Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
011210 CC Agenda
In 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 II] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE JANUARY 12, 2010 — 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: 10-01 Resolution: 10-01 6:00 P:M.:- Closed Session of the'City Council/Temecula;Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Government Code Section:. - "' 1) Conference with=real property negotiators, pursuant to, Government Code Section 549568 regarding the potential sale of the real property",located at 28640 Pujol Street," Temecula; California .(APN Nos. 922-053-026 and -021); owned by the Redevelopment Agency of the City, of, TemecuIa. The"parties to'' the negotiations for.the,' potential" sale of',, the:,, property are the Redevelopment' Agency- of they City., of Temecula; City of Temecula, and R.C. Hobbs Co. Negotiators for the Agency and City are. Bob Johnson,. Assistant City. Manager;' Patrick Richardson, Director -'"of Planning and;._ Redevelopment; and. Luke`; Watson;; . Management, Analyst. Under negotiation' are: the price .'and,,,terms;,of, the potential sale of the reaF'," property. " 2), Conference with „real property negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 regarding one parcel of "real property owned by John and Juanita Firestone and .their affiliates consisting of approximately 37"..58 acres (APN"Nos. 9407032-005 to�007")-generally located southwesterly of the extensions -of Pujol Street and ;Temecula Parkway. The parties to the , negotiations" for the, purchase of ".the property are' John and .-Juanita - µ Firestone and the City of Temecula. Negotiators for the City of Temecula are Shawn Nelson, City Manager; .Bob Johnson, Assistant City Manager; and Patrick Richardson; Director of Planning and, Redevelopment: Under negotiation are price and the"terms of the purchase of"the property— 3) Conference with City, Attorney pursuant to Government Code ' Section 54956.9(b) with" respect'to one matter of potential litigation. With, respectto , such matter, ;the City Attorney: ' has determined 'that a point has been, reached where there is a significant.'exposure, to litigation involving the ,City and„City related; entities based, on" existing facts and circumstances. With respect to such matter; the, City Council' will also meet pursuant to Government' Code Section ' 54956 9(c) to -, decide whether to initiate litigation — Public Public Information concerning existing litigation , between the' -City and= various parties may be acquired by .review ing..,.the public documents- .held by the, -°City Clerk. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jeff Comerchero Prelude Music: Murrieta Youth Music Club Invocation: Pastor John Ruhlman from Life Church Flag Salute: Council Member Edwards ROLL CALL: Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington, Comerchero PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Mavor's Award for Outstanding Achievement - Chaparral High School Football Team and Linfield Christian High School for both winning CIF Championship for their respective divisions 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 text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the action minutes of November 10, 2009; 2.2 Approve the action minutes of December 8, 2009. 3 List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 City Treasurer's Report as of November 30. 2009 RECOMMENDATION: ' 4.1 Approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2009. 5 Community Service Fundina Proaram Grant for VNW Circle of Care (at the request of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee Members. Marvann Edwards and Mike Naaaar) RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the Community Service Funding Program grant recommendation to VNW Circle of Care in the amount of $5,000. 3 6 Aareement for Consulting Services with Hirsch & Associates, Inc. for the Butterfield Stage Road Extension Proiect, Proiect No. PW09-02 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve an Agreement for Consulting Services with Hirsch & Associates, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $47,700 to complete the medians landscape and irrigation design plans for Butterfield Stage Road Extension, Project No. PW09- 02; 6.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve Extra Work Authorizations not to exceed the contingency amount of $4,770, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. 7 Aareement for fundina the acauisition of open space Droperty between Western Riverside County Reqional Conservation Authority and the City- of Temecula RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Appropriate $261,500 to the CIP Budget for Phase II of Open Space Land Acquisition of Francis Property from General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance in the amount of $217,000 and DIF Open Space Fund in the amount of $44,500; 7.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING THE ACQUISITION OF OPEN SPACE PROPERTY BETWEEN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA" 8 Authorize the preparation of documents necessary to file an application with LAFCO for an expansion of the City's Sphere of Influence and the Annexation of certain uninhabited; territory described as the Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) comprised of approximately 4.500 acres located southwest of the City RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO FILE AN APPLICATION WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY - FORMATION COMMISSION FOR AN EXPANSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED AS THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA ANNEXATION (NO. 2) COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 4,500 ACRES LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF INTERSTATE 15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO/RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE CORTESE-KNOX- HERTZBERG LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION ACT OF 2000 (LR09-0024) 9 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 09-08 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 09-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17.32 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS - - - - - ryrw ...: ****** *** RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ********__-_�- --vv-- TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 10-01 Resolution: No. CSD 10-01 CALL TO ORDER: President Chuck Washington ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington 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 10 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve the action minutes of November 10, 2009; 10.2 Approve the action minutes of December 8, 2009. CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT CSD GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS CSD ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, January 26, 2010, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. 7 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 10-01 Resolution: No. RDA 10-01 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Mike Naggar ROLL CALL:' AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Edwards, Roberts, Washington, Naggar 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 11 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve the action minutes of November 10, 2009; 11.2 Approve the action minutes of December 8, 2009. RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS RDA ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, January 26, 2010, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. M 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. 12 Approval for Levvina an Assessment for Fiscal Year 2010-2011 in connection with the Temecula Vallev Tourism Business Improvement District (TVTBID) RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Conduct a public hearing to consider protests regarding the levy of an assessment in conjunction with the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District; 12.2 Instruct the City Clerk to tabulate any written protests which might be received prior to the close of the public hearing regarding the formation of the proposed District; 12.3 If the City Clerk reports that there is not a majority protest received regarding this District, then adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 IN CONNECTION WITH THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (TVTBID) 12.4 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 3.40.040.B. OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE ASSESSMENT AGAINST LODGING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FROM TWO PERCENT (2%) TO FOUR PERCENT (4%) OF ROOM RENT 13 Transportation Uniform Mitiaation Fee (TUMF) Ordinance Amendment and Resolution to Adopt Revised TUMF Schedule (at the request of Council Member Washinaton) RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Introduce and read by title only an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.08 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM 13.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A REVISED AND UPDATED FEE SCHEDULE APPLICABLE UNDER THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) PROGRAM CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 14 Selection of 2010 Citv Council Committee Assianments RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Appoint a member of the City Council to serve as liaison to each of the City Commissions and Committees: Commission Liaison (One Member) Current Member Community Services Commission Comerchero Old Town Local Review Board Washington Planning Commission Naggar Public/Traffic Safety Commission Edwards 14.2 Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Standing Committees: Standina Committees City Sustainability Program Committee Economic Development Committee RDA/Old Town Steering Committee Finance Committee Current Member(s) Roberts, Washington Washington, Roberts Roberts, Edwards Edwards, Naggar 10 Infrastructure Beautification Committee Joint City Council/TVUSD Committee Murrieta/Temecula Committee Public Works/Facilities Committee Medical Task Force Committee Quality of Life/Temecula 2030 Master Plan Committee Southwest Cities Coalition Committee Edwards, Naggar Edwards, Washington Naggar, Washington Edwards, Roberts Naggar Roberts, Washington Edwards, Comerchero 14.3 Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following Representative Assignments (External Organizations): Representative Assignments Current Member(s) Animal Shelter Liaison/JPA Representative Edwards League of Calif. Congress — 2010 Voting Delegate Edwards, Alt. Comerchero Murrieta Creek Advisory Board Edwards National League of Cities Annual Congress — 2010 Voting Delegate Edwards, Alt. Comerchero Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison Roberts, Alt. Naggar Rancho California Water District Liaison — Proposed Addition Riverside County Child Safety Commission Edwards Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Board Edwards Riverside County Transportation Commission Roberts, Alt. Comerchero Riverside Transit Agency Representative Comerchero, Alt. Edwards Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors Roberts WRCOG Washington, Alt. Roberts RCA Representative Edwards, Alt. Washington Zone Committee (relating to TUMF Program for WRCOG) Washington, Alt. Edwards 14.4 Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following Ad Hoc Subcommittees: Ad Hoc Subcommittees (can be one or two members) Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Subcommittee Diaz Property Ad Hoc Subcommittee External Communications Ad Hoc Subcommittee French Valley Parkway Interchange Ad Hoc Subcommittee Higher Education Ad Hoc Subcommittee Homeless Shelter Ad Hoc Subcommittee Luxury Car Dealership Ad Hoc Subcommittee Military Ad Hoc Subcommittee Nicolas Valley Ad Hoc Subcommittee Current Members Edwards, Naggar Naggar, Washington Comerchero, Edwards Comerchero, Roberts Naggar, Washington Washington, Edwards Washington, Roberts Washington, Edwards Roberts, Washington 11 Old Town Civic Center Ad Hoc Subcommittee Promenade Mall Ad Hoc Subcommittee Ronald Reagan Sports Park Ad Hoc Subcommittee Roripaugh Ranch Ad Hoc Subcommittee Santa Margarita Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee South Temecula Land and Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee — Proposed Addition Summerhouse Senior Housing Development Ad Hoc Subcommittee Temecula Hospital Ad Hoc Subcommittee Transit Ad Hoc Subcommittee Villages of Old Town Ad Hoc Subcommittee Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee Wind Energy Ad Hoc Subcommittee — Proposed Deletion Youth Court Ad Hoc Subcommittee Youth Master Plan Implementation Ad Hoc Subcommittee Comerchero, Roberts Comerchero, Washington Edwards, Naggar Comerchero, Roberts Edwards, Comerchero Roberts, Washington Comerchero, Naggar Roberts, Comerchero Edwards, Roberts Comerchero, Edwards Edwards, Naggar Edwards, Comerchero 1 Naggar, Washington 15 An Ordinance Amending Section 10.28.01(D) of the Temecula Municipal Code regardina Prima Facie Soeed Limits on Certain Streets RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28.01(D) OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREETS CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, January 26, 2010, at 5:30 PM, for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. 12 PRESENTATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR Item No. 1 Item No. 2 ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE NOVEMBER 10, 2009 — 7:00 PM The City Council meeting convened at 7:02 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Maryann Edwards Prelude Music: Jessica Sorge Invocation: Larry Elwood of United Church of the Valley Flag Salute: Council Member Washington ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Naggar, Roberts, Washington, Edwards ABSENT: Comerchero, Roberts Family Night in Temecula - 2009-2010 Proclamation Diabetes Awareness Month Proclamation 234th United States Marine Corp Birthday Proclamation PUBLIC COMMENTS The following individuals addressed the City Council: • Mary Towell - Southern Temecula Safety Coalition • Karen Locklin - Rainbow Canyon Villages Homeowners Association • Wayne Hall - Hospital Update • Jeanne McClellan - Rotary Club of Temecula • Donald Lambert - Medical Marijuana CITY COUNCIL REPORTS 1 CONSENT CALENDAR Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Action Minutes - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the action minutes of October 27, 2009. 3 List of Demands - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 09-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 2009 - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 2009. 5 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Funding - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Increase estimated General Fund Grant Revenue by $29,032; 5.2 Appropriate $29,032 from General Fund Grant Revenue to the Police Department. 6 Community Service Funding Program for Fiscal Year 2009-10 - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Community Service Funding Program grants pursuant to the attached spreadsheet outlining the Ad Hoc Subcommittee's recommendations of $50,500 to 21 organizations. 7 First Amendment to the Agreement for Consulting Services between the City of Temecula and Environmental Science Associates (ESA) for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Old Town Specific Plan Amendment - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the First Amendment to the Agreement to increase the total agreement amount by $25,000 to address necessary additional traffic impact analysis items which were not within the scope of the initial agreement. 8 Agreement for Consulting Services with David Evans and Associates, Inc. for the Butterfield Stage Road Extension Beltway Project — Project No. PW09-02 — pulled off the agenda RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve an Agreement for Consulting Services with David Evans and Associates, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $304,125 for design services to complete the improvement plans for the Butterfield Stage Road Extension Project — Project No. PW09-02; 8.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve Extra Work Authorizations not to exceed the contingency amount of $30,412.50, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. 9 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Citywide Slurry Seal Project for FY 2008-09 — Project No. PW09-01 - Approved Staff Recommendation (3- 0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Accept the construction of the Citywide Slurry Seal Project for FY 2008-09, Project No. PW 09-01, as complete; 9.2 Direct the City Clerk to file and record the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; 9.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 10 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Citywide Concrete Repairs for FY 2008-09 — Project No. PW09-03 - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Accept the construction of the Citywide Concrete Repairs for FY 2008-09, Project No. PW 09-03, as complete; 10.2 Direct the City Clerk to file and record the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; 10.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 11 Temoorary Street Closure for the Winter Wonderland Event (Main Street between Old Town Front Street and the easterly end of the Main Street Bridge) scheduled for December 11, 2009 - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Receive and file the following proposed action by the City manager: Temporarily close Main Street for the "2009 WINTER WONDERLAND" EVENT. 12 Temporary Street Closures for Santa's Electric Liaht Parade on December 4. 2009 - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Receive and file the following proposed action by the City manager: Temporarily close certain streets for the "2009 SANTA'S ELECTRIC LIGHT PARADE" EVENT. 13 Acceptance of certain Public Streets into the Citv-maintained Svstem within Tract Ma No. 29734 (located northwesterly of the intersection of Deer Hollow Way and Peppercorn Drive- Centex Homes) - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 09- 93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY -MAINTAINED SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACT NO. 29734) 14 Fiber-optic Cable Installation to Fire Station 84 and Library - Contract Chanae Order to Construction Contract with High -Light Electric, Inc. for Traffic Signal Interconnect Equipment Installation — Project No. PW 04-05 -Approved Staff Recommendation (3- 0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve a Change Order for an amount not to exceed $23,700 to furnish and install additional fiber-optic cable from the Margarita/Pauba Road traffic signal controller to the utility closet in Fire Station 84 and authorize the City Manager to execute the change order. 15 Professional GIS Consultina Services to enhance the Citv of Temecula's GIS Parcel and Centerline Data Lavers — IS 09-02 - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Award a contract to D & W Consulting to provide GIS Parcel Date Integrity Updata in the amount of $63,370, and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. 16 Approval of Pre -Qualified Vendor for HP Enterprise systems for the Old Town Civic Center, Project No. IS RFQ10-09 (PH. 2) -Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Approve the HP vendor, listed below, as Pre -Qualified Value Added Reseller with HP channel certifications and eligible to submit bids for HP Enterprise Systems for Phase 2 of the Old Town Civic Center Project; 16.2 Authorize staff to negotiate with Nth Generation Computing Inc. for terms and conditions required to satisfy the computing requirements for the Old Town Civic Center Phase 2 as established in the City's Information Systems Master Plan. 17 Fourth Amendment to Contract with Meyer & Associates - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Approve the fourth amendment to the agreement with Meyer & Associates in the amount of $13,390, plus 10% contingency of $1,339. 18 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 09-07 - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 09-07 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 3.20.070 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE, REPORTING AND REMITTING, AND 3.20.110, APPEAL, OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX At 7:53 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Redevelopment Agency. At 7:55 P.M., the City Council resumed with regular business. 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. 22 Long Range Planning Project Number LR08-0017, a statutory update of the City of Temecula General Plan Housing Element - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Council Member Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Members Comerchero and Roberts absent. RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 09-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2008-2014 GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (LONG RANGE PLANNING PROJECT NO. LR08-0017) CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ADJOURNMENT At 8:14 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, November 24, 2009, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Maryann Edwards, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE DECEMBER 8, 2009 — 7:00 PM 6:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Government Code Section: Conference with real property negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 regarding the purchase of two parcels of real property owned by Abdi Nasehi and Leslie Ann Nasehi, husband and wife, as joint tenants. The two parcels are described as (1) the first parcel is approximately 1.83 acres (APN 940-31-0049) with a street address of 28450 6t" Street, Temecula, California 92590; and (2) the second parcel is approximately .41 acres (APN 940-31-0052) located adjacent to the first parcel at 28450 6t" Street, Temecula, California 92590. The parties to the negotiations for the purchase of the two parcels are: Abdi Nasehi and Leslie Ann Nasehi, Washington Mutual Bank, Quality Loan Service Corp. and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula. Negotiators for the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula are: Bob Johnson, Patrick Richardson and Luke Watson. Under negotiation are the price and terms of the purchase of the two parcels. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk. At 6:33 P.M. Mayor Edwards called the meeting to order (Council Members Naggar and Roberts were absent at that time). Council Member Roberts was in attendance of the Closed Session but Council Member Naggar was absent. The City Council meeting convened at 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Maryann Edwards Prelude Music: The Southern California Damekor Invocation: Rabbi Yitzchok Hurwitz of Chabad of Temecula Valley Flag Salute: Council Member Comerchero ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Naggar, Roberts, Washington, Edwards ABSENT: Naggar 1 PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS 2009 Excellence in Technology Practices PUBLIC COMMENTS The following individuals addressed the City Council: • Leah DiBernardo - • Gabrielle DiBernardo - • Charles Rear - CITY COUNCIL REPORTS CONSENT CALENDAR Non-profit — Slow Food Temecula Valley All Kids Everywhere Water Wastage and Segregated Trash Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the action minutes of November 10, 2009; continued to 1/12/10 2.2 Approve the action minutes of November 24, 2009. - Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-1-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent and Council Member Washington abstaining. 3 List of Demands - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 09-98 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 City Treasurer's Report as of October 31, 2009 -Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of October 31, 2009. 5 Financial Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2009 - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2009; 5.2 Approve a decrease of $85,000 in Operating Transfers Out from State Transportation Fund with corresponding decrease to Operating Transfer In to the General Fund. 6 Vehicle Repair and Maintenance Agreement - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve a two-year Vehicle Repair and Maintenance Agreement with Old Town Tire & Service LLC, in an amount not to exceed $86,000 annually. 7 California Department of Justice - Fingerprinting Agreement - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve a three-year agreement with the California Department of Justice in the amount of $220,000 for fingerprinting services. 8 First Amendment to Aareement for Plan Review Services with Tom Hanev for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve a First Amendment to the agreement for Consulting Services with Tom Haney in the amount of $20,000 to provide Plan Review Services for a total agreement amount of $60,000. 9 Approval of the Pre -Qualified Vendors for Audiovisual Intearation for the Old Town Civic Center — Project No. IS 09-02 - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve the list of audiovisual vendors, outlined below, as Pre -Qualified AV Integrators with National Systems Contractor's Association certifications and eligible to submit bids for audiovisual integration for Phase 2 of the Old Town Civic Center Project. 10 Award a Construction Contract for the Winchester Road/Hiahwav 79 North Corridor Beautification, Project No. PW 06-15 - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Award a construction contract for the Winchester Road/Highway 79 North Corridor Beautification, Project No. PW06-15, to Belaire-West Landscape, Inc. in the amount of $920,027; 10.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $184,005.40, which is equal to 20% of the contract amount. 11 Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Aareement with Construction Testin and Engineering, Inc. (CTE) for Additional Geotechnical and Material Testing Services associated with the Old Town Civic Center Project — Project No. PW 06-07 - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) for additional services associated with geotechnical and special inspection services for the Old Town Civic Center Project in the amount of $78,368.50 and authorize the Mayor to execute the Amendment. 12 Fourth Amendment to the Professional Services Aareement with T.Y. Lin International for the preparation of Plans, Specifications, and Estimate for the Western Bypass Bridge Over Murrieta Creek — Project No. PW06-04 - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve a Fourth Amendment to the agreement with T.Y. Lin International in an amount not to exceed $6,055 for additional services to provide a traffic forecast analysis of Pujol Street after completing the construction of the Western Bypass Bridge Over Murrieta Creek, Project No. PW06-04, and extending the term of the agreement to December 31, 2010. 13 Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services aareement with Leiahton Consultin Inc. for Additional Geotechnical and Material Testing Services Associated with the Old Town Infrastructure Project - Parking Structure and Office Retail PW 06-07 (1 D) - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Approve Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Leighton Consulting, Inc. for additional services associated with geotechnical and special inspection services for the Old Town Infrastructure Project, Parking Structure, and Office/Retail in the amount of $30,000 and authorize the Mayor to execute the Amendment. At 7:35 P.M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Redevelopment Agency. At 7:48 P.M., the City Council resumed with regular business. PUBLIC HEARING 25 Lona Ranae Plannina Proiect No. LR09-0020. Water Efficient Landscape Desian Ordinance - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 25.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 09-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17.32 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS Director of Planning Richardson reviewed the staff report (as per written material and a PowerPoint presentation), providing further clarification with regard to the audit components. Council Member Comerchero recommended setting up a joint meeting with Rancho California Water District to address common problems such as enforcement techniques. The public hearing was opened. Meggan Reed, Public Information Officer with Rancho California Water District, provided additional information with regard to complaint -based enforcement process. At this time, the public hearing was closed. At this time, City Attorney Thorson introduced Ordinance No. 09-08. 26 AB 1600 Financial Reports - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Roberts made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 26.1 Approve the AB 1600 Financial Reports for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2009. Finance Director Roberts presented the staff report (as per written material). The public hearing was opened; there being no public input, the hearing was closed. CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 27 Appointment of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem for Calendar Year 2010 RECOMMENDATION: 27.1 Entertain motions from the City Council Members to appoint the Mayor to preside, effective January 1, 2010, to the end of Calendar Year 2010; — Appointed Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero to preside as Mayor for 2010 (4-0-1) — Council Member Washington made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Roberts; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent 27.2 Entertain motions from the City Council Members to appoint the Mayor Pro Tem, effective January 1, 2010, who will assume the duties of the Mayor in the Mayor's absence, and hold this office until the end of the Calendar Year 2010. — Appointed Council Member Roberts to preside as Mayor Pro Tem for 2010 (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Mayor Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent 28 Appoint Southwest Cities Coalition Subcommittee (at the reauest of Mavor Edwards and Mayor Pro Tem Comerchero) — Appointed Mayor Edwards and Council Member Comerchero (4-0-1) — Council Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Roberts; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 28.1 Appoint two members to the Southwest Cities Coalition Subcommittee. Assistant City Manager Adams reviewed the staff report (of record). Paul Jacobs addressed the City Council with regard to this item, voicing his opposition to the formation of this subcommittee, expressing concern with the City giving up its independence. 29 Approval of the fiscal vear 2010-11 Temecula Vallev Tourism Business Improvement District (TVTBID) Advisory Board's Annual Report and Declaration of Intention to Amend the Annual Assessment and Lew an Assessment against Lodging Businesses within the TVTBID for fiscal year 2010-11 - Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Council Member Roberts made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Comerchero; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Council Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 29.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 09-99 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE REPORT OF THE ADVISORY BOARD FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 IN CONNECTION WITH THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (TVTBID) 29.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 09-100 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO INCREASE THE ASSESSMENT AUTHORIZED BY TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.40.030.B. FROM 2% TO 4% AND LEVY AN ASSESSMENT AGAINST LODGING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 AND FIXING THE TIME AND PLACE OF A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON AND GIVING NOTICE THEREOF DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager Nelson wished everyone a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that the Redevelopment Agency gave direction to staff with regard to the one item in Closed Session and noted that final action will be discussed in open session at a later date. ADJOURNMENT At 8:58 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, January 12, 2010, 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. Maryann Edwards, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] 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: January 12, 2010 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. 10- 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. 10- 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 $9,658,872.92. 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 12th day of January, 2010. Jeff Comerchero, 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. 10- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12th day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: IG1 ►1�Ko1l1►NllNdiIAdi1:l4:&1 ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 11/25/2009 TOTAL CHECK RUN: $ 532,964.32 12/02/2009 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 1,497,357.73 12/03/2009 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 832,104.88 12/03/2009 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 19,546.85 12/10/2009 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 1,782,659.59 12/11/2009 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 38,570.17 12/17/2009 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 3,005,372.96 12/23/2009 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 1,031,400.41 12/03/2009 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 29,138.09 12/10/2009 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 444,332.05 12/24/2009 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 445,425.87 TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR O1/12/2010 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 9,658,872.92 DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND CHECKS: 001 GENERAL FUND $ 4,613,636.37 120 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FUND 2,411.12 130 RECOVERY ACT JAG FUNDING 2,879.57 165 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 34,857.93 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 737,326.47 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "B" STREET LIGHTS 76,681.69 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE 172,030.30 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "D" REFUSE/RECYCLING 355,436.93 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 17,239.11 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 17,865.45 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND 1,541,717.99 275 CFD 03-3 WOLF CREEK IMPROVEMENT FUND 15,885.55 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT 243,439.36 300 INSURANCE FUND 229,393.88 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 108,063.20 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 19,462.13 340 FACILITIES 32,459.50 380 RDA DEBT SERVICE FUND 482,759.44 460 CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,350.50 472 CFD 01-2 HARVESTON A&B DEBT SERVICE 1,350.50 473 CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,350.50 474 AD03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD DEBT SERVICE 1,350.50 475 CFD03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,350.50 476 CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,350.50 477 CFD 03-02 RORIPAUGH DEBT SERVICE FUND 19,064.35 700 CERBT CALIFORNIA EE RETIREE GASB 45 9,263.57 $ 8,739,976.91 001 GENERAL FUND $ 550,280.50 165 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 21,664.48 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 231,813.94 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 277.45 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE 9,777.97 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 2,702.58 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 2,922.81 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 760.31 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT 8,319.28 300 INSURANCE FUND 2,959.36 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 50,537.36 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 11,207.60 340 FACILITIES 18,575.69 700 CERBT CALIFORNIA EE RETIREE-GASB45 7,096.68 918,896.01 TOTAL BY FUND: $ 9,658,872.92 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 11/25/2009 11:39:01AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 1368 11/25/2009 010349 CALIF DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT Support Payment 578.84 578.84 1369 11/25/2009 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) State Disability Ins Payment 24,319.41 24,319.41 1370 11/25/2009 000283 INSTATAX(IRS) Federal Income Taxes Payment 77,671.22 77,671.22 1371 11/25/2009 000389 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT OBRA- Project Retirement Payment 2,285.98 2,285.98 SOLUTION 1372 11/25/2009 001065 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Nationwide Retirement Payment 14,118.85 14,118.85 SOLUTION 1373 11/25/2009 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' PERS ER Paid Member Contr Payment 112,975.07 112,975.07 RETIREMENT) 135255 11/23/2009 013288 STUDIO 33 dpst:ice skating rink/mgmt srvcs:old town 35,765.00 35,765.00 135256 11/25/2009 004148 AT&T Oct teleconf svcs:cm ofc 856.14 856.14 135257 11/25/2009 003203 ARTISTIC EMBROIDERY supplies:'09 holiday light parade 734.06 734.06 135258 11/25/2009 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRVS curb repair Btt1d Stage Rd: PW 2,955.00 2,955.00 INC 135259 11/25/2009 004040 BIG FOOT GRAPHICS TCSD instructor earnings 665.00 665.00 135260 11/25/2009 008780 BYROM-DAVEY INC Repair Synthetic Turf: PBSP 2,542.70 2,542.70 135261 11/25/2009 004971 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, Nov copier leases: Citywide 4,744.84 4,744.84 INC 135262 11/25/2009 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES Community Health Charities Payment 101.00 101.00 135263 11/25/2009 004123 D L PHARES & ASSOCIATES Dec storefront lease: PD Old Town 2,763.09 2,763.09 135264 11/25/2009 007057 DERNBACH, ESTHER MARIE TCSD instructor earnings 490.00 490.00 Page apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 11/25/2009 11:39:01AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135265 11/25/2009 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELING Fuel for City vehicles: Code Enf 440.09 INC Fuel for City vehicles: B&S 242.41 Fuel for City vehicles: PW Traffic 222.79 Fuel for City vehicles: PW Lnd Dv 341.99 Fuel for City vehicles: PW Maint 764.33 Fuel for City vehicles: PW CIP 138.57 Fuel for City vehicles: Police 55.23 2,205.41 135266 11/25/2009 002390 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER Nov 95366-02 Diego Dr Ldscp 1,020.02 1,020.02 DIST 135267 11/25/2009 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 1017-20 express mail svcs: Citywide 371.59 371.59 135268 11/25/2009 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER PAYPAL TT Verisign Payflow Pro Transaction 128.90 AMAZON.COM, INC TT Samsung tunerless dvd/vhs 179.00 FRANKLIN COVEY COMPANY GB planner refills: PW 258.15 FRANKLIN COVEY COMPANY GB planner refills: PW 27.12 PALUMBOS RISTORANTE GB refreshments furn rfq Civic Ctr mtg 67.09 660.26 135269 11/25/2009 011145 FOSTER, JILL C. TCSD instructor earnings 84.00 TCSD instructor earnings 84.00 TCSD instructor earnings 84.00 TCSD instructor earnings 84.00 336.00 135270 11/25/2009 011967 FULL VALUE ENTERTAINMENT sttlmnt: Live at the Merc 11/13 164.50 164.50 135271 11/25/2009 008081 HALL & FOREMAN INC Sept Eng Svc:Santa Gertrudis Creek 9,860.01 Oct Eng Svcs:Santa Gertrudis Creek 12,399.68 Billing Adj: Sept Eng Svcs Gertrudis -3,550.85 18,708.84 135272 11/25/2009 012954 HANEY, JOHN THOMAS billing adj: B09-1355,1409 PA09-0226,227 163.40 billing adj: B09-1428,1741,1030,1329 106.69 9/17-9/25 plan review secs: B&S 2,153.48 9/2&9/29 plan review secs: B&S 1,600.14 10/1-8 plan review svcs: B&S 2,539.64 10/12-16 plan review secs: B&S 2,003.14 8,566.49 135273 11/25/2009 013164 HARDY, ANTHONY (TONY), J. TCSD Instructor Earnings 315.00 315.00 135274 11/25/2009 012204 HERITAGE FAMILY MINISTRIES TCSD Instructor Earnings 455.00 455.00 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 11/25/2009 11:39:01AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135275 11/25/2009 000194 1 C M A RETIREMENT -PLAN I C M A Retirement Trust 457 Payment 6,563.57 6,563.57 303355 135276 11/25/2009 004221 INLAND EMPIRE AFFILIATE OF Race for the Cure 10/18 22,500.00 22,500.00 135277 11/25/2009 001186 IRWIN, JOHN TCSD instructor earnings 181.30 TCSD instructor earnings 426.30 607.60 135278 11/25/2009 012422 KRONQUIST, MATHEW 70 % deposit:holiday lights Old Town 35,000.00 35,000.00 135279 11/25/2009 000209 L & M FERTILIZER INC Hardware supplies: PW Maint 10.67 10.67 135280 11/25/2009 012945 LABELLE- MARVIN INC Material Testing:Slurry Seal Project 1,150.00 1,150.00 135281 11/25/2009 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. reimb: tennis tmmnt supplies 8/29-30 110.96 110.96 135282 11/25/2009 000482 LEIGHTON CONSULTING INC 9/29-11/1 geotech svc: Old Town 24,966.83 24,966.83 135283 11/25/2009 012269 MARQUEZ, JOSEPH reimb: NAYC conf Orlando 11/7-11 404.16 404.16 135284 11/25/2009 001256 MARRIOTT HOTEL commercial veh.trng 12/6-18 Dep.Grip 942.36 942.36 135285 11/25/2009 013219 MATTHIES, FRANK H. Presentor:heritage day event 11/7 250.00 250.00 135286 11/25/2009 005887 MOFFATT & NICHOL ENGINEERS 8/30-9/26 Consult Srvcs:F.V.Pkwy 73,045.05 73,045.05 135287 11/25/2009 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING Supply & install hydromulch:pw maint 585.00 585.00 135288 11/25/2009 000233 NELSON, SHAWN reimb: Nov'09 internet services 44.99 44.99 135289 11/25/2009 013127 ON STAGE MUSICALS Torch Songs performance 11/8 6,167.00 6,167.00 135290 11/25/2009 002800 PACIFIC STRIPING INC Striping configurations: PW Traffic Div 3,318.65 3,318.65 135291 11/25/2009 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PERS Long Term Care Payment 169.04 169.04 PROGRAM 135292 11/25/2009 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 426.27 426.27 Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 11/25/2009 11:39:01AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135293 11/25/2009 012251 PORTRAIT PRODUCTIONS TCSD Instructor Earnings 567.00 567.00 135294 11/25/2009 002185 POSTMASTER postage:tcsd w/s brochures 6,364.12 6,364.12 135295 11/25/2009 000907 RANCHO TEMECULA CAR WASH Oct City vehicle detailing 157.50 157.50 135296 11/25/2009 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATION Tool and equipment rental: PW Maint 292.75 Tool and equipment rental: PW Maint 23.41 316.16 135297 11/25/2009 004498 REPUBLIC INTELLIGENT Traffic sgnl repair/maint:pwtraf9/14 975.00 Traffic sgnl repair/maint:pw traf 9/2 3,533.19 Traffic sgnl repair/maint:pw traf 4,178.43 8,686.62 135298 11/25/2009 013138 RISCH, VICKI G. TCSD Instructor Earnings 68.60 68.60 135299 11/25/2009 000353 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR Oct'09 parking citation assessments 7,780.75 7,780.75 135300 11/25/2009 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. reimb:Nat'I Lg Cities San Antonio 122.89 122.89 135301 11/25/2009 000815 ROWLEY, CATHY TCSD Instructor Earnings 210.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 455.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 490.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 455.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 280.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 56.00 1,946.00 135302 11/25/2009 002226 RUSSO, MARY ANNE TCSD Instructor Earnings 420.00 420.00 135303 11/25/2009 010759 S P M A, SOUTHERN PACIFIC membership dues:Aquatics 50.00 50.00 135304 11/25/2009 006815 SAN DIEGO, COUNTY OF Support Payment 12.50 12.50 135305 11/25/2009 009980 SANBORN, GWYN Country @ the Merc 11/14 606.00 606.00 135306 11/25/2009 008529 SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL Support Payment 200.00 200.00 135307 11/25/2009 008529 SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL Support Payment 100.00 100.00 135308 11/25/2009 009213 SHERRY BERRY MUSIC Jazz @ the Merc 11/12 493.50 493.50 Page:4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 11/25/2009 11:39:01AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135309 11/25/2009 009013 SISQUOC, LORENEA Presentation:Heritage Day 11/7 50.00 50.00 135310 11/25/2009 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Nov 2-30-296-9522:31035 rncho cal 558.96 Nov 2-30-099-3847:29721 ryecrest 19.55 578.51 135311 11/25/2009 013304 SO CALIF TENNIS ASSOCATION membership dues:tcsd sports prgm 120.00 120.00 135312 11/25/2009 012252 SOUND SKILZ ENTERTAINMENT Dj services:teen dance (rhythms) 11/14 750.00 750.00 INC 135313 11/25/2009 013305 SOUTHERN, KEN reimb: NAYC Conf Orlando 1117-11 626.65 626.65 135314 11/25/2009 011639 SPORTS BOOSTERS INC Advertising:Wnter Sports Poster'09 100.00 100.00 135315 11/25/2009 005786 SPRINT 9/26-10/25 cellular usage/equip 5,992.69 5,992.69 135316 11/25/2009 012188 STRONG FAMILIES TCSD Instructor Earnings 84.00 84.00 135317 11/25/2009 009061 STURDIVANT, ANGELA P. TCSD Instructor Earnings 857.50 857.50 135318 11/25/2009 009811 SUNNY HILLS TOWING LOWBED Vehicle towing srvcs:Police 190.00 190.00 SRVC 135319 11/25/2009 013014 TEMECULA MOTORCYCLE repair/maint of Police motorcyle 179.01 179.01 SERVICE 135320 11/25/2009 004308 TOWNE & COUNTRY AUTO & towing service:Police 450.00 450.00 TOWING 135321 11/25/2009 000325 UNITED WAY United Way Charities Payment 36.00 36.00 135322 11/25/2009 004794 VALLEY WINDS COMMUNITY tix sales/performance 11/4/09 260.07 260.07 135323 11/25/2009 004261 VERIZON Oct xxx-9196 gen usage:TCC Safe 165.20 165.20 135324 11/25/2009 002658 VOLLMUTH, MARY ee computer purchase prgm 1,150.36 1,150.36 135325 11/25/2009 009965 WEST, DALE ee computer purchase prgm 833.73 833.73 135326 11/25/2009 010193 WOOLSTENHULME, LUCIA TCSD Instructor Earnings 17.50 17.50 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 11/25/2009 11:39:01AM CITY OF TEMECULA Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 532,964.32 Pages apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 1 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135328 12/02/2009 011585 27511 YNEZ ROAD CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,376.54 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 29,935.32 33,311.86 135329 12/02/2009 013295 ABBOTT CARDIOVASCULAR CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 30,692.88 SYSTEMS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 8,645.33 39,338.21 135330 12/02/2009 001862 ADVANCED CARDIOVASCULAR CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,099.36 SYSTEM CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 14,438.50 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 52,664.00 70,201.86 135331 12/02/2009 006818 AFFAN, EMAN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135332 12/02/2009 013220 AIRD, ELIZABETH O. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135333 12/02/2009 005496 ALCALA, JOSE T. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 629.94 629.94 135334 12/02/2009 004331 ALLEN, CAROLYN A. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135335 12/02/2009 012433 ALVAREZ, HUMBERTO CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135336 12/02/2009 005530 AMADOR, PETER CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135337 12/02/2009 013221 ANDERSON, ARTHUR CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135338 12/02/2009 004633 ANDERSON, LEO O. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135339 12/02/2009 011557 ANDRE TRUST CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135340 12/02/2009 012425 ANTONIADIS, IOANNIS CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135341 12/02/2009 005435 ARCE, CEASAR R. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135342 12/02/2009 006821 ARGU ETA, LUIS A. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135343 12/02/2009 001823 ATKINSON, DAVID MICHAEL CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135344 12/02/2009 001740 ATWOOD & ANDREWS CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 12,170.68 DEVELOPMENT CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,133.59 15,304.27 Pagel apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 2 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135345 12/02/2009 004321 AVILA, NICOLAS CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135346 12/02/2009 011558 AYKOL, HASAN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 556.50 556.50 135347 12/02/2009 008171 AZEVEDO, MICHAEL V. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,713.46 1,713.46 135348 12/02/2009 006824 B P WEST COAST PRODUCTS, CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,091.44 2,091.44 LLC 135349 12/02/2009 008231 BAGINGITO, ALWIN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135350 12/02/2009 013296 BAKER, JOHN W CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135351 12/02/2009 013222 BALISACAN, DESI CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135352 12/02/2009 005430 BANK OF AMERICA NATL TR & CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,494.60 2,494.60 SAV 135353 12/02/2009 012428 BANTUM, MELVIN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135354 12/02/2009 006823 BARRERA, MAURICIO CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 604.74 856.72 135355 12/02/2009 013297 BEAL, DAVE J CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135356 12/02/2009 009221 BEAL, STEVEN M. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135357 12/02/2009 012430 BECHLER, BARRY M CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135358 12/02/2009 009222 BENECCHI, MICHAEL A. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135359 12/02/2009 004637 BENTLEY, WESLEYA. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135360 12/02/2009 013223 BHATIA, GAURAV CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135361 12/02/2009 009223 BITTNER, ANTON CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135362 12/02/2009 011560 BITTNER, SUSAN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135363 12/02/2009 009612 BYS RESTAURANTS, INC. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 6,022.34 6,022.34 135364 12/02/2009 013224 BLACKMER, DIRK M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135365 12/02/2009 012431 BOONE, JASON CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 478.76 478.76 135366 12/02/2009 008174 BOTROS, NABIL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135367 12/02/2009 009224 BOWDEN, PAUL E. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135368 12/02/2009 012432 BOYD, GLEN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135369 12/02/2009 005541 BRIONES, RUBEN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135370 12/02/2009 004641 BROTTEN, MICHAEL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135371 12/02/2009 005437 BROWN, CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135372 12/02/2009 008176 BUBELA, CHRISTOPHER CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135373 12/02/2009 006975 BURKE, MICHAEL W. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135374 12/02/2009 006825 BURKE, TIMOTHY M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 12,649.44 12,649.44 135375 12/02/2009 006976 BUTLER, JOSEPH CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135376 12/02/2009 011471 CALDERON, JOSE JUAN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135377 12/02/2009 005550 CALLERY, STEPHEN P. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135378 12/02/2009 013225 CALLIES, SHAANA L. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135379 12/02/2009 005542 CAPACIA, RUEL V. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135380 12/02/2009 012435 CARDENAS, GRACIELA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page3 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 4 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135381 12/02/2009 005502 CARDENTE, KENNETH CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135382 12/02/2009 005491 CARLISLE, JOHNIE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135383 12/02/2009 012436 CARMOUCHE, STANLEY P CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135384 12/02/2009 006826 CARTER, JONATHAN P. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135385 12/02/2009 009228 CASTANEDA, EDGAR CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135386 12/02/2009 012437 CASTELLON, FELIPE A CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135387 12/02/2009 006827 CASTRO, JUDY CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135388 12/02/2009 012438 CATALAN, UBALDO CUELLAR CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135389 12/02/2009 013226 CENTRONE, DOMENIC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135390 12/02/2009 009229 CERDA, SEBASTIAN S. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135391 12/02/2009 005520 CHAFFIN, MATTHEW PAUL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135392 12/02/2009 013227 CHAVIRA, PORFIRIO CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY08/09 1,004.12 1,004.12 135393 12/02/2009 008177 CHENG FAMILY PARTNERSHIP CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY08/09 6,299.52 6,299.52 135394 12/02/2009 009230 CHOI, JOANNE C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135395 12/02/2009 003882 CHRIST THE VINE LUTHERAN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 8,113.78 8,113.78 CHRCH 135396 12/02/2009 009231 CHRISTENSEN, CRAIG R. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135397 12/02/2009 005438 CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 13,657.36 13,657.36 LDS 135398 12/02/2009 004650 CLARK, RONALD M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 Page:4 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 5 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135399 12/02/2009 012441 CLIFF, ROBERTS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135400 12/02/2009 004651 CLONTS, SAM OWEN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 453.56 453.56 135401 12/02/2009 004652 COHN, STEPHEN R. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135402 12/02/2009 007005 COLEMAN, WANDA J. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135403 12/02/2009 004329 COSTCO WHOLESALE CORP CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,234.70 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 33,639.44 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 4,510.46 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,124.56 42,509.16 135404 12/02/2009 009232 COT INV CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,200.16 3,200.16 135405 12/02/2009 002154 CRANNEY, KAREN A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135406 12/02/2009 012442 CRATSLEY, MELVIN V CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135407 12/02/2009 013228 CRAWFORD, TIM CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 453.56 453.56 135408 12/02/2009 011587 CREEKSIDE RETAIL INV CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,748.13 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,691.61 6,439.74 135409 12/02/2009 012443 CROWE, HEIDI M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135410 12/02/2009 011473 DAI CHIEN, PENG CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135411 12/02/2009 011588 DAVIDSON DEV CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 34,351.12 34,351.12 135412 12/02/2009 005431 DAVIS, BARBARA W. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 478.76 478.76 135413 12/02/2009 006978 DAVIS, GABRIEL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135414 12/02/2009 005476 DAVIS, GLORIA JUNE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135415 12/02/2009 009234 DAVIS, THOMAS A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135416 12/02/2009 011474 DCH INV INC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 6,148.32 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 6,249.12 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 6,954.66 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,275.74 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 18,117.42 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 4,434.86 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,729.32 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 5,014.42 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 10,003.64 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,519.80 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 11,011.56 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,743.17 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,335.50 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 4,031.68 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,494.60 88,063.81 135417 12/02/2009 006830 DEFELICE, JOSEPH CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 453.56 453.56 135418 12/02/2009 001735 DEL TACO RESTAURANT PROP III CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,192.22 2,192.22 135419 12/02/2009 013229 DELAGARZA, ANITA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135420 12/02/2009 005474 DELAMATER, GERALD E. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135421 12/02/2009 005645 DELARIVA, LINDA A CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135422 12/02/2009 008182 DELCONTE, KAREEN E. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135423 12/02/2009 008232 DESCHAUWER, JACQUES CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135424 12/02/2009 006831 DESENS, JOHN C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135425 12/02/2009 013230 DEUTSCHE BANK NATL TRUST CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 CO 135426 12/02/2009 003412 DIAZ, AUSENCIO CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135427 12/02/2009 010634 DIEGO DEV CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 11,918.70 11,918.70 135428 12/02/2009 004656 DITTMAN, JAMES H. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 Pages apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 7 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135429 12/02/2009 011476 DIVERSIFIED INV COMPANY CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,250.54 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,880.50 7,131.04 135430 12/02/2009 005636 DOLLARD, DARREN W. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 403.16 403.16 135431 12/02/2009 008184 DOMINGUEZ, CLAUDIO CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 453.56 453.56 135432 12/02/2009 005508 DOUGHTY, LINDA S. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135433 12/02/2009 006981 DOUGLAS, PAUL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135434 12/02/2009 012446 DU, LETICIA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135435 12/02/2009 009239 DUNLAP, VIRGINIA L. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135436 12/02/2009 006834 DURAN, JOSE EDUARDO CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135437 12/02/2009 005466 DURNIL, DONALD T. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 579.56 579.56 135438 12/02/2009 004658 EASTWOOD, GREGORY D. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135439 12/02/2009 002589 ESBENSEN, PHILIP G CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,385.88 1,385.88 135440 12/02/2009 009240 FANG, LINA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135441 12/02/2009 006835 FARKAS, FERENC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 579.56 579.56 135442 12/02/2009 013231 FEDERAL HOME LOAN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 MORTGAGE CO 135443 12/02/2009 011561 FERNANDEZ, ALFREDO CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 403.16 403.16 135444 12/02/2009 009241 FERRIERA, RICHARD D. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135445 12/02/2009 009242 FERRO, MARIO CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135446 12/02/2009 008187 FILGER, BRIAN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page:7 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 8 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135447 12/02/2009 005553 FISHER, THOMAS W. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 881.92 881.92 135448 12/02/2009 012449 FLORI, KENNETH L. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135449 12/02/2009 008188 FOWLER, FREDDIE E. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 529.16 529.16 135450 12/02/2009 009243 FRAZIER, DARYN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 404.74 404.74 135451 12/02/2009 004661 FREET, LLOYD N. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135452 12/02/2009 013232 GALANOUDES, GEORGE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 8,351.54 8,351.54 135453 12/02/2009 005428 GARCIA, ANTHONY P. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135454 12/02/2009 009244 GARCIA, BRIZ BREMAUNTZ CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135455 12/02/2009 009245 GELLES, PAUL M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135456 12/02/2009 006839 GHASEMIAN, JAVID CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 529.16 529.16 135457 12/02/2009 009246 GIALLOMBARDO, DOMINICK CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135458 12/02/2009 005441 GILLMAN, CRAIG W. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135459 12/02/2009 004664 GIVANT, FRED R. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135460 12/02/2009 003893 GLOBAL HOTEL NETWORK INC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,502.52 3,502.52 135461 12/02/2009 011483 GOLDBERG, TED CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,637.88 1,637.88 135462 12/02/2009 009247 GOMES, COREY J. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 657.70 657.70 135463 12/02/2009 009248 GOMEZ, ROBERT CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135464 12/02/2009 006983 GONZALEZ, CARLOS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Pageb apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 9 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135465 12/02/2009 005545 GONZALEZ, SAL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135466 12/02/2009 006840 GOODMAN, JAMES R. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 529.16 529.16 135467 12/02/2009 006841 GORDON HOLDINGS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 585.62 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 7,987.78 8,573.40 135468 12/02/2009 004665 GRAHAM, CAROL A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135469 12/02/2009 012450 GRANADOS, DAVID A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135470 12/02/2009 004668 GREENLEE, MICHAEL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 680.34 680.34 135471 12/02/2009 006844 GREGORY, ROBERT C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,696.20 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 15,765.21 18,461.41 135472 12/02/2009 004333 GRIFFITH, PAUL JON CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135473 12/02/2009 012451 GRIMSHAW, DAVID RICHARD CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135474 12/02/2009 004670 GUARANTY FEDERAL BANK CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,545.00 2,545.00 135475 12/02/2009 012452 GUNAWAN, LILY CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135476 12/02/2009 004334 GUPTA, ASHOK K. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,519.80 2,519.80 135477 12/02/2009 004672 HAGBERG, PHILLIP K. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135478 12/02/2009 013233 HALEY, ANDREA N. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135479 12/02/2009 008189 HALL, KEVIN R. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135480 12/02/2009 006850 HANA, MANAL A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 453.56 453.56 135481 12/02/2009 006852 HAYES, DIANE K. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 554.36 554.36 135482 12/02/2009 005560 HEATH, WILLIAM M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 Page9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135483 12/02/2009 012454 HEISS, LINDA D. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135484 12/02/2009 009249 HERRON, SCOTT CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135485 12/02/2009 004675 HESS, MATTHEW T. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 503.96 503.96 135486 12/02/2009 012455 HOBBS, LEILANI M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135487 12/02/2009 011485 HOME SAVINGS OF AMERICA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,587.48 1,587.48 135488 12/02/2009 003896 HONORE, PATTI A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135489 12/02/2009 011565 HOPE, WILLIAM CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135490 12/02/2009 005535 HOUGHTALING, RICHARD JAMES CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135491 12/02/2009 005469 HUGAERT, EUGENE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135492 12/02/2009 012456 HUNTER, CHRISTOPHER D. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135493 12/02/2009 011586 INLAND WESTERN MDS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 15,849.60 15,849.60 PORTFOLIO 135494 12/02/2009 010636 INLAND WESTERN TEMECULA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,595.40 COMMON CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,981.30 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,074.16 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 957.52 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,267.82 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,041.04 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,419.02 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 45,658.92 62,995.18 135495 12/02/2009 008192 TREY, STEPHANIE S. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135496 12/02/2009 003897 J C PENNEY PROPERTIES INC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 23,005.84 23,005.84 135497 12/02/2009 009253 JARBOE, PATRICIA L. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135498 12/02/2009 010670 JHCH REDLANDS LAND CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 9,323.28 9,323.28 Page:10 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 11 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135499 12/02/2009 009254 JIMENEZ, ADRIANA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135500 12/02/2009 004685 JOHNSON, CHRISTEEN L. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135501 12/02/2009 008193 JOHNSON, TERRY E. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135502 12/02/2009 012458 JOHNSTON, JOSEPH R. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135503 12/02/2009 005733 JONES, EDWARD CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135504 12/02/2009 003898 JRAKK PROPERTIES CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,814.26 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,116.64 3,930.90 135505 12/02/2009 002594 JUBANY, LUIS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135506 12/02/2009 004686 KAISERMAN, DONALD TR NORRIS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 28,700.62 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 22,098.72 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 20,133.26 70,932.60 135507 12/02/2009 012460 KELLER, KARL HEINZ CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,864.66 1,864.66 135508 12/02/2009 006856 KERETA, JOSEPH A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135509 12/02/2009 012461 KGC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,023.76 3,023.76 135510 12/02/2009 004342 KHOURY, ALICE MARIE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135511 12/02/2009 005484 KIESAU, JEFFREY D. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 554.36 554.36 135512 12/02/2009 004688 KILMER, WALTER L. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 881.92 881.92 135513 12/02/2009 011566 KIM, DEUKSHIN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135514 12/02/2009 003900 KIMCO PALM PLAZA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 33,337.06 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 22,224.70 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,822.18 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,242.62 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,545.00 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,754.50 66,926.06 Page:11 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 12 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135515 12/02/2009 012462 KIMCO PALM PLAZA CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 16,202.36 16,202.36 135516 12/02/2009 008197 KINSEY, JONATHAN E. CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135517 12/02/2009 013234 KLEINER, ANDREW CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135518 12/02/2009 006987 KLETTER, MINDY S. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135519 12/02/2009 006859 KODAMA, JAY MASANORI CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135520 12/02/2009 005536 KORALEWSKI, RICHARD P. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135521 12/02/2009 004689 KRUSE, DAVID EDWARD CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135522 12/02/2009 013235 KUHNS, KRISTOPHER J. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 983.62 983.62 135523 12/02/2009 011532 L D R E CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,905.70 3,905.70 135524 12/02/2009 005556 LANDEROS, VERONICA CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 629.94 629.94 135525 12/02/2009 005513 LARA, MANUEL ENRIQUE CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135526 12/02/2009 006989 LARSEN, DOUGLAS F. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135527 12/02/2009 006861 LARSON, JASON ROY CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 226.78 226.78 135528 12/02/2009 009257 LAWLOR, JOSEPH CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135529 12/02/2009 004691 LEAVERTON, ROBERT M. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135530 12/02/2009 009258 LEE, EDMUND & HU, LINDA CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135531 12/02/2009 006862 LEGASSA, RICHARD L. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135532 12/02/2009 009259 LEMAUGA, LEE CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page:12 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 13 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135533 12/02/2009 003417 LEMKE, HERMAN GP & CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 4,384.46 4,384.46 TABER,WILLIAM 135534 12/02/2009 009260 LEONHARDI, RYAN A. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135535 12/02/2009 004692 LESUEUR, DANIEL J. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135536 12/02/2009 005497 LEYDON, KAREN A. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135537 12/02/2009 012468 LIM, HANS CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135538 12/02/2009 004693 LIVELY, HSIAO LIN JEN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135539 12/02/2009 011568 LLIESCU, MARIUS V CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135540 12/02/2009 012469 LOPEZ, ARTEMIO MORALES CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135541 12/02/2009 012470 LOPEZ, MARIA A. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 579.56 579.56 135542 12/02/2009 004696 LOPEZ, RAMON CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 403.16 403.16 135543 12/02/2009 006863 LOPEZ, RAYMOND SOL CRUZ CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135544 12/02/2009 003432 LOVE, PATRICIA B CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135545 12/02/2009 009263 LOWES HIW INC CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 40,896.48 40,896.48 135546 12/02/2009 009264 LUEVANO, ALFREDO CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135547 12/02/2009 011569 LUNDQUIST, ERIC B CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135548 12/02/2009 005422 LUPERCIO, ABRAHAM A. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135549 12/02/2009 009265 LYNCH, GILBERT CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135550 12/02/2009 002619 M E G INVESTMENTS CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 6,400.30 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 16,252.76 22,653.06 Page:13 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 14 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135551 12/02/2009 012534 M E G INVESTMENTS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 10,558.00 10,558.00 135552 12/02/2009 012535 M E G INVESTMENTS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 5,140.40 5,140.40 135553 12/02/2009 005512 MACYS WEST INC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 8,995.72 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 17,890.64 26,886.36 135554 12/02/2009 013298 MACYS CALIF INC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 30,766.86 30,766.86 135555 12/02/2009 012471 MADHANI, KISHOR G. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135556 12/02/2009 005504 MAEHLER, KURT E. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135557 12/02/2009 009272 MAHMOOD, MUSTAFA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135558 12/02/2009 013236 MAIN STREET CALIF INC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,948.18 2,948.18 135559 12/02/2009 004700 MANICHANH, SISOUVANH CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135560 12/02/2009 004701 MANISCALCO, JOSEPH J. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135561 12/02/2009 005464 MANOS, DIANE Y LIVING TRUST CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135562 12/02/2009 009276 MARQUEZ, RAUL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135563 12/02/2009 009277 MARSHALL, EDWARD C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135564 12/02/2009 006864 MARTINEZ, CARMEN M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135565 12/02/2009 011570 MARTINEZ, FRANKIE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135566 12/02/2009 013237 MARURKIEWITZ, JOHN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135567 12/02/2009 012473 MARUSKA, JOHN H. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135568 12/02/2009 008199 MAYFIELD, NIKKI L. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page:14 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 15 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135569 12/02/2009 004704 MCADAM, CONSTANCE J. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 529.16 135570 12/02/2009 013299 MCCLURE, MAYA A CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135571 12/02/2009 009280 MCKAY, MARTHA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135572 12/02/2009 005529 MCKENDRICKS, PATRICIA LYNN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135573 12/02/2009 006993 MCMICHAEL, DANIEL JOHN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 428.36 428.36 135574 12/02/2009 004708 MICHAEL, MARIA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135575 12/02/2009 001774 MICHALEK, CHARLENE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135576 12/02/2009 011572 MILLINGS, ANTHONY CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 708.26 708.26 135577 12/02/2009 004346 MOORE, JOHN L CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135578 12/02/2009 011573 MORALES, MICHAEL D CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 503.96 503.96 135579 12/02/2009 006995 MORIKAWA, WESLEY M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135580 12/02/2009 012477 MORILLO, DIANE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 403.16 403.16 135581 12/02/2009 006867 MOTLEY, MICHAEL M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135582 12/02/2009 005465 MOWRER, DONALD J. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135583 12/02/2009 013238 MSH SPEHAR PROPERTIES CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,771.78 2,771.78 135584 12/02/2009 006868 MULLANEY, RONNY SCOTT CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135585 12/02/2009 009287 MULLINS, AIDA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135586 12/02/2009 002967 MYERS, ANDREW L CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page:15 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 16 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135587 12/02/2009 008234 NEDELJKOVIC, VERA CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135588 12/02/2009 002969 NESBITT PARTNERS TEMECULA CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 12,825.82 12,825.82 135589 12/02/2009 012403 NGOON, TOM JUNG CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,628.52 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,897.78 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,005.38 7,531.68 135590 12/02/2009 006997 NIELSEN, DWIGHT DAVID CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 604.74 604.74 135591 12/02/2009 012479 NISHIMURA, EVAN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY08/09 201.58 201.58 135592 12/02/2009 012480 NOORDYK, JESSIE JO CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135593 12/02/2009 013243 NORDSTROM, ERIC W. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135594 12/02/2009 009289 NUMBER 2 PC CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,754.50 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 705.54 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,083.52 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,570.20 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,360.70 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 5,644.36 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,637.88 17,008.68 135595 12/02/2009 010666 OCC RETAIL CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,461.48 1,461.48 135596 12/02/2009 005557 OLVEDA, VICTOR CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135597 12/02/2009 009290 ONEILL & NANCY TRUST CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 907.12 907.12 135598 12/02/2009 004712 ONG, RICHARD CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135599 12/02/2009 008205 ORG 10 CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,620.60 2,620.60 135600 12/02/2009 005507 ORTEGA, LEOPOLDO CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135601 12/02/2009 008206 ORTIZ, ANGELINA L. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 806.34 806.34 Page:16 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 17 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135602 12/02/2009 011574 ORTIZ, MANUEL CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135603 12/02/2009 009291 OVERLAND BLDG G CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 831.54 831.54 135604 12/02/2009 008207 OVERLAND BUILDING B CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 100.78 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 806.34 907.12 135605 12/02/2009 009292 OVERLAND CORP CTR PROP CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 5,593.98 OWNERS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 4,384.46 9,978.44 135606 12/02/2009 010667 OVERLAND LAND & CATTLE CO CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 7,055.46 7,055.46 135607 12/02/2009 012482 PACE, CECIL CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 607.10 607.10 135608 12/02/2009 009294 PACHECO, DAVID ERNESTO CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135609 12/02/2009 006870 PACIFIC TRUST BANK CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,562.28 1,562.28 135610 12/02/2009 005495 PALLASIGUI, JOSE D. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135611 12/02/2009 003910 FALLER, JOANNE E. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135612 12/02/2009 005425 PAPA, ANDRES R. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135613 12/02/2009 012483 PARSONS, THERESA M. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135614 12/02/2009 006872 PASCO, STEPHEN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135615 12/02/2009 009295 PATTERSON, LEONE D. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 403.16 403.16 135616 12/02/2009 004349 PAULL, BECKY CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135617 12/02/2009 004714 PEREA, DAVID L. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135618 12/02/2009 012484 PEREIRA, MICHAEL J. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135619 12/02/2009 008209 PHAN, KEVIN QUOC CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 Page:17 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date Vendor 135620 12/02/2009 009298 PHELPS, WAYNE W. 135621 12/02/2009 004715 PHUNG, THANG Q. 135622 12/02/2009 011575 PIER, EDUARDO 135623 12/02/2009 005492 PIERCE, JON J. 135624 12/02/2009 005539 PINKHAM, ROCHELLE 135625 12/02/2009 004350 PLAZA TEMECULA 135626 12/02/2009 005503 PLOUFFE, KENNETH D. 135627 12/02/2009 012485 POWELL, MONTE 135628 12/02/2009 004717 POZOS, RANDALL DEAN 135629 12/02/2009 013239 PYLES, RAGAN 135630 12/02/2009 004720 RABINO, RODOLFO B. 135631 12/02/2009 012489 RAMIREZ, ESTELA 135632 12/02/2009 008210 RANCHO HIGHLANDS 135633 12/02/2009 006874 RECLUSADO, RONALD 135634 12/02/2009 009299 REEG, MATTHEW ROBERT 135635 12/02/2009 009300 REGAN, KENNETH DEAN 135636 12/02/2009 006880 REZA, ANTONIO H. 135637 12/02/2009 001811 RIDDLE, LOUIS W. Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 18 (Continued) Description Amount Paid Check Total CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,469.40 2,469.40 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 403.16 403.16 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,519.80 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,645.80 5,165.60 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 529.16 529.16 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 604.74 604.74 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 11,817.90 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 11,490.32 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 7,987.78 31,296.00 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page:18 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 19 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135638 12/02/2009 004721 RISTINE, PATRICK R. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135639 12/02/2009 009301 ROBINSON, EDWARD S. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135640 12/02/2009 012491 ROBINSON, KENNETH CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135641 12/02/2009 011498 RODARTE, ALFONSO CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135642 12/02/2009 009303 ROEDER, ANDREA D. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135643 12/02/2009 005467 ROMERO, EMIL N. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135644 12/02/2009 001843 ROOK, MICHAEL C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135645 12/02/2009 002162 ROOKS, LEANNE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135646 12/02/2009 012492 ROSAS, BOBBY C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135647 12/02/2009 004723 ROSIER, REX E. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135648 12/02/2009 004724 ROY, SEAN BRANDON CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135649 12/02/2009 012493 RUFFY, AIDA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 251.98 251.98 135650 12/02/2009 004725 SABELLA, ANGELA C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 50,144.18 50,144.18 135651 12/02/2009 006881 SAINDON, KAREN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135652 12/02/2009 008214 SALAZAR, RICHARD A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135653 12/02/2009 005468 SALDIVAR, ENRIQUE A. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY08/09 277.18 277.18 135654 12/02/2009 012494 SALDIVAR, MIRIAM CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 556.50 556.50 135655 12/02/2009 009305 SANTAANA, RAQUEL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page:19 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 20 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135656 12/02/2009 012495 SANTOS, AURELIO CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135657 12/02/2009 012496 SARR, ARAME CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135658 12/02/2009 012497 SCHAFER 41463 CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,469.40 2,469.40 135659 12/02/2009 012402 SCHAFER 41619 CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 907.12 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 100.78 1,007.90 135660 12/02/2009 011500 SCHNEIDER, ROBERT CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135661 12/02/2009 011578 SCOTT, DANIEL CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135662 12/02/2009 013240 SCRIPPS 115 CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 18,999.36 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 10,608.38 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 23,459.42 53,067.16 135663 12/02/2009 012498 SCUDDER, ELIZABETH ANN CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135664 12/02/2009 003917 SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 24,643.72 24,643.72 135665 12/02/2009 002973 SECRETARY OF VETERANS CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 AFFAIRS 135666 12/02/2009 012499 SELLERS, MATTHEW B. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135667 12/02/2009 005471 SERRANO, GABRIEL CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 604.74 604.74 135668 12/02/2009 008215 SHANNON, DOUGLAS JAMES CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135669 12/02/2009 011580 SHUAIBI, ISSA CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135670 12/02/2009 013300 SMITH COOLY JR & KAREN E REV CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 135671 12/02/2009 005463 SMITH, DEVI T. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135672 12/02/2009 012500 SMITH, RAYMOND CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135673 12/02/2009 004355 SMITHEY, BRETTE E. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 Page20 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 21 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135674 12/02/2009 009308 SOLANEZ INV CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,335.62 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,366.45 2,702.07 135675 12/02/2009 005524 SORENSEN, MICHAEL B. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135676 12/02/2009 005540 SPARLING, ROGER CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135677 12/02/2009 003921 SPEHAR BUSINESS PROPERTIES CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,804.90 3,804.90 135678 12/02/2009 003421 SRA VENTURES CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 4,737.24 4,737.24 135679 12/02/2009 004732 STALLO, JONATHAN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135680 12/02/2009 005498 STEED, KAREN M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135681 12/02/2009 009309 STERNGOLD, PAUL CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135682 12/02/2009 012501 STEWARDSHIP CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 655.14 655.14 135683 12/02/2009 001802 STEWART, JEAN M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135684 12/02/2009 010701 STONE, RUBIN LAUREN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY08/09 1,411.08 1,411.08 135685 12/02/2009 012503 TAKAMOTO, LEANN Y. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135686 12/02/2009 008218 TEMECULA MO, LLC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 11,742.30 11,742.30 135687 12/02/2009 005649 TEMECULA PAD H CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,267.82 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,822.18 5,090.00 135688 12/02/2009 005737 TEMECULA PAD PQ CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,696.20 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,141.84 4,838.04 135689 12/02/2009 004358 TEMECULA PLACE CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,225.36 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,318.22 5,543.58 135690 12/02/2009 003927 TEMECULA SELF STORAGE INC CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 8,214.58 8,214.58 Page21 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 22 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135691 12/02/2009 003928 TEMECULA TOWEE CENTER CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 77,358.12 ASSN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 8,038.18 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 5,896.34 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,814.26 93,106.90 135692 12/02/2009 006884 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 1,839.46 1,839.46 135693 12/02/2009 003929 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 52,664.00 52,664.00 SCHOOL 135694 12/02/2009 006885 THOMAS, DARREN D. CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135695 12/02/2009 012504 THOMAS, MARCIA CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135696 12/02/2009 012505 THREE WIVES INC CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 934.94 934.94 135697 12/02/2009 012506 TOLTON, DENNIS R. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135698 12/02/2009 013242 TORRES, ELISA Y. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 404.74 404.74 135699 12/02/2009 012508 TORRES, NIKITA L. CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135700 12/02/2009 002976 TOUSSAINT, RICHARD CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135701 12/02/2009 005554 TOWER OFFICE PLAZA I LLC CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 11,288.74 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 403.16 11,691.90 135702 12/02/2009 008719 TOWER OFFICE PLAZA II, & III CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 2,343.42 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,855.30 6,198.72 135703 12/02/2009 011502 TOWER PLAZA INC CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 10,457.20 10,457.20 135704 12/02/2009 004737 TRAN, AN HAI CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135705 12/02/2009 008221 TRAN, VINCE L. CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135706 12/02/2009 008222 TURKSON, GEORGE CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 907.96 907.96 135707 12/02/2009 012511 UNION BANK OF CALIF CFD 8&-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 4,661.64 4,661.64 Page22 apChkLst Final Check List 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description 135708 12/02/2009 006888 VARGAS, AMELIA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135709 12/02/2009 008223 VINCENT, CLAYTON P. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135710 12/02/2009 004742 VNENK, MILOS M. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135711 12/02/2009 005483 VOLLMER, JEFFREY J. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135712 12/02/2009 009314 WEBB, JAMES C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135713 12/02/2009 004745 WEHBA, MOHAMED NIJEM CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135714 12/02/2009 012513 WEIMANN, A. JAMES CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135715 12/02/2009 012514 WEINGART, G RUTH CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135716 12/02/2009 003931 WELLS FARGO BANK NATL ASSN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 135717 12/02/2009 008225 WELLS, MONICA A. 135718 12/02/2009 008226 WESTMAR OVERLAND 135719 12/02/2009 011506 WGABELVILLAGGIO 135720 12/02/2009 012515 WGABELVILLAGGIOIII CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 Amount Paid 910.64 201.58 352.76 554.36 1,335.50 277.18 605.30 201.58 3,704.12 251.98 957.52 3,754.50 1,537.08 1,461.48 1,108.72 3,653.72 201.58 403.16 881.92 2,847.38 4,334.06 831.54 579.56 5,341.98 2,570.20 2,847.38 8,844.52 Page: 23 Check Total 910.64 201.58 352.76 554.36 1,335.50 277.18 605.30 201.58 3,704.12 251.98 957.52 26,936.68 14,262.10 Page23 apChkLst 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 24 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135721 12/02/2009 005517 WHITE, MARTIN E. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135722 12/02/2009 012517 WIEDRICH, KENNETH C. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135723 12/02/2009 004746 WILLE, JOHN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135724 12/02/2009 011582 WILLIAMS, GEORGE EDWARD CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135725 12/02/2009 001844 WILSON, MAUREEN A CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135726 12/02/2009 008228 WINCHESTER FUELS CORP CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 3,023.76 3,023.76 135727 12/02/2009 006892 WOLF, JOHN P. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 428.36 428.36 135728 12/02/2009 012518 WONG, HERBERT CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135729 12/02/2009 012519 WOPPERER, STEVEN N. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 881.92 881.92 135730 12/02/2009 011583 YANG, SHU HUI CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 201.58 201.58 135731 12/02/2009 004749 YATES, PATRICIA CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 708.26 708.26 135732 12/02/2009 005561 YATES, WILSON P. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135733 12/02/2009 009322 YOUNG, KENNETH CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 403.16 403.16 135734 12/02/2009 004751 ZEEB, STEPHEN J. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 453.56 453.56 135735 12/02/2009 005551 ZEIF, STEVE LOUIS CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 327.58 327.58 135736 12/02/2009 005479 ZENK, HENRY CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 302.38 302.38 135737 12/02/2009 009323 ZHANG, YAN CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 277.18 277.18 135738 12/02/2009 004752 ZONA, KIMBERLY K. CFD 88-12 Reimbursement FY 08/09 352.76 352.76 Page24 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 25 12/02/2009 3:32:49PM CITY OF TEMECULA Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 1,497,357.73 Page25 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 1374 12/03/2009 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) State Income Taxes Payment 830.13 830.13 1375 12/03/2009 000283 INSTATAX(IRS) Federal Income Taxes Payment 3,310.94 3,310.94 135327 12/01/2009 010191 TAYLOR, JUDY MC for event:heritage day 11/7 300.00 300.00 135739 12/03/2009 006915 ALLIE'S PARTY EQUIPMENT equip rental:Old Town 11/6 302.30 billing adj: Sept rental correction -101.12 rental equip: teen dance 11/14 225.11 426.29 135740 12/03/2009 012943 ALPHA MECHANICAL SERVICE misc HVAC parts: MPSC 254.48 254.48 INC 135741 12/03/2009 013015 ALWAYS RELIABLE BACKFLOW backflow repairs: TCSD Parks 1,653.56 1,653.56 135742 12/03/2009 008732 ANSWERBAND INC, THE entertainment:20th annv 1215 1,800.00 1,800.00 135743 12/03/2009 012951 APPLIED DEVELOPMENT Oct Cnslt Svcs:Qlty Life Mstr Pln 7,625.07 7,625.07 ECONOMICS 135744 12/03/2009 011961 AT&T MOBILITY 3465/4070:cell phone usage 191.24 191.24 135745 12/03/2009 011438 BAKER, BLYTHE EDEN TCSD Instructor Earnings 660.00 660.00 135746 12/03/2009 010354 BATTERIES PLUS #316 batteries: Theater 48.55 48.55 135747 12/03/2009 009538 BENOIT, INA L. Santa Appearance:Ot 11/27-29 1,150.00 Santa Appearance:Ot 12/5-12/6 750.00 1,900.00 135748 12/03/2009 004040 BIG FOOT GRAPHICS promo items:senior health fair 1,144.00 promo items:high hopes pgrm 402.00 1,546.00 135749 12/03/2009 004262 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES DUI & drug screenings: Police 565.74 DUI & drug screenings: Police 499.80 1,065.54 135750 12/03/2009 013316 BLACKMUN, KARL VOID 0.00 0.00 0.00 135751 12/03/2009 012583 BLANCAY PRICE VOID 0.00 0.00 Page apChkLst 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date Vendor 135752 12/03/2009 005384 BOYZ Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA (Continued) Description VOID 135753 12/03/2009 004176 BROADWING VOID TELECOMMUNICATIONS 135754 12/03/2009 003138 CAL MAT VOID 135755 12/03/2009 001159 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE VOID 135756 12/03/2009 004248 CALIF DEPT OF DUI & drug screenings: Police JUSTICE-ACCTING 135757 12/03/2009 013318 CARDENAS, ROBERT Employee Computer Loan Pgrm 135758 12/03/2009 000131 CARL WARREN & COMPANY INC Aug liability claims svcs: Finance Sept liability claims svcs: Finance Oct liability claims svcs: Finance 135759 12/03/2009 012588 CBS RADIO INC radio advertising: Theater 135760 12/03/2009 000137 CHEVRON AND TEXACO City vehicles fuel: CM 135761 12/03/2009 004609 CINTAS DOCUMENT Nov doc shredding svcs: Library MANAGEMENT Nov doc shred svc: PD/City 135762 12/03/2009 005417 CINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY first aid supplies: PW Maint 135763 12/03/2009 013307 CISNEROS, ROBERT refund: violation dismissed:prkg cite 135764 12/03/2009 000912 CITY CLERKS ASSN OF CALIF 09/10 City Clerk mb: SJ/MB/GF 135765 12/03/2009 001264 COSTCO WHOLESALE computer hardware: Info Sys 135766 12/03/2009 008810 CROSSTOWN ELECTRICAL & Oct equip maint/repair:PW Traffic DATA Page: 2 Amount Paid Check Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,225.00 1,225.