment, if a sole proprietorship; one general partner, if the operator is a partnership; one officer or one director, if the operator is a corporation; and one RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 4 participant, if the operator is a joint venture. The application for permit does not authorize operation of a massage establishment unless and until such permit has been properly granted. The application shall contain or be accompanied by the following information: 1. The type of ownership of the business; for example, whether by individual, partnership, corporation or otherwise. If the applicant is a corporation, the name of the corporation shall be set forth exactly as shown in its articles of incorporation or charter, together with the state and date of incorporation and the names and residence addresses of each of its current officers and directors, and of each stockholder holding more than 5% of the stock of that corporation. If the applicant is a partnership, the application shall set forth the name and residence of each of the partners, including limited partners. If it is a limited partnership, it shall furnish a copy of its certificate of limited partnership filed with the Secretary of State. If one or more of the partners is a corporation, the provisions of this subsection pertaining to corporations shall apply. The applicant corporation or partnership shall designate one of its officers or general partners to act as its responsible managing officer. Such designated persons shall complete and sign all application forms required for an individual applicant under this Chapter, but only one application fee shall be charged; 2. The precise name under which the massage establishment is to be conducted; 3. The complete address and all telephone numbers of the massage establishment; 4. A complete current list of the names, residence addresses and copy of driver's license or other picture identification card issued by a governmental authority, of all proposed massage technicians, managers, operators, and employees in the massage establishment; 5. A description of any other business operated on the same premises or within the City of Temecula or the State of California that is owned or operated by the applicant; 6. The following personal information concerning the applicant: a. Full complete name and all aliases used by the applicant, b. Current address and all previous residential addresses for eight years immediately preceding the present address of the applicant; C. Acceptable proof that the applicant is at least 18 years of age; RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 5 d. Proof of legal residency and/or the ability to legally work in the United States, e. Height, weight, color of hair, eyes and gender; f. Two front faced portrait photographs at least two inches by two inches in size; g. The applicant's complete business, occupation and employment history for eight years preceding the date of application, including, but not limited to, the massage or similar business history and experience of the applicant; h. The complete massage permit history of the applicant, whether such person has ever had any permit or license to conduct a massage business issued by any governmental authority; the date of issuance of such a permit or license, whether the permit or license was denied, revoked or suspended; and the reason therefor; i. All criminal convictions occurring in any state or country, including convictions resulting from any plea of nolo contendre, within the last ten years, including those dismissed or expunged pursuant to Penal Code § 1203.4, but excluding infraction traffic violations, and the date and place of each such conviction and reason therefor; j. A complete set of fingerprints taken by the Police Department; 7. The name and address of the owner and lessor of the real property upon or in which the business is to be conducted. In the event the applicant is not the legal owner of the property, the application must be accompanied by a copy of the lease and a notarized acknowledgment from the owner of the property that a massage establishment will be located on the owner's property; 8. Authorization for the City, its agents and employees to verify all information contained in the application, including, but not limited to, performing a complete criminal history background check; 9. Such other identification and information as the Chief of Police may require in order to discover the truth of the matters required to be set forth in the application; 10. A statement in writing and dated by the applicant that he or she certifies under penalty of perjury that all information contained in the application is true and correct; RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 6 11. Statements in writing and dated by the applicant and the applicant's designated manager(s) certifying under penalty of perjury that they: a. Have received a copy of this Chapter; b. Understand its contents; and c. Understand the duties of a manager. If, during the term of a permit, the permit holder has any change in information submitted on the original or renewal application, the permit holder shall notify the Police Department of such change, within ten (10) business days thereafter, in writing. 12. A floor plan of the proposed massage establishment showing all interior areas and rooms where massage will be provided, all doors, restrooms, plumbing, and any other physical features required by the Chief of Police. B. The applicant, if a corporation or partnership, shall designate one or more of its officers or partners to act as manager during business hours. If the applicant is an individual, then that individual, or designee thereof shall act as manager. Any such designee must comply with the requirements of this subsection B. Each person who shall serve as manager shall complete and sign all application forms required of an individual applicant for a massage establishment permit. However, only one application fee shall be charged. Each manager must, at all times, meet all of the requirements of this Chapter for massage establishment permit holders or the massage establishment permit shall be suspended until a manager who meets such requirements is designated. If no such person is designated within ninety (90) days of permit approval, the massage establishment permit shall be subject to suspension and revocation. Operation of a massage establishment without a qualified manager being present is prohibited. C. Notwithstanding the fact that an application filed under this § 5.22.030 or § 5.22.060 may be a "public record" under Government Code § 6250, et seq., certain portions of such application contain information vital to the effective administration and enforcement of the licensing and/or permit scheme established herein which is personal, private, confidential, or the disclosure of which could expose the applicant to a risk of harm. Those portions of the application which are not subject to disclosure are: the applicant's residence address and telephone number, the applicant's date of birth and/or age, the applicant's driver's permit and/or social security number, and/or personal financial data. The City Council in adopting the application and licensing and/or permit system set forth herein has determined in accordance with Government Code Section 6255 that the public interest in disclosure of the information set forth above is outweighed by the public interest in achieving compliance with this chapter by ensuring that the applicant's privacy, confidentially or security interests are protected. The city clerk shall cause to be redacted from any copy of a completed permit application made available to any member of the public, the information set forth above. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 7 3.22.040 Massage Establishment permit issuance and denial. A. Upon receipt of a written application for a permit, the Chief of Police shall conduct an investigation to ascertain whether the applicant satisfies the requirements of this Chapter. The Chief of Police shall, within sixty (60) days of receipt of an application, approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. The sixty (60) day period may be extended for up to sixty (60) additional days, if necessary, to complete the investigation. The Chief of Police shall issue the permit, unless he or she makes any of the following findings: 1. The applicant, if an individual, or any of the officers or directors of the corporation, if the applicant is a corporation; or a partner, if the applicant is a partnership, or any person directly engaged or employed in the massage establishment, has, within ten (10) years preceding the date of the application: a. Any crime involving conduct which requires registration under any state, federal or territorial law similar to and including California Penal Code Section 290, or involving conduct which is a violation of the provisions of any state, federal or territorial law similar to and including California Penal Code Sections 266(h), 266(1), 314, 315, 316, 318, 647 (a), (b) or (d); any crime or violation for which the prosecutor accepted a plea to violation of California Penal Code Section 415, 602, or any lesser included or related offense, or any other Penal Code or other criminal violation in satisfaction or in lieu of, or as a substitute for, any of the foregoing crimes or Penal Code violations or for any crime involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or moral turpitude. In determining if the applicant pled to a lesser included or related offense or any other offense in lieu of any of the foregoing code sections or crimes, pursuant to any provision of this Section 5.22.040, the Chief of Police, and any person considering this matter on appeal, may consider the underlying facts resulting in the arrest regardless of the charge for which the applicant was convicted. For the purposes of this chapter, "conviction" means and includes a conviction pursuant to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere; b. Been convicted of a violation of Health and Safety Code § 11550 or any offense involving the illegal sale, distribution or possession of a controlled substance specified in Health and Safety Code 11054, 11055, 11056, 11057 or 11058; C. Been convicted of any offense in any other state which is the equivalent of any of the above-mentioned offenses; d. Engaged in conduct in another jurisdiction which, if it had occurred within the city, would constitute grounds for denial, suspension or revocation under this Chapter; RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 8 e. Been subjected to a permanent injunction against the conducting or maintaining of a nuisance pursuant to California Penal Code 11225 through 11235 or any similar provisions of law in a jurisdiction outside the State of California; f. Engaged in conduct in any state or country which would constitute an offense as described in subsection 1.a, above; g. Been convicted of an act involving theft, dishonesty, fraud, deceit or moral turpitude or an act of violence, which act or acts are related to the qualifications, functions or duties of the operator of a massage establishment, or which act or acts occurred in connection with the operation of a massage establishment; h. The applicant has had a massage operator or establishment, or massage technician permit, or other similar license or permit denied, suspended or revoked for cause by any governmental authority; 2. The applicant is required to register under Penal Code § 290. 3. The applicant has made a false, misleading or fraudulent statement or omission of fact to the City in the permit application process; 4. The application does not contain all of the information required by § 5.22.030; 5. The massage establishment, as proposed by the applicant, does not comply with all applicable laws, including, but not limited to, health, zoning, fire and safety requirements, regulations and standards; 6. The applicant has not satisfied the requirements of this Chapter in the time specified, B. If the application is denied for failure to comply with subsection 3 above, the applicant may not reapply for a period of one (1) year from the date the application was denied. 3.22.050 Massage Technician permit required. No person shall perform or administer a massage, including outcall massage, or advertise to provide massage services in the City of Temecula, unless such person has in effect a valid massage technician permit issued pursuant to 5.22.060 and 5.22.070 of this Chapter. R:/Ords 2008/Ords 08-12 9 3.22.060 Application for Massage Technician permit. A. Any person desiring a massage technician permit shall file a written application on the required form with the Police Department. The application shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee established by resolution of the City Council. The application shall contain the following information: 1. A statement of the exact location(s) where the applicant will be working as a massage technician, including the full street address, business name, and all telephone numbers associated with each such location, and the following personal information concerning the applicant: a. Full, complete and true name, including all other names ever used by the applicant, residential address, telephone number, and copy of driver's license or other picture identification card issued by a governmental authority; b. All previous residential addresses for eight (8) years immediately preceding the current address of the applicant; C. Acceptable written proof that the applicant is at least eighteen (18) years of age; d. Proof of legal residency and/or the ability to legally work in the United States; e. Height, weight, color of hair and eyes and gender; f. Two (2) front faced portrait photographs at least two (2) inches by two (2) inches in size; g. The business, occupation and employment history of the applicant for the eight (8) years immediately preceding the date of the application; h. The complete permit history of the applicant and whether such person has ever had any license or permit, issued by any agency, board, city or other jurisdiction, denied, revoked or suspended and the reasons therefor; 2. All criminal convictions occurring in any state or country, including pleas of nolo contendre, within the last ten (10) years, including those dismissed or expunged pursuant to Penal Code § 1203.4, but excluding traffic infractions, violations, and the date and place of each such conviction and reason therefor; 3. A complete set of fingerprints taken by the Police Department; RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 10 4. Such other information and identification as the Chief of Police may require in order to discover the truth of the matters herein specified and as required to be set forth in the application; 5. Authorization for the City, its agents and employees to verify all information contained in the application, including, but not limited to, performing a complete criminal history background check; 6. A statement in writing and dated by the applicant certifying under penalty of perjury that all information contained in the application is true and correct; 7. A statement in writing and dated by the applicant certifying under penalty of perjury that he or she: a. Has received a copy of this Chapter; in this Chapter. b. Understands its contents; and c. Understands the duties of a massage technician as provided 8. The health certificate required by § 5.22.100; 9. If, during the term of a permit, a permit holder has any change in information submitted on the original or renewal application, the permit holder shall notify the Police Department of such change within ten (10) business days thereafter, in writing. B. Each applicant must furnish, along with his or her photograph, an original or certified copy of a diploma or certificate and certified transcript of graduation evidencing completion of five hundred (500) hours of instruction from an approved or recognized school of massage, wherein the method, practice, profession, theory, ethics, anatomical and physiological knowledge and practice of massage is taught by state certified instructors. The applicant must also supply a course description, an outline of material covered and a letter to the City from the school administrator verifying completion. 1. The Chief of Police may consider an applicant's study of massage completed outside the State of California, at a licensed educational institution if proof of completion from a formalized course of study in massage practice, anatomy and/or physiology is provided with the application. Proof of completion shall include dates of study and the name, address and phone number of the school attended. 2. Any outside course of study submitted for approval shall meet the State of California's Office of Post-Secondary Education's minimum requirements and RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 11 all requirements set forth in Subchapter 3 of Chapter 21 of Division 1 of Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations. C. The applicant must also provide documentary proof of being issued a valid policy of insurance from a company authorized to do business in the State of California evidencing that the applicant is insured under a liability insurance policy providing minimum coverage of $2,000,000 for personal injury or death to one person arising out of the administration of massage. The policy must remain in full force and effect while the massage technician license is valid and is subject to inspection and verification by the Police Department. D. If required by written order of the Chief of Police issued not less than sixty (60) days prior to receipt of an application, each applicant for a new permit must pay a fee and take and receive not less than a seventy percent (70%) score on a written and/or practical examination conducted by the Police Department or other test administrator designated by the Police Department. Passage of such test may be required by the Chief of Police, prior to further processing of any application. The test administrator shall consist of a member or members appointed by the Police Department or the County Health Officer. The test administrator shall not be a City employee, and shall be qualified by reason of education and experience concerning the methods and procedures used in the practice of massage. The Health Officer and/or the Police Department shall develop and establish standards and procedures for the panel governing the administration of examinations for applicants for a massage technician license in order to determine whether such applicants are competent to engage in the practice of massage, and the Health Officer and/or the Police Department shall exercise such supervision as may be necessary to assure compliance therewith. An unsuccessful applicant shall be entitled to receive a copy of his or her test scores, but not the examination. Applicants wishing to take the test in a language other than English, may do so if the test is currently available in their language. If the test is not available in the applicant's preferred language, the applicant may pay the costs associated with having both the test and answer sheets translated by a court-certified translator approved by the Chief of Police. The written examination may be taken as often as is offered provided, however, that the test fee shall be paid for each test. E. Excepting only the requirement to file an application and fee, the Chief of Police may waive any of the permitting requirements of § 5.22.060, including testing, if he or she finds that the applicant is currently licensed as a massage technician in another jurisdiction having substantially the same or stricter permitting or licensing standards as are set forth in this Chapter. Any such waiver shall be effective only while such massage technician's other license or permit remains current and valid. 5.22.070 Massage Technician permit issuance and denial. A. Upon receipt of a written application for a permit, the Chief of Police shall conduct an investigation in such manner as he or she deems appropriate in order to ascertain whether the applicant satisfies the requirements of this Chapter. The Chief of RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 12 Police shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the application within sixty (60) days of the filing of an application. The sixty (60) day period may be continued for an additional thirty (30) days if necessary to complete the investigation. The Chief of Police shall issue such permit as requested, unless he or she makes any of the following findings: 1. The applicant has, within ten (10) years preceding the date of the application, been convicted of any of the following: a. Any crime involving conduct which requires registration under any state, federal or territorial law similar to and including California Penal Code Section 290, or involving conduct which is a violation of the provisions of any state, federal or territorial law similar to and including California Penal Code Sections 266(h), 266(1), 314, 315, 316, 318, 647 (a), (b) or (d); any crime or violation for which the prosecutor accepted a plea to violation of California Penal Code Section 415, 602, or any lesser included or related offense, or any other Penal Code or other criminal violation in satisfaction or in lieu of, or as a substitute for, any of the foregoing crimes or Penal Code violations or for any crime involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or moral turpitude. In determining if the applicant pled to a lesser included or related offense or any other offense in lieu of any of the foregoing code sections or crimes, pursuant to any provision of this Section 5.22.070, the Chief of Police, and any person considering this matter on appeal, may consider the underlying facts resulting in the arrest regardless of the charge for which the applicant was convicted. For the purposes of this chapter, "conviction" means and includes a conviction pursuant to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere; b. A violation of Health and Safety Code § 11550 or any offense involving the illegal sale, distribution or possession of a controlled substance specified in Health and Safety Code 11054, 11055, 11056, 11057 or 11058; or c. Any offense in any other state which is the equivalent of any of the above-mentioned offenses; 2. The applicant is required to register under Penal Code § 290, or has engaged in conduct which would constitute an offense as described in subsection 1.a., above; 3. The applicant has committed an act, which, if committed in this state would have been a violation of law and which, if done by a permit holder under this Chapter, would be grounds for denial, suspension or revocation of the permit; 4. The applicant has been convicted of an act involving theft, dishonesty, fraud, deceit or moral turpitude or an act of violence, which act or acts are RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 13 substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a massage technician, or which act or acts occurred in connection with the provision of massage or the operation of a massage establishment; 5. The applicant has had a massage establishment permit or massage technician's permit or other similar license or permit denied, suspended or revoked for cause by a licensing authority or by any city, county or state within ten (10) years prior to the date of the application; 6. The applicant has knowingly made a false, misleading or fraudulent statement or omission of fact to the City in the permit application process; 7. The application does not contain the information required by § 5.22.060; 8. The applicant failed to pass any written or practical examination required by this Chapter. 9. The applicant has not satisfied the requirements of this Chapter in the time specified; 10. The applicant has a communicable disease that presents an unreasonable risk of harm to the applicant or the public; 11. If the application is denied for failure to comply with subsections 6 or 7, above, the applicant may not reapply for a period of six (6) months from the date the application was denied. 5.22.088 Requirements applicable to the operation of Massage Establishments. A. Facilities. 1. Structure. Massage establishments shall be located in a zoning district which permits such use. When a new massage establishment is proposed to be constructed, a set of plans shall be submitted to the City of Temecula for approval and shall be accompanied by the appropriate application and plan check fee. 2. Signs; display of permits. Each operator shall post and maintain, in compliance with all state and City laws, a readable sign identifying the premises as a massage establishment. Neither signs or the front of the business shall be illuminated by strobe or flashing lights. Each operator and/or on-duty manager shall display the massage establishment permit in a conspicuous public place in the lobby of the massage establishment. In addition, each operator and/or on-duty manager shall ensure the massage technician permit for each massage technician employed at the establishment (whether on-duty or not) is conspicuously displayed in a public place in the lobby, or is contained within a clearly marked binder at the front desk or counter, RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 14 and that each massage technician is wearing or has in his/her possession the identification card required by § 5.22.090A.3. at all times when in the massage establishment. Massage technician permits shall be available for inspection only to City or Police Department representatives while performing official duties. The operator and/or on-duty manager must also post, on a daily basis in a conspicuous public place in the lobby, the name of the operator and on-duty manager, as well as all on-duty massage technicians. 3. Services list. Each operator shall post and maintain a list of services available and the cost of such services, in a conspicuous public place within the premises. No operator or on duty manager shall permit, and no massage technician shall offer or perform, any service other than those posted. 4. Lighting. Each operator shall illuminate each room where massage is given with light equivalent to a 40-watt incandescent light bulb, and shall provide sufficient ventilation. Such lighting and ventilation shall otherwise comply with the current Mechanical and Building Code of the City. The lighting in each massage room shall be activated at all times while the patron is in such room or enclosure. 5. Bath facilities. A minimum of one toilet and one separate wash basin shall be provided for patrons in each massage establishment. Each wash basin shall be equipped with soap or detergent and hot running water at all times and shall be located in close proximity to the area devoted to the performing of massage services. A permanently installed soap dispenser, filled with soap, and a single service towel dispenser shall be provided at the restroom hand wash sink. Bar soap may not be used. A trash receptacle shall be provided in each toilet room. Showers may be provided at the operator's option. 6. Separate rooms. If male and female patrons are to be treated simultaneously at the same massage establishment, separate massage rooms shall be provided for male and female patrons provided, however, that massage establishments having separate massage rooms for male and female patrons may provide "couples massage" in a single room, subject to the requirements of this subsection 6. Couples massage, i.e., concurrent massage of two persons, is permitted within one room provided all other requirements of this Chapter are satisfied including, but not limited to, provision of a separate massage table and massage technician for each customer. Any room to be used for couples massage shall be sufficiently sized so as to comply with any and all applicable Building and Fire Codes and to permit free passage and movement of the massage technicians. 7. Maintenance. All facilities of the massage establishment must be in good repair and shall be thoroughly cleaned and sanitized each day the business is in operation. All walls, floors and ceilings of each restroom and shower area shall be made smooth and easily cleanable. No carpeting shall be installed in any of these areas. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 15 8. Massage table. A massage table shall be provided in each massage room and the massage shall be performed on this massage table. The tables shall have a minimum height of 28 inches. Two inch thick foam pads with maximum width of four feet may be used on a massage table and must be covered with durable, washable plastic or other waterproof material. Beds, floor mattresses and waterbeds are not permitted on the premises. B. Operations. 1. Equipment. Each operator and/or on duty manager shall provide and maintain on the premises adequate equipment for disinfecting and sterilizing instruments used in massage. 2. Inspections. a. By accepting a massage establishment permit, each massage establishment permit holder consents to the routine inspection of the massage establishment, without prior notice, by the City's Building and Safety Department, Fire Department, Police Department and the Health Department for the purpose of determining that the provisions of this Chapter, state law or other applicable laws or regulations are met. Routine inspections shall not occur more than twice a year, unless violations are found or complaints are received. Criminal investigations may be conducted at any time permitted by law. The Police Department may inspect the occupied massage rooms for the purpose of determining that the provisions of this Chapter are met upon occurrence of any of the conditions referenced in § 5.22.0806.25 which would require the posting of the Notice To All Patrons. During an inspection, the Police Department may verify the identity of all on-duty employees. b. Inspections of the massage establishment shall be conducted during business hours. C. No operator or manager, or his or her agent or employee, shall refuse to permit an inspection of the massage establishment pursuant to this subsection by a representative of the Police Department anytime it is occupied or open for business. 3. Linen. Common use of towels or linen shall not be permitted. Towels and linen shall be laundered or changed promptly after each use. Separate cabinets or containers shall be provided for the storage of clean and soiled linen, and such cabinets or containers shall be plainly marked: "clean linen" and "soiled linen". 4. Sterilizing equipment. Each massage technician shall provide and maintain at the location where the massage is performed adequate equipment for disinfecting and sterilizing instruments used in massage. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 16 5. Living prohibited. No person or persons shall be allowed to live inside the massage establishment at any time. All living quarters shall be separate from the massage establishment. No food of any kind shall be prepared for sale or sold in the establishment unless permitted by the Temecula Municipal Code, and an appropriate food vending permit is granted by the City or County of Riverside. 6. Alcoholic beverages/drugs; Prohibited materials. No person shall enter, be in or remain in any part of a massage establishment licensed under this Chapter while in possession of, consuming, using or under the influence of any alcoholic beverage or controlled substance. The owner, operator and on-duty manager shall be responsible to ensure that no such person shall enter or remain upon the massage establishment. Service of alcoholic beverages shall not be permitted. No contraception devices; i.e. condoms or other prophylactics, shall be allowed on the premises or possessed by any employee while on the premises. 7. Recordings. No electrical, mechanical or artificial device shall be used by the operator or any employee of the massage establishment for audio and/or video recording or for monitoring the performance of a massage or the conversation or other sounds in the massage rooms without the written consent of the patron. 8. Roster of employees. The owner, operator and/or manager of the massage establishment shall maintain a roster of all employees, including operators, managers and massage technicians, showing each name, nick-name and alias, home address, age, birth date, gender, height, weight, color of hair and eyes, phone number, social security number, date of employment, and duties of each employee. The foregoing roster and all information therein shall be maintained on the premises for a period of two (2) years following the termination of each employee. The operator or manager on duty shall make the roster immediately available for inspection upon demand by a City or Police Department representative performing official duties, during all hours the massage establishment is open for business. Information in the roster shall be available for inspection only to City or Police Department representatives while performing official duties. 9. Coverings. The massage technician shall provide to each patron clean, sanitary and opaque coverings capable of covering areas of the patron identified as prohibited massage areas in § 5.22.090A.1, including the genital area, anus and female breast(s). No common use of such coverings is permitted, and re-use is prohibited unless adequately cleaned and sanitized. 10. Records. Every person operating a massage establishment shall keep a record of the dates and hours of each treatment or service, the name and address of the patron, the name of technician administering such service and a description of the treatment or service rendered. A short medical history form shall be completed by the operator to determine if the patron has any communicable diseases, areas of pain, high blood pressure or any physical condition which may be adversely affected by massage. These records shall be prepared prior to administering any RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 17 massage or treatment and shall be retained on the premises for a period of 24 months after such treatment or service. These records shall be open to inspection upon demand only by officials charged with enforcement of this Chapter and for no other purpose. The Police Department shall periodically inspect the records to ensure compliance with this Section. The information furnished or secured as a result of any such records shall be used only to ensure and enforce compliance with this Chapter or any other applicable state or federal laws and shall remain confidential. Any unauthorized disclosure or use of such information by any person, including any officer or employee of the City, shall constitute a misdemeanor. 11. Hours of operation. The owner must advise the City, in writing, at the time of application for a permit of the business hours, and any change in hours occurring thereafter. No person shall operate a massage establishment or administer a massage in any massage establishment or at an outcall location booked by that massage establishment pursuant to § 5.22.080C between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. A massage begun any time before 9:00 p.m. must nevertheless terminate at 9:00 p.m. All customers, patrons and visitors shall be excluded from the massage establishment during these hours and be advised of these hours. The hours of operation must be displayed in a conspicuous public place in the lobby within the massage establishment and in the front window clearly visible from the outside. 12. Advertising. No permitted massage establishment shall place, publish or distribute, or cause to be placed, published or distributed, in any publication or any website, any advertising matter that depicts any portion of the human body that would reasonably suggest to prospective patrons that any service is available other than those services authorized in this Chapter. No massage establishment shall employ language in the text of such advertising that would reasonably suggest to a prospective patron that any service is available other than those services authorized by this Chapter. 13. Insurance. No person shall engage in, conduct or carry on the business of a massage establishment unless there is on file with the Police Department, in full force and effect at all times, documents issued by an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of California evidencing that the permit holder is insured under a liability insurance policy providing minimum coverage of $2,000,000 for personal injury or death to one person arising out of the operation of the massage establishment and/or the administration of any massage. Evidence of the required insurance shall be provided to the Chief of Police at the time an initial application, or renewal application, is filed. 14. Compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act and related laws. All massage establishments must comply with all state and federal laws and regulations providing for access to and receipt of services by disabled persons. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 18 15. Municipal Code compliance. Proof of compliance with all applicable provisions of the Temecula Municipal Code shall be provided upon request by the Police Department. 16. Doors. All front, reception, hallway or front exterior doors (except back or exterior doors used solely for employee entrance to and exit from the massage establishment) shall be unlocked during business hours, except as may be permitted by applicable law (such as the Temecula Fire Code) which allow for safety doors that may be opened from the inside when locked. No massage may be given within any cubicle, room, booth or any other area within a massage establishment that is fitted with a lock of any kind (such as a locking door knob, padlock, dead bolt, sliding bar or similar device), unless the door is an exterior door. 17. Access. No customer shall be permitted to be within a massage establishment except within the lobby/reception area, or area where such customer is receiving massage services, during hours of operation. No entry doors to any room shall be obstructed by any means. 18. Discrimination. No massage establishment may discriminate or exclude patrons on the basis of their race, sex, religion, age, disability or any other classification protected under federal or state laws, rules or regulations. 19. Prohibited massage areas. No massage technician or other person shall massage the genitals or anal area of any patron or the breasts of any female patron, nor shall any owner, operator or manager allow or permit such massage. No operator, manager or employee while performing any task or service associated with the massage business, shall be present in any room with another person unless the person's genitals, gluteal crease, anus and, in the case of a female, her breasts, are fully covered. 20. Clothing. All persons employed in a massage establishment shall be fully clothed at all times while acting on behalf of the business or performing under the massage establishment permit. Clothing shall be of a fully opaque, non-transparent material and shall provide complete covering of the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, anal area and chest area. 21. Names. No person granted a permit pursuant to this Chapter shall use any name or conduct business under any designation not specified in his or her permit. 22. Display of identification cards. The operator and on duty manager shall ensure that, at all times while in the massage establishment, while open for business, or otherwise while massage is being performed, each massage technician wears or has in his/her possession the identification card required by § 5.22.090A.3. Such identification shall be provided to City or Police Department representatives upon demand. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 19 23. Responsibility for conduct of massage establishment. The owner, operator and on duty manager shall be jointly responsible for the conduct of all employees while the employees are on the premises of the massage establishment. Any act or omission of an employee constituting a violation of any provision of this Chapter shall be deemed to be an act or omission of the owner, operator and on duty manager for purposes of determining whether the massage establishment permit should be suspended or revoked, or an application for such permit or renewal thereof, denied. 24. Licensed Massage Technicians. No owner or operator shall employ any person as a massage technician who does not have a valid massage technician permit issued pursuant to this Chapter. Every operator shall report to the Chief of Police any change of employees, whether by new or renewed employment, discharge or termination, on the form and in the manner required by the Chief of Police. The report shall contain the name of the employee and the date of hire or termination. The report shall be made within five (5) business days of the date of hire or termination. 25. Notices. In the event that any employee of the massage establishment or any person who has been aided and abetted by an employee of the massage establishment has been found, after full hearing by administrative proceeding or state court, to have violated any of the offenses listed in 5.22.040A.1 or 5.22.070A.1, then the Chief of Police may require posting of the following notice: NOTICE TO ALL PATRONS - THIS MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT AND THE MASSAGE ROOMS DO NOT PROVIDE COMPLETE PRIVACY AND ARE SUBJECT TO INSPECTION BY THE TEMECULA POLICE DEPARTMENT WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE. a. The notice set forth above shall be prepared and issued by the Chief of Police. b. The notice shall be conspicuously posted in locations within the massage establishment that are easily visible to any person entering the premises and in each massage room. The notice shall be posted for twelve (12) months following the date of the offense. C. The requirement for posting the notice described in this Section is cumulative and in addition to all other remedies for violations, and penalties, set forth in this Chapter or otherwise in the ordinances, laws, rules or regulations of the City of Temecula, County of Riverside and the State of California. 26. Licensed massage technician on premises. No massage establishment permitted hereunder shall be open for business without having at least one massage technician holding a current valid permit for the specific establishment on the premises and on duty at all times when the establishment is open. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 20 27. Display of permits and identification cards. The operator and/or designated manager(s) shall ensure that the massage technician permit for each massage technician employed at the establishment (whether on-duty or not) is displayed or retained as required by § 5.22.080A.2, and that each massage technician is wearing or has in his/her possession the identification required by § 5.22.090A.3. at all times when in the massage establishment. Such identification shall be provided to City or Police Department representatives upon demand. 