Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout101194 CC AgendaAGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER - 30875 RANCHO VISTA ROAD OCTOBER 11, 1994- 7:00 PM In coml~liance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909l 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR 35. 102.35. I04ADA Title II] :EXECUTIVE SESSION::5:30PM;:ClosedSession of~the City Council: pursuant to Government Code §54956;9, Conference:with:Legal :Counsel -Existing Litigation (Old ~Vail Partners, Hill Rancho Regional Center and Dawes vs City of Temecula) and the Claim of Harrison, Nichols vs. the City of Temecula, et. al. At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 PM and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM. CALL TO ORDER: Invocation: Flag Salute: ROLL CALL: PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 94-29 Resolution: No. 94-98 Mayor Ron Roberrs presiding Pastor Ken Coil, Neighborhood Church of the Nazarene Councilmember Mu~oz Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Stone, Roberts Proclamation - Help Retarded Children Weekend PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council on items that are not listed on the Agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item n01; listed 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 befQrq the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute 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 Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minute~ RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of September 13, 1994. 2.2 Approve the minutes of September 27, 1994. 3 4 Resolution AoorovinQ List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94* A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Public Nuisance Abatement - 30301 Nicolas Road RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the issuance of a purchase order in the amount of $58,600to Environmental Control Systems, Inc. for the removal of all trash, debris, building foundations and for the securing of all buildings. 4.2 Approve an appropriation of $58,600 for Account No. 001-162-999-5250,Other Outside Services, from Unreserved Fund Balance. Reiect the Bid for the Pala Road at Hwv 79S, RiQht Turn Lane Proiect (No. PW94-08) RECOMMENDATION: 5,1 Reject the bid and direct staff to re-bid the Pala Road at Hwy 79S, Right Turn Lane Project (PW94-08). ReQuest to Caltrans for Freewav Guide SiQns Identifvine the Old Town Business District RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE INSTALLATION OF FREEWAY GUIDE SIGNS IDENTIFYING THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA BUSINESS DISTRICT 10 11 Interim Director of Public Works Contract RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve a contract with Kicak and Associates to provide Interim City Engineer/Director of Public Works services. Records Destruction ADDroyal RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve scheduled destruction of certain records as provided under the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy. Vehicle Purchase for Fire Inspector RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Authorize the purchase of an extended cab pick-up truck from Paradise Chevrolet. The purchase price is $12,791.71 ,excluding tax. Authorize Reduction in Faithful Performance Bond Amounts in Tract No. 25004-1 (Property Located East of Seraphina Road, North of Nicolas Road) RECOMMENDATION: 10. 1 Authorize a fifty (50) percent reduction in Faithful Performance Street, Water and Sewer improvement Bond amounts; 10.2 Accept the Faithful Performance Improvement Bond Rider in the reduced amount in Tract No. 25004-1; 10.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. Substitute Subdivision Improvement AGreement and Public Improvement Bonds in Tract 21067 (Property Located South of Highway 79-S and Northeast of Pala Road) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Accept Substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Faithful Performance and Labor and Material Bonds for Street, Water and Sewer Improvements, and Subdivision Monumentation Bond in Tract No. 21067; 11.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. 12 Solicitation of Construction Bids and ApPrOval of the Plans and Specifications for the Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements (Project No. PW94-03) 13 14 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for Project No. PW94-03, Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements. Walcott Corridor Imorovements, Proiect No. PW94-10. Rancho California Water District Fundine ReQuest RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Deny the request by Rancho California Water District to use City funds to relocate an existing waterline within existing street right-of-way. Approval of Contract Services Aereements RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve contract service agreements for Esgil Corporation, Vandorpe Chou Associates, Ray Grage and Associates and Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, to provide building plan check services to the Building and Safety Department. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 15 Second Readine of Ordinance 94-25 RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-25 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MODIFYING SECTION G(1 .) OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 475.73 ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA IN ORDINANCE NO. 90-04. TO CHANGE THE HOURS AND DAYS DURING WHICH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS ALLOWED 16 Second Readino of Ordinance No. 94-28 RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-28 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 10.36 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE REGULATION OF NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY PUBLIC HEARINGS Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 17 Soecific Plan No. 263 (Reoional Center) and Chanoe of Zone No. 5589 (Continued from the meeting of 9/13/94) RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340; TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340 INCLUDING A NEW MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERMINING NO ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE CIRCULATION MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD 18 17.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589, CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20 (HEAVY AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM) TO SP {SPECIFIC PLAN) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD 17.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 263 (REGIONAL CENTER) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD 17.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN 2634 PROPOSING A 1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CORE, 810,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE-INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAL 298,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS Plannina Al~131ication No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) - a Forty-One Foot, Six Inch Hioh (41 '6"), One Hundred Twenty-Two (122) Souare Foot Freestandino Freeway Oriented Sian for Toyota of Temecula Valley located on the East Side of Interstate 15 RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063 (APPEAL), UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FORTY-ONE FOOT, SIX INCH HIGH (41 '6"), ONE HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO (122) SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN FOR TOYOTA OF TEMECULA VALLEY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 15 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 911-150-005 19 Plannine Aoolication No. 94-0017, Develooment Aoreement for Tract 27827 (Located on the northwest corner of Nicolas Road and North General Kearny Road) RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Adopt the Negative Declaration for PA 94-0017. 19.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC., DBA COSCAN DAVIDSON HOMES, FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164- RORIPAUGH, PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0017 20 Disaooroval of Cable Television Rates for Basic Service Tier and Associated Eeui~ment of Inland Valley Cablevision, and Orderino a Refund for Excessive Rates RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DISAPPROVING THE CABLE TELEVISION RATES FOR BASIC SERVICE TIER AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT OF INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION, AND ORDERING A REFUND FOR EXCESSIVE RATES COUNCIL BUSINESS 21 RoriDauOh Ranch S~ecific Plan Density (Continued from the meeting of 9/13/94) RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Review and provide direction to staff. 22 23 24 25 26 27 Award of A Professional Services Contract to NBS Lowry to Prepare the Nicolas Valley Soecial Study RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Award a Professional Services contract to NBS Lowry in the amount of $24,673 to I~repare the Nicolas Valley Special Study and authorize the Mayor to execute said contract. Prooosed Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street", Acknowledaement Sian Size RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Approve the Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street~ acknowledgement. Community Services Commission A~oointments RECOMMENDATION: 24.1 Review the Ad-Hoc Committee recommendations and appoint two apl31icants to fill full three-year terms. Public\Traffic Safety Commission ADoointments RECOMMENDATION: 25.1 Appoint one member to serve a full three-year term on the Public\Traffic Safety Commission. Reauest from SuDervisor Bob Buster for Determination of City of Temecula's Interest in Pre-Fundina Assessment District 161 RECOMMENDATION: 26.1 Consider the suggestions set forth in the letter from Supervisor Bob Buster dated September 19, 1994. Desjan Services Contract - Parkview Fire Station Proiect RECOMMENDATION: 27.1 Award contract of $174,313 to RJM Design Group for the preparation of the master plan, schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project administration for the Parkview Fire Station Project. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: October 18, 1994, 7:00 PM, Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. TEMECULA :COMMUNITY SERVICES:DISTRICT:MEETING *::(Toi!be::!held atB:00) : CALL TO ORDER: President Jeffrey E. Stone ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Roberts, Stone PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR I Minute~ RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 27, 1994. 2 Utility Aoreements for Pala Community Park - Project No. PW93-O3CSD RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Contract for Extension of Electric Line Underground with Southern California Edison Company (SCE) to provide for installation of an underground line extension to Pala Community Park. 2.2 Authorize the payment of SCE application fees in the amount of $16,235.71. 2.3 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Water System Construction Agreement and the Agency Agreement with Rancho California Water District (RCWD) to provide for installation of domestic water service to Pala Community Park. GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Bradley DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next meeting: October 18, 1994, 8:00 PM, Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT.AGENCY MEETING CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Roberrs, Stone, Parks PUBLIC COMMENT: Anyone wishing to address the Agency, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 MinUte8 RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 13, 1994. 1.2 Approve the minutes of September 27, 1994. AGENCY BUSINESS 2 Contract Amendment to Provide Visual Impact Analysis in the Old Town Redevelopment Project (Continued from the meeting of 9/27/94) RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve an amendment to the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates to add a visual analysis into the Environmental Impact Report for the Old Town Redevelopment Project. 2.2 Increase the amount of the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates by $9,887.96. 2.3 Approve an amendment to the contract with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo to perform additional building design services needed to support the visual impact analysis. 2.4 Increase the amount of the contract with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo by $13,000. 3 4 ADDrooriation and AuthOrization tO Release funds for Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sian Lease RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Appropriate $20,000 from RedevelopmentAgency AccouRt No. 280-199-999- 5264. 3.2 Authorize payment of the Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sign Lease for two billboards in an amount not to exceed $20,000. Old Town RedeveloDment Advisory Committee RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 That the Old Town Redevelopment Advisory committee retain the existing committee structure of three appointed members and four elected members. 4.2 Direct staff to seek applications for the three appointments to the committee and to prepare election procedures for the four elected representatives. 4.3 Appropriate $15,000to Account #280-199-999-5225RDA elections from Unreserved Fund Balance. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next Meeting: October 18, 1994, 8:00 PM, Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. PROCLAMATIONS/ PRESENTATIONS The City of Temecula PROCLAMATION Wlt~.REAS, the Knights of Columbus in the State of California have undertaken a project of assistance for the treatment and care of mentally retarded children; and Wn'EREAS, the nearly 60,000 members of the Knights of Columbus in California are conducting their annual state-wide Candy Drive in the communities throughout California; and W~EREAS, the local area Knights of Columbus No. 9964 will be mobilizing a "Tootsic Roll Drive" and will be soliciting contributions at all of the major supermarkets in the area; and WltEREAS, the the proceeds of this campaign will be distributed to not-for-profit agencies and institutions dedicated to serving mentally retarded children, NOW, TI-W~REFORE, I, Ron Roberts, on behalf of the City Council of the City of Temecula, hereby proclaim the October 14, 15, and 16, 1994, to be "TttE llELp RETARDED CltllJ'lRli~ WEEKF. ND" in the City of Temecula, and urge all citizens to recognize and join in the spirit of this important fund raising campaign. IN W1TNESS WttEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Temecula to be affixed this llth day of October, 1994. Ron Robert.s, Mayor ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:06 PM at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Ron Roberts presiding. PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Stone, Roberrs ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Also present were City Manager Ronald Bradley, City Attorney Peter M. Thorson, and City Clerk June S. Greek. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor Tim Buttrey, Temecula Valley Christian Center Assembly of God Church. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the flag salute by Mayor Pro Tern Stone. PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS City Clerk June S. Greek administered the Oath of Office to new Planning Commissioners Marcia Slaven and Andrew Webster. Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney announced the City has received the Government Finance Officers Association CAPR Award, Certificate of Achievement. PUBLIC COMMENTS Merian E. Magree, 28801 Pujol St., expressed concern regarding crime at the Temecula Villas on Pujol Street. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Birdsall requested that a pro and con discussion of Proposition 187 be placed on a future agenda for public information. Mayor Pro Tern Stone requested that the health care initiative also be placed on a future agenda for discussion. Minutes~9\l 3\94 -1 - 09/27/94 City Council Minutes Sel~ternber 13, 1994 Councilmember Parks requested tha~: a voice mail line be installed at City Hall to allow the citizens to advise the council regarding their concerns on the Old Town Entertainment Project as well as other concerns. Councilmember Mu~oz suggested holding a second workshop on the Old Town Entertainment Project to solicit additional input. Mayor Roberts asked how soon the informational program would be put into place. City Manager Bradley reported the first newsletter should be out within the next 30 days. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Pro Tem Stone requested the removal of Consent Calendar Items 4 and 6. He also commented on Item 11, thanking Chief Building Official Tony Elmo for his efforts on this item. Councilmember Parks requested the removal of Item No. 22. Councilmember Mu~oz requested the removal of Item No. 8 and announced he would abstain on Items 6 and 18 due to a possible future conflict of interest and items 12-16 due to an existing conflict of interest. He also asked a question on Item No. 21, referring to the kinds of inspection services Celttans would provide. Director of Public Works Tim Serlet explained that Caltrans would maintain this signal and would be directly involved in all inspection services. Mayor Roberts announced Item No. 9 would be removed from the Consent Calendar since a request to speak was received on that item. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-3, 5, 7, 9-21, with Councilmember Mu~oz abstaining on Items 6, 18 because of a possible future conflict of interest and Items 12-16 for an existing conflict. The motion was unanimously carried. 1. Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2. Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of August 9, 1994. Minutes~9\l 3\94 -2- 09/27/94 City Council Minutes September 13, 1994 Resolution ADorovina List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-90 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Record'$ Destruction APproval RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve scheduled destruction of certain records as provided under the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy. Consideration of ReQulationS for Newsracks in Public RiQht-of-Wav (Continued from the meeting of 8/23/94) RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Continue this item to the meeting of September 27, 1994. 10. Authorization to Execute Supplemental Aareement for the Use of 20th Year Community Development Block Grant Funds RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Supplemental Agreement for the 20th Year Community Development Block Grant Funds. 11. Aooroval of Contract Award for Plan Review Services RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve an award of contract to Esgil Corporation, Vandorpe Chou Associates, Ray Grage and Associates and Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, to provide building plan review services on an as needed basis, to the Building and Safety Department. Minutes\9\13\94 -3- 09/27/94 CitV Council Minutes 12. September 13, 1994 Release Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-1 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Improvement Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-1, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and the Surety. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz 13. Release Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-2 RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Improvement Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-2, and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and the Surety. The motion was carried by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz AYES: 4 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 ABSTAIN: 1 Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberrs Minutes\9~l 3\94 -4- 09/27/94 City Council Minutes 14. Ser~tember 13, 1994 Release Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-3 RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Improvement Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-3, and Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and the Surety. The motion was carried by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz AYES: 4 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 ABSTAIN: 1 Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts 15. Release Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-4 RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Improvement Warranty Security for Tract No. 21675-4, and Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Riverside County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the Developer and the Surety. The motion was carried by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz AYES: 4 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 ABSTAIN: 1 Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts Minutes\9\13\94 -5- 09127/94 City Council Minutes September 13, 1994 16. Acceptance of Public Streets into the City-Maintained Street System (Within Tracts No. 21675-1, -2, -3 and -4) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY- MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACTS NO. 21675-1, -2, -3 AND -4) The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberts NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz 17. Acknowledcle Completion of Certain Improvements in Tract No. 26861-2 RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Acknowledge completion of certain improvements in Tract No. 26861-2, authorize the reduction in Faithful Performance Bond amounts for the improvement of private streets, accept the Faithful Perfcjrmance Warranty Bond Rider in the reduced amount and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Developer and surety. Minutes~9\l 3\94 -6- 09~27~94 City Council Minutes 18. 19. September 13. 1994 Final Parcel MaD No. 26232-1 (Located East of Winchester Road at Nicolas Road) RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Approve Final Parcel Map No. 26232-1, subject to the Conditions of Approval. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberrs NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz Solicitation of Bids for the Acquisition of Street StriDinq Contract (Proiect No. PW94- 17) RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public bids for the annual street striping contract (Project No. PW94-17). 20. Comoletion and Acceotance of the Solana Way Street Improvements, Project No. PW93-12 RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Accept the Solana Way Street Improvements, Project No. PW93-12, as complete. 20.2 Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract. 20.3 Direct the City Clerk to release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. Minutes~9\13\94 -7- 09/27/94 City Council Minutes September 13.1994 21. Contract for the Construction of an Interim Traffic Signal at Winchester (Hwy. 79N) and Nicolas Roads, Proiect No. PW93-11 RECOMMENDATION: 21. Authorize payment to the State of California for an encroachment permit fee in the amount of $6,720. City Treasurer's Reoort as of July 31, 1994 Mayor Pro Tern Stone expressed concern regarding the investment portfolio. Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney reported that since interest rates are rising, staff has requested proposals with other banking institutions and that information is forthcoming. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of July 31, 1994. The motion was unanimously carried. Memorandum of Understanding Concernina Plannine Area No. 7, Soecific Plan NO. 164, RoriDaueh, Model Home Aareement for Coscan Homes Mayor Pro Tern Stone stated he originally had concerns with the Memorandum of Understanding because of the absence of a hold harmless clause, however a revised version has been distributed which contains this language. City Attorney Thorson explained a revised MOU has been distributed and Section 3.6 provides that if the draft development agreement is not approved by the City Council, the provision of the original development agreement will remain in effect. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tern Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 6.1 Approve the Memorandum of Understanding concerning Planning Area No. 7 of the Specific Plan No. 164, Roripaugh, authorizing the payment of development fees at a specified level and directing the Mayor to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City and the city Clerk to attest thereto. Minutes\9\13~94 -8- 09/27/94 City Council Minutes September 13, 1994 The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Roberrs NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz Award of Vehicle Purchase Bid No. 94-20 Councilmember Mu~oz asked if this vehicle can be converted to propane. Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney answered that it will be converted. It was moved by Councilmember Mu~oz, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve staff recommendation as follows: 8.1 Award the purchase of the vehicle to Paradise Chevrolet. The purchase price is $12,633.79, excluding tax. The motion was unanimously carried. Property Insurance Renewal Robert L. Hemme, 43500 Ridge Park Drive, representing Strachota Insurance, expressed concern that additional information is needed to make a decision. He outlined the differences in the programs. Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney explained because of the earthquake, staff was directed to bring back proposals to the Council at mid-term. She introduced Luci Romero, Financial Services Administrator, to give an overview of the process used. Luci Romero reported that proposals were solicited from three companies, two of which responded. She explained a matrix was prepared from the information that was provided from these companies. Councilmember Mu~oz asked why staff recommends changing coverage. Ms. Romero explained that the coverage recommended by staff is a joint purchasing program which specializes in municipalities. She stated that the City would generally cover small losses and insure for big losses. Mr. Hemme informed the Council that some of the carriers under the recommended program are non-admitted carriers in the State of California. He indicated that this may be a violation of the insurance code. Minutes~9\l 3\94 -9- 09127/94 City Council Minutes SeJ~tember 13, 1994 22. Ms. Romero explained that the program recommended has multiple carriers, two of which are not admitted. She stated that these carriers, however, have an A + + rating, which is higher than Aetna, the City's current carrier. She also explained she has a letter from the insurance Commission, allowing use of this type of coverage. Councilmember Birdsall stated she does not feel it is wise to change insurance coverage mid-term, based on the costs involved. Councilmember Parks asked Mr. Heroine if the premium would go down if the deductible on the City's current policy was $5,000. Mr. Hemme answered the difference would be approximately $1,800. Mayor Pro Tem Stone stated he feels a miscommunication has occurred regarding insurance coverage, and feels the City would prefer to have a high deductible and add other needed coverages. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to continue this item to the meeting of October 11, 1994 with direction to staff to re- evaluate quotes from both companies under consideration at the higher coverage limits. The motion was unanimously carried. "No Parkincl" Zone on Diaz Road from Rancho California Road to 160 Feet North of Avenida Alvaratio Councilmember Parks expressed concern that striping a turn lane, would not allow passing on Diaz Road. Director of Public Works Tim Serlet explained this would be providing a safe turn pocket and the business owners along Diaz have requested this action. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve staff recommendation as follows: 22.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING A "NO PARKING" ZONE ON DIAZ ROAD FROM RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD TO 160 FEET NORTH OF AVENIDA ALVARAD0 The motion was unanimously carried. Minutes%9\13\94 - 1 O- O9/27/94 City Council Minutes September 13, 1994 RECESS Mayor Roberts called a recess at 8:38 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the previously scheduled Community Services District and Redevelopment Agency Meetings, with all members present at 9:25 PM. 23. Soecific Plan No. 263 (Reoional Center) and Chanae of Zone No. 5589 Mayor Roberrs opened the public hearing at 9:29 PM. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to continue the public hearing to the meeting of October 11, 1994. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks, Roberts NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone 24. Seecific Plan No. 1 (Cameos Verdes), Environmental Imoact RelDort 348, and Chanae of Zone No. 5617 City Attorney Peter Thorson explained that three members of the Council have a conflict of interest; Councilmember Mu~oz because of his work with Kemper, Mayor Roberts, based on his residence in Meadowview and Councilmember Birdsall because she also resides in Meadowview. Mr. Thorson explained that the "Rule of Necessity" applies in this case and lots would be drawn to determine who would vote on this issue. City Clerk June Greek distributed lots, two of which had the word "no" printed on it and one which had the word "yes". Councilmember Birdsall received the paper with the "yes" on it. City Attorney Thorson declared Councilmember Mu~oz and Mayor Roberts disqualified and Councilmember Birdsall requalified. He advised that Councilmember Birdsall should not participate in discussion, but only vote on the issue. Director of Planning Gary Thornhill presented the staff report and stated that the Meadowview Homeowners Association supports this project. Mayor Pro Tem Stone opened the public hearing at 9:50 PM. Ed Mowles, 27595 Dandelion Court, spoke in opposition to the connecting of both Starling or Sanderling Way through Roripaugh Hils. Minutes~9\l 3\94 -11 - 09127/94 City Council Minutes Seotember 13, 1994 Dennis Chiniaeff, 27555 Ynez, No. 201, spoke in favor of the project, stating he feels it will be of benefit to the community. Councilmember Parks asked if a traffic analysis was done on the connecting roads. Principal Engineer Ray Casey answered the issue is one of access rather than volume. Jim Gremanis, 40212 Starling Street, spoke in opposition of connecting Starling and Sanderling Way through Roripaugh Hills. Dave Gallagher, representing the Temecula Valley Unified School District, requested the Council delay approval of this specific plan until a satisfactory mitigation plan between the applicant and the school district is reached. Councilmember Parks stated that the conditions of approval of the tentative map allow this condition to be placed. Eric Doring, Attorney for the Temecula Valley Unified School District, stated that contradictory conditions exist and requested that time be given over the next two weeks to address these concerns. City Attorney Thorson stated that the Conditions of Approval clearly state there will not be any development until a mitigation agreement is reached. Donna Vedra, 40257 Mimulus Way, spoke in opposition of opening Starling Street and Sanderling Way. Aletha Herron, 27479 Senna Court, spoke in opposition to the opening of Starling Street and Sanderling Way. Dennis Chiniaeff, 27555 Ynez, No. 201, stated it is a difficult decision regarding the streets and he does not have a preference one way or the other. He said the City Attorney has adequately addressed the school issue and stated Kernper has worked with the school district and will continue to do so. RECESS Mayor Pro Tern Stone called a recess at 10:35 PM to change the tape. The meeting was reconvened at 10:36 PM. Mayor Pro Tern Stone suggested placing a fire gate at Sanderling and eliminating connecting Starling into Roripaugh. Councilmember Parks stated he would support closing the interconnect at Starling with a fire gate and allowing for pedestrian and bicycle traffic, but would prefer to open Sanderling Way. Minutes%9\ 13\94 - 12- 09/27/94 City Council Minutes September 13, 1994 It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve staff recommendation on 24.1 as follows. 24.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 348 ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND THE ADDENDA TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 348 ON PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberrs It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to approve staff recommendation 24.2 as follows: 24.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-26 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 1 (CAMPOS VERDES) LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts Minutes~9\13~94 -13- 09127/94 City Council MinuTes SepTember 13, 1994 It was moved by Councilmember Perks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to approve staff recommendation 24.3 as follows: 24.3 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-27 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MA OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5617 CHANGING THE ZONING FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20 (HEAVY AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE) TO SP (SPECIFIC PLAN) ON PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to approve staff recommendation 24.4, and approve an amendment to the Specific Plan to close the interconnect at Starling with a fire gate and to allow for pedestrian and bicycle traffic, and to open the connection at Sanderling Way. 24.4 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. I (CAMPOS VERDES} PROPOSING 308 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 19.8 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL\OFFICE\CHURCH USES, A 5.8 ACRE DETENTION BASIN, A 10.9 ACRE PARK, A 10.7 ACRE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND 13.0 ACRES OF ON-SITE ROADWAYS, LOCATED SOUTH OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND EAST OF MARGARITA ROAD Minutes\9\13\94 -14- 09/27/94 City Council Minutes September 13, 1994 The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to continue Items 25, 26 and 30. 25. 26. 30. Non-Profit Loan Proaram Policy City Council Meetina Schedule - November and December 1994 Cable Television Rate Reaulation Procedures The motion was unanimously carried. 27, Consideration of Traffic Siqnalization - Pala Road, La Paz and Maroarita at Hiahwav 79 $otjth Councilmember Birdsall announced she had a conflict of interest, due to the proximity of her residence, and stepped down from the podlure. Mayor Pro Tern Stone stated he placed this item on the agenda to discuss needed traffic signals and the delays experienced, due to Assessment District 159, to widen Highway 79. He suggested making these signals a priority in the Capital Improvement Plan and suggested placing temporary signals at Pala Road, Ija Paz and Margarita at Highway 79-South. Councilmember Mu~oz said he is supportive of signals at Pala and La Paz, but not Margarita at Highway 79 at this time. Councilmember Parks stated he is supportive of anything to expedite these signals, but expressed concern regarding the "throw-away" cost of interim signals. Mayor Roberts stated he is supportive of signals at Pala Road and La Paz, but understands that the signal at Margarita and Highway 79 South is already in design. Councilmember Mu~oz asked what the "throw away" cost would be for these signals. Director of Public Works Tim Serlet responded that 50% of the cost would be lost, Minutes\9\13~94 -15- 09127/94 City Council Minutes September 13, 1994 approximately $150,000 to $250,000. He also informed the Council that other projects would have to be delayed to place the signals as top priority. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to extend the meeting until 11:30 PM. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Birdsall absent. Eric Brown, 45673 Clubhouse, read a letter into the record from AI Brogen, supporting funding of signals at Highway 79 and Pala Road and La Paz and requesting consideration of signal at 79 and Wabash and Rainbow Canyon. Mr. Brown voiced his support of advanced funding for traffic signals. Susan Becker, 44626 La Paz Road, spoke in support of a signal at Highway 79 and La Paz Road. Jim Coleman, 30294 Cupeno Lane, representing California Sunset Homeowners Association, spoke in support of advance funding for signals. Paula McGaugh, 44627 La Paz Road, spoke in support of an interim signal at Highway 79 and La Paz. Jon Martin, 45805 Loma Linda, spoke in support of an interim signal at Highway 79 and La Paz and Highway 79 and Pala Road. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to instruct staff to evaluate the intersections and present a program within 30 days to address construction of the signals, costs, timing and priorities and the effects on the CIP program and staffing assignments. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Birdsall abstaining. 29. Discussion of Timelines for Winchester Road Imlarovements Mayor Roberts stated he placed this item on the agenda to address concerns regarding timelines'for Winchester Road improvements. He introduced Mr. John Canty, President and CEO of J.F. Davidson, to present a report. Mr. Canty presented a report outlining the new time line for the project and explaining delays. RECESS Mayor Roberrs called a brief recess at 11:37 PM to change the tape. The meeting was reconvened at 11:56 PM. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone to receive and file the report. The motion was unanimously carried. Minutes\9~l 3\94 -16- 09/27/94 Cstv Council Minutes September 13, 1994 CITY MANAGER REPORTS None given. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS None given. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Stone to adjourn at 11:47 PM to a meeting on September 27, 1994, 7:00 PM. The motion was unanimously carried. Ron Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk Minutes\9\13\94 -17- O9/27/94 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 1994 A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:05 PM at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Ron Roberts presiding. PRESENT 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberrs Also present were City Manager Ronald Bradley, City Attorney Peter M. Thorson, and City Clerk June S. Greek. iNVOCATION The invocation was given by Pastor David French, Temecula United Methodist Church. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the flag salute by Councilmember Birdsall. PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Stone presented a certificate of Appreciation to California Curves, inc. and thanked them for their efforts in the community. Kirk Wright and Gordon Nichol accepted the certificate. Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Stone presented a commemorative plaque to Tim Setlet, former Director of Public Works, for his 4 years of service with the City of Temecula. PUBLIC COMMENTS Larry Markham, 41750Winchester Road, requested the Council place an appeal of the action of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission regarding the "No Parking" designation on Vallejo Ave. on a future agenda. Philip Hoxey, 43318 Cielo De Azul, asked if the Redevelopment Agency plans to fund the entire Zev Buffman project. City Manager Ron Bradley answered that the financing study will be available in the next six to eight weeks. He explained that once information is obtained, public hearings will be held to inform the public and to take testimony. Merian E. Megtee, 28801 Pujol Street, #10, discussed concerns with her residence on Pujol Street. Minutes\9~27\94 -1- 10/04/94 City Council Minutes September 27, 1994 CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Parks announced there will be a meeting of the Murrieta Creek Advisory Committee, September 28th, at 3:00 PM at Murrieta City Hall. He also thanked the public for their input, through use of the Buffman Hotline, and encouraged the public to continue giving their input. He also requested staff place an appeal of the action of the Public/Traffic Safety Commission regarding the "No Parking" designation on Vallejo Avenue on a future agenda. Councilmember Birdsall announced the Temecula Tractor Race, sponsored by the Temecula Town Association, will be held October 7th through the 9th. Mayor Pro Tem Stone announced two City Council Candidate Forums will be held at the CRC, the first on Monday, October 3rd at 7:00 PM, which will also air on television Wednesday, October 5th at 7:00 PM and Saturday, October 8th at 10:30 AM. The second forum will be held Tuesday, November 1st at 7:00 PM and the television air dates will be announced at the next City Council Meeting. All viewings will be shown on inland Valley Cable, Channel 28. Mayor Pro Tem Stone also announced that Temecula was recently rated Riverside County's best place to live in an analysis of 21 cities in the county based on health, crime, income, housing, weather, smog, arts and leisure. He also informed the public that he hosted a fund raiser for the Temecula Museum and is happy to report that $7,400 was raised. He thanked Maxine Bendixson for her efforts on the project and also informed the Council and public that she has fallen and injured her ankle, and wished her a speedy recovery. CONSENTCALENDAR Mayor Pro Tem Stone announced that Item No. 5 would be continued due to a lack of quorum. Councilmember Birdsall announced she would abstain on item 4 due to a conflict of interest. City Attorney Thorson announced this item would also have to be continued due to a lack of quorum. Mayor Pro Tem Stone removed Item No. 6 from the Consent Calendar. He announced he would vote "yes" on Item 94-26, but remains opposed to the opening of Sanderling Way into the Roripaugh Development. Councilmember Parks commented on item No. 7 and explained that since requests for funding are only considered once a year, this function can be served by a special committee appointed by the City Council. He explained that this program is not being discontinued. Minutes\9\27\94 -2- 10/04/94 City Council Minutes September 2:7, 1994 It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-3 and 7-9 and continue items 4 and 5. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Muf~oz, Roberrs 1. Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2. Minutes 2.1 Approve the minutes of August 23, 1994. 2.2 Approve the minutes of September 7, 1994. 3. Resolution Aporovinq List of Demands 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-95 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Reiect the Bid for the Pala Road at Hwv 79S Riqht Turn Lane Project (No. PW94-08) 4.1 Continue to the meeting of October 11, 1994 due to a lack of quorum. Request to Caltrans for Freeway Guide Sions Identifvino the Old Town Business District 5.1 Continue to the meeting of October 11, 1994 due to a lack of quorum. Community Service Fundine Proclram Committee 7.1 Dissolve the community Services Funding Program Committee. Minutes\9\27\94 -3- 10/O4/94 City Council Minutes September 27, 1994 It was moved by Mayor ProTein Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 6.1 Approve the revised Owner Participation Agreement for International Rectifier. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts PUBLIC HEARINGS 10. Ordinance Reqardinq ReGulation of Construction Activity Chief Building Official Tony EImo presented the staff report. Mayor Pro Tem Stone opened the public hearing at 7:38 PM. Stacey Tescier, 40595 Eyota, Murrieta, asked if this ordinance would prohibit night construction on the Zev Buffman project if it moves forward. City Manager Bradley answered this would be a public works project which is exempted under the ordinance. Councilmember Parks asked if there is a method to allow exceptions. City Manager Bradley answered the Council has the ultimate authority. City Manager Bradley suggested amending Section 2 of the ordinance to permit emergency work by public utilities, as recommended by the City Attorney. City Attorney Thorson also suggested adding the words "Nationally recognized" before holidays. Councilmember Parks asked if language allowing for exemptions could be added to the Ordinance. City Attorney Thorson suggested the following language, "The City Council has the right to exempt projects from the provisions of the ordinance." Mayor Pro Tem Stone closed the public hearing at 7:52 PM. Minutes\9\27\94 -5- 10/04/94 City Councir Minutes September 27, 1994 It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to approve staff recommendation, as amended in Section 2 by the City Attorney to permit emergency work by public utilities, to add the words "Nationally recognized" before holidays and to authorize the City Council the right to exempt projects from the provisions of the ordinance. 10.1 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-25 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MODIFYING SECTION G(1 .) OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 457.73 ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA IN ORDINANCE NO. 90-04. TO CHANGE THE HOURS AND DAYS DURING WHICH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS ALLOWED The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts COUNCIL BUSINESS 11. City Council Meetina Schedule It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation with the following scheduling changes: The meeting of OctOber 25, 1994 will be rescheduled to October 18th; the November 8th meeting will be rescheduled to November 15th and the meeting of November 22nd will be rescheduled to November 29th. The meeting of December 13, 1994 will be the only meeting in December. 11.1 Direct the City Clerk to cancel and/or re-schedule meetings in October, November and December, 1994, and to perform all the appropriate postings and noticing requirements of the Government Code. Minutes\9\27~94 -6- 10/04/94 City Council Minutes September 27, 1994 The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: RECESS Birdsall, Parks, Stone None Mu~oz, Robarts Mayor Pro Tem Stone called a recess at 7:58 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the previously scheduled CSD and RDA meetings at 8:30 PM. 12. Cable Television Rate ReGulation Procedures Assistant City Manager Woody Edvalson presented the staff report. Mayor Pro Tem Stone asked if there has been an attempt on the City's part to get together with Inland Valley Cable to discuss the overstating of charges. Mr. Edvalson stated that will occur between now and the 1 lth of October. 13. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES TO REGULATE CABLE TELEVISION SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT RATES AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 93-74 The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberrs Non-Profit Loan ProGram Policy Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney presented the staff report. Minutes\9~27~94 -7- 10/04/94 Septernber 27, 1994 CiTV Council MinuTes 14. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve staff recommendation as follows: 13.1 Review and approve the Non-profit Loan Program criteria with revisions as appropriate. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts Consideration of Reoulations for Newsracks in Public Riqht-of-Wav Chief Building Official Tony Elmo presented the staff report. City Attorney Thorson stated there has been recently adopted State legislation that deals with adult materials and newsracks, and this confirms the position of the State Attorney General that cities may regulate the display to the public of what is on the top half of the newspaper. Councilmember Parks asked if this ordinance would add a new fee. Mr. Elmo answered this ordinance requires an encroachment permit that has been previously used for signage, and would now apply to newsracks in the public right-of-way. Councilmember Birdsall asked if this ordinance regulates news racks on private property. Mr. Elmo answered it does not. City Attorney Thorson reported that State law does address newsracks in public places. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to approve staff recommendation as follows: 14.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-29 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 10.36 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE REGULATION OF NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY Minutes\9\27\94 -8- 10/04/94 Citv Council Minutes September 27. 1994 15. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts Adootion and Implementation of the Emeroency Medical Services Plan Assistant City Manager Woody Edvalson presented the staff report. He announced that A.J. Wilson, Executive Director of WRCOG, who was scheduled to be present is ill, however, Michael Osher from the County of Riverside and Tim Vonault of Goodhew Ambulance are present to answer any questions the Council may have. Councilmember Parks expressed concern regarding the eight to ten minute response time for life threatening emergencies. Mr. Osher explained that the Fire Department responds in those types of emergencies within three to five minutes, and the ambulance follows with advanced life support systems. It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to approve staff recommendation as follows: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-97 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A COOPERATIVE PROGRAM FOR PROVISION OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts Minutes\9\27\94 -9- I 0/04/94 City Council Minutes September 27, 1994 16. RoriDauoh Ranch Soecific Plan Density It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to continue this item to the meeting of October 11, 1994. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz, Roberts CITY MANAGER REPORTS City Manager Bradley introduced interim Public Works Director Joe Kicak and welcomed him to the City of Temecula. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS None given. Councilmember Parks requested a staff report regarding the status of the City's Emergency Management Plan on a future agenda. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to adjourn at 9:00 PM. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Mu~oz and Mayor Roberrs absent. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk Minutes\9\27\94 - 1 O- 10/04/94 ITEM 3 RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TE1VIECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the mount of $1,064,381.20. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this llth day of October, 1994. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] R=sos 40 I STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMBCULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 94-. was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the llh day of October, 1994 by the following roll call vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None June S. Greek, City Clerk Re.o. 40 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 09/22/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 09/29/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 10/11/94 TOTAL CHECK RUN: $ 422.437.97 37,529.08 478,830,80 09/22/94 TOTAL PAYROLL: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 10/11/94 COUNCIL MEETING: 125,783.35 $ 1,064,381.20 DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 GENERAL $ 446,038.92 100 GAS TAX 34,727,66 120 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FUND 0,00 140 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 0,00 165 RDA-LOW/MOD 255,41 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 37, 109,50 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 1.545,18 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 0,00 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 21,239,37 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 0,o0 21 o CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ (CIP) 45,397,78 229 MARGARITA ROAD REIMB. DIST 0,00 ?50 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD 0,00 JBo RDA CIP 4,731,65 300 SELF-INSURANCE 4,948,05 31 ~ VEHICLES 0,00 320 INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS 7,969,99 33(3 COPY CENTER 5,698,89 340 FACILITIES 12,988,81 38(3 RDA-DEE~T SERVICE 0,00 390 TCSD DEBT SERVICE 315,946.64 PAYROLL 001 GENERAL $ 78.499.23 100 GAS TAX 19,290.53 165 RDA-LOW/MOD 584.61 190 TCSD 20,177.56 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 447.87 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B O.00 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 1,796.77 28(3 RDA-CIP 356.10 30(3 SELF-INSURANCE 598,36 320 iNFORMATION SYSTEMS 1,326.75 339 COPY CENTER 69445 34(3 FACILITIES 2,011.12 $ 938,597,85 125,783,35 TOTAL BY FUND: $ 1,064,381.20 VeX CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1 09/Z~, ,. 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER N/~E 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX ([RS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 3384514 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 00028~ FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (iRS) 33861~ 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (iRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 00028,:1 FIRSTAX (iRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (iRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (1RS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX ([R$) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 338614 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 37' 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 5 09/22/94 000283 FIRSTAX (IRS) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399550 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDO) 399530 09/22/94 000444 FIRSTAX (EDD) 20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE 20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE 20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE 20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT I PERSONNEL SERVICE 20228 09/22/94 000495 ACT I PERSONNEL SERVICE 2n~38 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE 09/22/94 000495 ACT 1 PERSONNEL SERVICE ITEM DESCRIPTION 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 FEDERAL 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000283 MEDICARE 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 SDI 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE 000444 STATE TEMP HELP W/E 08/06/94 TEMP HELP W/E 08/13/94 TEMP HELP W/E 08/13/94 TENP HELP W/E 08/13/94 TEMP HELP W/E 08/13/94 TEMP HELP W/E 08/13/94 TEMP HELP W/E 09/03/94 ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-2070 100-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 00q-2070 100-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 100-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 300-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 100-2070 165-2070 190-2070 191-2070 193-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-140-999-5118 001-165-999-5118 100-164-604'5118 001-140~999-5118 ITEM AMOUNT 14,247,11 4,053.10 103.24 2,581.56 46.88 213.16 30.24 87,98 279.83 92.63 156.02 2,97'/.15 736.61 20.88 720.93 17.44 63.98 11.64 22.44 58.36 23.52 67.32 571.16 146.99 236.17 7.81 28.69 3.58 10.54 26.25 3,~3.03 959.85 22.08 518.63 15.40 44.95 8.48 30.03 64.13 17.05 15.26 257.36 22.58 76.75 78.26 78.26 78.26 334.11 CHECK AMOUNT 26,612.02 6,410.08 925.58 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 2 09/22/94 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIQOS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 20229 09/22/94 000921 AETNA CASUALTY AND SURE 20230 09/22/94 ALMQUIST, RUTH 20231 09/22/94 000101 APPLE ONE 20231 09/22/94 000101 APPLE ONE 20231 09/22/94 000101 APPLE ONE 20232 09/22/94 001072 BANK OF AMERICA NT & SA 20233 09/22/94 BOBROSKY, PATRICIA 20234 09/22/94 001436 BROWN, CONNIE 20235 09/22/94 001006 BURTRONICS BUSINESS SYS 20236 09/22/94 000129 CAL WEST RENTAL CENTER 20237 09/22/94 000950 CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY 20237 09/22/94 000950 CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20238 09/22/94 000127 20239 09/22/94 20240 09/22/94 20241 09/22/94 20241 09/22/94 CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL CALIFORNIAN LEGAL 001610 CALTRANS-DISTRICT NO. 8 CARPENTER, CONHIE 000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER 000135 CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SER 20242 09/22/94 000429 20243 09/22/94 20243 09/22/94 20243 09/22/94 20243 09/22/94 20243 09/22/94 CHESHER, RUTH 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC. 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC. 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC. 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC. 000137 CHEVRON U S A INC. ITEM DESCRIPTION INSURANCE EFFECT 2/26/9 REFUND"CLASS CANCELLED TENP HELP W/E 08/27/94 TEMP HELP W/E 08/27/94 TEMP HELP W/E 09/03/94 INSTALLMENT PMT FOR 10/ REFUND DU~ TO ILLNESS PMT TO TCSD INSTRUCTOR COPIER MAINT CONTRACT E PARK MAINTENANCE RENTAL JULY 4 CELBRATION AD RDA ENV IMPACT REPORT A DISPLAY TUESDAY DISPLAY SUNDAY PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN NOTICE OF PUBLIC NEARIN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN PUBLIC NOTICES CALIFORN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN ENC PERMIT# 08-94-N-SN- REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED HARDWARE FOR SIGN INSTA TAX GIFT EXCHANGE W/SISTER 789-819-697-2 AUGUST 789-819-697-2 AUGUST 789-819-697-2 AUGUST 789-819-697-2 AUGUST 789-819-697-2 AUGUST ACCOUNT NUMBER 300-199-999-5204 190-183-4982 001~140-999-5118 001-140-999-5118 001-140-999-5118 390-1040 190'183-4982 190'183-999-5330 330-199-999-5217 190-180-999-5238 190-180-999-5254 280-199-999-5254 001-120-999-5254 001-120-999-5254 001-120-999-5256 001-161'999'5256 001-161'999"5256 001-161"999'5256 001'161'999"5256 001-120-999-5256 001-120'999'5256 001-120'999'5256 001-120-999'5256 001-120-999'5256 001-120-999"5256 001-161'999'5256 210-165-644-5804 190'183'4982 100-164-601-5244 001-100-999-5258 001-162-999-5263 001-110-999-5263 001-170-999-5262 100-164-602-5262 001-161-999-5262 ITEM AMOUNT 3,838.74 15.00 361.20 516.00 483.75 315,946.64 35.00 100.00 40.37 35.56 104.27 208.53 52.96 52.96 34.85 37.17 34.85 33.30 37.95 120.81 34.07 22.46 10.84 63.50 66.60 29.43 6,720.00 14.00 276.50 21.43 45.50 17.79 19.31 61.57 23.82 36.85 CHECK 15.00 1,360.95 315,946.64 35.00 100.00 40.37 35.56 312.80 631.75 6~720.00 14.00 297.93 45.50 09/2~,,, VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 20244 20245 20246 20247 20248 20249 20249 20250 20250 20251 20252 20254 20255 20256 20256 20256 20256 20257 20257 20257 20258 20258 20258 20259 20259 20259 20260 20260 20260 2P~z41 16:18 CHECK DATE 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 001555 CHRZSTOPHERSOR FXRE PRO CHURCN~ PAULA 000980 COAST IRRIGATION SUPPLY 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS 000447 CONTRONIX OF HEMET 001583 COOL CAPS 001583 COOL CAPS 000155 DAVL[N 000155 DAVLIN 001542 DEFABIIS, SEAM-PAUL MIC 000164 ESGIL CORPORATION 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE FERRIOLS, SOCORRO 001002 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK C 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYN 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 000192 GLOBAL COMPUTER SUPPLIE 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO HAAG, LISA HARRIS, SUSAN CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PER]ODE ITEM DESCRIPTION SEMI-ANNUAL FIRE SYSTEM REFUND-CHILD SICK IRRIGATION PARTS AND EQ ALARM MONITORING FEE FO REPAIR TO RADIO PROMOTIONAL MILK CAPS F TAX 09/13/94 COUNICL MEETIN VHS TAPE AND COPY ON RD PMT FOR TCSD INSTRUCTOR SERVICES 7/1/94 - 7/31/ EXTRA SLOPE MAINT SERVI SLOPE MAINT JULY/AUG 94 REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED 547~666403910099-JS FRANKLIN CALENDARS FOR "SEASONS" COMPACT REFIL FREIGHT TAX 909 181-1T23 GEN 909 649-1993 GEM 909 699-8632 GEN MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR THE 400 FORMATTED DISK FREIGHT TAX SVGA 14" COLOR MONITOR FREIGHT TAX REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-182-gg9-5250 190-183-4982 190-180-~-5212 340-1~q-9~-5250 001-162-~-5242 001-170-g~-5292 001-170-999-5292 001-100-999-5250 280-199-999-5250 190-183-999-5330 210-190-137-5802 193-180~999-5415 193-180-999-5415 190-183-4982 001-100-999-5258 001-161-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 001-140-999-5220 001-140-999-5220 190-182-999-5220 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 190-18~-4982 190-183-4982 ITEM AMOUNT 100.00 65.00 88.89 135.00 146.86 153,00 11.86 701.67 16.16 1,228. O0 234. O0 237.66 20.00 25.00 185.22 15.62 24. O0 4.75 2.23 590.38 1,054.43 16.87 48.96 19.23 4.32 260.00 11.15 20.64 458.00 20.00 35.50 25.00 35.00 PAGE 3 CHECK AMOUNT 100,00 65.00 88.89 135.00 146.8~ 164.8~ 717.83 1,228.00 234.00 257.66 25.00 185,22 46.60 1,661.68 r2.51 291.79 513,50 25.00 35.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA ~ 09/22/94 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 20263 09/22/94 000806 HOWARD, BOBBY PMT FOR TCSD INSTRUCTOR 190-183-999'5330 160.00 160.00 20264 09/22/94 HUMES, RICH REFUND FOR TCSD CLASS 190-183-4982 25.00 25.00 20265 09/22/94 000193 I C M A - ANNAPOLIS JUN PUBLICATIONS FOR PLANNI 001-161-999-5228 73.45 73.45 20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 001-2080 20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 OEF 00MP 100-2080 20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 OEF COMP 190-2080 20266 09/22/94 Q00194 1 c M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 OEF COMP 191-2080 20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 OEF COMP 193-2080 20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF C04P 500-2080 20266 09/22/94 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 340-2080 20267 09/22/94 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL MISC POOL SUPPLIES 190-182-999-5212 1,187.88 248.62 456.50 74.52 91.09 37.49 29.10 47.41 2,105.20 47.41 20268 09/22/94 001529 JOCHUM, LORI PMT TO TCSD INSTRUCTOR 190-183-999-5330 20269 09/22/94 001064 KEYE PRODbCTIVITY CENTE WRITING SEMINAR FOR T A 001-162-999-5261 168.00 139.00 168.00 139.00 20270 09/22/94 000206 KINKO'S OF RIVERSIDE, I COPIES AND MISC SUPPLIE 001-120-999-5220 36.56 20271 09/22/94 001607 L D 0 S COMMUNICATIONS LONG DIST. CALLS HILL 320-199-999-5208 20272 09/22/94 001513 LIBERTY AUTO CENTER REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE 001-110-999-5214 20272 09/22/94 001513 LIBERTY AUTO CENTER REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE 001-162-999-5214 1,680.65 121.96 116.08 1,6b~.~ 238.04 20273 09/22/94 001130 M K BATTERY VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FOR 190-180-999-5214 64.O7 ~,,07 20274 09/22/94 001600 MANSUR SERVICES, INC. 2 GALS OF PAINT FOR NEW 001-161-999-5250 57.15 57.15 20275 09/22/94 001142 MARKHAM & ASSOCIATES REVIEW OF STORM DRAIN G 100'164'601'5248 170.00 170.00 20276 09/22/94 000220 MAURXGE PRINTERS, INC. 20276 09/22/94 000220 MAURXGE PRINTERS, INC. 20276 09/22/94 000220 MAURIEE PRINTERS~ INC. 20276 09/22/94 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS, INC. 20277 09/22/94 000934 MCGRAW HILL, INC. 3 DIVIDERS FOR CAPITAL 001-140-999-5222 CLEAR COMBS 001-140-999-5222 BLANK STOCK FOR TEXT OF 001-140-999-5222 TAX 001-140-999-5222 PUBLICATION FOR PLANNIN 001-161-999-5228 185.00 32.00 356.50 44.45 58.54 617.95 58.54 20278 09/22/94 MCKEE, PATRICIA REFUND FOR TCSD CLASS 190-183-4982 20279 09/22/94 001030 MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, 20279 09/22/94 001030 MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, 20279 09/22/94 001030 MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, 20279 09/22/94 001030 MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, 20280 09/22/94 000885 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING 20280 09/22/94 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING 20280 09/22/94 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING MISC TAPES, CARD, MICRO 330-199-999-5277 MISC TAPES, CARD, MICRO 530-199-999-5277 MISC TAPES, CARD, MICRO 330-199-999-5277 PROCESSING & DUPLICATIO 330-199-999-5277 SOLANA WAY AT MARGARITA 100-164-601-5402 EMERG WORK ON MARG & SA 100'164-601-5402 EMERG WORK ON RANCHO VI 100'164-601-5402 95.00 439.97 90.68 484.02 24.61 918.00 6,097.00 3,858.00 95.00 1 , 039.28 10,I V~ CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5 09/Z~, ,~ 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER 20281 09/22/94 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES TOT AUDIT SERVICES 001-140-999-5248 20281 09/22/94 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES TOT AUDIT 001-140-999-5248 20281 09/22/94 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES TOT AUDIT 001-140-999-5248 20282 09/22/94 000239 OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERVIC TEMP HELP W/E 08/28/94 001-162-999-5118 20283 09/22/94 PARKER, MICHAEL CK WAS NEVER RETURNED A 001-1190 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PER REDE 001-2130 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PER REDE 100-2130 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 001-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 100-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 165-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS CEMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 190-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 191-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 193-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 280-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 300-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 320-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 330-2390 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS RET 340-2390 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 001°2390 2U~,Y+ 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 100-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 165-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 190-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 191-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 .SURVIVOR 193-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 280-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 300-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 320-2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 330'2390 20284 09/22/94 000246 PERS (EMPLOYEESI RETIRE 000246 SURVIVOR 340-2390 20285 09/22/94 PLOUFFE, IO~ROL REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED 190-183-4980 20286 09/22/94 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN 20286 09/22/94 000254 PRESS-ENTERPRISE COMPAN DISPLAY ADVERTISING DISPLAY ADVERTISING 001-161-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 20287 09/22/94 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY MISC LOCKSMITH SERVICES 190-180-999-5212 20288 09/22/94 000546 RADIO SHACK/BUTTERFIELD 20289 09/22/94 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C 20289 09/22/94 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES COPIES OF BLUEPRINTS COPIES OF BLUEPRINTS 01-06-29610-0 07/14-08 01-06-29725-0 07/14-08 SERVICE FOR 07/15 - 08/ SERVICE FOR 07/15 ' 08/ SERVICE FOR 07/15 - 08/ 20290 09/22/94 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER 20290 09/22/94 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER 20290 09/22/94 000262 RANCMO CALIFORNIA WATER 2n~nQ 09/22/94 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER 09/22/94 000262 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER 320-199-9~9-5221 001-161-999-5224 001-161-999-5224 190-181-999-5240 190-181-999-5240 193-180-999-5240 191-180-999-5240 190-180-999-5240 ITEM AMOUNT 238,77 494,40 499,11 468,00 25.00 171.88 85.88 12,996.93 2,550.22 108.84 2,668.53 87.47 316.46 61.17 106,82 268.21 114.60 294,79 50.51 11.15 .37 13.44 .42 1,44 ,19 ,46 ,93 ,93 2.00 70.00 75.66 94.09 30.00 52,04 12.93 24136 14.28 85.74 2,080.68 105.31 299.29 CHECK AMOUNT 1,232.28 468.0O 25.00 19,913.04 70.00 169,75 30.00 52,04 254,29 2,585.30 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA 09/22/94 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIOOS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 20291 09/22/94 000907 RANCHO CAR ~ASH CAR WASH & MAINT. FOR L 001-165-999-5214 20291 09/22/94 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH CAR WASHES FOR CITY VEH 001-162-999-5214 20291 09/22/94 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH CAR WASH SERVICE 190-180-999-5214 20291 09/22/94 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH CAR gASH SERVICE 001-110-999-5214 28.00 48.99 16,00 14.50 107.49 20292 09/22/94 001475 REVENUE AT RISK SEMINAR SEMINAR FOR MJM 09/26/9 001-140-999-5258 15.O0 15.00 20293 09/22/94 001046 REXONe FREEDMAN, KLEPET SERV%CES FOR AUGUBT 199 001-130-999'5247 240.00 240.00 20294 09/22/94 REYES, CZARINA REFUND FOR TCSD CLASS 190-183-4982 25.00 25.00 20295 09/22/94 000266 RIGHTWAY PORTABLE TOILET FOR CIT 100-164-601-5238 57.39 57.39 20296 09/22/94 SEEGAR, DONNA REFUND-CLASS CANCELLED 190-183-4982 28.00 28.00 20297 09/22/94 BEVY, VALERIE REFUND FOR TCSD CLASS 190-183-4980 30.00 30,00 20298 09/22/94 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 66-77-584-8087-02 08/08 340-199-999-5240 47.06 47.06 20299 09/22/94 000557 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON - SERVICE FOR 7/31 - 08/3 191-180-999-5319 20299 09/22/94 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON - 56-77-755-0157-01 08/05 191-180-999-5319 20299 09/22/94 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON - 56-77-755-0169-01 08/05 191-180-999-5319 20299 09/22/94 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON - 56-77-755-2147-01 8/10- 191-180-999-5519 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4751TS 100-164-604-5208 20500 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4752 SN 190-180-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4753 BH 190-180-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4754 KH 190-180-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4755 CITY VAN 190-180-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4757 JG 001-120-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4758 RR 001-100-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4759 TE 001-162-999-5208 20500 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4760 JH 100-164-603-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4761 SM 001-100-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4762 RP 001-100-999-5208 20500 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4763 PB 001-100-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4764 BB 100-164-601-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4765 BB 100-164-601-5208 20500 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4767 GT 001-161-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4769 JS 001-100-999-5208 20500 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4770 RB 001-110-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4204 WE 001-110-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4756 GEN 320-199-999-5208 20500 09/22/94 000575 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 205-4070 GEN 001-140-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 205-7826 GEM 320-199-999-5208 20300 09/22/94 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 214-1074 GEM USAGE 320-199-999-5208 20301 09/22/94 000291 SPEE DEE OIL CHANGE & T 836.13 246.68 57.75 18.44 65.93 105.54 40.07 65.00 40.28 39.08 76.07 60.59 86.58 255,45 89.55 42.11 68.27 42.03 77,39 60.12 46.8~ 41.99 36.34 125.60 36.34 80.61 1,561.77 OIL CHANGE FOR PW VEH 001-163-999-5214 20.99 20.99 20302 09/22/94 000465 STRADLEY, MARY KATHLEEN PMT FOR T~SD INSTRUCTOR 190-183-999-5330 420.00 ~ VOL CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 7 09/2c, y~ 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIQOS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 20303 20303 20303 20303 20304 20305 20306 20307 20307 20307 20307 20307 20307 20307 20308 20309 20309 20309 20309 20309 20309 20310 20310 20310 20311 20312 20312 20312 20312 20313 20313 20313 20313 20313 20313 20313 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 09/22/94 000305 TARGET STORE 000305 TARGET STORE 000305 TARGET STORE 000305 TARGET STORE 000310 TEMECULA CREEK INN 000825 TEMECULA CYCLES 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO, 001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS 001545 TIME MOTION TCX3LS 001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS 001545 TIME MOTION TOULS 001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS 001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS 001545 TIME MOTION TOOLS 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT POLAROID 600 2 PAK 5600 BUSH NELL 7 X 35 MM BIN TAX RECREATION SUPPLIES 100-164-601-5218 100-164-601-5218 190-182-999-5301 MEETING ROOM FOR BUDGET 190'180-999-5260 MAINTENANCE - CITY MOTD 001'170'999'5214 AWARDS FOR GOLF TOURN 001-2172 TMT-AE312 12FT PO~R CO TMT'LP92 DB25 M/M GENDE TMT"LP93 DB25 F/F GENDE TMT'LPBO DB9 M/M GENDER TMT'LPgO DB9 F/F GENDER FREIGHT TAX OFFICE SUPPLIES. MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COHP 001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF COMP 001065 U S C M/PEBSCO (DEF. C 001065 DEF CONP 000389 U S C M/PEBSCO COBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 000389 U S C M/PEBSCO COBRA) 000389 PT RET1R 000389 U S C M/PEBSCO COBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 000322 UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR MJM SAN JOSE 09/26/94 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW 000325 UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN 000325 UW 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNIFORMS FOR W/E 09/09/ UNIFORMS FOR W/E 09/16/ UNIFORM MAINTENANCE FOR UNIFORM MAINT FOR TCSD CITY HALL FLOOR MATS FLOOR MAT FOR C.R.C. FLOOR MAT FOR SR CENTER MISC APERTURE CARDS 001209 VAULT, THE 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 320-199-999-5221 190-180-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 001-2080 100-2080 190-2080 300-2080 320-2080 340-2080 001-2160 100-2160 190-2160 001-140-999-5258 001-2120 100-2120 190-2120 280-2120 190-180-999-5243 190-180-999-5243 340-199-999-5250 190-182-999-5250 190-181-999-5250 330-199-999-5277 198.70 29.99 17.72 111.04 59.45 300,06 256.54 39.75 9.90 9,90 7.90 7.90 4.91 5.84 347.11 12.04 2.28 2,525.26 188.45 275.08 5.00 312.50 50.0O 260.68 112.50 441.72 141.00 65.84 10.06 17.00 .60 23.00 23.00 16.35 16.35 30.75 69.39 16.75 194,70 CHECK AMOUNT 357.45 59.45 300.06 256.54 86.10 361.43 3,356.29 814.90 141.00 93.50 195,59 194.70 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA S 09/22/94 16:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PER]OOS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 20315 09/22/94 001076 WESTERN WASTE, INC. 20316 09/22/94 WIECHEC, MATTHEW 20317 09/22/94 WILSON, TAMARA ITEM DESCRIPTION PORTABLE TOILET RENTAL BOOT REIMBURSEMENT REFUND-DIFFERENCE IN FE ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-180-999-5238 190-180-999-5243 190-183-4982 ITEM AMOUNT 455.00 95.00 15.00 CHECK AMOUNT 455.00 95.00 15.00 TOTAL CHECKS 422,437.97 VC CITY OF TENECULA PAGE 09, . lZ:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERICOS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 100 GAS TAX FUND 190 COHNUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 210 CAPTTAL ]NPROVENENT PRQJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPNENT AGENCY - 300 XNSURANCE FUND 320 INFO~NATION SYSTENS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES TOTAL AIIXINT 5,955.04 2,590.27 10,762.91 30.fS 760.00 360.00 385.7'J 2,546.98 12,135.26 37,529.08 VOUCHRE2 09/29/94 '12:22 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VEHDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER 20318 09/Z3/94 000871 20325 09/29/944 20326 09/29/94 20327 09/29/944 20328 09/29/94 20328 09/29/94 20328 09/29/94 20329 09/29/94 20330 09/29/94 20331 09/29/94 000622 20331 09/29/94 000622 20331 09/29/94 000622 20332 09/29/94 001615 20333 09/29/94 000128 203344 09/29/94 001616 20335 09/29/94 001090 20336 09/29/94 000950 20337 09/29/944 000138 20337 09/29/94 000138 20338 09/29/94 000447 20338 09/29/94 000447 20339 09/29/94 001535 20339 09/29/94 001535 20339 09/29/94 001535 20340 09/29/94 000155 20341 09/29/94 001056 203441 09/29/94 001056 20342 09/29/94 000165 20342 09/29/94 000165 CITY OF TEMEOULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIlDOS VENDOR NAME HILTOR 000745 A T & T 001425 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR CORP. 000112 000101 APPLE ONE 000101 APPLE ONE 000101 APPLE ONE ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER HOTEL ACCOMMOOATIONS FO 190-180-qq9-5261 909-204-1200-0 MJM 001-140-999-5208 LA 601520209019~ TH 320-199-999-5208 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC PLANNING COIW4 ~SRP 10/ 001-161-999-5272 TEMP HELP W/E 09/17/94 280-199-999-5250 TENP HELP W/E 09/17/94 001-140-999-5118 TEMP HELP M/E 09/17/94 190-180-999-5118 001-140-999-5258 AUGUSTINEe DENISE REFUND FOR TCSO CLASS 190-18~-4982 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER INSTALL LIGHT-POOL DECK 190-182-999o5212 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER LIGHTING INSTALLATION 190-180-999-5212 BANTA ELECTRIC-REFRIGER SECURITY LIGHTING - C[T 100-164-601-5240 BEARBACXERS FULL PAGE AD IN FTBALL 280-199-999-5264 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, AUTO INSURANCE FOR PHYS 300-199-999-5201 0016144 ASSOC FOR GOVfT LEASING MANAGING LEASES SEMINAR CALIFORNIA DEPT OF CUMN ECONUM[C DEVE. MANUAL CAL[FORNIA DEPT OF GENE CALIF. PLANNERS BOOK LI CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY CITICORP NORTH AMERICA CITICORP NORTH AMERICA CUMTRONIX OF HEMET CONTRONIX OF HEMET CREEKSIDE TEXACO CREEKSIDE TEXACO CREEKSIDE TEXACO DAVLIN EXCEL LANDSCAPE EXCEL LANDSCAPE FEDERAL EXPRESS FEDERAL EXPRESS 001-161-999-5228 RDA AD FOR CITY COUNCIL 280-199-999-5262. INSTALLMENT PtqT 10/13 - 320-2800 INSTALLMENT PMT 10/13 - 320~199-999-5391 UN[DEN RADIO MOOEL # SP 190-180-999-5610 TAX 190~180-999-5610 REAR glNOOt~ REPLACEMENT 300-199-999-5207 V~HICLE MAINT-PUBLIC ~0 I00~164-601-52144 VEHICLE MAINT-PUBLIC ~0 100-16~-601-5214 AUDIO PROD. FOR PLANNIN 001-161-999-5250 SPRAT ROUNDUP-EXTRA t40R EXTRA ~ORK- REBAR HEADS EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 193-180-~99-5415 193-180-999-5415 001-162-999-52~0 320-199-999-52~0 ITEM AMOUNT 119.90 .89 60.76 90.00 103.20 516.00 343.1/` 50,00 25.00 978.00 7Z5,78 932.00 200.00 569.46 26.50 9.00 82.53 1,204.99 722.58 786.00 60.92 139.05 131.53 173.46 150.00 396.00 36~.00 41.21 9.50 CHECK AMOUNT 119.90 .89 60.76 90.00 962.~4 50.00 25.00 2,635.78 2r',~o 26.50 9.00 82,53 1,427,57 8/,,6.92 150.00 760.00 5Q.71 VC 09, 12:22 VOOCHER/ CHECK CHECK VBNDO~ NUMBER DATE NLINBER 20~43 09/29/94 001135 203~'+ 09/29/94 001002 20345 09/29/94 000993 20346 09/29/94 000949 20:Y+7 09/29/94 000184 20347 09/29/94 000184 20:~7 09/29/94 000184 20348 09/29/94 00017? 20348 09/29/94 00017? 20348 09/29/94 00017'/ 20348 09/29/94 00017? 20348 09/29/94 00017? 20348 09/29/94 00017? 20348 09/29/94 00017? 20348 09/29/94 00017? ':m~J,8 09/29/94 00017? ~ 09/29/94 001596 20350 09/29/94 001609 20351 09/29/94 00018~ 20352 09/29/94 001517 20353 09/29/94 000796 20354 09/29/94 000939 20355 09/29/94 001570 20356 09/29/94 001407 20357 09/29/94 000945 20357 09/29/94 000945 20357 09/29/94 000945 20358 09/29/94 001553 20359 09/29/94 000596 20360 09/29/94 000219 20360 09/29/94 000219 1 09/29/94 001~.0 VENDOR MANE FIRST CARE INDUSTRIAL N FIRST INTERSTATE BANK C FREEDOM COFFEE, iNC. G K N RENTALS G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYN G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYN G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYN GLENNIES OFFICE PRQOUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GOSCH TOWING & RECOVERY GREATER ALARM COMPANY, HANKS HARDHARE HEALTH & HUMAN RESODRCE I CRO 1 C B O - INLAND EMPIRE INFORMATION FOR PUSLIC iNTER VALLEY POOL SUPPL L P S COMPUTER SERVICE L P S CUNPUTER SERVICE L P S CORPUTER SERVICE LAWN TECH EQUIPffiENT CON LEAGUE OF CAL. CITIES MARTIN 1-NODR PHOTO HARTIN I*NODR PHOTO HATROS, ALORA CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER PRE-EMPLOYNENT PHYSICAL 001-150-q~-5248 MISC pLANNING PUBLICATI COFFEE SUPPLIES FOR CIT S[IPLOjM)ER RENTAL 909 695-3564 GEN 909 699-2475 P~ 909 699-7945 GEN OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR TCS OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR CRC OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR CRC OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR TCS 001-161-999-5228 340-199-999-5250 100-164-601-5238 320-199-999-5208 100-164-601-5240 320-199-999-5208 190-180-999-5220 190-182-999-5220 190-182-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-161-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR TCS 190-180-999-5220 PICK-UP DIESEL IN ROJ, D 100-164-601-5430 CITY HALL ALARM MONITOR 340-199-999-5250 REPAIR & NAINT ITEMS AC ~40-199-999-5212 EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PRO 001-150-999-5250 MEMBERSHIP DUES FOR 94 LUMBER & BLDG CODE SEMI NETWORK REPORTING SERVI POOL SUPPLIES AC POWER SUPPLY LABOR AND MILEAGE TAX R&R BLADE 96TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE PHOTO DEVELOPING FOR HA PHOTO DEVELOPING FOR CA PAYMENT TO INSTRUCTOR 001-162-999-5226 001-162-999-5261 320-199-999-5228 190-182-999-5212 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 320-199-999-5215 100-164-601-5215 001-100-999-5258 100-16~-601-5250 001-165-999-5250 190-18~-999-5330 iTEM Ale3UNT 190.00 130.50 167.60 Z20.00 32,79 34.24 3:L62 318.90 28,31 7.04 7.51 27.30 25 125.96 12,60 1.12 100,00 105.00 117.11 302.25 25,00 240.00 600.00 432,08 150.00 70.00 10.50 2] .80 585.00 36.7] 6.7~ 806.40 PAGE Z CHECK ANOUNT 190,00 130.50 167.60 Z2O,OO 100.65 554.55 100.00 105,00 117.11 302,25 25.00 240.00 600.00 432.08 2~0.50 58~.00 43 J,8 806.40 VOUCHRE2 09/29/94 12:22 CITY OF TENECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERInnS VCXJCHER/ OHECK CHEC~ VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER BATE NUMBER NAME 20362 09/29/94 000220 NAUR|CE PRXNTERS, INC. 20362 09/29/94 000220 NAURICE PRINTERS, INC. 20363 09/29/94 001205 NCOERNOTT, TIN K. 2036Z+ 09/29/94 000/.92 MCLARNEY, MARY JANE 20365 09/29/94 001526 MICHAELS STORES, INC. 20365 09/29/94 001526 NICHAELS STORES, INC. 20365 09/29/94 001526 NICHAELS STORES, iNC. 20365 09/29/94 001526 HICHAELS STORES, iNC. 20366 09/29/94 000228 MOBIL 20367 09/29/94 MORIKAWA~ ~SLEY 20368 09/29/94 000239 OLBTEN TEMPORARY SERVXC 20369 09/29/94 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOOOS 20369 09/29/94 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOOOS 20369 09/29/94 000241 ORANGE SPORTING GOOOS 20370 09/29/94 PACIFXC-AHERICAN CULTUN ZTEM DESCRIPTION NEIGHBORHOOD MATCH NEtIS TAX CPA LICENSE RENEMAL REIMB. FOR SEN CRAFT SUPPLIES CRAFT SUPPLIrES CRAFT SUPPLIES CRAFT SUPPLIES FUEL EXPENSE REFUND-SECURITY DEPOSIT TEMP HELP M/E 09/04 -09 5 002 MHITE SOFTBALLS 19 OOZ SOFTBALLS TAX SECURITY DEPOSIT REFUND ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-170-999-5222 001-170-999-5222 001-1A0-999-5226 001-160-999-5258 190-180-999-5301 190-182-999-5301 190-182-999-5301 190-180-999-5301 001-162-999-5263 190-2900 001-162-99q-5118 190-183-999-5380 190-183-999-5380 190-183-999-5380 190-2900 ! TEN AMOUNT 224.00 17.36 200.00 40.00 35.71 31.29 9.77 52.10 14.46 100.00 775.13 212.81 750.50 58.16 100.00 CHECK Ali3UNT 241.36 200.00 40.00 128.87 14.46 100.00 20371 09/29/94 PAUL, SANDY REFUND-SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-183-4990 100.00 100.00 20572 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 Q00249 PETTY CASH 20572 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 203?2 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH 20372 09/29/94 000249 PETTY CASH PETTY CASH REINBUREMENT PETTY CASH REXMBUREMENT PETTY CASH RE]MBUREMENT PETTY CASH REIMBUREMENT PETTY CASH REIMBUREMENT PETTY CASH REIHSURENENT PETTY CASH REXMBURENENT PETTY CASH REIMBUREMENT PETTY CASH REIMSURENEHT PETTY CASH REIMBUREMENT PETTY CASH REIMSUREMENT PETTY CASH REXNBURENENT 001-100-999-5260 001-110-999-5260 001-140-999-5258 001-150-999-5260 001-16~-999-5220 100-164-601-5260 100-16/,-602-5250 100-16~-604-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-181-999-5301 190-182-999-5301 190-183-999-5:$/,0 7.46 13.62 5.50 3.99 4.31 15.00 14,42 23,69 4,31 38,05 42.95 20.89 19~.19 20375 09/29/94 000253 POSTRASTER 20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTMASTER 20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTMASTER 20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTNASTER 20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTMASTER 20373 09/29/94 000253 POSTMASTER EXPRESS MAIL EXPRESS MAIL EXPRESS MAIL EXPRESS NAIL EXPRESS MAZL EXPRESS MAIL 100-164-604-52~0 001-161-999-523B 001-163-999-5230 001-150-999-52~0 001-110*999-5230 001-120-999-52S0 9.95 13.95 13.95 9.95 9.95 29.90 87.65 20374 09/29/94 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY LOCKSMITH SERVXCES 190-180-999-5212 60.82 60.82 VO CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 09/, 12:22 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERInnS VOUCHER/ CRECK NUMBER 20]76 20376 20376 20376 20]77 CHECK DATE 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 09/29/94 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NA~E 000546 RADIO SHACK/BUTTERFIELD 000~26 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL 000426 RANCEO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL 000426 RANCNO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL 000426 RANCRO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL 00070~ S X S, llC/INLAND OIL 000704 S K S, INC/INLAND OIL 000704 S K S, INC/INLAND OIL 000704 S K S, IRC/]NLAND OIL 00070/* S K S, INC/IRLAND OIL 000704 S K S, INC/INLAND OIL 001122 SCOTCH PAINT CORPORATIO 001617 SCOTT, GLENN 001618 SENIORS GOLDEN YEARS SMITH, ZENAIDA 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 000374 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 000574 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON OOlZlZ SOUTHERN CALIF GAS CONP 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPNON 001576 STEUARD COMPANY, THE 001576 STEWARD COMPANY, THE 001576 STEWARD COMPANY, THE 001546 STRAIGHT LINE GLASS 000825 TEMECULA CYCLES 000]07 TEHECULA TROPHY CO. TENECULA VALLEY GYMNAST TENECULA VALLEY GYMNAST 001487 TIERRA MECHANICAL, INC. TGASTNASTER$ - AREA TGASTMASTERS - AREA C-4 00161] TRI-CHAPTER CALBO ABN C ]TEN DESCRIPTION NISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES BLDG & NAINT SUPPLIES SUPPLIES FOR SENION CEN BLDG & NAINT SUPPLIES RETURNED ITEM CREDIT FUEL EXPENSE Fnn SEPT 1 FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1 FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1 FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1 FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1 FUEL EXPENSE FOR SEPT 1 NISC GRAFFITI REMOVAL S CUTTING TORCH FOR CITY SR CENTER ANNIVERSARY E MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT PEST CONTROL SERVICES F PEST CONTROL SERVICES F 66-77-7~5-0002-01SR CN 66-77-7~5-8082-01 8/22- ACCT# 11-8272-901-5751- 909 202-5153 GY PAPER DRILL DITS FREIGHT TAX ENCLOSE FRONT DESK OF C MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE POOL TROPHIES REFUND - EVENT CANCELLA REFURD - EVENT CANCELLA BUILDING NAINT SERVICE SECURITY DEPOSIT REFUND ADDITIONAL STAFF flOURS UNIFORM BUILD COOE SEMI ACCOUNT NUMBER I00-164-~01-5263 001-110-~-52E3 001-162-'1~x~-526] O01-165-~q~-5263 001-163-9~9-5263 100-16~-601-5218 100-1(>4-601-5242 190-183-'c~9-5320 001-140-~-5262 190-181-~-5240 001-150-99~-5208 ]]O-1W-gqg-5242 330-1~;'-qq~-5242 330-199-999-5242 190-182-~)q-5212 001-170-9q~-5214 190-182-~-5]01 190-~900 190-18]-4990 190-2900 190-183-4990 001-162-999-5261 ITEM AMOUNT 152.24 226.19 132.72 29.]3 29.52- 342.85 24.54 136.64 47,T3 61.85 325.62 100.00 60.00 26.97 21.00 21.00 30.93 1,225.85 5]6.82 76.24 139.80 5.02 10.83 975.00 201.4J, 19.40 100.00 530.00 67.50 100.00 20.00- 475.00 CHECK 152.24 358.72 657.98 ]25.62 100.00 60.00 26.97 42. O0 1,256.78 5]6.82 76.24 155.65 975.00 201 19.40 (:~0.00 67.50 475.00 VOUCHRE2 09/29/94 12:22 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NLI~BER DATE 20394 09/29/94 20394 09/29/94 20394 09/29/94 20395 09/29/94 20395 09/29/94 20396 09/29/94 20396 09/29/94 20397 09/29/94 20398 09/29/94 20399 09/29/94 20400 09/29/94 20401 09/29/94 20402 09/29/94 20402 09/29/94 ~0403 09/29/94 20403 09/29/94 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIDO$ VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NLIMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 001565 U S I 25" ROLL LAMINATOR 001565 U S I FREIGHT 001565 U S I TAX 000322 UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR TOOK REFUND U/O PAYING 000322 UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR TOOK REFUND g/O PAYING 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNIFORMS FOR PW WEEK OF 000326 URITOG RENTAL SERVICE UNIFORMS FOR TCSD 001209 VAULT, THE MISC APERTURE CARDS 001437 VIRACK, MARYANN PAYMENT TO INSTRUCTOR 001433 VYLARI PAYMENT TO INSTRUCTOR 190-1R'~-990-5~0 000379 W DEAN DAVIDSON CO. K. H]NTERGARDT PK INPRO 210'190-136-5802 000~40 WHITE CAP INDUSTRIES, I BOOT ALLOWANCE FOR R HU 100-1~-601-5243 000820 NINCHAK, KRIS ~ORKERS# CORP M~T 001-1182 000820 WINCHAK, KRIS NAP & PLAN CHECK SERVIC 001-16~-999-5249 000342 WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC RENT FOR OCTOBER 94 340-199-999-5234 000342 WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC CAM FOR SEPTEMBER 94 340-199-999-5234 ACCOUNT NUMBER 330-1940 330-1940 330-1940 001-100-999-5258 001-100-999-5258 100-16~-601-5243 190-180-999-5243 330-199-999-5277 190-1R~-999-5330 ITEM AMDUNT 825.00 52.16 63.94 144.00 6.00 23.00 16.35 196.70 208.00 432.00 360.00 83.98 31.23- 945,00 8,803.60 2,673.95 CHECK ANOUNT 941.10 150.00 39.35 196.70 208.00 432.00 360. O0 83.98 11,477.55 TOTAL CHECKS 37,529.08 CITY OF TENECULA PAGE 12:57 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 100 GAS TAX FUND 190 CONNUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 210 CAPITAL INPROVENENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPRENT AGENCY - 300 INSURANCE FUND 330 SUPPORT SERVICES TOTAL AN(XIWT 391,68Z.1A 10,978,34 13,517.55 17,381.26 38,083.78 ~,00~.91 107,00 2,871.82 4~,{S3;0.80 VQUGHRE2 CITY OF TENECULA 09/29/94 12:57 V(XJCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIQOS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 20/.07 20407 20407 20407 20/+07 20~07 20407 20408 20408 20408 20408 20409 20410 20410 20410 20410 20410 20411 20411 20412 20413 20413 20413 20414 20414 20415 20415 20416 20416 20416 20416 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 00019 BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS 000123 BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS 00012~ BURKE WILLIAHS & SORENS 00012~ BURKE WILLI/JqS & SORENS 00012~ BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS 000123 BURKE WILLIAMS & SORENS 00012~ BURKE UILLIANS & SORENS 001006 BURTRONICS BUSINESS SYS 001006 BURTRONZCS BUSINESS SYS 001006 BURTRORICS BUSINESS SYS 001006 BURTRONICS BUSINESS SYS 001009 D B X, 1NC. 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT $ERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 000/.81 GEOTECHNICAL & ENVIRONM 000202 J F DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES 000202 J F DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES 000202 J F DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES 001501 N. ARINA CCNTRACTORS, 001501 MARINA CONTRACTORS, 000220 MAUR%CE PRINTERS, ]NC. 000220 NAURICE PRINTERS, INC. 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES 000437 MORELAND & ASSOCIATES ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER PROF. SERVICES 8/19/9& PROF SERVXCES 8/31/94 PROF SERVICES 8/31/94 PROF SERVICES 8/31/94 PROF SERVICES 8/31/94 PROF SERVICE 08/'51/94 PROF SERVICES 8/~1/94 001-130-999-5246 001-1280 001-130-999-5246 190-180-999-5246 300-199-999-5207 280-199-999-5246 001-130-999-5246 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 330-1;9-q~-5217 SERV CONTACT RP6OSZ HI 330-1~9-q~9-5217 SERVICE CONTRACT UC1 CA 330-199-~9~-5217 TAX 330-1~9-~-5217 LOOP REPLACE FOR RANCHO 100-164-601-5402 CONTRACT INSPECTOR CONTRACT INSPECTO~ W/E CONTRACT INSPECTOR NO BACKUP-REIMBURSABLE NO BACKUP-REINBURSEABLE 001-162-999-5250 001-162-999-5250 001-162-999-5250 001-162-999-5250 001-162-999-5250 LANDSCAPE MAINT FOR SEP 193-180-999-5415 LANDSCAPE MAINT FOR SEP 190-180-999-5415 PROF. SERVICES 08/26/94 210-190'120-5802 PROF SERVICES FOR AUGUS PROF SERVICES FOR AUGUS PROF. SERVICES FOR 8/1 210-190-137-5802 210-190-137-5802 210-190-137-5802 LONA LINDA PK PHASE II 210-190-134-5804 IOX RETENTION ON INV C4 210-2035 CREATE/DESIGN COVERS FO 001-140-99q-5222 TAX 001-140*999-5222 CITY AUDIT 1~4 001-140-~-5248 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 280-199-9~-5248 SINGLE AUDIT 001-140-999-52&8 REVIEW OF DEVELOPER IMP 001-140-999-5248 TTEM AMOUNT 3,150.00 307.10 18,706.40 495.50 107.00 2,808.91 3,191.62 1,695.00 700.00 446.00 30.82 3,350.00 3,232.16 2,672.72 5,016.00 6~.16' 32.72' 17,381.26 6,877.81 1,483.01 3,307.92 282.40 2,837.00 28,295.50 2,829.55- 982.00 76.11 6,389.~4 1,200.00 1,200.00 937.78 CHECK AMOUNT 28,766.53 2,871.82 3,350.00 10,824.00 24,L 1,483.01 6A27.32 25,465.95 1,058.11 9,727.62 VO CITY OF TENECULA PAGE 09/, · 12:57 VOUCHER/CHEC[ REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMBER DATE NLNBER 20417 10/11/94 20417 10/11/94 20417 10/11/94 20417 10/11/94 20417 10/11/94 20418 10/11/94 20419 10/11/94 VENDOR NAME 001339 NORTON INTERNAT/ONAL 001339 NORTON INTERNATIONAL 001339 MORTON INTERNATIONAL 001339 NONTON INTERNATIONAL 001339 NORTON INTERNATIONAL 000230 NUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES 000231 N G S/LOWRY. INC. 20420 10/11/94 001007 20421 10/11/94 20421 10/11/94 20422 10/11/94 20423 10/11/94 20424 10/11/94 ~r~p4 10/11/94 10/11/94 10/11/94 ~0424 10/11/94 20424 10/11/94 20424 10/11/94 20424 10/11/94 20424 10/11/94 20424 10/11/94 20425 10/11/94 20426 10/11/94 NPGCORP. 001584 NEWPONT PRINTING SYSTEM 001584 NEWPORT PRINTING SYSTEM 001500 REGIONAL TRAINING CENTE 000354 RIVERSIDE CO. HEALTH DE 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF#S 000406 RIVERSIDE CO, $HERIFF'S 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF*S 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFPS 000406 RIVERSIDE CO, SHERIFF'S 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF#S 000406 RIVERSIDE CO. SHERIFF'S 000310 TENECULA CREEK INN 001512 WIND & SHADE SCREENS, ITEM DESCRIPTION 460/5 GALS WHITE PAINT 100/5 GALS RED LEAD FRE 50/5 GALS STENCIL GOARD 1250 LB DROP-ON BEN)S TAX CSO ADNIW SERVICES 93/9 SlJRVEYING SERVICES FOR *'EMERGENCY" STREET REPA 5500 3 PT CHECKS'GEM AC TAX TPJ~INING'EFFECT, PRESEN ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG LAW ENFONEMENT FOR AUG LAW ENFONEMENT FOR AUG LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG LAW ENFONEMENT FOR AUG LAW ENFORENENT FOR AUG LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG LAW ENFOREMENT FOR AUG LAW ENFOREMENT FON AUG ACCOUNT NUMBER 100-164-601o5218 100-164-601-5218 100-164-S01-5218 100-164-601-5218 100-164-601-5218 190-180-99~-5370 210-1~'-128-5802 100-164-601-5402 001-140-~-5222 001-140-~}9-5222 001-150-999-5248 00t-172-999-5255 001-170-999-5288 001-170-999-5299 001-170-999-5298 001-170-999-5294 001-170-999-5290 001-170-999-5262 001-170-999-5291 001-170-999-5281 001-170-999-5282 001-1230 GOLF TOURN GREEN FEES 001-2172 SHADE COVER OVER TOT LO 190-180-999-5212 , ITEM A~K30NT 3,910.00 1,150.00 350.00 375.00 4,650.24 4,707.50 1,395.00 1,~.2.00 104.01 1,552.00 6,288.25 212,760.58 22,347.36 19,128.40 12,537.14 7,130.88 18,010.42 4,805.91 22,358.50 2,945.60 4,805.92 9,800.32 1,494.00 CHECK ANOUNT 6,2]3.34 4,650.24 4,707.50 1,395.00 1,'~-6.01 1,552.00 6,288.25 326,810.71 9,800.]2 1,494.00 TOTAL CHECKS 478,630.80 ITEM 4 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager APPROVR~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER Anthony EImo, Chief Building Official/~ October 11, 1994 Public Nuisance Abatement - 30301 Nicolas Rd. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council: Approve the issuance of a purchase order in the amount of $58,600 to Environmental Control Systems, Inc. for the removal of all trash, debris, building foundations and for the securing of all buildings. Approve an Appropriation of 958,600 for account no. 001-162-999-5250, Other Outside Services, from Unreserved Fund Balance. BACKGROUND: Ordinance No. 90-24 Abatement of Public Nuisance was adopted by the City Council December 4, 1990. This ordinance allows the City to provide a just, equitable and practical method whereby lands or buildings which are dilapidated, unsafe, dangerous, unsanitary, cluttered with weeds, debris, abandoned vehicles, or are a menace or hazard to life, health or general welfare of the City of Temecula, may be required to be repaired, renovated, vacated, demolished or cleaned up by removal of offensive conditions. DISCUSSION: On approximately May 11,1993,code enforcement received a complaint regarding an alleged public nuisance located at 30301 Nicolas Rd. After inspection of the premises revealed the existence of weeds, trash, debris, and unsecured dilapidated buildings, abatement proceedings were initiated in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 90-24 for Public Nuisance Abatement. Notices were subsequently sent to all known owners by both first class and certified mail. In an effort to determine the extent of the nuisance condition, an inspection warrant was applied for and granted by the local district court judge. An inspection was then performed revealing, construction debris, concrete foundations, trash and debris throughout the property. As a result of this inspection, staff proceeded to declare the property a public nuisance, V:\TONY~AGENDA\30301.NIC 9/27/94 tda Agenda Report August 11,1992 Page 2 requesting that the nuisance be abated in a timely fashion. Upon expiration of the requested abatement period, a hearing was held before an independent hearing officer for the purpose of having the property's designation as a public nuisance upheld and the City given the authority to cause the abatement of the nuisance condition to be done. The hearing also gave the property owners the ability to give testimony as to why the property should not be designated a public nuisance and the nuisance abated by the City. The nuisance designation was upheld by the hearing officer and abatement was ordered. Staff obtained an abatement warrant on August 17, 1994 and has completed the bidding process for the abatement of the nuisance conditions. Bid proposals were received from a total of five (5) firms for the abatement work. Environmental Control Systems, Inc. was the low bidder with a bid of $58,600. A listing of all firms and their respective bids are as follows: 1. Seal Coater Company 974,925.00 2. Brimhall Company 972,985.00 3. Nathan C. McDonald 969,000.00 4. Environmental Control Systems, Inc. 958,600.00 5. ASAP Truck &Tractor 958,600.00 (Incomplete Bid) FISCAL IMPACT: It is necessary to appropriate 958,600 for account no. 001-162-999-5250,Other Outside Services, from Unreserved Fund Balance for these services. Following completion of the abatement process, a public hearing will be held before the Council to consider whether the 958,600 plus related City administrative costs will be recorded as a special assessment against the property. V:\TONY~AGENDA\30301.NIC 9/27/94 tda ITEM 5 TO: FROM: :~,~, DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL ~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Joseph Kicak, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 11, 1994 Reject the bid for the Pala Road at HWY 79S Right Turn Lane Project (No. PW94-08) PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Reject the bid and direct staff to re-bid the Pala Road at HWY 79S Right Turn Lane Project (PW94-08). BACKGROUND: On July 12, 1994 the City Council approved the construction plans and specifications, and authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids. The work to be performed includes, construction of asphalt pavement, traffic striping and signjng, embankment construction, and traffic control to construct a right turn lane for traffic proceeding east on Route 79 "South" to south on Pala Road. This widening project will reduce congestion on Route 79 "South" during peak levels of traffic. This project was also bid with an alternative to perform the construction during night hours, from 8:30 p.m. to 5:30 a.m. Sunday evenings thru Friday mornings. The engineer's estimate for the base bid of this project is $36,000. One (1) bid for the project was publicly opened on August 4, 1994 and the results for the base bid is as follows: Base Bid Alternative Bid 1. Vista Murrieta Corporation .......... $63,073.70 $6,768.00 Staff reviewed the bid proposal from Vista Murrieta Corporation and found that the proposal was complete and in order, but the unit prices were high. Their schedule of prices showed that out of the thirty bid unit prices, twenty-six were higher than the engineer's estimate. Three of the unit prices in the proposal were for the placement of asphalt, which was over -1 - r:\egdrpt\94\1011 \pw94-08 .awdtajp 58,000 more than estimated. The total bid cost was 563,073.70,which is almost 527,000 higher than estimated. Vista Murrieta Corporation has not performed any work for the City, but has performed well in other areas of Riverside County based on comments from references of previous work. The project's Notice Inviting Bids and the Instructions to Bidders stated that potential bidders were required to have a contractor's license classification A (General Engineering). Due to the fact that there is no apparent reason why there was only one bid response for this project, other than the possibility of the contractor's license requirement. Staff recommends that a re-bid of this project take place and that the license classification of C-12 (Earthwork and Paving Contractors) be added to the project specifications too increase the potential of the number of bidders and a lower bid price. A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact at this time, this is a Capital Improvement Project and will be funded through Development Impact Fees. -2- r:%agdrpt\94\1011\pw94-08.awd/ejp ITEM 6 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNE'=r.R.~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER City Council Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager October 11, 1994 Request to Caltrans for Freeway Guide Signs Identifying the Old Town Business District RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94--- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE INSTALLATION OF FREEWAY GUIDE SIGNS IDENTIFYING THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA BUSINESS DISTRICT BACKGROUND: The City has participated in the lease for a billboard located adjacent to Interstate 15 advertising Old Town Temecula. The Temecula Redevelopment Agency Board is being asked to support additional assistance for billboard leasing as part of its adopted Old Town Specific Plan Capital/Promotional Improvements Program. The request for the Caltrans installation of freeway guide signs identifying the Old Town Temecula Business District will be an additional no cost promotion that is anticipated to bring patrons off the freeway to do business in Old Town. FISCAL ANALYSIS: This action will have no adverse fiscal impact on the City. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL REQUF_~TING ~ INSTALLATION OF FREEWAY GUIDE SIGNS IDENTIFYING THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA BUSINESS DISTRICT WI~REAS, the identification of kistoric Old Town Temecula as a business district is an important concern to the citizens of Temecula; and WHEREAS, the grade separation between the Old Town and Interstate 15 renders services and businesses nearly. invisible to Interstate users; and WHEREAS, Interstate travelers would be better able to plan their stops with advance notice of business district and services available in Old Town Temecula; and WHEREAS, Old Town Temecula is a locally historic business district bypassed by the construction of Interstate NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOW: Section 1. That a letter, signed by the Mayor, accompany a copy of this resolution requesting the installation of freeway guide signs by Caltrans to identify the Old Town Temecula Business District. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, this day, the llth of October, 1994. Ron Roberts, Mayor ATI'P..ST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERS]DE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 94- _ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 1994, by the following vote: A YES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMbERS: June S. Greek City Clerk ITEM 7 APPROVAL ~ CITY ATI'ORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECUULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager October 11, 1994 Interim Director of Public Works Contract RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a contract with Kicak and Associates to provide Interim City Engineer/Director of Public Works services. BACKGROUND: Due to the departure of Tim Serlet, the City is currently in the process of recruiting a new City Engineer/Director of Public Works. Until a regular replacement is hired, staff is recommending that Joe Kicak, of Kicak and Associates be retained as the Interim City Engineer/Director of Public Works. Mr. Kicak has over 30 years of municipal engineering experience and currently serves as contract City Engineer for the City of Grand Terrace. Mr. Kicak has agreed to work 32 hours per week at a salary of 950.00 per hour. This arrangement is expected to continue until mid- December when the appointment of a new director is anticipated. FISCAL IMPACT: Due to salary savings, adequate funds are available in the Public Works Department budget to fund this contract. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement was made and entered into this 20th day of September 1994. by and between the City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation, and Kicak and Associates. a Civil Engineer and Planner Finn ("Consultant"). The paxties hemto mutually agree as follows: 1. Services. Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth. 2. Performance. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. 3. Payment. The City agrees to pay Consultant the amount of $50.00 per hour. This amount will not exceed $25,000 for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved by the City Council; provided that the City Manager may approve additional payment not to exceed $500. Consultant will submit an invoice at the conclusion of actual services performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of invoice. 4. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended so long as such amendment is in writing and agreed upon by both the City Manager and Consultant. 5. Ownership Of Documents. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension or abandonment of, this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. 6. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement without cause so long as written notice of intent to terminate is given to Consultant at least three (3) days prior to the termination date. In the event of termination, Consultant shall be paid for the services performed. 7. Indemnification. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense cost, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent acts or omissions under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 8. Status of Consultant. Consultant is an independent contractor in all respects in the performance of this Agreement and shall not be considered an employee of the City for any purpose. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 9. Term. This Agreement shall commence on September 20~ 1994, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than March 20, 1995. 