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 1,236.13 217.60 1,984.39 3,438.12 250.00 250.00 245.63 245.63 34.13 128.64 162.77 288.83 288.83 65.00 65.00 375.00 375.00 154.34 154.34 935.05 935.05 Page2 apChkLst 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 3 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135767 12/03/2009 010785 D.R. HORTON, INC. refund:pennit:reduct. in TUMF rate 1,312.00 1,312.00 135768 12/03/2009 001393 DATA TICKET INC Oct parking citation secs: Police 2,030.70 2,030.70 135769 12/03/2009 002990 DAVID TURCH&ASSOCIATES Oct -Nov federal lobbyist svcs CM 7,000.00 7,000.00 135770 12/03/2009 012589 DELGADO, ELMA refund:sec dep:TCC kitchen 150.00 150.00 135771 12/03/2009 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL portable restrooms:GHS tennis cts 64.98 64.98 SRVCS 135772 12/03/2009 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELING Fuel for City vehicles: TCSD 1,444.43 1,444.43 INC 135773 12/03/2009 011266 DUGAN, MICHELLE refund: kinder science 1775.201 70.00 70.00 135774 12/03/2009 011202 E M H SPORTS & FITNESS TCSD instructor earnings 462.00 TCSD instructor earnings 140.00 602.00 135775 12/03/2009 011203 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANING Novjanitorial svcs: TCSD Parks 5,315.00 5,315.00 135776 12/03/2009 011292 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE Sept EIR review: Liberty Quarry 14,263.06 ASSOC. Sept Eir Review: Old Town 51,527.93 Aug Eir Review: Old Town 39,375.92 July Eir Review: Old Town 10,774.75 115,941.66 135777 12/03/2009 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE landscape svcs: Wolf Creek 243.00 Oct Indscp maint: North Slopes 21,860.00 Oct Inscp svc: South Slopes 39,158.00 Oct Lndscp Svc: Sports Parks 43,040.00 Oct Lndscp Maint: Medians 16,487.00 120,788.00 135778 12/03/2009 000478 FAST SIGNS ESG signage: TV Museum 70.06 70.06 135779 12/03/2009 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 10/9 express mail svc: PW Maint 32.10 32.10 135780 12/03/2009 007659 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE title report: APN922-210-063 1,000.00 1,000.00 INSURANCE 135781 12/03/2009 003281 FOREMOST PROMOTIONS promo items:PD crime prevention 6,253.50 6,253.50 135782 12/03/2009 010493 FOREST CITY COMMERCIAL Dec lease pmt: PD mall storefront 1,458.33 1,458.33 MGMT Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135783 12/03/2009 011967 FULL VALUE ENTERTAINMENT sttlmnt: Live at the Merc 11/20 87.50 87.50 135784 12/03/2009 007866 G C S SUPPLIES INC Ink/Toner Cartridges: Info Sys 473.06 473.06 135785 12/03/2009 010326 G E MOBILE WATER, INC Nov osmosis washer maint:Stn 73 57.00 Nov osmosis washer rent:Stn 73 26.10 83.10 135786 12/03/2009 001937 GALLS INC uniform svc: police volunteers 7.90 uniforms: Police motorcycle unit 413.18 uniforms: Police motorcycle unit 451.23 uniforms: Police motorcycle unit 445.18 uniforms: Police motorcycle unit 251.35 uniforms: Police motorcycle unit 409.04 uniforms: Police motorcycle unit 442.60 2,420.48 135787 12/03/2009 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES Nov eng svcs:DePortola Rd 8,950.00 8,950.00 INC 135788 12/03/2009 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS Office Supplies: MPSC 207.83 INC Office Supplies: CM 123.15 Office Supplies: HR 39.79 370.77 135789 12/03/2009 013207 GRAPEVINE PROMOTIONS LLC Mini CD V-Mailcard: Econ Dev 2,902.50 2,902.50 135790 12/03/2009 002174 GROUP 1 PRODUCTIONS Video Svcs:City's 20th Anniversary 2,100.00 2,100.00 135791 12/03/2009 005056 GUTIERREZ, BETH reimb: cakes/ice emp luncheon 12/1 119.61 119.61 135792 12/03/2009 012954 HANEY, JOHN THOMAS billing adj: plan check fees inv 9 639.10 billing adj: plan check fees inv 10 27.42 666.52 135793 12/03/2009 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC Hardware supplies: TCSD Parks 1,205.53 Hardware supplies: TCSD 133.92 Hardware supplies: TCSD 53.26 Hardware supplies: TCSD 43.39 1,436.10 135794 12/03/2009 013312 HARRINGTON, JENNIFER refund:beg dance 1307.203 50.00 50.00 135795 12/03/2009 010210 HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC, THE Hardware supplies: TCSD 73.56 73.56 135796 12/03/2009 013252 HOOBE IDENTIFICATION ID software: Fire 553.75 ID Card Signature Pad: Fire 363.44 917.19 Page:4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135797 12/03/2009 001517 HORIZON HEALTH Nov Emp Asst Program: HR 756.80 756.80 135798 12/03/2009 000193 ICMA 09/101CMA dues/mb:Nelson,Shawn 1,400.00 1,400.00 135799 12/03/2009 004406 IGOE & COMPANY INC Nov flex benefit plan pmt 258.00 258.00 135800 12/03/2009 008662 INLAND VALLEY VICTORY refund:sec dep:CRC rm rental 150.00 150.00 CHURCH 135801 12/03/2009 013306 INLAND VLY BUSINESS & refund:var TUP:dupl pmts 100.00 100.00 COMM.FND 135802 12/03/2009 006914 INNOVATIVE DOCUMENT Oct copier maint/usage: Citywide 5,731.70 SOLUTIONS Oct copier maint/usage: Library 914.74 6,646.44 135803 12/03/2009 006924 INTL MUNICIPAL SIGNAL ASSOC. IMSA Cert Renewal 11/1&-19: RU 40.00 40.00 135804 12/03/2009 010607 INTL SOCI ETY OF 09/101SA recertification:Thurman,D 200.00 200.00 ARBORICULTURE 135805 12/03/2009 013290 IRIS GROUP INC, THE printing svcs: Theater postcards 2,723.62 2,723.62 135806 12/03/2009 013317 JONAN PROPERTIES SERVICE, refund:eng grad dep:APN921-040-036 36,865.20 36,865.20 INC. 135807 12/03/2009 003046 K F R O G 95.1 FM RADIO Radio Broadcast: Esg 11/5-1117 525.00 525.00 135808 12/03/2009 013313 KHALED, KHALEDA refund Fire CPR/AED 8250.206 20.00 20.00 135809 12/03/2009 013308 LABARRIE, MARIA refund:overpmt:prkg cite 65.00 65.00 135810 12/03/2009 007188 LAERDAL MEDICAL CORP. CPR/AED Supplies: Medics 2,964.48 2,964.48 135811 12/03/2009 012837 LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSOC INC video recorder key chain SET Team 319.00 319.00 135812 12/03/2009 013309 LESLIE, PATRICIA ANN refund:overpmt:prkg cite 10.00 10.00 135813 12/03/2009 004905 LIEBERT, CASSIDY & WHITMORE Oct HR legal svcs for TE060-01 486.00 486.00 Pages apChkLst 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 6 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135814 12/03/2009 003726 LIFE ASSIST INC medical supplies: Paramedics 534.20 534.20 135815 12/03/2009 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS Mast arm signs: PW Traffic Div. 2,544.75 Misc signs: PW Maint 5,644.94 8,189.69 135816 12/03/2009 004141 MAINTEX INC custodial supplies: var park sites 1,600.37 custodial supplies:var park 1,311.56 2,911.93 135817 12/03/2009 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASSN Nov officiating srvcs:csd sports pgrms 4,270.00 4,270.00 135818 12/03/2009 004307 MARINE BIOCHEMISTS Novwater maint srvcs:Haw/Duck Pond 3,900.00 3,900.00 135819 12/03/2009 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS INC Printing 2009 CAFR: Finance 952.65 Printing 2009 CAFR: Finance 527.44 1,480.09 135820 12/03/2009 012062 MCCRACKEN, MICHAEL refund:sec dep:CRC rm rental 150.00 150.00 135821 12/03/2009 011909 MCFARLIN & ANDERSON LLP Jul -Sep legal srvcs:roripaugh cfd 03-02 1,680.00 1,680.00 135822 12/03/2009 006571 MELODY'S AD WORKS INC. reimb exp:old town marketing pgrm 1,878.52 reimb exp:old town marketing pgrm 198.47 reimb exp:old town marketing pgrm 174.58 reimb exp:old town marketing pgrm 103.55 Dec mrkt & promo srvcs:old town 3,500.00 5,855.12 135823 12/03/2009 012962 MILLER, MISTY TCSD Instructor Earnings 710.50 710.50 135824 12/03/2009 012580 MINUTEMAN PRESS Window envelopes: PW 66.90 66.90 135825 12/03/2009 009835 MIRACLE PLAYGROUND SALES Misc supplies:var park sites 209.98 209.98 INC 135826 12/03/2009 001892 MOBILE MODULAR 11/12-12/11 modular lease: The Pantry 1,042.91 1,042.91 135827 12/03/2009 012757 MUND, KELLEY ROSE TCSD Instructor Earnings 210.00 210.00 135828 12/03/2009 001986 MUZAK -SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Dec Music Broadcast Old Town 69.11 Dec echostar video prgm: FOC 101.66 Nov echostar video prgm: FOC 101.66 272.43 135829 12/03/2009 012893 NEWMAN, KAREN refund:high hopes disneyland 24.00 24.00 Pages apChkLst Final Check List 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description 135830 12/03/2009 008528 NICHOLS, MELBURG & ROSETTO Sep Eng Srvcs:Old Town Civic Ctr Ph li Sep Eng Srvcs:Old Town Civic Ctr Ph li Oct Eng Srvs:Old Town Civic Ctr Ph li Sept Dsgn:Old Town Infrastructure 135831 12/03/2009 009337 NOLTE ASSOCIATES INC Oct eng design srvcs:ped bridge 135832 12/03/2009 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Oct public ntc ads: City Clerk/Pln Oct advertising:var csd special events 135833 12/03/2009 006140 NORTH JEFFERSON BUSINESS Jan -Mar assn dues xx17: French VIy PARK Jan -Mar assn dues xx20: French VIy 135834 12/03/2009 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Misc office supplies:police mall office DIV 135835 12/03/2009 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs: PW Traffic 135836 12/03/2009 002800 PACIFIC STRIPING INC 135837 12/03/2009 012833 PC MALL GOV, INC. 135838 12/03/2009 011660 PLANNET CONSULTING 135839 12/03/2009 012251 PORTRAIT PRODUCTIONS City Vehicle Maint Svcs: PW Land Dev City Vehicle Maint Svcs: PW Maint City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Bldg & Safety City Vehicle Maint Svcs:TCSD credit: exceeds contract bid items Citywide street striping pgrm Computer memory:lnfo Sys Ink & toner cartridges:info sys Ink & toner cartridges:info sys Oct consulting srvcs: Civic Cntr Master TCSD Instructor Earnings 135840 12/03/2009 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPANY Oct tcsd ads:youth master plan INC 135841 12/03/2009 004029 R J M DESIGN GROUP INC Oct dsgn:redhawk parks improvements 135842 12/03/2009 007051 RALPHS cookies: Breakfast w/Santa'09 135843 12/03/2009 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DISTRICT Nov various water meters:FS#84 Nov various water meters: FS#84 Nov water meters 30875 mcho vista Nov various water meters:tcsd Amount Paid 62,579.35 2,064.96 45,425.93 19,714.07 3,517.29 380.36 1,101.05 415.13 564.02 167.42 55.00 76.64 80.07 903.62 62.75 -21,618.14 133,543.14 2,028.70 174.43 174.43 73.26 126.00 989.68 1,832.65 239.65 15.87 309.81 433.49 22,712.10 Page: 7 Check Total 129,784.31 3,517.29 1,481.41 979.15 167.42 1,178.08 111,925.00 2,377.56 73.26 126.00 989.68 1,832.65 239.65 23,471.27 Page:7 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135844 12/03/2009 009725 RAZAVI, MANDIS TCSD Instructor Earnings 579.60 TCSD Instructor Earnings 193.20 772.80 135845 12/03/2009 000271 RBF CONSULTING Sept Consult Srvcs:1-15/79s Ult. Intrchg 87.47 87.47 135846 12/03/2009 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING Misc electrical supplies:var park sites 232.12 232.12 135847 12/03/2009 002110 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATION Tool and equipment rental: PW Maint 437.18 437.18 135848 12/03/2009 004498 REPUBLIC INTELLIGENT Oct traffic sgnl repair & maint:pw 594.40 594.40 135849 12/03/2009 001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO Oct radio rental & maint:police/prk 1,568.58 1,568.58 TECHNOLOGY 135850 12/03/2009 005756 RIVERSIDE CO TREASURER refund:overpmt:imagination wkshp 45.50 45.50 135851 12/03/2009 004822 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY reimb expenses:temecula trolley 930.60 930.60 135852 12/03/2009 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. reimb: Rail Volution Cf 10/28-11/1 286.50 286.50 135853 12/03/2009 009980 SANBORN, GWYN Country @ the Merc 11/21/09 609.00 609.00 135854 12/03/2009 013310 SCHNEEBERGER, CATHRYN OR refund:overpmt:prkg cite 55.00 55.00 FRED 135855 12/03/2009 009213 SHERRY BERRY MUSIC Jazz @ the Merc 11/19/09 262.50 262.50 135856 12/03/2009 004814 SIMON WONG ENGINEERING INC Oct Dsgn:Main Street Bridge/Murr Creek 495.00 495.00 135857 12/03/2009 004534 SKYTERRA Nov EOC Stn Satellite Phone Svcs 146.44 146.44 135858 12/03/2009 000645 SMART & FINAL INC Misc supplies:teen dance (rhythms) 125.67 Recreation Supplies:Mspc 161.73 287.40 Pageb apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date Vendor 135859 12/03/2009 000537 SO CALIF EDISON (Continued) Description Nov 2-27-371-8494:42189 winchester Nov 2-28-331-4847:32805 pauba LS3 Nov 2-21-981-4720:30153 tem pkwy Nov 2-28-904-7706:323290 ovrind trl Nov 2-29-224-0173: Fire Stns Nov 2-29-807-1093:28079 diaz rd ped Nov 2-29-807-1226:28077 diaz rd ped Nov 2-29-807-1382:43485 bus pk dr Nov 2-31-031-2616:27991 diaz rd ped Nov 2-18-937-3152:41950 moreno rd Nov 2-31-282-0665:27407 diaz rd ped Nov 2-31-419-2873:43000 hwy 395 Nov 2-02-351-4946:Sr Ctr Nov 2-29-223-8607:42035 2nd st ped Nov 2-19-171-8568:41970 moreno rd Nov 2-25-393-4681:41951 moraga rd Nov 2-29-657-2787:41638 winchester Nov 2-31-536-3655:cvc ctr twn sq F-17 Nov 2-20-817-9929:OT police Nov 2-29-933-3831: FOC Nov 2-14-204-1615:30027 fmt st rdio 135860 12/03/2009 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY Nov 101-525-0950-0:comm ctr Nov 101-525-1560-6:27415 entrprise Nov 095-167-7907-2:FS#84 Nov 125-244-2108-3: Library Nov 196-025-0344-3:C.Museum Nov 026-671-2909-8:Theater Nov 021-725-0775-4:Sr Ctr Nov 181-383-8881-6:Museum Nov 133-040-7373-0:Maint Fac Nov 091-024-9300-5:CRC Nov 091-085-1632-0:TES pool Nov 129-582-9784-3: FOC 135861 12/03/2009 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTROL Pest control srvcs: Sta 84 INC 135862 12/03/2009 004282 SOUTHWEST TRAFFIC SYSTEMS Pre-emption cable: PW CIP 135863 12/03/2009 000465 STRADLEY, MARY KATHLEEN TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings Amount Paid 25.28 138.41 39.67 187.25 1,540.23 21.63 20.47 20.89 20.35 654.21 21.63 20.89 868.55 497.87 53.98 220.08 20.89 1,284.18 205.43 1,527.77 32.45 19.63 113.53 156.15 199.55 4.04 66.82 160.50 32.76 59.39 2,567.16 14.79 110.96 94.00 1,100.00 235.20 739.20 302.40 Check Total 7,422.11 3,505.28 94.00 1.100.00 1,276.80 Page9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135864 12/03/2009 000305 TARGET BANK BUS CARD SRVCS Misc supplies: special events pgrm 20.46 Misc supplies:parade float supplies 101.40 Misc supplies:high hopes pgrm 163.92 Recreation supplies:childrens museum 31.01 Recreation supplies:childrens museum 128.62 Artist hospital ity:th eater 30.62 476.03 135865 12/03/2009 009500 TEMEC ELECTRONICS, INC Misc tools & equipment: PW Traffic 69.06 69.06 135866 12/03/2009 012265 TEMECULA ACE HARDWARE C/O Misc supplies:var park sites 12.29 Misc supplies:var park sites 8.96 Misc supplies:var park sites 15.31 36.56 135867 12/03/2009 010679 TEMECULA AUTO City veh repair & maint:csd maint 997.44 REPAIR/RADIATOR City veh repair & maint:Squad 92 287.82 1,285.26 135868 12/03/2009 007340 TEMECULA VALLEY FIRE EQUIP. Annual fire extinguisher srvc:theater 187.00 CO Annual fire extinguisher srvc:library 81.25 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:foc 64.25 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:city hall 114.50 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:mpsc 79.50 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:tcc 34.00 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:crc 178.75 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:west wing 66.25 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:t.museum 101.25 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:c.museum 38.75 Annual fire extinguisher srvc:parks 126.75 Annual fire extinguisher srvccsd 204.25 1,276.50 135869 12/03/2009 009194 TEMECULA VALLEY NEWS Nov advertising:Theater 143.20 143.20 135870 12/03/2009 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & Misc plumbing supplies:aquatics 11.21 SUPPLY Misc plumbing supplies:aquatics 29.24 40.45 135871 12/03/2009 003941 TEMECULA WINNELSON plumbing supplies:mpsc 40.69 COMPANY Misc plumbing supplies:library 344.98 385.67 135872 12/03/2009 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE Nov high speed internet:mpsc 44.95 44.95 135873 12/03/2009 000668 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC Sound tech srvcs:teen rock fest 10/10 825.00 825.00 135874 12/03/2009 004308 TOWNE & COUNTRY AUTO & Auto towing srvcs:police 400.00 TOWING Auto towing srvcs:police 300.00 700.00 Page:10 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 11 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135875 12/03/2009 003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE INC Misc traffic control supplies:pw maint 2,982.47 2,982.47 135876 12/03/2009 012725 TRZOP, NICHELLE TCSD Instructor Earnings 798.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 1,176.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 1,078.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 798.00 3,850.00 135877 12/03/2009 004145 TW TELECOM Nov city phones general usage 5,628.79 5,628.79 135878 12/03/2009 008517 UNITED SITE SERVICES OF 11/5-1212 fence rental Main St Bridge 26.64 26.64 CA,INC 135879 12/03/2009 011733 URIBE, RICHARD reimb:IMSA recert Reno,NV 11/17-20 608.70 608.70 135880 12/03/2009 004261 VERIZON Novxxx-2075 general usage 33.22 Nov xxx-3526 general usage:fire alms 106.27 Nov xxx-5696 gen usage:sprts comp 35.43 Novxxx-2676 general usage 35.43 Nov xxx-5706 gen usage: FOC 180.02 Nov xxx-2016 gen usage: reverse 911 120.33 Novxxx-0074 general usage 303.35 Novxxx-3564 gen usage: alarm 70.84 Novxxx-6084 general usage 34.31 Nov xxx-0714 gen usage:pd mall alrm 95.72 Nov xxx-5275 gen usage:tem pd dsl 36.56 Novxxx-9196 gen usage:tcc safe 165.20 1,216.68 135881 12/03/2009 012015 VERIZON BUSINESS FIOS Nov internet secs 439.95 439.95 135882 12/03/2009 004789 VERIZON ONLINE Nov internet svcs/EOC b/u: FS#84 42.99 42.99 135883 12/03/2009 013314 VILLANUEVA, GRISELDA refund:sec dep:CRC rm rental 400.00 400.00 135884 12/03/2009 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY INC Custodial supplies:c.mus/foc/thtr/crc 106.03 Misc custodial supplies:foc 380.52 Misc custodial supplies:crc 212.56 699.11 135885 12/03/2009 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC Tree trim srvcs:vail rnch pkwy/villages 402.50 Tree trimming srvcs:duck pond 430.00 Tree & stump removal:citywide 504.00 10/16-31 tree trimming srvcs:citywide 15,896.00 17,232.50 135886 12/03/2009 013315 WEST, DEIDRE refund:beg dance 1307.203 50.00 50.00 Page:11 apChkLst 12/03/2009 3:38:51 PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 12 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135887 12/03/2009 000621 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL Oct'09 TUMF Payment 62,552.00 62,552.00 OF 135888 12/03/2009 000621 WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL fy 09/10 clean cities coalition 10,000.00 OF fy 09/10 agency membership dues 18,714.00 28,714.00 135889 12/03/2009 010193 WOOLSTENHULME, LUCIA TCSD Instructor Earnings 42.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 5.60 47.60 135890 12/03/2009 013280 YUCAIPA AUTO & TRAILER CERT Trailer purchase: TCC 4,007.38 4,007.38 CENTER Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 832,104.88 Page:12 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 12/03/2009 4:56:32PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date Vendor 135891 12/03/2009 013316 BLACKMUN, KARL 135892 12/03/2009 012583 BLANCAYPRICE 135893 12/03/2009 005384 BOYZ 135894 12/03/2009 004176 BROADWING TELECOMMUNICATIONS 135895 12/03/2009 003138 CAL MAT 135896 12/03/2009 001159 CALIF DEPT OF JUSTICE Description Amount Paid Check Total ref:eng grad dep 50%:apn945-160-002 5,500.00 ref:eng grad dep bal.:apn945-160-002 5,500.00 11,000.00 11/13-20 Lndscp Plnck Svc:Planning 2,110.00 2,110.00 refreshments: CM/EcDv mtg 8/25 581.94 refreshments: Econ Dev Mtg 10/14 316.73 refreshments: CM/EcnDv mtg 11/10 304.50 refreshments: CM/EcDv mtg 6/11 251.06 refreshments: Council mtg 11/10 240.34 refresh m ents: quarry lunch mtg 174.00 refreshments: Planning bgt mtg 11/9 159.84 2,028.41 Nov long distance & internet secs 741.00 741.00 PW patch truck materials 249.20 PW patch truck materials 133.77 PW patch truck materials 64.47 447.44 Oct fingerprinting svcs:PD/City 3,220.00 3,220.00 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 19,546.85 Page apChkLst 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 1 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 1376 12/10/2009 000389 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT OBRA- Project Retirement Payment 2,304.92 2,304.92 SOLUTION 1377 12/10/2009 010349 CALIF DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT Support Payment 578.84 578.84 1378 12/10/2009 000283 INSTATAX(IRS) Federal Income Taxes Payment 80,987.22 80,987.22 1379 12/10/2009 001065 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT Nationwide Retirement Payment 16,857.99 16,857.99 SOLUTION 1380 12/10/2009 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' PERS ER Paid Member Contr Payment 114,310.69 114,310.69 RETIREMENT) 1381 12/10/2009 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE Child Care Reimbursement Payment 9,098.92 Child Care Reimbursement Payment 0.00 9,098.92 1382 12/10/2009 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) State Disability Ins Payment 25,408.33 25,408.33 1383 12/10/2009 000245 PERS - HEALTH INSUR PREMIUM PERS Health Admin Cost Payment 60,505.02 Blue Shield HMO Payment 0.00 60,505.02 135897 12/10/2009 003552 A F L A C AFLAC Cancer Payment 3,124.98 3,124.98 135898 12/10/2009 004148 AT&T Nov teleconf svcs:CM ofc 856.14 856.14 135899 12/10/2009 004973 ABACHERLI, LINDI TCSD instructor earnings 720.00 720.00 135900 12/10/2009 008552 ADKINS DESIGN CONSULTING Nov graphic design svc: Theater 1,954.22 1,954.22 135901 12/10/2009 004802 ADLERHORST INTERNATIONAL Nov training: Police K-9 unit 141.67 141.67 INC 135902 12/10/2009 003951 ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT Oct const: Rancho Cal rehab 424,307.52 Nov const: Rancho Cal rehab 206,698.15 631,005.67 135903 12/10/2009 012943 ALPHA MECHANICAL SERVICE HVAC repair: MPSC 733.00 733.00 INC 135904 12/10/2009 009787 ALTEC INDUSTRIES INC bucket truck repair: PW Traffic 1,276.79 1,276.79 Page apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135905 12/10/2009 013015 ALWAYS RELIABLE BACKFLOW backflow testing: Fire Stn's 66.00 backflow testing: Theater 88.00 backflow testing: MPSC 22.00 backflow testing: Medians/Parks 44.00 backflow testing: TCC 44.00 backflow testing: City Hall 66.00 backflow testing: Library 22.00 backflow testing: TV Museum 22.00 backflow testing: CRC 44.00 418.00 135906 12/10/2009 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES DUI & drug screenings: Police 464.50 DUI & drug screenings: Police 543.50 1,008.00 135907 12/10/2009 012985 ANDERSON & HOWARD Nov Structured Cabling:Civic Center 46,538.19 46,538.19 ELECTRIC INC 135908 12/10/2009 013338 APPLE STORE ee computer loan pgrm:c.payne 1,918.89 1,918.89 135909 12/10/2009 013332 ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTERS poinsettas:bkfast w/Santa 12/12 507.75 507.75 INC 135910 12/10/2009 001445 ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF 09/10 Community Service Funding 2,500.00 2,500.00 TEMECULA 135911 12/10/2009 002541 BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRVS asphalt saw cutting: PW Maint 6,775.00 6,775.00 INC 135912 12/10/2009 009538 BENOIT, INA L. Entertainment: Santa in Old Town 750.00 750.00 135913 12/10/2009 004040 BIG FOOT GRAPHICS TCSD instructor earnings 700.00 700.00 135914 12/10/2009 012583 BLANCA Y PRICE 122-4 Lndscp Plnck Svc:Planning 1,250.00 PA09-0011, PA06-0369 Fees Pd 610.00 1,860.00 135915 12/10/2009 008741 BORCHARD-TEMECULA LLC APN 961-440-011 Case No. 519307 43,992.00 43,992.00 135916 12/10/2009 005384 BOYZ refreshments: CM/EcDv mtg 8/25 581.94 Refreshments: Econ Devmtg 10/14 316.73 refreshments: CM/EcnDv mtg 11/10 304.50 refreshments: CM/EcDv mtg 6/11 251.06 refreshments: Council mtg 11/10 240.34 refresh m ents: quarry lunch mtg 174.00 refreshments: Planning bgt mtg 11/9 159.84 2,028.41 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135917 12/10/2009 000128 BROWN & BROWN OF CALIF INC #68806638 CNA Surety:Nelson, S 350.00 #70210716 CNA Surety:Yates, G 350.00 #70210685 CNA Surety:Johnson, B 350.00 1,050.00 135918 12/10/2009 009047 BUTTERFIELD STATION refund:eng grad dep:PM 31454 995.00 995.00 135919 12/10/2009 010731 C A S A COURT APPOINTED, 09/10 Community Service Funding 1,000.00 1,000.00 SPECIAL ADVOCATES FOR 135920 12/10/2009 000154 C S M F O 09/10 CSMFO mb: Brown, Pascale 110.00 110.00 135921 12/10/2009 003138 CAL MAT PW patch truck materials 108.54 PW patch truck materials 133.77 242.31 135922 12/10/2009 000790 CALIF DEPT OF PESTICIDE QAC License renewal:Wechec, M 60.00 60.00 135923 12/10/2009 004228 CAMERON WELDING SUPPLY Helium tanks rental/refill:TCSD 46.60 46.60 135924 12/10/2009 010434 CATERERS CAFE refreshments: Breakfast w/Santa 1,754.07 1,754.07 135925 12/10/2009 010434 CATERERS CAFE refresh m ents: sister city pgrm 12/1 292.70 292.70 135926 12/10/2009 009640 CERTIFION CORPORATION Nov investigative dbase svc: PD 158.95 158.95 135927 12/10/2009 003775 CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL '09 electric light parade participant 300.00 300.00 135928 12/10/2009 005417 CINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY first aid supplies: PW Maint 255.29 255.29 135929 12/10/2009 004017 COMERCHERO, JEFF reimb:Nat'I Lg Cities San Antonio, TX 60.98 60.98 135930 12/10/2009 008594 COMMUNITY BANK Escrow# 1418 All American Asphalt 47,145.28 47,145.28 135931 12/10/2009 008594 COMMUNITY BANK Escrow# 1418 All American Asphalt 22,966.46 22,966.46 135932 12/10/2009 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES Community Health Charities Payment 101.00 101.00 135933 12/10/2009 001264 COSTCO WHOLESALE holiday event supplies: TCSD 160.82 holiday event supplies: TCSD 783.16 holiday event supplies: TCSD 905.92 1,849.90 Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135934 12/10/2009 010650 CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING & HVAC deck repai r/waterp roofin g:Th eater 8,200.00 8,200.00 INC 135935 12/10/2009 012600 DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES INC Oct design eng svcs: Liefer Rd 3,945.00 3,945.00 135936 12/10/2009 003962 DAVID NEAULT ASSOCIATES INC Nov Add'I Insp Svcs:Pchga Pkwy 1,520.00 1,520.00 135937 12/10/2009 013191 DE LA CRUZ, ALMA refund:sec dep:crc mpr 150.00 150.00 135938 12/10/2009 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL portable restrooms:holiday parade 924.24 SRVCS Dec portable restrooms:Rdhk Pk 52.88 Dec portable restrooms:Vail Rch 52.88 Dec portable restrooms:Veterans Pk 52.88 Dec portable restrooms:LngCyn Pk 52.88 Dec portable restroom s: Riverton Pk 52.88 1,188.64 135939 12/10/2009 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELING Fuel for City vehicles: PW CIP 238.79 INC Fuel for City vehicles: PW Maint 852.51 Fuel for City vehicles: PW Traffic 91.82 Fuel for City vehicles: PW Lnd Dv 189.09 Fuel for City vehicles: Police 44.02 Fuel for City vehicles: B&S 209.68 Fuel for City vehicles: Code Enf/Pln 370.03 Fuel for City vehicles: TCSD 982.07 Fuel for City vehicles: TCSD/PW LID 56.85 3,034.86 135940 12/10/2009 012949 DRH, INC., CA DISB ACCOUNT refund: reduction in Tumf rate 984.00 refund: reduction in Tumf rate 2,106.00 3,090.00 135942 12/10/2009 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE Irrigation Repair: Vintage Hills 75.00 Landscape maint:Mrgita Median 566.75 Nov Landscape Maint: North Slopes 21,860.00 Nov Landscape Maint: South Slopes 39,158.00 Nov Landscape Maint: Medians 16,487.00 Nov Landscape Maint: Sports Parks 43,040.00 Oct Landscape Maint: City Facilities 9,685.00 Nov Landscape Maint: City Facilities 9,685.00 140,556.75 135943 12/10/2009 003053 FAGAN, MATTHEW entertainment: 20 yr anniv event 150.00 entertainment: sister city event 150.00 300.00 135944 12/10/2009 012633 FAITH AUTO GLASS & TINTING vehicle window replace: PW Maint 250.00 250.00 135945 12/10/2009 003747 FINE ARTS NETWORK entertainment: Carolers Old Town 600.00 600.00 Page:4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date Vendor 135946 12/10/2009 003747 FINEARTSNETWORK (Continued) Description Amount Paid Disney's High School Musical 11/13-22 525.45 Check Total 525.45 135947 12/10/2009 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER BYS RESTAURANTS, INC. GY meal: Fire mtg 11/4 MR,GP,GY 39.82 RANCHO DONUTS GY refreshments: Pub Safe Expo 11/14 15.00 VONS GYrefreshments:Mgmnt Trn 11/17 31.59 CATERERS CAFE GYrefreshments:Mgmnt Trn 11/17 31.20 PUBLIC HOUSE GYmeaI: PTSCChairmtg 11/19 40.80 VONS GY giftcards: employee recognition 584.70 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES GY airfare:Dep.Grip trn Sacramento 186.20 ONTARIO AIRPORT JC parking:Nat'I Lg Cities San Antonio 72.00 MENGER HOTEL JC htl:Nat'I Lg Cities San Antonio 560.40 CHEESECAKE FACTORY GR meal fire contract mtg Palm Desert 50.79 ORION PRINTER & PARTS GR printer part: Info Sys 38.70 PAYPAL GR verisign payflow pro trans 59.95 C S M F O GR 09/10 CSM FO mb:Roberts, G 110.00 CONSTANT CONTACT INC HP email notifications svc: Theater 75.00 MIMI'S CAFE GY meal: PW mtg 10/29 GB,RT,GY 17.08 COAST PNEUMATICS HP time clocks Harvest Lake Park 116.58 LEGAL SEA FOODS #028 RR meal: Rail Volution Cf Boston, MA 62.11 BRICCO RR meal: Rail Volution Cf Boston, MA 85.83 WESTIN HOTEL, THE RR htl: Rail Volution Cf Boston, MA 1,121.64 LINDBERGH PARKING SAN DIEGO RR parking:Rail Volution Cf 10/28-11/1 203.00 RUTH'S CHRIS STEAK HOUSE RR meal:Natl Lg Cites Cf San Antonio 127.15 ONTARIO AIRPORT RR parking:Natl Lg Cities San Antonio 90.00 HILTON RR htl:Natl Lg Cities S.Antonio 11/10-14 1,051.76 4,771.30 135948 12/10/2009 011704 FLOHR, JOHN reimb: Sister City Palm Desert 12/3 202.80 202.80 135949 12/10/2009 013076 GAUDET, YVONNE M. TCSD Instructor Earnings 531.30 531.30 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135950 12/10/2009 012066 GEOCON INLAND EMPIRE INC amendment #1 1/26-2/22 svcs 5,235.60 5,235.60 135951 12/10/2009 012066 GEOCON INLAND EMPIRE INC Jul geotech svcs:Pchga Pkwy II 907.50 907.50 135952 12/10/2009 005405 GILLILAND, ROBIN reimb: Sister City exp 11/30-12/5 167.59 167.59 135953 12/10/2009 011445 GRACE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH refund bus lic web feemon-profit 35.00 35.00 135954 12/10/2009 000711 GRAPHICS UNLIMITED printing: Leisure Activities Guides 29,900.00 29,900.00 LITHOGRAPHY 135955 12/10/2009 008444 GREAT OAK HIGH SCHOOL '09 electric light parade participant 300.00 300.00 135956 12/10/2009 002174 GROUP 1 PRODUCTIONS Video Prod Svcs:City 20th Anniv 8,000.00 8,000.00 135957 12/10/2009 005311 H2O CERTIFIED POOL WATER Nov pool maint svcs: CRC/TES 900.00 900.00 SPCL. 135958 12/10/2009 013325 HALL, MARK refund:scuba diving 3801.205 192.00 192.00 135959 12/10/2009 012954 HANEY, JOHN THOMAS billing adj: BO&1321,B09-1184 -425.00 10/20-23 plan review svcs: B&S 3,030.34 10/27-30 plan review svcs: B&S 1,853.99 billing adj: bldg plan check fees 485.63 4,944.96 135960 12/10/2009 006250 HAZ MAT TRANS INC hazardous waste disposal: PW 1,442.79 1,442.79 135961 12/10/2009 012204 HERITAGE FAMILY MINISTRIES TCSD Instructor Earnings 455.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 227.50 TCSD Instructor Earnings 500.50 1,183.00 135962 12/10/2009 000963 HOGAN, DAVID Retirement Medical Payment 699.00 699.00 135963 12/10/2009 010210 HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC, THE misc supplies: Theater 65.24 65.24 135964 12/10/2009 011049 HOSPICE OF THE VALLEY 09/10 Community Service Funding 3,000.00 3,000.00 135965 12/10/2009 000194 ICMA RETIREMENT -PLAN I C M A Retirement Trust 457 Payment 7,249.02 7,249.02 303355 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135966 12/10/2009 001573 INLAND EMPIRE FILM 09/101EFC sponsorship: Econ Dev 5,000.00 5,000.00 COMMISSION 135967 12/10/2009 009693 INLAND VALLEY CLASSICAL sttlmnt: The Nutcracker Nov'09 9,733.22 9,733.22 BALLET 135968 12/10/2009 012883 JACOB'S HOUSE INC Jacob's House Charity Payment 300.00 300.00 135969 12/10/2009 009336 KOPIE SHOP LLC Tern Presents promo items: Theater 505.31 Tern Presents promo items: Theater 65.25 570.56 135970 12/10/2009 012422 KRONQUIST, MATHEW Tree Lighting: Duck Pond 800.00 800.00 135971 12/10/2009 000209 L & M FERTILIZER INC equip repair/maint: TCSD 35.95 misc supplies: PW Maint 16.54 52.49 135972 12/10/2009 004051 L O R GEOTECHNICAL GROUP Add'I Geotech Svc: EWA# 1 6,000.00 6,000.00 INC 135973 12/10/2009 012945 LABELLE- MARVIN INC material testing svcs: PW CIP 3,090.00 3,090.00 135974 12/10/2009 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. TCSD instructor earnings 192.50 TCSD instructor earnings 808.50 TCSD instructor earnings 962.50 1,963.50 135975 12/10/2009 003726 LIFE ASSIST INC medical supplies: Paramedics 264.43 264.43 135976 12/10/2009 011003 LINE MASTER ENGINEERING INC equip repair/maint: PW Maint 445.45 equip shipping/handling:PW Maint 12.00 457.45 135977 12/10/2009 013311 MATERIAL HANDLING SUPPLY Forklift maintenance: PW Maint 180.38 INC Forklift maintenance: PW Maint 80.71 261.09 135978 12/10/2009 011179 MC MILLIN REDHAWK LLC TCSD Instructor Earnings 735.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 490.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 168.00 1,393.00 135979 12/10/2009 006571 MELODY'S AD WORKS INC. Reimb exp:old town marketing pgrm 84.67 84.67 135980 12/10/2009 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY MetLife Dental Insurance Payment 7,923.96 7,923.96 135981 12/10/2009 007210 MIDORI GARDENS Mainline repairs:vail ranch park 11/6 185.11 185.11 135982 12/10/2009 011649 MILLER, WENDY ee computer purchase program 2,000.00 2,000.00 Page:7 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135983 12/10/2009 001892 MOBILE MODULAR 11/24-12/23 modular bldg rental:OATC 619.88 619.88 135984 12/10/2009 011329 MOGHADAM, ALI Retirement Medical Payment 654.72 654.72 135985 12/10/2009 004586 MOORE FENCE COMPANY Replace exterior porch railing:c.mus. 28,000.00 28,000.00 135986 12/10/2009 010990 MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN Oct Youth Master Plan: CSD 977.50 977.50 INC 135987 12/10/2009 004508 NAGGAR, MICHAEL S. Reimb:Nov'09 internet services 34.99 34.99 135988 12/10/2009 008528 NICHOLS, MELBURG & ROSETTO Oct Dsgn:Old Town Infrastructure 4,943.24 4,943.24 135989 12/10/2009 009570 O C B REPROGRAPHICS Nov blueprint reproductions:CIP Prjts 1,649.52 1,649.52 135990 12/10/2009 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs: PW Maint 437.50 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW Maint 80.07 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW Maint 80.07 597.64 135991 12/10/2009 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs:TCSD 21.64 21.64 135992 12/10/2009 004712 ONG, RICHARD CFD 8&12 Reimbursement FY 07/08 330.12 330.12 135993 12/10/2009 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY Misc supplies:'09 Holiday Craft Workshop 148.80 INC Misc supplies:Parent n Me 26.95 Misc supplies:Children's Museum 71.94 Misc supplies: Recreation Pgrm 319.77 567.46 135994 12/10/2009 004069 PAL OFFICE PRODUCTS Equip repair:police 95.00 95.00 135995 12/10/2009 007638 PARDELL, CHRISTOPHER A. Nov dsgn srvcs:town square fountain 20,887.50 20,887.50 135996 12/10/2009 002099 PASCOE MANAGEMENT LLP Nov-Dec'09 Restroom Rental Old Town 1,652.00 1,652.00 135997 12/10/2009 013322 PATEL, PRAVIN VOID 0.00 0.00 135998 12/10/2009 001958 PERS LONGTERM CARE VOID 0.00 0.00 PROGRAM Pageb apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 135999 12/10/2009 000249 PETTYCASH VOID 0.00 0.00 136000 12/10/2009 011660 PLANNET CONSULTING VOID 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 136001 12/10/2009 005820 PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC VOID 0.00 0.00 136002 12/10/2009 000271 RBF CONSULTING VOID 0.00 0.00 136003 12/10/2009 013002 RED HAT PROPERTIES -, VOID 0.00 TEMECULA LP 0.00 0.00 0.00 136004 12/10/2009 004584 REGENCY LIGHTING Misc electrical supplies:var park sites 449.57 449.57 136005 12/10/2009 004498 REPUBLIC INTELLIGENT traf sgnl equip install:wolf crk/pech 1,971.38 traf sgnl equip install:wolf crk/pech 13,914.17 15,885.55 136006 12/10/2009 002412 RICHARDS WATSON & GERSHON Oct 2009 legal services 113,853.09 Jun/Oct 2009 legal services 798.50 114,651.59 136007 12/10/2009 001365 RIVERSIDE COUNTY OF permit:ice skating/old town square 612.00 612.00 136008 12/10/2009 004822 RIVERSIDE TRANSIT AGENCY Oct Co-op agrmnt:temecula trolley 25,000.00 Co-op agrmnttemecula trolley 930.60 25,930.60 136009 12/10/2009 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. reimb: Dec'09 internet service 44.99 44.99 136010 12/10/2009 013326 RUGGLES, VIRGINIA refund:Sr golf clinic 1503.206 40.00 40.00 136011 12/10/2009 007582 SAFEGUARD DENTAL & VISION SafeGuard Vision Plan Payment 946.66 946.66 136012 12/10/2009 006815 SAN DIEGO, COUNTY OF Support Payment 12.50 12.50 136013 12/10/2009 009980 SANBORN, GWYN Country @ the Merc 11/28 840.00 840.00 136014 12/10/2009 013327 SCHAFER, MICHAEL refund:eng grad dep:TM 30208 995.00 995.00 Page9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136015 12/10/2009 008529 SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL Support Payment 200.00 200.00 136016 12/10/2009 008529 SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL Support Payment 100.00 100.00 136017 12/10/2009 008529 SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL Support Payment 100.00 100.00 136018 12/10/2009 003506 SHIVELA MIDDLE SCHOOL BAND transportation cost:holiday parade 200.00 200.00 136019 12/10/2009 013178 SHURE INCORPORATED Equip repair:theater belt packs 108.75 108.75 136020 12/10/2009 000645 SMART & FINAL INC Misc supplies:recreation pgrm 36.18 Misc supplies:tree lighting ceremony 60.58 Misc supplies:tree lighting ceremony 8.03 Misc supplies:tree lighting ceremony 1,000.61 Recognition supplies: HR 143.59 1,248.99 136021 12/10/2009 013273 SMITH, JAMES Retirement Medical Payment 324.11 324.11 136022 12/10/2009 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Nov 2-29-479-2981:31454 tem pkwy 104.61 Nov 2-31-031-2590:28301 rncho cal 54.03 Nov 2-29-974-7899:26953 ynez LS-3 110.72 Nov 2-30-520-4414:32781 tem pkwy 532.50 Nov 2-00-397-5067:tcsd:var slopes 1,985.04 Nov 2-31-404-6020:28771 OT frnt st 1,592.53 Dec 2-27-805-3194:42051 main st 2,969.99 Nov 2-29-295-3510:32211 wolf vty 927.44 Nov 2-29-953-8447:31738 wlf vty PED 18.87 Nov 2-29-657-2332:45538 redwd PED 22.24 Nov 2-29-458-7548:32000 rncho cal 243.80 Nov 2-00-397-5042:city hall 4,751.53 Nov 2-29-953-8082:31523 wlf vty 23.04 Nov 2-29-953-8249:46497 wlf crk PED 19.55 Nov 2-29-657-2563:tcsd:med/slopes 169.50 Nov 2-2&629-0507:30600 pauba rd 6,620.38 Nov 2-02-502-8077:43210 bus prk B 1,277.38 21,423.15 136023 12/10/2009 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTROL Dec pest control srvcs: Fire stn 73 48.00 INC Dec pest control srvcs:Fire stn 92 42.00 Nov pest control srvcs:City facilities 541.00 631.00 136024 12/10/2009 012652 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Dec xxx-0141 gen phone usage 32.76 Dec xxx-0839 gen phone usage 70.08 102.84 Page:10 apChkLst 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 11 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136025 12/10/2009 007762 STANDARD INSURANCE Mandatory Life Insurance Payment 9,793.55 9,793.55 COMPANY 136026 12/10/2009 012723 STANDARD INSURANCE Voluntary Supp Life Insurance Payment 611.50 611.50 COMPANY 136027 12/10/2009 003000 STATE WATER RESOURCES 401 cert. appl. fee:W.Bypass bridge 5,101.00 5,101.00 136028 12/10/2009 012822 STEAD, JAMES R. refund:sec dep:rm rental/crc 150.00 150.00 136029 12/10/2009 006145 STENO SOLUTIONS Nov transcription srvcs: Police 483.28 483.28 TRANSCRIPTION 136030 12/10/2009 001546 STRAIGHT LINE GLASS Replace UVndow:CRC 344.98 344.98 136031 12/10/2009 013331 STUDENT OF THE MONTH PRGM, FY 09/10 Community Service Funding 3,000.00 3,000.00 INC 136032 12/10/2009 007273 STUMPS PRINTING COMPANY Misc supplies:breakfast w/Santa 358.52 358.52 INC 136033 12/10/2009 011667 T & T JANITORIAL INC Novjanitorial srvcs:Police storefront 790.00 Novjanitorial srvcs:City facilities 7,073.83 7,863.83 136034 12/10/2009 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL Oct Dsgn Srvcs:Western Bypass Bridge 4,858.20 Sep Dsgn Srvcs:Western Bypass Bridge 63,616.86 68,475.06 136035 12/10/2009 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 Union Dues Payment 5,026.00 5,026.00 136036 12/10/2009 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL Sunshine Fund 68.46 68.46 136037 12/10/2009 006325 TEMECULA VALLEY ELKS 2801 refund:sec dep:CRC gym 150.00 150.00 136038 12/10/2009 000311 TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH transportation cost:holiday parade 300.00 300.00 SCHOOL 136039 12/10/2009 011677 TEMECULA VALLEY PEOPLE FY 09/10 Community Service Funding 5,000.00 5,000.00 136040 12/10/2009 005970 TEMECULA VALLEY PLAYERS ticket revenue adv:Scrooge Dec'09 7,000.00 7,000.00 136041 12/10/2009 007187 TEMECULA YOUTH BASEBALL '09 Santa's Electric Light Parade winner 200.00 200.00 Page:11 apChkLst Final Check List 12/10/2009 12:17:41PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check# Date Vendor Description Amount Paid 136042 12/10/2009 003508 THOMPSON MIDDLE SCHOOL transportation cost:holiday parade 200.00 136043 12/10/2009 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE Dec high speed internet:42081 main st 58.29 136044 12/10/2009 000668 TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC Sound & lighting techs:tree lighting 325.00 136045 12/10/2009 007766 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT Nov undrgrnd secs alert tickets: PW 144.00 136046 12/10/2009 000199 UNITED STATE TREASURY Support Payment 250.00 136047 12/10/2009 000325 UNITED WAY United Way Charities Payment 36.00 136048 12/10/2009 012781 VALLEY JUNIOR GOLF ASSN TCSD Instructor Earnings 240.00 (VJGA) 136049 12/10/2009 004261 VERIZON Novxxx-7530 gen usage:Library 423.59 Novxxx-8900 gen usage:Library 856.34 Novxxx-5180 gen usage:79S irrig ctr 38.41 Novxxx-1999 general usage 40.72 Novxxx-0049 gen usage:Comerchero 35.43 Novxxx-4200 general usage 1,017.83 136050 12/10/2009 003785 WESTSIDE CITY I, LLC refund:eng grad dep:PM24085 995.00 136051 12/10/2009 000341 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES INC Sep Eng Srvcs:Pave Mgmt Pgrm 7,254.47 136052 12/10/2009 000348 ZIGLER, GAIL reimb:tree lighting ceremony 1213 164.30 reimb:20 yr anniv. celebration supplies 359.06 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: Page: 12 Check Total 200.00 58.29 325.00 144.00 250.00 36.00 240.00 2,412.32 995.00 7,254.47 523.36 1,782,659.59 Page:12 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 12/11/2009 9:33:07AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check# Date Vendor 136053 12/10/2009 013322 PATEL, PRAVIN 136054 12/10/2009 001958 PERS LONGTERM CARE PROGRAM Description refund:eng grad dep:27330 jefferson PERS Long Term Care Payment 136055 12/10/2009 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 136056 12/10/2009 011660 PLANNET CONSULTING Oct audio/visual consulting:civic center Sept audio/visual consulting:civic center Oct Old Town Sound System Retrofit Sept Old Town Sound System Retrofit 136057 12/10/2009 005820 PRE -PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC PrePaid Legal Services Payment 136058 12/10/2009 000271 RBF CONSULTING 136059 12/10/2009 013002 RED HAT PROPERTIES-, TEMECULA LP Amount Paid 995.00 169.04 532.68 12,000.00 10,105.00 4,500.00 4,005.00 486.25 Sep Parcel Map:Summerhouse 1,320.00 refund:overpmt of permit fees 1,796.91 refund:overpmt of permit fees 1,365.32 refund:overpmt of permit fees 1,294.97 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: Check Total 995.00 169.04 532.68 30,610.00 486.25 1,320.00 4,457.20 38,570.17 Page apChkLst 12/17/2009 1:13:46PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 1 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 1384 12/10/2009 005460 U S BANK RDA 2007 tax bonds debt srvc pmt 408,918.91 408,918.91 1385 12/10/2009 005460 U S BANK 2006 RDA TABs debt srvc pmt 73,840.53 73,840.53 136060 12/17/2009 003951 ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT Nov const:dual right turn tem pkwy 2,038.50 billing adj: invoice exceeds contract -358.71 1,679.79 136061 12/17/2009 009033 ALLEN, STEVEN L. photography:holiday parade 12/4 300.00 photography:tree lighting 12/5 300.00 600.00 136062 12/17/2009 013345 ANDERSON, JOHN D. refund:overpmt prkg cite #74078 45.00 45.00 136063 12/17/2009 012938 B & T WORKS INC rel retention PW09-03: Citywide 11,311.05 11,311.05 136064 12/17/2009 013343 BARRAGAN, NYDIA refund:sec dep:rm rental crc 400.00 400.00 136065 12/17/2009 009538 BENOIT, INA L. Santa Claus: Old Town 12/18-20 750.00 750.00 136066 12/17/2009 012583 BLANCA Y PRICE Billing Adj: Pa07-0229 Pymt Redd 1,300.00 1,300.00 136067 12/17/2009 005384 BOYZ CERT Training refreshments: TCC 900.00 refreshments: Council mtg 11/24 247.95 1,147.95 136068 12/17/2009 006908 C C & COMPANY INC entertainment:20 yr anniv event 700.00 700.00 136069 12/17/2009 006908 C C & COMPANY INC Dynamite Dave:Old Town 12/20 300.00 Dynamite Dave:Old Town 11/28 300.00 Dynamite Dave:Old Town 11/27 300.00 Dynamite Dave:Old Town 12/12 300.00 Dynamite Dave:Old Town 12/06 300.00 1,500.00 136070 12/17/2009 012089 CAFE DANIEL INC refreshments: City 20yr anniv event 500.00 500.00 136071 12/17/2009 004971 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, Nov copier use/maint: Fire 182.55 182.55 INC 136072 12/17/2009 000137 CHEVRON AND TEXACO City vehicles fuel: Police 1,159.31 1,159.31 136073 12/17/2009 010650 CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING & HVAC plumbing svcs: Stn 84 242.70 242.70 INC Pagel apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 12/17/2009 1:13:46PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136074 12/17/2009 013348 CROWNE HILL RESERVE disbursement/release impry C.H. HOA 400,000.00 400,000.00 136075 12/17/2009 007057 DERNBACH, ESTHER MARIE TCSD instructor earnings 262.50 TCSD instructor earnings 210.00 TCSD instructor earnings 210.00 TCSD instructor earnings 157.50 840.00 136076 12/17/2009 008704 EDWARDS, MARYANN reimb: Apr-Oct'09 internet svc 228.00 228.00 136077 12/17/2009 012811 ELLENA, TIMOTHY reimb:refreshments CERT trn 11/20-22 90.21 90.21 136078 12/17/2009 012630 ERICKSON-HALL rel retention PWO6-05 TCC 124,205.30 124,205.30 CONSTRUCTION CO 136079 12/17/2009 003665 EXCEL COMMERCIAL Nov long distance phone svcs 54.50 54.50 136080 12/17/2009 004464 EXXONMOBIL CARD SERVICES City vehicles fuel: CM 70.75 70.75 136081 12/17/2009 009953 FEDERAL CLEANING Decjanitorial svcs: PD mall office 625.00 625.00 CONTRACTORS 136082 12/17/2009 003747 FINE ARTS NETWORK caroling: Old Town 1215-12/13 1,200.00 1,200.00 136083 12/17/2009 003946 G T ENTERTAINMENT MC svcs: High Hopes 12/18 200.00 200.00 136084 12/17/2009 003946 G T ENTERTAINMENT Mc Svcs: Holiday Parade 1214 150.00 Santa svcs: tree lighting 12/3 50.00 200.00 136085 12/17/2009 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIATES Nov design svc:DePortola Road 1,210.00 1,210.00 INC 136086 12/17/2009 009608 GOLDEN VALLEYMUSIC SOCIETY sttlmnt: Classics at the Merc 1,062.60 1,062.60 136087 12/17/2009 012954 HANEY, JOHN THOMAS 11/2-11/12 Plan Ck Svcs: B&S 2,672.37 2,672.37 136088 12/17/2009 002701 HUB INT'L INSURANCE SERVCS Nov special events premiums 459.55 459.55 INC 136089 12/17/2009 005874 I E BIKES mountain bikes: Park Rangers 1,828.31 1,828.31 136090 12/17/2009 001123 INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION maintenance supplies: PW Maint 312.33 312.33 GROUP Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 12/17/2009 1:13:46PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136091 12/17/2009 011910 L H ENGINEERING COMPANY INC Co# 12: Old Town Infrastructure 12,835.33 12,835.33 136092 12/17/2009 001085 L N CURTIS & SONS rescue equip: Fire Truck 73 1,085.54 1,085.54 136093 12/17/2009 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS Misc signs: PW Maint Div 254.48 Signs: notification for 6th st businesses 81.56 336.04 136094 12/17/2009 004141 MAINTEX INC Custodial sup pl i es:th eater/crc/p arks 232.55 232.55 136095 12/17/2009 012421 MASINO, MARIANNE TCSD Instructor Earnings 175.00 175.00 136096 12/17/2009 012364 MASTERS, TRACY reimb:20th anniv. ribbon cutting event 69.80 69.80 136097 12/17/2009 000944 MCCAIN TRAFFIC SUPPLY INC Street name sign: PW Traffic 308.85 308.85 136098 12/17/2009 012062 MCCRACKEN, MICHAEL refund room rental overpmt/CRC 11/15/08 72.00 72.00 136099 12/17/2009 013346 MCMASTERS, SANDRA refund:parking cite # 73782 55.00 55.00 136100 12/17/2009 013342 MID -COAST FIRE PROTECTION refund:permit inspect fees 921-700-009 267.00 267.00 136101 12/17/2009 007210 MIDORI GARDENS Nov ldscp maint srvcs:var parks 70,105.00 Controller install: veterans park 10/15 1,650.00 Mainline repairs:wolf creek park 11/16 161.31 71,916.31 136102 12/17/2009 004002 MILNER SIGNS CERT Trailer Graphics: TCC 2,557.43 2,557.43 136103 12/17/2009 012580 MINUTEMAN PRESS business cards:j ross 118.05 118.05 136104 12/17/2009 009835 MIRACLE PLAYGROUND SALES Equip rehab:crc pool water slide 4,895.08 4,895.08 INC 136105 12/17/2009 005887 MOFFATT & NICHOL ENGINEERS Oct Consulting Srvcs:F.V. Off Ramp 46,962.43 46,962.43 136106 12/17/2009 012923 MOHEIT, MIKE refund:rm rental Library 105.00 105.00 136107 12/17/2009 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING Silt fence removal: Dendy & Diaz 3,466.25 3,466.25 Page3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 12/17/2009 1:13:46PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136108 12/17/2009 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS City Veh. Parts & Supplies: Sta 84 27.72 City Veh. Parts & Supplies: Sta 92 19.07 City Veh. Parts & Supplies: Sta 84 13.07 59.86 136109 12/17/2009 000727 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION 03/1/10-02/28/11 mbrshp:R.Johnston 150.00 150.00 ASSN 136110 12/17/2009 000718 NATIONAL RECREATION PARK 3/1/10-2/28/2011 mbrshp:H.Parker 140.00 140.00 ASSOC 136111 12/17/2009 005006 NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE Spcl tax admin srvcs:fnance dept 9,453.50 9,453.50 GROUP 136112 12/17/2009 008820 NEIGHBORS NEWSPAPER Nov ad: Christmas in Old Town 250.00 Dec ad: Christmas in Old Town 250.00 500.00 136113 12/17/2009 008528 NICHOLS, MELBURG & ROSETTO Nov Dsgn Srvcs:Civic Center Ph li 59,920.33 Nov dsgn srvcs:old town infrstr 9,704.09 Nov Dsgn Srvcs:Civic Center Ph 1 1,151.79 70,776.21 136114 12/17/2009 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES Nov public ntc ads:City Clerk/PIn/PW 1,151.07 Nov E.S.G. event ads: RDA 979.34 Nov advertising:tcsd holiday events 525.00 Nov advertising:Thtr/Temecula Presents 476.28 3,131.69 136115 12/17/2009 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES annual subscr: Finance 125887 126.00 126.00 136116 12/17/2009 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Misc office supplies:central services 19.14 DIV Misc office supplies:children's mus 18.04 Misc office supplies:children's mus 16.93 54.11 136117 12/17/2009 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Bldg & Safety 55.00 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Bldg & Safety 55.00 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Bldg & Safety 991.95 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Bldg & Safety 665.66 1,767.61 136118 12/17/2009 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs: PW Land Dev 167.94 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW CIP 87.50 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW Maint 87.50 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW Maint 87.50 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW Maint 54.37 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW CIP 36.57 City Vehicle Maint Svcs: PW Land Dev 36.57 557.95 136119 12/17/2009 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY Misc supplies:tiny tot pgrm 81.53 81.53 INC Page:4 apChkLst 12/17/2009 1:13:46PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 5 Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136120 12/17/2009 013198 ORTENZO-HAYES, KRISTINE TCSD Instructor Earnings 504.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 504.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 504.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 409.50 TCSD Instructor Earnings 220.50 TCSD Instructor Earnings 157.50 2,299.50 136121 12/17/2009 002652 PAT & OSCARS RESTAURANT Refreshments: High Hopes pgrm 12/18 700.00 700.00 136122 12/17/2009 013344 PETERSON, SARAH refund:sec dep:rm rental crc 150.00 150.00 136123 12/17/2009 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 496.44 496.44 136124 12/17/2009 001999 PITNEY BOWES Jan -Mar postage meter lease:Cntrl Srvcs 271.60 271.60 136125 12/17/2009 010338 POOL & ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS pool supplies/chemicals: crc & tes pools 277.99 INC pool supplies/chemicals: crc & tes pools 18.49 296.48 136126 12/17/2009 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPANY 12/24/09-12/22/10 subscr:csd 3254007 330.72 330.72 INC 136127 12/17/2009 013081 PRIORITY DOOR SYSTEMS Bay Door Repair: Sta 92 201.00 Bay Door Repair: Sta 92 152.00 353.00 136128 12/17/2009 012904 PRO ACTIVE FIRE DESIGN Nov plancheck srvcs:fre prevention 3,684.88 3,684.88 136129 12/17/2009 011751 PUAHI'S POLYNESIAN DANCERS refund:picnic rental:harveston comm 60.00 60.00 INC 136130 12/17/2009 004529 QUAID TEMECULA Novveh repair& maint:pd motorcycles 4,549.90 4,549.90 HARLEY-DAVIDSON 136131 12/17/2009 002012 R D O EQUIPMENT COMPANY City veh repair & maint:pw maint div 531.73 531.73 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 12/17/2009 1:13:46PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136132 12/17/2009 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DISTRICT Nov various water meters:tcsd 28,796.08 Dec various water meters:tcsd 15,543.13 Dec var water meters TES pool 786.22 Nov various water meters: Fire 697.51 Nov var water meters:tcsd 553.44 Nov water meterfloating mtr: PW 385.44 Nov var water meter: Wolf Crk S 190.74 Nov var water meters: main st 112.15 Nov var water meters Wolf Crk N 96.10 Nov water meterpechanga pkwy 75.29 Dec var water meters:calle elenita 73.04 Nov var water meters Wolf Crk N 59.47 Nov var water meters Wolf Crk N 54.10 Nov various water meters main st 54.03 Nov var water meters Wolf Crk N 25.57 47,502.31 136133 12/17/2009 002654 RANCHO FORD LINCOLN City vehicle maint: Stn 84 9.90 9.90 MERCURY 136134 12/17/2009 005062 RAWLINGS, PHIL reimb:equipment maint/Fire 50.09 50.09 136135 12/17/2009 000271 RBF CONSULTING Sep en srvcs:I-15/SR-79 UIt. Intrchg 60,140.26 60,140.26 136136 12/17/2009 000353 RIVERSIDE CO AUDITOR Nov'09 parking citation assessments 5,257.00 5,257.00 136137 12/17/2009 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEPT 10/8-11/4/09:law enforcement 1,361,644.89 1,361,644.89 136138 12/17/2009 013303 ROBERT I BOYD & ASSOCIATES AED equipment: Fire 6,708.79 AED equipment: Medics 5,858.09 12,566.88 136139 12/17/2009 009980 SANBORN, GWYN Country @ the Merc 1215/09 253.50 253.50 136140 12/17/2009 011511 SCUBA CENTER TEMECULA TCSD Instructor Earnings 84.00 84.00 136141 12/17/2009 010089 SECURITAS SECURITY SRVCS Nov security patrol srvcs:haw. lake 3,193.75 3,193.75 USA 136142 12/17/2009 009213 SHERRY BERRY MUSIC Jazz @ the Merc 12/3/09 252.00 252.00 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 12/17/2009 1:13:46PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136143 12/17/2009 000645 SMART & FINAL INC Misc supplies:recreation pgrm 229.90 Misc supplies:recreation pgrm 205.96 Misc supplies:recreation pgrm 126.43 Misc supplies:after school pgrm 121.93 Misc supplies:var holiday events 93.17 Misc supplies:after school prgm 76.54 853.93 136144 12/17/2009 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Nov 2-01-202-7330:various LS-1 76,289.99 Nov 2-01-202-7603:arterial stlt 27,516.83 Nov 2-05-791-8807:31587 tem pkwy 10,828.14 Dec 2-02-351-5281:tcsd:crc 3,571.71 Dec 2-26-887-0789:40233 vtg rd PED 1,789.22 Dec 2-20-798-3248:42081 main st 913.12 Dec 2-31-536-3655:41904 main st 812.82 Dec 2-2&171-2620: Police stn 710.27 Dec 2-10-331-2153:28816 pujol st 627.12 Dec 2-30-608-9384:28582 harveston 426.83 Nov 2-31-536-3481:41902 main st 191.07 Nov 2-31-936-3511:45647 pechanga 144.16 Dec 2-31-419-2659:26706 ynez tc1 89.01 Dec 2-30-066-2889:30051 rncho vista 20.89 123,931.18 136145 12/17/2009 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY Dec 055-475-6169-5:pbsp 259.86 Dec 015-575-0195-2:FS#92 236.11 495.97 136146 12/17/2009 002503 SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY operating fees:stn 84109664 293.21 emissions fee:stn 84109664 109.00 402.21 136147 12/17/2009 007341 SOUTH COAST WINERY, INC. bal.due:rental/rfrshmnts-sister cities 116.34 116.34 136148 12/17/2009 000293 STADIUM PIZZA INC refreshments:csd holiday events 1211 28.11 28.11 136149 12/17/2009 013288 STUDIO 33 Ice skating rink & mgmt srvcs:old town 35,765.00 35,765.00 136150 12/17/2009 009061 STURDIVANT, ANGELA P. TCSD Instructor Earnings 126.00 126.00 136151 12/17/2009 012119 TANK SPECIALISTS OF Tank Repair: Sta 84 485.36 CALIFORNIA Tank Repair: Sta 84 330.99 816.35 136152 12/17/2009 012265 TEMECULA ACE HARDWARE C/O Misc supplies:var park sites 8.40 8.40 136153 12/17/2009 013335 TEMECULA ACE HARDWARE INC Explorer Post Sweatshirts: Fire 358.71 358.71 Page:7 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 12/17/2009 1:13:46PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank: union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 136154 12/17/2009 010679 TEMECULA AUTO City veh repair & maint:fre prev 447.29 447.29 REPAIR/RADIATOR 136155 12/17/2009 011736 TEMECULA TROPHY INC Commemorative supplies:City 20 yr anniv 1,957.50 1,957.50 136156 12/17/2009 010046 TEMECULA VALLEY Oct'09 Bus. Impry District Asmnts 39,109.54 39,109.54 CONVENTION & 136157 12/17/2009 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & irrigation/plumbing supplies:var parks 8.17 8.17 SUPPLY 136158 12/17/2009 003849 TERRYBERRY COMPANY Recognition service awards:HR 3,294.20 3,294.20 136159 12/17/2009 003031 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE INC Waterflled barriers: PW Maint 4,962.26 4,962.26 136160 12/17/2009 004759 TWIN GRAPHICS Graphics: City police unit 978.75 978.75 136161 12/17/2009 012549 UPODIUM Apparatus maint: Sta 12 138.51 138.51 136162 12/17/2009 004261 VERIZON Dec xxx-5072 gen usage 2,315.01 Dec xxx-1341 gen usage theater 439.32 Dec xxx-0682 gen usage: civic ctr cam 92.17 Dec xxx-1941 gen usage:pta cd ttacsd 71.07 Dec xxx-3910 gen usageAst st irrig 38.46 Dec xxx-7562 gen usage:irrig contrlr 37.33 Dec xxx-2372 gen usage:wolf crk irrg 35.48 Dec xxx-6620 gen usage 34.31 3,063.15 136163 12/17/2009 004848 VERIZON SELECT SERVICES INC Nov long distance phone svcs 71.77 Nov long distance phone svcs 21.09 92.86 136164 12/17/2009 007987 WALMART senior holiday food program 820.00 820.00 136165 12/17/2009 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 11/1-15/09 tree trimming srvcs:citywide 10,095.00 10,095.00 136166 12/17/2009 000348 ZIGLER, GAIL reimb:team PACE tree decorating 289.06 289.06 136167 12/17/2009 003776 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION Medical Supplies: Paramedics 742.81 742.81 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 3,005,372.96 Pageb Item No. 4 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: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2009 PREPARED BY: Rudy Graciano, Revenue Manager RECOMMENDATION: Approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2009. BACKGROUND: Government Code Sections 53646 and 41004 require reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment portfolio, receipts, and disbursements respectively. Adequate funds will be available to meet budgeted and actual expenditures of the City for the next six months. Current market values are derived from the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) reports, Union Bank of California trust and custody statements, and from US Bank trust statements. Attached is the City Treasurer's Report that provides this information. The City's investment portfolio is in compliance with the statement of investment policy and Government Code Sections 53601 and 53635 as of November 30, 2009. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS: City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 2009 Cash and Investments Report CITY OF TEMECULA Through November 30, 2009 Fund Total 001 GENERAL FUND $44,931,214.47 100 STATE GAS TAX FUND $566,066.64 101 STATE TRANSPORTATION FUND 1,374,239.80 120 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FUND 4,952,564.70 150 AB 2766 FUND 430,034.67 160 AB 3229 COPS 22.77 165 RDAAFFORDABLE HOUSING 20% SETASIDE 6,698,659.27 170 MEASURE A FUND 7,602,566.54 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 57,281.91 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "B" STREET LIGHTS 319.93 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE 236,291.98 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "D" 239,655.28 195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "R" STREET/ROAD 8,096.85 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 138,505.60 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 1,349,484.13 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FUND 28,497,798.61 273 CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL IMPROVEMENT FUND 4,610,968.79 275 CFD 03-3 WOLF CREEK IMPROVEMENT FUND 1,291,356.64 276 CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 IMPROVEMENT FUND 158,164.84 277 CFD-RORIPAUGH 31,505,416.26 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIPPROJECT 3,687,443.95 300 INSURANCE FUND 954,004.06 310 VEHICLES FUND 820,285.03 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 331,942.96 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 290,055.46 340 FACILITIES 130,655.47 370 CITY 2008 COP'S DEBT SERVICE 853,572.37 380 RDA DEBT SERVICE FUND 6,658,283.75 390 TCSD 2001 COP'S DEBT SERVICE 12,268.98 460 CFD 88-12 DEBT SERVICE FUND 3,691,631.70 472 CFD 01-2 HARVESTON A&B DEBT SERVICE 819,912.05 473 CFD 03-1 CROWNE HILL DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,413,300.82 474 AD 03-4 JOHN WARNER ROAD DEBT SERVICE 113,331.93 475 CFD 03-3 WOLF CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,696,667.25 476 CFD 03-6 HARVESTON 2 DEBT SERVICE FUND 402,782.92 477 CFD 03-02 RORIPAUGH DEBT SERVICE FUND 7,866,183.26 700 CERBT CALIFORNIA EE RETIREE-GASB45 624.12 Grand Total: $165,391,655.76 Item No. 5 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: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: Community Service Funding Program Grant for VNW Circle of Care (at the request of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee Members, Maryann Edwards and Mike Naggar) PREPARED BY: Judith M. McNabb, Administrative Assistant RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Community Service Funding Program grant recommendation to VNW Circle of Care in the amount of $5,000. BACKGROUND: The Fiscal Year 2009-10 Community Service Funding Program grant recommendations were considered at the meeting on November 10, 2009. At that meeting, City Council awarded a total of $50,500 to 21 organizations. The Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Subcommittee Members, Maryann Edwards and Mike Naggar, allocated funding primarily to non-profit organizations who offer community -wide services such as food, clothing, and counseling/services to children. At the meeting on November 10, 2009, VNW Circle of Care was not awarded funding. However, after additional consideration, the Ad Hoc Subcommittee Members believe VNW Circle of Care do meet the criteria and recommend funding in amount of $5,000. FISCAL IMPACT: Fiscal Year 2009-10 Community Service Funding line item budget has a sufficient balance to provide for the grant recommendation of $5,000 to VNW Circle of Care. Item No. 6 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works DATE: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: Agreement for Consulting Services with Hirsch & Associates, Inc. for the Butterfield Stage Road Extension Project, Project No. PW09-02 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer, CIP Mayra De La Torre, Senior Engineer, CIP RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve an Agreement for Consulting Services with Hirsch & Associates, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $47,700.00 to complete the medians landscape and irrigation design plans for Butterfield Stage Road Extension, Project No. PW09- 02. 2. Authorize the City Manager to approve Extra Work Authorizations not to exceed the contingency amount of $4,770.00, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount. BACKGROUND: On May 13, 2008 the City Council approved Resolution 08-40, which among other things, directed staff to initiate the actions necessary for the City to construct Priority Public Improvements conditioned upon the Roripaugh Ranch Development and eligible for funding with Roripaugh Ranch Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 03-02 bond proceeds. The Priority Public Improvements include Butterfield Stage Road (BSR), Murrieta Hot Springs Road (MHSR), Calle Chapos and the public segment of South Loop Road. To properly program the bond proceeds, the Butterfield Stage Road Extension Project is included in the Capital Improvement Program Budget for FY 2010-2014. In July 2009, the City (as the Temecula Public Financing Authority; TPFA) and the Developer of the Roripaugh Ranch project executed the Amended and Restated Acquisition Agreement, which in addition to authorizing the payment and settlement of all outstanding claims on the Roripaugh Ranch property, provided the necessary mechanism for the City to contract for and fund the construction of the Priority Public Improvements with CFD bond proceeds rather than acquiring the completed improvements from the developer as was originally planned. Due to the magnitude and complexity of the improvements and the right-of-way needs, this project will be completed in two phases with the first phase to include: MHSR from roughly the intersection of Pourroy Rd. to BSR BSR from MHSR to Calle Chapos/South Loop Road Calle Chapos from BSR to Walcott Lane A 400' stretch of South Loop Road (extension of Calle Chapos) east of BSR. Phase 2 will complete BSR from Calle Chapos/South Loop Road to La Serena Road On November 14, 2009 City Council approved an agreement with David Evans and Associates, Inc. to complete the improvement plans for this project. Their scope of work included various improvement plans (i.e., streets, traffic signals, striping and signage, storm drain, and street light plans, and the Water Quality Management Plan for the roadway work), but did not include the median landscaping and irrigation plans along MHSR and BSR. Hirsch & Associates, Inc. (HAI) is the landscape/architecture/planning consultant that prepared the original landscape and irrigation plans for the developer. The City has negotiated an equitable and reasonable scope of work and associated fee with Hirsch & Associates, Inc. to revise and complete the median landscape and irrigation plans. The attached agreement for $47,700.00 includes final professional landscape and irrigation design services in the amount of $44,700 and a $3,000 allowance for reimbursable expenses. FISCAL IMPACT: The Butterfield Stage Road Extension Project is a Capital Improvement Project funded with the Roripaugh Ranch CFD No. 03-02 bond proceeds. Adequate funds are available in Project Account No. 210-165-723-5802 for this $52,470.00 request, which includes the agreement amount of $47,700 plus a 10% contingency of $4,770. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Agreement for Consulting Services 2. Project Description 3. Project Location AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND HIRSCH & ASSOCIATES, INC. BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD EXTENSION RORIPAUGH RANCH STREET IMPROVEMENTS - PHASES 1 & 2, PW09-02 THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of January 12, 2010, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Hirsch & Associates, Inc., a corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant'). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: TERM This Agreement shall commence on January 12, 2010, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than January 12, 2011, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. 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 by this Consultant 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 contract, 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 A, 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 Forty -Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($47,700.00) for the total term of this agreement, unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. C. The City Manager may approve additional work up to ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement as 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 Consultant 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 on 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 entitled "PAYMENT" herein. 7. 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 E 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 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 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 contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: i. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. ii. 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. iii. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. iv. Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: 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. Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Professional Liability Coverage: One million ($1,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. 0 C. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self -insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured's, 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. 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 rating of A-:VII or better, 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 may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting 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 5 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) 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 of Temecula: City of Temecula Attn: City Manager P.O. Box 9033 Temecula. California 92589-9033 -or- City of Temecula Attn: City Manager 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 To Consultant: Hirsch & Associates, Inc. Attn: Patrick L. Hirsch, President 2221 East Winston Road, Suite A Anaheim. California 92806 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, 7 or in the business of the Consultant or Consultant's 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. E IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. City of Temecula Hirsch & Associates, Inc. (Two Signatures if required by corporate papers) By: By: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: By: Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Patrick L. Hirsch, President Amelia Hirsch, Secretary By: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Hirsch & Associates, Inc. Attn: Patrick L. Hirsch 2221 East Winston Road, Suite A Anaheim, CA 92806 (714) 776-4340 (714) 776-4395 Fax Pat@hailandarch.com FSM Initials: Date: E EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED The specific elements (scope of work) of this service include: 10 HIRSCH & ASSOCIATES�INC. LAHNXAPE ARCHITECTURES PLANNING December 15, 2009 Ms. Mayra De La Torre, PE Senior Engineer Capital Projects Department of Public Works 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Butterfield Stage Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road Median Landscape Improvement Proposal Dear Mayra, Hirsch & Associates is pleased to submit our proposal for landscape architectural services. Mr. Patrick L. Hirsch, President of Hirsch & Associates, Inc, will provide personal services and attention to the City of Temecula and will have direct and continuous responsibility in all matters dealing with the projects. Mr. Charles E. Foley, Director of Projects, and Ms. Naomi Hirsch, Project Manager, will assist Mr. Hirsch. We appreciate the opportunity to submit our proposal and look forward to continuing our working relationship with the City of Temecula. Included within our proposal are sections addressing scope of work, scope of services, time schedule, professional fees and supplemental conditions. Thank you for your time and effort extended reviewing our proposal and please call me should you have any questions or concerns. Thank You, Patrick L. Hirsch, President Landscape Architect#1710 ASIA a¢a EAST WINSTON HORS, SUITE A. ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA EXECS PHONE 714.77"MO FAX Tu.rir ESSee www.HAwHOAECN.cON LAnnO Proposal Date: December 15, 2009 Butterfield Stage Road and Murrieta Hot Springs Road Median Improvements City of Temecula, CA Scope of Work The project shall consist of the median islands of Murrieta Hot Springs Road going east from the north boundary of Roripaugh Ranch to the intersection with Butterfield Stage Road, then south on Butterfield Stage Road to the intersection with Rancho California Road. The Scope of Work for revising the current median island landscape plans for Murrieta Hot Springs Road from the north boundary of Roripaugh Ranch, and Butterfield Stage Road to the south boundary of Roripaugh Ranch shall consist of changing several species of plant material, preparing plans that indicate the shape and locations of the new hardscape areas within the medians to reduce the landscape and irrigated. Hardscape area will be approximately 50 to 75 feet long and spaced 200 to 250 feet apart. Revise the planting plans, irrigation plans and irrigation calculations to accommodate these changes. The Scope of Work for the medians islands on Butterfield Stage Road from the south boundary of Roripaugh Ranch to Rancho California Road will consist of preparing new landscape, irrigation and hardscape plans. Hirsch & Associates, Inc. shall coordinate the median design with City's Department of Public Works, and TCSD and submit all plans to the Department of Public Works, TCSD, EMWD and RCWD for plan check and approval. A DWG file of the hardscape plans will be provided to the City and DEA so this information can be included on the median island improvement plans being prepared by DEA. Coordinate with the City and DEA. Scope of Services Construction Documents • Preparation of construction drawings and specifications setting forth in detail all work to be undertaken. Construction documents will be prepared in AutoCAD 2008, with project specifications prepared in Word format. Specifications will be prepared per The Standards Specifications for Public Works Contraction and construction details shall be prepared per City standards. • Submit 50% construction plans illustrating in detail all work to be undertaken. Update the probable construction cost estimate for improvements as shown on plans. Submit plans and cost estimate to city staff for review. Revise plans and cost estimate per staff comments. 1 • Prepare 100% construction plans and specifications illustrating in detail all work to be undertaken. Finalize probable construction cost estimate and submit plans, specifications and cost estimate to city staff for review. Revise plans and cost estimate per staff comments. • Submit plans to the Departments of Public Works, TCSD, EMWD and RCWD for plan check, approval and permits. Optional Services Project Bidding Assist city staff during project bid by providing clarification to construction documents and assist city staff with the preparation of addenda's during bid. Construction Support Hirsch & Associates will provide the following services during construction. Office • Communicate with city staff as necessary during construction. • Provide interpretation and clarification to the construction documents during construction. Answer all RFI received from city and General Contractor. • Review and approve product submittals and shop drawings provided by the Contractor. • Coordinate with all parties by telephone and fax as necessary. • Review and comment on all change orders requested by Contractor. • Prepare a complete set of Record Drawings, indicating "as -built" conditions obtained from information provided by the General Contractor. Field • Attend pre -construction meeting at site with all parties. • Attend `As- Requested' on -site project meetings with all parties to review work of Contractor. Prepare written reports of meetings for distribution to all parties. • Observe irrigation coverage test and main line pressure test. • Review landscape plant material delivered to site. 2 • Attend substantial completion inspection at request of City and prepare punch list. Review and approve punch list items upon their completion. • Attend final inspection upon completion of 30-day plant establishment and 60-day post landscape maintenance periods, and issue letter of acceptance to City. Services not Included in Scope of Services or Scope of Work The following services shall be excluded from the basic services listed above and shall be provided by the City at City's expenses. • Continuous daily inspection of Contractor's work • All project management and administrative services. • All inspection services normally provided by City, Building and Safety, Engineering, and Public Works Departments. • All geotechnical engineering services. • Agricultural soil suitability testing. • All other services not specifically included within the scope of work and scope of services. • Coordination and design of any off -site wet and/or dry utility extension or up -grades. • All work related to investigation, reporting, removal and disposal of asbestos and other hazardous materials currently on the site or in the existing building and picnic shade structure. • All work related to locating and documenting existing underground utilities and subterranean structures. • Off -site hydraulic and hydrology studies and calculations including existing and proposed storm drain studies. • Services related to existing or potential site contamination. • Services related to unsuitable soil discovered during site grading operations. • Preparation of easements, right-of-ways or land dedication documents. • Revisions to completed and/or partially completed plans, studies and construction documents which are in conformance with the approved conceptual designs and directions previously received from the City or other jurisdictions and agencies have control over the project design, approval and/or permitting. 3 • Grading and/or storm drain improvement on or through adjoining property. • All services related to environmental investigation and mitigation, clean up or permit, such as wetlands, hazardous or toxic materials or substances presently on -site or adjacent to the site and/or below the surface of the site or discovered during project design and construction. • All design work, cost estimating and construction observation services related to the under -grounding or relocation of existing unknown utilities (irrigation water pipes, telephone lines and electrical lines, storm drain lines and sewer lines) that are not shown on the plans provided by the city that run across the property are excluded since the scope of work for these utilities is not currently know and will be determined during the initial design phase of the project. • Payment of all plan check, permit and assessment fees for project development. • Laboratory sample collection and testing. • Hazardous water or toxic substance engineering and testing. • To Hirsch & Associates knowledge there are no wetlands within or adjacent to the project site and wetland permits are not included in the proposal. • All site survey work for project design and construction staking. • Documenting of existing utilities discovered during construction. • Printing and mailing of RFI's and addenda's associated with project bidding and construction. • All cost for computer plotting, printing, and computer scans, and photographic reproductions as requested by the City. • Preparation and filing of all CEQA and EIR reports and documentation for the project. • Reproduction and delivery cost. • 3D Perspective renderings and computer generated perspective renderings. City Responsibilities • Provide copies to Hirsch & Associates of all street improvement plans prepared by DEA. • Process the approval of all plans by governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the project. Coordinate submittals as necessary and pay all fees. • Reproduce final bid documents and plans. Pay all reproduction and delivery cost for plans and other items requested by city and required for project development. • Pay all cost for project bidding and issuance of addendums. 4 • Provide general conditions and special provisions and other City "boiler plate" in Word format for insertion into project specifications. • Provide project administration and project management services for the project. • Review and approved irrigation mainline pressure test and coverage test. Time Schedule Hirsch & Associates Inc maintains sufficient staff to provide all services in a prompt and timely manner. A final project schedule will be developed at the start of project design. The anticipated schedule is as follows and shall be established form the date of Notice to Proceed. Hardscape Plans for BSR and MHSR..... City Staff Review and Revisions ............ Preparation of Construction Documents ............ City Staff Review ............................................... Incorporation City Comment into Plans ............. Total Design Time .............................................. 1 weeks 2 weeks ............8 weeks ............. 1 week ............. 1 week ..........13 weeks Professional Fees Professional fees for services stated include all costs for general overhead, profit, telephone, clerical and incidental expenses not separately requested by City. Professional fees are good for a period of 90 days from date of proposal. Murrieta Hot Spring Road Plan Revisions and Cost Estimate ......................................... $7,500.00 Butterfield Stage Road Plan Revisions and Cost Estimate................................................$9,000.00 Butterfield Stage Road to Rancho California Road Plans and Cost Estimate .................$25,800.00 Plan Check and Approvals.................................................................................................$2,400.00 Total................................................................................................................................. $44,700.00 Optional Services 5 Project Bidding.................................................................................................................. $2,000.00 Construction Support (Office) ........................................................................................... $2,400.00 Construction Support (Field) 6 site meetings at $850/meeting......................................... $5,100.00 TotalFee............................................................................................................................ $9,500.00 Reimbursable Expenses PrintingAllowance............................................................................................................$3,000.00 (This cost is not included in professional fees stated above) Supplemental Service Additional Services Professional fees are based on a project as outlined within the Scope of Work. If scope of work or scope of services are increased or changed at the request of City, Hirsch & Associates Inc. shall receive additional compensation based on additional hours worked at the hourly rates stated below, or an agreed upon negotiated fee. City will approve additional services and costs in writing prior to performance of such services. Principle Landscape Architect $175/hr Director of Projects $120/hr Staff Landscape Architect $100/hr Project Manager $95/hr Senior Designer $80/hr Designer $75/hr Computer Graphic Designer $70/hr Clerical $60/hr Travel $0.58/mi Reproduction / Printing Cost Plus 10% Reimbursable Expenses All plotting, printing, blueprinting and photographic reproductions including special overnight deliveries (other than US Postal Service) shall be paid by the City as a direct reimbursable expense plus 10% to Hirsch & Associates Inc. Travel Authorized travel associated with project design and project meetings, are included within our fees, excluding travel associated with additional services and plant selection at local nurseries. Abandonment of Project In the event this project is abandoned by written notice from City compensation will be the last 6 progress billing invoice, plus a mutually agreed upon amount for work executed since that invoicing. If the project is suspended or abandoned, in whole, or part, for more than six (6) months, Hirsch & Associates shall be compensated for all services performed prior to receipt of written notice from City of such suspension or abandonment, together with all reimbursable expenses then due. If the project is resumed after being suspended for more than six (6) months, compensation shall be equitably adjusted, refer to professional fee schedule. Plans and Specifications Original drawings and specifications are instruments of service and shall remain the property of Hirsch & Associates Inc. until final payment has been received. Hirsch & Associates Inc. will supply City with one original set of plans and camera-ready specifications for duplication. Questions in Dispute All questions in dispute under this agreement may be submitted to arbitration when practical, and in accordance with the provisions of the American Arbitration Association. The prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees, to be fixed by the Arbitrator. In the event there are judicial proceedings instead of arbitration, reasonable attorney fees shall be fixed by the court. Landscape Architects are licensed and regulated by the California Board of Landscape Architects. Any questions concerning Landscape Architects may be answered by calling (916) 575-7230. Insurance Hirsch & Associates Inc. will maintain $1,000,000 Comprehensive General Liability Insurance, $1,000,000 Professional Liability Insurance, and $1,000,000 Workers Compensation Insurance throughout the duration of the project. Insurance certificates will be supplied prior to execution of contract. Execution To initiate professional services, Hirsch & Associates Inc. must receive an executed Agreement, Purchase Order or Services Agreement with our proposal as Exhibit "A". Respectfully Submitted, Mr. Patrick L. Hirsch, President Landscape Architect, ASLA #1710 7 Pmlmt Tito: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Title: BUTTERRIELD STAGE ROAD EXTENSION BELTWAY PROJECT PRIORITY:I Project Type: Circulation Description: Complete Buterfield Stage Road from Rancho California Rued to Mariana Hot Springs Road; Mumeta Hot Springs Road from Butterfield Stage Road to the City limits; and Nicolas Road from Burchfield Stage Road to Calle Grand, mating appror imasly 4.2 miles. Street insproverecom within the incorporated City limits will include curb, Polar, sidewalks, drainage facility, and s onlighO In sedition to the pavement. Department: Public Works— Account No. 210.165.723 Scope of Project: Project iroludea its formation of a community facilities dir ict acquisition of right-of-way, Noental analysis, design, and onsluctioo The design and combustion will include the for lanes on Blumenfeld Stage Road from Rancho California Road to MuoiM Hot Springs Road; four larew on Mount Hat Springs Road from Butterfield Stage Road to the City limits; and few lanes on Norms Road from Butterfield Stage Road M Cole Giresol, Benefit: Project will improve traffic circulation. Project Cost: Acluab Total Project to Wte 200AI0 101041 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Cast Administration P 130,746 5 MAN S 657,254 S 1,3381040 Aoquiotin 5 1,425,718 S 3001000 S 256.081 $ 1,991.799 Acquisition Facilirs' S 16300.00) S 16,N)t Cb11ummon P 7,eID,519 S 11,575,012 5 19,M5,530 Construction Engircmng $ 250,000 S 350,M P 600.00 Deign 5 150,000 $ 150,0100 5 300,000 Environmental P 30,000 S 250,0w $ 30lwo Touh 8 1556p64 $ 25,4]0,518 3 13.238.18] S S S P b365,369 Bounce u8 Funds - CFO (Ressipaugh Ranch) S 118,454 $ 25,470,518 5 13.238,387 $ 39,927,369 TUNIC S 1,438,000 S 1.438.O1) Tonal WntliuS: S 1556464 S 25747g518 $ 13R18,38] 5 S S S 40,265 ]69 Futuna, O i M Cobalt S 18,000 Annually Not, Assi Mil OWY w eWiot Misr note IP 'in dissrhol se 1�1— otelvesinallostisselpsi,oncii....h, essm a...amrucoins Ph..., I.ai Item No. 7 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Bob Johnson, Assistant City Manager DATE: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: Agreement for funding the acquisition of open space property between Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority and City of Temecula PREPARED BY: Bob Johnson, Assistant City Manager RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council Appropriate $261,500 to the CIP Budget for Phase II of Open Space Land Acquisition of Francis Property from General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance in the amount of $217,000 and DIF Open Space Fund in the amount of $44,500. 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: Resolution No. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING THE ACQUISITION OF OPEN SPACE PROPERTY BETWEEN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY AND CITY OF TEMECULA" BACKGROUND: N&A Development and Leasing Company, Inc. (Nassef M. Francis and Julie C. Francis) owned four parcels, or 113.58 acres, of open space land on the escarpment west of Old Town Temecula (exhibit attached). In September 2008, the City of Temecula partnered with the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) to acquire two of the four parcels, or 63.96 acres, of the Francis' property. The City contributed $500,000 and the RCA expended $203,000 plus closing costs to purchase these parcels. This land is now under the stewardship of the RCA and will be maintained as open space in perpetuity. N&A Development and Leasing Company, Inc. (the Francis') has expressed interest in selling the remaining two parcels, or 49.62 acres, of their property to the RCA. These parcels lie directly west and north of Old Town's Main Street alignment. Subsequently, the RCA authorized an appraisal of the Francis' property; the two parcels are valued at a combined total of $485,000. However, since the RCA does not have the funding to acquire this land at this time, they asked the City of Temecula if they would commit 54% of the total cost of purchase ($261,500) and the RCA would seek a Department of Interior Endangered Species Fish & Game Section 6 matching grant to cover the remaining 46% ($223,500) of the purchase price. The RCA and Francis' would be responsible for closing costs. During the October 20, 2009 Closed Session Meeting the City Council authorized staff to negotiate the purchase of these remaining two parcels on the escarpment west of the City of Temecula. Working with the RCA, the City has been successful in reaching a purchase price for both parcels. FISCAL IMPACT: The appraised value is $485,000 RCA staff has proposed leveraging City of Temecula funds with Federal Section 6 funding; the City would be obligated to pay 54% or $261,500 and the Section 6 match would be 46% or $223,500. State Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB) staff and the RCA Board have formally supported the acquisition. However, the WCB and RCA Boards must still approve the funding. It is expected that these approvals could occur as early as February 2010. Once funding is approved, it will take 90 to 120 days to actually deposit the Section 6 monies into escrow. The close of escrow date is expected to occur on 6/30/2010. Funding for the City's 54% commitment includes: $217,000 from a General Fund allocation resulting from the sale of 11 residential units to Jamboree Housing and $44,500 from DIF Open Space funds. An appropriation of these funds is required to acquire the property. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Agreement for funding the acquisition Purchase Agreement Maps of the parcels for sale RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING THE ACQUISITION OF OPEN SPACE PROPERTY BETWEEN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY AND CITY OF TEMECULA" THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Findings. The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares that: A. The Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority ("RCA") has entered into that certain agreement dated as of , 2009 entitled "Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property with Escrow Instructions" with N & A Development and Leasing Company, Inc. ("Purchase Agreement") for the purchase of approximately 49.62 acres of land west of the City of Temecula (the "Property") as identified on Exhibit A, Legal Description, of the Purchase Agreement. B. RCA will dedicate the Property to open space uses with public trails. C. The Property is located outside of the City boundaries, but within the City's Sphere of Influence. D. Acquisition of the Property and its dedication to open space and trail purposes will provide substantial value to the City of Temecula. The Property is a prominent natural feature dominating the western viewscape for the City in the areas known as the "Escarpment." Use of the Property for these purposes the fulfills goals and policies of the Open Space/Conservation Element of the General Plan for the City of Temecula and particularly the following: Goal 3, conservation of important biological habitats and protection of plant and animal species of concern, wildlife movement corridors, and general biodiversity; Goal 5, conservation of open space areas for a balance of recreation, scenic enjoyment, and protection of natural resources and features; Policy 5.1, conserve the western escarpment and southern ridgelines, the Santa Margarita River, slopes in Sphere of Influence; and Goal 8, development of a trail system that serves both recreational and transportation needs. E. Acquisition of the Property by RCA with the contribution from the City and the dedication of the Property to open space and trail purposes is consistent with the City's General Plan and each element thereof. F. The City Council has duly considered all terms and conditions of this Agreement and finds and determines that the Agreement is in the best interests of the City and the health, safety, and welfare of their residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable State and local law requirements. 2. Approval of Funding Agreement. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves that certain agreement entitled "AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING THE ACQUISITION OF OPEN SPACE PROPERTY BETWEEN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY AND CITY OF TEMECULA" (the "Agreement"), with such changes in the Agreement as may be mutually agreed upon by the RCA and City Manager as are in substantial conformance with the form of such Agreement on file in the Office of the City Clerk. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the Agreement, on behalf of the City. A copy of the final Agreement when executed by the Mayor shall be placed on file in the Office of the City Clerk. 3. City Manager's Authority. The City Manager (or his designee), is hereby authorized, on behalf of the City, to take all actions necessary and convenient to carry out and implement the Agreement, and to administer the City's obligations, responsibilities and duties to be performed under the said Agreement., including but not limited to, approval and execution on behalf of the City of the such escrow instructions, escrow agreements, implementing agreements, acceptances, certificates, estoppel letters, implementing agreements and other similar agreements and documents as contemplated by or described in the Agreement or as necessary and convenient to implement the Agreement. 4. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of , Jeff Comerchero, 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. - was duly and regularly 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: 1►to] x.�Ko1l1►[MIN d/IAd/l.1J:4:& 1 ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING THE ACQUISITION OF OPEN SPACE PROPERTY BETWEEN WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY AND CITY OF TEMECULA THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority, a public agency and joint powers authority ("RCA") and the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("M') and shall be dated as of January 12, 2010. In consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Recitals. This Agreement is made with respect to the following facts and purposes, which each party finds and determines to be true and correct: A. RCA is a joint powers authority, of which the City is a member agency, that was formed to implement the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ("MSHCP"), a multi -jurisdictional habitat conservation plan focusing on the conservation of both sensitive species and associated habitats to address biological and ecological diversity conservation needs in western Riverside County, and setting aside significant areas of undisturbed land for the conservation of sensitive habitat while preserving open space and recreational opportunities. B. RCA has entered into that certain agreement dated as of September _, 2009 entitled "Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property with Escrow Instructions" with N & A Development and Leasing Company, Inc. ("Purchase Agreement") for the purchase of approximately 49.62 acres of land west of the City of Temecula (the "Property') as identified on Exhibit A, Legal Description, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. C. RCA will designate the Property as Additional Reserve Lands pursuant to the MSHCP. (1 MSHCP, §§ 3.2.1 & 3.2.2; Implementing Agreement, §§ 3.3 & 3.72, p. 4.) D. The Property is located outside of the City boundaries, but within the City's Sphere of Influence. E. Acquisition of the Property and its dedication to open space and trail purposes will provide substantial value to the City of Temecula. The Property is a prominent natural feature dominating the western viewscape for the City in the areas known as the "Escarpment." Use of the Property for these purposes the fulfills goals and policies of the Open Space/Conservation Element of the General Plan for the City of Temecula and particularly the following: Goal 3, conservation of important biological habitats and protection of plant and animal species of concern, wildlife movement corridors, and general biodiversity; Goal 5, conservation of open space areas for a balance of recreation, scenic enjoyment, and protection of natural resources and features; Policy 5.1, conserve the western escarpment and southern ridgelines, the Santa Margarita River, slopes in Sphere of Influence; and Goal 8, development of a trail system that serves both recreational and transportation needs. F. City desires to assist the RCA in funding the purchase of the Property. G. Acquisition of the Property by RCA with the contribution from the City and the dedication of the Property to open space and trail purposes is consistent with the City's General Plan and each element thereof. H. The City Council has duly considered all terms and conditions of this Agreement and finds and determines that the Agreement is in the best interests of the City and the health, safety, and welfare of their residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable State and local law requirements. 2. City Contribution of Funds for Acquisition of Property. A. City shall pay to RCA the sum of TWO HUNDRED SIXTY ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND NO/100'S DOLLARS ($261,500.00) towards the purchase price of the Property. B. City shall pay such sum into the escrow for the purchase of the Property pursuant to the Purchase Agreement ("Escrow') within five (5) business days of notice to the City by RCA that the Escrow is ready to close. RCA's notice to the City shall provide directions for the wiring of the City funds to Escrow. C. Within five (5) business days of the close of Escrow, RCA shall provide City with a copy of the Grant Deed and a closing statement. 3. RCA to Dedicate Property to Open Space and Trail Uses A. As soon as practical, but not later than three (3) months from the date of the close of Escrow, RCA shall record a restrictive covenant, or another similar document, as determined by the RCA, to dedicate the Property to open space and trail uses that would be consistent with the MSHCP. B. City shall be a third party beneficiary to such restrictive covenant or similar document with the right to enforce its provisions. C. City shall consent to such restrictive covenant or similar document prior to its recordation, provided such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 4. Establishment of a Trail System on Property. A. City may use its reasonable efforts to establish a trail system on the Property for pedestrians and equestrians, consistent with the MSHCP. RCA agrees to cooperate with City's efforts in this regard. B. City agrees to pay for all costs associated with and undertake all other actions necessary in constructing and maintaining any trail system that may be developed on the Property and agrees to indemnify RCA against any liability, except such liability that may be the result of RCA's negligence. C. The trail system shall be approved by City on or before one (1) year from the close of Escrow. RCA agrees to work with the City to assure the trail system's consistency with the MSHCP. 6. Consideration of Annexation of Property into City. A. City may use its reasonable efforts to investigate the feasibility of annexing the Property into the City. RCA shall cooperate in the process to the extent appropriate. B. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to be, nor shall it be construed to be, a commitment on the part of the City to annex the Property into the City. 6. General A. 