28. Compliance with all laws. Each owner, operator and on-duty manager shall at all times comply with all provisions of this Chapter and all other applicable provisions of the Temecula Municipal Code, all conditions of any required zoning approvals, conditions imposed by the Chief of Police, and all state and federal laws, statutes and regulations. 3.22.090 Requirements applicable to Massage Technicians. A. All massage technicians shall comply with the following requirements and any other conditions imposed by the Chief of Police on issuance of the massage technician's permit. 1. Prohibited massage areas. No massage technician or other person shall massage the genitals or anal area of any patron or the breast(s) of any female patron. No massage technician or other person, while performing any task or service associated with the massage business, shall be present in any room with another person unless the person's genitals, gluteal crease, anus or, in the case of a female, her breasts, are fully covered. 2. Coverings. The massage technician shall provide to each patron clean, sanitary and opaque coverings capable of covering areas of the patron identified as prohibited massage areas in § 5.22.090A.1, including the genital area, anus and female breasts. No common use of such coverings is permitted, and re-use is prohibited unless adequately cleaned and sanitized. No massage technician shall massage any patron unless the person's genitals, gluteal crease, anus and, in the case of a female, her breasts, are fully covered at all times while the technician or other employee is present in the same room as the patron. 3. Identification cards. The massage technician shall wear or have in his/her possession a photo identification card prepared and issued by the Police Department at all times when present in the massage establishment. Such identification shall be provided to City regulatory officials upon demand. When worn, the identification card shall be worn on outer clothing with the photo side facing out. If a massage technician changes his or her business address, he or she shall, prior to such change, obtain from the Chief of Police a new photo identification card and advise the Police Department, in writing, of the new business address. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 21 4. Massage locations. Massage technicians shall not perform any massage at any location other than the massage establishment specified on the permit, or at an authorized outcall location booked by that massage establishment pursuant to § 5.22.080C. 5. Names. While on duty, the massage technician shall not use any name other than that specified on his or her photo identification card. 6. Clothing. Massage technicians and all massage establishment employees shall be fully clothed at all times while within a massage establishment or performing services under a massage establishment permit. Clothing shall be of a fully opaque, non-transparent material and provide complete covering of the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, anal area and chest area. 7. Inspections. By accepting a massage technician permit, each massage technician consents to the inspection of the massage establishment by the City's Building and Safety, Fire Department, Police Department, Code Enforcement and the Health Department for the purpose of determining that the provisions of this Chapter or other applicable laws or regulations are met. The massage technician further consents to the inspection of the occupied massage rooms by the Police Department for the purpose of determining that the provisions of this Chapter are met upon occurrence of any of the conditions referenced in § 5.22.080.6.25 which would require the posting of the Notice to All Patrons. 8. Every massage technician licensed under this Chapter shall annually complete at least twelve (12) hours of continuing education courses in massage from a recognized school of massage or equivalent organization as approved by the Chief of Police. Failure to complete such hours and submit proof of such completion in a form satisfactory to the Chief of Police at the time of permit renewal shall be grounds for denial of permit renewal. The minimum requirement of twelve (12) hours of continuing education courses to renew a permit is based on a five-hundred- hour education recommendation for membership in the American Massage Therapists Association (AMTA). If recommended hours of education for membership in the AMTA increase, the number of continuing education hours for renewal of permits under this Section shall increase by two (2) hours for each additional one-hundred (100) education hours required for membership in the AMTA. 6.22.100 Health certificate. A. Before issuing or renewing a massage technician permit, the Chief of Police shall submit the name and address of the applicant to the County Health Officer and shall advise the applicant that he or she must report for examination or, alternatively, the applicant may report to a private medical doctor duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of California for examination. The Chief of Police shall not issue the permit until advised that the applicant has been examined by the County R:/Ords 2008/Ords 08-12 22 Health Officer or his or her private physician and has been found to be free of any contagious or communicable disease as defined in this Chapter. B. In addition to the above requirements, upon submission of an initial application for a massage technician permit or upon annual renewal thereafter, the applicant shall submit to the Chief of Police a certificate from a medical doctor stating that the applicant has, within fifteen (15) days immediately prior thereto, been examined and found to be free of any contagious or communicable disease as defined in this Chapter; and if said applicant is not so found free of any contagious or communicable disease, his or her permit shall be denied or revoked by the Chief of Police. Failure to provide such health certificate shall result in revocation of the massage technician permit. C. For purposes of this Chapter, contagious and communicable diseases shall include tuberculosis and hepatitis A, B and C. D. Notwithstanding the above, if a person with a communicable disease wishes to be considered for licensing by the City, such individual may provide a report from an appropriate medical specialist concluding that, based upon a recent physical and review of medical records, allowing such individual to practice massage therapy would not interfere with the individual's treatment or health and that the individual's practice of massage therapy would not create a risk to patients, including patients with compromised immune systems. The report shall include any precautions recommended by the medical specialist. The Chief of Police shall consider the report and shall issue the permit within fifteen (15) days unless he or she finds that the risk of harm to the applicant or to massage customers if the permit is granted would be significant. E. The report or certification of an appropriate medical specialist must provide a description of his/her specialty and practice and include a detailed description of the physical and medical history he/she conducted, including the results of any tests for such individual. Any and all records provided by an applicant pursuant to this section shall be maintained as confidential medical records. 5.22.110 Transfers and changes of business. A. Every owner and operator shall report immediately to the Police Department any and all changes of ownership or management of the massage establishment or business, including, but not limited to, changes of manager or other person principally in charge, stockholders holding more than 5% of the stock of the corporation, officers, directors and partners, and any and all changes of name, style or designation under which the business is to be conducted and all changes of address or telephone numbers of the massage business. A change of location of any of the premises may be approved by the Chief of Police provided there is compliance with all applicable regulations of the City of Temecula. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 23 B. No massage establishment permit may be sold, transferred or assigned by a permit holder, or by operation of law, to any other person or persons. Any such sale, transfer or assignment, or attempted sale, transfer or assignment, shall be deemed to constitute a voluntary surrender of such permit and such permit shall thereafter be null and void; provided and excepting, however, that if the permit holder is a partnership and one or more of the partners should die, one or more of the surviving partners may acquire, by purchase or otherwise, the interest of the deceased partner or partners without effecting a surrender or termination of such permit, and in such case, the permit, upon notification to the Chief of Police, shall be placed in the name of the surviving partners. No massage technician permit may be sold, transferred or assigned by a permit holder or any operation of law to any other person or persons. 3.22.120 Fees. The City Council shall establish by resolution, and from time to time may amend, the fees for the administration of this Chapter, including required testing. Fees required by this Chapter shall be in addition to any required under any other chapter of this code. 3.22.130 Exemptions. A. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to the following classes of individuals or businesses while engaged in the performance of the duties of their respective professions: 1. Physicians, surgeons, chiropractors, osteopaths, acupuncturists and physical therapists who are duly licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California, provided such professionals are performing massage, as defined in this Chapter, at a licensed business as part of and to the extent permitted by their respective professions, and further provided massage is not being performed at any time by massage technicians or other persons who are required to obtain a massage technician permit pursuant to this Chapter; 2. Registered and licensed vocational nurses working on the premises of, and under the direct supervision of, a State licensed physician, surgeon, chiropractor or osteopath. Practical nurses or other persons that do not meet the requisite qualifications to obtain a massage technician permit under this Chapter, or any other person otherwise licensed by the State of California, whether or not employed by a physician, surgeon, chiropractor or osteopath, may not provide massage services or act as a massage technician; 3. Barbers and cosmetologists, licensed by the State of California, and persons licensed by the State of California to provide skin care {estheticians} or nail care (manicurists), as defined and to the extent provided in Business and Professions Code Section 7316, or any successor provision thereto, as follows: a. Barbers may massage the face and scalp; RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 24 b. Cosmetologists may massage the scalp, face, neck, arms, hands, feet below the calf, and the body extending from the clavicles upward; C. Estheticians may massage the face, neck, arms and the body extending from the clavicles upward; d. Manicurists may massage the hands, and feet below the calf. State licensed barbers, cosmetologists, estheticians and manicurists are subject to the exemption provided by this subsection 3 only while providing other barbering, cosmetology, skin care or nail care services in a facility licensed by the City of Temecula to provide such services. The provisions of this subsection 3 apply to apprentices of any of the foregoing who are licensed by the State of California, but only while performing barbering, cosmetology, skin care or nail care services under the direct supervision of a barber, cosmetologist, esthetician or manicurist who is subject to the exemption provided by this subsection. 4. Hospitals, nursing homes, sanitariums, or other health care facilities duly licensed by the State of California; 5. Fully accredited high schools, junior colleges, and colleges or universities whose athletic coaches and trainers are acting within the scope of their employment; 6. Trainers of amateur, semiprofessional or professional athletes or athletic teams; 7. Massage conducted in the course of education at any recognized school of massage, as defined herein. 8. "Chair massage", i.e., massage of the body from the waist up, to a person seated in a chair, provided by a City-permitted massage technician, provided the customer and massage technician are fully clothed and the massage is provided in full compliance with §5.22.090A.1 (no massage of prohibited massage areas.) 9. Persons and businesses exempt from the permitting requirements of this Chapter, pursuant to any State or Federal law that expressly preempts the permit requirements set forth in this Chapter, but only to the extent of such preemption. Any business or person claiming to be exempt pursuant to this subsection 9 shall have the burden of establishing the applicability of such exemption. R:/Ords 2008/Ords 08-12 25 B. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to massage services provided by the City of Temecula or by any City-authorized person, group, entity, business or organization as part of an official City program or function approved in writing by the City Manager. 5.22.140 Duration and renewal of permits. A. Permits for massage establishments and technicians may be renewed on a year-to-year basis provided the permit holder continues to meet the requirements of this Chapter. B. Applications for the permit renewal shall be filed with the Chief of Police at least sixty (60) days prior to expiration of the existing permit, otherwise the permit will lapse. At the discretion of the Chief of Police, a conditional permit pending satisfactory completion of the renewal application process may be issued to renewal applicants who have no permit revocation or suspension proceedings pending at the time of filing of the renewal application. C. Renewal applications shall set forth such information as may be required by the Chief of Police to update and verify the information contained in the original permit application. The applicant shall pay a new application fee when applying for renewal. 5.22.150 Suspension, revocation, permit denial, and appeal. A. Violation and noncompliance. The Chief of Police may refuse to renew a permit or may revoke or suspend an existing permit on the grounds that the applicant or permit holder has failed to comply with the permit conditions or other requirements of this Chapter. If a suspended permit lapses during the suspension period, a new application must be made at the end of the suspension period. In any such case, the applicant or permit holder shall have the right to appeal in the time and manner set forth in this Section. permit. B. Revocation, suspension, and denial of renewal of massage establishment 1. The Chief of Police may revoke or refuse to renew a massage establishment permit if he or she finds that any owner or operator: (i) no longer satisfies the requirements of § 5.22.040A, or (ii) has engaged in or permitted conduct that would be grounds for denial of a permit under § 5.22.040A., or (iii) has engaged in or permitted conduct that would be a violation of § 5.22.0806.19, B.20, B.24 or § 5.22.090 A.1, A.2 or A.6, as applies to massage technicians performing outcall massage; or (iv) has violated any provision of this Chapter within one year following suspension under subsection 2 below; or (v) has demonstrated an inability to operate or manage the massage establishment in a law abiding manner, thus necessitating one or more criminal investigations of the establishment by law enforcement officers. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 26 2. The Chief of Police may suspend a massage establishment permit for a period of thirty (30) days for violation of any subsection of § 5.22.080 not listed in subsection 1. above. permit. C. Revocation, suspension, and denial of renewal of massage technician 1. The Chief of Police may revoke or refuse to renew a massage technician permit if he or she finds that the technician: (i) no longer satisfies the requirements of § 5.22.070, or (ii) has engaged in conduct that would be grounds for denial of a permit under § 5.22.070A, or (iii) has engaged in conduct that would be a violation of § 5.22.090A.1, A.2 or A.6, or (iv) has violated any provision of this Chapter within one (1) year following suspension under subsection 2 below. 2. The Chief of Police may suspend a massage technician permit for a period of 30 days for any violation of any section or subsection of this Chapter not listed in subsection 1, above. D. Notice. When the Chief of Police concludes that grounds for denial of a new permit or permit renewal, or permit suspension or revocation exist, the Chief of Police shall serve the applicant or permit holder, either personally or by certified mail addressed to the business or residence address of applicant or permit holder, with a Notice of Denial of Permit, or Notice of Intent to Suspend, Revoke or Deny Renewal. This Notice shall state the reasons for the decision, the effective date of the decision, the right of the applicant or permit holder to appeal the decision to a Hearing Officer, and that the decision will be final if no written appeal is filed within the time permitted. E. Appeal. 1. The right to file a written appeal shall terminate upon the expiration of fifteen (15) days of the date of mailing by the Chief of Police of the Notice specified in subsection D, above. The written appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk of the City of Temecula and shall be accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount as set by City Council resolution, and the City Clerk shall promptly forward a copy of the appeal to the Chief of Police. 2. In the event an appeal is timely filed, the denial of renewal, suspension or revocation shall not be effective until a final decision has been rendered by the Hearing Officer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Chief of Police finds and determines that permitting a massage establishment to continue to operate, or a massage technician to continue to provide massage, pending the appeal hearing, would present an unreasonable and immediate risk to the public health and safety, the denial of renewal, suspension or revocation may take effect immediately. If no timely appeal is filed, the denial of renewal, suspension or revocation shall become effective upon expiration of the period for filing appeals. RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 27 3. Upon receipt of a timely appeal, the City Clerk shall make arrangements for the selection of a Hearing Officer to conduct the Appeal Hearing. Not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the Appeal Hearing, the City Clerk shall notify the Chief of Police and the Appellant of the names of three qualified attorneys or retired Superior Court or Appellate Court judges submitted to the City Clerk by a reputable firm providing mediators and arbitrators to serve as a panel from which the Hearing Officer will be selected. Within five (5) days of the date of mailing the notice of the available panel, the Chief of Police and the Appellant may notify the City Clerk in writing that he or she elects to remove one of the three potential Hearing Officers. The City Clerk shall then request the mediation and arbitration firm to select one of the remaining names on the list as the designated Hearing Officer for the Appeal Hearing. The Hearing Officer shall be fair and impartial and shall have no bias for or against the Chief of Police or the Appellant. 4. At the Appeal Hearing, the Hearing Officer shall receive oral and written evidence from the Chief of Police and the Appellant. The Hearing Officer shall have authority to administer oaths to those persons who will provide oral testimony. The evidence presented need not comply with the strict rules of evidence set forth in the California Evidence Code but shall be the type of evidence upon which reasonable and prudent people rely upon in the conduct of serious affairs. The Hearing Officer shall have broad authority to control the proceedings and to provide for cross examination of witness in a fair and impartial manner. The Chief of Police shall have the burden of proof to establish by clear and convincing evidence the facts upon which his decision is based. The Appeal Hearing shall be recorded by audio recording. Any party may, at its sole cost and expense, utilize the services of a certified court reporter to prepare the verbatim record of the hearing. If a court reporter is used, the transcript prepared shall be made available for purchase to both parties. The Hearing Officer may continue the Appeal Hearing from time to time, but only upon written motion of a party showing good cause for the continuance. 5. The Hearing Officer may uphold, modify or reverse the decision of the Chief of Police. Within ten (10) days of the conclusion of the Appeal Hearing, the Hearing Officer shall render his or her decision and make written findings supporting the decision. He or she shall send the decision to the City Clerk. Upon receipt of the Hearing Officer's Decision, the City Clerk shall send a copy of it to the Chief of Police and the Appellant, along with a proof of mailing. 6. Within ten (10) days from date of the City Clerk's mailing of the Decision, either party may appeal the Decision to the City Manager. The appeal shall be in writing and filed with the City Clerk, and shall state the grounds of the appeal and specify the errors in the Hearing Officer's decision. Upon receipt of the Appeal, the City Clerk shall schedule the Appeal for review by the City Manager to occur within thirty (30) days. 7. The City Manager's review of the Appeal shall be limited to determining whether the evidence received at the Appeal Hearing supports the findings R:/Ords 2008/Ords 08-12 28 and decision of the Hearing Officer. The City Manager shall be limited to considering the evidence presented at the Appeal Hearing. No public hearing shall be required and no new evidence shall be taken by the City Manager. The City Manager's decision on the Appeal shall be set forth in a written opinion. The City Clerk shall mail a copy of the City Manager's opinion to the Chief of Police and the Appellant along with a proof of service. Any legal action challenging the City Manager's decision shall be filed within ninety (90) days of the date of the proof of service of mailing of the City Manager's opinion, pursuant to § 1094.5, et seq. of the California Code of Civil Procedure. The City Manager's decision shall be final and effective upon mailing of the opinion. If the Appellant prevails following a final decision, the appeal fee shall be returned. 5.22.160 Violation and penalty. A. Violation of any provision of this Chapter is a misdemeanor and is subject to enforcement pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 1.20, 1.21 and/or 1.24 of Title 1 of this code. The provisions of this Chapter may be enforced by members of the Riverside County Sheriffs Department, persons employed by the City whose job descriptions require the person to enforce the provisions of this Code, including but not limited to code enforcement officers, and such other Enforcement Officials as described in Section 1. 16.020 of this Code or its successor sections. B. Any massage establishment operated, conducted or maintained contrary to the provisions of this Chapter shall be, and the same is declared to be, unlawful and a public nuisance, and the City may, in addition to or in lieu of prosecuting a criminal or administrative action hereunder, commence an action or actions, proceeding or proceedings for the abatement, removal and enjoinment thereof, in the manner provided by law, and shall take such other steps and shall apply to such court or courts as may have jurisdiction to grant such relief as will abate or remove such massage establishment businesses and restrain and enjoin any person from operating, conducting or maintaining a massage establishment or contrary to the provisions of this Chapter." SECTION 3: Time for Compliance. Commencing on the effective date of this Ordinance and Chapter hereby adopted, all permits are to be issued in accordance with the provisions of said Chapter. Existing massage practitioners' and/or technicians' permits that are valid and in good standing as of the effective date of this Ordinance, shall continue in effect until expiration, provided the affiliated massage establishment permit remains valid. All existing and validly permitted massage practitioner or technician permit holders shall have an additional three (3) years from the effective date of this Ordinance to meet and comply with the 500-hour training and testing requirement (if testing is required.) provided, however, that the 500-hour training and testing requirement of this Ordinance shall not apply if during this period the Massage Therapy Organization of the State of California established pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 384 of the Statues of 2008, Chapter 10.5 of the Business and Professions Code, commencing at Section 4600 ("SB RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 29 731 has implemented its certification program pursuant to SB 731 and such massage practitioner or massage technician is certified by the Massage Therapy Organization. Each massage establishment permit holder legally doing business as of the effective date of this Ordinance shall apply for a new permit not later than one-hundred twenty (120) days from said date, and shall comply with all new permit holder requirements for issuance of a permit before such a new permit may be issued. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in order to avoid a lapse of permit, owners and operators having massage establishment permits that will expire within said 120 day period must apply for a new permit within such time as is provided for a new permit application to be processed in accordance with this Ordinance. If a permit is denied for any such business, the business shall cease operation upon issuance of the decision of the Chief of Police, unless a timely appeal is filed in accordance with the Chapter adopted hereby. In such case, the business shall cease operation if and when there is a final decision upholding the decision of the Chief of Police. SECTION 4: Severability. The City Council declares that, should any article, provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of this Ordinance or the Chapter hereby adopted be or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences and words of the Chapter hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 30 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 Ordinance No. 08-12 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 18th day of November, 2008, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 31 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM NO. 12 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT NOVEMBER 18, 2008 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:40 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Edwards, Naggar, Washington, Comerchero ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Roberts Also present were City Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No reports at this time. CSD CONSENT CALENDAR 18 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Approve the minutes of October 28, 2008. 19 Award the Construction Contract for the Temecula Community Center Expansion, Project No. PW06-05 RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Award a construction contract for the Temecula Community Center Expansion, Project No. PW06-05 to Erickson Hall Construction Company in the amount of $1,184,000; 19.2 Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $118,400, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount; 19.3 Make a finding that the Temecula Community Center Expansion project is exempt from Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) fees. MOTION: Director Edwards moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Director Naggar seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Director Roberts who was absent. RAMinutes\111808 CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT No report at this time. CSD GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT No report at this time. CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS No additional comments. CSD ADJOURNMENT At 7:41 p.m., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, November 25, 2008, at 5:30 p.m. for a Closed Session with regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero. President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] RAMinutes\111808 2 ITEM NO. 13 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGENDA REPORT TO: General Manager/Board of Directors FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading Project No. PW06-05 Phase 1 PREPARED BY: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works Bill McAteer, Construction Manager RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: 1. Accept the Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading, Project No. PW06-05 as complete; and 2. Direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; and 3. Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: The Community Services District Board of Directors awarded a design contract to Meyer and Associates for the preparation of the master plan and construction documents for an expansion at the Temecula Community Center (TCC). During the development of the master plan, it was determined that two historically significant structures, (the Escallier House and Barn), that occupied the future Old Town Civic Center site could be relocated to the southern-most part of the TCC site. To expedite this relocation, a grading contract was awarded separately to prepare the site. On April 8, 2008, the Board of Directors awarded a contract to Addison Equipment Rental for the grading of the TCC Expansion in the amount of $49,995.00 and authorized a contingency in the amount of $4,999.50, 10% of the contract amount for a total authorization of $54,994.50. On June 24, 2008, the Board of Directors authorized additional funds in the amount of $1,980.33 to stabilize unsuitable soil for a final contract amount of $56,974.83. The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. All work will be warranted for a period of one (1) year from the date of acceptance by the Board of Directors. The City had beneficial use of this project site on May 20, 2008. The retention for this project was released pursuant to the provisions of Public Contract Code Section 7107. FISCAL IMPACT: The Temecula Community Center Expansion project is a Capital Improvement Program and is funded through a Community Development Block Grant, Development Impact Fees and Quimby. The total construction cost is $56,974.83, which is comprised of the original contract amount of $49,995.00 and the authorized contingency of $6,979.83. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Maintenance Bond 3. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. Box 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. 2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. 3. The Nature of Interest is a Contract which was awarded by the City of Temecula to Addison Equipment Rental, 10206 Elm Ave., Fontana, CA 92335 to perform the following work of improvement: Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading Project No. PW06-05 Phase 1 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on November 25, 2008. That upon said contract the Suretec Insurance Companywas surety for the bond given by the said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading, Project No. PW06-05 Phase 1 6. The location of said property is: 28816 Pujol St, Temecula, CA Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of November, 2008 City of Temecula STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of November, 2008. City of Temecula Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk CAProgram Files (x88)1Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp1897839.doc Form May 12 08 01:24p Addison Equipment Rental 9098226898 Bond Number 4360206 CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAINTENANCE BOND PROJECT NO PWO6.05 PHASE 9 TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION GRADING KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: Addison Equipment Rental, 10206 Elm Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335 NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTORS Corporation a - hereinafter called Principal, and Lhll;n wl~oUxrra CwporarkY, PnsbsasMp br'!ndwldun9 SUreTec Insurance Company, 3033 51h Avenue, Suite 300, San Diego CA 92103 NAME AND ADDRESS OF'SURETy hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF hereinafter Called OWNER, in tho penal sum of Fifty Six Thousand F DOLLARS and 83/100 CENTS 56,474.53 1 in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten (10%) of the Contract value payable by the said Cky of Temecula under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION Is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the 8th day of Aril 20 08 ' a op of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PWOg 06 PHASE I, TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION GRADING. WHEREAS, Said Contract provides that the principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of one (f) year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER, against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period; and WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and the final estimate was approved on Mav 2 , 20 08. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if wilhin one yper from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work, and the carrying out of the terns of said Contract. or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this instrument shall be void. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the fact) amount speed, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shalt be included, including reasonable attomeys' fees incurred by WNrEMNCE BOND M4 0.YY•MRO1E4tBF+a usr,.trum,,,...y~rp( py~gp",yx. May 14 08 02:40p Rddison Equipment Rental 9098226898 p.2 the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications. 14th Signed and sealed this (Seal) SURETY fay; Kevin P. Reed (Name) Attorney-in-Fact (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: day of May PRINCIPAL. By 20 os Robert W. Dye Jr. (Name) Vice President (Title) By, (Name) Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney (Title) MAINTCNANCEGON0 M-2 pv;ir,~i~odr.C~3NVramwo Usionscui~ccM,u,nirCenserera~r<roo.wana:;.i~ CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of ORANGE On _ 4 9 2cL)~ before ntc, Brandon K. Grindel, Notary Public (love lasers * and aids of dw mTmm) personally appeared 9~-L~ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persanW whose subscn-bed to the within instrument and fledged to me that j'sbmWmy executed the same in ' authorized capecity(ies), and that b ' ' signattx*pf on the instrument the person(p, or the entity upon behalf of which the person , executed the instrurent. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. W ESS [try hand arrd ofiCiel Seal. BRANDON K. GRINDEEL ~n Comm. # 1662838 rn UI NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA N ORANGE COUNTY My COMM. EXP. MAY 1, 2OtU Of Navy Pk"k (Notary 3ertl ......~..........W.~ ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL. MNI+'ORMATION DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOC'U'MENT fri*ordacnptinno(mVmd ddae wo) (Tick or dekwiytim ofatttmb d doe mm" eo otinmd) Numba of Psps Dootmtant D*W `r ! A A_ ~y ~.IAdoklwol infavtaatias) CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER 0 Individtat (s) O Corporate Of kvr (rmg) Partner(s) Attorney-ia-l=tect 0 Trustee(s) 0 Odd Kt INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLEIINO TMS FORM Av empta" At C&%%*ro awr esrwar wslMlke Co y, as V,V atow is dhr navy stcOm or w arraraw aabmwkwtowvvv fo w curt M ! 1 caw~ oars a+s u*pd to 40 aberrant. The etr+v)r0 4 (~a vbrywsrr 1r M k ntaolad masi* of Ca4tnda bt sack tlatmmew mW dkvmww I 4pm - *nhiW m mV be plwsd at swk o iarmww so Axv m dw t bhp Aw aw raynlrr air rtvwry to Aa ma mUW"m dkprJb• a nerory to • ft m and Coaaay iaYmnmmt mm be the Soto and Cotrny wbate ft doe+ar m ms(s) p"WaMy aFr+ellew before the notary p"C tot a edp 0& • ltwe of as kstim awat be die data that do si~s) Vataarity 4" mao4 %4" a m dm M dw mos 4Me Lire aduowletipta[ it ootapieled. • The awtsy pbrlt swat /virt his or her tttavt as it appaats •ri0vin bit a tar cawvlilmYsn lorbatved by a oottttta avd the* yrtur tfda (vtapey Oak) + Perim On cacao(s) of doarma si "90 who posonaNy appear at rho Neat of mworrimm" "mduciW rooeai if a -0 ankh the v4pwre an 1140 Vnei die ofe or ro"M by oar iMM.04 forma (i.er no fang Favlwe to oenoetly trtdiCSla dot Groan n NA oaatd help to mma drt 2UU4VWWMt;APA V17-JQ.Vr W"73•9N5 wr1W14ovyC1MmCurn Smwdy attneh Ohm dne owet to v!e sipW domme It CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of ORANGE Uri - /A / t ko0 before me, Brandon K. Grindel, Notary Public ()sere iwrnt arwe aAd toga of air o(ftas) personally appeared ~ohQ27 l~ t~ - who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the pefsoi o whose na ngg& sasu mcrbed to the within instrument and =knowledged to me that*ydw hvy executed the same in authorized capaciity(ias) and that by r si&u" on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person(A) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregping paragraph is true and corrmt. _ BRANDON K. GRINDEL 'fNESS my Mind and official seal. 77nn COMMA 1662838 rr~~ ( V, = ~ 140TARYPU9LIC•CAIIFORMA 41 ~•^i ORANGE CGUMt1. ASI COl!f.1. EXP. }AY 1. 2010 ~6 [""^•~7 3ew+o..-/~'TSV[••R•T?VM'T17~•VV9Y•Oq~'T1 Riptaare eFNatary Public ADDMONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT (Ti* or dacrpdw of asacfbd deco) - (Tick or *bMiptIm of oUsdW docwlraK caatimcd) ~vi Number of Pil~e3 . _ DoeutYWM I~rie~ I o_.. (Add4hoW tnfm w6m) CAPACITY CLAIMED BY 'THE SIGNER Q individwl (1) Caponte.Uft~r D Paatner(s) ❑ Ana may-in-!:tact ❑ Tnnt INM K: i IONS FOR C OMPL"No Ims aay driwewfwilprtwr cottpkrrr err C.A7'rWn ~ eavok we '%y - , abate In A hr wowry srraios or a ar'rtr se uchm rkAm • &W and Cotray ofo 000 mart be the l%w wd Cotmy where Ale 4WANAt A*"Ks) pefsaa * oPpt+r, Vetere die Mwy public for adutowledpateAt • thm of woosrbw*m aaaat be Ow date Art the sip ws) Pasotrtty oppomw v hkh amd o%dwstaaterateAteakawMedgwat isemo kud. • The nowy pwk wait pest ho or ter rears sa it appoats 04i0riw We a ha aswsadn faifeai' br s assets awd dM yww tft (nwwy pWWk) • Pfim 00 hMnt(s) of doottttteat sipuer(s) who pasmNey appear at the time of notan " • fA&CW Ate tvttect SWCAar or pkwd fomK by acaft off woortc, lotm (i.e iad *AVjyr s Asti )err cftb p the MOM form F46n a eormcdy l III, aas tarp in bnow m mAy iatd w rr , * g - cf drottwieat rooo *ft • TW INOWY real k0marira torch be der and 0woVz$u ally reprodsciblc. f posion ftw no MW oast a 1wa. if rat wp maioa UWAkm ft?meal if a JW06 wr era Pstw ft MbWwiro aow0ft a difrOOM sclowwWwwo fenw • ~ the Y tlik W" w 8kh dw stptsetre an Me wO doe office of cowlyde& ♦ Addkim d afrmom is m r pWW bra cotdd bap to omtni OW 8dI3I&0 rdprrrt is NO s boW s wAdrod to a dif wo daeurwtrl. bdioase Barre w"0f4INh Ralf dtretattetr4 at w*& of papas aad date. i MOM rite ap t"y ciw"d by dw S "W, if the der 00 rapaeitr it s atporsse O iew, adicare dw We (i.a UK). (!FO, %"guy). • Saw* a nch do 4mumtt to doe sipred decumertt awe .entma nna rtz tv.v~ sN sra•YSes WWWX4U41yLVAV .eom POA 510049 SureTec Insurance Company (LIMITED POWER OF ATTORNEY Know All Men by 21ese Presents, That SURETEC INSURANCE COMPANY (the "Company"), a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas, and having its principal office in Houston, Harris County, Texas, does by these presents make, constitute and appoint Kevin P. Reed of Santa Ana, CA its true and lawful Attorney(s)-in-fact, with full power and authority hereby conferred in its name, place and stead, to execute, acknowledge and deliver any and all bonds, recognizances, undertakings or other instruments or contracts of suretyship to include waivers to the conditions of contracts and consents of surety, providing the bond penalty does not exceed Five Million Dollars and no/100 ($5,000,000.00) and to bind the Company thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such bonds were signed by the President, sealed with the corporate seal of the Company and duly attested by its Secretary, hereby ratifying and confirming all that the said Attorney(s)-in-Fact may do in the premises. Said appointment shall continue in force until _ 10131/09 and is made under and by authority of the following resolutions of the Board of Directors of the SureTec Insurance Company: Be it Resolved, that the President, any Vice-President, any Assistant Vice-President, any Secretary or any Assistant Secretary shall be and is hereby vested with full power and authority to appoint any one or more suitable persons as Attorney(s)-in-Fact to represent and act for and on behalf of the Company subject to the following provisions: Attorney-in-Fact may be given full power and authority for and in the name of and of behalf of the Company, to execute, acknowledge and deliver, any and all bonds, recognizances, contracts, agreements or indemnity and other conditional or obligatory undertakings and any and all notices and documents canceling or terminating the Company's liability thereunder, and any such instruments so executed by any such Attorney-in-Fact shall be binding upon the Company as if signed by the President and sealed and effected by the Corporate Secretary. Be it Resolved, that the signature of any authorized officer and seal of the Company heretofore or hereafter affixed to any power of attorney or any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, and any power of attorney or certificate bearing facsimile signature or facsimile seal shalt be valid and binding upon the Company with respect to any bond or undertaking to which it is attached. (Adopted at a meeting held on 20'" of April, 1999.) In Witness Whereof, SURETEC INSURANCE COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed by its President, and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed this 20th day of June, A.D. 2005. ~~RAy~ TEC URANCE COMPANY By:_ State of Texas ss:' `2,.t T;ECURANCE COMPANY tw 1T B.J.Ki g, reside t County of Harris' On this 20th day of June, A.D. 2005 before me personally came B.J. King, to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say, that he resides in Houston, Texas, that he is President of SURETEC INSURANCE COMPANY, the company described in and which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said Company; that the seal affixed to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said Company; and that he signed his name thereto by like order. MichelleDyenny Fct ~tQ(y/r ~,LWI~ &ate of TOM$ W Cow EMTM Michelle Denny, Notary P lic August 27, 2€ 08 My commission expires August 27, 2008 I, M. Brent Beaty, Assistant Secretary of SURETEC INSURANCE, COMPANY, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Power of Attorney, executed by said Company, which is still in full force and effect; and furthermore, the resolutions of the Board of Directors, set out in the Power of Attorney are in full force and effect. Given under any hand and the seal of said Company at Houston, Texas this ~11 day ~~l ( 20 A.D. Any instrument issued in excess of the penalty stated above is totally void and without any validity. For verification of the authority of this power you may call (713) 812-0800 any business day between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm CST. CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OCT ZUUB TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO. PW06-05 PHASE 1 TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION GRADING This is to certify that '(hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR") declares to the City of Temecula, unde,/loath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW06-05 PHASE 1, TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION GRADING, situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: INSERT ADDRESS OR DESCRIBE LOCATION OF WORK HERE The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute Pursuant to Public Contract Code §7100, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. CONTRACTOR Dated: 1 C% l By: ,t< L Cam. Signature Print Name and Title ITEM NO. 14 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGENDA REPORT TO: General Manager/Board of Directors FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12 PREPARED BY: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works Bill McAteer, Construction Manager RECOMMEN DATION: That the Board of Directors: 1. Accept the Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12 as complete; and 2. Direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; and 3. Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: This project included the demolition and removal of the existing roller hockey rink dasher board system components and the procurement and installation of an entirely new aluminum frame and composite dasher board system including: penalty, player and scorer boxes, benches, professional goals and protective netting. On April 8, 2008, the Board of Directors awarded a contract to YAKKAR for this work in the amount of $178,350.00 and authorized a contingency in the amount of $17,835.00, 10% of the contract amount for a total authorization of $196,185.00. The project had $16,952.65 in change orders bringing the total cost of construction to $195,302.65. With regard to the changes over the original contract amount, these expenses related to a complete resurfacing and striping of the rink and for additional anchorage of the dasher board system to enhance safety. The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. All work will be warranted for a period of one (1) year from the date the District obtained "beneficial use" (i.e., August 8, 2008) of the project improvements. The retention for this project was released pursuant to the provisions of Public Contract Code Section 7107. FISCAL IMPACT: The Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board Replacement Project is a Capital Improvement Project and is funded by Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fees, as noted above, the total cost to complete this project was $195,302.65. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Maintenance Bond 3. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. Box 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. 2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. 3. The Nature of Interest is a Contract which was awarded by the City of Temecula to YAKKAR, 1440 Hunters Trail, Glendora, CA 91740 to perform the following work of improvement: Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System Project No. PW07-12 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on November 25, 2008. That upon said contract the Western Surety Company was surety for the bond given by the said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12 6. The location of said property is: 30875 Rancho Vista Rd., Temecula, CA Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of November, 2008 City of Temecula STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of November, 2008. City of Temecula Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk CAProgram Files (x88)1Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp1898187.doc Form ' CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAINTENANCE BOND EXECUTED IN DUPLICATE BOND NUMBER 70494212 PROJECT NO. PW07-12 PREMIUM INCLUDED IN PERFORMANCE BOND ROLLER HOCKEY RINK DASHER BOARD SYSTEM KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: ' YAKAR, 1440 HUNTERS TRAIL, GLANDORA CA 91740 NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S ' a , hereinafter called Principal, and ((11 in whether a Corporation, Partnership or indviduaq WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, 101 S. PHILLIPS SIOUX FALLS SD 57117 NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of SEVENTEEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS and 00 CENTS 00 ) in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten (10%) of the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the ' Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the 4th day of APRIL , 20 08, a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PW07- 12, ROLLER HOCKEY RINK DASHER BOARD SYSTEM. WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of one (1) year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER, against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period; and WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and the final estimate was approved on AUGUST 8 20 08 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work, and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract, or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this instrument shall be void. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by MAINTENANCE BOND M-1 RACIPIPROIECT51PW071PW07-12 Roller Hockey RinkIPW07-12 Bid Doc.doc the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications. Signed and sealed this 13th day of OCTOBER 20 08 (Seal) SURETY WESTERN SURETY COMPANY PRINCIP xAR By' By: SHAWN BILUME CI ICq ylq~ rn~,~ (Nzme; (Na[~qJe) ' A7: TORVEY-liv-^ACT f Y`2 S, e N K (i itie) (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney (Name) (Title) IAe11.RCNAmr[ PMIII ALA M4rIP%PPr16r.TC1P61 APWR7.19 PMH 14,*w RInkY3"7_19 AW IW dm CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of RIVERSIDE On O before me, R. CISNEROS "NOTARY PUBLIC" (Here insert tanno and tide of the officer) personally appeared SHAWN BLUME who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personA whose nameoYiskve-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/helf4heir authorized capacityfies), and that by his/heF#heirsignatureo) on the instrument the person(p7 or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. N Comm #1796916 NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA m RIVERSIDE COUNTY (Notary Sean My Comm. Expires June 7, 2012 J Signature of Notary Public ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT (Title or description of attached document) (Tide or description of attached document continued) Number of Pages _ Document Date (Additional information) CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER ❑ Individual (s) ❑ Corporate Officer (Title) ❑ Partner(s) ❑ Auomey-in-Fact ❑ Trustee(s) ❑ Other INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM Any acbmrhrdgmnu contained in Callibrttn must comam verbiage exactor as appears above in the notary section or a separate acknowbedgmeni form guar be property completed and marched to shat document. The ony mcepaw u if a document is ro be recorded outside of California. In such innamex any alrernatrre acknariedgmenr verbiage m may be printed an saeh a document so long as the verbiage does not require the notary m do something that is illegal far a votary in California (i. e. cenifytng the authorized capadty of the signer). Please cluck rite document carefullyforproper notarial wording and mach this farm grmquired. • Stare and County information must be the State and County where the document signer(s) personally appeared before the notary public for acknowledgment • Owe of nouriawion must be the date that the signer(s) personally appeared which must also be the same date the acknowledgment is completed. • The notary public must prim his or her name a it appears within his or her commission followed by a comma and then your tide (notary public). • Print the name(s) of document signer(s) who personally appear at the time of notarization. • Indicate the correct singular or plural forms by creasing off incorrect forms (i.c. hdshe/dey; is /are) or circling the correct forms. Failure to correctly indicate this information may lad to rejection of document according, • The notary seal impression must be clear and photographically reproducible. Impression must not cover text or lines. If Seel impression smudges, re-seal if a sufficient area permits, otherwise complete a different acknowledgment forth. • Signature of the notary public must match the signature on file with the office of the county clerk. 4 Additional information is not required but could help to ensure this acknowledgment is net misused or attached to a different document. O Indicate die or type of attached document, number of poges and data. d Indicate the capacity claimed by the sib. If the claimed capacity is a corporate officer, mdicwc the tide (i.e. CEO, CFO, Secretary). • Securely omen this docunent to the signed document 200SVemion CAPAVI2.10.07800-873.9865 www.NaaryC7ossts.cam Western Surety Company POWER OF ATTORNEY APPOINTING INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEY-IN-FACT Know All Men By These Presents, That WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, a South Dakota corporation, is a duly organized and existing corporation having its principal office in the City of Sioux Falls, and State of South Dakota, and that it does by virtue of the signature and seal herein affixed hereby make, constitute and appoint Michael D Stong, Rosemary Cisneros, Shawn Blume, Jeremy Pendergast, Individually of Riverside, CA, its true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, seal and execute for and on its behalf bonds, undertakings and other obligatory instruments of similar nature - In Unlimited Amounts - and to bind it thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such instruments were signed by a duly authorized officer of the corporation and all the acts of said Attorney, pursuant to the authority hereby given, are hereby ratified and confirmed. This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the By-Law printed on the reverse hereof, duly adopted, as indicated, by the shareholders of the corporation. In Witness Whereof, WESTERN SURETY COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed by its Senior Vice President and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed on this 19th day of October, 2007. Op WESTERN SURETY COMPANY Paul . Bruflat, Senior Vice President State of South Dakota 1 Jj ss County of Minnehaha On this 19th day of October, 2007, before me personally came Paul T. Bru lat, to me known, who, being by me duly swom, did depose and say: that he resides in the City of Sioux Falls, State of South Dakota; that he is the Senior Vice President of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY described in and which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed pursuant to authority given by the Board of Directors of said corporation and that he signed his time thereto pursuant to like authority, and acknowledges same to be the act and deed of said corporation. My commission expires + D. KRELL November 30, 2012 ~HO + x orri • SOUTH UTH DmAKOfAY /J• ♦ti......ti......~.titir..+~.ti~...~.titi.... D. Krell, NoTliry Public CERTIFICATE 1, L. Nelson, Assistant Secretary of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY do hereby certify that the Power of Attorney hereinabove set forth is still in force, and further certify that the By-Law of the corporation printed on the reverse, hereof is still in force. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the seal of the said corporation this I ~f t I day of(,'~i.('j , ;XX V . +/s„ItETyc WESTERN SURETY COMPANY 4'M L. Nelson, Assistant Secretary Form F4280-09-06 CITYOF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO PM7-12 ROLLER HOCKEYMNK DASHER BOARD SYSTEM This is to certify that 1" Y'* (tom the 'CONTRACTORI declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, toils, equipment, and aii other bid conhaded for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTORS agents, employees or -subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of We contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the buil' g, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of Improvement known as PROJECT NO. M0742, ROLLER HOCKEY RINK DASHER BOARD SYSTEM, situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: KA The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would Mute grounds for any third party to daim a Stop Notice against of any ..unpaid suns owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connectiom with the final payment of the Cordrad, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute Pursuers to Public Conrad Code §710D, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the city of TemecrrM and all agents and employees of the City. and each of them, from arty and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. CONTRACTOR Dated: < < , ty (fib 9y Signature M akxtw Am,,-, f a:, PM Narne and TO& REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM NO. 15 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 18, 2008 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:41 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Washington ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Roberts Also present were City Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments at this time. RDA CONSENT CALENDAR 20 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Approve the minutes of October 28, 2008. 21 Professional Services Agreement between Agency and Fehr & Peers RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 That the Agency Members approve a Professional Services Agreement between the Agency and Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants for the Old Town Parking Management Plan, in the amount of $53,510; 21.2 Approve a 10% contingency for an amount of $5,351. 22 Old Town Parking License Agreement - Munson RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 That the Agency Members extend the Old Town License Agreement between the Temecula Redevelopment Agency and Dennis Munyon for an annual amount of $9,500. RAMinutes1111808 MOTION: Agency Member Comerchero moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Agency Member Washington seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Agency Member Roberts who was absent. RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT No reports at this time. RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS No reports at this time. RDA ADJOURNMENT At 7:42 p.m., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, November 25, 2008, at 5:30 p.m. for a Closed Session with regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California Ron Roberts, Chairperson ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] RAMinutes1111808 2 RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT ITEM NO. 1 6 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: Executive Director/Agency Members FROM: John Meyer, Redevelopment Director DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Redevelopment Departmental Monthly Report RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. REDEVELOPMENT Town Square Market Place As part of the Civic Center Master Plan, the City has created a development opportunity for approximately 52,000 square feet of commercial and office development surrounding the Town Square along the reconfigured Main Street. The Agency has issued a Request for Interest to select a preferred development partner. Initially six firms were interviewed and a second round of interviews took place in early April. Council and Staff have heard presentations from the two finalists. A site visit was also conducted. On August 26, 2008, the City Council entered into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Pelican Properties to develop the project. Facade Improvement Program The Facade Improvement Program provides funding assistance to Old Town business and property owners to provide exterior improvements to their buildings and property. Funding in the amount of $80,000 is available during FY 2008-09. The following facade improvements are in process or recently completed: Palomar Hotel - Paint Exterior, New Windows and Doors La Menagerie - Design and Install Sand Blasted Wood Signs The Bank of Mexican Food - Paint Exterior Door & Window Frames Butterfield Square - Paint Exterior European Living - New Signs The Public House Restaurant - Paint Exterior - New Awnings HOUSING Housina Element Ur)date The Agency is preparing the Housing Element Update. A second draft of the Housing Element was submitted to the state Department of Housing and Community Development {HCD} for a 60 -day review and comment period on July 2, 2008. HCD comments were received on September 8, 2008. Staff met with HCD on October 17, 2008 to review proposed amendments based on HCD's comments. A final draft will be submitted to HCD for review in November 2008. A revised timeline has been prepared that anticipates a Planning Commission hearing in January 2009 and a City Council hearing in February 2009. Upon adoption by the City Council, the Housing Element will be submitted a final time to HCD for a 90-day Certification review. Diaz Road Exclusive Negotiation Agreement The Agency issued a Request for Interestto select a preferred development partner for the 30 acre site located on Diaz Road. Seven firms have responded. On September 9, 2008, the City Council entered into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with RC Hobbs Companyto develop the project. The Warehouse at Creekside On August 12, 2008, the City Council approved an Owner Participation Agreementwith Warehouse at Creekside for an Affordable Housing Mixed Use Project. The Agency is currently working with Bill Dalton on a new development on 3rd Street in Old Town. The proposed development includes 32 units of affordable housing and 3500 square foot ground floor of commercial. The project includes 1 dedicated parking space for each residential unit. First Time Homebuyers Program On July 22, 2008, the City Council approved an amendment to increase the loan amount for down payment assistance from $24,000 to $65,000. This down payment assistance will allow qualifying households to purchase homes in the $250,000 - $300,000 price range. Payments and interest are deferred for the first 5 years and then fully amortized in years 6 through 30. The Agency conducted a workshop for approved lenders on November 20, 2008 to explain and promote the program. Residential Improvement Programs The program budget for FY 08-09 is $200,000.00, with $36,605 funded to date. The amount available to each participant is $7,500. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 17 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Proposed Development Code Amendment to define full service hotels, revise the intensity bonus justification requirements, add new parking standards forfull service hotels, and allow for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full service hotel PREPARED BY: Katie Innes, Case Planner RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Introduce and read by title only an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 08- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE FULL SERVICE HOTELS, REVISE THE INTENSITY BONUS JUSTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHOSE INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS THE TARGET FLOOR AREA RATIO ALLOWED IN THE ZONE, ADD NEW PARKING STANDARDS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS, AND ADD PROVISIONS TO ALLOW FOR TANDEM PARKING SPACES FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHEN VALET SERVICE IS PROVIDED (LONG RANGE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. LR08-0045) BACKGROUND: In 1995, the City Council adopted the Development Code forthe City of Temecula. Since its adoption, the City Council periodically amends the Development Code to improve its clarity and make corrections and amendments as necessary. This Development Code amendment consists of four parts and proposes to add new policies, and clarify a number of provisions within the Code, which are described in detail within the attached November 5, 2008 Planning Commission Staff Report (and redlined attachments), and summarized below: 1. Define full service hotels as follows: Hotels which provide lodging facilities, full service on- site restaurant facilities, and meeting space, such as a ballroom; along with additional ancillary services within the facility, which may include health club/spa services, concierge services, room service, valet service, or similar hospitality related amenities, as determined by the Director of Planning. The purpose of adding a definition for full service hotels to the Code is to clarify the difference between typical hotel/motels and full service hotels. 2. Amend the intensity bonus justification requirements for full service hotels whose intensity of development exceeds the target Floor Area Ratio (FAR) allowed in the zone. This Amendment proposes to slightly relax the justification requirements for "full service hotels" in order to promote this type of development within the City. 3. Add a new parking ratio standard for full service hotels to require that one parking space be provided on-site for each guest room/suite, and require additional parking for the ancillary meeting space within the hotel facility. 4. Add a provision to the Development Code which allows for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full service hotel. Tandem spaces shall be permitted to be counted toward meeting the off-street parking requirements for the use. The Planning Commission considered the draft Ordinance on November 5, 2008. At this meeting the Planning Commission recommended that the Ordinance be revised to add a provision which requires parking spaces to be provided for the ancillary meeting space (ballrooms, conference rooms, meeting rooms) within a full service hotel. The Commission adopted Resolution No. 08-48 recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance No. 08-_, with the requested addition, with a vote of 5-0. ENVIRONMENTAL: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review, and a Notice of Exemption will be filed in compliance with CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant effect on the environment. Staff concluded that there is no possibility that the Code amendments will have a significant effect on the environment because the proposed Development Code Amendments are minor policychanges and clarifications to Title 17 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Staff has reviewed the proposed changes to the Development Code in context to their environmental impacts and determined that there is no potential for an adverse impact on the environment. The proposed amendments do not allow for additional development to occur or allow for significant adverse changes to the physical environment. The proposed Amendment will strengthen the City's ability to conduct a CEQA review for the future development of full service hotels since the Development Code amendment requires the preparation of a traffic study. As a result, a site-specific CEQA review will occur for every development application for full service hotels. These proposed amendments are minor clarifications of the Code and will ensure compliance with CEQA. As such, there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant effect on the environment. As a result, staff has concluded that the project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3), as it has been determined, with certainty, that there is no possibilitythat the Development Code amendments will have a significant effect on the environment. FISCAL IMPACT: Encouraging projects which meet the definition of a "full service hotel," by slightly relaxing the FAR justification requirements for such development projects, would provide a direct economic benefit to the City. These benefits include employment opportunities, the expansion of the City of Temecula's tourism industry, as well as providing a fiscal benefit to the City through the generation of transient occupancy tax. ATTACHMENTS: City Council Ordinance 08-_ Redlined/Strikeout Changes to the Development Code November 5, 2008 Planning Commission Staff Report EXHIBIT A CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE ORDINANCE NO. - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE FULL SERVICE HOTELS, REVISE THE INTENSITY BONUS JUSTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHOSE INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS THE TARGET FLOOR AREA RATIO ALLOWED IN THE ZONE, ADD NEW PARKING STANDARDS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS, AND ADD PROVISIONS TO ALLOW FOR TANDEM PARKING SPACES FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHEN VALET SERVICE IS PROVIDED (LONG RANGE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. LR08-0043) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. The proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. B. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on November 5, 2008, to consider the proposed Amendments at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to the matter. C. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed amendments, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 08-48, recommending that the City Council approve the proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code. D. On November 25, 2008, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Amendments at which time all persons interested in the proposed Amendments had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters, and following receipt of all public testimony closed the hearing. Section 2. Further Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula, in approving the proposed Municipal Code Amendments in Long Range Planning Application No. LR08-0045 hereby makes the following additional findings as required by section 17.01.040 ("Relationship to the General Plan") of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code are allowed in the land use designations in which the uses are located, as shown on the land use map, or are described in the text of the General Plan. B. The proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code are in conformance with the goals, policies, programs and guidelines of the elements of the General Plan. C. The proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code are consistent with the General Plan and all applicable provisions contained therein. Section 3. Environmental Findings. Environmental Compliance. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed City Council Ordinance No. 08- is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment. There is no possibility that the Code amendments will have a significant effect on the environment because the proposed Development Code Amendments are minor policy changes and clarifications to Title 17 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Staff has reviewed the proposed changes to the Development Code in context to their environmental impacts and determined that there is no potential for an adverse impact on the environment. The proposed amendments do not allow for additional development to occur or allow for significant adverse changes to the physical environment. The proposed amendment will strengthen the City's ability to conduct CEQA review for the future development of full service hotels within the City since the Development Code Amendment requires the preparation of a traffic study for projects which exceed the target intensity (Floor Area Ratio). As a result, site-specific CEQA review will occur for every development application for full service hotels. The proposed amendments are minor clarifications of the Code and will ensure compliance with CEQA. As such, there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant effect on the environment. As a result, staff has concluded that the project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Section 15061 (b) (3), as it has been determined, with certainty, that there is no possibility that the Development Code Amendments will have a significant effect on the environment. Section 4. That the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby amends subsection 17.08.050 (A) of the Temecula Municipal Code by replacing it in its entirety to read as follows: A. Commercial/Office/Industrial Incentives - Increases in the Floor Area Ratio. As part of the process of reviewing and approving an application for a Development Plan or Conditional Use Permit, the approval authority may consider an increase in the maximum allowable intensity as indicated in Tablel 7.08.040A. The amount of the increased intensity shall not exceed the maximum of the density range or floor area ratio stated for the specific land use designation. The requested increase may not be approved if the City's traffic engineer determines that the increased intensity would create an unmitigatable impact upon traffic circulation or would overburden any utilities serving the area. To be eligible for an increase in the floor area ratio, the applicant must meet the following: 1. A traffic impact analysis shall be prepared for the project as determined by the City's traffic engineer. 2. All projects, {with the exception of "full service hotels", for which separate justification requirements are provided below in Section 17.08.050 {3}} shall provide for FAR increase justifications from Table 17.08.050A as follows: a. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.01 to 0.10 shall incorporate two justifications from Category I, one justification from Category III, and one justification from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A. b. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.11 to 0.20 shall incorporate two justifications from Category I, one justification from Category II, one justification from Category III, and one justification from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A. C. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.21 to 0.30 shall incorporate two justifications from Category I, two justifications from Category II, two justifications from Category III, and two justifications from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A. d. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.31 or more shall incorporate two justifications from Category I, three justifications from Category II, three justifications from Category III, and three justifications from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A. 3. Full service hotel projects, must provide FAR increase justifications from Table 17.08.050 A as follows: a. Full service hotel projects proposing an FAR increase above the target FAR allowed for the zone shall incorporate one justification from Category I, one justification from Category II, one justification from Category III and one justification from Category IV, of Table 17.08.050A. Table 17.08.050A Justifications for an FAR Increase Category I Category II Category III Category IV Amenities Landscape & Art Community Benefit Conservation Uses which generate Utilize LEED Provide Provide trees at significant sales tax, or (Leadership in Energy bicycle 40% 36" box, uses that generate and Environmental lockers or 40% 24" box, and transient occupancy tax Design) eligible recycled lockable 20% 15-gallon building materials (such indoor sizes with all as exterior siding, storage, street and parking roofing changing lot tree sizes at a materials, and carpet - rooms, and minimum 24-inch 20% minimum recycle showers box size at the content) time of planting The project generate Utilize LEED eligible Provide a Increase a significant number of energy efficient location for landscaped open higher paying jobs materials and design to an on-site space area (higher paying jobs are include: roofing, daycare (increase must be considered skilled and insulation, exterior facility or equal to or professional jobs that siding, shading from provide a greater than 2% provide awnings and deep location for a of the site area incomes of at least one- recessed windows, daycare for each 0.05 half the median automated sensors and provider increase in FAR) household income for the controls for lighting, city of Temecula) heating, and air conditioning, waterless urinals, low-flow toilets and faucets, and aerators and timers on faucets Provide enhanced public Provide for on-site Provide Increase facilities that are needed renewable energy parking landscaped by the city beyond (minimum of 10% of the designated setback (at least required facilities energy needs) as a park two feet mitigation impact and ride additional for measures. Examples facility each 0.05 include: the increase in FAR) provision of community meeting centers, enhanced transportation improvements, police or fire stations, and public recreation facilities Table 17.08.050A Justifications for an FAR Increase Category I Category II Category III Category IV Amenities Landscape & Art Community Benefit Conservation Utilize "green roof' Provide a Provide an on- technology landscaped site public art courtyard feature of equal open to a or greater value public street than required by (minimum the city's public area equal art to 10% of ordinance and in the ground compliance with floor area) the city's public art ordinance Provide water quality mitigation in excess of minimum NPDES requirements Provide all air conditioning equipment at a SEER rating that exceeds the minimum California Building Code requirement Section 5. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby amends subsection 17.24.020 to add a new section 17.24.020 (F) to follow Section E, to read as follows: F. Tandem Parking/Valet Parking. Tandem parking for commercial uses may be approved provided that the tandem parking is limited to the following purposes: 1. Valet parking areas associated with a full service hotel. Tandem parking spaces associated with valet service may be counted toward meeting the minimum parking requirements for the use. 2. Valet service shall be provided to and from the main entrance of the hotel. A passenger loading and unloading zone, as approved by the city's traffic engineer shall be provided near the main entrance. 3. Availability of valet service shall be conspicuously posted inside and outside the establishment near the main entrance. 4. All designated valet parking area in which the automobiles are to be parked shall not be farther than 800 feet from the main entrance. Section 6. The City Council of the City of Temecula amends table 17.24.040 "Parking Spaces Required" to add a new row for "full service hotels" under the "Commercial Uses- Retail and Service" column, and by adding 1 space/guest room or suite (ancillary conference rooms, meeting rooms and ballrooms within the hotel shall be parked at 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area," under the corresponding row under the "Required Number of Spaces" column, as follows: Commercial Uses-Retail and Service Furniture stores, bulk goods, floor covering, 1 space/500 SF of GFA home improvement General retail with less than 25,000 SF-GFA 1 space/300 SF-GFA General retail with 25,000 SF or greater See shopping center Hotels and motels 1 space/guest room plus 1 space/10 rooms for guests and 2 spaces for resident manager Full Service Hotel 1 space/guest room or suite (ancillary conference rooms, meeting rooms and ballrooms within the hotel shall be parked separately at 1 s ace/300 SF GFA Laundromat 1 space/3 washing machines Plant nurseries 1 space/500 SF indoor GFA, plus 1 space/1,000 SF gross outdoor retail area Outdoor sales, including lumberyards, car 1 space/1,000 SF gross outdoor sales area, sales, salvage yards plus 1 space/300 SF of indoor sales area Restaurants Dine-in 1 space/100 SF-GFA, with a minimum of 10 spaces in all cases Fast food 1 space/75 SF-GFA, with a minimum of 10 spaces in all cases Shopping center (25,000 SF-GFA or 1 space/300 SF-GFA with the following greater) additions: Cinemas in shopping centers 1 space/5 seats Restaurant areas occupying greater than 1 space/100 GFA 15 percent of total shopping area GFA Section 7. The City Council of the City of Temecula adds to Section 17.34.010 "Definitions and Illustrations of Terms," a new definition for full service hotels under subsection "F" Definitions and Illustrations, to read as follows: "Full Service Hotel" means a hotel which provides lodging facilities and full service on- site restaurant facilities and meeting space, such as a ballroom; along with additional ancillary services within the facility, which may include health club/spa services, concierge services, room service, valet service, or similar hospitality related amenities, as determined by the Director of Planning. Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable. Section 9. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [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 Ordinance No. 08- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 25th day of November, 2008, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Proposed text looks like this. Deleted text 199kS lmkp thic Development Code Section - 17.08.050 Special Use Regulations and Standards A. Commercial/Office/Industrial Incentives-Increases in the Floor Area Ratio. As part of the process of reviewing and approving an application for a development plan or conditional use permit, the approval authority may consider an increase in the maximum allowable intensity as indicated in Tables 17.08.040A. The amount of the increased intensity shall not exceed the maximum of the density range or floor area ratio stated for the specific land use designation. The requested increase may not be approved if the City's traffic engineer determines that the increased intensity would create an unmitigatable impact upon traffic circulation or would overburden any utilities serving the area. To be eligible for an increase in the floor area ratio, the applicant must meet the following: 1. A traffic impact analysis shall be prepared for the project as determined by the city's traffic engineer. 2. All nroiects. (with the exception of "full service hotels". for which separate justification requirements are provided below in Section 17.08.050(3), shall 4P provide fEw FAR increase justifications from Table 17.08.050A as follows: a. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.01 to 0.10 shall incorporate two justifications from Category I, one justification from Category III, and one justification from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A. b. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.11 to 0.20 shall incorporate two justifications from Category I, one justification from Category II, one justification from Category III, and one justification from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A. c. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.21 to 0.30 shall incorporate two justifications from Category I, two justifications from Category II, two justifications from Category III, and two justifications from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A. d. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.31 or more shall incorporate two justifications from Category I, three justifications from Category II, three justifications from Category III, and three justifications from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A. 3. Full service hotel projects, must provide FAR increase justifications from Table 17.08.050 A as follows: a. Full service hotel projects proposing an FAR increase above the target FAR allowed for the zone shall incorporate one justification from Cate6ory I, one iustification from Cate2ory II, one iustification from Cate2ory III and one iustification from Cate2ory IV, of Table 17.08.050A. CAProgram Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp\898195.doc Proposed text looks like this. Deleted text 199kS lmkp Fhic Table 17.08.050A Justifications for an FAR Increase Category I Category II Category Category IV III Landscape & Community Benefit Conservation Amenities Art Uses which generate Utilize LEED Provide Provide trees at significant sales tax, or (Leadership in Energy bicycle 40% 36" box, uses that generate and Environmental lockers or 40% 24" box, and transient occupancy tax Design) eligible recycled lockable 20% 15-gallon building materials (such indoor sizes with all as exterior siding, storage, street and parking roofing changing lot tree sizes at a materials, and carpet - rooms, and minimum 24-inch 20% minimum recycle showers box size at the content) time of planting The project generate Utilize LEED eligible Provide a Increase a significant number of energy efficient location for landscaped open higher paying jobs materials and design to an on-site space area (higher paying jobs are include: roofing, daycare (increase must be considered skilled and insulation, exterior facility or equal to or greater professional jobs that siding, shading from provide a than 2% of the provide awnings and deep location for site area for each incomes of at least one- recessed windows, a daycare 0.05 increase in half the median automated sensors and provider FAR) household income for the controls for lighting, city of Temecula) heating, and air conditioning, waterless urinals, low-flow toilets and faucets, and aerators and timers on faucets Provide enhanced public Provide for on-site Provide Increase facilities that are needed renewable energy parking landscaped by the city beyond (minimum of 10% of the designated setback (at least required facilities energy needs) as a park and two feet mitigation impact ride facility additional for measures. Examples each 0.05 increase include: the in FAR) provision of community meeting centers, enhanced transportation improvements, police or fire stations, and public recreation facilities CAProgram Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp\898195.doc Proposed text looks like this. Deleted text 199kS lmkp Fhic Table 17.08.050A Justifications for an FAR Increase Category I Category II Category Category IV III Landscape & Community Benefit Conservation Amenities Art Utilize "green roof' Provide a Provide an on-site technology landscaped public art feature courtyard of equal or greater open to a value than public street required by the (minimum city's public art area equal to ordinance and in 10% of the compliance with ground floor the city's public area) art ordinance Provide water quality mitigation in excess of minimum NPDES requirements Provide all air conditioning equipment at a SEER rating that exceeds the minimum California Building Code requirement CAProgram Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp\898195.doc STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DATE OF MEETING: November 5, 2008 PREPARED BY: Katie Innes, Case Planner APPLICANT NAME: City of Temecula PROJECT Long Range Planning Application No. LR08-0045, a Development SUMMARY: Code Amendment to define full service hotels, revise the intensity bonus justification requirements for full service hotels whose intensity of development exceeds the target Floor Area Ratio allowed in the zone, add new parking standards for full service hotels, and add a provision to allow for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full service hotel CEQA: Categorically Exempt Section 15061 (b) (3) RECOMMENDATION: Recommend the City Council adopt an Ordinance BACKGROUND SUMMARY In 1995, the City Council adopted the Development Code for the City of Temecula. Since its adoption, the City Council periodically amends the Development Code to improve its clarity and make corrections and amendments as necessary. This Development Code Amendment consists of four parts and proposes to: 1) Define full service hotels to clarify the difference between typical hotels/motels and full service hotels; 2) Amend the intensity bonus justification requirements for full service hotels whose intensity exceeds the target Floor Area Ratio (FAR) allowed in the zone; 3) Add new parking standards for full service hotels; and 4) Add a provision to the Development Code which allows for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full service hotel. At the August 15, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission recommended clarification and expansion of the requirements for allowing an FAR increase beyond the General Plan and Development Code Targets. The Commission directed staff to draft an Ordinance which would require measurable and quantifiable justifications to be met to allow for an increase in the target FAR. Specifically, the new requirements were to avoid granting FAR increases based upon subjective criteria such as "exceptional" architecture and landscaping. On October 23, 2007, the City Council adopted an Ordinance which requires measurable and quantifiable justification criteria for projects requesting a FAR increase above the target. The current Ordinance requires that all projects proposing an increase in the FAR beyond the target shall comply with the quantifiable justification criteria. The current criteria also requires that a traffic impact analysis be prepared for the project, as determined by the City's Traffic Engineer, and that the project provide FAR justifications from each of the four categories which include: community benefit, conservation, amenities and landscaping. The current Ordinance structure also requires an increase in the number of justification criteria required to be met, as the proposed FAR increases incrementally. ANALYSIS Since the adoption of this Ordinance staff has found that certain uses, such as hotels, have difficulty in meeting the current FAR justification criteria. Considering the nature of hotels and their need to have multiple stories and larger building square footages as compared to, for example a typical office building, it is challenging for large scale hotels to meet the target FAR. Considering this, many of the hotels have Floor Area Ratios that are often above the allowable target allowed by the Development Code and General Plan. Below are the Floor Area Ratios for a number of hotels that have recently been constructed, or are currently being constructed, in the City: Marriott Fairfield Hampton Inn Springhill Suites Target FAR: 0.30 Approved FAR: 0.65 Target FAR: 0.30 Approved FAR: 0.53 Target FAR: 0.30 Approved FAR: 0.51 All of the approved Floor Area Ratios for the hotels listed above exceed the allowable FAR target; however they do not exceed the maximum FAR allowed by the Development Code and General Plan. Although many of the hotels constructed in the City exceed the target FAR, it is important to acknowledge that hotels provide important benefits to the community. These benefits include employment opportunities, the expansion of the City of Temecula's tourism industry, as well as providing a fiscal benefit to the City through the generation of transient occupancy tax. Encouraging projects which meet the definition of a "full service hotel," by slightly relaxing the FAR justification requirements for such development projects, would provide a direct economic benefit to the City. According to the Temecula Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, the lodging industry generated over $49.5 million dollars in hotel room revenue and occupancy rates in Temecula. Additionally, according to the same source, 457,000 visitors stayed in Temecula hotels in 2007, averaging 38,000 visitors per month. Staff is recommending that the current FAR criteria be amended to provide separate FAR requirements for "full service hotels." The proposed FAR intensity bonus justification requirements for "full service hotels" would still require that a traffic impact analysis be prepared for the project, as determined by the City's Traffic Engineer, in order to ensure that the increase in FAR above the target would not create an unmitigable traffic impact. Additionally, the new criteria would still require justifications to be based upon community benefit, conservation, amenities and landscaping; however "full service hotel" projects would be required to provide only one justification from each category, as opposed to being required to provide additional justifications as the FAR increases incrementally. In addition to amending the FAR justifications for "full service hotels," the second part of this Development Code Amendment provides a definition for full service hotels. The definition will differentiate between standard hotels/motels and full service hotels. For the purposes of this Development Code Amendment, full service hotels are defined as: hotels which provide lodging facilities and full service on-site restaurant facilities and meeting space, such as a ballroom; along with additional ancillary services within the facility, which may include health club/spa services, concierge services, room service, valet service, or similar hospitality related amenities, as determined by the Director of Planning. The objective of the proposed Development Code Amendment is to encourage the development of full service hotels in the City, while still requiring intensity bonus justifications as a trade-off to be permitted to construct a hotel that exceeds the target FAR for the zone. However, as indicated above, the separate FAR justification requirements for full service hotels will not be as restrictive as the current Ordinance. The reason for requiring fewer justifications for "full service hotels," as opposed to other types of uses, is that "full service hotels" will provide a number of services and benefits that will further promote tourism and economic growth for the community. According to the Economic Development Element of the City of Temecula General Plan, the City is to encourage the development of lodging along the freeway to enhance the tourism industry and enhance fiscal viability. Staff feels that the Development Code Amendment is consistent with the General Plan's goals related to tourism. Relaxing the FAR requirements for "full service hotels" will assist in continuing to promote Temecula as a destination resort area by encouraging development that will make the City a paint-of-interest for visitors and residents alike. Parking Requirement In addition to defining full service hotels, and revising the FAR justification requirements for full service hotels, this Development Code Amendment also includes provisions to add new parking standards to the off-street parking section of the code for full service hotels, and to allow for tandem parking when valet service is provided. Currently the Development Code requires that regular hotels/motels provide one parking space per guest room, one parking space for every ten guest rooms plus two additional spaces for the resident manager. The proposed Development Code Amendment includes a new parking standard for full service hotels which requires onr parking space for every guest room or suite. Staff has conducted a review of other parking requirements for other municipalities in the area and determined that the parking standard of onr space per guest room or suite is typical for a hotel use. A comparison of the parking standards are outlined below: City of Riverside: 1 parking space/guest room City of Corona: 1 parking space/bedroom + 2 spaces for the resident manager City of Ontario: 1 parking space/room or suite City of Carlsbad: 1.2 parking spaces/ unit City of San Diego: 1 parking space/room City of Escondido: 1 parking space/ per sleeping unit; 1 for resident manager and 1 loading space It is anticipated that many full service hotels will provide valet services. Often when valet service is provided, the cars are parked in a tandem fashion in order to efficiently accommodate the number of cars in the lot. Currently our Development Code is silent on the requirements and provisions relating to tandem parking and valet parking. The proposed Development Code Amendment will allow for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full service hotel. The tandem/valet parking spaces will be permitted to be counted toward the minimum parking requirements for the use. This will encourage full service hotels to provide valet services and ensure that adequate parking accommodations are being provided for hotel guests. No change to the hotel/motel parking standards is proposed at this time due to the fact that a typical hotel/motel is less likely to provide valet parking or require the need for tandem parking spaces. LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS Notice of the public hearing was published in the Californian on October 25, 2008. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review, and a Notice of Exemption will be filed in compliance with CEQA Section 15061 (b)(3). If can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant effect on the environment. Staff concluded that there is no passibility that the Development Cade Amendments will have a significant effect on the environment because the proposed Development Code Amendments are minor policy changes and clarifications to Title 17 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Staff has reviewed the proposed changes to the Development Code in context to their environmental impacts and determined that there is no potential for an adverse impact on the environment. The proposed amendments do not allow for additional development to occur or allow for significant adverse changes to the physical environment. The proposed amendment will strengthen the City's ability to conduct a CEQA review for the future development of full service hotels since the Development Code Amendment requires the preparation of a traffic study. As a result, a site-specific CEQA review will occur for every development application for full service hotels. These proposed amendments are minor clarifications of the Code and will ensure compliance with CEQA. As such, there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant effect on the environment. As a result, staff has concluded that the project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3), as it has been determined, with certainty, that there is no possibility that the Development Code Amendments will have a significant effect on the environment. ATTACHM ENTS PC Resolution Exhibit A - Draft CC Ordinance Redline/strikeout changes to the Development Code Exhibit 1 - Section 17.08.050 Special Use Regulations and Standards Exhibit 2 - Section 17.24.020 General Provisions Exhibit 3 - Table 17.24.040 Parking Spaces Required Exhibit 4 - Section 17.34.010 Definition of Terms Notice of Public Hearing ITEM NO. 18 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: AB 1600 Financial Reports RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the AB 1600 Financial Reports BACKGROUND: Government Code Sections 66006 requires that an accounting of the developer impact fees be made public and the information reviewed in a regularly scheduled public hearing. The Legislature finds and declares that the timely and proper allocation of development fees promotes economic growth and is, therefore, a matter of statewide interest and concern. Annually, the City Finance Department staff compiles a report of expenditures made with the developer impact fees collected and interest accrued during the year. Staff has compiled the AB 1600 Report for this purpose and recommends acceptance and approval of the report of expenditures made with the developer impact fees after hearing public testimony. This report covers activity for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2008. FISCAL IMPACT: Monies must be used within five years for specified purposes or returned to the developer. All funds are all programmed to be spent in accordance with the 2009- 2013 Capital Improvement Program adopted June 10, 2008, by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: AB 1600 Reports City of Temecula Open Space Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 1 Fees are collected for open space land acquisitions. The impact fees for open space land are based on the cost of land needed to maintain the City's existing ratio of open space acreage to population. Because these fees are population-driven, they apply only to residential development. The fee is $576.88 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex) and $805.22 per residential detached unit (single family), payable at the time of issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees $ 84,527 Interest income $ 50,028 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 134,555 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 375,000 Transfers out Total Uses $ 375,000 Total Available $ 922,011 $ (240,445) $ 681,566 evenue ng First In First Out Method (Unspent Funds Represent Endina Fund Balance I June 30. 2008 1 US rears Kevenues N/A ues Collected from FY2004/05 $ - ues Collected from FY2005/06 $ 283,849 ues Collected from FY2006/07 $ 263,162 ues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 134,555 Ending Fund Balance $ 681,566 Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001. Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures Capital Improvement Projects FY 2007-08 % Complete % Funded With Fee 210.190.142. MULTI TRAILS SYSTEM CITYWIDE $ 375,000 35.27% 39.40% Total $ 375,000 City of Temecula Public Facilities & Road Benefit Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 2 Fee is collected to provide street system, park and recreation, corporate, fire protection, and library facilities in an amount sufficient to meet the estimated demand created by residential and non-residential developments constructed in the City through build out. The fee varied depending on development type and was collected for each building payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees Interest income $ 14,010 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 14,010 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 473,011 Transfers out $ (395,840) Total Uses $ 77,171 Total Available $ 63,161 $ (63,161 $ - Using First In First Out Method Unspent Funds Represent Ending Fund Balance June 30, 2008 Previous Years Revenues $ - Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 $ - Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 $ - Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 $ - Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ - Total Ending Fund Balance $ - Result : Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001. (Capital Improvement Projects I FY 2007-08 1 % Complete I % Funded With Fee 210.165.726.5800 French Valley 1-15 Overcrossina $ 3/31/08 Transfer Fire Stations Wolf Creek/Library 1 $ (395, 840) 473,011 n/a n/a n/a n/a ITotal I $ 77.171 1 City of Temecula Public Services Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 3 Fee is collected to provide future space for police facilities and equipment. The fee is $350.25 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $197.97 per detached unit (single family), and $.05-$.20 per square foot of floor area for commercial developments. Fees is payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees Interest income $ - Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ - Expenditures tip Other Uses: Capital Projects $ - Transfers out Total Uses $ - Total Available $ - $ - $ - Using First In First Out Method IUnsoent Funds Represent Endina Fund Balance I June 30. 2008 1 rrevious Years Kevenues Z~ - Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 $ - Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 $ - Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 $ - Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ - Result : Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001. Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures Capital Improvement Projects FY 2007-08 % Complete % Funded With Fee n/a $ - Total $ - City of Temecula Fire Protection Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 4 Fee is collected to provide fire protection facilities in an amount sufficient to meet the estimated demand created by residential and non-residential development constructed in the City through build out. The fee varied depending on development type and was collected for each building payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees Interest income $ 343 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 343 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 11,595 Transfers out Total Uses $ 11,595 Total Available $ 11,252 $ (11,252) $ - evenue ng First In First Out Method IUnsoent Funds Represent Ending Fund Balance June 30. 2008 1 us Years Revenues $ ues Collected from FY2004/05 $ ues Collected from FY2005/06 $ ues Collected from FY2006/07 $ Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001. pital Improvement Facilities Expenditures 3/31/08 Transfer Fire Stations Wolf Creek/Library $ 11,595 100.00% 47.50% 11 City of Temecula Street Improvements Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 5 Fee is collected based on the total cost of such improvements and number of peak hour vehicle trips generated by future development. The fee is $1,171.69 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $1,673.85 per residential detached unit (single family), and $2.30-6.40 per square foot of floor area for commercial development. Fee is payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees $ 902,542 Interest income $ 54,806 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 957,348 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 4,369,037 Transfers out Total Uses $ 4,369,037 Total Available $ 4,588,456 $ 1,176,767 Five Year Revenue Test Using First In First Out Method Unspent Funds Represent Ending Fund Balance June 30, 2008 Previous Years Revenues N/A Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 $ 219,419 Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 957,348 Total Ending Fund Balance $ 1,176,767 Result : Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001. Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures ICapital Improvement Proiects I FY 2007-08 I% Complete 1% Funded With Feel 210.165.622.5800 Medians $ 1,137 100.00% 29.20% 210.165.624.5800 Rancho Cal Wide Old Town $ 1,903,060 100.00% 86.00% 210.165.632.5800 Diaz Rd Realignment $ 1,780,000 100.00% 74.60% 210.165.638.5800 Winchester Rd./79 North $ 260,000 8.90% 37.04% 210.165.668.5800 Pechanga $ 29,000 56.40% 7.40% 210.165.726.5800 French Vallev 1-15 Overcrossin $ 395.840 59.74% 9.20% City of Temecula Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 6 Fee is collected based on the total cost of such improvements and number of peak hour vehicle trips generated by future development. The fee is $165.86 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $236.94 per residential detached unit (single family), and $.33-$.90 per square foot of floor area for commercial development. Fee is payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees $ 176,559 Interest income $ 50,483 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 227,042 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 120,000 Transfers out Total Uses $ 120,000 Total Available $ 881,765 $ 107,042 $ 988,807 Five Year Revenue Test Using First In First Out Method Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 $ 452,121 Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 $ 309,644 Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 227,042 Total Endinq Fund Balance $ 988,807 Result : Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001. Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures 210.165.673.5800 Sign als-Rancho@Bus.Park $ 120,000 100.00% 100.00% City of Temecula Park&Recreation Improvements Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 7 Fee is collected for park improvements based on the cost of improvements needed to maintain the City's existing ratio of improved park acreage to population. The fee for recreation facilities is based on the existing ratio of facility replacement cost to population. Because these fees are population-driven, they apply only to residential developments. The fee is $1,979.17 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex) and $2,762.58 per residential detached unit (single family). Fee is payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees $ 201,997 Interest income $ 13,068 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 215,065 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 357,809 Transfers out Total Uses $ 357,809 Total Available $ 240,162 $ (142,744) $ 97,418 Five Year Revenue Test Using First In First Out Method Previous Years Revenues N/A Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 97,418 Total Ending Fund Balance $ 97,418 Result : Five year spent test met in accordan ce with Government Code 66001. Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures 210.190.137.5800 Roller Hockey Rink $ 30,000 13.30% 100.00% 210.190.173.5800 Sports Complex Patricia B. $ 241,731 100.00% 30.02% 210.190.179.5800 Play Structure $ 4,078 100.00% 100.00% 210.190.190.5800 Dog Parks $ 60,000 100.00% 100.00% 210.190.675.5800 Temecula Children's Museum $ 22,000 17.00% 100.00% ITotal 1 $ 357,809 1 City of Temecula Corporate Facilities Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 8 Fee is collected for City administrative and maintenance facilities. The need for future City Hall space is due to the demand for services housed in City Hall. The need for maintenance facilities is due to increase in street and park maintenance. The fee is $243.50 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment townhouse, and duplex), $454.13 per residential detached unit (single family), and $.16-$.44 per square foot of floor area for commercial developments. Fee is payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building permits is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees $ 176,969 Interest income $ 2,867 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 179,836 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 80,000 Transfers out Total Uses $ 80,000 Total Available $ 377 $ 99,836 $ 100,213 Five Year Revenue Test Using First In First Out Method Previous Years Revenues NIA Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 NIA Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 100,213 Total Ending Fund Balance $ 100,213 Result : Five year spent test met in accordan ce with Government Code 66001. Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures Capital Improvement Projects FY 2007-08 % Complete % Funded With Fee Maintenance Facility 210-165-742 80,000 100.00% 30.01% Total $ 80,000 City of Temecula Fire Protection Facilities Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 9 Fee is collected to provide future fire protection facilities and apparatus. The fee is $266.59 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $574.49 per residential detached unit (single family), and $.11 - $.16 per square foot of floor area for commercial developments, payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: i Developer fees $ 77,252 Interest income $ 4,132 Contributions from property owners Transfers in $ 251,789 Total Sources $ 333,173 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 298,789 Transfers out Total Uses $ 298,789 Total Available $ 460 $ 34,384 $ 34,844 First In First Out Method is Years Revenues ues Collected from FY2004/05 ues Collected from FY2005/06 ues Collected from FY2006/07 Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001. Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures Capital Improvement Projects FY 2007-08 % Complete % Funded With Fee 210.165.733 WOLF CREEK FIRE STATION $ 298,789 100.00% 47.50% Total $ 298,789 City of Temecula Library Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 10 Fee is collected to provide future library facilities and materials. Because these fees are population-driven, they apply only to residential developments. The fee is $527.15 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $735.81 per residential detached unit (single family). Fee is payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees $ 136,721 Interest income $ 3,775 Contributions from property owners Transfers in $ 232,817 Total Sources $ 373,313 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 373,429 Transfers out Total Uses $ 373,429 Total Available $ 116 $ (116) $ - First In First Out Method Previous Years Revenues N/A Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ - Total Endina Fund Balance $ - Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001. Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures Capital Improvement Projects FY 2007-08 % Complete % Funded With Fee Library 280-199-129 $ 373,429 100.00% 3.01% Total $ 373,429 City of Temecula Public Art Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 11 Fees are collected to enhance the quality of life for city residents, workers and visitors by providing for the acquisition, placement and maintenance of public artwork. The fee is equal to 10% of 1 % of the building value in excess of $100,000 payable upon the issuance of each building permit. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees $ 34,103 Interest income $ 3,378 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 37,481 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 190,000 Transfers out Total Uses $ 190,000 Total Available $ 181,654 $ (152,519) $ 29,135 nue Using First In First Out Method Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 NIA Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 NIA Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 29,135 Total Ending Fund Balance $ 29,135 Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures (Capital Improvement Proiects I FY 2007-08 1 % Complete I % Funded With Fee I 210.165.674.5800 Bridge fencing $ 190,000 1 City of Temecula Police Facilities Government Code 66000 Calculation FY 2007-08 Attachment No. 12 Fee is collected to provide future space for police facilities and equipment. The fee is $427.96 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $241.90 per detached unit (single family), and $.06-$.24 per square foot of floor area for commercial developments. Fees is payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases. The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project. Beginning Ending Account Description Fund Balance FY 2007-08 Fund Balance Revenues & Other Sources: Developer fees $ 55,214 Interest income $ 8,331 Contributions from property owners Transfers in Total Sources $ 63,545 Expenditures & Other Uses: Capital Projects $ 135,000 Transfers out Total Uses $ 135,000 Total Available $ 208,768 $ (71,455) $ 137,313 Five Year Revenue Test Using First In First Out Method Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 N/A Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 $ 73,768 Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 63,545 Total Ending Fund Balance $ 137,313 Result : Five year spent test met in accordan ce with Government Code 66001. Improvement Facilities Expenditures 210.165.644.5800 Old Town Parking, Office & Reta $ 135,000 COUNCIL BUSINESS ITEM NO. 19 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements - Environmental Mitigation (Project PW99-11 EM) PREPARED BY: Paula Gutierrez-Baeza, City Attorney's Office Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works - CIP Monica Adamee, Real Property Agent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Consider the following Resolution, which is a Resolution of Necessity of the City of Temecula: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION 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 STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION (PROJECT NO. PW99-11 EM) 2. Open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Resolution of Necessity, receive from staff the evidence stated and referred to in this Agenda Report ("Report"), take testimony from any person wishing to be heard on issues A, B, C, and D below, and consider all evidence to determine whether to adopt the proposed Resolution of Necessity. If the City Council finds, based on the evidence contained and referred to in this Report, the testimony and comments received at this hearing, and all written testimony submitted to the City Council, that the evidence warrants the necessary findings with respect to the proposed Resolution of Necessity, then City staff recommends, that the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion: R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 1 Adopt proposed Resolution No. 08-_ (which requires a 4/5ths vote of the entire Council) and authorize the City Attorney's office to file eminent domain proceedings to acquire the following real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located along the northern side of Temecula Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-076: An approximate 74,251 square foot (1.70 acre) permanent conservation easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel A Conservation Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Conservation Easement"; An approximate 25,007 (0.58 acre) square foot grading easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel B Grading Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "C" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Grading Easement"; and An approximate 22,648 (0.52 acre) square foot access/water line easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel C Access and Water Line Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "D" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Access and Water Line Easement". These real property interests are referred to below collectively as "Subject Property Interests" and are described more particularly in the Exhibits attached to the Resolution of Necessity. The Resolution of Necessity and its Exhibits "A", "B", "C" and "D" are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Authorize the City Attorney's office and City staff to file and prosecute eminent domain proceedings and to take all necessary steps to deposit, $30,250 with the Court, the amount of probable compensation, as required by law for issuance of an Order for Prejudgment Possession. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents. BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY: Description of Project: The City Council has before it a proposed Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition by eminent domain of certain real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located along the northern side of Temecula Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-076 ("larger parcel"), in connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements - Environmental Mitigation (Project PW99-11 EM) (referred to below as the "proposed Project"). The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public purpose, namely for conservation easement purposes to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed as part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project (PW99-11) (referred to below as "Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements") as required by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Specifically, the proposed Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square foot) permanent conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape the area and provide irrigation to the conservation easement area for a period of approximately 5 112 years. Accordingly, the City would need to acquire an approximate 22,648 R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 2 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line easement. The City would also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easementto connectthe conservation easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period of 5112 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5 112 years. At that time, the City would offer to re-convey the permanent grading and access/water line easement back to the property owner if the owner wished to retain these areas. As indicated above, the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public purpose, namelyfor conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto for the proposed Project to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed by the City as part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements as required by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public use pursuant to the authority conferred upon the City to acquire real property by eminent domain by Section 19 of Article 1 of the California Constitution, California Government Code Sections 37350, 37350.5, 37351, 40401 and 40404, California Civil Code Section 815 et seq., 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 by other provisions of law. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 815, the State Legislature has declared that the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space condition is among the most important environmental assets of California. The City was required to provide 1.7-acres of replacement mitigation for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian and wetland habitat located within the Wolf Valley Creek Channel resulting from the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City's construction of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements was for a public purpose, namely for public street and drainage purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to alleviate traffic congestion and improve traffic circulation and drainage in the area of the improvements. Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.120 authorizes a public entity to acquire property necessary to carry out and make effective the principal purposes involved including but not limited to property to be used for the protection or preservation of the attractiveness, safety and usefulness of the project. Here, the acquisition of the Subject Property Interests is for conservation easement purposes to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The Pechanga Parkway Phase 11 Improvements widened and improved Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway (formerly State Route 79 South) to Via Gilberto into a six-lane urban arterial highway to its full-width of 134 feet. It also improved and widened Pechanga Parkway from Via Gilberto to Pechanga Road into a four-lane arterial highwaywith a rig ht-of-way width of 110 feet. In addition, the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements constructed curbs, gutters, pavement delineation and signage, islands, sidewalks, landscaping, irrigation, streetlights, driveway approaches, traffic signal interconnect system, retaining wall improvements, and storm drain improvements. Further, the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements also included improvements to Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The storm drain improvements in connection with Wolf Valley Creek Channel included the under-grounding of a portion of the concrete lined Wolf Valley Creek Channel from Loma Linda Road to approximately 900 linear feet downstream of Muirfield Drive (approximately 1,900 total linear feet). Later improvements included the reconstruction of a portion of the existing rip rap/concrete-lined trapezoidal Wolf Valley Creek Channel from approximately 900 linear feet north of Muirfield Road downstream to the Temecula Creek confluence (approximately 1,100 total linear feet). The Pechanga Parkway Phase 11 Improvements resulted in permanent impacts to 0.10-acre and temporary impacts to 0.26-acre to wetland waters of the United States, regulated bythe United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. It also resulted in R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 3 permanent impacts to an approximate 0.85-acre of riparian habitat regulated by the California Department of Fish and Game contained within a 960 linear foot portion of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The City was required to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements by creating a 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area, which comprises a portion of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel. The proposed Project would be constructed pursuant to the requirements of the United States Army Corps of Engineers in Nationwide Permit NW43 No. 200500150-SMJ, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board in Water Quality Certification and Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharge of Dredge and/or Fill Materials No. 04C-107, and the California Department of Fish and Game in Agreement Regarding Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration (Notification No. 6-2003- 069). Approximately 48 percent of the proposed 1.70-acre permanent conservation easement on the larger parcel is located within the lower Temecula Creek floodway, 47 percent of this conservation easement is located in the lower Temecula Creek floodplain and the remaining 5 percent of the conservation easement area is located outside of the floodway or floodplain. The larger parcel is currently encumbered with an approximate 9.40-acre conservation easement and an approximate 16.50-acre conservation easement. The approximate 25,007 square foot permanent grading easement the City seeks to acquire is located completely in the lower Temecula Creek floodway and completely overlaps the existing conservation easements on the larger parcel. The approximate 22,648 square foot permanent access and water line easement the City seeks to acquire is located completely in the lower Temecula Creek Floodway. An approximate 15,948 square foot portion of this access and water line easement overlaps the existing conservation easements on the larger parcel and the remaining approximate 6,700 square foot area is located outside of the existing conservation easement areas. The mitigation comprising the proposed Project would take place within the 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area. The mitigation includes an approximate 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The mitigation would be completed consistent with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, which is incorporated in this Report by this reference. The purpose of the mitigation is to compensate for the loss of wetland and riparian habitat associated with the Wolf Valley Creek Channel improvement portion of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The proposed Project would enhance the overall functions and values of the subject portion of Temecula Creek watershed that currently provides limited biological and hydrological function to this area of the City. The proposed Project would require site preparation and amendments to the topography of the land to provide the area with adequate hydrology and would include a restoration effort consisting of a combination of seeding and planting to encourage establishment of riparian and wetland habitat. The regulatory agencies referenced above and the City expect that the proposed Project would successfully implement the mitigation effort based on the following factors: As a result of the mitigation effort, the mitigation site would support a physical environment that promotes the long-term sustainability and function of the proposed habitat to be created. The mitigation effort would include an appropriate site preparation phase to implement necessary amendments to the physical condition of the site priorto installation, including appropriate grading and excavation. This would be done in an effort to establish adequate natural hydrology to the site and promote the establishment of proposed seeding and planting. The mitigation effort would include a restoration plan and seeding and container plant palette that mimics the existing natural conditions, and consists of site-appropriate native R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 4 species, including dominant and common species found within the existing natural area. The seeding plant palette would include both long-lived dominant perennial grasses and short-lived, aggressive "weed beater" species. Planting would take place during the appropriate climatic seasons and supplemental irrigation measures are included to assist in establishing native species in case of extended drought conditions during the establishment period. Fencing would be constructed to prohibit intrusion, site disturbance and signage would be provided to properly identify the restoration area. Required Findings for Acquisition of Subject Property Interests by Eminent Domain In order to adopt the Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition by eminent domain of the Subject Property Interests, the City Council must find and determine with respect to the proposed acquisition of the Subject Property Interests that: A. The public interest and necessity require the proposed Project; B. The proposed 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 Interests described in the Resolution of Necessity are necessary for the proposed Project; D. The City has made an offer as required by Government Code Section 7267.2 to the owner of record of the real property it seeks to acquire. The amount of just compensation is not an issue before the City Council at this hearing. The hearing relates to issues A, B, C, and D above. The amount of just compensation would be determined in the eminent domain proceeding that would be filed if the City Council, in its sole discretion, adopts the proposed Resolution of Necessity. Environmental Analysis As mentioned above, the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests to mitigate storm drainage facilities and