10. Subcontracts. The Consultant shall not enter into any subcontracts for services to be rendered toward the completion of the Consultant's portion of this Agreement without the consent of the City. At all times, Joseph Kicak shall be primarily responsible for the performance of the tasks described herein. Consultant shall provide City with fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Joseph Kicak from Consultant's employ. Upon such notice, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shah be for the value of service rendered to the City. 11. Default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default, Default shall include not performing the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of the City. Failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder, if such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, shall not be considered a default. Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final. Consultant shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1280, et seq. City and Consultant shall share the cost of the arbitration equally. 12. Notices. Notices shall be given pursuant to this Agreement by personal service on the party to be notified, or by written notice upon such party deposited in the custody of the United States Postal Service addressed as follows: a. City: Attention: City Manager City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Attention: Joseph Kicak Kicak and Associates 21935 Van Buren St., Bldg. A, Ste. 3 Grand Terrace, CA 92313 The notices shall be deemed to have been given as of the date of personal service, or three (3) days after the date of deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal Service. 13. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. In the event of conflict between the terms. conditions, or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. 14. Liability. Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. Consultant agrees to indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, employees, and representatives for all claims or losses the City may suffer resulting from any negligent actions or omissions by Consultant. Consultant shall secure workman's compensation insurance. Upon request of Consultant, the City shall add Consultant to the City's worker's compensation policy and the Consultant shall reimburse the City for the cost of said insurance premiums. 15. Licenses. Consultant warrants that it maintains all necessary licenses. The parties hemto have executed this Agreement on the date and year above written. CONSULTANT By: Title ATI'EST: CITY OF TEMECULA By: Ronald E. Bradley City Manager June S. Greek, City Clerk AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ITEM 8 APPROVAL R~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council City Clerk October 11, 1994 Records Destruction Approval RECOMMENDATION: Approve scheduled destruction of certain records as provided under the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy. BACKGROUND: On March 22, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution No. 92-17 which authorizes the destruction of certain city records which have become outdated, obsotete or are excess documents, in compliance with Sections 34090 through 34090.7 of the Government Code. The records management program, administered by the City Clerk's Office, is in the process of microfilming all inactive records that are over two (2) years old. The attached exhibit details plot plans for the years 1989 and 1989 which have been copied to microfilm. Three microfilm copies have been prepared, one to be kept in the Planning Department, one in the City Clerk's records vault and one in permanent off-site storage. The City Attorney has reviewed this request and has signed Exhibit "1" of the Annual Review as provided for in Resolution No. 92-17. ATTACHMENTS: JSG Destruction of Records Request List of Records recommended for destruction TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Clerk Gail Ziglet, Office Specialist September 30, 1994 Destruction of Records Request Attached is a print out of Plot Plans (Retention Type 20324) from 1989. These records have been microffimed in triplicate with a copy distributed to the City Clerk's Records Vault, the Planning Department and a copy to the Vault in San Diego. The following have reviewed and approved this destruction request. Pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 34090, I hereby give my consent to the destruction of records under the direction of the City Clerk pursuant to the City of Temecula's adopted Destruction of Obsolete Records Policy. Department:Head: ' City Attorney: Ga/-y~o~o'll ~PP~r /o 7~ t s ~, y / Date RRDESTY...RR061 City of TemecuLa 'DOC. Ref ......... 161 Page 1 09/30/1~94 FiLes Ready fop Destruction Retention Code... 20324 10:33:30 Destruction Date. 12/31/1;94 Dc item Ret. FiLe Refere~e # Storage Nedis Ref. Date Ref. grief Description Code Security CLass Storage Location Location Reference 161 01/19/198~ 10376 PLot PLan 10376 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The FiLm 161 07/24/1989 11450 PLot PLan 11450 20324 0012 Film 3821H1AOO01 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/09/1989 8525 PLot Plan 20324 000~ FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/10/1989 11436 PLot PLan 11436 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/14/1989 11541 PLot PLan 11541 20324 0012 FiLm 3821NIAO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/16/1989 11429 PLot PLan 11429 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/16/1989 11437 PLot PLan 11437 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/16/1989 11441 PLot PLan 11441 20]24 0012 Film 3821NIAO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/21/1989 11439 PLot PLan 11439 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/23/1989 11442 PLot PLan 11442 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/25/1989 11447 PLot PLan 11447 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 08/25/1989 11449. PLot Plan 11449 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 08/25/1989 11456 PLot PLan 11456 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/01/1989 11465 PLot PLan 11465 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/05/1989 11502 PLot PLan 11502 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/12/1989 11477 PLot PLan 11477 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 1 19/12/1989 9924 PLot PLan 9924 20324 0012 FiLm 3821~1A0001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/18/1989 11546 PLot PLan 11546 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AOO01 Group 161/120/The Vault RRDESTY...RR061 City of Te~ecula Page 2 09/jTLOJl~)4 FiLes Ready for Destruction 10:3]:50 Dot Zt~ Rat. FiLe Reference # Storage Nedis Ref. Date Ref. Brief Description Code Security CLass Storage Location Location Reference 161 09/19/1989 114~9 PLot PLan 114~ 20324 0012 Fiim 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/20/1989 11495 PLot PLan 114~5 20324 0012 FiLm 3821NIAO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/20/1989 11511 PLot PLan 11511 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/IZO/The VauLt 161 09/20/1989 11513 PLot PLan 11513 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/25/1989 11562 PLot PLan 11562 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/Z6/1989 11505 PLot PLan 11505 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/26/1989 11522 PLot PLan 11522 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/2~1989 11514 PLot PLan 11514 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/the VauLt 161 09/27/1989 11526 PLot PLan 11526 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The vault 161 09/27/1989 11527 PLot PLan 11527 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/28/1989 11531 PLot PLan 11531 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 09/29/1989 11547 PLot PLan 11547 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 10/01/1989 11518 PLot 'PLan 11518 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The vault 161 10/02/1989 11544 PLot PLan 115~/, 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The vault 161 10/04/1989 11545 PLot PLan 11545 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 10/06/1989 11520 PLot PLan 11520 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 1 9/10/1989 11542 PLot PLan 11542 20324 0012 FiLm 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 10/10/1989 9194 PLot PLan 9194 20324 0004 Fiim 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The vault RRDESTY...RR061 City of Telaecuta Page 09/]0/1994 Files Reach/for Destruction 10:],_,~3:30 Doe. Itm Ret. File Refere~e # Storage H~ia Ref. Date Ref. Brief Description Code Security CLass Storage Location Lo~etion Refererie 161 10/13/1989 11536 PLot PLan 11536 20324 0012 Film 3821M1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/13/1989 11538 PLot Plan 11538 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/16/1989 11556 Plot PLan 11556 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/16/1989 11557 PLot PLan 11557 20324 0012 Film 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/18/1989 11548 PLot PLan 11548 20]24 0012 Film 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/18/1989 11593 PLot PLan 11593 20324 0012 Film 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/18/1989 11635 PLot PLan 11635 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/25/1989 11572 PLot PLan 11572 20]24 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/26/1989 1156~ PLot PLan 11566 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/]0/1989 11571 Plot PLan 11571 20324 0012 Film 3821HIAO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 10/]1/1989 11608 PLot PLan 11608 20324 0012 Film 3821HIAO001 Group 161/120/The Vault 161 11/01/1989 11604 PLot PLan 11604 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group I 161/120/The Vault 161 11/07/1989 11610 PLot PLan 11610 20324 0012 Film 3821H1AO001 Group ! 161/120/the Vault ....................... ~ .......................................... 161 11/07/1989 11611 PLot PLan 11611 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group i 161/120/The Vault 161 11/07/1989 11624 PLot PLan 11624 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group i 161/1ZO/the Vault 161 11/09/1989 11607 PLot Plan 11607 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group ! 161/120/The Vault 161 11/15/1989 11620 Plot PLan 11620 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 Group ] 161/120/The Vault 161 11/20/1989 11609 PLot Plan 11609 20324 0012 Film 3821N1AO001 GroupZ 161/120/The Vault RRDESTY..,RR061 City of TemecuLa Page 4 09/]0/199/* FiLes Ready for Destruction 10:33:30 Dou Ztem Rat. FiLe Reference # Storage 14edje Ref. Date Ref. Brief Description Cede Security CLass Storage Location Location Reference 161 11/21/1989 11622 PLot PLan 11622 2032/* 0012 FiLm 38211~1A0001 Group Z 161/120/The VauLt 161 11/29/1989 116~ PLOt PLan 1164/* 2032/* 0012 FiLm 38Z1N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 11/]0/1989 116~2 Plot PLan 11642 2032/, 0012 FiLm 38211~1A0001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 11/30/1989 11654 PLot PLan 1165/* 20324 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 11/]0/1989 1168~ PLot PLan 11684 2032/* 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/the Vault 161 12/05/1989 5702 PLot PLan 5702 2032/* 0011 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 12/08/1989 116~5 PLot PLan 11665 2032/* 0012 FiLm 3821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 12/08/1989 11666 PLot PLan 11666 2032/* 0012 film ]821H1AO001 Group 161/120/The vault 161 12/11/1989 11669 PLot PLan 11669 2032/* 0012 film ]821M1AO001 Group 161/120/the VauLt 161 12/1]/1989 11681 PLot PLan 11681 2032/, 0012 FiLm ]BZ1N1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt 161 01/10/1990 11685 PLot PLan 11685 2032/* 0012 FiLm ]821t~1AO001 Group 161/120/The VauLt Records Processed ITEM 9 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer October 11, 1994 Vehicle Purchase For Fire Inspector PREPARED BY: Luci Romero, Financial Services Administrator RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the purchase of an extended cab pick-up truck from Paradise Chevrolet. The purchase price is $12,791.71, excluding tax. DISCUSSION: On September 20, 1994, the City Council authorized the award of a bid to Paradise Chevrolet for a two-door extended cab two-wheel drive pick-up truck for the Community Services Department (TCSD). Given that the Fire Department desires to purchase the same type of vehicle as the TCSD vehicle, this vehicle may also be acquired through Paradise Chevrolet. Paradise Chevrolet will honor the bid amount for the additional vehicle. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds to purchase the vehicle were approved in the FY 1994-95 Fire Department budget. ITEM 10 APPROVAL ~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: ~. , DATE: S U BJ E CT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Joseph Kicak, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 11, 1994 Authorize Reduction in Faithful Performance Bond Amount in Tract No. 25004-1. PREPARED BY: 7~ Albert Crisp, Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council AUTHORIZE a fifty (50) percent reduction in Faithful Performance Street, Drainage, Water, and Sewer improvement bond amounts, ACCEPT the Faithful Performance Improvement bond rider in the reduced amount in Tract No. 25004-1, and DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. BACKGROUND: On August 25,1992, the City Council approved Tract No. 25004-1, and entered into subdivision agreements with: JLD Properties, a California General Partnership 22865 Lake Forest Drive, El Toro, CA 92630 for the improvement of streets and drainage, installation of sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued by Developers Insurance Company as follows: Bond No. 229848Sin the amount of $762,500($465,500, $155,500,and $141,500, respectively) to cover street, water, and sewer improvements. Bond No. 229848S in the amount of $382,000 ($233,000, $78,000, and $71,000, respectively) to cover labor and materials for street, water, and sewer improvements. 3. Bond No. 229834S in the amount of $20,900 to cover subdivision monumentation. Public Works Staff has inspected and verified the percentage of public improvements completed, and has reviewed the status of water and sewer improvements with the Eastern Municipal Water District. The Public Works Department therefore recommends a fifty (50) percent reduction ($381,250) in the Faithful Performance Bond amounts. The remaining amount is sufficient to cover both the remaining work and provide the minimum warranty bond level of ten (10%) of the original Faithful Performance bond amounts. Therefore, it is appropriate to reduce the Faithful Performance Bond amount as follows: Street, Water, and Sewer Improvements. $381,250 The subdivider is therefore submitting a Faithful Performance Bond Rider in the following reduced amount: Streets, Water, and Sewer Improvements Bond No. 229848S $381,250 There are no reductions or releases permitted in the Monumentation Bond or Labor and Materials Bond until all work is completed or until the lien period following City Council acceptance of the improvements has expired. All releases and reductions are authorized by City Council action. The affected streets, although not completed nor accepted, are Diego Drive, Andrews Way, Suzi Lane, Chandler Drive, and portions of Jons Place, Seraphina Road, Crishelle Lane, Eriks Court, and Orion Road. Attachments: Location Map Public Improvement Bond Rider (on file) n%agdq~\'g)4\lOll%u*2~O04-10~30/ac TRACT ~_~~ ~ No. 25004-1 VICINITY ~AP NO SCALE TRACT NO. 25004-1 ~) - Location Map ITEM 11 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Joseph Kicak, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 11, 1994 Substitute Subdivision ImprovementAgreement and Public Improvement Bonds in Tract No. 21067 PREPARED BY: ~4J/~ bert Crisp, AI Permit Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council ACCEPT the substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Faithful Performance and Labor and Material Bonds for Street, Drainage, Water and Sewer Improvements, and Subdivision Monumentation Bond in Tract No. 21067, and DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. BACKGROUND: On September 18, 1991, the City Council approved Tract Map No. 21067, and entered into subdivision agreements with: Kingsway Construction Corporation 2650 Camino Del Rio North San Diego, CA 92108 for the improvement of streets and drainage, installation of sewer and water systems, and subdivision monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued by Insurance Company of the West as follows: Bond No. 117 85 65 in the amount of $1,571,500 ($1,255,500, $149,500, and $166,500, respectively) to cover faithful performance for street, water and sewer improvements. Bond No. 117 85 65 in the amount of $785,750 ($628,000, $75,000, and $82,750, respectively) to cover labor and materials for street, water and sewer improvements. 3. Bond No. 117 85 66 in the amount of $31,284to cover subdivision monumentation. r:\egd~pt~94~lO11%tr21067 09281ac Kingsway Construction Corporation subsequently lost control of the site. The new developer for the subdivision is: Santa Barbara 86 (Westmark Communities, Inc., General Partner) One Columbia Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 and they have submitted replacement agreements and securities for the contractual work. Replacement surety bonds have been posted by the same surety, Insurance Company of the West, under the same bond numbers and in the same amounts as the original documents. The contractual eighteen (18) month period for completion of the work under the original agreement expired March 18, 1993. It is Staff's recommendation that the new developer, Santa Barbara 86 (Westmark Communities, Inc.) be granted an eighteen (18) month construction completion period as set forth in the Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Section 20-"Time for Completion of Work/Time Extensions). The contractual completion date would become April 11, 1996. The affected streets, although not completed nor accepted, are Trotsdale Drive, Canterfield Drive, Rein Court, Muirfield Drive, and portions of Jedediah Smith Road and Temecula Lane. Attachment: Location Map Substitute Public Improvement Bonds (on file) Substitute Agreement (on file) r:\egdmt\94~1011\tr21067 O9281ac VICINITY MAP HO ~rALF, 13. .t3,, e w TRACT NO. 21067 Location Map ITEM 12 "APPROVAL ~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Joe Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer (Interim) October 11, 1994 Solicitation of Construction Bids and Approval of the Plans and Specifications for the Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements, (Project No. PW94-03) PREPARED BY: ~ Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for Project No. PW94-03, Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements. BACKGROUND: During the design of the Winchester Road Bridge Widening project, staff received numerous concerns from the public regarding the traffic congestion on Winchester Road from Jefferson Avenue to Ynez Road. Several alternatives were developed to alleviate some of the congestion in this area. Three alternatives were chosen to be completed prior to the Winchester Road Bridge Widening project. One, is to remove the dip section on the east side of Jefferson Avenue at Winchester Road; two, is to interconnect Caltrans traffic signals with the City's traffic signal at Winchester Road and Jefferson Avenue; and three, to add an additional traffic lane on Winchester Road between Jefferson Avenue and the I-15 south bound on-ramp. The first two alternatives have been completed. The third alternative, is the proposed Winchester Road Interim Street Improvements, Project PW94-03. This project will widen the south side of Winchester Road between Jefferson Avenue and the I-15 south bound on-ramp, which will create an exclusive east bound right turn lane onto the south bound I-15. Also, the north side of Winchester Road will be widened to provide for a smother transition from the south bound I-15 off-ramp going west on Winchester Road. The existing traffic signal will be modified to provide for these widenings and the landscaping and irrigation will be installed adjacent to the proposed street improvements. These improvements will be constructed to their ultimate locations and no modifications will be needed during the Winchester Road Bridge Widening project. The plans, specifications end contract documents have been completed and the project is ready to be advertised for construction. The estimated construction cost for this project is $230,000. The Consultant has obtained the encroachment permit and approval of the plans from Caltrans. These plans are available for review in the City Engineer's office. FISCAL IMPACT: The project is being funded from Measure A. -:2- r:~agdrpt\94\lOl l~pw~4-O~.bid]ajp ITEM 13 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL ~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager 'Joseph Kicak, Interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 11, 1994 Walcott Corridor Improvements, Project No. PW94-10, Rancho California Water District Funding Request RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council deny the request by Rancho California Water District to use City funds to relocate an existing waterline within existing street right-of-way. BACKGROUND: The City has begun the design process on the Walcott Corridor. The project includes grading and paving for interim two (2) lane road on Walcott Lane, Calle Girasol, Calle Chapos and Nicolas Road. During the preliminary planning and alignment stages of the project it was determined that portions of Walcott Lane would have to be lowered to provide for vehicle site distance. This vertical grade change will require underground utilities to be relocated. Subsequently Rancho California Water District (RCWD) was contacted to give them the option of including the necessary pipeline relocation work with the road improvement plans.. RCWD has requested that a portion of the pipeline relocation cost be considered in the overall road project being funded by the City. RCWD recognizes that utilities have a subordinate right to the public right-of-way, however they believe that those constituents deriving the benefit of the project should pay for the facilities. The pipeline on Walcott Lane was recently constructed and the cost to relocate it is approximately $585,000of which approximately $195,000are considered new improvements to be constructed at the new connection of Walcott Lane and La Serena Way and would be funded by RCWD. The balance of $390,000 is considered by RCWD as a cost to the road project and is requesting the City fund this construction. RCWD has been very cooperative in the coordination of previous City Capital Projects and is requesting consideration in developing a mutually beneficial agreement in the construction of the proposed road improvements. Legally, all public utilities which are located within the public right-of-way and do not have prior rights must be relocated when they conflict with project being performed by the City. - 1 - r:\agd rpt~94\ 1011 ~w94-10 .agn/ajp RCWD is requesting release from that section of the code. This release could set a precedent for future City projects by significantly increasing the cost and preparation time for each City project. It should also be anticipated that other utilities will expect the same relief. FISCAL IMPACT: The Walcott Corridor is included in the Capital Improvement Program and is being funded by Measure A Funds. The request by RCWD would add approximately $390,000to the overall cost of the project. Attachment: Sketch -2- r:\agdrpt\94\1011\pw94-10.agn/ajp Improvement Corridor along Waleott Lane. LalSerena -- SCOPE OF WORK: 500feet of 30" iransmission main extended to La SereniL ITEM 14 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL: City Council/City Manager Anthony Elmo, Chief Building OfficiallY' October 11, 1994 Approval of Contract Services Agreements RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve contract service agreements for Esgil Corporation, Vandorpe Chou Associates, Ray Grage and Associates and Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, to provide building plan check services to the Building and Safety Department. DISCUSSION: On September 27, 1994, the City Council approved an award of contract to the Esgil Corporation, Vandorpe Chou Associates, Ray Grage and Associates and Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates. Due to the fact that plan check services are provided to the City on an as needed basis and compensated as a percentage of fees collected by the City, the City's standard 3rofessional services contract was modified to more directly address these services and com 9ensation arrangements. V:\TONY\AGSNDA\PLANCHCK.REV 1015194 tda AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 13th day of September, 1994, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and VandorDe Chou Associates, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Contractor." The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: I. SERVICES: Contractor shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A. 2. PERFORMANCE: Contractor shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. 3. PAYMENT: The City agrees to pay Contractor as set forth in Exhibit B. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. SUSPENSION. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMENT: The City may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. Within thirty-five (35) days after receiving an invoice from the Contractor, the City shall pay Contractor for work done through the date that work is to be ceased pursuant to this section. If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement such suspension, termination or abandonment shall make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. BREACH OF CONTRACT: In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default. Default shall include not performing the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of the City Failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance work hereunder, if such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, shall not be considered a default. -2- If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor defaults in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have ten ( 1 O) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor 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. 6. TERM: This Agreement shall commence on September 13, 1994, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than JUne 30, 1995. Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Contractor arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final. Contractor shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1280, et seo. City and Contractor shall share the cost of the arbitration equally. 10. NOTICE: Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590 and the Contractor Neil Evans, Vandoroe Chou Associates. Inc.. 295 Rampart Street. Orange. California 92668 unless and until different addresses may be furnished in writing by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have been served seventy-two (72) hours after the same has been deposited in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient service of notice for all purposes. 11. ASSIGNMENT: the Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be the value to the City of the services rendered. -5- 12. LIABILITY INSURANCE: The Contractor shall maintain insurance acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this contract, 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 Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid. The Contractor shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance: A. Minimum ScoPe of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001 ). 2. Insurance Services Office form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, code I "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025. 3. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the State of California, an Employer's Liability insurance. 4.Errors and Omissions insurance. -6- Minimum Limits of Insurance: Contractor shall maintain limits of insurance no less than: 1. General Liability $500,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. 2. Automobile Liability: $500,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Worker's Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $500,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000 must be declared to and approved by the City. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions: Insurance policies required by this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: a. All Policies: Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) day's prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail. b. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coveraae: The City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to -7- be covered as insureds as respects: Liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. With regard to claims arising from the Contractor's performance of the work described in this contract, the Contractor's insured coverage shall be primary insured as respects the City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance of self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the Contractor's insurance. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect the limits of the insurers liability. Worker's Compensation and Emclover's Liability Coverage: The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the 13. City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the City. Verification of Coveraae: Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. the certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. Contractor shall include all subcontracts as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnity and hold harmless the City and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising our of or resulting from the Contractor's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract. -9- The City shall indemnify and hold harmless VANDORPE CHOU and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from the City's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract. 14. FREEDOM FROM LIABILITY: The Contractor and Contractor staff, when performing duties as representative of the City, shall have the freedom from liability contained in the applicable section pertaining to the powers and duties of the building official of the most recent adopted edition of the California Building Code. 15. FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY: The City's Chief Building Official shall have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the Contractor and all work performed by the Contractor shall be to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the Contractor's interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed appropriate, the resources of the City Attorney and/or the Board of Appeals. 16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. -10~ In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CONTRACTOR By: Nell Evans. Vandorpe Chou Associates, Inc. CITY OF TEMECULA By: Ron Roberts, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney A I I EST: June S. Greek, City Clerk -11- EXHIBIT "A" TASKS TO BE PERFORMED PLAN CHECKING Provide a complete plan check service to the City of Temecula including analysis for compliance with the City's adopted uniform codes as follows: Building code requirement including: Requirements based upon type of occupancy; Requirements based upon type of construction; Engineering regulations including seismic loads; Detailed regulations of construction; Fire resistive standards for fire protection; Fire and life safety requirements; Accessibility for the physically handicapped. National Electrical Code requirements Uniform Plumbing Code requirements Title 24 energy conservation compliance City's amendments to the uniform codes Repetitive plan checks Review site plan Review soils reports Review foundation plans for conformance with soils report EXHIBIT "A" PROPOSED FEES Individual building plans: Recheck$: Partial plan checks: VanDorpe Chou Associates proposes to provide code consulting in accordance with the following fees: BLr~D]NG PLAN CHECK 65 % of the plan check fee collected by the City. Rechecks re included in the basic fee. Partial plan checks are individually negotiated. Generally, structural plan check only is 40 percent of the basic fee, energy plan check only is 15 percent of the basic fee. Other partial plan checks would be similarly charged. Preliminm'y Plan Check: There is no charge for preliminary plan check; it is included in our plan check fee. Repetitive plans: 15% of the fee charged for the first building type. Revisions: Revisions to previously checked plans are performed on an hourly basis at a rate of $50.00 per hour. Delivery: Pick-up and delivery costs arc included in our fee. Some jurisdictions send plans to us by United Parcel Service. ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL PLAN CHECK Plan checks are performed at 75 percent of the electrical and mechanical permit fees or on an hourly basis at a rate of $50.00 per hour. ADDITIONAL WORK Any additional work not included in the basic services listed above will be performed at an hourly rate of $50.00 per hour. CITY OF TEMECULA PROPOSED AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 13th day of September, 1994, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Ray Graoe & Associates, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor." The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: I. SERVICES: Contractor shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A. 2. PERFORMANCE: Contractor shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. 3. PAYMENT: The City agrees to pay Contractor as set forth in Exhibit B. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor defaults in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default, The Contractor 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 Contractor 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. 6. TERM: This Agreement shall commence on September 13, 1994, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 1995. Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Contractor arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration, The arbitrator's decision shall be final, Contractor shall select an arbitrator from a list provided.by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1280, et see. City and Contractor shall share the cost of the arbitration equally, -3- OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS: Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension of abandonment of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Contractor. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: The Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent Contractor. It is expressly understood and agreed that Contractor shall in no event as a result of this contract be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled, including, but not limited to, overtime, any retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, and injury leave or other leave benefits, and for such purposes shall be deemed an independent Contractor. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES: The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal 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 Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the contractor to comply with this section. -4- 10. NOTICE: Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590 and the Contractor Rav Graee. Principal, Ray Grage & Associates. 110 S. Main St.. Lake Elsinore, California 92530 unless and until different addresses may be furnished in writing by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have been served seventy-two (72) hours after the same has been deposited in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient service of notice for all purposes. 11. ASSIGNMENT: the Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be the value to the City of the services rendered. -5- 12. LIABILITY INSURANCE: The Contractor shall maintain insurance acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this contract, 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 Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid. The Contractor shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance: A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001 ). 2. Insurance Services Office form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, code I "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025. 3. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the State of California, an Employer's Liability insurance. 4.Errors and Omissions insurance. -6- B. Contractor shall maintain limits of Minimum Limits of Insurance: insurance no less than: 1. General Liability $500,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. 2. Automobile Liability: $500,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Worker's Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $ 500,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence, Deductibles and Self~Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000 must be declared to and approved by the City. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions: Insurance policies required by this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: a. All Policies: Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) day's prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail. General Liability and Automobile LiabiliW Coverage: The City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to -7- be covered as insureds as respects: Liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. With regard to claims arising from the Contractor's performance of the work described in this contract, the Contractor's insured coverage shall be primary insured as respects the City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance of self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the Contractor's insurance. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect the limits of the insurers liability. Worker's Compensation and Emolover's Liability Coverage: The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the -8- 13. City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the City. d. Verification of Coverage: Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. the certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. Contractor shall include all subcontracts as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising our of or resulting from the Contractor's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract. -9- The City shall indemnify and hold harmless Ray Grage & Associates and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from the City's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract. 14. FREEDOM FROM LIABILITY: The Contractor and Contractor staff, when performing duties as representative of the City, shall have the freedom from liability contained in the applicable section pertaining to the powers and duties of the building official, of the most recent adopted edition of the California Building Code. 15. FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY: The City's Chief Building Official shall have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the Contractor and all work performed by the Contractor shall be to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the Contractor's interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed appropriate, the resources of the City Attorney and/or the Board of Appeals. 16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. -10- In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CONTRACTOR By: Ray Grage, Ray Grage & Assicates CITY OF TEMECULA By: Ron Roberts, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney A~'I'EST: June S. Greek, City Clerk -11- EXHIBIT "A" TASKS TO BE PERFORMED PLAN CHECKING Provide a complete plan check service to the City of Temecula including analysis for compliance with the City's adopted uniform codes as follows: Building code requirement including: Requirements based upon type of occupancy; Requirements based upon type of construction; Engineering regulations including seismic loads; Detailed regulations of construction; Fire resistlye standards for fire protection; Fire and life safety requirements; Accessibility for the physically handicapped. National Electrical Code requirements Uniform Plumbing Code requirements Title 24 energy conservation compliance City's amendments to the uniform codes Repetitive plan checks Review site plan Review soils reports Review foundation plans for conformance with soils report EXHIBIT "A" EXHIBIT B Fee Proposal Our fee for providing Structural Plan Checking Services to the City of Temecula, as described in our Service Proposal on page 2, will be fifty-two percent (52 % ) of the building permit fee as established in Table No. 3-A "Building Permit Fees" in the 1991 Uniform Building Code (Appendix B). The building v~uation will be based on the City of Temecula Building Valuation Data (Appendix C). Building plans that have been revised or changed from the original submittal will be required to be resubmitted to the City of Temecula. The extent of the revisions, and the mount of time involved correcting the revisions, will be discussed and mutually agreed upon by the building director of the City of Temecula and Ray Grage and Associates. At the request of the Building Director of the City of Temecula, Ray Grage and Associates will be willing to meet with clients to discuss corrections or revisions. Services other than those shown in Services Proposal, that may be requested by the City of Temecula, will be billed per attached rote schedule. Rate Schedule Principal Engineer ................................... $95.00 Per Hour Principal Architect ................................... $95.00 Per Hour Engineer ......................................... $65.00 Per Hour Architect '. ........................................ $65.00 Per Hour ' Plan Checker ...................................... $50.00 Per Hour Building Inspector ................................... $50.00 Per Hour Clerical ......................................... $27.00 Per Hour Travel ........................................... $.27 Per Mile Outside Consulting Services .............................. Cost Plus 15 % Printing and Copies ................................... Cost Plus 15 % Items not listed are to be negotiated AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 13th day of Seotember, 1994, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and EsQil Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor." The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: I. SERVICES: Contractor shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A. 2. PERFORMANCE: Contractor shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. 3. PAYMENT: The City agrees to pay Contractor as set forth in Exhibit B. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor defaults in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor 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 Contractor 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. 6. TERM: This Agreement shall commence on September 13, 1994, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 1995. Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Contractor arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final. Contractor shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1280, et sea. City and Contractor shall share the cost of the arbitration equally. -3- OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS: Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension of abandonment of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Contractor. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: The Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent Contractor. It is expressly understood and agreed that Contractor shall in no event as a result of this contract be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled, including, but not limited to, overtime, any retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, and injury leave or other leave benefits, and for such purposes shall be deemed an independent Contractor. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES: The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal 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 Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the contractor to comply with this section. -4- 10. NOTICE: Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590 and the Contractor Richard Esqate, President. ESGIL Corporation. 9320 Chesapeake Drive. #208. San Dieao, California 92123 unless and until different addresses may be furnished in writing by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have been served seventy-two (72) hours after the same has been deposited in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient service of notice for all purposes. 11. ASSIGNMENT: the Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be the value to the City of the services rendered. -5- 12. LIABILITY INSURANCE: The Contractor shall maintain insurance acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this contract, 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 Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid. The Contractor shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance: Minimum Scooe of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001 ). 2. Insurance Services Office form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025. 3. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the State of California, an Employer's Liability insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions insurance. -6- Minimum Limits of Insurance: Contractor shall maintain limits of insurance no less than: 1. General Liability $500,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. 2. Automobile Liability: $ 500,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Worker's Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $500,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000 per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000 must be declared to and approved by the City. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions: Insurance policies required by this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: a. All Policies: Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) day's prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail. b. General Liabilitv and Automobile Liability CoveraQe: The City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to -7- be covered as insureds as respects: Liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. With regard to claims arising from the Contractor's performance of the work described in this contract, the Contractor's insured coverage shall be primary insured as respects the City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance of self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the Contractor's insurance. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect the limits of the insurers liability. Worker's Comoensation and Emolover's Liability Coverage: The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the -8- 13. City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the City. d. Verification of Coveraae: Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. the certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. Contractor shall include all subcontracts as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnih/and hold harmless the City and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising our of or resulting from the Contractor's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract. -9- The City shall indemnify and hold harmless ESGIL and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from the City's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract. 14. FREEDOM FROM LIABILITY: The Contractor and Contractor staff, when performing duties as representative of the City, shall have the freedom from liability contained in the applicable section pertaining to the powers and duties of the building official, of the most recent adopted edition of the California Building Code. 15. FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY: The City's Chief Building Official shall have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the Contractor and all work performed by the Contractor shall be to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the Contractor's interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed appropriate, the resources of the City Attorney and/or the Board of Appeals. 16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. -10- In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CONTRACTOR By: Richard Esgate, ESGIL Corporation CITY OF TEMECULA By: Ron Roberts, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney A]'I'EST: June S. Greek, City Clerk -11- EXHIBIT "A" TASKS TO BE PERFORMED PLAN CHECKING Provide a complete plan check service to the City of Temecula including analysis for compliance with the City's adopted uniform codes as follows: Building code requirement including: Requirements based upon type of occupancy; Requirements based upon type of construction; Engineering regulations including seismic loads; Detailed regulations of construction; Fire resistive standards for fire protection; Fire and life safety requirements; Accessibility for the physically handicapped. National Electrical Code requirements Uniform Plumbing Code requirements Title 24 energy conservation compliance City's amendments to the uniform codes Repetitive plan checks Review site plan Review soils reports Review foundation plans for conformance with soils report EXHIBIT "A" v:\Tony\Agenda\Ag~5-95.Esgil ~:.IUlBIT B ESGIL CORPORATION'S FEE SCHEDULE FOR PROPOSED SERVICES IN RESPONSE TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA RFP DATED APRIL 12, 1994 COMPLETE PLAN REVIEW: Esgil Corporation's fee shall be 52% of the Permit Fee calculated per Section 304 or the latest published edition of the Uniform Building Code for each building plan reviewed. The construction valuation shall be based on the most recent valuation multiplier published by the International Conference of Building Officials in Buildinq Standards, or on the architects estimated construction cost, or on the Building Official's cost estimate. Not withstanding the above, the minimum contractor fee for a plan review shall be one hundred dc~Ilars ($100.00). Plan review fee for repetitive identical buildings shall be 52% of the permit fee as noted above for the first, or basic building, and 10% of the permit fee as noted above for each repetitive building. The single fee includes all rechecks and there are no additional charges for preliminary plan review conferences at our office, expedited processing, reviewing plans that are eventually found to be incomplete or for the pick-up and delivery of plans or for meetings with the Building Official at his/her request. PARTIAL PLAN REVIEW: Partial plan reviews are discouraged due to the need to coordinate all disciplines in a plan review, however, the fees for partial plan review when requested are: 1. Basic minimum for any plan review: 35% of UBC Building Permit fee 2. Structural only 6% additional 3. Fire-Life 6% additional 4. · U..P.C. 1% additional 5. N.E.C. 1% additional 6. U.M.C. 1% additional 7. 'title 24 Energy and Sound Control 1% additional 8. Title 24 Disabled Access 1% additional Total: 52% of UBC fee PLAN REVIEW OF REVISIONS TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANS: Revisions to previously approved plans will be at Esgil Corporation's published houdy rates shown on the "Labor Rates Schedule," enclosed. We use our preferred rate schedule in Temecula. AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1 ;~;h day of September, 1994, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Robert Bein/William Frost & Associates . hereinafter referred to as "Contracto r." The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: I. SERVICES: Contractor shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. Contractor shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A. 2. PERFORMANCE: Contractor shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein. 3. PAYMENT: The City agrees to pay Contractor as set forth in Exhibit B. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor defaults in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor 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 Contractor 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. 6. TERM: This Agreement shall commence on Sectember 13, 1994, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30. 1995. Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Contractor arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final. Contractor shall select an arbitrator from a list provided.by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1280, et sea. City and Contractor shall share the cost of the arbitration equally. -3- OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS: Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension of abandonment of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Contractor. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: The Contractor is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent Contractor. It is expressly understood and agreed that Contractor shall in no event as a result of this contract be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled, including, but not limited to, overtime, any retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, and injury leave or other leave benefits, and for such purposes shall be deemed an independent Contractor. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES: The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal 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 Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the contractor to comply with this section. -4- 10. NOTICE: Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice on the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590 and the Contractor Bill Green, Robert BeinRVilliam Frost 28765 Sinale Oak Dr.. Temecula, California 92590 unless and until different addresses may be furnished in writing by either party to the other. Notice shall be deemed to have been served seventy- two (72) hours after the same has been deposited in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and sufficient service of notice for all purposes. 11. ASSIGNMENT: the Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the prior written consent of the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Contractor's sole compensation shall be the value to the City of the services rendered. -5- 12. LIABILITY INSURANCE: The Contractor shall maintain insurance acceptable to the City in full force and effect throughout the term of this contract, 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 Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid. The Contractor shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance: Minimum Scope Of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (ed. 1/73) covering Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001 ). 2. Insurance Services Office form No. CA 0003 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025. 3. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the State of California, an Employer's Liability insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions insurance. B. Contractor shall maintain limits of Minimum Limits of Insurance: insurance no less than: 1. General Liability 9500,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. 2. Automobile Liability: 9500,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Worker's Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of 9500,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: 91,000,000 per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of 91,000 must be declared to and approved by the City. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions: Insurance policies required by this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: a. All Policies: Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) day's prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail. b. General Liability and Automobile Liabilitv Coverage: The City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to -7- be covered as insureds as respects: Liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the contractor, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. With regard to claims arising from the Contractor's performance of the work described in this contract, the Contractor's insured coverage shall be primary insured as respects the City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance of self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the Contractor's insurance. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect the limits of the insurers liability. Worker's Comoensation and Emplover's Liability Coverage: The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the -8- 13. City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Contractor for the City. d. Verification of Coveraae: Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. the certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. Contractor shall include all subcontracts as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising our of or resulting from the Contractor's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract. The City shall indemnify and hold harmless Ray Grage & Associates and its agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising out of or resulting from the City's acts or omissions pursuant to this contract. 14. FREEDOM FROM LIABILITY: The Contractor and Contractor staff, when performing duties as representative of the City, shall have the freedom from liability contained in the applicable section pertaining to the powers and duties of the building official, of the most recent adopted edition of the California Building Code. 15. FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY: The City's Chief Building Official shall have final decision authority over the results of the plan check by the Contractor and all work performed by the Contractor shall be to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. In instances where the permit applicant takes exception to the Contractor's interpretation of the regulations contained in Title 24, the Building Official shall render a final decision utilizing, as deemed appropriate, the resources of the City Attorney and/or the Board of Appeals. 16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. -10- In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CONTRACTOR CITY OF TEMECULA By: By: Bill Green, Robert Bein/William Frost Ron Roberts, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney A ~ ~ EST: June S. Greek, City Clerk -11- EXHIBIT "A" TASKS TO BE PERFORMED PLAN CHECKING Provide a complete plan check service to the City of Temecula including analysis for compliance with the City's adopted uniform codes as follows: Building code requirement including: Requirements based upon type of occupancy; Requirements based upon type of construction; Engineering regulations including seismic loads; Detailed regulations of construction; Fire resistive standards for fire protection; Fire and life safety requirements; Accessibility for the physically handicapped. Na~iona~ Electrical Code requirements Uniform Plumbing Code requirements Title 24 energy conservation compliance City's amendments to the uniform codes Repetitive plan checks Review site plan Review soils reports Review foundation plans for conformance with soils report EXHIBIT "A" EXHIBIT B FRF~ PROPOSAL FOR STRUCTURAL PLAN CHF_EKING SERVICES CrrY OF TK, VIEEULA BUII.nlNG AND SAFETY J.N. 400670 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates is prepared to undertake the activities outlined in the "Scol~ of Services" according to the following proposed m~hod of compensation or as otherwise negotiated with the Chief Building Official and/or City Manager. For the performance of services as outlines, RBF proposes to base the professional fees for the Building and Safety Plan Checking services on fifty percent (50%) of the Building Perink Fee collected by the Building Department. This will assure the City that no costs will be incurred for the operation of contract Building Official services. For the performance of other Consultant Services described in the proposal, RBF proposes to bill based on the attached Hou~y Rate Schedule. This proposal is for the exclusive benefit of the City of Temecula and represents a proposal for Scope of Services at the mutually agreed upon compensation. ROBERT BEIN, WIllJAM FROST & ASSOCIATES EXI4mIT B ROBERT BEIN, W~'J,IAM FROST & ASSOCIATES HOURLY RATE SCI43~tTI,E JULY 1, 1994 - ~tYNE 30, 1996 CITY OF TP. NIECULA Classification Fee Rate Buildin2 Chief Building Official Structural Engineer Plan Checker Engineer Plan Examiner Senior Inspector Building Technician Building Inspector Permit Specialist $110 $98 $85 $63 $75 $50 $60 $45 Landscape Architecture Senior Landscape Architect Assistant Landscape Architect $68 $52 Computer Services Computer Aided Design and Drafting(CADD) Computer Data Entry Computer Time $60 $38 $15 Other Word Processing $35 Consultation in connection with litigation and court appearances will be quoted separately. Blueprinting reproduction and other direct expenses will be charged at cost. The above schedule is for straight time. Overtime will charged at 1.25 times the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will charged at 1.50 times the standard hourly rates or as negotiated. The foregoing wage rates are effective through June 30, 1996. The rates may be adjusted after that date to compensate for labor adjustments and other increases in other costs. ITEM 15 ORDINANCE NO. 94-25 AN ORDINANCE OF T!:IF. CITY COUNCIL OF THE C[r!~ OF TEMF, CXI,A MODIFYING SECTION G (1.) OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 457.73 ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY TB'E CITY OF TEIVIF_,CULA IN ORDINANCE NO. 90-04. TO CHANGE TRF. HOURS AND DAYS DURING WHICH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS THE CITY COLrNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HERFRY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findings: That the Temecula City Council hereby wakes the following findings; A. That it is the mission of the City of Temecula to maintain a safe, clean, healthy and orderly community; B. That it is necessary to re-examine the regulations relating to the days and times in which construction activity is undertaken; C. That it is necessary, pending conduct of such study and enactment of regulations based thereon, that medifications to Section G (1 .), of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73 be imposed pending the completion of such study; D. That if such moratorium were not imposed current regulations may compromise the public health, safety, welfare and quality of life. SECTION 2. That notwithstanding any provision of the City of Temecula Ordinance No. 90-04, and specifically Section G (1) of Riverside County Ordinance No. 457.73, during such time as this ordinance is in full force and effect, no person shall engage in or conduct construction activity, when the construction site is within one-quarter (1/4) of a mile of an occupied residence, between the hours of 6:30 P.M. and 6:30 A.M., Monday through Friday and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 6:30 P.M., on Saturday. Further, no construction activity shall be undertaken on Sunday and nationally recognized holidays. Public Works projects of any federal, state or local entity or emergency work by public utilities are exempt from the provisions of this ordinance. Residents working on their homes or property are exempt from the prohibition of construction activities on Sundays and holidays but must comply with the hourly restrictions set forth for Saturday when working on Sundays and holidays. The City Council may, by formal action, exempt projects from the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason held to be invalid, or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or portion thereof regardless of whether such other section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or portion thereof regardless of whether such other section, be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. This is an urgency ordinance adopted pursuant to Section 36934 and 36937(b) and shall take effect upon its adoption. This ordinance is adopted as an urgency ordinance because the same is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety. The facts constituting the urgency are set forth in Section 1 and in that uncontrolled periods when construction activity may currently be undertaken may impact negatively on the quality of urban life and therefore this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this __th day of ,1994. ATTEST: Ron Roberrs, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALII~ORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMF_,CULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temeeula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 94-25 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day of August, 1994 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of September, 1994, by the following vote: CO~CILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: CO~C~MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk Otds\94-25 3 ITEM 16 ORDINANCE NO. 9428 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 10,36 TO THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE REGULATION OF NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF 'rP_AVlECULA DOES I-IF~.RY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. as follows: Chapter 10.36 is hereby added to the Temecula Municil~l Cede to read CHAFFER 10,36 REGULATION OF NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY 10,36,010 10,36,020, 10,36.030, 10.36,040, 10,36,050, 10.36.060, 10,36.070, 10,36,080, 10.36,090, 10.36.100, 10.36,110, 10,36,120, PURPOSES AND INTENT. DEFINITIONS. REGULATIONS, I~EqTRICTIONS, AND PROCEDURES I~EL&TING TO NEWSRACKS. NEWSRACK PERMITS, PROHIBITION OF NEWSRACKS ON ROADWAYS, DANGEROUS CONDITIONS OR OBSTRUCTIONS, STANDARDS FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSTALI.ATION. STANDARDS OF MATERIALS SOLD, INFORMATION REQUI~Er}, NEWSRACKS IN VIOLATION OF THE REGULATIONS OF THIS CHAPTER, APPEALS, RESTRICTION OF DISPLAYED HARMFUL MATTER TO MINORS, 10.36.010 PURPOSES AND INTENT. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. It is the purpose and intent of this Chapter to provide for a reasonable and uniform regulation of newsracks in the City of Temecula. The uncontrolled placement and maintenance of newsracks on the public right-of-way unreasonably interferes with and obstructs the public's use of such rights-of-way and such obstruction of the free use of Orda\94-28 -1- property interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life and property by the entire community. B. The prolifera~on of newsracks on public rights-of-way to display words and pictorial material describing and depicting explicit sexual conduct and nudity, exposes children, minors and unwilling adults to such material, unreasonably interferes with the public's use of such right-of-ways, and constitutes unwarranted invasions of individual privacy. C. The Temecula General Plan policies and programs emphasize the importance of maintaining the aesthetic quality of the City and preventing the uncontrolled proliferation of signs and structures throughout the City. The regulations set forth in this Chapter are appropriate and reasonable regulations to protect the aesthetic values of the City and the health and safety of persons in the City of Temecula. The placement of newsracks which do not comply with the regulations set forth in this Chapter is detrimental to the aesthetic values of the City and the health and safety of the persons within the City. D. It is recognized that the use of rights-of-way is historically associated with the sale and distribution of newspapers and publications and that access to these areas for such purposes should not be absolutely denied. E. The protection and preservation of public health, safety and welfare requires that certain distance and height restrictions be placed on newsracks to insure the safety of pedestrians using the sidewalks and the safe flow of traffic on streets. F. Government agencies and utilities receive numerous claims from persons alleging injury due to the improper placement and maintenance of objects in the public right of way, such as power poles, light standards, signals, signal control boxes, newsracks, trees and similar objects. It is therefore necessary for the City to obtain some protection for such claims from private parties who will place objects in the public right of way. G. It is the purpose and intent of the special regulations for materials harmful to minors and sexual explicit material to protect and preserve the public health, safety and welfare of citizenry, especially minors, and that special regulation of the time, place and manner of the display of harmful matter and sexually explicit materials in newsracks is necessary. In adopting the regulations under this chapter, it is recognized that the display of harmful matter or sexually explicit materials in newsracks will cause the exposure of minors to adult material which, because of their immaturity, may adversely affect them. In addition, it is recognized that many persons are offended by the public display of certain sexual material. Special regulation of these uses is necessary to address these concerns. H. It is not the intent of the City Council of Temecula under this Ordinance nor any provision thereof to condone nor legitimize the distribution of obscene, harmrid to minors or sexually explicit materials, and the Council recognizes that state law prohibits the distribution of obscene and harmful to minors materials and expects and encourages law enforcement officials to enforce State Obscenity Statutes against such illegal activities in Temecula. I. It is not the intent of this Ordinance to suppress any speech activities prote~ted by the First Amendment, but to enact a content neutral ordinance and to balance prorectal activities with the n__~_ to protect the substantial governmental interests described above. 10.36.020. DEFINITIONS. The foliowing words, terms and phrases, when used in this division, shall have the meaning ascn'ibed to them in this section, unless it is apparent from the context that a different meaning is intended. A, 'Newsrack" shall mean any self-service or coin-operated box, container, storage unit, or other dispenser installed, used, or maintained for the display or sale of any written or printed material, including, but not limited to, newspapers, news periodicals, magazines, books, pictures, photographs, and records. B. 'Street* shall mean all that area dedicated to public use for public street purposes and shall include, but not be limited to, roadways, parkways, alleys, and sidewalks. C. *Parkway' shall mean that area between the sidewalk and the curb of any street and, where there is no sidewalk, that area between the edge of the roadway and the property line adjacent thereto. *Parkway" also shall include any area within a roadway which area is not a sidewaik and is not open to vehicular traffic. D. "Custodian' shall mean a person who has the responsibility of placing, servicing, or maintaining a newsra~k by depositing in and/or removing material from such newsrack and/or by collecting money from such newsrack. E. 'Harmful Matter* shall mean matter taken as a whole, the predominant appeal of which to the average person, applying contemporary statewide standards, is a prurient interest, meaning a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion, and is patently offensive to the prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable material for minors, and lacks significant literary, artistic, political, educational, or scientific value for minors as described in California Penal Code Section 313, or its successor Sections. 0t~.\94-28 A. The name, address and telephone number of the person owning the newsracks and the name, address, and telephone number of the custodian therefor. B. The location of newstacks being placed within the City. C. A written statement whereby the person who will place or maintain such newsrack on a public street agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, or employees from any loss or liability or damages, including expenses and costs, for bodily or personal injury and for property damage or other damages sustained by any person as a result of the installation, use, or maintenance of such newsrack within the City. D. A certificate of insurance establishing that there is in force and effect an insurance policy for the permittee which will remain in force during the time such newsrack is allowed to remain on public property, which policy shall be of public liability insurance against liability for the death of, or injuries to, persons or damages to property arising out of accidents attributable to the newsracks on City property. The mount of the coverage required shall be established by resolution of the City Council and a certificate of insurance shall not be required unless and until such a resolution is in full force and effect. The policy of insurance so provided shall contain a contractual liability endorsement covering the liability assumed by the permittee by the terms of his permit and shall contain a provision that such policy may not be cancelled except after thirty (30) days' notice in writing given to the City. 10.36.050. PROHIBITION OF NEWSRACKS ON ROADWAYS. No person shall instail, use, or maintain any newsrack which projects onto, into, or over any part of the roadway of any public street or which rests, wholly or in part, upon any portion of the roadway of any public street. 10.36.060. DANGEROUS CONDITIONS OR OBSTRUCTIONS. Subject to the specific provision of Section 10.36.070, no person shall install, use, or maintain any newsrack which, in whole or in part, rests upon, in, or over any public sidewalk or parkway when such installation, use, or maintenance endangers the safety of persons on property, or when such area or location is used for public utility purposes, public transportation purpose, or governmental use, or when such newsrack interferes with or impedes the flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic, including the ingress into or egress from any legally parked or stopped vehicle any residence or place of business, or the use of poles, posts, traffic signs or signals, hydrants, mailboxes, or other objects permitted at or near such location. 10.36.070. STANDARDS FOR MAINTENANCE AND INSTALLATION. Any newsrack which rests, in whole or in part, upon, in, or over any public sidewalk or parkway shall comply with the following standards: A. No newsrack shall exc_,~'d_ five (5') feet in height as measured from the sidewalk to the highest point on the newsrack, thirty (30") inches in width, or two (2') feet in depth. B Newsracks shall only be placed near a curb or adjacent to a wall or building. Such newsracks placed near the curb shall be parallel thereto and shall be no less than twenty-four (24') inches from the face of the curb. Newsracks placed adjacent to the wall of a building shall be placed parallel to such wall and shall be not more than six (6") inches from the wall. No such newsrack shall be placed or maintained on the sidewalk or parkway opposite another newsrack or group of newsracks nor in such a manner that prevents pedestrians from passing freely and without obsWuction along any sidewalk or through any marked or unmarked crosswalk- C. No publication vending shall be chained, bolted, or otherwise attached to property not owned by the owner of such newsrack or to any permanently fixed object unless the custodian of such newsrack shall have obtained the written permission of the owner of the property or object to which the newsrack is affixed. D. Newsracks may be placed next to each other; provided, however, no group of such newsracks shall extend more than eight (8) lineal feet along a curb or wall, and a space of no less than three {3') feet shall separate each such group of newsracks, provided the newsracks are otherwise in compliance with the provisions of this ordinance. E. Such newsracks may be chained or otherwise attached to one another; provided, however, no more than three (3) such newsracks may be joined Wgether in this manner, and a space of no less than three (3') feet of clear space shall separate each group of three (3) or less such newsracks so attached, pwvided the newsracks are otherwise in compliance with the pwvisions of this ordinance. F. No such newsrack or group of such newsracks permitted by the provisions of Subsection E. of this section shall weigh, in the aggregate, in excess of 125 pounds when empty. G. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, no newsrack shall be placed, installed, used, or maintained: 1. Within five (5') feet of any marked crosswalk; Within fifteen (15') feet of the curb remm of any unmarked crosswalk; 3. Within five (5') feet of any fife hydrant, fire call box, police call box, or any other emergency facility or structure; 0~h\94-28 4. Within five (5') feet of any driveway; 5. Within five (5') feet ahead of or twenty-five (25') feet to the rear of any sign marking a designated bus stop; 6. Within six (6') feet of any bus bench; 7. In any location ff the pheement of the newsrack reduces the cross space or the passageway of pedestrians to less than six (6') feet; 8. Within three (3') feet of any area improved with hwn, flowers, shrubs, or trees, or within three (3') feet of any display window or any building abutting the sidewalk or parkway, or in such a manner as to impede or interfere with the reasonable use of such window for display purposes; or H. No such newsrack shall be used for advertising signs or publicity purposes except relating to the display, sale, or purchase of the publications sold therein. I. Each such newsrack shall be maintained in a clean and neat condition and in good repair at all times. J. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, if the Chief Building Official finds that the location of a newsrack, in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section, will create or allow a condition pwhibited by any other section of this Chapter or will otherwise endanger the public health or safety, the Chief Building Official may prohibit such location of the newsrack or may allow the location of the newsrack in a manner deviating from, or at variance with, the standards provided in this Section, subject to such tens, conditions, and regulations as the Chief Building Official may deem necessary to protect the public peace, health, safety, and welfare and to carry out the purposes and int.~nt of this Chapter. Such finding may be made by the Chief Building Official at any time. 2. If such finding is made prior to the issuance of a permit, the finding shall be made by the Director of Public Works shall be made a pan of the permit at the time of its issuance. 3. If the finding is made subsequent to the issuance of a permit, a written notice of the finding of the Chief Building Official shall be given to the owner or custodian of such newsrack with the direction that there shall be compliance with the findings of the Chief Building Official within ten (10) business days after the date of mailing such notice. 0rd~\94-28 -7- 10.36.080. STANDARDS OF MATERIALS SOLD. No publication offered for sale from any newsrack placed or installed in, maintained on, or relocated to any public sidewalk or parkway, shall be displayed or exhibit in any manner which exposes to public view from the street any of the following: A. Any statements or words describing explicit sexual acts, sexual organs or excrement, where such statement or words have as their purpose or effect, sexual arousal, gratification or affront. B. Any picture or illustration of genitals, pubic hair, perineums, anuses, or anal regions of any person, or any picture or illustration which has as its purpose or effect, sexual arousal, gratification or affront. C. Any picture or illustration depicting explicit sexual acts, where such picture or illustration has as its purpose or effect, sexual arousal, gratification or affront. Explicit sexual acts means depictions of sexual intercourse, oral copulation, bestiality, sadism, masochism or excretory functions in conjunction with sexual activity, masturbation or lewd exhibition of the genitals, where any of the above conduct is depicted or described as being performed alone or between members of the same or opposite sex or between humans and animals or other acts of sexual arousal involving any physical contact with a person's genital, pubic region, pubic hair, perineum, anus or anal region. D. For purposes of this section, no publication shall be considered displayed or exhibited if the newsrack in which it is placed is covered on all sides, except for a one (1') inch wide vertical opening for the purpose of indicating the number of remaining publications, by opaque material preventing exposure to public view from the street. 10.36.090. INFORMATION REQUIllEr}. Every person or custodian who places or maintains a newsrack on a public sidewalk or parkway within the City shall have his or her or its name, address, and telephone number affixed thereto in a place where such information may be easily seen and shall comply fully with the provisions of Section 17570 of the Business and Professions Code of the State as it exists on the effective date of the ordinance adopting this Chapter, or as it may be hereafter amended. 10.36.100. NEWSRACKS IN VIOLATION OF THE REGULATIONS OF THIS CHAPTER. Upon a determination by the Chief Building Official that a newsrack has been installed, used, or maintained in violation of the provisions of this Chapter, an order to correct the condition will be issued to the owner and custodian of such newsrack. Such order shall be attached to said newsrack and confirmed by mailing a copy of such order to the owner and custodian by certified mail, return receipt requested to the address stated in the permit application. The order shall be effective upon receipt of the order by the owner or custodian, or three (3) business days following deposit of the order in the U.S. Mail, whichever occurs first. The order shall specifically describe the offending condition and describe the actions necessary to correct it. Both the owner and the custodian shall be Orda~94-28 -8- responsible for compliance with the order. If the newsrack is in such a condition or is placed so as to constitute an immediate danger to pedestrians, motorists or other persons, the Chief Building Official may move the newsrack or take such other action, including removal, so as to alleviate the dangerous condition. Unless the determination of the Chid Building Official is appealed, failure to properly correct the offending condition within ten (I0) business days after the date of mailing of the order shall result in the offending newsrack being removed and processed as unclaimed property under the applicable pwvisions of hw relating thereto. If the offending newsrack is not properly identified as to the owner pursuant to the pwvisions of this Chapter, such newsrock may be removed immediately and processed as unclaimed property under the applicable provisions of hw. The Chief Building Inspector shall cause an inspection to be made of the corrected condition or of the newsrack reinstailed after removal pursuant to the pwvisions of this section. The owner or custodian of such newsrack shall be charged an inspection fee for each such newsrack so inspected, which charge shall be in addition to all the other fees and charges required by hw. The amount of the inspection fee shall be set by resolution of the City Council. 10.36.110. APPEALS. Any person or entity aggrieved by any finding, notice, or action taken pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter may appeal, and shall be apprised of his right to appeal, to the City Manager. The City Manager's decision on the appeal shall be final. An appeal shall be perfected within three (3) business days after the receipt of the notice of any protested decision or action by filing with the office of the Chief Building Inspector a letter of appeal briefly stating the basis for such appeal. The hearing shall be held on a date no more than ten (10) days after the receipt of the letter of appeal. The appellant shall be given at least five (5) days' notice of the time and place of the hearing. The City Manager shall give the appellant, and any other interested party, a reasonable opportunity to be heard in order to show cause why the determination of the Chief Building Official should not be upheld. In all such cases, the burden of proof shall be upon the appellant to show that there was no substantial evidence to support the action proposed to be taken by the Chief Building Official. At the conclusion of the hearing, the City Manager shall make a final and conclusive determination in writing and the owner or custodian shall have ten (10) business days after the date of the determination of the appeal to comply with the order of the City Manager. 10.36.120. RESTRICTION OF DISPLAYED HARMFIlL MATFER TO MINORS. Any person who knowingly displays, or causes to be displayed, harmful matter as defined in this Chapter in any newsrack which is located on a public sidewalk, or any other public place from which minors are not excluded, is guilty of a misdemeanor, unless such person places what is commonly known as blinder racks in front of the material, so that the lower two-thirds of the material is not exposed to view and so that no harmful matter is exposed to public view. OrdsX94-28 -9- Section 2. 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 Clerk shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED AND APPROVED this llth day of October, 1994. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk OrdJ\94-28 -10- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, JUNE S. GI~F~FK, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 94-28 was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 27th day of September, 1994. That thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular m~eting of the City Council on the llth day of October, 1994, by the following vote, to wit: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk Otds~94-28 -11- ITEM 17 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 11, 1994 Specific Plan 263 (Regional Center) and Change of Zone 5589 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340; TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340 INCLUDING A NEW MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERMINING NO ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE CIRCULATION MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-___ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589, CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20 (HEAVY AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM) TO SP (SPECIFIC PLAN) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD R:',STAFFRPT~63SP.CC2 10/4/94 sail Introduce and ready by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 263 (REGIONAL CENTER) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN 263 PROPOSING A 1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CORE, 810,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE\INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAL 298,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS BACKGROUND Specific Plan 263 and Change of Zone 5589 were approved unanimously by the Planning Commission at their meeting on July 18, 1994. The Specific Plan and Change of Zone appeared on the City Council agenda of September 13, 1994. At that meeting, the Council continued these items to the October 11, 1994 City Council Meeting to allow the applicant additional time to work out infrastructure timing issues with City staff. As of the date of this report, this meeting had not yet occurred. Therefore, an oral report concerning the outcome of the proposed meeting will be presented at the Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACT None Attachments: 1. City Council Staff Report, September 13, 1994- Page 3 R:',STAFFP, PT~63SP.CC2 10/4/~4 sdl 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 R:~STAFFRP'I'~263SP.CC2 10/4/94 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor Ron Roberrs Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Stone Councilmember Pat Birdsall Councilmember Sal Munoz Councilmember Ron Parks Gary Thornhill; Director of Planning7~2'~ September 7, 1994 Urban Core Projects The Urban Core Projects Cl'he Regional Center and Campos Verdes Specific Plans) have been scheduled for the September 13, 1994 City Council Meeting. Due to the cornpie,city of these projects, they were forwarded to you, under separate cover, on September 2, 1994. Please retain all documents until after a final decision on the projects has been made. As always, should you have questions regarding these projects, please do not hesitate to'call me. R:\DEBBIE\CAMiaOS.MEM 916194 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY AT'FOR.__. ;RO~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGEF~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning September 13, 1994 Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center) and Change of Zone No. 5589 Prepared By: Debbie Ubnoske, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340; TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340 INCLUDING A NEW MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERMINING NO ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE CIRCULATION MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-.__ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589, CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-2(') (HEAVY AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM) TO SP (SPECIFIC PLAN) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-__ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN N0. 263 (REGIONAL CENTER) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN 263 PROPOSING A 1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CORE. 810,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE\ INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAl 298,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS. BACKGROUND Specific Plan 263 and Change of Zone 5589 were approved unanimously by the Planning Commission at their meeting on July 18, 1994. The Specific Plan is proposing a 1,375,000 square foot commercial core, 810,000square feet of Office\Institutional with possible Multi- Family Residential and an additional 298,000 square feet of Retail Commercial. The Specific Plan is accompanied by Change of Zone 5589 which is a proposal to change the zoning on the property from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum lot size) to SP (Specific Plan), DISCUSSION Specific Plan 263 is located in an area which has a General Plan Overlay designation of Village Center. Under the General Plan, the intent of the Village Center Overlay is to develop centers which will help to provide a sense of place, as well as, a focal point for activity. These Village Centers are intended to contain a concentration and mixture of compatible uses including retail, housing, and institutional. Each Village Center should have design guidelines and development standards. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the General Plan Overlay designation of Village Center. The applicant has provided both language and illustratives that will facilitate implementation of the Village Center concept. The applicant has worked with the Public Works staff on the timing and funding of both on- site and off-site traffic improvements. The Public Works staff has conditioned the project appropriately. 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 ORDINANCE NO. 94- ATTACHM'ENT NO. 1 ORDINANCE NO. 94- AN ORDINANCE OF TIlE CITY COUNCIl. OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CAI .IFORNIA, AMENDING TItF. OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN TItF. CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589, CHANGING ~ ZONE PROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) AND A-2-20 (HEAVY AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM) TO SP (SPECIFIC PLAN) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT TltF. SO~AST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCltF. STER ROAD THE CITY COUNCIl. OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Public hearings have been held before the Planamg Commission and City Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of the State of California, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The application land use district as shown on the attached exhibit is hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official Land Use map for the City of Temecula as adopted by the City and as many be amended hereafter from time to thne by the City Council of the City of Temecula, and the City of Temecula Official Zoning Map is amended by placing in affect the zone or zones as described in Change of Zone No. 5589 and in the above title~ and as shown on zoning map attached hereto and incorporated herein. Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk. R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 klb 5 Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOFrED this 13th day of September, 1994. RON ROBERTS MAYOR ATFEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CAI,IFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula. California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 9 __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the __ day of , 199__, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the __ day of , by the foilowing roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS COUNCILMEMBERS COUNCILMF~MBERS JUNE S. Gi~F,I:~K CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA / / CASE NO. - CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589 EXHIBIT - A t~ITY COUNCIL DATE - SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 ZONING: SPECIFIC PLAN R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 911194 ktb ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 94-_ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 263 (R~GIONAL CEN'IT_,R) LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WIN( :HESTER ROAD THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The official zoning map of the City of Temecula, entitled "Temecula/Rancho California Area" as adopted pursuant to Section 34 of Ordinance No. 90-()4, is amended as shown which map is made a part of this ordinance. Section 2. The City of Temecula hereby adopts those Land Use standards set forth in that certain document entitled "Temecula Regional Center Draft Specific Plan/FIR" dated February 1, 1994 on file in the office of the City Clerk. Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full lext of this Ordinance shah be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prio~ to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Counci:members voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of September, 1994. ATrk~ST: RON ROBERTS MAYOR June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TF_,MECULA I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 9 __ was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the __ day of , 199__, and that thereafter. said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the __ day of , by the tbllowing roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COLINCH .MEMBERS COUNCILMEMBERS COUNCILMEMBERS JUNE S GREEK CIT, CLERK ATTACHMENT NO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 94- R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/'7/94 klb 10 ATTACHNIENTNO. 3 RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIYIC PLAN 263 PROPOSING A 1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CORE, 810,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE\ INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE MU'LT1. FA1Vf~,Y RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAL 298,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIl, CO1VI1MRRCIAL LOCATED AT THE SOUTFrEAST CORNER OF ~ INTERSECTION' OF YNEZ AND WINCI:rFSTER ROADS. WHEREAS, KRDC, Inc. fried Specific Plan No. 263 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WfIEREAS, said Specific Plan application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Specific Plan on July 18, 1994 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission heating, the Commission recommended approval of said Specific Plan; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted public hearings pertaining to said Specific Plan on September 13, 1994, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Specific Plan; WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commasstun proceedings and Staff Report regarding the Specific Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF I'HE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findin2s. The City Council in approving the proposed Specific Plan, makes the following fmdings: 1. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the City's General Plan. General Plan designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, Public Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay. R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 klb 11 2. Specific Plan 263 is compatible with surround;rig land uses of Commercial to the north (Costco) and west (Palm Plaza). 3. Specific Plan 263 will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the pla.nne land use of the area. Environmental Impact Report 340 was prepared for the Specific Plan. and was certified by the City Council July 13, 1993. An Addendum to FF_IR 340 along with a new Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared which will be adopted for this project. No immediate impacts to the environment will result from the adoption of the Specific Plan. Impacts from future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Statements of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries. 4. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the General Plan. The key objective in the General Plan that relates to this Specific Plan calls for the development of a Village Center with mixed uses, pedestrian oriented design, and linkages to surrounding projects. In addition, the Village Center is intended to be a community focal point with high quality site and building design which provides for the incorporation of transit facilities. 5. Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. Section 2. Enviromnental Comoliance. Previously certi~,.d Environmental Impact Report No. 340 analyzed the significant impacts of Specific Plan No. 263 and proposed mitigation measures to reduce these impacts. Since the circulation mitigation measures have changed, an Addendum to this FEIR has been prepared which determined no additional impacts as a result of these changes. With this Addendure, a new Mitigation Monitoring Program will be adopted. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Specific Plan No. 263 which is attached as Attachment No. 10, located at the southwest comer of the intersection of Ynez Road and Winchester Road subject to the foliowing conditions: A. Attachment No. 5, attached hereto. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. R:\STAFFRPT~263$P.CC 9/7/94 klb '12 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13m day of September. 1994. RON ROBF_.RTS MAYOR A'rrF_,ST: June S. Greek, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I HF~REBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of , 199__ by the following vote of the Council: AYES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: CITY CI ATTACHMENT NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 94- R:\STAFFRPl'X263SP,CC 9r'//o,4 Idb 14 ATTACHMENTNO. 4 RF~OLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF T~F. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING ~ ADDENDUM TO FF,1R NO. 340; TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 340 INCLUDING A NEW MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERlVIINING NO ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE CIRCULATION MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ~ INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD WHEREAS, KRDC fried a request for an Addendum to FEIR No. 340 in accordance with Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, said Addendum application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to said Addendum on September 13, 1994, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or opposition to said Addendum; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIlE CITY OF TE1VIECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following fmdings: A. The City Council in approving the proposed Addendum, makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The Addendum was prepared since the proposed project does not change any of the impacts identified in FE.J.R No. 340. 2. None of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. 3. Only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to make FEIR No. 340 adequate under CEQA. 4. The changes to the EIR made by the Addendure do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 klb 15 Section 2. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby adopts the Addendum for FEIR No.340 and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for Specific Plan No.263 and Change of Zone No. 5589 which provisions are set forth in that certain document entitled "Addendum EIR/2 Regional Center Specific Plan," on f~e in the office of the City Clerk and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED this 13th day of September, 1994. RON ROBERTS MAYOR A'i'fJ~T: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was cluly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 13th day of September, 1994 by the following vote of the City Council: AYES: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: C OUNCILMEMBERS: JUNE S. GI~gK CITY CToF-P.K R:\STAFFRP~263SP.CC 9/7/94 Idb I 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\STAFFRIPT\263SP. CC 9r7/94 LIb 17 CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center) Project Description: A Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot commercial core, 810,000square feet of Office\Institutional with possible Multi-Family Residential, and an additional 298,000 square feet of Retail Commercial with an accompanying Change of Zone request changing the zoning from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum) to SP (Specific Plan). Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-130-046and 047,921-090-005,006 and 007 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT General Conditions The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Specific Plan No. 263, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. All development within this site shall be in accordance with thr requirements of all City ordinances, except as expressly modified herein, and State laws, and shall conform with the approved Specific Plan. Regulations or procedures Pot covered by the Specific Plan or appurtenant documents shall be subject to the City oldinances in effect at the time entitlement is required. This project and all subsequent projects within the site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 340 and the adopted Mitiga+ion Monitoring Program. 10. Prior to issuance of grading permits, approval of development permits, recordation of final maps, issuance of building permits and issuance of occupancy permits for any subsequent projects or activities within the site the applicant/developer shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program within EIR No. 348 have been satisfied for the stage of development that permits are being issued for. tl. Prior to the City Council hearing, Planning Area 3 shall be changed to Business Park and the appropriate zoning and development standards shall be established for Business Park designation. R:\STAFFRPT\265SP.CC 9RI94 kib 18 12. The Landscape Development Zone (LDZ), which includes the. Vransportation Corridor, along Winchester Road shall be thirty-seven feet (37') in width and shall be shown on all subsequent development proposal site plans and tentative maps. 13. Prior to approval of any map or development proposal within ~-ach Planning Area within the Specific Plan, a detailed design manual for each Plann~n,c: Area shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. 14. Within thirty (30) days of the final approval of the project by City Council, the Specific Plan and the Final Environmental Impact Report shall be sdbmitted to the Planning Department in final form for review and approval. The fiqal form shall include all conditions of approval and all modifications made by the Planing Commission and City Council. A master print copy (8 '~" X 11 ") and four (4) copies of the documents shall be submitted. 15. Prior to approval of any development plans, all subsequent projects shall receive appropriate clearances, conditions and approvals from all agencies with jurisdiction on project review. These agencies shall be determined by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. 16. The developer or the developer's successor-in-interest sl.all be responsible for maintaining the undeveloped portion of the site including weed abatement and litter removal. 17. The applicant shall deposit sufficient funds with the City eT Temecula to retain the services of a qualified consultant to administer and implement, ~e Mitigation Monitoring Program approved for this project as part of Environmental Impact Report 340 in compliance with Assembly Bill 3180. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 18. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for residential units thc projcct, the project applicant shall enter into a binding mitigation agreement the with the Temecula Valley Unified School District to ensure the mitigation of the new students generated by this Specific Plan. (Amended by Planning Commission on July 18, 1994) 19. If any of these conditions of approval differ from the commitment by the Developer made in the Specific Plan text or map exhibits or any other documents, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedence. 20. Any proposed amendment to this Specific Plan shall require public hearings and review by the Planning Commission and City Council, and/or shall be reviewed in accordance with such rules and regulations for the review of Specific Plan Amendments as may have been adopted by the City and which are in effect at the time of any proposed amendment is submitted. 21. The developer shall satisfy all the Quimby Act requirements ~}r the project. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. GENERAL CONDITIONS 22. All utility systems such as electric, including those which provide direct service to the project site and/or currently exist along public rights-of-ways adjacent to the site (except electrical lines rated 33 kv or greater), gas, telephone. water, sewer, and cable TV shall be placed underground, with easements provided a. required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utih-y provider. 23. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, as deemed nece sary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall consult with the State of California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine if permits or approvals are necessary from such agencies for any action contemplated by this proposal. Such consultation shall be in writing, and col~ies of said correspondence, including responses from agencies, shall be submitted to the City. Where appropriate, the terms, conditions, and recommendations of the noted agencies shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval into the areas of development. 24. Prior to issuance of building permits for the various phases of development, the Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements ano public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and pul~lic facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which the Developer requests its building permit for the project o~ any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment Jf Public Facility Fee. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility Fee. The amount of the bond snail be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands ti,at said agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. 25. Landscaping and permanent irrigation facilities shall be installed with street improvements. Perimeter walls if constructed shall be treated with graffiti-resistant coating and shall be installed adjacent to street improvemen.:s within each phase. R:\STAFFRPT\263SP,CC 9,r7/94 klb 20 26. A phasing plan addressing the schedule of necessary infrascn~cture requirements shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and the Planning Director prior to approval cf cn~' for each subsequent development applicatiof~. (Amended by Planning Commission on July 18, 1994) CIRCULATION 27. As a condition of approval for any subsequent development application associated with this Specific Plan, the Developer must enter into an agreement with the City for a "Trip Reduction Plan" in accordance with Ordinance No. 93-01. 28. Adequate primary and secondary access shall be provided for each phase of development as approved by the Department of Public Works. Access to office and commercial areas shall be reviewed by the Department of Public Works at the time of submittal of individual development applications. 29. All street sections shall correspond with Typical Roadway Cross Sections and requirements of the Circulation Element of City's General Plan, City ordinances and standards. 30. All intersections intervals shall comply with City and 3altrans standards and requirements. Accesses shown from Winchester Road to the site are conditional upon Caltrans' approval. Approval for accesses not currently, shown on the City's Memorandum of Understanding with Caltrans will be reeuired prior to subsequent discretionary approvals or any permits being issued by the C;ty. 31. The Developer shall provide bus bays and shelters within the Specific Plan. Location and number of bus bays shall be subject to approval of the City and Riverside Transportation Agency (RTA). If required additional rights-of-way dedications associated with bus bays shall be provided by the Developer 32. Necessary improvements have been/will be conditioned based on the project traffic studies and the conceptual phasing plan shown on Section III. A. 7. of the Specific Plan. Any substantive rephasing of the development must be approved by the Planning Commission through a rephasing application. A rephasing of the development considered to be minor or in substantial conformance with tte construction phasing plan approved with the adoption of the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan, as determined by the Department of Public Works and the Planning Director, may be approved administratively through applicable City procedures. Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits within any phase, all on and offsite improvements as referred to in the Traffic Reports and subsequent addenda along with additional requirements set heroin, or as set by conditions on individual tracts, must be constructed and/or bonded as required by the Department of Public Works. 33. Ensuing Traffic Reports, analyzing traffic impacts assaciated with subsequent development stages of the Specific Plan, shall be submitted to, identify implementation and timing of the necessary improvements to mitigate cumulative traffic impacts. 34. The following infrastructure improvements/reimbursements shall be completed prior to issuance of any occupancy: 35. Winchester Road parkway improvements, adjacent to Phase One, including sidewalks, landscaping, and street lights shall be completed by the Developer. Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer is responsible to bond for the traffic signals at the project's accesses from Overland Drive, Ynez Road, and Winchester Road, as required, including the associated street improvements, based on traffic ssgnal warrants analysis relative to subsequent development applications. Dedicate all necessary right-of-way for the constructran of the Winchester Road overpass at Interstate 15 (I-15) and the interchange ramps along with associated additional right-of-way necessary for the widening and improvements to Winchester Road from Ynez Road to the interchange, The Developer, the City, and CFD 88-12 shall enter into an agreement that provides for the reimbursement of acquisition cost of the required right-of-way. (Added by Planning Commission on July 18, 1994) A reimbursement agreement shall be executed between the Developer and the City to reimburse the City the cost of the existing improvements along Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road, The following infrastructure improvements/reimbursements sh~ll be completed prior to issuance of occupancy for any development above a cumular_i~e total of 750,000 SF. The Developer shall support the Community Facilities District (CFD) 88-12 supplemental bond sales necessary for the construction of Overland Drive, from Ynez Road to Jefferson Avenue (including the I-15 overpass), in accordance with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying Overland Drive as a Secondary Highway with 88 foo, full width right-of-way, and including the traffic signals at tl~e intersections of Overland Drive and Ynez Road, Jefferson Avenue, and Margarita Road. Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit Developer shall bond for the improvements to Margarita Road, from Solana Way to Winchester Road, including a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median, in accordance with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying Margarita Road as an Arterial Highway with 110 foot full width right-of-way with a reimbursement agreement. Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer shall bond for full street improvements to Overland Drive, from Margarita Road to Ynez Road, including a 12 foot wide raised landscape~ median, in accordance with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying Overland Drive as a Major Highway with 100 foot full width right-of-way with a reimbursement agreement. R:\STAFFRPT\263$P.CC 9R/94 Idb 22 36. Drainage 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. Water 45. The Developer is responsible to bond for prlcr and constru ;t ~he traffic signals at the intersections listed below. The Developer shall analyze the traffic signal warrants and shall install the traffic signals accordingly_and/or as directe,~ by the Department of Public Works at the following intersections: (Amended by Planning Commission on July 18, 1994) Margarita Road and Winchester Road (upgrade the existing signal) Margarita Road and North General Kearny Road Drainage and flood control facilities shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the City and/or Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). Prior to approval of any subsequent development applications, the Developer shall submit the master drainage plan to the City and RCFC&WCD to review the adequacy of the proposed and existing downstream drainage facilities. Drainage facilities within each phase shall be constructed immediately after the completion of the site grading and prior to or concurrently with the initial site development within that phase. All drainage facilities shall be designed to carry 1 O0 year stclm flows, subject to the approval of the Department of Public Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable. The Developer shall construct the proposed on and 3ffsite drainage facility improvements and the offsite detention basin provision as rec,~mmended in the Specific Plan and Drainage Study documents and/or as directed by the Department of Public Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable. As required by the Department of Public Works, additional Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports shall be submitted with subsequent development applications to study the drainage impacts and analyze necessary measures to mitigate the runoff created as part of the development of this project. The DeVeloper shall accept and properly dispose of all off-sit=~, drainage flowing onto or through the site. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion ot ~low. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, inc,!uding enlarging existing facilities or by securing drainage easements. and Sewer Water and sewer facilities shall be installed in accordance with the requirements and specifications of the City, Rancho California Water District (RCWD), and Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). Such requirements shall be applied at the subdivision or plot plan stages of the development. R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 917194 klb 23 46. Prior to the approval of subsequent development applicatians, the Developer shall submit the master water plan to RCWD to check for adequacy of the proposed water facilities. The Developer shall obtain written approval for the water system from RCWD. 47. Prior to the approval of subsequent development applications, the Developer shall submit the master sewer plan to EMWD to check for adequacy of the proposed sewer facilities. The Developer shall obtain written approval for the sewer system from EMWD. 48. Prior to the recordation of any tract map, commercial parcel map, or approval of any plot plan application, the Developer shall provide the City w~tl evidence that adequate wastewater treatment facilities are being provided to meet the needs of the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan development. Grading 49. No grading shall be permitted for any development area prior to tentative map or plot plan approval and issuance of grading permits for the specific area of development unless approved by the Director of Public Works for street purposes, (Added by Planning Commission on July 18, 1994) 50. Grading plans and operations shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, the recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Report, or any subsequent reports prepared for the project, the conditions of the grading permit, and accepted grading construction practices and t,'~, recommendations and standards specified in the Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) document. 51. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, Erosion Control plans shall be prepared in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to aujroval by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall post security and Enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements. 52. The Developer shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board, and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) implemented by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. 53. Each subsequent application for a phase of development shall include a conceptual grading plan to indicate at a minimum: · Preliminary quantity estimates for grading. Techniques and methods which will be used to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process in compliance with the City Standards and NPDES requirements. · Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 917194 klb 24 · Designation of the borrow or stockpile site location TO:' import/export material. Approximate time frames for development including tl~e identification of areas which will be graded during the rainy months. · Hydrology and hydraulic concerns and mitigations. 54. Major grading activities shall be scheduled during the dry season wherever possible, or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. 55. Soils stabilization, which may include revegetation of gradeO areas, shall occur within 30 days of final grading activities as directed by the Department of Public Works. 56. The site shall be watered during grading operations to contro: dust. 57. Temporary drainage and sediment control devices shall be installed as directed by the Department of Public Works. 58. An import/export route shall be submitted to the Departmen~ of Public Works prior to issuance of any grading permit. The plan shall inctude limitat,on to the duration of the grading operation and construction activities, a Traffic Cont, ~1 Plan, and a daily time schedule of operations. 59. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, a soils reports shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval, to address engineering, geologic, seismic, and soils engineering concerns for each tentative map or commercial parcel map for each phase of proposed development. 60. All public streets shall be maintinned and cleaned if necessary on a daily basis during grading operation and construction actiwties. Cash deposit, letter of credit or posting of bond to guarantee maintenance of all public rights-of-way affected by the grading operations and construction activities, shall be posted prio, to issuance of grading permits. 61. If subsequent Geotechnical and Soils Reports determine that <,ewatering of the site is necessary during construction, necessary permits (i.e. in uompliance with NPDES permit) shall be obtained from appropriate agencies prior to approval of the grading plans. Phasing 62. Construction of the development permitted by the Specific PI Jn, including recordation of final subdivision maps, may be carried out in stages provided that, adequate vehicular access is constructed for all dwelling units in each stage of development and further provided that such development conforms substantially with the intent and purpose of the Specific Plan Phasing Plan. 63. Development applications shall be submitted for each planning unit in each phase. Total acreage and land uses within each phase shall be substantially in accordance with the specifications of the Specific Plan. R:XSTAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/1/94 klb 25 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT The Temecula Community Regional Center Specific Plan was originally presented to staff as a mixed-use commercial development combining retail, office, hotel, .nstitutional, and regional mall facilities. However, the possibility exists that multi-family residential development could occur within Planning Area 1. In the event that residential development is approved, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) provides additional co~ ~ditions for the Temecula Regional Center, as follows: General Requirements 64. The developer, his successor or assignee, shall satisfy the park land dedication requirements in accordance with City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). Upon determination of the actual park land dedication requirement, the City of Temecula shall have the final decision of requiring the developer to dedicate land for public park purposes, or pay the equivalent "in-lieu" fee. 65. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets tl~at are adjacent to commercial/industrial development and multi-family residential developm_ent shall be maintained by a private property owner's association. 66. All perimeter walls, interior slopes and open space in residential areas shall be maintained by the individual property owner or an established property owner's association. (Amended by Planning Commission on July 18, 1994) 67. Class II bike lanes shall be designed in conformity with the City's Park and Recreation Master Plan and constructed in concurrence with the street improvements. 68. The landscaped medians shall be improved in conformance ~.ith the City of Temecula Landscape Plan Guidelines and Specifications. 69. The developer, his successor or assignee, shall maintain the ~andscaping and medians until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. 70. Construction of all proposed TCSD maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program, Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 71. All proposed TCSD maintenance areas (medians) shall be identified and offered for dedication on the final map. 72. Prior to recordation of the respective final map, constructlot drawings for proposed landscape medians shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff. 73. Prior to recordation of the respective final map, the subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve all proposed TCSD maintenance areas. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 74, Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phased map, the developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. 75. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phased map, the developer or his assignee shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the appropriate fees for the dedication of arterial and resident~;~l lights into the TCSD maintenance program. R:\STAFFILPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 Idb 27 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 VILLAGE CENTER CONCEPT R:/STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7/94 Idb 28 TO 198969464?7 P. 82 RSCXONAL CF, NTn pi.nnln~ Area 1 1. lqanninz Ares .1 Descriptive Stunmary Az~= 1. as d~piotcd in Figure 12A. con,i_,t~ d 71.9q gxms aczcs. devoted prim,Hly m ~d ~i ~el~ Within ~ p~g m ~ ~ ~ m Of m While ~in~ining ~m~U~ ~ a ~D~ ~nm~ A ~um Of 3~ m~d-f~ily dwelug mu s~ ~ ~ ~ P~g ~ 1. ~ ~enin~ ~y c~h"r 1) 1%fudure of Uses It is the intent of the mixed use development in planning Azca I of the Tennccnla Regiona/Center to allow for a mixture of commercial/ofl=icr-/'u~sdtutioDa] and residential use~. The rn~xcd use developmcnt is designed to encourage active street fzontages and a cordonable, human-scaled environn~ent that creates a fully functioning shopping street complex (i.e., a "IViaiu Str. t,t"). This Main SU'~t will b~ integrated into the overall mixed use development in Planning Area I and will bc connected by both stree~ and pedestrian walkways to the planned ~ development in piannlng Arca 2. The ~ S=eet will be an easy and quick walk away from offices and residences in the Temecula Regional Center, allowing both workers and rcsidenr~ to take advantage of the convenient, locally available shopping opportunities. A conccptual illu~h*aLive site plan depicting the Main Sucot concept in Planning Area 1 is shown in Figure 12B. A de~lleA view d the Main Street is illusLrated in Figure 12C. Vv"nilc r~ development may be the l~ixmuy 1.rid Use in pl.nnlug ~ l, it is envisioned that fhi. plauniUg area will also include additional employment opporhmities such as offices and personal service shops and businessca. hstitudonal and botel uses may be integrated physically into mixed use strucUucs or constmctezl as ~ buildings. Residcuthfi uses m,y be integrated into the same structure as non-residendaJ useS. Residential uses and cntries should constitute not more than 30~ of the gn~nd floor of any of these buildings. In areas which do not direcdy facc onto the slk~pZng meet(s), frcestanding rcsiden~al builtl~ngs may be constructed, It is also anticipated that sonme ~ree-smuding residential structures will also be emacd in Planning Area 1. KI-31 2) In planning for mixed use development, consideration shall be given to joint use of parking, common areas, landscaping, specific types of uses, housing types and sizes of units, and overall architectural design. Planning Area 1 development is proposed as a logical extension of the central commercial core activity in Planning Area 2, and a transition between Planning Area 2 and the adjacent residential property to the east. Institutional uses to be encouraged within Planning Area 1 include local, state or federal level services (i.e., postal service, economic development, social service, library, museum, etc.), if there is a need or demand for such uses. Building Scale and Plannin-° Area Design Development in Planning Area should not resemble a typical suburban shopping center or strip commercial plaza. The retail and office uses in Planning Area 1 may be arranged in a "U"-shaped configuration around a public green similar to traditional public greens, or in a linear fashion to form a "Main Street" with shops and offices oriented directly onto the street. Internal roadway circulation (which may be implemented by a perimeter ring road or other similar roadway configuration) will be provided around the Main Street area to facilitate traffic flow in and through Planning Area 1. The internal roadway system will distribute traffic to and from principal access points on the site Pedestrian connection to adjacent Temecula Regional Center uses and to nearby pedestrian ,systems parallel parking (optional) 4 - lane capacity (typ.) Conceptual Internal Roadway III-35 3) rather than on nearby arterial streets. This ring road may also connect Planning Area I with Planning Area 2. Limited on-street parking may be provided on portions of the internal roadway system, but in areas where the roadways cross parking areas, no on-street parking shall be allowed. The primary internal access roadway system will most likely be four lanes in width. The Main Street, on the other hand, will be limited to two through lanes (one in each direction) in order to foster a pedestrian scale. Individual buildings within Planning Area 1 may range in height up to 120 feet, provided that building setbacks and configurations for all structures in excess of 50 feet in height shall be determined by the City during Development Plan Review to ensure that adequate light. access and air is available to adjacent structures. Typically, buildings should maintain a pedestrian scale adjacent to the shopping street. For example, the portion(s) of a building that abuts a public street may be two or three stories in height. Additional building stories could progressively step back as the building height and number of stories increases. Not only will such architectural design permit light and air access to surrounding areas and ensure a pedestrian scale near ground level, but the massiveness of the building will be substantially reduced. Separate building entrances shall be required for commercial/office/institutional and residential uses when occupying the same structure; provided that this provision does not preclude internal connections between residential and non-residential uses. Intensification In order for the concept of a "Main Street" to truly funcilon, development of a certain density and intensity is necessary. Greater intensification of land use in this planning area provides the opportunity for innovative architectural design and landscaping. The higher concentrations of people will also increase the feasibility of mass transit to serve the site. Residential uses will be hmited to free-standing buildings containing single family attached or multi-family homes or vertically integrated buildings containing residential units over office and/or commercial uses. Because of the increased residential density in this area~ it is important that recreational arechilies be provided for residents. Freestanding residential structures, in particular, should contain recreational facilities such as spas, swimrmng pools, basketball courts, and weight rooms. These facilities may be provided within buildings or, if provided outside, may be arranged in interior courtyards or in walled-in enclosures in interior parking lots. Special consideration should be given to locating facilities with respect to the noise, activity, and light that they will generate. III-36 freestanding muhi-f~mily 4) comme~:isZ~fficcrmsdmdom~ uses (WP) with optional r~sidential on upper JIILl,. lJltl,]l Freestanding Residential Buildings & Vertirdly Intqlrated Bufiding~ (Residential Over Commercial/Office Uses) with Recreational Facilities The paztSng f~.ilifies should not be the dominant vist/al im-Ze of ~c project. Vas~ expanses of paving for ps~ing, without tt~ visual x~lief of landscaping, am higldy discouraged. Joint-paridng arrangcmcnts betwccn commercial, of~cc, and inst~e~ffions/ tlse~ al~ ellcou~ged to mi~imiT~_ the primbet of parIcing spaces r~luinXl Io serve thc development and avoid proliferafion of pazk:mg lots, In -aa;tion, completely scparate p~rlcing areas should be .~,iv,dded for residences. Incentives for Innovative Design Up to 300 mul~-f~mily dwHllngs can be ~ in this plnn'n~ng area to provide housing oppormuities for employees of the vazious businesses within the Temecula P~gional Center Specific Plan. Conversely, the pJ~,~ned commercial uses will enable p~oject residents to do their shopping by focC The mixtur~ of r=,sia~'ntial and non-residential land uses axe dcsignai to clcacase the traf~ generated by project development. 1/I-37 6) The pedestrian scale of the project will be enhanced by plazas, courtyards, sidewalk cafes, public mini-parks, pedestrian easements, and overall project landscaping. Pedestrian linkages will be provided between uses within Planning Area 1 and between Planning Area I and the larger retail uses in Planning Area 2. Retail and service commercial uses could predominate on the f~rst floor of the buildings, with offices and/or residential uses concentrated on the upper floors or behind the commercial uses. Vertically-integrated buildings offer the opportunity to provide affordable housing. Pedestrian-Oriented Desi~,n The small size of Planning Area 1 will encourage pedestrian movement between uses, while de-emphasizing automobile use. Retail uses are encouraged on street level to provided streetscape contiguity and visual interest for pedestrians. Continuous expanses of blank walls or sharp unbroken vertical surfaces create an uncomfortable atmosphere for the pedestrian. The mixed use area should incorporate the following elements of good pedestrian-oriented design: Pedestrian Circulation: Link interior parking areas and lots to city streets, city- wide open spaces (e.g., plazas, mini-parks, pedestrian malls, etc.) and the City's trait system to facilitate travel by walking, biking, or other non-motorized means. Building Facades: The design of building facades, particularly those facades that face public streets, should be architecturally interesting and in scale with the pedestrian. Storefront windows are encouraged in retail shops and, in most cases, should begin within 18" to 24" of the pavement. Typically, storefront windows help to entice customers into stores, stimulate visual interest, create "defensible space" by enhancing public views of store interiors and streets, and establish a predictable rhythm for passers-by. The scale and width of each storefront should be limited to establish an intimate scale that is more conducive to the pedestrian and cyclist than to the automobile. In general, storefront widths should relate to a human scale. Where storefronts must be large to accommodate specific uses, the building facades could be articulated with windows, insets, pillars, columns, arcades or other decorative architectural features to maintain the overall intimacy of the shopping street. Signage: A coordinated signage plan for development can facilitate pedestrian and vehicular movement throughout the planning area, without "visually assaulting" the senses. Signage should be designed at a scale that is not overpowering from the pedestrian's perspective. For example, small signs with a unique texture, shape, or interesting features can be more effective than large, massive, or glaring signs. This Temecula Regional Center Zoning Ordinance III-38 7) 8) contains comprehensive signage criteria for uses within Planning Area 1 (see Section II/.C.1. in this Specific Plan). Streetscape Design: To encourage human activity and movement, streets should be designed with the pedestrian in mind. Continuity in landscape design, placement of street furreturn, sitting areas, covered arcades for shelter against the sun and inclement weather, lighting, and paving patterns all contribute to creating a rich, functional, and aesthetically pleasing environment for pedestrians. Pedestrian Plazas: All areas of Planning Area 1, and the Main Street in particular, should be designed with pedestrian gathering spots and should include plazas and pocket parks for resting, eating, conversing, and people watching. Pedestrian plazas that are effectively placed within retail and office districts can be pleasant spaces for resting or having lunch between shopping trips or errands. Placement of pedestrian plazas must be carefully planned to assure their most effective use. For this reason, consideration must be given to the location of plazas relative to the pedestrian circulation panems, sunlight conditions, wind patterns, and the selection of building and landscape materials. Organization of Activities: The most important element in creating viable pedestrian spaces has little to do with the actual physical design of the space; if a space is to be conducive to pedestrian activity, them must be opportunities for pedestrian events and activities. Therefore, efforts to planning and organizing festivals, events, special sidewalk sales, entertalmment, and cultural displays should be made to help create desired pedestrian activity. Private marketing efforts should be encouraged to promote these types of community events. Signage This Specific Plan includes a comprehensive signage program for the mixed use development. The program includes retail commemial entry monumentat. ion, building identification signage, marquee signage, and directional signage. Although the signage criteria contained in the Zoning Ordinance in this Specific Plan includes maximum permitted. sign sizes, the individual sign that identifies a given use should be consistent with the scale and mass of the building on which it is located or which it identifies. Specific signage materials should be uniform throughout each individual development within Planning Area 1. Transit Alternatives/Options One of the primary objectives of establishing mixed use development within the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan is the creation of a density threshold and a mixture of uses that is capable of supporting transit alternatives to the automobile. Bus turnouts shall be provided at appropriate locations within Planning Area 1, subject to approval by the City 111-39 r'iday June 3, 19~4 1:22pm -- Page 9) b. Please t. of Temecula and, if necessary, the Riverside Transit Agency. Additional Innsit corridor right-of-way adjar. ent m Winchester Road on ~e western edge of th~ planning area will allow spac~ for a,-velopment of a mass transit sys~-~ (e.g., light rail, e~.) should such a system ever be constmu~ Village Center/lVfs~n Street Development Area The V1llsge CentedMain Slreet concept sh,d! apply to be~tween 10 to 1S acres within plann½ng Area 1. Blocks within the l~xaill Street area shall b~ el~Fined by a public street grid system. The ~emnlnder of the pJnnning m could be developcxl in a conventional f~hlon purSnnnt tO market demand if a continuation of thi~ concept is determined to be infeasibl~ by the City. Land Use Development Standards refer to Zone Ordinance No. in Section KLC of this Specific Plan, : Plannlng Stsndards In compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan, Village Center Overlay and 1 =nd Use Element Goal 5 - Policies 5.5 through 5.10, it is impox~nt m ereate a quality environment which establi~ht~ a ~en.~ of place through eatdul consideration and integration of the following design elements: a) Pedestrian orientation b) Pede~a-ian linkaSP,. c) Narrow streets and driveways with pedestrian paseos and wide sidew~lirs. d) Featur~ such as paseos, armu:les, plazas, courtyank squa~s, galleries and outdoor cares to encourage gathering. Z e) Gathering places such as pavilions, parks and bandstands. Festivals, entertai~7 ment, street vendon, outclcor markets and other special events should be f) Incorporation of fountnin~ and water boxties. g) Unique architectural and landscape architectural themes for identity. h) Ca~ful parking otientatiom 11140 2) 3) 4) 7) S) · It is i,mFnlant to note that not all use~ allowed in Planning Aria 1 are n~-ssarily expected to occur. For thin re~son, some of the above design features may not he at~prolnial= nor economically feasible. For this reason, only the conch-it of a ~VIain SlEet" is discussed in depth above. Additional options for possible development in planning ~ I Lrc discl/sscd in Section IV, Design GI/itleline~, in thk SpCCifiC Plan,, Access into Pl.nning Alea I ~ be yao~rided from Margarita Road, Apricot Avcnue and Winchester Road. Onc (1) minor entry cto~-~'ing is proposed through the Winches~r Road trnn.portntioD conidor into ]~nnning Alea 1. This minor crossing would ptovidc right-mr~-only access into thi. Mixed Use pl~nnlng Area (see Figure 12A). This propo~l shafll comply wi~a the current Memorandum of Underaanding (MOLT) between fine City of Temecula and Caltrans as to the location and spacing of minOr ~ pOi~tS along Winchester Road, Special roadway landsca~ treatments, as those depicted in Figur~ 14, 18, and :20, 1 ~nclscape Architectur~ Guidclin~ (S~c. lYE.) Shrill bc provided along Winchester Margatim. Road and Apricot Avenue. Major Enlry Monumentation as depicted in Figure :23, T ~-dscape ArchitecturSl Guidelines, shall be pwvid~d at the intersections of Winctmster Road and Margazita Road, and Margarita Road and Apricot Avenue, and along Margarita Road and !tFmchester Road, Minor Entry Monum~ntation, as dgpiaed in Egum 25, Landscat~ ArchitecUral Gui&:lines, shall be p,'ovided along Winchester Road. Margarita Road anti Apricot Avenue. Please tcfcr m Scc. IV. fOr Specific Design Guidclincs and othcr related design ctitcria. Please refer to Sec. I]I.A. for the following Development Plans and Standards that apply site-wide: rrr, A, 1 - Specific Land Use Plan rrr,/L2 - Circulation Hart HLA,3 - Drainage Ran ITI_&,4 - Water and Scwcr Plans m A.5 - Proj~ct PhasingPla~ m ~.6 - Grading Plan : l!l_&.7 - Lan&~-~Ving plan' IILA.8 - Maintemmce Plan 11141 ATTACHMENT NO. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, JULY 18, 1994 R:\STAFFRPT\263Sp. CC 9/7/94 kJb ~9 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION July 18, 1994 Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center) Change of Zone No, 5589 Prepared By: Debbie Ubnoske RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMEND Adoption of Resolution No. 94-~ recommending approval for Specific Plan 263 and Change of Zone 5589 based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: KRDC Inc. REPRESENTATIVE: T & B Planning Consultants PROPOSAL: Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot commercial core, 810,000 square feet of Office/Institutional with possible Multi-Family Residential and an additional 298,000square feet of Retail Commercial with an accompanying Change of Zone request changing the zoning from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural, 20 acre minimum tot size) to SP (Specific Plan No. 263). LOCATION: Southeast corner of the intersection of Ynez and Winchester Roads EXISTING ZONING: R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural, 20 acre minimum lot s~ze) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) M-SC (Manufacturing Service Commercial) A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural, 20 acre minimum lot size) C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial) PROPOSED ZONING: SP (Specific Plan No. 263) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: CC (Community Commercial) O (Professional Office) BP (Business Park) P (Public/Institutional) Specific Plan Overlay Village Center Overlay EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: PROJECT STATISTICS North: South: East: West: Commercial Development (Costco) Vacant Vacant Commercial Development (Palm Plaza) Planning Area 1 Total Area Possible Residential Retail/Office Building Area 72 Acres 300 Units 810,000 Square Feet Planning Area 2 Total Area Commercial Retail Building Area 97.8 Acres 1,555,000 Square Feet Planning Area 3 Total Area Retail/Office Building Area 5.5 Acres 118,000 Square Feet BACKGROUND Specific Plan 263 and Change of Zone 5589 were continued from the May 23, 1994and June 6, 1994 Planning Commission meetings. At the May 23 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission directed the applicant to provide more detailed information on the Village Center concept proposed for Planning Area 1. At the June 6 Planning Commission meeting, the applicant requested a continuance to the July 18, 1994 Planning Commission meeting to enable them to meet with staff to discuss the conditions of approval. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project proposal is a Specific Plan with an accompanying Change of Zone request on 201.3 acres. The project site is located along the south side of Winchester Road between Ynez and Margarita Roads. The City's General Plan designates the site as Specific Plan and Village Center overlay areas. The underlying land use designations of the General Plan consist of Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park and Public Institutional. The Specific Plan document contains the zoning, development standards and architectural guidelines for the project site. The proposed zoning and development standards contained within the Specific Plan document will govern development for this site over the City's R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.PC5 7/15/94 vg~ 2 Development Code unless it is not addressed in the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance. ANALYSIS Viltaqe Center Conceot Planning Area 1 located within the Regional Center Specific Plan has a General Plan Overlay designation of Village Center. Under the General Plan, the intent of the Village Center Overlay is to develop centers which will help to provide a sense of place, as well as, focal points for community activity. These Village Centers are intended to contain a concentration and mixture of compatible uses including retail, housing, and institutional. Additionally, each Village Center should have design guidelines and development standards. While the applicant has provided language relative to the Regional Center's Village Center, this language has been deemed inadequate by staff. At the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission directed the applicant to provide stronger language in the Specific Plan which would ensure the development of a Village Center in Planning Area 1. In addition, staff has requested the applicant provide design guidelines and development standards in the Specific Plan. Pursuant to the Commission's direction at the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has provided new language relative to the Village Center Concept, as well as, a number of illustratives (reference Attachment 3). Both the language and illustratives will be included in the Final Specific Plan. Circulation At the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting, staff requested the Commission provide direction on the timing and funding of both on-site and off-site improvements. The Public Works Department proposes the following: That this Specific Plan be required to bond for and construct certain regional improvements for the project implementation responsibility for regional facilities. That this Specific Plan be required to support either supplemental bond sales or district restructuring and supplemental bond sales which provide for certain regional facilities listed in Attachment "A" to the Mitigation Monitoring Program (refer to Attachment No. 5). That this Specific Plan be required to bond for and construct certain facilities within and adjacent to the project as detailed in the Conditions of Approval. The timing for these facility requirements may be further defined through the conditioning of subsequent development applications and the requisite phasing application. A typical section be added to the Specific Plan for the primary onsite circulation road(s). Landscape Development Zone (LDZ) The provision for a 37 foot Landscape Development Zone along Winchester Road was discussed at the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. The applicant stated he would provide this 37 foot LDZ. The Final Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan will contain an exhibit that illustrates this LDZ. School Mitiaation The Temecula Unified School District is requesting the developer sign a mitigation agreement with the District prior to Specific Plan approval. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 340 certified for the site on July 13, 1993 states that "the project applicant shall enter into a binding agreement with the Temecula Unified School District to insure the provision of adequate facilities at the time of project occupancy." Staff has conditioned the Specific Plan to comply with the mitigation proposed in the previously certified EIR. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Environmental Impact Report No. 340 was prepared for the project and certified by the City Council on July 13, 1993. Findings of Fact and Statements of Overriding Consideration for Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation, and Libraries and a Mitigation Monitoring Program were adopted at that time. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the City of Temecuta General Plan designations of Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, Public\Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay. Upon adoption by the City Council, Change of Zone 5589 which proposes to change the zoning on the site from Rural Residential (R-R) and Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum (A-2-20) to Specific Plan (SP) will render the Specific Plan consistent with the zoning on the site. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS At the May 23, 1994 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission directed the applicant to better define the Village Center Concept. Subsequent to this meeting, the applicant has provided staff with new language and illustratives which better defines the Village Center Concept. This new language and the illustratives will be provided in the Final Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan. The Commission also provided information to the Public Works staff on the timing and funding of both on-site and off-site traffic improvements. FINDINGS Specific Plan 263 Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the City's General Plan. General Plan designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, Public Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay. R:\STAFFRPT\263Sp. PC5 7115194 vgw 4 Specific Plan 263 is compatible with surrounding land uses of Commercial to the north (Costco) and west (Palm Plaza). Specific Plan 263 will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area. Environmental Impact Report 340 was prepared for the Specific Plan, and was certified by the City Council July 13, 1993. No immediate impacts to the environment will result from the adoption of the Specific Plan. Impacts from future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Statements of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the General Plan. The key objective in the General Plan that relates to this Specific Plan calls for the development of a Village Center with mixed uses, pedestrian oriented design, and linkages to surrounding projects. In addition, the Village Center is intended to be a community focal point with high quality site and building design which provides for the incorporation of transit facilities. Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. Chanqe of Zone 5589 Change of Zone 5589 wilt not have a significant adverse effect on the environment as determined in Environmental Impact Report 340 prepared for the project. No immediate impacts to the environment will result from the Change of Zone from Rural Residential (R-R) and Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum (A-2-20) to Specific Plan (SP). Impacts from future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Statements of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries. Change of Zone 5589 is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan. General Plan designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, Public\institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay. Change of Zone 5589 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the General Plan. The site of the proposed Change of Zone is suitable to accommodate all the land uses currently permitted in the proposed zoning district due to the fact that the parcel is of adequate size and shape for any proposed use. Landscaping, parking and lot coverage requirements will be met upon ultimate submittal of a development proposal. Adequate access exists to the proposed Change of Zone site. Proposed potential access points to the site will be from Ynez and Margarita Roads. Additional internal access and required road improvements to the site will be designed and constructed in conformance with City of Temecula standards. 6. Said findings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PC Resolution No. 94- - Blue Page 7 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 11 Revised "Village Center Concept" Language - Blue Page 22 Conceptual Circulation System Phasing Plan - Blue Page 23 Attachment "A", Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR No. 340 - Blue Page 24 Temecula Valley Unified School District Letter, April 18, 1994- Blue Page 25 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. 94- R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.PC5 7115194 vgw 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PC RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TENIECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SPECWIC PLAN NO. 263 PROPOSING A 1,375,000 SQUARE FOOT CO1VI/VIERCIAL CORE, 810,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE/INSTITUTIONAL WITH POSSIBLE MULTI-FAMII .Y RESIDENTIAL AND AN ADDITIONAL 298,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAH. COMiX!F. RCIAL; APPROVAL OF CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5589 TO CHANGE TltE ZONING PROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL (R- R) AND FIEAVY AGRICULTURE, 20 ACRE MINIMUM (A-2-20) TO SPECIFIC PLAN (SP). ~ PROJECT IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 910- 130-046 AND 047, 921-090-005, 006 AND 007. WHEREAS, KRDC, Inc. fried Specific Plan No. 263 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WItF~R.EAS, said application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said application on July 18, 1994 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS. at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission recommended approval of said application; NOW, TItF. RF. FORE, Tlt~, PLANNING COMMISSION OF TItF. CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findin2s. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of said application makes the following f'mdings, to wit: Specific Plan 263 1. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the City's General Plan. General Plan designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Offme, Business Park, Public Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Overlay. 2. Specific Plan 263 is compatible with surrounding land uses of Commercial to the north (Costco) and west (Palm Plaza). 3. Specific Plan 263 will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property, because it does not represent a significant change to the planned land use of the area. Environmental Impact Report 340 was prepared for the Specific Plan, and was certified by the City Council July 13, 1993. No immediate impacts to the environment will result from the adoption of the Specific Plan. Impacts from future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Statements of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries. 4. Specific Plan 263 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the General Plan. The key objective in the General Plan that relates to this Specific Plan calls for the development of a Village Center with mixed uses, pedestrian oriented design, and linkages to surrounding projects. In addition, the Village Center is intended to be a community focal point with high quality site and building design which provides for the incorporation of transit facilities. 5. Said f'mdings are supported by analysis, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. Change of Zone 5589 1. Change of Zone 5589 will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment as determined in Environmental Impact Report 340 prepared for the project. No immediate impacts to the environment will result from the Change of Zone from Rural Residential (R-R) and Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum (A-2-20) to Specific Plan (SP). Impacts from future development can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Statements of Overriding Considerations were adopted by the City Council on July 13, 1993 for the following: Noise, Air Quality, Agriculture, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Libraries. 2. Change of Zone 5589 is consistent with the City of Temecula General Plan. General Plan designations for the site are Community Commercial, Professional Office, Business Park, Public\Institutional, Specific Plan Overlay, and Village Center Ove~ay. 3. Change of Zone 5589 is consistent with the goals, policies, and implementation programs contained in the General Plan. 4. The site of the proposed Change of Zone is suitable to accommodate all the land uses currently permitted in the proposed zoning district due to the fact that the parcel is of adequate size and shape for any proposed use. Landscaping, parking and lot coverage requirements will be met upon ultimate submittal of a development proposal. 5. Adequate access exists to the proposed Change of Zone site. Proposed potential access points to the site will be from Ynez and Margarita Roads. Additional internal access and required road improvements to the site will be designed and constructed in conformance with City of Temecula standards. 6. Said f'mdings are supported by analysis. maps, exhibits~ and environmental documents associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference. B. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, Section 2. Environmental Compliance. Previously certified Environmental Impact Report No. 340 analyzed the significant impacts of Specific Plan No. 263 and proposed mitigation measures to reduce these impacts. Section 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of Specific Plan No. 263 located southwest corner of Ynez and Winchester Roads. A. Attachment No. 2~ attached hereto. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of July, 1994. STEVEN J. FORD CHAIRMAN I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 18th day of July 1994 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETARY R:\STAFFRPT\263$P.PC5 7/15/chl vgw '] 0 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center) Project Description: A Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot commercial core, 810,000square feet of Office\Institutional with possible Multi-Family Residential, and an additional 298,000 square feet of Retail Commercial with an accompanying Change of Zone request changing the zoning from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agriculture, 20 acre minimum) to SP (Specific Plan). Assessor's Parcel No.: 910-130-046and 047,921-090-005,006 and 007 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT General Conditions The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, it agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Specific Plan No. 263, which action is brought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City of Temecula will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City of Temecula. All development within this site shall be in accordance with the requirements of all City ordinances, except as expressly modified herein, and State laws, and shall conform with the approved Specific Plan. Regulations or procedures not covered by the Specific Plan or appurtenant documents shall be subject to the City ordinances in effect at the time entitlement is required. This project and all subsequent projects within the site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within EIR No. 340 and the adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program. Prior to issuance of grading permits, approval of development permits, recordation of final maps, issuance of building permits and issuance of occupancy permits for any subsequent projects or activities within the site the applicant/developer shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program within EIR No. 348 have been satisfied for the stage of development that permits are being issued for. Prior to the City Council hearing, Planning Area 3 shall be changed to Business Park and the appropriate zoning and development standards shall be established for Business Park designation. R:\STAFFRPT\263SP. PC5 7/15194 vgw 12 The Landscape Development Zone (LDZ), which includes the Transportation Corridor, along Winchester Road shall be thirty-seven feet (37') in width and shall be shown on all subsequent development proposal eite plans and tentative maps. , Prior to approval of any map or development proposal within each Planning Area within the Specific Plan, a detailed design manual for each Planning Area shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. Within thirty (30) days of the final approval of the project by City Council, the Specific Plan and the Final Environmental Impact Report shall be submitted to the Planning Department in final form for review and approval. The final form shall include all conditions of approval and all modifications made by the Planing Commission and City Council. A master print copy (8 ~" X 11 ") and four (4) copies of the documents shall be submitted. Prior to approval of any development plans, all subsequent projects shall receive appropriate clearances, conditions and approvals from all agencies with jurisdiction on project review. These agencies shall be determined by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. 10. The developer or the developer's successor-in-interest shall be responsible for maintaining the undeveloped portion of the site including weed abatement and litter removal, 11. The applicant shall deposit sufficient funds with the City of Temecula to retain the services of a qualified consultant to administer and implementthe Mitigation Monitoring Program approved for this project as part of Environmental Impact Report 340 in compliance with Assembly Bill 3180. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 12. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for the project, the project applicant shall enter into a binding mitigation agreement the with the Temecula Valley Unified School District to ensure the mitigation of the new students generated by this Specific Plan. 13. If any of these conditions of approval differ from the commitment by the Developer made in the Specific Plan text or map exhibits or any other documents, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedence. 14. Any proposed amendment to this Specific Plan shall require public hearings and review by the Planning Commission and City Council, and/or shall be reviewed in accordance with such rules and regulations for the review of Specific Plan Amendments as may have been adopted by the City and which are in effect at the time of any proposed amendment is submitted. 15. The developer shall satisfy all the Quimby Act requirements for the project. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department of Public Works. GENERAL CONDITIONS 16. All utility systems such as electric, including those which provide direct service to the project site and/or currently exist along public rights-of-ways adjacent to the site (except electrical lines rated 33 kv or greater), gas, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be placed underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. 17. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, as deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall consult with the State of California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine if permits or approvals are necessary from such agencies for any action contemplated by this proposal. Such consultation shall be in writing, and copies of said correspondence, including responses from agencies, shall be submitted to the City. Where appropriate, the terms, conditions, and recommendations of the noted agencies shall be incorporated as Conditions of Approval into the areas of development. 18. Prior to issuance of building permits for the various phases of development, the Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the date on which the Developer requests its building permit for the project or any phase thereof, the Developer shall execute the Agreement for payment of Public Facility Fee. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, the Developer shall post a bond to secure payment of the Public Facility Fee. The amount of the bond shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. The Developer understands that said agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, the Developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of this condition, of this Agreement, the formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that the Developer is not waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the amount thereof. 19. Landscaping and permanent irrigation facilities shall be installed with street improvements. Perimeter walls if constructed shall be treated with graffiti-resistant coating and shall be installed adjacent to street improvements within each phase. 20. A phasing plan addressing the schedule of necessary infrastructure requirements shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and the Planning Director prior to approval of any subsequent development application. R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.PC5 7/15/94 vgw 14 29. 30. Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer is responsible to bond for the traffic signals at the project's accesses from Overland Drive, Ynez Road, and Winchester Road, as required, including the associated street improvements, based on traffic signal warrants analysis relative to subsequent development applications. Dedicate all necessary right-of-way for the construction of the Winchester Road overpass at Interstate 15 (I-15) and the interchange ramps along with associated additional right-of-way necessary for the widening and improvements to Winchester Road from Ynez Road to the interchange. A reimbursement agreement shall be executed between the Developer and the City to reimburse the City the cost of the existing improvements along Margarita Road from Solaria Way to Winchester Road. The following infrastructure improvements/reimbursements shall be completed prior to issuance of occupancy for any development above a cumulative total of 750,000 SF. The Developer shall support the Community Facilities District (CFD) 88-12 supplemental bond sales necessary for the construction of Overland Drive, from Ynez Road to Jefferson Avenue (including the F15 overpass), in accordance with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying Overland Drive as a Secondary Highway with 88 foot full width right-of-way, and including the traffic signals at the intersections of Overland Drive and Ynez Road, Jefferson Avenue, and Margarita Road. Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit Developer shall bond for the improvements to Marganta Road, from Solaria Way to Winchester Road, including a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median, in accordance with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying Margarita Road as an Arterial Highway with 110 foot full width right-of-way with a reimbursement agreement. Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer shall bond for full street improvements to Overland Drive, from Margarita Road to Ynez Road, including a 12 foot wide raised landscaped median, in accordance with the Typical Roadway Cross Section of City's General Plan classifying Overland Drive as a Major Highway with 100 foot full width right-of-way with a reimbursement agreement. The Developer is responsible to bond for prior and construct the traffic signals at the intersections listed below. The Developer shall analyze the traffic signal warrants and shall install the traffic signals accordingly and/or as directed by the Department of Public Works at the following intersections: Margarita Road and Winchester Road (upgrade the existing signal) Margarita Road and North General Kearny Road R:\STAFFRP'D,263SP.PC5 7/15/94 vgw 16 Drainage 31. Drainage and flood control facilities shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the City and/or Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). 32. Prior to approval of any subsequent development applications, the Developer shall submit the master drainage plan to the City and RCFC&WCD to review the adequacy of the proposed and existing downstream drainage facilities. 33. Drainage facilities within each phase shall be constructed immediately after the completion of the site grading and prior to or concurrently with the initial site development within that phase. 34. All drainage facilities shall be designed to carry 100 year storm flows, subject to the approval of the Department of Public Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable. 35. The Developer shall construct the proposed on and offsite drainage facility improvements and the offsite detention basin provision as recommended in the Specific Plan and Drainage Study documents and/or as directed by the Department of Public Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable. 36. As required by the Department of Public Works, additional Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports shall be submitted with subsequent development applications to study the drainage impacts and analyze necessary measures to mitigate the runoff created as part of the development of this project. 37. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. 38. The Developer shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing facilities or by securing drainage easements. Water and Sewer 39. Water and sewer facilities shall be installed in accordance with the requirements and specifications of the City, Rancho California Water District (RCWD), and Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). Such requirements shall be applied at the subdivision or plot plan stages of the development. 40. Prior to the approval of subsequent development applications, the Developer shall submit the master water plan to RCWD to check for adequacy of the proposed water facilities. The Developer shall obtain written approval for the water system from RCWD. 41. Prior to the approval of subsequent development applications, the Developer shall submit the master sewer plan to EMWD to check for adequacy of the proposed sewer facilities. The Developer shall obtain written approval for the sewer system from EMWD. 42. Prior to the recordation of any tract map, commercial parcel map, or approval of any plot plan application, the Developer shall provide the City with evidence that adequate wastewater treatment facilities are being provided to meet the needs of the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan development. Grading 43. No grading shall be permitted for any development area prior to tentative map or plot plan approval and issuance of grading permits for the specific area of development. 44. Grading plans and operations shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, the recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Report, or any subsequent reports prepared for the project, the conditions of the grading permit, and accepted grading construction practices and the recommendations and standards specified in the Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) document. 45. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, Erosion Control plans shall be prepared in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements. 46. The Developer shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulated by the State Water Resources Control Board, and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) implemented by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. 47. Each subsequent application for a phase of development shall include a conceptual grading plan to indicate at a minimum: · Preliminary quantity estimates for grading. Techniques and methods which will be used to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process in compliance with the City Standards and NPDES requirements. · Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. · Designation of the borrow or stockpile site location for import/export material. Approximate time frames for development including the identification of areas which wilt be graded during the rainy months. · Hydrology and hydraulic concerns and mitigations. Major grading activities shall be scheduled during the dry season wherever possible, or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. 49. Soils stabilization, which may include revegetation of graded areas, shall occur within 30 days of final grading activities as directed by the Department of Public Works. 50. The site shall be watered during grading operations to control dust. 51. Temporary drainage and sediment control devices shall be installed as directed by the Department of Public Works. 52. An import/export route shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of any grading permit. The plan shall include limitation to the duration of the grading operation and construction activities, a Traffic Control Plan, and a daily time schedule of operations. 53. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, a soils reports shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval, to address engineering, geologic, seismic, and soils engineering concerns for each tentative map or commercial parcel map for each phase of proposed development. 54. All public streets shall be maintained and cleaned if necessary on a daily basis during grading operation and construction activities. Cash deposit, letter of credit or posting of bond to guarantee maintenance of all public rights-of-way affected by the grading operations and construction activities, shall be posted prior to issuance of grading permits. 55. If subsequent Geotechnical and Soils Reports determine that dewatering of the site is necessary during construction, necessary permits (ie. in compliance with NPDES permit) shall be obtained from appropriate agencies prior to approval of the grading plans. Phasing 56. Construction of the development permitted by the Specific Plan, including recordation of final subdivision maps, may be carried out in stages provided that, adequate vehicular access is constructed for all dwelling units in each stage of development and further provided that such development conforms substantially with the intent and purpose of the Specific Plan Phasing Plan. 57. Development applications shall be submitted for each planning unit in each phase. Total acreage and land uses within each phase shah be substantially in accordance with the specifications of the Specific Plan. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT The Temecula Community Regional Center Specific Plan was originally presented to staff as a mixed-use commercial development combining retail, office, hotel, institutional, and regional mall facilities. However, the possibility exists that multi-family residential development could occur within Planning Area 1. In the event that residential development is approved, the Temecula Community Services District {TCSD) provides additional conditions for the Temecula Regional Center, as follows: General Requirements 58. The developer, his successor or assignee, shall satisfy the park land dedication requirements in accordance with City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby). Upon determination of the actual park land dedication requirement, the City of Temecula shall have the final decision of requiring the developer to dedicate land for public park purposes, or pay the equivalent "in-lieu" fee. 59. Exterior slopes contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to commercial/industrial development and multi-family residential development shall be maintained by a private property owner's association. 60. All perimeter walls, interior slopes and open space shall be maintained by the individual property owner or an established property owner's association. 61. Class II bike lanes shall be designed in conformity with the City's Park and Recreation Master Plan and constructed in concurrence with the street improvements. 62. The landscaped medians shall be improved in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Plan Guidelines and Specifications. 63. The developer, his successor or assignee, shall maintain the landscaping and medians until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. 64. Construction of all proposed TCSD maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and City Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance program. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map 65. All proposed TCSD maintenance areas (medians) shall be identified and offered for dedication on the final map. 66. Prior to recordation of the respective final map, construction drawings for proposed landscape medians shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD staff. 67. Prior to recordation of the respective final map, the subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve all proposed TCSD maintenance areas. R:\STAFFRI~\2635P.PC5 7/15/94 vgw 20 Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 68. Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phased map, the developer or his assignee shall submit, in a format directed by TCSD staff, the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. 69. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phased map, the developer or his assignee shall file an application with the TCSD and pay the appropriate fees for the dedication of arterial and residential lights into the TCSD maintenance program. R:\STAt~FRPT\263SP.PC5 7/15194 vgw 21 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 REVISED "VILLAGE CENTER CONCEPT" LANGUAGE R:/STAFFRFF\263SP.PC5 7115/94 vg~' 22 REGIONAL Phnning Area 1. P!annin~ Area 1 ,, Descriptive Summary Pian,,ins Area 1, as depictat in Figurc 12A, co,,,,iwts of 71.97 gross ames, d~vo2d pr~m,,Hly to mixed uses inclodlng rclall, office, horn1, institutional, and residential. uses. The commex~ial, o~ice; and institutional developmeat within this planning area will sezve the needs of rata residents, while maintaining cx}13lpaflbillty with a residcnHM cllv~ A I:Da.x,b:llg~ Of :300 multi-family dwelling units shall be permitted in Planning Area 1. These dwellings may either be consl~uctecl as 5'ee-staz~ing sln~tun~s or integrated into the same building w~th off]cc and 1) 1VFL~tUm of Uses It is the intent of the mix~l use develophint in Planning Area I of the Teme~tla Regional Centex to allow for a mixtu~ of comm~i/officefmstitutionai and residential uses. The mixed use development is designed to encourage active street frontages and a comfortable, human-scaled environwent that Cr,--rps a fully funclioning shopping street complex (i.e., a "Main Street"). This Main Street will be integrated into the overall mixed use development in pJnnnirtg Area I and will be connected by both sm~ and pedeSLrian walkways to the pJanned retail develolxueut in pJnnning Afca 2. ThB MaiD. Street will be an c~sy and quick walk away from offices and residences in the Temecula Regional Center, allowing both workers and residents to take advantage of the convenient, locally available shopping opportunities. A conceptual illt~adve site plan depicting Main Street concept in Planning Area 1 is shown in Figu~ 12B. A detailed view of Main Street is illustratut in Figure 12C. While rntil development my be the ptlmaty lnnd I1~ in Planning ~ 1, it is envisioned that this planning area wi]] also include adClitiOUnl employment oppommities such as offices and personal sea-vice shops and businesses. Institutional and hotel uses may be integrated physically into mixed use 8trdctures Or cons131K:t~ as ~ buildings. Residential uses may be integrated into the same smmmm as non-residential uses. Residential uses and cnlfics should consdram not morn than 30~ of the 5,,Amd floor of any of these buDdln~s. In areas which do not directly face onto the shopping m~ct(s), frecstandlng residential btfild~ngs m.y l~ ennstmcmcL It is also anticipated that some free-standing re~dential structures wm also be en~-'ted in Planning Area 1. III-31 0 2) In planning for mixed use development, consideration shall be given to joint use of parking, common areas. landscaping, specific types of uses, housing types Pedestrian connection to adjacent and sizes of units, and overall Temecula Regional Center uses and architectural design. to nearby pedestrian systemS Planning Area 1 development is ~_A ~ "~ proposed as a logical extension of the central commercial core activity in Planning Area 2, and a transition between Planning Area 2 and the ..... adjacent residential property to the east. Institutional uses to be : ~ '\ encouraged within Planning Area I I include local. state or federal level services (i.e., postal service, economic development, social service, library, museum, etc.), if there is a need or demand for such uses ............ Buildin~ Scale and Plannin.o Area Design Development in Planning Area 1 should not resemble a typical suburban shopping center or strip commercial plaza. The retail and office uses in Planning Area I may be arranged in a "U"-shaped configuration around a public green similar to traditional public greens, or in a linear fashion to form a "Main Street" with shops and offices oriented directly onto the street. Internal roadway circulation (which may be implemented by a perimeter ring road or other similar roadway configuration) will be provided around the Main Street area to facilitate traffic flow in and through Planning Area 1. The internal roadway system will distribute traffic to and from principal access points on the site -.d , , · --parallel parking (optional) ~ 4 - lane capacity (typ .) Conceptual Internal Floadwa~t III-35 3) rather than on nearby arterial streets. This ring road may also connect Planning Area 1 with Planning Area 2. Limited on-street parking may be provided on portions of the internal roadway system, but in areas where the roadways cross parking areas, no on-street parking shall be allowed. The primary internal access roadway system will most likely be four lanes in width. The Main Street, on the other hand, will be limited to two through lanes (one in each direction) in order to foster a pedestrian scale. Individual buildings within Planning Area 1 may range in height up to 120 feet, provided that building setbacks and configurations for all structures in excess of 50 feet in height shall be determined by the City during Development Plan Review to ensure that adequate light access and air is available to adjacent structures. Typically, buildings should maintain a pedestrian scale adjacent to the shopping street. For example, the portion(s) of a building that abuts a public street may be two or three stories in height. Additional building stories could progressively step back as the building height and number of stories increases. Not only will such architectural design permit light and air access to surrounding areas and ensure a pedestrian scale near ground level, but the massiveness of the building will be substantially reduced. Separate building entrances shall be required for commercial/office/institutional and residential uses when occupying the same structure; provided that this provision does not preclude internal connections between residential and non-residential uses. Intensification In order for the concept of a "Main Street" to truly function, development of a certain density and intensity is necessary. Greater intensification of land use in this planning area provides the opportunity for innovative architectural design and landscaping. The higher concentrations of people will also increase the feasibility of mass transit to serve the site. Residential uses will be limited to free-standing buildings containing single family attached or multi-family homes or vertically integrated buildings containing residential units over office and/or commercial uses. Because of the increased residential density in this area, it is important that recreational amenities be provided for residents. Freestanding residential structures, in particular, should contain recreational facilities such as spas, swimming pools, basketball courts, and weight rooms. These facilities may be provided within buildings or, if provided outside, may be arranged in interior courtyards or in walled-in enclosures in interior parking lots. Special consideration should be given to locating facilities with respect to the noise, activity, and light that they will generate. 111-36 Jl_l,i-e3-1994 10:14 F'ROPI ~ R..,q, lqllqG TO 1,gecjG9464'-/'7 P,e3 fi~-esum~nSmuld-family Freestanding Residential BuDdlngS & Vertically Integrated Bu~dings (Residential Over Commercia!/OfDce Uses) with Recreational Facilities 4) Pro!ring Desjim '[jmlted on-slzcct paz~ing my be provided in PlnfnlnS A~a 1, parti~,lnrly along the "Main Street* On-street parking spaces ate intended for people rmmlng etnnds and are *shon-t~tu," spaces. These spaces may be mettaxi u> discouragc l~opk ~mm ~-~g h them for longer than an hour e~ two. Paxking lots should be placed in the interior of individual parcels so that the at~zanmce d tbe development f~om the meet is of buildings and plazas, not parking lots (sec Figure 12B). These interior pa~rln_~ lots arc intended for *long term" pa~cing. The parking facilities should net be the dominant visual im,_oe of Ihc project. Vas~ exT~n~p_.~ of l~ving for paddng, without the visual relief of landscaping, arc highly discouraged. Joint-parking arrangements bctwcen commugial, office, and institutional uses nr~ cncoungcd to minimize the number of parking spates required to serve the development and avoid pi6~feration of parking lots. In naAifion, completely separate pnr~ing areas should be provided for residences. Incentives for Innovative DesiL, n Up to 300 multi-family dw~llin~s c8J1 be erected in this plnnn~ng area to provide ho-~'inE oppornmities for employees of the various businesses Within the Tcmecula Regional Center Specific Plan. Conversely, dne planned comzncv~al uses will enable p~uject residents to do their shopping by foot. The mixmrc of residential and non-residential land uses are designed to decrease the ~ generated by project develop~nenL m-37 6) The pedestrian scale of the project will be enhanced by plazas, courtyards, sidewalk cafes, public mini-parks, pedestrian easements, and overall project landscaping. Pedestrian linkages will be provided between uses within Planning Area 1 and between Planning Area 1 and the larger retail uses in Planning Area 2. Retail and service commemial uses could predominate on the first floor of the buildings. with offices and/or residential uses concentrated on the upper floors or behind the commercial uses. Vertically-integrated buildings offer the opportunity to provide affordable housing. Pedestrian-Oriented Design The small size of Planning Area 1 will encourage pedestrian movement between uses, while de-emphasizing automobile use. Retail uses are encouraged on street leveI to provided streetscape contiguity and visual interest for pedestrians. Continuous expanses of blank wails or sharp unbroken vertical surfaces create an uncomfortable atmosphere for the pedestrian. The mixed use area should incorporate the following elements of good pedestrian-oriented design: Pedestrian Circulation: Link interior parking areas and lots to city streets, city- wide open spaces (e.g., plazas, mini-parks, pedestrian malls, etc.) and the City's trail system to facilitate travel by walking, biking, or other non-motorized means. Building Facades: The design of building facades, particularly those facades that face public streets, should be architecturally interesting and in scale with the pedestrian. Storefront windows are encouraged in retail shops and, in most cases, should begin within 18" to 24" of the pavement. Typically, storefront windows help to entice customers into stores, stimulate visual interest, create "defensible space" by enhancing public views of store interiors and streets, and establish a predictable rhythm for passers-by. The scale and width of each storefront should be limited to establish an intimate scale that is more conducive to the pedestrian and cyclist than to the automobile. In general, storefront ividths should relate to a human scale. Where storefronts must be large to accommodate specific uses, the building facades could be articulated with windows, insets, pillars, columns, arcades or other decorative architectural features to maintain the overall intimacy of the shopping street. Signage: A coordinated signage plan for development can facilitate pedestrian and vehicular movement throughout the planning area, without "visually assaulting" the senses. Signage should be designed at a scale that is not overpowering from the pedestrian's perspective. For example, small signs with a unique texture, shape, or interesting features can be more effective than large, massive, or glaring signs. This Temecula Regional Center Zoning Ordinance 111-38 7) 8) contains comprehensive signage criteria for uses within Planning Area 1 (see Section III.C.1. in this Specific Plan). Streetscape Design: To encourage human activity and movement, streets should be designed with the pedestrian in mind. Continuity in landscape design, placement of street furniture, sitting areas, covered arcades for shelter against the sun and inclement weather, lighting, and paving patterns all contribute to creating a rich, functional, and aesthetically pleasing environment for pedestrians. Pedestrian Plazas: All areas of Planning Area 1, and the Main Street in particular, should be designed with pedestrian gathering spots and should include plazas and pocket parks for resting, eating, conversing, and people watching. Pedestrian plazas that are effectively placed within retail and office districts can be pleasant spaces for resting or having lunch between shopping trips or errands. Placement of pedestrian plazas must be carefully planned to assure their most effective use. For this reason, consideration must be given to the location of plazas relative to the pedestrian circulation patterns, sunlight conditions, wind patterns, and the selection of building and landscape materials. Organization of Activities: The most important element in creating viable pedestrian spaces has little to do with the actual physical design of the space; if a space is to be conducive to pedestrian activity, there must be opportunities for pedestrian events and activities. Therefore, efforts to planning and organizing festivals, events, special sidewalk sales, entertainment, and cultural displays should be made to help create desired pedestrian activity. Private marketing efforts should be encouraged to promote these types of community events. Signage This Specific Plan includes a comprehensive signage program for the mixed use development. The program includes retail commercial entry monumentation, building identification signage, marquee signage, and directional signage. Although the signage criteria contained in the Zoning Ordinance in this Specific Plan includes maximum permitted sign sizes, the individual sign that identifies a given use should be consistent with the scale and mass of the building on which it is located or which it identifies. Specific signage materials should be uniform throughout each individual development within Planning Area 1. Transit Alternatives/Options One of the primary objectives of establishing mixed use development within the Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan is the creation of a density threshold and a mixture of uses that is capable of supporting transit alternatives to the automobile. Bus turnouts shall be provided at appropriate locations within Planning Area 1, subject to approval by the City III-39 ~Fridoy June 3, 199~, 1:22pm -- Page 2J J1.Jl~-1994 12:19 ~ I ~I~ ~ 1~ P.~ b, Please C. of Tm anxl, if _ne,:~__~azy, the Rivestatic Trsn~it Agency. Addifiosm] trsnsit corridor fight-of-way adjaccnt to Winds~mr Rosd on tl~ m ~1~ of ~ ph,,,,,in$ area will allow sps~ for developmere of a mass U~-~t syswn (e.g., light rail, etc.) should such asystnmcv~bcconstmctccL Vi!!n~e Ccnter/IVl'nh~ Sb'cct Development Area Thc VillsL2c C. entcr/l~-i- SU~et conccpt shall apply to betwere 10 to 15 acres within PIRnnlaE Azc8 1. BlOCkS within the Main Street area shall be de. fined by a public street f~ SyStClB, The Fr-mnindCr Of the pl.nnin~ kw'e8 could be developed in a conventional fs~hlon pursu:~ to market demand if a continuation of ,his concept is d~.ern~inf~l to bc infcasiblc by the CRy. Land Use Developmint Standards refe~ to Zon~ Ordinance No. . in Section IILC of thig Specific p!nn~ : phnni.~ Standards In complinnce with th~ goals and policies of the City's General Plan, Villng~ Cenmr Overlay and Land Use Element Goal 5 - Policim 5.5 through 5.10, it is important cre. a~ a quality environment which establishes a sens~ of place through careful considention and Integration of the following design elements: b) P~de~'ian linka~. c) Narrow streets and driveways with pedemian paseos and widc sidewalks. d) Featu~s such as pascos, arcades, plazas, cour~ards, squares, galleries and oa,~door cares to ancourage gathering. f) Gathering places such as pavilions, parks and bandstands. Festivals, enl~ain- me. nt, su'eet vendors, outdoor msimts and other special events should be Incorporation of lOgOfnin~= and water bodies. Unique arcMtecturel and landscape archite~twal fir, rues for identity. h) Careful parking orientation. I1]-40 2) 3) 4) ltis i.mpofiam to not~lhnt notali uses allowed in Planning Ama 1 are nec~ expecl:gl to occur. For this reason, song of the appropriate nor econo~ feasible. For thi,~ t'~ason, only the concept of a "Main Street" is disctuned in depth above. Addidonal options for possible development in plnnning Area Iag discussed in Section IV, Design C_w~idelint~, in thig Access into plnnnin~ Area 1 will be provided from Marguita Road, Apricot Avenue and Winchesl~r Road. One (1) =i~or entry cro~,,~ is proposed through me W'mcbester Road corridor into Planning ~ 1. This minor CSt. slin~ would Ixovide right-nun-only acceee into this ~ Use Pl~--i-g Area (see Figure 12A). This propoeal shall comply with the current M~morandum of Umteraanding (MOU) between the City of Temecula and Calinns as m the location and spacing of mines access points along Winchester Roll Special nantdway laudscape Ue. atnsmts, as those depicted in Figures 14, 18, and T ~-dscape ~a'chitectum Ouidcliues (Sec. IVY_..) shall be v, ovided along Wiuchester Road, biargaxita Road and Apricot Aveuue. Major EnUy Monumentafion as dcpictcd in Figurc :23, Landscape Architcctuntl Guidelines, shnll be provided nt the interactions of Winchester Road and Mmgdrita Road, and MarBat'its Road and Apricot Avenuc, and along Margarita Road and W'mchestcr Road. Minor Entry Monumentalion, as depicted in Figure 2.5. Landscapc An:hitcctural Cmidclines, shall be lauvided along Winchesmr Road. Mmgarita Road and Apricot Avenuc. Ple, ar, c t~fcr to Scc. IV. for Specific Dcsign C_midc/~tncs and otl~r tcla~ design criteria. Pleas~ rgfer to Scc. 1TI.A. for k following Development Plans aml Standards dmt apply site-wide: 1TIA. I- SpecificT~n,tUs~Plan rlT_A.2 - Cimulation Plan flTA.3 - Drainage Plan rlT A.4 - Wafa and Sewer Plans rfi-A.8 - Maimenwnre Plan HI-41 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CONCEPTUAL CIRCULATION SYSTEM PHASING PLAN DRAFT ADDENDU1VI EIR CAMPOS VERDES SPECIFIC PLAN RECEIVED .JAN 0 8 1993 'CITY OF TEMECULA SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 1 EIR NO. 348 Lead Agency: CITY OF TEMECULA 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 (714) 694-6400 Prepared By: Douglas Wood & Associates 567 San Nicolas Drive, Suite 301 Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 644-7977 ! Conceptual Circulation System Phasing Plan lrmdings of the traffic analysis indicate that, at projected build-out of the three Kemper[Beclford projects substantial roadway improvements will be needed in the study area. It is important to recognize that principal roadway improvements which comprise the planned City of Temecula Circulation Element will be needed in the future whether or not the proposed projects are implemented. Although these new and improved roadway facilities would be serving the immediate access needs of these proposed projects and other numerous planned development projects within the study area, most of the improvements would also play an important role in serving the general circulation needs of the Temecula commercial core area which straddle~ the 1-15 corr/dor. Some of the improvements (e.g. Winchester Road - S.R. 79 widening and 1-15/W'mchester Road interchange reconstruction) would even serve future regional circulation needa. The intent of the "conceptual circulation system phasing plan' developed in this study is to present a logical implementation sequence for the construction of needed area-wide roadway improvements which also considers the proposed phasing plan for the proposed Kemper/Bedford projects. It should be noted that project build-out (assumed Year 2000) roadway needs have essentially been based on full development (build-out) of all land uses within the immediate study area. The market driven implementation rate of major development projects in the area will have very strong influence on the timing of future roadway improvement needs. A~ these area development projects are implemented, they will require access. Many of the phased roadway improvements suggested in this plan are intended to provide for those local acc, ess needs and at the same time work towards completing the ultimate area-wide circulation network. In some cases, the phased improvement is over-designed for the anticipated local development access needs but considers ultimate needs and the desire to minim/ze future construction impacts related to phased widenings (e.g., initially building two lanes and the widening to four lanes at the later date). The assessment of financing/implementation responsibilities for area-wide roadway improvements should consider that the key elements of the planned circulation system (including the Overland overpass, Data Street overpass, and Winchester Interchange improvements) will be needed even if proposed Kernper/Bedford development projects are not implemented. Since it is more difficult to predict the rate and pattern of long-term (5 to 10 years) development than short-term (1 to 5 years) development, it should be recognized that the actual roadway ne, ed~ for implementation periods beyond 5 years could vary significantly from the conceptual plan presented in this study. It is also important to consider that many of the roadway improvements identified would involve a multi-jurisdiction/agency review and coordination process which could impact the conceptual implementation plan presented herein. A~ticipated Project Development Phasing - Project phasing assumed in this analy~Ls is based on the Project Phasing Plan presented in the individual Specific Plan documents. Sue to changing market strategies, these phasing plans have been developed as a 'guideline' only for City review and monitoring. Future market demands may dictate varying approaches to phasing which could alter the currently expected rate and/or sequence of project implementation. Project Phasing Plan a-~sumptioas are illustrated in Figures 4, 11, and 18 for the Temecula Regional center, Winchester HilLs, and Camps Verdes projects respectively. A more detailed breakdown of project phasing assumptions including anticipated development status and corresponding trip generation (both incremental and cumulative) by six analysis time periods is presented for each Kemper/Bedford project in Tables 1 through 3. Anticipated Background Development - In order to analyze roadway system implementation phasing needs, it was nece~ary to make general assumptions regarding the rate and location of other area development. For the purposes of this asse.~sment it was assumed that other area development would build-out at a constant rate over the next eight years and in a manner which would evenly dLstribute the new development throughout the study area. Conceptual Circulation System Phasing - Results of the circulation system phasing assessment are presented in Figures 5 through 10 (Tcme~ula Regional Center), Figures 12 through 17 (Winchester Hills), and Figures 19 through 24 (Campos Verdes). It should be noted that the Conceptual Cixculation System Phasing Plan is identical for each of the three projects. The individual phasing plans differ only in terms of the specific project development status and the corresponding cumulative project trip generation given for each implementation period. Our approach in preparing the Conceptual Circulation System Phasing Plan included planning level assessments which focused on the immediate access needs of each project as well as capacity of key congestion "bottle necks" such as the Winchester Road/Ynez Road intersection and Winchester Road/I-15 interchange. The proposed roadway impiovement implementation sequence has been formulated to provide incremental stages of relief to these congestion prone areas. Additionally, .,~se.~ment District 161 and Community Facilities District 88-12 have been considered in the development of the Phasing Plan, It is important to recognize that the Conceptual Circulation systems Phasing Plan presented herein does not imply that the individual Kernper/Bedford projects would be respons~le for implementing the roadway improvement needs identified in the Conceptual Phasing Plan. At the same time, it also needs to be recognized that the rate at which projects in the study area are permitted to develop should be correlated to the circulation systems' ability to adequately ac.~ommedate the traffic which these projects will generate. 10 1 t g I I] il I Ir I I l: I I I m: 0 As part of our roadway phasing assessment, we have identified a number of improvements which are currently anticipated to be critical (either directly or indirectly) to the development of the individual Kemper/Bedford projects. This does not suggest that the identified improvement,' but rather the timely implementation of the identifie~l improvement would influence the status of traffic congestion in the area. The resulting congestion levels could influence the City's ability to issue building permits. Temecula Regional Center (Refer to Figure 5 through 10) Projected 1993-1994 Implementation Period: Two-lane interim improvement of Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road. Ynez Road widening from project boundary south to Rancho California Road. Winchester Road widening from Margarita Road to Mun'ieta Hot Springs Road. New signal installations on Winchester Road to Margarita Road, Nicolas Road, and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Projected 1994 to 1995 Implementation Period: Extension of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road. Four-lane widening of Margarita Road from Solaria Way to Wi~3chester Road. New signal installations on Overland Drive at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, and Margarita Road. New signal installations on Winchester Road at Temec~ala Regional Center access roads. On-site circulation system improvements/access connections. Projected 1995 to 1996 Implementation Period Winchester Road interchange ramp improvements. Two-lane interim Ynez Road/Jackson Avenue extension to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Projected 1996 to 1998 Implementation Period: Winchester Road interchange overpass widening. New aignal irmtallations on Ynez Road at County Center Drive and Sate Street. new signal installation on Margarita Road at Date Street Two-lane extension of General Kearney Road easterly to Nicolas Road. Projected 1998 to 1999 Implementation Period: Date Street overpass improvements. 11 Projected 1999 to 2000 Implementation Period: Winchester Road widening between 1-15 and Ynez~Road. Jackson Avenue widening from the Temecula City limit to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Winchester Hills (Refer to Figures 12 through 17) Projected 1993-1994 Implementation Period: Four-lane widening of Margarita Road from Winchester Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road, · Two-lane interim improvement of Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road. Four-lane extension of Ynez Road to Date Street alignment On-site loop street and connector street improvements as depicted in Figure 12. Widening of Jefferson Avenue from Date Street to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Ynez Road widening from Overland Drive alignment to Rancho California Road, New signal installation on Winchester Road at Margarita and Murrieta Hot Springs Road intemectiom. Projected 1994-1995 Implementation Period: Two*lane interim improvement of Date Street west of Yncz Road. Four-lane improvement of Date Street from Margarita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Extension of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road. Widening of Margafita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road. Projected 1995-1996 implementation Period: Six-lane and two-lane interim improvement on Date Street as depicted n Figure 14. Four-lane on-site and two-lane interim off-site improvement of Ynez Road/.lackson Avenue to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. On-site loop street and connector street improvements as illustrated in Figure 14. Four-way stop control at Date Street/Margarita Road, Ynez Road/Project Connector Street, and Date Street/Ynez Road intersections. New signal installations at Date Street/Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Margafita Road/Project Connector Street intersections. Winchester Road interchange ramp improvements. 12 Projected 1996-1998 Implementation Period: Winchester Road interchange .overpass widening. Date Street widening from Lincoln to Margarita Road. New signal installations on Date Street at Ynez Road, Lincoln and Margarita Road intersections. New signal installations on Ynez Road at County Center Drive and the Project Connector Street intersections. Projected 1998-1999 Implementation Period: Construction of the Date Street overpas-~ and installation of new signals on Date Street at Madison Avenue and the Bu.sine.~ Park access street. New signal installation at Jackson Avenue/North Business Park access street ' ' Projected 1999-2000 Implementation Period: Widening of Jackson Avenue between the City limit and Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Campos Verdes Projected 1993-1994 Implementation Period: Two-lane interim improvement of Margafita Road from Solaria Way to Winchester Road. Four-lane improvement of General kearney Road from the new Margarita Road alignment to the easterly project limits. Solaria Way widening between Ynez Road and Margarita Road. Ynez Road widening from the Overland Drive alignment to Rancho California Road. Winchester Road widening from Margarita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. New signal installations on Margarita Road at Winchester Road and Solana .Way. Projected 1994-1995 Implementation Period: Four-lane widening of Margarita Road from Solana Way to Winchester Road. Extension of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road. New signal installations on Overland Drive at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, and Margarita. New signal installation at intersection of Margafita Road and General Keamey Road. Projected 1995-1996 Implementation Period: Winchester Road interchang~ ramp improvements. New signal installation at intersection of Margarita Road and Campos Verdes access road. 13 Projected 1996-1998 Implementation Period: Winchester Road interchange overpass widening. Two-lane General Kearney Road extension from easterly project limits to Nicolas Road. Projected 1998-2000 Implementation Period: (No system improvements assessed to be critical to the development of Campos Verdes. Recommended Mitigation Measures The formulation of recommended mitigation measures for the three Kernper/Bedford urban core projects has been based on a number factors including: 1. Endings of the original traffic impact studies prepared for the projects; 2. Findings of the project-related traffic utilization analysis of planned area roadway system capacity; and 3. Findings of the conceptual circulation system phasing analysis. Assessments of area roadway capacity utilization reveal that cumulative project traffic impacts are wide-spread but vary significantly in terms of magnitude. Furthermore this analysis also reveals that project trips are comprised of a combination of new trips and diverted trips. New trips consist of those project trips which would clearly be added to roadway network such as those vehicle trips which would have one end of the trip within the project and one end outside of the study area. Diverted trips describe those project-related trips on area roadways which result from the interaction of land uses within the projects and other local area land uses (both existing and planned). With diverted trips, the associated traffic impacts can not be defined as the responsibility of the projects under study since the opposite end of these trips, in effect, is being generated by other area land uses. At best the impacts of these trips could be assessed as the responsibility of the land use which is closest to the location where the impact occurs. It would not be equitable for the Kernper/Bedford projects to assume full respons~ility for the impact of these diverted trips since elimination of the Kernper/Bedford projects would not eliminate the land uses which are generating the opposite ends of these trips. Without the Kernper/Bedford projects these trips would essentially be redistributed to interact with other local or regional development. ., 14 In terms of the dispersion of project related traffic impacts (e.g. roadway capacity util~ation), it ks not practical to assess widespread roadway implementation cost responsibilities when "fair share' a.~sessments represent very small portions of the cost to implement individual roadway improvements. The approach taken in this assessment is one which recognizes the cumulative impacts over a widespread area and concentrates an equivalent mitigation effort in a strategic and more effective manner. [, Recommended m~tigation measures for cumulative traffic impacts identified for the Kemper/Bedford projects are summarized below: .1. 50 percent implementation respons~ility for Jackson Avenue from the Temecula/Murrieta City limits to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. · winchester Hills is a~sessed 90 percent of the mitigation. Temecula Regional Center is assess 10 percent of the Mitigation. 2. 16.6 percent or 1/6th implementation respons~ility for the Date Street overpass. · Winchester HilLs is assessed 100 percent of the mitigation. 28 percent implementation resp~ns~ility for the Winchester Road interchange overpass widening and currently planned ramp ~idenings. Winchester Hills is assessed 17 percent of the mitigation. Temecula Regional Center ks assessed 80 percent of the mitigation. Campos Verdes is assessed 3 percent of the mitigation. 5 percent implementation responsibility for the Overland Drive overpass improvement (Jefferson Avenue to Ynez Road). Temecuia Regional Center is as.sessed 60 percent of the mitigation. Campos Verdes is assessed 40 percent of the mitigation. 15 percent implementation respons~ility for the Ynez Road widening from Overland Drive to Rancho California Road. Temecula Regional Center is as,sessed with 70 percent of the mitigation. Winchester I--Iilis is assessed with 15 percent of the mitigation. Campos Verdes is assessed with 15 percent of the mitigation. 16.6 percent implementation responsibility for the WinchesteF Road widening from Margarita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. · Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 90 percent of the mitigation. · Winchester Hills is assessed with 5 percent of the mitigation. Campes Verdes is assessed with 5 percent of the mitigation. 15 ! [ 25 percent implementation responsibility for the four-lane Margafita Road improvement from Solana Way to Winchester Road. · Temecula Reg/onal Center is assessed with 65 percent of the mitigation. · Winchester Hills is assessed with 15 percent of the mitigation. · Campos Verdes is assessed with 20 percent of the mitigation. 15 percent implementation responsibility for the four-lane Margarita Road improvement from Winchester Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. · Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 35 percent of the mitigation.. Winchester HilLs is assessed with 60 percent of the mitigation. · Campos Verdes is assessed with 5 percent of the mitigation. 25 percent of the implementation responsibility for the four-lane Ynez Road improvement from its present terminus at Equity Drive to the Temecula/Murrieta City limits. · Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 20 percent of the mitigation. Winchester Hills is assessed with 80 percent of the mitigation. 10. 16.6 percent of the implementation responsibility for the six-lane Date Street improvement from the 1-15 overpass structure to Margarita Road. · Winchester Hills is assessed with 100 percent of the mitigation. 11.13 percent of the implementation responsibility for the four-lane Date Street improvement from Margafita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Winchester Hills is assessed with 100 percent of the mitigation. 12. 25 percent of the implementation responsibility for the four-lane improvement of Overland Drive from Ynez Road to Margafita Road. · Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 80 percent of the mitigation. · Winchester Hills is assessed with 10 percent of the mitigation. Campos Verdes is assessed with 10 percent of the mitigation. 13. 30 percent of the implementation responsibility for four-lane improvements responsibility for four-lane improvement of General Kearney Road from Margafita Road to the easterly C, ampos Vetdes project boundary. Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 30 percent of the mitigation. · Campos Vetdes is assessed with 70 percent of the mitigation. 14. 15 percent of the implementation respons~ility for the four-lane improvement of General Kearney Road from the easterly project limit to Nicolas Road. · Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 85 percent of the mitigation. · Campos Vetdes is assessed with 15 percent of the mitigation. 16 15. 10 percent of the implementation responsibility for the widening of Solana Way 'from Ynez Road to Margarita Road, · Temecula Regional Center is assessexl with 45 percent of the mitigation. Winchester Hills is assessed with 10 percent of the mitigation. · Campos Verdns is assessed with 45 percent of the mitigation. 16. 5 percent of the implementation responsibility for the widening of Murrieta Hot Springs Road from Date Street to Canyon Drive. · Temecula Regional Center is assessed with 30 percent of the mitigation. Winchester Hills is assessed with 70 percent of the mitigation. 