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) 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 written notice to the other party: City: CITY OF TEMECULA 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager With a copy to: Richards, Watson & Gershon 355 South Grand Ave., 40th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Attn: Peter M. Thorson RCA: WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 3403 Tenth Street, Suite 320 P.O. Box 1667 Riverside, CA 92502-1667 Attn: Executive Director With a copy to: Best, Best & Krieger LLP 3750 University Ave., Suite 400 P.O. Box 1028 Riverside, CA 92502-1028 Attn: Michelle Ouellette B. This Agreement is the result of negotiations between the Parties and is intended by the Parties to be a final expression of their understanding with respect to the matters herein contained. This Agreement supersedes any and all other prior agreements and understandings, oral or written, in connection therewith. C. Amendments hereto must be in writing executed by the appropriate authorities of the City and RCA. D. The parties agree that each party has reviewed and revised this Agreement and have had the opportunity to have their counsel and real estate advisors review and revise this agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. E. In this Agreement the neuter gender includes the feminine and masculine, and singular number includes the plural, and the words "person" and "party" include corporation, partnership, firm, trust, or association wherever the context so requires. F. Each person signing below personally warrants and represents to the parties that the party he or she represents has approved this Agreement, intends to be bound by its terms and that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of the party they represent. G. The parties acknowledge that time is of the essence in this Agreement H. If any term or provision of this Agreement shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected. I. A waiver or breach of covenant or provision in this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any other covenant or provision in this Agreement, and no waiver shall be valid unless in writing and executed by the waiving party. An extension of time for performance of any obligation or act shall not be deemed an extension of the time for the performance of any other obligation or act. J. Each party acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement is valid, binding and enforceable against the party. K. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts. Each shall be deemed an original and all, taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation Jeff Comerchero Mayor Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY, a public agency and a joint powers authority Charles V. Landry Executive Director Honey Bernas Clerk of the RCA Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: Best Best & Krieger, LLP General Counsel EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Criteria Cells = Project Site e wuwuS 11,11771 o soo 1,000 2000 3,000 City iPreviously Acquired Feet 0, AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ECO PY THIS AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PR PERTY WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ("Agreement') is entered into as of A 20Qr (the "Effective Date") between the WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY, a public agency and a joint powers authority (referred to interchangeably herein as "RCA" and as "Purchaser"), and N & A DEVELOPMENT AND LEASING COMPANY, INC. (referred to herein as "Seller"). RECITALS A. Seller is the owner of approximately 49.62 acres of real property located in Riverside County, Assessor's Parcel Number 940-080-002 and 940-090-001 ("Real Property ), more particularly described in the Legal Description attached as Exhibit A. B. Purchaser is desirous of purchasing the Property to augment the wildlife and plant habitat conservation region in the same geographic area, and Seller desires to sell the Property, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above Recitals, which are incorporated into this Agreement, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, Seller and Purchaser hereby agree as follows: 1. Definitions. As used in this Agreement the following terms shall have the following definitions: "Agreement' is defined in the preamble. "Approved Exceptions" is defined in Section 9(c). "Assignment" is defined in Section 19. "Close of Escrow" is defined in Section I l (d). "Closing Date" is defined in Section I I(d). "Deed" is defined in Section 1 l(b)(i). "Disapproved Exception" is defined in Section 9(d) "Effective Date" is defined in the preamble. "Environmental Laws" means all federal, state, local, or municipal laws, rules, orders, regulations, statutes, ordinances, codes, decrees, or requirements of any government authority regulating, relating to, or imposing liability or standards of conduct concerning any Hazardous Substance (as defined subsequently in this Agreement), or pertaining to occupational health or industrial hygiene (and only to the extent that the occupational health or industrial RVPUB\wHSM4892.2 hygiene laws, ordinances, or regulations relate to Hazardous Substances on, under, or about the Property), occupational or environmental conditions on, under, or about the Property, as now in effect, including without limitation, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) [42 U.S.C.A. §§ 9601 et seq.]; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) and the Solid Waste Disposal Act [42 U.S.C.A. §§ 6901 et seq.]; the Clean Water Act, also known as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) [33 U.S.C.A. §§ 1251 et seq.]; the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) [15 U.S.C.A. §§ 2601 et seq.]; the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA) [49 U.S.C.A. §§ 1801 et seq.]; the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) [7 U.S.C.A. §§ 136 et seq.]; the Clean Air Act (CAA) [42 U.S.C.A. §§ 7401 et seq.]; the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) [42 U.S.C.A. §§ 300f et seq.]; the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) [30 U.S.C.A. §§ 1201 et seq.]; the Emergency Planning and Community Right -to -Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA or EPCRTKA) [42 U.S.C.A. §§ 11001 et seq.]; the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHA) [29 U.S.C.A. §§ 655, 657]; the California laws regarding the underground storage of hazardous substances [H & S C §§ 25280 et seq.]; the Hazardous Substance Account Act [H & S C §§ 25300 et seq.]; the California laws regarding hazardous waste control [H & S C §§ 25100 et seq.]; the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 [H & S C §§ 25249.5 et seq.]; the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act [Wat C §§ 13000 et seq.], and any amendments of or regulations promulgated under the statutes cited above and any other federal, state, or local law, statute, ordinance, or regulation now in effect that pertains to occupational health or industrial hygiene, and only to the extent that the occupational health or industrial hygiene laws, ordinances, or regulations relate to Hazardous Substances on, under, or about the Property, or the regulation or protection of the environment, including ambient air, soil, soil vapor, groundwater, surface water, or land use. "EPA' is defined in Section (b) in the definition for "Hazardous Substances." "Escrow" is defined in Section 4. "Escrow Agent" is defined in Section 4. "Exception' is defined in Section 9(c). "Feasibility Period' is defined in Section 5(a). "FIRPTA Affidavit" is defined in Section 11(b)(ii). "Hazardous Substances" includes without limitation: (a) Those substances included within the definitions of "hazardous substance," "hazardous waste," "hazardous material " "toxic substance," "solid waste," or "pollutant or contaminant" in CERCLA, RCRA, TSCA, HMTA, or under any other Environmental Law; (b) Those substances listed in the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) Table [49 CFR 172.101 ], or by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or any successor agency, as hazardous substances [40 CFR Part 302]; RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 2 (c) Other substances, materials, and wastes that are or become regulated or classified as hazardous or toxic under federal, state, or local laws or regulations; and (d) Any material, waste, or substance that is: (i) a petroleum or refined petroleum product, (ii) asbestos, (iii) polychlorinated biphenyl, (iv) designated as a hazardous substance pursuant to 33 U.S.C.A. § 1321 or listed pursuant to 33 U.S.C.A. § 1317, (v) a flammable explosive, or (vi) a radioactive material. "Installation Contract" and "Installation Notice" are defined in Section 10. "Laws" shall mean all federal, state and local laws, codes, ordinances and regulations, excluding Environmental Laws. "Preliminary Report" is defined in Section 9(a). "Prevailing Party" is defined in Section 20. 'Pro ert ' means collectively the Real Property, all improvements presently or hereafter existing on the Real Property, all water rights, all mineral rights, all plans and specifications relating to the present or planned construction of improvements on the Real Property, including all governmental permits or licenses, utility contracts, service contracts, maintenance contracts, operating contracts, or other intangible property (if any) now or in the future owned by Seller in connection with the development, operation, or ownership of the Project or other rights relating to the ownership, use, or operation of the Property, including all materials purchased by Seller for use on the Project or in the construction of improvements on the Project, and all of Seller's rights in and to any fees paid to any governmental agency or utility. "Purchase Price" is defined in Section 3. "Purchaser" is defined in the preamble. "RCA" is defined in the preamble. "Seller" is defined in the preamble. "Title Policy" is defined in Section I I(a). "Withholding Affidavit" is defined in Section 11(b)(iii). RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 2. Purchase and Sale. Seller agrees to sell and Purchaser agrees to purchase the Property subject to the terms and conditions in this Agreement. 3. Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Property shall be FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100's DOLLARS ($485,000.00) ("Purchase Price'). On or before the Closing Date, Purchaser shall deposit with Escrow Agent the full amount of the Purchase Price in cash or in immediately available funds. 4. Escrow. By this Agreement, Purchaser and Seller establish an escrow ("Escrow") with a reputable title company chosen by Purchaser (the "Escrow Agent'), subject to the provisions of the standard conditions for acceptance of escrow and the terms and conditions in this Agreement, with a signed counterpart of this document to be delivered as escrow instructions to Escrow Agent. In the event of any conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the standard conditions for acceptance of escrow, the terms of this Agreement shall control. RCA's agent for matters related to the Closing.of Escrow shall be the County of Riverside's Department of Facilities Management. 5. Feasibility Period. (a) During the period commencing on the date of this Agreement and terminating on a date which is sixty (60) days from the date of this Agreement ("Feasibility Period"), Purchaser may undertake at Purchaser's expense an inspection of the Property. Said inspection may include: (i) a review of the physical condition of the Property, including but not limited to, inspection and examination of soils, environmental factors, Hazardous Substances, if any, and archeological information relating to the Property; and (ii) a review and investigation of the effect of any zoning, maps, permits, reports, engineering data, regulations, ordinances, and laws affecting the Property. Within ten (10) days following the full execution of this Agreement by both parties, Seller shall deliver to Purchaser copies of all surveys and other documents pertaining to the physical or environmental condition of the Property that are owned by or in the possession of Seller. (b) If Purchaser's environmental consultant requires additional time to determine the existence and extent of any Hazardous Substances on the Property, Purchaser shall have the right, exercisable by delivering written notice to Seller prior to the expiration of the Feasibility Period, to extend the Feasibility Period for up to an additional sixty (60) days to complete the testing. (c) If Purchaser disapproves of the results of the inspection and review or the results of any Phase I Environmental Report, Purchaser may elect, prior to the last day of the Feasibility Period (or any extension thereof), to terminate this Agreement by giving Seller written notification prior to the last day of the Feasibility Period (or any extension thereof). If Purchaser fails to properly notify Seller of the intent to terminate this Agreement, Purchaser shall be deemed to be satisfied with the results of the inspection and shall be deemed to have waived the right to terminate this Agreement pursuant to this provision. 6. Conditions to Purchaser's Performance. Purchaser's obligation to pe%form under this Agreement is subject to the following conditions: RVPUB\wHS\764892.2 4 (a) Purchaser's approval of the condition of the Property as provided in Section 5; (b) Purchaser's obtaining, by the Close of Escrow, financing from grant funds obtained from the State of California and the City of Temecula in an amount suitable for the acquisition of the Property. If approval of grant funding has not been obtained by Purchaser no later than June 30, 2010, then Seller shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon ten (10) business days written notice to Purchaser unless within said notice period, Purchaser provides Seller with assurances reasonably acceptable to Seller that alternative funding is available for closing no later than the Closing Date; (c) Seller's representations and warranties in this Agreement being correct as of the date of this Agreement and as of the Close of Escrow; (d) No adverse material change shall have occurred with respect to the condition of the Property from the end of the Feasibility Period through the Closing Date; (e) Seller's performance of all obligations under this Agreement; (f) Escrow Agent being prepared to issue the Title Policy on the Close of Escrow, subject only to the Approved Exceptions; and (g) This Agreement shall be expressly contingent upon formal acceptance and approval by the Purchaser's Board of Directors of this Agreement. To allow members of the Board of Directors to comply with Government Code section 84308, Seller agrees to disclose any contribution(s) given to members of the Board of Directors of more than $250 within the preceding twelve (12) months on the form attached hereto as Exhibit "D." 7. . Conditions to Seller's Performance. Seller's obligation to perform under this Agreement is subject to Purchaser's performance of all of the obligations which it is required to perform pursuant to this Agreement. 8. Access. (a) Access to the Property during the Feasibility Period shall be given to Purchaser, its agents, employees, or contractors during normal business hours upon at least one (1) business day's notice to Seller, at their own cost and risk, for any purposes, including, but not limited to, inspecting the Property, taking samples of the soil, and conducting an environmental audit (including an investigation of past and current uses of the Property). Purchaser shall indemnify and defend Seller against and hold Seller harmless from all losses, costs, damages, liabilities, and expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable attorney fees arising out of Purchaser's entry onto the Property or any activity thereon by Purchaser or its agents, employees, or contractors prior to the Close of Escrow except to the extent any such losses, costs, damages, liabilities, and expenses arise out of the gross negligence or willful acts of Seller. Any entry onto the Property by Purchaser or its agents, employees, or contractors shall be at reasonable times. The provisions of this Section shall survive the Close of Escrow. RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 5 (b) In addition to the provisions of Section 8(a), Purchaser and its agents, employees, or contractors shall have the right, from the date of this Agreement until the Closing Date, to contact any federal, state, or local governmental authority or agency to investigate any matters relating to the Property. Seller agrees to cooperate reasonably with Purchaser and its agents, employees, or contractors in the inspection of the Property and agrees to deliver to Purchaser all information in Seller's possession or control pertaining to the condition of the Property, including engineering and environmental reports, studies, tests, monitoring results, and related documentation. 9. Title. (a) Within ten (10) days following the execution of this Agreement by both parties, Purchaser shall cause Escrow Agent to issue to Purchaser (with a copy to Seller) a preliminary report for an ALTA Owner's Policy for the Property, setting forth all liens, encumbrances, easements, restrictions, conditions, pending litigation, judgments, administrative proceedings, and other matters of record affecting Seller's title to the Property ("Preliminary Report'), together with copies of all documents relating to title exceptions referred to in the Preliminary Report. (b) Seller agrees to deliver to Purchaser, promptly following the full execution and delivery of this Agreement, copies of any survey of the Property in the possession of Seller. (c) Purchaser shall approve or disapprove, in writing to Seller with a copy to Escrow Agent, each exception shown on the Preliminary Report and each encroachment, overlap, or boundary line dispute, or any other matter that materially and adversely affects title to the Property or that violates any law, rule, or regulation (each an "Exception') within thirty (30) days following the receipt of the Preliminary Report or the execution of this Agreement, whichever is later ("Review Period"). Purchaser's failure to approve or disapprove within the Review Period shall be deemed to be a disapproval of the Exceptions. The Exceptions approved by Purchaser hereunder shall be referred to as the "Approved Exceptions." (d) If any Exception is disapproved or deemed disapproved (each a "Disapproved Exception"), Seller shall have the right, but not the obligation, within thirty (30) days following expiration of the Review Period, to cause each Disapproved Exception to be discharged, satisfied, released, or terminated, as the case may be, of record, and in a form that is reasonably satisfactory to Purchaser and Escrow Agent, all at Seller's sole cost and expense. Seller authorizes Escrow Agent to disburse from the cash portion of the Purchase Price and proceeds otherwise disbursable to Seller upon Closing the sum sufficient to discharge any Disapproved Exception that may be discharged only by the payment of money. If Seller is unable or unwilling to obtain a discharge, satisfaction, release, or termination of any Disapproved Exception within the period specified above, then this Agreement shall automatically terminate ten (10) business days after expiration of the thirty day period for curing the Disapproved Exceptions or after Seller advises Purchaser in writing that Seller is unable or unwilling to cause such discharge, satisfaction, release, or termination, whichever occurs first, unless within such ten business day period, Purchaser waives in writing such Disapproved Exception, in which event such Disapproved Exception shall be deemed an Approved Exception under this Agreement. If this Agreement terminates pursuant to the foregoing sentence, then Seller shall RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 pay all charges of the Escrow Agent in connection with this transaction, including the charges of the surveyor and environmental engineering company, the parties shall be relieved of all further obligations and liabilities to each other under this Agreement except as otherwise provided herein, and all funds and documents deposited with Escrow Agent shall be promptly refunded or returned, as the case may be, by Escrow Agent to the depositing party. Anything above to the contrary notwithstanding, it is understood and agreed that Purchaser's indemnity obligations under Section 8 shall not terminate upon termination of this Agreement pursuant to this or any other provision hereof. 10. Marker Installation Contract. Seller shall execute a "fixed price" or "not to exceed price" contract for the installation of survey markers and white pipes [at a minimum of six (6) feet in height] ("Installation Contract"). Survey markers shall be installed in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance 460, section 9.10 and Ordinance 461, section 21 (attached herein as Exhibit `B"). Seller shall deposit with Escrow Agent prior to Close of Escrow a copy of the Installation Contract and Escrow Agent shall retain in Escrow sufficient of Seller's funds to pay the Installation Contract, which payment may occur after the Close of Escrow. Seller shall provide Purchaser and Escrow Agent with a Completion Notice, evidencing the completion of all work under the Installation Contract, along with a copy of the survey required to install survey markers, as required by State law. Within thirty (30) days after receipt of such Completion Notice, Purchaser shall provide written notice to Seller and Escrow Agent ("Installation Notice") that RCA approves of all work done under the Installation Contract; or, in the alternative, such Installation Notice shall detail any objections which RCA may have to the work done under the Installation Contract. If Purchaser fails to provide any Installation Notice within thirty (30) days of receipt of any Completion Notice, then of all work done under the Installation Contract shall be deemed to have been approved by Purchaser. Upon Seller's receipt of an Installation Notice containing objections or non-compliance issues, Seller shall arrange with the contractor to correct all items listed in the Installation Notice. Upon receipt of Seller's second Completion Notice (evidencing the correction of all items listed in Purchaser's Installation Notice), Purchaser shall have fifteen (15) days to provide a second Installation Notice to Seller and Escrow Agent., Should Purchaser's second Installation Notice contain any objections or corrections not yet satisfactorily completed, then Seller shall once again arrange for the remaining corrections. Upon completion, Seller shall once again issue a Completion Notice to Purchaser and to Escrow Agent. In the event all objections and corrections have not yet been satisfied/completed, Purchaser shall have the right to engage a different contractor to complete the work and Seller agrees to bear the costs for the different contract to complete the work described in Purchaser's Installation Notice(s). Any contractor retained by Seller or Purchaser under this Section 10 shall have a right of entry onto the Property. Escrow Agent's payment in full of the Installation Contract (directly to the contractor) shall only occur upon Escrow Agent's receipt of the following documents: (i) Purchaser's confirmation to Escrow Agent that all work under the Installation Contract has been completed satisfactorily; and (ii) a conditional lien release by contractor (if required) for the full payment to be made under the Installation Contract. RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 7 11. Close of Escrow. (a) Title. Simultaneously with the Close of Escrow, Escrow Agent shall issue an ALTA Standard Policy of Title Insurance (formerly referred to as a CLTA Title Policy) ("Title Policv') in the amount of the Purchase Price, subject only to Approved Exceptions. (b) Seller's Deposits into Escrow. Seller shall deposit with Escrow Agent on or prior to the Close of Escrow the following documents: (i) a grant deed in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "C" executed and acknowledged by Seller, conveying to Purchaser good and marketable fee simple title to the Property, subject only to the Approved Exceptions ("Deed"); (ii) Seller's affidavit of nonforeign status as contemplated by Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended ("FIRPTA Affidavit"); (iii) California Franchise Tax Board Form 593-C regarding the withholding of California taxes on the sale of California real estate ("Withholdine Affidavit'); (iv) copy of the Installation Contract and the Completion Notice described in Section 10; and (v) Seller's approval of the draft of Escrow Agent's closing statement. (c) Purchaser's Deposits into Escrow. Purchaser shall deposit with Escrow Agent, on or prior to the Close of Escrow, the balance of the Purchase Price in accordance with Section 3, RCA's approval of the Survey, the Certificate of Acceptance for the Grant Deed, and Purchaser's approval of the draft of Escrow Agent's closing statement. Purchaser shall deposit with Escrow Agent prior to or after the Close of Escrow, the documents related to the Installation Contract described in Section 10. (d) Closing Date. The conveyance of the Property to Purchaser and the closing of this transaction ("Close of Escrow") shall take place following the satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section 6 and Section 7, but in any event shall occur no later than June 30, 2010 ("Closing Date'), except as otherwise agreed by Purchaser and Seller in writing. Either Purchaser or Seller shall have the right to terminate Escrow and this Agreement if the conditions set forth in Section 6 (for Purchaser) or Section 7 (for Seller) have not been satisfied as of the Closing Date. (e) Closing Statement. No more than two days prior to the Closing Date, Escrow Agent shall deliver to Purchaser and to Seller, for their respective approvals, drafts of Escrow Agent's closing statement showing all receipts and disbursements of the Escrow. (0 Closing Instructions. On the Closing Date (or any extension thereof), Escrow Agent shall close Escrow as follows: RVPUB\WHS1764892.2 (i) record the Deed (marked for return to Purchaser) with the Riverside County Recorder; (ii) issue the Title Policy; (iii) prorate taxes, assessments, rents, and other charges as provided in Section 11(g); (iv) retain an amount of Seller's funds sufficient to pay the contractor under the Installation Contract described in Section 10; (v) disburse to Seller the Purchase Price less prorated amounts and charges to be paid by, retained for, or on behalf of Seller; (vi) charge Purchaser for those costs and expenses to be paid by Purchaser pursuant to this Agreement and disburse any net funds remaining after the preceding disbursements to Purchaser; (vii) prepare and deliver to both Purchaser and Seller one signed copy of Escrow Agent's closing statement showing all receipts and disbursements of the Escrow; (viii) deliver to Purchaser an Assignment (if any), the FIRPTA Affidavit, and the Withholding Affidavit; If Escrow Agent is unable to simultaneously perform all of the instructions set forth above, Escrow Agent shall notify Purchaser and Seller and retain all funds and documents pending receipt of further instructions jointly issued by Purchaser and Seller. It is mutually further agreed by and between Purchaser and Seller that if all, and each and every one, of the terms and conditions of this Purchase Agreement are not met within their respective specified time periods, then the Purchaser's deposit, if any, shall be immediately returned to Purchaser, this Purchase Agreement and the Escrow shall terminate and neither party shall have any further rights or obligations to the other party, and the Escrow shall be cancelled, unless extended in writing by both Purchaser and Seller. (g) Cost Allocations. Escrow Agent shall allocate the following costs at the Close of Escrow: (i) Seller shall pay: (A) all governmental conveyancing fees and taxes due upon transfer of the Property, provided that no documentary transfer tax will be payable with respect to this transaction, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 11922; (B) all charges in connection with issuance of a ALTA Standard Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of the Purchase Price; RVPUBMHS\764892.2 9 (C) all charges in connection with the Installation Contract; and (D) all charges in connection with a record of survey, if required; (E) one half of the escrow fee charged by Escrow Agent. (ii) Purchaser shall pay: (A) the recording charges in connection with recordation of the Deed; provided that this Deed is entitled to be recorded without a fee pursuant to Government Code Section 27383 because the Deed is for the benefit of a public agency; (B) one half of the escrow fee charged by Escrow Agent. (iii) Real Estate Taxes. Seller shall pay real property taxes at the Close of Escrow based on the most current real property tax bill available, including any additional property taxes that may be assessed after the Close of Escrow but that relate to a period prior to the Close of Escrow, regardless of when notice of those taxes is received or who receives the notice. Seller may seek reimbursement from the Riverside County Tax Assessor's office for any property taxes that have been assessed for a period after the Close of Escrow as Purchaser is a public agency exempt from payment of such taxes. Purchaser further agrees to cooperate with Seller to provide any necessary information to the Assessor's office in connection with such request for refund. (iv) Bonds, and Assessments. All present and future installments of any bond or assessment that constitutes a lien on the Property as of the Close of Escrow shall be paid by Seller. (h) Possession. Possession of the Property shall be delivered to Purchaser at the Close of Escrow. 12. Damage and Destruction. (a) If any portion of the Real Property is damaged by earthquake, mudslide, fire, release of or exposure to any Hazardous Substances, or any other casualty (other than any damage caused by Purchaser or its employees, agents, or contractors) prior to the Close of Escrow, such that the cost of fully repairing and correcting such damage is less than ten percent (10%) of the Purchase Price, Purchaser and Seller shall consummate this Agreement, but the cash portion of the Purchase Price payable at the Close of Escrow shall be reduced by an amount necessary to fully repair or correct any damage to the Real Property. (b) If any portion of the Real Property is damaged by earthquake, mudslide, fire, release of or exposure to any Hazardous Substances, or any other casualty (other than any damage caused by Purchaser or its employees, agents, or contractors), prior to the Close of Escrow, such that the cost of fully repairing or correcting such damage exceeds ten percent (10%) of the Purchase Price, as determined by the Purchaser, Purchaser may elect either (i) to RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 10 terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Seller, in which event neither party shall have any further obligations under this Agreement except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, or (ii) to proceed with the purchase of the Property, in which event this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, and Seller shall pay or assign to Purchaser (A) any amount due from or paid by any insurance company or any other party as a result of the damage and (B) the amount of any deductible under Seller's insurance policy and/or the cost of repairing or correcting such damage not covered by insurance shall be credited against the cash portion of the Purchase Price and shall reduce the amount payable at Close of Escrow pursuant to Section 3 hereof. 13. Condemnation. (a) If any portion of the Property is taken by condemnation or eminent domain by a third party or is the subject of a threatened or pending condemnation or eminent domain proceeding by a third party that has not been consummated prior to the Close of Escrow resulting in a decrease in the value of the Property in an amount not exceeding ten percent (10%) of the Purchase Price, Purchaser and Seller shall consummate this Agreement without change in the Purchase Price, provided that Seller shall assign to Purchaser Seller's rights to all awards for the condemnation or taking and shall indemnify and guarantee Purchaser with respect to any costs incurred by Purchaser in repairing and restoring the Property that are not paid by such awards. (b) If any portion of the Property is taken by condemnation or eminent domain by a third party or is the subject of a threatened or pending condemnation or eminent domain proceeding by a third party that has not been consummated prior to the Close of Escrow resulting in a decrease in the value of the Property in an amount in excess of ten percent (10%) of the Purchase Price, as determined by the Purchaser, Purchaser may elect either to terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Seller and Escrow Agent or to consummate this Agreement, in which event Seller shall assign to Purchaser Seller's rights to all awards for the condemnation or taking, but without the indemnity and guarantee provided in subsection (a) above. Upon termination, neither party shall have any further obligations under this Agreement except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. 14. Seller's Representations and Warranties. Seller represents and warrants to Purchaser that as of the date of this Agreement and as of the Close of Escrow: (a) Hazardous Substances. The Property is: (i) free from Hazardous Substances; (ii) contains no buried or partially buried storage tanks located on the Property, (iii) has not been used for the generation, storage or disposal of any Hazardous Substance and no Hazardous Substance has been spilled, disposed of, or stored on, under, or at the Property; and (iv) has never been used as a dump or landfill; (b) Compliance with Law. The Property is in material compliance with all applicable Laws and Environmental Laws; (c) Leases. No recorded or unrecorded leases, licenses, or other agreements allowing any third party rights to use or rights of possession in the Property are or will be in force as of the Closing; RVPUB\wHS\764892.2 11 (d) Litigation and Investigations. There is no pending or threatened litigation, administrative proceeding, or other legal or governmental action with respect to the Property, and Seller has received no notice, warning, administrative complaint, judicial complaint, or other formal or informal notice alleging that conditions on the Property are or have been in violation of any Laws or Environmental Laws, or informing Seller that the Property is subject to investigation or inquiry regarding the violation of any Laws or Environrmental Laws. (e) Condition of Property. There are no natural or artificial conditions upon the Property or any part of the Property that could result in a material and adverse change in the condition of the Property; (f) Access to the Property. There is vehicular access to the Property either directly through a public right of way or through a recorded easement; and (g) No Insolvency Proceedings. Seller has not (i) made a general assignment for the benefit of creditors; (ii) filed any voluntary petition in bankruptcy or suffered the filing of any involuntary petition by its creditors; (iii) suffered the appointment of a receiver to take possession of all or substantially all of its assets; (iv) suffered the attachment or other judicial seizure of substantially all of its assets; or (v) admitted in writing its inability to pay its debts as they come due. (h) No Other Agreements, Undertakings or Tenancies. Seller will not enter into any agreements or undertake any new obligations prior to Close of Escrow which will in any way burden, encumber or otherwise affect the Property without the prior written consent of Purchaser. (i) Disclosure. Seller has disclosed to Purchaser all information, records, and studies in Seller's possession in connection with the Property, including any reports or studies concerning Hazardous Substances. All information that Seller has delivered to Purchaser, either directly or through Seller's agents, is accurate and Seller has disclosed all material facts concerning the operation, development, or condition of the Property. Seller shall promptly notify Purchaser of any facts that would cause any of the representations contained in this Agreement to be untrue as of the Close of Escrow. If Purchaser reasonably concludes that a fact materially and adversely affects the Property, Purchaser shall have the option to terminate this Agreement by delivering written notice to Seller and Escrow Agent. If Purchaser terminates this Agreement pursuant to this Section, Escrow Agent shall cancel the Escrow and Seller shall be responsible for all costs of escrow. 15. Indemnity. (a) Seller agrees to indemnify, defend and hold Purchaser harmless from all Damages (as defined in sub -section (b) below) to the fullest extent not prohibited by applicable law, and all other costs and expenses incurred by reason of (i) the breach or inaccuracy of any warranties and representations in Section 14, and/or (ii) any third -party claims arising out of or related to the ownership and use of the Property with respect to any period prior to the Close of Escrow. RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 12 (b) Definition of Damages. "Damages" mean all liabilities, demands, claims, actions or causes of action, regulatory, legislative or judicial proceedings, assessments, levies, losses, fines, penalties, damages, costs and expenses, in each case as awarded by a court or arbitrator, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees. (c) Notice; Third Party Claims. (i) Whenever any claim shall arise for indemnification under this Section 15, the party entitled to indemnification ("indemnified nartv") shall promptly notify, in writing, the other party from whom indemnity may be sought under this Section 15 ("indemnifying party"), of the claim and, when known, the facts constituting the basis for such claim; provided, however, that the indemnified party's failure to give such notice shall not affect any rights or remedies of such indemnified party hereunder with respect to indemnification for Damages except to the extent that the indemnifying party is prejudiced thereby. (ii) In the event of any claim for indemnification hereunder resulting from or in connection with any claim or legal proceeding by a third party, the notice to the indemnifying party shall specify, if known, the amount or any estimate of the amount of the liability arising therefrom. Neither the indemnified party nor any indemnifying party shall settle or compromise any claim by a third party for which the indemnified party is entitled to indemnification hereunder, without the prior written consent of the other party, unless suit shall have been instituted against the indemnified party and the indemnifying party shall not have taken control of such suit after notification thereof as provided hereinafter. (iii) Upon receipt of a claim, the indemnifying party shall promptly undertake the defense of the claim with counsel reasonably acceptable to the indemnified party. At its own expense, the indemnified party shall have the right to participate in the defense with counsel of its own choice. If the indemnified party has assumed the defense of any such claim or legal proceeding on account of the indemnifying party's failure or refusal to prosecute such claim or legal proceeding, then all costs and expenses incurred by the indemnified party in connection with such assumption shall constitute Damages. Each party agrees to cooperate fully with the other, such cooperation to include, without limitation, attendance at depositions and the provision of relevant documents as may be reasonably requested by the indemnifying party; provided, however, that the indemnifying party will hold the indemnified party harmless from all of its expenses and costs, including attorneys' fees and costs, as and when incurred in connection with such cooperation by the indemnified party. 16. Seller's Covenants. Commencing with the full execution of this Agreement by both parties and until the Close of Escrow: (a) Seller shall not permit any liens, encumbrances, or easements to be placed on the Property, other than the Approved Exceptions, nor shall Seller enter into any agreement regarding the sale, rental, management, repair, improvement, or any other matter affecting the RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 13 Property that would be binding on Purchaser or the Property after the Close of Escrow without the prior written consent of Purchaser. (b) Seller shall not permit any act of waste or act that would tend to diminish the value of the Property for any reason, except that caused by ordinary wear and tear. 17. Authority of Parties. (a) Seller warrants that this Agreement and all other documents delivered prior to or at the Close of Escrow have been authorized, executed, and delivered by Seller; (i) are binding obligations of Seller; and (ii) are collectively sufficient to transfer all of Seller's rights to the Property and do not violate the provisions of any agreement to which Seller is a party or which affects the Property. If Seller is a corporation, partnership, limited partnership, limited liability company, trust or other legal entity, then Seller further represents that Seller is duly formed and validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the jurisdiction set forth in the first paragraph of this Agreement. If said jurisdiction is other than California, then Seller warrants that to the extent required by applicable law, Seller is registered to do business and is in good standing in the state of California. (b) Purchaser warrants that this Agreement and all other documents delivered prior to or on the Close of Escrow have been authorized, executed, and delivered by Purchaser; and are binding obligations of Purchaser. (c) The parties warrant that the persons executing this Agreement on their behalf are authorized to do so, and on execution of this Agreement, this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable against Purchaser or Seller in accordance with this Agreement. 18. Brokers. Each party shall be solely responsible for the fees or commissions of any broker that has been retained or consulted by such party in connection with this transaction. Each party agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other party from any claims, expenses, costs, or liabilities arising in connection with a claim by a broker for any such fees or commissions. 19. Assignment. Purchaser shall have the right to assign all rights and liabilities under this Agreement to any party or governmental agency. 20. Attorney Fees. In any action to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the Prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover from the nonprevailing party all reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. "Prevailing Party" shall include without limitation a party who dismisses an action in exchange for sums allegedly due; the party who receives performance from the other party for an alleged breach of contract or a desired remedy where the performance is substantially equal to the relief sought in an action; or the party determined to be the prevailing party by a court of law. 21. Notices. As used in this Agreement, notice includes but is not limited to, the communication of any notice, request, demand, approval, statement, report, acceptance, consent, waiver and appointment. All notices must be in writing. Notice is given either (i) when delivered in person to the person or company intended named below, (ii) when delivered via RVPUB\VHS\764892.2 14 facsimile with confirmation from the receiving party via return fax; or (iii) when sent via reputable overnight courier (such as Federal Express), addressed by name and addressed to the party or persons intended, as follows: To RCA: Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority C/O Economic Development Agency 3133 Mission Inn Avenue Riverside, CA 92507 Phone: (951) 955-4820 (or 4873) Fax: (951)955-4837 Attention: Carol Singh With copy to: Best Best & Krieger LLP 3750 University Avenue Riverside, CA 92501 Phone: (951) 686-1450 FAX: (951) 686-3083 Attention: Michelle Ouellette To Seller: N & A Development and Leasing Company, Inc. P. O. Box 1419 Temecula, CA 92593 Phone: (951)640-1689 until such time as a party gives notice of the change of address in accordance with the terms of this section. 22. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the documents referenced herein contain the entire agreement between the parties to this Agreement and shall not be modified in any manner except by an instrument in writing executed by the parties or their respective successors in interest. 23. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected. 24. Waivers. A waiver or breach of covenant or provision in this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any other covenant or provision in this Agreement, and no waiver shall be valid unless in writing and executed by the waiving party. An extension of time for performance of any obligation or act shall not be deemed an extension of the time for performance of any other obligation or act. 25. Construction. The Section headings and captions of this Agreement are, and the arrangement of this instrument is, for the sole convenience of the parties to this Agreement. The Section headings, captions, and arrangement of this instrument do not in any way affect, limit, amplify, or modify the terms and provisions of this Agreement. The singular form shall include plural, and vice versa. This Agreement shall not be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the parties, but rather as if both parties have prepared it. Unless otherwise indicated, all RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 15 references to Sections are to this Agreement. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are attached to it and incorporated in it by this reference. 26. Merger. All of the terms, provisions, representations, warranties, and covenants of the parties under this Agreement shall survive the Close of Escrow and shall not be merged in the Deed or other documents. 27. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts. Each shall be deemed an original and all, taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. 28. No Obligations to Third Parties. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the execution and delivery of this Agreement shall not be deemed to confer any rights upon, nor obligate any of the parties hereto, to any person or entity other than the parties hereto. 29. Amendment to this Agreement. The terms of this Agreement may not be modified or amended except by an instrument in writing executed by each of the parties hereto. 30. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 31. Successors. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the parties to this Agreement and their respective heirs, successors, and assigns. 32. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by California law. Each party hereby consents to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts sitting in the County of Riverside, State of California, in any action on a claim arising out of, under or in connection with this Agreement or the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. SELLER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE FOREGOING VENUE PROVISIONS HAVE BEEN CHOSEN AS THE APPROPRIATE AND CONVENIENT FORUM FOR ANY SUCH ACTION AND WAIVES ANY RIGHT TO OBJECT TO JURISDICTION ON THE BASIS OF LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION OR FORUM NON CONVENIENS. Seller hereby consents to service of process via mail or overnight courier to the address specified in Section 19 or by any other method permitted under California law. 33. Survival. All representations, warranties, covenants and indemnity obligations of the parties shall survive the Closing of this Agreement. 34. Cooperation. Seller understands that RCA may seek from third party governmental agencies funding to reimburse RCA in whole or in part for the Purchase Price of the Property. Seller agrees to reasonably cooperate to assist RCA during the process to seek such funding and to provide such documentation as reasonably necessary to assist RCA in applying for such funding. RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 16 N WITNESS WHEREOF, Purchaser and Seller have executed this Agreement to be effective on and as of the Effective Date set forth in the preamble to this Agreement. PURCHASER: SELLER: WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY Seller: N & A Development and Leasing REGIONAL CONSERVATION Company, Inc. AUTHORITY, a public agency and a joint powers authori Nassef M. Francis, President By: Charles V. Land Executive Director Approved as to Form: Seller: N & A Development and Leasing Best Best &Krieger P Company, Inc. / 1 _ BY: J e C. Francis, Vice -President GLAA 091709 289TL 12.995 RVPUB\W1iS\764892.2 17 EXIIIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCELS 154 AND 155, AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP 6835, ON FILE IN BOOK 29 PAGE(S) 27 THROUGH 41, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA RVPUB\WH8\764892.2 18 EXHIBIT B Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority Survey Monument and GPS Specifications Survey monuments shall be installed in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance 460, section 9.10 and Ordinance 461, section 21. (See attached Exhibit B-1.) Unless otherwise specified by RCA all monuments shall comply with criteria for Standard "A" monuments. Survey grade Global Positioning System ("GPS") coordinates shall be provided to RCA as to all identified monuments. RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 19 EXHIBIT B-1 htti)://www.clerkofffieboard.co.riverside.ca.us/ords.htm Ordinance 4.60 SECTION 9.10. SURVEYS AND MONUMENTS. A. At the time of making the survey for a final map or parcel map, the engineer or surveyor shall set sufficient durable monuments to conform to the standards described in section 8771 of the Business and Professions code and also comply with the requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and with the requirements of the County Surveyor. B. All monuments for final maps and parcel maps shall be set prior to the recordation of the map. The land divider may execute a secured agreement or cash bond guaranteeing the setting of the monuments upon approval by the County Surveyor. Ordinance 4.61 21. MONUMENTS 21.01 General Requirements: The subdivision boundaries, lot corners, road, street, highway centerline, angle points in all lines, beginning and end of all curved lines, shall monumented in accordance with the hereinafter described standard monuments and procedures. Any monument having characteristics other than the hereinafter described may be used only upon written approval of the County Surveyor. If an existing record and identified monument is found on the ground at the location of a subdivision corner, this monument may be used in lieu of replacement with a new monument provided the existing monument is a type considered to be durable. 21.02 Standard "A" Monuments: This monument is to be one inch (inside diameter) iron pipe eighteen (18 ") inches long.. A metal disc or plastic plug bearing the registered civil engineer or land surveyor number shall be securely affixed to the top of the pipe. The top surface of the monument shall be flush with natural ground, flush with surface in paved streets and twelve (12") inches down in unpaved streets. 21.03 Standard "B" Monuments: This monument is to be an eighteen (18") inch long copper clad steel pin to which is secured at one end a one and one-half (1-1/2") inch conical brass cap. The monument may be used as an alternate to the type "A" monument to mark centerline control on streets. The monument is to be driven flush with the street pavement. After setting the monument, the Registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor number shall be stamped into the surface of the brass cap. Modification of the above standard may be approved by the County Surveyor. See Standard drawing numbers 900 and 901 for further information. 21.04 Standard "C" Monuments: This monument to consist of a 2" x 2" x 18" long redwood stake cut from clear heartwood firmly set in the ground. The exact point of intersection of the lines shall be marked on the top center of the stake by a suitable tack or nail, which RVPUB\VHS\764892.2 20 in turn shall be used to secure to the stake the metal disk bearing the Registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor Number. A 1/2" rebar, 18" long with appropriately stamped plastic cap may be used in place of a redwood stake. See monument schedule for use of this monument. 21.05 Standard "D" Monuments: This monument to consist of a 3/4" inside diameter x 18" long galvanized iron pipe, driven to a point not to exceed 1" above the natural ground surface. The exact point of intersection of the lines shall be marked on the top center of the pipe by a suitable tack or nail, which in turn shall be used to secure to the pipe the metal disk bearing the Registered Civil Engineer or Land Surveyor Number of plastic plug with RCE or LS number with mark for exact point. See monument schedule for use of this monument. 21.06 Standard "E" Monuments: This monument to consist of lead plug or steel pin with metal Identification disk set in concrete curb. See monument schedule for use of this monument. RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 21 EXHIBIT C (GRANT DEED) RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 22 Recorded at request of and return to: Department of Facilities Management Real Estate Division 3133 Mission Inn Avenue Riverside, California 92507-4199 FREE RECORDING This instrument is for the benefit of the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority, and is entitled to be recorded without fee. (Govt. Code 27383) GRANT DEED PROJECT: MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN APN: 940-080-002 AND 940-090-001 FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, N & A DEVELOPMENT AND LEASING COMPANY, INC., herein called "Grantor", hereby GRANTS to WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY, a public agency and joint powers authority ("Grantee"), the real property in the County of Riverside, State of California, described as: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Grant Deed as of the _th day of , 20 N & A Development and Leasing Company, Inc. Nassef M. Francis, President Julie C. Francis, Vice President ATTACH NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RVPUB\WHS\764892.2 23 CERTIITCATE OF ACCEPTANCE This is to certify that the real property conveyed by N & A DEVELOPMENT AND LEASING COMPANY, INC., on the Grant Deed dated 20_, to the WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY (Grantee), is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer on behalf of the Grantee, pursuant to authority conferred by resolution of the Board of Directors. GRANTEE: Date: , 20_ WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY, A public agency and a joint powers authority By: Charles V. Landry Executive Director RVPU13\WHS\764892.2 24 EXHIBIT D (CONTRIBUTION DISCLOSURE FORM) RVPUB\WHs\764892.2 25 Item No. 8 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Patrick Richardson, Director of Planning and Redevelopment DATE: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: Authorize the preparation of documents necessary to file an application with LAFCO for an expansion of the City's Sphere of Influence and the Annexation of certain uninhabited territory described as the Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) comprised of approximately 4,500 acres located southwest of the City PREPARED BY: Betsy Lowrey, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO FILE AN APPLICATION WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR AN EXPANSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED AS THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA ANNEXATION (NO. 2) COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 4,500 ACRES LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF INTERSTATE 15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO/RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE CORTESE- KNOX-HERTZBERG LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION ACT OF 2000 (LR09-0024) BACKGROUND: On December 8, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolutions to apply to the Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") for an expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence and Annexation of approximately 4,997 acres located immediately southwest of the City of Temecula Boundary line, west of Interstate-15 ("Santa Margarita Area Annexation"). Resolutions also included a General Plan Amendment to the City's Land Use Map, Pre -Zoning of the area, adoption of associated hillside development standards and certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report of the Annexation. On June 4, 2009, LAFCO denied the City's Sphere of Influence and Annexation Applications determining that an application by Granite Construction for a proposed surface mine permit ("Liberty Quarry") within the Santa Margarita Area Annexation should be allowed to continue its process under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside and not the City of Temecula. LAFCO adopted formal Resolutions on June 25, 2009 disapproving the City's Sphere of Influence and Annexation request. In light of the LAFCO Commission's discussions that Liberty Quarry be processed through the County, the City requested LAFCO to reconsider the Santa Margarita Annexation and Sphere of Influence Applications with reduced boundaries removing the territory associated with the proposed Liberty Quarry project site (and a few surrounding parcels). A Reconsideration Hearing was held by LAFCO on September 24, 2009 and LAFCO determined new Sphere of Influence and Annexation Applications would need to be filed. On December 3, 2009, upon motion by LAFCO Commissioner Robin Lowe, LAFCO voted unanimously to waive the one-year waiting period for the City of Temecula to file the requisite Sphere of Influence and Annexation Applications in order to allow the City to proceed as soon as possible. Furthermore, LAFCO voted to reduce the application fees by fifty percent. If directed today by the City Council to proceed with the preparation of documents for a Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation Application consisting of reduced boundaries of the Santa Margarita area ("Santa Margarita Area Annexation No. 2"), staff will prepare the necessary Resolutions and associated documents. While Staff does not foresee the total cost exceeding $30,000, the City Manager would be the authority to approve all necessary professional service agreements including those that exceed this amount. Staff anticipates the proposal would then be presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meetings in February of 2010. If the Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation documents are ultimately approved by City Council in February, it is anticipated the City's Sphere of Influence Amendment and Annexation Applications could be submitted to LAFCO the last week in February. Barring any unforeseen delays, LAFCO would then schedule a hearing within six months to be heard no later than September 2010. FISCAL IMPACT: Appropriate funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2009-2010 budget as follows. The anticipated Fiscal Impact totals $34,300 of which $8,000 was encumbered in the Planning Department's Fiscal Year 2008-2009 budget. The balance of the funds are budgeted and split between the Finance Department budget in the amount of $3,500 and the Planning Department budget in the amount of $22,800. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Map RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO FILE AN APPLICATION WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION FOR AN EXPANSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA'S SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AND THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN UNINHABITED TERRITORY DESCRIBED AS THE SANTA MARGARITA AREA ANNEXATION (NO. 2) COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 4,500 ACRES LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTHWEST OF THE PRE-EXISTING CITY OF TEMECULA BOUNDARY LINE, WEST OF INTERSTATE 15 AND NORTH OF THE SAN DIEGO/RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOUNDARY TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE CORTESE- KNOX-HERTZBERG LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION ACT OF 2000 (LR09-0024) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare as follows: A. On December 9, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 08-112 to apply to the Local Agency Formation Commission ("LAFCO") for an expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere of Influence and Annexation to the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District of approximately 4,997 acres located immediately southwest of the City of Temecula Boundary line, west of Interstate-15 ("Santa Margarita Annexation Area"). B. On June 4, 2009, LAFCO denied the City's Sphere of Influence and Annexation Applications for the Santa Margarita Annexation Area determining that an application by Granite Construction for a proposed surface mine permit within the Santa Margarita Annexation Area should be allowed to continue its process under the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside and not the City of Temecula. C. On September 24, 2009 LAFCO denied the City's request for reconsideration seeking approval of a smaller annexation area and determined that a new Sphere of Influence and Annexation Applications would need to be filed. D. On December 3, 2009 LAFCO voted unanimously to waive the one-year waiting period for the City of Temecula to file the requisite Sphere of Influence and Annexation Applications in order to allow the City to proceed with a smaller Annexation Area and also approved a reduction in the application fees by fifty percent. E. The Council now desires the City Staff to proceed with preparation of the necessary documents and actions that will allow the Council to approve the filing of an application with LAFCO for an expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere Of Influence and the annexation of certain uninhabited territory described as the Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) to the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District. F. Santa Margarita Annexation Area (No. 2) generally consists of that certain uninhabited territory comprised of approximately 4,500 acres located immediately southwest of the pre-existing City of Temecula boundary line, west of Interstate 15 and north of the San Diego/Riverside County boundary and as depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Section 2. The City Council hereby authorizes and directs the City Staff to prepare such reports, studies and other documents as are required by LAFCO and the law to enable the City to file an application with LAFCO for an expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere Of Influence and the annexation of certain uninhabited territory described as the Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) to the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District. Such reports include, but are not limited to, CEQA documents, legal description, and Fiscal Impact Report updates. Section 3. The City Council hereby authorizes and directs the City Staff to prepare such ordinances and resolutions approving land use designations and texts as are required by LAFCO and the law to enable the City to file an application with LAFCO for an expansion of the City of Temecula's Sphere Of Influence and the annexation of certain uninhabited territory described as the Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) to the City of Temecula and the Temecula Community Services District. Such actions include but are not limited to a resolution expanding the City's Sphere of Influence, a resolution approving an amendment to the City's General Plan, an ordinance approving changes in the zoning code and an ordinance approving the zoning for Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2). Section 4. The City Council further authorizes and directs the City Staff to prepare such notices and other documents as required for an Expansion of the City's Sphere of Influence and the annexation of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) pursuant to the Cortese -Knox -Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act Of 2000 and to duly notice and conduct the public hearings required for the Expansion of the City's Sphere of Influence and the annexation of the Santa Margarita Area Annexation (No. 2) and land use approvals as required by applicable law. Section 5. The City Manager is hereby authorized on behalf of the City to enter into such professional service agreements and other agreements as are necessary to prepare the required reports and documents described herein. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of January, 2010. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor I_T40r:61n 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. - was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12th day of January, 2010, by the following vote: IG\'Ix.�K�1�1►NllNdil:1dil:l:4:63 NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Santa Margarita Annexation Area - Proposed Modified Boundary (Approximately 4,510 Acres) of O • • • • ' ••••••• ••• ••••• ••• ••••• ••••••• • •• �� • • • • • " • ' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I \ f V ym O ••••• • ••• • •••• •••• ••• ' •• ' ......•'• •••' .. . . . .. . . .. ... .. .. ... ... . . .... .. . .. . .. .. .. .. ... . .. .. .. ... ...... .... . ...... . .. ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ... :..: " : :..: " ......... Riverside County .. Santa Margarita Annexation Area - Proposed Modified Boundary ............................... San Diego County 0 650 1,300 2,600 3,900 5,200 Feet /ter © Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve Boundary OSanta Margarita Annexation Area (Original Boundary) City of Temecula — Highways -- Centerline Parcels rlphUmmy prgeticlpbminp'.mepJxopas•0_motlyouMM•sl.mxtl Item No. 9 ORDINANCE NO. 09-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17.32 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS 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 Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on November 4, 2009 to consider the proposed changes to the Temecula Municipal Code, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter. B. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Ordinance, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 09-24, recommending that the City Council approve this Ordinance providing for an amendment to Chapter 17.32 of the Temecula Municipal Code to update the Water Efficient Landscape Design standards. C. The City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on December 8, 2009 to consider the proposed changes to the Temecula Municipal Code and this Ordinance, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter. B. Following the public hearing, the City Council considered the entire record of information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. Section 2. Environmental Findings. The City Council hereby makes the following environmental findings and determinations in connection with the approval of the Chapter 17.32 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The City Council hereby finds that this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 15308, Class 8 Actions by a Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment. The proposed Code amendment improves the conservation of water resources by establishing more stringent drought tolerant and irrigation landscape standards. Section 3. Chapter 17.32 (Water Efficient Landscape Design) of Title 17 (Zoning) is hereby repealed in its entirety. i Acrr.�zm�arr.���a�x� Section 4. A new Chapter 17.32 entitled Water Efficient Landscape Design is hereby added to Title 17 (Zoning) of the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows: &TITIA I =I:» y y 19114 0119 We10111;-1ye1» Q *11 M01 SECTIONS: 17.32.010 Purpose. 17.32.020 Definitions. 17.32.030 Applicability. 17.32.040 General provisions. 17.32.060 Procedures. 17.32.060 Landscape requirements. 17.32.070 Irrigation system design requirement. 17.32.080 Grading Plan Requirements. 17.32.090 Residential requirements. 17.32.100 Commercial, office, industrial, public institutional requirements. 17.32.110 Open space/recreation/conservation zoning district requirements. 17.32.120 Maintenance and enforcement. Appendix A to Chapter 17.32 — Water Budget Formula Appendix B to Chapter 17.32 — City of Temecula Plant List 17.32.010 PURPOSE The following Water Efficient Landscape Standards are designed to assist landscape architects, irrigation designers, contractors, planners and the public in the selection of plant materials and irrigation methods that result in more water efficient and water conscious landscaping throughout the City. The purpose of this chapter is: A. To promote high quality, water efficient landscaping, water use management and water conservation through the use of water efficient landscaping, wise use of turf areas and appropriate use of irrigation technology and management; B. To provided for provisions for water management practices and water waste prevention; C. To establish a structure for planning, designing, installing, maintaining, and managing water efficient landscapes in new construction and rehabilitated projects; D. To reduce landscape water demands without sacrificing landscape quality or quantity; E. To retain flexibility and encourage creativity through appropriate design; R:/Ords 2009/Ords 09-08 2 F. To assure the attainment of water efficient landscape goals by requiring that landscape not exceed a maximum water demand of 70 percent of its reference evapotranspiration (ETo) or any lower percentage as may be required by water purveyor policy or State legislation, whichever is stricter; G. To eliminate water waste from overspray and/or runoff; H. To promote water conservation through public awareness; and I. To implement the requirements to meet the State of California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act 2006 and the California Code of Regulations Title 23, Division 2, Chapter 2.7. 17.32.020 DEFINITIONS "Applied water" means the portion of water supplied by the irrigation system to the landscape. "Active recreational use" means areas of active play or recreation such as sport fields, school yards, picnic grounds, or other areas of intense foot traffic that provide public benefit. "Amendment" means additions to the soil, such as compost, leaf mold, peat moss, or ground bark, which improves aeration and drainage of clay soils and helps hold water in sandy soils. "Application rate" means the depth of water applied to a given area in one hour, usually measured in inches per hour. "Backflow prevention device" means a safety device used to prevent pollution or contamination of the water supply due to the reverse flow of water from the irrigation system. "Check valve" or "anti -drain valve" means a valve located under a sprinkler head to hold water in the system to prevent drainage from sprinkler heads when the system is off. "Distribution uniformity" means a measure of how evenly water is applied over an area. "Emitter" means drip irrigation emission device that delivers water slowly from the system to the soil. "Established landscape" means the point at which plants in the landscape have developed significant root growth into the site. Typically, most plants are established after one or two years of growth. I:fie] r..MAPF7101r. i�FII�P. i "Establishment period" means, for purposes of this chapter, the first year after installing the plants in the landscape, or the first two years if irrigation will be terminated after establishment. The actual establishment period varies depending upon the plant species, the development of the plant's root system, soil conditions, and other environmental factors. "Estimated annual water use (EAWU)" means the total amount of water estimated to be needed to keep the plants in the landscaped area healthy. It is based upon such factors as the local evapotranspiration rate, the size of the landscaped area, the types of plants, and the efficiency of the irrigation system, as calculated by the formula contained in Section 17.32.060. "Evapotranspiration" means the quantity of water evaporated from adjacent soil and other surfaces, and transpired by plants during a specific time. "Flow rate" means the rate at which water flows through pipe fittings, valves, and emission devices, measured in gallons per minute, gallons per hour, or cubit feet per second. "Hardscape" means any durable surface material (pervious and nonpervious). "Homeowner provided landscaping" means any landscaping either installed by a private individual for a single family residence or installed by a licensed contractor hired by a homeowner "Hydrozone" means a portion of the landscape area having plants with similar water needs that are served by a valve or set of valves with the same irrigation schedule. A hydrozone may also be nonirrigated, for example, a naturalized area. "Invasive species" are non -indigenous species (e.g., plants or animals) that adversely affects the habitats they invade economically, environmentally, or ecologically. Lists of invasive species are included within the Western Riverside County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (incorporated by reference) "Irrigation efficiency" (IE) means the measurement of the amount of water beneficially used divided by the amount of water applied. "Landscape architect" means a person who holds a license to practice landscape architecture in the state of California Business and Professional Code, Section 5615. "Landscape area" (LA) means all the planting areas, turf areas, and water features in a landscape design plan subject to the Maximum Applied Water Allowance calculation. The landscape area does not include footprints of buildings or structures, sidewalks, driveways, parking lots, decks patios, gravel or stone walks, other pervious or non - pervious hardscapes, and other non -irrigated areas designed for non -development (e.g. open spaces and existing native vegetation. I:fie] r..FiWAPF7L075'.I "Landscape coefficient" means the functional equivalent of a crop coefficient in agriculture. When multiplied times ETo, it estimates the amount of water required to maintain landscape plants in good condition. "Landscape irrigation audit" means an in depth evaluation of the performance of an irrigation system conducted by a Certified Landscape Irrigation Auditor. An irrigation audit includes, but is not limited to: inspection, system tune-up, system test with distribution uniformity or emission uniformity, reporting overspray or runoff that causes overland flow, and preparation of an irrigation schedule. "Land use entitlement" means any legislative, discretionary or quasi-judicial review that requires City approval. "Lateral line" means the water delivery pipeline that supplies water to the emitters or sprinklers from the valve. "Low volume irrigation" means the application of irrigation water at low pressure through a system of tubing or lateral lines and low -volume emitters such as drip, drip lines, and bubblers. Low volume irrigation systems are specifically designed to apply small volumes of water slowly at or near the root zone of plants. "Main line" means the pressurized pipeline that delivers water from the water source to the valves or lateral lines. "Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA)" means the upper limit of annual applied water for the established landscaped area. "Microclimate" means the climate of a small, specific area that may contrast with the climate of the overall landscape area due to wind, sun exposure, plant density, or proximity to reflective surfaces. "Moisture -sensing device" means a device that measures the amount of moisture in the soil. "Mulch" means any organic material such as leaves, bark, straw or inorganic mineral materials such as rocks, gravel and decomposed granite left loose and applied to the soil surface to reduce evaporation and suppress weeds. "Operating pressure" means the pressure at which an irrigation system is designed by the manufacture to operate (static pressure minus pressure losses). This is usually indicated at the base or nozzle of a sprinkler. "Overspray" means when sprinklers deliver water beyond the landscaped area, wetting pavements, walks, structures, or other non -landscaped areas. "Plant factor" means a factor that, when multiplied by reference evapotranspiration, estimates the amount of water used by plants. I:fie] r..FiWAPF7101r. RIYXIN7 "Percolation" means the movement of water through the soil. "Potable water" means water which is meant for human consumption. "Precipitation rate" means the rate at which water is applied, usually expressed in inches per hour. "Pressure compensation bubbler" means an irrigation emitter useful for watering trees and shrubs with water basins; produces a reduced flow of water that bubbles on the soil. "Quick coupling system" means a sprinkler system which uses permanently installed valves and sprinklers that can be moved from valve to valve. "Rain sensor" means a component of the irrigation system that automatically suspends the irrigation schedule when it rains. "Reclaimed water," "recycled water," or "treated sewage effluent" means treated or recycled water of a quality suitable for nonpotable uses such as landscape irrigation and water features; not intended for human consumption. "Reference evapotranspiration (ETo)" means a standard measurement of environmental parameters which affect the water use of plants. ETo is given in inches per day, month, or year and is an estimate of the evapotranspiration of a large field of four- to seven- inch tall, cool season turf that is well watered. Reference evapotranspiration is used as the basis of determining the Maximum Allowable Water Allowance so that regional differences in climate can be accommodated. "Rehabilitated landscape" means a significant replacement of established landscaping and/or irrigation with a new landscaping and irrigation that requires a permit, plan check, or design review. For purposes of this chapter, "significant" is defined as any replacement exceeding fifty percent of a landscaped area and is at the discretion of the director of planning. Rehabilitated landscapes shall be consistent with the provisions of Chapter 17.32 of the Municipal Code. "Runoff' means water which is not absorbed by the soil or landscape to which it is applied. Runoff occurs when water is applied at too great a rate or when there is a slope. "Smart irrigation controller" means a type of irrigation controller which automatically adjusts the frequency and/or duration of irrigation events in response to changing weather conditions. "Soil texture" means the classification of soil based on its percentage of sand, silt and clay. I:AIOTV9W1A➢F7100KIFIIII- c3 "Special Landscaped Area (SLA)" means an area of the landscape dedicated solely to edible plants, areas irrigated with recycled water, water features using recycled water and areas dedicated to active play such as parks, picnic grounds, sports fields, golf courses, where turf provides a playing surface, or other areas of intense foot traffic that provide public benefit. "Sprinkler head" means a device which discharges water through a nozzle. "Static water pressure" means the pipeline or municipal water supply pressure when water is not flowing. "Station" means an area served by one valve or set of valves that operate simultaneously. "Temporarily Irrigated" means irrigation for the purposes of establishing plants, or irrigation which will not continue after plant establishment. Temporary irrigation is for a period of six months or less. "Turf' means a groundcover of cool- or warm -season grass that is mowed. "Valve" means a device used to control the flow of water in the irrigation system. "Water intensive landscaping" means a landscape with a WUCOLS plant factor of 0.7 or greater. "Water Use Classification of Landscape Species (WUCOLS)" means the publication entitled "Water Use Classification of Landscape Species" by the U.C. Cooperative Extension (1999 or most current version). 17.32.030 APPLICABILITY A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, requirements of this chapter shall apply to: 1. All new construction landscapes which are homeowner -provided and/or homeowner hired in single-family and multi -family residential projects with a total landscape area equal to or greater than 5,000 square feet requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check or design review; 2. All other landscape projects with a landscape area equal to or greater than 2,500 square feet subject to discretionary permits, plan check or design review; and Cemeteries: recognizing the special landscape needs of cemeteries, new and rehabilitated cemeteries are limited to Sections 17.32.070.GG, 17.32.070.HH, and 17.32.07011. Existing cemeteries are limited to Section 17.32.120.E; 1 4MOM M11111F7100M1FII1P. A 3. In the event Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions are required by the City for any permit subject to this Chapter, a condition shall be incorporated into any project approval prohibiting the use of water intensive landscaping and requiring the use of low water use landscaping pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter in conjunction with common area/open space landscaping. Additionally, such a condition shall also require the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions to incorporate provisions concerning landscape irrigation system management and maintenance. This Chapter shall not be construed as requiring landscaping on common areas or open space that is intended to remain natural. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions shall not prohibit the replacement of turf with less water intensive plant species. B. This chapter shall not apply to: 1. Any project with a total landscaped area less than 2,500 square feet; 2. Registered federal, state, and/or local historical sites and/or structures; 3. Ecological restoration projects that do not require a permanent irrigation system; and 4. Botanical gardens and arboretums open to the public. 17.32.040 GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Landscape plans and irrigation plans shall be drawn to the same scale B. All landscape plan approvals are subject to and dependent upon the applicant complying with all applicable City Ordinances, codes, regulations and adopted policies. C. Should any provision of this chapter conflict with any other provisions already established by the City, the more water efficient provision shall apply. D. If the water purveyor for a proposed project has adopted more restrictive water efficient landscaping requirements, all landscaping and irrigation plans submitted shall comply with the water purveyor's requirements. Said plans shall be accompanied by a written document from the water purveyor delineating the more restrictive requirements. E. Landscape design shall facilitate the implementation of landscape maintenance practices which foster long-term water conservation. Said practices may include, but not be limited to, scheduling irrigation based on established industry standards, conducting water audits and establishing a water budget to limit the amount of water applied per landscape acre. F. Landscaping for fuel modification zones shall be subject to standards required by the City's Fire Department. I:AL�78.Fi�APFII�78.Ci�FII�P. 7 G. Landscaping adjacent to the Western Riverside County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) conservation areas shall avoid invasive species as listed in the MSHCP. 17.32.060 PROCEDURES A. The submittal, review, revision and approval of all required landscape and irrigation plans shall be in compliance with already established City procedures for land use entitlements. The requirements of this chapter shall be submitted jointly along with the required applications, plans and fees required for land use entitlement as required by the Director of Planning and on file in the Planning Department. B. The landscape plan package shall include: construction landscape plans, irrigation plans, agronomic soils report, water budget, irrigation schedule, and maintenance schedule. C. An Agronomic Soil Report is required on all projects for appropriate specifications of soil amendments, and to facilitate selection of water efficient plant species suitable for the site. A soil analysis shall be conducted for the site from reasonable soil samples of the site. The Soil Report shall describe the soil type, pH, soluble salts, infiltration rate, limiting soil characteristics, and recommended soil amendments needed to remediate limiting soil characteristics. D. A construction cost estimate is required with all construction landscape plans. E. A landscape maintenance schedule is required with all landscape plans as identified in Section 17.32.110. F. Landscaping plans shall be prepared using the Water Budget Formula described in the Appendix A to Chapter 17.32. In addition, landscaping plans shall provide a water budget which includes estimated annual water use (in hundred cubic feet per year (ccf/yr)) and the area (in square feet) to be irrigated; and precipitation rates for each valve circuit. The Planning Director or designee shall approve all landscaping plans. G. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a project, subject to this Chapter, or as otherwise specified in the conditions of approval for a project, planting and irrigation plans prepared for the project shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director. H. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy, an applicant shall submit a letter of completion, subject to field verification by the planning director or his or her designee. Said letter of completion shall be prepared by the landscape architect and shall indicate that all plant materials and irrigation system components have been installed in accordance with the approved final landscape and irrigation plans. If a certificate of use and occupancy is not required for the project, such letter of completion shall be submitted prior to scheduling for the final inspection. The letter of completion shall be signed and certified by a licensed landscape architect and shall indicate: I:fie] r..Fi•APF7101r. i�FII�P. 7 1. Date; 2. Project information: a. Project name; b. Project applicant name, mailing address, telephone number; C. Project address; d. Property owner name and mailing address. 3. A field inspection of the irrigation system was completed prior to backfilling (evidence of field inspection shall be attached); 4. The landscaping has been installed in conformance with the approved planting and irrigation plans; 5. Irrigation audit report performed by a certified irrigation auditor after project installation (audit report shall be attached); 6. The irrigation controller has been set according to the irrigation schedule; 7. The irrigation system has been adjusted to maximize irrigation efficiency and eliminate overspray and runoff; and 8. A copy of the irrigation and maintenance schedule has been given to the property owner, local water purveyor, and the Planning Director. I. All landscape irrigation audits shall comply with the "Irrigation Association Certified Landscape Irrigation Auditor Training Manual (2004 or most current) and shall be conducted by a certified landscape irrigation auditor. J. The Planning Director or his/her designee shall have the right to enter upon the project site at any time before, during and after installation of the landscaping to conduct inspections for the purposes of enforcing this Chapter. 17.32.060 LANDSCAPE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS The design and installation of all proposed landscape improvements subject to this section shall comply with the following provisions: A. The Landscape plan shall be prepared by a Landscape Architect licensed by the State of California. B. All landscaping plans shall comply with the City of Temecula Citywide Design Guidelines. C. All landscaped areas shall be irrigated with an automatic irrigation system as R:/Ords 2009/Ords 09-08 10 required in this Chapter D. Water Quality Management Plan Best Management Practices (if applicable) that affect the landscaping shall be identified on the detailed construction landscape plans. E. Landscape design shall provide for the functional aspects of landscaping such as grading, drainage, minimal runoff, erosion prevention, wind barriers, provisions for shade and reduction of glare, and outdoor activities. F. Landscape design shall provide for the retention of existing mature landscaping that is in good, healthful condition, by incorporating such landscaping into the landscape plan. The protection, preservation and enhancement of native species and natural areas are required where feasible. G. Landscape design shall provide for the grouping of plants in regard to their water, soil, sun and shade requirements and in relationship to the buildings, so as to facilitate appropriate and efficient water applications. Plants with different water needs shall be irrigated separately. H. Protective tree grates shall be provided for trees planted in pedestrian areas. I. Root barriers shall be placed where trees are planted within five feet of any hardscape element or building. J. Turf shall be limited to only those areas designated for active recreational use. K. Turf shall not be planted in areas that are less than eight feet in width. L. Turf is not permitted on bermed areas or on slopes greater than 25 percent due to the problem of water runoff. M. A shallow swale shall be designed at the toe of all berms which are adjacent to sidewalks or other impervious/impervious hardscape surfaces to "catch" any runoff. This will help prevent weathering of pavement. If overhead spray irrigation is used for bermed areas, sprinkler heads shall be placed at the toe of the berm, so as to water from the bottom up. N. A minimum three-inch layer of mulching shall be installed and maintained over all non -turf areas. In areas with groundcover planted from flats, the mulch depth shall be no less than one and one-half inches. The mulching should be in the form of shredded bark, bark chips of varying sizes, or other similar materials. The size and type of mulch used should allow for moisture to pass through the surface, thus providing permeability and reduced erosion, particularly on slopes. Nonporous material shall not be placed under mulch. O. Stabilizing mulching products shall be used on slopes. P. If the area proposed for development is improved and is not scheduled for R:/Ords 2009/Ords 09-08 11 development within six months of the completion of the previous phase, it shall be temporarily landscaped and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control, and shall not be counted toward meeting the landscaped area requirements of the zoning district. Q. Enhanced hardscape features that include public art, sculpture and/or water features may be counted as part of the required landscaping as long as they are designed and integrated in a manner that accentuates the landscaping. R. Decorative water features. The surface area of a water feature shall be included in the high water use hydrozone area of the water budget calculation and shall use recirculating water systems. Where available, recycled water shall be used for decorative water features. S. Permeable surfaces shall be used wherever permissible in place of impervious paving, to encourage on -site water infiltration and support water conservation measures. T. The landscape plan, at a minimum, shall include 1. Property lines, streets, and street names; 2. Building locations, driveways, sidewalks, retaining wall, and other pervious or non -pervious hardscape features; 3. Special landscape areas; 4. Identify areas irrigated with recycled water; 5. Identify type of mulch and application depth; 6. Identify soil amendments, type and quantity; 7. Identify type and surface area of water features; 8. Type and installation detail of any stormwater best management practices; 9. A legend indicating all plant species by botanical name and common name, spacing, and quantities of each typed of plant by container size; 10. Delineate and label each hydrozone, and identify each hydrozone as low, moderate, or high water use; and 11. Identify area, in square feet devoted to landscaping and a breakdown of the total areas by landscape hydrozone. I:AL�78.FiAPFII�78.Ci�FII�P. YJ U. Maximum Applied Water Allowance. 1. The Landscape Plan shall be prepared using the following water budget formula: MAWA (in gallons) _ (ETo)(0.62)(0.7 x LA+0.3 x SLA) ETo is reference evapotranspiration SLA is the amount of special landscape area in square feet LA is total landscape area (including the SLA) in square feet. 2. For the purposes of determining the Maximum Applied Water Allowance, average irrigation efficiency is assumed to be 0.71. Irrigation systems shall be designed, maintained, and managed to meet or exceed an average irrigation efficiency of 0.71 V. Estimated Annual Water Use (EAWU). 1. EAWU for a given hyrdozone is calculated as follows EAWU (in gallons) _ (ETo)(0.62)[((PF x HA)/IE) + SLA] ETo is reference evapotranspiration PF is Plant Factor HA is hydrozone area in square feet IE is irrigation efficiency (minimum 0.71) SLA is the amount of special landscape area is square feet. 2. Landscaping plans shall provide EAWU (in the same units as the MAWA) for each valve circuit in the irrigation hydrozone. The sum of all EAWU calculations shall not exceed the MAWA for the project. 3. The plant factor used shall be from WUCOLS. The plant factor for low water use plants range from 0 to 0.3, for moderate water use plants range from 0.4 to 0.6, and for high water use plants range from 0.7 to 1.0. 4. The plant factor calculation is based on the proportions of the respective plant water uses and their plant factor, or the plant factor of the higher water using plant is used. 17.32.070 IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS All irrigation systems shall be designed, constructed, managed, and maintained to achieve the highest overall efficiency possible. Efficiency is measured by the amount of water beneficially used to sustain plant life divided by the amount of water applied. Efficiency is affected by the attributes of the controller, method of irrigation, irrigation equipment, proper hydrozoning, site topography, condition and size of plants, and weather conditions. I:AL�78.FiAPFII�78.Ci�FII�P. K3 The design and installation of all irrigation improvements shall be in compliance with the following provisions: A. The irrigation plan shall incorporate appropriate irrigation equipment, drip irrigation, bubbler, spray head, and/or rotor irrigation heads in order to provide the most efficient irrigation system. Irrigation systems shall be designed and maintained to meet or exceed an average irrigation efficiency of 0.71. B. A manual shut-off valve shall be required as close as possible to the point of connection of the water supply, to minimize water loss in case of an emergency or routine repair. C. The irrigation plan shall be prepared at the same scale as the construction landscape plan and, at a minimum, shall identify the following: 1. Location and size of service lateral(s); 2. Location and size of water meter(s); 3. Point of connection (POC) location and static pressure at POC. Each point of connection shall indicate the size of the water meter, the static pressure available, and the maximum flow of the irrigation system; 4. Manufacturer's name, model number, total flow rate (gallons per minute), designed operating pressure (psi), and precipitation rate for each overhead spray and bubbler circuit, and total flow rate (gallons per hour) and design operating pressure (psi) for each drip and low volume irrigation circuit; 5. Location, size, and type of all irrigation components including, but not limited to smart controller, central controller, master valve, flow sensor, backflow prevention device, ball valves, anti -drain check valves, pressure supply (main) line, lateral lines, pipe sizing, valves, spray heads, rotors, drip, low volume irrigation equipment, gallons per minute, pressure regulators, and pumps; 6. Hydraulic calculation worksheet including flow rate (gallons per minute), design operating pressure, and pressure loss for valve with "worse condition;" 7. Precipitation rate (inches per hour) for each spray type circuit; 8. Irrigation legend to include all irrigation equipment used on the project; 9. Location and identification of each hydrozone; 10. A hydrozone information table for each hydrozone; 11. Topographic elevation lines to determine slope; 12. Proximity to existing or planned recycled/non potable water lines; I:AL�78.Fi�APFII�78.Ci�FII�P. L! 13. Irrigation system details for assembly and installation; and 14. Calculation for the project's landscape Water Budget Formula (see Appendix A to Chapter 17.32). D. Separate landscape water meters shall be installed for non single-family residential landscaping with a landscaped area greater than 5,000 square feet. E. All non single-family landscaped areas must be serviced by a "smart irrigation controller" which automatically adjusts to the frequency and/or duration of irrigation events in response to changing weather conditions. Smart irrigation controllers shall have the following attributes: 1. Real-time, weather based program adjustment capability; 2. Project must have an on -site weather station or external ETo input; 3. Rain sensors shall be placed within an unobstructed natural rainfall area and shall be located above the irrigation spray pattern; 4. Master valve (or simultaneous operations) for landscaped areas greater than 12,000 square feet; 5. Flow sensor; 6. Multiple start times; and 7. Multiple programs. F. Residential front yard typical Irrigation plans must demonstrate that sufficient capacity exists on the specified irrigation controller to supply adequate additional zones for future side and backyard landscaping. More than one controller per residential unit shall be avoided. G. With the exception of single-family residential units, all irrigation plans shall be designed for use of non potable water in all areas scheduled for non potable water in the future. Provisions for the conversion to a nonpotable water system shall be provided within the landscape plan should there be the possibility for future nonpotable water availability. Water systems designed to utilize nonpotable water shall be designed to meet all applicable standards of the City of Temecula, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, State Department of Health Services, the Riverside County Health Department and the local reclaimed water purveyor. H. Non single-family residential landscaping greater than one acre in size shall include a central controller programmed to distinguish irregular flows (e.g. broken valve, line, spray head, etc.). The central controller shall temporarily shut off the affected branch or the entire system, and send an immediate electronic message to the maintenance entity. I:AL�78.FiAPFII�78.Ci�FII�P. 67 I. Separate valves shall be provided for separate water use planting areas, so that plants with similar water needs are irrigated by the same irrigation valve. Drip irrigation techniques or similar high -efficiency irrigation type shall be provided where appropriate (i.e., shrubs, massing in -mulched areas) in instances where spray irrigation is not necessary. J. Irrigation systems shall be zoned according to plant water use, slope aspect, and sun/shade microclimate. If low water use plants (that can also survive/flourish with medium water application) are used within a medium water use hydrozone, they must be counted as medium water use in the irrigation calculations. K. The capacity of the irrigation systems shall not exceed: 1. The capacity required for peak water demand based on water budget calculations; 2. Meter capacity; and 3. Backflow preventer type and device capacity. L. The use of head check valves shall be included in irrigation systems as applicable. M. Pressure regulation shall be incorporated into all irrigation systems to prevent excessive pressure at sprinkler heads. N. Low head drainage is not permitted. O. Swing joints or other riser -protection components are required on all risers subject to damage that are adjacent to high traffic areas. P. Bermed areas should be irrigated with drip line irrigation. If overhead irrigation is necessary for bermed areas, then sprinkler heads shall be placed at the toe of the berm. Q. Overhead spray systems shall not be used in landscape areas narrower than eight feet in width. R. Overhead irrigation shall not be permitted within 24 inches of any non -permeable surface, unless the landscaped area is adjacent to a permeable surface and no overspray or run-off occurs. S. Overhead irrigation shall be limited to the hours of 8 p.m. and 9 a.m. T. In mulched planting areas, the use of low volume irrigation is required to maximize water infiltration into the root zone. I:AL�78.Fi�APFII�78.Ci�FII�P. [:i U. Rotors and spray heads shall be designed and installed with no overspray onto non -permeable surfaces, structures, and non -vegetated areas. Head -to -head coverage with matched precipitation heads is shall be required, unless otherwise directed by the manufacturer. Rotors and spray heads shall be zoned separately. Half rotors and full rotors shall be zoned separately unless matched precipitation nozzles are used. V. High efficiency irrigation methods (e.g. drip, MP rotators, and microsprays) are required for appropriate applications. W. Point -to point drip systems shall utilize Schedule 40 PVC lateral lines. The lateral lines shall either be placed on -grade and secured with pipe anchors at a minimum 10 feet on center, or buried one foot below grade. X. For drip line installations, in -line pressure regulators shall be used per factory recommendations for the specific irrigation products being used. If drip line is being installed, it must be filtered at the valve along with any other necessary equipment. Y. The delivery tubing for point-to-point irrigation systems shall be no longer than three feet and attached to grade at minimum two foot intervals. Z. Emitter line drip systems shall have the lines placed no more than 18 inches apart. The emitter lines adjacent to curbs or walks shall be placed at a maximum of nine inches from the curb or walk. Emitter lines shall be attached to grade at a minimum of five feet on -center. All plants shall be planted between two emitter lines. AA. The finish grade for all on -grade drip systems shall be a minimum of three inches below adjacent curbs or walks. All drip systems shall receive a minimum of three inches of medium grind bark. BB. All drip systems shall utilize the mature canopy size of the plant in determining the number of emitters to be placed at each plant. A schedule showing the varying amount of emitters shall be placed on the plans. The run-times shall be shown in the irrigation schedules. CC. The maximum square feet of any drip valve shall be 2,500 square feet. DD. A drip system shall extend no more than any two sides of any building (north/east, and south/west, by exposure). EE. All drip systems shall have a brass/bronze line -sized basket strainer placed at the point of connection. FF. Systems shall be scheduled so that the irrigation precipitation rate does not exceed the infiltration rate of the soil. :AL�78.Fi�APFII�78.Ci�FII�P. I1 GG. A baseline irrigation schedule shall be provided on the plans for the six-month initial plant establishment period. The contractor shall adjust the schedule to meet site specific requirements and use the baseline schedule to set the weather based controller. The schedule currently in effect shall be posted in the controller. HH. A second baseline irrigation schedule shall be provided on the plans which incorporate the specific water needs of the plants throughout the post -establishment calendar year. The contractor shall adjust the schedule to meet site specific requirements and use the baseline schedule to set the weather based controller. The schedule currently in effect shall be posted in the controller. II. The irrigation schedules shall include the recommended irrigation days per week, number of cycles per day, minutes of run times per cycle, and estimated amount of applied irrigation water, expressed in gallons per month and gallons per year. JJ. The controller shall be operational and set to real-time weather prior to the completion of the 90-day maintenance period of the installing contractor. KK. After establishment of the plant materials, the irrigation of landscaped areas shall be limited to the hours between dusk and early morning in order to provide maximum benefit to the plant material and to reduce unnecessary water loss through wind drift and evaporation. Drip irrigation systems are exempt from this provision. 