other improvements constructed as part of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, which mitigation was required by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Accordingly, the environmental effects of the proposed 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 etseq. ("CEQA Guidelines") and the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") in connection with the Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City Council on February 13, 2001, several initial studies pursuant to the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and a Categorical Exclusion ("CE") pursuant to NEPA prepared for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements (Project No. PW99-11). The acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests were studied as an integral part of the Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, EIRs and the CE prepared in connection with the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City is the lead agency for approval under CEQA and FHWA is the lead agency for approval under NEPA in connection with the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. On April 11, 2006 the City prepared a Notice of Determination for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, which was dulyfiled on April 20, 2006with the County Clerk and Recorder's Office in accordance with CEQA. The Notice of Determination noted that the City approved the R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 5 Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements on March 14, 2006. The City made the following determinations in approving the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements: (1) The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements will not have a significant effect on the environment. (2) A Negative Declaration was previously prepared and adopted for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements pursuant to CEQA. The following environmental determinations have been made in the past which have evaluated the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, 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. • 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 bythe City Council on January 8, 2002 for interim widening improvements and the construction of a sound wall along the west side of Pechanga Parkway. (3) Mitigation measures were not made a condition of the approval of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. (4) A Statement of Overriding Consideration was not adopted forthe Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. (5) 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 Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. Pursuant to the Certificate of Fee Exemption, the City made the following findings of exemption: (1) The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements consists of the completion of widening improvements to Pechanga Parkwayto its ultimate configuration as defined in the City of Temecula General Plan Circulation Element. (2) Several Initial Studies were previously prepared that evaluated the potential for adverse environmental impacts associated that could result from the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. (3) These previous Initial Studies and prior Negative Declarations and Environmental Impact Reports indicated that no impacts would occur to fish and wildlife resources as a result of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements and the City of Temecula recommended that a Notice of Determination be prepared forthis project exempting the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements from further environmental review pursuant to Section 15161 of the CEQA Guidelines. The City found that Section 15161 applied here because a previous Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration has been prepared and it can be determined thatthe impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements have been fullydisclosed R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 6 and analyzed by the previous environmental determinations. (No wildlife related mitigation measures were required for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements). (4) The City of Temecula previously adopted a Negative Declaration or has evaluated the environmental impacts of widening Pechanga Parkway in an EIR for earlier related Projects. The following environmental determinations have been made in the past that have evaluated the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements 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. • 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 bythe City Council on January 8, 2002 for interim widening improvements and the construction of a sound wall along the west side of Pechanga Parkway. (5) The City of Temecula believes that the ultimate improvements to Pechanga Parkway were addressed in the previous environmental determinations made for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements and that there will be no impacts resulting from said Project that have not been addressed and analyzed in these previous reports. In accordance with the requirements of NEPA, Caltrans and FHWA approved a Categorical Exclusion ("CE") for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The Caltrans Environmental Chief Officer and the Caltrans Project Manager/DLA 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 Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements would not individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental effect and that said Project was excluded from the requirements to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The CE, Caltrans' findings in the CE, and the stipulations and/or directions set forth in the Continuation Sheet of the CE are incorporated herein by this reference. The proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests were studied as an integral part of the environmental documents discussed above. The proposed Project is a mitigation requirement for the City's construction of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The above environmental findings are the appropriate findings for the proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests. In connection with the proposed Resolutions of Necessity, City staff on November-, 2008, reviewed all of the environmental documentation prepared in connection with the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, including the Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified bythe City of Temecula City Council on February 13, 2001; the City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR, certified bythe 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 bythe 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 R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 7 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 Notice of Determination (EA-126) filed with the County Clerk on April 20, 2006, the CE (PLHL- 54591014) dated April 19, 2007 by FHWA and its Continuation Sheet approved by Caltrans and FHWA pursuant to NEPA, 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 proposed 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 acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests. City's Actions Pursuant to Government Code Section 7260 et seq. As more fully described below, the City of Temecula, pursuant to California Government Code Section 7260 etseq., obtained a fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in accordance with the appraised fair market value, and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008 to the owner of record, Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership. The City's offer letter included copies of the legal description of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel, a drawing depicting these property interests and the comparable sales data relied on by the appraiser. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025, the City also offered to pay the reasonable costs, up to $5,000.00 (Five Thousand Dollars), for an independent appraisal of these real property interests. The offer letter informed the property owner that by law, an appraiser licensed by the Office of Real Estate Appraisers must prepare the independent appraisal. The property owner was asked to let the City know by July 17, 2008 whether the owner wished to have the City issue this money to the owner for this purpose. It requested the property owner to either forward to the City an invoice from the appraiser identifying the property that is the subject of the appraisal and the fee charged for the appraisal. Alternatively, the property owner was allowed to submit a declaration under penalty of perjury providing the relevant information regarding the appraisal costs and identification of the property that is the subject of the appraisal. The property owners have not submitted either a declaration or invoice as of November 12, 2008. City staff has negotiated with the property owner on behalf of the City. As of November 12, 2008, the parties have not reached an agreement regarding the City's proposed acquisition of the Subject Property Interests. Based on the timeline of the proposed Project, it is necessaryfor the City Council to consider the adoption of the proposed Resolution of Necessity at this time. As discussed above, this hearing relates to issues A, B, C and D below. City's Actions Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235, the City sent a letter and notice by first-class mail on November 5, 2008 to the record owner Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership, advising the owner of the City's intent to consider the adoption of a resolution of necessity forthe acquisition of the Subject Property Interests byeminent domain atthe City Council's meeting of November 25, 2008. The notice advised the property owner of its right to appear and object to the proposed adoption of the resolution of necessity if the property owner filed a written request with the City to appear within fifteen (15) days of the date the notice was mailed. R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 8 A. The Public Interest and Necessity Require the Proposed Project As shown above, the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public use, namely for conservation easement purposes to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed as part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project as required by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. As planned and designed, and as approved by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the proposed Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square foot) permanent conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 815, the State Legislature has declared that the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space condition is among the most important environmental assets of California. The City was required to provide 1.7-acres of replacement mitigation for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian and wetland habitat located within the Wolf Valley Creek Channel resulting from the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements widened and improved Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway (formerly State Route 79 South) to Via Gilberto into a six-lane urban arterial highway to its full-width of 134 feet. It also improved and widened Pechanga Parkwayfrom Via Gilberto to Pechanga Road into a four-lane arterial highway with a right-of-way width of 110 feet. In addition, the Pechanga Parkway Phase I I Improvements constructed curbs, gutters, pavement delineation and signage, islands, sidewalks, landscaping, irrigation, streetlights, driveway approaches, traffic signal interconnect system, retaining wall improvements, and storm drain improvements. Further, the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements also included improvements to Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The storm drain improvements in connection with Wolf Valley Creek Channel included the under-grounding of a portion of the concrete lined Wolf Valley Creek Channel from Loma Linda Road to approximately 900 linear feet downstream of Muirfield Drive (approximately 1,900 total linear feet). Later improvements included the reconstruction of a portion of the existing rip rap/concrete-lined trapezoidal Wolf Valley Creek Channel from approximately 900 linear feet north of Muirfield Road downstream to the Temecula Creek confluence (approximately 1,100 total linear feet). The City's construction of the various components comprising the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements was for a public use, namely for public street and drainage purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to alleviate traffic congestion and improve traffic circulation and drainage in the area of the project. The acquisition of the Subject Property Interests for conservation easement purposes to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements is also for a public use for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto and is in the public interest and necessity. The Pechanga Parkway Phase 11 Improvements resulted in permanent impacts to 0.10-acre and temporary impacts to 0.26-acre to wetland waters of the United States, regulated bythe United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. It also resulted in permanent impacts to an approximate 0.85-acre of riparian habitat regulated by the California Department of Fish and Game contained within a 960 linear foot portion of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The City was required to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements by creating a 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area, which comprises a portion of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel. The proposed Project would be constructed pursuant to the requirements of the United States Army Corps of Engineers in Nationwide Permit NW43 No. 200500150-SMJ, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board in Water Quality Certification and Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharge of Dredge and/or Fill Materials No. 04C-107, and the California Department of Fish and Game in Agreement Regarding Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration (Notification No. 6-2003- 069). R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 9 As planned and designed, the City would landscape the conservation easement area and provide irrigation to this area for a period of approximately 5 112 years. The City would use an approximate 22,648 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line easement to provide access to and irrigation to the conservation easement area. The City would also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easement to connect the conservation easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period of 51 /2 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5 1/2 years. At that time, the City would offer to re-convey the permanent grading and access/water line easement back to the property owner if the owner wished to retain these areas. The mitigation would be completed consistent with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The purpose of the mitigation is to compensate for the loss of wetland and riparian habitat associated with the Wolf Valley Creek Channel improvement portion of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The proposed Project would enhance the overall functions and values of the subject portion of Temecula Creek watershed that currently provides limited biological and hydrological function to this area of the City. The proposed Project would require site preparation and amendments to the topography of the land to provide the area with adequate hydrology and would include a restoration effort consisting of a combination of seeding and planting to encourage establishment of riparian and wetland habitat. Further, the proposed Project is in the public interest and necessity because it would further Goal 3 of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City's General Plan, which seeks the conservation of important biological habitats and protection of plan an animal species of concern, wildlife movement corridors and general biodiversity. B. The Project is Planned and Located in the Mannerthat Will be Most Compatible with the Greatest Public Good and the Least Private Injury As discussed above, the proposed Project, as planned and designed, and as approved by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the proposed Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square foot) permanent conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The City seeks to acquire the approximate 1.70-acre conservation easement for a public use, namely for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed as part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project as required bythe California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 815, the State Legislature has declared that the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space condition is among the most important environmental assets of California. As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape the area and provide irrigation to the conservation easement area for a period of approximately 5 1 /2 years. The City would use an approximate 22,648 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line easement to provide access to and irrigation to the conservation easement area. The City would also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easement to connect the conservation easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period of 51 /2 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5 1/2 years. R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 10 The proposed Project, as planned and designed, is located near the vicinity of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The larger parcel is zoned OS-C (Conservation District) by the City. The General Plan Designation is OS (Open Space). The OS-C zone is intended for those lands that should remain in a natural state as much as feasible without intrusion from active recreational uses. The construction of buildings and other structures generally is not permitted in the OS-C zone, with few exceptions by a conditional use permit. Approximately 48 percent of the proposed 1.70-acre permanent conservation easement on the larger parcel is located within the lower Temecula Creek floodway, 47 percent of this conservation easement is located in the lower Temecula Creek floodplain and the remaining 5 percent of the conservation easement area is located outside of the floodway or floodplain. The larger parcel is currently encumbered with an approximate 9.40-acre conservation easement and an approximate 16.50-acre conservation easement. The approximate 25,007 square foot permanent grading easement the City seeks to acquire is located completely in the lower Temecula Creek floodway and completely overlaps the existing conservation easements on the larger parcel. The approximate 22,648 square foot permanent access and water line easement the City seeks to acquire is located completely in the lower Temecula Creek Floodway. An approximate 15,948 square foot portion of this access and water line easement overlaps the existing conservation easements on the larger parcel and the remaining approximate 6,700 square foot area is located outside of the existing conservation easement areas. As planned and designed, the mitigation would take place within the 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area. The mitigation includes an approximate 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The mitigation would be done consistent with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, which is incorporated in this Report by this reference. The purpose of the mitigation is to compensate for the loss of wetland and riparian habitat associated with the Wolf Valley Creek Channel improvement portion of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The proposed Project would enhance the overall functions and values of the subject portion of Temecula Creek watershed that currently provides limited biological and hydrological function to this area of the City. The proposed Project would require site preparation and amendments to the topography of the land to provide the area with adequate hydrology and would include a restoration effort consisting of a combination of seeding and planting to encourage establishment of riparian and wetland habitat. The proposed Projectfurthers Goal 3 of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City's General Plan, which is the conservation of important biological habitats and protection of plan an animal species of concern, wildlife movement corridors and general biodiversity. The proposed Project is planned and designed to allow the property ownerto have the rights to the permanent grading and access/water line easement after the 51/2 year period discussed above if the owner wishes the Cityto re-conveythese interests, thereby minimizing the impact to the larger parcel over the long term. C. The Subject Property Interests Described in The Resolution of Necessity Are Necessary for the Proposed Project As described above, as planned and designed, and as approved by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the proposed Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square foot) permanent conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The City seeks to acquire the approximate 1.70-acre conservation easement for a public use, namely for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed on as part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project as required bythe California Department of Fish and Game R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 11 and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape the area and provide irrigation to the conservation easement area for a period of approximately 5 112 years. The City would use an approximate 22,648 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line easement to provide access to and irrigation to the conservation easement area. The City would also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easement to connect the conservation easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period of 51 /2 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5 1/2 years. At that time, the City would offer to re-convey the permanent grading and access/water line easement back to the property owner if the owner wished to retain these areas. The proposed Project cannot be constructed without the acquisition of the following Subject Property Interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located along the northern side of Temecula Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-076: An approximate 74,251 square foot (1.70 acre) permanent conservation easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel A Conservation Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Conservation Easement"; An approximate 25,007 (0.58 acre) square foot grading easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel B Grading Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "C" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Grading Easement"; and An approximate 22,648 (0.52 acre) square foot access/water line easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel C Access and Water Line Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "D" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Access and Water Line Easement". D. The City has Made the Offer Required by Section 7260 et seq. of the Government Code to the Owner of Record of the Real Property Interests the City Seeks to Acquire As explained more fully above, the City pursuant to Government Code Section 7260 etseq. obtained a fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in accordance with the appraised fair market value, and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008 pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2 to Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership, the record owner of the Subject Property Interests: The following documents on file in the City Clerk's Office, the Planning Department and/or the Public Works Department, which are referenced in this report, are incorporated in this report by this reference: • Resolution of Necessity and Exhibits "A" through "D" to Resolution, attached hereto • City of Temecula General Plan (updated 2005) • Offer Letter from the City of Temecula to the Record Owner of the Subject Property Interests • Notice Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 from City of Temecula to Record Owner of the Subject Property Interests • Street Improvement Plans for Proposed Project R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 12 Environmental Documents Relating to Proposed Project and Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, including Notice of Determination and Categorical Exclusion and all documents referenced above in connection with CEQA and NEPA analyses. Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael Brandman Associates FISCAL IMPACT: The Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements-Environmental Mitigation, Project No. PW99-11 EM, is part of the overall Pechanga Parkway Street Improvements, Phase II Project. It is a Capital Improvement Program project approved bythe City Council as part of Fiscal Year 2008/ 2009 budget. Sufficient funds are available in Account No. 210-165-668-6700 to cover the $30,250.00 deposit. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution of Necessity and Exhibits "A" through "D" to Resolution, attached hereto R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 13 RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION 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 STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION (PROJECT NO. PW99-11EM) THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, FIND, DETERMINE, AND ORDER 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 interests described in Section 3 of this Resolution are to be taken for a public use, namely for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements - Environmental Mitigation (Project No. PW99-11 EM) ("Project") to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed by the City as part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project (PW99-11). The City seeks to acquire the real property interests described in Section 3 for a public use pursuant to the authority conferred upon the City of Temecula to acquire property by eminent domain by Section 19 of Article 1 of the California Constitution, California Government Code Sections 37350, 37350.5, 37351, 40401 and 40404, California Civil Code Section 815 et seq., 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. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 815, the State Legislature has declared that the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space condition is among the most important environmental assets of California. Section 3. The City seeks to acquire the following real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located along the northern side of Temecula Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-076 in connection with the Project: • An approximate 74,251 square foot (1.70 acre) permanent conservation easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" hereto labeled "Parcel A Conservation Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" hereto labeled "Conservation Easement"; • An approximate 25,007 (0.58 acre) square foot grading easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" hereto labeled "Parcel B Grading 11 086\01 58\1 099931 v.1 Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "C" hereto labeled "Grading Easement"; and • An approximate 22,648 (0.52 acre) square foot access/water line easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" hereto labeled "Parcel C Access and Water Line Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "D" hereto labeled "Access and Water Line Easement". Exhibits "A", "B", "C" and "D" to this Resolution of Necessity are incorporated herein by this reference. The Subject Property Interests are required for conservation easement purposes for the Project to mitigate the impacts of the City's construction of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project (Project No. PW99-11). Section 4. The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public purpose, namely for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto for the Project to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed as part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project as required by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square foot) permanent conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. As planned and designed, the City would landscape the conservation easement area and provide irrigation to the area for a period of approximately 5 1 /2 years. Accordingly, the City would need to acquire an approximate 22,648 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line easement to provide access to and irrigation to the conservation easement area. The City would also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easement to connect the conservation easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the Project, the City would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period of 5 1/2 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5 1 /2 years. At that time, the City would offer to re-convey the permanent grading and access/water line easement back to the property owner if the owner wished to retain these areas. The City was required to provide 1.7-acres of replacement mitigation for temporary and permanent impacts to riparian and wetland habitat located within the Wolf Valley Creek Channel resulting from the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City's construction of the various components comprising the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements was for a public purpose, namely for public street and drainage purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to alleviate traffic congestion and improve traffic circulation and drainage in the area of the improvements. The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements widened and improved Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway (formerly State Route 79 South) to Via Gilberto into a six-lane urban arterial highway to its full-width of 134 feet. It also improved and widened Pechanga Parkway from Via Gilberto to Pechanga Road into a four-lane arterial highway with a right-of-way width of 110 feet. In addition, the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements constructed curbs, gutters, pavement delineation and signage, islands, sidewalks, landscaping, irrigation, streetlights, z driveway approaches, traffic signal interconnect system, retaining wall improvements, and storm drain improvements. Further, the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements also included improvements to Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The storm drain improvements in connection with Wolf Valley Creek Channel included the under- grounding of a portion of the concrete lined Wolf Valley Creek Channel from Loma Linda Road to approximately 900 linear feet downstream of Muirfield Drive (approximately 1,900 total linear feet). Later improvements included the reconstruction of a portion of the existing rip rap/concrete-lined trapezoidal Wolf Valley Creek Channel from approximately 900 linear feet north of Muirfield Road downstream to the Temecula Creek confluence (approximately 1,100 total linear feet). The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements resulted in permanent impacts to 0.10-acre and temporary impacts to 0.26-acre to wetland waters of the United States, regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. It also resulted in permanent impacts to an approximate 0.85- acre of riparian habitat regulated b the California Department of Fish and Game contained within a 960 linear foot portion of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The City was required to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements by creating a 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area, which comprises a portion of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel. The Project would be constructed pursuant to the requirements of the United States Army Corps of Engineers in Nationwide Permit NW43 No. 200500150-SMJ, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board in Water Quality Certification and Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharge of Dredge and/or Fill Materials No. 04C-107, and the California Department of Fish and Game in Agreement Regarding Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration (Notification No. 6-2003-069). The mitigation comprising the Project would take place within the 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area. The mitigation includes an approximate 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The mitigation would be completed consistent with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The purpose of the mitigation is to compensate for the loss of wetland and riparian habitat associated with the Wolf Valley Creek Channel improvement portion of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The Project would enhance the overall functions and values of the subject portion of Temecula Creek watershed that currently provides limited biological and hydrological function to this area of the City. The Project would require site preparation and amendments to the topography of the land to provide the area with adequate hydrology and would include a restoration effort consisting of a combination of seeding and planting to encourage establishment of riparian and wetland habitat. Further, the Project is in the public interest and necessity because it would further Goal 3 of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City's General Plan, which seeks the conservation of important biological habitats and protection of plan an animal species of concern, wildlife movement corridors and general biodiversity. Moreover, the State Legislature has declared pursuant to Civil Code Section 815 that 3 the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space condition is among the most important environmental assets of California. Section 5. The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to mitigate storm drainage facilities and other improvements constructed as part of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, which mitigation was required by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Accordingly, 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") in connection with the Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City Council on February 13, 2001, several initial studies pursuant to the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and a Categorical Exclusion ("CE") pursuant to NEPA prepared for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements (Project No. PW99-11). The acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests were studied as an integral part of the Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, EIRs and the CE prepared in connection with the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City is the lead agency for approval under CEQA and FHWA is the lead agency for approval under NEPA in connection with the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. On April 11, 2006 the City prepared a Notice of Determination for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, 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 Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements on March 14, 2006. The City made the following determinations in approving the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements: (a) The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements will not have a significant effect on the environment. (b) A Negative Declaration was previously prepared and adopted for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements pursuant to CEQA. The following environmental determinations have been made in the past which have evaluated the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, 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. ■ 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. a ■ 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 Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. (d) A Statement of Overriding Consideration was not adopted for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. (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 Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. Pursuant to the Certificate of Fee Exemption, the City made the following findings of exemption: (a) The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements consists of the completion of widening improvements to Pechanga Parkway to its ultimate configuration as defined in the City of Temecula General Plan Circulation Element. (b) Several Initial Studies were previously prepared that evaluated the potential for adverse environmental impacts associated that could result from the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. (c) These previous Initial Studies and prior Negative Declarations and Environmental Impact Reports indicated that no impacts would occur to fish and wildlife resources as a result of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements and the City of Temecula recommended that a Notice of Determination be prepared for this project exempting the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements from further environmental review pursuant to Section 15161 of the CEQA Guidelines. The City found that Section 15161 applied here because a previous Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration has been prepared and it can be determined that the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements have been fully disclosed and analyzed by the previous environmental determinations. (No wildlife related mitigation measures were required for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements). (d) The City of Temecula previously adopted a Negative Declaration or has evaluated the environmental impacts of widening Pechanga Parkway in an EIR for earlier related Projects. The following environmental determinations have been made in the past that have evaluated the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements or interim improvements to Pechanga Parkway: • Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City of Temecula City Council on February 13, 2001. 5 ■ 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. ■ 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. (e) The City of Temecula believes that the ultimate improvements to Pechanga Parkway were addressed in the previous environmental determinations made for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements and that there will be no impacts resulting from said Project that have not been addressed and analyzed in these previous reports. In accordance with the requirements of NEPA, Caltrans and FHWA approved a Categorical Exclusion ("CE") for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The Caltrans Environmental Chief Officer and the Caltrans Project Manager/DLA 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 Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements would not individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental effect and that said Project was excluded from the requirements to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The CE, Caltrans' findings in the CE, and the stipulations and/or directions set forth in the Continuation Sheet of the CE are incorporated herein by this reference. The proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests were studied as an integral part of the environmental documents discussed above. The Project is a mitigation requirement for the City's construction of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The above environmental findings are the appropriate findings for the proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests. In connection with the proposed Resolutions of Necessity, City staff on November , 2008, reviewed all of the environmental documentation prepared in connection with the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, 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 s Report for Pechanga Parkway Phase II Street Improvements revised March 12, 2007 and all other technical studies prepared in connection with said documents, the Notice of Determination (EA-126) filed with the County Clerk on April 20, 2006, the CE (PLHL- 54591014) dated April 19, 2007 by FHWA and its Continuation Sheet approved by Caltrans and FHWA pursuant to NEPA, 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 acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests. Section 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2, the City obtained a fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in accordance with the fair market value and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008 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 Interests pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025. Section 7. The City provided notice to the record owner 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 Interests. Section 8. 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 Interests described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibits "B", "C" and "D" hereto are 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 Interests it seeks to acquire. Section 9. 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 City's General Plan, its Circulation Element, the plans for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, the environmental documents referenced above and in the Agenda Report, including the Notice of Determination and Categorical Exclusion approved by 7 the Federal Highway Administration and the California Department of Transportation pursuant to NEPA, the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, the offer letter sent to the property owner pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 7267.2, 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 10. 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 real property interests described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibits "B", "C" and "D" 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 11. 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. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] a 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. 