17. Signal system implementation responsibilities would be as indication below. a) 100 percent responsibility for on-site signals within the Winchester HilLs project including: · Date Street signals at Business Park Access Street, Ynez Road, Lincoln, and Margarita Road; · Ynez Road signals at Business Park Access Street, and Loop Road Connector Street (near Equity Drive); and Margarita Road signal at southerly Loop Road Connector Street. b) 100 percent respons~ility for Temecula Regional Center project perimeter access signals including: Winchester Road signal at westerly Regional Center Access Road; Overland Drive signal at Regional Center Access Road; and Existing regional modification costs at Palm Plaza Access and Costco Center Access. c) 100 percent respons~ility for Campos Verdes Access signals on Margarita Road at General Kearney Road and Campos Verdes Acce~ Street d) 50 percent responsibility for signals located at the following intersections: · Margarita Road/Winchester Road; · Margarita Road/Overland Drive; and · Ynez Road/Overland Drive. 25 percent responsibility for the signal installations at: Jackson Avenue/Murrieta Hot Spring~ Road; and · Margarita Road/Solana Way. 17 It is important to note that the implementation responsibilities detailed herein do not take into account Ya:mp~r/Bexlfords contfibutioas toward Assessment District 161 and Community Facilities District 88-12 which together address many of the improvements included in the refined recommended mitigation measures. KemperfBedford should be given credit where appropriate for asse.~sments involving the project properties and roadway improvements included in the 161 and 88-12 districts. Credits should also be considered for fight-of-way dedications involving the recommendeel street improvements. In addition to the above listed mitigation measures, the individual KemperfBedford projects would be responsible for implementing all on-site project street improvements which have not already been discussed. Individual project mitigation would also include preparation of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Programs which meet the requirements of the City's 'soon to be adopted" TDM ordinance. Please not that' ihe Winchester Hills project, as part of its' mitigation program, has reserved an easement along the 1-15 property frontage for a potential future collector-distributor road/interchange system invoMng Date Street. 18 I 1 i I l 1 I l ! ! 1 ! I i ] i *~,.. 0 LL. ATTACHMENT NO. 5 ATTACHMENT "A", MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR EIR NO. 340 R:\STAFFRFI'\263SP.PC5 7/15194 vgw 24 ATFACHMENT "A" Mitigation Monitoring Program EIR No. 340, Specific Plan No. 263 The Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan has been assigned by the Traffic Engineer the following percentage utilization of a percentage implementation responsibility for the off-site c'wculation improvements noted below. This implementation responsib'~ity for the provision of off-site roadway improvements is intended to mitigate the project' s portion of cumulative traffic impacts. These improvements and the project's iinplemontation responsibility are listed below: Improvement 1. Construction of Jackson Avenue from the Temecula]Murrieta City Limits to Murfieta Hot Springs Road 2. Winchester Road interchange overpass widening and currently planned ramp widenings 3. Overland Drive overpass improvement (Jefferson Avenue to Ynez Road) 4. Ynez Road widening from Overland Drive to Rancho California Road 5. Winchester Road widening from Margarita Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road 6. Four-lane Margarita Road improvement from Solana Way to Winchester Road 7. Four-lane Margarita Road impwvement from Winchester Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road 8. Four-lane Ynez Road improvement from its present terminus at Equity Drive to the Temecula/Murrieta City limits 9. Four-lane Overland Drive improvement from Ynez Road to Margarita Road 10 Four-lane impwvement of General Kearny Road from Margarita Road to the easterly Campos Vetdes project boundary 11 General Kearny from easterly project limit to Nicolas Road Implementation Responsibility Assigned to Temecula Regional Center 5.00% 22.40% 3.00% 10.50% 16.94% 16.25% 5.25 % 5.00% 20.00% 9.00% 12.75% R:~TAFFRFrO43PP.MEk{ 6/2/94 v~ 78 Improvement 12 Widening of Solana Way from Ynez Road to Ma~garita Rend 13 WiderLing of Murrieta Hot Springs Road from Date Street to Canyon Drive 14 Project perimeter access signals on Winchester Road, Overland Drive, the Palm p]n7~ ac. cess and Costco Center access 15 Signals at the intersections of: Margarita Road/Winchester Road, Margarita Road/Overland Drive and Ynez Rend/Overland Drive 16 Signals at the intersections of Jackson Avenue/Murrieta Hot Springs Rend and Margarita Rend/Solana Rend Implementation Responsibility Assigned to Temecula Regional Center 4.50% 1.50% 50.00%* 25.00%* This percentage implementation responsibility relates to all three Urban Core projects. Specific percentage responsibility by project is not available. R:',,~X$1'AFFRPTL~3PP.MIgA 6~2/94 ~ 79 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT L~I I ER, APRIL 18, 1994 R:XSTAFFRPT%263SP.P<:'5 7115194 v~v., 25 TEMECULA VALLEY Unified School District SUPERINTENDENT Patncla B Novotney. EdD April 18, 1994 Steve Jiannino City of Temecula Planning Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 BOARD Of EDUCATION SUBJECT: Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan Conditions Dear Mr. Jiannino: The Temecu(a Valley Unified School District provides the following information from our review of the proposed Specific Plan presented to the Planning Commission March 21, 1994. School Facilities Mitigation Agreement The proposed development includes the potential for 300 multi-family residential unats, generating approximately 192 students, as follows: # of students Elementary School: 84 Middle School: 57 High Schooh 51 Total 192 This number is lower than the number of 240 Students included in the February 1, 1994 Draft Temecula Regional Center EIR. Prior to Specific Plan approval, a signed mitigation agreement will be required between the developer and the School District to ensure adequate facilities for these new students, based on the Public Facilities Element of the City General Plan and the General Plan implementation Program. Section V D.5 of the Draft Specific Plan/EIR should be revised to reflect General Plan Policies and updated School District infcrmGtion as indicated in the attachment. If you have any questions, please call me at 695-7340. Dave Gallaher Director of Facilities Development cc: Patricia B. Novotney, Ed.D., Superintendent John Brooks, Assistant Superintendent Business Services Lettie Boggs, Coordinator of Facilities Planning Janet Dixon, Facilities Planning Analyst Dennis Chiniaeff, KRDC, Inc. 31350 Rancho Vssta Road ' Ternecula CA 92592 ' (909) 676-2661 April 18, 1994 T.R.C. Specific Plan Conditions Section V D.5 (TVUSD requested update for General Plan consistency - 4/18/941 SCHOOLS a. Existino Conditions The proposed project lies within the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD) for educational services and facilities. The District currently operates six elementary (grades K-E) schools, two middle (grades 6-8) schools and two high (grades 9-12) schools, The attached Table, provided by the District's Facilities Development Department, indicates the current enrollment, permanent building capacity, and interim (portable classrooms) capacity of each school. As the Table indicates, most District schools are operating above their permanent building capacity. The portable classrooms are temporary buildings utilized to accommodate the overflow of students as new permanent facilities are constructed. b. Project Impacts/Genera/Plan Relationship The Temecula Valley Unified School District utilizes the following criteria to calculate student generation. · Attached Dwellinn Units: Grades K-E - 0.28 students per unit; Grades 6-8 - 0.19 students per unit; Grades 9-12 - 0.17 students per unit · Detached [:)wellina Units: Grades K-E - 0.39; students per unit; Grades 6-8 - 0.24 students per unit; Grades 9-12 - 0.25 students per unit The proposed 300 multi-family residential units located within the "mixed-use" commercial area on-s~te could potentially gene approximately 192 students (utilizing the TVUSD criteria mentioned above). As no school facilities are proposed within the prole~, boundaries, the estimated 192 students generated by the Temecula Regional Center would require accommodation off-site. As previously mentioned, most District schools are currently operating above permanent building capacity. The additional students generated by this project will place an increased demand upon District facilities which are already impacted. It should be noted that the 300 multi-family residential units are intended to be located over commercial and office uses as residential flats. Generally, this type of housing does not attract as many families with school aged children as is reflected in the student generation data from other types of attached dwelling units. The estimated 192 students associates with the project portray a "worst-case" scenario. It is anticipated that the number of students generated by the project may be lower than the 192 total. GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP The Temecula Regional Center project site lies within the boundaries of the newly incorpurated City of Temecula. The City General Plan adopted in October 1993, requires the following mitigation measures with regard to school facilities impacts. c, General Plan IrnDlernentation ProdTram Ir~ accordance with the Public Facilities Element of the City General Plan and the General Plan Implementation Program, the impact of the new students from this project shall be mitigated through a mitigation agreement signed by the developer and the District, prior to Specific Plan approvals. The developer and District may agree to use one or more of the following financing mechanisms: 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of school fees Dedication of land and/or facilities Establishment of or annexation to a Community Facilities District Levying of a special tax Other alternatives agreed upon by the Developer and the District d. Level of SiQnificance After Mitiqation Upon completion of the mitigation measures proposed above, the level of impacts related to Schools will be reduced to an ,~significant level. 0'~ O>-c~ riB"' >- OJ .,,_, ~-: O: O: C%1 0010 CO ATTACHMENT NO. 8 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, JULY '~8, 1994 R:~STAFFRPT~263SP.CC 9/7194 Idb 30 reconveneOa~a Chairman Ford declared a recess at 7:17 P.M. The meeting was ~ 7:29 P.M. 9. Specific Plan No. 263 and Chanqe of Zone No, 5589 Specific Plan proposing a 1,375,000 square foot Commercial Core, 810,000 square feet of Office/Institutional and Mixed Use Residential with 298,000 square feet of retail with an accompanying Change of Zone request changing the zone from R-R (Rural Residential) and A-2-20 (Heavy Agricultural 20 acre minimum lot size) to SP (Specific Plan). Located south of Winchester Road between Ynez and Margarita Roads. Senior Planner Debbie Ubnoske presented the staff report stating the proposed project had been continued from the June 6, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Fahey stated that Condition No, 58 of the Conditions of Approval should more clearly state that it applied specifically to residential development in the Specific Plan. Planner Ubnoske stated the primary issue for the Regional Center is the Village Center Concept which was carried over from the May 23, 1994 meeting. Chairman Ford opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. Dennis Chiniaeff, representative for Kernper Community Development Company, 27555 Ynez Road, inquired as to the conditions which allow some community development to occur which interest both the City and Kernper. Mr. Chiniaeff also said the conditions should be balanced in terms of property improvements and area improvements. He also questioned whether Condition No. 12 of the Conditions of Approval applied to the residential portions of the proposed project. Mr. Chiniaeff asked about Condition No. 18 and the Developer Fee for commercial, office and residential; his understanding is that these were Facilities fees. Director Thornhill stated that Condition No. 12 relating to School District fees does apply to the residential portion of the project. Assistant City Attorney, Greg Diaz added legal comments relating to the School Mitigation issue and the impact fee both of which have not been resolved by the City Council and is under State Law. Dennis Chiniaeff asked about the payment of $10,000.00 for Community Facility Fees and whether the fee could be prepaid. Assistant City Attorney Diaz stated that the ~ 10,000.00 fee could not be prepaid. Condition No. 20 to be changed from "of any subsequent development application" to "for each subsequent development application." Mr. Chiniaeff, the applicant, inquired about Condition No. 28, Bullet No. 3 regarding the infrastructure being in place prior to issuance of occupancy permits and the dedication of the right-of-way for the construction of Winchester Road. Mr. Chiniaeff stated that the Right-of-Way was intended to be purchased under CFD 88-12. He requested that a provision be made stating that the acquisition cost be reimbursed for the required right-of-way. Condition No. 30 states "the developer is responsible to bond and construct traffic signals.,." The word prior should be struck from the condition. Condition No. 43 should include "unless approved by the Director of Public Works for street purposes." Commissioner Hoagland asked about Condition No, 30 and the method of reimbursement when improving property other than own and that the improvements are also part of Campos Verdes, Tim Serlet, Director of Public Works stated that the Right-of-Way reimbursement money went to the City for expended funds. Planning Director Thornhill stated that Condition No. 60 should read "...open space in residential areas shall be maintained..." It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to close the Public Hearing at 7:45 P.M. and Adopt Resolution No. recommending approval of Specific Plan No. 263 and Change of Zone No. 5589 based on Staff's recommendations subject to the Conditions of Approval including modifications to Condition No(s) 12, 20, 28, 30, 43, 58, and 60 as discussed, seconded by Commissioner Fahey. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Fahey, Hoagland, Salyer, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None Commissioner Hoagland moved to re-order the remaining Agenda items so that Item 10 follow the Planning Director's Report and other Commission business. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director Thornhill stated that the Johnson Ranch hearing needed to be reschedulel _" ~e to noticing. PLAf~, MNG COMMISSION DISCUSSION None OTHER BUSINL.'c~ None 10. Specific Plan No. 1, (,, ~nae of Zone No. 56 Report No. 348 Environmental Impact Specific Plan proposing 308 ! Commercial, approximately 13~ Detention, 10.8 acres of Park i accompanying Change of Z Residential) and A-2-20 (Specific Plan). Commissioners 7:55 P.M. due ..y residential units, 12 acres of ~s of Office/Commercial/Church/ _ r).7 acre Elementary School Site with an u~._ * changing the zoning from R-R (Rural AgriculL_-al, 20 acre minimum lot size) to SP and Fahey excused t~ ._ inselves from the meeting at conflict of interest. , Senior PI Debbie Ubnoske presented the staff rep t and stated that the originally heard at the June 6, 1994 Planning 'ommission mee Planner Ubnoske stated that the opening of Sand,, ';ng Way and/or Street needed to be discussed by the Commission. ATTACHMENT NO. 9 ADDENDUM TO FEIR 340 CONTAINING MITIGATION MONITORING REPORT R:\STAFFRPT\263SP.CC 9/7194 Idb ATTACHMENT NO. 10 REGIONAL CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN/EIR SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER ATTACHMENT NO. 11 CAMPOS VERDES AND REGIONAL CENTER COMPOSITE LAND USE PLAN R:\STAFFP, Ff'~63SP.CC 9r7/94 klb ~ ITEM 18 LEGAL ZE_-'CR TENTATIVE FRALT 27~27 T PARCEL OF LAND CONSiSTiNG OF TRACT 27827-;., ON FiLE IN BOOK .... SEE 90 THROUGH !00, INCLUSIVE, AND TRACT 27827-2, ON FiLE IN BOOK 250, PAGES i THROUGH 3, INCLUSIVE, BOTH RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WiTH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL "B" /"F LOT LINE ADiUSTMENT NO. PA94-9032, RECORDED MAY 31, 1994 AS INSTRJMENT NIl. 229114, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ALL LYING I?; THE CiTY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVESIDE, STATE OF CALIFOR.NiA, SAiD PORTION PARCEL "B" BEi,'4S MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3~ OF SAID TRACT 27527-2; A 3iSTAN'~E 92 5;4.&% FEET; u , '4F 'F E.'-77 P~.P"'ET THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE ')F SAID PARCEL "B" THE FOLLOWING FOj=' COURSES: 1. NORTH 48'17'05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 61.42 FEET: 2. SOUTH ~2°14'55" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 40}.87 FEET; 3. SOUTH 62°16'00' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 482.2° FEET T9 A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2082,00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 27'44'59'' WEST; 4. SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13'16'07", A DISTANCE OF 482.15 FEET TO A POINT C'N A NON-TANGENT LINE, A RADIAL LiNE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 14'28'52" WEST, SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 3! OF SAiD TRACT 27827-1; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 2~827-i THE FOLLOWING ~rNETEEN COIjRSES: ii. 12. .. SOUTH 10'41'04" WEST, A DISTANCE OF ~5.!q FEET; 2. NORTH '73'!8'56" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 12,4,~ FEET; 2. _=OUTH 57°20'50" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 38.43 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NCRTHWESTERLS AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 46.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF :SAID C'_'RVE THROUGH SAID PC. ZNT BEARS NORTH ,-33'07'0'7" EAST; 4. SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAiD CURVE THROUGH A 'CENTRAL AN;iF !42'4Z'46", A DISTANCE OF 114.58 FEET; 5 NORTH 44'10'08" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 5C,.OO FEET TO THE BEGiNNiNG OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTH-WESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF !00.00 FEET; >_ ,=n' ESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THDO GH A 'CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2~!t'44'', A DISTANCE OF 45.92 FEET TO THE BEGINNING A REVERSE CURVE, OONCACE NORTHEASTERLy AND HAViNj .=~2IJS 'DF 222i.00 FEET, AND TO WHICH A RADIAL BEAP. L E !if ...... .~,-1 11;'31 Z,;~ WEST; '~,DRTHWE.STEPLY AL,DN,.; SALE, REVERSE CJRV:: THROUGH A 'lENTHAL ANGLE OF 2'03'ii", A DISTANCE 79.5,~ FEET '.;, A P:31NT ';'N A NON-TANGENT LINE. A RADIAL LINE OF SAZE CURVE THR,:ij(~H S~Zi: POINT BEARS SODTH 21'34'20" WEST; ;OUTu 24°26'i ~." WEST, A DISTANCE OF 4,!.'2 FEET T(; THE ~r:rNN/NG OF a TANqENT OURVE, C,~N,jAVE '~ .... -- __, _A.~TERLk' HAVING A RADIUS OF 189.0L FEET; 9. SOUTHWESTERLy ALI:ING SAID CURVE THROUC-H A CENTRAL ANGLE 3°0U' L4", A DISTANCE OF 26.40 FEET; S,SUTH 10'25'5~" WEST, A DiSTAt,ICE CE =',~RTH 73°34'0['' WEST, A DISTANCE '0F SOUTH 16'25'59" WEST, A DISTANCE OF NORTH NORT!{ 7 ? ' 3 .t ' 0 i" WEST, le'~<'52." EAST, 7.~,3 FEET; S5.CS FEET; 7.24 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 35.~l,D FEET; A DISTANCE ,DF 2(.!5 FEET; TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPR{~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 11, 1994 Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) - A Forty-One Foot, Six Inch High (41'6"), One Hundred Twenty-Two (122) Square Foot Freestanding Freeway Oriented Sign for Toyota of Temecula Valley located on the East Side of Interstate 15 Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063 (APPEAL}, UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063,TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FORTY-ONE FOOT, SIX INCH HIGH (41'6"), ONE HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO (122) SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN FOR TOYOTA OF TEMECULA VALLEY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 15 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 911-150-005. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission directed Staff to deny an approximately 41 '6" high freeway oriented sign at their August 1, 1994 by a 4-0 vote. Staff requested that the Commission provide direction to deny the sign at approximately 41 '6" in height for two reasons. First, the height of the proposed sign was not consistent with another freeway oriented sign located on the adjacent property to the south (Ynez Car Care Center). The Planning Commission, on May 2, 1994, directed Staff to deny a request for a forty (40) foot high sign at the Ynez Car Care Center, opting to approve a sign between 25 and 30 feet in height. The City Council upheld the Commission's decision on June 28, 1994, approving a sign between 25 and 30 feet in height. This decision, in Staff's opinion, sets a precedent in the area. All of this was explained to the applicant prior to submittal; however, they opted to submit the sign at 41 '6" in height. R:\STAFFRPT\6;SPA94.CC 9/26/94 ktb 1 Exhibit 'C' Legal Description (to be Grmctze~]) ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 94- R:\STAFFRPT\6]PA9~,CC 9/26/9~ ktb 3 ATrACHMF-NT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 94.- A I~F-qOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063 (APPEAL), UPHOLDING PLANNING CO1VIMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0063, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FORTY-ONE FOOT, SIX INCH HIGH (41'6"), ONE HUNDliF. I~ TWENTY-TWO (122) SQUARE FOOT FREESTANDING FREEWAY OI~mNTED SIGN FOR TOYOTA OF TEMECULA VALLF-Y LOCATED ON ~ EAST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 15 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCF. L NO. 911-150-005. WHEREAS, Toyota of Temecula filled Planning Application No. PA94-0063 in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Riverside County Land Use and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WHEREAS, Planning Application No. PA94-0063 was processled in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WIF_,REAS, the Planning Commission considered Planning Application No. PA94-0063 on August 1, 1994 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribled by law, at which time interestled persons had an opportunity to testify either in supper or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing, the Commission directled Planning Staff to deny Planning Application No. PA94-0063; WHEREAS, Toyota of Temecula fled Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Riverside County Land Use and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference; WltEREAS, Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) was processed in the time and manner prescribled by State and local law; WHEREAS, the City Council receivled a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff Report regarding Planning Application No. PA94-0063; WHEREAS, the City Council considerled Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) on October 11, 1994 at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribled by law, at which time interestled persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the City Council heating, the Council deniled Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal); R:\STAFFRPT\63PA94.CC 9/26/9~ ktb 4 Second, Section 19.4.a.4. of Ordinance No. 348 (Free-Standing Signs) states that not more than one free-standing sign shall be permitted on a parcel of land (Toyota of Temecula is located on one parcel). Currently, Toyota of Temecula Valley has a freestanding sign along Ynez Road, and they do not intend to remove it. The exception to the one freestanding sign per parcel requirement under Ordinance No. 348 is for a shopping center that has frontage on two or more streets. Toyota of Temecula does not meet the definition of a shopping center as defined in Ordinance No. 348. Since the applicant is currently choosing to construct a freeway oriented sign, they will be precluded from advertising upon the Auto Mall Marquee in the event that it is constructed. Should the Auto Mall Marquee be constructed and the applicant wish to advertise on it, they will need to remove the freeway oriented sign prior to advertising on it. As required under the submittal requirements for an appeal, the applicant has submitted reason(s) or rationale to support the appeal. This has been included as Attachment No. FISCAL IMPACT NoRe, Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. Resolution No. 94- - Page 3 Planning Commission Staff Report: August 1, 1994- Page 7 Draft Planning Commission Minutes: August 1, 1994- Page 8 Exhibits - Page 9 Applicant's Reason(s) or Justification to Support the Appeal - Page 10 Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this llth day of October, 1994. RON ROBERTS MAYOR ATf~T: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 1 lth day of October, 1994 by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: JUNE S. GRRF~K CITY CLERK R:\STAFFRPT\63PA94.CC 9/26/9~ ktb 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 1, 1994 R:\STAFFRPT\63PA94,CC 9/26/!~. kib 7 NOW, T!~R~J*ORE, ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMF_~ULA DOES RESOLVE, DETF_.,RMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. F..j.01liDg~ That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. The City Council, in denying Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal), makes the following findings, to wit: 1. The project is not consistent with the City's General Plan. The freestanding sign does not provide design excellence in signage, nor does it preserve and enhance the positive qualities of individual districts. Further, it does not contribute to a streetscape system that provides cohesivehess and enhances community image. 2. The overall development of the land is not designed for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. To allow each existing business along with future businesses, to erect forty (40) foot high free-standing signs adjacent to Interstate 15 would result in visual blight. To approve projects that would result in visual blight would be contrary to the general welfare of the community. 3. The project does not conform to the logical development of the land and is not compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property. Based upon precedent established from decisions made by the City Council and Planning Commission, no signs individual use or center identification signs in this area, along Interstate 15 in excess of thirty feet have been approved. To approve a forty-one foot, six inch (41 '6") high free-standing sign at this location would not conform to the logical development of the land and would be inconsistent with present and future logical development in the area. In addition, the forty-one foot, six inch (41'6") high freeway oriented sign is not compatible with the scale of the buildings that are located on the site. Section 2. Environmental Compliance, The City of Temecula City Council hereby determines that Planning Application No. PA94-0063 (Appeal) is a statutory exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15270 (a) of the CEQA Guidelines. This Exemption states: "CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves." Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. R:\STAFFRPT\63PA94.CC 9/26/94 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: August 1, 1994 Planning Application No. 94-0063 - A Forty-One Foot, Six Inch High (41'6"), One Hundred Twenty-Two (122) Square Foot Freestanding Freeway Oriented Sign for Toyota of Temecula Valley located on the East Side of Interstate 15 Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner RECO1VE'~'ENDATION: DIRECT Staff to deny Planning Application No. 94-0063 for a forty-one foot six inch (41 '6") high, one hundred twenty-two (122) square foot fleestanding freeway oriented sign for Toyota of Temecula Valley BACKGROUND Planning Application No. 94-0063 was submitted to the Planning Department on July 7, 1994. This project is before the Planning Commission because current policy requires Commission direction with respect to freeway oriented signs. Staff is requesting that the Commission provide direction to deny the sign at approximately 41'6" in height for two reasons. First, the height of the sign is not consistent with another fleeway oriented sign that is located on the adjacent property to the south (Ynez Car Care Center). The Planning Commission denied a request for a forty (40) foot high sign at the Ynez Car Care Center, opting to approve a sign between 25 and 30 feet in height. The City Council upheld the Commission's decision approving a sign between 25 and 30 feet in height. This decision, in StafFs opinion, sets a precedent in the area. All of this was explained to the applicant prior to submittal; however, they have opted to submit the sign at 41'6" in height. Second, Section 19.4.a.4. of Ordinance No. 348 (Free-Standing Signs) states that not more than one free-standing sign shall be permitted on a parcel of land (Toyota of Temecula is located on one parcel). Currently, Toyota of Temecula Valley has a freestanding sign along Ynez Road, and they do not intend to remove it. The exception to the one freestanding sign per parcel requirement under Ordinance No. 348 is for a shopping center that has frontage on two or more streets. Toyota of Temecula does not meet the definition of a shopping center as defined in Ordinance No. 348. R:xSTAFFRPTXf3PA94.PC 7/27/94 vgw ATTACHMENT NO. 3 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 1, 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 1, 1994 Commissioner Fahey said she is not in favor of granting an extension of time to the applicant. Chairman Ford said he would like to see the applicant construct the wall with a time schedule. He clarified the Commission's direction would be to enforce the public use permit. 3. Review Capital Improvement PrOaram (CIP). for Consistency with the General Plan Senior Planner John Meyer presented the staff report. It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to approve staff recommendation and Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 94- 27 "A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA DETERMINING THAT THE CITY OF TEMECULA'S 1994-1995 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED CITY GENERAL PLAN" The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Hoagland, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Salyer Direct Staff to Deny PA94-0063 for A Forty-One Foot Six Inch (41 '6"0) Hiah, One Hundred Twenty-Two (122) Souare Foot Freestandina Freeway Oriented Siqn for Toyota of Temecula Valley Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to direct staff to deny Planning Application No. 94-0063 for a forty-one foot six inch (41 '6"} high, one hundred twenty-two (122} square foot freestanding freeway oriented sign for Toyota of Temecula Valley Chairman Ford asked jf the applicant's existing sign was removed and this sign placed, would staff view the request differently. Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan said yes. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Hoagland, Ford I PCMIN08/01/94 2 09123/94 Should the Commission approve the requested application, they should be aware of Condition of Approval No. 9 of Plot Plan No. 249 Cremecula Auto Mall Marquee). A portion of this condition states: "...all members and future members of the Temecula Valley Auto Mall will forego requesting any additional freeway oriented signage as long as the Temecula Valley Auto Mall Marquee is erected." Since the applicant is currently choosing to construct a freeway oriented sign, they will be precluded from advertising upon the Auto Mall Marquee in the event that it is constructed. Should the sign be constructed and the applicant wish to advertise on it, they will need to remove the freeway oriented sign prior to advertising on it. Attachments: Exhibits - Blue Page 3 a. Site Plan b. Elevations ATTACHMENT NO. 4 EXHIBITS R:\ST~FFRPT\63PA9/,,CC 9/26/9~ ktb 9 CITY OF TEMECULA Z..--> CASE NO. - PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0063 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - AUGUST 1, 1994 SITE PLAN PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Salyer AUGUST1,1994 5. Director's Hearing Update Report included in the agenda package. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 6. Planning ADDliCatiOn NO. 94-0042, Amendment No. 1 - Public Use Permit Proposed expansion to existing church including sanctuary, a worship/ fellowship hall, administrative space, preschool and day school facility, to be developed in three phases. Assistant Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report. Commissioner Hoagland and Chairman Ford expressed concerns regarding adequate parking at build-out of the project. Rev. Lyle Peterson, 29834 Corte Granada, Temecula, representing Hope Lutheran Church, provided background on the Hope Lutheran Church and outlined the proposal. Tim Holt, Chief Architect, 275 N. El Cielo, Palm Springs, talked about the architectural aspects of the project. John Rogers, 27393 Ynez Road, #154, Temecula, project engineer, talked about the engineering aspects of the project. He said Conditions of Approval Nos. 12, 15, 18, 25 refer to a written report requiring mitigated measures outlined in the mitigation monitoring program have been satisfied however, there are conditions imposed by the negative declaration and suggested the Commission delete these four conditions. He also said Condition No. 57 requires the applicant to pay any capital fee imposed on the project including that imposed as mitigation under the E.I.R. Negative Declaration however, they have not been given any conditions. Vince DiDonato, Alhambra Group Landscape Architects, 28441 Rancho California Road, Suite G, landscape architect for the project, provided an overview of the landscape plan for the project. Mr. DiDonato questioned Condition 11 (a), and said there is a significant amount of large trees on the project and he feels it his responsibility for identifying those trees which should remain on the site. He also expressed a concern regarding Condition 16, which he feels is inappropriate for the location recommended. PCMIN08101194 3 09123/94 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 APPLICANT'S REASON(S) OR JUSTIFICATION TO SUPPORT THE APPEAL R:\STAFFRPT\6]PA94.CC 9/26/94 kLb 10 Reasot~ or just. ification ~o support the appeal: The staff report, prepared by the City Planning Dept., for the Planning Commission, cited two factors as the basis for the de- nial of the proposed freeway sign. The first issue dealt with the height of the proposed sign (41'-6'). The report states that a precedent of 25'-30' has been set. There are at this time, signs along the freeway that exceed 30', Norm Reeves Honda and the Texaco Gas station to name two. Since these signs were existing prior to the approval of the Ynez.Car Care Center" application, precedence has been set, in fact, for taller freeway signs. The second issue refers to section 19.4.a.4. of ordinance no. 348, which states,."...that not more than one free-standing sign shall be permitted on a parcel of land...~ It appears that there has been some inconsistency in the past regarding the in- terpretation of this section. Currently, there are approximately nine businesses with what appears to be two free-standing signs cn the property, one on the frontage road and one on the freeway. This particular property has received approval twice in the past for a freeway sign in addition to the monument along Ynez Road. The first was in January of 1991 by Bedford Properties. The second, was the approval by tne Temecu!a City Council for ~ 73' tall "AuLo Center Message Sign". With the approval Of the pro- pose8 Toyota Freeway sign the existing approval for the Auto Cen- ter sign would become abandoned. The proposed Toyota Freeway sign complies with the city's adepted code, o~ freeway oriented signage, sections t9.4.a.l.(a) and 19.4.a.l.(b) of ordinance No. 348. In conclusion, we respectfully request that the Temecula City Council grant approval of the proposed 41'-6" tall Toyota Freeway sign. Desired action to be taken: To reverse the decision cf the Planning Commission and grant approval of the proposed 122 square foot, 41'-6" over all height (from existing property grade), "Toyota" Freeway sign. ,. CITY OF TEMECULA 2!'-4.60" TOYOTA ~'-8.53' 2'-6.18 A 41 '-6.75" 33'-9.29" B ~- F 3,-6.12- Total 122 Sq. Ft. CASE NO. - PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0063 EXHIBIT - B PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - AUGUST 1, 1994 ELEVATION R:\FAGANMXREPORTSITOYOSGN.pC 7/26/94 mf ITEM 19 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning October 11, 1994 Planning Application No. PA94-0017, Development Agreement for Tract 27827 Prepared By: Saied Naaseh, Associate'Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration for PA94-017 2. introduce and read by title only an ordinanc~ entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 94-_ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENTOF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC., DBA COSCAN DAVIDSON HOMES, FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164- RORIPAUGH, PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94- 0017 BACKGROUND: On September 19, 1994 the Planning Commission approved PA94-0017 with a 4-0 vote (Commissioner Billie Blair was absent). The original Development Agreement (No. 37) was approved by the County of Riverside for the Roripaugh Hills Specific Plan (S.P. 164), which includes Tract 27827, on November 4, 1988. In 1993, the developer initiated negotiations with the former City Manager, Mr. Dave Dixon, and the former City Attorney, Mr. Scott Field, for a new Development Agreement. These commitments set the foundation for the revisions in the Development Agreement Fee for this project. The proposed revisions would reduce the Development Agreement Fee from $5,183.00 to $3,000.00 and would entitle the develoDer to a maximum of $82,000.00in credits toward the construction of an on site public park. The construction of this park was a Condition of Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. In light of the concerns of the citizens regarding the house sizes and the house values when Tract 27827 was originally approved, the Planning Commission's main concern was adding provisions to the Development Agreement requiring a minimum house size of 1000 square feet to insure that the developer would not reduce the house sizes in the future. It should be noted that the square footage of the houses apDroved with Tract 27827 range between 1000 to ATTACHMENT NO. 1 ORDINANCE NO. 94--- ATrACI-HvIENT NO. 1 ORDINANCE NO. __ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWI~J~N THF~ CITY OF TEMECULA AND COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC., DBA COSCAN DAVIDSON HOIVIF.~, FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164- RORIPAUGH, PLANNING APPLICATIONNO. 0017 (PA94-O017) WItEREAS, Section 65864 et ~t. of the Government Code of the State of California and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure specified in said Resolution, Coscan Homes California, Inc., hereinafter "COSCAN" has fried with the City of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement which reflects an amendment and re-statement of existing County Development Agreement #37, (hereinafter "this Agreement"), of a residential housing subdivision on its property located at the northwest corner of Nicolas Road and North General Kearney Road, herelnafter the "Subject Property" which application has been reviewed and accepted for filing by the Planning Director; and, WHEREAS, notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of this Agreement with Coscan, has been duly given in the form and manner required by law, and the Planning Commission and City Council of said City have each conducted public hearings on September 19, 1994 (Planning Commission), and October 11, 1994 (City Council) at which time they heard and considered all evidence relevant and material to said subject. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby finds and determines, with respect to this Agreement by and between the City of Temecula and Coscan, that it: A. Is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that this Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for residential development consistent with the General Plan's land use designation of Medium Density Residential; B. Is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the Subject Property referred to therein is located as this Agreement provides for residential development pursuant to a Specific Plan which includes significant park and recreational improvements; R:XSTAFFRF~ITPA94.CC 10/4/~4 klb 4 C. Is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; D. Will not 'be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; E. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Planning Commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equaliTed assessment roll; F. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the heating body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or by diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; G. Notice of the public hearing before the City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days prior to the City Council public hearing, mailed at least ten (10) days prior to the heating to the project applicant, to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; H. Notice of the City Council hearing included the date, the time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, the general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or by diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the heating, and the notice of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; I. City Council approved this Agreement by Ordinance based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission and new evidence presented at the hearing on this Agreement, giving its reasons therefore and set forth their relationship between this Agreement and the General Plan; K. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from this legislation and this Agreement are as follows: 1. Generation of municipal revenue; 2. Construction of public infrastnctore facilities; 3. Enhancement of the quality of life, including recreation facilities for present and future residents of the City; 4. The opportunity for an adjacent residential-commercial project creating significant job opportunities, sales tax and ad valorera tax revenues for the City; 5. Payment of Public Facilities Fees (fire and traffic signal mitigation); 6. Participation in special assessment districts to finance City and regional infrastructure improvements; and, 7. The creation of significant park and recreation dedications for public use and the protection of significant natural resources. Section 2. APPROVAL. This Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Attachment "3" is hereby approved. The Mayor is authorized and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name of, the City of Temecula; and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be executed by the City until this Ordinance takes effect and the City has received from the applicant two executed originals of said Agreement. Section 3. 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 4. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. Section 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance and a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk at least five days prior to the adoption of this Ordinance. Within 15 days from adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of this Ordinance, together with the names of the Councilmembers voting for and against the Ordinance, and post the same in the office of the City Clerk. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA94-0017 Project Description: A ReQuest for Approval of a Development Agreement for Tentative Tract No. 27827 Assessor's Parcel No,: 911-150-035 and 911-150-038 Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be voided by reason of failure of condition. ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITHOUT MINIMUM HOUSE SIZES RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF City Clerk City of Temecula WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO City Clerk City of Temeeula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula CA 92590 (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use) AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164-RORIPAUGH PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0017 K: IDMSLIL W. DIRTY085996. WP 2. 3. 4. 5. m 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. TABLE OF CONTENTS Definitions ............................................ 5 Interest of Owner ........................................ 7 Exhibits .............................................. 7 Term ............................................... 7 Assignment ........................................... 8 5. I Right to Assign .................................... 8 5.2 Release of Transferring Owner ........................... 9 5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction ...................... 9 5.4 Subsequent Assignment ............................... 10 Mortgagee Protection .................................... 10 Binding Effect of Agreement ................................ 11 Relationship of Parties .................................... 12 Changes in Project ...................................... 12 Timing of Development ................................... 12 Indemnity and Cost of Litigation ............................. 12 11. I Hold Harmless .................................... 12 11.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement,. ................... 13 11.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall .......................... 14 11.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability ................... 14 11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement ................. 15 11.6 Environmental Assurances ............................. 15 Public Benefits, Public Improvements and Facilities .................. 16 12.1 Intent .......................................... 16 12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential) ........................ 16 12.3 Public Park ...................................... 17 12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits .......................... 17 12.5 Timing ......................................... 18 K:tDMSLIL W. DIRtO~B5996. WP 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. Reservations of Authority ' 18 13.1 Limitations, Reservations, and Exceptions ................... 18 13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals ....................... 19 13.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law ............. 19 13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies ...................... 20 13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension .......................... 20 13.6 Vesting Tentative Maps .............................. 20 Development of the Property ................................ 21 14.1 Rights to Develop .................................. 21 14.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations ................ 21 14.3 Changes and Amendments ............................. 21 Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement .................... 22 Financing District ...................................... 23 Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement ....................... 23 Enforcement .......................................... 23 Events of Default ....................................... 23 Procedure Upon Default ................................... 24 Damages Upon Termination ................................ 24 Attorneys' Fees and Costs ................................. 24 Notices ............................................. 25 Cooperation .......................................... 25 Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms .................... 26 Entire Agreement ....................................... 26 Counterparts .......................................... 26 Authority to Execute ..................................... 27 K:~DMSLIL Vt~DIRIOG85996. WP ii EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT C EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALq EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHTRIT D. NOTICE FROM MORTGAGEE EXHIBIT E MAP OF PUBLIC PARK K:IDMSLIL V~DIRtOO85996. WP iii AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA and COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC., dba COSCAN DAVIDSON HOlVfF-~ This Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into to be effective on the date it is recorded with' the Riverside County Recorder (the "Effective Date") by and among the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation ("City") and Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California Corporation, dba Coscan Davidson Homes ("Owner"): R_ECITALS A. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864, et seo. ("Development Agreement Statutes"), Day-Bar I, a California general paxtnership and others and the County of Riverside, California ("County") entered into Development Agreement No. 37 recorded in the Official Records of Riverside County, California on November 4, 1988, as Instrument No. 323487 ("Development Agreement No. 37"). B. Development Agreement No. 37 encompasses a project formerly located within County approved Specific Plan No. 164 known as "Roripaugh Hills", a mixed use subdivision, (the "Original Project") to be developed on property which became a part of the municipal boundaries of the City when the City incorporated on December 1, 1989. This Agreement encompasses only a portion of the Original Project, located in Planning Area 7 and known as "Roripaugh Cottages", a residential development (the "Project"). The balance of the Original Project covered by Development Agreement No. 37 not included within Planning Area 7 is not amended or impacted by this Agreement. C. Pursuant to the provisions of the Developmeni Agreement Statutes, the City became the successor-in-interest to the County under Development Agreement No. 37 upon incorporation of the City. D. Pursuant to Section 65868 of the Development Agreement Statutes, the City and Owner propose to restate and amend Development Agreement No. 37 to substitute this Agreement for the portion of Development Agreement No. 37 pertaining to the Project. E. Pursuant and subject to the Development Agreement Statutes, the City's police powers and City Resolution No. 91-52, City is authorized to enter into binding agreements with persons having legal or equitable interest in real property located within the City's municipal boundaries or sphere of influence thereby establishing the conditions under which such property may be developed in the City. F. By electing to enter into this Agreement, City shall bind future members of the City Council of City by the obligations specified herein and further limit the future exercise of certain governmental and proprietary powers of members of the City Council. Likewise, Owner shall bind its successors in interest to the obligations specified in this Agreement. G. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by the staff of the City, the Planning Commission of the City and the City Council of City and have been found to be fair, just and reasonable. H. City finds and determines that it will be in the best interests of its citizens and the public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement. I. All of the procedures and requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met with respect to this Agreement. J. Riverside County Ordinance No. 659, as adopted by the City, establishes public facilities impact fees for residential development within City CRSA Fees"). City requires these revenues to mitigate the impact of development. City requires RSA Fees from development of the Property in order to complete capital projects to mitigate the impact of the development. K. Development Agreement No. 37 provided for public facilities and services impact fees ("County Impact Fees") higher than the RSA Fees. These higher fees, particularly during the present economic situation, unduly discourage and delay development and thereby prevent City from ever receiving the RSA Fees. Consequently, the City desires to reduce the County Impact Fees for residential development in the Project to a level comparable to the RSA Fees. L. .On May 20, 1987, the County amended Ordinance No. 460 authorizing the imposition of Quimby Park Fees. Ordinance No. 460 required adoption of an implementation resolution designating a recipient of the Quimby Park Fees. On June 28, 1988, pursuant to Resolution No. 88-218, the County designated CSA 143 as the recipient of Quimby Park Fees subject to the adoption of a master plan. On June 27, 1989, pursuant to Resolution No. 89-33 I, the County adopted a master plan for CSA 143, establishing the Quimby Park Fees at three (3) acres per one thousand (1,000) new residents ("County Park Fee Standard"). M. Pursuant to Resolution No. 90-53, adopted on May 8, 1990, City has adopted Quimby Park requirements of five (5) acres of land for parks and recreational purposes, or payment of fees in lieu thereof, for every one thousand (1,000) people to reside in the proposed subdivision. N. The City interprets Development Agreement No. 37 to permit the imposition of increased Quimby Park requirements computed on City Park standards and has required Owner to satisfy Quimby Park requirements based on the City Park standards as a condition of issuance of building permits for the Project. O. City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the generation of municipal revenue, public infrastructure facilities and the enhancement of the K:tDMSLIL W. DIRiOD85996. WP 3 Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context othenvise requires: 1.1 "City" is the City of Temecula. 1.2 *City Public FaciLity Fee' is an amount to be established by Ordinance of 1.3 "County" is the County of Riverside. 1.4 "County Public Facilities and Services Fee" means the County Development Agreement Fee as set forth in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37. 1.5 "Development Exaction" means any requirement of City in connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Existing Development Approval for the dedication of land, the construction of improvements or pubLic facilities, or the payment of fees in order to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or other pubLic interests. 1.6 "Development Plan" means the Existing Development Approvals defined in Section 1.7 below which are applicable to development of the Project. 1.7 "Existing Development Approval(s)" means those certain development approvals in effect as of the effective date of this Agreement with respect to the Property, including, without limitation, the "Existing Development Approvals" listed in Exhibit A which were approved by the County or the City. 1.8 "Financing District" means a community facilities district formed pursuant to the Mello-Rcos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (California Government Cede Section 53311 et s~, as amended), an assessment district formed pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et seq.. as amended), a special assessment district formed pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 10102, as amended), or any other special assessment district existing pursuant to State law formed for the purposes of financing the cost K: IDMS~JL MA DIRtGO85996, WP 5 of public improvements, facilities, services and/or public facilities fees within a specific geographical area of the City. 1.9 "Interim Public Facilities Fee" means an amount of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per each residential unit developed in the Project. 1.10 'Land Use Regulations* means all ordinances, resolutions, codes, roles, regulations and official policies of City, governing the development and use of land including without limitation, the permitted use of land, the density or intensity of use, subdivision requirements, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property listed on Exhibit B which are a matter of public record on the Effective Date of this Agreement. "Land Use Regulations" does not include any County or City ordinance, resolution, code, role, regulation, or official policy, governing: (a) The conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations; (b) Taxes and assessments; (c) The control and abatement of nuisances; (d) The granting of encroachment permits and t-b.e conveyance of rights and interests which provide for the use of or the entry upon public property; (e) The exercise of the power of eminent domain. 1.11 "Owner" means the person having a legal or equitable interest in the Project; 1.12 Development Plan. 1.13 "Project" is the development of the Property in accordance with the "Property" is the real property described in Exhibit C. 1.14 adopted by City. 1.15 "RSA Fee" means the fee established by County Ordinance No. 659 as "Subsequent Development Approvals" means all development approvals required subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property. 1.16 "Subsequent Land Use Regulation" means any Land Use Regulation adopted and effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement. 2. IntereSt of Owner. Owner represents that it has the fee title interest in the Property and that all other persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property are to be bound by this Agreement. 3. Exhibits. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference: Exhibit Designation A B C D E Term. 4.1 Description Existing Development Approvals Existing Land Use Regulations Legal Description of the Property Notice From Mortgagee Site Plan of Park The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of ten (10) years thereafter, unless this Agreement is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the parties hereto. 4.2 occurrence of the entry of a final judgement or issuance of a final order after exhaustion of any appeals directed against the City as a result of any lawsuit filed against the City to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval by the City Council of City of this Agreement. K: IDMSLIL W. DIRIO085996. WP 7 This Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the 5. Assignment. 5.1 Right to Assign. The Owner shall have the right to sell, transfer, or assign the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410, et see.. or Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, as the same was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-04) to any person, parmership, joint venture, firm, or corporation at any time during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such sale, transfer, or assignment shall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties, and obligations arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following conditions precedent: (a) No sale, transfer, or assignment of any right or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer, or assignment of all or a part of the Property. (b) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within fifteen (15) business days thereafter, the Owner shall notify City, in writing, of such sale, transfer, or assignment and shall provide City with an executed agreement, in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, by the purchaser, transferee, or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee, or assignee expressly and . unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of the Owner under this Agreement. Any sale, transfer, or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions shall constitute a default by the Owner under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any purchaser, transferee, or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) of this Subsection, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee, or assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee, or assignee until and unless such agreement is executed. 5.2 Release of Transferring Owner. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer, or assignment, a transferring Owner shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement unless such transferring Owner is given a release in writing by City, which release shall be provided by City upon the full satisfaction by such transferring Owner of all of the following conditions: (a) The Owner no longer has a legal interest in all or any part of the Property except as a beneficiary under a deed of trust. (b) The Owner is not then in default under this Agreement. (c) The Owner has provided City with the notice and executed agreement required under Pasagraph (b) of Subsection 5.1 above. (d) The purchaser, transferee, or assignee provides City with security equivalent to any security previously provided by Owner to secure performance of its obligations hereunder. 5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction. The provisions of Subsection 5.1 shall not apply to the sale or lease (for a period longer than one year) of any lot which has been.. finally subdivided and is individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased to a member of the public or other ultimate user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate with respect to any lot and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the following conditions: (a) the lot has been finally subdivided and individually (and not in 'bulk") sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or other ultimate user; and (b) a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for a building on a lot, and the fees set forth in this Agreement have been paid. 5.4 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent sale, transfer, or assignment after an initial sale, transfer, or assignment shall be made only in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of this Section. 6. . Mortgagee Protection. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Owner, in any manner, at Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust, or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. City acknowledges that the lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Owner and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Owner shall reimburse City for any and all of City's reasonable costs associated with said negotiations, interpretations, and modifications and shall make reimbursement payments to City within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice from City. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. Co) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any pan thereof, which Mortgagee has submitted a request in writing, in the form as attached hereto as Exhibit D, to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, K:tDM$;IJL W, DIRtO085996. WP ~ 0 shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by the Owner in the performance of the Owner's obligations under this Agreement. (c) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee, in the form set forth on Exhibit D, requesting a copy of any notice of default given to the Owner under the terms of this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice of default to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to the Owner. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. (d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of the Owner's obligations or other affirmative covenants of the Owner hereunder, or to guarantee such performance, provided however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Owner is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to City's performance hereunder, and further provided that any sale, transfer or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.1 of this Agreement. (e) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, pursuant to subsection (d) above and who elects not to assume the obligations of the Owner set forth herein shall not be entitled to any rights to develop which have or may have vested as a result of this Agreement. K:tDMSLIL W. DIR~O085996~ WP 11 7. Binding Effect of Agreement. The burdens of this Agreement bind and the benefits of the Agreement inure to the successors-in-interest to the parties to it in accordance with the provisions of and subject to the limitations of this Agreement. 8. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between City and Owner is such that the Owner is an independent contractor and not the agent of City. 9. . Changes in Project. No change, modification, revision or alteration of Existing Development Approvals may be made without the prior approval by those agencies of the City equivalent to the County agencies that approved the Existing Development Approvals in the first instance (if the County had granted the approvals) or by the same City agency that granted the Existing Development Approvals, (if the City granted the approval in connection with the adoption of this Agreement). 10. Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that Owner cannot at this time predict when, or the rate at which the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors which are not within the control of Owner, such as market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camar~llo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the panics therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such par~ies, it is the parties, intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that the Owner shall have the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as the Owner deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to any timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan. 11. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation. 11. i Hold Harmless. Owner agrees to and shall hold City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for K: IDMSIJL W, DIRIOO95996. WP 12 personal injury including death and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Owner or those of its contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on its behalf which relate to the Project. Owner agrees to and shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, employees and representatives from actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of Owner's actiyities in connection with the Project. This h01d harmless agreement applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the operations referred to in this paragraph, regardless of whether or not City prepared, supplied, or approved plans or specifications for the Project. 11.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement. In the event the County seeks to challenge the right of City and Owner to enter into this Agreement or to terminate Development Agreement No. 37, and institutes an action, suit or proceeding to challenge this Agreement or invalidate and/or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement or the amendment of Development Agreement No. 37 or take such other action(s) which result in unreasonable delays in the development of the Property, City and Owner agree to cooperate and participate in a joint defense in any action against the parties, their officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all such obligations, liability, suit, claim, loss, judgment or lien, resulting from such action(s) brought by County, (but excluding actions to expunge any Its pendens) and to share the costs associated with attorneys, fees and costs that the parties may incur as the result of any such action or lawsuit to challenge City and/or Owner's legal authority to enter into this Agreement and/or terminate Development Agreement No. 37. Owner's defense costs herein shall be its pro rata share among all impacted landowners based on a ratio of conu-ibution of the total units owned by Owner which are subject to this Agreement compared to the total number of units within the City in which City has lowered the County fees. Damages (including the difference in the amount of any Interim Public Facilities Fee and the amount of the County Development K: [DMSLIL W. DIR$O085996. WP 13 Agreement Fee paid by Owner to City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement) shall be the responsibility of Owner. To the extent Owner has paid Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or County Development Agreement Fees to City of which it is adjudicated are lawfully the funds of County, City shall pay such sums to County and Owner shall have such liability for the payment of the difference between such fees reduced by the amount paid by the City. City and Owner shall mutually agree on legal counsel to be retained to defend any such action(s) brought by the County as herein provided. City and Owner each reserve the right to withdraw from the defense of the.County litigation in the event the County prevails at the trial level and there is an appeal. If either party withdraws after the trial and there is an appeal, the remaining party shall pay all of the costs and fees associated with said appeal. 11.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall. In the event the County prevails in any legal action or other proceeding to challenge, set aside, or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement and a trial court determines that Owner and/or the City is liable to make up any shortfall between the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be, and the County Development Agreement Fee which would otherwise have been imposed pursuant to Development Agreement No. 37, then Owner shall be responsible for paying any such shortfall subject to City's payment to County of any amounts collected and held by City under ~the terms of Development Agreement No. 37. Such payment by City and County shall reduce Owner's liability to County for payment of such fees by a like amount paid by City. 11.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability. In the event the County prevails at the trial court level against the City or the Owner as described in Section 11.2 of this Agreement, the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be, shall revert to the amount of the County Development Agreement Fee in effect at the time of entry of the final judgment in favor of the County. In the event this Agreement K:~DMSLIL W. DIRIO085996. WP 14 is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a trial court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions set forth in Section 12.3(a), (b) and (c) of this Agreement shall no longer be enforceable and from the date of .said final judgment or ruling of invalidity, Owner shall thereafter pay the County Development Agreement Fee as provided in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37. All other provisions of this Agreement shall remain valid and enforceable notwithstanding said ruling of invalidiVy. 11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement. Owner shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against City, its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any permit granted pursuant to this Agreement brought by a third party other than the County. City shall promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding, and City shall cooperate in the defense. If City fails to pwmptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding or if City fails to cooperate in the defense, Owner shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless City. City may in its discretion participate in the defense of any such claim, action, or proceeding. 11.6 Environmental Assurances. Owner shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by City, protect, and hold harmless City, its officers, employees, agents, assigns, and any successor or successors to City's interest from and against all claims, actual damages (including but not limited to special and consequential damages), natural resources damage, punitive damages, injuries, costs, response remediation and removal costs, losses, demands, debts, liens, liabilities, causes of action, suits, legal or administrative proceedings, interest, fines, charges, penalties and expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' and expert witness fees and costs incurred in connection with defending against any of the foregoing or in enforcing this indemnity) of any kind whatsoever paid, incurred, or suffered by, or asserted against, City K: IDMSLIL W. DIRtO085996. WP 15 or its officers, employees or agents arising from or attributable to any repair, cleanup, or detoxification, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure, or other plan (regardless of whether undertaken due to governmental action) concerning any Hazardous Substance or hazardous wastes at any place within the Property which is the subject of this Agreement. The foregoing indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant to Section 107(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, "CERCLA", 42 U.S.C. Section 9607(e) and California Health and Safety Cede Section 25364, and their successor statutes, to insure, protect, hold harmless, and indemnify City from liability. 12. Public Benefits. Public Improvements and Facilities. 12.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers private benefits on the Owner which should be balanced by commensurate public benefits. Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private benefits conferred on the Owner by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs resulting from development of the Project. 12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential). (a) In lieu of the County Development Agreement Fee, RSA Fee or City Public Facility Fee, for a period of five (5) years commencing on the Effective Date, Owner shall pay an Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit. The Interim Public Facilities Fee shall be paid as provided in Section 12.5 below. At the conclusion of the five (5) year period, Owner shall either continue to pay the Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit or such other public facilities fee as the City has then enacted and applied to residential development projects in the City. K: IDMSLIL W. DIRtO~85996. WP 16 Eighty Two Thousand Dollars ($82,000.00). Owner shall have the term of this Agreement within which to apply the park improvement fee credit towards Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees. City shall have a fight to review, audit and verify all costs associated with said park improvements under procedures to be mutually agreed upon between the parties. If at any time, the Interim Public Facilities Fees to be paid are less than the credit, referenced above, and Owner qualifies for the credit, Owner shall receive the difference directly from the City when due. For purposes of calculating credits under this Section, "Improvements" shall be defined as onsite work only (design, grading and construction), excluding street and utility work within the public right-of-way and any onsite environmental mitigation costs such as toxic removal and wetlands mitigation. 12.5 Timing. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City Public Facilities Fees, if any, required to be paid by Owner pursuant to this Agreement shall be deferred until such time as a certificate of occupancy has been obtained for the first production home built on the Property. Thereafter, the Interim Public Facilities Fees shall be paid at the time of issuance of building permits for each residential unit constructed on the Property. Collection of any and all interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City Public Facilities Fees required to be paid by the Owner for the model home units shall be paid in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding CMOU"), between the City and Owner regarding said model homes, which MOU is dated for reference 13. Reservations of Authority. 13.1 Limitations. Reservations, and Exceptions. ,1994. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the development of the Property: (a) Processing fees and charges imposed by City to cover the estimated actual costs to City of processing applications for Subsequent Development Approvals. K: iDMSiJL W. DIRIOO85996. WP ] 8 (b) Owner shall also pay all other customary and typical development exactions, for a project of this size and nature, in existence a~ of the Effective Date and throughout the term of this Agreement, including but not limited to, Fire, Traffic Signal Mitigation and K-Rat Fees pursuant to the provisions of City ordinances and resolutions in existence when paid. 12.3 Public Park. As additional consideration for entering into this Agreement, Owner agrees to dedicate to the City, or cause to be dedicated, and City agrees to accept when offered, park land equalling approximately three (3) acres pursuant to that certain undated Parkland/l-~ndscape Improvement Agreement between Owner and City. The park land is shown on Exhibit E which is attached and made a part hereof and incorporated by this reference. Owner shall improve, and Owner shall dedicate, or cause to be dedicated in fee or by grant of easement to City and City agrees to accept park land and improvements when offered for dedication and acceptance if such improvements meet the requirements of City for the construction and installation of park improvements. As a condition precedent to the City accepting the dedication of the park property and the improvements thereto, such property shall be free and clear of any and all liens, assessments, encumbrances and similar financial obligation relative to said property. Owner shall cause a title insurance company. to issue a CLTA title insurance owner's policy with standard exceptions on such property, which policy shall be provided to City. If City desires an ALTA title policy, the additional cost over the cost of a CLTA policy with standard exceptions will be borne by City. 12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits. At the time of completion of the improvements and transfer of the public park as provided in this Agreement, Owner shall receive a credit against payment of future Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees based on the actual improvement cost incurred by Owner for the public park, which exceeds the Project's Quimby Park requirements as calculated by the City, up to a total maximum credit of K: ~MS~L W. DIRIO085996. WP 17 Co) Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendation, appeals, and any other matter of procedure. (c) Regulations imposing Development Exactions; provided, however, that no such subsequen~y adopted Development Exactions shall be applicable to development of the Property unless such 'Development Exactions are applied uniformly to development throughout the City. (d) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications including without limitation, the City's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code and Fire Code. (e) Regulations which are not in conflict with the Development Plan. Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property. (f) Regulations which are in conflict with the Development Plan provided Owner has given written consent to the application of such regulations to development of the Property. 13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This Agreement shall not prevent City, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying the Subsequent Land Use Regulations which do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent City from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on the basis of the Existing or Subsequent Land Use Regulations not in conflict with the Development Plan. 13.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement prevent K: [DMSLIL W. DIR10085996, WP 19 or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do 'not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. 13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within the control of City possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or jointly with City and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. 13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 66~52.6 of the Government Code, the tentative subdivision map(s) or tentative parcel map(s) (vested or regular) approved as part of implementing the Development Plan shall be extended to expire at the end of the term of this Agreement 13.6 Vesting Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final subdivision map, or tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410, et seo_.~ and Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, as the same was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-0~, and if this Agreement is determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insofar as it grants a vested right to develop to the Owner, then and to that extent the rights, obligations, and protections afforded the Owner and City respectively, under the laws and ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above, development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions in this Agreement shall be controlling over conflicting provisions of law or ordinances concerning vesting maps. K: [DMStJI, W. DIRIOOEI5996. WP 20 14. Development of the Property. 14.1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, including payment of the hterim Public Facilities Fee, the Owner shall have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with, and to the extent of the Development Plan. The Project shall remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Plan. 14.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise provided under the terms of this Agreement, including the payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee, the rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations. City shall exercise its lawful reasonable discretion in connection with Subsequent Development Approvals in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provid?d by this Agreement including, but not limited to, payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee and/or the City Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be. City shall accept for processing, review, and action all applications for Subsequent Development Approvals, and such applications shall be processed in the normal manner for processing such matters. City may, at the request of Owner, contract for planning and engineering consultant services to expedite the review and processing of Subsequent Development Approvals, the cost of which shall be borne by Owner. 14.3 Changes and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that refinement and further development of the Project will require Subsequent Development Approvals and may K: IDMSSJI, W. DIRIOO8599& WP 2 ] demonstrate that changes are appropriate and mutually desirable in the Existing Development Approvals. In the event the Owner finds that a change in the Existing Development Approva/s is necessary or appropriate, the Owner shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval to effectuate such change. If approved, any such change in the Existing Development Approvals sha/1 be incorporated herein as an addendum to this Agreement and may be further changed from time to time as provided in this Section. Owner, shall, within thirty (30) days of written demand by City, reimburse City for any and all reasonable costs, associated with any amendment or change to this .Agreement that is initiated by Owner or Owner's successor. Unless otherwise required by law, as determined in City's reasonable discretion, a change to the Existing Development Approvals shall be deemed "minor" and not require an amendment to this Agreement provided such change does not: (a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole; or, (b) Increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole; or, (c) Increase the maximum height and size of permitted buildings; or, (d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes within the Property as a whole; or, (e) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or a supplemental Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code. 15. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement. (a) Pursuant to City Resolution No. 91-52, as it may be subsequently amended, City shall review this Agreement at least once during every twelve (12) month period from the Effective Date of this Agreement. The Owner or successor shall reimburse City for the reasonable and necessary costs of this review, within thirty (30) days of written demand from City. K:tDMSLIL W, DIRIO085996, WP 22 (b) During each periodic review by City, the Owner is required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The Owner agrees to furnish such evidence of good faith compliance as City in the exercise of its discretion may require. 16. Financing District. Upon the request of Owner, the parties shall cooperate in exploring the use of special assessment districts and other similar Financing Districts for the financing of the construction, improvement, or acquisition of public infrastructure, facilities, lands, and improvements to serve the Project and its residents, whether located within or outside the Property. It is acknowledged that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as requiring City or City Council to form such a district or to issue or sell bonds. 17. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties and in the manner provided for in Government Code Sections 65868, 65867 and 65867.5. If an Amendment is requested by the Owner or its successor, the Owner/successor agrees to pay City any Development Agreement Amendment fee then in existence as established by City Council Resolution, or if no such fee is established, to reimburse City for the actual and reasonably necessary costs of reviewing and processing said Amendment within thirty (30) days of written demand from City. 18. Enforcement. Unless amended or canoeled as herein provided, this Agreement is enforceable by any party to it notwithstanding a change in the applicable general or specific plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulations adopted by the City which alter or amend the rules, regulations, or policies governing permitted uses of the land, density, design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications. 19. Events of Default. Owner is in default under this Agreement upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: (a) If a warranty, representation or statement made or furnished by Owner to City is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made; K:gDMStJL W. DIRIO085996. WP 23 (b) A finding and determination by City that upon the basis of substantial evidence the Owner has not complied in good faith with one or more of the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 20. Procedure Upon Default. (a) Upon the occurrence of an event of default, City may terminate or modify this Agreement in accordance with the procedure adopted by the City. (b) City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Owner implied if on periodic review the City does not propose to modify or terminate this Agreement. (c) Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third person. (d) Non-performance shall be excused only when it is prevented or delayed by acts of God or an emergency declared by the Governor. (e) All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City' s regulations governing development agreements are available to the parties to pursue in the event there is a breach. 21. Damages Upon Termination. It is acknowledged by the parties that City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. In general, each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except that City, and its officers, employees and agents, shall not be liable in damages to Owner or to any assignee, transferee of Owner, or any other person, and Owner covenants not to sue for or claim any damages for breach of that Agreement by City. K: [DMStJL W. DIR[O085996. WP ~ 4 22. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If legal action by either party is brought because of breach of this Agreement or to enforce a provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and court costs, 23. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid and presumed delivered upon actual receipt by personal delivery or within three (3) days following deposit thereof in United States Mail. Notice required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: To City: City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Attention: City Attorney Notices required to be given to Owner shall be addressed as follows: To Owner: Coscan Davidson Homes 12865 Pointe De1 Mar, Suite 200 Del Mar, CA 92014 Attention: William A. Davidson With a copy to:Kolodny & Pressman 11975 E1 Camino Real, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92130 Attention: Jed L. Weinberg, Esq. A party may change the address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 24. Cooperation. City agrees that it shall accept for processing and promptly take action on all applications, provided they are in a proper form and acceptable for required processing, for discretionary permits, tract or parcel maps, or other land use entitlement for development of the Project in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. City shall cooperate with Owner in providing expeditious review of any such applications, permits, or land use entitlement and, upon request and payment of any costs and/or extra fees associated K:lDMStJL W. DIRtOO95996. WP 25 therewith by Owner, City shall assign to the Project planner(s), building inspector(s), and/or other staff personnel as required to insure the timely processing and completion of the Project. 25. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms. (a) The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. Co) If there is more than one signer of this Agreement their obligations are joint and several (c) The time limits set forth in this Agreement may be extended by mutual written consent of the parties in accordance with the procedures for adoption of the Agreement. (d) This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person, including but not limited to third party beneficiaries, shall have any fight of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 26. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto contain the complete, final, entire, and exclusive expression of the agreement between the parties hereto, and is intended by the parties to completely state the agreement in full. Any agreement or representation respecting the matters dealt with herein or the duties of any party in relation thereto not expressly set forth in this Agreement shall be null and void. 27. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which so fully executed counterpart shall be deemed an original. No counterpart shall be deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterpart executed by the other party to this Agreement is in the physical possession of the party seeking enforcement thereof. K:tDMSLILW. DIRtGO85996. WP 26 28. Authority to Execute. Each party hereto expressly warrants and represents that he/she/they has/have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his/her/their corporation, partnership, business entity, or governmental entity and warrants and represents that he/she/they has/have the authority to bind his/her/their entity to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executexl by the parties on the day and year first above written. "City" City of Temecula By: Ron Robe~s, Mayor june S. Greek, City Clerk AnDroved as to form: ~'eter M. Thorson, City Attorney "Owner" Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California corporatign, dba Coscan Davidson Homes - William A. Davidson (t edname) its Pres~Y~ent (~tle) Stephen H. Dawe (typedname) its Executive Vice-President (title) K. ~DMSIJI, W. DIRIO095996. WP 27 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) On ~.r,:~k ,6~ c D~ ~c-r~q-, before me, '~ [e__ ~- . .~ccc_. there insert the name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared ~,L~-, ,~-, A. ~,%, i~o~ ~. ~-r~p~ ~, 3~-C, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscrib~ to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity. upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature /-Z252 - (SEAL) STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On , before me, [here insert the name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature SEAL K:IDMSIJL W. DIRIOO85996. WP 2g Development Agreement No. 37 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 164. Amendment No. ZONING Ordinance No. 348.2788 (Zone Change No. 450!) Ordinance No. 164 as amended by Specific Plan No. 1. 348.2927 (Zone Change No. 5127) LAND DIVISIONS 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20703 and Final Tract Map No. 20703-1 (Recorded at Book 177, pages 72-76.) The development approvals listed above include the approved maps and all conditions of approval. COPIES OF THE EXlSTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. F_.XH. LE_ T A Development Agreement No. 37 EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS 2. Ordinance No. 3. Ordinance No. 348 2857. Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan as amended through Resolution No. 88-485. 340. 348 as amended through Ordinance 4. Ordinance No. 448 a. 5. Ordinance No. 458 8. 6. Ordinance No. 460 92. 7. Ordinance No. 461 6. 8. Ordinance No. 509 9. Ordinance No. 546.7a. 10. Ordinance No. 547.5. 11. Ordinance No. 555.15. 12. Ordinance No. 617.1. 448 as amended through Ordinance No. 458 as amended through Ordinance No. 460 as amended 461 as amended 509 as amended 546 as amended 547 as amended 555 as amended 617 as amended 13. Ordinance No. 650. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. 14. Resolution No. 87-525 Establishing Procedures and Requirements for the Consideration of Development Agreements, as amended by Resolution No. 88-39 and Resolution No. 88-119. COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE F..XHIBITB Request for Notice of Default Under Development Agreement Development Agreement: Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement Specific Plan No. 164. Roripaugh Planning Application No. 94-0017 Date: To: City Clerk and Planning Director, City of Temecula Pursuant to Section 6Co) and (c) of the above-referenced Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement, request is hereby made by as Mortgagee for the property (or portion therecO to receive copies of any Notice of Default issued by City against Owner in accordance with the terms and conditions of such Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. Copies of any such Notices should be mailed to the following address: (Mortgagee) (Person/Department) (Address) (City/State/Zip) (Telephone No.) A copy of this Notice should be filed with the project file to insure proper and timely notice is given. Under the terms of said Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement, as Mortgagee is entitled to receive copies of any- Notice of Default within ten (10) days of sending any such Notice to Owner. Failure to send any such Notice may have serious legal conseouences for the City. This request is to remain in effect until revoked by as Mortgagee or the Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement is terminated. The person executing this document on behalf of said Mortgagee warrants and represents that the entity he/she represents is a bonafide Mortgagee of said property and is entitled to receive copies of Notices of Default under said Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. The undersigned declares the above information is true and correct under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California. Dated: _, 1994. MORTGAGEE .By: (signature) (printed frame) I~: (title) [Notary required] This Notice is to be sent to both the City Clerk and Planning Director for the City of Temecula at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590 or such other location as Temecula City Hall may be located in the future. -2- SEP OB '~ 09:41AT~T F~'X___. ~.2/Z EXH~BffE ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH MINIMUM HOUSE SIZES RECORDED AT THE REQUF_.ST OF City Clerk City of Temecula WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO City Clerk City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula CA 92590 (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use) AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164-RORIPAUGH PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 7. 8. 9. I0. 11. 12. Definitions ............................................ 5 Interest of Owner ........................................ 7 Exhibits .............................................. 7 Term ............................................... 7 Assignment ........................................... 8 5. i Right to Assign .................................... 8 5.2 Release of Transferring Owner ........................... 9 5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction ...................... 9 5.4 Subsequent Assignment ............................... 10 Mortgagee Protection .................................... 10 Binding Effect of Agreement ................................ 11 Relationship of Parties .................................... 12 Changes in Project ...................................... 12 Timing of Development ................................... 12 Indemnity and Cost of Litigation ............................. 12 11. I Hold Harmless .................................... 12 11.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement,. ................... 13 i 1.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall .......................... 14 I 1.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability ................... 14 11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement ................. 15 I 1.6 Environmental Assurances ............................. 15 Public Benefits, Public Improvements and Facilities .................. 16 12. I Intent .......................................... 16 12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential) ........................ 16 12.3 Public Park ...................................... 17 12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits .......................... 17 12.5 Timing ......................................... 18 EXHIBITS EX}{I~IT A EXHIBrr B EXHIBIT C F. XISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT D. NOTICE FROM MORTGAGEE EXHIBIT E MAP OF PUBLIC PARK ~:: u~s~t w, otmoo~sss~. w~ iii AMFND1V[ENTANDRESTATEMENTOFDEVELOPMENTAGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TE1V[ECL~A and COSCAN HOMF-~ CALIFORNIA, INC., dba COSCAN DAVIDSON HOMY. S This Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into to be effective on the date it is recorded with the Riverside County Recorder (the "Effective Date") by and among the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation ("City") and Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California Corporation, dba Coscan Davidson Homes ("Owner"): RECITALS A. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864, et seq. ("Development Agr.eement Statutes"), Dav-Bar I, a California general partnership and others and the County of Riverside, California ("County") entered into Development Agreement No. 37 recorded in the Official Records of Riverside County, California on November 4, 1988, as Instrument No. 323487 ("Development Agreement No. 37"). B. Development Agreement No. 37 encompasses a project formerly located within County approved Specific Plan No. 164 known as "Roripaugh Hills", a mixed use subdivision, (the "Original Project") to be developed on property which became a pan of the municipal boundaries of the City when the City incorporated on December 1, 1989. This Agreement encompasses only a portion of the Original Project, located in Planning Area 7 and known as "Roripaugh Cottages", a residential development (the "Project"). The balance of the Original Project covered by Development Agreement No. 37 not included within Planning Area 7 is not amended or impacted by this Agreement. C. Pursuant to the provisions of the Development 'Agreement Statutes, the City became the successor-in-interest to the County under Development Agreement No. 37 upon incorporation of the City. D. Pursuant to Section 65868 of the Development Agreement Statutes, the City and Owner propose to restate and amend Development Agreement No. 37 to substitute this Agreement for the portion of Development Agreement No. 37 pertaining to the Project. E. Pursuant and subject to the Development Agreement Statutes, the City's police powers and City Resolution No. 91-52, City is authorized to enter into binding agreements with persons having legal or equitable interest in real property located within the City's municipal boundaries or sphere of influence thereby establishing the conditions under which such property may be developed in the City. F. By electing to enter into this Agreement, City shall bind future members of the City Council of City by the obligations specified herein and further limit the future exercise of certain governmental and proprietary powers of members of the City Council. Likewise, Owner shall bind its successors in interest to the obligations specified in this Agreement. G. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by the staff of the City, the Planning Commission of the City and the City Council of City and have been found to be fair, just and reasonable. H. City finds and determines that it will be in the best interests of its citizens and the public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement. All of the procedures and requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met with respect to this Agreement. Riverside County Ordinance No. 659, as adopted by the City, establishes public facilities impact fees for residential development within City ("RSA Fees"). City requires these revenues to mitigate the impact of development. City requires RSA Fees from development of the Property in order to complete capital projects to mitigate the impact of the development. K. Development Agreement No. 37 provided for public facilities and services impact fees ("County Impact Fees") higher than the RSA Fees. These higher fees, particularly during the present economic situation, unduly discourage and delay development and thereby prevent City from ever receiving the RSA Fees. Consequently, the City desires m reduce the County Impact Fees for residential development in the Project to a level comparable to the RSA Fees. L. On May 20, 1987, the County amended Ordinance No. 460 authorizing the imposition of Quimby Park Fees. Ordinance No. 460 required adoption of an implementation resolution designating a recipient of the Quimby Park Fees. On June 28, 1988, pursuant to Resolution No. 88-218, the County designated CSA 143 as the recipient of Quimby Park Fees subject to the adoption of a master plan. On June 27, 1989, pursuant to Resolution No. 89-331, the County adopted a master plan for CSA 143, establishing the Quimby Park Fees at three (3) acres per one thousand (1,000) new residents ("County Park Fee Standard"). M. Pursuant to Resolution No. 90-53, adopted on May 8, 1990, City has adopted Quimby Park requirements of five (5) acres of land for parks and recreational purposes, or payment of fees in lieu thereof, for every one thousand (I ,000) people to reside in the proposed subdivision. N. The City interprets Development Agreement No. 37 to permit the imposition of increased Quimby Park requirements computed on City Park standards and has required Owner to satisfy Quimby Park requirements based on the City Park standards as a condition of issuance of building permits for the Project. O. City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the generation of municipal revenue, public infrastructure facilities and the enhancement of the 4 ~ CQSTa fiF_SA FAX ~. 714'TS~S~18 P. 04 this AF~carat- NOW. TI~RI in ceauideralion of ec above y.~Itals a~ of the mutual he. xei~dl~ contained ~ for ou'~e~ Zood anti v~tmble condderatlm,. ths t~ mad suflidmcy of ¢aich is hereby acknowlcdl~ ~tt i~_nt~ralca tinrear, thc paraet ~re~ 4 City. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires: 1.1 "City" is the City of Temecuta. 1.2 "City Public Facility Fee" is an amount to be established by Ordinance of 1.3 "County" is the County of Riverside. 1.4 "County Public Facilities and Services Fee" means the County Development Agreement Fee as set forth in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37. 1.5 "Development Exaction" means any requirement of City in connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Existing Development Approval for the dedication of land, the construction of improvements or public facilities, or the payment of fees in order to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or other. public interests. 1.6 "Development Plan" means the Existing Development Approvals defined in Section 1.7 below which are applicable to development of the Project. 1.7 "Existing Development Approval(s)" means those certain development approvals in effect as of the effective date of this Agreement with respect to the Property, including, without limitation, the "Existing Development Approvals" listed in Exhibit A which were approved by the County or the City. 1.8 "Financing District" means a community facilities district formed pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (California Government Code Section 53311 et seq. as amended), an assessment district formed pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et seq., as amended), a special assessment district formed pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 10102, as amended), or any other special assessment district existing pursuant to State law formed for the purposes of financing the cost 1.14 adopted by City. 1.15 "RSA Fee" means the fee established by County Ordinance No. 659 as "Subsequent Development Approvals" means all development approvals required subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property, 1.16 "Subsequent land Use Regulation" means any I.and Use Regulation adopted and effective after the Effective Date of' this Agreement. 2. Interest of Owner. Owner represents that it has the fee title interest in the Property and that all other persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property are to be bound by this Agreement. 3. ExhibitS. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference: Exhibit Designation A B C D E Term. Description Existing Development Approvals Existing I_and Use Regulations Legal Description of the Property Notice From Mortgagee Site Plan of Paxk 4.1 The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of ten (10) years thereafter, unless this Agreement is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the parries hereto. 4.2 occurrence of the entry of a final judgement or issuance of a final order after exhaustion of any appeals directed against the City as a result of any lawsuit fried against the City to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval by the City Council of City of this Agreement. K:'~3MBLIL W. DIRlGO85998, Wp 7 This Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the 5. Assignment. 