17.32.080 GRADING PLAN REQUIREMENTS (if applicable) A. A grading design plan may be required and shall include rough/precise grade elevations prepared for the project by a licensed civil engineer. 17.32.090 RESIDENTIAL REQUIREMENTS A. Single -Family Residential Requirements. 1. The planting plans shall incorporate the use of compatible species of drought-tolerant/water-efficient plants to reduce water demand. A variety of plantings and hardscape should be selected and provided appropriately for their intended use. Special attention shall be given to selecting appropriate trees and plants that, at their maturity, will be in scale with the house and yard. Landscaping shall consist of plants found in the City of Temecula Plant List as identified in Appendix B to Chapter 17.32. 2. Landscape designs shall consider such factors as the function of the landscape elements, consistency with the building and its architectural design, compatibility to the area, special design features, berming, use of hardscape or nonorganic materials, and drought -tolerant plant materials for water conservation. 3. Existing mature trees and shrubs that represent the existing significant landscaping elements shall be preserved. I:fie] r..FiWAPF7101r. i11:II1P. 1..3 4. Street trees shall be planted along all streets in residential areas. On any street, at least one street tree shall be provided at the front of each residential lot. In the street side yard, slope, and similar areas, at least one street tree per 45 linear feet of street shall also be provided. 5. Front yard landscaping shall be provided in all residential zoning districts. In addition to the street tree requirement, front yard landscaping shall include, at a minimum, one 15-gallon size tree per lot, one 5-gallon size tree per lot, and a variety of drought tolerant shrubs and ground -cover. Shrubs shall be a minimum five gallons at the time of planting. Turf areas shall be used sparingly in response to functional needs only and shall be in compliance with the Water Budget Formula (Appendix A to Chapter 17.32). 6. Slope banks five feet or greater in vertical height with slopes between 5:1 and 2:1 shall, at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with a combination of appropriate shrubs, vegetative ground cover, and mulch that will absorb rainwater and reduce runoff for erosion control. If drip irrigation is used on slopes, a fertilizer injector system shall also be used. a. Slope banks five feet or greater in vertical height with slopes greater than or equal to 3:1 shall, at a minimum, be landscaped to soften their appearance as follows: i. One 15-gallon or larger tree per each 600 square feet of slope area; ii. One gallon or larger shrub for each 100 square feet of slope area; and iii. Appropriate vegetative ground cover or mulch. iv. In addition to the above requirements, slope banks in excess of eight feet in vertical height with slopes greater or equal to 2:1 shall also provide one 5-gallon or larger tree per each 1,000 square feet of slope area. 7. All trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary the slope plane. 8. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in a manner that at maturity they do not interfere with utility lines, sight lines for traffic safety, encroach on adjacent property, or create barriers to the solar access rights of adjoining property owners. 9. Residential front yard typical Irrigation plans must demonstrate that sufficient capacity exists on the specified irrigation controller to supply adequate additional zones for future side and backyard landscaping. More than one controller per residential unit shall be avoided. I:AL�78.FiAPFII�78.Ci�FII�P. F] 10. The project applicant shall provide home buyers with educational information regarding the design, installation and maintenance of water efficient landscape and irrigation landscapes as approved by the Director of Planning or water purveyor, upon the sale of each dwelling unit within the project. The plans shall include a key identifying the common names of the plants used in the landscaping. B. Residential Model Homes Requirements. 1. All model homes in residential subdivisions shall comply with provisions of this chapter. 2. The project applicant shall distribute outdoor water conservation pamphlets provided by local water purveyors, if available, to buyers upon the sale of each dwelling unit within the development. 3. A sign shall be displayed in the front yard of each model home which is clearly visible to home buyers. The sign shall indicate that the model home features water efficient landscape, hydrozones, and irrigation equipment which contributes to overall water efficiency. C. Multi -Family Residential Requirements 1. The planting plans shall incorporate the use of compatible species of drought-tolerant/water efficient plants to reduce water demand. A variety of plantings and hardscape should be selected and provided appropriately for their intended use. Special attention shall be given to selecting appropriate trees and plants that, at their maturity, will be in scale with the house and yard. Landscaping shall consist of plants found in the City of Temecula Plant List (Appendix B to Chapter 17.32). 2. Landscape designs shall consider such factors as the function of the landscape elements, consistency with the building and its architectural design, compatibility to the area, special design features, berming, use of hardscape or nonorganic materials, and drought -tolerant plant materials for water conservation. 3. To the extent feasible, existing mature trees and shrubs that represent the existing significant landscaping elements shall be preserved. 4. Parking areas shall comply with the standards as set forth by Chapter 17.24 of the Development Code. 5. All setback areas shall be landscaped, including interior courts, open space areas, and boundary areas that are not covered with buildings, pavement, or other hardscape surface. I:AL�78.Fi�APFII�78.Ci�FII�P. A] 6. Turf areas shall be used for functional needs only and shall be in compliance with the Water Budget Formula (Appendix A to Chapter 17.32). 17.32.100 COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL/PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS A. The planting plans shall incorporate the use of drought-tolerant/water efficient plants to reduce water demand. A variety of plantings and hardscape should be selected and provided appropriately for their intended use. Special attention shall be given to selecting appropriate trees and plants that, at their maturity, will be in scale with the house and yard. Landscaping shall consist of plants found in the City of Temecula Plant List as identified in Appendix B to Chapter 17.32. B. Landscape designs shall consider such factors as the function of the landscape elements, consistency with the building and its architectural design, compatibility to the area, special design features, berming, use of hardscape or nonorganic materials, and drought -tolerant plant materials for water conservation. C. To the extent feasible, existing mature trees and shrubs that represent the existing significant landscaping elements shall be preserved. D. All development projects shall also comply with the City of Temecula Citywide Design Guidelines. E. Street trees shall be planted at a minimum of one tree per 30 linear feet of street frontage. Trees shall be a minimum 15-gallon size at the time of planting. Shrubs shall be a minimum of five gallons at the time of planting. F. Setback areas that are not used for vehicular and pedestrian access shall be landscaped. In addition, all interior courts open space areas and boundary areas that are not covered with buildings, pavement, or other hardscape surface shall be landscaped. G. Landscape designs shall consider such factors as the function of the landscape elements, consistency with the building and its architectural design, compatibility to the area, special design features, berming, use of hardscape or nonorganic materials, drought -tolerant plant materials for water conservation, and utilize planting (i.e., combination of shrubs, trees and climbing vines) to break up large building masses and perimeter walls and fencing. H. The use or combination of berming, landscape materials, low level walls and structures, shall be used to screen parking areas, loading areas, trash enclosures, and utilities from public view. I. Parking areas shall comply with the standards as set forth by Chapter 17.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code. :AL�78.Fi�APFII�78.Ci�FII�P. i J. Slope banks five feet or greater in vertical height with slopes between 5:1 and 2:1 shall, at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with a combination of appropriate shrubs, vegetative ground cover, and mulch that will absorb rainwater and reduce runoff for erosion control. All trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary the slope plane. If drip irrigation is used on slopes, a fertilizer injector system shall also be used. 1. Slope banks five feet or greater in vertical height with slopes greater than or equal to 3:1 shall, at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with a combination of appropriate shrubs, vegetative ground cover, and/or mulch that will absorb rainwater and reduce runoff for erosion control, and to soften their appearance as follows: a. One 15-gallon or larger tree per each 600 square feet of slope area; b. One gallon or larger shrub for each 100 square feet of slope area; and C. Appropriate vegetative ground cover or mulch that will absorb rainwater and reduce runoff. 2. In addition to the requirements above, slope banks in excess of ten feet in vertical height with slopes greater or equal to 2:1 shall also provide on five -gallon or larger tree per each 1,000 square feet of slope area. K. Where trees are planted in pedestrian areas, a protective tree grate shall be provided. L. Trees and shrubs shall be planted so that they do not interfere with utilities, light standards, sight lines for traffic safety, encroach on adjacent property, or obstruct to the solar access rights of adjoining property owners. 17.32.110 OPEN SPACE/RECREATION/CONSERVATION ZONING DISTRICTS REQUIREMENTS A. A minimum of 80 percent of the net lot area shall be open space and unencumbered with buildings. Open space may include walkways and recreation areas. B. A minimum of 50 percent of the net lot area shall be covered with a drought - tolerant landscaping. C. A minimum of one drought tolerant shade tree shall be provided for every 1,000 square feet of net area. D. Turf areas shall be used for functional needs only and shall be in compliance with the Water Budget Formula (Appendix A to Chapter 17.32). I:4V1009W111111:71078Ci�FII�P. YJ E. Any remaining areas which are not otherwise landscaped or surfaced for a specific recreational activity shall be covered with drought -resistant vegetation, decorative hardscape. F. Pervious hardscape shall be used where feasible. G. Vehicular access ways shall be paved. 17.32.120 MAINTENANCE AND ENFORCEMENT A. Landscapes shall be maintained to ensure water efficiency. Landscape maintenance shall include, but not be limited to routine inspection, adjusting and repair of the irrigation system and its components, resetting irrigation controllers, aerating and dethatching turf areas, replenishing mulch, fertilizing, pruning, weeding, clearing of debris, monitoring for pests and disease, the removal and timely replacement of dead plants, and repair and timely replacement integrated architectural features. B. A 90-day maintenance period is required of the installing contractor immediately following approval of the final landscape inspection. C. An annual landscape maintenance schedule shall be prepared and provided to the property owner and Planning Director. The maintenance schedule shall identify plant types (turf, shrubs, groundcover, trees, etc.), mulch and/or inorganic ground cover, and shall indicate the frequency of pruning and fertilizer applications by plant type and the replenishment of mulch. D. Repair of irrigation equipment shall be done with originally specified materials or their equivalent. E. The City will rely on water purveyors to enforce landscape water use efficiency requirements. The City shall coordinate with local water purveyors and indentify programs that enhance and encourage landscape water use efficiency such as: 1. Tiered water rate structure; 2. Allocation -based conservation water pricing structure; 3. A rate structure at least as effective as the above options; 4. Irrigation audits and/or irrigation surveys; or 5. Penalties for water waste. F. New or rehabilitated landscape areas shall be subject to a landscape audit. The landscape audit shall include inspection of plant materials and irrigation systems in accordance with the State of California Landscape Water Management Program as described in the Landscape Irrigation Auditors Handbook, the entire document, which is hereby incorporated by reference. I:AL�78.Fi�APFII�78.Ci�FII�P. R3 G. Landscape audits will be coordinated with the water purveyor and shall be conducted by a certified Landscape Irrigation Auditor." Section 5. 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 6. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance including Appendices A and B 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 12th day of January, 2010. Maryann Edwards, Mayor r_Y40r:61n Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] I:4F1009W111111:7100K11:II11-k! 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. 09-08 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 8th day of December, 2009, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was dulX adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12t day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: 1►to] x.�Ko1l1►[MIN d/IAd/l1J4:&1 ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk I:fie] r..FiWAPF7101r. i11!II1P. 21 Appendix A City of Temecula Water Budget Formula WORKSHEET - (Insert Project Name) (For projects with more than t hydrozone) 1 Maximum Annual Water Allowance (MAWA) INPUT the total square footage of landscape =1 0 IS.F. INPUT the Hist. ETo for the area =1 MAWA = 0 ccf / yr 2 Estimated Annual Water Use (EAWU) Hydrozone # 1 INPUT Plant Factor = 0.8 (Turf) INPUT square footage of hydrozone = p INPUT hydrozone irrigation efficiency =1 0 EAWU = ccf / yr Hydrozone # 2 INPUT Plant Factor = 0.8 (High) INPUT square footage of hydrozone = 0 INPUT hydrozone irrigation efficiency =1 0 EAWU = ccf / yr Hydrozone # 3 INPUT Plant Factor = 0.5 (Med) INPUT square footage of hydrozone = 0 INPUT hydrozone irrigation efficiency = 0 EAWU = ccf / yr Hydrozone # 4 INPUT Plant Factor = 0.2 (cow) INPUT square footage of hydrozone - 0 INPUT hydrozone irrigation efficiency = 0 ' EAWU= ccf/yr Hydrozone # 5 INPUT Plant Factor = 0.1 (Very Low) INPUT square footage of hydrozone =r p -- INPUT hydrozone irrigation efficiency = 0 .Jt EAWU = ccf / yr Total EAWU = Occf / yr MAWA - EAWU = 0 ccf / yr (this number must be positive) INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING WATER BUDGET FORMULA 1. To find Maximum Allowable Water Allowance (MAWA) Maximum Allowable Water Allowance (MAWA) = STEP 1. Calculate the total square footage of the landscape area and insert MAWAA 0.62 x Bx 0.70/748 that number into Space A (Round the number to the nearest hundred). STEP 2. Insert the Reference Evapotranspiration (ETo) in Space B from Chart 1. STEP 3. Multiply A x .62 x B x .7, put the answer in Space C and divide by 748. This gives the MAWA in hundreds of cubic feet (ccf) (Space Dy 2. To Find Estimate Annual Water Use (EAWU) for each STEP 1. Find plant factor (Chart 2) for the hydrozone, using the highest plant factor per hydrozone. If a medium plant factor and a low plant factor are in the same hydrozone, the factor is medium. Place that number in Space E. STEP 2. Calculate the square footage for the hydrozone (round to the nearest hundred) and put the number in Space F. Next, insert the hydrozone irrigation efficiency factor (IF) from Chart 3 into Space G. STEP 3. Multiply ETo (Chart 1) x E x F x 0.62, then divide the number by (G x 748). This gives the EAWU number for Space H. STEP 4. Repeat steps 1 - 3 for each hydrozone. STEP 5. Add up the EAWU (Space H) for each hydrozone to calculate Total EAWU (Space 1). 3. To Find the Total Water STEP 1. To calculate the Total Water Allowance (Space J), Subtract the Total EAWU (Space 1) from MAWA (Space D) CIMIS Station I Location I ETo �_.. 62 I Temecula 1 66.14 130 -- emecula East 49.54 Chart2 Plant CategoryPlant Factor Hi h 0.7 - 1.0 Medium 0.4 - 0.6 Low 0.0 - 0.3 Chart 3 Application Method I Factor Drip 0.9 Bubblers 0).85 MP Rotors 0.75 Rotors 0.75 Micros ra s 0.7 S2ray Heads 0.7 Input the total square footage of landscape = A x 0.62 Input the Historical ETo forthe area = B x 0.70 MAWA = ccf r/748 D MAWA = ccf Estimated Annual Water Use (EAWU) EAWU = ETo x E x F x 0,621(G x 748) Hydrozone #1 Input Plant Factor Input square footage of F hydrozone = input nyarozone Irrigation effciency = G Hydrozone #1 EAWU= H ccf/yr Add each hydrozone H + H + H + H + H = I Total EAWU = Total Water Allowance MAWA-EAWU = =ccf/yr (this number must be positive) 0.62 ETo APPENDIX B, City of Temecula Development Code, 17.32, PLANT LIST, (by water use type) Height Spread Riv.Co. Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Feet Feet Native Comments Arctostaphylos emerald carpet GC 0.2 L 1 5 Acacia redolens prostrate acacia GC 0.2 L 2 12 Baccharis pilularis cvs. dwarf coyote brush GC 0.2 L 2 S Baccharis'Centennial' bentennial baccharis GC 0.2 L 2 5 Lantana montevidensis lantana GC 0.2 L 1 5 Maleophora crocea ice plant (Maleophora) GC 0.2 L 0.5 2 Myoporum parvifolium myoprum GC 0.2 L 0.5 8 Rosemarinus'Prostratus' trailing rosemary GC 0.2 L 2 6 Teucrium chamaedrys germander GC 0.2 L 1 2 Abelia grandiflora prostrate prostrate glossy abelia GC 0.5 M 2 3 Arctotheca calendula cape weed GC 0.5 M 1 5 Berberis sop. barberry GC 0.5 M 1 6 Cerastium tomentosum snow in summer GC 0.5 M 0.5 3 Ceratostigma pumbaginoides dwarf plumbago GC 0.5 M 1 4 Cotoneaster spp.(ground covers) cotoneaster GC 0.5 M 1 5 Fragaria chiloensis wild strawberry GC 0.5 M 0.5 1 Gazania spp. gazania GC 0.5 M 0.5 2 Geranium incanum cranesbill GC 0.5 M 0.5 2 Hypericum calycinum Aaron's beard GC 0.5 M 1 3 Juniperus conferta shore juniper GC 0.5 M 1 6 Lirope spicata creeping lily turf GC 0.5 M 1 3 Lotus corniculatus birdsfoot trefoil GC 0.5 M 1 3 Mahonia rapers creeping mahonia GC 0.5 M 2 3 Muehlenbeckia axillaris creepng wire vine GC 0.5 M 1 3 Myoporum X'Pacificum' pacifica saltbush GC 0.5 M 2 15 Myoporum'South Coast' south coast myoprum GC 0.5 M 2 10 Parthenocissus quinquefolia Virginia creeper GC 0.5 M 1 5 Pelargonium peltatum ivy geranium GC 0.5 M 2 4 Potentilla verna spring cinquefoil GC 0.5 M 1 3 Senecio mandraliscae kleinia GC 0.5 M 1 3 Thymus pseudolanuginosus wolly thyme GC 0.5 M 1 1 Thymus serphyllum creeping thyme GC 0.5 M 1 1 Trachelosperrnum asiaticum Asian star jasmine GC 0.5 M 1 3 Trifolium fragiferum O'Connor O'Connor's legume GC 0.5 M 1 6 Verbena rigida vervian GC 0.5 M 1 4 Zoyzia tenuifolia Mascarene grass GC 0.5 M 0.5 2 Ophiopogan japonicum mondo grass GC 0.8 H 1 1 Lotus scoparius deer weed P 0.1 VL 2 2 X Nolina parryi bear grass P 0.1 VL 6 3 X Achillea millefolium common yarrow P 0.2 L 3 3 Achillea tomentosa woolly yarrow, P 0.2 L 0.5 3 Artemisia absinthium wormwood P 0.2 L 3 3 Baileys multiradiata desert marigold P 0.2 L 1 1.5 Coreopsis auriculata'Nana' dwarf coreopsis P 0.2 L 0.5 2 Coreopsis lanceolata coreopsis P 0.2 L 1.5 2 Deschampsia caespitosa tufted hairgrass P 0.2 L 1.5 1 Dymondia margaretae dymondia P 0.2 L 0.5 2 Elymus spp. wild rye P 0.2 L 2 2 Encelia califomica California encelia P 0.2 L 4 4 X Epilobium spp.(Zauchneria) California fuchsia P 0.2 L 3 3 Kniphofia uvaria red hot poker P 0.2 L 2 3 Narcissus spp. daffodil P 0.2 L 2 1 Pennisetum alopecuroides Chinese pennisetum P 0.2 L 3 3 Pennisetum setaceum'Cupreum' purple fountain grass P 0.2 L 4 4 Stipa pulchra feather grass P 0.2 L 1.5 1.5 Stipa tenuissima feather grass P 0.2 L 1.5 1.5 Agapanthus africanus lily-of-the-nile P 0.5 M 1.5 1.5 Anigozanthos flavidus kangaroo paw P 0.5 M 2 2 Armeria maritima sea pink P 0.5 M 0.5 1 Asparagus spp. ornamental asparagus P 0.5 M 1 3 Calamagrostis spp. feather reed P 0.5 M 2 2 APPENDIX B, City of Temecula Development Code, 17.32, PLANT LIST, (by water use type) Height Spread Riv.Co. Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Feet Feet Native Carex comans sedge P 0.5 M 1 3 Centaurea cineraria dusty miller (cmeraria) P 0.5 M 2 2 Chrysanthemum superbum Shasta daisy P 0.5 M 2 2 Cuphea ignea cigar plant P 0.5 M 1 1 Delphinium elatum candle larkspur P 0.5 M 3 2 Dietes bicolor fortnight lily P 0.5 M 3 3 Dietes indiodes fortnight lily P 0.5 M 3 3 Digitalis purpurea foxglove P 0.5 M 4 2 Erigeron karvinskianus fleabane P 0.5 M 1.5 3 Erodium chemaedryoides cranesbill P 0.5 M 0.5 1 Erysimium linifolium wallflower P 0.5 M 2 2 Festuca califomica California fescue P 0.5 M 0.5 1 Festuca ovina glauca blue fescue P 0.5 M 0.5 1 Gaura lindheimer gaura P 0.5 M 3 3 Geranium sanguinium cranesbill P 0.5 M 1 2 Helictotrichon sempervirens blue oat grass P 0.5 M 2 2 Hemerocallis spp. day lily P 0.5 M 1 2 Heuchera sanguinea coral bells P 0.5 M 1 2 Imperata cylindrica'Rubra' Japanese blood grass P 0.5 M 1 2 Iris spp. Douglas iris hybrids P 0.5 M 2 1 Lillium asiatic asian lily P 0.5 M 2 1 Linaria purpurea toadflax P 0.5 M 1.5 1 Lirope muscari big blue lily turf P 0.5 M 1 1.5 Miscanthus sinensis eulalia grass P 0.5 M 5 5 Muhlenbergia dumosa bamboo muhly P 0.5 M 3 3 Muhlenbergia rigens deer grass P 0.5 M 3 3 X Nepeta X faassenii catmint P 0.5 M 2 2 Penstemon heterophyllus penstemon P 0.5 M 1 2 X Stachys bysantina lamb's ears P 0.5 M 1.5 1.5 Tulbaghia fragrans sweet garlic P 0.5 M 1 1 Tulbaghia violacea society garlic P 0.5 M 1 1 Zantedeschia aethiopica common calla P 0.5 M 2 1 Bergenia crassifolia winter blooming bergenia P 0.8 H 2 2 Equisetum spp. horsetail P 0.8 H 4 2 Adenostoma fasciculatum chamise S 0.1 VL 10 10 X Adenostoma sparsifolium red shanks/ribbonwood S 0.1 VL 10 10 X Calliandra eriophylia fairy duster S 0.1 VL 3 4 Cercocarpus minutiflorus San Diego mountain mahogany S 0.1 VL 6 10 X Fallugia paradoxa Apache plume S 0.1 VL 6 4 Lobelia laxiflora Mexican bush lobelia S 0.1 VL 2 2 Salvia apiana white sage S 0.1 VL 4 4 X Simmor is chinensis jojoba S 0.1 VL 6 6 X Agave americans century plant S 0.2 L 5 5 Arctostaphylos cultivars manzanita cultivars S 0.2 L Varies Varies Arctostaphylos spp. manzanita S 0.2 L Varies Varies X Baccharis pilularis consan. coyote brush S 0.2 L 10 6 X Baccharis sarothroides desert broom S 0.2 L 10 6 X Buddleia marrubiifolia woolly butterfly bush S 0.2 L 5 5 Caesalpinea gilliesii desert bird of paradise S 0.2 L 10 10 Caesalpinea mexicana Mexican bird of paradise S 0.2 L 6 6 Callistemon citrinus bottle brush S 0.2 L 12 10 Convolvulus cneorum bush morning glory S 0.2 L 3 3 Senna artemisioides feathery cassia S 0.2 L 5 5 Serra eremophila deset cassia S 0.2 L 5 5 Ceanothus spp. California lilac S 0.2 L Varies Varies X Ceanothus cultivars ceanothus S 0.2 L Varies Varies Cereus peruvianus Peruvian apple cactus S 0.2 L 25 6 Cistus spp. rockrose S 0.2 L Varies Varies Comarostaphylis diversifolia summer holly S 0.2 L 10 10 X Convolvulus cneorum bush morning glory S 0.2 L 3 3 Dales bicolor dales (bicolor) S 0.2 L 3 3 Dasylirion spp. desert spoon S 0.2 L 3 3 Comments Contain roots APPENDIX B, City of Temecula Development Code, 17.32, PLANT LIST, (by water use type) Height Spread Riv.Co. Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Feet Feet Native Comments Dendromecon spp. bush poppy S 0.2 L 15 15 Echium fastuosum pride of madeira S 0.2 L 5 5 Elaeagnus pungens silverberry S 0.2 L 12 12 Encelia farinosa brittle bush S 0.2 L 5 5 X Eriogonum spp. buckwheat S 0.2 L 3 4 X Euphorbia rigida euphorbia (rigida) S 0.2 L 2 3 Euryops pectinatus euryops/shrub daisy S 0.2 L 5 3 Forestiera neomexicana desert olive S 0.2 L 6 6 Fouquieria splendens ocotillo S 0.2 L 15 5 X Fremontodendron spp. flannel bush S 0.2 L 15 12 X Galvesia speciosa island bush snapdragon S 0.2 L 2 4 X Grevillea spp. grevillea S 0.2 L 4 4 Hesperaloe parviflora red/yelow yucca S 0.2 L 3 3 Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon S 0.2 L 8 8 Ilex vomitoria yaupon S 0.2 L 6 6 Keckiella antirhinnoides yellow penstemmon S 0.2 L 6 8 X Keckiella cordifolia heart -leaved penstemmon S 0.2 L 5 8 X Lantana camara lantana S 0.2 L 3 5 Larrea tridentata creosote bush S 0.2 L 4 4 Lavandula spp. lavender S 0.2 L 3 3 Lavatera bicolor tree mallow S 0.2 L 6 4 Leptospermum scoparium New Zealand tea tree S 0.2 L 6 6 Leucophyllum fnitescens Texas ranger S 0.2 L 6 6 Mahonia nevinii Nevin mahonia S 0.2 L 4 6 Malosma laurina (Rhus laurina) laurel sumac S 0.2 L 8 8 Nerium oleander oleander S 0.2 L 10 10 Rhamnus califomica coffeeberry S 0.2 L 10 10 X Rhamnus crocea redberry S 0.2 L 3 5 X Rhus ovata sugar bush S 0.2 L 8 8 X Rosmarinus offfcinalis rosemary S 0.2 L 5 5 Ruellia brittoniana mexican ruellia S 0.2 L 3 2 Contain roots Salvia chamaedroides blue sage S 0.2 L 1 4 X Salvia clevelandii Cleveland sage S 0.2 L 4 4 Salvia gregii autumn sage S 0.2 L 4 4 Salvia leucantha Mexican bush sage S 0.2 L 4 4 Salvia leucophylla purple sage S 0.2 L 4 4 Santolina spp. lavender cotton S 0.2 L 2 2 Sollya heterophylla Australian bluebell creeper S 0.2 L 2 4 Teucrium fruticans bush germander S 0.2 L 5 5 Trichostema lanatum woolly blue curls S 0.2 L 4 4 X Westringia fruticosa coast rosemary S 0.2 L 5 5 Yucca filamentosa Adam's needle S 0.2 L 2 5 Yucca whipplei. our Lord's candle S 0.2 L 3 3 X Abelia'Edward Goucher' pink abelia S 0.5 M 4 4 Abelia X grandiflora glossy abelia S 0.5 M 5 5 Abelia'Sherwoodi't Sherwood dwarf abelia S 0.5 M 3 4 Aspidistra elatior cast iron plant S 0.5 M 2 2 Buddleia davidii butterfly bush S 0.5 M 6 6 Buxus microphylla japonica Japanese boxwood S 0.5 M 4 4 Caesalpinea pulcherrima dwarf poinciana S 0.5 M 10 10 Callistemon viminalis weeping bottle brush S 0.5 M 20 15 Chamelaucium uncinatum Geraldton wax flower S 0.5 M 6 6 Clivia miniata Kafir Lily S 0.5 M 2 2 Cocculus launfolius laurel leaf cocculus S 0.5 M 25 25 Coprosma kirkii creeping coprosma S 0.5 M 2 3 Rabbit prone Coprosma repens mirror plant S 0.5 M 10 6 Cordyline australis cordyline S 0.5 M 20 6 Cotoneaster spp. (shrubs) cotoneaster S 0.5 M Varies Varies Cycas revoluta sago palm S 0.5 M 4 4 Dodonaea viscosa hopseed bush S 0.5 M 12 6 Dodonaea viscosa'Purpurea' purple hopseed bush S 0.5 M 12 6 Escallonia spp. escallonia S 0.5 M Varies Varies APPENDIX B, City of Temecula Development Code, 17.32, PLANT LIST, (by water use type) Height Spread Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Feet Feet Euonymus japonicus evergreen euonymus S 0.5 M Varies Varies Euryops pectinatus viridis green euryops S 0.5 M 5 5 Feijoa sellowiana pineapple guava S 0.5 M 10 10 Felicia amelloides blue marguerite S 0.5 M 1.5 4 Felicia fruticosa shrub aster S 0.5 M 2 3 Gardenia veitchii gardenia S 0.5 M 3 3 Garrya eliptica coast silktassel S 0.5 M 20 20 Grewia occidentalis lavender star flower S 0.5 M 6 6 Hebe spp. hebe S 0.5 M 3 3 Hibiscus syriacus rose of sharon S 0.5 M 10 6 Hypericum'Hidecote' St.Johnswort S 0.5 M 4 4 Ilex X altaclarensis'Wilsonii' Wilson holly S 0.5 M 8 8 Ilex aquifolium English holly S 0.5 M 20 20 Ilex cornuta'Burfordii' Burford holly S 0.5 M 10 10 Ilex dimorphophilla Okinawan holly S 0.5 M 3 3 Jasminum humile Italian jasmine S 0.5 M 10 10 Jassminum mesnyi primrose jasmine S 0.5 M 8 8 Juncus patens California grayrush S 0.5 M 2 2 Juniperus spp. juniper S 0.5 M Varies Varies Ligustrum japonicum Japanese privet S 0.5 M 10 10 Mahonia aquifolium Oregon grape S 0.5 M 6 6 Mahonia bealei leatherleaf mahonia S 0.5 M 8 8 Mahonia 'Golden Abundance' golden abundance mahonia S 0.5 M 6 4 Mahonia lomadifolia Chinese holly grape S 0.5 M 8 4 Murraya paniculata orange jessamine S 0.5 M 10 10 Myrtus communis true myrtle S 0.5 M 5 4 Nandina domestica heavenly bamboo S 0.5 M 5 3 Nandina domestica'Purpurea' heavenly bamboo S 0.5 M 1.5 1 Osmanthus fragrans sweet olive S 0.5 M 10 10 Perovskia spp. Russian sage S 0.5 M 3 3 Phormium hybrids flax S 0.5 M 4 3 Phormium tenax New Zealand flax S 0.5 M 5 4 Photinia X fraseri Fraser photinia S 0.5 M 10 10 Photinia serrulata Chinese photinia S 0.5 M 10 10 Pittosporum tobira mock orange S 0.5 M 8 8 Pitt. tobira'Wheelers Dwarf dwarf pittosporum S 0.5 M 2 2 Plumbago auriculata cape plumbago S 0.5 M 6 8 Punica granatum'nana' dwarf pomegranate S 0.5 M 3 3 Pyracantha spp. frethorn S 0.5 M Varies Varies Rhamnus alaternus Italian buckthorn S 0.5 M 12 12 Rhaphiolepis spp. Indian hawthorne S 0.5 M 4 4 Rhaphiolepis'Majestic Beauty' majestic beauty S 0.5 M 12 4 Rosa'Cecil Brunner' Cecile Bnunner rose S 0.5 M 6 6 Rosa hybrids bush rose S 0.5 M Varies Varies Spiraea japonica spiraea S 0.5 M 4 4 Tecomaria capensis cape honeysuckle S 0.5 M 6 8 Thymus vulgaris common thyme S 0.5 M 1 2 Trachelospermum jasminoides star jasmine S 0.5 M 1.5 5 Veronica spp. veronica S 0.5 M 1.5 1.5 Viburnum japonicum Japanese viburnum S 0.5 M 10 10 Viburnum rhytidophyllum leatherleaf vibumum S 0.5 M 8 8 Viburnum suspensum sadanque vibumum S 0.5 M 8 8 Viburnum tinus laurustinus S 0.5 M 8 8 Xylosma congestum shiny xylosma S 0.5 M 8 8 Prunus ilicifolia holly leaf cherry T 0.1 VL 40 25 Quercus dumosa California scrub oak T 0.1 VL 40 40 Quercus wislizeni interior live oak T 0.1 VL 40 40 Acacia baileyana Bailey acacia T 0.2 L 25 30 Acacia cultriforrnis knife acacia T 0.2 L 12 12 Acacia dealbata silver wattle T 0.2 L 40 30 Acacia smallii desert sweet acacia T 0.2 L 30 20 Acacia stenophyla shoestring acacia T 0.2 L 30 20 Riv.Co. Native Comments APPENDIX B, City of Temecula Development Code, 17.32, PLANT LIST, (by water use type) Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Height Spread Riv.Co. Feet Feet Native Comments Arbutus unedo strawberry tree T 0.2 L 20 20 Nolina recurvata bottle palm T 0.2 L 6 6 Brachychiton popumeus bottle tree T 0.2 L 40 30 Brahea edWis Guadelupe palm T 0.2 L 30 10 Ceratonia siliqua carob T 0.2 L 30 30 Cercidium floridum blue palo verde T 0.2 L 30 30 X Cercidium microphyllum little leaf palo verde T 0.2 L 25 25 X Cercidium praecox Sonoran palo verde T 0.2 L 25 25 Cercis occidentalis western redbud T 0.2 L 15 15 Chilopsis linearis desert willow T 0.2 L 25 25 Chitalpa tashkentensis chitalpa T 0.2 L 25 25 Cupressus arizonica var. glabra smooth Arizona cypress T 0.2 L 40 20 Cupressus sempervirens Italian cypress T 0.2 L 50 10 Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive T 0.2 L 20 20 Eucalyptus camaldulensis red gum T 0.2 L 70 40 Eucalyptus lehmannii bushy yate T 0.2 L 25 25 Gleditsia triacanthos honey locust T 0.2 L 50 30 Laurus nobilis sweet bay T 0.2 L 30 30 Leptospermum laevigatum Australian tea tree T 0.2 L 30 30 Olea europaea olive T 0.2 L 25 25 Parkinsonia aculeata Mexican palo verde T 0.2 L 20 20 X Phoenix canariensis Canary Island date palm T 0.2 L 50 40 Phoenix dactylifera date palm T 0.2 L 60 40 Pinus brutia Calabrian pine T 0.2 L 40 40 Pinus eldarica eldarica pine T 0.2 L 40 40 Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine T 0.2 L 40 40 Pinus pinea Italian stone pine T 0.2 L 50 40 Pittosporum phillyraeoides willow pittosporum T 0.2 L 20 15 Prunus lyonii Catalina cherry T 0.2 L 40 30 X Quercus agrifolia coast live oak T 0.2 L 40 50 X Quercus chrysolepis canyon live oak T 0.2 L 30 40 X Quercus ilex holly oak T 0.2 L 50 50 Quercus suber cork oak T 0.2 L 50 50 Rhus lancea African sumac T 0.2 L 25 25 Robinia X ambigua locust T 0.2 L 40 20 Schinus motile California pepper tree T 0.2 L 35 35 Sophora secundiflora Texas mountain laurel T 0.2 L 25 25 Washingtonia filifera California fan palm T 0.2 L 50 10 X Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm T 0.2 L 75 10 Acacia pendula weeping acacia T 0.5 M 25 15 Albizia julibrissin silk tree T 0.5 M 35 35 Alnus cordata Italian alder T 0.5 M 35 20 Arbutus'Marina' Marina arbutus T 0.5 M 35 30 Arecastrum romanzoffianum queen palm T 0.5 M 40 10 Not zone 18 Banksia integrifolia tree banksia T 0.5 M 20 10 Bauhinia variegata purple orchid tree T 0.5 M 30 30 Brachychiton acerifolius flame tree T 0.5 M 50 30 Brachychiton discolor Queensland lace bark T 0.5 M 30 30 Cedrus atlantica Atlas cedar T 0.5 M 50 30 Cedrus deodora deodar cedar T 0.5 M 60 30 Celtis sinensis Chinese hackberry T 0.5 M 40 40 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud T 0.5 M 30 30 Chamaerops humilis Mediterranean fan palm T 0.5 M 20 15 Chionanthus retusus Chinese fringe tree T 0.5 M 30 20 Cinnamomum camphora camphor tree T 0.5 M 40 40 Citrus spp. orange, lemon etc. T 0.5 M Varies Varies Not zone 18 Cupaniopsis anacardioides carrotwood T 0.5 M 40 40 Cypressocyparis leylandii leyland cypress T 0.5 M 20 10 Eucalyptus citriodora lemon scented gum T 0.5 M 60 30 Eucalyptus erythrocorys red cap gum T 0.5 M 20 10 Eucalyptus nicholii peppermint gum T 0.5 M 30 20 Eucalyptus torquata coral gum T 0.5 M 15 10 APPENDIX B, City of Temecula Development Code, 17.32, PLANT LIST, (by water use type) Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Height Spread Riv.Co. Feet Feet Native Comments Fraxinus oxycarpa'Raywoodi' raywood ash T 0.5 M 50 30 Fraxinus velutina Arizona ash T 0.5 M 50 30 Fraxinus velutina'Modesto' Modesto ash T 0.5 M 50 30 Geijera parviflora Australian willow T 0.5 M 25 20 Ginkgo biloba maiden hair tree T 0.5 M 60 30 Junipenus scopulorum'Tolleson' Tolleson's juniper T 0.5 M 20 10 Junipenus scopulorum skyrocket juniper T 0.5 M 20 3 Koelreuteria bioinnata Chinese flame tree T 0.5 M 30 30 Koelreuteria paniculata golden rain tree T 0.5 M 30 30 Lagerstroemia indica crape myrtle T 0.5 M 25 20 Ligustrum lucidum glossy privet T 0.5 M 35 30 Liquidambar styraciflua sweet gum T 0.5 M 50 20 Linodendron tulipifera tulip tree T 0.5 M 50 30 Magnolia grandiflora southern magnolia T 0.5 M 60 30 Magnolia soulangeana saucer magnolia T 0.5 M 20 20 Magnolia stellata star magnolia T 0.5 M 10 20 Malus spp. eg.'Prairie Fire' crabapple T 0.5 M 20 20 Maytenus boaria mayten tree T 0.5 M 30 20 Melaleuca styphelioides melaleuca T 0.5 M 30 20 Pinus canariensis Canary Island pine T 0.5 M 60 20 Pinus torreyana Torrey pine T 0.5 M 40 30 Pistacia chinensis Chinese pistache T 0.5 M 40 40 Platanus X acerifolia London plane T 0.5 M 50 30 Platanus racemosa California sycamore T 0.5 M 60 40 X Podocarpus gracilior fern pine T 0.5 M 40 40 Podocarpus henkelk long leaf yellow wood T 0.5 M 40 20 Podocarpus macrophyllus yew pine T 0.5 M 40 40 Populus fremontii western poplar T 0.5 M 50 40 X Populus nigra'halica' Lombardy poplar T 0.5 M 50 15 Prunus caroliniana Carolina laurel cherry T 0.5 M 35 20 Prunus sop. (ornamental) flowering cherry T 0.5 M 25 25 Prunus spp. (ornamental) flowering plum T 0.5 M 25 25 Punica granatum pomegranate T 0.5 M 20 20 Pyrus calleryana cultivars Callery pear T 0.5 M 40 20 Pyrus kawakamii evergreen pear T 0.5 M 40 40 Quercus lobata valley oak T 0.5 M 60 50 X Quercus virginiana southern live oak T 0.5 M 50 50 Sapium sebiferum Chinese tallow tree T 0.5 M 35 35 Tipuana tipu tipu tree T 0.5 M 30 30 Trachycarpus fortunei windmill palm T 0.5 M 30 10 Tristaniopsis laurina little leaf myrtle T 0.5 M 15 8 Ulmus parvifolia Chinese evergreen elm T 0.5 M 40 40 Vitex agnus-castus chaste tree T 0.5 M 20 20 Alnus rhombifolia white alder T 0.8 H 40 20 Surface roots Betula pendula European white birch T 0.8 H 30 15 Salix spp. willow T 0.8 H 20 20 Invasive roots Clematis lasiantha pipestem clemaltis V 0.2 L 1 10 Lonicera japonica Japanese honeysuckle V 0.2 L 1 10 Lonicera japonica'Halliana' Hall's honeysuckle V 0.2 L 1 10 Macfadyena unguis-cati cat's claw V 0.2 L 1 10 Vitis califomica California wild grape V 0.2 L 1 10 X Ficus pumila creeping fig V 0.5 M 6 6 Clematis armandii evergreen clemeltis V 0.5 M 15 5 Clytostoma callistigioides violet trumpet vine V 0.5 M 15 5 Distictis buccinatoria blood red trumpet vine V 0.5 M 20 5 Distictis'Rivers' royal trumpet vine V 0,5 M 20 5 Lonicera sempervirens trumpet honeysuckle V 0.5 M 20 5 Parthenocissus tricuspidata Boston ivy V 0.5 M 15 15 Rosa banksiae lady Banks rose V 0.5 M 15 15 Rosa hybrids..climbing climbing rose V 0.5 M 10 15 Solandra maxima cup of gold vine V 0.5 M 10 10 Solanum jasminoides potato vine V 0.5 M 10 10 APPENDIX B, City of Temecula Development Code, 17.32, PLANT LIST, (by water use type) Height Spread Riv.Co. Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Feet Feet Native Comments Wisteria spp. wisteria V 0.5 M 20 20 Clematis hybrids deciduous clematis V 0.8 H 15 5 Kc, Crop Coefficient LEGEND Established by WUCOLS' GC, Ground cover Kc 0.1, Very Low water use P, Perennial Kc 0.2, Low water use S, Shrub Kc 0.5, Medium water use T, Tree Kc 0.8, High water use, (Not recommended) V, Vine C, Cool Season Grass 'California Department of Water Resources W, Warm Season Grass WUCOLS III, August, 2000. Mowable Turf Grasses Cool Season Grasses, 80% of Eto Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Turf Varieties Comments Agrostis palustris Creeping Bentgrass C H 0.8 Penncross, A-4 Poa pratensis Kentucky Bluegrass C H 0.8 Rugby, Cobalt Blu-Rye Mix Festuca rubra Red Fescue C H 0.8 Dawson Festuca arundinacea Tall Fescue C H 0.8 Marathon Festuca arundinacea Tall Fescue, Dwarf Varieties C H 0.8 Bonsai, Matador Lolium perenne Perennial Ryegrass C H 0.8 Saturn, Manhattan Blu-Rye Mix Warm Season Grasses, 60% of Eto Botanical name Common name Type Kc Kc Turf Varieties Comments Cynodon dactylon Common Bermudagrass W M 0.5 Safari, Sultan Cynodon species Hybrid Bermudagrass W M 0.5 Santa Ana, TifDwarf, Tifway Buchloe dactyloides Buffalograss W M 0.5 Texoka, Cody Zoysia japonica Zoysia W M 0.5 De Anza, El Toro Stenotaphrum secundatum St. Augustine W M 0.5 Sod Only Pennisetum clandestinum Kukuyugrass W M 0.5 AZ1, Whittet TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Item No. 10 ACTION MINUTES of NOVEMBER 10, 2009 City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING The Temecula Community Services District Meeting convened at 7:53 PM. CALL TO ORDER: President Chuck Washington ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington ABSENT: Comerchero. Roberts CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. CSD CONSENT CALENDAR 19 Action Minutes — Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Director Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Director Naggar; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Directors Comerchero and Roberts absent RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Approve the action minutes of October 27, 2009. 20 Harveston Lake Paddleboat Concession Agreement — Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Director Edwards made the motion; it was seconded by Director Naggar; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Directors Comerchero and Roberts absent RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Approve the Harveston Lake Paddleboat Concession Agreement with Keith Gors dba Goodtime Rentals for a three year term. CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT CSD GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS CSD ADJOURNMENT At 7:55 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, November 24, 2009, at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. California. Chuck Washington, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] ACTION MINUTES of DECEMBER 8, 2009 City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING The Temecula Community Services District Meeting convened at 7:35 PM. CALL TO ORDER: President Chuck Washington ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington ABSENT: Naggar Iy�11�1-14[0KOI61 There were no public comments CSD CONSENT CALENDAR 14 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the action minutes of November 10, 2009; continued to 1/12/10 14.2 Approve the action minutes of November 24, 2009. — Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-1-1) — Director Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Director Roberts; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Director Naggar absent and President Washington abstaining 15 Financial Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2009 — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Director Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Director Roberts; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Director Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the three months ended September 30, 2009; 15.2 Approve an appropriation of $60,000 in the TSCD Parks and Recreation Operating Budget from TCSD Fund Balance. 16 First Amendment to the Willdan Financial Services Agreement for Assessment Engineering Services — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Director Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Director Roberts; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Director Naggar absent 16.1 Approve the First Amendment to the Willdan Financial Services Agreement to extend the term and increase the payment by $75,500. 17 Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for Replacement of Existing Playground Equipment and Safety Surfacing — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Director Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Director Roberts; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Director Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Authorize the Community Services Department to solicit construction bids for the replacement of the existing playground equipment and safety surfacing at the Ronald Reagan Sports Park. 18 Award a Construction Contract for Ronald Reagan Sports Park Desilting Basin Project — Proiect No. PWO5-13 —Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Director Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Director Roberts; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Director Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Award a Construction Contract for Ronald Reagan Sports Park Desilting Basin Project, Project No. PW 05-13, to Sean Malek Engineering and Construction in the amount of $182,900; 18.2 Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders up to 10% of the contract amount, $18,290; 18.3 Make a finding that the Ronald Reagan Sports Park Desilting Basin Project is exempt from Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) fees. CSD BUSINESS 19 Appointment of President and Vice President of the Community Services District for Calendar Year 2010 — Reappointed President Washington to preside as President for 2010 and appointed Director Edwards as Vice President (4-0-1) — Director Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Director Roberts; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Director Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Entertain motions from the Board of Directors to appoint the President, effective January 1, 2010, to preside until the end of Calendar Year 2010; 19.2 Entertain motions from the Board of Directors to appoint the Vice President, effective January 1, 2010, who will assume the duties of the President in the President's absence. and hold this office until the end of Calendar Year 2010. CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT CSD GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS CSD ADJOURNMENT At 7:41 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, January 12, 2010, at 5:30 PM., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. California. Chuck Washington, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Item No. I I ACTION MINUTES of NOVEMBER 10, 2009 City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING The Temecula Redevelopment Agency Meeting convened at 7:55 PM. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Ron Roberts ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Washington, Roberts ABSENT: Comerchero, Roberts RDA PUBLIC COMMENTS RDA CONSENT CALENDAR 21 Action Minutes — Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-2) — Agency Member Washington made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Agency Member Comerchero and Chair Person Roberts absent RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Approve the action minutes of October 27, 2009. 1 RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS RDA ADJOURNMENT At 7:55 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, November 24, 2009, 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] ACTION MINUTES of DECEMBER 8, 2009 City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING The Temecula Redevelopment Agency Meeting convened at 7:41 PM. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Person Ron Roberts ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar, Washington, Roberts ABSENT: Naggar RDA PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. RDA CONSENT CALENDAR 20 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Approve the action minutes of November 10, 2009; continued to 1/12/10 20.2 Approve the action minutes of November 24, 2009. — Approved Staff Recommendation (3-0-1-1) — Agency Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Agency Member Naggar absent and President Washington abstaining 21 Financial Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2009 — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) —Agency Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Agency Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Receive and file the Financial Statements for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2009. 1 22 Redevelopment Aaencv Proposed Tax Allocation Housina Bonds - Desianation of Consultants — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Agency Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Agency Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 09-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DESIGNATING CONSULTANTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF TAX ALLOCATION HOUSING BONDS AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO RDA PUBLIC HEARING 23 2010-2014 Redevelopment Agency Implementation Plan — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1) — Agency Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Agency Member Naggar absent RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 09-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A FIVE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 1-1988 RDA BUSINESS 24 Appointment of Chair Person and Vice Chair Person of the Redevelopment Agency for Calendar Year 2010 RECOMMENDATION: 24.1 Entertain motions from the Agency Members to appoint the Chair Person to preside, effective January 1, 2010, until the end of Calendar Year 2010; — Appointed Agency Member Naggar to preside as Chair Person for 2010 (4-0-1) —Agency Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Washington; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Director Naggar absent 24.2 Entertain motions from the Agency Members to appoint the Vice Chair Person, effective January 1, 2010, who will assume the duties of the Chair Person in the Chair Person's absence, and hold this office until the end of Calendar Year 2010. — Appointed Agency Member Roberts to preside as Vice Chair Person for 2010 (4-0-1) — Agency Member Comerchero made the motion; it was seconded by Agency Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval of those present with Director Naggar absent RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS RDA ADJOURNMENT At 7:47 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, January 12, 2010, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Ron Roberts, Chairperson ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] PUBLIC HEARING Item No. 12 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: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: Approval for levying an assessment for fiscal year 2010 -2011 in connection with the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District (TVTBID) PREPARED BY: David Bilby, Senior Debt Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council Conduct a public hearing to consider protests regarding the levy of an assessment in conjunction with the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District. 2. Instruct the City Clerk to tabulate any written protests which might be received prior to the close of the public hearing regarding the formation of the proposed District. 3. If the City Clerk reports that there is not a majority protest received regarding this District, then adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 IN CONNECTION WITH THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (TVTBID) 4. Introduction and First Reading of the Ordinance amending Temecula Municipal Code Section 3.40.030.B. increasing the Assessment from 2% to 4% entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 3.40.040.B. OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE ASSESSMENT AGAINST LODGING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FROM TWO PERCENT (2%) TO FOUR PERCENT (4%) OF ROOM RENT BACKGROUND: On December 13, 2005, a Public Hearing was held to consider protests regarding the formation of the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District. A majority protest was not received and, therefore, Council enacted an ordinance establishing the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District (TVTBID). Also adopted were resolutions to levy an assessment for fiscal year 2006-07 in the TVTBID, and resolutions to establish an advisory board for the TVTBID. A Management Agreement between the City of Temecula and the CONVIS was also approved for the operation and administration of the TVTBID. All of the hotel owners in the TVTBID have unanimously requested the City Council in increase the assessment from its current 2% to 4% of the room rents collected. The proposed Ordinance will accomplish this increase in the assessment. According to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (the Law), the City Council is authorized to annually undertake proceedings to Ievyan assessment against businesses within the TVTBID. In accordance with Section 36533 of the Law, the TVTBID Advisory Board has prepared and filed with the City Clerk a report for fiscal year 2010-11. The report, which was presented to City Council and approved on December 8, 2009, thoroughly details the proposed budget and activities, and programs and events for the District for the coming year. After approving the report, City Council adopted Resolution No. 09-100 to declare its intention to levy an assessment against lodging businesses for fiscal year 2010-11 within the District, to increase the assessment rate from 2% to 4%, and to set the time and place of a Public Hearing. The annual levy represents 4% of the room rates collected. These funds are expended for the purpose of marketing and promotions to increase tourism and marketthe Temecula Valleyarea as a tourist destination to the benefit of lodging businesses located and operating within the boundaries of the District. At this Public Hearing, testimony will be heard and protests may be made by any person with an interest in the proposed levy. In the absence of a majority protest, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the resolution to levy the assessment for the fiscal year 2010-11 (March 1, 2010 through February 28, 2011). FISCAL IMPACT: It is anticipated that the 4% annual assessment would result in the collection of approximately $1,168,400 in fiscal year 2010-11 which would be used bythe CONVIS for the promotion of tourism. The City would receive up to 2% of the assessments, or approximately $23,368, to offset administrative costs. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 10- Ordinance No. 10- RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-2011 IN CONNECTION WITH THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989, California Streets and Highways Code Section 36500 et seq. (the "Act'), authorizes the City Council (the "City Council") of the City of Temecula (the "City") to levy an assessment against businesses within a parking and business improvement area which is in addition to any assessments, fees, charges, or taxes imposed in the City. Section 2. Pursuant to the Act, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 05-16 establishing the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District (the "District') in the City. Section 3. The boundaries of the District are the boundaries of the City and include all lodging businesses therein (as defined in Temecula Municipal Code Section 3.40.020). Section 4. In accordance with Section 36533 of the Law, the Advisory Board for the District prepared and filed with the City Clerk reports entitled "2009-2010 Annual Report' and "2010-2011 Annual Report: Budget and Marketing Plan" (the "Reports"), and on December 8, 2009, Resolution No. 09-100, the City Council preliminarily approved such Report as filed. Section 5. On December 8, 2009, the City Council adopted its Resolution of Intention, Resolution No. 09-100, declaring its intention to levy and collect an assessment for fiscal year 2010-2011 (March 1, 2010 through February 28, 2011) against lodging businesses in the District. Section 6. Following notice duly given pursuant to law, the City Council has held a full and fair public hearing regarding the levy and collection of an assessment within the District for fiscal year 2010-2011. At the public hearing, the testimony of all interested persons regarding the levy of an assessment against lodging businesses within the District for fiscal year 2010-2011 was heard and considered. The City Council hereby determines that there was no majority protest within the meaning of the Act. Section 7. Based upon its review of the Report, a copy of which has been presented to the City Council and which has been filed with the City Clerk, and other reports and information presented to the City, the City Council hereby finds and determines that (i) the lodging businesses in the District will be benefited by the expenditure of funds raised by the assessment for fiscal year 2010-2011, (ii) the District includes all of the businesses so benefited; and (iii) the net amount of the assessment levied within the District for fiscal year 2010-2011 in accordance with Resolution No. 09-100, the Report, and Chapter 3.40 of the Temecula Municipal Code is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lodging business. Section 8. The City Council hereby confirms the Report as originally filed. Section 9. The adoption of this Resolution constitutes the levy of an assessment for fiscal year 2010-2011. The assessment formula is set forth in Chapter 3.40 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Assessments shall be paid in monthly installments. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of January, 2010. Jeff Comerchero, 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. 10- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12th day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: IG1 ►1�Ko1l1►NllNdiIAdi1:l4:&1 ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 3.40.040.B. OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE ASSESSMENT AGAINST LODGING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FROM TWO PERCENT (2%) TO FOUR PERCENT (4%) OF ROOM RENT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare as follows: A. The Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989, California Streets and Highways Code Section 36500 et sec., (the "Law") authorizes the City Council of the City of Temecula (the "City Council") to annually levy an assessment against businesses within a business improvement area for the purpose of promoting tourism, which is in addition to any assessments, fees, charges or taxes imposed in the City of Temecula (the "City"). B. Pursuant to the Law, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 05-16 on December 13, 2005, Chapter 3.40 of the Temecula Municipal Code, establishing the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District in the City (the "TVTBID"). C. The Law requires the City Council to appoint an advisory board which shall prepare an annual report for each fiscal year for which assessments are to be levied and collected to pay the costs of the activities described in the report and which shall make recommendations to the City Council on the expenditure of revenues derived from the levy of assessments, on the classification of businesses, as applicable, and on the method and basis of levying the assessments. D. By Resolution No. 05-121, the City Council appointed the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District Advisory Board to serve as the advisory board for the TVTBID (the "Advisory Board"). E. In accordance with Section 36533 of the Law, the Advisory Board has prepared and filed with the City Clerk, and the City Clerk has presented to the City Council, a report for fiscal year 2010-11 in connection with the proposed increase to four percent (4%) of the levy of an assessment against lodging businesses within the TVTBID entitled, "Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District 2010-11 Annual Marketing Plan Budget and Marketing Plan" (the "Report') and, by previous resolution, the City Council preliminarily approved the Report as filed. F. On December 8, 2009 the City Council held a duly noticed Public Meeting to consider the proposed increase in the TVTBID Assessment and adopted a resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO INCREASE THE ASSESSMENT AUTHORIZED BY TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.40.030.B. FROM 2% TO 4% AND LEVY AN ASSESSMENT AGAINST LODGING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 11 AND FIXING THE TIME AND PLACE OF A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON AND GIVING NOTICE THEREOF." G. On January 12, 2010, the City Council held a duly noticed Public Hearing on the proposed ordinance to increase the TVTBID Assessment. The City Council afforded all persons the opportunity to present comments to the City Council concerning the proposed ordinance. H. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. Section 2. Section 3.40.030.B. of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "B. The assessment shall be levied annually against all lodging businesses in the district based upon four percent (4%) of the rent charged by the operator per occupied room per night. Extended stays, defined as more than thirty consecutive calendar days and those exempt persons as defined in Temecula Municipal Code Section 3.20.040, will be exempt from the levy of assessments. The assessments shall not be included in gross room rental revenue for the purpose of determining the amount of the transient occupancy tax imposed pursuant to Chapter 3.20 of the Temecula Municipal Code (the 'transient occupancy tax')." Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause the same to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of January, 2010. Jeff Comerchero, 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. 10- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 12th day of January, 2010, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26th day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Item No. 13 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works DATE: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Ordinance Amendment and Resolution to Adopt Revised TUMF Schedule (At the request of Councilman Washington) PREPARED BY: Beryl Yasinosky, Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council Introduce and read by title only an Ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 15.08 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A REVISED AND UPDATED FEE SCHEDULE APPLICABLE UNDER THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) PROGRAM BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula is a Member Agency of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), a joint powers agency consisting of the City, the County of Riverside, and sixteen other member agencies located in Western Riverside County. In 2002, WRCOG adopted the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Nexus Study to address the impacts of new development on the Regional System of Highways and Arterials in Riverside County. In 2003, the City of Temecula adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing its participation in the TUMF program, codified in Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code (TUMF Ordinance). The City Council has adjusted the TUMF fees on an annual basis in accordance with Temecula Municipal Code Section 15.08.040, "Fee Adjustment" of the TUMF Ordinance, which authorizes periodic review and adjustment to the applicable TUMF fees in accordance with any adjustments made by the WRCOG Executive Committee. 2009 Nexus Study: WRCOG, with the assistance of TUMF participating jurisdictions, has prepared the second major update of the TUMF network entitled the "Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Nexus Study; 2009 Update" ("2009 Nexus Study") pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act), for the purpose of updating the fees. Socioeconomic forecasts for Riverside County were also incorporated and utilized in this update to correspond with the newly developed Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM). This resulted in a shift of the program base and horizon years from 2000 and 2030 to 2007 and 2035. Unit cost assumptions, based on the Construction Cost Index (CCI) reports, were revised to reflect overall decreases in the cost of constructing the regional transportation system. Completed projects were also removed to accurately reflect future transportation needs and cumulative regional impacts of new development in Western Riverside County. On September 14 and October 5, 2009, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2009 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended that the participating jurisdictions adjust their fees by amending their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction. Addendum to the 2009 Nexus Study The WRCOG Executive Committee also approved an Addendum to the 2009 Nexus Study that reflects a temporary reduction of the TUMF fees by 50% through December 2010. This optional provision originated as part of the Riverside County Board of Supervisor's efforts to implement stimulus measures that could contribute to a rebound of the housing market and construction jobs within the region. Although Riverside County and several other WRCOG member cities have already adopted the temporary TUMF reduction, the approval of the Addendum is at the discretion of each participating jurisdiction. The Addendum addresses the 50% reduction by adjusting the maximum TUMF share allocable to the various projects as well as the corresponding shortfall of TUMF funds. For example, any new projects approved for funding under the reduced fee period will only be eligible to receive 50% of the eligible project costs identified in the 2009 Nexus Study. In turn, agencies and developers requesting credits/reimbursement for TUMF improvements will only be eligible for 50% of the maximum TUMF share. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, agencies and developers would be required to mitigate any shortfalls to the TUMF program through other funding mechanisms or in -kind contributions. At this time, no alternative revenue sources have been identified to make up the difference. In this instance, other local, state, and federal funding project funding sources could be compromised as well. There are also unanswered questions about how approval of the reduced fees could affect current and future environmental documents, since the existence of the TUMF program has been the primary mitigation for cumulative traffic impacts in Western Riverside County. Since Councilmember Washington is not recommending that the City Council adopt the 50% temporary reduction in TUMF fees, the attached Ordinance and Resolution only includes adoption of the fees identified in the 2009 Nexus Study. Discussion: The proposed Ordinance provides the legal basis for a revised TUMF schedule based on the 2009 Nexus Study. The Ordinance also revises the definitions of "Class K and "Class B" Office projects and establishes a definition for "TUMF participating jurisdiction." The actual TUMF fee schedule is established through the Resolution. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, the proposed Ordinance and 2009 Nexus Study: (i) identify the purpose of the revised fees; (ii) identify the use to which the revised fees are to be put, including identification of any facilities to be financed; (iii) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; (iv) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development project upon which the fees are imposed; and (v) determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fees and the cost of the public facilities or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fees are imposed. In accordance with Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code, the proposed Resolution would establish the TUMF Fee Schedule allocable to new residential and non-residential development in the City to take effect on March 27, 2010, as shown on the following table: 2009 Nexus -Based TUMF Fee Schedule: Fee Category Units Current Fee Per Unit 07/01/09-06/30/10 Proposed Fee Per Unit Effective 03/27/10 Single -Family Residential DU' $9,812 $8,873 Multi -Family Residential DU $6,890 $6,231 Industrial SF GFA' $1.84 $1.73 Retail Commercial SF GFA $9.99 $10.49 Service Commercial SF GFA $5.71 $4.19 Class A Office Project SF GFA $2.19 $2.19 Class B Office Project SF GFA $2.19 $2.19 DU = Dwelling Unit SF GFA = Square Foot Gross Floor Area It should be noted that the Southwest Zone Committee (comprised of Temecula, Murrieta, Lake Elsinore, Wildomar, and Canyon Lake) has discussed the feasibility of maintaining the fees within the Zone at the levels identified in the 2009 Nexus Study. This would ensure that TUMF funds collected within the Southwest Zone would support projects within the Southwest Zone. As of the date this report, the City Councils for Lake Elsinore, Wildomar, Murrieta, and Canyon Lake have rejected the provision for the temporary 50% fee reduction. Staff has reviewed the proposed Ordinance for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program as described in the Ordinance is not a "project' within the meaning of Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, and is therefore exempt from the requirements of CEQA. The Ordinance establishes a funding mechanism for potential transportation improvements and does not approve the construction nor cause the construction of any specific transportation improvements within Riverside County. The proposed Ordinance will have no effect on the environment. A Notice of Exemption is proposed to be filed. FISCAL IMPACT: Adoption of the attached Ordinance and Resolution will have no direct fiscal impact on the City. TUMF fees are collected by the City and passed through to WRCOG to administer the TUMF program. However, approval of the Addendum and the corresponding fee reduction would require the City and/or developer to mitigate any funding shortfalls. ATTACHMENTS 1. Ordinance No. 10-_ Amending Chapter 15.08 (TUMF Ordinance) of the Temecula Municipal Code 2. Resolution No. 10- establishing and revising the TUMF Fee Schedule 3. 2009 Nexus Study and Addendum ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 16.08 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Chapter 15.08, Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program, of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 16.08.010 Title. This Chapter shall be known as the "Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance of 2009." 16.08.020 Findings. In adopting this Chapter, the City Council of the City of Temecula finds and determines that: A. The City is a member agency of the Western Riverside Council of Governments ("WRCOG"), a joint powers agency comprised of the County of Riverside and 16 Cities located in Western Riverside County. Acting in concert, the WRCOG Member Agencies developed a plan whereby the shortfall in funds needed to enlarge the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials in Western Riverside County (the "Regional System") could be made up in part by a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee ("TUMF") on future residential, commercial and industrial development. A map depicting the boundaries of Western Riverside County and the Regional System is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and incorporated herein as though set forth in full (the "Regional System"). As a Member Agency of WRCOG, and as a TUMF Participating Jurisdiction, the City participated in the preparation of a certain "Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study", dated October 18, 2002 (the "2002 Nexus Study") prepared in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code §§ 66000 et seq.) and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Based on the 2002 Nexus Study, the City adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing the City's participation in a TUMF Program. B. WRCOG, with the assistance of TUMF Participating Jurisdictions, has prepared an updated nexus study entitled "Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Nexus Study; 2009 Update" ("2009 Nexus Study") pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act), for the purpose of updating the fees. On September 14 and October 5, 2009, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2009 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program. The 2009 Nexus Study in on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated herein as though set forth in full. C. Consistent with its previous findings made in the adoption of Ordinance No. 06-04, the City Council has been informed and advised, and hereby finds, that if the capacity of the Regional System is not enlarged and unless development contributes to the cost of improving the Regional System, the result will be substantial traffic congestion in all parts of Western Riverside County, with unacceptable Levels of Service. Furthermore, the failure to mitigate growing traffic impacts on the Regional System will substantially impair the ability of public safety services (police and fire) to respond and, thus, adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare. Therefore, continuation of a TUMF Program is essential. D. The City Council finds and determines that there is a reasonable and rational relationship between the use of the TUMF and the type of development projects on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the transportation improvements that are necessary for the safety, health and welfare of the residential and non-residential users of the development in which the TUMF will be levied. E. The City Council finds and determines that there is a reasonable and rational relationship between the need for the improvements to the Regional System and the type of development projects on which the TUMF is imposed because it will be necessary for the residential and non-residential users of such projects to have access to the Regional System. Such development will benefit from the Regional System improvements and the burden of such developments will be mitigated in part by payment of the TUMF. F. The City Council finds and determines that the cost estimates set forth in the 2009 Nexus Study are reasonable cost estimates for constructing the Regional System improvements and the facilities that comprise the Regional System, and that the amount of the TUMF expected to be generated by new development will not exceed the total fair share cost to such development. G. The fees collected pursuant to this Chapter shall be used to help pay for the design, planning, construction of and right of way acquisition for the Regional System improvements and its facilities as identified in the 2009 Nexus Study. The need for the improvements and facilities is related to new development because such development results in additional traffic and creates the demand for the improvements. H. The City Council finds that the 2009 Nexus Study proposes a fair and equitable method for distributing a portion of the unfunded costs of improvements and facilities to the Regional System. The City Council hereby adopts the 2009 Nexus Study. 16.08.030 Definitions. For the purpose of this Chapter, the following words, terms and phrases shall have the following meanings: A. "Class 'A' Office" means an office building that is typically characterized by high quality design, use of high end building materials, state of the art technology for voice and data, on site support services/maintenance, and often includes full service ancillary uses such as, but not limited to a bank, restaurant/office coffee shop, health club, printing shop, and reserved parking. The minimum requirements of an office building classified as Class 'A' Office shall be as follows: (i) minimum of three stories; (ii) minimum of 10,000 square feet per floor; (iii) steel frame construction; (iv) central, interior lobby; and (v) access to suites shall be from inside the building unless the building is located in a central business district with major foot traffic, in which case the first floor may be accessed from the street to provide entrances/exits for commercial uses within the building. B. "Class 'B' Office" means an office building that is typically characterized by high quality design, use of high end building materials, state of the art technology for voice and data, on site support services/maintenance, and often includes full service ancillary uses such as, but not limited to a bank, restaurant/office coffee shop, health club, printing shop, and reserved parking. The minimum requirements of an office building classified as Class 'B' Office shall be as follows: (i) minimum of two stories; (ii) minimum of 15,000 square feet per floor; (iii) steel frame, concrete or masonry shell construction; (iv) central, interior lobby; and (v) access to suites shall be from inside the building unless the building is located in a central business district with major foot traffic, in which case the first floor may be accessed from the street to provide entrances/exits for commercial uses within the building. C. "Development Project" or "Project" means any project undertaken for the purposes of development, including the issuance of a permit for construction. D. "Gross Acreage" means the total property area as shown on a land division of a map of record, or described through a recorded legal description of the property. This area shall be bounded by road rights of way and property lines. E. "Habitable Structure" means any structure or part thereof where persons reside, congregate or work and which is legally occupied in whole or part in accordance with applicable building codes, and state and local laws. F. "Industrial Project' means any development project that proposes any industrial or manufacturing use allowed in light industrial and business park zones as defined by Title 17, Zoning, of the Temecula Municipal Code, or within a similarly defined planning area within an adopted specific plan. G. "Low Income Residential Housing" means residential units in publicly subsidized projects constructed as housing for low-income households as such households are defined pursuant to section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code. "Publicly subsidized projects," as the term is used herein, shall not include any project or project applicant receiving a tax credit provided by the State of California Franchise Tax Board. H "Multi Family Residential Unit' means a development project that has a density of greater than eight (8) residential dwelling units per gross acre. I. "Non -Residential Unit' means retail commercial, service commercial and industrial development which is designed primarily for non - dwelling use, but shall include hotels and motels. J. "Recognized Financing District' means a Financing District as defined in the TUMF Administrative Plan as may be amended from time to time. K. "Residential Dwelling Unit' means a building or portion thereof used by one (1) family and containing but one (1) kitchen, which is designed primarily for residential occupancy including single-family and multi -family dwellings. "Residential Dwelling Unit" shall not include hotels or motels. L. "Retail Commercial Project' means any development project that proposes any commercial use not defined as a service commercial project allowed in the neighborhood commercial, community commercial, highway tourist commercial and service commercial zones as defined in Title 17 of this Code, or within a similarly defined planning area within an adopted specific plan. M. "Service Commercial Project' means any development project that is predominately dedicated to business activities associated with professional or administrative services, consists of corporate offices, financial institutions, legal and medical offices as further defined in the professional office as defined in Title 17 of this Code, but excluding any residential uses, or within a similarly defined planning area within an adopted specific plan. N. "Single Family Residential Unit' means each residential dwelling unit in a development that has a density of eight (8) units to the gross acre or less. O. "TUMF Participating Jurisdiction" means a jurisdiction in Western Riverside County which has adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing participation in the TUMF Program and complies with all regulations established in the TUMF Administrative Plan, as adopted and amended from time to time by the WRCOG. 16.08.040 Establishment of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee. A. Adoption of TUMF Schedule. The City Council shall adopt an applicable TUMF schedule through a separate resolution, which may be amended from time to time B. Fee Calculation. The fees shall be calculated according to the calculation methodology fee set forth in the Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as amended from time to time. The following shall be observed for purposes of calculating the fee: 1. For non-residential projects, the fee rate utilized shall be based upon the predominant use of the building or structure identified in the building permit and as further specified in the TUMF Administrative Plan. 2. For non-residential projects, the fee shall be calculated on the total square footage of the building or structure identified in the building permit and as further specified in the TUMF Administrative Plan. C. Fee Adjustment. The fee schedule may be periodically reviewed and the amounts adjusted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. By amendment to the resolution, the fees may be increased or decreased to reflect the changes in actual and estimated costs of the Regional System including, but not limited to, debt service, lease payments and construction costs. The adjustment of the fees may also reflect changes in the facilities required to be constructed, in estimated revenues received pursuant to this Chapter, as well as the availability or lack thereof of other funds with which to construct the Regional System. WRCOG shall review the TUMF Program no less than every four (4) years after December 1, 2009. D. Purpose. The purpose of the TUMF is to fund those certain improvements to the Regional System identified in the 2009 Nexus Study. E. Applicability. The TUMF shall apply to all new development within the City, unless otherwise exempt hereunder. F. Exemptions. The following new development shall be exempt from the TUMF: 1. Low income residential housing. 2. Government/public buildings, public schools and public facilities. 3. The rehabilitation and/or reconstruction of any habitable structure in use on or after January 1, 2000, provided that the same or fewer traffic trips are generated as a result thereof. 4. Development Projects which are the subject of a Public Facilities Development Agreement entered into pursuant to Government Code section 65864 et seq, prior to May 28, 2003, the effective date of Ordinance No. 03-01, wherein the imposition of new fees are expressly prohibited provided that if the term of such a Development Agreement is extended by amendment or by any other manner after the effective date of this Chapter, the TUMF shall be imposed. 5. Guest Dwellings, as defined in Title 17 of this Code. 6. Additional single family residential units located on the same parcel pursuant to the provisions of any agricultural zoning classifications as defined in Title 17 of this Code. 7. Kennels and Catteries established in connection with an existing single family residential unit as defined in Title 17 of this Code. 8. Detached Second Units pursuant to Title 17 of this Code. 9. The sanctuary building of a church or other house of worship, eligible for a property tax exemption. 10. Any nonprofit corporation or nonprofit organization offering and conducting full-time day school at the elementary, middle school or high school level for students between the ages of five and eighteen years. G. Credit. Regional System improvements may be credited toward the TUMF in accordance with the TUMF Administrative Plan and the following: 1. Regional Tier a. Arterial Credits: If a developer constructs arterial improvements identified on the Regional System, the developer shall receive credit for all costs associated with the arterial component based 2009 Nexus Study for the Regional System. WRCOG staff must pre - approve any credit agreements that deviate from the standard WRCOG approved format. b. Other Credits: In special circumstances, when a developer constructs off -site improvements such as an interchange, bridge, or railroad grade separation, credits shall be determined by WRCOG and the City in consultation with the developer. All such credits must have prior written approval from WRCOG. C. The amount of the development fee credit shall not exceed the maximum amount determined by the 2009 Nexus Study for the Regional System or actual costs, whichever is less. 2. Local Tier a. The local jurisdictions shall compare facilities in local fee programs against the Regional System and eliminate any overlap in its local fee program except where there is a Recognized Financing District has been established. b. If there is a Recognized Financing District established, the local agency may credit that portion of the facility identified in both programs against the TUMF in accordance with the TUMF Administrative Plan. 16.08.060 Reimbursements. Should the developer construct Regional System improvements in excess of the TUMF fee obligation, the developer may be reimbursed based on actual costs or the 2009 Nexus Study, whichever is less. Reimbursements shall be enacted through an agreement between the developer, and the City, contingent on funds being available and approved by WRCOG. In all cases, however, reimbursements under such special agreements must coincide with construction of the transportation improvements as scheduled in the five-year Capital Improvements Program adopted annually by WRCOG. 16.080.060 Procedures for the Levy. Collection and Disposition of Fees. A. Authority of the Building Department. The Director of Building & Safety, or his/her designee, is hereby authorized to levy and collect the TUMF and make all determinations required by this Chapter. B. Payment. Payment of the fees shall be as follows: 1. The fees shall be paid at the time a certificate of occupancy is issued for the Development Project or upon final inspection, whichever comes first (the "Payment Date"). a. This section should not be construed to prevent payment of the fees prior to issuance of an occupancy permit or final inspection. b. Fees may be paid at the issuance of a building permit, and the fee payment shall be calculated based on the fee in effect at that time, provided the developer tenders the full amount of his/her TUMF obligation. C. If the developer makes only a partial payment prior to the Payment Date, the amount of the fee due shall be based on the TUMF fee schedule in place on the Payment Date. d. The fees shall be calculated according to the fee schedule set forth in this Chapter and the calculation methodology set forth in the Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as amended from time to time. e. In accordance with the requirements authorized by Government Code Section 66007, if the fee is not fully paid prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any portion of the project, the property owner, or lessee if the lessee's interest appears of record, as a condition of issuance of the building permit, shall execute an agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, to pay the fee or charge, or applicable portion thereof, within the time specified in this subsection. (i) The obligation to pay the fee or charge shall inure to the benefit of, and be enforceable by, the local agency that imposed the fee or charge, regardless of whether it is a party to the contract. (ii) The agreement shall contain a legal description of the property affected, shall be recorded in the office of the Riverside County Recorder and, from the date of recordation, shall constitute a lien for the payment of the fee or charge, which shall be enforceable against successors in interest to the property owner or lessee at the time of issuance of the building permit. (iii) The agreement shall be recorded in the grantor -grantee index in the name of the City as grantee and in the name of the property owner or lessee as grantor. (iv) The City shall record a release of the obligation, containing a legal description of the property, in the event the obligation is paid in full, or a partial release in the event the fee or charge is prorated. (v) The agreement may require the property owner or lessee to provide appropriate notification of the opening of any escrow for the sale of the property for which the building permit was issued and to provide in the escrow instructions that the fee or charge be paid to the local agency imposing the same from the sale proceeds in escrow prior to disbursing proceeds to the seller. 2. The fees required to be paid shall be the fee amounts in effect at the time of payment is due under this Chapter, not the date when this Chapter was initially adopted by Ordinance No. 10- . The City shall not enter into a development agreement which freezes future adjustments of the TUMF. 3. If all or part of any development project is sold prior to payment of the fee, the property shall continue to be subject to the requirement for payment of the fee. The obligation to pay the fee shall run with the land and be binding on all the successors in interest to the property. 4. Fees shall not be waived. C. Disposition of Fees. All fees collected hereunder shall be transmitted to the Executive Director of WRCOG within thirty (30) days of receipt by the City for deposit, investment, accounting and expenditure in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter and the Mitigation Fee Act. D. Appeals. Appeals shall be filed with WRCOG in accordance with the provision of the TUMF Administrative Plan. Appealable issues shall be the application of the fee, application of credits, application of reimbursement, application of the legal action stay and application of exemption. E. Reports to WRCOG. The Director of Building & Safety, or his or her designee, shall prepare and deliver to the Executive Director of WRCOG, periodic reports as will be established under Section 15.08.070 of this Chapter. 16.080.070 Appointment of the TUMF Administrator. A. WRCOG is hereby appointed as the Administrator of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program. WRCOG is hereby authorized to receive all fees generated from the TUMF within the City, and to invest, account for and expend such fees in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter and the Mitigation Fee Act. The detailed administrative procedures concerning the implementation of this Chapter shall be contained in the TUMF Administrative Plan adopted May 5, 2003, and as it may be amended from time to time. Furthermore, the TUMF Administrator shall use the Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as it may be amended from time to time, for the purpose of calculating a developer's TUMF obligation. In addition to detailing the methodology for calculating all TUMF obligations of different categories of new development, the purpose of the Fee Calculation Handbook is to clarify for the TUMF Administrator, where necessary, the definition and calculation methodology for uses not clearly defined in the respective TUMF ordinances. B. WRCOG shall expend only that amount of the funds generated from the TUMF for staff support, audit, administrative expenses, and contract services that are necessary and reasonable to carry out its responsibilities and in no case shall the funds expended for salaries and benefits exceed one percent (1 %) of the revenue raised by the TUMF Program. The TUMF Administrative Plan further outlines the fiscal responsibilities and limitations of the Administrator." Section 2. Effect. No provisions of this Ordinance shall entitle any person who has already paid the TUMF to receive a refund, credit or reimbursement of such payment. This Ordinance does not create any new TUMF. Section 3. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby find and determines that: A. On January 12, 2010, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. (the "Mitigation Fee Act") on the 2009 Nexus Study described in Section 2 of this Ordinance, the resolution adopting the TUMF proposed to be adopted under the 2009 Nexus Study, and this Ordinance. B. At least ten (10) days prior to this hearing, the City Council made the 2009 Nexus Study, the TUMF Resolution and this Ordinance available for public review. C. At the Public Hearing, the City Council duly considered data and information provided by the public relative to the cost of the improvements and facilities for which the fees are proposed and all other comments, whether written or oral, submitted prior to the conclusion of the hearing. Section 4. CEQA Findings. The City Council hereby determines, in accordance with 14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15061(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA Guidelines"), that the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program as described in this Ordinance is not a "project' within the meaning of Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines, and is therefore exempt from the requirements of CEQA. The Ordinance establishes a funding mechanism for potential transportation improvements and does not approve the construction nor cause the construction of any specific transportation improvements within Riverside County. This Ordinance will have no effect on the environment. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(d) and 15062, the City Manager is hereby directed to cause a Notice of Exemption to be prepared, executed and filed for the foregoing determination in the manner required by law, that this is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, not environmental impact assessment is necessary. Section 5. Severability. If any one or more of the terms, provisions or sections of this Ordinance shall to any extent be judged invalid, unenforceable and/or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of competent jurisdiction, then each and all of the remaining terms, provisions and sections of this Ordinance shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable. Section 6. Judicial Review. In accordance with State law, any judicial action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this Ordinance shall be commenced within ninety (90) days of the date of adoption of this Ordinance. Section 7. Ordinance No. 06-04. This Ordinance supersedes the provisions of Ordinance No. 06-04 provided this Ordinance is not declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction or not approved by a referendum. If, for whatever reason, this Ordinance is declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction or not approved by a referendum, Ordinance No. 06-04 and all other related ordinances and policies shall remain in full force and effect. Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective sixty (60) days following its adoption. Section 9. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of January, 2010. Jeff Comerchero, 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. 10- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 12 day of January, 2010, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26th day of January, 2010, by the following vote: F-Ayd:.�Ko1l1►NllNdiIAdi1:l4:63 NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk I .r I. r TUMF os IIIWTI �C�I�IIR�"" s ■omIN ■ F= �■�IIYiY�AFI I_ _s Elbe ; !!��■R III��aYW1111� . F.luii��191�: V15-14 --_` 13-115�� YYL .I �.�. � •Y LJL31� E>JL M _ •��■ , IIII• .W.ISe� 2 rdam 91 n .. r All It., ► 17 L All �l 111 ■I . , p-,1� NY � � = .IIIIIIIL�I� Tie 1 1I 1: ' aF_IrGi� IEYYt �I MIMMIN M_ li0 ianir I 1 4 t ell IIIIIIIoil mmm r'q a� tr rF hlll6 e� .YGi1—� �:M&T/ sA mCINTe) gailrn2 0 Is Ah n 40 RESOLUTION NO. 10- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A REVISED AND UPDATED FEE SCHEDULE APPLICABLE UNDER THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) PROGRAM THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Title and Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. This Resolution shall be known as the "Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Resolution of 2009" ("Resolution"). B. On January 12, 2010, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. (the "Mitigation Fee Act") on the 2009 Nexus Study described in Chapter 15.08 as adopted by Ordinance No., adopted on January 12, 2010 and this Resolution. C. At least ten (10) days prior to this hearing, the City Council made the 2009 Nexus Study, the TUMF Resolution and this Ordinance available for public review. D. At the Public Hearing, the City Council duly considered data and information provided by the public relative to the cost of the improvements and facilities for which the fees are proposed and all other comments, whether written or oral, submitted prior to the conclusion of the hearing. E. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code §§ 66000 et seq.) the City Council hereby readopts all findings included in Chapter 15.08 as adopted by Ordinance No., adopted on January 12, 2010, including those findings made in the 2009 Nexus Study. Section 2. Establishment of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Schedule A. In accordance with Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code, the City Council adopts the following TUMF schedule applicable to all new development projects, beginning March 27, 2010: (1) $8,873.00 per single family residential unit (2) $6,231.00 per multi -family residential unit (3) $ 1.73 per square foot of an industrial project (4) $10.49 per square foot of a retail commercial project (5) $ 4.19 per square foot of a service commercial project (6) $ 2.19 per square foot of a service Class A and B Office B. No provision of this Resolution shall entitle any person who has already paid the TUMF to receive a refund, credit or reimbursement of such payment. This Resolution does not create any new TUMF. Section 3. Severability. If any one or more of the terms, provisions or sections of this Resolution shall to any extent be judged invalid, unenforceable and/or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of competent jurisdiction, then each and all of the remaining terms, provisions and sections of this Resolution shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable. Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect on the effective date of Ordinance No. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of January, 2010. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor I_T40r:61n 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. 10- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 12th day of January, 2010, by the following vote: 01 Nl l N di l :1 di 1:l 4 : 63 NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk WRCOG Prepared for TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE NEXUS STUDY 2009 UPDATE FINAL REPORT The Western Riverside Council of Governments In Cooperation with The City of Banning The City of Beaumont The City of Calimeso The City of Canyon Lake The City of Corona The City of Hemet The City of Lake Elsinore The City of Menifee The City of Moreno Valley The City of Murrieta The City of Norco The City of Perris The City of Riverside The City of San Jacinto The City of Temecula The City of Wildomar The County of Riverside Eastern Municipal Water District March Joint Powers Authority Western Municipal Water District Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff. DRAFT OCTOBER 1, 2009 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS _ TABLEOF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................... LIST OF TABLES........................................................... .......... ...... ........ ............ .......... ____ ............... ...ii ES.0 Executive Summary ................. ........................................................................................... iii ES.1 Introduction and Purpose of the Nexus Study .................................................. ......... iii ES.2 Future Growth.................................................................................................................. iii ES.3 Need for the TUMF..........................................................................................................v ESAThe TUMF Network.......................................................................................................... vi ES.5 TUMF Nexus Analysis......................................................................................................vill ES.6 Fair -Share Fee Calculation........................................................................................... ix ES.7 Conclusions..................................................................................................................... ix 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THE NEXUS STUDY....................................................1 2.0 FUTURE GROWTH..................................................................................................................4 2.1 Recent Historical Trend..................................................................................................4 2.2 Available Demographic Data......................................................................................4 2.3 Demographic Assumptions Used for the Nexus Study Analysis...............................5 3.0 NEED FOR THE TUMF..........................................................................................................10 3.1 Future Highway Congestion Levels............................................................................10 3.2 Future Transit Utilization Levels.....................................................................................13 3.3 The TUMF Concept........................................................................................................14 4.0 THE TUMF NETWORK...........................................................................................................16 4.1 Identification of the TUMF Roadway Network.........................................................16 4.2 Backbone Network and Secondary Network..........................................................19 4.3 Future Roadway Transportation Needs.....................................................................22 4.4 Public Transportation Component of the TUMF System.........................................26 4.5 Existing Obligated Funding..........................................................................................27 4.6 Unfunded Existing Improvement Needs....................................................................27 4.7 Maximum TUMF Eligible Cost.......................................................................................28 4.8 TUMF Network Evaluation............................................................................................37 5.0 TUMF NEXUS ANALYSIS......................................................................................................39 5.1 Future Development and the Need for Improvements.........................................39 5.2 Application of Fee to System Components.............................................................40 5.3 Application of Fee to Residential and Non -Residential Developments..............42 6.0 FAIR -SHARE FEE CALCULATION.......................................................................................44 6.1 Residential Fees.............................................................................................................44 6.2 Non -Residential Fees....................................................................................................45 7.0 CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................................47 8.0 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................48 WRCOG DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 12 LIST OF TABLES Table ES.1 -Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County ............... x Table 2.1 - Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County... ...... ........ 5 Table 2.2- Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County..............7 Table 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County ........... 8 Table 3.1 - Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2007-2035)* ................. l 1 Table 4.1 - Unit Costs for Arterial Highway and Street Construction.....................................24 Table 4.3 - Unit Costs for Transit Capital Expenditures.............................................................26 Table 4.4- TUMF Network Cost Estimates..................................................................................31 Table 4.5-TUMF Transit Cost Estimates......................................................................................37 Table 4.6 - Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2035 Base vs 2035 TUMFNetwork)*......................................................................................................................38 Table 5.1 - 2035 Vehicle Trips By WRCOG Zone.......................................................................41 Table 5.2 - 2035 Percent Vehicle Trips By WRCOG Zone........................................................41 Table 5.3 - Backbone -Secondary Network Share Calculation.............................................42 Table 5.4- Residential vs. Non -Residential Person Trip Production.......................................43 Table 6.1 - Fee Calculation for Residential Share ($2.61 billion)............................................45 Table 6.2- Fee Calculation for Non -Residential Share ($1.16 billion)...................................46 Table 7.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County...............47 LIST OF FIGURES Figure ES.1 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County........ v Figure ES.2 - Regional System of Highways and Arterials-TUMF Network Improvements. vii Figure 2.1 - Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County.................6 Figure 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ............. 7 Figure 2.3- Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County .......... 9 Figure 4.1 - Regional System of Highways and Arterials for Western Riverside County ..... 18 Figure 4.3 - Western Riverside County Area Planning Districts (TUMF Zones) ......................21 Figure 4.4- Regional System of Highways and Arterials-TUMF Network Improvements ... 30 WRCOG II DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 13 ES.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY_ . ES.1 Introduction and Purpose of the Nexus Study Western Riverside County includes 16 incorporated cities and the unincorporated county covering an area of approximately 2,100 square miles. Until recently, this portion of Riverside County was growing at a pace exceeding the capacity of existing financial resources to meet increasing demand for transportation infrastructure. Although the recent crisis in the mortgage industry and the associated economic downturn has slowed this rate of growth, the region is expected to rebound and the projected growth in Western Riverside County is expected to increase. This increase in growth could significantly increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in the transportation infrastructure. In February 1999, the cities of Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore, the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the Building Industry Association (BIA) met to discuss the concept of a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) for southwest Riverside County. In August of 2000 the concept was expanded to include the entire WRCOG sub -region. The TUMF Program is intended to be implemented through the auspices of WRCOG. While the TUMF cannot fund all necessary transportation system improvements, it is intended to address a current transportation funding shortfall by establishing a new revenue source that ensures future development will contribute toward addressing the impacts of new growth on regional transportation infrastructure. Funding accumulated through the TUMF Program will be used to construct transportation improvements that will be needed to accommodate future travel demand in Western Riverside County. By levying a fee on new developments in the region, local agencies will be establishing a mechanism by which developers and in turn new county residents and employees will effectively contribute their "fair share" toward sustaining the regional transportation system. This TUMF Draft Nexus Study is intended to satisfy the requirements of California Government Code Chapter 5 Section 66000-66008 Fees for Development Projects (also known as California Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600) or the Mitigation Fee Act) which governs imposing development impact fees in California. The results of the first review of the Program were documented in the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on February 6, 2006. This version of the WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study Report documents the results of the second major review of the TUMF Program conducted in 2008 and 2009. The findings of this report were ultimately adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on October 12, 2009. ES.2 Future Growth For previous versions of the TUMF Nexus Study, the primary available source of consolidated demographic information for Western Riverside County was provided by WRCOG III DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 1M the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Recognizing the need to develop a more comprehensive source of socioeconomic data for Riverside County, the Riverside County Center for Demographic Research (RCCDR) was established under the joint efforts of the County of Riverside, the Western Riverside Council of Governments, the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, and the University of California, Riverside in 2005. RCCDR is responsible for establishing and maintaining demographic information and ensuring data consistency through a centralized data source of demographic characteristics. With the availability of demographic information developed specifically for Riverside County, the socioeconomic forecasts developed by RCCDR for Western Riverside County were used for this update of the TUMF Nexus Study and associated fee schedule. A major distinction between the SCAG 2004 RTP data used for the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update and the RCCDR data used for this 2009 Update is the change in both the base year and horizon year; from 2000 and 2030 to 2007 and 2035. This shift in the base and horizon year demographic assumptions of the Program carries through all aspects of the Nexus analysis, including the travel demand forecasting, network review and fee calculation. The population of Western Riverside County is projected to increase by 62% in the period between 2007 and 2035, a compounded rate of approximately 1.7% annually. During the same period, employment in Western Riverside County is anticipated to grow by 111% or 2.7% annually. Figure ESA illustrates the forecast growth in population, household and employment for Western Riverside County. WRCOG 1v DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 15 Figure ESA - Population, Households and Employment In Western Riverside County - _... Employment Sector: P.W 58: a Irc1V 9e'al t 5s9.J7J a8c,v".::e I 11 61 ¢, 5521SA i 595019 Household Type: 329e14 Oy �^ ,py QOe .I.d• e• 'C Q.o3 ofp {° hod' Q• � do ES.3 Need for the TUMF The WRCOG TUMF study area was extracted from the greater regional SCAG model network for the purpose of calculating measures for Western Riverside County only. Measures for the Western Riverside County TUMF study area included total vehicle daily miles of travel (VMT), total daily vehicle hours of travel (VHT), total combined vehicle hours of delay (VHD), and total VMT experiencing unacceptable level of service (LOS Q. As a result of the new development and associated growth in population and employment in Western Riverside County, additional pressure will be placed on the transportation infrastructure, particularly the arterial roadways, with the VMT estimated to increase by 55% or 1.6% compounded annually. By 2035, 36% of the total VMT on the regional arterial highway system is forecast to be traveling on facilities experiencing daily LOS E or worse. Without improvements to the arterial highway system, the total vehicle hours of delay (VHD) experienced by area motorists on arterial highways will increase over 5.4% per year. The need to improve these roadways and relieve future WRCOG v DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 16 congestion is therefore directly linked to the future development which generates the travel demand. As population and employment in Western Riverside County grows as a result of new development, demand for regional transit services in the region is also expected to grow. RivTAM outputs indicate that by 2035, regional transit services are forecast to provide approximately 27,969 trips per day. This translates into a forecasted increase of 10,358 trips per day or 59%. A substantial number of the trips will be served by bus transit services within Western Riverside County. The need to provide additional bus transit services within Western Riverside County to satisfy this future demand is therefore directly linked to the future development that generates the demand. The idea behind a uniform mitigation fee is to have new development throughout the region contribute equally to paying the cost of improving the transportation facilities that serve these longer -distance trips between communities. Thus, the fee should be used to improve transportation facilities that serve trips between communities within the region (primarily arterial roadways) as well as the infrastructure for public transportation. The fee should be assessed proportionately on new residential and non-residential development based on the relative impact of each use on the transportation system. ESA The TUMF Network The Regional System of Highways and Arterials (also referred to as the TUMF Network) is the system of roadways that serve inter -community trips within Western Riverside County and therefore are eligible for improvement funding with TUMF funds. Transportation facilities in Western Riverside County that generally satisfied the respective guidelines were identified, and a skeletal regional transportation framework evolved from facilities where multiple guidelines were observed. This framework was reviewed by representatives of all WRCOG constituent jurisdictions and private sector stakeholders, and endorsed by the WRCOG Public Works Committee, WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee, TUMF Policy Committee and the WRCOG Executive Committee. The TUMF Network was refined to distinguish between facilities of "Regional Significance" and facilities of "Zonal Significance". The Facilities of Regional Significance have been identified as the "backbone" highway network for Western Riverside County. Facilities of Zonal Significance (the "secondary" network) represent the balance of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials for Western Riverside County. A portion of the TUMF is specifically designated for improvement projects on the backbone system and on the secondary network within the zone in which it is collected. Figure ES.2 illustrates the TUMF improvements to the Regional System of Highways and Arterials. WRCOG A DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 17 The NVE01(p-nal '$y:*jj*o coil LHjjb w*y,* & A ir it co Ir 1 0 1 0 T V iM [IF N e it 1w M r o-m r (9 v o am V - - -------- Fib, 1--ftw= ------- Uftimate Number of Lanes dV 2 Lanes PASS 4 Lanes 11 6 Lanes & 8 Lanes Mid -County Parkway I It E. 2 Lanes CENT"L 4 Lanes NORTHWEST Railroad Crossing s 51, 0 1- 2. $4,550,000$2,120,000 per lane r, 0 per lane N Interchanges 1 - $43,780,000 REMETI bAn (D 2 - $22,280,000 JACINTO z r 0 3 - $10,890,000 Bridges Railroads 0 Freeways & Highways Lakes & Rivers TUMF Zones SOUTHW,+� Streets & Roads City Boundaries VURCOG Boundary WINE ew N Miles 0 2 4 8 The total cost of improving the TUMF system is $4.26 billion. Accounting for obligated funds and unfunded existing needs, the estimated maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program is $3.77 billion. The maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program includes approximately $3.54 billion in eligible arterial highway and street related improvements and $61.8 million in eligible transit related improvements. An additional $60.0 million is also eligible as part of the TUMF Program to mitigate the impact of eligible TUMF related arterial highway and street projects on critical native species and wildlife habitat, while $107.9 million is provided to cover the costs incurred by WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program. ES.5 TUMF Nexus Analysis There is a reasonable relationship between the future growth and the need for improvements to the TUMF system. These factors include: ➢ Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing as a result of future new development. ➢ Continuing new growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways. ➢ The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future development in Western Riverside County. ➢ Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development. ➢ Roads on the TUMF network are the facilities that merit improvement through this fee program. ➢ Improvements to the public transportation system will be needed to provide adequate mobility for transit -dependent travelers and to provide an alternative to automobile travel. The split of fee revenues between the backbone and secondary highway networks is related to the proportion of highway vehicle travel that is relatively local (between adjacent communities) and longer distance (between more distant communities but still within Western Riverside County). To estimate a rational fee split between the respective networks, the future travel forecast estimates were aggregated to a matrix of trips between zones. The overall result is that 52.0% of the regional travel is assigned to the Backbone network and 48.0% is assigned to the Secondary network. In order to establish the approximate proportionality of the future traffic impacts associated with new residential development and new non-residential development, 2035 Base person trip productions from the Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM) were aggregated by trip purpose. It was concluded that home -based person trips represent 69.2% of the total future person trips, and the non -home -based person trips represent 30.8% of the total future person trips. WRCOG Ali DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 19 ES.6 Fair -Share Fee Calculation The balance of the unfunded TUMF system improvement needs is $3.77 billion which is the maximum value attributable to the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new development in the WRCOG region, and will be captured through the TUMF Program. By levying the uniform fee directly on future new developments (and indirectly on new residents and new employees to Western Riverside County), these transportation system users are assigned their "fair share" of the costs to address the cumulative impacts of additional traffic they will generate on the regional transportation system. Of the $3.77 billion in unfunded future improvement needs, 69.2% ($2.61 billion) will be assigned to future new residential development and 30.8% ($1.16 billion) will be assigned to future new non-residential development. ES.7 Conclusions Based on the results of the Nexus Study evaluation, it can be demonstrated that there is reasonable relationship between the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new land development projects in Western Riverside County and the need to mitigate these transportation impacts using funds levied through the proposed TUMF Program. Factors that reflect this reasonable relationship include: ➢ Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing as a result of future new development. ➢ Continuing new growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways; ➢ The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future development in Western Riverside County; ➢ Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development; ➢ Roads on the TUMF network are the facilities that merit improvement through this fee program; ➢ Improvements to the public transportation system will be needed to provide adequate mobility for transit -dependant travelers and to provide an alternative to automotive travel. The Nexus Study evaluation has established a proportional "fair share" of the improvement cost attributable to new development based on the impacts of existing development and the availability of obligated funding through traditional sources. The fair share fee allocable to future new residential and non-residential development in Western Riverside County is summarized for differing use types in Table ES.l. WRCOG Ix DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 20 Table ES.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County Land Use Type Units Development Change Fee Per Unit Total Revenue ($ million) Single Family Residential DU 156,745 `. $8,873 $1,390.8 Multi Family Residential DU 194,934 $6,231 $1,214.6 Industrial SF GFA 57,535,808 $1.73 $99.3 Retail SF GFA 21,758,982 $10.49 $228.2 Service SF GFA 105,461,087 $4.19 $442.3 Government/Public SF GFA 39,061,333 $9.98: $389.9 MAXIMUM TUMF VALUE $3,765.1 WRCOG x DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 21 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THE NEXUS STUDY Western Riverside County includes 16 incorporated cities and the unincorporated county covering an area of approximately 2,100 square miles. Until recently, this portion of Riverside County was growing at a pace exceeding the capacity of existing financial resources to meet increasing demand for transportation infrastructure. Although the recent crisis in the mortgage industry and the associated economic downturn has slowed this rate of growth, the region is expected to rebound and the projected growth in Western Riverside County is expected to increase. This increase in growth could significantly increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in the transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial roadways of regional significance, since traditional sources of transportation funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the needed improvements. Development exactions only provide improvements near the development site, and the broad -based county -level funding sources (i.e., Riverside County's half -cent sales tax known as Measure A) designate only a small portion of their revenues for arterial roadway improvements. In anticipation of the continued rapid future growth projected in Riverside County, several county -wide planning processes were initiated in 1999. These planning processes include the Riverside County General Plan Update, the Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) and the Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Related to these planning processes is the need to fund the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new development. Regional arterial highways in Western Riverside County are forecast to carry significant traffic volumes by 2035. While some localized fee programs exist to mitigate the local impacts of new development on the transportation system in specific areas, and while these programs are effective locally, they are insufficient in their ability to meet the regional demand for transportation infrastructure. Riverside County Supervisor Buster recognized the need to establish a comprehensive funding source to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development on regional arterial highways. The need to establish a comprehensive funding source for arterial highway improvements has evolved into the development of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) for Western Riverside County. In February 1999, the cities of Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore, the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the Building Industry Association (BIA) met to discuss the concept of a TUMF. The intent of this effort was to have the southwest area of Western Riverside County act as a demonstration for the development of policies and a process for a regional TUMF Program before applying the concept countywide. From February 1999 to September 2000, the Southwest Area Transportation Infrastructure System Funding Year 2020 (SATISFY 2020) Program progressed with policy development, the identification of transportation improvements, traffic modeling, cost estimates, fee scenarios and a draft Implementation Agreement. WRCOG 1 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 22 In May 2000, Riverside County Supervisor Tavaglione initiated discussions in the northwest area of Western Riverside County to determine the level of interest in developing a TUMF for that area of the county. Interest in the development of a northwest area fee program was high. In August 2000, the WRCOG Executive Committee took action to build upon the work completed in the southwest area for the SATISFY 2020 program and to develop a single consolidated mitigation fee program for all of Western Riverside County. This action was predicated on the desire to establish a single uniform mitigation fee program to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the regional arterial highway system, rather than multiple discrete and disparate fee programs with varying policies, fees and improvement projects. A TUMF Policy Committee comprising regional elected officials was formed to recommend and set policies for staff to develop the TUMF Program and provide overall guidance to all other staff committees. The TUMF Program is implemented through the auspices of WRCOG. While the TUMF cannot fund all necessary transportation system improvements, it is intended to address a current transportation funding shortfall by establishing a new revenue source that ensures future development will contribute toward addressing the impacts of new growth on regional transportation infrastructure. Funding accumulated through the TUMF Program will be used to construct transportation improvements such as new arterial highway lanes, reconfigured freeway interchanges, railroad grade separations and new regional express bus services that will be needed to accommodate future travel demand in Western Riverside County. By levying a fee on new developments in the region, local agencies will be establishing a mechanism by which developers and in turn new county residents and employees will effectively contribute their "fair share" toward sustaining the regional transportation system. This TUMF Nexus Study is intended to satisfy the requirements of California Government Code Chapter 5 Section 66000-66008 Fees for Development Projects (also known as California Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600) or the Mitigation Fee Act) which governs imposing development impact fees in California. The Mitigation Fee Act requires that all local agencies in California, including cities, counties, and special districts follow two basic rules when instituting impact fees. These rules are as follows: 1) Establish a nexus or reasonable relationship between the development impact fee's use and the type of project for which the fee is required. 2) The fee must not exceed the project's proportional "fair share" of the proposed improvement and cannot be used to correct current problems or to make improvements for existing development. The initial WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study was completed in October 2002 and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee in November 2002. Its purpose was to establish the nexus or reasonable relationship between new land development projects in Western Riverside County and the proposed development impact fee that would be used to improve regional transportation facilities. It also identified the proportional "fair share" of the improvement cost attributable to new development. WRCOG DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 23 Consistent with the provisions of the Mitigation Fee Act, the WRCOG Executive Committee has established that the TUMF Nexus Study will be reviewed at feast every five years. Furthermore, acknowledging the unprecedented and unique nature of the TUMF Program, the Executive Committee determined that the first comprehensive review of the Program should be initiated within two years of initial adoption of the Program primarily to validate the findings and recommendations of the study and to correct any program oversights. The results of the first review of the Program were documented in the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on February 6, 2006. This version of the WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study Report documents the results of the second major review of the TUMF Program conducted in 2008 and 2009. The findings of this report were ultimately adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on October 12, 2009. A current list of the standing WRCOG TUMF related committees and committee membership is included in Appendix A. In coordination with WRCOG, city and county representatives, developers, and other interested parties reviewed and updated the underlying assumptions of the Nexus Study as part of this comprehensive program review. In particular, the most recent socioeconomic forecasts developed by the Riverside County Center for Demographic Research (RCCDR) were incorporated to correspond with the newly developed Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RivTAM) that was also utilized for this update. This use of RivTam and the RCCDR forecasts resulted in a shift of the program base and horizon years from 2000 and 2030 to 2007 and 2035. Additionally, the underlying unit cost assumptions were recreated to utilize the most recent available materials, labor and property cost values. Furthermore, the TUMF network was re-examined based on the RivTAM model results to eliminate those projects having been completed prior to the new program base year, and to more accurately reflect future project needs to address the cumulative regional impacts of new development in Western Riverside County. WRCOG 3 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUNIF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 2.0 FUTURE GROWTH 2.1 Recent Historical Trend Western Riverside County experienced robust growth in the period from the late 1990's to the mid 2000's. The results of Census 2000 indicate that in the year 2000, Western Riverside County had a population of 1.187 million representing a 30% increase (or 2.7% average annual increase) from the 1990 population of 912,000. Total employment in Western Riverside County in 2000 was estimated by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to be 381,000 representing a 46% increase (or 3.9% average annual increase) over the 1990 employment of 261,000. Despite the recent economic recession and the associated residential mortgage and foreclosure crisis, Western Riverside County continues to grow due to the availability of relatively affordable residential and commercial property, and a well educated workforce. By 2007 the population of the region had grown to 1.569 million, a further 32% growth in population from 2000. Similarly, total employment in the region had also grown from 2000 to 2007 with 516,000 employees estimated to be working in Western Riverside County. This represents a 35% increase from the 381,000 employees working in the region in 2000. 2.2 Available Demographic Data A variety of alternate demographic information that quantifies future population, household and employment growth is available for Western Riverside County. For previous versions of the TUMF Nexus Study, the primary available source of consolidated demographic information for Western Riverside County was provided by SCAG. SCAG is the largest of nearly 700 Councils of Government (COG) in the United States and functions as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties in Southern California including Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Imperial. SCAG is mandated by the federal government to research and plan for issues of regional significance including transportation and growth management. As part of these responsibilities, SCAG maintains a comprehensive database of regional socioeconomic data and develops demographic projections and travel demand forecasts for Southern California. Recognizing the need to develop a more comprehensive source of socioeconomic data for Riverside County, the Riverside County Center for Demographic Research (RCCDR) was established under the joint efforts of the County of Riverside, the Western Riverside Council of Governments, the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, and the University of California, Riverside in 2005. RCCDR is responsible for establishing and maintaining demographic information and ensuring data consistency through a centralized data source of demographic characteristics. RCCDR subsequently coordinates with SCAG by providing demographic estimates and forecasts for Riverside County as input to the SCAG regional forecasts. The RCCDR forecasts are also used as the basis for the recently created RivTAM. WRCOG 4 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 25 2.3 Demographic Assumptions Used for the Nexus Study Analysis With the availability of demographic information developed specifically for Riverside County, the socioeconomic forecasts developed by RCCDR for Western Riverside County were used for this update of the TUMF Nexus Study and associated fee schedule. A major distinction between the SCAG 2004 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) data used for the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update and the RCCDR data used for this 2009 Update is the change in both the base year and horizon year; from 2000 and 2030 to 2007 and 2035. This shift in the base and horizon year demographic assumptions of the Program carries through all aspects of the Nexus analysis, including the travel demand forecasting, network review and fee calculation. The RCCDR 2007 data were compared to the SCAG 2004 RTP data used in the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update. As can be seen in Table 2.1 and Figure 2.1, the 2007 data reflects considerable growth in population, households and all employment sectors except retail. It should be noted that the decline in retail is mostly reflective of a revision in data analysis methodology between retail and service uses than any significant change in retail or service employment in Western Riverside County. Table 2.1 - Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County Sector 2000 2007 Change %Change (SCAG) (RCCDR) Population 1,193,862 1,569,393 375,531 31T Households 381,182 530,289 149,107 39% Employees Industrial 140,284 175,571 35,287 25% Retail 74,356 39,576 -34,780 -47% Service 133,567 256,813 123,246 92% Government/Public 39,556 43,954 4,398 11 % Total 387,763 515,914 128,151 33% Notes: - Y2000 Population, Household, and Employment data from the SCAG Finalized 2004 RTP - Y2007 Population, Household, and Employment data from RCCDR WRCOG S DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 26 Figure 2.1 - Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County Laaaroo- t - t' - 3 ii::O.pY'- " L539.J93 � Fmploymenl Seclon: i 4C'Doo- .— % OSrvv�cc I 75A ago a,�n F i >a ase 133.511 �t Al � M1 �p ry1 a0" 0Y Table 2.2 and Figure 2.2 compare the socioeconomic forecasts for the Program horizon years; Year 2030 used in the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update with the Year 2035 forecasts used in this study. Most of the difference between the two sets of future socioeconomic data can be attributed to the increase in forecast year from 2030 to 2035. However, the new forecasts incorporate the most recently available data and account for current trends including the influence of the current economic recession on the rate of growth in Western Riverside County. WRCOG 6 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 27 Table 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County Sector 2030 2035 Change % Change (SCAG) (RCCI Population 2,400,017 2,537,583 137,566 6% Households 784,447 881,968 97,521 12% Employees Industrial 278,152 276,782 -1,370 0% Retail 197,494 87,170 -110,324 -56% Service 364,291 595,039 230,748 63% Government/Public 75,729 131,842 56,113 74% Total 915,666 1,090,833 175,167 19% Notes: - Y2030 Population. Household. and Employment data from the SCAG Finalized 2004 RTP - Y2035 Population. Household, and Employment data from RCCDR Figure 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County 3,J,^,aOLB- Employment Sectors: 2.40C."7 2.S]75S ,•0 ,.M_ a5mv�cn -. U.ODD- 595M, , I 41 . _ OQ eo^fe 0. WRCOG 7 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update ME Table 2.3 and Figure 2.3 summarize the socioeconomic data obtained from RCCDR and used as the basis for completing this Nexus Study analysis. The RCCDR employment data for 2007 and 2035 was provided for thirteen employment sectors consistent with the California Employment Development Department (EDD) Major Groups including: Farming, Natural Resources and Mining; Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Retail Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities; Information; Financial Activities; Professional and Business Service; Education and Health Service; Leisure and Hospitality; Other Service; and Government. For the purposes of the Nexus Study, the EDD Major Groups were aggregated to Industrial (Farming, Natural Resources and Mining; Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities), Retail (Retail Trade), Service (Information; Financial Activities; Professional and Business Service; Education and Health Service; Leisure and Hospitality: Other Service) and Government/Public Sector (Government). These four aggregated sector types were used as the basis for calculating the fee as described in Section 6.2. Appendix B provides a table detailing the EDD Major Groups and corresponding North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Categories that are included in each non-residential sector type. Table 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment In Western Riverside County Sector Year2007 Year2035 Change % Change Population 1,569,393 2,537,583 968,190 62% Households Single -Family 395,409 552,154 156,745 40% Multi -Family 134,880 329,814 194,934 145% Total 530,289 881,968 351,679 66% Employees Industrial 175,571 276,782 101,211 58% Retail 39,576 87,170 47,594 120% Service 256,813 595,039 338,226 132% Government/Public 43,954 131,842 87,888 200% Total 515,914 1,090,833 574,919 111% Notes: - Population, Household. and Employment data from RCCDR WRCOG 8 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 29 Figure 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment In Western Riverside County k — - u' Employmenl5eclor: ss, l;e ;., -� 5 .,I Household Type: s95 Cd9 3�9EId x J3l aeC 'A+66,3 10,195, 0 °v WRCOG 9 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 30 3.0 NEED FOR THE TUMF All new development has some effect on the transportation infrastructure in a community, city or county due to an increase in travel demand. Increasing usage of the transportation facilities leads to more traffic, progressively increasing traffic congestion and decreasing the level of service (LOS)'. In order to meet the increased travel demand and keep traffic flowing, improvements to transportation facilities become necessary to sustain pre -development traffic conditions. The projected growth in Western Riverside County (62% growth in population and a doubling of employment in under 30 years) can be expected to significantly increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in the transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial highways and roadways that carry a significant number of the trips between cities, since traditional sources of transportation improvement funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the improvements needed to serve new development. Development exactions generally provide only a fraction of the improvements with improvements confined to the area immediately adjacent to the respective development, and the broad -based county -level funding sources (i.e., Riverside County's half -cent sales tax known as Measure A) designate only a small portion of their revenues for arterial roadway improvements. This section documents the existing and future congestion levels that demonstrate the need for future improvements to the transportation system to specifically mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development. It then describes the TUMF concept that has been developed to fund future new developments' fair share of needed improvements. The forecast of future congestion levels is derived from Year 2035 Base travel demand forecasts for Western Riverside County developed using RivTAM. The Year 2035 Base evaluates the effects of 2035 population, employment and resultant traffic generation on the 2007 transportation network. 3.1 Future Highway Congestion Levels To support the evaluation of the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the transportation system in Western Riverside County, existing (2007) and future (2035) traffic data were derived from RivTAM. To quantify traffic growth impacts, various traffic measures of effectiveness were calculated for each of the two scenarios. The WRCOG ' The Hiahwav Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp 2-2, 2-3) describes LOS as a "quality measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, generally in terms of such service measures as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and comfort and convenience." Letters are used to designate each of six LOS (A to F), with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F representing the worst. According to the Highway Capacity Manual, LOS C or D is typically used in planning efforts to ensure an acceptable operating service for facility users. Therefore, LOS E represents the threshold for unacceptable LOS. WRCOG 10 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 31 TUMF study area was extracted from the greater regional model network for the purpose of calculating measures for Western Riverside County only. Measures for the Western Riverside County TUMF study area included total vehicle daily miles of travel (VMT), total daily vehicle hours of travel (VHT), total combined vehicle hours of delay (VHD), and total VMT experiencing unacceptable level of service (LOS Q. These results were tabulated in Table 3.1. Plots of the Network Extents and screen shots of the respective results dialog boxes are attached in Appendix C. Total Arterial VMT, VHT, VHD and LOS E Threshold VMT were calculated to include all principal arterials, minor arterials and major connectors, respectively. Regional values for each threshold were also calculated for a total of all facilities including arterials, freeways, freeway ramps, freeway connectors and High -Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. Table 3.1 - Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2007-2035)* Measure of Performance Dail 2007•' 2035" %Chan a %Annual VMT-TOTAL ALL FACILMES 39.187.718 60.772.353 55% 1.64% VMT-FREEWAYS 24,056,704 32.920.502 377. 1.177. TOTAL ARTERIAL VMT 15,131,014 27,851,851 847. 2.29% VHT- TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 1.362,725 2.385,725 757o 2.10% VHT-FREEWAYS 885.753 1.301,737 47% 1.44% TOTAL ARTERIAL VHT 476,972 1,083,988 1277a 3.09% VHD- TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 540,363 1,049,291 94% 2A9% VHD-FREEWAYS 457,562 704,578 54% 1.61% TOTAL ARTERIAL VHD 82,801 344,713 316% 5A27. VMT LOS E-TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 25,847,218 50.001.659 93% 2.47% VMT LOS E- FREEWAYS 20,422,906 31.864.589 56% 1.66% TOTAL ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 5,424,312 18,137,070 234% 4.57% %of ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 277 36% ' Based on RivTAM " Volume is adjusted by PCE factor NOTES: VMT = vehicle miles of travel (the total combined distance that all vehicles travel on the system) VHT= vehicle hours of travel (the total combined time that all vehicles are traveling on the system) VHD = vehicle hours of delay (the total combined time that all vehicles have been delayed on the system based on the difference between forecast travel time and free -flow (ideal) travel time) LOS = level of service (based on forecast volume to capacity ratios. Daily capacity was calculated as ten times AM peak hour capacity) LOS E or Worse was determined by a V/C ratio that exceeds the 0.9 threshold as indicated in the Riverside County General Plan. WRCOG 1 DRAFT- October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 32 The following formulas were used to calculate the respective values: VMT = Link Distance * Total Daily Volume VHT = Average Loaded (Congested) Link Travel Time * Total Daily Volume VHD = VHT- (Free -flow (Uncongested) Link Travel Time * Total Daily Volume) VMT LOS E or F = VMT (on links where Daily V/C exceeded 0.90) Note: Volume to capacity (v/c) ratio thresholds for LOS E are based on the Transportation Research Board 2000 Edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000) LOS Maximum V/C Criteria for Multilane Highways with 45 mph Free Flow Speed (Exhibit 21-2, Chapter 21, Page 21-3). The calculated values were compared to assess the total change between 2007 and 2035, and the average annual change between 2007 and 2035. As can be seen from the RivTAM outputs summarized in Table 3.1, the additional traffic generated by new development in the region will cause congestion on the highway system to increase almost exponentially in the absence of additional highway infrastructure investments, with the most significant increase in congestion observed on the arterial highway system. Many facilities will experience a significant increase in vehicle delay and deterioration in LOS to unacceptable levels as a result of new development and the associated growth in traffic. According to the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000), LOS C or D are required to "ensure an acceptable operating service for facility users." LOS E is generally recognized to represent the threshold of unacceptable operating service and the onset of substantial systemic traffic congestion. The Congestion Management Program for Riverside County (CMP) published by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) in 2003 designates LOS E as the "minimum LOS standard for intersections and segments along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways" in Riverside County. "The intent of the CMP is to more directly link land use, transportation, and air quality, thereby prompting reasonable growth management programs that will effectively utilize new transportation funds, alleviate traffic congestion and related impacts, and improve air quality." 2 The CMP provides a mechanism for monitoring congestion on the highway system and, where congestion is observed, establishes procedures for developing a deficiency plan to address improvement needs. The reactive nature of the CMP to identify and remediate existing congestion differs from the proactive nature of the TUMF Program to anticipate and provide for future traffic needs. For this reason, the TUMF Program follows the guidance of the Highway Capacity Manual in establishing LOS E as the threshold for unacceptable level of service, and subsequently as the basis for measuring system performance and accounting for existing needs. This approach ensures a more conservative accounting of existing system needs as part of the determination of the "fair share" of mitigating the cumulative regional impacts of future new development on the transportation system. 2 Congestion Management Program for Riverside County- Executive Summary (Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2003) Page ES-3, ES-1 WRCOG 12 DRAFT- October I, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 33 The continuing need for a mitigation fee on new development is shown by the adverse impact that new development will have on Western Riverside County's fr nsportation infrastructure. As a result of the new development and associated growth in population and employment in Western Riverside County, additional pressure will be placed on the transportation infrastructure with the total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on the Western Riverside County system of arterial roadways estimated to increase by 55% or 1.6% compounded annually. As shown in Table 3.1, the VMT on arterial facilities experiencing LOS of E or worse will increase by 234% or 4.6% compounded annually in Western Riverside County in the period between 2007 and 2035. By 2035, 36% of the total VMT on the regional arterial highway system is forecast to be traveling on facilities experiencing daily LOS E or worse. Without improvements to the arterial highway system, the total vehicle hours of delay (VHD) experienced by area motorists on arterial highways will increase by over 5AT per year. The combined influences of increased travel and worsened LOS that manifest themselves in severe congestion and delay highlight the continuing need to complete substantial capacity expansion on the arterial highway system to mitigate the cumulative regional impact of new development. The RivTAM outputs summarized in Table 3.1 clearly demonstrate that the travel demands generated by future new development in the region will lead to increasing levels of traffic congestion, especially on the arterial roadways. The need to improve these roadways and relieve future congestion is therefore directly linked to the future development which generates the travel demand. 3.2 Future Transit Utilization Levels In addition to the roadway network, public transportation will play a role in serving future travel demand in the region. Transit represents a critical component of the transportation system by providing an alternative mode choice for those not wanting to use an automobile, and particularly for those who do not readily have access to an automobile. As population and employment in Western Riverside County grows as a result of new development, demand for regional transit services in the region is also expected to grow. Transit trip forecasts were derived from RivTAM. Consistent with the analysis of highway trips described in Section 3.1, year 2007 and year 2035 scenarios were used to represent existing and future transit trips, respectively. Transit person trips internal to Western Riverside County (both originating in and destined for Western Riverside County) were aggregated. The year 2007 and year 2035 aggregated Western Riverside existing and future transit person trips were compared in order to assess the impact of new development on transit demand. The RivTAM outputs indicate that regional transit services accommodated approximately 17,611 trips per day in Western Riverside County in Year 2007. By 2035, regional transit services are forecast to provide approximately 27,969 trips per day. This translates into a forecasted increase of 10,358 trips per day or 59%. INRCOG 13 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 34 RivTAM outputs for transit person trips in the WRCOG region are summarized in Appendix D. The significant future growth in demand for public transit services is reflective of the cumulative regional impacts of new development, and the associated increase in demand for all types of transportation infrastructure and services. While some of the future transit trips identified by RivTAM will be accommodated by regional transit services such as Metrolink, a substantial number of the trips will be served by bus transit services within Western Riverside County. The need to provide additional bus transit services within Western Riverside County to satisfy this future demand is therefore directly linked to the future development that generates the demand. 3.3 The TUMF Concept A sizable percentage of trip -making for any given local community extends beyond the bounds of the individual community as residents pursue employment, education, shopping and entertainment opportunities elsewhere. As new development occurs within a particular local community, this migration of trips of all purposes by new residents contributes to the need for transportation improvements within their community and in the other communities of Western Riverside County. The idea behind a uniform mitigation fee is to have new development throughout the region contribute uniformly to paying the cost of improving the transportation facilities that serve these longer -distance trips between communities. Thus, the fee should be used to improve transportation facilities that serve trips between communities within the region (primarily arterial roadways) as well as the infrastructure for public transportation. Some roadways serve trips between adjacent communities, while some also serve trips between more distant communities within the region. The differing roadway functions led to the concept of using a portion of the fee revenues for a backbone system of arterial roadways that serve the longer -distance trips (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the entire region), while using a second portion of the fee revenues for a secondary system of arterials that serve inter -community trips (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the communities most directly served by these roads - in effect, a return -to -source of that portion of the funds). Reflecting the importance of public transit service in meeting regional travel needs, a third portion of fee revenues was reserved for improvements to the public transportation infrastructure (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the entire region). Much, but not all, of the new trip -making in a given area is generated by residential development (i.e. when people move into new homes, they create new trips on the transportation system as they travel to work, school, shopping or entertainment). Some of the new trips are generated simply by activities associated with new businesses (i.e. new businesses will create new trips through the delivery of goods and services, etc.). With the exception of commute trips by local residents coming to and from work, and the trips of local residents coming to and from new businesses to get goods and services, the travel demands of new businesses are not directly attributable, to residential development. The consideration of different sources of new travel demand WRCOG 14 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 35 is therefore reflected in the concept of assessing both residential and non-residential development for their related transportation impacts. In summary, the TUMF concept includes the following: ➢ A uniform fee is levied on new development throughout Western Riverside County. ➢ The fee is assessed proportionately on new residential and non-residential development based on the relative impact of each new use on the transportation system. ➢ A portion of the fee is used to fund capacity improvements on a backbone system of arterial roadways that serve longer -distance trips within the region: a portion of the fee is returned to the area in which it was generated to fund capacity improvements on a secondary system of arterial roadways that link the communities in that area; and a portion of the fee is used to fund improvements to the public transportation infrastructure within the region. WRCOG 15 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 36 4.0 THE TUMF NETWORK _ 4.1 Identification of the TUMF Roadway Network An integral element of the initial Nexus Study was the designation of the Western Riverside County Regional System of Highways and Arterials. This network of regionally significant highways represents those arterial and collector highway and roadway facilities that primarily support inter -community trips in Western Riverside County and supplement the regional freeway system. As a result, this system also represents the extents of the network of highways and roadways that would be eligible for TUMF funded improvements. The Regional System of Highways and Arterials (RSHA, also referred to as the "TUMF Network') does not include the freeways of Western Riverside County as these facilities primarily serve longer distance inter -regional trips and a significant number of pass -through trips that have no origin or destination in Western Riverside County3. The TUMF Network is the system of roadways that serve inter -community trips within Western Riverside County and therefore are eligible for improvement funding with TUMF funds. The RSHA for Western Riverside County was identified based on several transportation network and performance guidelines as follows: 1. Arterial highway facilities proposed to have a minimum of four lanes at ultimate build -out (not including freeways). 2. Facilities that serve multiple jurisdictions and/or provide connectivity between communities both within and adjoining Western Riverside County. 3. Facilities with forecast traffic volumes in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day by 2035. 4. Facilities with forecast volume to capacity ratio of 0.90 (LOS E) or greater in 2035. 5. Facilities that accommodate regional fixed route transit services. 6. Facilities that provide direct access to major commercial, industrial, institutional, recreational or tourist activity centers, and multi -modal transportation facilities (such as airports, railway terminals and transit centers). Appendix E includes exhibits illustrating the various performance measures assessed during the definition of the RSHA. Transportation facilities in Western Riverside County that generally satisfied the respective guidelines were identified, and a skeletal regional transportation framework evolved from facilities where multiple guidelines were observed. Representatives of all WRCOG constituent jurisdictions reviewed this framework in the context of current local transportation plans to define the TUMF Network, which was subsequently endorsed by the WRCOG Public Works Committee, WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee, TUMF Policy Committee and the WRCOG Executive Committee. 3 Since pass -though trips have no origin or destination in Western Riverside County, new development within Western Riverside County cannot be considered responsible for mitigating the impacts of pass through trips. The impact of pass - through lips and the associated cost to mitigate the impact of pass through trips (and other inter -regional freeway trips) is addressed in the Riverside County Transportation Commission Western Riverside County Freeway Strategic Plan, Phase If - Detailed Evaluation and Impact Fee Nexus Determination, Final Report dated May 31, 2008. WRCOG 16 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 37 The RSHA is illustrated in Figure 4.1. Although the TUMF Network was reviewed as part of the Nexus Update, there were no significant changes to the composition of the network that was originally adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. WRCOG 17 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update IN ® X ,e j it (9 U1 all Sy sit a p (9 1 LH i g�h ways & Artter, �1 1(9r W es1(0rLn ER-1vcrs1cd�C c9LUunity Fit re 4,,,1 F Network ways & Highways Boundaries :OG Boundary i low:. 2 4 4.2 Backbone Network and Secondary Network As indicated previously, the TUMF roadway network was refined to distinguish between facilities of "Regional Significance" and facilities of "Zonal Significance." Facilities of Regional Significance were identified as those that typically are proposed to have a minimum of six lanes at general plan build-out4, extend across and/or between multiple Area Planning Districts (APD - the five aggregations of communities used for regional planning functions within the WRCOG area) or zones, and are forecast to carry at least 25,000 vehicles per day in 2035. The Facilities of Regional Significance have been identified as the "backbone" highway network for Western Riverside County. A portion of the TUMF fee is specifically designated for improvement projects on the backbone system. The Backbone Network is illustrated in Figure 4.2. Facilities of Zonal Significance (the "secondary" network) represent the balance of the RSHA for Western Riverside County. These facilities are typically within one zone and carry comparatively lesser traffic volumes than the backbone highway network, although they are considered significant for circulation within the respective zone. A portion of the TUMF fee is specifically designated for improvement projects on the secondary network within the zone in which it is collected. The WRCOG zones are illustrated in Figure 4.3. Although facilities were identified based on the minimum number of lanes anticipated at general plan buildout, in some cases it was determined that sufficient demand for all additional lanes facilities may not exist on some facilities until beyond the current timeframe of the TUMF Program (2035). As a result, only a portion of the additional lanes on these facilities have currently been identified for funding with TUMF revenues, reflecting the cumulative impact of new development through the current duration of the TUMF Program. WRCOG 19 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Er tt e or I q I is cp 1 j 4 — - --------------- S it (V rr M ER _ I Y� 10 r I 11(d e V(gcu Ali Ag . Z Backbone Network TUMF Network Freeways g ways City Boundaries WRCOG Boundary T . . . . . 11 J, N + 0 2 4 r a J A Y A r a Ln Ln J Ln v it s T U M Ln e / I N,71= F 1 1, it r le 4 TUMF Network 7�i Lj TUMF Zones e I . Fr eeways reeways & Highways PASS C. 1 City Boundaries V W W Co R G Boundary RCOG Boundary k, CENTRAL NORTH HEMETISAN JACINTO SOUTHWEST Miles 4.3 Future Roadway Transportation Needs For the purpose of calculating a "fair share" fee for new development, it is necessary to estimate the cost of improvements on the TUMF system that will be needed to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of future transportation demands created by new development. Estimates of the cost to improve the network to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development were originally developed based on unit costs prepared for the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Regional Arterial Cost Estimate (RACE)5, and the WRCOG Southwest District SATISFY 2020 Summary of Cost Estimates 6 (TKC/WRCOG 2000). The RACE cost estimates were developed based on a summary of actual construction costs for projects constructed in Riverside County in 1998. The initial unit cost estimates for the TUMF (based on inflated RACE cost estimates) were reviewed in the context of the SATISFY 2020 Draft Cost Estimates and were consolidated to provide typical improvement costs for each eligible improvement type. The refinement of unit costs was completed to simplify the process of estimating the cost to improve the entire TUMF network. Based on RACE and SATISFY 2020, consolidated cost estimates included typical per mile or lump sum costs for each of the improvement types eligible under the TUMF Program. The resultant revised unit cost estimates were used as the basis for estimating the cost to complete the necessary improvements to the TUMF network to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development. Variations in the consolidated cost estimates for specific improvement types were provided to reflect differences in topography and land use across the region. Unit costs for roadway construction were originally varied to account for variations in construction cost (and in particular, roadway excavation and embankment cost) associated with construction on level (code 1) rolling (code 2) and mountainous (code 3) terrain, respectively. Right-of-way acquisition costs which originally included consideration for land acquisition, documentation and legal fees, relocation and demolition costs, condemnation compensation requirements, utility relocation, and environmental mitigation costs were also varied to account for variations in right-of-way costs associated with urban (developed commercial/residential mixed uses - code 1), suburban (developed residential uses - code 2) and rural (undeveloped uses - code 3) land uses, respectively. Lump sum costs for interchange improvements were originally varied to account for variations in cost associated with new complex, new standard (or fully reconstructed), or major (or partially reconstructed) or minor (individual ramp improvements) interchange improvements. For the purposes of the TUMF Nexus Update, the original unit cost categories were reviewed to generate entirely new unit cost values based on the most recent available construction cost, labor cost and land acquisition cost values. In addition, supplemental categories have been added to the cost assumptions to better delineate 5 Parsons Brinckerhoff/Coachella Valley Association of Governments, 1999, Regional Arterial Cost Estimate (RACE) 6 TKC/Western Riverside Council of Governments, 2000, SATISFY 2020 Summary of Cost Estimates WRCOG 22 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 43 the need to mitigate the cumulative multi -species habitat impacts of TUMF arterial highway improvements in accordance with the Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), and to account for the costs associated with WRCOG administration of the TUMF Program. Section 8.5.1 of the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) MSHCP adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on June 17, 2003 states that "each new transportation project will contribute to Plan implementation. Historically, these projects have budgeted 3% - 5% of their construction costs to mitigate environmental impacts." This provision is reiterated in the MSHCP Final Mitigation Fee Nexus Report (David Toussig and Associates, Inc., July 1, 2003) section 5.3.1.2 which states that "over the next 25 years, regional infrastructure projects are expected to generate approximately $250 million in funding for the MSHCP" based on mitigation at 5% of construction costs. To clearly demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the MSHCP, the TUMF Program will incorporate a cost element to account for the required MSHCP contribution to mitigate the multi -species habitat impacts of constructing TUMF projects. In accordance with the MSHCP Nexus Report, an amount equal to 5% of the construction cost for new TUMF network lanes, bridges and railroad grade separations will be specifically included as part of TUMF Program with revenues to be provided to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) for the acquisition of land identified in the MSHCP. The relevant sections of the MSHCP document and the MSHCP Nexus Report are included in Appendix F. Appendix F provides a detailed outline of the assumptions and methodology leading to the revised TUMF unit cost assumptions. Table 4.1 summarizes the unit cost estimate assumptions used to develop the TUMF network cost estimate, including a comparison of the original TUMF unit cost assumptions and the current revised unit cost assumptions developed as part of this review of the TUMF Nexus. Cost estimates are provided in current year values as indicated. To estimate the cost of improving the regional transportation system to provide for future traffic growth from new development, the transportation network characteristics and performance guidelines (outlined in Secfion 4.1) were initially used as a basis for determining the needed network improvements. The initial list of improvements needed to provide for the traffic generated by new development was then compared with local General Plan Circulation Elements to ensure that the TUMF network included planned arterial roadways of regional significance. A consolidated list of proposed improvements and the unit cost assumptions were then used to establish an initial estimate of the cost to improve the network to provide for future traffic growth associated with new development. WRCOG 23 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Table 4.1 - Unit Costs for Arterial Highway and Street Construction Component Type Cost Assumptions as published October 18, 2002 Cost Assumptions per 2005 Update February 6, 2006 Cost Assumption per 2009 Nexus Update Description Terrain $550,000 $640.000 $628,000 co,swc:•:oo cos r,:>m.o- .... Terrain $850,000 $990,000 $761,000 Corsiruct o: cos or,tw M:' -ro .._ Terrain 3 $1,150,000 $1,340,000 $895,000 co mC,"• os ur --o _:O - ....s Landuse 1 $0,000 $ 80,000 $ 000 io couo Landuse 2 $420.000 $850,000 $803,000 o cos x:o Landuse 3 $240,000 $485,000 $237,000 o co sca Interchange ) No $46.500,000 $43,780,000 CO � , -,,cos - Interchange 2 $20,000,000 $23.300.000 $22,280,000 o °r Interchange 3 $10,000,000 $11.650.000 $10,890,000 Interchange $2,000,000 $2,330,000 n/a mo=ro-;--:-r-o-. •: o: Interchange 5 No $2.500.000 n/a r: o - •. Bridge 1 $2,000 $2,350 $2,880- RRXing' 1 $4,500,000 $5,240,000 $4,550,000�- RRXing 2 $2.250.000 $2,620,000 $2,120,000 E.+ ..., , Intersection 1 $300,000 $350.000 $380,000 -1 Planning 10% 10% 107. P ^5 fc�•. _.� Engineering 25% 25% 25% �aa:: cos: o,.o Contin ene 10% 107. 107^ C'COS°°osex o, Admstration n/a n/a 3% _r C+JpSf 'Or, Eoo n/a 5% 5%co�swuc:+cos:• cowMSHCP 'RRXing = Railroad Crossing A peer review process utilizing real world experience and perspectives from both the private and public sectors was critical in developing a realistic network of proposed improvements to mitigate the additional traffic resulting from future development in Western Riverside County. Representatives of private development firms and the BIA have continued to participate in the process Program. This involvement has included active at various workshops conducted at critical completing the Nexus update. of developing and updating the TUMF participation of private developer staff milestone points in the process of As part of the 2009 Program update, the list of proposed improvements included in the initial Nexus Study and validated during the 2005 update was reviewed for accuracy and, where necessary, amended to either remove projects completed prior to the new base year of the TUMF Program (2007), remove projects that are no longer needed based on changes in the patterns of growth within the region, or add further improvements to accommodate additional projected traffic growth associated with new development. The specific network changes were screened by the WRCOG Public Works Committee for consistency with TUMF network guidelines and were WRCOG 24 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update DRAFT -October 1. 2009 45 subsequently reviewed by representatives of the public and privates sectors at a series of workshop meetings conducted in June 2009. Based on the findings of the network screening and workshop reviews, elements of specific projects were revised to reflect necessary network corrections, modifications to project assumptions and to incorporate a limited number of additional segment improvements following further review and recommendation through the WRCOG standing committee structure. A matrix summarizing the disposition of the requests received as part of the TUMF Nexus Update was developed and is included in Appendix G. Eligible arterial highway and street improvement types to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development on Network facilities include: 1. Construction of additional Network roadway lanes; 2. Construction of new Network roadway segments; 3. Expansion of existing Network bridge structures; 4. Construction of new Network bridge structures; 5. Expansion of existing Network interchanges with freeways; 6. Construction of new Network interchanges with freeways; 7. Grade separation of existing Network at -grade railroad crossings; 8. Expansion of existing Network -to -Network intersections. All eligible improvement types provide additional capacity to Network facilities to accommodate future traffic growth generated by new development in Western Riverside County. Following the comprehensive update of the TUMF Program, the estimated total cost to improve the RSHA for Western Riverside County is $3.92 billion with this cost including all arterial highway and street planning, engineering, design, right-of-way acquisition and capital construction costs, but not including transit, MSHCP or program administration costs that will be subsequently described. It should be noted that the full cost to improve the TUMF Network cannot be entirely attributed to new development and must be adjusted to account for the previous obligation of other funds to complete necessary improvements and unfunded existing needs. Sections 4.5 and 4.6 describe the adjustments to the total TUMF Network improvement need to account for existing needs and obligated funds. In addition to the arterial highway and street improvement costs indicated above, the TUMF Nexus Update included specific consideration for the TUMF Program obligation to the MSHCP program to mitigate the impact of TUMF network improvements on species and habitat within Western Riverside County. The TUMF obligation to MSHCP was calculated at a rate of 5% of the total construction (capital) cost of new lane segments, bridges and railroad grade separations on the TUMF Network. The total TUMF obligation to the MSHCP as indicated in the TUMF Network cost fee table is approximately $62.4 million. The TUMF Nexus Study 2009 Program Update similarly includes specific consideration of the costs associated with WRCOG administration of the TUMF Program. The average cost for WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program was calculated at a rate of 3% of the WRCOG 25 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update total eligible cost of new lane segments (including interchanges, bridges and railroad grade separations) on the TUMF Network and new transit services. The -total cost for WRCOG administration of the TUMF Program as indicated in the TUMF Network cost fee table is approximately $107.9 million. The detailed TUMF network cost calculations are provided in Section 4.7, including each of the individual segments and cost components considered as part of the TUMF Program, and the maximum eligible TUMF share for each segment following adjustments for obligated funding and unfunded existing needs as described in subsequent sections. 4.4 Public Transportation Component of the TUMF System In addition to the roadway network, public transportation will play a role in serving future travel demand in the region. Public transportation serving inter -community trips is generally provided in the form of public transit bus services and in particular express bus services between strategically located community transit centers. Transit needs to serve future travel in Western Riverside County via public transit bus were provided by the Riverside County Regional Transportation Agency (RTA). The identified public transit needs include transit centers, express bus stop upgrades, and capital improvements to develop express bus service within the region. Metrolink commuter rail service improvements were not included in the TUMF Program as they typically serve longer inter -regional commute trips equivalent to freeway trips on the inter -regional highway system. Updated cost estimates for improving the infrastructure serving public transportation, including construction of transit centers, express bus stop upgrades, and capital improvements needed to develop express bus service within the region were provided by RTA. The updated transit unit cost data provided by RTA are shown in Table 4.3. Table 4.3 - Unit Costs for Transit Capital Expenditures Component Type Cost Assumptions as published October 18, 2002 Cost Assumptions per 2005 Update February 6, 2006 Cost Assumptions per 2009 Nexus Update Description Transit Center $6,000.000 $6,990,000 _$5,655,000 Regional Transit Centers Bus Stop $10.000 $11.600 $27,000 Bus Stop Amenities Upgrade service Capital $540,000 $630,000 $550,000 Regional Corridor Transit Service Capital Vehicle Fleet $325.125 $380,000 -$550,000 Regional Flyer vehicle Fleet The estimated total cost for future transit services to accommodate forecast transit demand is approximately $166.9 million with this cost including all planning, engineering, design and capital improvement costs. Detailed transit component cost estimates are included in Section 4.7. WRCOG 26 DRAFT -October 1, 2009. TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 47 4.5 Existing Obligated Funding For some of the facilities identified in the TUMF network, existing obligated funding has previously been secured through traditional funding sources to complete necessary improvements. Since funding has been obligated to provide for the completion of needed improvements to the TUMF system, the cost of these improvements will not be recaptured from future developments through the TUMF Program. As a result, the TUMF network cost was adjusted accordingly to reflect the availability of obligated funds. To determine the availability of obligated funds, each jurisdiction in Western Riverside County was asked to review their current multi -year capital improvement programs to identify transportation projects on the TUMF system. A detailed table identifying the obligated funds for segments of the TUMF network is included in Appendix H. A total of $270.8 million in obligated funding was identified for improvements to the TUMF system. The estimated TUMF network cost was subsequently reduced by this amount. 4.6 Unfunded Existing Improvement Needs A review of the existing traffic conditions on the TUMF network (as presented in Table 3.1) indicates that some segments of the roadways on the TUMF system currently experience congestion and operate at unacceptable levels of service. In addition, demand for inter -community transit service already exists and future utilization of proposed inter -community transit services will partially reflect this existing demand. The need to improve these portions of the system is generated by existing demand, rather than the cumulative regional impacts of future new development, so future new development cannot be assessed for the equivalent cost share of improvements providing for this existing need. In the initial TUMF Nexus Study, the cost of existing improvement needs was estimated by identifying the roadway segments on the TUMF network that operate at LOS E or F according to the modeled 2000 base year volumes. The application of the LOS E threshold is consistent with national traffic analysis guidelines that stipulate LOS D as the minimum acceptable LOS for arterial roadway facilities. The cost to improve these roadway segments with existing unacceptable LOS was calculated using the same method applied to estimate the overall system improvement cost. This method estimated the share of the particular roadway segment (including all associated ROW, interchange, structure and soft costs) that was experiencing unacceptable LOS, and reduced the estimated cost to reflect the relative share. The adjusted value reflected the maximum eligible under the TUMF Program to improve only those portions of the segment (and the relative share of associated improvement costs) that were not experiencing an existing need and were therefore considered to be exclusively addressing the cumulative impacts of new development. By the application of this methodology, the initial TUMF Nexus Study did not account for the incremental cumulative impact of new development on those segments with an identified existing need. For this reason, the methodology to account for existing need was reviewed as part of the TUMF 2005 update to provide for the inclusion of INRCOG 27 - DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update incremental traffic growth on those segments with existing need. The following approach was applied to account for this oversight in the initial existing need methodology: Identify those segments with an existing need by evaluating the RivTAM base year model networks and delineating those segments included on the TUMF RSHA that have a daily volume to capacity (V/C) ratio exceeding 0.90. 2. Calculate the initial cost of addressing the existing need by estimating the share of the particular roadway segment 'new lane' cost (including all associated ROW and new lane construction soft costs but not including interchange, railroad grade separation and bridge costs and their associated soft costs). It should be noted that where the TUMF network identifies more than one new lane in each direction, only the first lane in each direction is considered to be addressing existing need and any additional new lanes would be fully eligible under TUMF for addressing exclusively future needs. 3. Determine the incremental growth in V/C by comparing the weighted average base year V/C for the TUMF segment (delineated under step 1) with the RivTAM 2035 baseline assigned model network V/C for the corresponding segments. 4. Determine the proportion of the incremental growth attributable to new development by dividing the result of step three with the total 2035 baseline V/C in excess of LOS E. 5. For those segments experiencing a net increase in V/C over the 2007 base year, 'discount' the cost of existing need improvements by the proportion of the incremental V/C growth through 2035 compared to the 2007 base year V/C (up to a maximum of 100%). The unfunded cost of existing highway improvement needs (including the related MSHCP obligation) totals $225.2 million. Appendix H includes a detailed breakdown of the existing highway improvement needs on the TUMF network, including the associated unfunded improvement cost estimate for each segment experiencing unacceptable LOS. For transit service improvements, the cost to provide for existing demand was determined by multiplying the total transit component cost by the share of future transit trips representing existing demand. The cost of existing transit service improvement needs is $105.1 million representing 37% of the TUMF transit component. Appendix H includes tables reflecting the calculation of the existing transit need share and the existing transit need cost. 4.7 Maximum TUMF Eligible Cost A total of $270.8 million in obligated funding was identified for improvements to the TUMF system. Since these improvements are already funded with other available INRCOG 28 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update .• revenue sources, these projects cannot also be funded with TUMF revenues. Furthermore, the total cost of the unfunded existing improvement needs is $330.1 million. These improvements are needed to provide for existing transportation needs and therefore their costs cannot be assigned to new development through the TUMF. Based on the estimated costs described in Sections 4.3 and 4.4, the total value to complete the identified TUMF network and transit improvements is $4.26 billion. Having accounted for obligated funds and unfunded existing needs as described in Sections 4.5 and 4.6, respectively, the estimated maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program is $3.77 billion. The maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program includes approximately $3.54 billion in eligible arterial highway and street related improvements and $61.8 million in eligible transit related improvements. An additional $60.0 million is also eligible as part of the TUMF Program to mitigate the impact of eligible TUMF related arterial highway and street projects on critical native species and wildlife habitat, while $107.9 million is provided to cover the costs incurred by WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program. Figure 4.4 illustrates the various improvements to the RSHA included as part of the TUMF network cost calculation. Table 4.3 summarizes the TUMF network cost calculations for each of the individual segments. This table also identifies the maximum eligible TUMF share for each segment having accounted for obligated funding and unfunded existing need. A detailed breakdown of the individual cost components and values for the various TUMF Network segments is included in Appendix H. Table 4.4 outlines the detailed transit component cost estimates. It should be noted that the detailed cost tables (and fee levels) are subject to regular review and updating by WRCOG and therefore WRCOG should be contacted directly to obtain the most recently adopted version of these tables (and to confirm the corresponding fee level). WRCOG 29 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update +1 The RgiJIm-nIal $y*1t*un ml LHghwa_ys & A it it (V ir i a i - MIM E IN a m m T h 1 orn , p r m w i r tt S CENT y I NORTHWEST Miles 0 2 4 8 '11?' HEMETI SR,, ✓ACINTO Y PASS 4 ..4 Ultimate Number of Lanes n' 2 Lanes 4 Lanes ICE 6 Lanes '.". 8 Lanes Mid -County Parkway /✓ 2 Lanes 4 Lanes Railroad Crossings ill e 1 - $4,550,000 per lane © 2. $2,120,000 per lane Interchanges O 1 - $43,780,000 0 2 - $22,280,000 O 3 - $10,890,000 Bridges Railroads Freeways & Highways Lakes & Rivers TUMF Zones Streets & Roads Ciry Boundaries r . WRCOG Boundary Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates Men.e Ehonac Manl5lo I_I1 .1 $1,09= $1', ory. Men.. Goble Casz Emanoc 'eW $.40V.W0 b?niS000 M. 6 P- ampson FW�l M6nlzz Men 9 Gabon 1._ C M9n196 Men le Gorbonl toll IN '_:N No b-_"3,rW Menlbz MMllee $lnpwn Ald,19.15 064 16?No.No $3ININ Merle. Menlo, Alezrgolz 11—lIMl 0.')P. U bC Men 56 o_P I Hon. I. p Mllrd Manlee wpoN ",1 9n1m1 M6nlzz Nbwpotl Mome o F 61".I "pfgU S ,Nc, Enlyd M6nlzz I..wpMI I_'l5 Mznizz WE b- 'I CCC bnlml MznlzS $Coll I'JIS PRpaS 1U $il°: N }gip:,',".c 9nllal Mbnlez coil Murtlzla II'!I$ 1, of., ) rl ll0 .ntr., Mznizz aP- d Ima...... 11 t, IE2 Elo I'fC entld a 6Y loyeand. 1 I )U' enlral Moeno Vallzy NeSWntllo Il... I '�o0 $1: r". o1c enlral Mo19no Vallzy AloseErdro Namn Mrnzno Pzocn 0l) $]SSL d:'S5'. Cenral Moreno Vallzy M0r5n0 PSaCM1 Glman $prinps dl:. No 1'//.°.I !Iip obi $'i ,"I UUC Millar Morino valley So Co..,Gimn SplY as Pto Azssan,d (] $I)IUI No 'i :F._'o I'l: 5nlml Morino Volley Pzcnz Vislo IronwoW S_0 Vd)2Wp 'r9 [qi Vol., Iplini,—II Pzrr Imnwaae nny., enlral Moreno Volley nnym50e Caclos '_N I.d:4 N0 I.;Gr..0 Myl.WIWI Moreno Volley Perrk 'Mr. .tors Ynoa :.- $14.IoE 41F.4'.1. 5nlyd Moreno Volley PMCM1e P9 Canyon rI o 6!.O:.WO $+0')].ff.0 Ininol Pzrts nl . P6n5 r Iz Gozz 70Y 70 _,4 .NO 9n Val P61 , Yeyilan9 Go9E __ Innol Pert manor eniml P-115 MW{Orinly IH.r 4.55 8.1!1!1Wo 5nir01 P51R5 Pertls HOR5y Ynoa I.. n. I.W b466)WO Mniral en, Pomona Ciln!5ano ^_d'% $5.°4I WO enl101 PPzrtls tlrvs Wev0 050 $p enlral earnPen, HVbvo 11In IS bE ]]d N0 $/.0'_1Mjo znVal 1.TOna I -^_I_. Part5 .d 111 WonInd en"",Pamon5nd PPamono Evans PIdM ^_C3 ].di'.NC 174'92(N 9nlld P$P-J4(41n1 E116 I^li $'-'"IX WO $'""P!NC rt1ml o.r.%d Emanoc P-11 anzrtnann r.,IInz I.IV ae.NO yE.1°. om a V0 UoralMtl Imanc rnps Endo. 47e 1�,. 0 0.i.enlal ,.d Mellz5 na SP 74 ynocciel $15 I3No 115 13.9nTrM IJoroled MW4EMnly Pldel PFIOp9 $_I:':O Wo 1_1^_oc. znirdaralee Pomona ' Pltler Plco O.r] $_ I3Wo 8'__]'a No anlyd UnFl.o.nolea Pomona Poo Pnapz f9t n.60I W0 b4nC'.0 enaa colpolole0 norpor0 P9c z Canyon mareno Pic M era 9n1 5 coW&jr_ Rrnps aP r bs15r ., d 414.. 1d: 9..enlral onncorporalad SllEmanoc 11. _.E 0 $c Normwzxl corona woPa56o Gmnez SFcan '_4o b='I�I9➢]o �Y. "IaNClormwzsl Corna PooLFcoln Calllomb _`.91 $0Corona od amU COIOna Gr6zr SP II DOTFpE53 POn[M1 O$_ $I"!-0.WU bl,_iCpCvilormwzsl Colon. Ger Oomnga,PanCM1 PNlooes 0.( $, _`,NG Pa V, M Paszo Granez '_01 0 Mormwesl Gtlni09 Mo, ARFo1oo Imolwzn _9 1U $c IWmw651 Ply..Idz ARnIIOIP Monnal'o $0 W H.,ill sl Pry Ode AR'nM—M. Alassontlra _0' 1'_-.1".o 'i_G}__. 1.oIIIXI W551 P 5 on onlo Ano PnSr n. Pr.MrS M on MoIlnobm1.nyon :.I. �50 norinwea PNerw. van ooa 11.11.11 e41 40MW I PN-Illde on Boren oalwen Omnpe lzrmcM $3-5F 4CUo 12 sd(YC Nollnwasl Unilconooml6d AISAontlm o .M. Vol. Inane I _J W SO Hormw551 IJnncoryaraletl Neo.nero Vblo Grand, 1-_I5 1:_`6 $o Sc II.Mwell Un hc.noorol.d ealalco EI S.bmnlz Honey JMn or, I,r ).WO BC.P".CtC 7r w orpala =e —Ho rIe—Y Hon NOMw.st Unncalp eo CaIOICO -15v IznzYal Canyon O.M, $?`111 Mormw.51 eorparal9E Calolco Iemzsml Canyon la 5Krr0 :CI $L')'4 C00 1e]x"4 gq Mor w corpam5 o corpolol.tl aril Ln weoern Ho w 153 I4.34 No 'll- Uc Ilamwe5l cOryomTed Han.wn .WU HIXInw551 LIn1no.I,nood SchIly n a16vone Cleveone 0.50 s, onl WO 5'�3°I CCO NOMwbsl cory.i.ed cM19STan A Rzel all 1417.001 Norm —A llnncpryOrol5tl SCll in— AS1rzz1 HOmne, 0:'] V?ei No 8I.161 No Ilormwzsl IJnhcorpo2le Scnikmm Hamn9r 1-1`1 031 $64.]9?NO $6!.]R0.o ERE! Llnnmryoral5tl Scn195TM bt5 Anhplon L'I] $^<:)qNO 43:/4. 12m1531 Vn r—ro.ral9 on iSP-< PMn.,.ye Ao..I [, U '/'_W Coryoralz on P.Uren P5 5 An 5 l`I. N..Wz51 !m , qo..'1 . on I. MocPnpbVtl Canyon WOW 4.41 $I IIOMw531 IJnnEciporaletl Ivan R!nMI OlanpE i5rt0<5 I_15 IP! 70_4!. NO WRCOG 31 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 52 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) E n and Boa.�mom 19Y I.. 0 Pass BZa�Umonl POUero Oar Valley lean )Matzo CCnyon dtn 1.1) $!),I E).w0 PO55 eammont SPT) Pcaz�monit I-lo Mallow _° 61-, )')I CO Pass Unkarywatbtl 'P."'eamVmono mnsla. C.11—le 0.".°. 10 i�, Pass COfpotal5 PO z st_'.I i _`Pass Ilnhl,..ormad Potrzro Ill )91P5aVmOnit "=0? $1,w?00c }II Pass lmDo.ramalStl SP-Ti(Lame Canyon) C.Il Glmns"n., U On Jsell. onoolve, rmol DomSnpom alalz . d 1. C an Jackal. Hemet SP-)d Winchester Weston I,llrmJ an Jaclmo on Jac nb MId Co!mly WOm,n ontlerssln 11.1 !.CGlO di an Jaclmo 3,anJ.l Pomona WImen S.Pdatson 1??. 5s.1'ir. C00 dG l> �v an Jul San 1.1In. Pomona amis—n State 2 2Y 1, ?, W' 11:'. rail on lac Into 3.n manta Pamono Stolz Ion l.rlrlto Pamono Ced.r an jal Son jacinto .Mon. Cedar P9 an).clot. Unn'.m.n.tetl D.Pne'pon P-09lwncnzstzr ?m $, 11? 1. 1.e an Jackal. Unn,.m.aletl Glman Sprnas Pndo. onnasse)n !.9P":wc I:'io":CCfi an I.C.I. Llnn—mmated MCCounty "Idge $i.So,:WO $+.:-0e wC as cob c.1mal5 Pannone,II. 0 OY. an Cme Corpo-I'd SP-d name 717, 5S an Jacinto lnnCarpMalad SP-T%Memel eypa551 aP�)d )Partial Domznt_fon1 __ t'�d`3.wB 1<-.d`l. On Jac nto COIporoted SP-91H6mzt R} a551 3om9na77 951z! 1 .:9'_, 10I'I an Jacnto Unncarpomtza SR)Y )San laeAtlo Bypass) Pomona SP-)d )Pardo) Leo 611.,I)an $)lo, an Jaclmo Jmm,,, .m.d SP-)') ISMesenanl Giman Sprnas Pomano 1.9'; V-"_,e4wo $_4.`OP000 M Jac Into UnIncOryarateb SPJ9 Wnchbslbrl Oomenlon) reiar 4.9 $?::Il$, .111.11 Canyon a Gabfz P.Ma anyon M." ..0 ..:1XU Canyon La z Pa rw anYon anyon ab mwe9 Lars Elsinore Polrwa Canyon -1: canyon HlH $?d,9'�9(0 l%p WNwzsl MVrtlbfo GN1on Y911h hli Cppp5r Cralt '_de _']d11.DJ0 _'!71: ol MVn to U fan eln Wper r aVbn o 0 o lnwosl rt151O oulon ills ?4._4 .21 al Ml .1. Clnlon 5 n ao Uhwest M1rt1910 k5nch valley (Date) nencneslzrl Memel IQ'� $?:)av_w0 ..)a_cco aanhW631 .,.me'. Mz...wlal JM9n A55( Y5119! Chen rom '_CO $'%,?loco. 6'%.?�m Sa-thwest .-nlota Mznlzz cot) Yzllzr IIs, 0 W wthwzsl Tasl kzncn v...y MCraorila Ynzz 0'A $0 $C ncn alley S55P .: . olthwesl 5y rtbso bet Pan co all omo 0 _,t.l _s. .Owed 15mecplo French Valley PCncno CalllomO 115 ("a") 1°b Ws7Iwo A_ol Aw ao 11myesl oc.l. SP-)'%(WFCn5515r1 .1me s..I som- lzllzr m 717 $15)'%I.wO $I .I'm." WIal IVnaeccm an -15 z51 'd:lda p[p W am Puntly anyon n551 d ,oimwesl wldamar Impn rSnn Palomar PIs Os' $C Ic dtnwPA UnItcorparmed P.enlon SP)9 Eo515rn 11.11 '_4. 51 .O.O $1IX. el C.;emsztl holm Y61tn Bdomr 756 $47 It !0 9 '/ as Ihw951 LNFc oramtl Hbw on Mzn15e Lh tlznbzrazr a17 $C $0 Wthwzsl Unsm...mtztl Nzwpon Lhd5nbP..r 51�79 WFCnzslin $0 $0 WIDw551 pnnmra... IsJ 31J1 1IS Elhonoc 6R'% Ld:J"Si wU lde 11 .11 W1 w551 Vn e.m.al5tl P- Y OSt.-7w-7z/ a 65tbr Par51 d,`s_ I I :I yt .1'?.. ..Imyalj Vnncorporalz Fm Prypossl Porzl _ ol1hV/b3t Unn'm,esa.,J SP-)9 East9m syposs/Anial Vine SP�)'%IConslancel 4.19 $I _"- _ ollhwost UnnCorpo.IPd SP-79 ( Pal eyposLAnzol 3P,)'/(Constance) tam. Pisa I.I.f va",!,, aanhV/bst Unncorywalba SP-)9lEa BBryoSVAnzol SolPH0 1..I.W 1 17 dU!:/GGO onhwest corparas9a SP-)'l JEast5m 11.1s) fitly— Id. a,thwsst Unbcorponate am Ryposs Pola W thwbsI Unncorpomted aP i1W 5115r Inompwn `�w0 lire. a!tnw5sl COrpaaac, a, lwncnz5lzn Ihompwn La Alba altnw551 Un VCOMCMtztl SP)'%IWFcn5519r WAIbo Hunlzr 70 a'C onhwbsl ncoryomted aP 'i Ill P.. M-mats Holrpr. p5 I.Id B WRCOG 32 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 53 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) REA REEi NAMESOOMEN enllalP Men55 PfgpS 5wporl Coll d!.p. 14Gif. 5nlral M5nY55 GOSfr lVanOa L55551 Lone 1A b(.I ICLO 1; i'O iSA: 5n11d Mzn1156 G091S N5wporl JVonllo I_"/ SC 6V 5ntrd Mznllz5 Hdlantl nnllopb HaSn I.W bl'•C;_IMJD HI+,C__[I}i 5nlral Menl zz lR 9n1101 M5n1156 MCCOII iP ]'/IWFC16516r <_C:�.WO 1!.0 5n4o1 MZn1159 M[COII ID15 A�ZIn 19 ".!!{,.WO onlml ASP51 M50 55 4.4.%. EE0 M<m5bMcColl 7E znirvl MZnX95 MVrtKta MCCaIIC PlZwporl '_O:=17o.�O HC 6n1101 MPDXzz MVnK1v Ell, 1 GJntly Canyon _tWznl.11 Morena Vale, CPCNS 1-^_15 HEOCOCY 1,91b'I.1135nllol Mvmno Volley EVCalyptVS 1-_15 ivwnpat5 I.CG1'_<%1_5nlral Moreno Volley EOmTypWs lownpvl5 fre05hY O.!I W zy 5tl5nc aP . �KheeE Snl. Marano valley a[P!s G 5nlyd Morena Volley Hnocock 16c 115 Vkto COYIVS 4.I3 0 b0 onlyd Moreno Valley d—CY an Mtaz4! H rle, Knox D]4 b_':)i_0]D 5nllol Morena VolleY IronwaOtl iP A Pztllantls fi! uSGi G]0 onfrolMoreno alloy CO 'or,, Alzswn m _. A. _ 9nir01 MIX5n0 valley svalle Pla,Yrntlm Yenned, .W571 5ntr01 Moreno Volley La55o119 JOM 1l nrld, Olzonaznn 2,14 $C 1 entml MOATIOVOIky Moreno Scorch Peelle Canyon $P10 I.:I :�]._'10 WO 3I:_0. Zntml Moreno Valley PMwn WOW AleSwntlro 2tie 5VV61.0 $3, 11. bniml MomnDV. A, Nolan POSS Ino'..oO $P_/-0 04:� $o G onfral Mge OV0115 PhSon PasyCEIAPCvrttlw onlorFl Ilonwoo0 $"_31]. 5nllol MOf5n0 5y bchb oEyan 11r,A la nO P5o[ 40, C 2 2by Pz lantl5 .Edra d :/__ _ _ 5nlyd Moron Volloy SVMymSaE ke05rkY 1—, '_6_a $0 $ Znlral PSrtls Ellk ME U(4N1 1-1_15 11,11E. 501ra1 IMA, Evans Pk,cYE10 Noevo LO YJ.%(E.D]C $1:"P= Pomona a_. enirol PZn W!e�vE _ • _%1. = p.0 .ntral P5M5 Evons 0M.Ed5r P..CEO 0.'J% C Hfi ranlroll I., Ps n Polar C CSnlral en, Evan, Pgel MC..n 0,41 $1. o.°Mo $I I` 00 emral Pink Go'atz LzS., Elnanac 1,4 b'_4:".000 11 ilL 5nllo1 Penh Y n 1-_I. oIViY n n ies 0.. 4 call PZn15 arWy n PzrtkElan, I.. 0 v) Warl Penis Moevv 1J, MJrtISta I_/_� S.If-COC $ v'•J G.Q enlml Poll, NVevO MVOKIa DVIIIOP IW H4'.I',,x 9nt101 Plink PIIXzn R. 1.115 li,11, W0 ?dC'S)WO bnl.I Pon, Y.c_fq Indian Indr.nol I.W $--`"%ODD _ 'i or, ctlm , enirolon, PloCona "I WEE.O `.I')I!FO -10 .aC1i 5nlral Pm1, iP-Id IMaINbw,1 -^_I•A.`lmmlly F POLL, Ell DO.O 1, 5 bl }I'.]!I HIV 5nllol LInryCOIpOIOtbd PfkP, iP�I4 ProC0151 iMp,pn :m bll JI}WC }II%-" call UnFcu'Pomtoo PllppI ilnpSOn Newport 1,5� 6°.: °<.WD 4°.:9'.IF7 onlrdLInFCayn—otl "S MI V5rinan M.I.COryoIO ,, Par, .-'0.°I NEW COToml.d Moen an/ AP O 5 I.,PIEPCO Po /N I.:- °�I.. enlral rinhla cciced NV5v0 DfinloP M5nYo5 "'.00 $P.0;_To S-li__ o) 5n hal IJEFCOrpOrOlOd PY eon PaWCETAP Conbol C.Ell Moonl Vemon 334 b_1 K. 1_'I renlr01 IlnM1coryvr.ced Sary. Pmv MFz EII6 140 $0 bD zn4ol Iln Furl om15tl PShcontl, San llmo..Can Loc,", -6 $ For.!dn aP-1 Movn llo 4.1 C 0 ovtl NorNW551 Moru Ik Mcr", LES, $r, C NO. -Orr Po rtlpz nbrp NOIhW91t cola— Mcendla ttn ;hor— .1 4 70y EDY 14.I1E WG Mapnola PmpaV 0 0 CW Maanvlla PiT O Ontarb 1.1] V Colon Man GrrnO' Ontarb 0.°�4 $2"lED- M1.. wr C0=0 Mon HbtlSE VOIIby PohMo5 0'S $1-11n.COrono Mon Pahrtla5 SPOI a-, $o $ E�..W.11 Carona MORE iP91 S. Grano OEW 414W0 $alor. e, XbtlSn al5y nods D Mcr I5Y PIOEIZna 5 SPHI 0n oY clan Ia d_, 4'_. 4Corona Onbrb 111 EI CMnita I).o9 H3 PE°.WO $3949 Nrn%wz,l IT a _n PVSna NOTW55t Corona OnorlO PNena VS. Mvn 015 $o $0 Ma 51 pp NOMwe,t Yelbpp FARE 0=042$0 ! or w P POV NorXIw651 Corona Ontario Plmpa!n -L jNollhwOld1 PC.co. AVIOC Osrenraon GkNwrl Corona Palroa, OT—n MOF IVI Grancl .cCNOELPrvzr ory O Man Harinwzsl Carona 5 IV i 1 ZE Pwer WRCOG 33 DRAFT -October I. 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) LREA PLAN ALLY CITY '—L PA.' SEGMENITTO ATIL" TOTAL COM I.A.M. W.1 li o'n—I Nor'O PMr a Ma�!nibn1,8 /FC Noni NIXKo I51 Moi!nlbn HOmnbr 0._/� f0 Lori Ngca Id PN5! I-15 144 MIZ .0 b"?'_I ry'fj HPni 1 NO'KO 6m HOmnbr COIIIIXnb 111 1`:)%I.WO I`1'/1.CCC M 1p On um a NIX%w551 NOco CNIIIXnb AIIFpIan bur 0'18 $5.:1�).W0 ':L.1). NOmwzst N«co E"non Pll6' SIP L✓.� 8?._:d.Wo 83__5+. !1«mWz51 H]mnhr anlo Ana Pvzr M all5y 11 NOco a ey I' No'. NOmwzsf PI«co Xbtlzn Vonzy HomnSr IIf M 80 ba !I«mwhsl Morn N«Ko COyOon Xomnzr I,A $'T.W WO 14 L11.WO Nmmwzsf PI«co NOm Colilwnb Nfnplon Lai b0 b0 PI«Inwhsl Horn PNhr Alcnboltl mtlon LN 84➢)OAU $_P:_RW Nmmw,isl PNzrsltlz IdN MaM151 Morfn 1.1hol Yng Oi.% 80 $ Po- w P"Mi 5 acapo-] on PI« w .. NnmwzSl PNhmeS Add— SP-)1 AnFplon 1.`d a $o N«In.0 PN5rsN5 MOmS SP-'1 Lbctln Oid $1:':J!: WO Httmwzsl PMhRWh POSno M. SOn10 Ana Plvzr Phtlwootl 0.?L 80 tl Normwz5l P 6 Conym r CCnIral COVnry ..y 0 or PNZRItl9 anYan r551 sTTy Vq V6W '/d _ 0 PS d. Hormwzsl vN6rs105 Canyon Cresl Vh Vlslo AlSsnntlro 0./-" 80 8 Nonni PIv nitlz «IY.n i651 Mar1F Lc�m Sr g Cznlral 0 "onil 1 vionod L-1 Chico ao 19lilsp 60 -19 So North PN6RItl6 C5n1rO1 11-91 Mpanolb 0)( b'_]''_.WO $_']= W Norl PNnidd6 Control AlAdontl10 1P-)1 Ndr. 5A1 P 515tlh Control Von 8!'r5n MOpnOlq ti? 0 0 P« w KOpO o so', Nvinw551 PNzrsltlz ChKaao Spmc�S Co—olo 0..71, 856.5')OWO $_�.'SO WO M«mw551 PNe0do C.A�mab Mon GA._I.0% b_°.O°).WO 6_e, 0o)0.0 Hamwbsl P... kJz Iowa Cznlzl "Itl 8_K..q]W0 l4_-TL' G Plvud5 _ zrslly n '0 N«m wh51i'No J oIM'zF OOtl d° 0 PNzrs z Ann410n SP% 0 NamweslplylPAd W Slzrta SP-11 Inoiana 01'] 80 30 N.W551PN6rs1tl5 LO Sid. Intlbno VKlab 0.]°. 80 bC PNrsltlz L6mon lIn Onew 0 Mi55bn inn zrsly IW 005 80 bG No'mwoslPrvz rSltlh Lncoln O aSnnplon IS`� 0 Nodhw 5rstlo llltOn on P�Srtzn NO%w5s1 PN5rsltl6 Lincoln WONhofpn yKlgb iA? $s1?_GCG loci t PNzrsltlz CnKom v l«b An'nomn 0° $1 W Norl PN6r5106 Matllson PA1 1IXb 0?/ $1^:')6 CCn ]I`:r!. ryii .dn"W"l 11..d. Maonolb BNSFPP L. SKrta .'