08-_ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk 9 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PECHANGA PARKWAY STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION EASEMENTS THAT PORTION OF THE REMAINDER PARCEL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY A MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL "A" CONSERVATION EASEMENT BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL "B" OF THE "WETLAND CREATION AREA" AS DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED NOVEMBER 14, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 561440 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT" AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT NO. 366277, RECORED OCTOBER 8, 1997 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH 60°30'00" WEST, 63.17 FEET (NORTH 60°31'05" WEST, 63.17 AS RECORDED IN SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 561440) ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL "B", "WETLAND CREATION AREA" TO THE BEGINNING OF.A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 190.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B", "WETLAND CREATION AREA" THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°12'50", AN ARC LENGTH OF 110.14 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 86°17'10" WEST, 131.69 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL"B", "WETLAND CREATION AREA" TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 190.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B", "WETLAND CREATION AREA" THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°10'07", AN ARC LENGTH OF 100.04 FEET; THENCE NORTH 63°32'43" WEST, 23.37 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE.OF PARCEL "B", "WETLAND CREATION AREA" TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B" "WETLAND CREATION AREA" THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°59'49", AN ARC LENGTH OF 226.87 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B", "WETLAND CREATION AREA" SOUTH 86°54'37" EAST, 548.70 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 82°38'40" EAST, 224.77 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°34'27" EAST, 489.39 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT"; Page 1 of 7 Created on 6/21/2007 2:10 PM BY: R.C.O. CK'D BY: B. Fox F:107012001Legals\SD MITIGATION ESMTS.doc THENCE SOUTH 55°52'16" WEST, 64.65 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT"; THENCE SOUTH 72°53'44" WEST, 201.78 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT"; THENCE NORTH 85°45'31" WEST, 386.01 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 74,251 SQUARE FEET OR 1.70 ACRES MORE OR LESS. THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B" AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF. PARCEL "B" GRADING EASEMENT COMMENCING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL "B" OF THE "WETLAND CREATION AREA" AS DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED NOVEMBER 14, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 561440 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT" AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT NO. 366277, RECORED OCTOBER 8, 1997 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 85°45'31" EAST, 386.01 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT"; THENCE NORTH 72°53'44" EAST, 61.78 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT" TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 72°53'44" EAST, 140.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT"; THENCE LEAVING THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT" SOUTH 46°41'42" EAST, 287.02 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 76°24'18" WEST, 65.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 58°32'48" WEST, 327.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING CONTAINING 25,007 SQUARE FEET OR 0.57 ACRE MORE OR LESS. THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "C" AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF. Page 2 of 7 Created on 6/21/2007 2:10 PM BY: R.C.O. CK'D BY: B. Fox F:\0701200\Legals\SD MITIGATION ESMTS.doc PARCEL "C" ACCESS AND WATER LINE EASEMENT A STRIP OF LAND 20 FEET WIDE, THE CENTERLINE OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT "A" OF PARCEL MAP NO. 29132 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 199, PAGES 78 THROUGH 80 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH 16°36'44" WEST, 10.23 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "A" TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 61 °16'24" WEST, 90.52 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 90.00 FEET;. THENCE WESTERLY AND NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 86°44'18", AN ARC LENGTH OF 136.25 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 58°00'42" EAST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY AND WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 93°58'32", AN ARC LENGTH OF 82.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 54°02'10" WEST, 55.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°28'54", AN ARC LENGTH OF 43.57 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41 °33'15" WEST, 77.05 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38°38'27", AN ARC LENGTH OF 67.44 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 80°11'42" WEST, 121.08 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°16'21", AN ARC LENGTH OF 68.54 FEET TO. THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 49°04'40" EAST; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 54°02'36", AN ARC LENGTH OF 94.32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 85°02'04" WEST, 31.87 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°08'48", AN ARC LENGTH OF 31.93 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 85°49'08" WEST, 232.74 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B", "GRADING EASEMENT" AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. Page 3 of 7 Created on.6/21/2007 2:10 PM BY: R.C.O. CK'D BY: B. Fox F:\0701200\Legals\SD MITIGATION ESMTS.doc THE SIDELINES OF SAID 20 FOOT EASEMENT SHALL BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED AS TO BEGIN AT THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "A" AND TO TERMINATE ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL "B". CONTAINING 22,648 SQUARE FEET OR 0.52 ACRES MORE OR LESS. THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "D" AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF. PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION: KEVIN B. COZAD REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 26159 EXPIRES: 3-31-2008 ~0• r N0.28159 Exp 3/31/E1r3 iVr~ Page 4 of 7 Created on 6/2112007 2:10 PM BY: R.C.O. CK'D BY: B. Fox F:\0701200\Legals\SD MITIGATION ESMTS.do< EXHIBIT "B" CONSERVATION EASEMENT Q O Go V r z m v 1.m-- r,-, w Fi ~ r m N z ~ 00 O f~ ~ Oo N W W O) W 2 O V O co V to N (n (n Z (n C): c0~ N pOj Co., i OM G'1 , C4 , , A' Olt N _ O V O CA W rn rn rn 0 r r r p c p o z M r rn 7 o • _ OOD S T, C N co a n c w / v ~ n1 ~ I Nv o o ~ I ~ m w I rZTI / I N CD I I I y ~ I ► I m j~ ~ I :n I ti y I y o I I 5 Z w y 1, p a I I tiR I ~v ~ O I vy v rc-p I ~j SCALE: 1"=200' I \ I. \ I \ I \ \ I \ PREPARED FOR: CFESSf~ CITY OF TEMECULA /Q C 43200 BUSINESS PARK DR. TEMECULA, CA 92590 (951) 694-6411 rc NO. 2169 RECORD OWNER: EV1 BORCHARD-TEMECULA, L.P., r A CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP~r. n NZZ..-i c / W v zn 1 I o I w I I c1~ I `T' I QlA n I I o~~l nyal mZ^I ~~al ti ~I I I I I i / SHEET 5 OF 7 CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS / PLANNERS Air SURVEYORS / GPS 151 South Girard Street Hemet, Ca 92544 TEL (951) 652-4454 • FAX (951) 766-8942 E-MAIL kbcozadOkbcozod.com I EXHIBIT "C" I GRADING EASEMENT Q kp~ V rn w -v m C Z irn m C N 0) ONO 01 Ell rT1 V cn V O S O i- O O O N O O v 00 r a c V) v v Z OD c; O- N N f.7 N N3 pz ? W W Olt Olt ll~ L*' ::9 m m rn / I I / F 1 I tiro co I ~ m I ~c I o I ~ I oo \ W I 'Oa'r c~ I \ v Z-A I r \ Z \ ► 1 / SCALE: 1"=200' 1 1 / / / / I I I ► I N ,W I I O O•~ I I ~ I I C31 I ~ I ~I i ~~\SHEET 6 OF 7 I ~ 1 \ PREPARED FOR: CITY OF TEMECULA ~OS~ ~ O• C 43200 BUSINESS PARK DR. TEMECULA, CA 92590 (951) 694-6411 f40.26159 RECORD OWNER: EXP, 3ri.1 BORCHARD-TEMECULA, L.P., A CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP / W 1 CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS / PLANNERS SURVEYORS./ GPS 151 South Girard Street Hemet, Ca 92544 TEL (951) 652-4454 • FAX (951) 766-8942 E-MAIL kbcozodOkbcozod.com EXHIBIT "D" ACCESS AND WATER LINE EASEMENT I I % I 11 ~ ~ ; I I ti 1 I va~j III r- 1 \ ~1 1 a aka I. \ ~m~~ I I n\ \ (n R 0 1 c m C) p \ rn rn ym~ \ y 0 1 ~ ~ Vic, gym \ 1z) lh >0 ~R i 'W 1 ' Z r O> r CT r A r L4 r N r Z rn r Z z _j Ln co rn ~0 -4 crl (D co O O O CT D co ? V CA CT V N r rn a) w z N (n N N co co co ~ CA M z v2 g q 1 oC) (A C) ( N W N 41 O O ? N co -0. N cn O ~ 73 W ~ \ 11 ~ ~ ~ m ~ I yo N w ; Niz:~ o all ~ w tea-, \ I ~ ClJ \ 1 ~ p ~ ys~ N ~ m \II C31 p N ` ( j l CI1 i PREPARED FOR: CITY OF TEMECULA 43200 BUSINESS PARK DR. TEMECULA, CA 92590 (951) 694-6411 RECORD OWNER:. BORCHARD-TEMECULA, L.P., A CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP C-) c C...) rn V M Cn ~ w N j m n w co rn Cn 4~. co w z c G9 V w N 01 to w U1 -r-. Ln O 1.1 2 rCTI L4. N ? A V CT W r o o o o o cn co Cl g m 0 0 0 Co 0 0 o c 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 (n O O' C7 O O O C) . cq I ? w (D w co ~ N co w Oa (72 ~ O O w N. LA ~ r 01 1 N CA (3 j 00 N 00 cn 01 CA 4Z D Oo i CA i i V i ~ i N i Oa i \ Q\~oFE , \\60 \r\ \o \ ~ Zg~6 y, QIN ~d Z rn No 26159 4~ ~jVItv. \~F!Attr~~~ w V.- SHEET 7 OF 7 CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Z SUNRVICIPAL EYORS ~NGPUSLTANTS /PLANNERS Y 151 South Girard Street Hemet, Co 92544 TEL (951) 652-4454 • FAX (951) 766-8942 E-MAIL kbcozadOkticozod.com SCALE: 1"=200' ITEM NO. 20 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway - Dual Turn Lanes From Temecula Parkway (Project No. PW 06-11) PREPARED BY: Paula Gutierrez-Baeza, City Attorney's Office Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works - CIP Monica Adamee, Real Property Agent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Consider the following Resolution, which is a Resolution of Necessity of the City of Temecula: RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION 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- DUAL TURN LANES FROM TEMECULA PARKWAY (PROJECT NO. PW06-11) 2. Open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Resolution of Necessity, receive from staff the evidence stated and referred to in this Agenda Report ("Report"), take testimony from any person wishing to be heard on issues A, B, C, and D below, and consider all evidence to determine whether to adopt the proposed Resolution of Necessity. If the City Council finds, based on the evidence contained and referred to in this Report, the testimony and comments received at this hearing, and all written testimony submitted to the City Council, that the evidence warrants the necessary findings with respect to the proposed Resolution of Necessity, then City staff recommends that the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion: R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 1 Adopt proposed Resolution No. 08-_ (which requires a 4/5ths vote of the entire Council) and authorize the City Attorney's office to file eminent domain proceedings to acquire the following real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located at the southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010- 073: ➢ An approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street purposes, which is described on Exhibit "A" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Dedication of Right-Of-Way' and is depicted on Exhibit "B" labeled "Dedication of Right of Way"; ➢ An approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent public roadwaythat will revert back to the property owner after construction of the Project in the manner proposed, which is described on Exhibit "A-1" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Slope Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B- 1" labeled "Slope Easement"; and ➢ An approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a term of eighteen (18) months to facilitate construction of the Project, which is described on Exhibit "A-2" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Temporary Construction Easement" and depicted on Exhibit "B-2" labeled "Temporary Construction Easement". These real property interests are referred to below collectively as "Subject Property Interests" and are described more particularly in the Exhibits attached to the Resolution of Necessity. The proposed Resolution of Necessity and its Exhibits "A", "B", "A-1 "B-1 "A-2" and "B-2" are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Authorize the City Attorney's office and City staff to file and prosecute eminent domain proceedings and to take all necessary steps to deposit $120,000 with the Court, the amount of probable compensation, as required by law for issuance of an Order for Prejudgment Possession. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents. BACKGROUND: Description of Project: The City Council has before it a proposed Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition by eminent domain of certain real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located at the southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California, identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-073 ("larger parcel"). Specifically, the Subject Property Interests consist of an approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto in connection with the Proposed Pechanga Parkway- Dual Turn Lanes from Temecula Parkway (Project No. PW06- 11) (referred to below as "proposed Project"), an approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent public roadway that will revert back to the underlying fee owner after construction of the proposed Project, and an approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a term of eighteen (18) months to facilitate the construction of the proposed Project. The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests to construct the proposed Project. R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 2 The proposed Project would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway consistent with the City's General Plan and would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks. Temecula Parkway is designated as a principal arterial in the City's General Plan and is currently configured with three eastbound and three westbound traffic lanes in the vicinity of the larger parcel. There are also two westbound left turn lanes, one eastbound left turn lane and one eastbound right turn lane at the signalized intersection with Pechanga Parkway. The construction of the proposed Project in the manner proposed would not change the westbound configuration of Temecula Parkway. The proposed Project would change the eastbound configuration of Temecula Parkway to realign the existing single right turn lane to accommodate two right turn lanes. The proposed Project would not change the grade of the larger parcel from which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests. The grade of Temecula Parkway would change as it approaches the intersection at Pechanga Parkway. The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public use, namely public street purposes, and all uses necessary or convenient thereto in connection with the proposed Project pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Cityto acquire real property by eminent domain by Section 19 of Article 1 of the California Constitution, Government Code Sections 37350, 37350.5, 37351, 40401 and 40404, 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 by other provisions of law. As mentioned above, the proposed Project would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway and would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003061041) for the 2005 City of Temecula General Plan Update ("2005 General Plan EIR"), which was certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005, contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary lanes at principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. The Circulation Element of the General Plan indicates that the failure of key intersections to perform at adopted performance standards significantly impairs the overall effectiveness of the transportation network. The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the 2005 General Plan EIR. For example, the Circulation Element indicates that Principal Arterials, such as Temecula Parkway, have six lanes of through travel with additional turn lanes at specific locations. The proposed Project would construct the two dedicated right turn lanes that are needed at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to improve traffic circulation at this intersection. The proposed Project is needed to improve traffic circulation 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 traffic congestion and have impacted traffic circulation on Pechanga Parkway. The proposed Project's construction of two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway would improve traffic conditions at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway. Level of Service ("LOS") describes the efficiency and quality of traffic operations. LOS is ranked on a scale of LOS A to LOS F, with LOS A representing excellent efficiency or free-flow traffic and LOS F representing extreme congestion or a forced or breakdown flow. At LOS F, traffic volumes exceed capacity, resulting in jammed intersections. This can result in delays greater than 80 seconds at intersections and/or two-cycle signal waits. The proposed Project would improve the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkwayfrom LOS F to LOS E, which is still below the LOS D goal established by the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan is to "strive to maintain a LOS D or R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 3 better at all intersections within the City during peak hours and LOS C or better during non-peak hours." The construction of the proposed improvements would bring the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to a level of service closer to the LOS D goal set forth in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. By improving the efficiency of traffic circulation as set forth above, the proposed Project would also help to meet Goal 3 of the Circulation Element, which is to provide an efficient City circulation system through the use of transportation system management and travel demand management strategies. The proposed Project adds turn lanes to implement this Goal. The proposed Project will also complywith policy3.2, which is to discourage on-street (curbside) parking along principal arterial roadways to minimize traffic conflicts and increase carrying capacity. The impacted portions of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway will continue to prohibit curbside parking. As indicated above, increased development in this area of the City and an increase in patrons of the Pechanga Casino have resulted in additional traffic congestion on Pechanga Parkway and have impacted traffic circulation efficiency on Pechanga Parkway. This traffic congestion may increase the risk of traffic accidents. The proposed Project is in the public interest and necessity and is needed to improve traffic circulation and safety in this area of the City. The proposed Project would improve traffic circulation and efficiency at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, benefiting the residents of this area of the City and the community as a whole. As indicated above, the proposed Project is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. By making right turn movements from Temecula Parkway to Pechanga Parkway more efficient, the proposed Projectwould improve traffic circulation and efficiencyatthis intersection and on Pechanga Parkway during peak hour traffic. This may also consequently 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. For the reasons set forth above and discussed more fully below, the construction of the proposed Project is needed to ensure that adequate traffic circulation is maintained at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway. Required Findings for Acquisition of Subject Property Interests by Eminent Domain In orderto adoptthe proposed Resolution of Necessityforthe acquisition byeminent domain of the Subject Property Interests, the City Council must find and determine that: A. The public interest and necessity require the proposed Project; B. The proposed 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 Interests described in the Resolution of Necessity are necessary for the proposed Project; D. The City has made an offer as required by Government Code Section 7267.2 to the owner of record of the real property it seeks to acquire. The amount of just compensation is not an issue before the City Council at this hearing. The hearing relates to issues A, B, C, and D above. The amount of just compensation would be determined in the eminent domain proceeding that would be filed if the City Council, in its sole discretion, adopts the proposed Resolution of Necessity. R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 4 Environmental Analysis The environmental effects of the proposed Project were studied and analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines"). On September 24, 2008, the City filed a Notice of Exemption for the proposed Project pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. In adopting a Notice of Exemption, the City determined that the environmental effects of the proposed Project were studied by the City Council on April 12, 2005, when the City Council certified the 2005 General Plan EIR (SCH #2003061041). Specifically, the Circulation Element of the 2005 General Plan discussed the need for and includes provisions to add auxiliary turn lanes at principal intersections in the City. The City has identified the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway as one of the intersections that need these auxiliary turn lanes. The 2005 General Plan EIR contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary turn lanes at principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. The Notice of Exemption found that the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the City found the proposed Project is exempt from further review under CEQA pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Notice of Exemption, 2005 General Plan EIR, Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report dated June 4, 2003, the Environmental Checklist prepared bythe City in connection with the 2005 General Plan EIR and agenda reports prepared in connection with these environmental documents are incorporated herein by this reference. In connection with the proposed Resolution of Necessity, City staff on November-, 2008, reviewed all of the environmental documentation prepared in connection with the proposed Project, including the Notice of Exemption dated September 24, 2008, the 2005 General Plan EIR certified bythe Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005 by City Council Resolution No. . Pursuantto 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 proposed 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 Interests. City's Actions Pursuant to Government Code Section 7260 et seq. The City of Temecula, pursuant to California Government Code Section 7260 et seq., obtained a fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in accordance with the appraised fair market value, and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008, to the owner of record, Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership. The City's offer letter included copies of the legal description of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel, a drawing depicting these property interests and the comparable sales data relied on by the appraiser. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025, the City also offered to pay to the record owner the reasonable costs, up to $5,000.00 (Five Thousand Dollars), for an independent appraisal of these real property interests. The offer letter informed the property owner that by law, an appraiser licensed by the Office of Real Estate Appraisers must prepare the independent appraisal. The property owner was asked to let the City know by June 30, 2008 whether the owner wished to have the City issue this money to the owner for this purpose. It requested the property owner to either forward to the City an invoice from the appraiser identifying the property that is the R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 5 subject of the appraisal and the fee charged for the appraisal. Alternatively, the property owner was allowed to submit a declaration under penalty of perjury providing the relevant information regarding the appraisal costs and identification of the property that is the subject of the appraisal. The City did not receive an invoice or declaration regarding any appraisal costs. City staff has negotiated with the property owner on behalf of the City. The owner indicated to City staff that it would accept the City's offer. On July 31, 2008, the City sent a letter to the property owner confirming the owner's acceptance of the City's offer together with a Purchase and Sale Agreement. City staff and the property owner have had further discussions regarding the City's proposed acquisition of the Subject Property Interests since July 31, 2008. As of November 12, 2008, however, the property owner has not executed the proposed Purchase and Sale Agreement. Based on the timeline of the proposed Project, it is necessaryfor the City Council to consider the adoption of the proposed Resolutions of Necessity at this time. As discussed above, this hearing relates to issues A, B, C and D below. City's Actions Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235, the City sent a letter and notice by first-class mail on November 5, 2008 to the record owner Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership, advising the owner of the City's intent to consider the adoption of a resolution of necessity forthe acquisition of the Subject Property Interests byeminent domain atthe City Council's meeting of November 25, 2008. The notice advised the property owner of the owner's right to appear and object to the proposed adoption of the resolution of necessity if the property owner filed a written request with the City to appear within fifteen (15) days of the date the notice was mailed. A. The Public Interest and Necessity Require the Proposed Project The proposed Project is necessaryto ensure thattraffic circulation and efficiency is improved at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkwayand to ensure thatthe goals of the Circulation Element are met. As planned and designed, the proposed Project, would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkwayto southbound Pechanga Parkwayand would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks consistentwith the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The 2005 General Plan EIR, which was certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005, contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary lanes at principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. The proposed Project would construct necessary auxiliary lanes. The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the 2005 General Plan EIR. The proposed Project is in the public interest and necessity because it is needed to improve traffic circulation 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 traffic congestion and have impacted traffic circulation on Pechanga Parkway. As planned and designed, the proposed Project's construction of two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway would improve traffic conditions at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway. The proposed Project would improve the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway from LOS F to LOS E, which is still below the LOS D goal established by the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan 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 proposed improvements would bring the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to a level of service closer to R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 6 the LOS D goal set forth in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The addition of the dual right turn lanes, as planned and designed, would allow for increased capacity for right turn movements onto Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway. The increase in traffic congestion in the location of the proposed Project may increase the risk of traffic accidents. The proposed Project is in the public interest and necessity and is needed to improve safety for both pedestrians and vehicles in this area of the City. The proposed Project would improve traffic circulation and efficiency at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, benefiting the residents of this area of the City and the community as a whole. As indicated above, the proposed Project is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. By making the right turn from Temecula Parkway to Pechanga Parkway more efficient, the proposed Project would improve traffic circulation and efficiency at this intersection and on Pechanga Parkway during peak hour traffic. This may also consequently 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. The proposed Project may require the relocation of several utilities to the proposed new right-of-way area. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests, namely public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto, is a more necessary public use than the uses to which the public utility easement holders have appropriated those utility easements, which are located in the Subject Property Interests and are affected by the proposed Project. B. The Project is Planned and Located in the Mannerthat Will be Most Compatible with the Greatest Public Good and the Least Private Injury As discussed above, the proposed Project, as planned and designed, would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkwayto southbound Pechanga Parkwayand would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks consistentwith the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The 2005 General Plan EIR, which was certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005, contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary lanes at principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. As planned and designed, the proposed Project would construct necessary auxiliary lanes. The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the 2005 General Plan EIR. The proposed Project is planned and located in the manner that would ensure that traffic circulation and efficiency is improved at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway benefiting the residents of this area of the City and the community as a whole. As discussed above, increased development in this area of the City and an increase in patrons of the Pechanga Casino have resulted in traffic congestion and have impacted traffic circulation at several intersections along Pechanga Parkway, including the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway. The proposed Project would improve the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway from LOS F to LOS E, which is still below the LOS D goal established by the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan 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 proposed improvements would bring the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to a level of service closer to the LOS D goal set forth in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The proposed Project is planned and located to alleviate the growing traffic congestion at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, to serve the needs of the community, and has been planned and located to minimize the impact to the larger parcel. The improvement of traffic circulation and R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 7 reduction of traffic congestion at this intersection during peak hour traffic may also consequently 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. The proposed Project may require the relocation of several utilities to the proposed new right-of-way area. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests, namely public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto, is a more necessary public use than the uses to which the public utility easement holders have appropriated those utility easements, which are located in the Subject Property Interests and are affected by the proposed Project. C. The Subject Property Interests Described in the Resolution of Necessity Are Necessary for the Proposed Project As described above, the proposed Project, as planned and designed, would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkwayto southbound Pechanga Parkwayand would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks consistentwith the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The proposed Project requires the acquisition of the following Subject Property Interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located at the southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-073: ➢ An approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street purposes, which is described on Exhibit "A" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Dedication of Right-Of-Way" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" labeled "Dedication of Right of Way"; ➢ An approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent public roadway that will revert back to the property owner after construction of the Project in the manner proposed, which is described on Exhibit "A-1" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Slope Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B- 1" labeled "Slope Easement"; and ➢ An approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a term of eighteen (18) months to facilitate construction of the Project, which is described on Exhibit "A-2" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Temporary Construction Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B-2" labeled "Temporary Construction Easement". The City's construction of the proposed Project requires the acquisition of the above Subject Property Interests. The proposed Project may require the relocation of several utilities to the proposed new right-of-way area. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests, namely public street 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 have appropriated those utility easements, which are located in the Subject Property Interests and are affected by the proposed Project. R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 8 D. The City has Made the Offer Required by Section 7260 et seq. of the Government Code to the Owner of Record of the Real Property Interests the City Seeks to Acquire As explained more fully above, the City, pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2 obtained fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in accordance with the appraised fair market value, and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008 to Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership, the record fee owner of the Subject Property Interests. The following documents on file in the City Clerk's Office, the City's Planning Department and/orthe City's Public Works Department, which are referenced in this report, are incorporated in this report by this reference: • City of Temecula General Plan (Update 2005) • Offer Letter from the City of Temecula to Borchard-Temecula, L.P., the record owner of the Subject Property Interests • Notice Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 from City of Temecula to record owner of the Subject Property Interests • Street Improvement Plans for Proposed Project • Environmental Documents Relating to Proposed Project, including Notice of Exemption and the 2005 General Plan EIR FISCAL IMPACT: The Pechanga Parkway- Dual Right Turn Lanes from Temecula Parkway, Project No. PW06-11, is a Capital Improvement Program project approved by the City Council as part of Fiscal Year 2008/ 2009 budget. Sufficient funds are available in Account No. 210-165-637- 5700 to cover the $120,000 deposit. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution of Necessity and Exhibits "A", "A-1", "A-2", "B", "B-1" and "B-2" to Resolution attached hereto R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 9 RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION 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 - DUAL TURN LANES FROM TEMECULA PARKWAY (PROJECT NO. PW06-11) THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, FIND, DETERMINE, AND ORDER 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 interests described in Section 3 of this Resolution are to be taken for a public use, namely for public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto in connection with the Pechanga Parkway - Dual Turn Lanes From Temecula Parkway (Project No. PW 06-11) ("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 City seeks to acquire the following real property interests (which are referred to below collectively as "Subject Property Interests") from the real property, which is a vacant lot located at the southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-073 ("larger parcel"), for public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto: • An approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street purposes, which is described on Exhibit "A" hereto labeled "Legal Description for Dedication of Right-Of-Way" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" labeled "Dedication of Right of Way"; • An approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent public roadway that will revert back to the property owner after construction of the Project in the manner proposed, which is described on Exhibit "A-1" hereto labeled "Legal Description for Slope Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B-1" labeled "Slope Easement"; and • An approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a term of eighteen (18) months to facilitate construction of the Project, which is described on Exhibit "A-2"hereto labeled "Legal Description for Temporary Construction Easement" and depicted on Exhibit "B-2" labeled "Temporary Construction Easement". The Subject Property Interests described on Exhibits "A", "A-1" and "A-2" and depicted, respectively, on Exhibits "B" "B-1" and "B-2" hereto are incorporated herein by this reference. The Subject Property Interests are required for the construction of the Project, which a public use. Section 4. The Project would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway consistent with the City's General Plan and would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks. Temecula Parkway is designated as a principal arterial in the City's General Plan and is currently configured with three eastbound and three westbound traffic lanes in the vicinity of the larger parcel. There are also two westbound left turn lanes, one eastbound left turn lane and one eastbound right turn lane at the signalized intersection with Pechanga Parkway. The construction of the Project in the manner proposed would not change the westbound configuration of Temecula Parkway. The Project would change the eastbound configuration of Temecula Parkway to realign the existing single right turn lane to accommodate two right turn lanes. The Project would not change the grade of the larger parcel from which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests. The grade of Temecula Parkway would change as it approaches the intersection at Pechanga Parkway. The Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003061041) for the 2005 City of Temecula General Plan Update ("2005 General Plan EIR"), which was certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005, contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary lanes at principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. The Circulation Element of the General Plan indicates that the failure of key intersections to perform at adopted performance standards significantly impairs the overall effectiveness of the transportation network. The Project is consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the 2005 General Plan EIR. For example, the Circulation Element indicates that principal arterials, such as Temecula Parkway, have six lanes of through travel with additional turn lanes at specific locations. The Project would construct the two dedicated right turn lanes that are needed at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to improve traffic circulation at this intersection. The Project is needed to improve traffic circulation 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 traffic congestion and have impacted traffic circulation on Pechanga Parkway. The Project's construction of two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway would improve traffic conditions at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway. Level of Service ("LOS") describes the efficiency and quality of traffic operations. LOS is ranked on a scale of LOS A to LOS F, with LOS A representing excellent efficiency or free-flow traffic and LOS F representing extreme congestion or a forced or breakdown flow. At LOS F, traffic volumes exceed capacity, resulting in z jammed intersections. This can result in delays greater than 80 seconds at intersections and/or two-cycle signal waits. The Project would improve the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway from LOS F to LOS E, which is still below the LOS D goal established by the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan 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 proposed improvements would bring the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to a level of service closer to the LOS D goal set forth in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. By improving the efficiency of traffic circulation as set forth above, the Project would also help to meet Goal 3 of the Circulation Element, which is to provide an efficient City circulation system through the use of transportation system management and travel demand management strategies. The proposed Project adds turn lanes to implement this Goal. The proposed Project will also comply with policy 3.2, which is to discourage on-street (curbside) parking along principal arterial roadways to minimize traffic conflicts and increase carrying capacity. The impacted portions of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway will continue to prohibit curbside parking. By making right turn movements from Temecula Parkway to Pechanga Parkway more efficient, the proposed Project would improve traffic circulation and efficiency at this intersection and on Pechanga Parkway during peak hour traffic. This may also consequently 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. and the CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines"). On September 24, 2008, the City filed a Notice of Exemption for the proposed Project pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. In adopting a Notice of Exemption, the City determined that the environmental effects of the Project were studied by the City Council on April 12, 2005, when the City Council certified the 2005 General Plan EIR (SCH #2003061041) pursuant to City Council Resolution No. Specifically, the Circulation Element of the 2005 General Plan discussed the need for and includes provisions to add auxiliary turn lanes at principal intersections in the City. The City has identified the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway as one of the intersections that need these auxiliary turn lanes. The 2005 General Plan EIR contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary turn lanes at principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. The Notice of Exemption found that the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the City found the proposed Project is exempt from further review under CEQA pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Notice of Exemption, 2005 General Plan EIR, Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report 3 dated June 4, 2003, the Environmental Checklist prepared by the City in connection with the 2005 General Plan EIR and agenda reports prepared in connection with these environmental documents are incorporated herein by this reference. In connection with the proposed Resolution of Necessity, City staff on November 2008, reviewed all of the environmental documentation prepared in connection with the Project, including the Notice of Exemption dated September 24, 2008, the 2005 General Plan EIR certified by the Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005 by City Council Resolution No. . 