5.1 Right to Assign. The Owner shall have the right to sell, transfer, or assign the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410, et sea.. or Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, as the same'was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-04) to any person, pamership, joint venture, firm, or corporation at any time during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such sale, transfer, or assignment shall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties, and obligations arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following conditions precedent: (a) No sale, transfer, or assignment of any right or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer, or assignment of all or a pan of the Property. (b) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within fifteen (15) business days thereafter, the Owner shall notify City, in writing, of such sate, transfer, or assignment and shall provide City with an executed agreement, in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, by the purchaser, transferee, or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee, or assignee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of the Owner under this Agreement. Any sale, transfer, or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions shall constitute a default by the Owner under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any purchaser, transferee, or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) of this Subsection, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee, or assignee, but the Benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to 'such purchaser, transferee, or assignee until and unless such agreement is executed. 5.2 Release of Transferring Owner. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer, or assignment, a transferring Owner shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement unless such transferring Owner is given a release in writing by City, which release shall be provided hy City upon the full satisfaction by such transferring Owner of all of the following conditions: (a) The Owner no longer has a legal interest in all or any pan of the Property except as a beneficiary under a deed of trust. (b) The Owner is not then in default under this Agreement. (c) The Owner has provided City with the notice and executed agreement required under Paragraph (b) of Subsection 5.1 above. (d) The purchaser, transferee, or assignee provides City with security equivalent to any security previously provided by Owner to secure performance of its obligations hereunder. 5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to individual Lots upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction. The provisions of Subsection 5.1 shall not apply to the sale or lease (for a period longer than one year) of any lot which has been finally subdivided and is individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased to a member of the public or other ultimate user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate with respect to any lot and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the following conditions: (a) the lot has Been finally subdivided and individually (and not in 'bulk") sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or other ultimate user; and (b) a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for a building on a lot, and the fees set forth in this Agreement have been paid. 5.4 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent sale, transfer, or assignment after an initial sale, transfer, or assignment shall be made only in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of this Section. 6. . Mortgagee Protection. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Owner, in any manner, at Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust, or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. City acknowledges that the lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Owner and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Owner shall reimburse City for any and all of City's reasonable costs associated with said negotiations, interpretations, and modifications and shall make reimbursement payments to City within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice from City. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any pan thereof, which Mortgagee has submitted a request in writing, in the form as attached hereto as Exhibit D, to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, K.'IDMSLJL W. DIRIOOE5996. WP ~ 0 shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by the Owner in the performance of the Owner's obligations under this Agreement. (e) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee, in the form set forth on Exhibit D, requesting a copy of any notice of default given to the Owner under the terms of this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice of default to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to the Owner. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. (d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Properly, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or pan thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of the Owner's obligations or other affirmative covenants of the Owner hereunder, or to guarantee such pe~ormance, provided however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Owner is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to City's performance hereunder, and further provided that any sale, transfer or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.1 of this Agreement. (e) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, pursuant to subsection (d) above and who elects not to assume the obligations of the Owner set forth herein shall not be entitled to any fights to develop which have or may have vested as a result of this Agreement. 11 7. Binding Effect of Agreement. The burdens of this Agreement bind and the benefits of the Agreement inure to the successors-in-interest to the parties to it in accordance with the provisions of and subject to the limitations of this Agreement. 8. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between City and Owner is such that the Owner is an independent contractor and not the agent of City. 9. . Changes in Project. No change, modification, revision or alteration of Existing Development Approvals may be made without the prior approval by those agencies of the City equivalent to the County agencies that approved the Existing Development Approvals in the first instance (if the County had granted the approvals) or by the same City agency that granted the Existing Development Approvals, (if the City granted the approval in connection with the adoption of this Agreement). I0. Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that Owner cannot at this time predict when, or the rate at which the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors which are not within the control of Owner, such as market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cat. 3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties, it is the parties, intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that the Owner shall have the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as the Owner deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to any timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan. 11. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation. 11. i Hold Harmless. Owner agrees to and shall hold City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury including death and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Owner or those of its contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on its behalf which relate to the Project. Owner agrees to and shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, employees and representatives from actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of Owner's actiyities in connection with the Project. This hold harmless agreement applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the operations referred to in this paragraph, regardless of whether or not City prepared, supplied, or approved plans or specifications for the Project. 11.2 County Litigation ConcerninE Agreement. In the event the County seeks to challenge the fight of City and Owner to enter into this Agreement or to terminate Development Agreement No. 37, and institutes an action, suit or proceeding to challenge this Agreement or invalidate and/or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement or the amendment of Development Agreement No. 37 or take such other action(s) which result in unreasonable delays in the development of the Property, City and Owner agree to cooperate and participate in a joint defense in any action against the parties, their officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all such obligations, liability, suit, claim, loss, judgment or lien, resulting from such action(s) brought by County, (but excluding actions to expunge any l!s pendens) and to share the costs associated with attorneys, fees and costs that the parties may incur as the result of any such action or lawsuit to challenge City and/or Owner's legal authority to enter into this Agreement and/or terminate Development Agreement No. 37. Owner's defense costs herein shall be its pro rata share among all impacted landowners based on a ratio of contribution of the total units owned by Owner which are subject to this Agreement compared to the total number of units within the City in which City has lowered the County fees. Damages (including the difference in the amount of any Interim Public Facilities Fee and the amount of the County Development K:IDMSLIL W. DIR{OG95396 WP 13 Agreement Fee paid by Owner to City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement) shall be the responsibility of Owner. To the extent Owner has paid Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or County Development Agreement Fees to City of which it is adjudicated axe lawfully the funds of County, City shall pay such sums to County and Owner shall have such liability for the payment of the difference between such fees reduced by the amount paid by the City. City and Owner shall mutually agree on legal counsel to be retained to defend any such action(s) brought by the County as herein provided. City and Owner each reserve the right to withdraw from the defense of the.County litigation in the event the County prevails at the trial level and there is an appeal. If either party withdraws after the trial and there is an appeal, the remaining party shall pay all of the costs and fees associated with said appeal. 11.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall. In the event the County prevails in any legal. action or other proceeding to challenge, set aside, or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement and a trial court determines that Owner and/or the City is liable to make up any shortfail between the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be, and the County Development Agreement Fee which would otherwise have been imposed pursuant to Development Agreement No. 37, then Owner shall be responsible for paying any such shortfall subject to City's payment to County of any amounts collected and held by City under .the terms of Development Agreement No. 37. Such payment by City and County shall reduce Owner's liability to County for payment of such fees by a like amount paid by City. 11.4. County Prevails in Litigation - Severability. In the event the County prevails at the trial court level against the City or the Owner as described in Section 11.2 of this Agreement, the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be, shail revert to the amount of the County Development Agreement Fee in effect at the time of entry of the final judgment in favor of the County. In the event this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a trial court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions set forth in Section 12.3(a), (b) and (c) of this Agreement shall no longer be enforceable and from the date of said final judgment or ruling of invalidity, Owner shall thereafter pay the County Development Agreement Fee as provided in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37. All other provisions of this Agreement shall remain valid and enforceable notwithstanding said ruling of invalidity, 11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement. Owner shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against City, its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any permit granted pursuant to this Agreement brought by a third party other than the County. City shall promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding, and City shall cooperate in the defense. If City fails to promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding or if City fails to cooperate in the defense, Owner shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless City. City may in its discretion participate in the defense of any such claim, action, or proceeding. 11.6 Environmental Assurances. Owner shall indemnify, defend with counsel . approved by City, protect, and hold harmless City, its officers, employees, agents, assigns, and any successor or successors to City's interest from and against all claims, actual damages (including but not limited to special and consequential damages), natural resources damage, punitive damages, injuries, costs, response remediation and removal costs, losses, demands, debts, liens, liabilities, causes of action, suits, legal or administrative proceedings, interest, fines, charges, penalties and expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' and expert witness fees and costs incurred in connection with defending against any of the foregoing or in enforcing this indemnity) of any kind whatsoever paid, incurred, or suffered by, or asserted against, City K: {DMSIJ[, W. DIRtG085996. WP 1 ~ or its officers, employees or agents arising from or attributable to any repair, cleanup, or detoxification, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure, or other plan (regardless of whether underta!~en due to governmental action) concerning any H~7~rdous Substance or h~:'~rdous wastes at any place within the Property which is the subject of this Agreement. The foregoing indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant to Section 107(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, "CERCLA", 42 U.S.C. Section 9607(e) and California Health and Safety Code Section 25364, and their successor statutes, to insure, protect, hold harmless, and indemnify City from liability. 12. Public Benefits, Public improvements and Facilities. 12.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers priv.ate benefits on the Owner which should be balanced by commensurate public benefits. Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private benefits conferred on the Owner by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs resulting from development of the Project. 12.2 Public Facilities Fee fResidential~. (a) In lieu of the County Development Agreement Fee, RSA Fee or City Public Facility Fee, for a period of five (5) years commencing on the Effective Date, Owner shall pay an Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit. The Interim Public Facilities Fee shall be paid as provided in Section 12.5 below. At the conclusion of the five (5) year period, Owner shall either continue to pay the Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit or such other public facilities fee as the City has then enacted and applied to residentiai development projects in the City. Eighty Two Thousand Dollars ($82,000.00). Owner shall have the term of this Agreement within which to apply the park improvement fee credit towards Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees. City shall have a right to review, audit and verify all costs associated with said park improvements under procedures to be mutually agreed upon between the parties. If at any time, the Interim Public Facilities Fees to be paid are less than the credit, referenced above, and Owner qualifies for the credit, Owner shall receive the difference directly from the City when due. For purposes of calculating credits under this Section, "Improvements" shall be defined a.s onsite work only (design, grading and construction), excluding street and utility work within the public right-of-way and any onsite environmental mitigation costs such as toxic removal and wetlands mitigation. 12.5 Timing,. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City .Public Facilities Fees, if any, required to be paid by Owner pursuant to this Agreement shall be deferred until such time as a certificate of occupancy has been obtained for the first production home built on the Property. Thereafter, the Interim Public Facilities Fees shall be paid at the time of issuance of building permits for each residential unit constructed on the Property. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City Public Facilities Fees required to be paid by the Owner for the model home units shall be paid in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding CMOU"), between the City and Owner regarding said model homes, which MOU is dated for reference , 1994. 13. Reservations of Authority. 13.1 Limitations, Reservations. and Exceptions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the development of the Property: (a) Processing fees and charges imposed by City to cover the estimated actual costs to City of processing applications for Subsequent Development Approvals. K:~DM.SLIL W. DIRIO095996. WP 1 ~ Co) Owner shall also pay all other customary and typical development exactions, for a project of this size and nature, in existence as of the Effective Date and throughout the term of this Agreement, including but not limited to, Fire, Traffic Signal Mitigation and K-Rat Fees pursuant to the provisions of City ordinances and resolutions in existence when paid. 12.3. Public Park. As additional consideration for entering into this Agreement, Owner agrees to dedicate to the City, or cause to be dedicated, and City agrees to accept when offered, park land equalling approximately three (3) acres pursuant to that certain undated parkland/Landscape Improvement Agreement between Owner and City. The park land is shown on Exhlbit E which is attached and made a part hereof and incorporated by this reference. Owner shall improve, and Owner shall dedicate, or cause to be dedicated in fee or by grant of easement to City and City agrees to accept park land and improvements when offered for dedication and acceptance if such improvements meet the requirements of City for the construction and installation of park improvements. As a condition precedent to the City accepting the dedication of the park property and the improvements thereto, such property shall be free and clear of any and all liens, assessments, encumbrances and similar financial obligation relative to said property. Owner shall cause a title insurance company to issue a CLTA title insurance owner's policy with standard exceptions on such property, which policy shall be provided to City. If City desires an ALTA title policy, the additional cost over the cost of a CLTA policy with standard exceptions will be borne by City. 12.4 Park improvement Fee Credits. At the time of completion of the improvements and transfer of the public park as provided in this Agreement, Owner shall receive a credit against payment of future Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees based on the actual improvement cost incurred by Owner for the public park, which exceeds the Project's Quimby Park requirements as calculated by the City, up to a tota/maximum credit of K: LDMStJL W. DtRtO095~96. WP 17 (b) Procedural regulations relating to heanng bodies, petitions. applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendation, appeals, and any other matter of procedure. (c) Regulations imposing Development Exactions; provided, however, that no such subsequently adopted Development Exactions shall be applicable to development of the Property unless such 'Development Exactions are applied uniformly to development throughout the City. (d) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications including without limitation, the City's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code and Fire Code. (e) Regulations which are not in conflict with the Development Plan. Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property. (f) Regulations which are in conflict with the Development Plan provided Owner has given written consent to the application of such regulations to development of the Property. 13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This Agreement shall not prevent City, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying the Subsequent I..and Use Regulations which do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent City from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on the basis of the Existing or Subsequent Land Use Regulations not in conflict with the Development Plan. 13.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement prevent K: LDMSIJL W. DIRIO0 85.g96. WP 19 or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do 'not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. 13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within the control of City possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or joinfly with City and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. 13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 66452,6 of the Government Code, the tentative subdivision map(s) or tentative parcel map(s) (vest.ed or regular) approvext as pan of implementing the Development Plan shall be extended to expire at the end of the term of this Agreement 13.6 Vestin~ Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final subdivision map, or tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410, et Seq.~ and Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, as the same was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-04, and if this Agreement is determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insofar as it grants a vested right to develop to the Owner, then and to that extent the rights, obligations, and protections afforded the Owner and City respectively, under the laws and ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above, development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions in this Agreement shall be controlling over conflicting provisions of law or ordinances concerning vesting maps. K.' ~DMSLIL W. 0/R10085996, WP 20 14. Development of the Property. 14.1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, including payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee, the Owner shall have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with, and to the extent of the Development Plan. The Project shall remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Plan. 14.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise provided under the terms of this Agreement, including the payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee, the rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations. City shall exercise its lawful reasonable discretion in connection with Subsequent Development Approvals in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provided by this Agreement including, but not limited to, payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee and/or the City.Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be. City shall accept for processing, review, and action all applications for Subsequent Development Approvals, and such applications shall be processed in the normal manner for processing such matters. City may, at the request of Owner, contract for planning and engineering consultant services to expedite the review and processing of Subsequent Development Approvals, the cost of which shall be borne by Owner. 14.3 Chan~es and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that refinement and further development of the Project will require Subsequent Development Approvals and may K.' IDMSIJL W, DIRIG(:)8599E, WP 2 1 i~onday October ~ 199Z> 2:05 -- F~X NO. 7147555848 P. 05 dcrnon.~u at~ that changes are {ttmpropdate and mutually dc~L'-able tn the Bxixf~g 13~mlopment Approvals. In {he evcnt ~ Owne~ finds Ib. at a change In t~e Bzlstlng I:~W, lopmcnt iS ncCe&.laP] or ~lmpzt)pdstt~, me {~er si!~1] ~p~y f~ S Slll~cqtlent Development Al:)ptoval to effedum such e, hange, If al~pt. oved. any such c. han~ in ~e ~xls6ng DevOUt &pptov'dls ~ha]] be incorpon~d hewein as an add~ndum to P~h Agzement and rn~y 5~ fm-d~r changed from ~-~e~o time aS provided ln flds Sectiort. Owner, shall, wil~thitty(30)thyg ofwxilten demmld by Cfty, relmbur~ City for any and all ,x~ooa51~ ~, ~hted With any amendment or Change to this A~xnent 11~ is inidm~d by Owner or Owners successor. Unleg othorwise required by law, u de~mnined in City's reasonable disete6on, a ~ ~o te ]~xis~ng D~velopment Approvals shall be deemed "m~not" and not require an amendment to this A~feement provided ~uch chsnp d~ not: (a) Alt~ ~e pe. tmltted use~ of the Prepetty as t whore; Co) lnc~'eaz the density or inteasipJ of us~ of the Property a~ a whole; or, (e) In4m~.se the mlximum h~iRht and ~ of perinitial building; or, (d) Deletca3rt~lui~mcntfofthere~t~tticaordedleationofl~dforpubllc pt~l~s withB tl~ Property as a whole; (e) Cons6tu~e a project t~lujflsg a subsequent. or a supplemental Eavl~onmonlnl Imp~t Report puz'~u2nt to Section 21166 of the Public Resourt~ Code. 14.4 M'mimum Unit ~ Owner agre~ 1~1 the llnit~ m be cotxstrdeted On l>topclty shall be t minimum of one ~hotls~md CI,000) ~cluax~ fe~t in size. 15. .Perledie Review of Compliance ~h (a) Pu~uant to City Re~olu~en No. 91-52, ~x it may be amended, City shaR review lids Agreement at !~ast o,~cs dining every twelve 02) month period from t~ Effe~ive Da~ of ~ds Agreement. Tb~ Own~ or s~ec~sor shall x~nbu~c C~ty tot time reasonable and necessary costs of this review, within thirty (30) days of written demand from City. I~0'a ZI~'S~SkeIS '0N ~,~ NVlIZ~HNa m AN(10q0119~:tt Co) During each periodic review by City, the Owner is required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The Owner agrees to furnish such evidence of good faith compliance as City in the exercise of its discretion may require. 16. Financing District. Upon the request of Owner, the parties shall cooperate in exploring the use of special assessment districts and other similar Financing Districts for the financing of the construction, improvement, or acquisition of public infrastructure, facilities, lands, and improvements to serve the Project and its residents, whether located within or outside the Property. It is aclcnowledged that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as requiring City or City Council to form such a district or to issue or sell bonds. 17. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties and in the manner provided for in Government Code Sections 65868, 65867 and 65867.5. If an Amendment is requested by the Owner or its successor, the Owner/successor agrees to pay City any Development Agreement Amendment fee then in existence as established by City Council Resolution, or if no such fee is established, to reimburse City for the actual and reasonably necessary costs of reviewing and processing said Amendment within thirty (30) days of written demand from City. 18. Enforcement. Unless amended or canceled as herein provided, this Agreement is enforceable by a~y party to it notwithstanding a change in the applicable general or specific plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulations adopted by the City which alter or a.mend the rules, regulations, or policies governing permitted uses of the land, density, design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications. i9. Events of Default. Owner is in default under this Agreement upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: (a) If a warranty, representation or statement made or furnished by Owner to City is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made; K:IDMSIJL W. DIRIG085996. WP 23 (c) person. (d) Co) A finding and determination by City that upon the basis of substantial evidence the Owner has not complied in good faith with one or more of the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 20. Procedure Upon Default. (a) Upon the occurrence of an event of default, City may terminate or modify this Agreement in accordance with the procedure adopted by the City. (b) City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Owner implied if on periodic xeview the City does not propose to modify or terminate this Agreement. Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third Non-performance shall be excused only when it is prevented or delayed by acts of God or an emergency declared by the Governor. (e) All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements are available to the parties to pursue in the event there is a breach. 21. Damages Upon Termination. It is acknowledged by the parties that City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. In general, each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except that City, and its officers, employees and agents, shall not be liable in damages to Owner or to any assignee, transferee of Owner, or any other person, and Owner covenants not to sue for or claim any damages for breach of that Agreement by City. K:IDMSLIL W. DIRIO085996. WP 24 22. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If legal action by either party is brought because of breach of this Agreement or to enforce a provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and court costs. 23. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid and presumed delivered upon actual receipt by personal delivery or within three (3) days following deposit thereof in United States Mail. Notice required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: To City: City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Attention: City Attorney Notices required to be given to Owner shall be addressed as follows: To Owner: Coscan Davidson Homes 12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200 Del Mar, CA 92014 Attention: William A. Davidson With a copy to:Kolodny & Pressman 11975 El Camino Real, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92130 Attention: Jed L. Weinberg, Esq. A party may change the address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 24. Cooperation. City agrees that it shall accept for processing and promptly takd action on all applications, provided they are in a proper form and acceptable for required processing, for discretionary permits, tract or parcel maps, or other land use entitlement for development of the Project in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. City shall cooperate with Owner in providing expeditious review of any such applications, permits, or land use entitlement and, upon request and payment of any costs and/or extra fees associated K:~DMStJL 'f~DIRtOO85996, WP 25 merewith by Owner, City shall assign to the Project planner(s),. building inspector(s), and/or other staff personnel as required to insure the timely processing and completion of the Project. 25. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms. (a) The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. Co) If there is more than one signer of this Agreement their obligations are joint and several. (c) The time limits set forth in this Agreement may be extended by mutual written consent of the parties in accordance with the procedures for adoption of the Agreement. (d) This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person, including but not limited to third party beneficiaries, shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 26. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto contain the complete, final, entire, and exclusive expression of the agreement between the parties hereto, and is intended by the parties to c6mpletely state the agreement in full. Any agreement or representation respecting the matters dealt with herein or the duties of any party in relation thereto not expressly set forth in this Agreement shall be null and void. 2'7. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which so fully executed counterpart shall be deemed an original. No counterpart shall be deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterpart executed by the other party to this Agreement is in the physic. al possession of the party seeking enforcement thereof. K: ~DMSiJL W. DIRIOOE59S6. WP ~ 6 28. Authority to Execute. Each party hereto expressly warrants and represents that he/she/they has/have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his/her/their corporation, partnership, business entity, or governmental entity and warrants and represents that he/she/they has/have the authority to bind his/her/their entity to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executed by the parties on the day and year first above written. "City" City of Temecula By: Ron Roberts, Mayor june S. Greek, City Clerk Amproved as to form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney "Owner" Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California corporation, dba Coscan Davidson Homes William A. Davidson (t ed name) its Pres~Y]genr' (rifle) By: ~.c-,~t Stephen H. Dawe (typed Bame) its Executive Vice~President (title) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) On ~riSk m~ c ~, ~cr~, before me, ~ tL ~..~cc~. [here insert the name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared ~,~,~-~ A ~.~.~,1~o~ e~ s-r~,~ ~. G.~..-q personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the ~ame in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity. upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (SEAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On , before me, [here insert the name and title of the officer/notary] personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (SEAL) K: iDMSIJL W. DIRtO085.996. WP 2 ~ Developmen~ Agreemen~ N~. 37 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 164 as amended 164. Amendment No. 1. ZONING Ordinance No. 348.2788' (Zone Change No. 4501) Ordinance No. 348.2927 (Zone Change No. 5127) LAND DIVISIONS 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20703 No. 20703-! (Recorded at Book by Specific Plan No. and Final Tract Map 177, pages 72-76.) The development approvals lis~ed above include the approved maps and all conditions of approval. COPIES OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. A Development Agreement No. 37 EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS !. Riverside County Comprehensive amended through Resolution No. 2. Ordinance No. 340. 3. Ordinance No. 348 as amended 348.2857. 4. Ordinance No. 448 as amended 448.a. 5. Ordinance No. 458 as amended 458.8. 6. Ordinance No. 460 as amended 460.92. 7. Ordinance No. 461 as amended 46~.6. Ordinance No. 509 as amended 509.2. 9. Ordinance No. 546 as amended 546.7a. 10. Ord~nanceNo. 547 as amended 547.5, 11. Ordinance No. 555 as amended 555.15. 617 as amended General Plan as 88-485. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No. 12. Ordinance No. 617.1. 13. Ordinance No. 650. 14. Resolution No. 87-525 Establishing Procedures and Requirements for the Consideration of Development Agreements, as amended by Resolution No. 88-39 and Resolution No. 88-119. COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. EXHIBIT B Exhibit 'C' Legal Description (to be attached) LEGAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27827 PARCEL OF LAND CONSiSTiNG ~F IRA,iT 27837-i, ON FiLE fN BOOK 249, ,S 90 T~ROjGH !00, INCLUSiVe, AND ;RACT 2~827-2, ON F!LS IN BOOK PAGES i ~HROUGH 3 INCLUSIVE BOTH RECORDS OF ~IVERSIDE CC. UNTY, CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WiTH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL "B" ~F LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. PA94-0032, RECORDED MAY 31, [994 AS INSTRUMENT 220114, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ALL LYING iN THE CiTY ')F TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVESIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SAiD PORTION OF PARCEL 'B' BEING MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIgED AS FOLLOWS: BEGiNNiNG AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3~ OF SAiD TRACT 27827-2; ~.'-'li'i~' i}T'-' ', ~ °'l~' 3 ,-!, 'r_, A DISTANCE OF 5~4,83 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF COURSES: SAiD PARCEL "B" THE FOLLOWING FOUR 1. NORTH 48'17'05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 6i.42 FEET: 2, SOUTH 02°i4'55" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 40}.87 FEET; 3. SOUTH 62°16'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 482.29 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2082.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF SAiD CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 27~44'59'' WEST~ 4. SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13'16'07", A DISTANCE OF 482.i5 FEET TO A POINT C'N A NON-TANGENT LINE, A RADIAL LiNE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 14'28'52' WEST, SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE NORTHERLY OORNER OF LOT 3! OF SAID TRACT 27~27-1; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 27827-! THE FOLLOWING NINETEEN OOURSES: i. SOUTH I~'41'04" WEST, A DISTANCE OF .~5,!9 FEET: 2. NORTH 73'!e'56'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF ~2.4~ FEET: 3.SOUTH 57"~0'56' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 38,43 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAViNO A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF SAZD C'JRVE THROUGH SAID POINT ~EARS NORTH .~3'07'07" EAST; 4. SOUTHWESTEELY ALONG SAiD CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE i~2~42'4e'', A DISTANCE OF !14.58 FEET~ 5. NORTH 44'~0'08' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 50,00 FEET TO THE BEGiNNiNG OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND H~VIN] A RADIUS OF !00.00 FEET~ ~. NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAiD CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL AN:zLE OF 2d~10'44'', A DISTANCE OF 45.92 ~ TO Tu~ BEGiNNr~ia A REVERSE CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2211.00 FEET, AND TO WHICH A RADIAL BEARS SOUTH 1}~31'38'' WEST; NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAiD REVERSE CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2'03'~[", A DISTANCE 79.59 FEET i'D A POINT A NON-TANGENT LINE. A RADIAL LINE OF SAiD CURVE THRGUGH ~" '3 '20 r,_.lNl BEARS SOUTH 21 4 " WEST; 8. S~UTH 24~26'13'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 44.~2 FEET TO THE ~EGiNNiNG OF A TAXiGENT CURVE, CON,iAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AXE HATING A RADIUS OF ~89 . 00 FEET; 9. SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3~00' L4", A DISTANCE OF 26.40 FEET: 10. SODTH 16°25'59" WEIST, A DiSTAl'ICE CF I?,TI] FEET; ii. NORTH 73°34'0['' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 135.00 FEET: 12. SOUTH [6'25'5~' WEST, A DISTANCE OF ~7,24 FEET; !3. NORTH 73~34'01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 85.~',0 FEET: i ,~ NORTH i ,' ~ ~= ' ~ ..... T a D/STANOE nr -'r~ ~ ~ ~TT~ · 15. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST, A 16. SOUTH [o'25'59" WEST, A I~. NORTH 7~°34'0!'' WEST, l 18. NORTH !6° 25'59" EAST, A 19. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST, A NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT DISTANCE OF [5~.00 FEET; DISTANCE OF 18.43 FEET; DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET; DISTANCE OF 20,29 FEET: DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET TO "F" OF SAID TRACT 27827-[, BEING ALSO THE NORTHEAST TRACT 27827-2; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY i, 2. SOUTH 3. NORTH 4. SOUTH 5. NORTH o. SOUTH 7. NORTH 8. NORTH 9. NORTH i0. SOUTH 11. NORTH POINT ELEVEN COURSES: NORTH 73°34'01.. WEST 16° 25'59" WEST 73°34'01" WEST 16°25 59" WEST 73°34 0l" WEST !6°25 59" WEST 73° 34 0i" WEST i6°25 59" EAST 73° 34 01" WEST, !o~ 25 59" WEST, 0i" WEST, OF BEGINNING. CORNER OF LOT !8 OF SAID THE A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 4.26 FEET; A DISTANCE OF !05.00 FEET~ A DISTANCE OF 33.80 FEET~ A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 80.20 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 6.33 FEET; A SiSTANCE OF 155.00 FEET; A DISTANCE OF !o.33 FEET; A DISTANCE ~F 85.00 FEET TO THE LINE OF SAID TRACT 27827-2 'THE Request for Notice of Default Under Development Agreement Development Agreement: Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement Specific Plan No. 164. Roripaugh Plannin~ Application No. 94-0017 Date: To: City Clerk and Planning Director, City of Temecula Pursuant to Section 6(b) and (c) of the above-referenced Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement, request is hereby made by as Mortgagee for the property (or portion thereof) to receive copies of any Notice of Default issued by City against Owner in accordance with the terms and conditions of such Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. Copies of any such Notices should be mailed to the following address: (Mortgagee) (Person/Department) (Address) (City/StateJzip) (Telephone No.) A copy of this Notice should be fled with the project file to insure proper and timely notice is given. Under the terms of said Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement, as Mortgagee is enti~ed to receive copies of any'Notice of Default within ten (10) days of sendinE any such Notice to Owner. Failure to send any such Notice may have serious legal consequences for the Citw. This request is to remain in effect until revoked by as Mortgagee or the Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement is terminated. The person executing this document on behalf of said Mortgagee warrants and represents that the entity he/she represents is a bonafide Mortgagee of said property and is entitled to receive copies of Notices of Default under said Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. F. XH~ffE ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 19, 1994 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19. 1994 Mike Knowlton, 39130 Pale Vista Road, Temecula, expressed opposition proposed project density and presented a petition of opposition from th/h/h,~// surrounding property owners. ,/./ Commissioner Slaven said she understands the issue before~dth the property owners and the residents surrounding the property, how/e~r she said she supports staff's recommendation for denial. / Commissioner Fahey said the proposed projec't/~not in compliance with the General Plan and probably will not be in complianc~ a result of the special study. · ' , by Commissioner Slaven to close Map No. 25063 and Adopt Rebution No. 94- denying Change of Zone No. 5598 / AYES: A/ COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Slaven, Webster, Ford NOES: , / 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair 9. PA94-0017 Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. Commissioner Webster asked if the County has provided any response regarding their interpretation of the fees. Director Thornhill stated the City has been in disagreement with the County regarding fees since the City's incorporation and it is the City's position that once the City incorporated and was providing the levels of service to the developments the City should collect the fees. He added that the City believes the clause that is contained in the Development Agreements that were previously negotiated with the County is improper. Assistant City Attorney Greg Diaz said the County has been consistent in their position that they are entitled to fees as a matter of contract law. The City Attorney's office has reviewed the provisions of the government code as it pertains to Development Agreements and the incorporation of new cities and it was determined that once incorporated, the City is entitled to 100% of the fees. He added that the developer in this Development Agreement has agreed to provide funds to defend the City's position should the City go to court in defense of their position on the fees. PCMINOg/19/94 5 09/28/94 DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 1994 Chairman Ford opened the public hearing. Dale Gleed, 12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200, Del Mar, representing the applicant Coscan Davidson Homes, said they have worked with the City Planning Department on the agreement and are satisfied with the fee requirement. Chairman Ford said he remembers at the time the project went before the Council there was discussions regarding minimum home sizes and he is concerned there is no language included in the Development Agreement which addresses that discussion. Director Gary Thornhill said he remembers the discussion however, he does not remember that being included in the Conditions of Approval. Dale Gleed stated the house sizes proposed range from 1000 to 1500 square feet. Chairman Ford said he would like to see the comments made regarding the unit size tied to the Development Agreement. Director Thornhill said he would have to go back to the minutes of that Council meeting and if that was the intent of the Council, he would then determine what that intent was and bring that back at another hearing. He said he doesn't recall any precise comments regarding square footage. Dale Gleed said the plan today is the same as the original concept plan, however, if the applicant changed the plans, they would have to bring that back to the Planning Department. Mr. Gleed said he would be willing to agree to a 1000 square foot minimum, Commissioner Fahey said the issues raised by Chairman Ford are important and staff should review prior to sending this item forward to the City Council, It was moved by Commissioner Fahey, seconded by Chairman Ford to approve Adopt the Negative Declaration for PA94-0017 and Adopt Resolution No. 94- recommending approval of PA94-0017 by City Council, based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff report and subject to the Conditions of Approval and direct staff to follow up on the comments made during the City Council hearing on minimum house sizes.' The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Slaven, Webster, Ford NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair PCMIN09/19/94 6 09/2BI94 ATTACHMENT NO. 6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT, SEPTEMBER 19, 1994 R:\STAI~FP, PT~I7PA~..CC 10/4/94 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1994 Planning Application No.: PA94-0017 (Development Agreement for Tract 27827) Prepared By: Saied Naaseh RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. ADOPT the Negative Declaration for PA94-0017; and ADOPT Resolution No. 94- recommending approval of PA94-0017 by City Council, based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Rf!port; and subject to the attached Conditions of Approva:. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: Leo Roripaugh REPRESENTATIVE: Sanford Edward PROPOSAL: A Request for Approval of a Development Agreement for Tentative Tract No. 27827 LOCATION: Located on the northwest corner of l-4icolas Road and North General Kearney Road EXISTING ZONING: SP (Specific Plan) SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: Santa Gertrudis Creek Specific Plan No. 164, Medium High Density Residential (5.1 Dwelling Units Per Acre) R-2 (Multiple Family Dweqings) O (Office-Commercial) PROPOSED ZONING: N/A GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential (7 to 12 ';',. 91ling units per acre) EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: South: East: West: Santa Gertrudis Creek Single Family Dwellings Single Family Dwellings Vacant PROJECT STATISTICS Total Area: Number of Lots: Existing Development Agreement Fee: Proposed Development Agreement Fee: 22.5 acres 162 $5,183.00/Unit $3,000.00/Unit BACKGROUND The original Development Agreement (No. 37) was approved by the County of Riverside for the Roripaugh Hills Specific Plan (S.P. 164) which includes Tract 27827 on November 4, 1988. In 1993, the developer initiated negotiations with the former City Manager, Mr. Dave Dixon, and the former City Attorney, Mr. Scott Field, for a new Development Agreement. These commitments set the foundation for the revisions in the Development Agreement Fee for this project. The proposed revisions would reduce the Development Agreement Fee from $5,183.00 to $3,000.00 and would entitle the developer to a maximum of $82,000.00 in credits toward the construction of an on site public park. The construction of this park was a Condition of Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Development Agreement Fee includes only an Interim Public Facilities Fee and has eliminated other fees associated with County approved Development Agreements such as Regional Parkland Fee, Habitat Conservation Fee and Public Services Offset Fee. interim Public Facilities Fee The proposed Development Agreement is for a period of ten (10) y~ ars and applies to Tract 27827. This tract was approved by the City Council on January 25, 1994 and contains 162 single family lots and a three (3) acre public park. The Interim Public Facilities Fee will be $3,000.00 per unit and will be paid for the first five (5) years of the 'erm of the Development Agreement. After this period, the developer will either continue to pay the Interim Public Facility Fee of $3,000.00 or such other Public Facilities Fee adopted by the City and applied to other residential projects. Public Park and Park Improvement Fee Credits According to an Agreement signed at the recordation of the map between the City and the developer, the three (3) acre park will be constructed and dedicated to the City prior to issuance of the 34th Certificate of Occupancy of the project or within eighteen months of the recordation of the first phase of the final map, whichever comes first. The developer will receive credits against the Interim Public Facilities Fee for a maximum of $82,000.00. The amount of credit will be determined by the difference between the actual cost of improving the park and the project's Quimby Park requirements. ANALYSIS The existing approved Development Agreement includes the follow!ng fees: Public Facilities Fee Regional Parkland Fee Habitat Conservation Fee Public Services Offset Fee $2,292.00 $424.00 $315.00 $2,152.00 Total Development Agreement Fee $5,183.00 According to the County, all County approved Development Agreements have a section which purports to require the split of certain fees between the County and a city should any portion of the property by covered the agreement become part of a city. That section provides that the Regional Parkland Fee ($424.00), the Habitat Conservation and Open Space Land Fee ($315.00) would continue to be fully payable to the County. Additionally, two-thirds (2/3) of the Public Services Offset Fee ($2, 152.00)and 5.3% Public Facilities Fee ($2,292.00)would be payable to the County. Therefore, according to the County, a total of $2,295.14is payable to the County from the $5,183.00 Development Agreement Fee, leaving $2,887.85 as the City's portion of this fee. The proposed $3,000.00 Interim Public Facilities Fee is greater than $2,887.85, City's portion of the existing Development Agreement Fee, should the County interpretation of the fees be used. However, the City contends that the County's interpretation of the Development Agreement is not in accordance with State law which provides that the benefits of a Development Agreement as well as its burdens transfer to a City upon incorporatior,. As the property which is the subject of this Development Agreement is now within the City boundaries the County is no longer entitled to any fees under the Development Agreement, EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION This project will be consistent with the General Plan since the General Plan currently designates the site as Medium Density Residential and the approved development project which is implemented by this Development Agreement for this site is consistent with this designation. This project is consistent with Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 2's High Density zone since the development project which is implemented by this Development Agreement it meets all the requirements for this zone. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION A Initial Study was prepared for this project and it revealed no significant impacts. Therefore, Staff recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Since prior commitments by the former City Manager and City Attorney were made to the developer in regards to reducing the Development Agreement Fee, Staff supports this p~'oject. It should be noted that for any new Development Agreements, Staff would be looking at increased fees to be justified by a new fee study. City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Pro~.,: will result in the a. Generation of municipal revenue; b. Public infrastructure facilities; Enhancement of the quality of life; including recreation facilities for present and future residents of the City; The opportunity for an adjacent residential-commercial project creating significant job opportunities, sales tax and ad valorera tax revenues for the City; e. Payment of Public Facilities Fees (fire and traffic signal mitigation); Participation in special assessment districts to finance City and regional infrastructure improvements; and, The creation of significant park and recreation dedications for public use and the protection of significant natural resources. Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PC Resolution - Blue Page 6 Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 10 Initial Study - Blue Page 12 Approved Development Agreement - Blue Page 27 Proposed Development Agreement - Blue Page 28 Exhibits - Blue Page 29 A. Vicinity Map B. Zoning Map C. General Plan D. Tract Map 27827 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 94.-_ ATi'ACHMENT N0. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 94-_ A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING CO1VIMISSION OF TIEIF- CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY TIFF. CITY COUNCH~ OF AMF. ND1VIENT AND RESTATEMF. NT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164, RORIPAUGH; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA94-0017 THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WIt~.REAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Ten~ecula has received an application for an Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement, Specific Plan No. 164, Roripaugh; Planning Application No. PA94-0017, (hereinafter "Development Agreement" ); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public Laaring on September 19. 1994, on the issue of recommending approval or denial of the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES FIND AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the Development Agreement, Atxachment No. 5, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Attachment No. 2 and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full herein. Section 2. That in recommending the adoption by the City Council of the Developmere Agreement the Planning Commission hereby make the following findings: 1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temeculas's General Plan in that the Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of certain real property for residential development and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of Medium Density Residential; and, 2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the u~'.es authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the Property st oject to the Development Agreement is located as the Development Agreement provides for single faraily homes and that this Development Agreement is consistent with good planning practices by providing for the opportunity to develop the Property consistent with the General Plan, and, R:\STAFFRPT\17PA94.PC 9/15/94 klb 7 3. The Development Agreemere is in conformity with the public convenience. general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; and, 4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental m the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof; and, 5. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Comzaission was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the Pl,:nning commission public hearing, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the project applicant and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all propony owners within three hundred feet (300') of the property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; and, 6. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the heating body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description and text or by diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; and, 7. The Development Agreement complies with the goal~ and objectives of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the traffic impacts of the development over the period of the Development Agreement will be substantially mitigated by the mitigation measures and conditions of approval imposed; and. 8. The Development Agreement complies with requirements of the zoning district in which the applicant proposes to develop in that the Specific Plan zoning of High Density Residential is consistent with the Medium Density Residential :3eneral Plan Land Use Designation; and, 9. The benefits that will accrue to the people of the Cit> of Temecula from this legislation and this Development Agreement are as follows: City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the: a. Generation of municipal revenue; b. Public infrastructure facilities: c. Enhancement of the quality of life; including recreation facilities for present and filmre residents of the City; d. The oppormhity for an adjacent residential-commercial project creating significant job opportunities, sales tax and ad valorem tax revenues for the City; e. Payment of Public Facilities Fees (fu'e and traffic signal mitigation); R:\STAFFRPT\I7PA94.PC 9/15/94 klb 8 f. Participation in special assessment districts to finance City and regional infrastructure improvements; and, g. The creation of significant park and recreation dedications for public use and the protection of significant natural resources. Section 3. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shah cause this Resolution to be transmitted to the City Council for further proceedings in accordance with State law. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __ day of STEVEI~'J. FORD CHAIRMAN I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof. held on the __ day of , by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: GARY THORNHILL SECRETLY R:\STAFFRPT~17PA94.PC 9/15/94 Irdb 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA94-0017 Project Description: A Request for Approval of a Development Agreement for Tentative Tract No. 27827 Assessor's Parcel No.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 911-150-035and 911-150-038 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be voided by reason of failure of condition. R:\STAFFRPT~ITPA94.PC 9/15/9~ lab I 1 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 INITIAL STUDY City of Temecula Planning Department Initial Environmental Study I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION II. 1. Name of Project: Roripaugh Estates 2. Case Numbers: Planning Application No. PA94-0017 (Development Agreement) 3. Location of Project: Located on the North-west corner ot Nicolas Road and North General Kearney Road 4. Description of Project: Date of Environmental Assessment: A Request for Approval of a Development Agreement for Tentative Tract No. 27827 August 8, 1994 6. Name of Proponent: Leo Roripaugh Address and Phone Number of Proponent: P.O. Box 2 Temecula. CA 92590 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations to all the answers are provided in Section lID I. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes geologic substructures" X Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or over covering of the soil? X c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils. either on or off the site? X Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion? X g. The modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake? X R:\STAFFRPT\I7PA94.IS 9/15/94 tjs I ~ Yes Maybe Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, liquefaction, ground failure, or similar hazards? X Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zor e? X 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X b. The creation of objectionable odors? X Alteration of air movement, temperature, or moisture or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? __ __ X 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff?. _ __x c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? _ x__ Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions. withdrawals. or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X h, Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? __x Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? X 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops. and aquatic plants)? X R:\STAFFRPT\I7pA94.1S 9/15/94 tjs '~4 Yes b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of plants? c, Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing specms? d. Reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (animals includes all land animals, birds, reptiles, fish. amphibians, shellfish, benthie organisms, and/or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals? c. The introduction of new wildlife species into an area? d. A barrier to the migration or movement of animals? e. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce or result in light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in: a. Alteration of the present land use of an area? b. Alteration to the future planned land use of an area as described in a community or general plan? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? Maybe No X R:x, STAFFRPTX17PA94.1S 9115194 tjs 1 ~ 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of any hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes, but is not limited to, pesticides, chemicals, oil or radiation)? b. The use, storage, transport or disposal of any hazardous or to~ic materials (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? c. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, densit3, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems, including public transportation? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? Yes Maybe N__o X X X X R:\$TAFFRFF\I7PA94.1S 9/15/94 tjs 'l 6 e. Maintenance of public facilities. including roads? f. Other governmental services: 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? __ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energ2, or require the development of new sources of energy? __ 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to any of the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? __ b. Communications systems? __ c. Water systems? __ d. Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks? __ e. Storm water drainage systems? __ f. Solid waste disposal systems? __ g. Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient patlern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above? __ 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? __ b. The exposure of people to potential health hazards, including the exposure of sensitive receptors (such as hospitals and schools) to toxic pollutant emissions? __ 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public~ __ b. The creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? __ c. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area? __ 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality ,~r quantity of existing recreational resources or opportunities? __ Yes Maybe N__o R:\STAFFRPT\17PA94.1S 9/15/94 tjs 'l 7 20. Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. The alteration or destruction of any paleontologic, prehistoric, archaeological or historic site.'? b. Adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? c. Any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. Restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? Yes Maybe N_..Q X R:XSTAFFRPTXlTPAq4.1S 9/15/94 tjs IH. DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Earth 1 .a.d. No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions ~r in changes in geologic substructures, destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated wi~ the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Trac~ Map No. 27827. 1.b. No. The project will not cause disruptions, displacements, compacti~n, or overcovering of soil, since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. 1 .c.g. No. The project will not result in change in topography or ground surface relief features, or modification of any wash, channel, creek, river or lake since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Deciaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. 1 .e.f. No. The project will not result in an increase in wind or water erosion of soils. either on or off the site and changes in siltation, deposition or erosion since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed wire the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. 1.h.i. No. The project will not result in exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, and development near an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone, since the General Plan EIR does not identify the site in being in any of these areas. However, the site is within a liquefaction zone as identified in the General Plan EIR since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Air No. The project will not result in the local deterioration of air quality since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. 2.b.c. No. The project will not create objectionable odors or cause alteration of air movement, temperature or moistare or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigamd with the mitigation n: '~asures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827 Water 3.a.c.d. e.f.g.h. i. No. The project will not cause changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters, alterations to the course or flow of flood waters, change in the amount of surface water in any waterbody, discharge into surface waters or in any alterations of surface water quality, alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters, change in the quantity of ground waters, reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies, or exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. 3.b. No. This project will not cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff sinco the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site h~,ve been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Plant Life 4.a.b.d. No. This project will not change the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plant, reduce the numbers of any unique, rare, threatened or endangered species of plants or reduce the acreage of any agricultural crop since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. No. This project will not introduce new species of plants since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Animal Life No. The project will not cause a change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals since the project does not involve any construction. No impazts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated v,!th the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. 5.b.c. d.e. No. The project will not cause a reduction in numbers of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered species of animals, introduction of new wildlife species into the area, a barrier to the migration or movement of animals or deterioration to existing fish o~r wildlife habitat since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. R:\STAFFRjrI~17PA94.1S 9115194 tjs 20 Noise No. The project will not increase the existing noise levels since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed wi~h the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. 6.b.c. No. The project will not expose people to severe noise or vibrations since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Light and Glare , No. The project will not cause an increase in light and glare since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Land Use No. The project will not cause an alteration of the present land use of the area since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. 8.b. No. The proposed project will not cause alteration to the future planned land use of this area. when ultimately developed, as described in the draf~ General Plm, which designates the site as Medium Density Residential since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Natural Resources 9.a.b. No. The project will not result in an increase in the rate of use of any natural resources and depletion of any nonrenewable natural resources when the site is ultimately developed since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Risk of Upset 10.a.b. No. The project will not result in a risk of explosion and/or, the release of hazardous substances, when the site is ultimately developed since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. R:\STAFFRPT\I7PA94.1S 9/15/94 10.c. No. The project will not result in any interference with an emergenci~ response plan when the site is ultimately developed since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declarahon for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Population 11. No. This project will not make alterations to the location, distribution. density, or growth rate of the human population of this area since the project does not involve an~ construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the consu'uction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Housin~ 12. No. The project will not affect existing housing and create a demand for new housing since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Transnortation/Circulation 13.a.f. No. The project will not generate daily trips, increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentanve Tract Map No. 27827. 13.b.c.d. No. The project will not create additional demand on parking, cause a substantial impact on existing transportation systems, alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods and alteration to waterborne, rail or air traffic since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with. the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Public Services 14.a.h.c. d.e.f. No. The project will not have a substantial impact on fire protection, police protection, schools, parks and other governmental services since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. R:\STAFFRPTX17PA<)4.1S 9115/94 Energy 15.a.b. No. The project will not result in substantial use of fuel or energy since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Utilities 16.a.b.c. d.e.f.g. No. The project will not result in a need for new system or substantial alterations to any of the following: power or natural gas, communication systems, water systems, sanitary sewer systems, storm water drainage systems, solid waste disposal systems and will not result in a disjointed or inefficient pattern of utility delivery system improvements for any of the above since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation m,-.asures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Human Health 17.a. No. The project will not create potential health hazards when the site is ultimately developed since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigat on measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27227. 17.b. No. The project will not expose people to potential health hazards. including the exposure of sensitive receptors such as hospitals and schools to toxic pollutant emissions since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Aesthetics 18.a.b.c. No. The project will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view, or in a detrimental visual impact on the surrounding area since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measure~ proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. Recreation 19. No. The project will not result in an impact upon the quality or quatuity of existing recreational resources or opportunities since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated with the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declar~Ti,on for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. R:\STAFFRPT\17pA94.1S 9115194 Cultural Resources 20.a.b.c. d. No. The project wiif not result in alteration or destruction of an) paleontologic, prehistoric, archeological or historic site, adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object, any potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values, or restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area since the project does not involve any construction. No impacts are anticipated since all the impacts from the construction of this site have been mitigated witix the mitigation measures proposed with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 27827. R:\STAFFRPTH7PA94.IS 9/15/94 tjs 24 IV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential to either: degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish, wildlife or bird species, cause a fish, wildlife or bird population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant, bird or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Yes Maybe N_,~o Does the project have the potential to achieve short ten, to the disadvantage of long term, environmental goals? (A short term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long term impacts will endure well into the future. ) X Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project's impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) X Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X V DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME "DE 1VIINEVIUS' IMPACT FINDINGS Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources? Wildlife is defined as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued viability" (Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code). Yes N__o X R:\STAFFRFr\ITPA94.IS 9115194 tjs 25 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because the Mitigation Measures described on the attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the project will mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Signature Saied Naaseh, Associate Planner Name and Title Aumast 8. 1994 Date R:~STAFFRPT~lTPA94.1S 9115194 tjs 26 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 APPROVED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 15. NORTH ~3°34'01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF !'5L.00 FEET: lo. .SOUTH io'25'59" WEST, A DISTANCE ,ilF 18.47 FEET: 17. NORTH 79~34'0!'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET; 18. NORTH !6°25'59" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 20,29 FEET; 19. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT "F" OF SAiD TRACT 2782~-!, BEING ALSO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT !3 I)F SAiD TRACT 27827-2; TO THE THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ="Li/?W~;G ELEVEN COURSES: i. NORTH 73°34'01'' WEST, A 2. SOUTH 16° 25'59 3. NORTH 73°34'01 4. SOUTH 16°25'59 5. NORTH 73'34'01 NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT 27827-2 THE 6 7 8 9 !0 !i SOUTH I0°25'59 WEST NORTH 73°34'01 WEST NORTH 16°25'59" EAST NORTH 73° 34'01" WEST SOUTH !0~25'5}'' WEST NORTH 73=54'0i" WEST POINT cDF BEGINNING. i31.00 FEET; DISTANCE OF WEST, A DISTANCE OF 4.20 FEET; WEST, A DISTANCE OF !05.00 FEET; WEST, A DISTANCE OF 38.80 FEET; WEST A DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 86.20 FEET: A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 6.33 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 155.00 FEET: A DISTANCE OF 1o.37 FEET; A DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET TO tHE TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNE'.~ FINANCE OFFICE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Harwood T. Edvalson, Assistant City Manager October 11, 1994 Disapproval of Cable Television Rates for Basic Service Tier and Associated Equipment of Inland Valley Cablevision, and Ordering a Refund for Excessive Rates RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 94- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DISAPPROVING THE CABLE TELEVISION RATES FOR BASIC SERVICE TIER AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT OF INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION, AND ORDERING A REFUND FOR EXCESSIVE RATES BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula has been granted authority under the 1992 Cable Act to regulate basic tier rates, along with installation and equipment charges for cable operators operating within the City limits. Pursuant to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations, Burke, Williams & Sorensen, with consulting services from the accounting firm of Diehi, Evans, has reviewed the cable television rates of Inland Valley Cablevision for the period of September 1, 1993 through July 14, 1994. The attached documentation provides an in-depth explanation of the review process, and describes the conclusions and recommended findings. Inland Valley Cablevision has been provided the appropriate documentation, and has been requested to make a response before the public hearing. ITEM 20 Recorded at request of Clerk, Board of Supervisors County of Riverside When recorded return to Riverside County Planning Director 4080 Lemon ~treet, 9th Floor Riverside. CA 92501 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT N0. 37 A development agreement between COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE and DAV BAR I and others Specific Plan No. 164 - Roripaugh [~ ~) OCT 4 1988 Development Agreement No. 37 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.1 1.1.1 1.1.2, 1.1.3 1.1.4 1.1.5 1,1.6 1.1.7 1.1.8 1.1.9 1.1.10 1.1.11 1.1.12 1.1.13 1.1.14 1.1.15 1.1.16 1.1.17 1.2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4 2.4.5 2.5 2.6 2.7 HEADING PAGE RECITALS ................ 1 DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS ........ 3 Definitions ......... 3 Agreement ........ 3 COUNTY ...... 3 Development ....... 3 Development Approvals ..... 3 Development Exaction ....... 3 Development Plan .......... 4 Effective Date ......... 4 Existing Development Approvals 4 Existing Land Use Regulations 4 Land Use Regulations ........ 4 OWNER ...... 4 Mortgagee ............. 5 Pro]ect .............. 5 Property .......... 5 Reservations of Authority ..... 5 Subsequent Development Approvals 5 Subsequent Land Use Regulations 5 Exhibits .............. 5 GENERAL PROVISIONS ........... 5 Binding Effect of Agreement ..... 5 Ownership of Property ........ 5 Term ...... ~ 6 Assignment ......... 6 Right to Assign .......... 6 Release of Transferring Owner 6 Subsequent Assignment ...... 7 Partial Release of Purchaser, Transferee. or Assignee of Industrial or Commercial Lot .... 7 Termination of Agreement With Respect to Individual Lots Upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction ...... 7 Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement 8 Termination ............ 8 Notices ..... 8 i SECTION HEADING PAGE 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.6.1 3.6.2 3.6.3 3,6.4 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2,2 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.3 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 7.1 7.2 7.3 DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY ...... 10 Rights to Develop 10 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations ......... 10 Timing of Development ........ 10 Phasing Plan ............. 11 Changes and Amendments ........ Reservations of Authority ...... ll Limitations, Reservations and Exceptions ...... Subsequent Development Approvals 13 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law 13 Intent . 13 Public Works .... Provision of Real Pro~e~t½ ' Interests by COUNTY ......... 13 Regulation by Other Public Agencies 14 Tentative Tract Map Extension .... 14 Vesting Tentative Maps . 14 PUBLIC BENEFITS ........... 14 Intent ....... 14 Public Facilities and Services Mitigation Fee .......... 15 Amount and Components of Fee .? 15 Time of Payment ....... 15 Reduction for Low-Occupancy .... 15 Annual Fee Adjustment ..... 16 Credits ........ 16 Continuatio~ of Fees ..... 16 FINANCING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 17 REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE ....... 17 Periodic Review ....... 1~ Special Review 17 Procedure 17 Proceedings'Upon ~o~i~i~a~i~n' or Termination ........... 18 Hearing on Modification or Termination 18 Certificate of Agreement Compliance 18 INCORPORATION AND ANNEXATION . 19 Intent Incorporation Annexation ..... 19 ...... 19 ..... 19 ii SECTION HEADING PAGE 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 10. 11. 11 1 11 2 11 3 11 4 11 5 11 6 11.7 11 8 11 9 11 10 11 11 11 12 11 13 11 14 11 15 11 16 11 17 11 18 11 19 11 20 DEFAULT AND REMEDIES ....... 19 Remedies in General ......... 19 Specific Performance ........ 20 Release ............... 20 Termination or Modification of Agreement for Default of OWNER .... 20 Termination of Agreement for Default of COUNTY .......... 21 THIRD PARTY LITIGATION ........ 21 General Plan Litigation . 21 Third Party Ligitation Concerning Agreement . 22 Indemnity ...... 21 Environment Assurances ....... 22 Reservation of Rights ...... 22 Survival ..... 23 MORTGAGEE PROTECTION . 23 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ....... 24 Recordation of Agreement ...... 24 Entire Agreement ....... 24 Severability ........... 24 Interpretation and Governing Law . 24 Section Headings ......... 25 Singular and Plural ....... 25 Joint and Several Obligations 25 Time of Essence ..... 25 Waiver ........... 25 No Third Party Beneficiaries 25 Force Majeure ....... 25 Mutual Covenants ....... Successors in Interest ....... Counterparts Jurisdiction and Venue . Project as a Private Undertaking Further Actions and Instruments Eminent Domain Agent for Service of Process Authority to Execute Signatures 25 26 26 26 26 26 26 27 27 27 iii DEv~ELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 37 Th~s Development Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") is entered into effective on the date it is recorded with the Riverside County Recorder (hereinafter the "Effective Date") by and among the COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE (hereinafter "COUNTY"), and the persons and entities listed below (hereinafter "OWNER"): DAV BAR I. a California General Partnership: JOHN E. RORIPAUGH: JUNE RORIPAUGH TULL; LEO E.'RORIPAUGH and MARlAN E. RORIPAUGH, Trustees of the Leo E. Roripaugh and Marian E. Roripaugh 1975 Trust: LEO E. RORIPAUGH and MARlAN E. RORIPAUGH 1975 TRUST: and LEO E. RORIPAUGH and MARIAN E. RORIPAUGH BAR-DAV. a California Partnership DAV-BAR II, a California General Partnership RECITALS WHEREAS, COUNTY is authorized to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property, pursuant to Section 65864, et seq. of the Government Code: and. WHEREAS. COUNTY has adopted rules and regulations for consideration of development agreements, pursuant to Section 65865 of the Government Code: and, WHEREAS. OWNER has requested COUNTY to enter into a development agreement and proceedings have been taken in accordance with the rules and regulations of COUNTY: and, WHEREAS. by electing to enter into this Agreement. COUNTY shall bind future Boards of Supervisors of COUNTY by the obligations specified herein and limit the future exercise of certain governmental and proprietary powers of COUNTY: and, WHEREAS, the terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by COUNTY and the Board of Supervisors and have been found to be fair. just and reasonable: and. WHEREAS, the best interests of the citizens of Riverside County and the public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement: and. WHEREAS. all of the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met with respect to the Project and the Agreement: and, WHEREAS. this Agreement and the Pro]ect are consistent with the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan and any Specific Plan applicable thereto: and. -1- WHEREAS. all actions taken and approvals given by COUNTY have been duly taken or approved in accordance with all applicable legal reguirements for notice. public hearings. findings. votes, and other procedural matters= and. WHEREAS. development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement will provide substantial benefits to COUNTY and will further important policies and goals of COUNTY: and. WHEREAS. this Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning and provide for the orderly development of the Property. ensure progressive installation of necessary improvements. provide for public services appropriate to the development of the Project. and generally serve the purposes for which development agreements under Sections 65864. et seq. of the Government Code are intended; and. WHEREAS. on July 26. 1988. Special Assessment District No. 161 was formed by County Resolution No. 88-347 pursuant to a petition. executed by OWNER. requesting the District to be formed and consenting to said District being formed to provide a financing mechanism to pay for the construction of certain public facilities that would benefit the Property and OWNER advanced those monies needed to pay all costs associated with forming said District and retained and paid civil engineers to design and engineer the public facilities to be constructed. and said public facilities were designed to benefit the Property and certain of the facilities may have been oversized to benefit adjacent properties and the public at large; and. WHEREAS. OWNER has incurred and will in the future incur substantial costs in order to assure development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement: and. WHEREAS. OWNER has incurred and will in the future substantial costs in excess of the generally applicable requirements in order to assure vesting of legal rights to develop the Property in accordance with this Agreement. incur III III III III III III III III -2- to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the of development on the environment or other public interests. impacts 1.1.6 "Development Plan" means the Existing Development Approvals and the Existing Land Use Regulations applicable to development of the Property. 1.1.7 "Effective Date" means the date this Agreement is recorded with the County Recorder. 1.1.8 "Existing Development Approvals" means all Development Approvals approved or issued prior to the Effective Date. Existing Development Approvals includes the Approvals incorporated herein as Exhibit "C" and all other Approvals which are a matter of public record on the Effective Date. 1.1.9 "Existing Land Use Regulations" means all Land Use Regulations in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Land Use Regulations includes the Regulations incorporated herein as Exhibit "D" and all other Regulations which are a matter of public record on the Effective Date. 1.1.10 "Land Use Regulations" means all ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules, regulations and official policies of COUNTY governing the development and use of land, including, withoutlimitation, the permitted use of land. the density or intensity of use, subdivision requirements. the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the property. "Land Use Regulations" does not include any COUNTY ordinance, resolution, code, rule, regulation or official policy. governing: (a) The conduct of businesses. and occupations: (b) Taxes and assessments: professions. (c) The control and abatement of nuisances: (d) The granting of encroachment permits and the conveyance of rights and interests which provide for the use of or the entry upon public property; (e) The exercise of the power of eminent domain. 1.1.11 "OWNER" means the persons and entities listed as OWNER on page 1 of this Agreement and their successors in interest to all or any part of the Property. -4- COVENANTS NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: ~. DEFINITIONS AND EXHIBITS. 1.1 Definitions. The following terms when used in this Agreement shall be defined as follows: 1.1.1 Agreement. "Agreement" means this Development 1.1.2 "COUNTY" means the County of Riverside. a political subdivision of the State of California. 1.1.3 "Development" means the improvement of the Property for the purposes of completing the structures, improvements and facilities comprising the Project including. but not limited to: grading: the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property: the construction of buildings and structures: and the installation of landscaping. "Development" does not include the maintenance, repair, reconstruction or redevelopment of any building. structure, improvement or facility after the construction and completion thereof. 1.1.4 "Development Approvals" means all permits and other entitlements for use subject to approval or issuance by COUNTY in connection with development of the Property including, but not limited to: Ca) Specific plans and specific plan amendments: (b) Tentative and final subdivision and parcel maps: (c) Conditional use permits. public use permits and plot plans: (d) Zoning: (e) Grading and building permits. 1.1.5 "Development Exaction" means any requirement of COUNTY in connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Development Approval for the dedication of land, the construction of improvements or public facilities, or the payment of fees in order -3- 1.1.12 "Mortgagee" means a mortgagee of a mortgage. a beneficiary under a deed of trust or any other security-device lender. and their successors and assigns. 1.1.13 "Pro3ect" means the development of the Property contemplated by the Development Plan as such Plan may be further defined. enhanced or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 1.1.14 "Property" means the real property described on Exhibit "A" and shown on Exhibit "B" to Agreement. this 1.1.15 "Reservations of Authority" means the rights and authority excepted from the assurances and rights provided to OWNER under this Agreement and reserved to COUNTY under Section 3.6 of this Agreement. 1.1.16 "Subsequent Development Approvals" means all Development Approvals required subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property. 1.1.17 "Subsequent Land Use Regulations" means any Land Use Regulations adopted and effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement. 1.2 Exhibits. The following documents are attached to. and by this reference made a part of. this Agreement: Exhibit "A" -- Legal Description of the Property. Exhibit "B" -- Map showing Property and its location. Exhibit "C" -- Existing Development Approvals. Exhibit "D" -- Existing Land Use Regulations. Exhibit "E" -- Fee Credits. 2. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 2.1 Bindinu Effect of Aureement. The Property is hereby made subject to this Agreement. Development of the Property is hereby authorized and shall be carried out only in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 2.2 Ownership of PropertY. OWNER represents and covenants that it is the owner of the fee simple title to the Property or a portion thereof. -5- 2.3 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for a period of 10 (ten) years thereafter unless this term is modified or extended pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2.4 Assignment. 2.4.1 Right to Assign. OWNER shall have the right to sell. transfer or assign the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the Subdivision Map Act. Government Code Section 66410. et seq., or Riverside County Ordinance No. 460) to any person, partnership, )oint venture, firm or corporation at any time during the term of this Agreement: provided, however, that any such sale. transfer or assignment shall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties and obligations arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following conditions precedent: (a) No sale. transfer or assignment of any right or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer or assignment of all or a part of the Property. (b) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within fifteen (15) business days thereafter. OWNER shall notify COUNTY. in writing. of such sale, transfer or assignment and shall provide COUNTY with an executed agreement, in a form reasonably acceptable to COUNTY, by the purchaser. transferee or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee or assignee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement. Any sale, transfer or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions shall constitute a default by Owner under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any purchaser, transferee or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) Of this Subsetsriot 2.4.1, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee or assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee or assignee until and unless such agreement is executed. 2.4.2 Release of Transferring Owner. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer or assignment, a transferring OWNER shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement unless such transferring OWNER is given a release in writing by COUNTY, which release shall be provided by COUNTY upon the full satisfaction by such transferring OWNER of the following conditions: -6- (a) OWNER no longer has a legal or equitable interest in all or any part of the Property. (b) OWNER is not then in default under this Agreement. (c) OWNER has provided COUNTY with the notice and executed agreement required under Paragraph (b) of Subsection 2.4.1 above. (d) The purchaser. transferee or assignee provides COUNTY with security equivalent to any security previously provided by OWNER to secure performance of its obligations hereunder. 2.4.3 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent sale, transfer or assignment after an initial sale, transfer or assignment shall be made only in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of this Section. 2.4.4 Partial Release of Purchaser, Transferee or AssiGnee of Industrial or Commercial Lot. A purchaser, transferee or assignee of a lot. which has been finally subdivided as provided for in the Development Plan and for which a commercial or industrial plot plan for development of the lot has been finally approved pursuant to the Development Plan, may submit a request. in writing, to COUNTY to release said lot from the obligations under this Agreement relating to all other portions of the property. Within thirty (30) days of such request, COUNTY shall review, and if the above conditions are satisfied shall approve the request for release and notify the purchaser. transferee or assignee in writing thereof. No such release approved pursuant to this Subsection 2.4.4 shall cause. or otherwise affect, a release of OWNER from its duties and obligations under this Agreement. 2.4.5 Termination of Aareement With Respect-to Individual Lots Upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction. The provisions of Subsection 2.4.1 shall not [pply to the Sale or lease (for a period longer than one Fear) of any lot which has been finally subdivided and is individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased to a member of the public or other ultimate user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate With respect to any lot and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the following conditions: (a) The lot has been finally subdivided and individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased -7- (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or other ultimate user; and, (b) A Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for a building on the lot, and the fees set forth under Section 4 of this Agreement have been 'paid. 2.5 Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or cancelled in whole or in parr only by written consent of all parties in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. This provision shall not limit any remedy of COUNTY or OWNER as provided by this Agreement. 2.6 Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: (a) Expiration of the stated term of this Agreement as set forth in Section 2.3. (b) Entry of a final judgment setting aside. voiding or annulling the adoption of the ordinance approving this Agreement. (c) The adoption of a referendum measure overriding or repealing the ordinance approving Agreement. this (d) Completion of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement including issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptance by COUNTY or applicable public agency of all required dedications. Termination of this Agreement shall not constitute termination of any other land use entitlements approved for the Property. Upon the termination of this Agreement, no party shall have any further right or obligation hereunder except with respect to any obligation to have been performed prior to such termination or with respect to any default in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement which has occurred prior to such' terminationor with respect to any obligations which are specifically ~et forth as surviving this Agreement. Upon such termination, any public facilities and services mitigation fees paid pursuant to Section 4.2 of this Agreement by OWNER to COUNTY for residential units on which construction has not yet begun shall be refunded to OWNER by COUNTY. 2.7 Notices. (a) As used in this Agreement, "notice" includes. but is not limited to, the communication of notice, request, demand. approval. statement. report, acceptance. consent, waiver. appointment or other communication required or permitted hereunder. -8- time. (b) All notices shall be in Writing and shall be considered given either: (i) when delivered in person to the recipient named below: or (ii) on the date of delivery shown on the return receipt. after deposit in the United States mail in a sealed envelope as either regis_tered or certified mail with return receipt requested. and postage and postal charges prepaid. and addressed to the recipient named below= or (iii) on the date of delivery shown in the records of the telegraph company after transmission by telegraph to the recipient named below. All notices shall be addressed as follows: If to COUNTY: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of Riverside 4080 Lemon St., 14th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 with copies to: County Administrative Officer County of Riverside 4080 Lemon St., 12th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 and Director Planning Department County of Riverside 4080 Lemon St., 9th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 County Counsel County of Riverside 3535 Tenth St., Suite 300 Riverside. CA 92501 If to OWNER: Davidson Communities 12520 High Bluff Drive Suite 300 San Diego. CA. 92130 with a copy to: Dennis D. O'Neil, Esq. Pettis, Tester, Kruse & Krinsky 18881 Yon Karman, 16th. Floor lrvine. CA. 92715 (c) Either party may. by notice given at any require subsequent notices to be given to another person or -9- entity. whether a party or an officer or representative of a party. or to a different address. or both. Notices g£ven before actual receipt of notice of change shall not be invalidated by the change. 3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY. 3.1 Rights tO Develop. Subject to the terms of this Agreement including the Reservations of Authority, OWNER shall have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Development Plan. The Pro}ect shall remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as contemplated by 'the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Plan. 3.2 Effect of Acreement on Land Use ReCulations. Except as otherwise provided under the terms of this Agreement including the Reservations of Authority. the rules, regulations- and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations. In connection with any Subsequent Development Approval. COUNTY shall exercise its discretion in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provided by this Agreement including, but not limited to, the Reservations of Authority. COUNTY shall accept for processing, review and action all applications for Subsequent Development Approvals. and such applications shall be processed in the normal manner for processing such matters. 3.3 Timin~ of Development. The parties acknowledge that OWNER cannot at this time predict when or the. rate at which phases of the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors which are not within the control of OWNER, such as market orientation and demand, interest cares. absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal.3d 465, that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of.development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties' agreement. it is the parties' intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that OWNER shall have the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. subject only to any timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan or the Phasing Plan set forth in Section 3.4. -10- 3.4 Phasing Plan. Development of the Property shall be sub3ect to all timing and phasing requirements established by the Development Plan. 3.5 Chanaes and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that refinement and further development of the Project will require Subse'quent Development Approvals and may demonstrate that changes are appropriate and mutually desirable in the Existing Development Approvals. In the event OWNER rinds that a change in the Existing Development Approvals is necessary or appropriate. OWNER shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval to effectuate such change and COUNTY shall process and act on such application in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations. except as otherwise provided by this Agreement including the Reservations of Authority. If approved. any such change in the Existing Development Approvals shall be incorporated herein as an addendum to Exhibit "C", and may be further changed from time to time as provided in this Section. Unless otherwise required by law. as determined in COUNTY's reasonable discretion, a change to the Existing Development Approvals shall be deemed "minor" and not require an amendment to this Agreement provided such change does not: (a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole: or, (b) Increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole: or. (c) Increase the maximum height and size of permitted buildings: or. (d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes within the Property as a whole: or, (e) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code. 3.6 Reservations of Authority. 3.6.1 Limitations, Reservations and ExcePM~ions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the development of the Property. (a) Processing fees and charges of every Kind and nature imposed by COUNTY to cover the estimated actual costs to COUNTY of processing applications for Development Approvals or for monitoring compliance with any Development Approvals granted or issued. -11- (b) Procedural regulations re~ating to hearing bodies. petitions. applications. notices. findings. records. hearings. reports. recommendations. appeals and any other matter of procedure. (c) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications including. without limitation. the County's Building Code. Plumbing Code. Mechanical Code. Electrical Code. Fire Code and Grading Code. (d) Regulations imposing Development Exactions: provided. however. that no such subsequently adopted Development Exaction shall be applicable to development of the Property unless such Development Exaction is applied uniformly to development. either throughout the COUNTY or within a defined area of benefit which includes the Property. No such subsequently adopted Development Exaction shall apply if its application to the Property would physically prevent development of the Property for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the Development Plan. In the event any such subseguently adopted Development Exaction fulfills the same purposes. in whole or in part. as the fees set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. COUNTY shall allow a credit against such subsequently adopted Development Exaction for the fees paid under Section 4 of this Agreement to the extent such fees fulfill the same purposes. (e) Regulations which may be in conflict with the Development Plan but which are reasonably necessary to protect the public health and safety. To the extent possible. any such regulations shall be applied and construed so as to provide OWNER with the rights and assurances provided under this Agreement. (f) Regulations which are not in conflict --with the Development Plan. Any regulation. whether adopted by initiative or otherwise. limiting the rate or timing of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property. (g) Regulations which are in conflict with the Development Plan provided OWNER has given written consent to the application of such regulations to development of the Property. -12- 3.6.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This Agreement shall not prevent COUNTY, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying Subsequent Land Use Regulations which do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent COUNTY from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on the basis of the Existing Land Use Regulations or any Subsequent Land Use Regulation not in conflict with the Development Plan. 3.6.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations, enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. 3.6.4 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that COUNTY is restricted in its authority to limit its police power by contract and that the foregoing limitations, reservations and exceptions are intended to reserve to COUNTY all of its police power which cannot be so limited. This Agreement shall be construed, contrary to its stated terms if necessary, to reserve to COUNTY all such power and authority which cannot be restricted by contract. 3.7 Public Works. If OWNER is required by this Agreement to construct any public works facilities which will be dedicated to COUNTY or any other public agency upon completion, and if required by applicable laws to do so, OWNER shall perform such work in the same manner and subject to the same requirements as would be applicable to COUNTY or such other public agency should it have undertaken such construction. 3.8 Provision of Real Property Interests by COUNTY. In any instance ~here OWNER is required to construct any public improvement on land not owned by OWNER, OWNER shall at its sole cost and expense provide or cause to be provided, the real property interests necessary for the construction of such public improvements. In the event OWNER is unable, after exercising reasonable efforts. including, but not limited to, the rights under Sections 1001 and 1002 of the Civil Code, to acquire the real property interests necessary for the construction of such public improvements. and if so instructed by OWNER and upon OWNER'S provision of adequate security for costs COUNTY may reasonably incur, COUNTY shall negotiate the purchase of the necessary real property interests to allow OWNER to construct the public improvements as required by this Agreement and. if -13- necessary, in accordance with the procedures established by law. use its power of eminent domain to acquire such required real property interests. OWNER shall pay all costs associated with such acquisition or'dondemnation proceedings. This section 3.8 is not intended by the parties to impose upon the OWNER an enforceable d~ty to acquire land or construct any public improvements on land not owned by OWNER, except to the extent that the OWNER elects to proceed With the development of the Project. and then only in accordance with valid conditions imposed by the COUNTY upon the development of the Project under the Subdivision Map Act or other legal authority. 