.0'i ii::'//.Olio SI_. ' Normwzzl PN5151tl6 Mapnofq Labbrta H011bOn _ 0 b0 dC «lnW.' M0... dln r P z Ma on 17.7F70 O!n y 1') 0 C LdY.Ad1 PN515itl5 Monz1 IdP an la Ana 11-r '_0 i0 ilr PIoril l PNzrsltlz Morfn Wm5r rFa Idm LJ`/SP-/0 11 DS]°WO V "OCCOC NOFhw551 P".1d. MPsbn in Phdlood L5mOn 0)') 0 b0 North —I P h vzrlooY n nocY .. FO03_ 0 G N«hw55 V511OOY npiOn Poyzwn/ ManlzCio C Iddi P.A..A do, 8O5w-.7MN mull. 7of 0.P� ':_I?. 0 H«mw551 PNhr5W5 Add, Cry51al View V. VklolSw 0:,5 bl'_)'_'.M) 11 _')_!.WO HIXNW651 PNzrsWS rod, V'0V'610 SantlimKY OG'. $'•.=,Cd,WO 8^_.SOi.LCO Ill PNhRWh P6tlwootl lS80n. Wayl Mlszbn Inn LNNhrslty 0.0°� W bG Pa w P 5 nd.d. On PVibn PIX W PNersltlz y5! P-% Mapnoly Yzr vNbnitlb lylz! Xolzno wz115 1.W, $0 lPivenod 11Whwo,1 PNzrsltlz yl5r wh115 AnFpion 1.-�`. dE51.W0 4+.P51."'Yn105 CnHzrsliy vztlwoatl SR91 0._?G 80 $ NodinyA,Mv6 0 HOmwz51 vN5r5106 Vt1oY Matllwn WOznbalan Q$^ $0 $ Ngmwesl 6R1tl5 woLlFplon vefgb HzrmoSo C'.OS 8Z3]'_Wo b??]'=W lorlPrvz an P�!Izn —oil N«mwesl Pd-nd5 woatl van Pomn Pe@amour o $ 11or l PNzrsltlz wodo ed'i ".M.b a3> WIL"Too SW PC Npmwosl VnFCIXpIXO1BC MCnboltl aOn 86mortlFOCounly PN6! 1(3?'Si°, 0]p $)_'"1: W0 Na W KIXp«alh ArmsPonp Y, B6moo o o 11 allhy C NOPwz51 IJnnKIXpo"alztl PSIIpOV9 ConPi Goll50!'O POr'Ch Von O!rzn 860iW 11«0lwzzi 'PFC on... tl COnIIL Odlowo Pmch Lil zvinz b0 NaElw5z1 oi...«a150 Condi ZMO'.Id' Wn5vll16'Innn st K«p«a5 005 apo5lw5 cal Canyon 005140 «mwbsf '..c«a«ai5tl El czrtno 1-I� OmarbcwIGin . OntlO On 1.1n.r Jn y P_ HamwzSl Ln1CIXOIXo5O 11.0 o "1 WRCOG 34 DRAFT- October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 55 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) REFP alsi CQY STREIINAME SEGME IFR EEGMEHR0 E iA M MA UMi MF SNAU Corporaz prove11 Un cory0Vn. AmbzrM1 lmon z .d'/ 0 ��0. NoeM1wzst Unncmporalze ..Mo., Lmonnz scnlzkman LW :23JxoNXI NOIMW.It UnFmlporalze Hammel SCMSkman Von. Ann. Prvzr 13 D_VRS/W. Wol N7Mw5 Itt Un7COPOra9 Hammel B914rOV9 Hor0lwzA -zln llzz 000 000J otmwzst Pa. M cmaallaonl5ma mbto lWra1'aq a(l NMHNnNwwormmmwwwS5zss5fl1 nInCopamted toVena VKtb El iobcre000n gwhst orpamtl corpoma Afn 77wz9 nncaomzb Aso Hann Ii5 -,Wo $1'-.]aP`xa LUUnncorpa n yPr-J. Onncam ncorvomlza Lan n95 Efil .1V a0 Hamwa nncarporoned Lonnz Von Pprzn 'e]'_' $I'_Ynl Wo a';--ritt H.rmwzslcp nz Van CazY W Nall!n c OnS by PrarVia, S d5ol5 0 Hartwell Uncl,. 015tl Mal olly1da!rx 3VA. Ana see, 1.11 S, 4so, "0 $II ]5°.0 NaMw951 Unnmrp .18d Noll SnIYSn SPll LAI 0 8 70M-1 [OlpOralStl Mlssbn SP'A S.M. Al. PNSr $0 b TO W9sl UnncarpOralztl _M5!Tingsl Canyon Van n WO NOMlwes1 corparal5e PNSr L'mon'rle Me 0.')`� $0 P. Normw551 Carports 5tl Pools.- San Kmortln0 oily Nolmw5zl Unncorp0ra15tl COI Canyon OnT.I. Irrxcany a!5 $1 411.WO IAIIRO NorNwast Unnc Orporalze iem/iiml Canyon IVsmny oOS Laoos 0Il Wo aC NOIMl .It IJnncorpwal5e TeejCO1 Canyon DOSLO90S aroy 1.10 s,.11 N0 '.Cll :q NOMwSsf Unnc.,a.lz0 izmzscal Canyon L9roy Dawson Canyon Ifl VIII .Ws I-, I1`I.0 N.rmwzn Corparaee temzlc.l anyon Oawlao anyon Is, a:_. !1 �q IIOMw95tUnIc.cl anyon 1- , Part anyon ..dl r})C Hartwell InblOryorot.d let cal Canyon IY Canyon Iralan TlIcI llat .r c pi0 11 HOrmwest Uninconcorated Volley m11nanp MISSbn OdP 10 nlGNwzs1 lancocra.rol.d wnhs,".n Xzmlosa More, o l,df.00 k'1 J".'I�r 11WInw551 Irp Catsrolzb Il -l-na ola... r/PNO Pa. Banong 1. ocean I 11,.4 aC Pass lscnnl. Hp11antl a0 aY Volley w15m1.'in al3 _ Poll ¢onnlp MI_Mlantl SpmpS 5rty atlzy 7.7 VOISy(1411j Pass ll,.noba SO5M Is"l Ap.cn51ro1 _ 60➢5C00 .CC Po55 ¢.nnnp Lb,.F.a55 LFCa2 551 "-01 a0 P.55 Bann. PamsSy I�10 Wihl.nd', JO SC Pa55 Ban. ts Pam59y W15on 1='m H,AX, apmpi io 10 0 ,allP.onnno P 555Y 10 Pa55 BOlnnts . Snn LOY95 l.ntl n551 1.W a10?l]WO IC.-I'CCO P.onnnp aunt Il Hionlone Spmps 1p.c xl_aMOnb Hams I.^3 $0 a Po55 8tsnnnp PamSZY Lnan 0.^_8 a0..Ilf bdB.l');c00 losseannn. lVIM wiw xbaltsna H.mz VluLQ $0 aO a Poll 8shI RN NI M1pMspfn Ol dll Xlpnlontl HOm6 1.01 1.01 1!I4.WO Pass or Pzoamon 1$1 Wnnsy Vano d.. Pa55 P4amal 151 Pn5yman 5n HlpmarW pmpS . 0 0 Pass Pzoscan l 61n bl0 lonespmm '-_d bo 1 PHcAn O55zn I.-mpnns O atlzy al Pass 09OVman1 HipnlVallSaMc,y1,M Wi50l I9tl aLcIsIn"N. al( 1,'.._d.L\]0 %1,.?.OW 1o55 alXXXI Valley dtl HlpM1lan ap 45 P,.,Ile onq 0 V Pa55 ¢z.Umom aY Volley( dla) PzllSylvtsnY .d} 0 Pzavmonl Valley OaYVon blo a50: A.W0 Pass BBOVMo., . OOY VOtl 51CI P.9oVmOat Clly LinitS Cazrty VaY9y 1s1/C5mrOl OVSn &46 3dE 10 a0 W Pass ¢zaemool sy(SIC OaY VOEzv (SICI C09nY V011zy (J S1/Czniml OveA 110 a3.10AU0 95 Pzavmonl PznnsNV.nb Gm lsi all 0.B $I`. ]']I Na $c Pass 09aVnoon dm si P655 PzaVal A 40h C,50 11 Wo0 PaMCmmzm euyanl colmp Lnz Shall 0.9" aC b Pots d soVs e iUs O.A 3i"P5. 0 P. ColYnessl CM19rry Valley POb90, Pa.., .50 V.11,000 a Col a COrylfy P. ryan 1" " :/d.. 0 Passs COIhsS.w 0959iI LOAn Ca9 VOYfi Champbn5 1.5I I/dW0 $'.]4 Pau Colmzw Snpl9ton Oryanl Canal IA, 1.75.WO $10 A. Pa.oIm950 Condlt I.cerl, _ P.ss URIC Orporofzd CM19rty Volley HIMIantl Spr11p5 N cle 0.';i d. V'_WO 11 Y.-_. !InnCOIpOIOIfib Cn5rry VOYzy 11.15 Desert Lawn ido ad'_]f!.Wo Is. IJnhmla-Ad LNZ OaY Canyon OoYV.,A,(Slq on Pzr ortlno Cavnly sl $. if Pass ul Xasor.l ov ey a an --con, ol y.Wo o0C an J,slHSmzl V.y". an JtscF10 -on✓2]a Stetson 10, 0 an Jac.. Hem51 Sane9rsw P,Cro55np Acocb O49 10 i an lol Xzmz1 lvandesson sl.twl PP Crossna W, $0 bC an JtscF10 Hzmzl c. on Menlo Fmlonotl5 IW $2 f, lc on JaMb H9m21 SP-]4 Vhl CoWifon 10_ $0 an Jaclnb Xzm5 SP-4 (RascalPamOn. 0 on J.lHam1 -/ v r brba n m b PC .n Jail 'erne, State Oamzln'poni In-c.. '.1 W an Jaclnb I ... I State Cnambzrs Slhl3on 0.f1 W iC an Jaclnlo HBInh1 State xor'tla EVo-ade I,IA W bL on Jac nb j. e, Folloa BPl W0 0a JO[ n mzl tsn Jaclnb H9mhl Sizib lWaXonl Cal I.fq :41 GC0 $":ii11. .n l.nnb x5me1 warren ESvl.nod9 Dome-nl 4.`11 u.1>f lAo Ilv.'4.. ror WRCOG 35 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 56 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates (continued) KLA PLAN LMW ANT REE! A E nto San lOCintO Sp 0110 9 Mo.�nton G I.d'i G/ IO anJOClntO FSplanatl Mamma. 51.15 0 0 On JOc f0 ESPIMotl9 ]0 ]..OWIo an Joc Nfo Santlzrsan Pamana wlana0z 0 .r ie-_On Jac Nlo SP-'J(moor PaTOno an JOc.l. 0b an Jai 5,191ian Jacinfol ]fn5 SP-]4 0 $to I an Jaclnlo SPAY tSan lacNlol Nwln Pomona 11,d ]tn UTTA O V1,51 bC nlo San Jaclnlo Stan, Pomona Evd_,,ae O $a nlo CnIO ala5 Ilmon apTpS POn[ an jo6nto an J.i WAAL Ontl POn[ Psp 0an Jai an 1c,cintoPOTOna anatl5 nla colpara 5 apr a amzlson 55nb_onl :.. Jnlo llnFcarporofba 11711WY•c—r—, .........a., $0 W fnwbsl LAYS Oma ..ad Lincoln Jolt 17 $G bC bi1nw95 Gmna OI 60de1 GE!' _ 0 Y.W a W111W65t LOY6I... LOY9 Ili !YlcolnP ?.1C l_-141 N0 o!Inwzsl JOYS EISFon, ,r a Pwlmaa Canyon E!ndy Canyon DO awln W551 Lore EI5Io SP-74 tC011iu/Pvenod51 LIS dlY..,. 10 al`.o]°.WC }Il •d]c0 aonnw5st Lai EI5For5 'aP 14(Grand) "-..A SP-71 Orhpal 1:4 $d`/.I COO b?./?+'LOn Wnw55 w aP� Pwb el m z .d OI a Wln—I Mart.. OI o 1_Iran 1"1 COU 1U/! MVrtlblO C011lomd OaYi II`bm Or"a, YSiln i0 50 MVrthIO 15f5Rw1 MVrriZla..11,1., CnZrty 0 FC Pon 1.1—.! NVlmya IP bI P9A0 'dd.1%9S. a M5a MVrtl.d 1.1 SprnaS I]}p.90GM!nMla Iie Namos jO..n MVrtzla L6 NOTOS 1-_ : _' CUU _ O!Inwbsl n510 MV PI610 Ho15p-Pi I -_I. OraOr I.+ o on11W65t .,AiMurtiBIO Ho15PYn, 19115rWn II^IS I,II "I !n andi ML-naia MVPP610 HO15prPas Maraarll0 3P.]'1 Wn,M1iShn for $,?!_nirj 1.!. adtnw551 mi W. Holmzo lzlhrwn cnrion YAiin LCI W Ln w1ll5wcoe Clinion rLP, -A Om.S >U 5 5r50n cne, v.PC,. W Pri 15r11 o!la Mam_aMa 77m6ta Hof Sprnps SR19 15nA,Io 61) WInw551 T,are,ld Oltl nown rain PantllO C011lOmp I15/SP-]Y 1.45 $O aG on.W5A I—L.I. W0.nao T]90mbcn 6ol vY Glbzao 1.', w b0 wz onnsl I5rn5CVla Mcnanao T. Giln.d. PSChanao Poaa Lda $0 6 a bllnW951 Pancno Colllom JB ZrWn vicr fo 1.°..9 ,^-- WI w Nla On< Po o ora _ @nlSllZltl slap. I!. wtnwzsl rliemzc�lol 1 atlnw5n ono SP 11 p5m5(elol Scpan_aa Pooa e5nzrM1tl 51op6 ?.O°� bU difti Wid.ar rri lAf Polgnor Ga] u.!3d. o n/.!SalMk annnw5n Piid..r eAndy CanYan MWon 115 a94 so. A. Jss'.0.l] nnn—L r C5n a Ratter Palpnar d 'J. M G!ndy Onyon - d minwesl ! PoICTar Cllnfon Yblln Wf,., 0]4 $I"_.Jwo $11_1. CO aallnw551 pl� Polona! MM.n Cllnlon.111i (:?A.WO onnwbn oral5tl G1R41 cou 5Pa9 lw'ncn5shp b?941.WC Y.9+<.Nc W1nw551 Nal6tl P+!ifi..ld SI.aA ManIStO Hal SdrFgs Pan, ha C ollfomYs V9 A vwc 11l'7]W om1 P7RMd afapB C SP-'1 zcVlol ,?0 :J.I.Wo .Ai COra.r.N, 8!n 5 51 a +PP- Iwn,n551Bn AV WINW551 IJnhcardorded RaltAnGd 511 A.d W nn,la Hot Span., $I'/[" a Wlnwbil Un ColpO101Ztl CSntrol Grand Aclanor PEIIN a0!0wzsl corPln` Gmna OtlzPo CSntml S'_40:C0.tl onnwzs _ c rpam5 rs5tn6 anyon Izmbsml anyon awl w corPam50 ntlan rt anyon b. atlJtnW551 Unhfl rpCMTAP M-TrAnd HOT SprngS aP ]' WFcn65t5r PWrtoy 1I. J'I.M 0 Wiw n,wpomh P00 an ol6Po Wnly onnw551 Unncarporat5a 1.m6 . Canyon Ini lna11lmu LOY5 CI N.ICd.CCp411.' m 5 .-Aaminmranon $ 107?1(4C0 msxcr a I.-mo ro 1=n.000 WRCOG 36 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 57 Table 4.5 -TUMF Transit Cost Estimates MR PLAN U151 LEAD AGENCY PROJECT .TAME LOCA;,:,1' u ^ frl 'C x5 nR. Regbna' kiA Reg--: -.•.• le;l V:b b�-✓^f 5i :. •.• Fl1Yf/;.. Re gbna RTA B 5 - '. —',' Z. —_ Nart.wcsl/Ct ll RTA C-111501"e,5 r, Le GoD1, CO 2N,'[C N,;0-es'/Foss WA SIDO Rfjbncl Flyer C, ra'. SR- 60 rr;9CDr'rom 59 Co. Gamin, 45 2A7V'^" 9 e5G•^ Ncl'wcs'15a1 Joclnl RTA 11-215/5V4Reg11',a, Flyer C. pl 121515R 1:<orfticr r. R 'myc;r,SCn -Ir ]] 23,Crp NoltFAesJ5ou?.eil REA I- IS Re01ana1 Flyer Capllol b15 CaGICJ, RJrn SB CO. 1e lemaCu1 19 26752,5 J'761 b Re Qbndl RTA Rcplonnl Fly,; Vol Beet Vorioes robins rnabnwb¢ 92 I/'6W'= r= OIVI 6 4.8 TUMF Network Evaluation To assess the effectiveness of the proposed TUMF Network improvements to mitigate the cumulative regional impact of new development in Western Riverside County, the proposed network improvements were added to the 2035 Baseline network in RivTAM and the model was run to determine the relative impacts on traffic conditions. To quantify the impacts of the TUMF Network improvements, the various traffic measures of effectiveness described in Section 3.1 for the 2007 and 2035 base networks were again calculated for the 2035 TUMF Network scenario. The results for VMT, VHT, VHD, and total VMT experiencing unacceptable level of service (LOS E) were then compared to the results presented in Table 3.1 for the no -build conditions. The 2035 comparison results are provided in Table 4.6. Plots of the Network Extents are attached in Appendix H. As shown in Table 4.6, the VMT on arterial facilities experiencing LOS of E or worse will decrease by 14% with the addition of the TUMF Network improvements while the share of VMT on the regional arterial highway system experiencing daily LOS E or worse will be reduced to 33%. It should be noted that the total VMT on the arterial system Increases by 8% as a result of freeway trips being diverted to the arterial system to benefit from the proposed TUMF improvements. Despite a greater share of the total VMT in 2035, the arterial system is able to more efficiently accommodate the increased demand with the proposed TUMF improvements. Although VMT on the TUMF improved arterial system increases by 8%, VHT on the arterial system decreases by 6% indicating traffic is able to move more efficiently. Additionally, a substantial benefit is observed on the freeway system with VHT reduced by 5% following TUMF improvements. By completing TUMF improvements, the total VHD experienced by all area motorists would be reduced by 24% over the levels that would be experienced in 2035 without TUMF improvements. These results highlight the overall effectiveness of the TUMF Program to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development. WRCOG 37 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update M Table 4.6 - Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2035 Base versus 2035 TUMF Network)* Measure of Performance Dail 2035(Base)-- 2035 TUMF Network)— Change VMT- TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 60,772,353 62,457,677 3% VMT- FREEWAYS 32,920,502 32.321,916 -2% TOTAL ARTERIAL VMT 27,851,851 30,135, 761 8% VHT- TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 2385.725 2.274.736 5% VHT- FREEWAYS 1,301,737 1,230,030 -6% _ TOTAL ARTERIAL VHT 1,083,988 1,044,706 -4"G VHD- TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 1,049,291 909,428 VHD-FREEWAYS 704.578 647,606 TOTAL ARTERIAL VHD 344,713 261,822 -24% VMT LOS E-TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 50,001,659 47.005,020 -6% VMT LOS E-FREEWAYS 31,864,589 31,321.324 -2% TOTAL ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 18,137,070 15,683,696 -14% % of ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 36% 337. ' Based on RivTAM " Volume is adjusted by PCE factor NOTES: VMT = vehicle miles of travel (the total combined distance that all vehicles travel on the system) VHT= vehicle hours of travel (the total combined time that all vehicles are traveling on the system) VHD = vehicle hours of delay (the total combined h'me that all vehicles have been delayed on the system based on the difference between forecast travel time and free -flow (ideal) travel time) LOS = level of service (based on forecast volume to capacity ratios. Daily capacity was calculated as ten times AM peak hour capacity) LOS E or Worse was determined by V/C ratio that exceeds a 0.9 threshold as indicated in the Riverside Countv Generol Plan. WRCOG 38 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 59 5.0 TUMF NEXUS ANALYSIS The objective of this section is to evaluate and document the rational nexus (or reasonable relationship) between the proposed fee and the transportation system improvements it will be used to help fund. The analysis starts by documenting the correlation between future development and the need for improvements on the TUMF system, followed by analysis of the nexus evaluation of the key components of the TUMF concept. 5.1 Future Development and the Need for Improvements Previous sections of this report documented the projected residential and employment growth in Western Riverside County, the expected increases in traffic congestion and travel delay, and the identification of the transportation system improvements that will serve these future inter -community travel demands. The following points bring together this information in a synopsis of how the future growth relates to the need for improvements to the TUMF system. ➢ Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing. Development in Western Riverside County is expected to continue at a robust rate of growth into the foreseeable future. Current projections estimate the population is projected to grow from a current level of 1.57 million to a future level of over 2.54 million in 2035, while employment is projected to grow from a current level of 516,000 to a future level of over 1,091,000 (as shown in Table 2.3). ➢ Continuing growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways. Traffic congestion and delay on arterial roadways are projected to increase dramatically in the future (as shown in Table 3.1). Without improvements to the transportation system, congestion levels will grow rapidly and travelers will experience unacceptable travel conditions with slow travel speeds and lengthy delays. ➢ The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to future development in Western Riverside County. Traffic using arterial roadways within Western Riverside County is virtually all generated within or attracted to Western Riverside County, since long-distance trips passing through the region typically use the freeway system, not arterial roadways. Therefore, the future recurring congestion problems on these roadways will be attributable to new trips that originate in, terminate in, or travel within Western Riverside County. ➢ Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to alleviate the future congestion caused by new development. To maintain transportation service at or near its current levels of efficiency, capacity enhancements will need to be made to the arterial roadway system. These enhancements could include new or realigned roads, additional lanes on existing roads, new or expanded bridges, new or upgraded freeway interchanges, grade WRCOG 39 DRAFT -October 1, 2009 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update 2009 Network Costs Adopted October 5, 2009 Cost Estimate IRCTC I'dedly Comdanm Central Menitee MenUee SR44(Pinacate) Simpson 2.49 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 2W 0 $3,127,000 $1.1W.OW $0 $1.152,000 $0 $42MOOD $1.0ro.aoo $546,000 $7,503,000 $7,503,000 Central Menihm Menage Holaad Gabani LM 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Menifee Mende. Garboni Scott 1.00 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.254.000 $473.000 $0 $0 $0 $125,000 $314.OW $173,000 $2339.000 $2,339,000 Cenhal MenUee Menifee Smpon Aldergote 0." 0 4 4 a% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,60B4O00 $607.000 b0 SO $0 $161.000 $402000 $222.000 $3,000.000 $3.000,000 Central mmufa. Monaco AldeMate Newport 0.98 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 Central Menitee Moran. HavvPM Holland 1.07 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Menifee Nowped Goeh MunleM 1.81 0 6 6 80% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,365,000 55151000 Sa $0 N $137,,000 5341,000 S1B&aN $2,M M 52,546.000 Corbel MenUee Newport Murdefo 1.215 Z05 4 6 2 0% 1 3 2 0 0 $2,573,000 $971.000 MelkM0 3o $0 $Zdas.000 $6.213,000 3ZSBZaM $39.104.000 $37,104,000 $0 $0 $2055AM $0 $0 $9N,0N SZ2µON $906.N0 513.13o,N0 $13,130,000 Cenhal MenUee NeWROd 1.215 Merdhe 0,95 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,19&OM $449A00 50 $0 $0 $119.000 $298,000 $1"ADIS $2220,OM 52,171,00101 Central MnMfoe sea 1.215 Brig a ZN 2 6 4 0% 1 3 2 a 0 $5,12&000 $1,935A00 $2228NIM $0 $0 $2741.000 $6,85ZN0 5293d.M0 541A7MN0 $40,533,000 Central Menifee Scoff Mumeta 1,215 1.94 2 6 4 0% 1 3 a 0 a $4,8821000 $1.842,000 $0 $a $0 ws.W0 $1.221JOIN $6720M $9.105.o00 $9.105.000 Central MenUee SRJ4 maff cws an", 1.89 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2,W71000 $8971000 31 $0 $0 $23MM $594.000 $327,000 $4.433,000 $4,433,000 Control Moore Valley Ahoo.ndro 1-215 Penis 3.71 4 6 2 60% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,863,000 $2,3B2.oW $0 $0 $0 $186.OW $466.0W S425.WO $5,3n000 $5,322,000 Central Moreno Valley Alessandro Pens Namn 2.N 2 6 4 15% 1 2 0 0 0 $4,270.000 $5A60-NO $0 $0 $0 $427.0W $1.068A00 $973.WO $12.198.o00 $12.198.000 Combat Moreno Valley Alessandro Nasan Moreno Beach My? 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,245,000 $1,591,000 $0 $0 $0 $125.000 $31 LOW $284.000 $3.556,000 $3,556,000 Control Momrw Valley Alessandro Moreno Beach Gilman Springs 4.13 2 4 2 0% I 3 0 a 0 $S'lm000 $1.959,ON $0 $0 $a $519.000 $1.298.000 $715A00 $9.6BI.W0 $9.681.000 Central Mareno Valley GOmon Spin,, SR40 Aloomdro 1.67 2 4 2 0% 1 3 3 0 0 $2.100.000 $793.000 $10.890.WO $0 $0 P.M,= $3,248,000 $1,378,000 $19,706,000 $19,207,000 Control Mareno Valley Penis Reche Ynta Ironwood 2.W 2 4 2 10% 1 2 0 0 0 $Z485,000 $3,178,000 $0 $0 $0 $249.000 $621.001) $566.W0 $7.099.000 $2099.000 Central Moreno Valley Perm Ironwood S.nn,...d 0.52 4 6 2 80% 1 2 3 0 0 $i3o.N0 $166.000 $10.890.Wo $0 $0 $1.1oz000 $2755.000 $1.119.OW $16.162.000 $16.162,000 Central Mo.. Va9.y Penn S.nnym..d Cactus 2.00 4 6 2 W% 1 2 0 0 0 $502,000 $6420W $0 $0 $0 $501000 $I26.000 $114.Wa $1,434,000 $1,366,000 Central Morn Valey Pe's Cactus Harley Krwx 3.50 2 6 4 25% 1 2 0 0 0 $6.601.000 58.44M.aW Sa $0 $0 $660.000 $I.650.0N $1.504.00) $18,855.000 $13.951,000 Cordial Memne Valley Reche Vhla Reche Canyon Heacxk 1.66 2 4 2 on 2 2 0 a 0 $Z53D.N0 $2,67&000 M $0 $0 $253.00) 5633.000 $ 1BADD $6.606.W0 55,097,001) Central Pere 11UVC.0 Penis GaetE 0.30 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 a $377.00 $483.000 $0 $0 W $UJIN $94.000 SB6.OW $1.078,000 $1.078.000 Cenhal Ferris Eftwnac Keystone Gout 2.24 0 4 4 34% 1 3 0 400 0 $3.714.000 $1.4020W $0 $4.608.000 $0 $832,000 $2.08L000 6972,OW $1&609,000 $I3,609,0N C.Mhol Penis Ethanac 4215 Sherman 035 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $438.000 $56MOW $0 $0 $0 $"Ooii $110.OW $IW.OW $1,252.000 $1.252.000 Central Penis Ethanac Goeft M.meta 0.99 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.239.000 $1.SB5.OW $0 $0 $0 $124.01W $310,000 $282,N0 $3.540,NO $3540,000 Central Pems Ethonoc Manta 6215 0.90 2 4 2 a% 1 2 3 a 0 $I.IW,OW $L445.OW $10,890,W0 $0 $a $112M,Wa $3.005.000 $1.347.000 $I9,019,OM $19.019,Wa Cenhal lens Mid-C..My 1.215 Mder CBS 0 2 2 0% 1 2 1 SW 0 $5,718.000 $7,311,000 $dS'PB0,N0 S1,YI20W $0 $5.123.000 $12M7.OM 55.856.000 $9Z322Na 582132110(a0 Cenhal Peals Pens Harley Knox Ramorn0 1.00 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $Z502.00 $944.aW $0 $0 $0 $25MA00 $626,00(1 $345,000 $4.667,000 $3,393,000 Control Pens Pere Ramona Cihuz 2.49 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $3.132,000 $1,182,000 $0 sal $0 $313.OW $783.000 $431.000 $5.841.Wo $5.831,000 Central Pens Pens COmz Nuew 0.50 6 6 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Pens Pers Nuevo Ilth 1.75 2 4 2 O% 1 2 0 300 0 $2.194,000 $2806AW $0 $1,72MMO $0 $3920W $981OW $673.000 $8,774.000 $6.023,000 Central Penh Ramona 1.215 Pend. 1.47 4 6 2 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $1,844N0 $2,30.= S22.200.0110 Sa $0 $2,412.04)(1 $6.031.000 $ZWAOD $37.57&MO $37.508,000 Control Penh Ramona Perd. Evans 1.00 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 300 0 $1,251M0 $1,594'.000 $0 $11M.000 $0 $298,aa0 $745AN $1.58,000 $6,079,000 561079.000 Cenbel Perms Rameno Evans Met Z09 4 6 2 0$$ 1 2 0 0 a $Z62&WO 53.354,000 $0 SO s0 $E620N $656AN 551MOM $7A93A00 $7,493,900 Cenhal Peels SR-74(4th) ISO 6215 229 4 4 0 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $0 $0 $M280.000 $0 $0 $2228.WD $5.570,000 $2228.000 $32,306.000 $32,306,000 Central Unincorporated Etharwa SRJ4 Kmefone 1.07 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2688.000 $1.014,000 $0 $0 $0 $269.W0 $672W0 $370.000 $5.013,000 $5.013.000 Central Unincar,00mmal [Hharac Sherman Malihews 0.61 2 4 2 0% 1 3 a 0 1 $770.000 $291.000 $0 $0 $18.200.000 $1.897.000 $4,743,000 $1.926,000 $27,827.000 $27.827,000 Cenhal Unincorporated Gilman Spime Alessandro Bddge 4.98 2 4 2 O% 2 3 0 0 0 $7.574,000 $2,359,000 $0 $0 $a $757.000 $1.894.000 $993.000 $13.577,000 $I0,039,OW Central Unincaparm.cl M.Mea Ramona SR-741Nnacatal 6.52 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 S8. n= $3.090.000 $0 $0 $0 $81%ow $2.047.OW $1'm'm $15,273,0110 $15,273,M Corbel Unbncomeraled MU -County Md., Bdd,. 6.92 0 2 2 OR 1 3 0 600 0 $8169600131 $3,28ZOM W $3A56,M0 $0 $1215AM $3,03MN0 $I'MAT0 $21230,00) $21,230,000 Control Unkcorporded Rameno Ntler NCO 0.97 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $121MOM $460,N0 N M 50 5122.000 $306MD $168.000 52A73.001il 52273AM Cordial U.M.Ommaled Ramon. PICo Bdd,. 5.95 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 1,3110 0 $14,955AN $51644AM $D $14,976,000 $0 52993.N0 $7A83.1100 WS&UN $49,507.000 $47,7133,000 Central Dnlne.maraled Reche Canyon San Berecinino County ReChe Vhla 3.35 0 4 4 0% 3 3 0 D 0 $11.997030 $3.117AM 50 s0 $0 $1,200.M0 SZ999,0110 511617100) WAINIA00 517154MOD) Cooled Unicorpemled so" Blom, SR-79(Winlundim) 3.M 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $7.636,000 $2,8620M SD s0 $0 $764,000 $1.N9.000 $Iji Zooa $14,243,000 $114,243,001 Central Unincoroomted SRJ4 Ethanac an 2.0 4 4 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 SO s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Foothill Pozen Grande Uncoln 2.60 0 4 4 0% 3 3 a 300 0 $9,308.000 $2,465.000 $a $3,456.000 $0 $1.276.000 $3.191.000 $1,523.000 $21,219.000 -$681MOOD Northwest Corona Foothill Uncoln CardaNa 2.81 4 4 0 O% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $a $0 $0 Northwest Carona FOOthM Califanla 1-15 0.89 2 4 2 0% I 2 0 0 0 $1.116.000 $1A27.000 10 Sa $0 $112000 $279,00) $234.000 $3.188.000 $3.188.000 NadhwM Corona Green Mee SR-91 0ominavet Ranch 0.52 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $651,0110 SMADD M M $0 $"Sall $163.000 $148.0110 $1.860,OM $1,21MIM Nodhwed Carona Green River 0omin0ue7 Ranch PaRrada 0.56 4 6 2 0% 2 2 0 a 0 $BSaAo0 51199.000 $0 $0 $0 $85,ND $213A00 SUSAN $2,224,00 52,1911.00111 Northwest Corona Green River Palisades Pasco Grande 201 4 4 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Ale.andm Affngton Trauhvee 2.21 6 6 0 a% 2 2 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $a $0 $0 $a $0 NMhwest Riverside AWrgton North Magnofa 5.92 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Riverside Adington Magrrolio Al o.nda 2.02 4 6 2 11% 2 2 3 0 a $2.723.000 $2,873.001) $10A901000 $0 Sa $1.361.000 $3A03.001) $1.649.00o $22,899,000 $20,625.OW Nodhwed Rhold. Van Down Santa Ana mva sR-91 3.44 4 6 2 13% 1 2 3 11000 0 $3.7$1AM $4,796,000 $101990.000 $$.760AW Sa $2.Mo.OM $51100.0110 UWADD $MAS7.M0 $30.923AM Nedhend Riverside Van Buren $4-91 MOCMnRbbd Canyon 3.10 4 6 2 4% 1 2 0 0 0 $3,748,000 $41792M0 $0 $0 $0 3375AM $937,0110 UNION 510,706,000 $51191"OM HodMnnM MversW. Van Bumn Wood OeuMekn 0.0 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 M 30 30 50 50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Nelleest Mumelde Van Boren Trauberm Omn,. M1nace 127 4 6 2 22% 1 2 0 0 a $1.249.Mo 51.597.000 s0 $0 $0 5125.0N $312.00 $285,000 $3,56MOOD $3,514,000 Nortlov.0 thurrorpaoted Aleso:mao Tmulwein Yata Grande L22 6 6 O 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO NMhwed Unincorporated Alessandro Vsta Grande L215 1.26 6 6 0 0% 2 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No6hwed UM.C.,mal l Ca)oke 8Solumne Hare, John 0.76 2 6 4 a$$ 2 3 0 0 0 52.302.000 $717p00 50 N $0 $284A00 $S76,M0 $302AM 54,127OM $3,573AM NOdhwed U.Smoc' ailed Ca$ako Hmrley John Haag 5.79 2 6 4 U% 1 2 0 0 0 $14A41,000 $18,597.OM $0 $0 $0 51,454OD0 $3,636,100 $3.314,000 $41.545,000 $40.65OAM Nedhwed UnlncemOmfod Ca)ake Haag 1.219 0.28 4 6 2 ITS 1 3 0 0 0 $357.000 $lW.ow $0 $0 $0 =ADD $89.OM S42N0 $666,000 $666A011 Nwlhweat Unincarpaofod Ca)ako 1.15 Temezcd Canyon 0.66 4 6 2 0% 1 2 2 a 0 $62P,M0 511106010111) SIZ280AM M $0 3Z311.N0 $S,772N0 $2AI7.= $34.674,M0 $9A31,000. Nodhwed Unln.."holed Cooke Temezoal Carryon Sa Skin 3.21 2 6 4 0% 3 3 0 175 0 $11,492M0 $3.M.OM $0 $1016.M0 $0 511135110110 33,377,0111) 51.655AN $2Z934N0 322934,N0 Ned vend Unince,emoted. Ca)dco To Sim aSobmde 6.11 2 6 4 0% 3 3 0 0 0 521.874,000 35,"ZON s0 50 $0 $Z182000 $5.Y9.N0 $2,767,600 $38A89.M0 $N.OB9,OM Nedhwed Unfecommoled SchBamen San BernadNe County Hamm. 1.53 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 2N 0 $3ASIAN %MOM $0 $ZSM,NO SD $616,000 $1.639.OM $111011.01) $14.M.N0 $14,34zm Nodhwed Unlncormeded Schlezman Borden. Sumner BAD 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 51,252ADD 51,6010N $u N N $12SM0 $313,001) SMSAN $3,576,000 $3A740N Nedhwed Unlncomomied SCMinrnan Sumner Clevefond 0.50 0 6 6 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.884.M0 $2A19AN $0 $0 30 5188,01111 5471.0011 5429.OM $$,MI.= $5.381AN NOdhwed Unlncorpnaled. SCNbzmen aevefond Asti TIM 0 6 6 a% 1 2 0 0 0 S867AN ST.iNAN s0 N $0 Sa2No $217A01) $1911.000 52A".M 52477.001) Nedhwed Unlncerponaed S.Ne.man ASIeell Mamma 0.27 2 6 4 OR 1 2 0 0 0 56861000 MIXON N M 30 $69Aa0 St72DDD $156,0N $1.961.aN 51,961,0N NOUhemd Unlncarpomfod Schlezmen Hamner 1.15 Mai 0 6 6 0% 1 2 1 0 0 $1.161,000 $1A84AN 543,P8SN0 $0 $0 $4A94,OM $11=.N0 54.643A00 $66.7920100 $66.797.00 NoMmenot Unincorporated! Scblezman 1.15 Mmfim 1.97 0 4 4 M 1 3 0 1AW a $4,9$40110 $1.86RAM s0 511.520A00 $0 $1,647AN $4,119A0D. SIA34AM $25,943,000 $251943.000 Nedhwed Unlncemerated Van Boren SR-M BeReOmve 1.43 4 6 2 O% 1 2 0 0 a $1,794,No $2,294,000 $0 $0 s0 $I79AOM SN2M0 WIND $5.125.00) $2,192 DD Nodhwezt Unincorporated. Van Barra BlReOmve Sonia Ma Mee 3.60 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $4,616,000 $6,774,0001 M M $0 $OSZOM $1,129,000 $I,029,00D 512,90MN0 $51569,000 N.Munl UnlncoOrOmled Van Buren Mockingbad Canyon Wood 4.41 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $5535,N0 $ZOnAN N $0 50 SMAN $IANA00 $11261.001) $15AIl,MD $12345,000 Radii Uninconmealed Van Bumn ponce Tent. 1.215 TAP 4 6 2 O% 1 2 1 0 0 $2368,000 $3,O23.= $43,MAw $0 $0 $4.615000 $11,07.000 $4,9i&ON 570,246,0010 $0,716.00D Pas Beaumont Beaumont Oak Valley ll4th) 1-10 137 4 4 a 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 W $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pros Beaumont POharo Oak Valley(San Omebe Conyendlln 1.17 0 4 4 0% 1 3 2 3M I 52,93P.MD $1,1020M $2Z2WOOD $3.456,N0 $18.2M1N0 $4.6BBAN $11,719.00 $4."BADD $69,189,OM M. Paz. Bodement SR-19(Be.U.M) 1.10 MaRew 0.N 4 4 0 O% 1 2 3 0 0 $0 $0 $IOA90,N0 $0 s0 51.089.000 SZWAOO $11OBZNO 5151791A00 $0 Paz' Unlcommaled SR-n(Beeamed) Melt. California, MW 4 4 0 01; 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 M M $0 $0 $0 $0 5o 50 Parr thflru m etl Patron, 4M let pA5 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,1Sg0N $427,0N $0 $D $0 5113AM SWIM STUAM $2109.000 52109.000 Pmz UilimumomMtl Pelrem let SR-79(Beaumont) 203 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $6,191,M0 $1.92&ON $0 $0 $0 $619,N0 $1,54BAN sel2aN $11ANAN $11,099,N0 Pau Unkcemoratetl SRJ9(Ramb Canteen) California GBmmn Spasms 4A7 4 4 0 O% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 M M $0 so s0 San Jacinto Hemet Oomenlgont Women Sa,deaOM 1.77 4 6 2 0% 1 3 a 0 0 $2.22S.000 sm." $0 $0 $0 $223,000 $556,00 $307,000 $4,151.000 $4,151.000 San Jacinto Hemet Oomengani Sanderson State 2.14 4 4 a 0% 1 3 0 110 0 $0 $a $0 $D $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet SRJ4 Wlnchata Women 2.59 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $3.249.000 $4.155.000 $0 $0 60 $325,000 $11I2000 $740,000 $9,M1,000 $7,335,000 son Jacinto son Jacinto MId-Ceunfy Women Sandeaen 1.73 0 2 2 0% 1 2 a 0 0 SZ169,N0 $Z774,N0 s0 M 50 $217.000 $54ZM0 $694.001) $6.196,000 56196A0 a.. J.Cbt. San sm.lnte Ramona Women Sanderson 1.73 4 6 2 OR 1 2 0 a 0 $Z169,M0 $2,"4,000 So $0 SO $217.001 56120aa $4mlom $6,196.N0 $61196AN San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Sandmmn Stile Z39 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $5.997.aW $7.668,000 $0 $0 $0 $00AW $1,499.000 $1.367.OW $17.131.000 $13.661.000 San Jacinto Sin Jacinto Ramona State Mahn 266 2 4 2 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $3134510W $4,278.000 $0 $0 $n $335.OW $836.00D $76ZOW $9,M6,000 $9.301AW San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Mom Cedar 208 a 4 4 0% 1 2 0 ISO 0 $5.225.000 $6,6BLOW $a $1,728.000 $0 $695.000 $1.738.001) $1.363.000 $17.430.000 $17.430.000 tam 2009 Network Costs Adopted October 5, 2009 Network Detailed Cost Estimate Son Jacinto unmco ated Domenigom SR-J91Winchesterl W.,en 3.10 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 300 0 $3,891.000 $1.468.060 $0 $1.728.000 $0 $562.000 $1A05.000 $709.000 $9263.W0 $8,788,000 San Jacelb Unmcmporated GOman Springs Bridge Sanderson 295 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $3,I04A00 $1,398,000 $0 $0 $0 $390.000 $926,OW $510.000 $6,90 ,W0 $6.908.000 San ladnto UnincOmOmted Mid -County Bridge W. 2,35 0 2 2 M 1 3 0 0 0 $29511000 $1,114,000 $0 50 $0 $295,000 SMM0 $6011000 SS,WS,OW $S,W5,000 San Jacinle Unincemorahsi Be.... Bridge Warren 2.35 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $5,901,000 $ZWJ0W $0 $0 SO $590AW $1,475,000 $013A00 $11,006,000 $I1.Wd.W0 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-74 Byggs SR-191Winchesterl 3.53 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $4A28.000 $1,671,00 $0 $0 $0 $40.3.000 $1.107.000 $610,000 $8,259,000 $8,259,000 Son JeclutO Un6umpmoled SR-79(Nemal Bypass) SRJ4(NOtlda) Domeny0nl JIM 0 6 6 oR 1 3 2 300 0 $12133000 $4,519,000 $22,280,00D $5118L000 $D $3.m.coo $909,000 $4A18,000 $62,453A00 $62,453,000 $an Jacinto UnNcomm.ted SR->9(Hensel Bypa.) DOmenigani Wln.besle, 1.50 0 6 6 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $5.6S2W0 $2133,000 $0 $0 50 $MSAW $1A13A00 $999,OW $10,542,000 $10.542,000 San Jeclnte Unincer,onsed SR-79(So. Jacinto Bypass) Ramona SK-34(Midda) 6.50 0 6 6 01% 1 3 2 0 0 U449AWD $9,249,000 SM,280,9011, $0 $0 $4677,000 ST1.693,001) 56'sn" $M,989A00 $M,9Bym $an Jacinto Unincorymaled S249(Sandenen) Gthaan$polsgs Ramene 1.92 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 2,600 0 $2,409,000 $90%000 $0 $14,936,00D 30 $i.M9.W0 $4,346,000 $1,829,000 $U6208.000 $2/,500.000 San Jacinto Unlnc.,arat d SR-M(Wlnchester) DomeWgoni Kegs, 490 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $12,310,000 $15.741.OW $0 $0 $o $1,231,OW $3,028.000 $2805.000 $35,145.000 $23.042,000 S.A.1 Canyon lake Gael4 Rafted Canyon Newpod 0.50 2 4 2 0% 2 2 0 2W 0 $259.000 $801.OW $0 $I,152A00 $D $191.aW 5478,000 $291.00 $3,652,000 $2,605,000 S.A.st Canyon lake 2e11road Canyon Canyon Juts Gaeh 1.95 4 6 2 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $2962W0 $3.125.O00 $0 $0 $0 $296,000 $241,000 $609AW $7.233.000 $7,508,000 Southwest lake FMnam R.Rmad Canyon 1.15 Canyon Nuts 2.29 4 6 2 50% 1 3 2 0 0 $1,438,000 $543.000 Mao,W0 $0 $0 SZ392oW $5,930,000 52426,OW $34,989,000 W,989,000 S.ulhwesl Mwdela Clinton K.M 1.16 Copper Gail 2.0 2 6 4 0% 1 3 3 0 0 $612311000 $2351.000 $10,8901000 $0 W $1,312000 $4.280,000 $1.947,000 $21A11,000 $26.M6,000 Souhwest Muutet. Miss. KeBh Coppe,C,all Teebn 4B3 6 6 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 W 50 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 50 $0 $0 Southwest Muutela Conlon KeBh TeWen 1.215 0.83 4 6 2 M 1 3 2 0 0 $1A41.= $393.000 =30.00 $0 $0 $2332oW $5,830.Wo $2321,000 $34247,00D $34,267,000 SOelhwest Mudd. MI.. K.M 1.215 Meadawimk 0.95 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $939A00 $354,000 50 $0 $0 $94,00D $235000 $129,000 $1,051.0W s.751,000 Southwest Muntta hench VaRry(Dale) SR-y9(Wlnch.sMJ Margarita 1.03 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,296,000 $1,657,000 50 W $0 $130.000 SUA000 $295,000 53,942oW $3,202,000 Southwest Murrieta MeadowlakiMendes) K.W Groton KeBh 2.00 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $5,024,000 $1.896,000 $0 $0 $0 $5020W $1,256,000 $692,000 $9,370,000 $9,370,000 Southwest Munleta Mendee Scott Water 1.08 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula hench Valley M.ga,Ba ymz 0.91 4 4 0 0% 1 2 a 0 a $0 $0 SD $0 50 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 Southwest T....W hench Valley Y... MUWNa Geek 1.29 0 4 4 M 1 2 1 300 0 $3.240,000 $4143,000 $43,280,000 $3,B56,W0 $0 $51048,000 512619,000 $SA62000 $12,348,000 $64,827,000 S.Wnsmal Temecula french Valley MunlBte C.k Rancho Caft.ta 236 0 4 4 M 3 2 0 to 0 $8,463,000 $1,593,000 $0 $11M.000 50 $1,019,000 $2,548,000 $112701000 523.129.000 523,129,000 Southwest T....I. hench Valley Rancho Ca ,.w 1.15(R.M) 1.86 0 4 4 0% 3 2 2 300 0 $6,623,000 $5,982.00D $222801000 SIMS.= 50 $3211A00 541020W $3,860,000 $54,579,OO) $37,201,000 Sou4b.0 Temecula SK-n(W9ncneste,) Muni Nat Springs Jefferson 230 6 6 0 056 1 1 3 0 0 SD $0 $10.8"Mo $0 SO $11089.000 $2,M M $1.089,000 $16,791,000 $15,391,000 Southwest WOdomar Burly Canyon 1-15 Sunset 3.42 2 6 4 0% 2 3 3 0 0 $10, O5A00 $3,240.000 $10.890.M $0 $0 $2,130,000 $5.324.000 $2,454,000 $34,443,000 $34.443.000 Southwest Motorcar Burbly Canyon Sunset Mulsieta 1.01 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2.527.000 $954.000 $0 $0 $0 $253.000 $632.000 $348.000 $4.714,000 $4.714.000 Southwest Wldomar Cfiton Keith Palomar HS 0.55 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated Benton SR-79 Bade. Bypon 2.40 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $3.018,000 $1,339,000 $0 $0 $0 $302W0 $155,000 $416,000 $5,630.000 $5,63D,000 Southwest Uninco,poMetl CButon KaBh Meodoedsuk SR." 254 0 6 6 M 1 3 0 1.2W 0 $9,"I.W0 $3,612,000 $0 $20,736,000 $0 $3,031,000 $2.W.000 $3,392,000 $49.919,00D $47,919,000 South.st Unincerpa,aled New,d Mendee Dndenbeme, 0.32 6 6 a D% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 W $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest U.Mso,,m.led Newpod UncienM1mgm SILM(y0nchedm) 3.58 6 6 a o% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 So $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Mn,,ry tad SR-74 1-15 Hhanaa 4.89 4 6 2 0% 2 3 2 0 0 $1,449.000 $2.320,0e0 $2228D.000 $0 $0 $2973.000 $7,432,000 $3,205,000 $45,659.00) $45,522,000 Southwest Whs..mOmled $1J9(Fadem Byp.ss/Wmh1 SR-79(WlncM1aMO Be.] 452 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 100 0 $5.672,000 $2142AW $0 SSy6,W0 $0 $6251000 $1,SSSM0 SIM,= $I1A23,000 511,42JOW S.A"d Uninco,poMed SR-79(faslem type.) BOSW Wn0 406 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 2W 0 $12293.000 $3,830,000 $0 $2304,W0 50 $11460.0m $3,651,000 $1,843,000 $25,386,OO1) $25,386A00 Southwest Bet .... pmuted SR-09(ResleM Bypas/AmoJ Wn, SR-795Coralunce) 4.49 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 0 y6,034W0 $212BAW $0 50 W SWAM $1,709,000 $896,OW $1"501000 $122540W Southwest Unlncemsnatd 5R."(Easbm Bypass/Anne) SIM(Cceience) Smtla RBa 1.14 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 70 0 $3,470,0110 $1.W1,000 $0 $1,152000 $0 $462000 $1,156,000 $SI M $1,891,000 $701,000 Southwest Uninco,pmaNtl SR-M(FasMnBypan/Ama)Sonia Rita paiwtew 1.07 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $5,388.000 $1,69B.000 $0 $0 30 $639,001) $1,349,000 $709,000 $9,659AW $9,659,OW Southwest Unincmpmaled SR-79(Eastern Bypass) EahWew 9alu 1.0 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $4,505A00 $1,403,000 $0 SD $a $451,OW $1.IU,M $591.OW 50,096AN $11,076,000 SOUMwesl Unlncorporaletl SR-79(Eastern Bypass) pale 1-15 C21 0 4 4 0% 3 3 2 200 0 $15.086.000 $31995.200 $22280,W0 $23W.000 $0 $3.967,000 $9.918.W0 $4.367,0041 $61.912,000 $61.912,000 ss, th.l Unlnro onsfeE $R-99(Wincheste,) Beam Themgon Us 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 a 0 $3,096,000 53.959AW $0 SD 50 $310,W0 $774,O0111 $006,0011 $8,045.004 $81845,000 Southwest Unincmparaled SR-79(Wlnchester) Thompson WARse JAI 4 6 2 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $2,275000 $2909,000 $0 $0 $0 $M,= S569AW ssie'uW $6A99,000 $31623.000 Saethwest Bet .... ps,ruted SR-N(Wlnchester) la Alba Hanle, 0.50 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $632,000 $BW,OW $0 50 50 563.Wo $158.OW $144oW $1,1115.000 $7620W 2618 2009 Network Costs Adopted October 5, 2009 H-1 TUMF Network Central Menifee Goeb Juanita Lasser Lane 2.61 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $3,2IIA00 $1,M7,000 $0 $0 $0 $328,000 $819.0W $451.W0 $6.112.000 $5.930.000 Control Menifee G= NewpW Juontla 1.36 2 2 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Menifee Holland Antelope Houn 1.00 0 4 4 0% 1 2 a 350 a $2512000 $3,212,000$0 $4,032,000$0 $654.000 $1.636AW $926,030 $13.022,000 $13,022,000 Central Mentlee McCall Men'rfee SR 79(Wlnchested 4.45 0 2 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $5.585.000 $2,108.000 $0 $0 $0 $559.000 $1.396.000 $769,000 $10Al2.000 $10.417.000 Central Menifee McCall SR-29(Wnchester) Warren 2.58 0 2 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $3.234,013) $1,221,000 $0 $0 $0 $323.000 $W9.000 $446,000 $6,0nom $6,033,000 Central Venture McCall 1,215 Aspel 1.0 4 6 2 0% 1 3 3 0 0 $1,5420W $5B20W $10,890,Wo $0 $0 $1.243,000 $3.108,000 $I,WI.oW $18,666.000 $18.666,000 Central Menifee McCall Aspel Menifee 0.95 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2.396.001 $9a40W $0 $0 $0 $240,000 $599,000 $330000 $4,469,000 $4,469.000 Central Menifee Munieta enssnac McCall 1.95 2 4 2 29% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.239,OW $656,W0 $0 $0 $0 $17d000 $435.000 1240.000 $3244,000 $3,244.000 Central MenBae Mnmieta McCall Newport 2.03 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 WO 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central MenHee Mnid. Newport Bundy Canyon 3.W 2 2 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Cactus 1,215 Heacack 1.81 4 6 2 25% 1 2 2 0 0 $1,204.000 $2,179.OW $22,280,000 $0 $0 $23981000 $5,996.W0 $2.616.000 $37,173,000 $37.173.000 Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus 1-215 Towngate 1.00 4 6 2 25% 1 2 0 0 0 $942000 $1,2040W $0 $0 $0 $94,000 $236,000 $2150W $2.691,000 $2.691.000 Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus Towngate Frederick 0.67 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o Cenfral Morem Valley Frederick SR40 Alessandro 1.55 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno Vale, Heacack Cactus San Michele 2.79 2 4 2 15% 1 2 a I a $2.979.000 $3.B09.OW $0 $8640W $0 $384.000 $961.000 $765,000 $9,762,000 $6,726,000 Central Moreno Valley Heacack Reche Van. C." 4.73 4 4 0 905S 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno Va0ey Heocock San Michele Harley Knox O.74 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 IW 0 $932.000 $3520W $0 $864,000 $0 $180,000 .$449,OW $215,030 $2992,000 $2,4I6, 00 Central Moreno Valley Ironvoatl SR40 Redlands 8.46 2 4 2 35% 1 2 3 0 0 $619W,OW $B,827,000 $10,690A00 $o $0 $1.9N.000 $4,448,003 $2,662000 $35.509,000 $35,509,000 Central Moreno Valley Lasselle Eucalyptus Alessandro 1.00 2 4 2 40% 1 2 0 0 0 $751.000 $960.000 $0 $0 $0 $75,000 $188.000 $171,000 $2,145,000 $2,145,000 Central Morero Valley Lasselle Alessandro John F Kennedy LW 2 4 2 20% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,005.OW $1,285,000 $0 $0 $0 4101.000 $251.000 $229.000 $2,871.000 $2,8I1,000 Central Moreno Valley La..Re John Kennedy Oleander 3.14 4 4 0 I= 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno Volley Moreno Beach Reche Canyon SR40 1.32 2 4 2 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $1,I17,000 $2.195,000 $22,280A00 $0 $o $2,400,000 $5,999,Wa $2,619,000 $3I210,000 $37,210,000 Central Moreno Valley Nason Imnwootl Alessandro 2.02 2 4 2 W% 1 2 2 0 0 $1,I75,000 $2268000 $22.280,Wo $0 $0 $2.406,000 $6,014.000 $2,632000 $39,376.000 $3].3)6,000 Central Moreno Valley Pigeon Pass Irornvood SR40 0.43 4 4 0 100% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Morero Valley Pigeon Pass/CETAP Corridor CaMvini honwootl 3.23 2 4 2 80% 1 2 a 0 a $B)I,OW $1,03I.000 $o $0 $0 $BLOW $mom $185.000 $2,317.000 $2317.000 Central Monero Valley Reche Canyon Reche Vista Moreno Beach 4.02 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno V.riey Redlands Locust Alessandro 268 2 4 2 0% 1 2 2 0 a $3366A00 $4,W4A00 $22260,000 $0 $0 $2565.000 $6A12000 $2.995.000 141.922.000 $41226,O00 Central Morena Volley Surmymead Eetlerak Penis 2.02 4 4 0 100% 1 1 0 0 0 $o EO $0 f0 $0 $0 $0 EO W $O Central Perlis Eli, SRJ4141h) 1-215 1.92 a 2 2 0% 1 2 2 0 1 $2.407,01)) $3,028,O00 $222B0,000 $a $9,100AW 53,329,OW $8,442,W0 $3.687,000 $52.378.000 $52,328,000 Central Pens Evan Placentia Nuevo 1.50 0 4 4 725, 1 3 0 0 0 $LO55,000 $398= $0 $0 $0 $106.000 $264.O00 $145.W0 $1.968.000 $1.968.000 Central Pens Evan Morgan Ramona 0.59 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $144000 $281.000 $0 $0 $0 $74,000 $186,000 $103,030 $1,W8,000 $1,388,000 Central Penis Evan Nuevo 4215 1.99 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 400 0 $5,W9AW $1,890AW SO $4,608,000 $0 $962,000 $2.404,0o0 $1,151000 $16.024,000 $16,024,000 Central Pens Evora Oleander Ramona 0.99 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Penn Evan Placentia Rider O.SB 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Pens Evans Rider Morgan 0.49 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $621.000 $234.000 $0 $0 $0 $62000 $155.000 $86,000 $111581000 $IJ58,000 Central Perris Goeh Laser Eharoc 1.04 2 4 2 0% 1 3 a 0 0 $1,307,000 $493,030 $0 $0 $0 $1310W $327,000 $180,000 $2,4 ,D(30 $199,000 Central Pens Hanky Knox 1-215 Indian 1.53 2 4 2 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $1.924,000 $2A60.OW $10.890,000 $0 $o $1.2B1,000 $3.204.000 $1.52AW $21,286.000 $21,286.000 Central Perris Harley Knox Indian Pens 0.50 2 4 2 25% 1 2 0 0 0 $136,OW $200.000 $0 $0 $o $16,000 $39,000 $36.01)) $447.000 $442,000 Central Pens Hate, Knox Pens Evan 1.03 0 4 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $2,587,000 $3,208,0W $0 $0 $0 $259.W0 $647.000 $5"oW $7.391,000 $2.391.000 Control Pens Nuevo F215 Mundell. 1.36 4 6 2 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $1.704.000 $2179,000 $10.890.000 $0 $o $1,258000 $3,149.000 $1477,000 $20,658,000 $20,658,000 Central Penn Nuevo Mrmiet. Dunlop 1.00 2 4 2 23% 1 3 0 300 0 $969.000 $3660W $0 $1.228,000 $0 $270.000 $694.000 $306.000 $4,313,000 $4.313.000 Central Pens Placentia 1-115 Indian 0.32 0 4 4 0% 1 3 2 0 0 $929.000 $351,000 $22280.000 $0 $0 $2321,000 $51802000 $2,356,000 $34,039.000 $54.039,000 Central Penis Placentia India, Redlands 1.00 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,254,0W $4n,000 $0 $0 $o $125.Wo $314.000 $123,W0 $2.339.000 $2,339,000 Cenfral Penis Placentia Redlands Wlsan 0.25 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Pens Placenta Vilb. Earns 0.25 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 WO 0 $1,892.M $714.000 $0 $3,456,000 $o $535,000 $1.339A00 $606,000 $8,540.000 $8,540,000 Central Pens SR-74(Matthews) F215(mostlyin Perris Ethan.. 1.25 4 4 0 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $0 $0 $10,890,000 $0 $0 $1.089,Wo $2223W0 $1,089000 $15,791,000 $15,791,000 Central Unincorporated Briggs SR-24 IPaacafe) S"vnpsan 2.50 0 4 4 0% I 3 0 0 0 $6128O4W $2.370.000 $0 $0 $o $628,000 $1.520,0D0 $865,030 $11,713,000 $11,713,000 Central Unincorporated Briggs Simpson Newport 1.53 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 600 0 $1,916,000 $I23,000 $0 $3,456.000 $o $537.000 $1.343.000 $610,W0 $8,585.000 $8.585.000 Central Unincorporated Center(Moin) t-215 Mt Vemon 1.50 2 4 2 a% 1 2 3 0 2 $1.882.000 $2A02.01)) $10.890.WO $0 $8A80.000 $2,125,00 $5.313.000 $2,366.00C $33,463,000 $33A63000 Cenlml Unincorporated Efs Post SR-74 2.65 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $3,322,000 $I,255.OW $0 $o $0 $3330W $832000 $458.000 $6W5.000 $6,W5.0W Cenfral Unincorporated Mount Vemon/CETAP CondCenter Pigeon Pass 0.61 2 4 2 09. 3 3 0 0 0 $1.0mmo $287.000 $0 $0 $0 $10810W $271,000 $137,000 $1,68I,000 $1,887,000 Central I-Knaorpomted Nuevo Dunlap Menifee 2.00 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 400 0 $2,510,000 $947,00O $0 $2304,000 $0 $481.OW 31.2o4.oa0 1576.000 $8.042000 $8.022,000 Central Unincorporated Pigeon Pass/CEFAP Corridor Contarini Mount Vernon 3.38 0 4 4 0% 3 3 0 0 0 $121W,Wo $3.207,000 $0 $0 $o $1,211,000 $3.027.000 $1,532.000 $21,0B6.0W $21,096.OW Central Unincorporated Post S.M. Rosa Mine or. 0." 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Redlands San TanotaCanyon Locust 2.60 2 2 0 0.% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 , Northwest Corona 611, SRA1 Magnolia 4.84 4 4 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Carona Auto Center Railroad SR-91 oS0 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8480,OW $B48.000 $2.1W.000 $8481000 $12,296.OW $0 NWhwest Corona Haden Valley Norco HIB Mcpnky 0.59 4 4 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NONh.0 Corona Lincoln Partridge Ontario 3.20 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Magnolia 6ih Sherman 0.61 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 WO 0 $120.000 $985.OW $0 $1,I28,000 $0 $250,030 $625,000 $34BDa0 $4.706,000 $4,706,000 Northwest Corona Magna Shani Rimpau 0.39 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Magnolia Rimpau Ontario 1.19 6 6 0 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 NWhwest Corona Main Grand Ontario U13 2 4 2 0% 1 3 a 0 0 $1.106,Wo $411,000 $0 $0 $0 $111.000 $277000 $152W0 $2063.000 $1.951,000 Northwest Corona Main Ontario Foofhil 0.24 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NWhwest Carona Main Haden Valey Patrd,re 0.35 4 6 2 0% 1 2 a 0 a $437,OW $558000 $0 $0 $0 $44,000 $109.OW $IW,Wo $1,24B4O00 $957.000 4 Northwest Corona Main PoM1 W SR-91 0.86 6 6 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Carona Main SR41 S. Grand 0.86 4 6 2 0% 1 1 0 0 a $1A75,000 $2.880.0W $0 $0 $0 $108.000 $269.O00 $396.030 $4,728.000 $4J28,000 NWhwest Corona Mcdnley Haden Valley Pomenatle 0.52 4 4 0 05% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NWhwest Corona MCKmley Pramen.de SR41 0.W 6 6 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 L... $0 NWhwest Corona McKinley SR41 Magna. 0.31 4 6 2 011 1 1 0 100 1 $391.0W $11049.000 $0 $576.000 $29.=030 $2.827.00 $9.069.000 $2,932.000 $42.1420W $40.242000 NWhwest Corona Ontario 1-15 ECegAo 0.94 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,186,01)) $1,516.000 $0 $0 $0 $119,0W $292.000 $210,0130 $3,388,000 SIMS= NWhwest Corona Ontario ❑ecdn Buena Wia 0.32 4 6 2 m 1 2 0 0 0 $403,000 $516.000 $0 $0 $0 $4O00 $101.000 $92.OW $1,152,000 $631,000 �. Northwest Corona Ontario Buena Ysta Main 0.65 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NWhwest Corona Ontario Main Kellogg 0.28 6 6 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Ontario Kellogg Fullerton 0.32 4 6 2 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $4020W $1,072,000 $0 $0 $0 $40,000 $Iol.OW $14l $1968,000 $IJ68,O00 NWhwest Corona Ontoria Fullerton Rimpau 0.42 6 6 0 O% I 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NadM1west Corona Ontario Rfnpau W5 0.60 6 6 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NWhwest Corona Railroad Auto Club Sherman 1.97 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $B.4BO0W $848,o0o $2.120.11130 $848.000 $1 m'm $12.296.000 SSF NWhwest Corona R Broad Sh. Main (at Grandl 1.26 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 a $1.582.000 $20moo $0 $o $0 $159,W0 $397.000 $3620W $4.534.030 $3.028.000 45 NWhwest Carona River Corydon Main 2.22 4 4 0 0% 1 2 a 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 s Northwest Corona Serfas Club SR41 Green River 0.96 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 a a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NWhwest Norco Ist PMxidga Mauritian 0.26 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $322,000 $122,000 $0 $o $0 $32,01)) $BI,Wo $44,030 $601,aW $601,W0 NWhwest Norco Ist Moun0on Hamner 0.26 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 W $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 j... NWhwest Norco 2nd River H15 1.44 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,804,030 $681,000 $0 $0 $0 $180,00 $451.00) $249,W0 $3.365.000 $2.321.000 NWhwest Norco 6th Hamner CaFRania 1.21 4 4 0 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $0 $0 $10,8901000 $0 $0 $1.089.W0 $Zm000 $1,W9.OW $15.791,000 (t. $15.991,W0 Northwest Norco Arrington North Arington 0.99 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.22it= $462,000 $0 $0 $0 $122,13W $3061OW $169,W0 $2282.000 $2,282000 NMhwest N. Cardona Arlington 61h 0.98 2 4 2 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.231.OW $1.594.00411 $0 $0 $0 $123,O1H) $3oaom $281,000 $3.517,000 $3,511,000" i Northwest Norm Corydon River 5/h 1.46 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.839.OW $2352.000 $0 $0 $0 $184,01)) $460.O00 $417.000 $5254,000 $5254,O00 NMhwest Norco Hamner Santa And River Hidden Valley 3.05 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $3,834AW $4,903.000 $0 $0 $0 $383.0W Vsir 00 $874,000 $10,95310W $10,953,000 NWMxest Norco Hidden Valley 1-15 Norco Hills 1.52 4 4 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Norco Haden Vale, Hamner I-15 0.13 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 Northwest Norco Norco Corydon Hamner 1.20 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.511.000 $1.932000 $0 $0 $0 $151.000 $328AW $344.00) $4.316,000 $4,316,000 Northwest Norco North California Arlington - 0.81 4 4 a 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Nam River AnchDdtl Corydon 1.14 2 4 2 m 1 2 0 0 0 $1.432000 $1,831.O00 $0 $0 $0 $14&000 $30,O01) $326.OW $4,090.000 $2328.000 49 2009 Network Costs Adopted October 5, 2009 H-1 TUMF Network Nadu,rest Riverside IIt Maket Main DOS 4 4 0 0% 1 1 a 0 0 $0 so, $0 $0 $0 s0 $o so $0 $0 Nathwest Riverside Ind Cnpago 1-215 0.36 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $a $0 Northwest Riverside Adams SRAI Arfngtan 1.56 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Nodhwed Rive¢de Adams SRAI Llncoin 0.54 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8.480.000 $848,000 $2,120,000 $848,O00 $12,296,000 $12,296,000 Northwest Riverside Buena Vet. Santa Ana River Redwood 0.30 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Riverside Canyon Crest Central Counts Club 0.59 4 4 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMfnvest Riverside Canyon Crem Country Club Ma Vista 0.94 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 a $1.433.00o $446,000 $0 so $0 $143,M $358.000 $188Aa0 $2,568.000 $1.854.000 NM1mwest Riverside Canyon Crest Via Vista Alessandro 0.68 4 4 0 a% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest Martin Luther Keg Centel D.S 4 4 0 0% 2 2 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $a Northwest Riverside Central Chicago 1-215/SR40 2.15 4 4 0 09= 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwesf Riverside Central SR-91 Mognorw 0.76 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $9541000 $1,=.00a $0 $0 $0 $95,000 $239.000 $217,000 $2,725,000 $2.925.000 NMM1west Riverside Central At ... nd. SR-91 205 4 4 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $a $0 Northwest Riverside Central Van Buren Magnolia 3.53 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Norlbwest Riverside Chicago Akaando Spruce 3.42 4 4 o 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Chicago Spruce Columbia O.75 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18mawo $1.820A00 $4.550.000 $1,820,000 $26.390.000 $26.390,000 Northwest Riverside Columbia Main Iowa 1.09 4 4 a 0% 1 2 3 0 2 $0 $0 $10,890,000 $0 $8A80,000 $1,937.00 $4.843,000 $1,937,000 $28,087.000 $28.0B7.000 Northwest Riverside low. Center 3d 2.25 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $2.823.000 $3.609.000 $0 $0 $12.720.O00 $1,554.00a $3.886.000 $1,915.000 $26.507.000 $26.509.000 NMM1wed Riverside Iowa SO University 0.51 4 4 0 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside JFK Trautwem Wood La 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 s0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside La Siena AlfrgUm SRAI 3.56 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside to Siena SR41 Indana 0.19 4 4 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a Northwest Riverside La Siena Indiana Victoria 0.98 4 4 0 OR 1 2 0 0 0 $0 s0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Riversitle Lemon (NO One way) Mission Inn University 0.06 3 3 a 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMM1west Riverside Lincoln Ad.. YVbLJpgt.m 1.55 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Lincoln Van BUTen Adams 1.54 4 4 0 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMM1west Riverside Lincoln W.mingiam VioiMa 1.43 2 4 2 0% i 2 0 0 a $1.n9.00g $2299.000 $0 $0 $0 $180,000 $449.000 $409.000 $5,132.000 $5.132000 Northwest Rierside Lincoln Vatona Arington 0.28 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Madison SRAI Victoria 0.86 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8A80,000 $849.000 $2,120,000 $848,000 $12,296,000 $12.296.000 Northwest Riverside Magma BNSF RR In Siena 3.09 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 s0 $S.48D.a00 $848.000 $2.1m.wo $848.000 $12296.000 $12.296,000 NMfnved Riverside Magnolia La Sieve Homson 2.90 6 6 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 f0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMM1west Riverside Magnolia Hanson 141h 5.98 4 4 0 0% 1 2 a a 2 $0 $0 $0 s0 $B,4BO.00O $848,000 $2.120.000 $848,000 $12.06.000 $12296.000 Northwest Riverside Main 1st San Bernardino County 2.19 4 4 a a% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Riverside Market 14th Santa Ana River 203 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Martin Luther ling 14M 1-215/SR30 2.11 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $2.651.000 $3.390.000 $0 $a s0 $265.000 $663.000 $604.000 $7.573.000 $6,890,000 NMhwest Riverside Mission inn Redwood Lemon 0.99 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 a $0 $0 W $0 $o $0 $0 TO $0 $0 NMhwest Riverside Overlook S.rdtroak Alessandro 0.32 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMM1west Riverside Overlook Washington Bcdewir Ma Monkcito 0.56 4 4 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside OvMook 8adewin/Vw Montecifo Crystal Viaw 0.81 2 4 2 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $1.231.000 $1.298.000 $0 s0 $0 $123.000 $308.000 $253.000 $3.213.000 $3,213,000 Northwest Riverside OVerook Crystal View Via Vista 0.55 0 4 4 0% 2 2 0 500 0 $1.694,000 $1,969,000 $0 $5.760.000 $0 $943.000 $1,859.000 $920,000 $12,723,000 $12,723,000 Northwest Riverside Overook Va Vita Sandtack 060 2 4 2 0% 2 2 a 0 0 $959.00a $1.012.000 $0 $0 $0 $96.000 1240.000 $199Aa0 $2504.000 $2.504.000 NMhwest Riversitle Redwaad SO One wpyl Mbsionlnn University 0.08 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside TrauMein Alessan&. Van Buren 2.19 4 4 a 0% 2 2 a a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Tyler SR-91 Magn.fa 0.43 6 6 0 a% 1 2 2 0 0 $0 $0 $22,280,000 $0 $0 $2.228.000 $5.570.000 $2.228.000 $32.306,000 $32.306,000 Northwest Riversitle Tyler Magrolo Hole 0.29 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Riverside Tyler Hole Woos 1.06 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Tyler Welts Adngfan 1.35 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 a $1,698,000 $2.191.000 $0 $0 $0 $1I0A00 $425,000 $38I.000 $4,851,000 $4,851.000 Northwest Riverside University Redwood SRAI 0.86 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $n $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Riverside University SR-91 1-215/SR-60 2.01 4 4 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $a $a $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 northwest Riverside Victoria Madeon Washington a.52 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Washngton Victor. Hermosa 2.06 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $2,581.000 $3,300.000 $0 $0 $0 $258.000 $645.000 $5s%000 $9.392a00 $1,372,000 NMhwest Riverside Wood JFK Van Buren 0.90 2 4 2 501% 1 3 a a 0 $44a.000 $166,000 $0 $0 $0 $44,000 $110.000 $61,000 $821,000 $821.Oo0 Northwest Riversitle Wood Van Buren Bergomont 0.11 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Wood Bergamont Krameno 0.39 2 4 2 60% 1 3 0 0 0 $1951000 $94.000 $0 $0 s0 $20,000 $49,000 $27,000 $365Aa0 $365.O110 Northeast Unincoporated Archibad San Bernardino County RMer 3.0 2 4 2 67% 1 3 0 1.200 0 $1.981000 $655,000 $0 $6,912.O00 $a $865.000 $2.162.000 $930.000 $13.258.000 $9336,000 NMM1west Unincorpoated Armstrong Son Bemardno County Valley 7.53 2 4 2 4M 2 3 0 0 0 $969,Oo0 $239.000 $0 $0 $0 $27,000 $192,000 $101A00 $1,376.000 $1.169.DOa NMM1west Unincorporated Befgnove CantuGMeono Ranch Van Buren 0.0 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $362000 $136.000 $0 $0 $0 $36.O0a $91.000 $50.000 $675,000 $609,000 Northwest Urimcarporated Conno alkano Ranch Hamner Winevile 0.94 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 a $0 W $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Unincorporated ContuGalkano Ranch Wnevile Belgrave L82 0 4 4 20% 1 3 0 0 0 $3.657.000 $1.380.000 $0 $0 $0 $366.000 $914.000 $504,000 $6.821.000 $6821,000 Northwest Unincorpaoted Dos Lagos (Wettk) Temescal Canyon 1-15 0.21 4 4 a 0% 1 3 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $a s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwesf Unincorporated 0Contra 1-13 Ontario 0.56 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $699.000 $264.000 $0 $0 $0 $70.000 $I75.000 $96.000 $1.304,000 $1,304.000 NMhwest Unincopoated Eltwanda San Bemard. County SR40 Lot) 6 6 0 a% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Uninco posted Etwordo SRC timonNe 3.00 4 4 0 a% 1 3 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TO $0 $0 NMhwest Unincorporated Hamner Belgrave AmberM1ll 0.42 4 6 2 a% 1 3 0 a 0 $522000 $199,000 $0 $0 $0 $52.000 $131,000 $92,000 $9I4,000 $974.000 NMhwest Unecaporated Hamner AmberhT ❑monite 0.49 2 6 4 0% 1 3 a a 0 $1,234,000 $466.000 $0 $0 $0 Slam $309.000 $170'Wo $2302000 $1.850.000 Northwest Unincorpoated Hamner Limardte Schl.4man 1.00 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.251,000 $472,001) $a $0 $0 $125.000 $313,000 $192000 $2,333,000 $2,333,000 Northwest Unincaryarated Hamner SCM1lecmorr Santa Anna River 1.29 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 1.200 0 $323O000 $1119.000 $0 $13,624,000 $0 $1,905AOa $4,264A00 $1.827.000 $26.069.000 $25.696.000 Northwest Unincorporated Hamner Motors Belgrave 1.11 2 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.393.000 $526,000 $0 $0 $0 $139.000 $348.000 $192.000 $2598.000 $2,559.000 NMM1west Unincorporated Haney John Wasnmgtan Scottsdale 0.12 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Had, John Scottsdale Catalco 1.19 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1A92000 $563.000 $0 $0 $0 $149.000 $393.000 $206A00 $2.983,000 $2,983,OOa Northwest Unmaorpvrated La Ske. Vpfara El Sobrante 2.22 4 4 a 0% 2 3 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $o $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Lo Siena 8Sothmate Cajako 2.36 2 2 0 ON 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Unincoparated limonite ArchIDdd Hamner 1.99 4 6 2 0% 1 3 a 0 a $2,505,00o) $9"J" $0 $0 $0 $251,M $626,000 $345A00 $4,693,000 $4.393.000 Northwest Unincarparated Limortfe Hamner 1-15 0.62 4 6 2 a% 1 3 3 0 0 $995.000 4292000 $I0.890100a $0 $0 $1.167.000 $2.916.000 $1,196.000 $19.236.000 $16.754.000 Northwest Unncopoated Limonite 1-15 Wnevile 0.40 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 Nodimmat Unincorporated Umonite Vf ®e Efwanda a.99 3 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NorOrwest Unincorporated Limonite ENVanda Von Buren In 2 6 4 0% 1 3 a a 0 $6,82= $2599.000 $0 $0 $0 $6B3.0aa $1,909,000 $941,000 $12,737,000 $9,299.000 Northwest UnFcwpaated Limonite Van Buren Clay 0." 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $995.000 $396.ro0 $0 $0 $0 $100.000 $249.000 $139.00o $1,857,000 $1,857,000 NMhwest Unincorporated Limonite Clay Riverview 2.45 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Unincorporated Market Rubio.. Santa MO River 1.94 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 1.000 0 $2192000 $827,000 $0 $5.960.000 $0 $I95.000 $11988.000 $878.000 $12440,000 $11,753.00 NMhwest Unincorporated Melon Mmisen SR40 1.61 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a Northwest Unincaponoted Mission SR-60 Santa Ana River 9.39 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 LOGO 0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Unincorporated Mockirgbird Canyon Von Brien Calaico 4.34 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 a $6.601,000 $2055.004) $0 $0 $0 $660,000 $1.650Aa0 $866,000 $11.831.000 $11,576.000 NMhwest Unincorporated Riverview limonite Mission 0.95 4 4 a 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMlswesl Unmcorpwated Rubidorn San Bemadino County Mission 2.65 4 4 0 0% 2 3 3 0 a $0 $0 $10.890.000 $0 $0 $1,09,000 $2.923000 $110891080 $15,991,000 $15,991.000 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Ontario Tuscany 0.65 2 4 2 20% 2 3 0 0 0 $989.000 $245AOo $0 $0 $0 $99A00 $199.000 $103,000 $1,411,000 $1,41 LOOa NMM1west Unincorporated TemescalConyon Tuscany Oa Lagos 0.91 4 4 0 o% 2 3 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Dos Lagos Leroy 1.10 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $1.6wcoo $523AOa $0 $0 $0 $I68.O00 $420.000 $220.000 $3.011.000 $3.01 LOW Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Leroy Does. Canyon 1.89 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $2.13m,aaa sB94.000 $0 $0 $0 $289.000 $918,000 $396.000 $5.145.000 $5.145.000 Northwest Unincaryorated Temenod Canyon Dawson Carryon 1-15 0.0 4 4 0 0% 2 3 3 0 0 $0 $0 $10.89Oo00 $0 $0 $1.089.000 $2.923.000 $1.089.000 $16,Nl,000 $15,791,000 NMhwest UnhcMpaated Tem..l Canyon H5 Pork Canyon 3.41 2 4 2 0% 3 3 0 0 0 $6.098.O00 $1.615.000 $0 $0 $0 $610.00 $1.525.000 $991.000 $10.619.000 $10.619,000 Northeast Unincorporated Temescol Canyon Pak Carryon Indan Tuck Liao 255 2 4 2 05E 2 3 0 0 0 $3,892.000 $1,20I,000 $0 $0 $0 $388.000 $969,000 $5m,m $6,949,000 $6,949,000 Northwest Unincorporated Valley Armstrong Mission 0.48 4 4 a 0% 1 3 0 0 a $0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 "M 2009 Network Costs Adopted October 5, 2009 Prickly Gould..1n Bold) Narihwest Unincorporated Woad kramena Cojako 2.99 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $3J52,000 $1,416,01M $0 $0 $0 $3I5.000 $938.oW $51ZWO $6,998,000 $6.998,000 Pass Banning Blh Wilson 1-10 0.54 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ross Banning Highland Springs Oak Valley (14th) Wilson lath) O.73 2 4 2 O% 1 2 0 0 0 $922.OW $1.1I9,0W $0 $0 $0 $92.000 $231.W0 $210,000 $2,634,000 $1,317.000 Ross Banning Highkmd Springs Cherry Valley Oak Volley 116M) 1.53 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,927.000 $2.464.000 $0 $0 $0 $193W0 $482.000 $439,000 $5,505.000 $2]53.000 Pea Banning 1-108ypes South 1-10 Apache ira3 3.29 0 2 2 0% 1 2 3 3W 0 $4,12I,W0 $5,227,000 $10,8901000 $1,728,000 $0 $1.695.WD $4.166,OW $2=20W $30,085,000 $30.085.000 Pass Banning Lincoln Sunset SR-243 2.01 2 2 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Banning Romsey 1-10 Wistm (81h) 1.90 2 2 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Banning Ramsey "an (ath) Highland Springs 3.55 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 j0 $0 $0 $0 $0 W $0 $0 Pass Banning SR-243 410 Wesley 0.62 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 j0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Banning Sun Lakes Highland Home Sunset 1.W 0 4 4 0% 1 2 0 200 0 $2,512,OW A.212,000 $0 $2,304.000 $0 $482.000 $1,204,000 $803,0DD $10.517.OW $10.517.000 Pass Banning Sun Lakes Highland Springs HlghbM Home 1.33 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 40 40 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pan Banning Sunset Ramsey Lincoln 0.28 2 4 2 0% 1 2 3 0 1 $355,OW $454,000 $10.890.WO $0 $18200.W0 $2.945,WC $9,361.Wa $2.990.000 $43.195.000 W.195.000 Pass Banning Wilson(8M) Highland Noma Wilson 181h) 2.51 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 40 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Banning WBson (ath) Hghl.nd Springs Highland Home 1.01 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.265.0(0 $1.618.0W $0 $0 $0 $129,01M $316.000 $2N.M $3,614,000 $3.614,001) Pass Beaumont 1st Vlele Pennsylvania 1.28 2 4 2 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.6120W $2.062,OW $0 $0 $0 $161.000 $403,000 $369A00 $4.605.000 $0 Ross Beaumont 1st Penmylvania Highland Springs 1.10 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 10 $0 W $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont 6M 1-10 Highkrcl Sprngs 2.24 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Desert Lawn Champions Oak Valley (SfC) 0.99 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a E1,239.000 $467,00D $0 $0 $0 $124,000 $310,000 $171.W0 $2,311,000 $0 Pass Beaumont Highland Songs Wis. IBM) Sun Lakes O.76 4 6 2 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $957.OW $1.223.000 $10.89D.000 $0 $0 $1.185.000 42,962, 00 $1,307,000 $16.524.000 $19.15a= Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (14th) Highland Springs Pennsylvania 1.13 4 4 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ;0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (I 4th) Pen.'k,.n s Oak View 1.4p 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 Pea Beaumont Oak Valley (14th) Oak View 1-10 0.65 3 6 3 0% 1 2 3 100 0 $1,22400 $1,565,000 $10,690.0W $864,000 $0 $1.298,000 $3245A00 $1,454.0W $20,540,000 $D Ross Beaumont Oak Valley (SIC) Beaumont City Limits Cherry Valley 1J St / Central Over 3.46 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 a $0 $0 j0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ea $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley lS3C) Cherry Valley lJ St Central Over PI 1.69 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2,092,000 $990,OW j0 $0 $0 $209=0 $523.0W $288,000 $3,902.000 10 Pau Beaumont Penmylyani. 6th 1st 0.53 2 2 0 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $0 $0 $10,890,000 $0 $0 $1.089.000 $2,723.000 $l.OB9,D00 $15,791,000 $0 Pass Beaumont VI.I. 4th 10 0.31 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $391.000 $499A00 $0 $0 $0 $39,000 $98.00 $89,000 $1.116,000 $0 Pass Beaumont Viol. 6M 4th 0.50 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 1 $03.000 $909,WO $0 $0 $1B20a,000 $I.B83.W0 $4,908.OW $1,964= $28,19I,000 $0 Pass Calimesa Bryant County tine Singletom 0.38 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $n $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass CalBneso C.Bmesa County Line 1-10 0.80 4 4 0 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $0 $0 $ffi280,000 $0 $0 $2.228A00 $5,570AW $2,228,000 $32.306,OW $32306.W0 Pan Car c- Cherry Valley Roberts Palmer 0.50 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $624.000 $235.W0 $0 $0 $0 $62,000 $156.000 $86.000 $1,163W0 $0 Pass C.fimesa County Line 1-10 Bryant 1.74 2 4 1 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $1.105.Wo $1.413.000 $10.890.WO $0 $0 j1.2W.W0 $2.999.OW $1.341,000 $18.948.000 $18.94B.000 Pass Calimesa Desert Lawn Cherry Valley CMmoions 1.61 2 4 2 0% 1 3 a 0 0 $2018,M $961AW $0 $0 $0 $202,000 $505.000 $278,000 $3,I64.W0 $3264,OW Pass Calimesa Singleton Bryant Condit 1.86 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $5,668.M $1.965AW $0 $0 $0 $567.000 E1,41TWO $943,0) $10.160.0m $10,160.000 Pass Calimesa Singleton Condit Roberts 0.85 2 4 2 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $1,068W0 $1,3660W $22,280,000 $0 $0 $2.335.000 $5,832000 $2,471,000 $35,352.OW $35.352,OW Pass Unincorporated Cherry Valley Highland Springs Noble 0.95 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2.392.000 $903.000 40 j0 $0 $239.OW $598,000 $3W.OW $4,462WC $4,4620W Pass Unincorporated Cherry Valley Noble Desert Lawn 3A0 2 4 2 0% 1 3 2 WO 0 $4,265,000 $1,610,000 $2226D.OW $1.128.W0 $0 $2.827.000 $9.068,W0 $2988,000 $42,766,000 $42.I66.000 Pass Unincorporated two Oak Canyon Oak Voley ISrC) San Bemardino County 2.83 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Unincorporated Oak Valley l$fCI San Bemardino County Beaumont City Limas 5.65 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9.10D.000 $910,000 $2,275,00 $910A00 $13,195,000 $13.195.0m San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Acacia Menlo 0.98 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ea $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Domenigonf Stetson JAB 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 300 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $0 $D $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sar... n RR Croats, Acacia 0.42 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Stetson RR Crossing 0,58 4 4 0 07. 1 2 0 0 0 $0 40 $0 $0 j0 $0 $0 $0 j0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Menlo Esplonede I.W 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,255,W0 $1,605,0W $0 $0 $0 $126." $314,OW $286000 $3,586,000 $1,789.0W San Jacinto Hemet SR-74 Warren Cawston IA2 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 jo $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet SR-74(florid.) Columbia Raman. 2.58 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet SR-74/5R-79 (Honda) Cawdon Columbia 4.03 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 40 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Dornengoni Chambers 1.31 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Chambers Stetson 0.51 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 a $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Hand. Esplanade 1.94 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 j0 San Jacinto Hemet State Stetson fkrio. 1.25 2 4 2 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $1,565.W0 $4.192,001) $0 $0 $0 $157.000 $391.000 $576,000 $6,881,000 $4,936,OW San Jacinto Hemet Stetson Cwnton State 2.52 4 4 a 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Son Jacinto Hemet Stetson Warren Caweton 1.00 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,255,M $473,000 $0 $0 $0 $126.000 $314.000 $173,000 $2.341,000 $2,341,000 San Jacinto Hemet Women Esplanade Domenigonf 4.99 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 S00 0 $6.267.W0 $2365AW $0 $1.728.000 $0 $800,000 $1.999.OW 41.036.000 $14.195,000 $13,396W0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade Ramona Mountain 0.20 0 4 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $W2,000 $6420W $0 $o $0 $50.000 $126,000 $114,00D $1,434,000 $1, A4.000 San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplonode Mountain Stale 2.55 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade State Women 3.53 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $4,437.000 $1.674.GW $0 $0 $0 $444,W0 $I.1w,OW $611,000 $B.295,WO $8.275.000 San Jacinto Son Jacinto Sanderson Ramona Esplanade 3.55 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $4A55.000 j1,681.aW $0 $0 $0 $446.000 $1.114.000 $614.000 $8.310A00 $4,162.000 San Jacinto Son Jacinto SR-99 lNarth Ramona) State San Jacinto 1.02 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto SR-29 (San Jacinto) JM SR -A 2.25 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto SR-99 (San Jacinto) North Ramona Blvd )M 0.25 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $310.01M $396.Wo $0 $0 $0 $31.000 $18,00D $11,000 $886.000 $686.WD Son Jacinto San Jacinto State Ramona Esplanade 1.99 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto State Street Gilman Springs Quandt Ranch 0.76 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 SW 0 $955AW $368000 $0 $MBO,WO $0 $384,13M $959,000 $4280W $5,958.WC $5.348.000 San Jacinto San Jacinto State Street Ouandt Ranch Ramona 0.70 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Warren Ramona 6planade 3.47 2 4 2 0% 1 3 D 0 0 $4.359.000 31.645.OW $0 10 $0 $436,0W $1.090.W0 bdW,DOD $8.1W.W0 E8.13D.000 San Jacinto Unincorporated Gilman Sptngs SaMeaon Stale 2.54 2 4 2 W. 1 3 0 1W 0 $3,196,00i $11206,01M $0 $576,000 $0 $3I2.OW Sm.= $498,M $6J9600 $4,733,000 San Jacinto Unincarponted SR-79(Winchester) SR-74IfbMa) Domenigonf 3.23 2 2 0 0% 1 3 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $o Bon 2009 Network Costs Adopted October 5, 2009 Detailed Cost Estimate (RCTChloMyCoalition InSold) Southwest Lake EBeore Grand Lincoln Ton I 4 4 0 05 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Lake&more Grand Toff SR-741Riyeside) 0.86 2 4 2 40% 1 3 0 0 0 $646.000 $244.000 $0 $0 $0 $65,000 $162.000 $89A00 $1206,000 $1,206.000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Lake 1F15 Lincoln 330 2 4 2 25% 2 3 3 0 0 13,543,000 $1,103,000 $10,8901000 $0 $0 $1.443,000 $3,608.000 $1,554,000 $2Z141.000 $20.582000 Southwest Lake Elsinore Mission Railroad Canyon Bundy Canyon 2.39 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Lake Elsinore SR-741ColrouRiveidel PIS Lakeshom 11u 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $5278.000 $6,749.000 $0 $0 $0 $528,000 $1.320,000 $1,203,000 $15.028.000 $11,647.000 Southwest Lake Elsinore SR-94 [Grand) Riverside SR-74 (Odegal 0.64 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,599.00D $2,04 ,000 $0 $0 $0 $160.00D $400,000 $364,W0 $4.567,000 $3,937.000 Southwest Lake Min. SR-741RNemde) Lakeshore Grand 1.74 2 6 4 10% 1 2 0 0 0 $3,925.000 $5.019.00 $0 $0 $0 $393,000 $981.000 $894,000 $11.212,000 $10,949,000 Southwest Mumeta California (lake Jefferson FIS 0.32 4 6 2 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $398,000 $509A00 $2312801000 $0 $0 $1268A00 $5,690,000 $2,319.000 $33.444.000 $33.444.000 Southwest Munieto California Gars LI5 Clinton Keith 126 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 40 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Mumefa Jefferson Muni Hat Springs Chevy 126 6 6 0 f 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Mumeta Jefferson Palomar Nutmeg 1.02 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2.561000 $962,000 $0 $0 $0 $256.000 $641,000 $353,000 $4JI9,000 $4,929,000 Southwest Murrieta Jefferson Nutmeg Muriel. Hot Slam, 2.32 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $5.953.000 $9.611000 $0 $0 $0 $595,000 $1.468.000 $1.359.OW $12,005,000 $16,105,000 Southwest Munieta Las Alamos J.ff a.n 1-15 0.38 2 4 2 05 1 2 0 350 0 $472,000 $60300 $0 $10161000 $0 $249.000 $622,000 $309,000 $4,271,000 $4,271.000 Southwest Mvmet. Los Alamos F15 1,215 1.39 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $I,751.000 $1239.000 $0 $0 $0 $II5.M $438,000 $399,000 $5001000 $4,I92,000 Southwest MUmeta Muerieta Hot Springs 1-415 Mangano. 1.48 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Muniela Musnata Hot Springs Jefferson 1,215 1.11 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest MUmeta Mumieto Hot Spings Margarita SR-99(Ma.1hosteO 1.01 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.266.000 $418.000 $0 $0 $0 $127,000 $317.00D $174.000 $2,36100D $1.448.000 Southwest Mumeta Nutmeg Jefferson Clinton Keith 1.92 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 SO $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Murrieto Whilewood Clinton Keith Las Alamos 101 4 4 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Jefferson Cherry Rancho California 129 4 4 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Margarita Mumieto Hot Springs SR-79 (Temecula) 2.39 4 4 a 0% 1 3 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Cie Town Front Rancho California 1-15/SR-99 1.45 4 4 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 W $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Pechongo SR-79(Temecula) Via Glo.do 1.32 6 6 0 0% I 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Pechanga Yw Gilberto Pechanga Road 1.44 4 4 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SD $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Rancho California Jefferson Marganta 189 4 6 2 60% 1 1 3 0 0 $949,000 $2.541.000 $10,890.000 $0 $0 $1,184.000 $2,960,000 $1,438,000 $199621000 $18.384.000 Southwest Temecula Rancho CalBomia Margarita Butterfield Stage 1.96 4 6 2 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $2,461.000 $6,593.000 $0 $0 $0 $246.000 $616.000 $905=0 $10,818,000 $10,818,La0 Southwest Temecula SR-791Temecula) 1-15 Pechanga 0.64 6 8 2 O% 1 3 0 0 0 $BOSAW $304A00 $0 $0 $0 $81.000 $201,Oo0 $111,000 $1.502,000 $123,000 Southwest Temecula SR-29(Temecula) Pechanga Road Butterfield Stage 108 6 6 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Moamar Baxter 415 Pabmar 0.39 2 4 2 0% 1 3 3 0 0 $463.000 $175A00 $10.890.000 $0 $0 $1,135,000 $28M= $1,I53,000 $16.6m000 $16,654,000 Southwest W, do., Bundy Canyon Micron HS 0.94 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $I.175,000 $1.503,000 $0 $0 $0 $118.00D $294.000 $268,000 $3,358,030 $3.358,000 Southwest Wldomar Central Border Palomar O.74 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $925.000 $1,181000 $0 $0 $0 $93,000 $231.000 $211A00 $2.642,000 $2,642,000 Southwest Wldomar Mission Burbly Canyon Palomar 0.84 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest wildomar Palomar Clinton Keith Jefferson 0.24 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $924.000 $349.000 $D $0 $0 $92.000 $231.000 $127AD $1.223,000 $1,723.000 Southwest Wikomar Palomar stolen Clinton Keith 2.79 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $3,503.000 $3.322.000 $0 $0 $0 $350,M $876,000 $483,000 $6.534000 $6,534.000 Southwest Unincorporated Briggs Scott SR-N(Winchester) 3.39 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $4260.000 $1.ecag00 $0 $0 $o $426,W0 $1.065.WO $587.000 $7.94600 $7,946,000 Southwest Unincorporated Butterfield Stage Murneta Hat Springs Rancho CaTriamia 1.78 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 650 0 $5.427.000 $1.690.000 $0 $2.488.000 $0 $1,292,000 $3,229A00 $1,461.000 $20.587,000 $20.587.000 Southwest Unincorporated Sufferliek Stage Rancho C.1torri SR-29(Temecula] 2.30 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $3,493,000 $1.0881000 $0 So $0 $349.000 $873,000 $458,000 $6,263,000 $6,261.000 Southwest Unincorporated Butterfield Stage SR-29(Wiinchester) Auk) 128 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $3.420.000 $1.081.000 $0 $0 $0 $347,000 $868,00D $455,000 $6.m.000 $6,221,000 Southwest Unincorporated BuHer0ek Stage Auk Murrieto Hot Sam, 2.23 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 450 0 $6,788,000 $1114,000 $0 $5.184.000 $o $1,197,000 $2.993,000 $1.4m000 $19685,000 $19,685.000 Southwest Unincorparated Central Grand Palomm 0.51 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $642.000 $821.000 $0 $0 $0 $64,000 $161.000 $146AW $1,834,000 $1.04,000 Southwest Unincorporated Grand CO.,. Central 6.98 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $8,I70,000 $11,214,000 $O $0 $0 $877.000 $2.193,000 $1,998,000 $25,052,000 $25,052,000 Southwest Unincorporated Horsethief Carryon Temesaal Canyon I-15 0.12 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $211000 $W.000 $0 $0 $o $21.000 $53.000 $29.000 $395.000 $395.O30 Southwest Unincorporated Indian Truck Trall TemescalCanyon 1-15 0.18 2 6 4 0% 1 3 3 0 0 $4 goo $166.000 $10.890,WO $0 $o $1,133.Wo $2,833,000 $1,150,000 $16,612,000 $16.612,000 Southwest Unincorporated Mumetu Hot Springs SR-79(Winchester) PaunW 1.75 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated Pala Pechongo Son Diego County 138 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TnmA Administration MSHCP Taw $ 166,945A00 $ 61.826.000 $ 107,916d20 $ 10I,916,420 E 62,362,000 $ 59,959,000 $4,261,117A20 $ 3,765,089A00 B.S TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION. FEE NEXUS STUDY 2009 UPDATE ADDENDUM 1 TEMPORARY FEE REDUCTION Prepared for The Western Riverside Council of Governments In Cooperation with The City of Banning The City of Beaumont The City of Calimesa The City of Canyon Lake The City of Corona The City of Hemet The City of Lake Elsinore The City of Menifee The City of Moreno Valley The City of Murrieta The City of Norco The City of Perris The City of Riverside The City of San Jacinto The City of Temecula The City of Wildomar The County of Riverside Eastern Municipal Water District March Joint Powers Authority Western Municipal Water District Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff. Adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee October 5, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................'......... Al-1.0 BACKGROUND ..................................... Al-2.0 TUMF NEXUS IMPLICATIONS ................ Al-2.1 Maximum Eligible TUMF Share....... Al-2.2 TUMF Program Revenue Shortfall. A1-3.0 APPENDICES ......................................... LIST OF TABLES Table Al-2.1 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates - 50% ADJUSTED ........................ Table A 1-2.2 - TUMF Schedule of Fees - 50% ADJUSTED ................................... LIST OF FIGURES Figure Al-1.1 -Total Building Permit Valuation in the Inland Empire ........... .. 6 12 WRCOG I Addendum 1 -Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Al-1.0 BACKGROUND The July 2609 Inland Empire Quarterly Economic Report' indicates that "in 2009, the Inland Empire is facing its most serious economic challenge since the 1930s." According to the report, the area lost 48,650 jobs in 2008 with a further loss of 82,600 jobs forecast in 2009. The report attributes the loss of jobs to declines in the construction, logistics and manufacturing sectors as well the region's population -serving activities. Specifically addressing the construction sector, the report states "in 2005, the Inland Empire's developers received $12.5 billion in construction permits.... With the residential, retail, industrial and office sectors under enormous pressure, 2009 will see just $1.9 billion in permits issued (based on first quarter 2009). That means a drop of $10.6 billion (- 84.7%) in funds entering the region. Of this drop, $8.3 billion was lost by residential builders and $2.3 billion by non-residential developers. The result is an estimated $21.2 billion reduction in the area's economic activity. As a result, construction employment has fallen 49.0%from a peak of 127,500 in 2006 to 67,100 in 2009." Figure At-1.1 -Total Building Permit Valuation in the Inland Empire ' John E. Husing, Ph.D., Inland Emoire Quarterly Economic Reoorf Riverside and San Bernardino Counties California Volume 21 Number 3, July 2009 (http://www.wrcog.cog.ca.us/downloods/QER20July2OO9WRCOG.pdf) WRCOG t Addendum 1 -Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Figure' A11-1.1 clearly illustrates the impact of the economic recession on the construction sector in the Inland Empire, including Western Riverside County. The significant declines in the Total Building Permit Valuation in the Inland Empire observed since 2005 is evident with the forecast valuation for 2009 at the lowest level in two decades. The Inland Empire Quarterly Economic Report indicates that since "the residential construction depression has been the primary cause of the Inland Empire's deep downturn, that sector's re-emergence will be a key to recovery." The report indicates that housing "demand has returned to its mid-2002 volume, and price appears to be stabilizing near its first quarter 2002 level. However, roughly 70% of home sales are foreclosures." The report goes on to indicate that "the foreclosure supply will thus likely prevent home prices from rising to a level where residential construction can reemerge for several years. Given that construction labor and material costs have fallen, this time period will be shortened only if governmental fees, lot sizes and house sizes can be reduced. Recognizing the significance of the current economic recession to Western Riverside County, business, community and government leaders established the Riverside Economic Development Red Team in 2008. The Red Team recommended three goals critical to recovery of the regional economy. These goals included "reduce the cost of building new homes so that the new home building industry can put people back to work." In response to the Red Team recommendations, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors at the meeting on July 21, 2009 acted to reduce its local development impact fees (DIF) by 50%. As part of its action, the Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution encouraging the WRCOG Executive Committee to similarly consider a temporary TUMF reduction. A copy of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors July 21, 2009 action including the ordinance amendment and resolution to the WRCOG Executive Committee is included as Appendix Al -A to this Addendum. Consistent with the Red Team recommendation and the Riverside County Board of Supervisors July 21, 2009 action, almost one-third of the WRCOG jurisdictions have reduced development impact fees in the past year with others considering the matter over the next few months. Following the action by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, the Riverside Economic Development Red Team forwarded a letter to the WRCOG Executive Director reiterating the recommended goals and highlighting the actions of local jurisdictions to "create jobs and jump-start the economy by deferring and/or reducing construction fees." A copy of the letter from the Riverside Economic Development Red Team dated August 24, 2009 is included as Appendix Al -B to this Addendum. At the meeting on September 14, 2009, the WRCOG Executive Committee considered a temporary reduction of the TUMF. The WRCOG Executive Committee "supported the Red Team recommendation and Board of Supervisors' request for a temporary 50% TUMF reduction for a one-year period, to be ratified at the next meeting." The WRCOG WRCOG 2 Addendum 1 - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Executive Committee in taking this action cited the importance of creating jobs in Western Riverside County by stimulating the housing market through lower fees. At the meeting on October 5, 2009, the WRCOG Executive Committee ratified the previous action to "authorize a temporary 50% reduction in the current TUMF for one year commencing immediately and ending December 31, 2010." The WRCOG Executive Committee further resolved that "the reduced TUMF applies to new building permits associated with new development projects. If reduced fees are paid at the time application is made for a building permit and either the application or the building permit expires, subsequent building permit applications on the same parcel shall be subject to the full TUMF amount, unless the temporary fee reduction is still in effect at the time of the subsequent. No provision of the temporary TUMF reduction shall entitle any person who has already paid TUMF to receive a refund, credit or reimbursement of such payment." WRCOG 3 Addendum 1 -Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Al-2.0 TUMF NEXUS IMPLICATIONS The action of the WRCOG Executive Committee to temporarily reduce TUMF proportionally reduces the fees paid by each new development to mitigate its impact on the regional transportation system. Since the transportation impact of a particular development is a constant from the perspective of the Program, a reduction in the fees paid by the development means that the development is no longer contributing a fair share of the total cost to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development on the regional transportation system based on the TUMF Program Nexus Study. As a result, the entire program basis must be adjusted accordingly to ensure that each development continues to contribute a fair share of the total Program costs without unduly burdening later projects to make up the TUMF revenues that are effectively forfeited during the temporary reduction period. The program adjustment will be reflected in a commensurate reduction in the maximum TUMF share of the costs for each project in the Program. Subsequently, the TUMF revenues available for programming eligible project activities, including planning, design and construction, along with credits and reimbursements, are also reduced proportionately. In addition to assuring the Program Nexus, these adjustments prevent an imbalance in the TUMF Program revenues that are being programmed from occurring due to the temporary reduction in the share of project costs being collected. In effect, the adjustments ensures an appropriate balance is maintained between the overall fee revenue that is generated at the reduced fee levels compared to the eligible project costs upon which the TUMF is based and the revenues expended. Despite the reduction in the level of the fee, the transportation impact of any new development remains constant and the reduction in fees means that the development is no longer contributing a fair share of the cost to mitigate its impacts. Since the burden to mitigate the impacts of the development cannot be passed on to other developments through the TUMF program, it is necessary for the TUMF revenues that are forfeited during the temporary reduction period to be made up from other sources. The following sections will summarize the adjustments to the TUMF Program Nexus based on the 2009 Program Update Nexus Study. Specifically, the following sections will describe the adjustments to the maximum TUMF share of the various Network and Transit project costs before providing the adjusted Fee Schedule. The following sections will also address the issue of the resultant Program funding shortfall. WRCOG 4 Addendum I -Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Al-2.1 Maximum Eligible TUMF Share The calculation of the TUMF is based on the three basic variables - unit cost assumptions, recommended network improvements, and the change in development. In general, the fee for the TUMF program is calculated based on the following formula: Unit Cost Assumptions x I Recommended Network Improvements = TUMF Change in Residential and Non -Residential Development Applying this formula, unit cost assumptions for the various eligible TUMF project types are used to estimate the overall cost to improve the TUMF Network as described in the TUMF Nexus Study. The resultant maximum eligible network improvement cost (or maximum TUMF share is then divided proportionally between various residential and non-residential development categories such that each new development type contributes its 'fair share' to the program. Any change in one formula variable has a related impact on the overall fee, although it is important to note that the resultant impact to the overall fee is not necessarily directly proportional to the formula variable change due to the intricacies of the fee calculation. In contrast, a discretionary change in the fee (such as the temporary 50% fee reduction) represents a change in the resultant value of this formula. As described previously, this change subsequently needs to be reflected in the basis for the fee in order to maintain the Program Nexus and ensure a balance between fee revenues and eligible expenditures. This change can be reflected by making a commensurate adjustment to the numerator (the maximum TUMF share) in the TUMF equation. Based on the methodology to calculate the maximum TUMF share, this can be accomplished most easily by reducing the unit cost assumptions proportional to the recommended fee reduction. The adjusted unit cost assumptions and resultant adjusted maximum TUMF share will not represent the fair share cost to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the transportation system. The resultant value represents the proportional share of the maximum eligible network improvement cost that will be collected by the Program based on a temporarily reduced fee level. This amount also represents the maximum TUMF share that can be programmed for expenditure on a project. Since administration of the Program is a relatively fixed cost, the Administration multiplier was increased to 5% for the period of the fee reduction to ensure sufficient revenues are generated to administer the Program during this time. Table Al -2.1 presents the adjusted maximum eligible network improvement cost based on the temporary fee reduction. Table Al-2.2 provides the adjusted Schedule of Fees in accordance with the WRCOG Executive Committee action of October 5, 2009. WRCOG 5 Addendum 1- Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Table Al -2.1 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates - 50% ADJUSTED Central Menifee Ethanac Mumeta 1-215 0.90 $9.5,wl0 $9,W9AW Central Men Go ng ong Case Ethanac 2.W $4.010,060 $3.534.0W Cenral M.Hfee Montt. SR-741Pirwcatel Simpson 2.49 $3,751.W0 $3J51,080 Central Menifee Menlfee Holland Canoed I.W $0 $0 Central Menifee Menifee Cnhani Scott I.W $I,17O.WO $I,170.0W Central Menifee Menifee Simpon Altlergate 0." $I.499,0W $I,499.OW Central Menifee Menifee Aldergate Newpod 0.98 $0 $0 Central Monica. Menifee Newport Holland - 1.07 $D $0 Central MenHee Newpod Goetz Modeta 1.81 $11ZJ3.W0 $Lm,= Control MenH<e Newpod Monidv I-215 205 $16.552.= $18,552W0 $13,1MAM 5$1,130,0W Central MenHee 1.215 Moulton 695 $L110,Wo $L086,OW Central Menike sewpOsl ScaH 204 $m,955,OM $$4.266,W0 Central MenHee Srotr Mum Murrteta 1-215 I-215 1.89 $d,552.000 $2,552,000 Central Moreno $RJ6 Matthews Bdggs L89 $2,68.W0 $2,660W0 Central Moreno Valley Alessandro I-2m Pens 3.W $2,660.WO $2,IMM Central Moreno Vale, Alessandro NascnMores 2.W $611M,WO $6,iWAW Central Moreno Valley Alessandro No, Moreno Beach $4.840M Camhal Marano Valley MarenO BeacM1 Mo. Gilman$pdngs 4.13 V.BHJ.OW $4,8d0,WD $9.84..000 Central Moreno Valley' GnmrWm Gilman Springs SRS0Rack Alexandro 1.13 'I.6J $9.856,WD $3.5600W Central Moreno Valley Penis Rechead 2.52 $3,SSO.OiJ $81MI..OW Central Moreno Volley Penis Ironwood Sunnyme Sctus d 0.W $$717 0 $$653,OW Central Moreno Valley Penh Sun,Cactus eatl Cactus _ 2.W $)I)AW Central Mweno Valk, Pen's Harley Knox 3.66 $9A2),aW ,975= $6,9)SAW Central Met, Volley Reche Vlda Rahe Reche Canyon Heacack 1.66 $3,39.W $2549,M0 Central Pens Ilth/Case Penn Caefr }8r)4 0 00 Central Pens Ethanac Keystone Gcefr 22d 2.24 $QWd,000 ,W4, $$626.M Central Pens Ethanac 1-215 Sherman $626,OOD 00 Central Penn, onty Rldw 4.35 4.W $6L152M0 ,159. $$1,159.W0 Central Pens Penn Pens Had Had, Knox Ramona $2.922. 0 $L6960W Central Pens Pems Citrus 2.49 2.d9 $2922.O$0 WITM Cenral Pens Perris Citne Nuevo 11.50 $0 $0 Ceniml penb Penis Nuevo Nuevo Ilih I.75 $4,386.Wp $3,DIOA00 Central Penis Ramona Runs 1.47 $$3,W9,= $S3,039 W Central Pens Ramona Penn Penn, IAND $3,W9,W0 $3,039,000 Contra Penn, Ramona Evans Md., 209 $3,J46,OW Central Penn Ulis 1-215 1215 2.29 16.]M,.W0 $$ZW6.000 $$2,153AW Central UNncorpwated Ethonafil Ethanac Sh.c Keystone L0I $2506,000 $2,506,OW Central Unincoramated EthanGilman Sherman Mdgeewz b13,913,OW $$5420,UOD Central Uni.cacroted Gilman Springs Bridge 4.98 6,98 $6]89.OW $S.W0.000 Central Unimueaorated Menifee Romendo Ramona SRddlPina<ate 6S2 $),636,W0 $),638AW Central Unincmpaated R....nty Bdd,Mae $$1,1361" $$I,IUm Central Unincarymded Roman. War Ritler 0.92 0.9J 0 $1,136AM Central Unlncorporaed Ramona Nco grw 2AW, $26,804,M0 $23,BS1,OM Central Unhunpr Reche Carryon San Bernardino County Roche Roche Vid.M.c 3.35 $10.1am $B.T/1.OW Central aged UKn.aaraletl SroH Diggs (WlnchesMr$ &W $),1220$0 $2122W0 Central SRdd Ethanac ER-19 Ellk 2.68 2.68 $0 Nwihwed Corona Corona Foothill Cantle Lincoln 260 $10.609, -$V.42o,O$D M Ncrh.mt Corona Foothill Unco ❑acorn CalHomia 0.81 $0 $0 $p Nodbwest Corona Foothill a -IS 0.0 $$nll 0 $$W.= Nadhwed Carona Green Nver SR-91 SR-91 OOMn0uei Ranch 0.52 $931,M0 $646,W0 Nodhwad Corona Green Nver uez Ranch n $1.114,O$0 $1,IO1. Northwest Corona Green River P.1%cd Palbades Fea. Pasep Grande 2.21 2.01 $o $0 $0 NMM1west Riverside Alessandro Adingtan $0 $0 Northwest Riverside M.,nTrautvein Magnolia 5.21 5.92 $0 $0 Nodhwezt Rwanda Mutton ma, Magnolia Alessandro 2.02 $IL451,OW $10.313W0 Nadhwed Rlvwslde VairyJbn Van Buren Santa Ana Meer 3.10 $12429,W0 $$ZS98, 0 Nadhwed Riverdtle Van Boren M. Mmbeel. ird Carryon 3.10 $5,353.O$0 $2598,W0 NodMxest Riverside Van Breen Woo Wood Rrauhveln $0 $0 Nadhwesf Mee.WUnTmer Van Buren TouMeln Grta 1.43 1.22 $1,>B2 $1,JSS,O$0 Nwihwesf Unincorporated Alessandro ear Granrace Vista Grande 1.22 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincarparated Alessandro Vista Vista Ganda 1.26 E0 $0 Nodhwed Unlncarpwded Cajalca Nsobrank Had Nadi John O.76 5L786,Om Nodhvred - Unlncorpwaed Cajaco Hadey John HaMI 5,79 20.M.000 $m=..WO $ Unincorpmdetl Cajalco 1.15 0.66 $M&M $MIMU $333.000 HmMeH.Med Nodhwed Unincorporated Cajvko Terne1-21S Canyon $11.336,OM -$;90R,= Nodhrred Unincorporated Cajalco Remescd Canyon T nu L. Sle.l la9eva 121 321 $11,468.W0 $ m Nadhwed Unincorporated la9anv $19,06gM0 $19.044,W0 .M' Nadrwed Unlncomozded Schliesman SahH,s San Bemvrtlino County Heenan 1.0 $Lv2aao $J.1911 W Nadhwed Uninam,orded Schliesman Sumner Smurno 0.50 Bum $L190.W0 $LJ90,W0 Nodhwed Unincaryarded Schllesman Sumner Cleveland $2,692,000 $Y.6920W Nahwed Unincarpmof d Schliesman CWM. d Hamner 0.M 0.23 $L23J,000 $$9W. W Nadhwed Unincorporated Sch0esman AShost H Hamner 0.21 $980.W0 $990,0W Nodhwed Unincorporated Schliesman inner Hamner 1-15 $33,9nm $33,39&OW Nodhwed Unlnco SchVan 1.31 i.W $$"6z 0 $$1,MM Nodhwed mused Unlncorpwded Buren Van Buren SR-m SR- Belh,rm $2562000 0?6.= $2,M5,OM N.A.d Unhusorpmded Van Buren Belkgrave Seth. Me Santo Ma Now 3.0 3,41 $6,45LM0 $2,JBS,W0 Nodhwed Unincorporated Van Buren Wood $),90JW0 36,174,Om NwMwed Unlncwporatetl Van Buren Ce....gerrce gunge Terrace 1.215 1.89 1.89 $351123.OW 534,358,OW WRCOG 6 Addendum 1 - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Table Al -2.1 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates - 507* ADJUSTED (continued) Pas Beaumeal =tmoit Paper. Oak Valley(So. Uroaleo Cm,.W,4th 1.17 $34.596,001 $o Pas SR-79(Beaument) I.TO Mellow 080 $9,096,M $0 Pass Unlcor,smaled SR-79(Beaumont) Mellow CalH.mia ISM $0 $0 Pa , Unincorporated Pohero Mh 1st 0." $1,054,000 P.05 = Pas Unlacerpaaled Feb.. 1st SRJ9(Sentiment) ILLS $51551 $5,5Y)'M Pas Unincorporated SR-99(lamb Canyon) California Gilman Spines 4.89 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Domeni0onl Women Sanderson 1.77 $Z075.000 $2075A00 San Jacinto Hemet DomeniBoni Sanderson State 2.14 $0 SO San Jacinto Hemet SR-74 Winchester Women 2.59 $4.641.0W $3.668.000 San Jacinto San Jacinto Mid-Counly Wane. Sanderson 1.93 $5099,000 $3,099,00D San Jadrd. $an Jadnl. Ramona Wanen $..de... 1.93 $3,099.000 $3.099,OW San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Sanderson State 2.39 $0565,000 $6,MJKX, San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona State Main 2.66 $4,278.W0 $4.60.OW San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Main Cedar 2.08 $BJl&WO Ee.TS.OW San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Coder SR-94 1.10 $0 $0 San Jacinto Unincorporated Domeniltonl SR-79(Winchester) Women 3.10 $4.880.