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 proposed 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 Interests. Section 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2, the City obtained a fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in accordance with the fair market value and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008 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 Interests pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025. Section 7. The City provided notice to the record owner pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 of its decision to consider the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition of the Subject Property Interests by eminent domain. Section 8. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests, namely public street 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 have appropriated those utility easements, which are located in the Subject Property Interests 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 Interests described in Exhibits "A", "A-1" and "A-2" and depicted, respectively, on Exhibits "B" "B-1" and "B-2" hereto are necessary for the Project; and a D. The City has made the offer required by Government Code Section 7267.2 to the owner of record of the Subject Property Interests 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 2005 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 Exemption, the 2005 General Plan EIR, the offer letter sent to the property owner pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2, 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 Exhibits "A", "A-1" and "A-2" and depicted, respectively, on Exhibits "B" "B-1" and "B-2" attached hereto. 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. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] 5 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. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk s EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY A DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-VVAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP, SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,571.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 101 14' 05" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 060 58'22", AN ARC LENGTH OF 191.19 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CORNER CUT BACK AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTH 540 18'48- EAST, 31.29 FEET ALONG SAID CORNER CUT BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,588.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 020 18' 32" WEST, SAID CURVE ALSO BEING CONCENTRIC TO AND 88.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 050 04'21". AN ARC DISTANCE OF 140.59 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180 37' 15", AN ARC LENGTH OF 43.55 FEET; THENCE NORTH 630 59' 51" WEST, 37.37 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2,978 SQUARE FEET OR 0.07 ACRES MORE OR LESS. GRANTOR HEREBY RELEASES AND RELINQUISHES TO THE GRANTEE ANY AND ALL ABUTTER'S RIGHTS OF ACCESS BETWEEN THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND AND THE GRANTOR'S REMAINING PROPERTY LYING SOUTHERLY THEREOF. EXCEPTING AND RESERVING THERETO THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED ACCESS OPENING: A 30-FOOT WIDE PUBLIC ACCESS OPENING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL 14; Page 1 of 2 THENCE SOUTH 630 59'51- EAST, 17.07 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF SAID THIRTY FOOT WIDE ACCESS OPENING; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 630 59'51- EAST, 20.30 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 040 45'08", AN ARC LENGTH OF 11.11 FEET TO THE END OF SAID 30-FOOT WIDE PUBLIC ACCESS OPENING. THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "W, AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF: PREPARED Y ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION: oQpOFESS/pl /KEVIN B. COZAD PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 26159 REGISTRATION EXPIRES 3131108 NO. 26159 t,r E KP 3/31A6 IV% Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "B" DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY A DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. CR- 0051 pp' L=896. P.O. B. o'er Jl-E\ C1 PARCEL 1 " C2 17.00' C3 Lo D \ _ _ /N C4 I C y CORNER CUTBACK CA Ni SEE DETAIL BELOW ° PARCEL MAP 30180 P.M. 208/56-61 v TRACT 20319 M.B. 181/54-58 ( A=02'42'25". R=1067.00' L=50.41') D G) "E o (P1 053 ACRES) 1) 83, (N69%Rl \ \ (Np1 ` 7~ SR 79 cR) _ r R=1500.00 3 6=04'42'30" i I . 3 L=123.26') 71.oo•'t M rl col.. y oCf M ~ ~ ~OS ~5w PARCEL 13 so' I •LE 1"=60' SCALE: 1 "=60' P. 0. B. 30' ACCESS OPENING is 46 526'00' 09"W (R) DETAIL NOT TO SCALE ( ) INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PM 208/56-61 No. 26159 `Q, EV. S/S1/08 L INE TABLE CURVE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING CURVE LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT DELTA L1 37.37 W63-59'51 -W Cl 191.19 1571.00 95.71 6'58'22" L2 31. N54'18'48"W C2 43.55 134.00 21.97 18'37'16" L3 113.60 N54'18'44W C3 140.59 1588.00 70.34 5'04'21" L4 36.34 N08'45'19"E C4 11.11 134.00 70.34 4'45'08" 17.07 S6359'51"E L6 20.30 563'59'51"E EXHIBIT "A -1" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR SLOPE EASEMENT A SLOPE EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS. RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP, SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,571.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 10° 14'05" WEST; THENCE SOUTH 630 59'51" EAST, 37.37 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 260 00'09" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180 37'16", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 43.55 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,588.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 070 22'53" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05° 04' 21 AN ARC DISTANCE OF 140.59 FEET, TO THE BEGINNING OF A CORNER CUT BACK AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 02018'32" WEST, ALSO BEING CONCENTRIC TO AND 88.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTH 54° 18' 44" EAST ALONG SAID CORNER CUT BACK, 21.63 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,600.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 0.1 ° 39' 44" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05° 43' 09", AN ARC LENGTH OF 159.71 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 146.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 070 22'53" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18° 37'16", AN ARC LENGTH OF 47.45 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 26° 00' 09" WEST; THENCE NORTH 630 59' 51" WEST, 33.65 FEET; THENCE NORTH 080 45'19" EAST, 12.56 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 2,774 SQUARE FEET OR 0.06 ACRES MORE OR LESS. Page 1 of 2 Created on 9f2WM 3:52 PM BY: JS.W. CK'DBY:K.COZAD F: \07009D0\0fficeT BgaW-wW1 _Slope doc THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B", AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF: PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION: EVIN B. COZAD PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 26159 REGISTRATION EXPIRES 3/31/08 Page 2 of 2 Created on 912612007 3:52 PM BY: J.S.W. CWD BY: K. COZAD F:\07009001office\Lega(\Ease01_Slope.doc EXHIBIT "B -1" SLOPE EASEMENT SLOPE EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. Co u* f DO' L'42'30V~ 19'~ 'J(i*1 „Q fr ~i PARCEL MAP 30180 P.M. 208/56-61 PARCEL14 r ACRES) PARCEL13 *d0 TRACT 20319 M.B. 181/54-58 SCALE: i"=60' INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PM 208/56-61 v LINE TABLE CURVE TABLE UNE LENGTH BEARING CURVE DELTA LENGTH RADIUS TANG L1 37.37" S 63'59'51" E Cl 18'37'16" 43.55 134.00' 21.97- L2 21.63' S 54-18'44" E C2 5*04'2r 140.59' 1588.00' 70.34' EXHIBIT "A - 2" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP, SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,571.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 100 14'05" WEST; THENCE SOUTH 080 45'19" WEST, 12.56 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 630 59' 51" EAST, 33.65 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 146.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18037' 16", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 47,45 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,600.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 070 22'53" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALSO BEING CONCENTRIC TO AND 100.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05° 43' 09", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 159.71 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE CORNER CUT BACK AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 01 ° 39'44" WEST; THENCE SOUTH 540 18' 44" EAST ALONG SAID CORNER CUT BACK, 21.27 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,612.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 01° 02'08" WEST; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALSO BEING CONCENTRIC TO AND 112.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06° 20'45", AN ARC LENGTH OF 178.54 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 158.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 07° 22'53" WEST; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180 37' 16", AN ARC LENGTH OF 51.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 63°59'51 " WEST, 29.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 080 45'19" EAST, 12.56 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Page 1 of 2 Created on 10/812007 11:12 AM BY: J.S.W. CIC D BY., K COZAD F1070090"icelegaWmeC2_TempComLdoc CONTAINING 3,004 SQUARE FEET OR 0.069 ACRES MORE OR LESS. THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B", AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF: PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION: "KEVIN B. COZAD PROFESSIONAL CIVIL (rev; ENGINEER NO.26159 REGISTRATION EXPIRES 3/31/08 Page 2 of 2 Created on 106200711:12 AM BY:J.S.W. IXCD BY: K COZAD F:\070MOUCtkeLLegaNFase02_TemRomstdoc EXHIBIT "B - 2" TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. T 71' P.O. B. 12' SR 79 ~R=~500ri23.267 '1 10G ' tj CORNER CUTBACK PARCEL 1 %k . C (A=D2*42'25- R=1067.00* PARCEL MAP 30180 L=5D.41') 1 P. 61 PARCEL14 (1.053 ACRES) PARCEL 13 TRACT 20319 M.B. 181/54-58 LEGEND V111A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PM 208/56-61 LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING Li 12.56' S 08'45'19" W L2 33.65' S F L3 21.27' 54' 18*44" F L4 29.92' N r W L5 12.56' N 06'45'19" E CURVE TABLE CURVE DELTA LENGTH RADIUS TANGENT G1 18'37'16" 4715' 146.00' 23.94' G2 .5'43'09" 159.71' 1600.00* 79.92" C3 6'20'45" 178.54' 1612.00' 89.36' C4 18.3716" 51.35' 158.00' 25.90' DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS ITEM NO. 21 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: City Council Travel/Conference Report - October 2008 PREPARED BY: Sue Steffen, Executive Assistant RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file On October 1, 2008 Council Member Ron Roberts traveled to Los Angeles to attend the Southern California Association of Governments Administration, Transportation & Communications Committee, and Regional Council Meetings. On October 11, 2008 Council Member Ron Roberts traveled to Seoul, South Korea in connection with his duties as Chairman of the Metrolink Board. The purpose of the trip was to meet with top management of Hyundai-Rotem (the company building over 100 Metrolink passenger cars) as well as inspect and approve a rail car prototype. Expenses for this trip will be paid for by Metrolink. Attachments: Meeting Agendas SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS Main Office 818 West Seventh Street 12th Floor Los Angeles, California 90017.3435 t (213) 236-1800 ((213)236-1825 www.xag.ra.gov Officers President Richard Dixon, Lake Forest FlrstVice President Harry8aidwin, Son Gabriel Second Vice President !on Edney, EI Centro Immediate Post President Gary Ovitt, San Bernardino County Policy Committee Chairs Executive/Administration Richard Dlxon,.Lake Forest Community, Economic and Human Development Larry McCailon, Highland Energy & Environment Keith Hanks, Azusa Transportation Mike-Ten, South Pasadena MEETING OF THE Thursday, October 2, 2008 9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. SCAG Offices 818 West 7t" Street, 12th Floor San Bernardino Conference Rm A & B Los Angeles, CA 90017 213.236.1800 If members of the public wish to review the attachments or have any questions on any of the agenda items, please contact Carmen Summers at 213.236.1984 or summerstcDscag.ca.oov Agendas and Minutes for the Executive/Administration Committee are also available at: www.scag.c gov/commiftees/eac.htm SCAG, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), will accommodate persons who require a modification of accommodation in order to participate in this meeting. If you require such assistance, please contact SCAG at (213) 236-1868 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting to enable SCAG to make reasonable arrangements. To request documents related to this document in an alternative format, please contact (213) 236-1868. The Regional Council Is comprised of 83 elected officials representing 168 cities, six counties, five County Transportation Commissions, Imperial Valley Association of Governments and a Tribal Government representative within Southern California. 09.0608 EXECUTIVE/ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE AGENDA OCTOBER 29 2008 The Administration Committee may consider and act upon any of the items listed on the agenda regardless of whether they are listed as information or action items. 1.0 CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Hon. Richard Dixon, Chair) . 2.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - Members of the public desiring to speak on items on the agenda, or items not on the agenda, but within the purview of the Executive/ Administration Committee, must fill out and present a speaker's card to the Assistant prior to speaking. Comments will be limited to three minutes. The chair may limit the total time for all comments to twenty minutes. 3.0 REVIEW and PRIORITIZE AGENDA ITEMS 4.0 CONSENT CALENDAR 4.1 Approval Items 4.1.1 Minutes of Sentemher 4.2008 Meetine 4.1.2 Contracts Over $250,000 4.2 Receive & File 4.2.1 Contracts/Purchase Orders Between $.5,000 - $250,000 5.0 ACTION ITEMS 5.1 Update to the SCAG Investment Policy (Wayne Moore, CFO) Recommended Action: Recommend that the RC amend Article X of the RC Policy Manual replacing the Statement of Investment Policy with the 2008 SCAG Investment Policy. 6.0 STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE (Jon Edney, 2nd Vice President) i Attachment Attachment Attachment Attachment 1 b 12 5 minutes 13 10 minutes EAC - OCT 2008 Doc#147986 Salcido-924/20084:44:35 PM TIME PG# ~04 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS 9 KECUTIVE/ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE AGENDA OCTOBER 29 2008 TIME 5 minutes Lantz, Chair) 8,1 Federal Legislative Reauthorization 10 minutes (Councilmember Glen Becerra) 8.2 SB 395 ((Stembergg~~ 10 minutes (Sharo Director of Legislation) 9.0 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT PG# 10.0 CFO MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Attachment 5 minutes 24 11.0 CLOSED SESSION A closed session will be held only if necessary to report significant development or to take required action. 11.1 Conference with Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation 3 cases (Government Code Section §54596.9) a) NRDC v: EPA b) City of Irvine vs. SCAG, Court of Appeal, 4`h District, No. G040513 c) City of La Mirada, City of Palmdale vs. SCAG, Court of Appeal, 2nd District, No. B206528 11.2 Public E=Ioyee Performance Evaluation (Government Code Section _ 5~ 4957) Title: Executive Director EAC-C# Dort! 14 Salcido-9/25/2008-9:11:11 ti SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS TIME PG# 12.0 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Any Committee member or staff desiring to place items on a future agenda may make such request. 13.0 ANNOUNCEMENTS 14.0 ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the Executive/Administration Committee will be held on Thursday, November 6, 2008 at the SLAG offices in downtown Los Angeles. EAC - OCT 2008 Doc#147986 Salcido-9/242008-0:44:35 PM III SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS Main n 818 West Seventh th Street Thursday, October 2, 2008 12th Floor 10:00 a.m. -11:00 a.m. Los Angeles, California 90017-3435 SCAG Offices f(213)236-1800 818 West 7th Street, 12th Floor San Bernardino Conference Rm A & B www.scag.ca.gov Los Angeles, CA 90017 - Officers (213) 236-1800 President Richard Dixon, Lake Forest FirstVice President If members of the public wish to review the attachments or Harry Baldwin, San Gabriel have any questions on any of the agenda items, please Second Vice President contact Mariana Pulido at 213.236.1881 or Jon Edney, El Centro oulido Q scaa.ca.oov Immediate Past President Gary ovitt, San Bernardino County Agendas and minutes for the Transportation Policy Committee Chairs Committee are also available at: Execumve,Administation www.scaa.ca.gov/committees/tc.htm Richard Dixon, Lake Forest Community, Economic and - SCAG, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), will Human Development accommodate persons who require a modification of accommodation in order to Larry Mccallon, Highland participate in this meeting. If you require such assistance, please contact SCAG Energy a Environment - at (213) 236-1868 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting to enable SCAG to Keith Hanks, Azusa make reasonable arrangements. To request documents related to this document in an alternative format, please contact (213) 236-1868. Transportation Mike Ten, South Pasadena The Regional Council is comprised of 83 elected officials representing 168 cities, sixcounres,five OmmyTansponationCommissions, Imperial Valley Association of Governments and a Tribal Government representative within Southern Caldomia. a9.aaae MEETING OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AGENDA OCTOBER 29 2008 The Transportation Committee may consider and act upon any of the items listed on the agenda regardless of whether they are listed as information or action, items. 1.0 CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Hon. Mike Ten, Chair) 2.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - Members of the public desiring to speak on items on the agenda, or items not on the agenda, but within the purview of the Transportation and Communications Committee, must fill out and present a speaker's card to the Assistant prior to speaking. Comments will be limited to three minutes. The Chairman may limit the total time for all comments to twenty minutes. 3.0 REVIEW and PRIORTIZE AGENDA ITEMS 4.0 CONSENT CALENDAR 4.1 Aimroval Items 4.1.1 Minutes of September 4, 2008 Meeting 5.0 REPORTS/ACTION ITEMS 5.1 Draft 2008 RTP Amendment #1 and the associated Draft 2008 RTIP Amendment #08-01 (Ryan Ku o, SCAG Stafn (Draft RTPAmendment #1 will be mailed under Separate cover) Staff will present a brief report on the Draft 2008 RTP Amendment #I and Draft Consistency Amendment to the 2008 RTIP for public review and comment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Release the Draft 2008 RTP Amendment #1 and the Associated Draft 2008 RTIP Amendment #08-01 for a 30-day public review and comment. Attachment TIME PG# Attachment 10 min SOUTHERN OOf CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS rc - OCT 2008 Doc#147979 Salcido-9/25/2008-3:58:38 PM TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AGENDA OCTOBER 29 2008 6.0 INFORMATION ITEMS TIME PG# 6.1 Inland Port Feasibility Study Attachment 15 min 10 (Dan Smith, The Tioga Group) A presentation will be made of the results of a SCAG study on the feasibility of the development of an inland port facility for the region. 6.2 AB 32 Attachment 10 min 20 (Jacob Lieb, SCAG and Lynn Terry, California Air Resources Board) Staff will summarize the concepts to develop comments on the Draft Scoping Plan, in addition to receiving a briefing from ARB staff on the Scoping Plan. 6.3 Compass Blueprint Update Attachment 10 min 2? (Jennifer Sarnecki, SCAG) Staff will provide an update on the program focus for FY2008-2009. 7.0 AVIATION TASK FORCE REPORT (Hon. Paul Glaab, Chair) 8.0 MAGLEV TASK FORCE REPORT (Hon. Lou Bone, Chair) 9.0 CHAIR'S REPORT Attachment 5 min 10.0 STAFF REPORT (Naresh Amatya, SCAG) 11.0 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS ii TC - OCT 2008 Doe4147979 Salcido-9/25/2008-3:56:11 PM- TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AGENDA OCTOBER 29 2008 TIME PG# 12.0 ANNOUNCEMENTS 13.0 ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the Transportation Committee will be held on November 6, 2008 at the SCAG office in downtown Los Angeles. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS TC - OCT 2008 Doc#147979 Salcido-925/2008-2:50:05 PM Ill SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS Main Office NO. 502 MEETING OF THE 818 West Seventh Street 12th Floor Los Angeles, California Thursday, October 2, 2008 . - 90017.3435 12:15 p.m. - 2.00 p.m. - t(213)236-1800 f(213)236-1825. SCAG Offices wwwscag.ca.go~ 818.West 7th Street, 12th Floor San Bernardino Conference Rm A & B Officers ..Los Angeles, CA 90017. President (213) 236-1800 Richard Dixon, Lake Forest - FirstvlcePresident Harry Baldwin, San Gabriel Second Vice President Jon Edney, E7 Centro . If members of the public wish to review the attachments Jon Immediate Past President or have any questions on any of the agenda items, Gary ovltt San Bernardino County please contact Shelia Stewart at 213.236.1868 or Policy Committee Chairs Stewart scagca.gov Executive/Administration Richard Dixon, Lake Forest - Agendas and Minutes for the Regional Council are also Community, Economic and available at: Human Development Larry McCallon,Highland _ www.scaci.ca.ooylcommiftees/rc.htm Energy & Environment Keith Hanks, Azusa SCAG, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), will Transportadon accommodate persons who require a modification of accommodation in Mlkeren, South Pasadena order to participate in this meeting. If you require such assistance, please contact SCAG at (213) 236-1868 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting to enable SCAG to make reasonable arrangements. To request documents related to this document in an alternative format, please contact (213) 236-1868. The Regional Councll Is comprised of 83 elected officials representing 168 cities, six counties, five CountyTransportation Conwnlmlons, Impedal Valley Association of Governments and a Tribal Government representative within Southern California. WACO REGIONAL COUNCIL AGENDA OCTOBER 2, 2008 PG# The Regional Council may consider and act upon any of the items listed on the agenda regardless if they are listed as information or action items. 1.0 CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Hon. Richard Dixon, President) 2.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD -Members of the public desiring to speak on items on the agenda, or items not on the agenda, but within the purview of the Council, must fill out and present a speaker's card to the Assistant prior to speaking. The Regional Council may consider and act upon any of the items listed. on the agenda. Comments will be limited to three minutes. The President may limit the total time for all comments to twenty minutes. 3.0 CONSENT CALENDAR 3.1 Approval Items 3.1.1 Minutes.of September 4, 2008 Meetine 3.1.2 Contracts over $250.000 Attachment Attachment 1 7 3.2 Receive & File . 3.2.1 Contracts/Purchase Orders between $5,000 -$250,000 Attachment 13 3.2.2 CFO Monthly Financial Report 4.0 PRESIDENT'S REPORT 4.1 Committee Appointments 5.0 COMMITTEE REPORTS/ACTION ITEMS 5.1 Executive/Administration Committee (EAC) Report 5.1.1 Update to the Investment Policy (President Dixon, Chair) ' Recommended Action: Approve 1 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS Attachment Attachment 17 24 REGIONAL COUNCIL AGENDA OCTOBER 2, 2008 PG# 5.2 Transportation Committee (TC) Report 5.3 Community, Economic & Human Development (GEED) Report 5.3.1 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) Attachment 32 Recommended Action: Approve Resolution #08-502-1 adopting the 2008 RCP. 5.4 Enemy & Environment Committee Report (EEC) Report 5.4.1 Report on AB32 Attachment 42 Recommended Action: Authorize staff to submit comments on the AB32 Draft Scoping Plan, based on the concepts described in the report. I 5.5 L_eaislative/Communication and Membership Subcommittee Report 5.5.1 Federal Legislative Reauthorization (Hon. Glen Becerra, Chair) 5.5.2 SB 375 (Steinberg,) (Sharon Neeley, Director, Legislation) 6.0 INFORMATION 6.2 Update .on Strategic Plan (Hon. Jon Edney) 7.0 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT (Hasan Ikhrata) 9.0 ADJOURNMENT The next meeting of the Regional Council will be held on November 6, 2008 at SCAG Offices in downtown Los Angeles. ii SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS z E E H W O H O O M 0 F P4 C4 F 0 H o ( ~ l ' y I ~ t ! i l i ~ I I I i i s ~ ; [ ~ I F I I i 1 1 j ~ I i 1 ~ C y 1 ~ i I~ i t f g,~ b = ' ~ E I 'S~' p ~ i p c C] _I(7 a i i i i is 1 ~ ~ c 2 y i Y I 3 i C2 T p5 Ld e Z Z W R I Z G R d o d i 3 E N E r 2 = S S d c Cf ! c" a s J :3 Y O.: C6 i a 2 rZ Z r2 ` 1 ! 4 3 ! 1 ~ ° ! d a'i v L ' 1 [ O O i a °1 i! I I Qc C L 4 cf ' 1 [ 4 0 ~I 2 L ._..1 Y e Oi 0 ~ $ c L 555ppp C lO ~ I 2. AAA lil ~ l~ ll 3 f T LL I I_° c E l c i y y i ~ C7 : d L c u ~ Q E ~C ~ L i L O. E J C E I C 1, p O ~ J t i O E J C ~r .r t LL c~~l i li E 3 mi Iw yi CO) i Si ~ j UI ~ ~ d ~='Ep , C L7 PP Q O[OiO R RI RfC:~r 0~0~01 R M M 0 M OI Rl OI 01 M `:O ^J OI ppI M. ME M OI R O OI M~RE . . 00 O . r C, W r I OIT O r 47t W I AI M : f ~ I T ~ ~ E r= ' { l i ~ [ III ~ ~ I III t I . I _ I ~ ~ 0 ~ I ~ ~ m co l p~ O ~ .T-I~I~ O O N M tc) tD W ~ N v 01 .M co i r 7. m O O ; r I NC G r ~ T ITEM NO. 22 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Monthly Report The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development Department for the month of October 2008. CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES New Cases The Division received 47 new applications for administrative, other minor cases, and home occupations including 8 applications for public hearings during the month of October. The new public hearing cases are as follows: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 6 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1 MINOR MODIFICATION 1 SPECIAL PROJECTS & LONG RANGE PLANNING ACTIVITIES The Long Range Planning Division commits work efforts toward larger scale and longer time frame projects for both private and public purposes. These activities can range from a relatively simple ordinance or environmental review to a new specific plan or a general plan amendment. Some of the major special projects and long range planning activities currently in progress are described in the paragraphs below: Temecula Regional Hospital - This project was approved bythe City Council on January 22, 2008. The CEQA challenge period for the Supplemental EIR expired on February 28, 2008. No legal challenges were filed regarding the SEIR. The CEQA challenge period for the second reading of the Zone Change expired on March 14, 2008. The City Attorney filed a Return to the Writ of Mandate for the project with the Riverside County Superior Court on March 20, 2008. A ruling from the Court regarding compliance with the Court's order was expected by the end of May 2008 and staff is awaiting this ruling. (FISK) General Plan Housing Element Update - State law requires the City to adopt an update to the Housing Element by June 30, 2008 and it must be certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) by December 31, 2008. A draft version of the Housing Element was sent to HCD on February 12, 2008 to begin its 60-day review and comment period. Staff received comments on the draft Housing Element from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on April 13, 2008. Based on these comments, staff prepared a revised draft and submitted to HCD for a second 60 -day review on July 2, 2008. Preliminary HCD comments were received on September 8, 2008. Redevelopment Agency staff is working with HCD staff to review areas of concern prior to submitting for a formal final review. A revised timeline has been prepared that anticipates a Planning Commission hearing in January 2009 and a City Council hearing in February 2009. Upon adoption bythe City Council, the Housing Element will be submitted a final time to HCD for a 90-day Certification review. (PAPP) Nicolas Valley Rural Preservation Area - Staff has prepared a conceptual land use plan and conceptual financing options to pay for needed road improvements. A third workshop was held on November 29, 2007 where information on infrastructure options and recommended density was provided to residents and interested parties. The results of a survey conducted that evening indicated that a majority of property owners favor the formation of an Assessment District and favor increased density. Staff held a briefing meeting with the Nicolas Valley City Council Subcommittee on January 31, 2008 to discuss findings and to seek further direction. Staff met with the City Manager in March to discuss scope of work, timing and budget. A community meeting was held on June 17, 2008 to provide an update on the process. Approximately 20 residents attended. Staff indicated to the residents that it is the City's intent to run parallel processes for the Assessment District/Leifer Road Improvement Plans and the General Plan/Zone Changes to increase the density, and that we anticipated the process to take between 18 to 24 months. Staff agreed to provide website and email updates on a quarterly basis to the residents on the project progress. An internal staff meeting (Planning, Public Works, TCSD, and Finance) was held on August 6to discuss timelines, budget, work tasks, and priorities. Staff is working on constraints/lotting analyses to develop firm numbers for assessment district fiscal analysis. In addition, staff has hired Bob LaCoss (PDS) to prepare Design Guidelines and will be hiring a consultantto prepare an EIR. A community meeting to discuss community character and design was held on October 21't. Approximately 40-50 people attended the meeting. Planning staff briefly brought everyone up to speed on the process and where we are and then introduced Bob LaCoss who is the consultant hired to prepare the Design Guidelines. It was the consensus of the attendees that they wanted Guidelines which would protect the rural nature of Nicolas Valley. They also mentioned that farming, equestrian uses, vineyard themes, Palomar Mountain and the Santa Gertrudis creek were things that they associated with Nicolas Valley. It is anticipated that staff will be meeting again with the community in December to present some early concepts based on the information they provided. Staff anticipates completing the GPIZC process by July 2009. (PETERSIKITZEROW) Transit Center and Transportation Planning - Staff has received the letter from ACOE confirming the conceptual location of the transit center within the Murrieta Creek Recreation Basin. This letter is needed in order for RTA to move forward with the transit center design, and supplemental EIS. Staff will continue working with agency staff to update transit center timelines, provide input into the RTA route restructuring, and work with agency staff to establish a Transportation NOW chapter for southwest Riverside County. Staff met with RTA staff to discuss potential bus stop locations within the City of Temecula for a new commuter link route that will connect Riverside County residents from Hemet to the Escondido Transit Center. Two stops are being considered forthe northern area of the City along Winchester Road and one stop at the southern end of the City near Temecula Parkway. Staff also discussed two options for the Harveston Shuttle routes. The options being considered would connect the Harveston communityto the Mall area andlorOld Town Temecula. (WESTISCHUMA) Heritage Tree Ordinance - Staff has prepared a Heritage Tree Ordinance which will protect certain tree species and other large trees throughoutthe City. The item was reviewed bythe Planning Commission on April 16, 2008 and the Planning Commission continued the item for 45 days to allow staff the necessary time to amend the draft Ordinance. Staff has revised the Ordinance based largely on the City of Thousand Oaks tree preservation ordinances which were originally adopted in the 1970's and revised overtime. The draft Ordinance has been reviewed by the City Attorney and staff is preparing a standard contract for review bya Consulting Arborist. The draft Ordinance is tentatively scheduled for review bythe Planning Commission in December 2008 and is tentatively scheduled for City Council in January 2009. (PAPP) Massage Ordinance - Staff is working with the Temecula Police Department to develop a new massage ordinance that is more restrictive than the existing ordinance and will be implemented and monitored directly by the Police Department. The proposed ordinance will require each employee to undergo several hundred hours of training, to wear identification at all times and includes more severe penalties for violators and business owners. The City Attorney has been making revisions to the draft Ordinance based on comments received from PD and local business owners working in conjunction with PD. Temecula PD will be scheduling briefing meetings with members of the City Council when the final draft Ordinance is completed. (FISK) Procedures to Implement CEQA - The Planning Department has hired Environmental Science Associates to prepare a policy document that will identify thresholds of significance to provide direction to staff regarding the level of environmental analysis required for new projects. This project will also include local guidelines and a procedure manual for processing CEQA documents, including the adoption of local exemptions, significance thresholds, and procedures for the City to contract for the preparation of Environmental Impact Reports. This effort has been expanded to include internal procedures for coordinating the environmental review of Capital Improvement Projects. ESA has prepared a draft procedure handbook that is currently being reviewed. Staff's goal is to present this handbook to the Council for review and approval in November. The CEQA thresholds portion of this work effort is currently on-hold pending the update to the Circulation Element. (KITZEROWISCHUMAIWEST) Sustainability Program - Several staff level working groups (with outside agency representatives) have been developing measurable goals for the major categories of the Sustainability Plan - Energy, Green Buildings, Water, Air Quality, Waste Reduction, Transportation and Community Design, and Open Space. The working groups are near completion with the goal setting process and are prepared to meet with the Council Subcommittee. The City Council Subcommittee meeting originally scheduled for November 5, 2008 was cancelled, but will be rescheduled. On October 14, 2008, the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing staff to proceed with the development of a Green House Gas Emissions Inventory and Climate Action Plan, which when completed will be incorporated into the Sustainability Plan. Staff is also developing a program to assist existing residents and businesses with making energy efficiency improvements to their properties. Staff will present the draft program structure to the Sustainability Subcommittee for direction prior to taking it forward to the City Council. (WESTILECOMTE) ■ Santa Margarita Area Annexation - The revised EIR dated September 22, 2008 was distributed for public review from September 22, 2008 through November 5, 2008. A public hearing is scheduled for the Planning Commission on November 19, 2008. A public hearing is anticipated for City Council on December 9, 2008. (BROWNILOWREY/ WEST/LECOMTE) Development Code Update - Staff is preparing an update of the Development Code that proposes to remove the distinction that exists between zoning standards for kindergarten through grade twelve (K-12) public schools (including charter schools) and zoning standards for K-12 private schools. The amendment proposes all schools, including colleges and universities, proposed within all commercial zoning districts shall be subject to City review of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) [except Temecula Valley Unified School District, State and Community Colleges may be exempt pursuant to State law] so thatthe placement of schools and their relationship to surrounding uses, as well as CEQA impacts, can be analyzed on a case by case basis with each Conditional Use Permit. The amendment to the Development Code ensures that vocational and trade schools, such as cosmetology schools, and other specialized vocations, would not be subject to the same process as K-12 schools and colleges and universities since they are viewed more as a business than a conventional school. (LOWREY) Old Town Specific Plan Update - Staff is working in conjunction with consulting firms Inland Planning+Design and Fehr and Peers (parking and circulation) to prepare an update to the Old Town Specific Plan that addresses the ten goals and recommendations for Old Town presented to City Council on March 25, 2008. On August 11, 2008, the Old Town Local Review Board formed a steering committer for the Specific Plan Update consisting of Board Members Blair and Harker, with the purpose of this committee being to provide the Old Town Local Review Board with additional opportunities to review and comment on concepts and preliminary plans as the Specific Plan update progresses and for the committee to report back to the other Board members on the progress of the update. Staff intends to complete the analysis/research phase of this update in October 2008, to complete the first draft of the Specific Plan update in February 2009, to present the draft update to the public in March 2009, and to bring the updated plan to the Old Town Local Review Board for review in April 2009, to the Planning Commission for review in May 2009, and to City Council for review in June 2009. (FISK) Planning Agenda Report 10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008 1. Recently Approved APN # • PA08-0122 CUP - Fresh and Easy in PDO#5 944290012 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS A Conditional Use Permit application to allow a grocery store larger than 10,000 square feet with alcohol sales, ABC License Type 20 for beer and wine, in Sub Area B of the Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay (PDO) #5 (APN 944-370-005, 006, and 007). Submitted Date Approved Date 5/30/2008 Oct 15 2008 APN # • PA08-0123 FIE Major Mod PDO#5 944290012 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS A Major Modification to the approved Development Plan at Temecula Village, PDO#5, to allow a 13,969 square foot Fresh and Easy Market, and a 5,800 square foot Pad C (APN 944-370-005, 006, and 007). Submitted Date Approved Date 5/30/2008 Oct 15 2008 APN # • PA08-0197 NORRIS RANCH PUMPKIN PATCH 959070012 KNUTE NOLAND A Major Temporary Use Permit for a Pumpkin Patch to be located at 31300 Rancho Community Way (APN: 959- 070-012). Submitted Date Approved Date 9/9/2008 Oct 9 2008 APN # • PA08.0208 2008 FALL ROD RUN 922026008 CHRISTINE DAMKC A Major Temporary Use Permit for the Fall Rod Run event in Old Town on October 10th from 1:00pm to 8:00pm and October 11th from 5:00am to 4:00pm. Submitted Date Approved Date 9/16/2008 Oct 9 2008 APN # PA08-0212 FROSTY'S FOREST PUMPKIN 910420005 KNUTE NOLAND PATCH A Major Temporary Use Permit for Frosty's Forest Pumpkin Patch to be operated at 40820 Winchester Road from October 9, 2008 to October 31, 2008. Submitted Date Approved Date 9/18/2008 Oct 8 2008 APN # • PA08-0215 RANCHO CHRISTMAS TREES 959070012 KNUTE NOLAND A Major Temporary Use Permit for a Christmas tree lot to be operated at the south west corner of Temecula Parkway and Rancho Community Way, 31300 Rancho Community Way, from November 28, 2008 to December 24, 2008, 9:00 am to 9:00 pm daily. Submitted Date Approved Date 9/19/2008 Oct 28 2008 APN # 1 of 7 Planning Agenda Report 10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008 • PA08-0227 FAMILY FALL FESTIVAL 920090005 KNUTE NOLAND A Major Temporary Use Permit for a Family Fall Festival (Business Expo) to be held at Chaparral High School, 27515 Nicolas Road, on October 18, 2008 from 10:00 am to 5:00 pm. Submitted Date Approved Date 9/30/2008 Oct 16 2008 2 of7 Planning Agenda Report 10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008 2. APN # • PA08-0125 Temecula Village PDO-5 Amendl 944290012 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS A Zoning Amendment to modify PDO-5 (Temecula Village) to permit Grocery Stores up to 15,000 square feet with a Conditional Use Permit (currently allowed up to 10,000 SF w/CUP). Other changes include reducing landscape buffer/setback along Rancho California Road from 25 to 20 feet and miscellaneous clean-up/references to previous approvals. Temecula Village is located along the south side of Rancho California Road, east of Moraga Road. (Associate projects PA08-0122 and PA08-0123 - Fresh and Easy DP/CUP) Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date City Council 6/4/2008 6/26/2008 Nov 18 2008 APN # • PA08-0153 Grace Presbyterian Major Mod 957140010 BETSY LOWREY A Major Modification Application to modify an existing Fellowship Hall/Worship Center originally entitled as a one- story 2,600 square foot expansion to be a two-story 6,532 square foot expansion (a total increase of 3,932 square feet) for Grace Presbyterian Church, generally located at the southwest corner of Nicolas and Calle Medusa at 31143 Nicolas Road [APN 957-140-010]. This project is related to previously approved Development Plan Planning Application PA02-0257. Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date Planning Commision 7/7/2008 8/5/2008 Nov 5 2008 APN # • PA08-0154 Iron Wok Minor CUP 910320039 ERIC JONES A Minor Conditional Use Permit for the Iron Wok to conduct live entertainment with a band or Disc Jockey. A dance area will also be provided. Located at 26520 Ynez Road. Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 7/8/2008 I TBD APN # Scheduled for Hearing • PA08-0179 Pujol Street Apartments 922260001 DANASCHUMA A Tentative Residential Parcel Map (TPM 36119) to create one parcel for the Pujol Street Apartment complex located at 28801 Pujol Street. (Related project: PA07-0229) Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date Directors Hearing 8/20/2008 9/18/2008 Oct 30 2008 APN # PA08-0183 EONS Gaming 921830015 DANA SCHUMA A Minor Conditional Use Permit to authorize EONS Gaming to have an indoor video gaming facility located within a 3,866 square foot unit at 41533 Margarita Road, Suite M101 in the Bel Villaggio shopping center. The gaming facility proposes to have 30 gaming stations available from 12 p.m. to 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 10 a.m. to 12 a.m. Fridays and Saturdays. Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date Planning Commision 8/25/2008 9/18/2008 Nov 19 2008 APN # • PA08.0196 Starbuzz Hookah Minor CUP 960020057 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS A Minor Conditional Use Permit application for a Starbuzz Hookah Lounge in suites 108 and 109 of shopping center at 32483 Temecula Parkway. 3 of7 Planning Agenda Report 10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008 Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date Directors Hearing 9/9/2008 10/2/2008 Nov 20 2008 APN # • PA08.0206 Public House MCUP alcohollent 922044024 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS A Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow for live entertainment and a Type 47 (On-Sale General) Alcohol Beverage Control license to allow the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits at the Public House restaurant located at 41971 Main Street in Old Town. Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date Directors Hearing 911512008 Nov 20 2008 AYN # • PA08-0224 Martial Arts Studio CUP 954030001 ERIC JONES A Minor Conditional Use Permit for a Martial Arts studio located in suite 8700 totaling 4,996 square feet within the Meadows Village Shopping Center. Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 9/30/2008 TBD APN # • PA08.0225 Fit Wize for Kids Minor CUP 954030001 ERIC JONES A Minor Conditional Use Permit for a Fitwize for Kids facility located in suite B400 totaling 3,023 square feet within the Meadows Village Shopping Center. Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 9/30/2008 TBD 4 of7 Planning Agenda Report 10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008 3. APN # • PA07.0309 PDO-6 Zoning Amendment 959060007 ERIC JONES A Zoning Amendment application to amend the Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6). The site is generally located on Temecula Parkway approximately 325 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 11/1/2007 TBD APN # • PA08.0165 AT&T Wireless 954020005 DANA SCHUMA A Conditional Use Permit/Antenna Facility Application for ATT Wireless to install two slimline poles and an equipment structure on Rancho California Water District property located at 41520 Margarita Road. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 7/31/2008 8/28/2008 TBD APN # • PA08-0189 Penske Truck Leasing DP 909370013 KATIE LECOMTE A Development Plan application to construct a 13,248 square foot industrial building for Penske Truck Leasing located at 42006 Remington Avenue (APN: 909-370-0013). Please note: This application is associated with Conditional Use Permit application PA08-0190. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 8/28/2008 TBD APN # • PA08-0190 Penske Truck Leasing CUP 909370013 KATIE LECOMTE A Conditional Use Permit (with related Development Plan PA08-0189) to authorize truck leasing and rental, light duty truck maintenance and truck washing bays, at the proposed 13,248 square foot Penske Truck Leasing facility located at 42006 Remington Avenue (APN: 909-370-013). Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 8/28/2008 TBD APN # • PA08-0220 The Painted Garden PCN 922045025 KATIE LECOMTE A Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity to authorize a Type-42 (beer and wine - public premises) to allow for wine tasting at The Painted Garden located at 28657 Old Town Front Street (APN: 922-045-025). Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 9/24/2008 TBD APN # New Submittals Pending DRC Meeting • PA08-0143 BAILY'S RESTAURANT BANQUET 922046018 TUP CHRISTINE DAMKO A Major Temporary Use Permit to allow Bally's Restaurant to conduct banquets/events throughout the year within a tent approximately 2,000 sqaure feet on restaurant property. Live entertainment is also part of this application. Bally's Restaurant is located at the north west corner of Front Street and Second Street within the Old Town Specific Plan. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 6/25/2008 TBD 5 of7 Planning Agenda Report 10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008 APN # • PA08-0228 Crowne Plaza Type 70 License 921060055 KATIE LECOMTE A Conditional Use Permit to authorize a Type-70 (On-Sale General - Restrictive Serrvice) ABC license, for Crowne Plaza Hotel, proposed to be located east of Jefferson and approximately 500 feet north of Rancho California Road. This license would allow for the sale or furnishing of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption on the premises to the establishment's overnight transient occupancy guests. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 10/1/2008 TB D APN # • PA08.0231 CHRIST THE VINE WIRELESS 921830035 KNUTE NOLAND A Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate and maintain a wireless facility of six (6) panel antennas mounted inside of an existing bell tower that is connected to the main building at Christ the Vine Lutheran Church, 29581 N. General Kearny Road. An eight (8) foot CMU wall matching the church building will be constructed to house (4) BTS radio equipment cabinets that are included with this installation. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 10/6/2008 11 /6/2008 TB D APN # • PA08.0232 TEMECULA CREEK INN WIRELESS 922220003 KNUTE NOLAND A Conditional Use Permit for the construction, operation and maintenance of a wireless antenna facility consisting of six (6) panel antennas, four (4) BTS radio equipment cabinets and one microwave dish to be located at the Temecula Creek Inn Golf Course, 44501 Rainbow Canyon Road. The antennas are to be attached to a new ninety three (93) foot monopine and the equipment cabinets are to be housed in a new eight (8) foot CMU wall and chain link fencing. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 10/6/2008 1116/2008 TB D APN # • PA08-0233 RANCHO BAPTIST CHURCH 922130017 WIRELESS KNUTE NOLAND W A Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate and maintain a wireless facility consisting of six (6) panel antennas, four (4) BTS radio equipment cabinets and one microwave dish at Rancho Baptist Church, 29775 Santiago Road. The antennas are attached to a new 77'- 4" monopine and the equipment cabinets are located inside a new T- 9" wrought iron fence. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 10/6/2008 11/13/2008 TB D APN # • PA08-0241 Islamic Center DP 957140007 ERIC JONES A Commercial Development Plan for a two story 24,943 square foot Islamic Center located at APN 957-140-007 & 957-140-011, both parcels total 4.12 acres. The project will constructed in two phases. (Related: Planning Application PA08-0242, Conditional Use Permit) Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 10/14/2008 TBD APN # • PA08.0242 Islamic Center CUP 957140007 ERIC JONES 6 of7 Planning Agenda Report 10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008 A Conditional Use Permit to allow a 24,943 square foot Islamic Center to operate within a VL zone located on parcels 957-140-007 & 957-140-011. (Related Planning Application PA08-0241, Development Plan) Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 10/14/2008 TED APN # • PA08-0244 Arco Car Wash CUP/DP 950100011 BETSY LOWREY A Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit Application to construct a 946 square foot self-serve drive-through car wash at an existing Arco Gas Station located on the northwest corner of Temecula Parkway and Margarita Road at 44239 Margarita Road [APN 959-080-017] Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 10/21/2008 TBD APN # • PA08-0250 FROSTY'S FOREST CHRISTMAS 910420005 KNUTE NOLAND TREE A Major Temporary Use Permit for a Christmas Tree Lot to be operated at the Promenade Mall, 40820 Winchester Road, from November 28, 2008 to December 23, 2008, 9:00 am to 9:00 pm. Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date Administrators Hearing 10/29/2008 Nov 30 2008 APN # • PA08-0253 The Edge Restaurant CUP 922033009 ERIC JONES A Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow the Edge Restaurant & Lounge to pursue a Type 47 ABC license. Related application PA08-0254, Minor Mod Planning Review Only Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 11/3/2008 TBD APN # • PA08.0256 Crowne Plaza Hotel PCN 921060055 KATIE LECOMTE A Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity to authorize a Type-70 ABC license for the proposed Crowne Plaza Hotel located east of Jefferson Avenue, west of Interstate 15 and approximately 500 feet north of Ranchol California Road (APN: 921-060-055). Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned 11/5/2008 TBD 7 of7 SPft1NGS O i f~{ a yy~ ~`yy ~`'7` ~uRR1~7R tlOT SptyNGS ~O yr i / FAD C"? 1 ~ ~ ~ ++t = 1,. I N~GO S PA08-0153 9 1 s PA08-0241•P 08-0242 1 lur rlr PA08-0227 ~57~~-~~y r. r Y i i• , T I ,i J l i PA08-0212 PA08-0231 1 O (JPA08 0250 1 l P PA08-0154 PA08-0223 {)PA08-018 U4R~Y~o _i PA08-0190 OPA08-0189 / i PA08-0125 v A) PA08 0122oPA08 0123 08 0165 !.D~ rG ~ G~,O ~11Sf H RD N _ ~~.1u"/ Cicas A PA A228 9q ~PA08=0256 ~y P...000208'-` PIM LFB FM gym ( i O gP y ~ PA08-0233 J P.A08-0179 U ~ pOR~O~~p ~~.08-0196 PA08-0244 PA08 0215 P.A 0.197 PA07-0309 197 i sue'` ` ~ ••,i r Legend r _ PA08-0232 Planning Status - October 2008 0 1. Recently Approved 0 2. Scheduled for Hearing ~r`~, • 3. New Submittals Pending DRC Meeting CIS" /F V 4 J f / ~1 y,U 4 \ / ~ J ITEM NO. 23 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Public Works Department Monthly Report RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file the attached Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Reports for the month of October, 2008. MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works FROM: bq6 Brad Baron, Maintenance Superintendent DATE: November 6, 2008 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - October, 2008 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of October, 2008: 1. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 85 B. Total signs installed 1 C. Total signs repaired 81 if. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns M. ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs B. Total Tons IV. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned V. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations B. Total S.F. VII. STENCILING A. 176 New and repainted legends B. 800 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping 20 5,346 59 613 0 37 3,100 R:V AINTAINWOACTRRT Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 47 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trirmning, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 61 service order requests for the month of September, 2008. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 225 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and response to street emergencies. The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of October, 2008 was $63,994.00 compared to $34,885.00 for the month of September, 2008. Account No. 5402 Account No. 5401 Account No. 999-5402 $ 29,069.00 $ 34,925.00 $ -0- cc; Dan York, Deputy Director of Public Works/Land Development Ali Moghadam, Principal Engineer - Traffic Amer Attar, Principal Engineer - Capital Improvements Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer - Land Development R:\MAINTMI OACTRR mo N d O L O) d x v O z m m H m F Q 0 M W Q J J. J 74o 0.~ N ~ LL M N OD Cf fp - C w O O 0 0 O O N i9 f0 W in O fp ~ v Oi ep w O O N N ID OD in O r O O O N O r N 1 i0 W Mr w w O ep 'O c C6 CO O W M r N" r N~ ra en W M A O~ V C' WN" O N a O! en OD O t0 c b d! N tG O 0 Oi i0 w N M V O M ~ M r N v p" m~ ~ U Q 0 ~i Z Q .Q N F W i0 O O O O Of O O O OM O r O N O i0 O t0 O r r N O O y a o Q.: H. - C! OJ C N b tp C In O N A h tV O G E - co 2 Y V tD f9 fp A OD M M T N m M t0 N R b M lD N A Of M Oi N N W N N A O a N V F J J OD C"! W OD Oi i919. OD V M " p O d y ' . 0 Q Q i0 N t'1 - t9 M M w N A m a n O F. U. i W en . ~ ui w ui ui vi M ui m p t y o 'a y Q m LL - U M 0 0 W YWc K w 3m O~ U K 00 . U. ~ 0 0 0 OZ U O x y W ' R IL Z N U 3m,0 W z m > > Z O U 7 F F o ' N > Z LL C N m of o,~ o o a m o ' o o m o, o o o o o n o ¢ m ~o m m _ U. F a~ ow r W O N C' N N ` N N O ~tNO'. Q b' l l C) (O M ' V' N Hl (A tb V t0 ? ro ffl - O' N J W J U e' a r» W wQ Oo . ~x o U) z Q O y LL (QO O O N fnO 0 O M V N. ,p N O C W C'! N (O N W Y W m O N C 77 M Q K m 0 320 0 U G Q 01 M N F 4' 3 ' w m $ m 'S a c m J , J O R li CtiU E 2 LL m ` W:U z a f!1 N W U z c W e W - F W CO) y W p, U W t/1 - I 3 F 0 N . Z LL 7 0 W j y o O W W O LL 0 W L u J W 06 x z 0 O z ~ m Q Q IL m ¢ W < w w w v ~ W z c i x c H ¢ U a - U n w Y W W O J Q Z W y CO) z 0 W y W O S W 3 1 z z Z 0 3 J p K 2 - Q > w - F Q fA N ? N y C7 ~ ? y Q ~ 0 W J- N D O W ~ p R W m W i ? ° Y a J ~ O m m Q y o~ J h N O F LL mm Q = L m n a N (p ~ ~ T ❑ y a O o moot o 0 O OOI M OOI O co ~ tV Q V Q C) V 7.-Mn N N (O ~ r IV W O O O ~ ~ F J a rc Q no O ON 0 O O M 7 M r N N Z CO rl'OD w w m w U W O w OOOO W O OOO o OO OD~o O O N OO) (O OIt n O)ina n-co V)Q m 6 M ci V3 06 o C=; A M M R W m F O J ap fL CL w V N O N m V G O~ 0 0 O O O O O O O O ~ N~ M O N~ M a N U) N N O O O N to U. 0 w M: (n0 m O N7 fR fA w z U J Q wz< a V O O O O 0 0 0 N O O O H Z o n (q LL Y ~ o ~ Q r a Z J m ~ dLL ~ z LL a(D O c i q N m c N y O~ a) N LL a z z m a N J ca F a) rnN H m E o o 0 nU) ~ a~0 o a) . .V i ~ a mc N M 0' 0 g V £ H d' R Dc Cla- m Z OCH W N m ~ A ~ m m w..:.. QO02 0 0A ~ HI- rn n M n o n m v n O M W M W T N to V O 3 N LL O U m N N N z m ao ~ J 3 z z Q N s a 0 N Q N z a Uaa 4%-~ W U ¢ dym ~°~❑O m H U F } C C U ~ O p F rnrnm dO aZi H 0 (A (A 0 IL K z,Q(4 STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of October, 2008 DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK SIZE CONTRACTOR. ` MQNTELEONE EX*CAYATING Date: 10/03/08 CITYWIDE CITYWIDE NPDES PLACEMENT IN R.O.W.s # 5402 TOTAL COST $ 9,500.00 Date: 10/30/08 DENDY PARKWAY & REPLACE DAMAGED P.C.C. MARGARITA N/O MORAGA # 5402 TOTAL COST $ 2,600.00 Date: 10/30/08 DEL RIO BRIDGE OUTLET WASH-OUT BACKFILL, COMPACT, PLACE RIP-RAP AND SLURRY # 5401 TOTAL COST $ 6,500.00 CONTRACTOR: BECKER ENGINEERING Date: 10/08/08 BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD REMOVE SILT & DEBRIS; INSTALL NPDES MEASURES # 5402 TOTAL COST $ 4,525.00 Date: 10/08/08 VALLEJO CHANNEL REMOVE SILT & DEBRIS FROM CHANNEL # 5401 TOTAL COST $13,865.00 Date: 10/15/OS SANTIAGO AT YNEZ CONSTRUCT DESILTING POND FOR NPDES MEASURES # 5401 TOTAL COST $ 6,185.00 Date: 19/29/08 VALLEJO CHANNEL PLACE 25 YDS. SLURRY IN CHANNEL TO PROTECT RIP-RAP AND EROSION # 5401 TOTAL COST $ 8,375.00 CONTRACTOR: REAIS COMMERCLIL MANAGEMENT , . Date: 10/08 CITYWIDE TRASH, WEEDS, DEBRIS AND V-DITCH CLEANING IN R.O.W.s # 5402 TOTAL COST $ 12,444.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401 $ 34,925.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 $ 29,069.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #99-5402 - 0 - RAMAINTMMMOACTRn CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008 10/06/08 SANTIAGO AT BRIDGE DECK OVERLAY A.C. 383 3.5 10/07/08 SANTIAGO AT BRIDGE DECK OVERLAY A.C. 108 2.5 10/08/08 OLD TOWN AREA OVERLAY A.C. 350 3.5 10/09/08 OLD TOWN AREA OVERLAY A.C. 79 2 10/13/08 CITYWIDE POTHOLE REPAIRS 155 3 10/14/08 MEADOWVIEW AREA REPAIR OVER-SIDE DRAINS 376 3 10/15/08 CITYWIDE A.C. OVERLAYS 490 4 10/16/08 CITYWIDE A.C. OVERLAYS 499 3.5 10/20/08 VIA LA VIDA R & R A.C. 285 5.5 10/21/08 MARGARITA AT PIO PICO R & R A.C. 285 8 10/22/08 42762 AGENA STREET R & R A.C. 266 7 10/23/08 PAUBA AT LA PRIMAVERA A.C. OVERLAYS 352 5 10/27/08 CITYWIDE POTHOLE REPAIRS 637 3 10/28/08 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE R & R A.C. 78 2 10/29/08 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT CITY LIMITS A.C. OVERLAYS 1,003 3.5 TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 5,346 TOTAL TONS 59 R:WMNTAINIWKCM LTMASPHALTRPR CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008 DATE I OCA®O $ RK COMPL°ETTD 10/01/08 AREA #3 CLEANED & CHECKED 13 CATCH BASINS 10/01/08 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 56 CATCH BASINS 10/01/08 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 13 CATCH BASINS 10/02/08 AREAS #1 & #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 106 CATCH BASINS 10/02/08 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 12 CATCH BASINS 10/06/08 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 24 CATCH BASINS 10/07/08 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 20 CATCH BASINS 10/08/08 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 19 CATCH BASINS 10/09/08 AREA #2' CLEANED & CHECKED 7 CATCH BASINS 10/13/08 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 14 CATCH BASINS 10/15/08 AREA #3 CLEANED & CHECKED 21 CATCH BASINS 10/16/08 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 9 CATCH BASINS 10/20/08 AREA #3 - CLEANED & CHECKED 23 CATCH BASINS 10/20/08 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 17 CATCH BASINS 10/21/08 AREA #4 CLEANED & CHECKED 26 CATCH BASINS 10/21/08 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 18 CATCH BASINS 10/21/08 AREA #3 - CLEANED & CHECKED 20 CATCH BASINS 10/22/08 AREA #4 CLEANED & CHECKED 13 CATCH BASINS 10122/08 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 22 CATCH BASINS 10/22/08 AREA #3 CLEANED & CHECKED 23 CATCH BASINS 10/23/08 AREA #4 CLEANED & CHECKED 33 CATCH BASINS 10/27/08 CITYWIDE CLEANED & CHECKED 28 CATCH BASINS 10/28/08 AREA #3 CLEANED & CHECKED 29 CATCH BASINS 10/28/08 AREA #5 CLEANED & CHECKED 19 CATCH BASINS 10/28/08 AREA #5 CLEANED & CHECKED 19 CATCH BASINS 10/30/08 AREAS #1 & #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 9 CATCH BASINS TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 613 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008 LOCAL WORXOMPLEIEb 10/01/08 PASEO GALLANTE REMOVED 3 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/02/08 REDHAWK REMOVED 8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10103/08 JUNE COURT REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/03/08 HOPACTONG REMOVED 36 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/03108 LAHONTAN STREET REMOVED . 50 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/06/08 FELIX VALDEZ REMOVED 24 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/06/08 PECHANGA BRIDGE REMOVED 74 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/06/08 WOLF CREEK /REDHAWK REMOVED 37 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/06/08 BUTTERFIELD BRIDGE REMOVED 148 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/06/08 LOMA LINDA REMOVED 21 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/06/08 EMPIRE CREEK INLET REMOVED 22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/06/08 .27531 YNEZ - REMOVED 11 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/06/08 WINCHESTER BRIDGE REMOVED 1,103 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/10/08 28535 FRONT STREET REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/10/08 TOWER PLAZA REMOVED 37 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/13/08 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT CORTE FLORECITA REMOVED 63 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/13/08 SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK REMOVED 151 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/14/08 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT CORTE FLORECITA REMOVED 47 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/14/08 ROMANCE AT TOY COURT REMOVED 25 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/15/08 27133 JEFFERSON REMOVED 46 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/16/08 SANTA GERTRUDIS REMOVED 97 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/20/08 DEER HOLLOW REMOVED 166 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/20/08 DEER MEADOWS REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/20/08 SANTA GERTRUDIS. CREEK REMOVED 210 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/21/08 WOLF VALLEY REMOVED 22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10121/08 MARGARITA ROAD AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/22/08 COUNTY CENTER REMOVED 27 S.F. OF GRAFFITI RAMAINTAIMWKCWLTD\GRA 0TI\ 10/27/08 AVENIDA DE MISSIONS REMOVED 86 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/27/08 SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK REMOVED 114 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/28/08 WELTON REMOVED 19 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/28/08 VAIL RANCH REMOVED 38 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/29/08 CORTE RODRIGUEZ REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/30/08 WABASH LANE REMOVED 160 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/30/08 BEDFORD COURT REMOVED 35 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 10/30/08 MARGARITA ROAD REMOVED 108 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 3,100 TOTAL LOCATIONS 37 R:\ MNTMMW CMPLM\GRA HTI\ a oa W ~ W I~1 oz~ V h~l Q~ N PLO W A ~o~cvcnrv~oor GY d' V1 ~ V M V M ~ M. a a U a OzQ U W O O Z F U O F a w m cs a r J W Z 7 Q J_ I IL a a m w ZLL Q F LL Q cn 7 N Cad W M 7 N oo w4' A c o O ~ o H z w rn U oMO O N Obi W ti prp _ . . _ h V. O 0 H y ~ , ti w ~a ti Q V) 0 ' z q - . x V 3 00000oooooaooaooooo0000000 00000000oooooaooooo0000000 oooooaooooo000000000000000 +-rnn~Mrrnnu~Mrrnn~nM+-rnnu>Mrrnn l1YMr ~f1cY'ct ad'~MMMMM NNNNNrrr CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008 DATE ' REC'D LOCATION" REQUEST DATE WORK' COMPLETED 10/03/08 42568 CONDIDA DRIVE TREE REMOVAL 10/03/08 10/05/08 CROWNE HILL ROAD POTHOLE 10/05/08 10/06/08 MARGARITA ROAD DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/06/08 10106/08 32918 BONITA MESA TREE CONCERN 10/06/08 10/06/08 MORAGA ROAD DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/06/08 10/06/08 GREEN TREE ROAD SAND IN PIPES 10/06/08 10/06/08 VIA PUESTA DEL SOL V-DITCH CLEANING 10/06/08 10/06/08 MORAGA ROAD - CHANNEL CLEANING 10/06/08 10/07/08 LEIGH LANE TRASH CLEAN-UP 10/07/08 10/07/08 LA SERENA TRANSMISSION FLUID IN STREET 10/07/08 10/07/08 TEMECULA PARKWAY STICKER ON SIGN 10/07/08 10/08/08 ANACONDA COURT S.N.S. MISSING 10/08/08 10/09/08 REDHAWK PARKWAY TREE LIMB 10/09/08 10/10/08 BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD TREE TRIMMING 10/10/08 10/13/08 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/13/08. 10/13/08 YNEZ N/B DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/13/08 10/13/08 45680 COUTE LOBOS ROOT PRUNING 10/13/08 10/13/08 WAGASA PLACE STORM DRAIN CLEANING 10/13/08 10/14/08 CHANDLER WEED ABATEMENT 10/14/08 10/14/08 CHANDLER TRASH PICK-UP 10/14/08 10/16/08 NICOLAS AT VIA LOBO TRASH PICK-UP 10/16/08 10116/08 JEFFERSON N/O SANBORN RAISED SIDEWALK 10/16/08 10/21/08 CALABRIA DRIVE FADED STOP SIGN 10/21/08 10/21/08 42070 TEATREE COURT ROOT PRUNING 10/21/08 10/22/08 31842 COUTE MONTECITO TREE TRIMMING 10/22/08 10/22/08 MORAGA DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/22/08 10/22/08 SOMERSET SIGN DOWN 10/22/08 RANWWMN\WR COWLTMSORS\ DATE REC'D LOCATION REQUEST 10/22/08 TEMECULA PARKWAY A.C. REPAIRS n10/22/08 10/22/08 31400 VIA EDUARDO TREE REMOVAL 10/23/08 GOLDEN ROD OIL SPILL 10/23/08 10/24/08 CORTE BENAVENTE S.N.S. MISSING 10/24/08 10/27/08 42070 TEATREE COURT ROOT PRUNING 10/27/08 10/27/08 29910 VIA PUESTA DEL SOL STORM DRAIN PLUGGED 10/27/08 10/27/08 40555 NEW TOWN DRIVE STORM DRAIN PLUGGED 10/27/08 10/27108 MORAGA DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/27/08 10/27/08 ORCHARD CHURCH DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/27/08 10/27/08 MORAGA AT CHANNEL DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/27/08 10/28/08 LASERENA DEBRIS PICK-UP-_ 10/28/08 10/28/08 MORAGA DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/28/08 10/28/-08 42797 TWILIGHT COURT TREE TRIMMING 10/28/08 10/28/08 31955 LODGE HOUSE COURT DEAD TREE 10/28/08 10/28/08 45964 PARSIPPANY COURT DEAD TREE 10/28/08 10/29/08 HOPE WAY DEBRIS PICK-UP 10/29/08 10/30/08 BUTTERFIIELD STAGE ROAD STORM DRAIN CLOGGED 10/30/08 10/30/08 LOMA LINDA ROAD CELL IN DRAIN 10/30/08 10/30/08 45492 TOURNAMENT LANE TREE TRIMMING. 10/30/08 10/30/08 FLORES AT YNEZ STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE 10/30/08 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 47 R:\MAINTAIM W RKCOM?=\SORS\ CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008 10/01/08 WINDSOR ROAD - TRIMMED 4 R.O.W. TREES 10/02/08 CITYWIDE SIGN MAINTENANCE - TRIMMED 7 R.O.W.TREES 10/06/08 MORENO TRIMMED 6 R.O.W. TREES 10/09/08 MAIN STREET TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 20 RAMAINTAIMWRKCOMPLTMTREES CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SIGNS MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008 ,DAAZ LOGATIOL~T RfiORK COMPLETED;. ` 10/01/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 4 REPAIRED 5 10/02/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 10 REPAIRED 5 10/07/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 21 REPAIRED 2 10/08/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 2 10/09/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 2 REPAIRED 6 10/09/08 4141 CHEMIN C OUTET INSTALLED N-T4-1 10/14/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 8 REPAIRED 1 10/15/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 6 REPAIRED 2 10/16/08 WINCHESTER REPLACED 1 INSTALLED 3 10/20/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 4 REPAIRED 2 10/21/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 3 REPAIRED 2 10/22/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 12 REPAIRED 7 10/23/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 2 REPAIRED 38 10/27/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 7 REPAIRED 4 10/31/08 CITYWIDE REPLACED 7 REPAIRED 4 TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 85 1 81 R:WAINTAIMW KCMPLTDl lGNS\ CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008 ~ LOO Cr~TION ' ;WORK COMPY;ETED . < 10/01/08 AREA #3 REPAINTED 73 LEGENDS 10/02/08 AREAS # 3 & #4 REPAINTED 20 LEGENDS 10/07/08 AREA #5 REPAINTED 40 LEGENDS 10/09/08 AREA #4 REPAINTED 18 LEGENDS 10/09/08 AREA #2 REPAINTED 800 L.F. RED CURB 10/29/08 AREA #2 REPAINTED 12 LEGENDS 10/30/08 AREAS #2 & #4 REPAINTED 13 LEGENDS TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS 176 NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F. 800 RM AINTAIN\WRKCOMPLTO\STRIPING ITEM NO. 24 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Jerry Williams, Chief of Police DATE: November 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Police Department Monthly Report The following report reflects the activity of the Temecula Police Department for the month of October 2008. PATROL SERVICES Overall calls for police service 8350 "Priority One" calls for service 50 Average response time for "Priority One" calls .................................7 Minutes VOLUNTEERS Volunteer administration hours 391 Special Events 445 Community Action Patrol (CAP) hours 1407 Reserve officer hours (patrol) 8 Training hours 332 Total Volunteer hours 2172 CRIME PREVENTION/GRAFFITI Crime prevention workshops conducted 10 Residential/business security surveys conducted 2 Businesses visited 20 Businesses visited for past crime follow-up 20 Crime prevention articles 1 Total square footage of graffiti removed 3,100 Number of Graffiti Locations 37 OLD TOWN STOREFRONT Total customers served 396 Sets of fingerprints taken 83 Police reports filed 11 Citations signed off 02 Total receipts $6,069.00 SPECIAL ENFORCEMENT TEAM (SET TEAM) On sight felony arrests On sight misdemeanor arrests Felony arrest warrants served Misdemeanor arrest warrants served Follow-up investigations Parole Searches Gang Members Contacted TRAFFIC Citations issued for hazardous violations 1345 D.U.I. checkpoints conducted 0 D.U.I. Arrest ...........................27 Non-hazardous citations 605 Stop Light Abuse/Intersection Program (S.L.A.P.)citations 319 Neighborhood Enforcement Team (N.E.T.) citations 134 Parking citations 560 Seatbelts ..........................46 School Zones ..........................55 Cell Phone Cites ...............................155 Injury collisions 18 Presentations ............................0 INVESTIGATIONS Beginning Caseload 175 Total Cases Assigned 56 Total Cases Closed ....................................................................................39 Number of community seminars/presentations conducted 1 PROMENADE MALL TEAM Calls for service 295 Felony arrest/filings 11 Misdemeanor arrest/filings 28 Vehicle burglaries 0 Vehicle thefts 2 Total receipts $6,304.00 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS Felony arrests 4 Misdemeanor arrests 16 Citations 50 Youth counseled 205 Presentations 21 YOUTH ACCOUNTABILITY TEAM School visits 69 Home visits 35 Presentations .......................................................3 Truancy Sweep .......................................................1 DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD M /oo�-/0 PARKS & OBERHANSLEY A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 27250 VIA INDUSTRIA, SUITE B TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 MAIN TELEPHONE: (951) 699-4200 FACSIMILE: (951) 699-1200 Offices in San Diego and Temecula, California November 25, 2008 PHILIP D. OBERHANSLEY phil@potemecula.com (951) 699-4200 9736.000 Hand -Delivered Mayor Michael S. Naggar and Members of the Temecula City Council City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 RE: Temecula City Council Meeting, November 25, 2008, Agenda Item No. 19 Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements — Environmental Mitigation (Project No. PW99-11EM) Dear Mayor Naggar and Councilmembers: This firm represents Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership (`Borchard") in connection with the above -referenced matter. Borchard owns the real property in question. We hereby request this letter be made a part of the public record for Agenda Item No. 19 of the Temecula City Council Meeting for Tuesday, November 25, 2008. Borchard hereby objects to the proposed adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements — Environmental Mitigation (Project No. PW99-11EM) (the "Proposed Project"). Borchard objects to the Proposed Project on the grounds that: (1) the public interest and necessity do not require the Proposed Project; (2) the Proposed Project is not planned and located in the manner that will be most compatible with the least private injury; and (3) the monetary compensation offer made by the City to acquire the real property interests required for the Proposed Project was insufficient to satisfy the requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2. PARKS & OBERHANSLE Y A Professional Law Corporation Mayor Naggar and Temecula City Councilmembers November 25, 2008 Page 2 1. The Public Interest and Necessity Do Not Require the Proposed Project. The City unilaterally identified the subject real property interests out of literally hundreds, if not thousands, of eligible acres that could satisfy the need generated by the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City then unilaterally subjected these real property interests to the permitting processes of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and the California Department of Fish and Game, in hopes of utilizing them for a conservation easement. Again, there is nothing of a particular public interest or necessity pertaining to the subject property interests in and of themselves. Rather, the City is attempting to create such public interest and necessity by means of the entitlements the City obtained therefor through the permitting agencies without input or consultation whatsoever with Borchard. This does not rise to the level of public interest and necessity required by California Law and, therefore, the City should not adopt the Resolution of Necessity for the Proposed Project. 2. The Proposed Project is not Planned and Located in the Manner that will be most Compatible with the Least Private Injury. As indicated above, the City never consulted with Borchard regarding the subject real property interests in any of the planning or location for such interests. Consequently, the Proposed Project is not most compatible with the least private injury. Indeed, of Borchard's approximately 54 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, wetlands creation and/or other Temecula Creek undeveloped land (collectively, the "Borchard Wetlands Acreage"), the approximate 1.70 - acre portion identified by the City is highly injurious to Borchard's future plans for this property. Borchard has been exploring with the City's planning staff for over two years the possibility of developing this property for a seniors housing project (albeit any such future development would be subject to additional governmental approvals). Even though such future development may be uncertain, the City's acquisition of the subject real property interests would make any such future development plans impossible. The City did not even meet with, or seek the input of, Borchard regarding which portion of the Borchard Wetland Acreage to consider for the Proposed Project. How can the City be sure the Proposed Project is planned and located in the manner that will be compatible with the least private injury when the City hasn't even conferred with the property owner in question (especially when almost any other portion of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage could have been utilized for the Proposed Project with far less private injury to the Borchard Wetlands Acreage)? 1W PARKS & OBERHANSLE Y A Professional Law Corporation Mayor Naggar and Temecula City Councilmembers November 25, 2008 Page 3 3. The Monetary Compensation Offer made by the City to Acquire the Real Property Interests Required for the Proposed Project was Insufficient to Satisfy the Requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2. The monetary compensation offer made by the City to acquire the real property interests required for the Proposed Project was woefully insufficient. Other similar mitigation property in the area has sold between $75,000 and $150,000 per acre and yet the City has offered only $18,000 per acre. Borchard has not previously raised this issue, or requested its own appraisal at City cost and expense, because the location of the 1.70 acres desired by the City is so detrimental to any other use by Borchard of the remainder of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage. Indeed, the City's appraisal fails to take into account the detriment this taking would have on the balance of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage. Based on the foregoing, Borchard just recently has engaged City staff in discussion regarding the City's potential acquisition of the entirety of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage. This would be extremely beneficial to the City in that the City would have the ability to mitigate for future projects through its own land bank without the need to engage in future condemnation proceedings to acquire suitable mitigation property. However, the present attempt by the City to acquire the subject real property interests by way of condemnation at such a disparate reduced price from perceived current market value may irreparably endanger any future negotiations between Borchard and the City for the entirety of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage. Please be advised, if formal condemnation proceedings are instigated by the City, Borchard will object to the City's proposed deposit of $30,250 (Agenda Item 19.4) in order to obtain immediate possession of the subject real property interests because such sum is below the minimum good faith cash fair market value under California Law. For the reasons set forth above, Borchard objects to the Proposed Project, and will exercise all rights and legal processes available to it in the future to oppose it. Sincerely, Ag�6Z lYil Aftiltip D. berhansley, of PARKS & OBERHANSLEY A Professional Law Corporation PDO:sr cc: Borchard Temecula, L.P. 100,2-1,) PARKS & OBERHANSLEY A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 27250 VIA INDUSTRIA, SUITE B TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 MAIN TELEPHONE: (951) 699-4200 FACSIMILE: (951) 699-1200 Offices in San Diego and Temecula, California November 25, 2008 PHILIP D. OBERHANSLEY phil@potemecula.com (951)6994200 9736.000 Hand -Delivered Mayor Michael S. Naggar and Members of the Temecula City Council City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 RE: Temecula City Council Meeting, November 25, 2008, Agenda Item No. 20 Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway — Dual Turn Lanes From Temecula Parkway (Project No. PW06-11) Dear Mayor Naggar and Councilmembers: This firm represents Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership (`Borchard") in connection with the above -referenced matter. Borchard owns the property in question. We hereby request this letter be made a part of the public record for Agenda Item No. 20 of the Temecula City Council Meeting for Tuesday, November 25, 2008. Borchard hereby objects to the proposed adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway — Dual Turn Lanes From Temecula Parkway (Project No. PW06-11) (the "Proposed Project"). Borchard objects to the Proposed Project on the grounds that: (1) the Proposed Project is not planned and located in the manner that will be most compatible with the least private injury; and (2) the monetary compensation offer made by the City to acquire the real property interests required for the Proposed Project was insufficient to satisfy the requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2. PARKS & OBERHANSLEY A Professional Law Corporation Mayor Naggar and Temecula City Councilmembers November 25, 2008 Page 2 1. The Proposed Project is not Planned and Located in the Manner that will be most Compatible with the Least Private Injury. When the City first approached Borchard regarding the Proposed Project, Borchard cooperated in every way possible. In connection with such cooperation, and the due diligence associated therewith, Borchard discovered, for the first time, the existence of an AT&T fiber-optic line that runs right through the middle of its property. The location of such line may well reduce the value of the Borchard property by 35 percent, or more, because it prevents commercial improvements from being constructed over the top of it. There is no recorded easement or agreement of any kind pertaining to this fiber-optic line — rather it remains in place from what used to be the old alignment of Pala Road (and which was conveyed by the City to Borchard's predecessor -in -interest by way of Grant Deed without reservation of any kind for the fiber-optic line). Apparently, the City never vacated the old Pala Road right-of-way and failed to include AT&T in the condemnation action related to its conveyance of the property to Borchard's predecessor -in -interest. I Given the foregoing circumstances, the relocation of the AT&T fiber-optic line should be included within the scope of the Proposed Project in order to avoid further, significant private injury to Borchard and its real property interests. 2. The Monetary Compensation Offer made by the City to Acquire the Real Property Interests Required for the Proposed Project was Insufficient to Satisfy the Requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2. The monetary compensation offer made by the City to acquire the real property interest required for the Proposed Project was insufficient to satisfy the requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2. Other similarly zoned property just 500 feet away from the property in question sold recently for $50 per square foot and yet the City has offered only $30.87 per square foot. Such a significant difference in price might be resolved through negotiations with the City if it were not for the dramatic, detrimental financial impact the City's past actions or inactions regarding AT&T's fiber-optic line have already had on the subject real property interests. If the City is willing to participate in resolving the relocation of AT&T's fiber-optic line in connection with the proposed condemnation acquisition contemplated by the Proposed Project, Borchard is willing to negotiate in good faith a total resolution of these issues. 1 Under California law, had the City taken either course of action, AT&T would have been required at such time to relocate the fiber-optic line at its sole cost and expense. However, in light of present circumstances, AT&T refuses to relocate its fiber-optic line unless Borchard agrees to pay such relocation expenses — estimated at approximately $250,000. 4r PARKS & OBERHANSLEY A Professional Law Corporation Mayor Naggar and Temecula City Councilmembers November 25, 2008 Page 3 If formal condemnation proceedings are commenced through the courts by the City, Borchard will object to the City's proposed deposit of $120,000 (Agenda Item 20.4) in order to obtain immediate possession of the subject real property interests because such sum is below the minimum good faith cash fair market value sum required under California Law. For the reasons set forth above, Borchard objects to the Proposed Project, and will exercise all rights and legal processes available to it in the future to oppose it. PDO:sr cc: Borchard-Temecula, L.P. Sincerely, p & a)bi4�tl'l Philip D. Oberhansley, of PARKS & OBERHANSLEY A Professional Law Corporation