3.9 Regulation by other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within the control of COUNTY possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or jointly with COUNTY and'this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. For example, pursuant to Government Code Section 66477 and Section 10.35 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, another local public agency may provide local park and recreation services and facilities and in that event, it is permitted, and therefore shall be permitted by the parties, to participate jointly with COUNTY to determine the location of land to be dedicated Or in lieu fees to be paid for local park purposes. provided that COUNTY shall exercise its authority subject to the terms of this Agreement. 3.10 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 66452.6 of the Government Code. no tentative subdivision map or tentative parcel map. heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property. shall be granted an extension of time except in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations. 3.11 Vesting Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final subdivision map, or tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision M~p Act (Government Code Section 66410, et seq.) and Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 and if this Agreement is determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insolaf as it grants a vested right ~0 develop to OWNER, then and to that extent the rights and protections afforded OWNER under the laws and ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above, development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions in this Agreement shall be controlling over any conflicting provision of law or ordinance concerning vesting maps. 4. PUBLIC BENEFITS. 4.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that development of the Property will result in substantial public -14- needs which will not be fully met by the Development Plan and further acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers substantial private benefits on OWNER which should be balanced by commensurate public benefits. Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private benefits conferred on OWNER by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs resulting from the Project. 4.2 Public Facilities and Services Mitigation Fee. 4.2.1 Amount and Components of Fee. OWNER shall pay to COUNTY a public facilities and services mitigation fee in the total amount of $4277.00 for each residential unit constructed on the Property, which fee shall be comprised of the following components: (a) Public Facilities Fee $1891 per Residential Unit (b) Regional Parkland Fee $350.00 per Residential Unit with $50.00 allocated for recreational trails (c) Habitat Conservation and Open Space Land Bank Fee $260.00 per Residential Unit (d) Public Services Offset Fee $1776.00 per Residential Unit The amount mitigation subsection of the public facilities and services fee shall be adjusted annually as provided 4.2.4. in 4.2.2 Time of Payment. The fees required pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 shall be paid to COUNTY prior' to the issuance of building permits for each residential unit. No fees shall be payable for building permits issued prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement. but the fees required pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 shall be paid prior to the re-issuance or extension of any building permit for a residential unit for which such fees have not previously been paid. 4.2.3 Reduction for Low-Occupancy Residential Units. The fees required pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 shall be reduced by 33.3 percent for low-occupancy residential units. For the purposes of this Subsection. low-occupancy residential units shall be limited to the following: (a) One bedroom and studio apartments rooms, dens, and any similar room shall be considered to be bedrooms); (family (b) Mobilehomes: (c) 'Residential units in developments that are legally restricted to occupancy by senior citizens pursuant to Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 or state law. 4.2.4 Annual Fee Adjustment. The fees required pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 shall be adjusted annually during the term of this Agreement on the anniversary of the Effective Date in accordance with the changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside Area (hereinafter CPI) published monthly by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The annual adjustment shall be calculated in the following manner: (a) Divide the CPI for month and year of the Effective Date into the CPI for the month immediately preceding the anniversary in which said fees are to be adjusted. (b) Multiply the quotient obtained by the calculation in Paragraph (a) above times said fees. (c) The result of the multiplication obtained in Paragraph (b) above shall constitute the fees payable during the succeeding year. If the CPI specified herein is discontinued or revised during the term of this Agreement. such other government index or computation with which it is replaced shall be used in order to obtain substantially the same result as would have been obtained if the CPI had not been discontinued. In no event shall the fees be less than the fees set forth in Subsection 4.2.1. 4.2.B Credits. OWNER shall be entitled to credit against the fees required pursuant to Subsection 4.2.1 for the dedication of land. the construction of improvements or the payment of fees as specifically set forth in Exhibit "E". To the extent that Subsection 4.2.4 results in an increase in the fees payable pursuant to 4.2.1(a). then the credit provided in this Subsection for Public Facilities as specified in Exhibit "E" shall be likewise increased by the same percentage. No increase in the credits set forth in Exhibit "E" shall be allowed for any item which is not specifically identified as a Public Facility Credit on Exhibit "E". 4.3 Continuation of Fees. Should all or any portion of Property become part of a city or another county. the fees payable pursuant to Section 4.2 shall remain and still be payable to COUNTY on the following basis: -16- (b) Upon completion of a periodic review or a special review. the Planning Director shall submit a report to the Board of Supervisors setting forth the evidence concerning good faith compliance by OWNER with the terms of this Agreement and his recommended finding on that issue. (c) If the Board finds on the basis of substantial evidence that OWNER has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. the review shall be concluded. (d) If the Board makes a preliminary finding that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. the Board may modify or terminate this Agreement as provided in Section 6.4 and section 6.5. Notice of default as provided under Section 8.4 of this Agreement shall be given to OWNER prior to or concurrent with. proceedings under Section 6.4 and section 6.5. 6.4 Proceedinas Upon Modification or Termination. If. upon a finding under Section 6.3. COUNTY determines to proceed ' with modification or termination of this Agreement. COUNTY shall give written notice to OWNER of its intention so to do. The notice shall be given at least ten calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing and shall contain: (a) The time and place of the hearing; (b) A statement as to whether or not COUNTY proposes to terminate or to modify the Agreement; and. (c) Such other information as is reasonably necessary to inform OWNER of the nature of the proceeding. 6.5 Hearin~ on Modification or Termination. At the time and place set for the hearing on'modification or termination. OWNER shall be given an opportunity ~o be heard. OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The burden of proof on this issue shall be on OWNER. If the Board of Supervisors finds, basedeSpot substantial evidence, that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms or conditions of the Agreement. the Board may terminate this Agreement or modify this Agreement and impose such conditions as are reasonably necessary to protect the interests of the County. The decision of the Board of Supervisors shall be final, subject only to ~udicial review pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 6.6 Certificate of Aareement Compliance. If. at the conclusion of a Periodic or Special Review. OWNER is found to be in compliance with this Agreement. COUNTY shall. upon request by OWNER. issue a Certificate of Agreement Compliance ("Certificate") to OWNER stating that after the most recent -18- (a) Fees under 4.2.1(a) shall be payable at the rate of five and three tenths percent (5.3%) thereof to COUNTY and the remainder to such city or other county. (b) Fees payable under Subsections 4.2.1(b) and {c) shall be fully payable to COUNTY. (c) Fees under Subsection 4.2.1(d) shall be payable at the rate of one-third (1/3) thereof to such city or other county and the remainder to COUNTY. 5. FINANCING OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. If deemed appropriate. COUNTY and OWNER will cooperate the formation of any special assessment district, community facilities district or alternate financing mechanism to pay for the construction and/or maintenance and operation of public infrastructure facilities required as part of the Development Plan. COUNTY also agrees that, to the extent any such district or other financing entity is formed and sells bonds in order to finance such reimbursements. OWNER may be reimbursed to the extent that OWNER spends funds or dedicates land for the establishment of public facilities. Notwithstanding the foregoing, it is acknowledged and agreed by the parties that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as requiring COUNTY or the COUNTY Board of Supervisors to form any such district or to issue and sell bonds. in 6. REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE. 6.1 Periodic Review. The Planning Director shall review this Agreement annually, on or before the anniversary of the Effective Date, in order to ascertain the good faith compliance by OWNER with the terms of the Agreement. OWNER shall submit an Annual Monitoring Report, in a form acceptable to the Planning Director, within 30 days after written notice from the Planning Director. The Annual Monitoring Report shall be accompanied by an annual review and administration fee sufficient to defray the estimated costs of review and administration of the Agreement during the succeeding year. The amount of the annual review and administration fee shall be set annually by resolution of the Board of Supervisors. 6.2 Special Review. The Board of Supervisors may order a special review of compliance with this Agreement at any time. The Planning Director shall conduct such special reviews. 6.3 Procedure. (a) During either a periodic review or a special review. OWNER shall. be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The burden of proof on this issue shall be on OWNER. -17- Periodic or Special Review and based upon the information Known or made Known to the Planning Director and Board of Supervisors that (1) this Agreement remains in effect and (2) OWNER is not in default. The Certificate shall be in recordable form. shall contain information necessary to communicate constructive record notice of the finding of compliance, shall state whether the Certificate is issued after a Periodic or Special Review and shall state the anticipated date of commencement of the next Periodic Review. OWNER may record the Certificate with the County Recorder. Whether or not the Certificate is relied upon by assignees or other transferees or OWNER, COUNTY shall not be bound by a Certificate if a default existed at the time of the Periodic or Special Review, but was concealed from or otherwise not known to the Planning Director or Board of Supervisors. 7. INCORPORATION AND ANNEXATION. 7.1 Intent. If all or any portion of the Property is annexed to or otherwise becomes a part of a city or another county. it is the intent of the parties that this Agreement shall survive and be binding upon such other jurisdiction. 7.2 Incorporation. If at any time during the term of this Agreement. a city is incorporated comprising all or any portion of the Property. the validity and effect of this Agreement shall be governed by Section 65865.3 of the Government Code. 7.3 Annexation. OWNER and COUNTY shall oppose. in accordance with the procedures provided by law. the annexation to any city of all or any portion of the Property unless both OWNER and COUNTY give written consent to such annexation. 8. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES. 8.1 'Remedies in General. It is acknowledged by the- parties that COUNTY would not have entered into this Agreement it were to bedliable in damages under this Agreement, or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. if In general, each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except that COUNTY shall not be liable in damages to OWNER, or to any successor in interest of OWNER. or to any other person, and OWNER covenants not to sue for damages or claim any damages: (a) For any breach of this Agreement or for any cause of action which arises out of this Agreement; or -19- (b) For the taking. impairment or restriction of any right or interest conveyed or provided under or pursuant to this Agreement: or (c) Arising out of or connected with any dispute. controversy or issue regarding the application or interpretation or effect of the provisions of this Agreement. 8.2 Specific Performance. The parties acknowledge that money damages and remedies at law generally are inadequate and specific performance and other non-monetary relief are particularly appropriate remedies for the enforcement of this Agreement and should be available to all parties for the following reasons: (a) Money damages are unavailable against COUNTY as provided in Section 8.1 above. (b) Due to the size, nature and scope of the project, it may not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property or portions thereof. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement. and it is not possible to determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. 8.3 Release. Except for nondamage remedies. including the remedy of specific performance and judicial review as provided for in Section 6.5. OWNER. for itself. its successors and assignees. hereby releases the COUNTY. its officers. agents and employees from any and all claims. demands, actions. or suits of any kind or nature arising out of any liability. known or unknown. present or future. including. but not limited to. any claim or liability. based or asserted. pursuant to Article I. Section 19 of the California Constitution. the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. or any other law or ordinance which seeks to impose any other liability or damage. whatsoever. upon the COUNTY because it entered into this Agreement or because of the terms of this Agreement. 8.4 Termination or Modification of A~reement for Default of OWNER. Subject to the provisions contained in Subsection 6.5 herein. COUNTY may terminate or modify this Agreement for any failure of OWNER to perform any material duty or obligation of OWNER under this Agreement. or to comply in good faith with the terms of this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "default"): provided. however. COUNTY may terminate or modify -20- this Agreement pursuant to this Section only after providing written notice to OWNER of default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any, required by OWNER to cure such default and, where the default can be cured, OWNER has failed to take such actions and cure such default within 60 days after the offstrive date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such 60 day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions necessary to cure such default within such 60 day period and to diligently proceed to complete such actions and cure such default. 8.5 Termination of ~areement for Default of COUNTY. OWNER may terminate this Agreement only in the event of a default by COUNTY in the performance of a material term of this Agreement and only after providing written notice to COUNTY of default setting forth the nature of the default and the actions, if any, required by COUNTY to cure such default and, where the default can be cured, COUNTY has failed to take such actions and cure such default within 60 days after the effective date of such notice or, in the event that such default cannot be cured within such 60 day period but can be cured within a longer time, has failed to commence the actions necessary to cure such default within such 60 day period and to diligently proceed to complete' such actions and cure such default. 9. THIRD PARTY LITIGATION. 9.1 General.Plan Litication. COUNTY has determined that this Agreement is consistent with its Comprehensive General Plan. herein called General Plan. and that the General Plan meets all requirements of law. OWNER has reviewed the General Plan and concurs with COUNTY's determination. The parties acknowledge that: (a) Litigation is now pending challenging the legality. validity and adequacy of certain provisions of the General Plan: and. (b) In the future there may be other similar - challenges to the General Plan: and, (c) If successful. such challenges could delay or prevent the performance of this Agreement and the development of the Property. COUNTY shall have no liability in damages under this Agreement for any failure of COUNTY to perform under this Agreement or the inability of OWNER to develop the Property as contemplated by the Development Plan of this Agreement as the result of a judicial determination that on the Effective Date. at any time thereafter. the General Plan. or portions thereof. are invalid or inadequate or not in compliance with law. or -21- 9.2 Third Party Litigation ConcerninQ Agreement. OWNER shall defend. at its expense. including attorneys' fees. indemnify. and hold harmless COUNTY, its agents. officers and employees from any claim. action or proceeding against COUNTY. its agents. officers. or employees to attacK. set aside. void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any permit granted pursuant to this Agreement. COUNTY shall promptly notify OWNER of any such claim. action or proceeding. and COUNTY shall cooperate in the defense. If COUNTY fails to promptly notify OWNER of any such claim, action or proceeding, or if COUNTY fails to cooperate in the defense, OWNER shall not thereafter he responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless COUNTY. COUNTY may in its discretion participate in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding. 9.3 Indemnity. In addition to the provisions of 9.2 above. OWNER shall indemnify and hold COUNTY, its officers, agents. e-ployees and independent contractors free and harmless from any liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any act or omission of OWNER, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors and independent contractors, for property damage. bodily injury, or death (OWNER'S employees included) or any other element of damage of any kind or nature. relating to or in any way connected with or arising from the activities contemplated hereunder. including, but not limited to. the study, design, engineering, construction, completion, failure and conveyance of the public improvements. save and except claims for damages arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of COUNTY. OWNER shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, COUNTY, its officers, agents. employees and independent contractors in any legal action based upon such alleged acts or omissions. COUNTY may in its discretion participate in the defense of any such legal action. 9.4 Environment Assurances. OWNER shall indemnify and hold COUNTY. its officers, agents, and employees free and harmless from any liability, based or asserted, upon any act or omission of OWNER, its officers, agents, employees.. subcontractors. predecessors in interest. successors. assigns and independent contractors for any violation of any federal. state or local law, ordinance or regulation relating to industrial hygiene or tc&,environmental conditions on, under or about the Property, including, but not limited to. soil and groundwater conditions, and OWNER shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, COUNTY, its officers, agents and employees in any action based or asserted upon any such alleged act or omission. COUNTY may in its discretion participate in the defense of any such action. 9.5 Reservation of Riahts. With respect to Sections 9.2.9.3 and 9.4 heroin. COUNTY reserves the right to either (1) approve the attorney(s) which OWNER selects. hires or otherwise engages to defend COUNTY hereunder, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. or (2) conduct its own defense, provided, however, that OWNER shall reimburse COUNTY forthwith for any and -22- all reasonable expenses incurred for such defense, including attorneys' fees, upon billing and accounting therefor. 9.6 through 9.6. Agreement. Survival. inclusive. The provisions of this Sections 9.1 shall survive the termination of this lo. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit OWNER, in any manner, at OWNER's sole discretion. from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. COUNTY acknowledges that the lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretatiSns and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time. to meet with OWNER and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. COUNTY will nor unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent With the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid. diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, which Mortgagee, has submitted a request in writing to the COUNTY in the manner specified herein for giving notices. shall be entitled to receive written notification from COUNTY of "any default by .OWNER in the performance of OWNER's obligations under this Agreement. (c) If COUNTY timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default give~['to OWNER under the terms of this Agreement, COUNTY shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to OWNER. The Mortgagee shall have the right. but not the obligation. to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. (d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no -23- Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of OWNER'S obligations or other affirmative covenants of OWNER hereunder. or to guarantee such performance: provided. however. that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by OWNER is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by COUNTY . the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to COUNTY's performance hereunder. and further provided that any sale. transfer or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 2.4 of this Agreement. 11. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 11.1 Recordation of AUreement. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation thereof shall be recorded with the County Recorder by the Clerk of the Board Supervisors within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 11.2 Entire Aareement. This Agreement sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the parties, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements Which are not contained or expressly referred to heroin. No testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any proceeding of any Kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 11.3 Severability. I[ any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenforceable. the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby to the extent such remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform taking into consideration the purposes of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provision of the Public Benefits set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement, including the payment of the fees set forth therein. are essential elements of this Agreement and COUNTY Would not have entered into this Agreement but for such provisions, and therefore in the event such provisions are determined to be invalid, void or unenforceable, this entire Agreement shall be null and void and of no force and effect whatsoever. 11.4 Interpretation and Governin~ Law. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. This Agreement shall be construed as a whole according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the objectives and purposes of the parties hereto, and the rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement. all parties having been represented by counsel in the negotiation and preparation hereof. -2¢- 11.5 Section Headinas. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 11.6 Singular and Plural. As used herein, the singular of any word iacludes the plural. 11.7 Joint and Several ObliQations. If at any time during the term of this Agreement the Property is owned. in whole or in part. by more than one OWNER, all obligations of such OWNERS under this Agreement shall be )oint and several, and the default of any such OWNER shall be the default of all such OWNERS. Notwithstanding the foregoing. no OWNER of a single lot which has been finally subdivided and sold to such OWNER as a member of the general public or otherwise as an ultimate user shall have any obligation under this Agreement except as provided under'Section 4 hereof. 11.8 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is an element. 11.9 Waiverl Failure by a party to insist u~3n the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, or the failure by a party to exercise its rights upon the default of the other party, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to insist and demand strict compliance by the other party with the terms of this Agreement thereafter. 11.10 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 11.11 Force Ma%eure. Neither party shall be deemed to be in default where failure or delay in performance of any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused by floods, earthquakes, other Acts of God, fires, wars, riots or similar hostilities, strikes and other labor difficulties beyond the party's contr~ol, (including the party's employment force), government regulations. court actions (such as restraining orders or in)unctions). or other causes beyond the party's control. If any such events shall occur. the term of this Agreement and the time for performance by either party of any of its obligations hereunder may be extended by the written agreement of the parties for the period of time that such events prevented such performance. provided that the term of this Agreement shall not be extended under any circumstances for more than five (5) years. 11.12 Mutual Covenants. The covenants contained heroin are mutual covenants and also constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefited thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such bonefired party. -25- 11.13 Successors in Interest. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Agreement. All provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land. Each covenant to do or refrain faom doing some act hereunder with regard to development of the Property: (a) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every portion of the Property: (b) runs with the Property and each portion thereof: and. (c) is binding upon each party and each successor in interest during ownership of the Property or any portion thereof. 11.14 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed the parties in counterparts. Which counterparts shall be construed together and have the same effect as if all of the parties had executed the same instrument. by 11.15 Jurisdiction and Venue. Any action at law or in equity arising under this Agreement or brought by an party hereto for the purpose of enforcing, construing or determining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the Superior Court of the County of Riverside. State of California. and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for the filing, removal or change of venus to any other Court. 11.16 Pro~ect as a Private Undertaking. It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the development of the Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement. No partnership. joint venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Agreement. The only relationship between COUNTY and OWNER is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such property. 11.17 Further Actions and Instruments. Each of the parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in the performance of all obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time. the other party shall promptly execute. with acknowledgemerit or affidavit if reasonably required. and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Agreement to carry out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. 11.18 Eminent Domain. shall be construed to limit or its power of eminent domain. No provision of this Agreement restrict the exercise by COUNTY of 11.19 Auent for Service of Process. In the event OWNER is not a resident of the State of California or it is an association, partnership or joint venture without a member, partner or joint yentutor resident of the State of California, or it is a foreign corporation, then in any such event, OWNER shall file with the Planning Director, upon its execution of this Agreement, a ~]esignation of a natural person residing in the State of California, giving his or her name, residence and business addresses, as its agent for the purpose of service of process in any court action arising out of or based upon this Agreement, and the delivery to such agent of a copy of any process in any such action shall constitute valid service upon OWNER. If for any reason service of such process upon such agent is not feasible, then in such event OWNER may be personally served with such process out of this County and such service shall constitute valid service upon OWNER. OWNER is amenable to the process so served, submits to the jurisdiction of the Court so obtained and waives any and all objections and protests thereto. 11.20 Authority to Execute. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of OWNER warrants and represents that he/they have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his/their corporation, partnership or business entity and warrants and represents that he/they has/have the authority to bind OWNER to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year set forth below. 3807LIT 9-23-88 ATTEST: GERALD A. MALONEY (SEAL) COUNT OF RIVEESID rman isors -27- OCT 4 OWNER Dated: Io / . DAV BAR I. a California General Its: Dated: ,~/.~/~,.'c By: Its: "' (ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE OFFICERS.) col ':~Y OF San Diego ,,i October 12, 1988 DAV BAR I __. the parI~er~lljp ' '~E13_~a~ J. Speer William A. David~n~ known en me to be the :~ COUNTYOF San Diego .~ on October 19, 198__8 Joseph E. Tra~y and of sat,sfactory ewdence) to be tt~e Dersons who executeci the w;thin instrument as Senior Vice , · Bartart ~merican corporated knowntometoDeomeoftneDa~neBo~ DAV BAR I. a California General Partnership ./ 19;~*~ , before me the unaers,gnecL a FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP (ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE OFFICERS.) -29- POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL ~EN BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT JUNE R. TULL has made, constituted, and appointed, and by these presents does n~ke, constitute, and appoint LEO E. RORIPAUGH, of Temecula, California, her true and lawful attorney for her and in her name, place, and stead, and for her use and benefit in all matters pertaining to any interest she may have in and to any and all real property located in Riverside County, State of California. GIVING AND GRANTING unto LEO E. RORIPAUGH, full power and authority to do and perform all and every act and thing whatsoever reguisite and necessary. to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as she might or could do if personally present, and hereby ratifying and confirming all that her said attorney, LEO R. RORIPAUGS, shall lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue of these presents as above stated. IN WITNESS WHEP, EOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the /~ day of October, 1988. STATE OF ALASKA } ) ss. THIRD JUDICI~ DISTRICT ) THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on the /~day of October, 1988, before me, the undersigned Notary PUblic, in and for Alaska, duly commissioned and sworn as such, personally appeared JUNE R. TULL, who is known to me and to me ~nown to be the individual named in and who executed the above and foregoing Power of Attorney, and she acknowledged to me the execution thereof as her free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein set forth. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my notarial seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. Dated: ./.j ",'. JUNE RORIPAUGB TULL STATE OF CALIFORNIA k ..~ ~ ~ '_ S.S. COUNTY OF On ti~,s the_ ">'. 11-__dayof './L! ,1 '. 19 ~7 Ileforeme. the underssgned. a Notary Public in and f~ said County and Site. L~ ,-"- ~:,,r: .i ._ \i ,, ...... provedlo~eoflffie.4~lsolsatlslaclof~eviG~91ce ~_ -j,,- .'(,, "~ ~- ~c',,t' Drlnc~pal :and i'~ "} ~ . themto~s ~ name~as AItOn~ey~n laCt. /~ "'.,,F~ ~-"; Signature __ FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP (ALL SIGNAUTRES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE OFFICERS.) -30- ~TATE OF CALIFORNIA ~ SS 19 ~ . i~efore m t~ un0erslgne~, a FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP (ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE OFFICERS.) -31- Dated: Dated: LEO E. RORIPAUGH and MARIAN E. MA IAN E. RO{=~IPAUGH ~: STATE OF CALIFOR,I~A . cou~T~ o~ ~f',G,c~C ss, and ackn~legM mat ~ exam ~ . S~tum of NO~ SAFECO TITLE INSURINCE 19 ~ Detore me me unOers~gne0. a FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP (ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE OFFICERS.) -32- Dated: Dated: MAR~N E. RORIPAUGN STATE OF CAUFORI~IA . COUN'~' O~ ~n th,s the J SS. FOR NOTARY SEAL OR STAMP (ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE OFFICERS.) -33- BAR-DAV. a California Partnership Dated: Dated: By: Its: By: Its: i:ol XTY OF San Diego October 12, 1988 Pre~hient. and fl/a -~.,,l~r~ ,,f Davidson Communities. Inc. BAR-DAV __. the parlnership '~lizabe~ Speer ~ a · her.re me. the tsndersigned. a Notary Public in and fnr William A. D_avidson known to me to be the . known Io me to be "'~FFXClAL SEAL COUNTYOF San Diego On October 19, 1988 sa,cI State, personally al~peared , before me, the unders~gned, a Nolary Public ~n and for Joseph E. Tracy incorporated .o,0o,.,.on ...c.,.~ ,pe ..,,~.....,,..,.., g.,...., ,o ,,..,- . Notaly pubhc-Calilornil SAN DIEGO COUNT a Cali£ornia General Pa=f'ne=shlp y '99 S ,gnat ure ,~' 'dr-. 'i--, J~' ~T'j ~'. ' .~ (This area for officill .otarml (ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE OFFICERS.) -34- Dated: DAV-BAR IX, a California General Partnership Its: Dated: BF: Its: ~ -TXTE OF CXI,IFORNI X ~'~ cot NTY or San Diego ~' on October 12, 1988 . bef,,re me. lbe undersigned, a Notary Public in and ~ai,i >~a~e. per~,nall~ appeared Willi~ A. Davidson known ~ me ~n be the ~ -.,,,,~, ,,f Davidson Co~unities . I~C · . the cnr~ralion fi,al ex~'med 5lizab h Je ~ped or Printed~ ~ COUNTY OF San Diego ~ Joseph E. Tracy ~ ~ ~ i ~o~1 y ~ 0 · 40 Dro~ to me on t~/i of sat,sfacto~ evsdence) to ~ the persons who executed the within instrument ~s S e~io ~ V tC ~ Incorporated known to me to ~e One of the OartnerS Of DAV BAR I, a California General Partnership (ALL SIGNATURES SHALL BE ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. EXECUTION ON BEHALF OF ANY CORPORATION SHALL BE BY TWO CORPORATE OFFICERS.) -35- evelopment Agreement No. 5 EXHIBIT A - Page 1 of 12 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY THE LAND REFERRED TO BELOW UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: IS SITUATED IN THE OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF PARCEL 1: ALL THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 163, 164, 165, 166, 181, 182, 183 AND 184, APRICOT STREET, BANANA STREET, ILM4XLTON AV~qUE, OOJ~4 ~AY AVENUE AND HANCOCK AVENUE AS SHOWN ON MAP OP THE TEPLECULIL I,ILI4D AND WATER COMPANY ON PILE IN BOOK 8 PAGE 359 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBEDAN POI,LOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF T!~ C~rTERLXNE OF BAlD ~/M~ILTON AVENUE WITH THE E~STER~Y LINE OF ~T C~TIXN P~C~ OF CO~,TO ~Z CO~ OF RI~XDB BY DEE ~E ~Y 15, 1947 IN BOOK 842 PAGE 288 OF ~8, ~8 OF ~IDE ~, C~XFO~IA: ~CE SO~ 42 DZ~E~ 05' 29~ ~, ~ONG ~ID ~I~ 0F ~ILTON ~, · DIBT~a OF 261.21 ~ ~ ~ MOST ~ST~Y CORNER OF TH&T PORTION OF 2~ID LOT 184 CONVEYED TO E. RORIPAU~, ~ ~, BY D~ PILED FOR ~ D[~ 27, 1945 AS INSTR~ NO, 3005, OF OFFIC~ ~C0~S OF ~XD/ ~, ~IFO~IA; ~CE 20~ 76 DEG~ 18' 29w ~, (FO~Y ~D 2~ 76 DEGREES 26' mT) ~oNo m NOR~T~Y LM OF ~ID P~ CO~G TO LEO [. RORIPAU~, ~, A DIST~a OF 317.10 ~CE ~0~ 51 DEGREES 56' 20" ~T, (FO~Y KCO~E SO~ 52 DECREES 07' ~T) ~G ~ NORS~Y LM OF SAID P~ CO~ TO LEO [. RO~PAU~, ~ ~, A DI~C/OF 945,26 FEET (FO~Y ~CO~E 943,7 ~) ~ ~ MOST ~T~Y ~ OF SAID P~ ~ ~ LEO RO~PAU~, ~ ~; ~ ~ BEING ~ MOST NOR~LY ~ OF ~T ~RTION OF ~D L~ 183 CO~ ~ LEO K, RO~PA~, ~ ~, ~ D~ PILED FOR DECN~ 27, 1945 M ~~ ~, 3004 OF O,l~ ~2 OF DEG~ 28' 25" ~T) ~NG ~ ~R~T~Y L~ OF ~D ~T ~lO~ P~C~ ~ ~ LEO K, RO~PAU~, ~ ~, A DIST~C/ OF 1,411.97 F~ ~ ~ MO~ ~T~Y ~ OF ~D P~C~, ~a BO~ ~ DE~ 54' 44w ~T, ~ ~ ~~ OF BAlD ~C~ ~, A DX~ OF 4,570.08 ~ ~ ~ ~ST B~ BY DEE FILE ~R ~ B~ND 7, 1960 U NO. 78468 OF O'lC~ ~8 OF ~IDK ~, Page 2 of 12 THENCE NORTH 41 DEGREES 57 ' 46 ', ( FORMERLy RECORDED NORTH 42 DEGREES 31' 05" WEST) ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLy LINE OF SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO J. B. SHAMEL, A DISTANCE OF 1,439.23 FEET (FORMERLY RECORDED 1,431.71 FEET ) T0 THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL, SAID CORNER BEING ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE WlHCHESTER- TEMECULA ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, 1930 IN BOOK 722 PAGE 561 OF DEEDS RECORDS OF RTVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE NORTH 35 DEGREES 07e 11" fiST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 34 DEGREES 34' 55" EAST) ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 489.60 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND CONVEYED TO JOHN E. RORIPAUGH BY DEED FILED FOR RECORD MAY 2, 1963 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 45246, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE SOUTH 41 DEGREES 57e 46w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED SOUTH 42 DEGREES 31' 05" EAST) ADISTANCE OF 1,089.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 35 DEGREES 07e I1" EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 34 DEGREES 34' 55" EAST) A DISTANCE OF 205.18 FEET; THENCE NORTH 41 DEGREES 57v 46" WEST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 42 DEGREES 31 ' 05 w WEST ) A DI STANCE OF 1,089.00 FEET TO SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF WlNCHESTED-TENECULA ROAD; THE PROCEEDING THREE (3) COURSES ARE ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO JOHN E. RORIPAUGH; THENCE NORTH 35 DEGREES 07e 11'' EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 34 DEGREES 34' 55" EAST) A DISTANCE OF 166.74 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ON A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE BOUTHEAST HAVING A EADIUS OF 925.37 FEET, THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 1X DEGREES 37' 00', AN ARC LENGTH OF 187.62 FEET: THENCE NORTH 46 DEGREES 44* 11w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 46 DEGREES 11' 55w EAST) A DISTANCE OF 529.48 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ON A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 530.50 FEET, SOUGH AN ANGLE OF 34 DEGRF, ES 32~ 30", AN ARC LENGTH OF 319.82 FEET; THENCE NORTH 12 DEGREES 11* 41'' EAST, (FORMERLY NECORDED NORTH 11 DEGREES 39' 25* BAST) A DISTANCE OF 504.67 FEET TO THE CENTERLIRE OF SAID JOHN JAY AVENUE, SAID CENTERLINE ALSO BEING THE BOUTHERLY LINE OP SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO THE COtJNTY OF !rIVERSIDE BY DEED RECOEDRD J'ULY 15, 1947 IN BOOK 842 PAGE 288 OF ItAPB, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE SOUTH 41 DEGREES 52' 39 EAST, ALONG SAID BOUTHE!tLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 5.67 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTIIERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL: THENCE NORTH I~DEGREV8 33' 31" EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED NORTH 13 DEGREES 01' 15w EAST) ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF BAlD PARCEL, A DISTANCE OF 1,596.82 FEET (IrOItMER~Y IrECORDED 1o597.25 PEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPTING THEREFRON THAT FORTION LYING NORTRw-RLy OF T!~ SOUTHERLY LINE OF NXCOL~S ROAD AS CONVEYED TO TH~ COtgiTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 80861 AND RE-RECORDED MAY 7, 1979 AS INSTHUMENT NO. 92671 BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, ~IT-IFORNIA; Page 3 of 12 ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM TEAT PORTION LYING WITHIN TRACT 20703-2, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 185 PAGES 37 THROUGH 44, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYXNG WITHIN TRACT 20703-3, AS SHOWN BY MaP ON FILE IN BOOK 186 PAGES 20 THROUGH 28, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS. RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 2: BEING A PORTION OF THAT PORTION OF THE TEMECULA RANCHO AS DESCRIBED IN a DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1970 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 91390 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; ALSO BEING DESCRIBED INSTRUMENT CALIFORNIA, A PORTION OF THAT PORTION OF THE TEMECULA RANCHO AS AS PARCEL 3 IN a DEED RECORDED MAY 29, 1969 AS NO. 53291 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, BEING NONE PARTICt,-aqLY DESCRIBEDAS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF TRACT MAP NO. 3883 ON FILE IN BOOK 53 PAGES I THROUGH 35 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID POINT BEING ON THE PROLONGATION LINE OF TRACT MaP 3334 SAID LINE BEING COMMON WITH THE LINE BETWEEN MURRIETA aND TENECULA PORTIONS OF TIlE TRNECULA RANCHO AS SHOWN ON SAID TRACT NAP NO. 3883; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG 8AID RANClIO LINE NORTH 44 DEGREES 56' 04' EAST 690.51 FEET TO a CURVED PORTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF NICOLAS ROAD AS SHOWN ON COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MAP NO. 854-F, SAID CURVE BEING NON-TANGENT WITH SAID RANCliO LINE, SAID POINT RAVING A RADIAL BEARING OF NORTH 02 DEGREES 52' 11w WEST SAID CURVE BEINC CONCAVE TO THE NORTHERLY WITH A RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 111.42 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH a CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5 DEGREES 19* 13w TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE IN a RADIAL DIRECTION OF SOUTH 8 DEGREES 11e 24M EAST 55.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WaY LINE OF SAID NXCOLAS ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 40 DEGREES 32e 03w WEST 33.24 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 5 DEGREES 43* 24w EAST 181.55 FEET TO a TANGENT CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY WITH A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 26.20 FEET SOUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE Off 15 DEGREES 00~ 38w TO A TANGENT LIME; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID TANGENT LINE SOUTH 20 DEGNEES 44v 02' EAST 50.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY WITH ARADXUS OF 48,00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 63.76 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH a CEI~TRAL ANGLE OF 76 DEGNEES 06' 22M; THENCE LEAVING SAID CURVE IN a SOUTHEASTERLY DXNECTXON 80UTH 2 DEGREES 10~ 13' EAST 131.15 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 33 OF SAID TRACT 3883 SAID POXNT ALSO BEING AN ANGLE POINT IN THE BOUNDANY OF SAID TRACT 3883; Page 4 of 12 ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PORTION LYING WITHIN SAID LOT 181; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM T~IAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 166 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 166, SAID POINT BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STREET AND JOH]4 JAY AVENUE AS SHOIfi4 ON SAID MAP OF THE TEMEC'tJLA LAND AND WATER COMPANY; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 41 DEGREES 58" WEST, 139.03 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SODTH 51 DEGREES 04' 52" NEST, 336.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 77 DEGREES 47' 46w WEST. 120.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID DEED RECORDED JANUARY 22, 1975 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 81619 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; SAID LINE ALSO BEING CO)~tON WITH THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE WINCHESTER-- TENECULA ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, 1930 IN BOOK 722 PAGE 561 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY, ALONG SAID LINE NORTH 12 DEGREES 12' 14' EAST, 501,78 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID JOHN JAY AVENUE; THENCE SOU'I'dEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF JOHN JAY AVENUE SOUTH 41 DEGREES 55' 58" EAST, 408.94 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LO~ 182 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 181, SAID POINT BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STREET AND JOHN JAY AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TH~ TEMECULA LAMD AXTD WATER COMPANY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE SAID CENTERLINE OF BANANA STREET NORTH 48 DEGREES 16' 44" EAST, 272.01 FEE~ TO YHZ TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF BANANA ~YREET NORTH 46 DEGREES 16' 44" MAST, 423.79 FEEt TO THE CENTERLINE OF NICHOLAS ROAD AS SHOWN ON COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MAY NO. 854-P;' THENCE SOUTHEASTERLy ALONO SAID CENTERLINE OF NICROLAS ROAD SOtFrH 73 DEGREES 34' 01" FAST 93.79 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 16 DEGREES 25' 59w WEST, 360.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH M DEGKF. F_~ 34' 01w Wr. ST, 317.40 F~E'T TO ~ THU~ POINT OF BEGINNING; ALSO EXCEPTING TliEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN TRACT 20703-1 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 177 PAGES 72 THROUGH 76 INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFOHNIA; Page 5 Of 12 " .THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ]LLONG SAID TRACT BOUNDARy SOUTH 12 DEGREES 18' 23" EAST 512.54 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 53291; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CMERLINE NORTH 47 DEGREES 59' 28" EAST 156.22 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A Su&DIUS OF 1200.00 FEET; THENCE NORTREASTEALY 890.92 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42 DEGREES 32' 24'' TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 91390; THENCE NORTH 5 DEGREES 27' 04w HAST 306.46 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF SAID NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY AND SAID NICOLAS ROAD; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID' CENTERLINE OF NICOLAS ROAD SOUTH 75 DEGREES 12' 17" WEST 543.81 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH WITH A RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 138.34 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6 DEGREES 36 ' 19'' TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 2534 APPROVED BY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON JULY 31, 1987. PARCEL 3: THAT PORTION OF RANClIO TEMECULA AS SHOWN BY HAP ON FILE IN BOOK 1 PAGE 37 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO, 3334 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 54 PAGES 25 TO 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DISTANT T~n£ON NORTH 44 DEGREES 54 ' EAST, 2922.78 THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREES 19' 22'' EAST, 89.24 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH HAVING & RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 340.15 FEET THROUGH a CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10 DEGREES 14' THENCE CONTINUING EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 424.32 FEET SOUGH A CEHTR~.L ANGLE OF 20 DEGREES 15' THENCE TARGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 75 DEGREES 10 ' 35 w HA~T 2091.62 FEET; THENCE SOUTH W5 DEGR~ED 10' 35'' WEST, 1706.86 MET TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING''; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 75 DEGNEED 10' 35" WEST, 384.77 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH HAVING A RADIUS OF 1200.00 THENCE SOUTNNESTEALY ALONG SAID CURVE 764 · 47 FEET SOUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 36 DEGREES 30' Page 6 of 12 THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 68 DEGREES 19' 22" WEST, 89.24 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 3334; THENCE ALONG SAID PROLONGED LINE SOUTH 44 DEGREES 54* 44" WEST, 1210.54 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 50 DEGREES 10' THENCE SOUTH 80 DEGREES 13' THENCE NORTH.12 DEGREES 20' THENCE NORTH 77 DEGREES 40' THENCE SOUTH 12 DEGREES 20' THENCE NORTH 47 DEGREES 25' EAST, 179.54 FEET; 48" EAST, 342.48 FEET; 00" WEST, 120.00 FEET; 00" EAST, 168.00 FEZ'T: 00' EAST, 512.80 FEET; 59' 53" EAST, 155.60 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF a TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1200.00 FRET; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 73.77 FEET THROUGH a CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3 DEGREES 31' 21w; THENCE SOUTH 58 DEGREES 31' 18" EAST, 270.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 82 DEGREES 01~ 19w EAST, 266.58 FRET; THENCE NORTH 45 DEGREES 34' 21' EAST, 778.56 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 83 DEGREES 17' 25" EAST, 342,34 FEET TO a LINE WHICH BEARS 80UTII 14 DEGREES 49' 25w EAST FROM TEE wTRUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; THENCE NORTH 14 DEGREES 49' 28w WEST, 871.85 FRET TO THE wTHUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THaT PORTION DESCRIBED ES FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF TRACT MAP NO. 3883 AS SHOWN BY MaP ON FILE IN BOON 63 PAGES TBROUGB 35 OF RAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSXDE COUNTY, CaLXFOENIA, SAID POINT BEING ON THE PROLONGATION LINE OF TRACT M~P NO. 3334 SAID LINE BEING COMMON WITH THE LINE BETWEEN MURRIETA aND TEMECULA PORTIONS OF THE TEMECULA RANCHO aS SHOWN ON SAID TRaCT MAP NO. 3883; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAXD RANCHO LINE NORTH 44 DEGREES 56v 04" EAST, 690.51 FEET TO a CURVED PORTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF NICOLAS ROaD aS SHOWN ON COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MAP NO. 854-F, SAID RANCNO LINE, SAID POINT HAVING a RADIAL BEAMING OF NORTH 02 DEGREES 52* 11" WEST, SaID CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO TBX NORTHERLY WITH a RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET, ALSO BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CUNVE TBROU~H a CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5 DEGREES 19' 13", 111.42 FEET; THENCE IN A RADIAL DIRECTION OF SOUT~ 8 DEGREES 11~ 24" WEST, 55.00 FEET TOo"'fiIB 80UTHERLY RX~rr OF WAY LINE OF Bald NZCOLaS ROAD: THENCE SOUTH 40 DEGREES 32* 03' WEST, 33.24 FRET; THENCE 80UTH 5 DEGREES 43~ 24' EAST, 181.55 FEET TO A TENGENT CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEASTERLY WITH a !aDIUS OF 100.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTHFaSTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTPaT./LMGLE OF 15 DEGREES 00' 38', 26.20 FEET TO A TaNGENT LINE; Page 7 of 12 THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID TANGENT LXNE SOUTH 20 DEGREES 44' 02" EAST, 50.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY WITH ARADIUS OF 48.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 76 DEGREES 06* 22", 63.76 FEET; THENCE LEAVING ~AID CURVE IN A SOUTHEASTERLY DIRECTION SOUTH 2 DEGREES 10* 13" EAST, 131.15 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 33 OF SAID TRACT 3883; SAID POINT ALSO BEING aN ANGLE POINT IN THE BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 3883; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID TRACT BOUNDARY SOUTH 12 DEGREES 18' 23' EAST, 512.54 FEET TO CENTERLINE OF NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 53291 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 47 DEGREES 59~ 28" EAST, 156.22 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF a TANGENT CURVE BEING CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET: THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH a CENTRP, L ANGLE OF 42 DEGREES 32* 24", 890.92 FEET TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 91390 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, OF a PARCEL OF LaND DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1970 AS XNSTHUMENT NO. 91390 OF OFFXCIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALXFORNIA: THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE 80UTIiWESTERLY BOUNDANY LINE OF SAID PANCRL RECORDED AS XHSTHUHENT NO. 91390 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA: NORTH 65 DEGREES 42' 25" WEST, 658.63 FEETTO SAID RaNCH0 LINE: THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID RANCI!0 LINE 80UTH 44 DEGREES 56' 04' WEST, 202.06 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:" BEGINNING AT a POINT IN THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 3334, AS SHOWN 3Y MAP ON FXLE IN BOOK 54 PAGES 25 TO 30, XMCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORD8 OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DISTANT TIiEREON NORTH 44 DEGREES 54' 44w EAST, 2922.78 FEET TO ~ TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE 80UTH 68 DEGREES 19~ 22" EAST, 89.24 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH, HAVING a RADIUS OF 1200.00 FEET, DELTA 16 DEGREES 14' 28w LENGTH OF 340.15 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 5 DEGREES 26* 10" EBaT, 385.37 FEET: THENCE NORTH 65 DEGREES 43' 19w WEST, 658.77 FEET: THENCE NORTH 4d DESPOt8 54* 44" EAST, 318.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PORTION LYING WITHIN PARCEL MAP 5732, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 13 PAGE 85 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, rmT-IFOANIA; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN NICHOLAS ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, 1979 AS XNSTRUMENT NO. 80861 AND RS-RECORDED RAY 7, 1979 aS INSTRUMENT NO. 92671 BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA: Page 8 of 12 ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN TRACT 20703-1 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 177 PAGES 72 THROUGH 76 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. SAID LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH LOT LIME ADJUSTMENT NO. 2429, AS DISCLOSED BY GRANT DEED RECORDED JANUARY 16, 1987 AS INSTRUMENT NO~ 13075 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORHIA. PARCEL 4: ALL THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 181, 182, 183 BAD 184, APRICOT AVENUE, BANANA STREET, AND HAMILTON AVENUE, OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY, AS SHOWN BY RAP ON FILE XN BOOK 8 PAGE 359 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF BAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA LYING NORTHERLY OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF NICOLaS RORD, RE CONVEYED TO THE COt,4TY OF RIVERSIDE BY DOC"JMENT RECORDED APRXL 23, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 80861 AND RE-RECORDED MAY 7, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 92671 BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING NORTHERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF SAID HAMILTON AVENUE WITH THE EASTERLY LIME OF THAT CERTAIN PANCRL OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED JULY 15, 1947 IN BOOK 842 PAGE 288 OF MAPS, leECORES OF I~IVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE SOUTH 42 DEGREES 05' 29w EAST, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF HAMILTON AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 261.21 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF THAT PORTX0N OF SAID LOT 184 CONVEYED TO LEO E. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, BY DEED FILED FOR R~CORE DECEMBER 27, 1945 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3005, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE SOUTH 76 DEGREES 18' 29w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED SOUTH 76 DEGREES 26' EAST) ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO LEO E. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, a DISTANCE OF 317.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTHS1 DEGREES 56' 20w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED SOUTH 52 DEGREES 07' EAST) ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LIN~ OF SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO LEO E. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, A DISTANCE OF 945.26 FEET (FORMERLY RECORDED 943.7 FEET) TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL CONVEYED TO LEO RORIPAUGH, ET AL; SAID CORNER ALSO BEING THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THAT PORTION OF GAID LOT 183 CONVEYED TO LEO Z. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, BY DEED FXLED FOR RECORD DECEMBER 27, 1945 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3004, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREE8 58v 04w EAST, (FORMERLY RECORDED SOUTH 69 DEGREES 28' 25" EAST) aLONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF 8aID LAST MEI4TIONED PARCEL CONVEYED TO LEO E. RORIPAUGH, ET AL, a DISTANCE OF 1,411.97 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL, SAID CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF SAIDAPRICOT STREET. Page 9 of 12 PARCEL 5: THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 181, 182 AND JOHN JAY AVENUE, OF THE TENECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY, AS SHO~N BY HAP ON FILE IN BOOK 8 PAGE 359 OF NAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION.OF LOT 181 LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF NXCOLAS ROAD, AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DOCUMENT RECORDED APRIL 23, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 80861 AND RECORDED HAy 7, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 92671, BOTH OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 182 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 181, SAID POINT BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STHEETAND JOHN JAY AVENUE, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF ~ TEMECULA LAND AND WATER CONPINY;' THENCE NORTHFJ[STERLY [LONG ~ SAID CENTERLINE OF BRNRNA STREET NORTH 48 DEGREES 16' 44" EAST 272.01 FEET TO ~ ~RUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLIREOP BANANA STREET NORTH 48 DEGREES 16' 44" F.~ST 423.79 FEET TO ~ CENTERLINE OF NICHOLAS ROAD AS SHOWN ON COUNTY OF RXVERSIDE IOiP NO. 854-F; THENCE SOUTHEaSTERLy ALONG SAID CENTERLIME OF NICOLBS RO~D SOUTa 73 DEGREES 34' 01" r.~ST 93.79 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 16 DEGREES 25' 59" WEST 360.00 MET; THENCE NORTH 73 DEGREES 34' 01" WEST 317.40 FEET TO ~ TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LOT 181 BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBEDAS FOLLOWS: BEGZNNZNG AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAZD LOT 181, SAID POINT BEZNG TKE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STREET AND 3OHM 3AY AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID MaP OF THE T~4ZCULA LARD/LWD WATER COMPANY; THENCE NORTHWESTERLy aLONG BAXD CENTERLINE OF JOHN 3AY AVenUE , NORTH 41 DEGREES 55' 58" WEST 139.03 FEET; THENCE NORTH 51 DEGREES 04' 52w EAST 192.23 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73 DEGREES 34' 01" EAST 152.60 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF 8AID BANANA STREET; THENCE 80UTHWF~TERLY aLONG SAID CENTERLINE OF BANANa STREET SOUTH 48 DEGREES 16t 44n WEST 272.01 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Page 10 of 12 ?ARCEL THAT PORTION OF LOT %66 AND JOHN JAY AVENUE, OF THE TEMECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 8 PAGE 359 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT %66, SAID POINT BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF BANANA STREET AND JOHN JAY AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF THE TRNECULA LAND AND WATER COMPANY; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF JOHN JAY AVENUE NORTH 41 DEGREES 55' 58" WEST %39.03 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 51 DEGREES 04w 52' WEST 336.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 77 DEGREES 47' 46w WEST 120.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID DEED RECORDED JANUARY 22, 1975 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 8%69 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE OOUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID.LINE ALSO BEING CO)e40N WITH THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE WINCHESTER-TENECULA ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVENSIDE BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, 1930 IN BOOK 722 PAGE 561 OF DEED, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID LINE NORTH %2 DEGREES %2' %4" EAST 501.78 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID JOHN JAY AVENUE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF JOHN JAY AVENUE SOUTH 41 DEGREES 55' 58" EAST 408.94 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 7: THAT PORTION OF RANCH0 TEMECULA IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK % PAGE 37 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUI~eY, ClLLXFOENTi, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTHEASTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF TRACT 334, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 54 PAGES 25 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, OF-MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DISTANCE THENEON NORTH 44 DEGREES 54' 44w MAST, 2,992.78 FEET FROM THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF RAID TRACT; THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREES %9' 22' EAST, 89.24 FEET TO THE BEGINNING TO A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY RAVING A RADIU~ OF %,200.00 FEET; ~ THENCE SOUTHEASTER~Y ALONG RAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL RNGLE OF %6 DEGREES %4' 28w AN ARC DISTANCE OF 340.15 F~ET; THENCE SOUTH 5 DEGREES 26' %0w WEST, TO THE CENTERLINE OF NICOLAS ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 23, %979 AS INSTRt~4ENT NO. 92671 .OF OFFICIAL RECORDS-OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE SOUTH 75 DEGREES %2' 17" WEST, ALONG SAID CENTEKLZRE, 543,8% FEETTOT HE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLy HAVING A RADIUS OF %200 FEET; Pa~e 11 of 12 THENCE SOUTH 75 DEGREES 12' 17" WEST, ALONG SAID CENTERLINE, 543.81 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY RAVING A RADIUS OF 1200 FEET: THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE AND ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11 D~GREES 55' 32" AN ARC LENGTH OF 249.76 FEET MORE OR LESS, TO THE COMMON LINE BETWEEN HURRIETA AND TEMECULA PORTIONS OF SAID TENECULA RANCHO; THENCE NORTH 44 DEGREES 56' 04" EAST, ALONG SAID RANCliO LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 8: THAT PORTION OF THE TENECULA RANCHO IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAPS ON FILE IN BOOK i PAGE 37 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE SAID TEMECULA RANCHO AND THE LINE SEPARATING THE MURRIETA PORTION AND THE TEMECULA PORTION OF THE SAID TEMECULA RANCUO; THENCE SOUTH 44 DEGREES 55' 06" WEST A DISTANCE OF 2,004.90 FEET ALONG THE LAST SAID LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF MEGINNING; THENCE CONTIr4~JINO SOUTH 44 DEGREES 55' 06" WEST A DISTANCE OF 906.36 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE SAID LINE SEPARATING THE MURRIETA PORTION AND THE TZMECULA PORTION OF THE SAID TEMECULA RANCRO AND THE CENTERLINE OF NICHOLAS ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 68 DEGREES 19' 14" EAST, ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID NICHOLAS ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 88.91 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE RAVING A RADIUS OF 1,200.00 FEET AND CONCAVE NORTHERLY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 340.35 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16 DEGREES 15' 01" TO THE INTER- SECTION OF SAID NICHOLAS ROAD AND MARGANITA ROAD; THENCE IN A NON-TANGENT DIRECTION NORTH 5 DEGREES 25' 52" EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID MARGADITA ROAD A DISTANCE OF 260.54 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, HAVING A RADIUS OF 680.00 FEET AND CONCAVE EASTERLY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 468.64 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3g DEGREES 29' 14w TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 9: LOTS 1, 2, 3, 17, 21 AND 23 INCLUSIVE OF TRACT 20703-1, AS SHOWN BY RAP ON FILE IN ROOK 177 PAGES 72 THROUGH 76 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 10: LOTS i THROUGH 105, INCLUSIVE OF TRACT 20703-2, AS SHOWN BY NAP ON FILE IN ROOK 185 PACES 37 THROUGH 44, INCLUSIVE, OF NAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. Paqe 12 of 12 PARCEL ll: LOTS 1 THROUGH 132, ZNCLUSZVE OF TRACT 20703-3, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 186 PAGES 20 THROUGH 28, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COt,VNTY, CALIFORNIA. Development Agreement No. 37 EXHIBIT B MAP SHOWING PROPERTY AND ITS LOCATION Development Agreement No. 37 EXHIBIT C EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 164 as amended 164, Amendment No. 1. ZONING Ordinance No. 348.2788 (Zone Change No. 4501) Ordinance No. 348.2927 (Zone Change No. 5127) LAND DIVISIONS 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20703 No. 20703-1 (Recorded at Book by Specific Plan No. and Final Tract Map 177, pages 72-76.) The development approvals listed above include the approved maps and all conditions of approval. COPIES OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. Development Agreement No. EXHIBIT D 37 EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan as amended through Resolution No. 88-485. Ordinance No. 340. Ordinance No. 348 as amended through Ordinance No. 348.2857. Ordinance No. 448 as amended through Ordinance No. 448.a. Ordinance No. 458 as amended through Ordinance No. 458.8. Ordinance No. 460 as amended through Ordinance No. 460.92. Ordinance No. 461 as amended through Ordinance No. 461.6. Ordinance No. 509 as amended through Ordinance No. 509.2. Ordinance No. 546 as amended through Ordznance No. 546.7a. 10. Ordinance No. 547.5. 11. Ordinance NO. 555.15. 12. Ordznance No. 617.1. 547 as amended through Ordinance No. 555 as amended through Ordinance No. 617 as amended through Ordinance No. 13. Ordinance No. 650. 14. Resolution No. 87-525 Establishing Procedures and Requirements for the Consideration of Development Agreements, as amended by Resolution No. 88-39 and Resolution No. 88-119. COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. Development Agreement No. EXHIBIT E FEE CREDITS None. ATTACHMENT NO. 5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT R:\STAFFI~tI'~ITPA94.1S 9115194 tjs 28 RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF City Clerk City of Temecula WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO City Clerk City of Temecuta 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula CA 92590 (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use) AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 164-RORIPAUGH PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 94-0017 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Definitions ............................................ 5 2. Interest of Owner ........................................ 7 3. Exhibits .............................................. 7 4. Term ............................................... 7 5. Assignment ........................................... 8 5. 1 R/ght to Assign .................................... 8 5.2 Release of Transferring Owner ........................... 9 5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction ...................... 9 5.4 Subsequent Assignment ............................... 10 6. Mortgagee Protection .................................... 10 7. Binding Effect of Agreement ................................ 11 8. Relationship of Parties .................................... 12 9. Changes in Project ...................................... 12 10. Timing of Development ................................... 12 11. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation ............................. 12 11.1 Hold Harmless .................................... 12 i 1.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement .................... 13 11.3 public Facilities Fees Shortfall .......................... 14 11.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability ................... 14 11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement ................. 15 11.6 Environmental Assurances ............................. 15 12. Public Benefits, Public Improvements and Facilities .................. 16 12.1 Intent .......................................... 16 12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential) ........................ 16 12.3 Public Park ...................................... 17 12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits .......................... 17 12.5 Timing ......................................... 18 K:$DMSLIL W. DIRIO085996. WP i 13. Reservations of Authority ...................... ' ............ 18 13. I Limitations, Reservations, and Exceptions ................... 18 13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals ....................... 19 13.3 Modification or Suspension by State or Federal Law ............. 19 13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies ...................... 20 13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension .......................... 20 13.6 Vesting Tentative Maps .............................. 20 14. Development of the Property ................................ 21 14.1 Rights to Develop .................................. 21 14.2 Effect of Agreement on T~nd Use Regulations ................ 21 14.3 Changes and Amendments ............................. 21 15. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement .................... 22 16. Financing District ...................................... 23 17. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement ....................... 23 18. Enforcement .......................................... 23 19. Events of Default ....................................... 23 20. Procedure Upon Default ................................... 24 21. Damages Upon Termination ................................ 24 22. Attorneys' Fees and Costs ................................. 24 23. Notices ............................................. 25 24. Cooperation .......................................... 25 25. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms .................... 26 26. Entire Agreement ....................................... 26 27. Counterparts .......................................... 26 28. Authority to Execute ..................................... 27 K:tDMSLIL W, DIRLO085996. WP ii EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT C EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT D. NOTICE FROM MORTGAGEE EXHIBIT E MAP OF PUBLIC PARK K:t~A4S~IL W,~)1~1~085996. V,/P iii AMF~NDMENT AND RESTATEMENT OF DEVFJ~OPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA and COSCAN HOMES CALIFORNIA, INC., dba COSCAN DAVIDSON HOMES This Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into to be effective on the date it is recorded with' the Riverside County Recorder (the "Effective Date") by and among the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation ("City") and Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California Corporation, dba Coscan Davidson Homes ("Owner"): RECITALS A. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864, et seq. ("Development Agreement Statutes"), Day-Bar I, a California general partnership and others and the County of Riverside, California ("County") entered into Development Agreement No. 37 recorded in the Official Records of Riverside County, California on November 4, 1988, as Instrument No. 323487 ("Development Agreement No. 37"). B. Development Agreement No. 37 encompasses a project formerly located within County approved Specific Plan No. 164 known as "Roripaugh Hills", a mixed use subdivision, (the "Original Project") to be developed on property which became a part of the municipal boundaries of the City when the City incorporated on December 1, 1989. This Agreement encompasses only a portion of the Original Project, located in Planning Area 7 and known as "Roripaugh Cottages", a residential development (the "Project"). The balance of the Original Project covered by Development Agreement No. 37 not included within Planning Area 7 is not amended or impacted by this Agreement. K: [DMSt./L W. DIRlOOB5996. WP 1 C. Pursuant to the provisions of the Development Agreement Statutes, the City became the successor-in-interest to the County under Development Agreement No. 37 upon incorporation of the City. D. Pursuant to Section 65868 of the Development Agreement Statutes, the City and Owner propose to restate and amend Development Agreement No. 37 to substitute this Agreement for the portion of Development Agreement No. 37 pertaining to the Project. E. Pursuant and subject to the Development Agreement Statu~es, the City's police powers and City Resolution No. 91-52, City is authorized to enter into binding agreements with persons having legal or equitable interest in real property located within the City's municipal boundaries or sphere of influence thereby establishing the conditions under which such property may be developed in the City. F. By electing to enter into this Agreement, City shall bind future members of the City Council of City by the obligations specified herein and further limit the future exercise of certain governmental and proprietary powers of members of the City Council. Likewise, Owner shall bind its successors in interest to the obligations specified in this Agreement. G. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by the staff of the City, the Planniffg Commission of the City and the City Cguncil of City and have been found to be fair, just and reasonable. H. City finds and determines that it will be in the best interests of its citizens and the public health, safety and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement. I. All of the procedures and requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act have been met with respect to this Agreement. J. Riverside County Ordinance No. 659, as adopted by the City, establishes public facilities impact fees for residential development within City CRSA Fees"). City requires these K:IDMSLIL W. DIRtO085996. WP 2 revenues to mitigate the impact of development. City requires RSA Fees from development of the Property in order to complete capital projects to mitigate the impact of the development. K. Development Agreement No. 37 provided for public facilities and services impact fees ("County Impact Fees") higher than the RSA Fees. These higher fees, particularly during the present economic situation, unduly discourage and delay development and thereby prevent City from ever r~iving the RSA Fees. Consequently, the City desires to reduce the County Impact Fees for residential development in the Project to a level comparable to the RSA Fees. L. .On May 20, 1987, the County amended Ordinance No. 460 authorizing the imposition of Quimby Park Fees. Ordinance No. 460 required adoption of an implementation resolution designating a recipient of the Quimby Park Fees. On June 28, 1988, pursuant to Resolution No. 88-218, the County designated CSA 143 as the recipient of Quimby Park Fees subject to the adoption of a master plan. On June 27, 1989, pursuant to Resolution No. 89-331, the County adopted a master plan for CSA 143, establishing the Quimby Park Fees at three (3) acres per one thousand (1,000) new residents ("County Park Fee Standard"). M. Pursuant to Resolution No. 90-53, adopted on May 8, 1990, City has adopted Quimby Park requirements of five (5) acres of land for parks and recreational purposes, or payment of fees in lieu thereof, for every one thousand (1,000) people t0 reside in the proposed subdivision. N. The City interprets Development Agreement No. 37 to permit the imposition of increased Quimby Park requirements computed on City Park standards and has required Owner to satisfy Quimby Park requirements based on the City Park standards as a condition of issuance of building permits for the Project. O. City and Owner acknowledge that development of the Project will result in the generation of municipal revenue, public infrastructure facilities and the enhancement of the K: tDMSLIL W. DIRIOG85996. WP 3 quality of life, including recreation facilities for present and future residents of the City. The benefits to the City and Owner contemplated by development of the Project include: (1) the opportunity for an adjacent residential-commercial project creating significant job opportunities, sales tax and ad valorera tax revenues for the City; (2) payment of Public Facilities Fees (fire and waffic signal mitigation); · (3) participation in special assessment districts to finance City and regional infrastructure improvements; ~4) the creation of significant park and recreation dedications for public use and the protection of significant natural resources. P. The City and Owner acknowledge that due to the present economic situation, none of these benefits to the City are possible unless the Project proceeds with development. Q: Without admitting or determining any fights or obligations as between City and Owner, each to the other, with respect to the amount of the Quimby Park requirements, and to balance the needs of the City to provide adequate parks and recreational facilities with the difficulty of land development in today's economy, City and Owner agree that in lieu of additional Quimby Park requirements, Owner will dedicate and develop park land as described in this Agreement. R. City Council of City has approved this Agreement by Ordinance No. __ adopted on , and effective on ("Effective Date"). On the Effective Date, Development Agreement No. 37 shall be terminated as to the Project only and of no further force and effect with respect to the Project, having been replaced by this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE in consideration of the above Recitals and of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged and incorporated herein, the parties agree: K:IDMSLIL V~DIRIOO85996. WP 4 City. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires: 1.1 "City" is the City of Temecula. 1.2 "City Public Facility Fee" is an mount to be established by Ordinance of 1.3 "County" is the County of Riverside. 1.4 "County Public Facilities and Services Fee" means the County Development Agreement Fee as set forth in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37. 1.5 "Development Exaction" means any requirement of City in connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or Existing Development Approval for the dedication of land, the construction of improvements or public facilities, or the payment of fees in order to lessen, offset, mitigate or compensate for the impacts of development on the environment or other public interests. 1.6 "Development Plan" means the Existing Development Approvals defined in Section 1.7 below which are applicable to development of the Project. 1.7 "Existing Development Approval(s)" means those certain development approvals in effect as of the effective date of this Agreement with respect to the Property, including, without limitation, the "Existing Development Approvals" listed in Exhibit A which were approved by the County or the City. 1.8 "Financing District" means a community facilities district formed pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (California Government Code Section 53311 et $eq, as amended), an assessment district formed pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 et see_.. as amended), a special assessment district formed pursuant to the Improvement Act of 1911 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 10102, as amended), or any other special assessment district existing pursuant to State law formed for the purposes of financing the cost K:IDMSLIL W. DIRIOOEI5996, WP 5 of public improvements, facilities, services and/or public facilities fees within a specific geographical area of the City. 1.9 "Interim Public Facilities Fee" means an amount of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per each residential unit developed in the Project. 1.10 "Land Use Regulations" means all ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules, regulations and official policies of City, governing the development and use of land including without limitation, the permitted use of land, the density or intensity of use, subdivision requirements, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, the provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property listed on Exhibit B which are a matter of public record on the Effective Date of this Agreement. "Land Use Regulations" does not include any County or City ordinance, resolution, code, rule, regulation, or official policy, governing: (a) The conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations; Co) Taxes and assessments; (c) The control and abatement of nuisances; (d) The granting of encroachment permits and the conveyance of rights and interests which provide for the use of or the entry upon public property; (e) The exercise of the power of eminent domain. 1.11 "Owner" means the person having a legal or equitable interest in the Project; 1.12 Development Plan. 1.13 "Project" is the development of the Property in accordance with the "Property" is the real property described in Exhibit C. K:tDMSLIL V~DIRtO085996. WP 6 1.14 adopted by City. 1.15 *RSA Fee" means the fee established by County Ordinance No. 659 as *Subsequent Development Approvals' means all development approvals required subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with development of the Property. 1.16 "Subsequent Land Use Regulation" means any Land Use Regulation adopted and ~ffective after the Effective Date of this Agreement. 2. Interest of Owner. Owner represents that it has the fee tifie interest in the Property and that all other persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property are to be bound by this Agreement. 3. Exhibits. The following documents are referred to in this Agreement attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference: Exhibit Designation A B C D E Term. Description Existing Development Approvals Existing l ~nd Use Regulations Legal Description of the Property Notice From Mortgagee Site Plan of Park 4.1 The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall extend for a period of ten (10) years thereafter, unless this Agreement is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the parties hereto. 4.2 This Agreement shall terminate and be of no force and effect upon the occurrence of the entry of a final judgement or issuance of a final order after exhaustion of any appeals directed against the City as a result of any lawsuit fried against the City to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval by the City Council of City of this Agreement. K:tDMSLIL W. DIRIOO85996. WP 7 5. Assignment. 5.1 Right to Assign. The Own~r shall have the right to s~ll, transfer, orassign the Property in whole or in part (provided that no such partial transfer shall violate the Subdivision Map Act, Government Code Section 66410, et see.. or Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, as the same'was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-04) to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corporation at any time during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such sale, transfer, or assignment shall include the assignment and assumption of the rights, duties, and obligations arising under or from this Agreement and be made in strict compliance with the following conditions precedent: (a) No sale, transfer, or assignment of any right or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together with the sale, transfer, or assignment of all or a part of the Property. Co) Concurrent with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within fifteen (15) business days thereafter, the Owner shall notify City, in writing, of such sale, transfer, or assignment and shall provide City with an executed agreement, in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, by the purchaser, transferee, or assignee and providing therein that the purchaser, transferee, or assignee expressly and unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of the Owner under this Agreement. Any sale, transfer, or assignment not made in strict compliance with the foregoing conditions shall constitute a default by the Owner under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the failure of any purchaser, transferee, or assignee to execute the agreement required by Paragraph (b) of this Subsection, the burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon such purchaser, transferee, or assignee, but the benefits of this Agreement shall not inure to such purchaser, transferee, or assignee until and unless such agreement is executed. 5.2 Release of Transferring Owner. Notwithstanding any sale, transfer, or assignment, a transferring Owner shall continue to be obligated under this Agreement unless such transferring Owner is given a release in writing by City, which release shall be provided by City upon the full satisfaction by such transferring Owner of all of the following conditions: (a) The Owner no longer has a legal interest in all or any part of the Property except as a beneficiary under a deed of trust. (b) The Owner is not then in default under this Agreement. (c) The Owner has provided City with the notice and executed agreement required under Paragraph (b) of Subsection 5.1 above. (d) The purchaser, transferee, or assignee provides City with security equivalent to any security previously provided by Owner to secure performance of its obligations hereunder. 5.3 Termination of Agreement with Respect to Individual Lots upon Sale to Public and Completion of Construction. The provisions of Subsection 5.1 shall not apply to the sale or lease (for a period longer than one year) of any lot which has been finally subdivided and is individually (and not in "bulk") sold or leased to a member of the public or other ultimate user. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate with respect to any lot and such lot shall be released and no longer be subject to this Agreement without the execution or recordation of any further document upon satisfaction of both of the following conditions: (a) the lot has been finally subdivided and individually (and not in 'bulk") sold or leased (for a period longer than one year) to a member of the public or other ultimate user; and K: $DMSLIL W, DIRiOOB5996. WP ~) Co) a Ceni~cato of Occupancy has been issued' for a building on a lot, and the fees set forth in this Agreement have been paid. 5.4 Subsequent Assignment. Any subsequent sale, transfer, or assignment after an initial sale, transfer, or assignment shall be made only in accordance with and subject to the toms and conditions of this Section. 6. . Mortgagee Protection. The parties hemto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Owner, in any manner, at Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust, or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property. City acknowledges that the lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Owner and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Owner shall reimburse City for any and all of City's reasonable costs associated with said negotiations, interpretations, and modifications and shall make reimbursement payments to City within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice from City. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any pan thereof, which Mortgagee has submitted a request in writing, in the form as attached hereto as Exhibit D, to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, K:LOMSLIL W. DIRIG085996. WP 10 shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by the Owner in the performance of the 0wner's obligations under this Agreement. (c) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee, in the form set forth on Exhibit D, requesting a copy of any notice of default given to the Owner under the terms of this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice of default to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to the Owner. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. (d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any pan thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of the Owner's obligations or other affirmative covenants of the Owner hereunder, or to guarantee such performance, provided however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Owner is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to City' s performance hereunder, and further provided that any sale, transfer or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.1 of this Agreement. (e) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, pursuant to subsection (d) above and who elects not to assume the obligations of the Owner set forth heroin shall not be enti~ed to any rights to develop which have or may have vested as a result of this Agreement. K:IDMSLIL t.~DIRIOO85996. WP 11 7. Binding Effect of Agreement. The burdens of this Agreement bind and the benefits of the Agreement inure to the successors-in-interest to the parties to it in accordance with the provisions of and subject to the limitations of this Agreement. 8. Relationship of Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between City and Owner is such that the Owner is an independent contractor and not the agent of City. 9. . Changes in Project. No change, modification, revision or alteration of Existing Development Approvals may be made without the prior approval by those agencies of the City equivalent to the County agencies that approved the Existing Development Approvals in the first instance (if the County had granted the approvals) or by the same City agency that granted the Existing Development Approvals, (if the City granted the approval in connection with the adoption of this Agreement). 10. Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that Owner cannot at this time predict when, or the rate at which the Property will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors which are not within the control of Owner, such as market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption, completion and other similar factors. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties, it is the parties, intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that the Owner shall have the right to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as the Owner deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment, subject only to any timing or phasing requirements set forth in the Development Plan. 1 I. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation. 11.1 Hold Harmless. Owner agrees to and shall hold City, its officers, agents, employees and representatives harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for K: IDMStJL W. DtR~O085996. WP 12 personal injury including death and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of the Owner or those of its contracWr, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on its behalf which relate to the Project. Owner agrees to and shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents, employees and representatives fwm actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of Owner's actiyities in connection with the Project. This h01d harmless agreement applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the operations referred to in this paragraph, regardless of whether or not City prepared, supplied, or approved plans or specifications for the Project. 11.2 County Litigation Concerning Agreement. In the event the County seeks to challenge the right of City and Owner to enter into this Agreement or to terminate Development Agreement No. 37, and institutes an action, suit or proceeding to challenge this Agreement or invalidate and/or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement or the amendment of Development Agreement No. 37 or take such other action(s) which result in unreasonable delays in the development of the Property, City and Owner agree to cooperate and participate in a joint defense in any action against the parties, their officers, agents and employees, from and against any and all such obligations, liability, suit, claim, loss, judgment or lien, resulting from such action(s) brought by County, (but excluding actions to expunge any lis pendens) and to share the costs associated with attorneys, fees and costs that the parties may incur as the result of any such action or lawsuit to challenge City and/or Owner's legal authority to enter into this Agreement and/or terminate Development Agreement No. 37. Owner's defense costs herein shall be its pro rata share among all impacted landowners based on a ratio of contribution of the total units owned by Owner which are subject to this Agreement compared to the total number of units within the City in which City has lowered the County fees. Damages (including the difference in the amount of any Interim Public Facilities Fee and the amount of the County Development K: $DMSUL W. DIRiOOBS996. WP 1 ~ Agreement Fee paid by Owner to City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement) shall be the responsibility of Owner. To the extent Owner has paid Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or County Development Agreement Fees to City of which it is adjudicated are lawfully the funds of County, City shall pay such sums to County and Owner shall have such liability for the payment of the difference between such fees reduced by the amount paid by the City. City and Owner shall mutually agree on legal counsel to be retained to defend any such action(s) brought by the County as herein provided. City and Owner each reserve the right to withdraw from the defense of the.County litigation in the event the County prevails at the trial level and there is an appeal. If either party withdraws after the trial and there is an appeal, the remaining party shall pay all of the costs and fees associated with said appeal. 11.3 Public Facilities Fees Shortfall. In the event the County prevails in any legal action or other proceeding to challenge, set aside, or enjoin the enforcement of this Agreement and a trial court determines that Owner and/or the City is liable to make up any shortfall between the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be, and the County Development Agreement Fee which would otherwise have been imposed pursuant to Development Agreement No. 37, then Owner shall be responsible for paying any such shortfall subject to City's payment to County of any amounts collected and held by City under the terms of Development Agreement No. 37. Such payment by City and County shall reduce Owner's liability to County for payment of such fees by a like amount paid by City. 11.4 County Prevails in Litigation - Severability. In the event the County prevails at the trial court level against the City or the Owner as described in Section 11.2 of this Agreement, the amount of the Interim Public Facilities Fee or the City Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be, shall revert to the amount of the County Development Agreement Fee in effect at the time of entry of the final judgment in favor of the County. In the event this Agreement K:tDMStJL W. DIRIO085996. WP 14 is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a trial court of competent jurisdiction, the provisions set forth in Section 12.3(a), (b) and (c) of this Agreement shall no longer be enforceable and from the date of said final judgment or ruling of invalidity, Owner shall thereafter pay the County Development Agreement Fee as provided in Section 4.2 of Development Agreement No. 37. All other provisions of this Agreement shall remain valid and enforceable notwithstanding said ruling of invalidity. 11.5 Third Party Litigation Concerning Agreement. Owner shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against City, its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any permit granted pursuant to this Agreement brought by a third party other than the County. City shall promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding, and City shall cooperate in the defense. If City fails to promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceeding or if City fails to cooperate in the defense, Owner shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless City. City may in its discretion participate in the defense of any such claim, action, or proceeding. 11.6 Environmental Assurances. Owner shall indemnify, defend with counsel approved by City, protect, and hold harmless City, its officers, employees, agents, assigns, and any successor or successors to City's interest from and against all claims, actual damages (including but not limited to special and consequential damages), natural resources damage, punitive damages, injuries, costs, response remediation and removal costs, losses, demands, debts, liens, liabilities, causes of action, suits, legal or administrative proceedings, interest, fines, charges, penalties and expenses (including but not limited to attorneys' and expert witness fees and costs incurred in connection with defending against any of the foregoing or in enforcing this indemnity) of any kind whatsoever paid, incurred, or suffered by, or asserted against, City K:tDMSLIL W. DIR~O085996. WP or its officers, employees or agents arising from or attributable to any repair, cleanup, or detoxiftcation, or preparation and implementation of any removal, remedial, response, closure, or other plan (regardless of whether undertaken due to governmental action) concerning any Hazardous Substance or baTarclous wastes at any place within the Property which is the subject of this Agreement. The forego'rag indemnity is intended to operate as an agreement pursuant to Section 107(e) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, "CERCLA", 42 U.S.C. Section 9607(e) and California Health and Safety Code Section 25364, a~d their successor statutes, to insure, protect, hold harmless, and indemnify City from liability. 12. Public Benefits. Public Improvements and Facilities. 12.1 Intent. The parties acknowledge and agree that this Agreement confers private benefits on the Owner which should be balanced by commensurate public benefits. Accordingly, the parties intend to provide consideration to the public to balance the private benefits conferred on the Owner by providing more fully for the satisfaction of the public needs resulting from development of the Project. 12.2 Public Facilities Fee (Residential). (a) In lieu of the County Development Agreement Fee, RSA Fee or City Public Facility Fee, for a period of five (5) years commencing on the Effective Date, Owner shall pay an Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit. The Interim Public Facilities Fee shall be paid as provided in Section 12.5 below. At the conclusion of the five (5) year period, Owner shall either continue to pay the Interim Public Facilities Fee of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) per dwelling unit or such other public facilities fee as the City has then enacted and applied to residential development projects in the City. K:IDMSIJL W. D/RIO085996. WP 16 (b) Owner shall also pay all other customary and typical development exactions, for a project of this size and nature, in existence as of the Effective Date and throughout the term of this Agreement, including but not limited to, Fire, Traffic Signal ]v~itigation and K-Rat Fees pursuant to the provisions of City ordinances and resolutions in existence when paid. 12.3 Public Park. As additional consideration for entering into this Algrcement, Owner agrees to de~ticate to the City, or cause to be dedicated, and City agrees to accept when offered, park land equalling approxima~ly three (3) a~res pursuant to that certain undated Parkland/Landscape improvement Agreement between Owner and City. The park land is shown on Exhibit E which is attached and made a pa~ hereof and incorporated by this reference. Owner shall improve, and Owner shall dedicate, or cause to be dedicated in fee or by grant of easement to City and City agrees to accept park land and improvements when offered for dedication and acceptance if such improvements meet the requirements of City for the construction and installation of park improvements. As a condition precedent to the City accepting the dedication of the park property and the improvements thereto, such property shall be free and clear of any and all liens, assessments, encumbrances and similar financial obligation relative to said property. Owner shall cause a title insurance company to issue a CLTA title insurance owner's policy with standard exceptions on such property, which policy shah be provided to City. if City desires an ALTA title policy, the additional cost over the cost of a CLTA policy with standard exceptions will be borne by City. 12.4 Park Improvement Fee Credits. At the time of completion of the improvements and transfer of the public park as provided in this Agreement, Owner shall receive a credit against payment of future Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees based on the actual improvement cost incurred by Owner for the public park, which exceeds the Pro. ject's Quimby Park requirements as calculated by the City, up to a total maximum credit of K: tDMSLIL W. DIR~O085996, WP ] '7 Eighty Two Thousand Dollars ($82,000.00). Owner shall have the term of this Agreement within which to apply the park improvement fee credit towards Interim Public Facilities Fees or City Public Facilities Fees. City shall have a right to review, audit and verify all costs associated with said park improvements under procedures to be mutually agreed upon between the panics. If at any time, the Interim Public Facilities Fees to be paid are less than the credit, referenced above, and Owner qualifies for the credit, Owner shall receive the difference directly from the City when due. For purposes of calculating credits under this Section, "Improvements" shall be defined as onsite work only (design, grading and construction), excluding street and utility work within the public right-of-way and any onsite environmental mitigation costs such as toxic removal and weftands mitigation. 12.5 TiminE. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City Public Facilities Fees, if any, required to be paid by Owner pursuant to this Agreement shall be deferred until such time as a certificate of occupancy has been obtained for the first production home built on the Property. Thereafter, the Interim Public Facilities Fees shall be paid at the time of issuance of building permits for each residential unit constructed on the Property. Collection of any and all Interim Public Facilities Fees and/or City Public Facilities Fees required to be paid by the Owner for the model home units shall be paid in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding CMOU"), between the City and Owner regarding said model homes, which MOU is dated for reference , 1994. 13. Reservations of Authority. 13.1 Limitations. Reservations. and Exceptions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the development of the Property: (a) Processing fees and charges imposed by City to cover the estimated actual costs to City of processing applications for Subsequent Development Approvals. K: IDMSIJL W. DIRIOOE5996. WP 18 (b) Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendation, appeals, and any other matter of procedure. (c) Regulations imposing Development Exactions; provided, however, that no such subsequently adopted Development Exactions shall be applicable to development of the Property unless such 'Development Exactions are applied uniformly to development throughout the City. (d) Regulations governing construction standards and specifications including without limitation, the City's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code and Fire Code. (e) Regulations which are not in conflict with the Development Plan. Any regulation, whether adopted by initiative or otherwise, limiting the rate or timing of development of the Property shall be deemed to conflict with the Development Plan and shall therefore not be applicable to the development of the Property. (f) Regulations which are in conflict with the Development Plan provided Owner has given written consent to the application of such regulations to development of the Property. 13.2 Subsequent Development Approvals. This Agreement shall not prevent City, in acting on Subsequent Development Approvals, from applying the Subsequent Land Use Regulations which do not conflict with the Development Plan, nor shall this Agreement prevent City from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Development Approval on the basis of the Existing or Subsequent Land Use Regulations not in conflict with the Development Plan. 13.3 Modification or SuSpension by State or Federal Law. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement prevent K: iOMS L,'L W. D/RiO O B5996. WP 19 or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal laws or regulations, provided, however, that this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do 'not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. 13.4 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the parties that other public agencies not within the control of City possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or jointly with City and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. 13.5 Tentative Tract Map Extension. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 66452.6 of the Government Code, the tentative subdivision map(s) or tentative parcel map(s) (vested or regular) approved as part of implementing the Development Plan shall be extended to expire at the end of the term of this Agreement 13.6 Vesting Tentative Maps. If any tentative or final subdivision map, or tentative or final parcel map, heretofore or hereafter approved in connection with development of the Property, is a vesting map under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410, et sea.~ and Riversi~te County Ordinance No. 460, as the same was incorporated by reference into the Ten~ecula Municipal Code by Ordinance No. 90-04, and if this Agreement is determined by a final judgment to be invalid or unenforceable insofar as it grants a vested right to develop to the Owner, then and to that extent the fights, obligations, and protections afforded the Owner and City respectively, under the laws and ordinances applicable to vesting maps shall supersede the provisions of this Agreement. Except as set forth immediately above, development of the Property shall occur only as provided in this Agreement, and the provisions in this Agreement shall be controlling over conflicting provisions of law or ordinances concerning vesting maps. K: tDMSLIL W.D/R{O085996, WP 14. Development of the Property. 