= $4.392AW San Jacinto Unincwparaled Giman Springs Brid0e Sanderson 2.95 $3.454,M $3.454AW San Jacinto Unlms.,so bat Mld-County B1IdBe Warren 235 $2,752.000 WSZWD San Jacinto UMncorporabd Ramona BddBe Wanen Z35 $5,505,000 $5,505,W0 San Jacinto Uninco0soroted SRa4 MIT, SR-79(Winch.d.,) 3.53 $4,1W NK) $4,130,OW San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79(Hemet Bypas) S11-94(Fl.dda) Dirmast OM &22 591,22 = $31.226,000 San JaciMe UMncerpaoled SRJ9(Hemet Bypass) Domsoliml Wholmoar 1.50 $Bz ZOW S5,272,000 San Jacinto Unincmpo led SR-9?(Son lacdnto Bypass) Ramona SR-74(0oddo) 6.W W. 95.000 538,99g00o San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-97(Sanderson) Gilman Spdn,a Ramona 1.92 $13,103.000 $1Z25BAW San Jacinto Unincorporated SRJ9(Wlnchesle) D.meta'smi Ran, L90 $12,583,000 $11.524,000 Southwest Canyon take Goats Railroad Canyon Newpod 0.50 $11826A00 $1,343,= Southwest Canyon lake Railroad Canyon Canyon Hills GeeU 1.95 $3,865,000 $3,7M.000 Southwest lake Bill., RMboad Carryon 1-I5 Canyon Mns 229 $12A94000 $17A94.000 Southwest Mandela COMen Keith 1.15 Copper Crag 240 $13,206,W0 $13,394,000 Southwest MUMeto CUM.. K.Rh Capper Craft Toulon 0,83 $0 So Southwest Monte. Cnnton Keith toile. 1.215 0.83 $19,12&000 $19.12i,000 Southwest Monteta CnMon Keith 1-215 Meadowlark 0.95 $0951000 $875,000, Southwest M.Meta French V.1,(Da t) SR-99(Wdncloohn) Margarita 1.03 $1,WZ000 $1,85ZOW Southwest Murree Meadowlark (Menidee) Keller Clinton Keith 2.00 $4,6850W $4.685.OW Southwest Mmieta Menifee Scott Koller LAB $0 $0 Southwest Temecula French Valley Margarita Yneu 0.91 $0 So Soulhwed Femecula French Valley Tna Munl0ta Creek 1.29 $3&095.W0 $25.954,O00 Southwest Temecula French Valley Munlela Creek Rancho California Z36 $11,566,000 $11.566,000 Southwest Temecula French Valley Ranch. CalH.mla 1.15(finat) 1.86 $24991,OW $10.413,000 S.uthwed Temecula SRJ9(Wlncheda) MUMeta Hot Sol., JeReoon 2" $9,89A,000 $7.896,000 Southwest Widomar Bundy Canyon 1-15 Sunset 3.42 $17.22ZOW $12.222.OW Southwest Wildomar Bundy Canyon - Sunset Munieta I.01 $2,352.000 $2.357,000 Southwest Wldamar Clinton Keith P.I. 1-15 0.55 $0 $0 Southwest Whoorpomted Benton SR-79 Eastem Bypass 2.40 $Z814A00 $2.814,OW Southwest Unincorporated Clinton Keith Meadev4ads SR." 254 $23,958,000 $2&950,000 Southwest Unincorporated Newport Manila, UndenbeMer 0.A $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated NOwpod U.denb.,., SR."(Wlnchader) 3.58 $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated SR-24 1-16 Ethan. 4.89 $22,828.W0 $22.984,a00 Southwed Unincorporated SRJ9(Easlan BypassJWashIrSRJ9(Winchede0 Gael LS2 $5,713,00D $5,913,M Southwest Unlncap.roled SR-79(Eastern Bypan) Bore] We. L" $1Z693,000 $12.693,000 Southwest Undncmporaled SR-79(Eadem Bypass/Peso) Wno SR-99(Caatance) 449 $6,125A00 $6.1n,,W0 Southwest Unincorporated SR-79(Eader. ll,as/Ama)SR-99(C.ndance) Santa Rita 1.14 $3,945,000 $3194.5.0W Southwest Unlncorporaled SR-79 (Eastern BYpas/Ama) Santa Rita Fairly]. 1." $4,829,000 54,829,05) Smithwesl UMncorporated SR-79(Eastern Bypas) F.M. Pala i.48 K0391M $4,039.000 SooMwed UMncorpoMed SRJ9(Eastern Bypass) Pala IA5 421 W,958.000 $30,958,000 Seulhwed Unincorporated SRJ9(Wlnchester) Keller Moorman Z47 $4..423.W0 $4,423,000 Southwest Unincapaaled SRJ9(Wtheirl Thompson WAlba 1,81 $3,240,000 $1.810,= Southwest Unincapaated SR-79(Mireleter) la Alba Hunter 050 $M." $381,000 WRCOG r Addendum 1 - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Table Al -2.1 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates - 50% ADJUSTED (continued) AREAPf ND151CV STREEINAME - SEGMEWFRCM - SEGMENRO MILES ADJUSTED COST" ADJ MAXNMF SHARE Cenhal MenRee Briggs NewpM Scott 3.05 $3514,000 ,516pW Cenhal MenRee Caeh Juanita Lesser Lane 2.61 $3,051,W0 $2,966.OW Central Menifee Goetz Newport Juanita 1.36 $0 $0 Central MenRee HGland Antelope Houn 1.00 $6,51 I= $6,51 I= Central Menifee McCall Menifee SR 791Wnchested 4A5 $5.209,W0 $5.z,R'm0 Cenhal Menifee McCall SR-791Winehesterl Warren 2.% $3.016.000 $3.016.000 Central Menifee McCall 1-215 Aspel 1.23 $9.334.O30 $9,334.000 Central Menifee MCC.N Meal MenRee 0.95 $2.235.00p $2.235.0W Central Menifee" Muvieta Ethan.. McCall 1.95 $1,621.m0 $1,621.001) Central Menifee Monet. McCall NewpM 2.03 $0 $0 Central Menifee Mrn.fa Newport Bundy Canyon 3.W $0 $0 Cenhal Moreno Valley Cactus 1-215 Heacock 1.81 $18.581.000 $18,58IAW Central Moreno Valley Eucalyptus 1-215 Towngate 1.00 $1.3d5.W0 $1.345,W0 Central Morena Valley Eucalyptus Towngate Frederick 0.67 $0 $0 Central Marano Valley Frederick SR-60 Alessandro 1.55 $0 $0 Central Moreno vole, Heacock Cactus San Michele 2.19 $4.880.000 $3.3620m Central Moreno Valley Heacack Rohe Vista Cactus 4.73 $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Heacook San Michele Haley Knox O.74 $1,496,OW $Ilm m Central Moreno Valley Ironwood SR40 Redlands 8.46 $p,156.W0 $17.756.OW Cenhal Moreno Valley Labelle Eucalyptus Alesandro I.W $1,013.W0 $1,013.OW Central Morena Valley Lasselle Alessandro John F Kennedy 1.00 $L43EM $1.431.OW Central Moreno Valley Laselle John F Kennedy Obeid, 3.14 $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Moreno Beach Roche Canyon SR-60 1.31 $18.606.W0 $16.606.OW Central Moreno Valley Nasan Ironwood Alessandro 202 $18.6W.W0 $18.688A00 Central Moreno Valley Pigeon Pass Imnwootl SR-W 0.43 $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Pigeon Pab/CEIAP Candor Contanni IranwoM 3.23 $1,161,000 $1.161.M Central MorenoVoley Reche Canyon Reche Vista Monona Beach 442 $0 $0 Central Moreno Volley Redlands Locust Alessandro 2.60 $20.961= $23.613,OW Central Moreno Valley Sunnymead Frederick Penis 2.02 $0 $0 Central Penis Ellis SR-74 t4tht 1-215 1.92 $26.181.0(10 $26.18I.000 Central Penis Evans Placentia Nuevo I.W $985.OW $ RE= Central Perris Fans Mayan Ramona 0.59 $693.OW $693.m0 CerAml Perris Fare Nuevo 1-215 1.99 $8.01 I,m0 $8.011.000 Central Perk Fans Oleander Ramona 0.99 $0 $0 Central Perth Fame Placentia Rider 0.58 $O $1 Central Pests Evans Rider - Morgan 0.49 $M." 8580.00D Central Per, Goetz laser EthanIndian < $1.218.OW $M4.M Control Pont,. Hatley Knox I -die Indian L!B 1.53 $10.644,OW $1$224,ao0 Central Pars Hatley Knox Indian Perris 0.03 $224.Om Central Party Hatley Knox Penis Fans 1.36 $3b960KI .69A0W $3.696,OW Central Pests Nuevo Mvnep 1.00 $16330,000 $10.3360W Central Penis Nuevo Mun Murata Vale, $2156,W0 $2.156.000 Central Penis Placentia Inds 0.00 0.31 $$1.A $V,020.OW Central Pests Placentia Indite Redlands Redlands 1.25 70.000 $LI )O.$0 $I. VO.$0 Central Placentia Redlands Wilton 0.25 $0 $0 Central pent, Penis Placentia Wilson Fans $4.210,m0 $4,2103W Cenhal Pecs MMhewsl tWn Hhanac 1.25 $5.B96,W0 $5.896000 Control Uninearpaated Brims Briggs SR-74 Ennoble) SRJ41PIramie) 2.50 2.53 $5.89,W0 $5.85Z000 Control Unlne.r crated Briggs Simpson N.Ibe 1.53 $d.294.000 $4.294.Om Central Unincorporated lMalnl Mt Vernon Mt V. 1.65 $$3.103.W0 $$3,133,Om Central Unincorparaed Eli, Past Post $$945.W0 $3J02.Om Central Unincorporated Mount Mount Vernon/GEfAP Cortid Rgeb Pigeon Pas 0.61 0.61 $945.OW $945.W0 Central Unincorporated Nuevo Dunlap Dunlap MenRee 2.38 $4,019OM $4,012.0m Central Unincospanded Past Pass/CEfAP Cortla Mount Vernon 3.44 $10,544.O$0 $10.544. Central Unincorpoated Post Sent. Rose Santa Rosa Mine $0 $0 Central Redlands San Tmoteo Canyon LEffsocust locust 2.0 260 $0 W $0 Northwest Co..carpaalM Co 61h SR-91 Magnolia $p $1 Northwest Corona Center Raihoad SR-91 0.30 0.59 $6.Id8,000 $0 Northwest Carona Hidden Hidden Valley Norco MCKinley $0 $0 NMhwest Corona ❑is,in Parkndge be Ontario 3.20 3.61 $0 $0 NMhwest Corona M�nolia 61h m 020 $2.352.0$0 $2.352,0$0 Northwest Carona Mr�nallo 5herbom Rfrnp Rtrmpau $0 $0 Northwest Carona Magnolia Ontarto 1.39 1.88 $O $0 Nosrh '.d Carona Main Grand Grand FooMo 0.88 $1.031. $9)5,0$0 NMhwest Carona Main Ontario Foothill 025 $0 $0 M NMhwest Corona Main -Main Hidden Valley Partridge 035 $624.O$0 $419,0$0 Northwest Carona ge SR1 SR-9 0.86 $0 $0 NMhwest Caren. Morn SR-91 SR-91 Grand 0.86 b2365.000 E2.365.O$0 NMhwest Corona oM McKinley Hidden Valley PS. rom Promenade 033 $0 NMhwest Corona McKinley Promenade 033 $0 SO $0 NMhwest Corona MCFJn. ElCgnofa Mal, 0.94 $21,693.WO $$1.693= Northwest Carona Orton 1-15 I-15 Elen. 0.32 $1.693.WO $$316 W NOAtswest Corona Ontario Lincoln Vista Buena Visia 0.65 $SD. $316.0$0 NMhwest Carona Ontario Maine Vhta Main 0.65 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Ontario Main Kellogg 0 $0 W $0 NMhwest Carona Ontario Kellogg Fullerton 03232 $BBd,0$0 $BBd,O$0 NMhwest Corona Ontario Fullerton Minibus,-15OA2 $0 .$0 NMhwest Corona Ontario u 1-15 $0 $0 NMhwest Corona Relined Auto Club Auto merman 1.W 1.26 $6,265=0 $6.148.m0 Northwest Corona Railroad Sherman Main tat Grarldi 1.26 $2265, $1513.0$0 Northwest Corona River Main 2.96 $0 $0 - $0 Northwest Corona Serfaz Club SR-91 SR-91 Green River 0.96 $0 j0 WRCOG 9 Addendum 1 - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Table Al-2.1 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates - 50% ADJUSTED (continued) AREA PLAN DISFCIIY SiREEMAME - SEOMEWFROM _ SEOMENITO MILE$ ADJUSTEDCOF ADJMA%TUMFSHARE Northwest Na a Ist Parinict Mauritian 0.26 $WO.WO $300Am Northwest Noma Ist Mountian Hamner 0.26 $0 $0 Northwest Norco 2nd My,HS L44 $1,682,0 W $1.160.000 NWhwest Norco 6th Hamner California 1.71 $7,896,W0 $7,8963W NWhwest Norco Arlington North Arington 0.97 $1,141,LW $1.141A00 Northwest Norco C.H.ba Arlington 6th 0.98 $1,759,000 $1J59.W0 NWlnvest Norco Corydon Over Sth 1.46 $2.6M= $2,628.000 Notlhwezt Norco Hamner Santa Ana Over Hidden Volley 3.05 $5.4I6,O $5.476.000 NWhwest Noma Hidden Valley 1-15 Norco His 1.52 $0 $0 NWtlwesf Norco Hidden Valley Hamner -15 0.13 $0 $0 NWhwest Norco Norco Corydon Hamner 1.4 $2,159,000 $2,159,0M Northwest Norco North Calilania AUirgtan 0.81 $0 W Na-Ihwest Norco Over Archbald Corydon 1.14 $2,045,000 $1.164,M NWhwest Riverside 14th Market Marlin Luther King 039 $0 W Northwest Riverside Ist Mat Main O.W - $0 - $8 Northwest Riverside 3,,1 Chlcgo 1-215 0.36 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Adams SR-91 Arlington 1.56 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Ad.. SR-91 Uncdn 0.54 $6,148,000 $6,148.0W NWhwest Riverside Buena Vkto Santa Ana ON, Redwood 0.30 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest Central Country Club 0.59 $0 $0 Nodtuvad Riverside Canyon Crest Country Club Via Vista 0.94 $1.284.000 $921.M Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest Vla Vista Alessandro 0.68 $0 $0 NWhwest Riverside Canyon Crest Martin Luther King Central 0.95 $0 W NWinvezt Riverside Central Chicago 1-215/SR-W 2.15 $0 W NWhwest Riverside Central SR-91 Magnolia 0.76 $1,368000 $1.363,W0 Northwest Overdo. Central Alry andm SR-91 2.05 $0 $0 NWhwest Riverside Central Van Burn Magnolia - 3.53 $0 $0 NWMvest - Riverside Chicago Aleammic, Spmce 3.42 $0 W Northwest Riverside CNcaga Spruce Coumbia 0.75 $13,195,000 $13.195,0W NWhwest Oversee Columbia Main Iowa 1M $14.044.W0 $14,044.000 Northwest Riverside larva Center and 2Z $13.254,000 $13.254.0W Northwest Riverside Iowa 3rd University 051 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside JFK Tmulwein Woad OAS $0 $0 Northwest Riverside La Serra Arlington SR-91 3.56 $0 $0 Notlhwezt Riverside La Sena SR-91 Indana 0.19 $0 $0 Northwest Rivedde La Sena Indiana Victoria 0.28 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Lemon INS One way) Mssion Inn University 0A8 $0 $0 NWhwest Riverside Lincoln Adams Washirgton I.55 $0 $0 NWhwest Riverside Lincdn Van Boren Adams 1.54 $o W NWhwest Riverside Lincoln Washlrgtm Victoria 1.43 $2562.0(0 $3.567,0W NWtvvest Riverside Lincoln Victor. AEirgton 0.2B $0 $0 NWhwesf Riverside Madison SR-91 Victoria 0.86 $61148W0 $6.I48.OW Northwest Riverside Magnolia BNSFRR La Sena 3109 $6,1480W $6.14B.000 Northwest Riverside Magnolia LO Sierra Harrison 2.70 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Magnolia Normal 14th 5.98 $6,I48aW E6.148.OW Northwest Riverside Main I,f San Bernardino County 219 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Market 14th Santa Ana Over 2.03 $0 W Northwest Riverside Martin Luther King 14th 1-215/SR-60 2.11 $3.M.000 Sl"7OW NWhwest Riverside Mission Inn Redwood Lemon 0.29 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Overlook Sandtrack Meacham 0.32 - $0 $0 NWhwest Riverside Overlook Washington Bodewin/Via Montecifo 0.56 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Cvnm.k BoduWcff. Montedto Crystal A. 0.81 $1.606.W0 $1.W6AW NWhwest Riverside OveBook Crystal Vlew - Via Vista 0,55 $6,361.000 $6.361.000 Northwest Riverside OveBook Vt. Vista 5andhack 0.63 $1,252.W0 $1,252000 Northwest Riverside Redwood (58 One way) Mission Inn University 0.06 $0 $0 NWhwest Riverside Tmulwein Alessando Van Buren 2.19 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Tyler SR-91 Magnolia 0.43 $16,ISBOW $161153.000 NWhwenf Riverside Tyler Magndia Hole 0.27 $0 $0 NWhwest Riverside Trer Hole Wells 1.06 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside TNer We11s Arington 1.35 $2.424.W0 $2.424,000 Narlmm't Riverside Unlvers0y Redxaod SR-91 0.86 $0 W NWhwest Riverside Unlverslt, SR-91 I-215/SR-60 2.01 $0 W NW-cm,t Riverside Votorta Madsen Washington 0.52 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Washington Victoria Hemwsa 2.05 $3,686,000 $3.686.000 Northwest Riverside Wood JFK Van Buren 0.70 $410,W0 $410,000 Northwest Riverside Wood Van Buren Begamont 0.11 $0 $0 Notlhwezt Riverside Woad Begamont Kmmerla 039 $184,OW $184AW Notlhwezt Unincorporated Archibald San Bernardino County River 3.63 $6,6280W $5,617,000 Notlhwezt Unincorporated Armstrong San Bernardi no County - Valley 1.53 $687=0 $581(m Northwest Unincorpwded Bellgrave Cantu lleano Ranch Van Breen 0.29 $332.W0 $304A00 Nodth t Unincaporoled Cosh G.Ileano Ranch Hamner Wneville 0.94 $0 W NWhwest Unincorporated Cantu alleana Ranch Wneville Bellgrave 1.82 $3.411.W0 $3.411 AW NWhwest Unincorporated Dos logos Weidck) Ternmod Carryon -15 0.21 $0 $0 Northwest Unimorsovted EI Cerrito 1-15 Ontario 0.56 $651.W0 $651.= NWhwest Unincorporated Eliwanda Son Bem.chno County SRfi 1.00 $0 $0 Northwest. Unincorporated EtFwando SR-W ❑mart. 3.00 $0 $0 WRCOG 9 Addendum I - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Table Al -2.1 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates - 50% ADJUSTED (continued) AREA PLAN DLSTCM S1REEINAME - SEGMENIFRO.M - SEWEryT0 MILE$ ADJMEDCM 'ADJ MAX nHMF SHARE Northwest Unincorporated Hamner Belly.. Ambrhlll OA2 $486A00 $486,W0 Northwest Lishorporated Hamner Amberhill Umonite 0.49 $1.151,0a0 $9m" Northwest Unincorporated Hamner Umonite Schell 1.00 $1,168.W0 $1,168.M Northwest Unincrpoafed Hamner Schleisman Santa Anno River 1.29 $13,036,000 $12,850.0W Ncdhwest UnlnOorprated Hamner Misfgn 6e1grave 1.11 $12991000 $1,278,000 NertHyWat Unincorporated Harley John Wa'hirgtcn Scottsdale 0.12 $0 $0 Nerfhwesf Unincorporated Haney John S4.1bcale Cold.. 1.19 $1,392AW $1,392.OW Northwest Unincorporated La Siena Vlotona EI S.1cante 2.22 $0 $0 Norl Unincorporated La Sena El Sobronte Catalpa 2.36 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Umonite Archibald Hamner 1.99 $2337,M $2,187.000 Norhwest Unincorprated ❑mOnOe Hamner 1-I6 0.62 $B.617.000 $8.396,W0 Northwest Unincopoated Umonite 1-15 Wneville 0.40 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Umonite Wnev'Jle Edward. 0.99 $0 .$0 Northwest Unincorporated Umonite Etlwanda Van Buren 272 $6.3n.W0 $4,651,M Northwest Unincapoated Limonite Van Buren Clay 0.79 $930.000 $930,000 Nortlnvezt Unincorporated Limonite Clay Riverview 2.45 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Market Rubid. Santa Ana River 1.74 $6,221.WO $5.828.OW NrtM est Unincorporated Mlsslon Milliken SR-60 1.61 $0 $0 Nortirv+est Unincorporated Misziors SR -A) Santa Ana River 7.39 $0 $0 NOdinvesf Unincorporated Mockingbird Canyon Van Buren Cgalco 4.34 $5.916.000 $5.7881 Noril Unincorporated Riverview LimOnOe Mission 0.95 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Rubio. San Bernardino County MBion 265 $9.8961WO $7,896.WO Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Ontano Hoop, 0.65 $707,000 $909,0W Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Tuscany Dos Lagos 0.91 $0 W Northwest tlnincaporated Temescal Canyon Do, Lagos Leroy 1.10 $1.506.WO $1,506,000 Northwest Uhlncrparated Temescal Carryon Leroy Dawson Canyon IB9 $2,573.1)W $2,573.0W Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Carryon Dawson Canyon 1-15 0.W $7,896,W0 $7,8l Norhvest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon 1-15 Park Carryon 3.41 $5.309,OW $5.309.004) Northwest Unincoporafed Tom esml Carryon Park Canyon Indian Truck nail 2.55 $3,475,000 $3.475= NortMv,et Unincorporated Valley A finx'g MI.I.n 0.48 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Washington Hennes. Harley John 3.96 $4,641AW $4,641.000 Nortirv,,et Unincorporated Wood lummeria Cgalc. 2.99 $3.499,W0 $3.499AW Pass Banning Bth Wilson 410 0.54 $0 SO Pass Banning Highland Spings Oak Valley114th1 M. l8thl 0J3 $1.316,W0 $658,000 Pass Banning Highland Springs Cherry Valley Oak Valley 114thl 1.53 $2752000 $1.376,00(1 Pass Banning 1-10 Bypass South 1-10 Apache Tail 329 $15.041.000 $15.041AW Pass Banning Lincoln Sunset SR-243 2.01 W $0 Pass Banning Ramey 1-10 Wlson(Bill 1.70 $0 $0 Pass Banning Ramsey Ws. l8thl Highland Sprlrlgs 3.55 $0 $0 Pass Bannlrg SR-243 1-10 Wesley, 0.62 $0 Its Pass Banning Sun Lakes Highland Home Sunset 1.W $S.MM0 $5.258,000 Pass Banning Sun Lakes Highland Springs H101 Home in $0 $O Pas' Banning Sunset Ramsey Lincoln 0.28 $21.597,000 $21,599,OW Pass Banning Wilson l8thl Highland Home Man f8 h) 2.51 $0 $0 Pass Banning Wison l8thl Highland Spring' Highland Home 1.01 $I,802.OW $1,807.000 Pass Beaumont 1st Vie. Pormsyvani. 1.28 $2304,W0 $0 Pass Beaumont 1st PennryNanla Highland Spdrg' 1.70 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont 61h 1-10 Hghland Spnngs 2.24 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Desert Loan Champion' Oak Valley lSrQ 0.99 $1,155.WO $0 Ross Beaumont Highland Springs Wis. l8thl Sun Lakes 0.76 $9.262AW $8,579.000 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley114thl Highland Spdngs Pennrylvania 1.13 $0 .$0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley114th1 Pennsylvania Oak V1ew IA0 $0 54) Pass Beaumont Oak Val1ey114th1 Oak View I-10 0.65 $18269,000 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley 151CI Beaumont City Umits Cherry Valley P St Central Oven 3.46 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley lSfCl Cherry Valley p St Central Over, 1-10 - 1.67 $1,952.M $0 Pass Beaumont Pennrylvania 6th 1st 0.53 $7.896M $0 Pass Beaumont Viele 4th 1st 0.31 $559,W0 $0 Pass Beaumont Viela 6th 4th 0.50 $14.1D(i $0 Pass Calimesa Bryant County Line Singleton 0.38 $0 $0 Pau Calimesa Calimesa Caunty Line F10 0.80 $16.153.OW $16.153,OW Pass Calimesa Cherry Valley Roberti Palmer 0.50 $$B20W $0 Pass Calimesa County Line 1-10 Bryant 1.76 $9.476.WO $9A76AW Pas, Collroesa Desert Lawn Cherry Valley Champions 1.61 $1,882,000 $1,882,01)) Pass Calimesa Singleton Bryant Cohost 1.86 $SA81.0W $5.081, 0 Pass Cal mesa Singleton Condit Robert, 0.85 $17,699.0W $I7.699,W0 Pass Unlncopoafed Chem'Voley Highland Springs Noble US $2231,W0 $2.231.10W .Pass UnncorpOrated Chem/Valley Noble Desert Lawn 3.40 $21,383.1M $21,381OW Pass Unincorporated We Oak Canyon Oak Valley (SIC) San Schlem er County 2.81 $0 $0 Pass Unime.rporated Oak Valley l5TCl San Bernhardt. County Beaumont City Limits 5.65 $6.598,W0 $6,598.00S, San l.cwto Hemet Sanderson Acacia Menlo 0.98 $O $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Domenigani Stetson 1.08 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson RR Crossing Acacia 0.42 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Stehon RRCroz'irg 0.58 .$0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Menlo Bplargde I.W $1,794.W0 $895.000 Son Jacinto Hemet SR-74 Wrmn Caw'ton 1.02 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet SR-741Flaidal Columbia Ramona 2.58 $0 $0 Son Jacinto Hemet SR-74/SR-19 Modtlal Coveter, Columbia 4.03 $0 $0 San Jaclnfo Hemet State Domenigonl Chambers 1.31 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Chambers Stetson 0.51 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Fall Esplanade 1.74 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet state Stetson Florida 1.25 $3,440W0 $2.469.000 San Jacinto Hemet Stetson Caxstan State 2.52 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Stehon Warren Cawston 1.00 $1.1711 $1.170.0W San Jacinto Hemet Warren Belched. Domenigoni 4.99 $I.096AW $6.697.000 WRCOG 10 Addendum 1 - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Table Al-2.1 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates - 50% ADJUSTED (continued) AREA PLAN Dig Cray MEEINAME - SECMENfFROM SEGMENTT0 MII£5 ADIUAEDGOA ADJMAKTUMF SHARE San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade Ramona Mauntam 0.20 $II).0 000 $>I>. San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade Mauntam State 255 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade State Woven 3.5 $4.136.000 $.130,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto SandeNW Ramona 3.55 $4,155.0S $2,081.00 San Jacinto San Jacinto SR-79 (North Ramorw] State Ron Son Jacinto IA2 $0O $0 ,an Jar lnro San Jacinto SR-79 Jacinto] Nth SR-74 225 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Bar-" (San Jacinto] North Ramona Blvd b443.0 $4d3,0$0 San Jacinto San Jacinto State mon Raa Bell e 1." 1.99 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto State Sheet Gilman spAgs Ranch 0.76 b2900.p0 $2.6)5.0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Aare Street Ouandt Ranch Ramona Ramon 3.40 $0 $D $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Warren Ramona de 3.47 $4.066,000 $2,066A00 Son Jacinto Unincorporated Gilman Spines SR-74 state State $3,399,0$0 $2,360,0$0 San Jacinto UrnLake Non ]Flonda] gani 3M $0 $0 Southwest Elsinore Lake Elsinore Demand Diamond Mism 1-15 0.24 $281.0$0 $260,0$0 Southwest Lake Elsinore Grand Uncen TO" 1.29 1.29 $p EO Southwest Lake E6lnore Grand Tuft ia5 SR- SRJdIRiversidel $603A00 $60IM" Southwest Lake Eslnore like Lincoln 3.10 $I L0>La$0 $10.291.0$0 Southwest Lake Elsinore Mission Rea Railroad Canyon Bundy Canyon 2.39 2.10 $0 30 Southwest Lake Bsinae SR-74(Gran r/Poverside] Lakeshore 2.64 $N,539,W0 $5.023,a00 Southwest Lake Hsinced SR-N4(Gnmd) Fle Riverside SR-74 (Gdegal $2.283.000 $1.960.0M Southwest Lake SR-A(Riversold iake..n Grand (Stop 1.64 iJd $5.605A00 $SAJ3.000 SoWMvest Mum.tinne Murneta Calfomia Oaks Jefferson 1-15 . $16.72200 $16,N22.OSO Southwest Mumeta CallOaks -I$ Clinton Keith .26 26 $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Jefferson MLrtieta Hot Springs 2.26 $0 $0 Southwest Murrieta Jefferson NCherryutmd Nutmeg 1.02 $2.300.000 $2,308.000 Southwest MBdeta Jefferson Nutmeg Nutmeg Mumetd Hat Springs 2.37 $8.502.00) $2.135,0M Southwest M.M.N. Los Alamos 1-21 0.30 $2135.a00 $2.135.000 SOWhwest Muvieta LosnutoH 1-15 1-215 1.39 $2.503.0$0 $2.390.OSO Southwest Mwrleta Murl HW Springs M. Margarita 1,40 $0 $0 Southwest Mumera Murrieta Hot SpHrgs Jeffs Jefferson 1-2)5 1.01 $D 30 Southwest Mumeta Mumieto Hat Springs Margarita SR $I.IB0,0$0 $)23,0$0 Southwest Mumefa Nutmeg Jefferson Clintons Kartheste0 Keith 7.01 $0 Southwest Mmecul Wff.n.nd Canton Keith Ma Los Alamos 2.01 2.29 $0 M $0 Southwest Temecula Jeiferson Cherry Rancho 2.29 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Margarita Hot Springs m.cul.ia SRJSR-79 culal $0 Southwest Temecula ad To. Front Rancho Rancho Califomia 1-a 1.45 1.45 $0 $0 $0 5oWhwast Temecula Pechanga Sea9pemeculo) Cad9 Gildedo 1." $0 .$0 Southwest Temewla Pechanga Viaerson Pe Read 1.4d $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Rancho Califomia Jefferson Mmg.rga Margaa 1.09' $5,410.000 $9,410. 0 Southwest Temecula Ranchornecul is Margarita Butterfield Stage 1." b$760.000 $5,610A00 Southwest Temecula SR-79 H5 Pch.n Pechanga j]SO.a$0 $61.0$0 Southwest Temecula SR-99(iemecula) Pechanga Read Balomard Singe 3.64 $0 $0 Southwest MJtlemor Baxter Palomar 0.00 0.94 $0.3D,000 $0.322AW Southwest Mldamar Bundy Canyon Me Mission 0.94 $1.6N9.000 $1.320.O Southwest Wildamar Central Baxter Palomar Pal OJ4 $1.32).0$0 $1.320.0SO Southwest Wldomar Mission Bandy Canyon Palomar 0.04 $p $0 5auihwest Wildomar Palomar Clinton Keith 2.74 $262.000 $80.000 SOWhwest Mldomor Pabmar Minton Canton Keith $3.266.000 $3.266.000 Southwest Unincorporated Biggs Scott SR-79( 3.39 3.39 $39I3.000 $3,973.00) Southwest Unincarparated Butterfield Stage Hot Springs Rancho Cahester] RanchoCalll0 $$3,132JM0 b$3,13Z 0 Southwest Unincorporated Butterfield Stage Rancho RanchoCarlAuld (Temecula] 2.30 $3.132.000 b3, 132000 Southwest Unlncapormed Butterfield Stage SHa9IMnchesterl Auld 223 $3.111."" $3,11 hp00 Soutiv,doiutItl UnfincorImbourporated ButterfiCentel Stage Auld Muonn.rt. Hot Springs $$916. 00 $$91A000 Southwest Unincoporated Grand Pabmar MI b916.000 $916,000 Southwest Unincorpa-aretl Gnantl &nd @repo 6.51 $1$199. 0 $1$199.000 SONhwesf Unincorporated HofanTru Canyon Temescal Carryon 1-15Cenral 1-15 0.90 $1951000 5.0r Unincorporated Indian imck trail Temescal Carryon -IS 0.7N $0,306.0$0 ,306.00D $0.306.0$0 Most SOWMvest Unincorporated aHotSpirgz SRd9(MnchesreQ P-,dY 1.10 I.NS $0 $0 Southwest Unincaryorated Pala Palo Pechanga Die son Diego Camry 1.30 $0 $0 TramX Adminlshallon ABSHCP Tod WRCOG 11 TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update $ 03.473A00 $ 30913000 $ BUBB. 00 $ 87,600,M0 $ 31,103.000 $ 29,979.000 5Q§a�pLb B Addendum I - Temporary Fee Reduction Adopted October 5, 2009 Table A1-2.2 - TUMF Schedule of Fees -50% ADJUSTED Fee Levels (2009 CCI Adjustment as adopted February 2, 2009) Fehmnm 9 9nn9 thi nunh Orfnher 5 9nn9 Land Use Type Units Fee Per Unit Single Family Residential DU $ 9,812 Multi Family Residential DU $ 6,890 Industrial SF GFA $ 1.84 Retail SF GFA $ 9.99 Service SF GFA $ 5.71 Class A & B Office** SF GFA $ 2.19 Fee Levels (2009 Nexus Update - 50%, ADJUSTED - as adopted October 5, 2009) October A. 2009 throuah December 31: 2010* Land Use Type Units Fee Per Unit Single Family Residential DU $ 4,437 Multi Family Residential DU $ 3,115 Industrial SF GFA $ 0.86 Retail SF GFA $ 5.24 Service SF GFA $ 2.10 Class A & B Office** SF GFA $ 1.10 Fee Levels (2009 Nexus Update as adopted October 5, 2009) After neremher All 9010* Land Use Type Units Fee Per Unit Single Family Residential DU $ 8,873 Multi Family Residential DU $ 6,231 Industrial SF GFA $ - 1.73 Retail SF GFA S 10.49 Service SF GFA $ 4.19 Class A & B Office** SF GFA Notes: `- Actual Implementation date and fee levels maybe adjusted for in accordance with local TUMF ordinances `- Class A & B Office fee after July 1, 200710 be reviewed based on results of detailed market analysis. A detailed breakdown of the adjusted maximum TUMF share for projects on the TUMF Network is included as Appendix Al-C to this Addendum. WRCOG 12 Addendum 1 - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 A11-2.2 TUMF Program Revenue Shortfall Since the transportation impact of any new development remains constant as determined in the TUMF Nexus Study, the 50% reduction in fees means that the development is no longer contributing a fair share of the cost to mitigate its impacts. This effectively means that the TUMF Program is no longer able to collect sufficient revenues from new development to mitigate these impacts. Section 66001 (d) (3) of the California Government Code requires a local authority that imposes an impact fee program to "identify (on at least a five yearly basis) all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing in incomplete improvements identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a)" which refers to the "public facilities for which the fee is charged". Because the 50% reduction in the TUMF effectively forfeits a substantial portion of the funding that would be necessary to complete the facilities identified in the Nexus Study, it is necessary for the revenue shortfall to be made up from other sources. In accordance with the provision of the Mitigation Fee Act, it is necessary for WRCOG to identify the specific sources of revenue to be used for this purpose. The Nexus Study for the TUMF Program is intended to establish the full funding fair share to complete facility improvements that are needed to mitigate the impacts of new development. However, as described in the TUMF Administrative Plan, the TUMF "Program is not designed to be the only source of revenue to construct the identified facilities, and it will be necessary for matching funds from a variety of available sources to be provided." As a result of the TUMF Ordinance exemption of Government and Public Sector land uses and certain other land use types, the phased implementation of other Non -Residential land uses, and statutory provisions for vesting rights, the TUMF program inherently includes a funding shortfall. Based on the estimated fair share established in the TUMF Nexus Study completed for the 2009 Program Update, approximately 9% of the TUMF mitigation need can be attributed to the impact of Government and Public Sector land uses that are exempt by Ordinance from paying the fee. Furthermore, the 10-Year Strategic Plan previously estimated that approximately 2% of the estimated TUMF revenues will not be captured as a result of the original multi -year phase -in of TUMF for non-residential land uses, while an additional 5% will not be captured as a result of pre-existing local agency developer agreements and project vesting. Combined, these exemptions and waivers create an overall program shortfall of approximately 16% which equates to approximately $602 million based on the Nexus Study completed for the 2009 Program Update, or approximately $21.5 million on a prorated annualized basis. In the past, the TUMF program has addressed the inherent program revenue shortfall that results from TUMF Ordinance exemptions and other statutory limitations through encouraging sponsoring agencies and private developers to voluntarily provide alternate revenue match (either as cash, in -lieu contributions or exactions). This voluntary use of alternate funding match is formalized in the 10-Year Strategic Plan as a criterion for ranking and prioritizing projects during programming. Typically this voluntary match has resulted in the Program meeting the inherent revenue shortfall of WRCOG 73 Addendum 1- Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 approximately 15% to 20%. The temporary fee reduction will substantially increase the amount of the TUMF revenue shortfall that will be created during the period the reduction is in effect. " The temporary fee reduction will effectively reduce the fee revenue generated by a further 42% (50% of the 84% of revenues that would be otherwise generated based on the pre-existing TUMF Ordinance and statutory limitations). This would equate to a total of approximately $2.2 billion in revenues being forfeited over the life of the Program based on the Nexus Study completed for the 2009 Program Update, or approximately $78 million on a prorated annualized basis. Since the actual rate of development in Western Riverside County in recent years has been substantially below the historical average, it is likely the actual revenue shortfall observed during the fee reduction period would be less than the prorated annualized estimate. However, on a percentage basis, the revenue forfeited remains effectively consistent regardless of the rate of development, ands since the level of impact (and the resultant cost to mitigate the impact) is directly proportional to the rate of development, the funding shortfall will remain approximately 58% of the fair share cost of mitigation that is attributable to the new development that occurs during the fee reduction period. In other words, only. 42% of the fair share cost to mitigate the impacts of new development will actually be collected during the reduced fee period. Consistent with the narrative described in the TUMF Administrative Plan, the local sponsoring agencies and private developers have a responsibility to seek alternative funding sources to meet the TUMF program funding shortfall. Alternate match to meet the TUMF funding shortfall could include the utilization of traditional transportation funding sources (such as STP, CMAQ, Measure A and other discretionary federal, state or local transportation funds) and in -kind services (such as local agency planning, engineering or right of way acquisition, or right of way and roadway facility dedications by private developers). The importance of local agencies and private developers seeking alternative funding sources to meet the program funding shortfall is further emphasized by the significant increase in the proportional share of the funding shortfall that will be created by each new development that does not contribute a fair share toward the cost to mitigate transportation impacts during the reduced fee period. As described previously, it is estimated that the funding shortfall during the fee reduction period will be 58% of the fair share cost of mitigation that is attributable to the new development that occurs, based on the TUMF Nexus Study completed for the 2009 Program Update. Historically, sponsoring agencies and private developers have not demonstrated an ability to voluntarily provide such a substantial funding match and therefore additional measures will be required to ensure the Program funding shortfall can be adequately met. To ensure the funding shortfall is adequately addressed in accordance with the provision of the Mitigation Fee Act, a mandatory alternate match requirement may need to be established as part of the programming and implementation of all TUMF project, including projects sponsored by public agencies and those completed by private developers. WRCOG 1 14 Addendum I - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Al-3.0 APPENDICES Appendix Al -A Riverside County Board of Supervisors July 21, 2009 Action Appendix Al -B Riverside Economic Development Red Team Letter, August 24, 2009 Appendix Al -C TUMF Network Detailed Cost Estimate - 50% ADJUSTED WRCOG 15 Addendum I - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 Appendix At -A Riverside County Board of Supervisors July 21, 2009 Action WRCOG Addendum I - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 SUBMITTAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA r i FROM: Transportation and Land Management Agency (TLMA) SUBMITTAL DATE: July 2, 2009 SUBJECT: Temporary Reduction of Development Impact Fees (DIF). RECOMMENDED MOTION: That the Board of Supervisors: 1. Re -introduce and adopt, on successive weeks, Ordinance No. 659.8, an Ordinance of the County of Riverside Amending Ordinance No. 659; and 2. Find the adoption of Ordinance No. 659.8 is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) in that it can be seen with certainty there is no possibility the ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment; and 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2009-236, a Resolution of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors encouraging the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) to implement the Red Team recommendations for a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Reduction; and 4. Direct TLMA and the Executive Office to report to the Board bi-annually on the temporary DIF reduction; and 5. Direct the Executive Office to work with the appropriate County Departments to establish a procedure to offset the loss of Development Impact Fee revenues. CONTINUED ON PAGE 2 z C/( 0 U z Geor Johnson, Director o z Transportation an and Management Agency U Z) Current F.Y. Total Cost: O V (7 FINANCIAL $Unknown In Current Year Budget: N/A w Current F.Y. Net County Cost: $ N/A Budget Adjustment: N/A 0 Q DATA Annual Net County Cost: $ N/A For Fiscal Year: 2009/10 o = SOURCE OF FUNDS: Positions To Be Deleted Per A-30 r ofco Requires 4/5 Vote o m C.E.O. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE 8� & B a c' CountyExecutive Office Signature Tina Grand x MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS N On motion of Supervisor Buster, seconded by Supervisor Wilson and duly carried DERED that the above matter is approved as recommended by unanimous vote, IT WAS OR and that Ordinance 659.8 is approved as re -introduced with waiver of the reading. Ayes: Buster, Tavaglione, Stone, Wilson and Ashley Nays: None Kecia Harper -Them i Absent: None , C Board m pate: July 14,'�009 B xc:. TLMA, E.O., WRCOG, COB(2) Deputy o a Prev. Agn. Ref.: 3:95 = June 30, 2009 1 District: All Agenda Number: ATTACHMENTS FILED WITH 3 e 80 THE CLERK OF THE BOARD Board of Supervisors July 2, 2009 Page 2 BACKGROUND:. At the June 30, 2009, Board of Supervisors meeting, the. Board expressed a desire to increase the amount of the temporary fee reduction from 30% to 50%, but to limit the reduction to a one-year time period. Staff has revised the proposed ordinance amendment to show a 50% temporary reduction in fees for a period of one year. The Board reiterated its desire to have TLMA present bi-annual reports on the status of the temporary DIF reduction and make recommendations for program changes if appropriate. An additional recommended motion is included in this Form 11 to address the Board of Supervisors' desire to look for ways to offset any potential loss of DIF revenues. The Executive Office would work with other appropriate county departments, including the Auditor -Controller, to establish a mechanism or procedure that would identify funding from other sources for infrastructure projects to offset the loss of DIF revenues. GJ:GN:kh 1 ORDINANCE NO. 659.8 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 659 3 AND CHAPTER 4.60 OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY CODE ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES 4 5 The Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside ordains as follows: 6 Section 1. The title of Ordinance No. 659 is amended to read as follows: 7 "ORDINANCE NO. 659 8 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 9 ESTABLISHING A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE PROGRAM" 10 11 Section 2. A new Section 15. is added to Ordinance No. 659 to read as follows: 12 "Section 15. TEMPORARY REDUCTION OF FEES. Pursuant to the fee 13 adjustment authority set forth in Section 14. of this ordinance and notwithstanding Section 7. 14 or any other provision of this ordinance, the DIF amounts in effect on the effective date of 15 Ordinance No. 659.8 shall be temporarily reduced by fifty percent (50%) for the period 16 commencing on August 20, 2009 and ending on August 20, 2010. 17 a. Application. The temporary fee reduction described in this 18 19 section shall not apply to or affect fees owed under any 20 development agreement or other contractual arrangement in effect on or before the effective date of Ordinance No. 659.8. If 21 reduced fees are paid at the time application is made for a 22 23 building permit and either the application or the building permit 24 issued on the application expires, subsequent building permit 25 applications on the same parcel shall be subject to the full DIF amount, unless the temporary fee reduction is still in effect at 26 the time of the subsequent application. 27 28 t 1 2 3 4 5 6 71 81 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 b. Effect. No provision of this section shall entitle any person who has already paid Development Impact Fees to receive a refund, credit or reimbursement of such payment. This ordinance does not create any new Development Impact Fees or increase the amount of any existing Development Impact Fees. This ordinance only effects a temporary change in the County's existing Development Impact Fees. C. Expiration. As of August 20, 2010, this section is repealed without further action by the Board of Supervisors, unless the Board of Supervisors repeals or modifies this section prior to that date. The repeal of this section shall not affect the validity of actions taken or Development Impact Fees paid under the authority of this section." - Section 3. Existing Sections 15. through 22. of Ordinance No. 659 are renumbered Sections 16. through 23. respectively. Section 4. Existing Section 17. of Ordinance No. 659 is amended to read as follows: "Section 18. CREDITS. If an owner or developer of real property dedicates land or constructs facilities identified in the Public Facilities Needs List, the County may grant the owner or developer a Credit in one or more of the Fee Components described in this ordinance against the Development Impact Fees required. No Credit shall be granted for the cost of improvements not defined herein as "Facilities." An owner or developer may request a Credit from the Transportation and Land Management Agency at the time of development approval. A Credit granted at the time of development approval shall be included as a condition of that approval. After development approval, but before the issuance O� 1 2 3 4 5 6 71 8' 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 0 17 U r ti m 26 27 28 of a building permit, an owner or developer may request a Credit from the Executive Office. If the Transportation and Land Management Agency or the Executive Office determines that a Credit is appropriate, the owner or developer shall enter into a Credit Agreement which shall be approved by the Board of Supervisors. The Credit amount shall be initially calculated by estimating the fair market value of the land dedicated or by estimating the cost of constructing Facilities. The County shall subsequently review and determine the actual value of the land dedicated and the actual construction costs allowable. Any Credit granted shall not exceed the allocated cost for the Facilities. Any Credit granted shall be given in stated dollar amounts only." Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. ATTEST: CLERK OF THE BOARD: By: Deputy (SEAL) BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA By: Chairman 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ld 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Board of Supervisors County of Riverside RESOLUTION NO.2009-236 ENCOURAGING THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (WRCOG) TO IMPLEMENT THE RED TEAM RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A TUMF REDUCTION WHEREAS, the County of Riverside is a member of the Red Team comprised of public and private sector representatives which was formed to identify and address the housing issues existing in the region; and WHEREAS, the County of Riverside is experiencing unprecedented declines in housing prices, home sales and new home construction; and WHEREAS, this decline has delayed planned residential projects and planned commercial and industrial projects which provide local jobs and tax revenues, support balanced growth and help fund I safety and other services that enhance quality of life; and WHEREAS, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, the County of Riverside is experiencing double digit unemployment rates and for the month of May had an unemployment rate of 13.1 % which was higher than the state's unemployment rate of 11.5%; and WHEREAS, these higher unemployment rates further erode the economic recovery of the region; and WHEREAS, Economist John Hosing, Ph.D. has extensively studied the city and county economies of Southern California and particularly the Inland Empire; and 1 2 3 4 5 M. 7 8 S. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 17 1 I 27 1 28 i WHEREAS, Dr. Husing participated in the Red Team and was commissioned by the private sector to develop a strategy for dealing with the major economic issues facing the region today; and WHEREAS, Dr. Husing prepared a report dated May 11, 2009 that recommends jurisdictions reduce fees in order to stimulate the economy and promote housing starts and job growth; and WHEREAS, the Red Team concurs with the report and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the County of Riverside has temporarily reduced its development impact fees and implemented several economic stimulus measures to promote job and economic growth such as public works projects, summer jobs programs and first time homebuyer incentives; and WHEREAS, several cities and school districts have also reduced development fees and implemented local economic recovery strategies; and WHEREAS, the Western Regional Council of Governments (WRCOG) developed and administers Western Riverside County's Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program (TUMF) and manages the implementation of the regional arterial road network; now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED by the Board of Supervisors the County of Riverside, State. of California, in regular session assembled on July 14, 2009, that it here requests the Executive Committee of WRCOG reduce TUNE Program fees as outlined in Dr. Husin, May 11, 2009 report. Appendix Al -B Riverside Economic Development Red Team Letter, August 24, 2009 WRCOG Addendum 1 - Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 August 24, 2009 Mr. Rick Bishop Executive Director Western Riverside Council of Governments 4080 Lemon Street, 3rd Floor Riverside, CA 92501 Dear Mr. Bishop: Last year at this time, business, community and government leaders from Western Riverside County gathered to discuss the worsening economy. Our region was battered by foreclosures, job losses and declining local government revenues. But instead ofjust waiting and hoping for an economic rebound, we formed the Riverside Economic Development RED TEAM to identify actions that could be taken to spur recovery in the housing sector and protect our quality of life. The RED TEAM, working with one of the Inland Empire's most respected economists, Dr. John Husing, and the Western Riverside Council of Governments, examined the situation and recommended three goals critical to a recovery: • Defend communities from the impact of having large numbers of dilapidated or rental properties injected into single family detached neighborhoods. • Cut off the growing supply of foreclosed homes, so prices can stabilize and the market can return to responding to traditional supply and demand forces. • Reduce the cost of building new homes so that the new home building industry can put people back to work. Until it does, the serious recession will continue. We're pleased to report that since the RED TEAM adopted its final recommendations in 2009, progress has been made. Public -private partnerships are investing to purchase, refurbish and sell foreclosed properties to homebuyers. Some lenders are working to try and help residents prevent foreclosure. And many local governments have acted to create jobs and jump-start the economy by defen-ing.and/or reducing construction fees. Clearly, the RED TEAM has made a difference and it is the direct result of the work of so many dedicated community leaders. But our letter is not simply recognition of progress to date. Now, more than ever, we must stay focused and committed to our respective communities. State budget uncertainty means that we must fight to protect our region. We must stay focused on the three RED TEAM goals and work to make them reality. Thank you for all that you do to make Riverside County and its cities a better place. Sincerely, zi2v, '10, ZW4) Ronald O. Loveridge Mayor City of Riverside John Tavaglione Supervisor, District 2 Riverside County Appendix Al -C TUMF Network Detailed Cost Estimate - 50%, ADJUSTED WRCOG Addendum 1 -Temporary Fee Reduction TUMF Nexus Study - 2009 Program Update Adopted October 5, 2009 m �b 11YHmm Pti Nxlom i3N;w'V0 P Ilan. p M m II�Swpm W4.I'. Yseamt Vw�vrel _ i;s4un YPo.Om Y)4om ipo VI�Fm Ius.ma i"im R)s!oa ."I.— Y,ISIpw _ p FuuWe 1WF'S mi m iE)AW Nwow P p p 'NPT W ''w, ilYll il.l ]4m N.man ".rmm5 ')vm _ P to P P P P P w Wq+l • p P b p • x•ya� • yix�rta yPs a a ] n a J o o N.liion -P ibJym V bMimwo Sn�. '�Ja,¢a ma9uvP b.vt�i X•�M P N. P 3]L{M �i�nmt 5'RNimt •�' "im XWVP yuNOR yr'II'ii� W SII ➢% w P P p b.Niym Yy¢o SIz 11ry¢.IXo Nrxl.ao ypp p m I.— _ 'iu pll 'imww _ m Sim n.xr5.ov ilne� b.1m- ifw m li w P iure➢ uSNm u NSP Yv, aom Syellmv inmi'°oo¢.. amlS4W0mo AlII.W Nm..m P ar:mo YRom mmo bsiwo mtmNb�mmo v vw46 1P. SN6'm lfum unimo w sore YN).on bo 'i f2 m maU fOm SIAUAm lupwo WUFm 14¢4m5 WrWx µmlmo ••"mav iNWI W� An lm.Wv 1a16 Y�rzlr.om ,pR Ya1(pp %� nmN on "'4p P E413oz "YriAm Sim Y�16 im %��N4mo emim�• YYIWo f l,Ue,ox N)xwi P b fo 'rs�m 3 Urim 'IYiwO UI4¢o fi"� etyma Xfl)mo fl.ogLLMm p NNFw N 31)6m'. pPo.Om We,mo Sx?umo N➢Nmo _ l.lfipn i'll lm uROR 1111. P Yu Mm m Sp Si.m4m .Fw S;mIOY Wi¢a fly4�m JIIM.m Ei rm Nn� sme N at NNYumo iSaT f%imM fsamm fN' �� ursrore ai 11�� P U! � .¢p p p I.rl Iflu.pp 3 JIAI.yp Ue�e;wo S�p)aNrm wR ¢ N4(.w P r. oo, inlaw IxavvawWm°Ie•fa Ww�NeW pM1pr °IJ 1;1IYY.1R)iMawRo pP lvYmo 4nmo 1'r'S N11m Im uewrPoR 1 2 f o.pa Slm.m Uawoe UvY;mn112 O.m0Uo0 IlI.o Uw m® N6vJn Ul3Ywo cImI mw u'inmn;i S;u°�y:,'m0° NSfxi1a.wNINi4.mw®i PwM..n.wi mo iwmi » wAil.. om NIE vm, w U.IIIw p U P P � li Nim Y'vX� P E U. wo p lin.w 11.svapn 3 opw armo No.mr, JI),No,wbo axarm•� % P W.PVP Ilnpw i!sramp fl.5rae'xv MXww rn vxl 1 2® % " 'ymro'P b P P iw >IWma "i oR Si"a30 im StIT0.a ca„O� p P NP R P p m P nryyyr yrortsi. xnCma p lo anpmv MyneN U m P pm P P p xm N^`v.Ptl fl.N).wo m'IDCE y) 31 WP fp WimS JyPm6rz ,SY¢oR fSbrm YynLW illASl.ma SSim iro.l13IX0 x�Yb °"we JIA4cz f2 my u _ x�PN %u b YY sw N'i m'S fl. m "i N Wrkwnu°126 m P P io .Mwa unwvlwm m p W pP Nnevo¢my y3ym %m Y%.I9S..mmW SISPWSuW.omRf INEIX.i0.¢YO y5b. fNR.Nma myy°,"�•rx �n• v°e milli m ve[wM liJ NiTYl.4tl JSiI%.MN,m .xA Jifmlli.Tmfuiy,ottmRa N4mga .OT irt0% St mm JIPNPn JII.Woa fEpµoR imtm lT.aupR W•x 1 4uYiv» N %frN® n+.wael•u a•n ��� W sAw '�fWm fLfiOn '�SW� um M xe rn n�i v.im R A A Lion WPn Y3m3 Sn .rbm°x Jm® v�eroam P m Y'MI— vY.000 vu Wan® sbco u)mme w %xa� uvm sabvm Lim® .a.awel•a rb,00•,•w 3+•.,+ n�xr�m.e .,•. umam P P m Jnm a% ymFm Wiwo Siu u�i.w ammo XMm W°WI.,N pa 'S 'o Xwo W)m vim mni Amxll.Wlnlx Nn� W wo n m ss m miupR'i SS Xw.® %mmt '4mm Mvn Fn'urvnrW� xvM'1 rxlui. 5� y5R® 'rz a. p T fe.rr..i Sxm,� X:K o•°tl""°'m x �` 'y N.moo¢o ooRo o-T^Srem-n 0°0°00 �P 3 fw a Mm o m i P P w A Apiao A W ]Impm Aw.� µulwa Sl iH.m� A ]° A A Tmon iv�Pu ,n2m �.� %mans iA]ms� ]xw5m SSmon '�s�'^ nm , w°➢w p A Yw.°w �mM° «� %IRM° A Y 2om µ4mo W4wmo WAm s°ns°�n xv m xns�IM ]2;z- Nu4vo Ya.ua A no� mE� A iu:icerr� w %m w ileiow H10z000 wimp µee4wo µ o isimo Nuawo %almo mm1°'°p Aamo m &la IrvwanM oWOoo >u�wm m A A�� Tn® i:rm''w°o� Snn® a+mw mW°se LTIXmufYVwl IrMMeal evv+AN emx ]a A futon %�A.ow NIRwo weM LTlxem�Tpn�l YmrXatl MVRmw° LTISm SWrgfro°nl Rn �Ixmem %iW W Afam11.1. n Slv Yniws ,1]m.� NMw AmFPo IIAr4P0 µn9s T293au ,[vxm A fwew° X...n :X.Sam A'W`.w0w xa - m f v Semi mm�1 cam m cm T-Io t'wvarON �pvu°n A' SlL l�iaq�y 5%aaAo A RINws W X� i1V%m5 in �4 mYlwue^ LTIYMcrnlnl— 251; Tn,m Yt R l4lT i1Fw Ttm 1 4a nn NY2w i m5 f° ,o ] m T�iw f4 ro5 ft xspetiv X T.Ram j ° A e Fy11�Mn1 T4.Rwo Su%.am W A.mnwo f1A4on infxm Rr%➢w LSrlxMtlmYq xdigm %n. b l=miTiewE T� 2A p w r 1°° Mt41.mm0o mm °pdmwerWeW a54#n 11'm y. T 34T12S"oo.m ].11. iIll.A o v fif11.1 i] YW� A pAo A U.NnY 4 Merbv fimlaT°X f%TS.aa µn % % W 514enm] A >L614on aW1.wo ]ROn ix0.¢p2m ft SW Wa tl X.uyvl wmpmia Xartvl aenxwv X.n11Mi�NnX A A T i aA 1L iwm5evu LTlfi�mXywn/xvw nmlArcMY1 ssµ.� ,ItIaA A m T)lime�➢w twxFm ]gym eL¢0 ilu]S3P9 ]x2)efaiw fiA urovw+MC LTISmIw�fvwNv.pvro YT ltS 51y f%as,® liz mupnlae 4T1[wlvnflsnJXvy nml�M1rca1 +•^wm�X �2r1Yu+.n55°..JW am_F �Cwwnul v %m�m ''k �.1/ SSfg4n a fTtcn W A atlie40n WW 4m nwm %rma�lrx LTI[alvnf5pvl f%� m•® µ WWi ofuom i° f94ws W¢a uN°mwwx LSf1�wxNAf 1'1 XJv LTOxn.N1v1 n �O° StaSmm f5. St ¢ao A.mo R %Y.� n�R➢w WSWa� N0� uwvvpad LTIX4Lalv1 _.. uunaurSMm, to 5 . n w , n _ «94.Ao .. _ -- -- _ tm Aian „maw iRton WI® w,�f il.u4ov Yre➢m p � w iIH➢m i♦I4m Iv♦mo j2mx(0.p Ix9dem0 'NW rm„ 11.35e.� N,we,wpop w I2aleAxpop Yvm Sel4mr Nm,o Wr,9 ie,srl,mo ,MI ILxv;ox ilNlmo p N pn.[ro N+¢aa YIDf.Wo N91Wrcnwlwl m WW Iliaa1 pflNlmm Am p YMimo p pm i6Yom in(om iI.SMOm Iumo Ssyimo po emo ifylf4o «a'I il.lf¢w3 WxAm pw p Slmm Ymon IrU.wo Y.ms.mo SIL¢wo _ �eev� �xm YesPv p V]eAm p p p N Nx,On p Yfo,wp p iiNr,mO Y,n;wo w e�mcvmon w w p `x vaW [rrgq�� Y s2os Nn.� SlMamo YOLom 111.r♦o� pw p Nm Il,lfl.o'a IuvA i111.w ilrepq I}w Am JlroLwo S14ss2- ssiN i14Y;Popo il.vim0 v vew P qm p N p p p voW H'°"°v°W 11 Sr. w � il9xm Nw.an M denu u.xw ° p ]e.a:�... faw sP:o'1 2 1. n luxop ivies ixrzuam J `f aw➢`o'o il).osq� veW @Mqw Yasum p m I9♦4m Vtwo voW vow[enrsey ♦mM 3 p p Fm `x ilxamo Nlcmpo l.oaimo it oa «x `i veW rom xm p Nslx➢ mx p SIxIo.oW Ol e,ml� vaW vV.eW fmw.+e _ it o Jrl Wa . �o p Il.w,ttq V,w pv 11, N4 mo il4ee4ro3 W P�nCm�lcxu[ xmm cl lwxi im k w `i Ax pozm� i+ice v. Mlanz "w w p Y .m vsvmpo YI Lo � w u " nN aA u ma � ilw.e➢w aa9el.00mo iran;ouwo `vnmm'o `I nl.«o.mp a ssaw JI.1000° Mrzssao S;suAm Yi+ss:� a.le2o0 wf:� v w u w:m nsx N ua�o i+ `ol]I aem u:w:pw fKam m umamo WIFE Jl zmAm V)S� %♦+imp oll.� u mp p p mp p m 6 m'" YllAm iln� p p p o p Ylom Y4om fKwn cn4 Ip1.PD p p Ilewym�o ie4IX0 Ywpa Y.IIMT 1NO.Wl p21mx laezom ly«Spu �pe5 llYam,ow SYU4ao iµumw Hnvw A^�° a i;x9♦aW 14sn4wv Illluo'n p M♦Ktto p w N Pw NwAm IFa�Pw inlSIXo YY.W i,vmo,�m i14JWrco Ne4om YKOW ,IxSiw fll.lK� Num m so w Yss➢w p.latwo l2w i.Ammp NA4n i!v40m )".Am amm `I vm `4 _ 2p N+J.om iK 119.m0 N4wa 9� I.IiaVtl vwx♦Iwiewrnl if♦4opm Yv44 p N. ➢wm f `'ux.pm i Mxm vmpomee epp aesmeu w pn®14p -4 Yuo ` II asi o m mao w urs.om uum 3 }el.pm 0 iwmo iu'u9°'n0ao vA96mo acm2 1. mzam u a Jxe..om idiom Voimo Mnum Ha mo c Rlew¢I 1 s fluam JI�I.W♦mwA N. 14 nw 3 isw i;.�ppm N'Jumm9sF:mmmoo `Y Y1 i��unv v«mrvcnwcsu IiiIUoNss� p,W� '4 iox i U�fiYcaw °lw Nisa.�om lm—s4 MeoxYlfz�moPm o we eay wCu p to w No4om ysl:mYmWO 45un Hp uAmwmM cuwn laan ran4 4N m y w w p w mp p N m p m w p w POD reo� � p p ML4 w IK♦.➢m baop N. m ♦v. J Wo ula,moo ipo P � w m p w "'°'•'°� ' p ssuAw N9u p p« " w p ixwa p ulx➢m Nxxwmwo Yvvmo rzmao _ w v w w w p "m=H isuam vwA� p Jo �vbl �' w on Yuppp ve,mo avr w sns w i"e mw"v']T' mnw. ule.[w fom Sp p ry IIIm usw wo Yumo Nn.om _ `� s o i!♦Wm0 w N N IN,ua Iss J mo irfe.w ISie; o izxeimoo ;e[Mry rufNnvcty gym. p p N p p w p w w nkuWl' n sPnl m p p p w 'f"' MwmbIt 6 2`o Am m ;x♦N O�W p p e4op eso.p Il wo I2♦IV%0 >jFu� Inexom i`Ysam ill o)I.mo IIYa 31¢r)I xaa ewmwlc1 Iv ixw. im+pz YIAw 3 an 14 on 4M 2lmia� p w p p m N w w m p N VYPoS p w io lmiw yso,om Y(Wx W♦Am wN W4p wu042 1W!op m p N p p m w RNRu ue W � p w w N' nw p HI♦.Om il.pw, 4v,mo Fop ylK,wo Can µy,lmcmrcp11 6 2ixxi➢m 1 ♦Rp p w in. 311¢w,l Ilarmo 12 :Smp Ir,ir]wo 4e N w N p p p w P. w m N w rv]� YK,00po v w uuo"'oo Jlvixao N"'° Ny°°ao Mwla NI2M u,uippo ii'�tl Ws:me v:nMn u.l♦Lom �� �r4plm weom Jxx!om p p w ul.ao vs;➢m ivamo Y♦.w) ilwppp Y.In.mp vY.pm NawAop ""•, ^vim N.n.� n ♦5j N w w 93� 93pp ivp,ma ixlaon zexa� ne7.VnWn �"v� M Jai[ J io lu po w 1 lef.mmpo ilxxapro iilwµa Jz Nalm.ex rum ax ugywybOe I.I♦ rz ♦ x w r i o o a Yllow 1+15 p m N iaioz Yrf.mo ilU. a 11oKua Il.luw p fo N p p _ uwlm4 1w w p w NN w p w)m trnvna ornMU+e w w N w w a*vM A«e 16 i apm 1'65mt w w I4 W csnntl 10 w p w pN p w w •��•' p]2� Nsopm .bred a4g^^ w w w w p c. 1.410 u nose. p n w ra roaoro.wl.r:w w w v w w Yu."`n wroMnee �e m+4' � a « w ,bawls^ w n w w "`nivb w w w w i4ewmp I.Weuwsw. w xa a�ae w w p walA�o. tioro1 iev 1 2 1 Dw w w � bMrMVuabmecw MIaFw Nei m w w w uYmp Nn.wx wm oboes w ump.mp w Poda[pBarorM mm im Y`m'vwy w Abe sane I.gpneu w io w fll.uo➢x p w w ISY M x' ip w w p w Nvr4 mw m w N w w �W x1�5ISNp w p w w we�rupeneKlm y1NSm➢W es4� faWtw w w Wes oru i w p io wn]. w w �w Nesaw YMr�alev •War+ Fern Vmwew ^ N.a� ill+go Imes w o wmw'a4C mwra M w 4 i io u+pmpama Yul cFecevrX ) � w w w Wrcuwnne �emua Be w )o IPmmpanM Wnv : tivwe2 1gi�Appmi i ml� N io p x w.mm a,ic n Wiam i r.eltoz %xsop'�m p p M.+sxmo N WapO S'rmAm w uxmwaM wee Mvr Yra,ror�m wa �en icn�ilm. cma� Newo p w w w w w w n Si+Y i��' v uw�„«w i bAm u. mwo aroromrew m^"6�5 Y"�^c^�°W ewe NereFm il.xn.p9 N tl sp voaar.a a'"° i,vnmp vwAm w p io pa puWua Pla p Sweon 1e Am M pma� f a�w rose w, w m w m m• w aw,mp°e'm.a coMn w m v Po: NWiapa SmAm b q q YmM Y,.ra�am raw oa repo, �. Nmw Nezpm w w Inmoaam o�"m xo �mm 34Y[[0 Nn.A9 N W N INbmuvaftl s�`m calla mip LL Kp w i� uWm�.�w.am c�ucamn Plk sms way.m Yptow w w�nn.0 wwNm uprcvyvlee uanp wM mn eg2eM ive x e x w s i p o p Siwpo p SSAie.m 1mon M w w wo Niue iY4� N,me,mo N]iom w w w w Wm 3 .� lies Npvap naeappup N.ms.mo w u w w w w w w � arp.� rzntmp Nlpmp rv.vx� vxnxppwe 3 Am i'i.:u� io:imp Nv my pa w w w � ip w p ms. m Pm. Po � mp myemo Nsauwv V i we. � Nia �p Sm.epm iexe.� upwpmp cramp f65aa am: ro WxAop wi o"o unn�o ' u«].p3oo' w w w � ip pw fo i 15am Nxe,wp wnwp SLm4mo •wl.�o il.WxpA w� ilgma in.mo u nvw il]x1oA 11. � mow m ivay.pw )I 14Lm Ile,l6ymo me ul:vw iweEtW] w w WPv NINW Slvxmo exa S3 mwo w w w �p So ilN.w mo naox Smp.� i2ev4Poa Rx )nPz WAm Nlom el4 pz m il(W] Srw,mw. � wNI4Am )IWIRn Nb0.m] isaE6po w�n� 111.W Se0.om W.om yppW t1Y.IXo )vuAx )Iw.� Wimo 1 Mellpn N,nsma iss.m bem w W � WI w WIC p w w w w iK n`p�o[ me i�lmislm �IWe.pO° xtue ixl3xam Ni 3914wo mmemo Sil,ne.mo p mw im0.uO )vammo 3196Wp IY S :n 111- w 31. ivvv mo � w u � p il�v umr, �iw wA'�pp � issn» i�wm )iPnm iusp f w N A'�pp w vnpw bump w wv. � Am is ml w swamp w u mx w wsA°p u um.00wp v�'p�pp 3i++:AOe'm wsoowp Ne+.APo mimp i°d pmmp NwAm Wm Sf 0 1114p]p SI.w4mp il.SpaWI Syemp 114W1 )1Ntox ml«� 3lxexmp W4wn )Sieun an Ne+Wy umpm NV Fm Wymp issues Aatm] ^ion m w w Nmpm Hev.mp Y¢ µurge pmpv eo,uq ear ""w bmm w•. Mr�Nq v2 �InN amK wmnlernl NpMagr•p wt voplr•rnl n vnwlxml voeylrml .=wmq wmcl iryrm� SfArm r»+�wma m+r�P,rd.e ➢xr,a�er.e crr.,vma.. c"`w`mc� ox�owr.s �=.ubn Ifbbcl vrlWmRaesel a=r sa,rmra Wuwpruee amanefpnyr NbmwdM. NI pYrc➢rrrrep w:iC—RA.vI b=•fl?au'bl wrs„w wrsoam rorsara TI— nr� w�werrp wMem MN mrwxrb,e. xq•m Nno. N�� vawmsw�w k� rmm. w�mm. rn�w:ror r•�+pro v«.x«e.b xcrrms>,ra mMN ��j pu spM eerwA w'n =lwgvaw Vf�rcaredo.m a:.i+�vdbc.anlo oarv�� ua•r,. �,vabv �rpuM� nun;;xsP.,or oavw fl=cl cadv cam '"'fin d,N �ro 6�. o m •r�ipt� b=.r[btlp au�rrypx .=.fl•bm•I ve.x sMn. blmrgel br:��c.armrsm.gr <wry`� 1w'oa, Mee .Ir: rPm».Nn C mrmar i+n•..=tla wmen vo�nma n.. ab� Ana srm er.dream. immv :nrur"r "''a cwrep�.xn I o o i V71- wvo wo.000 MIr.Om =aolm v orrP o i rv� lzrusm m➢� a w Ysmo i.n.W K.vsm� sr. w iinio�oo wss➢o arwoz i l.sre.� s w wK.Pwo K»r.m f 1N�Pm a.m,om uw•om uiio"'oo w i w 0 w a w=. m iu=s=se �o i.+v000 iuuro nau on w>'Po YmPww YN➢W a=.00wo wuom wszoa w iKi io 1w➢o 1rU0�mow i o n.ow w 10 w ii<imo an.➢ww us?ao w 0 wNzaoo w rzo� uuP"0oo i:m.➢m ir�imAv fi�mero iu5ia b� f a w w woo i=x w Yozwo Ksa�o Im:wo w f �Milm➢ v.uoowo a6za o iz=uom i riEzaa usiwa r w wrzaowo n w nrzmo iLLO� w=.w muo iu4m SSRox IMtm Koi`sm fxowo u=aoowo aiio'0°o0 ssrvmo w iKp 0 w w lriii=.w wra➢owo YKos w In 1w0 1rv.wc �,wo boo w IJ11 uamo YI=Swo i l'ae::mo v.+•.ow iuxUW w waoowo YPesFa KJ+rma wioso:o'o'w il4p oi00°oo w 1w.Po izlsuoo Izwz000 i w sn w w w no Yw� ii mwo anPm »am000 w u n.�nao 11411 y uw'a°0°oo m axm+ b � w w iws o 0 w wm o nv w Y Ix.00 wvw i2•rlmo mo f2tdfm4 vKoowo a aoer� uo=mO w u Kao w+smo Y=.00wo w m 0 MPYm KwL6�W �� n,�. ��a �., ,o. ��a EXHIBIT Al-C.2 - TUMF Regional Transit Cost Estimate - 507.ADJUSTED AREA PLAN DIST LEAD AGENCY PROJECT NAME _ LOCATION UNRS (number/ len th in miles ADJUSTED -TOTAL AD-1 MAX TUMF SHARE Regional WA Regional Transit Centers Various locations region wide 11 31,103.000 111519,000 Regional RTA Bus Stop Amenities Upgrade Various locations region wide 70 945,000 350= Northwest/Central RTA Central Spine Service Capital Corona, Riverside, Moreno Valley 24 6,600,000 2,444.000 Northwest/Pass RTA SR60 Regional Flyer Capital SR-60 condor from SB Co. to Banning 45 12,375,000 4,583= Northwest/San Jacint RTA-215/SRl4 Regional Flyer Cap l-215/SR-74 corntlor from Riverside to San Jaci 37 10,175,OOD 3.768,000 Northwest/Southwest RTA 1- 15 Regional Flyer Capital 1-15 Condor from SB Co. to Temecula 49 13.475,OOD 4,994000 Regional RTA Regional Flyer Vehicle Fleet Various routes region wide 32 8,800,000 3,259,000 aml s' - . ?:J.'j 49 2009 Network Addendum Approved on October 5, 2009 for the 50% Fee Reduction Estimate -50%ADJUSTED (10C Pdorey C..WasN Cenho MenHee MenHee SR-741Pinacatel Simpson 2.49 2 4 2 of 1 3 a 260 0 i..__..___ $L563.0$0 §590.0$0 $590.___-$576 $0 _0 b5)6,$0 $0 $0 $21d.0$0 §535.0$0 $05.W- $2)3.D$0 $273.= $3.......000 j3.)Sh $3,7.1,WC $3,)S1,$0 Central MenHee MenHee Hofi.ndGadc.n Grnbani 4 0 1 3 0 0 0 }0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 §0 §0 Cenhal MenBee M.W..erffee GaMani 5roH LOD 2 2 4 2 M 1 3 0 0 0 $62).000 $23).WO $0 $0 $0 $63.W0 $Ml'000 $1.1)O,OW $1,1)O,NO Cenhal MenHee Menfee Simpson AItlmOWa 0.64 0.98 a 4 4 M 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $804,a$0 $303,040 $0 $0 $0 $80,040 }201.0$0 1SUM11." b111.0$0 $1.499,0$0 EI,499. Cenhal Mende. Menlo. Newpod 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Cenhal MenHee Mended Newport Newpod 1.98 I.81 4 6 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1) $0 $0 $0 $a CaMral Menthes Nawpad Desk Mendel Munide 1.81 0 d 6 6 80% 1 3 a 0 0 $682W0 $258.000 $0 SD $0 $68.01) $in,WO $94,000 $12n,DD0 $1273,01111 Central MenHee Newpat Madeta 1.21S US 4 6 2 0% 1 3 2 0 0 SI.M.000 Won $111140.000 50 $0 $1,243,000 $3,107..000 11.291.001 318,552AW $18'M'W0 $0 $0 $9,055,W0 N $0 $t06,N0 522N.W0 $M16,000 $13.130,000 $13,130,000 CeMrol MenHee Newpod I.215 MmMe 0.95 4 6 2 a% 1 3 a 0 0 $595,Wa $224,ON N 30 $0 $60,W0 $149,000 $821000 $1,110.000 $1.086A011 CeMmI MenHee sea 1.215 Bd➢➢s 2" 2 6 4 M1 3 2 0 0 $25641000 $968,000 $11.1d4AW Sa $0 $1,370,000 $1,26.000 $IM7,,000 520,935.000 $W266AW Central MenBee Smtt Munieta 1-215 1.94 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $4A41.000 $921,M $0 $0 $0 $2,W= $610.000 $33 m $4,552,000 $4.5520D0 Cenhal MenHee SR-74 Matthews Biggs 1.89 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.189.000 $449.W0 $0 $0 $0 $119,OW $297.0W $164.000 $2.218.000 $2218, 0 Cenhal Moreno Valet' Alenanm P215 Pens 3.71 4 6 2 60% 1 2 0 0 0 $931,000 $1,191,000 $0 $0 $0 $93,00 $233.000 $212.0W $2.660,000 $2660.WO Cenhal Moreno Valley Al.as,nw o Pens Nason 2.00 2 6 4 15% 1 2 0 0 0 $2,135,OW $2J30.MO $0 $0 $0 $214,000 $534.OW $487AW $6.I00.10 $6.100,000 Cenhal Moreno VaOey AlessaMro No-. Moreno Beach 0.99 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $6M000 $796,000 $0 $0 $0 $62,000 $156,M $142,m $1,77BOW $V78.000 Cenhal Moreno Valley Alessandro Moreno Beach Gilnwn Spmgs 4.13 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2595,0W $9n.W0 $0 $0 $0 $2W,000 $649.W0 $357.M $4.840.OW $4.840.000 Cenhal Moreno V.Aey GIInn. Spdn,, SR40 Alessandro 1.67 2 4 2 (A 1 3 3 a 0 $).050.000 $396.000 $5.445.Wa $0 $0 $65D.000 $1.624.000 $689.OW $9.854AW $9,604.000 Central Moreno Volley Pens Roche Veto ror..'P 220 2 4 2 im 1 2 0 0 0 $1.243,000 $1.589,W0 $0 $0 $0 $124.000 $311,000 SM.= $3,550=0 $3.55(t.000 Cenhal Moreno Valley Pens honwood Sunnymead 0.52 d 6 2 80% 1 2 3 0 0 $65W0 n3MO $5.445.000 $0 $0 $551.0W $t.398AW $559.OW $8.081.000 $8.081,000 Central Moreno VaOey Pens Sunnymead Cactus 2.W 4 6 2 80% 1 2 0 0 a $moon S321AW .$0 $0 $0 §25.000 Sam $57A00 $717,OW $6830W Central Moreno VWey Pens Cactus Had, Knox 3.50 2 6 4 25% 1 2 0 0 0 $3,300.000 $4,2N1.000 $0 $0 $0 $330.00a S825.000 $7520W $9.427.000 $6.975,000 Ce,dnsl Mo.. VWby R«M Vhta Roche Canyon Heacack 1.66 2 4 2 0% 2 2 0 0 0 51,263W0 $1,935,OW $0 $0 W $127..000 $316400 $260,000 $2.=IND $zM'000 Cenhal Pens 11M/Case Pens Goek 0.30 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $189,000 $241,m $0 $0 $0 $19,a00 $47.000 $43A00 $53 'om $539.000 Cenhal Pears 8twrwc Keystone Gcek 2.N 0 4 4 34% 1 3 0 400 0 $1.857,000 $701.000 $0 $2.W4,000 $0 $416.000 $1.O40.W0 $486.W0 $6.804.000 $6,804A00 Cenhal Porte Nano. 1,215 Sherman 0.35 2 4 2 M 1 2 a 0 0 $219.000 $2W.W0 $0 $0 $0 $=oso $55AW $50.00 $626,000 $621.000 Cenhal Pens Ethan.. Gcek Munieta 0.99 2 4 2 M 1 2 0 0 0 $620,WD $792000 $0 $0 $0 $6200D $15SW0 $141.W0 $1.))0,W0 $1.))0, 00 Cenhal Penis Hhanac Munleta 1-215 0.90 2 4 2 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $S65.W0 $722000 $5,4d5,W0 $0 $0 $601.00D $LSW,OW $673,000 $9.509' 0 $9.509.a00 Gosal Pens h1W-County 1-215 Side, 455 0 2 2 0% 1 2 1 3W 0 $2,859.000 $3.655.000 521A90.000 $064,000 $0 $2561AW $6,403.000 $2927A00 $41,159,000 $41,159,000 Central Penis Pens Hadey Knox Ramona Loo 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.251.000 $4720W $0 $0 $0 $125.000 $313,000 $1720W $2.33SM $1.696.000 Central Pen¢ Pens Ramona Cihus 2.49 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.566.000 $5911M $0 $0 $0 $157.000 $39200D $216,000 $2.9MM $2.917.000 Cenhal Penh Pens CHrvs Nuevo 0.50 6 6 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $D $0 $0 $0 Cenhal Pens Pens Nuevo I I.75 2 4 2 M 1 2 a 300 0 $1.097.W0 $1.4 '000 $0 $B64.000 $0 31961000 $690.WD SWUM $4,386.000 $3.010.000 Cadml Penh Raman. 1.215 Penn 1.47 4 6 2 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $9=CK)D $1,179,000 511.140,001 $0 $0 $1.WS000 $3.01600 S1.3ulm $18.7107.000. $111,754,0011 Cenhal Penh Ramona Penis Evans 1.00 4 6 2 Mh 1 2 0 300 0 $625,000 $800.000 $0 $864.000 5a $149,030 $372,000 $229,000 $3.039.000 $3,W9,000 Cenhal Penh Ramona Evans Rides 209 4 6 2 01% 1 2 a 0 0 $1A11,000 $1.6n1OW N $0 $0 5131.00)0 $3N,000 5299AN $3,746,000 $3.746,000 Cenhal Perm SR-94(4M) His 1-215 2.29 4 4 0 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $0 $0 $11.140.W0 $0 $0 $I.114.WO $ZnSoW $1.114.000 $16.153W0 $16,153,OW Cenhal Uninacp ated Ethanac SR-74 Keystone 1.07 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.3441000 $W7,000 $0 $0 $0 $134.000 $336.00 $185.DW $2.506.OW $2.506.000 Cenhal Unincoporated Ethanoc She..n Matthews 0.61 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 1 $385.00 $145.OW $0 $0 $9,100,000 $949.OW $2371.0W $963.000 $13.913,W0 $13,913,000 Central Uninc.,.,Wed Giman 5pmOs Alessandro "do. 4.98 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $3.987.OW $1.m.W0 SO $0 $0 $379.000 $947,000 $497.000 $6J89AW $5.0m.000 Cenhal Unncorporated Menifee Ramona SR-94 lPimcatel 6.52 2 4 2 M 1 - 3 0 0 0 $405.OW $1,546.000 $0 $0 $0 $410,0W $1.024.W0 $564.W0 $7.6380W §7.638,000 Central Unlncarpmaled Wd-County Side, Ofte 6.92 0 2 2 0% 1 3 0 600 a $41348AN SIMI, W $D $1,728,100 W $608,000 $1.519A00 $M'm $1016161000 $10,616'an Cadnsl Uninca,pasaled Ramona Rid., Nco 0.97 4 d 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $609AD0 $=Jim 50 N $0 $61AW $1S20a0 $N,ON $1,t36,N0 $1,136,000 Cenhal Unlncarponded Ramona Plea Won 5.95 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 I'm 0 57An.0011 $2822000 $0 $7A118,100) $0 $1A97.000 S3,741A0D $LM.000 $24,8030W $23,651,000 C hdsal Uninco,poraied Reche Canyon Son Be.sudina County Reche We 3.35 a 4 4 0% 3 3 a 0 0 $51999,000 $1.5118AW $0 $0 $0 $6W,W0 $1.5110AW $759,W0 $10p46,0011 $B,nLOW Cenhal Unlcama,aMtl ScaH BAR, SR•>9(Nnchedn) 3.04 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $3,818.1111,11 $1,441AN W $0 $0 $Mm $955040 $M.W0 $71122N0 $7,122,000 Central Urtinaorpwated SR-74 EMaiwc are 2.68 4 d 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Foofhil Paseo Grande LincoM 2.0 0 4 4 0% 3 3 0 3W 0 $4,654.000 $1,432WO $0 $1.728.000 $0 $6X000 $1.596.OW $761AW $10.609.0o0 417,420,OW Nodhwest Corona Fcoth0 Uncoln COrdornia 2.81 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Foothll CalHamia H5 0.89 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $558N0 $713,000 $0 $0 $0 $56,000 $140.000 $127.00() $1.594AW $1.594,000 NaOhwed Caana Green W., SR-91 0aminaue>Ranch 0.0 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 a 5326,W0 $416,000 $0 $0 30 $33W0 Sam $74.000 $931,0001 SWAND0 Northwed Corona Green N. Doad.insRanch PWha4a5 0.56 4 6 2 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $426,W0 $4N.W0 $0 3D $0 $43,000 $107,WO $BBAW $1,114.000 $I.I01,W0 Northwest Corona Green River P.E.ades Paseo Grande 2.01 4 4 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NorMwat RNenide Alessor . Adington Traulwein 2.21 6 6 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TO $0 Nwlhwest Riverside Arington North Magnola 5.92 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NWhwed Riverside Arington Magnolia Alessandro 2.02 4 6 2 11% 2 2 3 0 0 $1.3aOOO $1.437,00 $5A4SOW $0 $0 $681,0W $1J02,000 $824AW $11,451.000 $10.313.000 Nodh.st Riverside Van Buren Soria Me Nver SR-91 3A4 4 6 2 I= 1 2 3 1.000 0 $1,976.000 52.398A00 $514451000 S2A80,000 W $1.020.0110 $25NAW $1260111011 $1>,429,000 $15,462,000 Nadhwed Nvndde Van a... $1-91 MocMnBbW Canyon 3.10 4 6 2 4% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,874,0110 $2,396,0001 $0 $0 SO $187,WO $469,0111) $423,0130 $5,353W0 $35930N Nodhwed Riverside Van Bore. Woad Tmuhvek, 0.49 6 6 0 03B 1 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 W SO $0 30 m $0 $0 Hadhwad Riverside Van Rosen Tsavlwain O.W. I..... 1.27 4 6 2 M 1 2 0 a 0 $M,000 $nB4OW $0 $0 $0 562AN $i5L000 $Mow Si,>82.W0 51,755,000 Northwest Unincorporated Alenandro Trwlwein Vhta Grande 1.22 6 6 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Nedhwest Unlncorporofed Alessandro VistaG snde 1-215 1.26 6 6 0 0% 2 2 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwed UnincoporaNdl Cadolco 8S.W me Barley John 0.76 2 6 4 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $1.i51,W0 $M'm $0 $0 $0 $115000 SnIlIo 0 $151= 52063AN $1,786.001) NOdhwed Unlnce,pe,nied Cajalco Hadeyj.hn Hang in 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 a $7272AW $9,29610101) $0 $D $0 SM1000 $I16181010 $1.657.001) $WIMM $W.325,000 NMHened UnIncerposaNd Calalco Hand! 1415 028 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1>B.0A0 $67.4111101 N $0 $0 $18.W0 $45.W0 $25,0W $B39AW S333,000 Nedhwed Unincerpotaled Cajdao 1.15 TamncW Canyon 0.66 4 6 2 0% 1 2 2 a 0 $4I4,0011 $SW.000 $11.140.001) $0 $0 $1.155,000 SZN9.000 $12W,W0 $ly,3Y.OW -$7.907AW Nadhwa,t Uni.."orated COjdca T..oWCannn La Slenn 3.21 2 6 4 0% 3 3 0 175 0 $51746,000 $1.522AN $0 $Im'm $0 $676,000 $1,699AW 58211AN $I1A68.0W SIlAN.W0 Nwihwed Unincorporated Cnjalco Le Siena 85ataante 6.11 2 6 4 0% 3 3 a 0 0 $10,937.000 $2,1196A1(t) 50 W $0 $1.a94.W0 5274AW $1=000 $19.IN4,000 $19.OM,OW Bastioned Unincarporaed Schlesnsan San Benladlno County Nanboa 1.53 2 6 4 011 1 2 0.. 200 0 51,926,N0 $24620W $0 $1,1520W S0 $301%AW $M= $5541000 $y,in,ND $7,1720011 Hadhwesl UnNcwpanded SchBaman Harman Sumner 0.0 2 6 4 M% 1 2 0 0 0 $626.N0 $Nl= $0 N $0 $63,000, $15>A00 $1430m Si.>90.000 $1,790.M NOtlhsvest Untoc.1porakd Schaesman sense., C 'sdshM 0.50 0 6 6 0% 1 2 0 a 0 594ZM $125.OW $0 $0 SO $MOW $2M.N0 $215,0011 $2,692W0 $2,69Z= Nodhwesl Unincmposaktl SchResmm, CNvelond ASheet om 0 6 6 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $4S3,Wa S55A000 N N $D $43,011111 $I081000 $99.1411) $I237.000 $1,237A011 Nodheed UNncaponled SCh3esmm ASheet Hamner 0.27 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $WAN $4330W $0. $0 $o $34,0110 $86,0110 $Mow $9N,Ooo $9N,aN Nodhwed UNncorporofaci SehBesman He.., 1.16 0.31 a 6 6 0% 1 2 1 0 a $51311 $742W0 $21.89DAW N $0 '$2247AW $5,618,000 ani' W S33.8N,000 533,358A110 NOdhened Unlncmpeeled Schlieman 1.15 NRnylan 1.97 0 4 4 a% 1 3 0 I'M a $24nA0D $935,000 N $5,760,000 $0 SS24AN $2069.000' $917.001) $12992AN $12972000 Nadhwed Unlnca,pwaed Van Amen SR-60 Rehasave 1.0 4 6 2 01S 1 2 a 0 0 5097AW $1,147.000 $0 N so $90.W0 $M.W0 $2030W $Z,S62,OOD $t.N6.ON Nadhweat UnMcapaatad Van Buren IaBeOmve Santa Me Rive, 360. 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 a 0 $2253N0 $288>,WO $0 $D. S.. N $226,W0 5665,N0 $SI6,ON $6A61.0,11D $2,711ISAW Nadhwal Unincapaaled Van Bum. Mocid"IsM Canyon Wood "1 4 6 2 O% 1 2 a 0 0 52768W0 $3,639.M $0 30 SD $2»,WO $692W0 SaIAW $7,9W,0110 $6,174,000 Nodhwed Uninco,po,atetl Va. Bute. O..,e Semen 1.215 199 4 6 2 0% 1 2 1 a 0 $I,1B4,OW $1,514AN $21.11140.0110 $0 $0 52n3N0 $5,769A00 $2A530N $MlnlW0 $34.358.000 .Pan Beaumont Beaumont Oak Volley 171th1 410 1.37 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 s0 $0 $0 - $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ines Investors! Pahem Oak Valley (Son amateo:anyon4M 1.17 0 4 4 a% t 3 2 NO 1 $1,4n,W0 _ 5555AW $11.140.00 $I.=.= $9.1W,0W $284400D 55,801W0 $2,399,000 $34.696.OW $0 Pas Beaumont SR-n(BepunsoN) 1.10 Meow ON 4 4 0 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $0 $0 $5A45,W0 $0 50 $545,OW $1,361,0411 $Ml= $706.000 $0 ion Unico,poMetl S!•>9 (BeavmOM) McBOw CaDi 0.36 4 4 0 a% 1 2 0 0 a $0 W S0 $0 So $0 N $0 $0 $0 Pau UNncospaaled Pahesa 4ta Id 0.45 0 4 4 0% 1 3 a 0 0 $565AW $213AW $0 $0 $0 $57AW $141.000 $)BAN $1,054,N0 $1A53000 Pau Micmpwand Pohem id SE-79(Beaumani) 203 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 0 a $3,096AW $964,000 $0 $0 $0 5310AW S»4,000 BIBIJBR $5,501= $5,55DIM Pan Unlnmmesaled S11J9(lamb Canyon). CaBomta GBnan Spdn➢s 487 4 4 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 N N $0 $0 W N 50 $0 $0 $0 told 2009 Network Addendum Approved on October 5, 2009 for the 50% Fee Reduction San Jaeht0 Hemet DOmem cmi Sanderson State . 214 4 _ 4 0 0% 1 3 a ......- 1-.. W W W 1111.uw l...uuu li5.UW $2.W5,000 52.075.000 San Jacinto Hemet SR44 Mnchester women 2.59 4 6 2 0% I 2 0 0 110 0 So $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 se"..Ions San Jacinto MW{ Unty We. Russian.. In 0 2 2 0 O $1.625.OW $2,07I,000 $0 $0 $0 $163.OW $W6,MD $320AW $4.641.OW $3,668.000 San J..Mf. San Jacinto I.... Wasroa Sandman 1.73 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.OBS,ND $113820011 $0 M $0 $109,N0 $21'lAM $M7.OW $31099,N0 $3,099,ON San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Sanderson State 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 a $1.MWO $1„181.000 $0 M $0 $1091000 $291.MD $247,000 $3,099.000 $3A99AD San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona State 2.39 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $2,998,OW $3.834.000 $0 n $0 $3W,000 $250.000 $683,WO $8,565,O00 $6.830.W0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Main Main Cedes 2.66 2 4 2 OR 1 2 0 0 0 $1.693,OM $2.139,000 $0 $0 $0 $167.000 $418,000 $381.000 $4,71BA00 $4.650,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto Ramona Cedar 20 0 4 4 0% 1 2 0 1SO a $2612.000 $3,340.000 $0 $8640W $0 $348.000 $869,000 $682000 $a.215.W0 $8JI5.000 San Jacinto SR-94 1.10 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Unincorporated D rherigoni SR-79(Wmhsc%,) Warren 3.10 4 6 2 O% 1 3 0 300 0 41,945.000 $734,000 $0 n"NO $0 $281.OW $902.ODD $354,OW $4.86D.ON $4.392,000 San Jacinto Unincorporoted Gammi Springs Bridge Sanderson 2.95 2 4 2 O% 1 3 0 a 0 $1,852,000 $699,00 $0 $0 $0 $185.OW $40.000 $25S.WO $3,454,000 $3A54.000 San JaclnW Uninc.rparaled Mid.CO.My Bddge Women 235 0 2 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,425,000 $553,000 $0 $0 $0 $IM,= $369.00 $2020M S2752ND $23521000 San JaclMo UnSrcamaraed I.... B"'. We. 235 2 6 4 0% 1 3 a 0 a $29511N0 $1,114AM $0 $0 50 $2951000 $798:NO $407,OW $S.WSADO $5,505,000 San Jacinto inincorporoled SR44 Beggs SR-79(WM.hested 3.0 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2214A00 $836.W0 $0 $0 $0 $221,0100 $554,000 $305,O00 $4,130,000 $4.130,000 San Jacinto uNnc.rp.raled SR-99(HemM Bypass) SR-74(edda) D..M,.M 3.22 a 6 6 01% 1 3 2 WO 0 $61066.000 $2289,ON $11.140,00 $ MOOD $0 $119M,000 $49M,OM 32A39,O00 $312240N $31226,000 San JaclMa Unincorporated SR-79(Hemel OWass) Domen10.n1 VMchese, 1.0 0 6 6 0% 1 a 0 a 0 $2,826,0110 $1,W3A00 M M $0 post.N0 $1112-000 $W9,OW $5.232W0 $5,23201111 San Jacinto Unincorporated SR-79(Sen J.chnno Sypan) Ramona SR-)415Wdda) 6.50 0 6 6 0% 1 3 2 0 0 $122440N $4,622,001) 311.1m.NO $0 $0 52,399.000 $5A47AN $2,1101,000 $38,995,00(l $38,99S,ND Be- Jacinto Unincerpwaled SR-79(Sen2en.n) Ghana Sprin, Ramona 1.92 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 26N 0 $1.204,000 SWOM $0 $)AOB,NO $0 $869.NO al"A0a $915.ON $13,103,000 $122531000 Son JacMfo 0.1..neonates! SR-79(Mnchester) Oamentsml sets, A" 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $6.155.N0 $9A7hU00 $0 M $0 $616.N0 $1.09.000 $1,403.000 $I7.SB40N $11,524AN Southend Canyon lake Gels Reboad Canyon N."cel 0.0 2. 4 2 0% 2 2 a we 0 $3R,000 $WORN $0 $526A00 $0 $96,0110 mg.N0 51360W $1.0261N0 $1,343,001, S.ulhwed Conyers lake Wooed Canyon Conyan HM GaMJ 1.95 4 6 2 09. 2 2 a 0 0 $1A91AN $1,562aM $0 M SD $148,000 5390,000 $304,000 $3,965AM $3,753.000 Southwest RouMxvst lake Mi... Ralro.d Canyon 1.15 Canyon HIM 229 4 6 2 9% 1 3 2 a 0 $719,01HO $271p00 $I1.iWAN $0 $D $1,186AN $2965ADD $1213" $17,494,000 $19A94.13110 Sautheet Momola MUMefa CMIn BON 1-is Copgr Gull 2e 2 6 4 O% 1 3 3 0 0 $3,115,000 $1.176AM $5,44500 $0 $D $856.ON $2lWAW $934AN $13,306,000 $13139411100 CMten Reah Capp., C,alt Refs. 0.0 6 6 a 0% 1 3 0 0 0 M $0 $0 M $0 M $0 30 $0 $0 Scot." Ai Onfam Bean Lobs 1.215 an 4 6 2 03S 1 3 2 0 0 $522M0 $196.0" $11,1W,M0 $0 $0 $111661000 $2915,N0 $1,186,aN $13,121,O00 $17.123,000 SoulM1wed Mumele aniam Bell, 1-215 MeadoMod, &7S 4 6 2 O% 1 3 0 0 0 $469,00 SIMON $0 M $0 $47,= $117.000 $65AN $87S,000 $0751000 SeWhwesl Mandela Rench VNey(Date) S9-29(Mnchedn) Mamedlo 1.03 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 a 0 $648AN $829.O0 M $0 $0 $65.O01) $162BOO $IMAM $1,852.OD0 $IA52AN Southwest Muniata Meadowlod(Whid..) We, Canton Kenn 200 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $2512,000 $948.W0 $0 $0 $0 $251.00 $SM.000 $346,0130 $4.685,WO $4.685,000 Southwest Mumeta Menlee Scott Keler 1.08 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SouMwed Semecuno bench Valley Mamadte ymc 0.91 4 4 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 M $0 Southwest Usnecuh Rench Valley Y.. MUMelo Creek 1.29 0 4 4 O% 1 2 1 3N 0 $1,6N,N0 $2O92W0 50 $21AN.000 $0 $1,924W0 $0 $0 M $ m,= $0 $6,310A00 $D $2y31,N0 $0 $38,825,000 $0 $25.954.N0 Soehwest lemec.M Rench Valley Manhole Cro.k RenchaCmlasMa 236 a 4 4 0% 3 2 0 in 0 $4,232MO $3.392,000 50 $864,000 $0 $SIO,ON $1274.000 38891000 $11,566A00 $11,566,N0 Southwest Temecula Rench Valley Ranch. CaSlgnia 415(thmi 1.86 0 4 4 07.. 3 2 2 NO 0 $3,333AN 52994,400 $11.1411A00 $1.228.000 $0 $1,621,N0 $4,051,000 $1,9N,ON $26.391,OID $10A13,000 Saulhwed I.me.ulu SI.29(Mnchashn) MurdMe Hot SPdny Jeaea.n III) 6 6 0 0% 1 1 3 0 0 $0 $0 35A45,Na $0 $0 $545AW $1.361.O00 $549,N0 $7,e96,000 59,896A1DO Southwest Wildomor Bundy Canyon 1-15 Sumet 3.42 2 6 4 O% 2 3 3 0 0 $5.203.000 $1,620,W0 $5A45.W0 $0 $0 $1.065,000 $266ZW0 $1=000 $19,222,000 $17.222.0W Southwest Wiklomar Bond, Canyon Sumet Munleto 1.01 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 a 0 $1264.000 $479.000 $0 $0 $0 $126.00 $316.000 $124,O00 $2.357,000 $2,359,000 Southwest Wiklomar Linton Keith Palomar 1-15 0.55 4 4 0 O% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 W $0 $0 Southwest Unincoporated Benton SR-99 Eahan Bypaa 2.40 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.509.000 $569.OW $0 $0 $0 $1511WO $.377.MD $NB.DW $2,814.000 $0 $2,814,000 SOuthwed Mincorposated Cannon soon Btead.wiask SK-79 IN 0 6 6 0% 1 3 0 1.200 0 $4,7165,000 $1.BO6,ON 50 $10,368,00 $0 $1,515,N0 33.788,000 $1,696,000 $23.958.ON $23,958,000 South"" Unlncorpamled Newpad M.Wee Umenberpw 0.77 6 6 0 a% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 M $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Snulhwed Unincorporated Newpad Undenb.to. SRJ9(Wlnch.9.) 3.58 6 6 a 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 SD M $0 M m $0 $0 Southwest Unincorporated SR-74 HIS Em.c 4.89 4 6 2 O% 2 3 2 0 0 $3.724.00 $1,160.ODO $0 $0 Southwesl UMncesparoed SR-79(Eadem BypossMashi SR-79(Wincheser) Basel C52 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 IN $11.1.tomo $0 $0_ $1.486W0 $3.216.OM $1.602,W0 $22,828,000 $22.984,O00 Seuthwed UMncesparaled SR-n(Eastem Bypass) 1.1 Vino 404 0 4 4 0 $2319,M0 $1,071AN $0 $2JIB,MO $0 $313.0% $982A00 $4201030 $5,713A00 $5,713,000 Soolhwed Unlnc.,.raled SR." (Bad. lypass/An[.)Vino 5499(CaaeRm.) 449 2 4 0% 2 3 0 NO 0 56,149,000 $11915.ON M $I,152N0 50 Most) $1A25AN $922,000 $12.693,0011 $12,693,00 Sauthwed Unincmp0rafed SR-"(Besem bypass/Ama)SK-79(CoasMnce) S.M. Rohe 1.14 0 2 O% 2 3 0 0 0 $3A17,000 $1,064,01M $0 50 $0 $342.N0 $854WD $MM $61129.000 $6,125,000 Southwest Unincarpaned SR-n(Eodem Bypass/Ama)$note ON Palmew 1.72 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 100 0 $1,DBS,NO $SWAN W $526A0 $0 $2311O3111 $5y4N0 $28S,DW $3,945,000 $3.9440N Saulhwed UMncmpoaded SR-79(Easlem Bypass) Beat. Pdo 1.40 4 4 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $2,694A00 $BS9.0M M $0 $0 $269.1100 S674,000 59540N $4,629.000 nA29,ON Southwest Unlncaspasaled SR-79(Earlem Bypass) Pd. WS D 4 4 0% 2 3 0 0 0 32253.0OU $WZON $0 $0 M $2251000 $%sow $296,t1M $0.039,00 $4,039A00 Saulhend Unincmpomted SR-29(WlnchesM) Beer lhempson 42T 249 0 4 4 O% 3 3 2 1N 0 39,643,000 $1,997,0M $11,10,00 $ilia 0 $D $1,984AN $4.959,O010 $2103,ODD $30,95BAN $30,958.W0 Southwest Uninc.rpnaed SR-29(WMchese,) IhamPson la Aee 4 6 2 07.. 1 2 0 0 0 $1,Sa8,Na $1,980,OM M $D $0 $155A00 W7AN $353A0D $4A23A00 $4,423A00 Seulhwed Uninca,paraied SRJ9(WMche,1e0 WAlba Hunter 1.81 4 6 2 0% 1 2 D a D $111371000 $IA54,ON $0 $0 $0 $114,000 $234,000 $259,W0 $3256,000 $1.810AM SoWhwet Minces abed SR-29(Mncheser) Huller MunMe Nd Sprigs am 114 4 6 6 2 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $316,000 $W4,000 $0 M $0 $32AM MAIN SMODO $9N,N0 $3e1,0M Sabtatel 6 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 50 $0 M $0 $0 $0 M 50 $0 $0 295.15 26 12.985 2 $244.641.OW $151.473.000 $290.4W.OW $60.336,000 $18.20D.000 $61,393,OW $153,418.000 $16,513,000 $1,056,3931. WY2.539.OM 6 2aR 2009 Network Addendum Approved on October 5, 2009 for the 50% Fee Reduction Cost Estimate -50%ADJUSTED (1CICNIntl9Cond9 In$oki) Central Mentlee Goeh Juanita Lesser Lane --- 2 2 u u 41.Y16,Uuu g]23.000 $0 $0 $0 $1920m --$4ID.mD $2"." $3.574.000 3,574.000 Central Mentlee Goet4 Newport Juanita .61 1.36 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,639.000 $618,0110 $0 $p $0 $1660W $410.WO $m,imtt $3.057.000 $2,966,000 Central Mende. HCCOR H.uhSR l.m 2 0 2 0 0% 1 3 O 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 EO $0 f0 f0 Central Menifee Macal McNfeArtok,pa Menifee SR I91Winchezte0 4AS 0 4 d 0% 1 2 0 350 a $1.256,0m $1.606,a00$a $2,016,WO$0 $321,DW $B18,Om $488,M $6.511.000 $6.511400 Central Mendea MCCaI SR-791Wmchesterl W. 2.58 2 2 a% 1 3 0 0 0 $2793,000 $1.054.000 $0 $0 $0 $2)9,am $698,m0 $385,Om $5,209,0M $5.209,ox Central Mentlee MCCW H215 Azpel 1.23 0 2 2 0% 1 3 0 a 0 $1,6V.Om $610,00 $0 $0 $0 $l Q,OW $4W10(30 $223,0W $3.016.WO $3,016.00 Central MenHee McCall Aspel Menifee 0.95 4 6 2 0% 1 3 3 0 0 $])1,0)) $291,W0 ISMSWa $0 $0 $6m000 $1,554.W0 $651Am $9,334.m0 $9.334.000 Central Mentlee Mureta Hhanac McColl 2 6 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1,19810W $4520W $0 $0 $0 $1M.000 $3e0,000 $165.OW $2,235,000 $2,235,000 Central Mende. Murdeta McCall Newport 1.95 2W 2 4 2 29% 1 3 0 0 0 $869,m0 $328AW $0 $0 $0 $W,WO $217.WD $120,00 $1,621.000 $1.421.000 Central Mentlee Murder. Newport Bundy Canyon 3.00 4 2 4 2 0 0 0% I 3 0 2m 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 j0 §0 $0 Central Moreno Maon VaII.y CacheN215 Heacock 1.81 d 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 j0 $0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno Valet' Evmlyptus I-215 Towngate 1.00 4 6 2 25% 1 2 2 0 0 $852,WD $1,WO.WO 140 $11,m0 $0 $0 31,199,000 $2998.OW 51,3m.m0 $18,58),WO $18.587,0W Central Marano Vo$ey Eucalyptus Towngate Frodedak 0.67 4 6 2 25% 1 2 0 0 0 $471,WO $602000 $0 $0 $0 $47,1100 $118.m0 $107.00) $1,345,W0 $1,345,000 Central Moreno Valley Frederick SR40 Alessandro L55 4 4 4 a 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 N $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Heacmk Cactus San Michele 2.79 2 4 0 2 a% 15% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Heacock Reche Veto Cache 4.73 4 1 2 0 150 0 $I,d89,Om $1.904.000 $0 $d32,030 $0 $192.00) $molar $W3,W0 $4,880.0W $3.30.000 Cont Central Moreno Valley Heacmk Son Michele Harley Knox O)4 2 4 d 0 2 90% 0% 1 2 0 0 U $0 §0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 EO Central Marano Valey tronwmd SR-6a Remands 8.46 2 4 1 3 0 tW 0 $466,WO $176.00) $0 $432,000 $0 $90.000 M.Wo $107,000 $1,496.m0 $L238,W0 Central Moreno Valley Laszelie Eucalyptus Alessanmo LOD 2 35% t 2 3 0 0 $3A520W $4.414.MO $5A45.W0 $0 $0 $W0.000 $2224.D00 $1.MI.W0 $1],)56,W0 $q.]56.000 Central Moreno Valley Lasselle Alessandro John F Kennelly 1.00 2 2 4 4 2 40% 1 2 0 0 a $375,000 $480.OW $0 $0 $0 $Sti $940W $86=0 $1,073,000 $1,073.000 Central Moreno Votey L Lovell. John F Kennedy Oleander 3.14 4 2 20% 1 2 0 0 0 $5W,000 $643,Wa $0 $0 $0 j50.W0 §126.m0 bI I5,W0 $1.137.000 $1.437.000 Central Moreno Valley Moreno Beach Reche Canyon SR-60 L3) 2 4 d 0 100% 1 2 0 0 0 §0 30 $0 $0 $0 $0 ja EO $0 $0 Control Moreno Valet Mason knnwood Alessandro 2.02 2 2 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $Broom $1.a9B,Wa $11.14a.000 $0 $0 sl@ .OW $3,03).M $1.310,W0 $18,606.0W $18,606.OW Central Moreno Valley Pigeon Pass Ironwood set 0.43 4 2 3O% 1 2 2 0 0 $wwit $1,135,030 $11.140.W0 $0 $0 $L203,000 $3.W).000 $1,316.030 $18,M,W0 $18.688,000 Control Marano Valley Pigeon Pav/CEfAPCanGIX Cantarini Irornvaad 3.23 4 2 4 0 103% 1 2 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Moreno Vol, Reche Canyon Reche yea Marano Beach 4.02 2 4 2 2. 0 80% 1 2 0 a 0 $406.000 $519,M $0 $0 $0 $41.W0 $102WO $93,Wa $1.161,000 $1.161.000 Cenral Moreno Valley Redlands Locust Alessandro Z68 2 4 2 W. 2 3 0 0 0 $0 40 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Marano Valley Sunnymead Frederick Penis Z02 4 M 1 2 2 0 0 $1,683,000 $Z152,W0 Summit $0 $0 $1,21J20m $3,M& W $1,49SWO $20.961,000 $20.613.01W Central Peak He SR-74(4th) N215 1.92 a 4 a 1110% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 .$0 $0 j0 $0 §0 $p $p jp Central Penis Evan, Placentia Nuevo 2 2 O% 1 2 2 0 1 $12a3.Om j1.539.m0 $11.140Ap0 $0 $4,5W.0W $L689,Om $4.22&OW $1.843,W0 $26,187.WO $26,18),OW Central s Perris Evans Morgw Rarnanv . 1W 0.59 0 4 d )2% 1 3 0 0 0 $5W.W0 $199Am $0 $0 $0 $53,W0 $132W0 $)3=0 $985,0W $985,OW Central Penn Nano Nuevo 4215 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $372,W0 $140.000 $D $0 $0 $37,0DD $9311W $51.WO $693,OW $693,00 Central Perm Evans Oleander Ramom 1.99 0.99 0 4 4 Of. 1 3 a 441(l 0 $2,W4,01B) $945,WD $0 $2,304,OW $0 $481.OW $1,202W0 $575,Wn $8.011.0W $8.011,000 Central Penh Nanz Placentia Rider 0.58 4 4 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 Central Penis Evans - Rider Morgan 0.49 4 6 0 0% 1 3 0 0 D $0 m $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Peas Goetz Lesser Ethanoc LOd 2 0% 1 3 0 a 0 $311.000 $117,OW $0 $0 $0 $31,W0 $78.OW $43,11W $580,0W $59010W Central Penis Halley Knox 1-215 huh. 1.53 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $60,000 $247.000 $0 $0 $0 $65.000 $10.00 $90.000 $1218.000 $9)),Wo Central Perris Harley Knox Indian Penn 2 4 2 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $962mD $1. M= $5.,muw $0 W $641Am $1,602000 $764,00 $10.644,000 $10.644.000 Central Penis Hafty Knox -Perm Evans 0.50 2 4 2 75% 1 2 0 0 0 $78,W0 $100.W0 $0 $0 $0 §9.0m $201W0 $18,000 $224.000 $M4,000 Central Penn Nuevo H215 Muriel. 1.m 1.36 0 4 4 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1394,Om $1.654.030 $0 $0 $0 $129.000 $324000 $295,000 $3.6960m $3,696,W0 Central Penis Nuevo Muneta DUmap 1.00 4 6 2 0% 1 2 3 a 0 $852000 $1,0901WO $5.,ptS,W0 $0 $0 $630.000 $1.574,m0 $739.000 $10,330,W0 $10,330= Central Penis Placentia 1-215 mi. 2 4 2 23% 1 3 0 301) 0 $d84,000 $183.M $0 $86d.Om $0. $135.000 $337.W0 $15310m $2,156,WO $2.156.000 Central Pens Placentia Indian Redlands, 0.37 0 4 4 0% 1 3 2 0 0 $465.W0 $175,0D0 $11.140.000 $0 W $1.161,W0 $2901.W0 $1,178.000 $17,020,00 $17,020,000 Central Penis Placentia Remands Wkon 1.0 0.25 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $627,00D $23I,0)0 $0 $0 $0 $63.W0 $157,000 $86.000 $1,170.000 $1,170.000 Central Penn Placentia W1son Ever¢ 0.75 4 0 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 Central Perk SR-74(Mattheve) 1-2151mostly In Pens( Efiarwc 1.25 d 4 4 0% 1 3 0 3m 0 $946,000 $351.0m $0 $1.748,Wa $0 $267.000 $669,WO $W3.W0 $4,220,OW $4,2M= Central Unincorporated Briggs IPiiwmiet Sro Smpmn 2.50 0 4 0 0% 1 2 3 0 O $0 jp $5A45.Om b0 $0 3545.OW $1.361.Opp bs45,00D j).896.Wa $).896.m0 Cenhal Unincorporated Briggs p Simpson Newport 1.0 4 d 0% t 3 0 0 0 $3,140.000 $1,185.000 $0 $0 $0 $314,OW $)85,m0 $433,0W $5,85),WO $5,85),m0 Centel Unincorporatetl Center (Main) F215 Mi Veman 1.50 2 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 600 0 $958,00 $362.Wa $0 $1,728,000 $0 $269,OW $6] 000 $WSOm $4.294.W0 $4,294,000 Central unincorporated Elk Post SR-74 4 2 0% 1 2 3 0 2 $941.1300 $1,204.1= $5,445,1W $0 $4,240.000 $11063Am $2657.m0 $1,183000 $16,733,000 $16733,000 Central Unincorporated Mount Vernon/CRAP Carrid,Center Pigeon Pass 2.65 0.61 2 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $1,663.0W $628.W0 40 $0 $0 $166.OW $416,m0 $229,W0 $3,102,0110 $3,102.000 Central Unincorporated Nuevo Dunlap MenBee 2DO 4 2 0% 3 3 0 O 0 $54ZWO $144,01M $0 $0 $0 $S4,W0 5136.1)(10 $69,000 $945,000 $945.0)(1 Central UnincaryoroMd Pigeon Pass/CFAP Corona Canbnni Mount Veman 3.38 2 0 4 2 a% 1 3 0 4(10 - a $1.255,00) $474,OW $0 $1.152Am $0 $241,0W $WZ030 $288.000 $4,012.M $4,012,WC Central Unincorporated Post Santa Rosa Mine 91n 0.44 4 4 0% 3 3 0 0 0 $6,055,0N0 $1.603.000 $0 $0 $0 $606.0m $1.514m0 $766.0W $10,544W0 $10.544,000 Central Unincorporated Redlands San gmoteo Canyon Locut Z60 2 2 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 EO $O $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 EO Northwest hwest Corona 6th SR-91 Magro$o d.84 d d 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwesf Corona Auto Center Ralroad SR41 0.30 4 0 0% 1 I 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a Northwest Corona Hidden Valley Norco Hills Mcl-they 0.59 4 4 0 076 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,20000 1424.000 $10600m $424,W0 $6.1481000 $0 Northwest Corona Umoln Parkndg. OMafq 3.20 4 4 4 0 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Magna. 6fi Sherbarn 0.61 4 6 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Carom Magnoria Sh.W.ro ROnpau 0.39 2 0% 1 2 0 3W 0 $385.W0 $492,W0 $0 $864.W0 $0 $125,030 $31ZWD $174,OW $2352,000 $2.352,030 Northwest Corona Magnolia Rimpau Ontario 1.17 6 6 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 To $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Main Grand! Ordalia 0.88 2 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 40 $0 ja - Nalhwest Corona Main Ontario Foatldl 074 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $5531000 $209.OW 10 $0 $0 $M.WO $)W,W0 $76,000 $1.031.000 $975,000 NMhwest Corona Main Hidden Valet Palaitlge 0.35 4 4 4 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $O $0 §0 §0 $0 §0 $0 EO $0 N Corona Ma Mass Pahritlge SRAI p.B6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $218,WD $2)9,OW $0 $0 $0 $22W0 §SSOm $W.= $624,000 $4)9,m0Northwest Northwest Corona Main SRAl SCearM 036 6 6 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona McKinley Places Valey Prannaak, 0.57 4 4 6 2 O% 1 1 0 0 0 j538.W0 $1,dsct.ow $0 $0 $0 $SC,mO $135,000 $198,OW $2,365,WO $2,365,WO Northwest Corona Mcgnley Promenade SA91 0.33 6 4 6 0 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 Sa EO Northwest Carom M.Finley SR41 Magrpfn 0.31 4 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Ontario kis 9Certo 0.94 6 2 O% 1 1 0 1W 1 $196,000 $524.OW $0 MWO $13.650,1W $1,413.000 $3534,000 $1.466,01K $21.07I,MC $19,171.000 Northwest Corona .Ontario Uncalo Suem Veto 032 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $593.000 $75BA00 $0 W $0 $59,W0 $148,000 -$135.OW $1,693AW $116931000 Northwest Corona Ontado Buena Ares Man 0.65 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $202A0 $258,OW $0 $0 $0 $.= $5IJW $44.000 $5]).000 $316.000 Northwest Corona Ontario Main Ke$agg 0.78 6 6 6 0 O% 1 2 0 a 0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 Nadhwed Carom Ontario :Kellogg Fuledon 032 6 0 :2 0% I 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ` $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 .Northwest Corona Ontario '.HAkrton Rrtnpou 0.42 4 6 0% I 1 0 0 0 $W1.1:00 $539,W0 $0 $0 $0 $20,00 $W.= $74,W0 $884,0D) $864.01W Northwest Corona Ontario Rimpau 1-15 0.60 6 6 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 '$0 $0 $0 j0 ' $0 9$0 $0 $0 Northwest Corona Railroad : Auto Club Shearon 1.97 6 4 6 0 0% 1 1 2 0 0 0 $0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 .-$0 $0 $0 $0 NpAwest Corona R.1opod Sherman Main tat Grand( 1.26 2 4 a 0% 1 - 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,240,0[0 -.$424,0W $1.06D,OOa $424.OW $6,148.01W $61148,Om `Northwest Corona 'River Corydon Man 4 2 0% 1 2 D 0. a $m,= $1,014,000 $0 $0 $0 $».ma $198.0D) $I81AW $2,265M $1.513.OW Northwest ..Corona Sort.OWb SR-91 - Green River 2.27 0.96 4 d 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 `.$0 '$0 :$a $0 "$0 Northwest Norco 1st Parokl a Mountion 0.26 4 2 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Norco 1,4 MountWn Haasher 0.26 d d 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $161,WO $6).OW $0 $0 $0 $16.000 $440A0 $22000 sno m $30D.m0 Northwest Norco 2nd River F15 4 0 OR 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Norm 61h Hamner Caltamlp 1." 1.71 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 a_ 0 $902.0)1) $34).M $0 $0 $0 MOD) $M6.11430 $124.MD $1.682000 $1.160,000 Northwest Norm Adggton North Arkreton 0.97 4 4 0 0% 1 2 3 0 a $0 $0 $5,445.1)(B0 jO $0 $545,000 $1,361= $545,1314 $7396,0W $7,896,ODO Northwest Norco California Arfo hn 6th 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $612.W0 $23I= $0 $0 $0 $61,11430 $1531000 $84,W0 $1,141,Om $1,141,W0 Northwest Norco Croydon River 5th 0.98 1.46 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $616,00 $78I,030 $0 $0 $0 $62W0 $154,00p $140,W0 $1759,W0 $1.759.WO Northwest Norco Hamner Soda Am River HiddenValey 3DS 2 4 4 2 OR 1 2 0 0 0 $9211,m0 $1.176.W0 $0 $0 $0 $92.W0 $2W,001) $210,0Y0 $2,628.WO $2,628,W0 Northwest Norm Ifidden Vale, kis Norco HB, 1.52 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $1,91ZOm $2,451,030 $0 $0 $0 $192,01)(1 $499.W0 $437.WO $5.476,m0 $5.476,WU Northwest Marco Hidden Valley Hamner 415 0.13 4 4 4 0 O% 2 2 0 0 a $0 m $0 $0 $0 $0 m $0 $0 $0 Northwest Norco Norm Cordon H.. 1.20 2 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Norhwed Norco North CafdarNa Arfigtm 0.91 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 a $756,030 $966.M $0 $0 $0 $76.WD $189100D $172.1W $2,159.000 - $2,159,m0 Northwest Norm River ArcNbarJ Corydon 1.14 2 4 0 O% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 ja $0 $0 $0 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $716,000 $915.Om $0 $0 $0 $MAOo $I79,0c)0 $163,W0 $2045.000 $1164.0:10 306 2009 Network Addendum Approved on October 5, 2009 for the 50% Fee Reduction Network Detailed Cost Estimate - Northwest Riverside 10 Market Main 0.08 4 4 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 .NMhwest Riverside 3rd Chicago F215 0.36 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Riverside Adams SRAI Arington 1.56 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 Northwest Riversde Adams SR41 Lincoln 0.54 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4.240.000 $424.OW $1,060,Wa Northwest Riverside Buena Vet. Santa Ana River Redwood 0.31) 4 4 - 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Norhwest Riverside Canyon Crest Central Country Club 0.0 4 4 0 M 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Riverside Canyon Crest County Club Via Vat. D.94 2 4 2 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $716.000 $223,000 $0 $0 $a $%Laid $IN.000 Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest V. Veto Alessandro 0.0 4 4 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Canyon Crest M.ft WMr Ming Central 0.95 4 4 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Cenhal Chicago F215/SR-60 2.15 4 4 0 05S 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riv..de Central SR-91 Magnoria 0.96 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $4II,000 $610.OW $0 $0 $0 $48.W0 $119,WD Nosihwest Riverside Cenhal Alessandro SR41 205 4 4 a 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 10 Northwest Riverstde Cenhal Van Buren Magnolia 3.53 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Chicago Alessandro Spruce 3.42 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Ch... Spruce Columbia O.75 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,IOD.000 $910.000 $2275.000 NMhwest Riverside Columbia Main Iowa IM 4 4 0 M 1 2 3 0 2 $0 $0 $5.445.W0 $0 $4.24D.OW $969.000 $2.421,000 Northwest Riverside kwa C.Mer 3rd 2.25 4 6 2 M 1 2 0 0 2 $1,41 LW0 $I,WS,OW $0 $0 $6.3W,000 $179.000 $1.943.OW NMhwest Riverside Iowa 3rd University 0.51 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside 1FK TraW .m Waal 0.48 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside L. Siena Arlington SR41 3.56 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside La Sena SRAI India. 0.19 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside WSiena Indiana Victoria 0.28 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 .$0 $0 NorMwest Riverside Lemon [NB One way) Mission Inn University 0.08 3 3 0 M 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside lincdn Adams Washington 1.55 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Uncaln Van Buren Adams 1.54 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Uncoln Washington Vktord 1.43 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $898,000 $1.149.000 $0 $0 $0 $mwo Sm.= Northwest Riverside Uncoln Victoria Asington 0.28 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Month. SR-91 Victoria 0.86 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,240.000 $424.000 $1.060.000 Northwest Riverside Magnoria BNSF RR LO Siena 3.09 4 4 a 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $D $4210.000 $424.000 $1.060.000 NMhwest Rw rsde Magnolia La Sena Hans.n 2.70 6 6 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Norihwest Riverside Magnolia Harrison 14th 5.98 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,240.000 $424.000 $1.060.OW Northwest Riverside Main Ist San Bemardino County 2.19 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Market 14M Santa An. River 2.03 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D Northwest Riverside Martin Wihes Mg 14M 1,215/SR-60 2.11 4 6 2 0% 1 2 0 0 a $1.326,00 $1,695,W0 $0 $0 $0 $133,OW $3320p0 NMhwest Riverside Mission Inn RedwaM Lemon 0.99 4 4 0 M 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Nodhwest Riverside Overlook Sandhack Alessandro M2 4 4 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 W $0 Northwest Riverside Overlook Washington Bodewin/ViaMontecito 0.56 4 4 0 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Overlook BodoMwV. Montecito Crystal Yew 0.81 2 4 2 0% 2 2 0 0 0 $615,000 $649.00a $0 $0 $0 $62.000 $15.WD Northwest Riverside Overlook Crystal View Via Veto 0.55 0 4 4 M 2 2 0 500 0 $837.000 $B83,U00 $0 $2,BW0W $0 $3I2,000 $M,MD Northwest Riverside Overlook Val Vida Sandirack 0.0 2 4 2 M 2 2 0 0 0 $479.000 $506.000 $0 $0 $0 $48.W0 $ix= Northwest Riverside Redw.M)SB One way) Musson inn UniversM 0.08 4 4 0 M 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $O $0 $0 $0 Norhwest Riverside Trautweh Alessandro Van Buren 2.19 4 4 0 M 2 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Nodhwest Riverside Tyler SR-91 Magnolia 0.43 6 6 0 M 1 2 2 0 0 $0 $0 $11,I4OWa $0 $o $1,114,W0 $2.785.000 Nodhwest Riversde Tyler Magnolia Hole 0.27 4 4 0 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Tyler Hole Welk L06 6 6 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Tyler Welu Ar$rgton 1.35 2 4 2 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $849,W0 $1.05O00 $0 $0 $0 $BSWO $212,000 NMhwest Riverside University RedwaM SR-91 0.86 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest. Riverside University SR-91 1-21S/SR-6) 2.01 4 4 a 0% 1 2 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Nodhwest Riverside Vktad. Madison Washington 0.52 2 2 0 M 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D Northwest Riverside Washington Vktoda Hermosa 2.05 2 4 2 M 1 2 0 0 0 $1,290,OW $1,650.W0 $0 $0 $0 $129,00 $323,000 Northwest Riverside WOM JFK Van Buren 0.90 2 4 2 50% 1 3 0 0 0 $Mmo $83.ODD $0 $0 $0 $22W0 $55.0m NMhwest Riverside Wood Van Buren Bergomont 0.11 4 4 0 M 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Riverside Wood Bergamanl Paranoia 0.39 2 4 2 W% 1 3 0 0 0 $98.000 $32.OW $0 $0 $0 $10,W0 $25.O ) NMhwest Unincorporated Archlbad San Benardew County River 3.63 2 4 2 62% 1 3 0 I$00 0 $867,000 $327,W0 $0 $3,456,OW $0 $432,OW $I.WI,WO NMhwest Unincorporated Amahong San Bernuadnro County VaNsy 1.53 2 4 2 6M 2 3 a 0 0 $384.000 $119.OW $0 $0 $0 $38W0 $96,W0 Nodhwest Unincorporated BeBgrove CanloG fl.. Ranch Van Buren 0.29 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $181,OOD $68O0U $0 $0 $0 $18.000 $45.W0 Northwest Unincorporated Cunta ffeara Ranch Hamner WinevOle 0.94 4 4 a a% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated C.rduGaBeara Ranch Winev3e BeBgrove 1.82 0 4 4 20% 1 3 - 0 a 0 $1.829.OW $6901003 $0 $0 $0 $183.000 $45I,W0 Northwest UnincoPamted Dos Lagos (Weirlck) Tem..ICanyon 1-15 0.21 4 4 0 M 1 3 0 a 0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Unincorporated 0C.rito 1-15 Ontario 0.56 2 4 2 M 1 3 0 0 0 $349.OW $132,1M $0 $0 $0 $%.WO $87.00O Northwest Unincoporated Elnvanda San Benachno County SR40 1.00 6 6 0 M 1 3 0 0 0 $0 % $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated ERWando SRiO LLnonBe 3.00 4 4 0 M 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Unincorporated Hamner Beligrave Amberlul DA2 4 6 2 M 1 3 0 0 0 $261M0 $98,WD $0 $0 $0 $26,1300 $65,000 NMhwest Untnccrposded Hamner Am1h."I limonite 0.49 2 6 4 M 1 3 0 0 0 $619.000 $233.W0 $0 $0 $0 $62WD $15 .000 NMhwest UNncopoated Hamner Umonite . Schk:rsman IM 4 6 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $626,Wa - $2360W $0 $0 $0 $3.00D $152.000 Northwest Unincorporated Hanter ScNeisman Sand Anna River 1.29 2 6 4 IM 1 3 0 LMD 0 $1.615.OW $610.M $0 $6.9120W $0 $853.OW $2,1320W NMhwest Unincorporated Hamner Mission BeRI 1.11 2 6 2 M 1 3 a 0 0 $696,WO $263AW $a $0 $0 $90.W0 $174.000 Northwest Unlncorywated HaleylDhn W.11in13ton Scotisdak 0.12 4 4 0 a% 1 3 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 50 $0 Northwest Unincoporated HMey John Scottsdale Cquic. 1.19 2 4 2 M 1 3 0 0 0 $946,W0 $281.M $0. $0 $0 $95.W0 $187.000 Northwest Unincorporated La Siena Victoria 'asclarante 222 4 4 0 M 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 ,$0 $0 $0 - - $0 $0 Nodhwest Unincorporated La Sierra aSobranfe Cajaka 236 2 2 0 M 2 3 0 a 0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated 'Limonite Archaaa Hamner 1.99 4 6 2 M 1 3 '0 0 0 $1,253,OW $493.OW $0 $0 $0 $125AW $313,WD Northwest UNncomosated Umanite Hamner F15 0.62 ,4 6 2 IM 1 3 3 0 0 $389.W0 $146.OW $5A45.OW :$0 $0 $583.OW $1.98.00 Northwest UNraorporaled Limonite .1-I5 Wine lle 0.40 4 4 0 M 1 3 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $n $o $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated UmoNte Wnevle Etxvanda - 0.99 3 4 0 M 1 3 '. 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Uniraolparated U.Nfe EtW.ida Van Buren - 2.n 2 6 4 : M 1 3 - -0 0 0 $3,415= $LMMI) $0 $0 $0 $342,OW $8K= Northwest Unincorporated Umonite Van Buren Cloy On 4 6 2 IM 1 3 0 0 0 $498,000 $1881W0 $0 $0 $0 $W.000 $125.ODp Northwest Uniraaporoted Utnonite Clay Riverview 2.45 4 4 a M J 3 0 : 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Market RuNdoux Santa Ana Rorer 1.94 2 4 2 0% 1 -3 0 IM0 '0 $1.096.W0 $414.M $0 $2.880.W0 so $398.0W SM.= Northwest Unincorporated Mission MIMI sl- -1.61 4 4 0 0% - 1 3 0 0 a $0 $0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 NMhwest Unincorporated Mission SR1 Santa Ano River 9.39 4 4 - a O% 1 3 0 I,WD 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Mackingb6d Canyon Van Buren .Cajaka 4,34 2 4 2 M 2 3 a 0 0 $3.300.000 $1.028.000 $0 $0 $0 $3W,0W $M,W0 Northwest Unincorporated Riverview Umanle Mission 0.95 4 4 0 M 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Rubdoux San Benarafino County Mission 2.65 4 4 0 M 2 3 3 0 0 $0 $0 $5,4,15= $0 $0 $SAS,OW $1,361.OW Northwest Uninaonporched Temescal Carryon Ontario Tuscany, 0165 2 4 2 20% 2 3 0 0 0 $394,W0 $123000 $0 $0 $o $39.W0 $99.000 Northwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Tuscany Dos Lagos 0.91 4 4 0 M 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Temescd Canyon D. Lag. Leroy 1.10 2 4 2 M 2 3 0 0 0 $84OW0 $262,OW $0 $0 $0 $84000 $210.000 NMhwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Leroy Dawson Canyon 1.89 2 4 2 M 2 3 0 a 0 $1.435.OW $449.W0 $0 $0 $0 $146W0 E359,OOD Northwest Unlncalporahcl Temescal Canyon Dawson Canyon FI5 0.28 4 4 0 0% 2 3 3 0 0 $0 $0 $5.445.OW $0 $0 $545.gW f1.361.W0 NMhwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon Fi5 Park Canyon 3.41 2 4 2 M 3 3 0 a 0 $310491OW $809A00 $0 $0 $0 $305,Wa $762000 NMhwest Unincorporated Temescal Canyon PM Canyon Indantrucknot 2.55 2 4 2 0% 2 3 - 0 0 0 $1.938.OW $W4,OW $0 $0 $0 $194.OW $485.WO NMhwest Unincopoated Volley An.M1nng Mums, 0.4 4 4 0 M 1 3 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Northwest Unincorporated Washington Henna Hanley John 3.96 2 4 2 M 1 3 0 0 0 $2,allJ)D0 $939.OW $0 $0 $0 $249.000 $622WD Nodhwest Uniraosporated Wood Kranletla Cajdco 2.99 2 4 2 M 1 3 a 0 0 $1.8I6.W0 $9WAW $a $0 $o $IB80W $469.WD $0 $0 $0 $424,W0 $6.I48OW $6,148,000 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $94,000 $1,284Wa $927.000 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $109,000 $1,363,000 $1,363,W0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $910.OW $MI95,000 $13,195.01M $969.M $14.044,000 $14,044,000 $958.000 $13.254,000 $13.2$4,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $0 $205,000 $2,569,Wa $2,569.W0 $0 $D $0 $424,000 $6,148.WO $6,148000 $424.OW $6.148.W0 $6.148,WO $0 $0 $0 $424,000 $6.148.000 $6.148.000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $302.WO $3,986,OOD $3.449.000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $126W0 41.606.0W $1.606.000 $460,WO $6,361,OW $6,361,000 $99,000 $1,252,OW $1,252.000 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,114,WO $16,150W0 $16,153,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $193,0W $2,424,WO $2A24,W0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $294.OW $3,686,1)(10 $3,686,W0 $W,WO $410,OW $410,01M $0 $0 $0 $14MO $184,OW $184,0W $465.W0 $6.628,000 $5.417.000 $50O0o $689,0W $583,O ) $26.000 $339.W0 $304,OW $0 $0 $0 SM.= $3.41I.0M $3.411.000 $0 $0 $0 $48.000 $651.000 $651.OW $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,00s) $06,000 $486.W0 $85AW $1,I51= $925AW $66,0W E1.168.W0 $1a68.W0 $914,OW $13,06,W0 $12850,01M $96,W0 $I.299.W0 $1.298,OD0 $0 $0 $0 $103,OW $1.392.W0 $1.392W0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $193,W0 $2.339,W0 $2,18TIM0 $WB.M $11,617WI) $8.396,W0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $420.W0 $6,320.W0 $4.651.0410 $69=0 ,$9W,OW $930:OW " $0 $0 $0 $439,W0 $6.221.0W $5,878.000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $433,00 $5,916,OW $5.988W0 $0 $0 $0 $545,000 $2596.01M - $9.896Opa $52.000 $707.000 $909.= $0 $0 $0 $110,0M $1,06AW $1.506W0 $18B.OW $2,573= $2,593,00 $545AW $2.896.W0 $9.896.W0 $386.0W $S.W9.OQT $S.M.OW $254,OW $3.495.W0 $3.495.W0 $0 $0 $0 $343.001) $4.641.OW $4.641,OW $25B4O0l) $3,499.000 $3,499.W0 4as Al-C.1 2009 Network Addendum Approved on October 5, 2009 for the 50% Fee Reduction In Bow Pass Banning Highland Springs Oak Valley (14th) Wilson l8th) 0.93 2 4 2 on 1 2 0 a 0 $461.000 $589.000 $0 $0 jot $46.000 $115.000 $IOS,C00 $1,316000 $658.000 Pau Banning highland Springs Cherry Valley Oak Valley (141h) 1.53 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $963,000 $I'MJM0 $0 $0 $0 $96,000 $241,000 $220.0o0 $2,752.000 $6396,000 Pass Banning F10 Bypass South Flo Apachehol 3.29 0 2 2 0% 1 2 3 300 0 $2,063,000 $2638.000 $5.445,000 $864,000 $0 $837,000 j2093.D00 $1.101.000 $15,041,000 $15.041.000 Pass Banning Lincdn Sumet SR-243 2.01 2 2 a 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Banning Ramsey HD WAS. f8thl LM 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 .Pins Banning Ramsey Wilson (8th) Highland Springs 3.55 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pons Banning SR-243 Flo Wesley 0.62 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 O D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ea $0 $0 $0 Pass Banning Sun Lakes Highland Home Sunset 1.00 0 4 4 0% 1 2 0 200 0 $1,256.000 $1.606.000 $0 $1.152,000 $u $241.000 $6020OD $401.0OD $5,25B.000 $5258.000 Pass Banning Sun Lakes Highland Springs Highland Ham. 1.33 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Banning Sunset Ramsey Lincoln 0.28 2 4 2 0% 1 2 3 0 1 $199,0OD $229,000 $5,145.000 $0 $9200LOM $1,4720D0 $3,681,000 $1.495.000 $26597,DDO $21.597.000 Pass Banning Man ( M) Highbrd Home Wilson l8th) 2.51 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pau Banning Wison (8th) HigNand Springs Highland Home 1.01 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $633.000 $809.000 $0 $0 $0 $63,000 $158.000 $144,000 $1.80I,000 $1,809,000 Pass Beaumont Isf Assle Pennsylvania 1.28 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $606,000 $1.051.000 $0 $0 $0 $81.000 $202.000 $184,000 $2,304,000 $0 Pass Beaumont let Pennsylvania Highland Springs 1.10 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont 61h Flo Hghhnd Springs 2.24 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Desert Lavin Champions Oak Valley (STC) 0.99 2 4 2 an 1 3 0 0 0 $619.000 $234.000 $0 $0 $0 Sam $155,00D $B5.MO $1,165.000 $0 Pass Beaumont Highlond Springs Wilson(BM) Sun Lakes 0.96 4 6 2 0% 1 2 3 0 0 $418.000 $612.000 $5.445.000 $0 $0 $5920M $IA81,000 $654.000 $9262,000 $8,5I9.ODD Pass Beaumont Oak Valley (14thl Highland Springs P.meylv.Na 1.13 4 4 O 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 $0 Pens Beaumont Oak Valley (14th) Penmylvania Oak View 1.,10 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Volley 114th) Oak Yrew Flo 0.65 3 6 3 0% 1 2 3 100 0 $612000 $98200D $SA45'M $432.000 $0 $649.000 $1.6220M $229.000 $10,269,ODO $0 Pau Beaumont Oak Valley fSTC) Beaumont City Omits Cherry Valley IJ St/ Central Over 3.46 2 2 0 W. 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 So $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pass Beaumont Oak Valley lSTC) CheM Valley ill St Central - Over V10 1.69 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.046.000 $395,000 $0 $0 $0 $105,000 $262a00 $144.000 $1,952,000 $0 Pass Beaumont Pennsylvania Mh 1st 0.53 2 2 0 0% 1 2 3 a 0 $0 $0 $5.445.000 $0 $0 $545.000 $1.361.OpO $545,000 $9,896,000 $0 Pass Beaumont vide 4th 1st 0.31 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 a 0 $195.MO $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $S01000 $49,DM $45,000 $5591ow $0 Pass Beaumont Mel. 6th 4M 0.50 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 1 $317,000 $M5.oaa $0 $0 $9.1M.DDD $94ZOW $2.354.000 $98200D $14.100,000 $0 Pass CoBmes. - Bryant County Uses Angleton 0.38 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $a $D TO $0 $0 $a $0 $0 $0 Pass CaBmesa CaBmesa County Line Flo 0.80 4 4 0 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $0 $0 $11.140.000 $0 $0 $1,114.000 $2.785.000 $1,114,000 $16,153,000 $16.153.000 Pass Cannes. Cherry Valley Robed, Palmer 0.50 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $3120DD $118.000 $0 $0 $0 $31.000 $98.000 $43.000 $582.000 $0 Pass CaBmesa County Line Flo Bryant 1.96 2 4 1 0% 1 2 3 0 - 0 $553.000 $909.000 35A45.000 $0 $0 $600,0o0 $1150D.000 $691,000 $9A76.000 $9.476,ODO Pass C.Wes. Desert Lawn Chen, Voley Ch.mpiom 1.61 2 4 2 a% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.009,000 $381.000 $0 $0 $0 $101.000 $252.000 $139,00 $1,882000 $1.882.000 Pass CaBmesa Singleton Bryant Canso 1.86 0 4 4 a% 2 3 0 0 0 $2834.000 $8831000 $0 $0 $0 $283.0o0 $ID9.0o0 $372,000 $$.081.MO $5,061,000 Pass CaBmesa Singleton Condor Robetls 0.85 2 4 2 0% 1 2 2 0 0 $5FL000 $6BS.000 $11.14D.000 $0 $0 $1.169,000 $29I9.000 $1.236.000 $17,679,00 $19.699.000 Pass Unincorporated Cherry Valley Hghlantl Springs Noble 0.95 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $1.196.000 $451,000 $0 $0 $0 $120.000 $299,ODD $165,000 $2.231.000 $2$31,000 Pass Unincorporated Cherry Valley Neale Dosed Lawn 3.41 2 4 2 0% 1 3 2 300 0 $2.131000 $805.000 $11.140.DD0 $864.00D $0 $1.414.000 $3,534,000 $1.494,000 $21.383,000 $21,383,000 Pass Unincorporated Uve Oak Canyon Oak Volley (STC) San Bernardino County 2.81 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 - $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a Pass Unincorporated Oak Valley (STC) San Bemwtlino County Beaumont City Limiln 5.65 2 2 0 0% 2 3 0 0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,550.00 w50o0 $L138,000 $455.000 $6.598.000 $6.598.000 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Acacia Menlo 0.98 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Domenigom Slefson 1.0 4 4 0 a% 1 2 0 300 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson RR Crossing Acacia 0.42 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $D $0 $o $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Stetson RR Crossing 0.58 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 a 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Sanderson Menlo Bplanade 1.0 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $628000 $803,000 $0 $0 $0 SO= $157.000 $143,000 $1.994,000 $89S.0o0 San Jacinto Hemet SR-94 Waren Cawston 1.02 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet SR-74(Florida) Columbia Ramona 2.58 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet SR&4/SR-99(Fiance) Caw,ton Columbia 4M 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Domengoni Chambers 1.31 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Chambers Stetson 0.51 4 4 0 09. 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Florida Bplanade 1.74 4 4 0 ot% 1 2 0 a 0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet State Stetson Flarida 1.25 2 4 2 0% 1 1 0 a 0 $98200D $2096.000 $0 $0 $0 $98.001) $196,000 $288.000 $3.440,000 $2,469.000 San Jacinto Hemet Stetson Caw,ton State 2.52 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto Hemet Stetson Warren Candor, I.00 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $629.000 $237,000 $0 $0 $0 $6300o $157.000 $86.000 $1,190,000 $I,I90,000 San Jacinto Hemet Warren Bplan.de Domenigoni 4.99 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 300 0 $3.133,000 $1,182,000 $0 $864000 $0 S4a0.o00 $999.00D $518,000 $7,096,000 $6,697.000 San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade Ramona Mountain 0.20 0 4 4 O% 1 2 0 0 0 $251.000 $321,000 $0 $0 $0 $25,000 $63A0a $52.000 $)II.OM $919.00J San Jocinb San Jacinto BPI ..de Mountain State 255 4 4 0 O% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Esplanade State Warren 3.53 2 4 2 a% 1 3 0 0 0 $2218.0M $839,00ot $0 $0 $0 $222.OW $555000 $306.000 $4,13B.000 $4.138,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto Sanderson Ramona Bplargde 3.55 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $227.000 $841.000 $0 $0 $0 $223.000 $SS7000 $307.000 $4,155A00 $2,081.000 San Jacinto San Jacinto SR-99(NWh Ramona) State San Jacinto 1.02 2 2 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto SR-I9 (San Jacinto) 9th SR-74 2.25 4 4 a 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 Son lacints, San Jacinto SR-79(S.n Jacinto) North Ramona Blvd 9M 0.25 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $155.MD $198.000 $0 $0 $0 $16.001) $39000 $35,000 $443.000 $443,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto State Ramona Bplanade 1.99 4 4 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto State Street Gilm. Spmg, Quandt Ranch 0.96 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 Shot 0 $498.000 $180.000 TO j1A4o,0aa $0 $192000 $480,00D $210,000 $2.980.000 $2.675,000 San Jacinto San Jacinto State Street Quandt Ranch Ramona 0.90 4 4 0 0% 1 3 a 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 San Jacinto San Jacinto Warren Ramona Bplan.de 3.47 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $2.160.000 $W.= $0 $D $0 $218.000 $545.000 $30D.000 $4,066,000 $4.066,000 San Jacinto Unincorporated GOman Springs Sanderson State 2.54 2 4 2 a% 1 3 0 Too a $1.598.000 $603.000 $0 $288.ODD $0 $189.Wot $4M,000 $249.000 $3,399,000 $2,36B4O00 San Jacinto Urincoryorated SR-791Wnchesteff. SR-74(FIorid.) Domenigani 3.23 2 2 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 - $0 $0 $0 $0 TO $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Lake Min. Olamond Mission F15 0.24 4 6 2 0% 1 3 a a 0 Sm.= $57,000 $0 $0 $0 $15AOD $38A00 .$21,000 $M11000 $2M.00a Southwest Lake 6gnore Grand Lincoln Toll 1.29 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Lake Elsinore Grand Toff SR-74(Riversde) 0.86 2 4 2 40% 1 3 0 a 0 Sm.= SIM. 0 $0 $0 $O $32000 $81.00o $45.000 $603,000 $603,000 Southwest Lake EBlnare Lake FI5 Lincoln 3.10 2 4 2 25% 2 3 3 0 0 $1,991,000 $552o00 35,145,000 $0 $0 $9220D0 $1.804,000 $7II.000 $11A71,000 $10,291.000 Southwest Lake Min. Mission Railroad Canyon Sued, Canyon 239 4 4 0 O% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Lake Min. SR-74(Colier/Riverside) F15 Lakeshone 2.10 2 6 4 0% 1 2 0 0- 0 $2639.000 $3395.000 $0 $0 $0 $264.DM $660.00D $601,000 $9,539.000 $5,823.000 Southwest Lake &inure SR-74(Grard) Riversde SR-74(Ortega) 0." 2 6 4 a% 1 2 0 0 0 $999.Oa0 $l=J000 $0 $o $0. SWIM $21)0,000 $182.011D $2R83,000 $1.9681000 Southwest Lake Minn. SR-74(Rimed.) Lakeshore Grond 1.94 2 6 4 10% 1 2 0 0 0 $1.962000 $2,509,000 $0 $0 $0 $196.000 -$491.OW $U7.000 $5,605,M $5.473.000 Southwest Muriel. C.R.mla Oaks Jefferson FI5 0.32 4 6 2 0% 1 2 2 0 a $199A0o $255.000 $11.140.000 $0 `.$0 $1.134.000 $2835A00 $1,159A00 $16J22,000 $16.922.01)0 Southwesf MWrcta California Oaks FIS Conlon KsRh - 226 4 4 0 A% 1 2 0 0 0 '$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ... jot $0 $0 $0 $0 Sauthwe t Murriet. ,Jefferson Menial. Hot Springs Cherry 226 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 - $0 $0 $0 $0 ) $0 $0 ';$0 $0 Southwest MwUet. Jefferson Palomar Nutmeg 1.02 0 4 4 0% 1 3 0 a 0 $1.281.000 $483.00D '$0 $0 $0 $128A00 $320,000 $176.00(0. -.$2.388,000 $2,388,000 Southwest Minimal. I.Rence Nufineg Munieta Hot Spmgs 239 2 6 4 M 1 2 0 0 0 $2916.000 $3.806.000 "$0 $0 $0 $298,000 :$744,000 '$698.000 $8.5n= l$8,052,000 Southwest Muni Los Alamos Jefferson F15 SIM 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 3M 0 $236.001) $Mi'm $0 $1.008.Oo0 $0 $146,000 '..$311,000 $155'oko ` $2,135AOD $Z135.000 Southwest M,niiefa Los Alamos FIB F215 1.39 2 4 2 0% 1 2 a 0 0 $896,001) $1.120.000 $0 $0 $0 $BB.00D :'$219.00D $200,Mo $2.503.000 $2398.000 Southwest Memet. Muni Hot Springs F215 Margarita 1.48 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $a '. $0 $D $0 $0 $0 ' $u $0 '$0 : '. $0 Southwest Misstate MuMeta Hot Springs Jefferson F215 1.11 6 6 0 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 '$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0. $0 Southwest Mumet. Murriet. Hof Springs Margarita SR-991WInchtenci 1.01 4 6 2 O% 1 3 0 0 0 $633A00 $239.o00. $0 $0 $a $63=0 $ISB.= $67,000 $1.I80,M $]23.000 Southwest Mumeta Nutmeg Jeffers. Onion Keith 1.97 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 -- $0 $0 $0 Southwest Murieta Whdewood Clinton Keith Los Alamos 2.01 4 4 0 a% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 :0 $0 $0 - $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Jefferson Chary Rancho California 2.29 4 4 a 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $a $0 $0 $o Southwest Temecula Margarita Mumeta Hot Springs SR-2? ffemecug) 2.38 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Old Town Font Rancho COHemia FI5/SR-99 1.45 4 4 0 0% I 1 0 0 0 $0 jot $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $a $0 $0 Southaven Temcoul. Pechanga SR-991TemeCulal Via Gilberto 1.32 6 6 0 0% 1 I a 0 0 $D $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Pechanga Via GBbedo PCcl,ango Road 1.44 4 4 0 0% 1 1 0 0 0 - $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Temecula Ranch Ca@omlo Jeffers. M.,.&. 1.89 4 6 2 M% 1 1 3 0 0 $04.000 $1.271.000 $5.445.000 $0 $0 Moog $1.480.000 $919.000 $9.981.000 $9,19200D Southwest Temecula Ranclso C.0 nia Margarita BifferfieM Stage 1.96 4 6 2 0% 1 1 0 0 0 $1,230,000 $3.296.0ov $0 $0 $0 $123.000 $309,000 $453,000 $5.410.000 $5.410,000 Southwest Temecula SR-19(Temec.lo) F15 Pechanga 0.64 6 8 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $402000 $152,000 $0 $0 $0 $40.000 $1011000 $55.000 $950,000 $0.000 Southwest Temecula SR-99(Temeculo) Pechanga Road Buffediem Stage 3.08 6 6 0 0% 1 3 0 0 a $0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 .$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest WBdamar Bader F15 Polomm 0.39 2 4 2 0% 1 3 3 a 0 $232.000 $37.000 $5.445.000 $0 $0 $568.000 j1.419.000 $596.000 $8.321,000 $8,327.00 Southwest WBdamar Bund, Canyon Minion FI5 0.94 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $5881000 $251.000 $0 $o $0 $59.00D $147000 $134,000 $1.6N.M $1.629000 5M 2009 Network Addendum Approved on October 5, 2009 for the 50% Fee Reduction EXHIBITAI-C.1 TUMFNetwork Detailed Cost Estimate -50%ADJUSTED (ROC Pd.* Could. 1. Bold) AREA PLANDISICU SIREETNAME SEGMENIFROM SEGMENIIO MILES EXISIINGLN FLITUREW INCREASELN %COMPLEIE TORO LANDUSE INiERCHG BRIDGE WING NEWLNC09 ROWCOSI MTCHGCOST BROGCOST RRXCOST PLNG ENG CONTIG ADJUSTEDCOST ADJMAXTUMFSHAI SoulhAest Wildomar Central Boater Palomar 0.74 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $462, 00 $591,W0 $0 $0 $0 $46,0W $116.W0 $105.0W $1.320.000 $1,320000 Southwest Wikcon., Mission Bundy Canyon Palomar 0.84 4 4 0 OtE 1 2 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwevf WikJomar Palomar Canton Keith Jefferson 0.24 2 4 2 O% 1 3 0 0 0 $46ZWO $174.000 $0 $0 $0 $46.0DD Slum $66000 $862,000 $862000 Southwest Wildomor Palomar Mission Clinton Keith 2.29 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 a $1,751.000 $661.000 $0 $0 $0 $I25,OW $438.W0 $241.00D $3.266.M $3.266,W0 ioulhwest Uninco05orated Biggs Scott SR-"(Wincherte0 3.39 2 4 2 O% 1 3 0 0 0 b2-130.000 $804,000 $0 $0 $0 $213.OW $03,00 $293.00D $3,923,000 $3,973.000 Southwest Unincorporated Butterfield Stage Mualeta Hot SpnnM Rancho California 1.28 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 650 0 $2,714,000 $845.000 $0 $3.744.000 $a $646,000 $1,615,000 $230.000 $10.294,000 $10.294,000 Southwest Unincorporated BuherBeid Stage Rancho CalBomo SR-29(Temecula) 2.3D 2 4 2 O% 2 3 0 0 0 $1.747,000 $S"= $0 $0 $0 $175.OW $43I,000 $229,0W $3,132.W0 $3.132.000 Souff vast Unincorporated Bulteriiakt Stage SR-29(Winchester) Auld! 2.28 2 4 2 O% 2 3 0 a 0 $1]35.000 $SW.OW $0 $0 $0 $174.0W $434.000 $228,0W $3.111,033 $3,111,000 Southwest UnincOrporaled BWterMld Stage Auld Mumeta Hot Springs 2.23 0 4 4 0% 2 3 0 450 0 $3.394.000 $1,057,000 $0 $2.592.000 $0 $W9.0W $1,497.000 $904,OW $9,843.000 $9.843.000 Southwest Unincorporated Central Grand Palomar 0.51 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $321.WD $410.00D $0 $0 $0 $32.0R0 $80W0 $13,000 $916,000 $916'm Southwest Udacarporated Grand Ortega Central 6.98. 2 4 2 0% 1 2 0 0 0 $4.385,000 $5,609.W0 $0 $0 $0 $439,W0 $1.096.0W $999,000 $12.526.000 $12.526.000 Southwest Unincorporated Horsethief Canyon Temescd Canyon W5 0.12 2 4 2 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $106.W0 $4a.OW $0 $0 $0 $II= $22.00D $1510(30 $199,000 $199,W0 Southwest Unincorporated Indian Truck Trail Temescd Canyon H15 0.18 2 6 4 01% 1 3 3 0 0 $=,W0 $83.000 $5,445.000 $0 $0 $567.000 $1.416.000 $525,000 $8,306,00 $8,306,000 Southwest Unincorporated Munleta Hot Springs SR49(hrmcheste0 Pounoy 1.25 4 4 0 0% 1 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 So.mAcot Unincorporated Palo Pechanga San Diego County 1.38 2 2 0 O% 2 3 0 0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Southwest Unlncor,oraled Temescal Canyon Indian Trvek Trail Lake 1.21 2 4 2 DR. 2 3 0 100 0 $912.00 $286.000 - $0 $2E8,000 $0 $121.000 $301,000 $149.000 $2.062.000 $2.062,000 SuEMtol 471.25 32 11.800 15 $168,557,000 $121.009,000 $236,885.000 $41.4I2.W0 $90.3300W $153,>42,000 b13d,331,aW 65,836,000 $912,1.9a $841.520,000 Tdob Network 266.40 58 24.785 12 $ 413.198.OW $ 92.480,W0 $ 522325,W0 $ IOI,BOB,WO 108,530.0W I15.115,OW $ 28>.>49,W0 $ 142349,ODU $ 1,968,553,OW 4 1,934059AOC lranx8 $ 83.473,000 $ 30,913.000 Adnrl. raBon $ 87.600.000 $ 82.600.030 MSHCP $ 31,183,000 $ 29.979.000 Total R._ ra mB COUNCIL BUSINESS Item No. 14 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Susan W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services DATE: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: Selection of 2010 City Council Committee Assignments RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Appoint a member of the City Council to serve as liaison to each of the City Commissions and Committees: Commission Liaison (One Member) Current Member Community Services Commission Comerchero Old Town Local Review Board Washington Planning Commission Naggar Public/Traffic Safety Commission Edwards 2. Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Standing Committees: Standing Committees City Sustainability Program Committee Economic Development Committee RDA/Old Town Steering Committee Finance Committee Infrastructure Beautification Committee Joint City Council/TVUSD Committee Murrieta/Temecula Committee Public Works/Facilities Committee Medical Task Force Committee Quality of Life/Temecula 2030 Master Plan Committee Southwest Cities Coalition Committee Current Member(s) Roberts, Washington Washington, Roberts Roberts, Edwards Edwards, Naggar Edwards, Naggar Edwards, Washington Naggar, Washington Edwards, Roberts Naggar Roberts, Washington Edwards, Comerchero 3. Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following Representative Assignments (External Organizations): Representative Assignments — External Organizations Animal Shelter Liaison/JPA Representative League of California Congress — 2010 Voting Delegate Murrieta Creek Advisory Board National League of Cities Annual Congress — 2010 Voting Delegate Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison Rancho California Water District Liaison — Proposed Addition Riverside County Child Safety Commission Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Board Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside Transit Agency Representative Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors WRCOG RCA Representative Zone Committee (relating to TUMF Program for WRCOG) Current Member(s) Edwards Edwards, (Alternate Comerchero) Edwards Edwards, (Alternate Comerchero) Roberts, (Alternate Naggar) Edwards Edwards Roberts, (Alternate Comerchero) Comerchero, (Alternate Edwards) Roberts Washington, (Alternate Roberts) Edwards, (Alternate Washington) Washington, (Alternate Edwards) 4. Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following Ad Hoc Subcommittees: Ad Hoc Subcommittees — (Can be one or two members) Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Subcommittee Diaz Property Ad Hoc Subcommittee External Communications Ad Hoc Subcommittee French Valley Parkway Interchange Ad Hoc Subcommittee Higher Education Ad Hoc Subcommittee Homeless Shelter Ad Hoc Subcommittee Luxury Car Dealership Ad Hoc Subcommittee Military Ad Hoc Subcommittee Nicolas Valley Ad Hoc Subcommittee Old Town Civic Center Ad Hoc Subcommittee Promenade Mall Ad Hoc Subcommittee Ronald Reagan Sports Park Ad Hoc Subcommittee Roripaugh Ranch Ad Hoc Subcommittee Santa Margarita Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee South Temecula Land and Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee — Proposed Addition Summerhouse Senior Housing Development Ad Hoc Subcommittee Temecula Hospital Ad Hoc Subcommittee Transit Ad Hoc Subcommittee Villages of Old Town Ad Hoc Subcommittee Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee Wind Energy Ad Hoc Subcommittee — Proposed Deletion Youth Court Ad Hoc Subcommittee Youth Master Plan Implementation Ad Hoc Subcommittee Current Members Edwards, Naggar Naggar, Washington Comerchero, Edwards Comerchero, Roberts Naggar, Washington Washington, Edwards Washington, Roberts Washington, Edwards Roberts, Washington Comerchero, Roberts Comerchero, Washington Edwards, Naggar Comerchero, Roberts Edwards. Comerchero Roberts, Washington Comerchero, Naggar Roberts, Comerchero Edwards, Roberts Comerchero, Edwards Edwards, Naggar Edwards, Comerchero Naggar, Washington BACKGROUND: The City Council has established the policy of appointing one of its members to serve as liaison to each of the city commissions. This policy also included appointing council members to serve as the council's representatives to external organizations and on a number of standing committees and ad hoc subcommittees. The above committee structure is recommended to facilitate the efficient flow of communication. Each year this list is reviewed and revised for the upcoming calendar year. The council members appointed on each of these respective committees will serve through calendar year 2010. Ad Hoc Subcommittees are formed for a specific limited purpose and will operate for a limited time until its purposes are fulfilled ("ad hoc") as opposed to "standing committees" that have continuing subject matter jurisdiction. The descriptions of the purposes and duration of the proposed ad hoc subcommittees are as follows: Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee reviews funding applications from various non-profit organizations requesting Community Service funding for the year. This committee will meet in October/November 2010 and will make specific recommendations to the City Council for 2010 community services funding. Diaz Property Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee is responsible for evaluating and negotiating terms and conditions associated with the disposition and development of the Agency owned property located at the North West Corner of Diaz Road and Dendy Parkway. Currently, the responses to request for qualifications of developers is pending before the Agency and is expected to be acted upon in 2010. The term of this committee is through the completion of the development or disposition of the property. External Communications Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee is responsible for addressing the expansion of local news coverage possibly in both radio and television not only within Temecula but the Inland Empire. Of significant challenge for this committee will be the support and presentation of a new or "niche" Designated Media Area (DMA) for consideration by Federal officials and the FCC. The subcommittee will report back to the Council on its findings by December 2010 with more frequent updates as may be necessary. French Valley Parkway Interchange Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee shall workwith representatives from Caltrans, Federal Highways, and elected officials at the city, state, and federal levels. It is anticipated this subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendations by December 2010. Higher Education Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee is responsible for attracting and facilitating the development of a higher education facility in the City of Temecula. The subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendation by December 2010 with more frequent updates as may be necessary. Homeless Shelter Ad Hoc Subcommittee —This subcommittee is responsible to work with county and non-profit, faith -based sector to explore transitional shelters for the homeless. The subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendations by December 2010. Luxury Car Dealership Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee is responsible for the attraction of luxury car dealerships to our community. Auto sales represent a large percentage of sales tax revenue to the City and the expansion and attraction of dealerships will preserve a revenue stream to maintain City services. The subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendations by December 2010. Military Ad Hoc Subcommittee— This subcommittee shall work with the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), Camp Pendleton, and other branches of the military to assist active members of the military with special projects and community outreach. The subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendations by December 2010. Nicolas Valley Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee shall work with the residents of Nicolas Valleyto develop new land use designations which could ultimately allow the formation of an Assessment District to allow for the paving of certain roads in Nicolas Valley. It is anticipated that this subcommittee will need to guide this effort for the next year. The subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendations by December 2010. Old Town Civic Center Ad Hoc Subcommittee —This subcommittee is responsible for reviewing and providing general guidance related to the design of the Civic Center in Old Town. It is also responsible for evaluating and negotiating terms and conditions associated with the disposition and development of the Agency owned property located adjacent to the Town Square along Main Street in Old Town. The term of this committee is through the completion of the Civic Center. Promenade Mail Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee was established to provide policy direction for the expansion to the Promenade Mall. It is anticipated that the mall will continue to evolve and this subcommittee will be necessary through 2010 when the Mall Expansion is expected to be completed. Ronald Reagan Sports Park Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee will meet as needed and work with the Friends of the Ronald Reagan Sports Park to review proposed public art piece for installation at the park. The subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendations by December 2010. Roripaugh Ranch Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee will monitor and report on the issues affecting the Roripaugh Ranch Community Facility District Bonds, litigation affecting the Roripaugh Ranch Project, and development issues affecting the Roripaugh Ranch Project. The subcommittee shall report back to the Council as needed through 2010. Santa Margarita Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This committee will assist Planning Department staff in discussions and information dissemination with LAFCO staff and Commission members on the Santa Margarita Annexation. This committee will meet on an as needed basis during the months of January, February, March and April of 2010. Additional subcommittee assistance may be required after the LAFCO hearing tentatively scheduled for April. It is recommended that this ad hoc subcommittee serve until the end of the 2010 calendar year. South Temecula Land and Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee —The purpose of this ad hoc subcommittee would be to review and provide direction on regional transportation and planning/land use issues in south Temecula extending from Ynez/De Portola Road south to the San Diego County Line. Projects such as Temecula Creek Inn, the proposed Heritage Hotel and potential changes to the proposed hospital would also be brought before this subcommittee. Summerhouse Senior Housing Development Ad Hoc Subcommittee —The Summerhouse Ad Hoc Subcommittee provides policy direction to staff regarding the Summerhouse Affordable Housing Development which is currently under construction. There are several milestones as this project proceeds that may necessitate direction from the Ad Hoc Subcommittee during 2010. Temecula Hospital Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee was formed to work with Universal Health Systems to locate a new hospital in Temecula. It is anticipated that this subcommittee will need to continue with this effort until the Hospital obtains its State approvals in 2010. Transit Ad Hoc Subcommittee— This subcommittee shall work with staff on the development and implementation of commuter transit services between Temecula Valley and north San Diego County. The subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendations by December 2010. Villages of Old Town Ad Hoc Subcommittee —This subcommittee was formed to work with staff and the property owner to develop a vision plan for the Firestone land holdings located on the westerly side of Old Town. It is anticipated that this subcommittee will guide this effort for this next year. Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee will work with staff to make recommendations regarding community members who have made significant contributions to the City of Temecula. This subcommittee is needed on an on -going basis to potentially recognize outstanding citizens. Youth Court Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee will work with staff, and the Temecula and Murrieta Police Departments to monitor and encourage continued participation in this program which focuses on rehabilitation and provides an alternative to the traditional juvenile criminal system. Youth Master Plan Ad Hoc Subcommittee — This subcommittee will work with staff and the community to implement phases of the Youth Master Plan. The subcommittee will report back to the City Council on its recommendations by December 2010. FISCAL IMPACT: None Item No. 15 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works DATE: January 12, 2010 SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 10-_ Amending Section 10.28.01(D) of the Temecula Municipal Code Regarding Prima Facie Speed Limits on Certain Streets PREPARED BY: Jerry Gonzalez, Associate Engineer — Traffic Daniel A. York, City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28.01(D) OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREETS SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE: The Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows to modify the declared prima facie speed limits only on the following streets: Name of Street and Portion Affected Declared Prima Facie Speed Limit Miles Per Hour Commerce Center Drive Via Montezuma to Rider Way 25 Loma Linda Road Pechanga Parkway to Via Del Coronado 35 Pauba Road Butterfield Stage Road to Via Del Monte m Pechanga Parkway Temecula Parkway to Rainbow Canyon Road 40 Pechanga Parkway Rainbow Canyon Road to Wolf Valley Road 45 Pechanga Parkway Wolf Valley Road to South City Limit 40 Redwood Road Loma Linda Road to Wolf Creek Drive North 30 Via La Vida Margarita Road to Solana Way 30 Wolf Creek Drive North Pechanga Parkway to Wolf Valley Road 30 Wolf Creek Drive South Wolf Valley Road to Pechanga Parkway 30 BACKGROUND: The California Vehicle Code requires local authorities to establish, review and reaffirm or adjust speed limits within their jurisdiction on the basis of an Engineering and Traffic Survey when there is a change in roadway conditions such as the widening of roadway and installation of additional travel lanes. The required speed limit survey provides the mechanism for the legal enforcement of the posted speed limit by the use of radar or any other electronic speed -measuring device. As defined in the California Vehicle Code, an engineering and traffic survey is "a survey of highway and traffic conditions in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation for use by state and local authorities." The survey shall include, but not be limited to, consideration of prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements, accident statistics, and highway, traffic, and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver. These characteristics are all considered when determining a reasonable and prudent posted speed limit. It should be noted that establishing a speed limit, which is not consistent with the 85`h percentile speed, constitutes a "speed trap" and is not enforceable by the use of radar or any other electronic speed -measuring device. In the past, the City Council has considered similar Engineering and Traffic Survey data used to establish posted speed limits on major, secondary and collector roadways in the City. The current Engineering and Traffic Survey includes roadway segments that were not previously surveyed because the roadway was under construction, the roadway was new and had not been accepted into the City's maintained system, or the characteristics of the roadway had not changed significantly to warrant an Engineering and Traffic Survey. The survey includes Pechanga Parkway, Wolf Creek Drive North, Wolf Creek Drive South, Loma Linda Road, Redwood Road, Commerce Center Drive, Pauba Road and Via La Vida. The results of the survey on Pechanga Parkway indicate the current posted speed limit at three (3) locations does not require a change, and the recommended speed limits are consistent with the existing 40 MPH posted speed limit. There are however, three (3) locations where conditions and 85`h percentile speeds warrant a decrease in the posted speed limit. The locations are: • Pechanga Parkway — Rainbow Canyon Road to Muirfield Drive 50 MPH to 45 MPH • Pechanga Parkway — Muirfield Drive to Loma Linda Road 50 MPH to 45 MPH • Pechanga Parkway — Loma Linda Road to Wolf Valley Road 50 MPH to 45 MPH In addition to Pechanga Parkway, the survey includes six (6) locations where a decrease in the 55 MPH Prima Facie (PF) speed limit is being recommended. The locations are: • Loma Linda Road — Pechanga Parkway to Via Del Coronado 55 MPH to 35 MPH • Redwood Road — Loma Linda Road to Wolf Creek Drive North 55 MPH to 30 MPH • Wolf Creek Drive North — Pechanga Parkway to Wolf Valley Road 55 MPH to 30 MPH • Wolf Creek Drive South —Wolf Valley Road to Pechanga Parkway 55 MPH to 30 MPH • Pauba Road — Butterfield Stage Road to Via Del Monte 55 MPH to 40 MPH • Via La Vida — Margarita Road to Solana Way 55 MPH to 30 MPH The existing 25 MPH school zone located on Loma Linda Road, Redwood Road and Wolf Creek Drive North will not be affected and will remain "25 MPH When Children Are Present'. Lastly, the results of the survey reaffirmed that current posted speed limit of 25 MPH on Commerce Center Drive is consistent with 85`h percentile speeds and appropriate for conditions, thereby eliminating the perception that the posted speed limit constitutes a "speed trap". At their meeting of December 10, 2009, the Public/Traffic Safety Commission considered the proposed speed limit changes and recommended that the City Council amend Section 10.28.01(D) of the Temecula Municipal Code to establish the posted speed limits identified in Exhibit "K. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in the Public Works Sign Maintenance Account No. 001-164-602-5244 and Public Works Striping and Stenciling Account No. 164-602-5410. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance 2010- 2. Exhibit "A" — Engineering and Traffic Survey Summary of Recommendations ORDINANCE NO. 10- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AMENDING SECTION 10.28.01(D) OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREETS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 10.28.10(D) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows to modify the declared prima facie speed limits only on the following streets: Declared Prima Name of Street Facie Speed Limit and Portion Affected Miles Per Hour Commerce Center Drive Via Montezuma to Rider Way 25 Loma Linda Road Pechanga Parkway to Via Del Coronado 35 Pauba Road Butterfield Stage Road to Via Del Monte 40 Pechanga Parkway Temecula Parkway to Rainbow Canyon Road 40 Pechanga Parkway Rainbow Canyon Road to Wolf Valley Road 45 Pechanga Parkway Wolf Valley Road to South City Limit 40 Redwood Road Loma Linda Road to Wolf Creek Drive North 30 Via La Vida Margarita Road to Solana Way 30 Wolf Creek Drive North Pechanga Parkway to Wolf Valley Road 30 Wolf Creek Drive South Wolf Valley Road to Pechanga Parkway 30 Section 2. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. Section 3. The City Council shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 12th day of January, 2010. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor I_T40r:61n 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. - was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 24th day of January, 2010, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26th day of January, 2010, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: IG1:i.��G11►�K�1�1►Nll�dil�dil:l�:i.� Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk REQUESTS TO SPEAK REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date > '— �! I wish to speak on Agenda Item IN For Against Subject: Z:nt-aducel 8/4r,S 091-0Grra)/'0eq,`n Cry a Name: -JO-n i-I-). Phone: / Address: ` City/State/Zip:-Teme0-�la16A g259� If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: �nla.nr� r�t,n�gc/rent L rL� The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. Date Subject: REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. I wish to speak on Agenda Item No For Against City/State/Zip: If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You Date ` L a I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. 1,15 For Against Name:�r�ilunC.l t _ Phone: Address: . City/State/Zip: If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You., Date 1 �1.Z'1I671L I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. A 41LIl h For 41 Against Cb M')/ Subject: A�%GI4 fi'eJ`Cq A Z� Name:®�/Dt �w /h�' ��� State/Zip: ��h%.tr/ 92;562' If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. REQUEST TO SPEAK CITY OF TEMECULA After completing, please return to the City Clerk. Thank You. Date / -12 %o I wish to speak on Agenda Item No. For Against Subject: Name: N%% Phone: / � n Address: � City/state/7io: If you are representing an organization or group, please give the name: L- 0 T4Gv A/ 04sye?aAA-jai o') The City Clerk will call your name when the matter comes up. Please go to the public podium and state your name and city of residence for the record. N Q C ao3-30 LIST OF DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED. Submitted by Donald Lambert 1-12-2010. Pertaining to medical research at University of California San Diego (UCSD), with ultimate consideration with other material which should lead to modification of some training for some Temecula Employees. I AM NOT ASKING ANYONE TO READ VERY MUCH OF THESE DOCUMENTS I DO REQUEST YOU LEAF THROUGH EACH ENCLOSED DOCUMENT FOR A MINUTE OR LONGER TO SATISFY YOURSELF THIS IS REAL MEDICAL RESEARCH AND SCIENCE AND THAT IT DOES EXIST. There are a lot more studies like it available from US and foreign research centers This information herein is typical of research being done SINCE 2000. These medical studies are more recent than the studies of marijuana mentioned on the National Institute on Drug Abuse web site that are nearly all from the 1990's The National and California Narcotic Officers Association web sites on the topic of marijuana have some statements contrary to what is presented here. 1 hope to comment on those soon. That can relate to police training in Temecula. Most studies like the ones described herein being performed by the University of California Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research at UCSD and UCSF require approval from ALL of the following. The UCSD Institutional Review Board The Research Advisory Council of California The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) The University of California Center for Medicinal Research. (CMDR) In addition if the study requires humans using marijuana approval of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is also required. DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED 1. CALIFORNIA STATE LAW. HEALTHY AND SAFETY CODE 11362.9 MEDICAL MARIJUANA RESEARCH PROGRAM. Authorizes the Regents of the University of California to approve a program if they want to. If they do approve then UC SHALL create a program to study medical marijuana (AKA Cannabis) States various rules. Use objective scientific research for the efficacy and safety as part of medical treatment, get a lot of approvals for studies. Use federal government grown and processed cannabis when available through NIDA. . DOCUMENT ENCLOSED PRINTED FROM THE UCSD NEWS WEB SITE 2. There was already a program getting started at University of California, San Diego. News Release dated November 28, 2001. DEA Approves UC Center for Medicinal Cannabis Studies, and approved two specific studies. DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED PRINTED FROM THE UCSD CMCR WEB SITE VIEWED ONLINE THERE ARE LINKS TO MOST OF THE REFERENCED ARTICLES. www. cmcr.ucsd.edu 3. CMCR. CENTER FOR MEDICINAL CANNABIS RESEARCH DIRECTORY lists members of the SCIENTIFIC REVIEW BOARD. 20 members from other Research Organizations, mostly universities, plus some from UCSD. Also lists 18 members of the NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL 4. CMCR. CENTER FOR MEDICINAL CANNABIS RESEARCH NEWS. Lists about 59 news articles in newspapers and news magazines about studies being done at CMCR 5. CMCR. CENTER FOR MEDICINAL CANNABIS RESEARCH STUDIES. Lists studies active, undergoing review, completed studies, And discontinued studies. 6. CMCR. CENTER FOR MEDICINAL CANNABIS RESEARCH SCIENTIFIC REPORTS AND SUPPORTED SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS Lists 8 scientific reports, and 36 supported scientific publications. If viewed online has links to the reports and publications. CMCR. CENTER FOR MEDICINAL CANNABIS RESEARCH Part of their assignment from the legislature is to study methods of delivery of the useful cannabinoids into the human by means OTHER than smoking. Item 8 is linked from CMCR item 6 above 8. VAPORIZATION as a SMOKELESS cannabis Delivery System: A Pilot Study. Abstract enclosed Published in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics in 2007. Published online 11 April 2007 This abstract was published in Nature Journal. 18 healthy inpatient subjects enrolled to compare inhaled Cannabis sativa vaporized in a "Volcano" device with marijuana smoked in a "standard cigarette" This abstract on injection was also published in the same issue of Nature Journal I do not know whether CMCR participated. It looks like it is from the University of Heidelberg, Germany 9. Abstract enclosed. INJECTION of serum CTHC directly into blood stream. (CTHC is made in the body from THC taken orally, and occurs naturally in cannabis, THC and CTHC are objects of medicinal research.) The ten subjects were white non-smokers. Five mg were injected over 10 minutes in each. The amount of CTHC in the blood was measured right away and over time. Measurable quantity was detected up to 96 hours later. This was also published in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics in 2007. Published online 11 April 2007. This abstract was published in Nature Journal. California SB-420, 2003 . • Page 1 of 4 Medical Marijuana Research program 11362.9. (a) (1) It is the intent of the Legislature that the state commission objective scientific research by the premier research institute of the world, the University of California, regarding the efficacy and safety of administering marijuana as part of medical treatment. If the Regents of the University of California, by appropriate resolution, accept this responsibility, the University of California shall create a program, to be known as the California Marijuana Research Program. (2) The program shall develop and conduct studies intended to ascertain the general medical safety and efficacy of marijuana and, if found valuable, shall develop medical guidelines for the appropriate administration and use of marijuana. (b) The program may immediately solicit proposals for research projects to be included in the marijuana studies. Program requirements to be used when evaluating responses to its solicitation for proposals, shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following: (1) Proposals shall demonstrate the use of key personnel, including clinicians or scientists and support personnel, who are prepared to develop a program of research regarding marijuana's general medical efficacy and safety. (2) Proposals shall contain procedures for outreach to patients with various medical conditions who may be suitable participants in research on marijuana. (3) Proposals shall contain provisions for a patient registry. (4) Proposals shall contain provisions for an information system that is designed to record information about possible study participants, investigators, and clinicians, and deposit and analyze data that accrues as part of clinical trials. (5) Proposals shall contain protocols suitable for research on marijuana, addressing patients diagnosed with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) or the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), cancer, glaucoma, or seizures or muscle spasms associated with a chronic, debilitating condition. The proposal may also include research on other serious illnesses, provided that resources are available and medical information justifies the research. (6) Proposals shall demonstrate the use of a specimen laboratory capable of housing plasma, urine, and other specimens necessary to study the concentration of cannabinoids in various tissues, as well as housing specimens for studies of toxic effects of marijuana. (7) Proposals shall demonstrate the use of a laboratory capable of analyzing marijuana, provided to the program under this section, for purity and cannabinoid content and the capacity to detect contaminants. (c) In order to ensure objectivity in evaluating proposals, the program shall use a peer review process that is modeled on the process used by the National Institutes of Health, and that guards against funding research that is biased in favor of or against particular outcomes. Peer reviewers shall be selected for their expertise in the scientific substance and methods of the proposed research, and their lack of bias or conflict of interest regarding the applicants or the topic of an approach taken in the proposed research. Peer reviewers shall judge research proposals on several criteria, foremost among which shall be both of the following: (1) The scientific merit of the research plan, including whether the research design and experimental procedures are potentially biased for or against a particular outcome. (2) Researchers' expertise in the scientific substance and methods of the proposed research, http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/sb420-03.httn 1/4/2010 1:43:49 AM -California SB'420, 2003 • • Page 2 of 4 and their lack of bias or conflict of interest regarding the topic of, and the approach taken in, the proposed research. (d) If the program is administered by the Regents of the University of California, any grant research proposals approved by the program shall also require review and approval by the research advisory panel. (e) It is the intent of the Legislature that the program be established as follows: (1) The program shall be located at one or more University of California campuses that have a core of faculty experienced in organizing multidisciplinary scientific endeavors and, in particular, strong experience in clinical trials involving psychopharmacologic agents. The campuses at which research under the auspices of the program is to take place shall accommodate the administrative offices, including the director of the program, as well as a data management unit, and facilities for storage of specimens. (2) When awarding grants under this section, the program shall utilize principles and parameters of the other well -tested statewide research programs administered by the University of California, modeled after programs administered by the National Institutes of Health, including peer review evaluation of the scientific merit of applications. (3) The scientific and clinical operations of the program shall occur, partly at University of California campuses, and partly at other postsecondary institutions, that have clinicians or scientists with expertise to conduct the required studies. Criteria for selection of research locations shall include the elements listed in subdivision (b) and, additionally, shall give particular weight to the organizational plan, leadership qualities of the program director, and plans to involve investigators and patient populations from multiple sites. (4) The funds received by the program shall be allocated to various research studies in accordance with a scientific plan developed by the Scientific Advisory Council. As the first wave of studies is completed, it is anticipated that the program will receive requests for funding of additional studies. These requests shall be reviewed by the Scientific Advisory Council. (5) The size, scope, and number of studies funded shall be commensurate with the amount of appropriated and available program funding. (f) All personnel involved in implementing approved proposals shall be authorized as required by Section 11604. (g) Studies conducted pursuant to this section shall include the greatest amount of new scientific research possible on the medical uses of, and medical hazards associated with, marijuana. The program shall consult with the Research Advisory Panel analogous agencies in other states, and appropriate federal agencies in an attempt to avoid duplicative research and the wasting of research dollars. (h) The program shall make every effort to recruit qualified patients and qualified physicians from throughout the state. (i) The marijuana studies shall employ state-of-the-art research methodologies. 0) The program shall ensure that all marijuana used in the studies is of the appropriate medical quality and shall be obtained from the National Institute on Drug Abuse or any other federal agency designated to supply marijuana for authorized research. If these federal agencies fail to provide a supply of adequate quality and quantity within six months of the effective date of this section, the Attorney General shall provide an adequate supply pursuant to Section 11478. (k) The program may review, approve, or incorporate studies and research by independent http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/sb420-03.htm 1/4/2010 1:43:49 AM California SB-420, 2003 • • Page 3 of groups presenting scientifically valid protocols for medical research, regardless of whether the areas of study are being researched by the committee. (1) (1) To enhance understanding of the efficacy and adverse effects of marijuana as a pharmacological agent, the program shall conduct focused controlled clinical trials on the usefulness of marijuana in patients diagnosed with AIDS or HIV, cancer, glaucoma, or seizures or muscle spasms associated with a chronic, debilitating condition. The program may add research on other serious illnesses, provided that resources are available and medical information justifies the research. The studies shall focus on comparisons of both the efficacy and safety of methods of administering the drug to patients, including inhalational, tinctural, and oral, evaluate possible uses of marijuana as a primary or adjunctive treatment, and develop further information on optimal dosage, timing, mode of administration, and variations in the effects of different cannabinoids and varieties of marijuana. (2) The program shall examine the safety of marijuana in patients with various medical disorders, including marijuana's interaction with other drugs, relative safety of inhalation versus oral forms, and the effects on mental function in medically ill persons. (3) The program shall be limited to providing for objective scientific research to ascertain the efficacy and safety of marijuana as part of medical treatment, and should not be construed as encouraging or sanctioning the social or recreational use of marijuana. (m) (1) Subject to paragraph (2), the program shall, prior to any approving proposals, seek to obtain research protocol guidelines from the National Institutes of Health and shall, if the National Institutes of Health issues research protocol guidelines, comply with those guidelines. (2) If, after a reasonable period of time of not less than six months and not more than a year has elapsed from the date the program seeks to obtain guidelines pursuant to paragraph (1), no guidelines have been approved, the program may proceed using the research protocol guidelines it develops. (n) In order to maximize the scope and size of the marijuana studies, the program may do any of the following: (1) Solicit, apply for, and accept funds from foundations, private individuals, and all other funding sources that can be used to expand the scope or timeframe of the marijuana studies that are authorized under this section. The program shall not expend more than 5 percent of its General Fund allocation in efforts to obtain money from outside sources. (2) Include within the scope of the marijuana studies other marijuana research projects that are independently funded and that meet the requirements set forth in subdivisions (a) to (c), inclusive. In no case shall the program accept any funds that are offered with any conditions other than that the funds be used to study the efficacy and safety of marijuana as part of medical treatment. Any donor shall be advised that funds given for purposes of this section will be used to study both the possible benefits and detriments of marijuana and that he or she will have no control over the use of these funds. (o) (1) Within six months of the effective date of this section, the program shall report to the Legislature, the Governor, and the Attorney General on the progress of the marijuana studies. (2) Thereafter, the program shall issue a report to the Legislature every six months detailing the progress of the studies. The interim reports required under this paragraph shall include, but not be limited to, data on all of the following: http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/sb420-03.htm 1/4/2010 1:43:49 AM California SB'420, 2003 • Page 4 of 4 (A) The names and number of diseases or conditions under stut (B) The number of patients enrolled in each study by disease. (C) Any scientifically valid preliminary findings. (p) If the Regents of the University of California implement this section, the President of the University of California shall appoint a multidisciplinary Scientific Advisory Council, not to exceed 15 members, to provide policy guidance in the creation and implementation of the program. Members shall be chosen on the basis of scientific expertise. Members of the council shall serve on a voluntary basis, with reimbursement for expenses incurred in the course of their participation. The members shall be reimbursed for travel and other necessary expenses incurred in their performance of the duties of the council. (q) No more than 10 percent of the total funds appropriated may be used for all aspects of the administration of this section. (r) This section shall be implemented only to the extent that funding for its purposes is appropriated by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act.. http://www.chrisconrad.com/expert.witness/sb420-03.htm 1/4/2010 1:43:49 AM University of California, Sa iego: External Relations: News Information:... Pagel of 3 4__MW - rGetting Around Campus Health Sciences Visitors & Friends > News > Releases > Health > Article News Releases November 28, 2001 "'' CAMPAIGN I Contact: Sue Pondrom, UCSD (619) 543-6163 r- zucsn IDEA Approves UC Center for Medicinal Cannabis Studies The University of California's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR), has received Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) approval to begin two clinical studies on the possible efficacy of cannabis in the treatment of two severe medical disorders. The studies approved by the DEA are: • "Short -Term Effects of Cannabis Therapy on Spasticity in Multiple Sclerosis" Project Director Jody Corey -Bloom, M.D. (UCSD) - An outpatient study of the efficacy and safety of smoked marijuana versus placebo for the treatment of muscle spasms, loss of function, and related pain in patients with Multiple Sclerosis (M.S.). . Placebo -controlled, Double -Blind Trial of Medicinal Cannabis in Painful HIV Neuropathy" Project Director Ronald Ellis, M.D., Ph.D., (UCSD) - An outpatient study on the efficacy of smoked marijuana versus placebo for the alleviation of peripheral nerve pain associated with HIV infection. DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson said "this announcement is consistent with the DEA position that the question of whether marijuana has any legitimate medical purpose should be determined by sound science and medicine". Igor Grant, M.D., director of the CMCR at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) stated that "the approval of these clinical trials by the DEA and other federal and state agencies provides a unique opportunity to conduct much needed rigorous scientific studies that can determine if http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/health/DEAapproval.htm 1/4/2010 11:35:35 PM University of California, SaAiego: External Relations: News i lnfonnation:.. cannabi roducts have a role in amelioratingWering or improving prognosis in severe medical conditions for patients that might not have benefited fully from other treatments." In addition to exploring possible benefits, these studies will monitor potential side effects and toxicities. In particular, the following sub -study will investigate effects on complex behaviors such as driving skills. . "Impact of Repeated Cannabis Treatments on Driving Abilities", Project Director Thomas Marcotte, Ph.D., (UCSD) - An outpatient study on the effects of repeated administration of medicinal cannabis on driving ability (acute and/or long-term). Patients with HIV -related neuropathy or spasticity associated with M.S. will be evaluated for impairments using driving simulator assessments. A further study at University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) is pending DEA approval, anticipated in the near future. . "Cannabis for the Treatment of HIV -Related Peripheral Neuropathy", Project Director Donald Abrams, M.D. (UCSF) - An inpatient study on the efficacy of smoked marijuana for the alleviation of peripheral nerve pain associated with HIV infection. The CMCR, headquartered at UCSD and UCSF, is a statewide, state -funded initiative to study the safety and efficacy of medicinal cannabis to treat certain medical conditions. The Center supports and coordinates scientific research at universities and research centers throughout California, assessing the use of cannabis as an alternative for treating specific medical conditions. Diseases and conditions targeted for treatment are those that have been identified as warranting further research by the National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine, and by a National Institutes of Health expert panel. Before studies are submitted to the state and federal regulatory review agencies, an external Scientific Review Board, composed of national senior scientists, conducts a thorough review of each study, only approving studies of the highest scientific standards. The CMCR also has a National Advisory Council in place to advise and assist the Center's directorate. After approval by the Scientific Review Board, each of the above studies were approved by the Research Advisory Panel of California, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Drug Page 2 of 3 http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/health/DEAapproval.htm 1/4/2010 1 1:35:35 PM University of California, Sa tego: External Relations: News Inm foration:... Page 3 of 3 Enforce t Administration (DEA). The studigWill order product from NIDA and are expected to begin recruitment at the beginning of next year. Copyright ©2001 Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved Last modifed Mon Apr 10 14:52:00 PDT 2006 -4k%-XJC'SD Official web page of the University of California, San Diego http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/health/DEAapproval.htm 1/4/2010 11:35:35 PM CMCR:.DIRECTORY _I • • Page 1 of 2 HOME ranneral ion Statement N ew s Scientific Reports) Gnabis Research eee!!! Unhronhv of California DIRECTORY Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research 150 W. Washington, 2nd Floor San Diego, CA 92103 (619)543-5024 cmcr@ucsd.edu For media inquiries, please contact: Debra Kain Director, Health Sciences Research Communications UC San Diego Health Sciences Communications & Public Affairs (619) 543-6163 ddkain@ucsd.edu Directorate Director: Igor Grant, M.D. Co -Directors: Tom Coates, Ph.D. J. Hampton Atkinson, M.D. Andrew Mattison, Ph.D. (Deceased) Coordinating Core Center Manager: Thomas Marcotte, Ph.D. Research Associate: Ben Gouaux Scientific Review Board James Anthony, Ph.D., M.Sc. Johns Hopkins University William Breitbart, M.D., Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Alan Budney, Ph.D., University of Vermont Don Cherek, Ph.D., University of Texas Health Sciences Center Steven Childers, Ph.D., Wake Forest University Reena Deutsch, Ph.D., University of California, San Diego William L. Dewey, Ph.D., Virginia Commonwealth University Judith Feinberg, M.D., University of Cincinnati Holmes Hospital Richard Foltin, Ph.D., Columbia University Richard Gracely, Ph.D., NIDCR - National Institutes of Health Margaret Haney, Ph.D., Columbia University http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/directory.htm 1/5/2010 12:35:59 AM CMCR: DIRECTORY Page 2 of 2 loliles Herkenham, Ph.D., National Instike of Mental Health Karl Kieburtz, M.D., M.P.H., University of Rochester Robert A. Parker, Sc.D., Harvard University Frank Porreca, Ph.D., University of Arizona Judith Rabkin, Ph.D., M.P.H., Columbia University Srinivasa Raja, M.D., Johns Hopkins University Richard Rauck, M.D., Wake Forest University Wilfred Van Gorp, Ph.D., Columbia University Leslie Weiner, M.D., University of Southern California Sandra P. Welch, Ph.D., Virginia Commonwealth University Tanya Wolfson, M.A., University of California, San Diego National Advisory Council J. Richard Crout, M.D., Crout Consulting Samuel A. Deadwyler, Ph.D., Wake Forest University Dale Gieringer, Ph.D., California NORML Lester Grinspoon, M.D., Professor Emeritus, Harvard Medical School Janet Joy, Ph.D., Institute of Medicine Lewis Judd, M.D., University of California, San Diego Alexandros Makriyannis, Ph.D., University of Connecticut T. Philip Malan, M.D., Ph.D., University of Arizona Billy Martin, Ph.D.,Virginia Commonwealth University Charles O'Brien, M.D., Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania John Phair, M.D., Northwestern University Medical School June Machover Reinisch, Ph.D., R2 Science Communications, Inc. Roger A. Roffman, D.S.W., University of Washington Donald P. Tashkin, M.D., University of California, Los Angeles Robert Temple, M.D., Food and Drug Administration Scott Thorpe, J.D., Special Assistant Attorney General, State of California The Honorable John Vasconcellos, Retired, California State Senate Tom Vischi, Retired, Department Health and Human Services http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/directory.htm 1/5/2010 12:35:59 AM 'CMCR: NEWS • • Page 1 of 4 HOME ion scientific Reports Participant Information In wtigator lnformation rZnabiw s rch unMash�ysof CAWOMIa News August 18, 2008 Medical marijuana: What does science say? By Jill U. Adams, Los Angeles Times August 18, 2008 Pro: Marijuana use for chronic pain and nausea By Jill U. Adams, Los Angeles Times August 18, 2008 Con: Marijuana's damaging effects By Jill U. Adams, Los Angeles Times August 18, 2008 Vaporizers can cut marijuana smoke, retain similar medical effects By Jill U. Adams, Los Angeles Times August 7, 2008 Medicinal Marijuana Effective For Neuropathic Pain In HIV, Study Finds ScienceDaily August 6, 2008 Marijuana Eases Nerve Pain Due to HIV: Study Shows Smoking Pot Provides Pain Relief From HIV -Related Neuropathy By Kelli Miller Stacy, WebMD Health News August 6, 2008 Marijuana Relieves HIV -Related Neuropathic Pain By Crystal Phend, MedPage Today . August 6, 2008 Medical Marijuana Works for HIV -Related Nerve Pain, Study Says By Elizabeth Lopatto, Bloomberg . August 6, 2008 Medicinal Marijuana Eases Neuropathic Pain in HIV The Washington Post August 6, 2008 Medicinal Marijuana Effective for Neuropathic Pain to HIV. Press Release, University of California, San Diego. April 30, 2008 Low -dose pot eases pain while keeping mind clear Anne Harding, Reuters April 27, 2008 Clearing the Haze: Government -funded research at UCSD investigates marijuana's effects to better understand how the drug can both help and hurt its users. Justin Gutierrez, UCSD Guardian April 18, 2008 Presidential Candidates on Marijuana ohn Tierney, New York Times April 18, 2008 Low -dose pot eases pain while keeping mind clear Anne Harding, Reuters November 23, 2007 Marijuana Study Yields Surprising Results NBC San Diego November 22, 2007 Effect of pot smoking on pain all in the dose: study By David Douglas, Reuters http://www.emcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/news.htm 1 /4/2010 11:37:13 PM CMCR; NEWS October 31, 2007 HealthDay News Page 2 of 4 Right Dose of Pbt Can Ease Pain October 26, 2007 Can Puffing Pot Ease Your Pain? Ivanhoe October 25, 2007 Smoking cannabis in medium doses may help ease neuropathic pain By Mohit Joshi, TopNews October 24, 2007 Smoked Cannabis Proven Effective in Treating Neuropathic Pain Press Release, University of California, San Diego October 24, 2007 Too Much Cannabis and Pain Relief Goes Up in Smoke By Charles Bankhead, MedPage Today 48 October 24, 2007 Study: Too Much Marijuana Makes Pain Worse, Not Better Fox News April 30, 2007 Marijuana for Painful Peripheral Neuropathy? By Judith Feinberg, MD, AIDS Clinical Care February 13, 2007 Medical pot cuts pain, study finds: First rigorous research looked at HIV patients By Sabin Russell, San Francisco Chronicle February 13, 2007 Research Supports Medicinal Marijuana: AIDS Patients in Controlled Study Had Significant Pain Relief By Rick Weiss, Washington Post i February 13, 2007 Pot eases HIV patients' pain, study finds: Three marijuana cigarettes daily effective, according to new report from UCSF By Rebecca Vesely, Oakland Tribune February 13, 2007 UC study: Pot may cut nerve pain By Carrie Peyton Dahlberg, Sacramento Bee February 13, 2007 Marijuana May Ease AIDS Patients' Foot Pain: The smoked drug lessens a burning numbness that accompanies the illness, study finds By Randy Dotinga, HealthDay February 13, 2007 HIV patients smoking marijuana eases pain, scientists report By Paul Elias, Associated Press February 12, 2007 Smoked Cannabis Reduces Pain Caused by Peripheral Neuropathy Press Release, University of California, San Francisco June 12, 2005 2005 Scientifically Speaking, This Drug's on the Wrong List By Editorial By Daniele Piomelli in the Washington Post June 8, 2005 Ailing Users Loyal to Pot: Despite High Court's Ruling, They See No Alternatives By Lesli A. Maxwell and Edie Lau, Sacramento Bee June 7, 2005 Science Murky on Drug's Effects: Is it More Effective Than Medications? By Byron Spice, Pittsburgh Post -Gazette June 6, 2005 Bay Area Researcher Breaks New Ground in Pot http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/news.htm 1/4/2010 11:37:13 PM CMCR:, NEWS Study • Page 3 of 4 CBS 5, San Francisco May 10, 2005 UCSD Researchers Studying Marijuana, Pain Relief: Illegal Drug Could One Day Be Legitimate Medicine 10 News, San Diego November 15, 2004 Marijuana research hasn't created a buzz: Medicinal cannabis studies are going more slowly than expected as the state's voters back stem cell work. By Edie Lau, Sacramento Bee March 28, 2004 Family remedy: Shelly Arnold's home-grown answer to her son's pain tests the acceptance of medical marijuana. By Will Evans, Sacramento Bee November 24, 2003 Reefer Sanity, The brain's cannabinoid is the target of a rush (ha!) to develop new drugs By Meredith Wadman, Fortune Magazine November 7, 2003 Cannabis study shows small MS benefit By Helen Pearson, Nature August 29, 2003 Medical Marijuana Slowly Gains Ground By Daniel DeNoon, WebMD Medical News August 20, 2003 Medical Marijuana Center Opens Doors By Brian Vastag, JAMA.2003; 290:877-879 June 27, 2003 Minimal Long -Term Effects Of Marijuana Use Found in Central Nervous System by UCSD Researchers -UCSD Health Science News June 27, 2003 Study: Pot Doesn't Cause Permanent Brain Damage By Deena Beasley, Reuters Health E-Line June 27, 2003 Study: Pot doesn't hurt thinking skills By Jenny Diamond, San Diego Union Tribune May 1, 2003 The Myth of "Harmless" Marijuana By John P. Walters, The Washington Post April 14, 2003 Marijuana Compounds May Act Without Causing High By Jacqueline Stenson, Reuters Health February 2003 Medical Marijuana By Heather Bentley, San Diego Physician October 27, 2002 Is Pot Good For You? By John Cloud, Time.com October 14, 2002 Marijuana study tries to bring facts to heated debate By Linda Marsa, The Los Angeles Times (latimes.com) April 18, 2002 420: Researching the highs of cannabis UCSD's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research explores possibilities By Jessica Kruskamp, UCSD Guardians April 7, 2002 Smoking out pot's medical potential By Edie Lau, The Sacramento Bee March 5, 2002 Segment from NPR's All Things Considered titled, "Marijuana and the Brain". Articles discussed in the segment: Cannabis, Cognition, and Residual Confounding Cognitive Functioning of Lona-term Heavy Cannabis Users Seekinq Treatment http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/news.htm 1/4/2010 11:37:13 PM 'ICMCR:. NEWS Page 4 of 4 December 16, 2001 Letter to the* Editor. Igor Grant, M.D., CMCR Director. December 15, 2001 Cannabis research to start early next year By Philip J. Hilts, New York Times November 28, 2001 CMCR receives DEA approval for 2 studies. Press Release, University of California. November 28, 2001 The DEA announces the approval of 2 CMCR studies. DEA Press Release, The Sacramento Bee. November 28, 2001 The DEA approves registrations for two CMCR researchers. Press Release, DEA. June 25, 2001 The Supreme Court ruling against manufacturing and distributing medicinal cannabis exempts research By A.J.S. Rayl, The Scientist February 22, 2001 CMCR approves research studies. Press Release, University of California. August 29, 2000 CMCR established at the University of California. Press Release, University of California. http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/news.htm 1/4/2010 11:37:13 PM CMCR: RESEARCH Page 1 of 1 • • HOME enter for General In Iorimation Directory -Mission Statement ]iW]les Reports Participant Investigator nal Gnabis Research University of California CMCR STUDIES Studies Under Review Investigator Affiliation Title Barth Wilsey, M.O. UCSD The Analgesic Effect of Vaoonzed Cannabis on Neurooathic Pain in Spinal Cord Inlury Active Studies Investigator Affiliation Title Mark Wallace, M.D. UCSD Efficacy of Inhaled Cannabis in Diabetic Painful Peripheral Neuropathy Completed Studies Investigator Affiliation Title Donald Abrams, M.D. UCSF Cannabis for Treatment of HIV -Related On Peripheral Neuropathy Donald Abrams, M.D. UCSF Vaporization as a Smokeless Cannabis Delivery System Jody Corey -Bloom, UCSD Short -Term Effects of Cannabis Therapy on M.D., Ph.D. SDasocity in MS Sean Drummond, UCSD Sleep and Medicinal Cannabis Ph.D. Ronald Ellis, M.D., UCSD Ph.D. Thomas Marcotte, UCSD Ph.D. Ian Meng, Ph.D. UCSF Danlele Piomelll, UCI Ph.D. Rachel Schrler, Ph.D. UCSD Mark Wallace, M.D. UCSD Barth Wilsey, M.D. UCD Discontinued Studies Placebo -controlled Double Blind Trial of Medicinal Cannabis in Painful HIV Neurooathv LLli Impact of Reoeated Cannabis Treatments on Al Drivino Abilities �C! Mechanisms of Cannabinoid Analgesia !n Effects of Cannabis Therapy on Endooenous 17�1e Cannabinoids Effects of Medicinal Cannabis on CD4 immunity in AIDS Analgesic Efficacy of Smoked Cannabis !*i Double Blind, Placebo Controlled Trial of Smoked Marijuana on Neurooathic Pain Investigator Affiliation Title Donald Abrams, M.D. UCSF Cannabis in Combnation with Doiolds for Cancer Pain: A Pilot Study Mark Agius, M.D. UCD Cannabis for Soasbclty/Tremor in MS: Placebo Controlled Study Mark Barad, M.D., UCLA Cannabinoids in Fear Extinction Ph.D. Suzanne Dibble, UCSF DNSC, R.N. Dennis Israelski, M.D. San Mateo County Mark Wallace, M.D. UCSD Treating Chemotherapy Induced Delayed Nausea with Cannabmoids MMJ for HIV -Associated DSPW Adherence and Compliance Sub -Study Analaesic Efficacy of Smoked Cannabis in Refractory Cancer Pain http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/research.htm 1/5/2010 12:11:40 AM CMCR: SCIENTIFIC REPS • Page 1 of 5 HOME 1111ANNAIMP!M Fir icinal nabis Research e..ny of Gaoeamia Scientific Reports senerel In formaion irectory �1 ■ American College of Physicians, Position Paper: .ssion Statement Supporting Research into the Therapeutic Role of New s Marijuana (2008) studies cientific Reports Action Report: Medical Board of California, July 2004 Participant Information California Physicians & Medical Marijuana: A Statement Investigator lnfom lion by the Medical Board of California --May 7, 2004 Canadian Senate Report (2002) .National Institute on Drug Abuse, Conference Summary, 2001: Workshop on Clinical Consequences of Marijuana Institute of Medicine Report, Executive Summary, 1999: Marijuana and Medicine, Assessing the Science Base The United Kingdom Parliament House of Lords Select Committee on Science & Technology Ninth Report, November4,1998 Cannabis: The Scientific & Medical Evidence National Institutes of Health, Expert Panel Report, 1997: Workshop on the Medical Utility of Marijuana The Canadian Consortium for the Investigation of Cannabinoids in Human Therapeutics (CCIC) A Summary of Research Abstracts - updated monthly CMCR Supported Scientific Publications Ellis R, Toperoff W, Vaida F, van den Brande G, Gonzales J, Gouaux B, Bentley H, Atkinson JH. Smoked Medicinal Cannabis for Neurooathic Pain in HIV: A Randomized, Crossover Clinical Trial. Neu ropsychopharmacology. E- pub ahead of print. doi:10.1038/npp.2008.120.--August 2008 Corey -Bloom J, Wolfson T, Gamst A, ]in S, Marcotte T, Bentley H, Gouaux B. Short -Term Effects of Medicinal Cannabis on Svasticity in Multiple Sclerosis. Poster presented at the 60th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Neurology (Chicago, IL). 2008. Wilsey B, Marcotte T, Tsodikov A, Millman J, Bentley H, Gouaux B, Fishman S. April 2008 A Randomized, Placebo -Controlled, Crossover Trial of Cannabis Cigarettes in Neuropathic Pain. Neuropathic Pain. Journal of Pain. E-pub ahead of print. doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2007.12.010, Wallace M, Schulteis G, Atkinson JH, Wolfson T, http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/marijuana.htm 1/5/2010 12:16:31 AM CMCR: SCIENTIFIC REPS Page 2 of 5 Lazzaretto D, Bentley H, Gouaux abramson I (November 2007) Dose -dependent Effects of Smoked Cannabis on Capsaicin-induced Pain and Hvoeralgesia in Healthy Volunteers. Anesthesiology. 107(5):785-796 Gonzalez R, Martin EM, Grant I, Neuropsychology and Substance Use, Taylor & Francis Group. (2007) Marijuana (Chapter 5, 139-170) DI Abrams, HP Vizoso, SB Shade, C Jay, ME Kelly, and NL Benowitz. Vaporization as a Smokeless Cannabis Delivery vstem: A Pilot Study. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007 Apr 11; [Electronic publication ahead of print]. Abrams DI, Jay CA, Shade SB, Vizoso H, Reda H, Press S, Kelly ME, Rowbotham MC, Petersen KL. Cannabis in painful HIV -associated sensory neuropathy: A randomized placebo -controlled trial. Neurology 2007 68 515-521. Rossi S, Yaksh T, Bentley H, van den Brande G, Grant I, Ellis R. (2006). Characterization of interference with 6 commercial delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol immunoassays by efavirenz (glucuronide) in urine. Clinical Chemistry, 52, 896-7. Igor Grant and B. Rael Cahn, Cannabis and endocannabinoid modulators: Therapeutic promises and challenges, Clinical Neuroscience Research, Volume 5, Issues 2-4, November 2005, Pages 185-199. Abrams, D., Jay, C., Vizoso, H., Shade, S., Reda, H., Press, S., Kelley, M.E., Rowbotham, M., Petersen, K. Smoked Cannabis Therapv for HIV -Related Painful Peripheral Neuropathv: Results of a Randomized, Placebo -Controlled Clinical Trial. 2nd Annual Meeting of the International Association for Cannabis as Medicine. 2005. Ilan, A., Gevins, A., Role, K., Vizoso, H., Abrams, D. The Coanitive Neurophvsiological Effects of Medicinal Marijuana in HIV+ Patients with Peripheral Neuropathv. 2nd Annual Meeting of the International Association for Cannabis as Medicine. 2005. Abrams, D., Vizoso, H., Shade, S., Jay, C., Kelley, M.E., Benowitz, N. Vaporization as a Smokeless Cannabis Delivery System: A Pilot Study. 2nd Annual Meeting of the International Association for Cannabis as Medicine. 2005. Marcotte, T., Rosenthal, T., Corey -Bloom, I., Roberts, E., http://www.emcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/marijuana.htm 1/5/2010 12:16:31 AM CMCR:.SCIENTIFIC REPS Page 3 of 5 Lampinen, S., Allen, W. The Impa�of Cognitive Deficits and Spasticity on Driving Simulator Performance in Multiple Sclerosis. Proceedings of the Third International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design. 2005. Lopez, C., Toperoff, W., van den Brande, G., Tapert, S., Atkinson, J.H., Drummond, S.P.A., Increased Sleep Disturbances in Patients with HIV -Related Neuropathy. 2005 Annual Meeting of the Associated Professional Sleep Societies. Igor Grant, Foreword by Igor Grant, M.D., Director, Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR1, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Page 1067. Alexandros Makriyannis, Raphael Mechoulam and Daniele Piomelli, Therapeutic opportunities through modulation of the endocannabinoid system, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1068-1071. Cecilia J. Hillard and Abbas Jarrahian, Accumulation of anandamide: Evidence for cellular diversity, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1072-1078. Natsuo Ueda, Kazuhito Tsuboi and Didier M. Lambert, A second N-acylethanolamine hydrolase in mammalian tissues, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1079-1085. Shou-Yuan Zhuang, Daniel Bridges, Elena Grigorenko, Stephen McCloud, Andrew Boon, Robert E. Hampson and Sam A. Deadwyler, Cannabinoids produce neuroprotection by reducing intracellular calcium release from rvanodine-sensitive stores, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1086-1096. Liana Fattore, Sabrina Spano, Gregorio Cossu, Serena Deiana, Paola Fadda and Walter Fratta, Cannabinoid CB1 antagonist SR 141716A attenuates reinstatement of heroin self -administration in heroin -abstinent rats, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1097-1104. Carl R. Lupica and Arthur C. Riegel, Endocannabinoid release from midbrain dopamine neurons: a potential substrate for cannabinoid receptor antagonist treatment of addiction, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1105-1116. http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/marijuana.htm 1/5/2010 12:16:31 AM CMCR:.SCIENTIFIC REPS Page 4 of 5 Ester Fride, Datta Ponde, Aviva Beer and Lumir Hanus, Peripheral, but not central effects of cannabidiol derivatives: Mediation by CB1 and unidentified receptors, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1117-1129. Pal Pacher, Sandor Batkai and George Kunos, Blood pressure regulation by endocannabinoids and their receptors, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1130-1138. Roger G. Pertwee, Adele Thomas, Lesley A. Stevenson, Yehoshua Maor and Raphael Mechoulam, Evidence that 1-7-hvdroxv-4'-dimethvlheptvl-cannabidiol activates a non-CB1. non-CB2, non-TRPV1 target in the mouse vas deferens, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1139-1146. ]in Fu, Fariba Oveisi, Silvana Gaetani, Edward Lin and Daniele Piomelli, Oleoylethanolamide, an endogenous PPAR-ralohal aoonist. lowers body weight and hyperlipidemia in obese rats, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1147-1153. Nissar A. Darmani, Angelo A. Izzo, Brian Degenhardt, Marta Valenti, Giuseppe Scaglione, Raffaele Capasso, Italo Sorrentini and Vincenzo Di Marzo, Involvement of the cannabimimetic compound, N-palmitoyl- ethanolamine, in inflammatory and neuropathic conditions: Review of the available pre -clinical data, and first human studies, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1154-1163. Kahlid Salim, Lido Schneider, Sumner Burstein, Ludwig Hoy and Matthias Karst, Pain measurements and side effect profile of the novel cannabinoid aiulemic acid, Neuropharmacology, Volume 48, Issue 8, June 2005, Pages 1164-1171. .de Jong, B.C., Prentiss, D., McFarland, W., Machekano, R., and Israelski, D.M. (2005) Marijuana use and its association with adherence to antiretroviral therapy amono HIV -infected persons with moderate to severe nausea. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, 38, (1), 43-46. Giuffrida A, Leweke FM, Gerth CW, Schreiber D, Koethe D, Faulhaber J, Klosterkotter J, Piomelli D. Cerebrospinal Anandamide Levels are Elevated in Acute Schizophrenia and are Inversely Correlated with Psychotic Symptoms. Neu ropsychopharmacology. 2004 Nov;29(11):2108-14. Schrier, R., Soto, P., Hamlat, C., Durand, D., Ceci, K., http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/marijuana.htm 1/5/2010 12:16:31 AM CMCR:.SCIENTIFIC REP%S Page 5 of 5 Ellis, R. (2004, 3). Effects of in V*Cannabinoids on T- cell Responses of HIV Infected Patients. Poster presented at the loth Society on Neuroimmune Pharmacology Conference (Santa Fe, NM). Jay, C., Shade, S., Vizoso, H., Reda, H., Petersen, K., Rowbotham, M., Abrams, D. The Effect of Smoked Mariivana on Chronic Neuroaathic and EXperimenta% Induced Pain in HIV Neuropathy: Results of an Open - Label Pilot Study. Proceedings 11th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, abstract 496, p.243, 2004. A.M. Papanastassiou, H.L. Fields, I.D. Meng. Local application of the cannabinoid receptor agonist. WIN 55,212-2, to spinal trigeminal nucleus caudalis differentially affects nociceotive and non-nociceotive neurons.. Pain. 2004 Feb;107(3):267-75. Diane Prentiss, MA, MPH, Rachel Power, PhD, Gladys Balmas MD, MPH, Gloria Tzuang, MPH, and Dennis M. Israelski, MD. Patterns of Marijuana Use Among Patients With HIV/AIDS Followed in a Public Health Care Setting. JAIDS Volume 35, Number 1, January 1, 2004 Abrams, D.I., Jay, C., Petersen, K., Shade, S., Vizoso, H., Reda, H., Benowitz, N., Rowbotham, M. The Effects of Smoked Cannabis in Painful Peripheral Neuropathv and Cancer Pain Refractory to Opioids. Proceedings of the International Association of Cannabis as Medicine, Cologne, 2003, p.28. Grant, I., Gonzalez, R., Carey, C., Natarajan, L., and Wolfson, T. (2003). Non -acute (residual) neurocognitive effects of cannabis use: A meta -analysis study. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 9, 679- 689. Gonzalez R., Carey, C., and Grant, I.: Nonacute (Residual) Neuropsychological Effects of Cannabis Use: A Oualitative Analysis and Systemic Review. J Clin Pharmacol 2002: 42; 48S-57S. http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/geninfo/marijuana.htm 1/5/2010 12:16:31 AM Clinical Pharmacology Article Page Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2oo7) 82, 572-578; doi:10.1038/si.clpt.6100200; published online 11 April 2007 Vaporization as a Smokeless Cannabis Delivery System: A Pilot Study D I Abrams'i,23, H P Vizosol,3, S B Shade'-,3, C Jay4,5, M E Kelly1,23 and N L Benowitza,6 0 'Community Consortium, Positive Health Program, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California, USA 'Division of Hematology -Oncology, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California, USA 3Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA 4Division of Neurology, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California, USA 5Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA 6Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA Correspondence: DI Abrams, (dabrams(a)nho.ucsf.edu) Received 29 September 2oo6; Accepted 25 February 2007; Published online 11 April 2007. Abstract Although cannabis may have potential therapeutic value, inhalation of a combustion product is an undesirable delivery system. The aim of the study was to investigate vaporization using the Volcano® device as an alternative means of delivery of inhaled Cannabis sativa. Eighteen healthy inpatient subjects enrolled to compare the delivery of cannabinoids by vaporization to marijuana smoked in a standard cigarette. One strength (1-7, 3.4, or 6.8% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)) and delivery system was randomly assigned for each of the 6 study days. Plasma concentrations of e-9-THC, expired carbon monoxide (CO), physiologic and neuropsychologic effects were the main outcome measures. Peak plasma concentrations and 6-h area under the plasma concentration —time curve of THC were similar. CO levels were reduced with vaporization. No adverse events occurred. Vaporization of cannabis is a safe and effective mode of delivery of THC. Further trials of clinical effectiveness of cannabis could utilize vaporization as a smokeless delivery system. MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated. http://www.nature.com/clpt/journal/v82/n5/abs/6100200a.html 1/2/2010 11:59:21 PM of 2 .CUnical Pharmacology & Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2007) 82, 63-69. doia0.1038/sj.clpt.61oo199; published online 4 April 2007. Pharmacokinetics of ii-nor-9-Carboxy-&9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (CTHQ After Intravenous Administration of CTHC in Healthy Human Subjects A Glaz-Sandberg-', L Dietz, H Nguyen3, H Oberwittlerl, Rolf Adedanz and Gerd Mikus' 'Department of Internal Medicine VI, Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany 'Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany 3University Hospital Pharmacy, Heidelberg, Germany Correspondence: G Mikus,(aerd.mikus(&med.uni-heidelbera.de) Received 29 December 2006; Accepted 21 February 2007; Published online 4 April 2007. Abstract After cannabis consumption there is only limited knowledge about the pharmacokinetic (PK) and metabolic properties of 11-nor-9-carboxy-e9- tetrahydrocannabinol (CTHC), which is formed by oxidative breakdown from e9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Despite widely -varying concentrations observed in smoking studies, attempts have been made to interpret consumption behavior with special regard to a cumulated or decreasing concentration of CTHC in serum. Ten healthy nonsmoking white male individuals received g mg CTHC intravenously over io min. Highest serum concentrations of CTHC were observed at the end of the infusion (336.8,61.7 µg/1) followed by a quick decline. CTHC concentration could be quantified up to 96 h after administration, with a terminal elimination half-life of 17.6_5.5 It. Total clearance was low (91.2:24.0 ml/min), with renal clearance having only a minor contribution (0.136±0.094 ml/min). This first metabolite -based kinetic approach will allow an advanced understanding of CTHC PKs data obtained in previous studies with THC. MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated. http://www.nature.com/clpt/journal/v82/nI/abs/6100199a.html 1/2/2010 11:38:22 PM clinical.Pharmacology & T,I�rapeutics - Abstract of article: Ph�lnacokinetics... Page 2 of 2 RESEARCH • • Pharmacokinetics of ii-nor-9-Carboxy-A 9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (CTHC) After Intravenous Administration of CTHC in Healthy Human Subjects Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics Article Response Preclinical pharmacokinetics and metabolism of a novel prototype DNA-PK inhibitor NU7026 British Journal of Cancer Original Article Modeling of Brain D2 Receptor Occupancy -Plasma Concentration Relationships with a Novel Antipsychotic, YKP1358, Using Serial PET Scans in Healthy Volunteers Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics Article Response Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Paracetamol Following Intravenous Administration of 5 g During the First 24 h with a 2-g Starting Dose Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics Article Response See all 9 matches for Research Clinical Pharmacology S Therapeutics ISSN 0009-9236 EISSN 1532-6535 About NPG Privacy policy Nature News Contact NPG Legal notice Naturejobs RSS web feeds Accessibility statement Nature Asia Help Nature Education Search: © 20to American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics partner of AGORA, HINARI, OARS, INASP, Cross Ref and COUNTER IE http://www.nature.com/clpt/joumal/v82/nl/abs/6100199a.html 1/2/2010 11:38:22 PM r� ('finical Pharmacology Article Abstract of article: Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2007) 82, 63-69. doi:1o.io38/sj.clpt.6roor99; published online 4 April 2007. Pharmacokinetics of 1i-nor-9-Carboxy-d9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (CTHQ After Intravenous Administration of CTHC in Healthy Human Subjects A Glaz-Sandberg-', L Dietzz, H Nguyen3, H Oberwittlerl, Rolf Adedana and Gerd Mikusl `Department of Internal Medicine VI, Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany 'Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany 3University Hospital Pharmacy, Heidelberg, Germany Correspondence: G Mikus, (eerd.mikus(&med.uni-heidelber ..de) Received 29 December 2006; Accepted 21 February 2007; Published online 4 April 2007. Abstract After cannabis consumption there is only limited knowledge about the of 2 pharmacokinetic (PK) and metabolic properties of 11-nor-9-carboxy-e9- tetrahydrocannabinol (CTHC), which is formed by oxidative breakdown from 69- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Despite widely -varying concentrations observed in smoking studies, attempts have been made to interpret consumption behavior with special regard to a cumulated or decreasing concentration of CTHC in serum. Ten healthy nonsmoking white male individuals received 5 mg CTHC intravenously over io min. Highest serum concentrations of CTHC were observed at the end of the infusion (336.8:6t.7 µg/1) followed by a quick decline. CTHC concentration could be quantified up to 96 h after administration, with a terminal elimination half-life of 17.6s5.5 h. Total clearance was low (91.2s24.0 ml/min), with renal clearance having only a minor contribution (0.136a0.094 ml/min). This first metabolite -based kinetic approach will allow an advanced understanding of CTHC PKs data obtained in previous studies with THC. MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated. http://www.nature.com/clpt/journal/v82/nl/abs/6100199a.html 1/2/2010 11:38:22 PM Y, Ginical Pharmacology & T apeutics - Abstract of article: Ph�acokinetics... Page 2 of 2 RESEARCH Pharmacokinetics of ii-nor-9-Carbon-A 9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (CTHC) After Intravenous Administration of CTHC in Healthy Human Subjects Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics Article Response Preclinical pharmacokinetics and metabolism of a novel prototype DNA-PK inhibitor NU7026 British Journal of Cancer Original Article Modeling of Brain D2 Receptor Occupancy -Plasma Concentration Relationships with a Novel Antipsvchotic YKPia ,8 Using Serial PET Scans in Healthy Volunteers Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics Article Response Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Paracetamol Following Intravenous Administration of 5 g During the First 24 h with a 2-g Starting Dose Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics Article Response See all 9 matches for Research Clinical Pharmacology & 1herapeutics ISSN 0009-9236 EISSN 1532-65:35 About NPG Privacy policy Nature News Contact NPC Legal notice Naturejobs RSS web feeds Accessibility statement Nature Asia Help Nature Education Search: G 20lo American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics partner of AGORA, HINARI, DARE, INASP, CrossRef and COUNTER go http://www.nature.com/clpt/joumal/v82/nl/abs/6100199a.html 1/2/2010 11:38:22 PM