14.1 Rights to Develop. Subject to the tens of this Agreement, including payment of the Intorim Public Facilities Fee, the Owner shall have a vested right to develop the Property in accordance with, and W the extent of the Development Plan. The Project shall remain subject to all Subsequent Development Approvals required to complete the Project as contemplated by the Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land for public purposes shall be those set forth in the Development Plan. 14.2 Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations. Except as otherwise provided under the terms of this Agreement, including the payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee, the rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to development of the Property shall be the Existing Land Use Regulations. City shall exercise its lawful reasonable discretion in connection with Subsequent Development Approvals in accordance with the Development Plan, and as provided by this Agreement including, but not limited to, payment of the Interim Public Facilities Fee and/or the City Public Facilities Fee, as the case may be. City shall accept for processing, review, and action all applications for Subsequent Development Approvals, and such applications shall be processed in the normal manner for processing such matters. City may, at the request of Owner, contract for planning and engineering consultant services to expedite the review and processing of Subsequent Development Approvals, the cost of which shall be borne by Owner. 14.3 Changes and Amendments. The parties acknowledge that refinement and further development of the Project will require Subsequent Development Approvals and may t~: IDMS~dL W.O/RI ooes996. wP 2 1 demonstrate that changes are appropriate and mutually desirable in the Existing Development Approvals. In the event the Owner finds that a change in the Existing Development Approvals is necessary or appropriate, the Owner shall apply for a Subsequent Development Approval 'to effectuate such change. If approved, any such change in the Existing Development Approvals shall be incorporated herein as an addendure to this Agreement and may be further changed from time to time as provided in this Section. Owner, shall, within thirty (30) days of written demand by City, reimburse City for any and all reasonable costs, associated with any amendment or change to this.Agreement that is initiated by Owner or Owner's successor. Unless otherwise required by law, as determined in City's reasonable discretion, a change to the Existing Development Approvals shall be deemed "minor" and not require an amendment to this Agreement provided such change does not: (a) Alter the permitted uses of the Property as a whole; or, Increase the density or intensity of use of the Property as a whole; or, (c)Increase the maximum height and size of permitted buildings; or, (d) Delete a requirement for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes within the Property as a whole; or, (e) Constitute a project requiring a subsequent or a supplemental Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code. 15. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement. (a) Pursuant to City Resolution No. 91-52, as it may be subsequenfiy amended, City shall review this Agreement at least once duting every twelve (12) month period from the Effective Date of this Agreement. The Owner or successor shall reimburse City for the reasonable and necessary costs of this review, within thirty (30) days of written demand from City. K:~DMSLIL W. DIRLO085996, WP 22 (b) During each periodic review by City, the Owner is required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement. The Owner agrees to furnish such evidence of good faith compliance as City in the exercise of its discretion may require. 16. Financing District. Upon the request of Owner, the parties shall cooperate in exploring the use of special assessment districts and other similar Financing Districts for the financing of the construction, improvement, or acquisition of public infrastructure, facilities, lands, and improvements to aen~e the Project and its residents, whether located within or outside the Property. It is acknowledged that nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as requiring City or City Council to form such a district or to issue or sell bonds. 17. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties and in the manner provided for in Government Code Sections 65868, 65867 and 65867.5. If an Amendment is requested by the Owner or its successor, the Owner/successor agrees to pay City any Development Agreement Amendment fee then in existence as established by City Council Resolution, or if no such fee is established, to reimburse City for the actual and reasonably necessary costs of reviewing and processing said Amendment within thirty (30) days of written demand from City. 18. Enforcement. Unless amended or can~led as herein pr. ovided, this Agreement is enforceable by any party to it notwithstanding a change in the applicable general or specific plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulations adopted by the City which alter or amend the rules, regulations, or policies governing permitted uses of the land, density, design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications. 19. Events of Default. Owner is in default under this Agreement upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: (a) If a warranty, representation or statement made or furnished by Owner to City is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made; K: [DMSL,'L W. D/RIO085996. WP (b) A finding and determination by City that upon the basis of substantial evidence the Owner has not complied in good faith with one or more of the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 20. Procedure Upon Default. (a) Upon the occurrence of an event of default, City may terminate or modify this Agreement in accordance with the procedure adopted by the City. (b) City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Owner implied if on periodic xeview the City does not propose to modify or terminate this Agreement. (c) Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third person. (d) Non-performance shall be excused only when it is prevented or delayed by acts of God or an emergency declared by the Governor. (e) All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements are available to the parties to pursue in the event there is a breach. 21. Damages Upon Termination. It is acknowledged by the parties that City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof. In general, each of the parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement, except that City, and its officers, employees and agents, shall not be liable in damages to Owner or to any assignee, transferee of Owner, or any other person, and Owner covenants not to sue for or claim any damages for breach of that Agreement by City. K:IDMSL/L W. DIRtO085996. WP 24 22. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. If legal action by either party is brought because of breach of this Agreement or to enforce a pwvision of this Agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and court costs. 23. H0tices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mall, postage prepaid and presumed delivered upon actual receipt by personal delivery or within three (3) days following deposit thereof in United States Mall. Notice required to be given to City shall be addressed as follows: To City: City of Temeeula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Attention: City Attorney Notices required to be given to Owner shall be addressed as follows: To Owner: Coscan Davidson Homes 12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200 Del Mar, CA 92014 Attention: William A. Davidson With a copy to:Kolodny & Pressman 11975 E1 Camino Real, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 92130 Attention: Jed L. Weinberg, Esq. A party may change the address by giving notice in writing to the other party and thereafter notices shall be addressed a~d transmitted to the new address. 24. Cooperation. City agrees that it shall accept for processing and promptly take action on all applications, provided they are in a proper form and acceptable for required processing, for discretionary permits, tract or parcel maps, or other land use entitlement for development of the Project in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. City shall cooperate with Owner in providing expeditious review of any such applications, permits, or land use entitlement and, upon request and payment of any costs and/or extra fees associated K:tDMSLIL W. DIR$O085996. WP 25 therewith by Owner, City shall assign to the Project planner(s), building inspector(s), and/or other staff personnel as required to insure the timely processing and completion of the Project. 25. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Tens. (a) The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. Co) If there is more than one signer of this Agreement their obligations are joint and several. (c) The time limits set forth in this Agreement may be extended by mutual written consent of the parties in accordance with the procedures for adoption of the Agreement. (d) This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person, including but not limited to third party beneficiaries, shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 26. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the exhibits hereto contain the complete, final, entire, and exclusive expression of the agreement between the parties hereto, and is intended by the parties to completely state the agreement in full.. Any agreement or representation respecting the matters dealt with herein or the duties of any party in relation thereto not expressly set forth in this Agreement shall be null and void. 27. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which so fully executed counterpart shall be deemed an Original. No counterpart shall be deemed to be an original or presumed delivered unless and until the counterpart executed by the other party to this Agreement is in the physical possession of the party seeking enforcement thereof. K: tDMSLIL W.O/nlO085996. WP 26 28. Authority to Execute. Each party hemto expressly wan'ants and represents that he/she/they has/have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his/her/their corporation, partnership, business entity, or governmental entity and warrants and represents that he/she/they has/have the authority to bind his/her/their entity to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Agreement has been executed by the parties on the day and year first above written. "City" City of Temecula By: Ron Roberrs, Mayor i'Une S. Greek, City Clerk Am.roved as to form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney "Owner" Coscan Homes California, Inc., a California corporation, dba Coscan Davidson Homes William A. Davidson (t ed name) its President (title) Stephen H. Dawe (typed name) its Executive Vice-President (title) K:IDMSLILW. DIRIOQ85996, WP 27 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) Onf2r;~k,~L~r~, ,q~dr, before me, '~ktt_. ~..~cec_ [here insert the name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared ~,~-,~.~, A. D,~,,~o,~ ~. 3-r~,~. ~. FL~.-~, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity. upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (SEAL) STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On , before me, [here insert the name and title of the officer/notary], personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (SEAL) K: IDIdSUL ~,DIRIO085998. WP 2 8 Development Agreement No. 37 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS SPECIFIC PLAN Specific Plan No. 164 as amended by Specific Plan No. 164, Amendment No. 1. ZONING Ordinance No. 348.2788 (Zone Change No. 4501) Ordinance No. 348.2927 (Zone Change No. 5127) LAND DIVISIONS 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20703 and Final Tract Map No. 20703-1 (Recorded at Boo~ 177, pages 72-76.) The development approvals listed above include the approved maps and all conditions of approval. COPIES OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. _.EXIle_IT A Development Agreement No. 37 EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS 2. Ordinance No. 3 Ordinance No. 348.2857. 4 Ordinance No. 448.a. 5 Ordinance No. 458.8. 6 Ordinance No. 460.92. 7 Ordinance No. 461.6. 8 Ordinance No. 509.2. 9 Ordinance No. 546.7a. 10. Ordinance No. 547.5., 11. Ordinance No. 555.15. 12. Ordinance No. 617.1. Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan as amended through Resolution No. 88-485. 340. 348 as amended through Ordinance No. 448 as amended 458 as amended 460 as amended 461 as amended 509 as amended 546 as amended 547 as amended 555 as amended 617 as amended through Ordinance No. through Ordinance No through Ordinance No through Ordinance No through Ordinance No through Ordinance through Ordinance through Ordinance through Ordinance No No No No 13. Ordinance No. 650. 14. Resolution No. 87-525 Establishing Procedures and Requirements for the Consideration of Development Agreements, as amended by Resolution No. 88-39 and Resolution No. 88-119. COPIES OF THE EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS LISTED ABOVE ARE ON FILE IN THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE. F. XHIBITB Exhibit 'C" Legal Description (to be attached) LEGAL DESGRiPTION TENTATIVE TRACT 27827 AT PARCEL OF LAND CONSISTING OF TRACT 27827-i, ON FiLE IN BOOk Z49, .,GES 9c THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE, AND TRACT 27827-2, ON FILE IN BOOK 250, PAGES L THROUGH 3, INCLUSIVE, BOTH RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WiTH THAT PORTION OF PARCEL "S" OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. PA94-0032, RECORDED MAY 31, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 220114, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, ALL LYING IN THE CiTY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVESIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SAiD FORTION OF PARCEL "B" BEING MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIRED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 30 OF SAiD TRACT 27827-2~ ....... z,~-._-.~. A!.q'N/'' THE WESTERLY LiNF A liETAHOE O[ E,=4.8%' FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL CGURSES: 1. 2. 3. "B" THE FOLLOWING FOUR NORTH 48'17'05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 6i.~2 FEET; SOUTH o2°14'554 EAST, A DISTANCE OF 409,87 FEET; SOUTH 62°16'01~'' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 482,2o FEET TO A ROINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE. CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2082.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAID POINT SEARS SOUTH 2~°44'59'' WEST; 4. SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13'16'07", A DISTANCE OF 482.15 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT LINE, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SA!~ POINT BEARS SOUTH !4'28'52" WEST, SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 31 OF SAID TRACT 27827-l; THENil WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT 27827-! THE FOLLOWING NINETEEN COURSES: SOUTH 16'41'04" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 85.!~ FEET; 2 NORTH 73°18'56'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 12.4~ FEET; 3 SOUTH 57°20'50'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 38.43 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH SAiD POINT BEARS NORTH 83'07'07" EAST; 4 SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF !42'42'46", A DISTANCE OF 114.5R FEET; 5 NORTH 44~10'08'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO THE RESiNNiNG OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY AND HAVIN~ A RADIUS OF !0O.00 FEET; s NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL AN~LE OF 2e'!e'44". A DISTANCE OF 45.92 FEET TO THE REGiNNING OF A REVERSE CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RAiIUS OF 222i.00 FEET, AND TO WHICH A RADIAL SEARS S~UTH 1~,~31'j8'' WEST; NORTHWESTERLy ALONG SAID REVERSE CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL A~LE OF 2'03'!1". A DISTANCE 79.59 FEET l<, A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT LINE. A RADIAL LINE OF SAil' CURVE THROUGH SAIL POINT REARS SOUTH 21'34'20" WEST; 8 SOUTH 24°26'13" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 4,1.'2 FEET TO THE REcINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CON,iAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 189.00 FEET; 9. SOUTHWESTERLy ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3°00'[4'', A DISTANCE OF 26.40 FEET; !0. SOUTH 16°25'59" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 17.50 FEET; i!. NORTH 73°34'01', WEST, A DISTANCE OF 135.00 FEET; 12. SOUTH 16'25'59'' WEST, A DISTANCE OF 17.24 FEET; 13. NORTH 73°34'01- WEST, A DISTANCE OF 85.f~0 FEET; i4. NORTH 10~25'59'' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 20.!5 FEET; 15. NORTH 73~34'0I'' WEST, A io. SOUTH 10'25'59" WEST, A 17. NORTH 73°34'0!'' WEST, A 18. NORTH 16°25'59" EAST, A 19. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST, A NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT DISTANCE OF [5[.00 FEET; DISTANCE OF 18.43 FEET; DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET; DISTANCE OF 26.29 FEET; DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET TO THE "F" OF SAID TRACT 27827-!, BEING ALSO THE NORTHEAST TRACT 27827-2; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY FOLLOWING ELEVEN COURSES: I. NORTH 73°34'01" WEST A 2. SOUTH 3. NORTH 4. SOUTH 5 NORTH 6 SOUTH 7 NORTH 8 NORTH 9 NORTH !O SOUTH 1i NORTH POINT 16° 25'59" WEST A 73~34'01" WEST A 16"25'59" WEST A 73°34'01" WEST A 16°25'59" WEST A 73"34'01" WEST A 16°25'59'' EAST A 73° 34'01" WEST A I6° 25'59" WEST A 73~34'0i" WEST A OF BEGINNING. CORNER OF LOT 18 OF SAID LINE OF SAID TRACT 27827-2 THE DISTANCE OF DISTANCE OF DISTANCE OF DISTANCE OF DISTANCE OF 131.00 FEET; 4.26 FEET; 105.00 FEET; 33.80 FEET; 131.00 FEET; DISTANCE OF 86.20 FEET; DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET; DISTANCE OF 6.33 FEET; DISTANCE OF 155.00 FEET: DISTANCE OF lo.33 FEET; DISTANCE OF 85.00 FEET TO THE Request for Notice of Default Under Development Agreement Development Augment: Amendment and Re~atement of Development Agreement Specific Plan No. 164. Ror~augh Planning Application No. 944)017 Date: To: City Clerk and Planning Director, City of Temecula Pursuant to Section 6(b) and (c) of the above-referenced Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement, request is hereby made by as Mortgagee for the pwperty (or portion thereof) to receive copies of any Notice of Default issued by City against Owner in accordance with the tens and conditions of such Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. Copies of any such Notices should be mailed to the following address: (Mortgagee) (Person]Department) (Address) (City/State/Zip) (Telephone No.) A copy of this Notice shouM be filed with the project fie to insure proper and timely notice is given. Under the/enns of said Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement, as Mortgagee is enti~ed to rec__eive copies of any Notice of Default within ten (10) davs of SelldlnE ally Slleh Notice to Owner. Failure to send any such Notice may have serious legal conseeuences for the City. This request is to remain in effect unffi revoked by as Mortgagee or the Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement is terminated. The penon executing this document on behalf of said Mortgagee warrants and represents that the entity hashe represents is a bonafide Mortgagee of said property and is entitled to receive copies of Notices of Default under said Amendment and Restatement of Development Agreement. ATTACHMENT NO. 6 EXHIBITS R:~STAFFPAwr\17PA~4.1S 9/15/94 I~,_ 29 CITY OF TEMECULA { CASE NO. - PA94-0017 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 27827 EXHIBIT - A VICINITY MAP PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 19, 1994 CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION - SP (SPECIFIC PLAN) BP ,~ CC M ."'--n ' SITE LM / EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (7 TO 12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) CASE NO. - PA94-0017 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 27827 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 19, 1994 CITY OF TEMECULA ,t I/ CASE NO. - PA94-0017 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 27827 EXHIBIT-D TRACT MAP 27827 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - SEPTEMBER 19, 1994 FISCAL ANALYSIS: Based on information provided to date, the City's consultants have determined that the cable systems 9, 119 subscribers have been overcharged $0.16 per month for basic tier service. Those with remote control and converter boxes were overcharged $0.21 and 80.18 per month, respectively. Projecting a rebate by Inland Valley of approximately 823,000 to subscribers, the City will have to rebate the 5% franchise fee on those lost revenues, totaling approximately $1,200. The City has spent approximately $5,700 dollars to date on attorney and accountant fees to prepare the proposed rate rebate for its citizens. RESOLUTION NO. _ A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA DISAPPROVING TFIF~ CABt,F~ TF.t,~-VISION RATES FOR BASIC SERVICE TIER AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT OF INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION, AND ORDERING A REFUND FOR EXCESSIVE RATES The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the City of Temecula ("City") was certified to regulate rates for cable programming services and equipment pursuant to the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992; WHEREAS, Western Communication, dba Inland Valley Cablevision ("Inland Valley") holds a franchise to operate a cable television system within the City; WHEREAS, on or about January 26, 1994, Inland Valley fled its Form 393 with the City seeking approval of its maximum initial permitted rates for regulated cable programming services and equipment; WltEREAS, the City has obtained reports dated September 29, 1994 from Burke, Williams & Sorensen and September 21, 1994 from Diehl, Evans & Company, analyzing the Form 393 submitted by Inland Vatley; WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing pursuant to Sections 76.935 and 76.935 and 76.942 of Ti~e 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations to take written and oral testimony from all interested paxties, including Inland Valley, concerning the Form 393 submitted by Inland Valley, the aforementioned reports and Inland Valley's response thereto; and; Wlt!~REAS, the City Council has considered the testimony received during the public hearing and the reports and letter described above; NOW, TItF~REFORE, the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby resolves, determines and orders as follows: Section 1. The rates and charges for the Basic Services Tier and associated equipment as identified in the FCC Form 393 are hereby disapproved for the reasons and on the grounds contained in the Reports of Burke, Williams & Sorerisen and Diehl, Evans & Company, which reports are incorporated inW this Resolution by reference as if fully stated herein. Section 2. This Resolution constitutes a written decision disapproving, in whole or in part, initial rates within the meaning of Section 76.936 of the Rules and Regulations of the Commission. Section 3. The permitted rates for the basic service tier and associated equipment for the period from September 1, 1993 through July 14, 1994 shall be as follows: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Basic service tier (23 channels) - $11.66 Hourly Service Charge - $44.50 Installation of unwired homes - $44.50 Installation of pre-wircd homes - $29.82 Installation of additionai connection at time of initial instsllation - $11.13 Installation of addtional connection as separate installation - $22.25 New install - underground $ 0.00 Trip charge $ 0.00 Tier change charge $ 0.00 Monthly charge for lease of remote control $ 0.32 Monthly charge of converter box $ 2.34 Section 4. For the period from October 11, 1993 through July 14, 1994, Inland Valley shall refund to subscribers that portion of previously paid basic service tier and equipment rates in excess of the permitted rates established in Section 3 of this Resolution. Inland Valley shall implement the refund no later than 30 days kfter the date this Resolution is approved by the City Council. Section 5. Inland Valley, in its discretion, may implement the refund required in Section 4 in the following manner. A. By returning overcharges to those subscribers who actually paid the overcharges, either through direct payment or as a specifically identified credit to those subscribers' bill; or B. By means of a prospective percentage reduction in the rates for the basic service tier or associated equipment to cover the cumulative overcharge. This shall be reflected as a specifically identified, one-time credit on prospective bffis to the class of subscribers that currently subscribe to the cable system. Section 6. All refunds required pursuant to Section 4 shall include interest computed at the same rate as established by the United States Internal Revenue Service for tax refunds and additional tax payments. Section 7. At least ten (10) days prior to implementing any refunds, Inland Valley shall notify the City how it intends to implement the refund order and how it calculated the mount of the refund. Section 8. Inland VaLley shall notify the City of the gross mount of the refund owing subscribers and the mount of the refund upon which Inland Valley paid any franchise fee to the City. Within thirty (30) days of receiv'mg the statement from Inland Valley, the City shall refund to Inland VaLley that portion of the franchise fee that was paid on refunds made to subscribers. Section 9. The City Council has determined that the maximum rate for the cable programming service tier is $0.507 per channel, or $10.14 for the 20 channels offered on the second tier. However, Inland Valley is charging subscribers $10.37 for the cable programming service tier. The City Manager is hereby directed to bring this discrepancy to the attention of the FCC for the purpose of determining if subscribers are entitled to a refund on the cable programming service tier. Section 10. Should Inland Valley appeal this rate determination of the City Council of the City of Temecula to the FCC pursuant to Section 76.944 of the Rules and Regulations of the Commission, the City Council does grant an automatic stay of the execution of the refund ordered hereunder. Such stay does not constitute a change in the effective date or implementation date of this Resolution. Nor does such stay, in any way, constitute an endorsement of the rates and charges in effect from September 1, 1993 to July 14, 1994. Section 11. The City Clerk is hereby directed to post a copy of this resolution in such place or places as City Notices are normally posted and to make copies to this decision available to the public at the office of the City Clerk during normal business hours. Section 12. This resolution shall become effective as of the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOFrED by the City Council of the City of Temecula at its regular meeting held on the 11 of October, 1994. ATFEST: Ronald H. Roberts, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF R1VERSII)E)ss COUNTY OF TEMECULA) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 94-_ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 11 day of October 1994, by the foilowing vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCn.MEMBERS: C OUNCILlVlEIMBERS: C OUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek City Clerk P:~syersk'dnhncbl.res LAW OFFICES BURKE, WILL/AMS & SONENSKN September 29, 1994 Mayor Ron Roberrs and Members of the City Council CITY OF TEMECULA 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: Cable Television Rates for Basic Service Tier and Associated Equipment of Inland Valley Cablevision Dear Mayor Roberts and City Councilmembers: In 1992, Congress enacted the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 (the "1992 Cable Act"). One of the principal objectives of the 1992 Cable Act was to regulate cable television rates, which had risen significantly since Congress had deregulated cable rates pursuant in 1984. In order to implement the 1992 Cable Act, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted regulations establishing a "benchmark" system of rate regulation. These initial rate regulations were contained in the FCC's April 1993 First Report and Order, which went into effect on September 1, 1993. Temecula's cable operator, Inland Valley Cablevision, like all other cable operators throughout the nation, instituted a new rate structure on September 1, 1993 in order to comply with the FCC's benchmark rates. Inland Valley Cablevision also filed a rate regulation.form with the City, known as the Form 393, so that the city could independently determine if Inland Valley Cablevision's rates complied with the FCC regulations. The benchmark rates represents the rates a cable operator would charge if it were subject to "effective competition." The benchmark system was derived from a nation-wide rate survey the FCC conducted as September 30, 1992. Based on the survey, the FCC concluded that cable rates should be reduced by 10% from their September 30, 1992 levels to account for a lack of effective competition in the cable television industry. September 29, 1994 Page 2 Burke, Williams & Sorensen, with consulting services from the accounting firm of Diehl, Evans, has reviewed the cable television rates contained in Inland Valley's Form393. The Report of Diehl, Evans is attached. It is our conclusion that Inland Valley Cablevision's rates in Temecula are in excess of the rates permitted pursuant to FCC Regulations, and that a refund is in order. Consequently, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the enclosed Resolution entitled: "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula Disapproving the Cable Television Rates for Basic Service Tier and Associated Equipment of Inland Valley Cablevision, and Ordering a Refund for Excessive Rates." The principal effect of this Resolution is to reduce basic tier cable rates. This means that as a result of rate regulation, since September 30, 1992 basic tier rates have been reduced from $12.31 for 14 channels to $11.66 for 23 channels. I. BackGround Under the 1992 Cable Act, cities are authorized to regulate "basic tier" rates, along with installation and equipment charges. The "basic tier" of cable service includes all broadcast television channels, any public, educational and governmental channels required by the franchise and any other channels the operator choose to carry on the basic tier. Each cable operator is required to offer the basic tier of service. Cable operators may not require subscription to any other tier as a condition of receiving programming offered on a per channel or pay-per-view basis. The 1992 Cable Act further permits subscribers and cities to file complaints with the FCC if they believe rates for the second service tier (known as the cable programming service or "CPS" tier) are unreasonable. The CPS tier typically includes most satellite channels, like CNN, WTBS and Prime Ticket, but excludes premium and pay-per-view channels. ORANGE: 1535. '~ September 29, 1994 Page 3 Once Temecula became certified to regulate rates, Inland Valley Cablevision was required to file a rate schedule with the City -- known as a Form 393 -- to obtain City approval of its basic tier rates. Essentially, the Form 393 takes the operator through two steps to establish maximum rates for the basic service tier and for equipment and installation charges. First, the maximum rates for equipment and installation are determined based upon actual cost plus a reasonable profit. These maximum rates are established by determining the capital costs and expenses associated with each type of equipment (e.g. converter boxes, remote controls) and service (e.g., installation for unwired and prewired homes). In particular, an "hourly service charge" is determined. The hourly service charge represents the cable operator's hourly labor rate for performing the various types of installations. For example, if the hourly service charge is $27.14 (the national average) and its takes 1.25 hours to install service at a prewired home, then the maximum service charge for installing service at a prewired house is 1.25 x $27.14 = $33.93. Second, maximum basic service tier rates as established. The Form 393 is designed to squeeze out "monopoly profits" from subscriber rates. To do this , the Form 393 uses a series of worksheets to determine if rates need to be reduced, and by how much. Three factors are used to determine benchmark rates: number of subscribers, number of channels, and number of satellite signals. Then, if the actual cable rates are below the benchmark rates, the current rates become the maximum regulated rates, whichever is less. More recently, the FCC has replaced the Form 393 with the Form 1200. This new form was a result of the FCC's March 30, 1994, Second Report and Order, in which the FCC concluded that its original determination that rates should be reduced by an average of 10% was insufficient, and that rates actually should be reduced by approximately 17%. Accordingly, the FCC issued a new Form 1200 and a new set of rate regulations. These regulations went into effect on July 14, 1994, and on that same date, Inland Valley Cablevision, like cable operators throughout the nation, readjusted its rates. 535.1 September 29, 1994 Page 4 However, instead of setting benchmark rates, Inland chose the option of basing its maximum permitted rate on a cost-of- service showing. The FCC also adopted on March 30, 1994 cost-of- service rate regulations to provide a "safety valve" to cable operators ensuring them compensatory rates if their benchmark rates were too low. The cost-of-service standards were issued as interim regulations pending the outcome of a cost study currently underway at the FCC. Only the cable operator, not the FCC or the City can decide, whether to undertake a cost-of-service showing. Cost-of- service showings must be submitted on FCC Form 1220. Inland submitted its Form 1220 to the City on August 15, 1994. A very brief summary of the impact of rate regulation on Temecula is attached. A more detailed explanation of our review of Inland Valley Cablevision's Form 393 is set forth below. II. Review of Inland Valley Cablevision's Form 393 The Diehl, Evans review of Inland Valley Cablevision's Form 393 disclosed several material errors in setting the maximum basic tier and equipment and installation rates. In summary, Diehl, Evans found as follows: 1. Basic Tier Rates. On September 30, 1992, Inland offered two service tiers subject to regulation: the basic tier comprising 14 channels, and the CPS tier comprising 23 channels. At that time, Inland charged $12.31 for 14 channels of basic tier service and $18.74 for 37 channels of Basic/CPS service. (These rates include a $0.46 pass-through charge for the possessory interest tax.) On September 1, 1993, Inland retiered in'response to rate regulation, offering 23 basic tier channels and 20 CPS tier channels. Concurrently, Inland modified its rates to charge $11.82 for basic tier service and $22.19 for basic/CPS service. Subsequently, Inland filed its Form 393, claiming a maximum permitted rate for basic tier service of $11.87. (All of these rates include the $0.46 pass through.) Diehl, Evans' analysis concludes that Inland's Form 393 contains a number of material errors. Consequently, it is recommended that the maximum basdic service tier rate should be reduced to $11.66 for 23 channels or $0.507. This amounts to a refund to basic service tier subscribers of $0.16 per month. ORANGE: 1535,1 September 29, 1994 Page 5 2. EauiDment and Installation Rates. FCC Regulations set the maximum equipment and installation rates at the lesser of the maximum permitted rate according to the Form 393 or the actual rate. In this case, Inland's equipment rental rates exceed its permitted rates. Specifically, Inland's equipment and installation rate schedule will be adjusted as follows: Permitted A c t u a 1 Lower of Rate Rate Actual or Permitted Rate Hourly Rate $44.52 $44.50 $44.50 Installation of unwired 44.52 44.50 44.50 homes Installation of prewired 29.83 29.82 29.82 homes Installation of additional connection at time of initial 11.13 11.13 11.13 Installation of additional connections as separate installation 22.26 22.25 22.25 New install underground 0.00 0.00 0.00 Trip charge 0.00 0.00 0.00 Charge for changing tiers 0.00 0.00 0.00 Monthly charge for lease 0.32 0.50 0.32 of remote control Monthly charge converter box of 2.34 2.55 2.34 ORANuE: 1535 · 1 September 29, 1994 Page 6 III. Recommendation Our recommendation on implementing our review of the Form 393 have two components: Establishing Maximum Rates and Refunds. 1. Establishina Maximum Rates. The basic service tier rate for the period from September 1, 1993 through July 14, 1994 should be reduced from the then current rate of $11.82 per month to $11.66 per month, and a refund should be ordered. This should be implemented thirty (30) days after the City Council establishes the maximum rate. The maximum equipment and service charges should be set at the lower of the permitted and actual rates. 2. Refunds. FCC Regulations provide that the City may not order refunds for more than one year retroactively. Consequently, if a city is to order any refunds for the full period between September 1, 1993 through July 14, 1994, it is required to act by September 1, 1994. Unfortunately, in order to complete our review of Inland's rates, several document requests were necessary, delaying completion of the review. Consequently, refund liability is from October ll, 1993 through July 14, 1994. In this case, Inland was overcharging on its basic rates by $0.16 per month. Consequently, for the period from October 11, 1993, through July 15, 1994, each basic tier subscriber will be refunded or credited approximately $1.44, which will be approximately $13,131.36 for 9,119 subscribers for 9 months. In addition, Inland was overcharging on remote controls and converter boxes by $0.21 and $0.18 per month, respectively. Consequently, basic subscribers who also leased a remote control and converter will receive an additional refund or credit of $3.51. Further, the FCC regulates rates for the CPS tier. This same analysis indicates a $0.23 per month overcharge for CPS service. The Resolution directs the City Manager to bring this discrepancy to the attention of the FCC. Finally, FCC Regulations also specify certain procedures for ordering rate refunds. Accordingly, the recommended refund order directs Inland to take the following steps within thirty days after Council action: ORANGE: 15:]5.1 September 29, 1994 Page 7 A. Inland may make refunds: (i) By refunding overcharges to those subscribers who actually paid the overcharges; or (ii) By means of a specifically identified, one- time credit on prospective bills. Refunds shall include interest computed at applicable rates published by the Internal. Revenue Service for tax refunds and additional tax payments. When the City orders a cable operator to pay refunds to subscribers, it also must return to the operator that portion of the franchise fee that was paid on the total amount of the refund to subscribers. The City must promptly return the franchise fee overcharge either in an immediate lump sum payment, or Inland may deduct it from future franchise fee payments. In conclusion, the FCC Regulations require that the City Council conduct a public hearing at which Inland may testify before any of the above actions are taken. I will be available at that public hearing to answer any questions the City Council may have. cc: Very truly yours, SCOTT F. FIELD of BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN Peter Thorson, City Attorney William Morgan, CPA ORANuc: 1535.1 CITY OF TEMECULA AGI~k'3~,n-UPON LIMITED PROCEDLr~ REVIEV~ OF CABLE TV RATES AS OF SEPTE1VI~ER 21, B DmHL,EVANS &COMPANY 18401 VL)N KAP,.MAN AVE., SUITE 200 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 927151542 PHONE (714) ?57 7100 FAX (714) 7572707 September 21, 1994 INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT ON AGREED-UPON LIMITED PROCEDURES REVIEW City Council City of Temecula Temecula. California We have applied certain agreed-upon procedures to the accounting records of Western Communications. Our procedures and findings are noted herein. It is understood that this report is solely for your information and is not to be referred to or distributed for any purpose to anyone who is not a member of City Council or management of the City of Temecula, or an employee or authorized representative of Western Communications. However, if this report is made a matter of public record, its distribution will not be limited. Because the procedures we performed do not constitute an examination in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, we do not express an opinion on any of the accounts or items referred to herein. In connection with these procedures, except as noted herein, no matters came to our attention that caused us to believe that other specified accounts or items should be adjusted. However, had we performed additional procedures, or had we made an examination of the financial statements of Western Communications in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. This report relates only to the accounts and items specified herein, and does not extend to the financial statements of Western Communications taken as a whole. Although defalcations and similar irregularities may occasionally be disclosed by this type of engagement, it is not designed for such purpose and should not be relied upon to disclose fraud, should any exist. -1- OTHER OFFICES AT 2965 ROOSEVELT 5TP-jEET CAILLSBAD. CA 92008 238c~ 1619) 729-2343 FAX (619) 729 2234 SUMMARY OF PROCEDURES We applied the following procedures to the accounts and records of Western Communications, hereinafter referred to as "Western": 1. We compared channel line-ups and cable rates of Western as of September 30, 1992 and September 1, 1993. (See Schedule 1). 2. We compared the number of channels and cable rates on the City of Temecula with other selected Southern California cable TV systems. (See Schedule 2). We compared equipment and installation rates for Western with other selected Southern Califorma cable systems, and with average rates from a survey of 147 cable systems compiled by the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA). (See Schedule 3). We reviewed FCC Form 393 (as prepared by Western) to determine if the form had been completed accurately and in accordance with FCC regulations and rate tables. Our review included the following procedures: We agreed key financial and subscriber data on Form 393 to the books and records of Western. Our procedures included a review of channel cards, a review of sample customer bills, vouching of purchase invoices related to the acquisition of remote controls and converter boxes and a review of Western's worksheets supporting their computation of the hourly service charge and other charges. We recomputed and compared the benchmark channel rates as of September 30, 1992 and January 3, 1994 (the initial date of regulation) with the rates reported on Form 393. We prepared a comprehensive letter to Western management setting forth questionable areas in the computation of Form 393. We had various phone conferences with Western officials regarding these matters. d. We recomputed the maximum permitted per channel rate and the maximum permitted rate for the basic service tier (exclusive of any franchise fee). -2- SUMMARY OF FINDINGS On September 30, 1992, according to Worksheet 2 of the original Form 393, Western offered 36 channels under two tiers for $18.28. Based on our review of the channel card, Western was actually offering 37 channels at September 30, 1992. Also, the actual price for both tiers was $18.74, a $0.46 difference. Western "passes through" the County property tax to subscribers. The FCC Form 393 only permits franchise fees to be passed through to subscribers. Consequently, the property tax of $0.46 should have been added back to the basic tier rate. (See Schedule 1). According to Worksheet 1 on the original Form 393, Western offered 44 channels under two tiers for $20.29. However, Western's channel card, which listed 45 channels, indicated that no programming was available on two channels. Accordingly, our revised Form 393 reflects 43 channels. Also, the rates on Worksheet 1 have been adjusted to the actual rate in effect on the "initial date of regulation" plus the $0.46 property tax pass-through. (See Schedule 1 and the discussion at paragraph 5 below). Before adjustments recommended in this report, the average price per channel for the two tiers decreased only $.01, or 2.0%, from September 30, 1992 to September 1, 1993. Schedule 2 presents a comparison of the number of channels and basic cable rates on the City of Temecula with other selected Southern California Cable TV systems as of September 1, 1993. The City of Temecula's per channel rate of $0.516 and rate of $22.19 for 43 channels is reasonable, and is hi line with other Southern California cable systems. 5. In connection with our review of Form 393, we made the following adjustments: a. Worksheet 1, Line 101: On Worksheet 1 of the original Form 393, as filed by Western, the Tier Charge for the Basic Tier was reported as $12.88, and Tier 2 was reported as $7.41. As further explained below, the Basic Tier amount should have been $11.82, and Tier 2 should have been $10.37. Under cable regulations issued by the FCC, the "initial date of regulation" is defined as "'the date of local notice that the system is subject to regulation". According to 47 CFR Section 76.922(b)(ii)(c)(2), this date is when the City sends a written notice to the cable cable operator that it is certified to regulate rates. Generally, the City also notifies the operator at this time that it has 30 days to complete and forward Form 393 to the City. On January 3, 1994, the City of Temecula sent notice to Western that it was certified by the FCC to regulate basic tier rates. On January 26, 1994, Western forwarded Form 393 to the City of Temecula. The cable rates, number of subscribers, etc. used on Worksheet 1 of Form 393 should have been as of January 3, 1994. -3- SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (CONTINUED) 5. (Continued): a. Worksheet 1, Line 101 (Continued): In reviewing the Form 393 from Western, we noted that the cable rates and number of subscribers used on Worksheet 1 for the "Initial Date of Regulation" were as of a date prior to September 1, 1993. Accordingly, in the revised Form 393, as p~esented at Schedule 5, the mounts for Worksheet 1 were recompnted using cable rates in effect on or after September 1, 1993, plus the $0.46 property tax pass-through. b. Worksheet 1, Line 104/Worksheet 3, Line 301: On the original Form 393, the amount reported on Worksheet 1, Line 104, was $46,866, and the mount reported on Worksheet 3, Line 301, was $17,717. These amounts should be substantially the same, as explained below. On November 10, 1993 the FCC issued a "Public Notice" entitled, "Questions and Answers on Completion of FCC Form 393 and Associated Filing Requirements". Question No. 7 dealt with amounts to be reported on Lines 104 and 301. The answer to this question stated, in part: "Where operators have restmcmred equipment rates as of September 1, 1993....we would anticipate that in most cases, absent special circumstances, operators will enter on Line 104 the same, or nea~y the same, number on Line 301". Accordingly, in our revised Form 393, we have used $16,509 at both Line 104 and 301. c. Worksheet 1, Lines 121 Through 128: Line 121 The benchmark cable rate is a function of the number of satellites channels in relation to the total of all channels, utilizing a table developed by the FCC. Based on the information supplied by Western, at the date of initial regulation, using a total of 43 channels, 28 of which were satellite, the benchmark calculation would have been $0.524. Line 124 The instructions that accompany the FCC Form 393 calculate the time period factor as "the number of whole months from September 30, 1992 to the date the cable operator submits the FCC Form 393." Therefore, this number varies according to the date of submission of each cable operator's filing. The date of filing was January 26, 1994. The whole months from September 30, 1992 to January 26, 1994 totals 15. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (CONTINUED) 5. (Continued) d. Worksheet 2, Line 220: Line 220 The benchmark cable rate is a function of the number of satellites channels in relation to the total of all channels, utilizing a table developed by the FCC. Based on the information supplied by Western, for September 1992, using a total of 37 channels, 24 of which were satellite, the benchmark calculation would have ben $0.590, e. Revisions to Cable Rates: Based on the adjustments discussed above, and based on our revised Form 393, as presemed at Schedule 5, the maximum permitted rate for the basic service tier should be decreased from $11.82 ($11.36 as computed by Western, plus $0.46) to $11.66. Recommendation: We suggest that the rate for the basic service tier be reduced from $11.82 to $11.66, retroactive to September 1, 1993. This will result in a rate reduction of $0.16 per subscriber per month. f. Equipment and Installation Charges: Noted below is a comparison of the remote control charge, converter box charge and hourly service charge for the City of Temecula with the National average for 147 cable systems (as published by the National Association of Telecorrtmunications Officers and Advisors, or NATOA) and with certain other Southern California cable systems. City of Temecula (Western) Charge For Remote Hourly Control Converter Service Charge Box Charge $ .50 $ 2.55 $ 44.50 National Average .25 2.00 27.14 City of Alhambra (Cencom) .12 1.65 20.00 City of Cosha Mesa (Copley/Colony) .27 1.70 38.09 South Orange County (Dimension) .16 1.96 24.00 -5- SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (CONTINUED) 5. (Continued) f. Equipment and Installation Charges (Continued): Noted below is a discussion of how Western computed these charges, and our recommended revisions to the charges, where appropriate. Remote Control Chante On Form 393, Schedule C, Western reported a "gross book cost" for remote controls of $21,703 for 2,725 units, or a cost per unit of $7.96. This mount appears reasonable when compared with 1993 purchase invoices for remote controls. (During 1993, a large number of units were purchased at a unit price of $7.00, plus sales tax and freight.) However, in our opinion, the depreciation charge on the remote controls was not reasonable. The annual depreciation charge on Schedule C was $10,852, or exactly one-half of the total costs of acquisition. This means that Western has depreciated the remotes over two years. An official of Western advised us that the remotes normally are depreciated over five years. A five-year life appears reasonable. Accordingly, in our recomputed Form 393 at Schedule 5, we have used a depreciable life of five years. and a depreciation charge of $4,341. Also, on Form 393, Part III, Step C, Line 9, our review indicated that the number of maintenance and service hours related to the remote controls should be 104 hours, rather than 124 hours. (See Schedule 4). As a result of these adjusmaents, we recommend that the charge for a remote control be decreased from $0.50 to $0.32. Converter Box Charge On Form 393, Schedule C, Western reported a "gross book cost" for converter boxes of $389,983 for 2,725 units, or a cost per unit of $143.11. A unit price of $143.11 appears excessive when compared with 1993 purchase invoices. (During 1993, most converter boxes were purchased at prices ranging from $116.00 to $120.00, including sales tax and freight.) Also, an official at Western advised us that converter boxes normally are depreciated over 10 years. Accordingly, we made the following adjustments to Schedule C: -6- SUMMARY OF HNDINGS (CONTINUED) (Continued) f. Converter Box Charge (Continued): Cost As Originally Reported $ 389,983 As Adjusted (2,725 units at $120.00) Accumulated Net Book Depreciation Value ROI Currein (At 11.25 %) Depreciation $ 72,239 $ 317,744 $ 35,746 $ 34,981 (18.5%) 327,000 60,495 266,505 29,982 32,700 (18.5%) Also, on Form 393, Part III, Step D, Line 16, our review indicated that the number of maintenance and service hours related to the converter boxes should be 312 hours rather than 373 hours. (See Schedule 4). As a result of these adjustments, we recommend that the charge for a converter box be decreased from $2.55 to $2.34. HourIv Service Charge The hou~y service charge was computed in the following manner by Western: Annual Costs for Maintenance and Installation $129~657 Total Labor Hours 2~912 Hou~y Service Charge In reviewing this calculation, the number of labor hours appeared to be low based on a subscriber count of 8,656. (Please noted that an increase in the number of labor hours would cause a decrease in the hourly service charge.) Upon investigation, we were informed by Western management that Inland Valley Cablevision charges customers only for time that the installation personnel are at the cnstomer's home performing the installation. Travel time and other "overhead" type hours are not included. By conwast, most other cable operators compute the hourly rate, and charge customers, based on an "average cost method" which includes travel and other overhead hours. Also, many other cable operators have a separate "trip charge" in addition to their standard installation charges. (See Schedule 3). If, in fact, Western is charging customers only for hours spent at the customer's home, and not for travel and preparation time, then we agree that the $44.52 rate per hour is reasonable. However, the scope of this engagement did not include a review of actual time charges included on the bills to Temecula subscribers. -7- SUPPORTING SCHEDULES SCHEDULE 1 CITY OF TEMECULA COMPARISON OF CHANNEL LINE-UPS AND CABLE RATES AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1992 AND SEPTEMBER 1, 1993 Description September 30. 1992 September 1, 1993 Channels Pricing Channels Pricing Tier 1: Total channels 14 $ 12.31 23 $ 11.82 Price per channel 0.879 0.513 Tier 2: Total channels 23 6.43 20 10.37 Price per channel 0.279 0.518 Totals for Tier 1 and Tier 2: Total Channels Price Per Channel 37 $ 18.74 43 $ 22.19 $ 0.506 $ 0.516 Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review. -8- SCHEDULE 2 COMPARISON OF CABLE TV RATES FOR VARIOUS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CITIES AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1993 Basic Tier Second Tier Number Rate Basic Number Rate CPS City of Per Service of Per Service (Cable Operator) Channels Channel Rate Channels Channel Rate City of Temecula (Inland Valley) 23 $ .513 $ 11.82 20 $ .518 $ 10.37 National Average City of Alhambra (Crown - Cencom) 20 .551 11.09 29 .456 13.23 25 .456 11.40 City ofBrea (Century) 36 .715 25.75 6 .568 3.41 City ofBuenaPark (Comcas0 33 .293 9.66 19 .750 14.26 City of Garden Grove (Paragon) City of Lakewood (Colony) 33 .349 11.52 26 .349 9.07 City of Long Beach (CVI) 26 .537 13.95 18 .425 7.65 City of Orange (Cablevision) 21 .534 11.20 20 .534 10.70 City of Peramoum (Continental) 21 .406 8.53 27 .505 13.64 South Orange County (Dimension) 28 .523 14.64 16 .506 8.10 City of Yorba Linda (Jones Spacelink) 33 .423 13.96 20 .450 8.99 Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review. -9- SCHEDULE 2 COMPARISON OF CABLE TV RATES FOR VARIOUS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CITIES (CONTINUED) AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1993 Total - Both Tiers Number Rate Basic City of Per Plus CPS (Cable Overator) Channels Channel Rate City of Temecula (Inland Valley) 43 National Average City of Alhambra (Crown - Cencom) $ .516 $ 22.19 54 .456 24.63 City ofBma (Cenmry) 42 .694 29.16 City ofBuenaPark (Comcast) 52 .395 23.92 City of Garden Grove (Paragon) 62 .343 21.25 City ofLakewood (Colony) 59 .349 20.59 City ofLongBeach (CVI) 44 .491 21.60 City of Orange (Cablevision) 41 .534 21.90 City of Peramount (Continental) 48 .462 22.17 South Orange County (Dimension) 44 .517 22.74 City of Yorba Linda (Jones Spacelink) 53 .433 22.95 Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review. -10- SCHEDULE 3 CITY OF TEMECULA COMPARISON OF EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION RATES FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA WITH OTI-IFR CABLE TV SYSTEMS AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1993 Description Amoums City ~f Temecula City of Lakewood South Orange From National finland Valley) (Covlev/Colonv) County (Dimension) Survev (Note 1) Average Hours Amount Hours Amount Hours Amount Hours Amount Equipment Charges: Remote control $ .50 $ .19 $ .16 $ .25 Converter boxes 2.55 1.38 1.96 2.00 Installation Charges: Hourly service charge 44.50 31.44 24.00 27.14 Unwired Home - Initial Installation: · Aerial 1.0 44.50 1.3 39.30 1.43 34.34 1.56 39.96 · Underground 2.33 73.25 (Note 2) Prewired Home .67 29.82 1.0 31.44 .60 14.72 .92 23.29 Additional Outlets: · With initial installation .25 11.13 .8 26.09 .25 9.81 .55 14.01 · Separate installation .50 22.25 1.0 31.44 .55 13.08 .88 22.43 Other Charges: Charge for changing tiers 1.99 2.00 17.38 Trip charge 26.09 (Note 2) Note 1: These hours and dollar mounts are "averages" from a national survey of 147 cable systems. The amount were compiled by the National Association of Telecommunlcations Officers and Advisors (NATOA). Note 2: This information was not available in NATORs survey. Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review. -11- SCHEDULE 4 CITY OF TEMECULA MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR HOURS JUNE 30, 1993 Unaudited; see independent accountants' report on agreed-upon limited procedures review. -12- SCHEDULE 5 CITY OF TEMECULA FORM 393, AS REVISED BY DIEI'IL, EVANS AND COMPANY (UNAUDITED) FILE NAME I:\1994~ACCKI~8789FC1.WK1 FCC 393 - PART I REQUEST FOR CABLE RATE APPROVAL COVER SHEET Community Unit Identification Code CA Name of Cable Operator INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION Mailing Address Date: 21 - Sep - 94 City Person to contact regarding this form State ZIP Code Telephone Fax Number Local Franchlsing Authority ~ CITY OF TEMECULA Mailing Address City ~e ZIP Code This form is being ftind with respect to: ~ basic rate regulation ~'~ cable progr~mmlqg service rate regulation If this form is being filed in response to a complaint about your cable programming service rates, please attach a copy of the complaint to this cover sheet. The following sections are to be completed after you have filled out the workshee~s in PARTS II and III and calculated your actual and permitted rates. FOR BASIC SERVICE TIER AND EQUIPMENT Program Sen, ice Rate I (1) Number of channels in basic service tier (4) Maidmum permitted rate for basic service tier (exclusive of any franchise fee): (multiply (1) by (3) above) 23 $11.82 $0.507 $11.66 Note: If your current rate for the basic service tier (entry 2) exceeds the maidmum permitted rate for that tier (entry 4), you must submit a cost-of-service showing or your basic service rate will be reduced to the maximum permitted level shown in entry4, Franchise fees have been excluded from this analysis in order to compare your monthly rate for the basic service tier to the maximum permitted level. whether you itemize them or not, any franchise fees you pay for the basic service tier should be added to your monthly rate us part of the service when billing your subscribers. See 47 C,F.R. Section 76.985. EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION RATES Note: Your equipment and installation rates for the basic sen, ice tier must not be included in your program service rate for th3' tier, but rather must be completely unbundled. In addition, those equipment and installation rates must not exceed your actu~ costs including a reasonable profit. The method for unbu~tlling your equipment and installation rates from the basic sentice progr~mmlng rate, (i~ nece~ty), and for determining your permitted equipment and installation rates, is prescribed in PART II, (unbundling) and PART Ill (rate-setting) of this form. Enter in the spaces below the rate figures you have calculated in PART IIl of this form. Your actual basic sen, ice equipment and installation charges may not exceed these rates, although they may be lower. (1) Charges for basic service installatious* (from Lines 6 or 7 of Equipment and Installation Worksheet) (a) Hourly rate OR (b) Average installation charges: 1. Installation of unwired homes 2. Iustaliationofprewiredhomes 3. Installation of additional connetion at time of initial installation 4. Installationofadditionalconnections requiring separate installation 5. Other installations (specify) TRIP CHARGE NEW INSTALL-UNDERGROUND Item 3 (2)Charge~or changing tiers (if any) (from Line 29, 30,or 31 of Equipment and Installation Worksheet) (:3)Monthly charge for lease of remote controls (from Line 21 in Equipment and Installation Worksheet) Remote control type 1: Remote control type 2: Remote control type 3: Monthly charge for lease of converter boxes (from Line 14 in Equipment and Installation Worksheet) Converter box type 1: Converter box type 2: Converter box type 3: (5) Monthly charge for lease of other equipment (from Line 28 in Equipment and Installation Worksheet) Other equipment (specify) Other 2: Au r UAL $44.50 $~.50 $29.82 $11.13 $22.25 $o.oo $o.oo $0.00 PERMH-r~,D RECOMMENDED $44.52 $44.50 $44.52 $44.50 $29.83 $29,82 $11.13 $11.13 $22.26 $22.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $O.50 $0.32 $0.32 $2.55 $2.34 $2.34 * If you have further charges for additional connections beyond those reflected in your installation charge, attach a sheet e~plaining your calcuhtious and setting forth those additional charges. SEE Note to Equipment and Installation Worksheet instructions in PART III of this form. ,¢ o FCC FORM 393 - PART III WORKSHEET FOR CALCULATING EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION CHARGES Cabie Operator Name: Community Unit ID (CUID): INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION Franchise Authority: Date: 21 -Sap-94 CITY OF TEMECULA Line 1. Line 2. Line3. line4. Line 5. Step A. Hourly Service Charge Annual cost of maintenance and installation of cable facilities and Services (exclude purchase cost of consumer equipment) (B0ac 1 of Schedule A + Bent 2 of Schedule B) Customer equipment and installation parentage (attach explanation) Annual customer equipment maintenance and installation costs, excluding cost of leased equipment (Line 1 · Line 2) Total labor horns for maintenance and installation of customer equipment and service (attach explanation) Hourly service charge (HSC) (Line 3/Line 4) $193,517 67.0% $129,657 2,912 $44.52 line 6. OR Line 7. Step B. Installation charge Uniform HSC for all installations (insert amount from Line 5) Average charge for installation type (See schednic D for average installation chugc calculations) a. Unwired home instuilation (Schedule D, Linea.2) b. Prewired home installation (Schedule D, Line2.b) c. Additional connection instaltation at time of initial instaHation (Schedule D, Line c.2) d. Additional connection instuilation requiring separate inst'llation (Schedule D, Line d.2) c. Other installations (specify: (Schedule D, Line e.2) Item I Unwired home installation underFound Item 2 Item 3 $44.52 44.5:P- 29. 11.', 22.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 Step C. Charges for Licensed Remotes (Calculate leparately for each nignificant differrent type and atlach additional sheets al necessary) Line 8. Line 9. Line 10. Line 11. Line 12. Line 13. Line 14. Annul capital costs (Col. J of Schedule C) Total maintenance/service hours (attach explanation) Total maintenance/service cost (Line 5 x Line 9) Total cost of remote (Line 8 + Line 1.0) Number of units in service (Col. i o[ Schedule C) Unit cost (Line 11/Line 12) Rate per month (Line 13/12 months) Remote 1 5,766 104 4,631 10,396 2,725 3.815 0.318 Remote 2 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 0 FCC FORM 393 - PART III, Page 2 Step D. Charges for Leased Converter Boxes Calculate scparatley for each =iSnificantly differnet type and attach additional sheets as neecuRry) Line 15. Line 16. Line 17. Line 18. Line 19. Line 20 Line 21 Annual Capital costs (Col. J of Schedule C) Total maintenance/service hours (attach explanation) Total maintenancc/serviCa COst (Line 5 x Line 16) Total COst of converter b~x (Line 15 + Line 17) Number of units in service (Col. I of Schedule C) Unit cost (Line 18/Line 19) Rate per month (Line 20/12 months) Type 1 62,682 312 2.342 Type 2 Line 22. Line 23. Line 24. Line 25. Line 26. Line 27. Line 28. Step E. Charges for Other Leased Equipment Annul Capital costs (Col. J of Schedule C) Total maintenance/service hours (attach explanation) Total maintcnancc/servlcc cost (Line 5 x Line 23) Total cost of converter box (Line 22 + Line 23) N umber of units in service or # of subs. (Col. 1 of Schedule C) Unit cost (Line 25/Line 26) Rate per month (Line 27/12 months) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Step F. Charges for Changing Sendice Tiers or Equipment Ling 29. Nominal charge for chanSin8 service tiers OR Line 30. uniform HSC for changin8 service tiers (Line 5) OR l Line 31. Avs. charSe for changin8 service tiers (Line 5 x Av8. hours to chanBe tiers) 1.99 0 44.5(~ Step G. Franchise Area Monthly Equipment and Installation Costs for Adjustment of Regualtcd Service Line 32. [Line 33. j Line 34. Annual customer equipment and installation costs (Line 3 +Bca 3 of Sched, C) Adjustment of Line 32 to franchise area level: See instructions Attach explanation of adjustment method. Monthly equipment and installation cost (Line 33/12 months). Enter on Worksheet 3, Line 301. 198,104 1 198,10~ 16,509 FCC FORM 393 - PART III SCHEDULE D AVERAGE INSTALLATION CHARGES Cable Operator Name: INLAND VALLEY CABLEVISION Franchise Authority: CITY OF TEMECULA Community Unit ID (CUID): Date: 21 -Sep-94. This form is being filed for: Basic Tier Cable Programming Sen/ice Unwired Home installation: 1. Average Hours per Installation (attach explanation) 2. Unwirad Home Instalation Charge (Line a.1 x HSC) Prewired Home Installation: 1. Average Hours per Installation (attach explanation) 2. Pra~vired Home Instalation Charge (Line b.1 x HSC) Additional Connection Installation at Time of Initial Installation: 1. Average Hours per Additional Connection (attach explanation) 2. Additional Connection-initial Instalation Charge (Line c.1 x HSC) Additional Connection Installation after Initial Installation: 1. Average Hours per Additional Connection (attach explanation) 2. Additional Connection-Separate Instalation Charge (Line d.1 x HSC) Other installation (by Item Type): Unwired Home Installation: 1, Average Hours per Additional Installation (attach explanation) 2. item 1 Instalation Charge (Line e.1 x HSC) Trip Charge 3. Average Hours per Additional Installation (attach explanation) 4. Item 2 Instalation Charge (Line e.3 x HSC) 5. Average Hours per Additional Installation (attach explanation) 6. Item 3 Instalation Charge (Line e.5 x HSC) 7. Average Hours per Additional Installation (attach explanation) 8. Item 4 Instalation Charge (Line e.7 x HSC) Note: For HSC (Hourly Service Charge) use amount from Line 5 of the Worksbeet for Calculating Equipment and Installation Charges (Page 25 of FCC Form 393). 1.00 44.52 0.67 29.83 0.25 11.13 0.50 22.26 0.00 0.00_. O, 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 FI LENAME I:\1994~CCTG\88789fc3 FCC FORM 393 - PANT III SCHEDULE A CAPITAL COSTS OF SERVICE INSTALLATION & MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT A B C Equipment Gross Book Aceurn Dcpr Vehicles 30,022 16.208 Tools 6,308 2,614 Maintenance Facility :59.282 12,GG2 Drops Other 591A80 193365 TOTAL 687,092 224209 11.25% G Taxes D E F Federal Slate DefeaTed Net Book Return on Intome Income Taxes B-(C+D) lnvestmcnl Tax Tax 0 13,814 1,554 0 3,694 416 0 47,260 5,317 0 398,115 44,788 0 462,883 52,074 H Current j Provimion for Total Dcp~e,~iation (add F,G,H) 0 5,752 7,306 631 1.047 0 0 3,100 8,417 0 56,194 100.982 0 65.677 117,751 BOX 1 SCHEDULE B ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSES FOR SERVICE INSTALLATION A MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT (Exciudin8 Depreciation) {s.p;= u,,=, l o,,.;.::1 o,,., 8':1 °'h"o I Box 2 A Equipment } Remote 1 ~ Remote 2 I Remote 3 Coav. Box 1 Conv. Box 2 Cony. Box 3 Other Other TOTAL SCHEDULE C CAPITAL COSTS OF LEASED CUSTOMER EQUIPMENT B C Gross Book Accum Depr 2 1.703 9,038 11.25% G Taxes H D E F Federal State Current Deferred Net Book Return on Income Income Provision for Taxes B-(C+D) Investmen1 Ta~ Tax Depreciation 0 12,665 1,425 0 0 4,341 0 266,505 29,962 0 0 32,700 327,000 60,495 348,703 69,533 0 279,170 31,407 0 0 37,041 Total # J of units Total in service (add F.G.H) 2,725 5,766 I 0 { 0 2.725 ' 62,682 0 0 5,450 68,448 BOX 3 ITEM 2 1 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPR(~ CITY ATI'ORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Gary Thornhilt, Director of Planning October 11, 1994 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Density Prepared By: John Meyer, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: Review and Provide Direction to Staff BACKGROUND This item was continued from the Council's September 27, 1994 agenda at the request of the applicant. Attached for the Council's review is the September 27, 1994 staff report and a letter from the applicant to the Director of Planning stating his viewpoint, Attachments 2. 3. 4. September 27, 1994 Staff Report - Page 2 August 30, 1994 from the Keith Companies to the Director of Planning - Page 3 Staff Letters Dated July 18 and August 15, 1994 - Page 4 Excerpts from City of Temecula General Plan - Page 5 R:\GF~qPLAN~RORIPAGH.CC2 10/3/94 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 SEPTEMBER 27, 1994 STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ' APPRO~ CITY ATI'ORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager~'2'' Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning September 27, 1994 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Density Prepared By: John Meyer, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: Review and Provide Direction to Staff BACKGROUND The property owner representative and the specific plan applicant have requested that the City Council make a determination on the density of the subject specific plan proposal. The Planning Department has been working with new applicants of the subject Specific Plan since May, 1994. A formal planning application was received in August, 1994, for the Specific Plan and Change of Zone. As previously stated, calculation of density has been an ongoing issue surrounding this project. Specifically, whether the 3 dwelling units per acre, as setforth in the General Plan is a gross density versus a net density, During the General Plan's public hearing process before the Planning Commission, a property owner representative requested that Roripaugh Ranch be granted an overall density of 3 dwetiing units per acre. Staff concurred with the request but the Commission ultimately set the density at 2 dwelling units per acre. The Commission felt that the City would be better served if an increase in the density was considered concurrently with a Specific Plan proposal. Before the City Council, the property owner representative again requested that Roripaugh Ranch be granted an overati density of 3 dwelling units per acre. At its August 17, 1993 meeting the City Council granted the applicant's request. DISCUSSION When the General Plan was revised to reflect the changes made by the City Council (Pre-Final Edition, December 1993)the Key Objectives for Roripaugh Specific Plan (Table 2-9, Land Use Element, page 2-40) stated: "To develop a master planned residential community that provides a variety of housing types suited to the terrain and shall not exceed an average of three dwelling units lTer acre grading that is sensitive to natural landforms; and developrnent that protects sensitive natural resources of the area," R:\GEI,~LAJ~RORIPAGH,CC 9119194 The property owner's representative and the project applicant interpreted the term "average density" as to mean gross density over the entire 790 acre site, Shortly after meeting with the applicant in May, staff provided a follow-up letter outlining the steps that would be used by the Department to process the Specific Plan application. Based on a request from the applicant, staff wrote a letter On Juiy 18, 1994 (attached for the Council's review), referencing the density, as stated above, and indicating how the General Pian provided for the calculating of density. Section IV.A.1 of the Land Use Element (page 2-23) states: "The maximum density defines the maximum number of units per net acre at which development can occur within a given area. Net acre is defined as the gross project or lot area, less that portion of the site to be used for the following: arterial, major, secondary and collector roads; and the floodway portion of a floodplain, Determination of precise density, development location, and lot coverage on any residential property is a function of: Opportunities and constraints presented by natural, cultural or scenic features; Policies and implementation programs of the General Plan intended to maximize public safety; achieve high quality site planning and design; provide sufficient levels of public service; retain significant natural resources; ensure compatibility between uses; and encourage development of Village Centers; Building and development stanclards contained in the Development Code, public works standares, and other regulations and ordinances." Subsequent to receiving this letter, the specific plan application was submitted to the Planning Department. Again the preliminary maximum unit count was based on .a gross acre density calculation. On August 15, 1994 another letter was issued by the Planning Department indicating that this was inaccurate and inconsistent with the General Plan. CONCLUSION The owner's representative and the specific plan applicant feh there was sufficient discrepancy in the record to warrant the City Council review of this issue. As a result, staff agreed to bring the issue before the Council. Staff believes the language under the Key Objective for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan does not contradict other portions of the Land Use Element and that calculating density is stated in a strait forward manner based on net density. Should the Council wish to revise the manner in which allowable density is calculated, it should direct staff to bring back a General Plan Amendment to revise the text of the General Plan. Such action will affect how density is calculated on a community wide basis. R:%GE.N~L,AJ~RORJ]PAGR.CC 9/19/94 2 Attachments 1. Staff Letters Dated July 18 and August 15, 1994- Page 4 2. Excerpts from City of Temecula General Plan - Page 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 AUGUST 30, 1994 FROM THE KEITH COMPANIES TO THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING R:\GP, NPLAN~RORIPAGH.CC2 10/3/94 3 Abr~-3i-l.~9~ 09: i~ F~OM The Ke i~, Co. Ri~ERSIDE TO 6~41~e5 ~. Ci THE KEITH COMPANIES- IN'L~ND ~tPII~S, INC, Mo~no Va~' ® ~ ~more · Palm ~n · Vic~lUc AuSust JO, 1~)4 Mr. Gsr~, TborubiU, PlanninS Director CiZy of Tamecull 4317,1 Business Park Drive Tamecull California 92590 R. oripaugh Ranch - General Plan Consistency Thank you for meeting with P, ic Stephens and me and listenins to our thoughts about your letter to us, dated August' 17, regarding ~e consistency of our Specific Plan application with the Land Use Element of the Tamecull General Plan. As you are aware, we &re steadfast about the intent of City Council as well as the notion that City Council took ~ year as it relates to the maximum number of dwelling units permitted on the Koripau~ Kanch property. Please oonsider the following points regarding our position: While acknowledging the l~nguage in the 'General Plan that identifies net acres as the basis for calculating density, the General Plan subsequently goes on to provide "additional direction" to 'Specific Plan ms, including Roripaugh Ranch, wherein it seatag that Roripau~h Ranch shall not exceed a maximum avenge of three dwelling units per acre; Johnson Ranch was given direction by City Council during last year's General Plan process. Said direction was that Johnson .Ranch was entitled to 1.5 dwelling units per gross acre; Rancho Bella Vista/Mountain View was approved at a density of 3.0 units per gross acre; Additionally, enclosed for your review is the trmxscript of the City Council hearing of AuguSt 17, 1993 we have prepared, where the Nicolas Valley area, including Itoripacgh Ranch was discussed. The transcript clearly shows that it was the understanding and iraant of all contamed, including City Council, that three units per gross acre is that which was bemg considered tad approved for R, oripaugh As I am sur~ you Feel, we do not want to stand before the Pining Commission and City Counci3 with a question as to whether we are consistent with the General Plan in ie~uis V AL~-Sl-199~ 09:11 ~ROM The K~l~h Co. RI~ERSiEE TO 6941999 P.B2 of the allowable density. This is the most basic of issues that we must hsve resolved We also feel quite comfortable; 2iron the issues outlined heroin, that a finding of consistency with the Land Use Elementof the General l:'lan would not ram any question of resistsrice. Our desire is to resolve this issue and concentrate on the desi2n details proposed in the $psci~c Plan. The final density and number o£ dwelling. units on goripau~h Ranch will then be determined as they should be, based on the merits and festures of the physical desi2n of the proje~ and the relationship with the physical surroundings. Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. We look forward to resolving thiS issue in a manner h~s~.permits us to turn our attention to the merits of the project itself. Please give me or Ric Stephens a call should you have any questions or would like to discuss this issue further. Smcerely, Tom G Nievez Senior Planner Norm Dyer,. GRC Development Tom Clerk, GRC Development Bob Lindauer, The Keiih Companies Ric Stephens, The Keith Companies RiCk RoboXts, The Keith Companies Tom Bimey, The Keith Companies ]THEKgrrH COMPANIES PJ. JG-31-i994 09:11 FROM The Keitn Ca. RIUERSIDE TO 6941999 F.03 Transcript of the Ternecula City Council Hearing of August 17, 1993 Ho~au Mayor- S. ~gdvard: ~v~a~Of: S. Edward: Mayor. G. Thorahilh R~uest to reopen the public hearing to consider Area 5, Nicohs Valley, and r~ceive public testimony Public hearing is reopened on Nicolas Vailby, Area 5. We do have three rcquesu to speak. My ntme is Sinford Edward, 110 Newport C~at~r Drlvc, r~prescndng Roril~ugh l~nch Inc. Mayor, councilpersons, we are essentially ~,king that have a littic clmup. Rori~ugh hnc. h is parcel no. 8, the hrge parcel on the s~-ea. Wc have two r~luests. One revolves around the entire g00 acres. The other revolves around just the panhandle, whi& is 160 acres. It should be noted that the panhandle area is in the City and the other part is not inside the City, but within fie Sphere. Correct. Staff recommended to the Phnning Commission that the land use be designated at 3 units per acre overall. That was starfs recommendation. But the Planning Commission basically deferred and said they preferred to have the landowner come in with a Specific Plan. We are in agreement with that. But then, subsequent to the Planning Commission, at looking at the maps and anticipated land uses, we are going to be prechd~ from the opportunity of coming before you at a hter datc with a $pecific Plan and EIR that would mitigate any issues that would essentially allow us to d¢velop at 3 units to the acre. So, in order to be able to do that, and not have to ask for a General Plan Amendment, we're requesting that one hnd use category be added to the anticipated lind use, and thaz's the Low Medium land use....and that a couple of the areas which have a 0 - 5 degree slope be changed to a LM, Low Medium land use. All that will effectively do is allow us, when ~e do come back with a Specific Plan, to try to get that overall 3 units per acre, which staff did rccommcnd, and to be able to do so without having to go through a General Plan Amendment. Does staff agree with the conclusion of the speaker wkh respect to the impact of that request? Do you want that repeated? [ heard most of it. h's hard to relate it to the kind of area that he's talking about. That's the only problem I have. How much of the property os in the 0 - 5% slope area? AbG-3i-lg94 09:12 ~ROM The Kel~n Co. RIUERSIDE TO 694199~ P.g4 S. Saber& G. ThomhHh S. Edvard: G- Thornhill: Mayor: G. Thornhill: Mayor: S. Edward: Mayor:. P. Birdsall: Mayor: G. Thornhi!l: ParJut G. Thornhill: Parks. S. Edward: On the larSc 640 acre pared, I'd say approximately 40 to 50%. If we were to ¢k-vclop, quo:e/unquore, at the maximum allowable designations, according to the map u it exists right now, we would end up with approximately I000 units on 800 acres, which would be far short of even stafi"s recommendation of 3 units per acre. We basically have 2 land use categories on the map as it exists now. That's Hillside Residential and Low Residential. This is the first time that I am aware of this one. Did you write John (Meyer) a letter? Yes. I think that's where we are suffering from John's absence. We wrote him on both June 11 and July 14. remember the other properties, but not this one. Does staff need more time to sit down with the applicant? I think we need to report back to the Council on this. Unfortunately, Mr. Meyer had a conversation that...information....(inauch'ble) Do you have a problem with that? No, I don't have a problem with that. Does Council have a problem with that? No. 8, then, we are going to take out of this bunch. Is that correct? ~ight. I think, conceptually, I don't have too much of a problem with this bemuse of the slopes involved. Usually, you egn develop at those densities on those slopes, but... (inaud~le) This will come back as s Specific Plan? Absolutely. You want some flexibility in the Speeiflc Pla~ to allow some little bit higher densities in eertaln areas so you can pay for all the improvements you are going to have to put in. Exactly. We don't anticipate going beyond the 3 units per acre, but, as you're suggesting, there may be some areas where development will take place at a AUG-3!-199~ ~9:1i FROM The Kei%n Co. RIUERSIDE TO 6941999 Mayor: S. Edward.: Ma~o~. Larry ~ynch: L. Lynch: Mayor.' R. Stephens: Mayor: D. Hog: much lower level. But if we don't have fie flexibility in the areas that have less slope to get the deusit~ back, effectively the proper~ won't be developable. There's on last issue, which is the second one, H1 just mention it in passing, and that relates to the panhandle. That right now has a current Assessment District tax, which is locked in at a basic rate. And we want to get the underlying maps to conform to that Assessment District rate. That is someth;,sg we had discussed with staff and they told us it vats an overall policy, but this was one partlcular instance where they didn't realize it was existing and we weren't able to pick it up. OK. Again, I think perhaps that's an issue that be further developed with surf a~d then when it comes back, we can address thc total package. Thank you. Thank you very much. Larry Lynch rotdressing No. 61. Representing DL Equities, owner of Rancho Bella Vista. I want to confirm that the Spedfie Plan, as adopted by the County, is to be "adopted, as is" as part of this General Plan. Starf is nodding affirmatively. (Not applicable) Richard Stephens, addressing Ro~paugh Ranch. .Richard Stephens, The Keith Companies, representing Gent~ Homes. We are m agreement with Mr. Edward's request, I'd llke to also remind you that the site has numerous environmental constraints and giving that little higher density allows for much more flexibility in land planning or creadve solutions to problems. We did have one question, and that xeas the significance of the exhibit with the red coloring. It looks like, perhaps staff can clarify this, that there was a request made on the site for a Specific Plan designation that was denied. Am I misinterpreting the significance of this exhibit? Mn Hogan? Yes. That's not a denial of a Specific Plan. That map only depicts the different [and use requests we have received and whether or not there was a recommendation to support it or oppose it. So, when a property owner comes in. he would be able to identify the property and identify what staffs AL~-3i-i994 e9:15 F~ON The K~i~n Cc. RIUERS[DE TO 6941999 P.06 ~ S~h~s: D. Hog~u: Mayor:. S. Edwer& 5. Edward: K. Jackson: Mayor:. rec~mmend~tlon was without having to look through a rather complicated mistfix, Thank you. All right, we have no other requests to speak on this group. Dave, do you want to proceed? Starting... I'm going to give thc introduction to all the properties inchded in here. And rll mention Item No. 8 as a matter of course, as the Council's position on that has nlready been made clc-ar. One Moment. Thc original general Plan for that area showed a combination of Open Space, d Hillside resi ential and Low Density Residential They requcsted Open Sl~ce, Hillside Kesidend:i, Low density and Low Medium density residential so that the tots] average density on the proiect would increase to 3 units per acre. After some discussion, sraff doesn't have any problems with making a change in had usc density, w/th the understanding that the final density of the project, for the entire area, wi][ not exceed 3 uniu per acre. We~d llke to make that recommendation to Council. OF,- Does the applicant fed OK with that, iust for the purposes of moving along? YeaIn, that sounds good on the surface. I thought, prior to this, that the understanding was that staff wanted us to come in with a Specific Plan. And my concern is, iet's say it says we can yield 3.1 or somet~ng like that. I hate to lock myself into a ccillng right now, Like anybody involved in the process, there's always give and take and it seems like I'm giving fight out of the chute and I don't even know what the ramifications are. So, I would ask for clarification just to be contingent upon the Specific Phn and I'll get hammered then. I'H get beat up hter, I think we need to have a target density though. We need it for traffic/circulation, for all the other elements we have to deal with in the General Plan. And to me, we're changing {Tom 2 to 3, and that seems to give you a lot of tierabillty. OK., alrlght, 6jr enough. Minor modifications of 10% one way or the other, which will give him 3.1, if that is a concern. Alright, I think we have agreement and concurrence. 4 TOTA_ P. 86 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 STAFF LI= I '~ ~:RS DATED JULY 18 AND AUGUST 15, 1994 R:\GENPLANXROILLPAGH,CC2 10/3/94 4 of Temecula s P~r~ Drive · Temecula. Californl~ 92590 July 18, 1994 (909J 694-1989 · FAX ICY09} 694-1999 Tom Nieves The Keith Companies 22690 Cactus Avenue, Suite 300 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 SUBJECT: Maximum Density for the Roripauoda Ranch Specific Plan Dear Mr. Nieves: This letter is in response to your request of the Planning Department' s determination of the overall density for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan. The I and Use Element of the City' s adopted General Plan states that the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan project "...shall not exceed an average of three dwelling units per acre...' The Land Use Element further states: "The maximum density. defines the maximum number of units per net acre at which development can occur within a ~ven area. Net acre is defined as the g-ross project or lot area, less that pomon of the site to be used for the following: arterial, major, secondary and collector roads: and the floodway portion of a flood plato.' Second, please be aware that net acreage is not the sole determinant of the overall densiry. Section IV(A)(1) of the land Use Element also lists the other factors that are used in determining net density. These factors include: opportunities and constraints of the site (e.g. topography, hydrology, sensitive habitats, etc.), policies and implementation progra. rns of the General Plan, and other City building and development standards. Third, you have had discussions with staff regarding the definitions of Average Density and Target Densit-j, as the terms apply to this project. However, because the site has multiple Land use designations, and because the General Plan specifically states the project's avera.,Ze density, the target density provisions do not apply to this project. Therefore, it is your responsibility to provide staff with a calculation of the net acreage of the site in order to determine the preliminary maximum unit count. Mr. Tom Nieves July 18, 1994 Page Two In addition to the density issue, them are other issues that still need to be resolved prior to the submittal of an application for thix project. It is the Planning Depaxtment's position that there has not been an adequate discussion of the opportunities and constraints of the site as outlined in a letter to you dated May 25, 1994. While the opportunities and constraints have been discussed in general terms, staff ha~ yet be presented with any information other than the preliminary land use plan. Specifically, staff would like to see detailed information as it relates to biological resources, axcbaeology, paleontology, topography, hydrology, infrastructure, and surrounding land use patterns. In addition, stuff would like to review a conceptual site plan of the commercial axeas which show how these areas will conform m the Village Center concept shown in the General Plan. Upon reviewing the most recent illustrative site plan depicting two small commercial sites, staff is concerned about the these areas conforming to the General Plan. In closing, I would like to take this opportunity to invite you and your representatives to disc.us~ the oppormhities and constraints of the site. ff you wish to set up said meeting, or you have any questions about this letter, please contact Craig Ruiz at (909) 694-6400. Sincerely, Gary. Thornhill Dn-ector of Planning cc: Thomas Clark, Royal-Clark Development of Temecula s Park Drive · Temecula. California 92590 August 15, 1994 694-1989 · gAX/909) 694-199~ Tom Nieves The Keith Companies 22690 Cactus Avenue, Suite 300 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 SUBfECT: General Plan Consistency for the Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan Dear Mr. Nieves: Ci~' staff has performed a cursory. review of your submittal for the above referenced project. After reviewing the proposed density for the project, it is staffs opinion that the project is inconsistent with the Ciry.'s General Plan. Previously, staff indicated to you, both verbally and in written correspondence, that the General Plan states this project shall not exceed a maximum of three units per "net" acre. Staff further stated that net acreage is defined as the gross project area less that portion of the site to be used for General Plan Circulation roadways and the floodway portion of a flood plain. However, no data has been provided on the amount of net acreage. The proposed 2,370 units is based upon "gross" acreage, which inconsistent with the General Plan. In order for staff to continue processing this application, you will need to do one of the following: 1. Reduce the number of units proposed in the specific plan based upon a calculation of the net acreage of the site and submit the revised plan. 2. File a General Plan Amendment to reflect the increase in density proposed in the specific plan. Please note, based upon staffs initial review of the plan and prior comments provided to you, staff will most likely be unable to support a General Plan Amendment for an increase in density. It should be noted that City staff has not yet reviewed this project. If staff continues processing the project, further comments will be provided. ATTACHMENT NO. 4 EXCERPTS FROM CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN - PAGE 5 R:/GENPLAN'xRORII~AGH.CC? 10/3t94 5 CITY OF TEMECULA Land Use Element 1. Residential Designations Each of the residential use cstego~es includes a rang~ of allowable densities. The maximum density defines the ma,~tirnum number of uni5 per net acr~ at which development can occur within a given area. Net acr~ is defined as the gross project or lot area, te~s that portion of the site m be used for the following: arterial, major, secondary and collector roads; and the floodway pomon of a flood plato. Determination of precise density, development location, and lot coverage on any residential property is a function of: Opportunities and constraints presented by natural, cultural or scenic fsatur~s; Policies and implementation progr~rn-~ of the General Plan intended to maximize public safety; achieve high quality site p}nnni~lg and design; provide sufficient levels of public service; retain significant natural nno~; ensure compatibility between usc-~; and encourage development of Village C~ntet~. Building and development standards contained in the Development Code, pubic works standards, and other regulations and ordinances. Future residential development is expected to occur at the target level of density stated in Table 2-7 for each residential designation. Development at a density between the target and maximum level may only occur for the Hillside, Very Low, Low and Low Medium designations, at the discretion of the Planning Commission/City Council in exchange for special public benefits (as identified in Policy 5.1). The amenities or public benefits provided are intended to satisfy a ne~l over and above the minimum requirements of the General Plan and other city policies and regulations. It is assumed that some residential development will occur below the target level of density and some development will occur above the target level based on the provision of public amentries or benefits. For purpos~ of analyzing the impacts of the General Plan, the target level of density for the above identified designations is assumexL A target level of density is not established for the Medium and High designations so as not to preclude or discourage the development of afffordablc housing. However, for purposes of analyzin. g the impacts of the General Plan, a probable level of development within the Medium and High designations is assumed. TI~-OP~Cip.12~.Lr~ · Ds~c: November 9, 1993 Page 2-'~ al ! t; ITEM 22 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager, Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning. October 11, 1994 Award of a Professional Services Contract to NBS Lowry to Prepare the Nicolas Valley Special Study Prepared By: Craig D. Ruiz, Assistant Planner RECOMMENDATION: 1. Award a Professional Services Contract to NBS Lowry in the amount of ~24,673 to prepare the Nicolas Valley Special Study and authorize the Mayor to execute said contract. BACKGROUND During the City's General Plan adoption process, the area known as Nicolas Valley was designated as a Special Study Overlay. The Special Study Overlay designation is intended for those areas in the community that require a comprehensive, detailed evaluation ot development and constraints. The purpose of the special study is to recommend any changes to General Plan land uses based upon analysis of the following: · The provision of flood control, sewer, water and other services; · The impacts of the surrounding development in terms of traffic, light, noise, etc; · Methods to provide a transition between rural and urban development; · Topography and related visual impacts of development; · Existing lot patterns; · Traffic circulation and impacts on level of service; and · Vegetation and wildlife resources, The City of Temecula issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to local consulting firms to prepare a Special Study for the Nicolas Valley area. In response to the City's request, three firms submitted proposals. The Selection Committee of Planning Director Gary Thornhill, Public Works Director Tim Serlet and Senior Planner John Meyer reviewed all three proposals and ranked the firms based upon their expertise and ability to address the issues in Nicolas Valley. Staff then met with the preferred consultant to discuss and negotiate the proposed scope of work and costs of the project. Staff has been successful in negotiating a reduced project price from that which was originally submitted. R:\STAFFRFF'd~CVALLY.CC 10/5/94 Ires 1 FISCAL IMPACT The approval of the contract will result in the expenditure of $24,673. This amount has been budgeted for in the Planning Department's current fiscal year budget. In addition, should the study recommend an amendment to the General Plan, there will additional administrative costs to prepare said amendment. Attachments: Special Study Overlay Map - Page 3 Scope of Work - Page 4 Project Time Line - Page 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 SPECIAL STUDY OVERLAY MAP SPECiAl, STUDY OVERLAY ~Special Study Overlay General Plan Prog. ram i~ L~ ~ THE ![ PLANNING HGURE 2-6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 SCOPE OF WORK TASK 1 Subtask Output TASK 2 Subtask Output TASK 3 Subtask Output TASK 4 Subtask SCOPE OF WORK MEET WITH CITY STAFF TO OBTAIN BACKGROUND DATA. Conduct one two-hour meeting at the City of Temecula to include the following: A. Introduction of consultant team to background information. B. The Project Team's review of available background data. The Project Team and City Staff will establish the background research phase of scope. Presentation of relevant baseline material to Consultant for further review. REVIEW BACKGROUND DATA. During a three-week period, the Project Team will review background data, illustrate pragmatic data in both a graphic 1"-200' scale overlay mapping exercise, and present a letter report outlining to major issues. A preliminary understanding of the project area's jurisdictional, physical and environmental influences. This will be translated on to maps at 1 "=200' scale in trace overlay format, as well as an outline report identifying to the major issues. FIELD TRIP TO THE PROJECT AREA FOR ONSITE REVIEW OF APPLICABLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION Undertake a half-day field trip to site to verify background assumptions. The Project Team will verify the project area's characteristics through afield reconnaissance. OPPORTUNITY AND CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS Undertake research to ascertain and determine constraints for the project and the project area. the opportunities and Evaluate governmental issues: 1. Land use compatibility with existing and proposed uses/plans, includes an examination of existing lot configurations and a review of the general plan and community issues with staff. proposals\ternecula\nicolas .vly 1 Output TASK 5 Subtask Output TASK 6 Subtask Identify and evaluate engineering issues, such as, drainage/flooding, infrastructure and service needs. Includes an examination of soils and slo. pe/~opography. Prepare one reproducible original of an opportunities and constraints report in written and graphic format using a I"=200' scale topographic base map with overlay describing the findings of the tasks described above. A reproducible original of the opportunity and constraints analysis report and map at 1 " =200' scale, with recommendations regarding the client contracting special studies subconsultant. STAFF REVIEW OF OPPORTUNITY AND CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS Evaluate significance of issues identified in the Opportunity and Constraints Analysis and derive a consensus for the issues affecting the property. A. Discuss report findings. B. Establish the capacity analysis strategy. C. Meeting to review preliminary opportunities and constraints graphic. NBS/Lowry will prepare preliminary opportunities and constraints for meeting with City. NBS/Lowry will incorporate review comments and submit final material to City. JOINT WORKSHOP WITH CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND GENERAL PUBLIC Meet with the City Council, Planning Commission and the interested residents of the Nicholas Valley in the early stages of the project in order to review opportunities and constraints analysis. Meeting to be conducted by City Staff. Output TASK 7 Subtask Initial meeting with the Council, Commission and public to present the opportunities and constraints report and map. PREPARE ALTERNATIVE LAND USE CAPACITY CONCEPTS Based upon the completed opportunities and constraints analysis and relevant input received from Public Workshop, NBS/Lowry will prepare and evaluate potential alternative land use capacity alternatives. proposals\ternecula\nicolas .vly Output TASK 8 Subtask Output Two alternative land use capacity concepts will be prepared. Potential land use intensity variations will be prepared, based upon alternative infrastructure phasing and geographic or biological constraints. The first alternative will analyze just the study area and the capacity of infrastructure based upon General Plan build-out in the area. The second alternative will address pending master plan applications under the assumption they will be approved. The impact of this assumption will determine the available infrastructure and phasing of improvements and the capacity potential based on available infrastructure. The alternative land use capacity concepts will be evaluated in an effort to identify potential positive and negative issues associated with each concept and weigh them as they relate to each other and the surrounding community. The different issues to be evaluated include: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Land use/market Traffic and circulation General biological opportunities or constraints Preliminary infrastructure analysis/infrastructure phasing Pending land use entitlements and surrounding land uses Surrounding community character Graphic diagrams of preliminary land use capacity concepts at 1~=200' scale. A reproducible original of a written analysis of the benefits and potential problems associated with each alternative. A preliminary infrastructure phasing for each alternative. STAFF REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE LAND USE CAPACITY CONCEPTS Evaluate significance of issues identified in the land use capacity analysis and derive a consensus on the issues affecting the project area. A. Discuss the report findings by phone. B. Confirm the capacity analysis. C. Finalize study report and distribute. Finalize report and distribute one reproducible original to staff. proposals~ternecula\nicolas.vty 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 PROJECT TIME LINE R:\STAFFRPT\NICVALLy. CC 10/5/94 hns ~ SENT BY:NBS/LOWry, InC. ; 9-28-94 ;IO:OOAM; Zrvine~ 909694547?;# 3 Special Land Use And Can'ying Capacity Study For The Nicola~ VaLley Overlay Area. LfidUmPla~ IlM!iili T~'a_" Iir'~lJe ITEM 23 APPROVAL:R~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/City Council Joseph Kicak, interim Director of Public Works/City Engineer October 11, 1994 Proposed Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street", Acknowledgemerit Sign Size PREPARED BY: ~l~/] Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street" acknowledgement sign size. BACKGROUND: On August 9, 1994 the City Council approved the adoption of the Keep Temecula Clean "Adopt-A-Street" Program. At that time City staff was directed to reduce the proposed 30" X 30" acknowledgement sign. At this time City staff has acquired two (2) proto type acknowledgement signs, 18" X 18" and 24" X 24" for J::ouncil's review and approval. Upon approval, the acknowledgement signs will be installed at 15 locations already identified in the program, when "adopted". FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in the Public Works Department Sign Maintenance Account 100-164-601 - 5244. r: ~agdrpt~94~1011 ~ADOPTSTR.sigtajp ITEM 1 ITEM 24 aPPROV~~ FINANCE OFFICER CI'~'Y R~M~AGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council City Clerk ~. October 11, 1994 Community Services Commission Appointment RECOMMENDATION: Review the Ad-Hoc Committee recommendations and appoint two applicants to fill full three-year terms. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Council's adopted policy and procedure for making appointments and re-appointments, the two commission positions which had terms that expired October 2, 1994, were advertised in two local newspapers of general circulation. The applications received were forwarded to the President and Vice President of the Temecula Community Services District for review. Councilmember Birdsall and Mayor Pro Tem Stone have recommended the re-appointments of Commissioners Jeff Nimeshein and Rich Saltysiak for full three (3) year terms of office. Attached are copies of the applications which were received by the filing deadline of September 27, 1994. ATTACHMENTS: Copies of Applications for Appointment APPL,CAT, O. ,.D CO~v~j'NITY ~ERVICES CONMISSION BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE: NAME: Jeffery Nimeshein ADDRESS: 311 Via Gilberto 5 Years YEARS RESIDENT OF TEMECULA Temecula 92592 (909) 699-9924 HOME PHONE: HumAn Services Manager OCCUPATION: 8450 La Mesa Blvd., La Mesa, CA EM PLOYER/AD DRESS: 91941 (619) 464-0505 WORK PHONE: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES: M.S. Recreation Administration B.A. Recreation A.A. Physical Education ~J LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE: Temecula Community Services Commission - 1990-Present ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: (Professional, technical, community, service): California Park & Recreation Society California Boards & Commissions BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD OR COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Uee additional paper H necessa~): I have successfully served on the very active Community Services Commission from its inception. This commission has performed a vital role in the advancement of Park and Recreation development in Temecula. Over this period I have contributed countless time and energy serving on numerous committees dealing with important issues and community development. Furthermore, I have taken a leadership role on many issues, and also served as chairman of the commission this past year. With over 25 years of education, training and experience in the Park, Recreation and Community Services field, I feel eminently qualified and honored to serve on the Community Services Commission. (continued on next page) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for publicity purposes. , OA : PLEASE NOTE: Appl~ations will be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies. Retum to: City Clerk's Office, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989 2/forms/COM-O01 (continued from page 1) I believe I have made a strong individual contribution to the community, while working in harmony as a team member with other commissioners. There has been considerable accomplishment, but there is still much to do. My past commission experience will be invaluable in this future process. CITY OF TEMECULA APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO COMMISSIC I~ ~ 4, Qualification Requirement: Resident of City of Temecul~ COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE: COMMUNIT¥ SERVICE DTSTRTCT NAME: Rich Soltysiak ADDRESS: 30519 Wailea Court YEARS RESIDENT OF TEMECULA: Seven HOME PHONE: 676-1470 WORKPHONE: 676-1470 OCCUPATION: CiVil Engineering COnSultant EMPLOYER/ADDRESS: , ,,- ........... Self-~mployed .... ~ .... EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DE(~REES: BS/CE Marquette University~' Milwaukee; WiSconsin - 1979 Registered Civil Engineer, State of California -' 1983 m LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH "~ YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE: _ Temecula and Murrieta Coordinating Committee since 1991 ' ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: (Professi0naL~echnicaltcommun~, seaice):., BRIEFLY ~ATE WHY-YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS COMMISSION; AND WHY YOUj::':~:2~'~:-2~f-:':i' BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION.': BE SPECIFIC (Use addmonal; paper ~ :~"~[~ ~': necessa~): ' ~ .... ' :F :'- .: - ,': :' rri ' "' I unde~nd ~at any or all information on ~is form may be veHfied.-I consent to ~e release of information for public~ purposes. ' ' ~ .... SIGNATURE: · DA~: ~ '-' PL~SE NO~: Applications will be kept on fge for consideration of ~re vacancies.t. - ..... Remm to: C~ Clerk's Office, 43174 Business Park Drive, TeMcula, CA 9~90 17141 . ".-...--~- . : . "'..1: :: ~:.[' .==l?:_-4~ ~ 't-'C'~'Ei'c: 2~o~s/CO~1 ' ' CITY OF TEMECULA BOARD, COMMITTEaR C MMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH TO SERVE: YEARS RESIDENT ADDRESS:c.':~C'~!'Z'J'' /fj/~ /_4j ,c~*A ~/"- OF ECULA HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE: OCCUPATION: LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE: BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD ~/OMMISSION, AND WHY Remm to: CJ~ ~3174 ~siness Park DHve, Temecula, CA 9~90 (714~6~-19~ 2/formslCOM-O01 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council City Clerk October 11, 1994 Public Traffic Safety Commission Appointment RECOMMENDATION: Review the Ad-Hoc Committee recommendations and appoint an applicant to fill a full three-year term. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Council's adopted policy and procedure for making appointments and re-appointments, the commission position which has a term that expires October 2, 1994, was advertised in two local newspapers of general circulation. The applications received were forwarded to the Mayor who serves as liaison for the Commission and Councilmember Mu~oz for review. Due to Mayor Robert's Sister City trip to Europe, we were unable to secure his recommendation on time for the agenda deadline. Staff will transmit his recommendation under separate cover as soon as it is received. Councilmember Mu~oz recommends the appointment of Commissioner non Guerriero. Attached are copies of the applications which were received by the filing deadline of September 27, 1994. ATTACHMENTS: Copies of Applications for Appointment CITY OF TEMECULA PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY CO~IISSION T E B ' ~ j BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU WISH 0 S RVE: NAME: RON GUERRIERO ~- ~ YEARS RESIDENT OF TEMECULA ADDRESS: 41510 CHENIN BLANC 92591 6,3 HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE: 676-6150 SAME OCCUPATION: ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY TRAINER EMPLOYER/ADDRESS: 41510 CHENIN BLANC TEMECULA EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES: AA POLICE SCIENCE BA CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION/SOCIOLOGY UCR-COURSE WORK IN GOVT. CONTRACTS CALIF. CO~MJNITY COLLEGE TEACHING CERT. CALIFORNIA REAL ESTATE LICENSE CALIF. CERTIFIED HAZARD MATERIALS INSTRUCTOR NIOSH SCBA INSTRUCTOR LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU H~%S~%DARAT~RI~pY~RMM~i~F~rEE (DRUGS & YOTj"DZ) TVHS 1990-1994 TEMECULA/MURRIETA TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE SEVERAL SUBCOMMITTEE' S AND AD HOC COMMIi"F~ES FOR PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION BOARD MEMBER, TEMECULA BALLOON & WINE FESTIVAL, BOARD MEMBER, TEMECULA TOWN ASSOC. PAST PRES. TVHS FOOTBALL PAR_!NT SUPPORT G~0LrP(B~amn~CF~q) wn nnArm' ~ Ag~r~ BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD OR COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper if necessary): AS A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER WORKING IN THE TRAFFIC DIVISION, I WORKED ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION, TRAFFIC STATS, AND WORKED WITH THE CITY TRAFFIC DIVISION, AS WELL AS WITH THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. I FEEL I HAVE CONTRIBUTED MUCH THE THE PUBLIC/TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION IN MY FOUR YEARS, AND KNOW I CAN CONTINUE TO CONTRIBUTE IF ALLOWED TO REMAIN. I BELIEVE THE COMMISSION CAN ASSIST THE CITY COUNCIL IN MANY WAYS, WITH THIER DIRECTION, AND I AM READY TO SPEND THE TIME REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE COUNCILS GOALS FOR A BETTER TEMECULA. I HAVE SERVED ON SEVERAL SUBCOMMITTEES, AND AD HOC COMMITTEES THE PAST FOUR YEARS, AND CURRENTLY SERVE ON THE JEFFERSON CORRIDOR COMMITTEE, AND LOWER 79 COMMITTEE. I ASK THAT I BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE SERVICE TO THE CITY, AND COUNCIL. I understand ~at any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this /jrN::jjjor.!?p..rpq,~s r DATE: SEPTEMBER 22 1994 PLEAi~be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies. , Retum to: City Cierk's Office, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989 21fon~alCOM*O01 CITY OF TEMECULA APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COM~ AR NAME: '~ ~ R C/vlC/~ C~)(~)'/Y~'//7/~RS RESIDENT HOME PHONE: WORK PHONE: OCCUPAT,O.: EMPLOYER/ADDRESS: EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND/DEGREES: /Yew V~K 7_,~/~e,~'/7'~ - /,~--<Z- Lr)eR T/ F/ e ,4 7'e //v' '7~'R,=.= /~ ~Sn~e T'y- (',:>? Se.,. LIST ANY RIVERSIDE COUNTY OR OTHER CITY BOARD, COMMI'I'rEE OR COMMISSION ON WHICH YOU HAVE SERVED AND THE YEAR OF SERVICE: ORGANIZATIONS TO WHICH YOU BELONG: (Professional, technical, community, service): BRIEFLY STATE WHY YOU WISH TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD OR COMMISSION, AND WHY YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE QUArIFlED FOR THE POSITION. BE SPECIFIC (Use additional paper I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for publicity purposes. B,G.. TU.E: ~ / .~ ~ .. ,~: ?_,, _ ~.~ PLEASE NOTE: Applications will be kept on file for consideration of future vacancies. Retum to: City Clerk's Office, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92390 (714) 694-1989 2/formslCOM-OO1 ITEM 26 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager October 11, 1994 Communications from Supervisor Buster regarding Winchester Road Widening PREPARED BY: City Clerk June S. Greek RECOMMENDATION: Consider the suggestions set forth in the letter from Supervisor Bob Buster dated September 19, 1994. BACKGROUND: The attached letter from Supervisor Bob Buster deals with the City's desire to assist in expediting the widening of Winchester Road. jsg BOB BUSTER SUPERVISOR FIRST DISTRICT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE September 19, 1994 The Honorable Ron Roberts, Mayor City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 cc: City Council R. Bradley T. Serle= Dear Ron: The Board of Supervisors will soon be making a number of decisions pertaining to the future of Assessment District 161. While all are important,' decisions affecting the completion of Winchester Road appear to be of highest interest to district homeowners and property owners, Temecula Valley Unified School District and the City of Temecula. For a number of months, several current and former Temecula council members have been "volunteering" the financial assistance of the city in the completion of Winchester, particularly the stretch between Margarita and Murrieta Hot Springs roads. The Board recently approved in concept a proposal that would allow a public Dr private entity to advance money for construction, with later reimbursement from district proceeds. Given that the city's assistance has been volunteered by other than a majority of the City Council, I thought it would be appropriate to contact you in an effort to ascertain the city's official position. If the city has any interest in such a course of action, I suggest that we get together, with the appropriate staff, to discuss possibilities. Please contact Leannah Bradley or Ken Van Vechten at my Riverside office to set a date and time. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you, in advance, for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Supervisor Bob Buster First District Riverside County BB:kvv cc: Mentbers, Board of Supervisors Larry Parrish, Chief Administrative Officer '] 4~80 LEMON STREET, 14TH FLOOR · P. O. EOX 1369 "* RIVERSIDE. CA 92502-1359 · (9091 275-1010 · FAX :,~'Jg) 686-2909 '1 410(32 CCUNTY CENTER DRIVE,. SUITE A2.05 · TEMECULA, CA 92591 "{,°09) 694-5150 · ~=AX (909) i594-5190 ITEM 27 ' APPROV,~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager DATE: October 11, 1994 SUBJECT: Design Services Contract - Parkview Fire Station Project PREPARED BY: (~ .~Lx~/Phyllis L. Ruse, Senior Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the city Council award contract of $174,313to RJM Design Group for the preparation of the master plan, schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project administration for the Parkview Fire Station Project. BACKGROUND: On May 26, 1994, the City solicited Statements of Qualifications from architectural and landscape architectural firms for design services for the Parkview Fire Station Project. The approximately 46 acre site is south of the Rancho Vista ballfields at the Rancho California Sports Park and north of Pauba Road. The master plan will include the area from the channel bed, the slope, and region up to Pauba Road. It will extend east to west between Margarita Road and the 10 acre church site on Pauba Road. The City received several Statements of Qualifications which were reviewed and ranked by a review committee. The six (6) firms judged to be the most qualified were invited to offer an oral presentation to a selection committee comprised of a member from the City Council (Mayor Pro Tern Jeff Stone), a battalion chief from the Fire Department, and City staff. The selection committee ranked RJM Design Group as the most qualified firm for this project. Staff has negotiated with RJM Design Group a final Scope of Work and a cost proposal of $174,313 for this project. Upon award of a contract with the design team, staff will form a project committee to develop the master plan for the site. It is envisioned that the ultimate improvements will include a fire station to service the City east of Interstate Highway 15, off-site road improvements along Pauba Road, passive parkland amenities, and footprints for possible municipal buildings to be determined at a later date. A construction estimate of $1,650,000is projected to cover the first phase which consists of the fire station and off-site road improvements. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost of this Design Services Contract is $174,313. This project is budgeted and approved in the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY 1994-95. The current construction budget is $1,250,000. However, it is projected that sufficient funds from Fire Mitigation Fees will be collected to fund this project. Fire Mitigation Fees can only be used for fire projection projects. AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 19 , between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and RJM Design Group, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant". The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth in the "Statement of Qualifications" submitted by Consultam dated June 30, 1994 in response to City's "Request for Qualifications for the Parkview Site Improvement Project." PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform, all tasks described herein. PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, at the hourly rates set forth in Section 9.4 of Exhibit "A" attached hereto, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount will not exceed $174,313 {One Hundred Seventy-Four Thousand Three Hundred Thirteen Dollars and No/100) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved by the City Council. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month, Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. SUSPENSION. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMENT. The City may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon 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. Within thirty-five (35) days after receiving an invoice from the Consultant, the City shall pay Consultant for work done through the date that work is to be ceased pursuant to this section. If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement such suspension, termination or abandonment shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. BREACH OF CONTRACT. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default. Default shall include not performing the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of the City. Failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder, if such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, shall not be considered a default. v:\rjmprKvw .agr -1 - 100394 If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant defaults 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. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on the first date stated above and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than March 31, 1996. Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute between the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final. Consultant shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1280, et sea. City and Consultant shall share the cost of the arbitration equally. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension or abandonment of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of the Consultant or any of the Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except 'as herein set forth. The 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. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal 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 laws and regulations. v:\rjmprkvw .agr -2- 100394 Automobile Liability: $1,000,000combined single lirnit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability: Workers' Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers' Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. 4. Errors and Omissions Insurance: $1,000,000per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000 must be declared to and approved by the City. Other Insurence Provisions. Insurance policies required by this contract shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions: All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail. General Liability and Automobile Liability coverages. The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, lease, 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, With regard to claims arising from the Consultant's performance of the work described in this contract, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or serf-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the Consultant's insurance. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers officials, employees or volunteers. 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. Worker's Compensation and Employers' Liability Coverage. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Consultant for the City. v:\rjrnl)rkvw .agr -4* 100394 Verification of Coveraae. Contractor shall furnish the City with certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. The certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. Consultant shall include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. 13. LICENSES. The Consultant and subconsultant shall obtain all necessary licenses, including but not limited to City Business License. 14. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense cost, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent performance under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement and any documents or i~strument attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof. In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall prevail. EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. v:\rjmprkvw .agr -5- 100394 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above writlen. CONSULTANT CITY OF TEMECULA By: By RJM Design Group, Inc. Ron Roberts, Mayor Robert J. Mueting, President APPROVED AS TOFORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk v:\rjmprkvw .agr -6- 100394 EXhibit "A" PARK VIEW SITE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK DESCRIFrION OF SERVICES PHASE I 1.0 RESOURCE DOCUMENTATION Obtain documentation available from the City pertaining to this project (including topographic and boundary survey, soils investigation and rifle report). One meeting with City staff to review the project scope; refine time schedules; develop comprehensive use progrnm,~; functional space requirements; and a financial plan. Assist the City in establishing a Project Committee and laying the ground work for receiving community input as necessary to develop a comprehensive program to meet the present and future needs of the City of Temecula. We suggest working with a Project Committee made up of representatives from the City Council, City Staff, Parks and Recreation Commission, the Fire Department and individuals from the COmmUIlity that have a special interest or background related to the specific facilities in the Parkview Site. We propose extensive coordination between the Project Committee and the Design Team and integration of their expertise into the design process. C. Review State and local codes and standards applicable to site development. D. Acquire base map and resource information from City. In general, we anticipate the following resources will be necessary to be furnished by the City. These kems have been expressly excluded from our scope of services. 1. Enviromental studies and Environmental Impact Report. 2. Demographic profdes and facilities survey. 3. Space requirements. 4. Staff projections and population projections. 5. Financing plan. 6. Approved Park and Recreation Master Plan. MEETINGS: (1) - 1-Kickoff meeting with key players to obtain documentation and establish project schedule. PRODUCTS: Updated schedule P~k~iew Site Improvmamt Project Pa~e 1 City of Tcmecula/994-5 1 2.0 D~,-fMLED ~fll~ ANALYSIS Our next tasic will he to physically review, analyze, and document existing site assets and deficiencies. The analysis of the site and surrounding relationships shall also be review~ in regard to the potential importance of phasing for initial and future construaion. A. Conduct field investigations and analysis of existing conditions including utilities, drainage and topo and easements. Photo document site and prepare initial site awareness score. B. Produce site analysis/opportunities and constraints exhibit. C. Prepare utilities availability map. D. Evaluate off-site R.O.W. improvements necessary for site access. E. Obtain and review existing hydrology studies that are available from other developments in the project vicinity. PRODUCTS: Opportunities and constraints/site analysis map, utilities availability map, base map at appropriate scale. Park,~ew S~te Improvmmt Project P~e 2 City of Temecula/994-51 3.0 PROGRAMMING/SITE PLANNING/MAS-rF,~R PLAN A primary service proposed within our overall scope of work is an intensive programming phase scheduled during the first portion of the project. Our programming services shall be organized such that the participating users shall be initially interviewed, presented with interim information and results for review and discussion, and shall receive a final presentation in regards to the general recommendation of the program specific to all park and fire station facilities. During the programming period, sessions shall be conducted with the Project Committee and our Design Team for review and presentationof programming analysis and studies. The Programming Phase is an intensive and concentrated scenario of site and building planning, area projections, and functional relationships. The Programming Phase is one of the most important aspects of the entire project in that it shall establish the immediate foundation and relationships for all park components. SrrE AWARENESS TOUR/WO~OP Site Scores Prepare draft site scores for site awareness tour. B. Prepare workbook for site awareness tour including refined site scores. C. Conduct morning awareness tour on-site during community workshop. D. Conduct a one day community workshop. E. During workshop, develop (3) site plan alternatives for parkview site at conceptual level. Compile a summary bubble diagram of workshop consensus plan showing building spatial relationships, site facilities and circulation. Conduct meeting with city staff to review consensus plan, spatial arrangements, site, and building program. An Architectural Program shall be prepared for the Fire Station component of the project. Interviews shall be conducted to determined required space allocations. Functional adjacencies, equipmere specifications and support systems shall be identified and presented. I. Civil Design/Documemation A one page Summary Report shall include evaluation of alternatives and recommendation for: · On-site utility systems · Off-site utilities work · Site grading and drainage · Parking improvements and paving Parkview Site lmprovmeat Project Page 3 City of Tera=cula/994-51 K, Project Budgeting Services relating to the development of a Statement of Probable Construction Cost based on programming and scheduling studies and consisting of: · Conversion of programmed requirements to net area requirements. · Development of initial approximate gross facility. areas. · Evaluation of construction market conditions. · Application of unit cost data to gross areas. · Estimates of related costs such as site and facility development, landscaping, utilities, services, furniture, equipment and design services. Prepare preliminary master plan based upon City staff comments on consensus plan and refined program. Meet with City/Agency for review of prelimin~'y master p|an. Prepare final master plan, program requirements for picnic, parking and park facilities and amenities and conceptual floor plan/elevations of the fire station facility based on City/Agency comments. MEETINGS: PRODUCTS: (1) - All Day Workshop (2) - City Review Meetings Meeting notes, program graphics (tissue format) and written summary of program recommendations, preliminary master plan, final master plan and fire station conceptual floor plan. Parkview Site Improvement Project Page 4 City of T~mecula/994-51 4.O PHASE H 5.0 A. B. D. E. F. JOINT MEk'~ING Prepare for and attend (2) Public review meetings to present site analysis, project program, and site master plan. Submit for review and approval. MEETINGS: (2) - Public Review Meetings PRODUCTS: Mounted drawings as produced in site analysis and programming. Site master plan documents. SCHEMATIC DESIGN Prepare schematic designs and plans relative to the fire station and fire station site. Provide an estimate of probable construction cost for the proposed fire station facility and site improvements. Section 404 Report (N.I.C.) Section 1601 Report (N.I.C.) Conduct meeting with the City staff, to review and discuss Schematic Proposals. Refine Schematic Plans based on staff input. MEETINGS: (1) - City staff meeting PRODUCTS: Schematic layout plans of the fire station, parkLag, site landscape, lighting and site f~rniture concepts, cost estimate, meeting notes. Parkview Site Improvemeat Project Page 5 City of Temccula/994-51 6.0 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT The sixth task of our services shall be to prepare all preliminary plans and cost analysis based upon the approved schematic desigu documents in order to fix and describe the scope and character of the entire Project, including landscape architectural, architectural civil, structural, mechanical and electrical systems, materials and such other elements as may be appropriate. Consideration shall be given to availability of materials, equipment and labor, construction sequencing and scheduling, economic analysis of construction, user safety and maintenance requirements, and energy conservation. In addition, during Design Development Phase, requirements for cabinets, casework, hardware, and related specialties shall be determined. A preliminary furniture plan shall be prepared indicating usage and furniture layout of every work station, office, and support space. Final selection of materials, textures, and colors shall occur. Prepare final designs and plans relative to site, architectural, structural, electrical, civil, and mechanical engineering associated to the proposed project complete with site and floor plans, exterior elevations. B. Prepare preliminary grading, drainage, sewer, utilkies, access and circulation studies. C, Perform earthwork take offs. D. Prepare probable estimates of construction costs per square foot. E. Conduct staff meeting to review final design prior to construction drawings. MEETINGS: (1) City staff meeting, PRODUCTS: Refined preliminary plans, elevations, refined cost analysis, defined mechanical and electrical systems, preliminary civil plans, materials board and cost estimate. 7.0 CON~-[RUCTION DOCUMENT PHASE The final Construction Document Phase of the project consists of the preparation of the construction documents to include final drawings, specifications, calculations, and final cost estimates. Our proposal includes complete archkectural and engineering services required to execute the project. Specifically, we have included the following disciplines. A. Landscape Architectural/Site Development B. Architectural C. Civil Engineering Parkvlew Site Improvmumt Proj~t P~e 6 City of Temecu|a/994-Sl Prepare and Process Best Management Practices (BMP's): Pursuant to federal mandate, all grading projects commencing after November of 1990 must employ best management practices which remove effluents and pollutants from runoff water to a degree of water quality acceptability prior to discharge into a natural system. During the construction document stage, the design team proposes to review possible BMP's with the city for incorporation into the parkview site landscape system. D. Structural Engineering E. Mechanical Engineering F. Electrical Engineering During this phase, the Contract Documents are prepared setting forth in detail the requirements for the construction of the project. General conditions, instructions to bidders, and all special requirements are defined, and when combined with the various trade specifications, a complete project manual is produced. 8.0 BIDDING PHASE Bidding Procedures The Consultant shall assist the City with the Bidding Phase of the project. Questions, clarifications, or conflicts arising out of the bidding process will be resolved by addenda prepared by the Consultant (maximum (2) two addenda). Addenda to the contract for construction shall be prepared in writing to document any clarification or modification made to the contract documents. Parkview Site Isnprovment Proj~sct Page City of Tcmccula/994-51 9.0 CONSTRUCTION ADMIN1S-rRATION PHASE The Consultant Design Team shall conduct Biweekly job site meetings for a 6 month construction period to generally review and evaluate the construction schedule, monitor weekly performance, review quality control stand_ards, and provide assistance for any clarification or revision to the contract for construction. Shop drawings and related submittals shall be reviewed and returned to the consultant for appropriate action. The Contractor's requests for information, proposal requests, and related communications shall be artended to on a regular basis. Contractor's pay requests shall be reviewed by the Consultant on a monthly basis in accordance with the amount of work completed and in accordance with the contract documents. At every job site meeting, min~.ltes shall be prepared, published and distributed by the Consultant to all parties concerned, specifically noting current action items and related responsibilities. Upon completion of the Construction Phase the Consultant shall organize and conduct a final walk-through and review. A final punch list for all required corrections and remaining work shall be prepared. During the Construction Phase of the project, the following services shall be furnished: Preeonstruction Conference A preconstruction conference shall be organized and conducted to brief all parties concerned with general and special requirements of the contract for construction. Procedural matters, routing of information, and project representatives shall be defined. Attendees shall include representatives from the City's staff, the Consultant, the Contractor, and all major subcontractors. Job Site Meetings Bi-weekly job site meetings (total of 13) shall be scheduled and conducted by the Consultant for the same day and time through the duration of the project. Scheduling, coordination, requests for information, and changes to the contract for construction are routinely monitored. The Consultant shall publish and distribute a field report for each job site meeting, documenting the progress of construction and specifically noting current and delinquent action items. Submittal and Shop Drawing Review The Consultant shall review all required shop drawings and related submittals as required by the contract documents. Parkview Sit~ Improvemint Project Page g City of Terr~eula/994-51 Project Close=Out At the completion of the Construction Phase a final job site meeting and review of the entire facility shall be conducted. A final punch list will be published and distributed by the Consultant to all parties concerned, specifically noting required corrections, non-conforming work, and work remaining to be completed. A second walk-through shall be conducted when all punch list items have been corrected, at which time a Final Notice of Completion shall be filed by the City. Parkview Site hnprovement Project Page 9 City of Temecula/994-S 1 SECTION 10.0 FEE SUMMARY ESTIMATE 10.1 PHASE I: FEE SC/HEDULE It is the objective of our Design Team to provide the most comprehensive, yet efficiem approach to the development of the PARKVIEW SITE IMI~ROVE1VIENT PROJECT. Fees for Phase I and Phase II are as follows: Master Plan for 46 acre site 1.0 Resource Docunaentation 2.0 Detailed Site Analysis 3.0 Programming/Site phnni/lg/ Master plan 4.0 Joint Meeting Subtotal $ 4000.00 $ 5432.00 $24,240.00 $ 1.000.00 $34,672.00 PHASE H: Design and Construction Documents for Fire station Building and ± 1% acre Site development. (Based on 9300 SF Bldg) 5.0 Schematic Design 6,0 Design Development 7,0 Construction Documents 8.0 Bidding 9.0 Construction Administration (Bi-weeldy visits based upon a six month construction period) $15,488.00 $26,911.00 $73,441.00 $ 4,921.00 $18.880.00 Subtotal $139,641.00 Grand Fee Total $174,313.00 Parkvle~v Site lmltovemeat Proj,et P~ge 10 City of Tcme~ul~/994-51 9.2 9.3 Reimburse Allowance sin order to save consultant mark-up on reprographic, printing, photographic, and delivery expenses, it is our suggestion that a Temequla account be established at a local blueprint company for the PARKVIEW TEMECULA SITE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. This will save the city approximately 10-20% city discount and consultant mark-up) ADDITIONAL SERVICES The following items shall not be a part of the fee identified in the above, but shall be reimbursable to RJM Design Group. payment section Additional meetings and site visits as authorized by the City of Temecula. Preparation of Topographic and Boundary information. Environmental Impact Report, if required, shall be provided under separate contract. 9.4 RJM Design Group shall provide the necessary plan check revisions requested by the city for two plan check reviews. All subsequent changes shall be done in accordance with the attached Standard Hourly Fee Schedule. STANDARD HOURLY FEE SCHEDULE The Client agrees to pay Consultant as compensation for all authorized work included in the Scope of Services heretofore stated, at the hourly rates below. PRINCIPAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DESIGNER SENIOR DRAFTSPERSON JUNIOR DRAFTSPERSON FIELD OBSERVATION WORD PROCESSOR $100.00 Per hour $88.00 per hour $82.00 per hour $55.00 per hour $48.00 per hour $88.00 per hour $35.00 per hour Billings for all time and materials and contract extension work shall be in accordance with the level of work perfomed and will be broken into the categories listed above. FEE ESCALATION: Fees will be escalated each August 1st in accordance with any increase in the Consumer's Price index or other mutually agreed upon cost index. Beginning with August 1, 1995. All provisions for escalations stated, pertain to all contract extension and additional work. parkview Site Improvmmt Project Page 11 City of Ten~cula/994-51 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 1994 A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:15 PM at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. President Jeff Stone presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: 3 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Parks, Stone 2 DIRECTORS: Mu~oz, Roberts Also present were General Manager Ronald E. Bradley, General Counsel Peter Thorson and City Clerk June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Parks to approve Consent Calendar No. 1. The motion was unanimously carried with Director Mu~oz and Roberts absent. 1. Minutes 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 13, 1994. GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT None given. DIRECTORS REPORT None given. Minutes. CSD\092794 - 1 - 7/19/94 Temecula Communitv Services District Minutes September 27, 1994 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Birdsall to adjourn at 8:16 PM to a meeting on October 11,1994, 8:00 PM, Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried with Director Mu~oz and Roberts absent. Jeff Stone, President ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk\Board Secretary Minutes.CSD\092794 -2- 7/19/94 ITEM 2 · APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Shawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services October 11, 1994 Utility Agreements for Pala Community Park - Project No. PW93-03CSD PREPARED BY: ~' Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects Dennis Armstrong, Assistant Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Authorize the Mayor to execute the Contract For Extension Of Electric Line Underground with Southern California Edison Company (SCE) to provide for installation of an underground line extension to Pala Community Park. 2. Authorize the payment of SCE application fees in the amount of $16,235.71. Authorize the Mayor to execute the Water System Construction Agreement and the Agency Agreement with Rancho California Water District (RCWD) to provide for installation of domestic water service to Pala Community Park. BACKGROUND: The first phase of construction began on August 17, 1994. The contractor is scheduled to begin installing the underground utilities at the end of October, 1994. Therefore, the Community Services District must enter into the following agreements prior to the installation of the underground utilities: Contract For Extension Of Electric Line Underground (SCE) and Water System Construction Agreement and Agency Agreement (RCWD). The attached standard agreements have been reviewed by the City Attorney and found to be acceptable for execution. r:\agdrpt\94\101 l\pw93-03.ut¥/alp FISCAL IMPACT: Application fees in the amount of $5,731.71 will be paid to RCWD. The application fees for an SCE service extension total $16,235.71. A portion of the SCE fees may be refundable after the completion of the project in accordance with the provisions specified in section 8 of the SCE contract. Although utility application fees are not a part of the construction contract, sufficient funds are available in the Capital Projects Account for Pala Community Park. This project is being funded through Development Impact Fees. ATTACHMENTS: Contract For Extension Of Electric Line Underground (SCE) Water System ConstruCtion Agreement (RCWD) Agency Agreement (RCWD) r:\agdrpt\94\101 l\pw93-03.uty/ajp REVISED: 9/6/94 CONTRACT FOR EXTERSION OF ELECTRIC LIRE UNDER6ROUND - RULE NO. 15 This Contract, issued this 6th day of September , 1994 , is made between SOOTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CONPANY, a corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'Edison'). and City of Temecula (hereinafter referred to as 'App]icant'.) RECITALS: Applicant has requested Edison, pursuant to Edison's Rule No. 15, Line Extensions, to provide for in tellatioR f an underground line extension to the location or locations in the County of , State of California, substantially described as follows: 44900 Temecula Lane Temecula, CA 92591 for delivery of electricity to serve the ]cad specified in this Contract or to reach a residential subdivision or Commercial or industrial development as referred to in Section B.3. of Rule Nos. 15.1 or 15.2. In consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this Contract. the parties named above agree as follows: 1. Edison shall install the underground electric distribution lines provided Edison has the legal right to occupy public streets, roads, and highways necessary for the construction. operation. and maintenance of such extension, or has first obtained rights of way therefor on public )ands and private property satisfactory to and without cost to or condemnation by Edison. subject to the terms of this Contract. 2. Service connections to furnish electric service shall be installed pursuant to Edison's Ru]e No. 15. 'Service Connections and Facilities on Customer's Premises'. 7830 The length of overhead equivalent line extension requested by Applicant is agreed to be feet. Any such line extension footage exceeding the total free footage shown in Paragraph 9 is tclb~Odesignated excess footage. For the purposes of this Agreement, the excess footage is agreed to be feet. 4. Edison's total estimated-installed cost of the line extension is $19,527.00 , Which amount is subject to refund based on the free footage allowances and provisions of Section 8. of Rule No. 15. 5. Three-fourths of the difference between the above stated total estimated-installed cost of the o f 6. Where mutually agreed upon by Edison and Applicant. Applicant shall perform additional work or install additional facilities in accordance with Edison's specifications, timing, and applicable tariffs. Edison shall reimburse Applicant for the Applicant-furnished facilities and work by applying a credit first toward the nonrefundable and then toward the refundable amounts due herein. 7. The total a~o~u~,o be paid by Applicant to Edison concurrently with the execution of this 1 71 Contract shall be $ which is the sum of the refundable advance and nonrefundable ~nounts required hereunder. less any reimbursable amount credited according to Paragraph 6. The refundable and nonrefundable amounts in this Contract include an income tax component of contribution and are calculated as shown below: Descr i Dt i on Amount a. Line 5,excess cable & ITCC Non-Refundable Billinq $15,261.83 b. PLUS 780' X 6,90 + ITCC Refundable BillinQ $ 7,211,88 c. LESS Structs, Excav, Duct & Tre~l~l~ursable Credit $ 6,238.00 d. Total Customer Billinq $16,235,71 e. OR Total Customer Credit -0- G860324.02 -1- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract. (Print or Type, except for Signature) Corporation. or partnership: Signature: / Mailing Address: Title: Telephone: Amount Advanced: (If group of Applicants) City of Temecula Ronald E. Bradley 43172 Business Park Dr., City Manager 909 694-6411 Temecula, CA 92590 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COHPANY District Manager (Sqgnature) San Jacinto Valley District Date Executed: Date Edison First Ready to Serve W.O. No. 6677-2303 32324 AssQc. W.O. NO(S). GBE0324.02 -4- 10. Applicant agrees to install, and commence using in a bona fide manner within six months aft- the date the line extension is completed and continue to so use for a period of three years, th appliances and items on which the Company's allowances are based. If applicant fails to take service fails to install one or more of the appliances or items contracted for, the Company may calculate and bill and the Applicant shall pay an amount according to the Company s line extension Rule in effect at the time extension was made as though service had been requested on the basis of the actual appliances and equipment installed. 11. Title to and ownership of the electric line extension and other facilities installed hereunder, which are to be owned, operated, and maintained by Edison as provided by Edison's tariffs. shall vest in Edison. Applicant does hereby agree that upon completion and acceptance by Edison of any Applicant- Installed facilities, title to each and every component part thereof shell immediately pass to Edison free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, without further action upon the part of Applicant. 12. Applicant warrants that all work and/or equipment furnished or installed by Applicant or its contractor shall be free of defects in workmanship and material. lhe warranty period shall begin from the date of final acceptance by Edison and extend for one year. Should the work develop defects during that period, Edison, at its election, shall either (a) repair Or replace the defective work and/or equipment, or {b) demand that Applicant repair or replace the defective work and/or the equipment and, in eitber event, Applicant shall be liable for all costs associated with such repair and/or replacement. Applicant, upon demand by Edison, shall promptly correct, to Edison's satisfaction and that of any governmental agency having jurisdiction, any breach of any warranty. 13. Applicant shall, at its own cost, defend, indemnify and hD)d harmless Edison, its officers, agents, employees, assigns and successors in interest from and against any and all liability, damages, losses, claims, demands, actions, causes of action, costs including attorney's fees and expenses, or any of them, resulting from the death or injury to any person or damages tD any property caused by Applicant or its contractor and employees, officers or agents of either Applicant op its contractor, or any of them, and arising out of the performance or nonperformance of their obligations under this Contract. 14. This Contract is subject to the applicable provisions of Edison's tariffs, including Rule 15, filed with and authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission. 15. 'This Contract shall, at all times, be subject to such changes or modifications by the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, as said Commission may, from time to time, direct in the exercise of its jurisdiction. 16. This Contract shall not be effective unless it is (i executed and delivered by Applicant Edison, together with payment required hereunder, within 90 days of the bate first written above, and accepted by Edison. This Contract shall then be effective on the date executed by Edison and shall take effect without further notice to Applicant. 17. Notwithstanding Paragraph No. 16 above, when applicable, if the Applicant does not commence installation of any Applicant-installed facilities (i.e. acts beyond mere preparation) within one year from the effective date of this Contract, Edison may, in its discretion, revise the basis of its estimates and recalculate the refundable, nonrefundable, and reimbursable sums set forth herein. 18. The completion date requested by Applicant is ~ ~nh~ ?~ 19q/, G860324,02 -3- REVISED: 9/6/94 CONTRACT FOR EXTEWSION OF ELECTRIC LINE UNDERGROUND - RULE NO. 15 This Contract. issued this 6th day of September , ]994__ . ts made between SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY. a corporation (heroinafter referred to as 'Edison'), and City of Temecula (hereinafter referred to as "Applicant".) RECITALS: Applicant has requested Edison. pursuant to Edison's Rule NO. 15, Line Extensions, to provide for in tailsrich. f an underground line extension to the location or locations in the County of . follows: State of California. substantially described as 44900 Temecula Lane Temecula, CA 92591 for delivery of electricity to serve the load specified in this Contract or to reach a residential subdivision or commercial or industrial development as referred to in Section B.3. of Rule Nos. 15.1 or 15.2. In consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this Contract, the parties named above agree as follows: 1. Edison shall install the underground electric distribution lines provided Edison has the legal right to occupy public streets, roads. and highways necessary for the construction, operation. and maintenance of such extension, or has first obtained rights of way therefor on public lands and private property satisfactory to and without cost to or condemnation by Edison. subject to the terms of this Contract, 2. Service connections to furnish electric service shall be installed pursuant to Edison's Rule No. 16, "Service Connections and Facilities on Customer's Premises', 7830 The length of overhead equivalent line extension requested by Applicant is agreed to be feet. Any such line extension footage exceeding the total free footage shown in Paragraph 9 is toTb~Odesignated excess footage. For the purposes of this Agreement, the excess footage is agreed to be feet. 4, Edison's total estimated-installed cost of the line extension is S19,527.00 , which amount is subject to refund based on the free footage allowances and provisions of Section B. of Rule No. 15. 5. Three-fourths of the difference between the above stated total estimated-installed cost of the tnhr; .. ,;; q; d-installed cos,: of an equi,,alent overhead li.e .; te.si ,n is o f 6. Where mutually agreed upon by Edison and Applicant. Applicant shall perform additional work or install additional facilities in accordance with Edison's specifications, timing, and applicable tariffs. Edison shall reimburse Applicant for the Applicant-furnished facilities and work by applying a credit first toward the nonrefundable and then toward the refundable amount~ due heroin. 7. The total amount to be paid by Applicant to Edison concurrently with the execution of this Contract shall be $ 16 f 235.71 which is the sum of the refundable advance and nonrefundable a~ounts required hereunder. less any reimbursable amount credited according to Paragraph 6. The refundable and nonrefundable amounts in this Contract include an income tax component of contribution and are calculated as shown below: Descr i pt i on Amount a. Line 5,excess cable & ITCC Non-Refundable Billinq $15,261.83 b, PLUS 780' X 6.90 + ITCC Refundable Billino $ 7,211.88 c, LEgS Structs, Excav, Duct & TreR~'~ursable Credit $ 6,238.00 d. Total Customer Billinq $16,235.71 e. OR Total Custome~ Credit -0- G85D3Z4.02 -t- 8. The refundable amount set forth in Paragraph 4 herein shall be subject to refund. without interest, in accordance with the following provisions: {a) Refunds will be made for connection of (1) separately metered permanent load and/or customs and (2) permanently installed load which is in excess of the toad for which allowance has been made where added by a customer within one year of first taking service. (b) Refunds will be made on the basis of $ 9,2 5 per foot for each foot that the allowable free length, as listed below, exceeds the additional length of an equivalent overhead line, if any, required to serve such new load and/or customers. rof connection of additional load by existing (c) Refunds will be made within 90 days. a.fter. date of first service to permanent load and/or customers, and within 90 days of date of notlflcetl~ customers. except that refunds due may be cumulated be o e pa)n~ent until they aggregate $25, or, if the total refundable balance is less than $25, until the amount due equals the balance. {d) Where there is a series of extensions, on any of which an amount is still refundable, and Edison makes succeeding free extensions with excess allowances or where additional load or customers connect to succeeding extensions, refunds will be made to repay in turn each of such amounts which remain refundable beginning with the first in series from the original point of supply. (el When two or more parties make a joint advance on the same extension, refundable amounts will be distributed to these parties in the same proportion as their individual advances bear to the total joint aovance. {f) No refund will be made by Edison in excess of the amount subject to refund nor after a period of ten years from the date Edison is first ready to render service from the extension, and any unrefunded amount remaining at the end of the ten-year period will become the property of Edison. 9. ALLOWABLE FREE LENGTH OF EXTENSION: ALLOWANCE * X NUMBER = FEET DF FREE EXTENSION Lighting and Appliance Customer{s) 300 feet Electric Refrigerator Customer{s) 75 feet Electric Range Customer{s) 2DO feet Electric Water Heater Customer{s) 275 feet Electric Clothes Dryer Customer{s) 40 feet k~ of Heating Equipment (1.5 kW or more per unit) 35 feet HP of Motors {i hp or more per motor) 50 feet Home Freezer Customer{s) 5D feet Automatic Dishwasher Customer{s) 2D feet Air Cooling Installations {less than one hp per unit) 50 feet Furnace Blower Motors 10 feet Heat Pump Customer{s) 800 feet HP of Air Conditioning Load {room or central unit} 75 feet OTHER SERVICE kW of Connected Lighting Load kW of Connected Cooking or Heating Load HP of Connected Motor Load {one hp or more per motor) HP of Air Conditioning Load (room or central unit) 1,000 Lumens of Street Lighting 125 feet 75 feet 175 feet 50 feet 25 feet Total Free Footage Total Free Footage Allowed FEET OF FREE EXTENSION -0- G860324.D2 -2- 10. Applicant agrees to install, and cormnonce using in a bona fide manner within six months after the date the line extension is completed and continue to so use for a period of three years, those appliances and itemson which the Company's allowances are based. If applicant fails to take service or fails to install one or more of the appliances or items contracted for, the Company may calculate and bill and the Applicant shall pay an amount according to the Company's line extension Rule in effect at the time extension was made as though service had been requested on the basis of the actual appliances and equipment installed. 11. Title to and ownership Of the electric line extension and other facilities installed hereunder, which are to be owned, operated, and maintained by Edison as prqv__i~ed by Edison's tariffs, shall vest in Edison. Applicant does hereby agree that upon completion and acceptance by Edison of any Applicant- installed facilities, title tD each and every component part thereof shell in~nediately pass to Edison free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, without further action upon the part of Applicant. 12. Applicant warrants that all work and/or equipment furnished or installed by Applicant or its contractor shall be free of defects in workmanship and material. The warranty period shall begin fro~ the date of final acceptance by Edison and extend for one year. Should the work develop defects during that period, Edison, at its election, shall either {a) repair or replace the defective work and/or equipment, or (b) demand that Applicant repair or replace the defective work and/or the equipment and, in either event, Applicant shall be liable for all costs associated with such repair and/or replacement. Applicant, upon demand by Edison, shall promptly correct, to Edison's satisfaction and that of any governmental agency having jurisdiction, any breach of any warranty. 13. Applicant shall, at its own cost, defend, indemnify and hold harmless Edison, its officers, agents, employees, assigns and successors in interest from and against any and all liability, damages, losses, claims, demands, actions, causes of action, costs including attorney's fees and expenses, or any of them, resulting from the death or injury to any person or damages to any property caused by Applicant or its contractor and employees, officers or agents of either Applicant or its contractor, or any of them, and arising cut of the performance or nonperformance of their obligations under this Contract. 14. This Contract is subject to the applicable provisions of Edison's tariffs, including Rule No. i5, filed with and authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission. 15. This Contract shall, at all times, be subject to such changes or modifications by the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, as said Commission may, from time to time, direct in the exercise of its jurisdiction. i6. This Contract shall not be effective unless it is {i} executed and delivered by Applicant to Edison, together with payment required hereunder, within 90 days of the date first written above, and (ii) accepted by Edison. This Contract shall then be effective on the date executed by Edison and shall take effect without further notice to Applicant. 17. Notwithstanding Paragraph No. 16 above, when applicable, if the Applicant does nat commence installation of any Applicant-installed facilities {i.e. acts beyond mere preparation) within one year from the effective date of this Contract, Edison may, in its discretion, revise the basis of its estimates and recalculate the refundable, nonrefundable, and reimb~;/sable sums set forth heroin. 18. The completion date requested by Applicant is ¶ ~o~nh~r ?A, 199/~ · GaGO324.02 -3- IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this Contract. (Print or Type, except for Signature) Corporation. or Partnership: City Of TemecUla Name of Individua~//~ / Signature: Mailing Address:/ Title: Telephone: Amount Advanced: (If group of Applicants) 43172 Business Park Dr., Temecula, 909 694-6411 CA 92590 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY District Manager (S~gnature) San Oacinto Valley District Date Executed: Date Edison First Ready to Serve w.0. No. 6677-2303 32324 Assoc. W.O. No(s). G860324.02 -4- REVISED: 9/6/94 CONTRACT FOR EXTENSION OF ELECTR]C LINE UNDERGROUND - RULE NO. 15 This Contract, issued this 6th day of September , 1994 , is made between SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, a corporation (heroinafter referred to as 'Edison"~', and City of Temecula (heroinafter referred to as "App]icant".) RECITALS: Applicant has requested Edison, pursuant to Edison'a Rule No. 15, Line Extensions, to provide for in tallarSon. f an underground line extension to the location or locationsin the County of t zvers e · State of California· substantially described as follows: 44900 Temecula Lane Temecula, CA 92591 for delivery of e]ectricity to serve the load specified in this Contract or to reach a residential subdivision or commercial or industrial development as referred to in Section B.3. of Rule Nos. 15.1 or 15.2. In consideration of the above recitals and of the mutual promises and covenants contained in this Contract, the parties named above agree as follows: I. Edison shall install the underground electric distribution lines provided Edison has the )egal right to occupy public streets, roads, and highways necessary for the construction, operation, and maintenance of such extension, or has first obtained rights of way therefor on public lands and private property satisfactory to and without cost to or condemnation by Edison, subject to the terms of this Contract. 2. Service connections to furnish electric service shall be installed pursuant to Edison's Rule No. 16, "Service Connections and Facilities on Customer's Premises'. 7830 The length of overhead equivalent line extension requested by Applicant is agreed to be feet. Any such line extension footage exceeding the total free footage shown in Paragraph 9 is to~b~Odeslgnated excess footage. For the purposes of this Agreement, the excess footage is agreed to be feet. 4. Edison's total estimated-installed cost of the line extension is $19,527.00 , which amount is subject to refund based on the free footage allowances and provisions of Section B. of Rule No. 15. 5. Three-fourths of the difference between the above stated total estimated-installed cost of the = qEeTd-installed cost of an equivalent overhead li.. exteos, . is o f B. Where mutually agreed upon by Edison and Applicant, Applicant shall perform additional work or install additional facilities in accordance with Edison's specifications, timing, and applicable tariffs. Edison shall reimburse Applicant for the Applicant-furnished facilities and work by applying a credit first toward the nonrefundable and then toward the refundable amount~ due heroin. ,. The t;;a %e pa,d by Applicant to Ed,son concurr.ntly w,th the .xesution of this Contract shall 1 7which is the sum of the refundable advance and nonrefundable amounts required hereunder, less any reimbursable amount credited according to Paragraph 6. The refundable and nonrefundable amounts in this Contract include an income tax component of contribution and are calculated as shown below: a. Line b. d. Description Amount 5,excess cable & I~CC Non-Refundable Billinq $15~261,83 PLUS 780' X 6,9D + I~CC Refundable Billinq $ 7~211.88 LESS Structs~ Excav~ Duct & ~reRne~'~ursable Credit $ 6~238.00 Total Customer Billinq $16~235.71 OR Total Customer Credit -0- G860324.02 -1- 8. The refundable amount set forth in Paragraph 4 heroin shall be subject to refund, without interest, in accordance with the following provisions: (a) Refunds will be ma~e for connection of {1) separately metered permanent load and/or customer. and (2) permanently installed load which is in excess of the load for which allowance has been made where added by a customer within one year of first taking service. (b) Refunds will be made on the basis of $ 9 o 2 5 per foot for each foot that the allowable free length, as listed below, exceeds the additional length of an equivalent overhead line, if any, required to serve such new load and/or customers. (c) Refunds will be made within 9D days after date of first service to permanent load and/or customers, and within gO days of date of notification of connection of additional load by existing customers, except that refunds due may be cumulated before payment until they aggregate $25, or, if the total refundable balance is less than $25, until the amount due equals the balance. (d) Where there is a series of extensions, on any of which an an~unt is still refundable, and Edison makes succeeding free extensions with excess allowances or where additional load or customers connect to succeeding extensions, refunds will be made to repay in turn each of such amounts which remain refundable beginning with the first in series from the original point of supply. (el When two or more parties make a joint advance on the same extension, refundable amounts will be distributed to these parties in the same proportion as their individual advances beer to the total joint advance. (f) No refund will be made by Edison in excess of the amount subject to refund nor after a period of ten years from the date Edison is first ready to render service from the extension, and any unrefunded amount remaining at the end of the ten-year period will become the property of Edison. 9. ALLOWABLE FREE LENGTH OF EXTENSION: ALLOWANCE * X NUMBER = FEET OF FREE EXTENSION Lighting and Appliance Customer{s) 300 feet Electric Refrigerator Customer(s) 75 feet Electric Range Customer{s) 200 feet Electric Water Heater Customer{s) 275 feet Electric Clothes Dryer Customer(s) 40 feet kW of Heating Equipment {1.5 kW or more per unit) 35 feet HP of Motors {i hp or more per motor) 50 feet Home Freezer Customer(s) 50 feet Automatic Dishwasher Customer{s) 20 feet Air Cooling Installations {less than one hp per unit) 50 feet Furnace Blower Motors 10 feet Heat Pump Customer{s) 800 feet HP of Air Conditioning Load (room or central unit) 75 feet DTHER SERVICE kW of Connected Lighting Load kW of Connected Cooking or Heating Load HP of Connected Motor Load (one hp or more per motor) HP Df Air Conditioning Load (room or central unit) 1,000 Lumens of Street Lighting 125 feet 75 feet 175 feet 50 feet 25 feet Total Free Footage Total Free Footage Allowed FEET OF FREE EXTENSION -0- G86D324.02 10. Applicant agrees to install. and commence using in a bona fide manner within six months after the date the llne extension is completed and continue to so use for a period of three years, those appliances and items on which the Company's allowances are based. If applicant fails to take service or fails to install one or more of the appliances or items contracted for. the Company may calculate and bill and the Applicant shall pay an amount according to the Compan~s line extension Rule in effect at-t'ne time extension was made as though service had been requested on the basis of the actual appliances and equipment installed. 11. Title to and ownership of the electric line extension and other facilities installed hereunder. which are to be owned. operated. and maintained by Edison as pr~v_].i~ed by Edison's tariffs. shall vest in Edison. Applicant does hereby agree that Upon completion and acceptance by Edison of any Applicant- installed facilities, title to each and every component part thereof shall ir~nediately pass to Edison free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. without further action upon the part of Applicant. 12. Applicant warrants that all work and/or equipment furnished or installed by Applicant or its contractor shall be free of defects in workmanship and material. The warranty period shall begin frcm~ the date of final acceptance by Edison and extend for one year. Should the work develop defects during that period. Edison, at its election. shall either (a) repair or replace the defective work and/or equipment. or {b} demand that Applicant repair or replace the defective work and/or the equipment and. in either event, Applicant shall be liable for all costs associated with such repair and/or replacement. Applicant. upon demand by Edison. shall promptly correct. to Edison's satisfaction and that of any governmental agency having jurisdiction, any breach of any warranty. I3. Applicant shall. at its own cost. defend. indemnify and hold harmless Edison. its officers. agents. employees. assigns and successors in interest from and against any and all liability. damages. losses. claims. demands, actions. causes of action. costs including attorney's fees and expenses, or any of them. resulting from the death or injury to any person or damages to any property caused by Applicant or its contractor and employees. off icers or agents of either Applicant or its contractor. or any of them. and arising out of the performance or nonperformance of their obligations under this ContraCt. 14. This Contract is subject to the applicable provisions of Edison's tariffs. including Rule No. 15. filed with and authorized by the California Public Utilities Commission. 15. ~his Contract shall. at all times. be subject to such changes or modifications by the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. as said Commission may. from time to time. direct in the exercise of its jurisdiction. 16. This Contract shall not be effective unless it is i) executed and delivered by Applicant to Edison, together with payment required hereunder, within g0 days of the date first written above. and {ii) accepted by Edison. This Contract shall then be effective on the date executed by Edison and shall take effect without further notice to Applicant. 17. Notwithstanding Paragraph No. 16 above. when applicable. if the Applicant does not commence installation of any Applicant-installed facilities (i.e. acts beyond mere preparation) within one year frDm the effective date of this Contract. Edison may. in,its discretion. revise the basis of its estimates and recalculate the refundable. nonrefundable. and reimbu~/Sabte sums set forth heroin. 18. The completion date requested by Applicant is ~ Octobe~ 28, 1994 . G860324,02 -3~ IN WITNESS WHEREOP. the parties hereto have executed this Contract. {Print or Type. except for Signature) Corporation. or Partnership: City of Temecula Name of Individual / Signature: V// Mailing Address: Title: V/ Telephone: Amount Advanced: {If group of Applicants} 43172 Business Park Dr., 909 694-6411 Temecula, CA 92590 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY District Manager (S~gnature) San Jacinto Valley District Date Executed: Date Edison First Ready to Serve w.0. No. 6677-2303 32324 Assoc. W.0. No(s). G860324.02 -4- ~ RANCH0 CALIFORNIA VATEl DISTXICT OF RIVZRSIDE COUNTY VATEI $YSTEN CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT (DEVELOPER INITIATED/CONTKACTOI INSTALLED) THIS AGREEMENT is made on this llth day of October 1994 . by and between RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, a public agency of the State of California, hereShelter designated as the 'District' end City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Dr.,Temecula, CA 92590 , represented by Ronald E. Bradley,City M~r 'Developer', located st Ph. No. (909) 694-6444 hereinafter designated as the W~rEEAS, Developer iS plannan2 a development of three (3) lo~(s) located within the development referenced wAthin records of the County of Riverside, State of California. as: Lots 87, 88 and 89 of Tract No. 21067 and is further identified on the map attached to and made a part of this Agreement$ and WHEREAS, said subdivision viII require a water distribution system to provide domestic water service to the lands referenced above; and W~RZAS, Developer is desirous of havin2 the District provide domestic water service to said lands and is viiiin2 to convey to the · District the water distribution system after the construction thereof. contingent upon the Dlstrict's acceptance of such conveyance on the terms and conditions set forth herein. THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGKEZ AS FOLLOWS: 1. District agrees to provide domestic water service to the aforesaid development in compliance with its applicable rules. regulations, APPENDIX 'L' 8/1/91 ordinances, orders when, as, and If Developer has complied vltb the terms end conditions contained herein. 2. Developer agrees to construct the water system facilities necessary for aforesaid development in accordance with the following terms and conditions: A. Developer viII cause water flystem facilities to be constructed ·s shown on the Discrict approved water construction drawings at its expense by · qualified California licensed Contractor. Said Contractor shall be currently licensed by the State of California with either a specialty contractor, 'C-3&, pipeline license or a General Engineerins Contractor, "A" license. Said contractor shall be experienced in the construction of domestic racer systems and shall have been reviewed by the District and epproved by the District as · qualified Contractor before I contract is signed and construction begins. I. Said water system facilities will be constructed and installed in full compliance with all applicable rules, regulations and ordinances of District including, bu~ not limited to, District's Standard Snecifications and Standard Drawl·as for Veter end SanStar7 Sever Yacllities. 'C. Vater construction drawings for said water system facilities shall be approved by District prior to the presentation thereof to contractors for bidding purposes and said facilities shall be constructed and installed in full compliance with said ·pproved vater construction drawings and District specifications referenced in paragraph 'B' above. D. The entire cost of the construction of such domestic system shall be paid by the Developer. Such construction shall be APPENDIX 811191 inspected by District personnel for conformance with the spproved dravinSs and District specifications. Z. The District is not responsible and does not own the water system facilities until the7 ere inspected and approved by the District,' the-Paithful'Perf~,u,ance 'Bond is executed and accepted by the District, all fees and charSos ere paid in fuZZ, the Unconditional Lien Vaiver and Release and the gater System Grant Deed ere executed and accepted by the District. Until such Developer is responsible for the facilities and is liable for damsBe to said facilities, F. All existin2 District facilities shall be protected in place. Any damaled District facilities shell be replaced or repaired by ~eveloper at the davalope:'s expense to the satisfaction of District. G. Developer will, on demand, pay all costs incurred by the District as may be necessary to complete construction lncludin2 the applicable hourly rate for an inspector for such time as may be required as determined by District to inspect the construction of the water system facilities. Said rates shall be that which is applicable at the time of actual inspection. The inspector shall work under the supervision of District, and shall provide inspection until the vater system facilities is accepted and approvad as stated herein. 3. Construction shall not basin until District issues the 'Notice to Proceed". Prior to District issuin2 "rotice to Proceed", Developer shall submit the followinS: A. Copy of contract between Developer and Contractor verifying cost of water system facility construction. 811191 APPENDIX 'L' B. Certiftcntloa of streets to finnl Irede, C. Certificates of insurance for contractor and all subcontractors on District form (A reSins of A in the latest issue of Best's Key Ratins Guide, Property-Casualty, Written by A.H. Best Company). D. A faithful performance bond with corporate surety or sureties satisfactory to the District (A resins of A in the latest issue of Best's Key Rating Guide, Property-Casualty, Written by A.H. Best Company) on District forms. Said performance bond bait8 for not less than one hundred percent (100Z) of the tots1 contract price. Said bond Susrsntees the completion of the facilities (including submission of the Unconditional Lien Waiver and Release and the Water System Grsnt Deed) and Suarantees the materials and workmanship of the installed domestic water system against failures of any type for one (1) year from the date of the fllins of the 'Notice of Completion'. Said bond shall provide for the payment of all costs incurred by the District for the repair of such failures within the one (1) year Suerattle period. separate City/County bondinI is required, Developer can submit approved copy of City/County bondins in lieu of District bond. 4. The District will provide construction water sad firs protection to the development after the Contractor has completed all items on the District Inspector's Construction Deficiency List, evidence has been submitted indicstin8 County acceptance of compsction, acceptable becterioloSicnl test results have been obtained, and any remaining inspection fees art paid in full. APPENDIX 'L' 8flfg~ 5- The District will provide drop-in meters to the development and file a Notice of Completion after the following has been submitted: A. Drop-in Meter Application and all related meter installation and connection fees. B. Unconditional Lien Waiver and Release for waterline construction. C. A Grant Deed executed b7 Developer vesting title of said water system facilities to the District. 5aid Grant Deed must be on District form and vests title only after the District files the Notice of Completion. In the event water rights are appurtenant to the development, Developer shall also grant said water rights to the District on District form. D. An Agency Agreement will be required for each parcel if there is not a current Agenc7 Agreement recorded against the property. The Agenc7 Agreement gives the District the right of management of the groundwater resource to the District. for the benefit of all District customers. 6. At District's option, the terms and conditions of this Agreement will become null and void and District will have no further' obligations hereunder in the event the construction of the facilities covered herein has not begun within 12 months of the date of this Agreement. In the event construction has not been accepted by District within 24 months of the date of this Agreement, this Agreement and an7 other related water system facility requirements must then be revised to include any new conditions and to cover all increased costs, including an7 new fees and charges which may be in effect at that time. No further work will be permitted until all provisions of this paragraph have been fulfilled. APPENDIX 8/1/91 7. Developer agrees to hold the District free and harmless from any expense or liability resulting from the construction or installation of the water system facilities, and further agrees that Developer will indemnify the District and viii hold it, its employees and agents free and harmlesl from and against any and ell liabilities for death, injury, loss or damage to .persons -or .property which may arise before, after or during construction of the water system facilities as a result of any work performed by Developer or on its behalf. 8. In the event that either party shall fail to perform its part of this Agreement, and suit shall be comehoed, or an attorney employed to enforce the provisions thereof, the party who fails to perform his part of the Agreement agrees to pay any and all costs involved therein, and to pay a reasonable attorney's fee. 9. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto, and each of them. 10. Vhenever in this Agreement notice is required to be given, the same shall be given by certified mall, postage prepaid, addressed to the respective parties It the following addresses: To Eancho California rarer District: Rancho California ~ater District General ~anager P.O. Box 174 Tamsouls, California 92390-0174 TO Developer: City of Temecula Ci~V Manager 43174 Business Park Tamsouls, CA 92590-3606 APPENDIX "L' 811191 ZZ. This ASFeemenC coDe/ins IZ~ of the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties hereto, end no o~her aircements, oral or otherwise, shall be deemed to exist or to bind the parties hereto unless hereafter duXy placed in writin8 and executed by the undersiSned. 8/1191 APPENDIX 'L' RANCHO CALIFOKNIA WATER DISTRICT General ManeSet Date: DEVELOPEl Company: City of Temecula By: Name: Ronald E. Bradley Tt~e: City Manager Date: APPENDIX 'L' Slllgl W, .zo'7 RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT 42135 Winchester Roac~ Post Office Box 9017 _Temecula CA 92589-901" AGENCY AGREEMENT NO. THIS AGREEMENT, made this 1 lth day of October 19 94 ,by and between City Of T~.mertt]~ (hereinafter referred to as "Landowner"), and RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT. a Dubhc corporanon organized and existing under Division 13 of the Wafer Code of the State of Califorma (nerelnafter referred to as me "District"), for the property described as follows: p= 1 = Co---,,,,ity Park (legal description attached). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS. the District has power and authority to act as agent for the extraction. diversion. storage and distribution of water owned by other parties: and WHEREAS. Landowner es the owner of certain land within the D~strlct described In Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof: and WHEREAS, said land owned by Landowner is a portion of lane found by the United States District Court. United States of America vs. Fallbrook Public Utility District, et el., m the United States Dis~_nct Court, Southern District of California. Southern Division. Case No. 1247. affirmed in part by the Urnted grates Court of Appeals for tRe Ninth Circuit, Case No. 18931. to , land riDerlab to Certain rivers and Streams, including the anta Marganta Rrver and its tributaries. and also which may De lane ovenay~ng percolating waters under a court decree entered December 26 1940 ~n the case Rancho Santa Margarlta vs. Vail. 11 CaL.2d 401 (19391. and reinstated by the United States Court of ApDea~s for the Ninth Circuit in said Case No 18931: are WHEREAS. Landowner w~tnout transferring any water right and pr~vnege pertaining to said land, does desire to empower the D~stnct to act as its agent and the agent of its Successors and assigns to extract. store and d~vert me water to which it is entitled (herelnafter referred to as "local water"1 and to supply the same to its land and all other land having. under the laws of the State of Cafitorma or pursuant to any ludgement or contract, a tegal right to have sa~d water apphed thereon. NOW, THEREFORE in consideranon of the mutual prom~ses and agreements herera contained. the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Landowner hereby designates the Dmtrict its excius~ve agent and the exclusive agent of its assigns and successors In interest tar the extraction. dwerslon, storage. blendrng and distribution of all local water upon or under the lands of Landowner referred to in the recitals hereof for the burpose of butting Sa~d local water to beneficial use to the fulleel extent of which it ~s capaPle for the lands and inhabitants of Landowner and all other lands within the watershed of me Santa Margarlta R~ver, and its tributaries on Which said local water now and hereafter may be legally apDhed. It is the intention of Landowner by this Agreement to maintain a binding and ~ermanent arrangement whereby said local water shall be oDerly maintained and be perpetually delivered and distributed o all of said lands entitled mereto and the subdivisions thereof for the use of Landowner. Its assigns and its successors in roterest and other owners of such lands. Section 2. Landowner hereby grants to the D~stnct the right to blend local water with imported supplemental water. to d~stnbute imported water to Landowner in i~eu of or In addmen to the distribution of local water and to Store ~moor~ed water under me lands of Landowner, Section 3. Landowner agrees that all local water to De used by Landowner within the DIStrict shall De obtained from the D~strlct or its assigns and successors in interest. Landowner snail not divert or extract within or outside the boundaries of the District local water for Landowners own use within the Dlstnct nor shall Landowner supply local water for use within the District by others. Landowner further agrees not to divert or extract within the District local water for use Dy Landowner or 0there outside the Distract. Landowner reserves to itself its assigns and its successors In Interest all water right5 and Dnvileges presently owned and which may De herematter acquired pertaining to Said land and nothing in this Agreement snail be construed as appropriating or dedicating sa~e water rights or any water to public use Section 4 This agency snail be effectwe and ~rrevocable in perpetuity and the same snarl be eeemeo an agency coupled with an interest. provided nowever tn~s Agreement shall terminate and be of no further force or effect upon a determination by any court of Competent jurisdiction m an appropriate action that the-method of extraction and distribution of sa~d local water nereln provided is not a Proper method of exercising the riDerlab and other water rights of Landowner. Section 5. The District agrees to d~vert. extract. store and distribute local water for the benefit of Landowner The D~stnct agrees to accluire by lease. burchase. gin or omerw~se all wells and water distribution facihtles useful and necessary to extract. store and distribute sa~d local water to the lands and Inhabitants entitled thereto ~n accordance with tins Agreement, Nothing contained here~n shall prohibit the D~stnct from exercising any of its powers granted by the Cahfom~a Water D~strlct Law nor snail the District be brohib~ted from acGumng supplemental water for distribution to all lands within the District Section 6. This Agreement shalt not be assignable Dy the D~strict without the written consent of Landowner: provided nowever. the District may contract with any munlc.aal. public or private corporation for the management and operation of any water facilities owned by or leased by the D~strict. Section 7. The District snail nave full controi of the afiocatlon of all costs of acclulsition an0 construction of D~stnct facilities using any method or a combination of methods. as set forth m the California Water D~strlct Law, or raising tunes to defray said costs. The District may adopt such rules and regutanons for the diStributIOn Of tracal water as it beems necessary Tne DISTriCt may allocate the distribution df the available local water ~n any manner authorized ~n The California Water D~stnct Law or the rules and regulations of the District adopted pursuant to said law Rates and charges for the distribution Of local water may De made aria snal; De payable by Lanaowner, its assigns and the successors m Interest as detertamed by the Board of D~rectors of the Distnct from time to time: provided. however. said rates and charges shal~ not be so set to discriminate between water users In substantmlly the same classification SECTION 8 Neither the DIstnct nor the Landowner warrants The auantlty or auahty ot the local water to be extracted and a~stnDulea by tne D~strict SECTION 9 The District and Landowner intend that the prows~ons of the Agency Agreement shall constitute covenants that run w~th the land and shah inure to the benefit of and be bindrag upon the assigns and successors in interest of the Dlstnct and Landowner The District and Landowner therefore agree as follows: ta) The D~stnct is the owner of land and water d~stributlon facilihes within its boundaries which will be benefitted by the Agency Agreement. The District land benefits from The Agency Agreement because wells located on the District land nave a more assured reliable water supply. The District land particularly benefitted by the terms of this Agency Agreement is described in Exhibit "B" of that certain Agency Agreement recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Rwerside as Document No 398782 by the D~strlct on October 22, 1992, wmcn ts ~ncorporated heroin by reference. Landowners land conefits from the rights set forth in Sections 1 and 5 above to connect to the District's water system. The covenants of the Agency Agreement alsra benefit all other landowners within the boundaries of the District who have similarly covenanted with the D~stnct. by securing a reliable region-wide water source. and its attendant ~ncreased property values. The boundands of the District are described In Exhibit "C" of that certain Agency Agreement recorded m the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside as Document No 398782 ra> me Distrio: o- OCtODe' 22 1992, which IS Incorporated herera ray reference Linedwho' is the owner of land which Is affected by the covenants o; this Agency Agreement and' is descrlbec in Exnlp:t "t- ~D Tn~ covenants of this Agency Agreement snal: de DIROIR_C UDC- successive owners of the lane oescrloed in Exhsra~: "A e' ~ interest therein Or a bertion thereof for the Deneht Of the Disthe, land and facilities and other landowners who have s~mdarty covehinted with the D~stnct. lc} The parties agree that the acts required by th~s Agency Agreemen: relate to the use repair maintenance and improvement O~ the long described ~n Exmpzt "A". (d) The parties agree that the Agency Agreemen! snarl be recorded at the County Recorder s Oft~ce o~ RIverside County ft is further agreed that this Agency Agreement snal, not be effective until it is recorded at the o~Ece of tne R~versloe County Recorder. and crabsent for recordatlon is nereev giver SECTION 10. In the event Landowner snail conve~ transfer or m any manner alienate title to all Or any perhen ot the real proper~y of Landowner iracited within the DEStnCt. the successors in interest in the fee Simple estate or any lessor estate oT Said real property shall execute an Agency Agreement m tne ~oentlcal form hereof as a condition precedent to said transfer: proweed however, non-compliance with sa~d condition snail in no w~se de Construed to annul or terminate the agency created hereby and all rights and duties hereunder snail De bindrag on me assigns and successors In interest of the reai property of Landowner located within the D~stnct SECTION 11. If any one or more of the terms prows~ons covenants or condffions of this Agency Agreement snail to any extent be declared invalid. unenforceable, void or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of competent ~unsd~ctlon+ the findrag or order or decree of which becomes final, none of the remaining terms. provisions, covenants and con01tsons of this Agency Agreement snail be affected thereby and each provision of this Agency Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to th~ fullest extent permitted by law IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. City of Temecula P'Lan~owner CORPORATESEALi Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager ATTEST: Secretary: RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT By: General Manager EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PALA COMMUNITY PARK Lots 87, 88 and 89, of Tract No. 21067, in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, as shown by map on file in Book 231 of Maps, Pages 41 through 48, inclusive, recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of said County. pwl 3\agdrpt\94\O927\pw93-O3.uty MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1994 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order on Tuesday, September 13, 1994, 8:59 P.M. at the Temecula Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California, Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding. PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Roberts, Stone, Parks ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson, City Clerk June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENT None given. AGENCY BUSINESS 1. Minutes It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Mu~oz to approve staff recommendation as follows: 1.1 Approve the minutes of August 9, 1994. 1.2 Approve the minutes of August 23, 1994. The motion was unanimously carried. 2. RDA Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Criteria Finance Officer Mary Jane McLarney presented the staff report. Agency Member Stone asked legal counsel if he has a conflict on this item based on his ownership of property in Old Town. City Attorney Peter Thorson ruled no conflict exists since no specific property in Old Town Temecula is involved. Theresa McLeod, 42200 Main Street, No. F128, spoke in favor of leaving the loan criteria as it stands with a $100,0001imit. Agency Member Stone stated the City is not a bank and emphasized his commitment to the $100,000 limit. RDAMIN/09/13/94 1 O8/29/94 Redevelopment Aaency Minutes September 13, 1994 Agency Member Mu~oz voiced his support of the $100,000 limit. Agency Member Birdsall requested that a site map and documentation of bank denial of funding be added to the loan application package and check list. Chairperson Parks stated there needs to be a method to review projects on an individual basis, perhaps through a different program. He emphasized the benefits of projects that clearly meet redevelopment goals and reinvest a portion of the $14,000,000 redevelopment funds back into the community. Agency Member Roberts suggested that larger loans should be referred to Riverside County Economic Development funding. It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Roberts to direct staff to maintain the policy without change in the amounts authorized and further directed that a requirement for a site map, and documentation of bank denial of funding be added to the loan application package and check list. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Roberrs, Stone NOES: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Parks ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Executive Director Ron Bradley informed the Agency the proposed bylaws for the Main Street Program have been submitted to the Old Town Merchants Association for review. He also reported that the in-house technical work has been completed to assist them with the recruitment for the Main Street Director. He stated the package will be going to them this week for their review and comment and will be shared with the Agency. AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS Agency Member Birdsall asked that the Agency Members see the documentation before it is distributed, because of the concerns she had outlined. She asked if the existing organization will become the Main Street Organization or whether a new organization will be formed. Executive Director Bradley explained that the Main Street Program will stand on its own as a new organization and what the Old Town Merchants Organization choose to do is up to them. He said that concerns of the organization are being met and the program will be agendized for Agency Review and input. RDAMIN/09/13~94 2 08~29~94 Redevelooment Aaencv Minutes Seotember 13, 1994 Chairperson Parks requested that the RTC apartment project be placed on the agenda for a status report. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Roberrs to adjourn at 9:25 P.M. to a meeting on September 27, 1994, 8:00 PM. The motion was unanimously carried. ATTEST: Chairperson Ronald J. Parks City Clerk June S. Greek RDAMIN/09/13/94 3 08/29/94 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1994 A regular meeting of the City of Temeeula Redevelopment Agency was called to order on Tuesday, September 27, 1994, 8:16 P.M. at the Temeeula Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California, Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding. PRESENT: 3 ABSENT: 2 AGENCY MEMBERS: AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Stone, Parks Mufioz, Roberrs Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, City Attorney Peter Thorson, City Clerk June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENT None given. CONSENT CALENDAR It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Birdsall to approve Consent Calendar Items 1 and 2. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 2 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Stone, Parks AGENCY MEMBERS: None AGENCY MEMBERS: Mufioz, Roberrs Minutes 1.1 Approve the minutes of September 7, 1994. Final Version of the International Rectifier Owner Participation Agreement 2.1 Approve the revised Owner Participation Agreement for International Rectifier. RDAMJNI09127194 1 08~29~94 Redevelopment Aclencv Minutes AGENCY BUSINESS September 27, 1994 h was moved by Agency Member Birdsall, seconded by Agency Member Stone to continue Items 3 and 5 to the meeting of October 11, 1994. Contract Amendment to Provide Visual Impact Analysis in the EIR for Old Town Redevelopment Project Appropriation and AuthOrization to Release Funds for Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sign Lease The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 2 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Stone, Parks AGENCY MEMBERS: None AGENCY MEMBERS: Mufioz, Roberrs Status Report on Proposed Purchase of Rancbo West Apartments Assistant City Manager Woody Edvalson presented the staff report. Agency Member Birdsall suggested that if the City does purchase these apartments, a couple of units be used as a mini recreation center. She explained this type of facility has been very successful in other cities and information is available through the League of California Cities. Therese McLeod, 42200 Main Street, No. F128, addressed the Agency regarding the importance of quality apartment management and recommended retaining the current management company of the Rancho West Apartments if the City acquires this property. Chairperson Ron Parks ordered the item received and filed. AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS None given. RDAMINI09127194 2 08/29/94 Redevelopmerit Aaencv Minutes EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT September 27, 1994 Executive Director Ron Bradley reported that the Buffman Hot Line has received 125 calls on both sides of the issue. He thanked the citizens for their input and encouraged everyone to participate. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Birdsall to adjourn at 8:30 P.M. to a meeting on October 11, 1994, 8:00 PM. The motion was unanimously carried. ATYE S T: Chairperson Ronald J. Parks City Clerk June S. Greek RDAMINI09127194 3 08/29194 ITEM 2 CITY MANAGER ~", [ TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: Redevelopment Agency Board Members Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning DATE: October 11, 1994 SUBJECT: Contract Amendments to Provide a Visual Impact Analysis in the EIR for the Old Town Redevelopment Project RECOMMENDATION: It is requested that the Redevelopment Agency Board authorize the City Manager to: (1) Approve an amendment to the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates to add a visual impact analysis into the Environmental Impact Report for the Old Town Redevelopment Project; and, (2) Increase the amount of the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates by $9,887.96; and, (3) Approve an amendment to the contract with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo to perform additional building design services needed to support the visual impact analysis; and, (4) Increase the amount of the contract with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo by $13,000. BACKGROUND: On May 31, 1994, the Redevelopment Agency approved the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the Old Town Redevelopment (Buffman) Project. On June 27, 1994, City staff held a Public Scoping Meeting to solicit citizen input on the topics and issues that should be included in the EIR. During the meeting, several people expressed a concern that the proposed project, including the Western Bypass Corridor, would have a significant adverse impact on the area's visual character. Based upon these comments, staff determined that adding a visual analysis into the EIR was necessary to adequately address the community's concerns. As a result, staff requested that Tom Dodson contact a firm experienced in computer assisted visual analysis and have them submit a proposal to the City. A Riverside-based firm, Geographics, submitted a proposal in August to perform a comprehensive Aesthetic and Visual Analysis. A copy of the Geographics proposal is included in Attachment No. 1. In the process of preparing the scope of work for the visual impact analysis, a need for additional information on the locations and shapes of the proposed arena and hotels was identified. This additional design work will allow the visual impact analysis to include more than "wire box" outlines of the proposed facilities. This would help the Planning Commission, City Council, and general public to more easily assess the potential impacts of this project. A copy of the scope of work for this proposed contract amendment is included in Attachment No. 2. During the September 7th meeting, the City Council/Redevelopment Agency approved the transfer of $65,000 to the RDA Consulting Account with the stipulation that all additional consultant contracts be presented to the City Council/Redevelopment Agency for their approval. These proposed contract amendments are some of the additional anticipated consultant expenses included in staff's presentation at the September 7th Workshop. It is staff's opinion that this analysis is needed to ensure that the EIR for the Old Town Redevelopment Project is complete, provides needed information to the Council and community, and is technically defensible. FISCAL IMPACT: Approving this contract amendment would increase the current contracts with Tom Dodson & Associates from $75,800 to $85,687.96 and with Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo from $54,62Oto $67,620. No additional funds are being added to the contract with Tom Dodson & Associates to cover Dodson's extra expense of adding the Geographic analysis work ~nto the EIR. One half of the cost of these contact amendments would be funded by The Zev Buffman Group under the existing agreement with T.Z.B.G. Inc. Attachments: 1. Geographics Proposal - Page 3. 2. Wimberly Allison Tong & Goo Proposal - Page 4. AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT ORDER NO. The Agreement dated May 31, 1994, between the City of Temecula and Tom Dodson & Associates (herein referred to as "Agreement") is hereby amended as follows: Section 1. The approved Scope of Work of the Agreement (Exhibit A) is hereby amended to include the work activities described in Exhibit 1 of this Amendment. The work activities in Exhibit 1 are added to the Scope of Work as Task 8. Section 2. Section 3 of the Agreement, Payment, is hereby amended to increase the total (not-to- exceed) cost of the contract from $75.800 to $85.688. Section 3. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shah remain the same. The parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the Date and Year above written. CONSULTANT CITY OF TE1VIECULA By: By: Tom Dodsom President Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney A'I-rI:~ST: June S. Greek, City Clerk ATTACHMENT NO. 1 EXHIBIT NO. 1 WORK PLAN. AESTHETIC A~NrD VISUAL ANALYSIS TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OLD TOWN RE_DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AUGUST 2, 1994 Introduction This proposal oudines the approach and methodology for the analysis of aesthetic and visual impacts for the Old Town Redevelopment Project EIR. The analysis is limited to the portions of the proposed project with the highest potential for aesthetic impacts--the Wild West Arena, two major proposed hotels, and the construction of the Western By-pass Road in the vicinity of the p.roposed~ structures. These portions of the project axe located in a visually sensitive area. They are visible from the elevated portions of Interstate 15 and Rancho California Road and serve as part of the mountainous backdrop to many views.of Old Town Temecula. Geographies proposes a visual and aesthetic analysis methodology consisting of six major components: · Comprehensive site analysis · Photographic documentation · Visual simulations · Written analysis of the aesthetic impacts · Aesthetic mitigation measures · Light and glare analysis I. Comprehensive Site Anah'sis The goal of the Compi'ehensive Site Analysis is to provide baseline data on the aesthetic opportunities and constraints of the site in its existing condition. This data provides an analytical framework for detailed analysis of aesthetic issues and impacts. A, The analysis will begin with the establishment of key viewpoints. It is expected that as many as six Viewpoints will be required to represent critical views of the site. A written viewshed analysis of the site will be conducted. as viewed from the key viewpoints. The viewshed analysis will identify both areas of high visual prominence and sensitivity within the study area, as well as areas of lesser visual sensitivity. 4178 CHESTNUT STREI=:i II~fl=i'.l|[s]~l~l,'l ~'l~,.?' 'ibm FACSIMILE 909 369 8837 II. Photographic' Documentation Color photographs well be produced depicting existing conditions on the study area as viewed from the key viewpoints identified in the previous analysis. As noted, as many as six viewpoints are anticipated to be required. Color photographs will be ha.ken from eye level with a medium format camera eqUipped with a lens that approximates as closely as possible the view as seen by the unaided human eye. The photographs will be rephotographed as black-and whim PMTs using a large format process camera for reproduction in the final report III. - Color 'Visual Simulations -. Large scale visual simulations will be produced precisely illustrating the impacts of specific development proposals, as viewed from two of the six analysis viewpoints identified in the proceeding analysis. It is anticipated that the visual simulation views will be from locations on the two major traffic arteries with high degrees of expsure to the project--Interstate 5 and Rancho California Road. The aim of the simulations is to realistically portray the eventual appearance of the proposed development. including grading, roadway improvements, structures, and other visually significant project features. The visual simulations will use color photographic images, ivith project additions realistically rendered on the surface of the enlargements. In the absence of specific architectural plans. typical buildings or building envelopes will be rendered in a manner agreed upon in consultation with the project proponent anc~ project architect. The visual simulations (ragether with photographs depicting existing conditions from the same viewpoint) will be produced at a scale suitable for us~ in public hearings -- 30" x 40" -- and will be rephotographed as black-and white PMTs using a large format process camera for reproduction in the Environmental Impact Report. IV. Written Anah'sis The written technical report will document existing conditions, project impacts, and mitigation measures in compliance with CEQA and local roles to implement CEQA. Determination will be made whether mitigation measures will reduce impacts to insignificance and provide criteria for significance. The detailed environmental analysis will employ a general framework drawn from the Vi,qual Contrast Rating $vStem methodology developed by the Bureau of Land Management, to.tether withconcepts drawn from Scenic Oualitv Evaluation methodology. The following are descriptions of proposed written analysis methodologies. The Contrast Rating System was developed by the Bureau of Land Management in its Visual Resource Manaeernent System. This contrast rating system is used to measure the degree of contrast.between the existing landscape and human addition to it. The process segregates a landscape into its major'features, defined within the BLM system as land]water surface, vegetation, and human additions. Each landscape feature in turn, is divided into its basic elements of form, line, color, and texture. The Contrast Rating compares the landscape addition with existing conditions, feature by feature, element by element according to the degree of contrast: strong, moderate. we~k, or none Visual Contrast Negligible Negligible Definition Object ks visible in clear conditions but otherwise unnoticeable. Object is evident but not particularly noticeable. Weak · Object is Cleariy seen but seldom prominent in relation to the overall scene. Moderate' Object is prominent or codominant in the overall seen& but is the focus of attention onl9 in occasional conditions. S~ong Focus of attention in most views. Extreme Dominates all views completely. Using this methodology, thd rep6rt will determine the visual impacts of the pi'oposed project. The Scenic Quall.w of the Existing 'Landscape Scenic Quality. Evaluation is a methodolqgy which has been developed over the past ' 30 years to assess the aesthetic quality of a landscape in objective terms. What had been considered extremely subjective has been found to be identifiable, consistent. ' qualifies that can be cle.o21y described and weighted. The Scenic Quality Evaluation methodology is based on these four basic criteria: varie_ty includes the number of objects in a landscape, their distribution. and relationship in terms of the scale between them.. Landscapes with considerable variety have the potential of possessing high levels of scenic quality. Variety is in opposition to monotony, where the' repetition of a limited number of visual elemenxs can be uninteresting. Vividne~ is that qu',~ity in the visual landscape which has the power to create a lasting impression, The most obvious source of vividness is contrast4 ff it avoids confusion. Unity is the balanced, orderly, harmonious quality of combined landscape elements. A unified landscape is not the simple sum of i.ts elements, but rather a balanced compatibility between components. lJniqueness is 'the scarc!ty of an object or landscape in a physiographic region, Unique objects can be of physical, biological or human interest. 3 These four factors act in complex concert to create the visual quality of a landscape. Variety and vividness can lead to higher- visual quality, but only if they do not diminish the unity of the scene. A great range of variety containing vivid visual elements may produce an extraordinary landscape if unified, or the scene may be a disorderly clutter if there is no unity. On the other-hand, a strongly unified landscape can be a visual monotone if it does not contain variety and vi~.'idness. The presence of unique elements can add value to any lanclscape. V, Visual MitigatiOn Measures A detaileli range of visual mitigation options will be developed as required for sensitive areas within the project site. Additional mitigation measures of a broader and more conceptual nature will also be outlined. ' Recommended mitigation measures may address grading, road alignments, architectural elements and massing, height/bulk limits, use of materials, and landscaping, li_ohtino. q, i~dscaping, and project effects on adjacent hillsides. Determination will be made ~0ncerning the'impact of the project following implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. VI~ Light and Glare Analysis A comprehensive light and glare analysis '&'ill be performed. Determinations will be made concerning potential light ahd glare impacts on surrounding areas. The issue of potential project light pollution which could adversely affect astronomical observation at 'Mount Palomar Observator,J, will also be addressed. Mitigation measures will be recommended as required. 4 COST.PROPOSAL AESTHETiC AND VISUAL ANALYSIS TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT OLD TOWN lIEDEVELOPMENT PRO/ECT AUGUST 2, 1994 III. Visual Analysis A. ' Field and Photography Time 12 hours x $60.00/hour B. Analysis/Report Writin~ Alternatives Analysis/Response to Comments 32 hours x $60.00/hour Photographic Documentation A. Photographic Processing and Enlargements B. PMTs for inclusion in report 30" x 40" Visual Simulations A. Photographic Prtyzessing and Enlargements .Per Simulation $ 174.00 Tax $ 13.49 x two simulations .(before and after of two views, a lotal of four prints) B. Simulation Production $. 720.00 $ 1,920.00 $ 112.00 $ .120.00 $ 7~9.96 S 5,400.00 C , P~frs for inclusion in report Mounting 54.00 92.00 IV. RepOrt Graphics Visual Analysis Map 6 hours x $40.0 0/hour Meeting Attendance Project (5oordination Meetings 8 hours x $60.0O/hour TOTAL $ 240.00 k 480.00 $ 9,887.96 5 Additional meeting attendance or attendance as required atpublic hearings will be billed hourly at $60.00/hour. PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT Douglas McCulloh will serve as project manager and principal investigator for this project, Scott Meek and Carole Buchheim will be responsible for technical graphics production. Photographic processing will be subc6ntracted to Custom Graphics of Santa Aria. 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT ORDER NO. The Agreement dated June 14, 1994, between the City of Temecula and Wimberly Allison Tong & Coo (herein referred to as "Agreement") is hereby amended as follows: Section 1. The approved Scope of Work of the Agreement (Exhibit A) is hereby amended to include the work activities described in Exhibit 1 of this Amendment. Section 2. Section 3 of the Agreement, Payment, is hereby amended to increase the total (not-to- exceed) cost of the contract from $54,620 to $67,620. Section 3. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain the same. The parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the Date and Year above written. CONSULTANT CITY OF TEMECULA By: By: Michael R. Paneri, AIA Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk EXHIBIT NO. 1 SCOPE OF WORK Our scope of work will ~ddtess the area of the West Side Specific Plan nnd include the Con~pt Dasiin of the ~ Phase I ~,,,~ Phase ~1 Herds, and the commercial and residential compon~ts of the project to the south, along the proposed We~rn Bypass Cotrlder. The pu~o~ of the P~-Concept Design, is to establish buildin8 fotX printing. Kale and mmin~, and preliminary architectural design, d~picting the character of esr. h proj~t component- This in~,,,,ation will b~ ues~ by C~ogrephius to illustr~m the probable buildin~ ¢on.fi~uretinns and their impact on the views in their photoFaphic documents. Although, the~ are many alt=rnatives that should be nonsid~td at a funtr~ ~te, for this effo~ WAT~'G will prepare one (1) Pre-eon~ept Design alternative, which refl,~ts a high degree of impeel; to the exittang site. The teem agreed that this "worst case scenario" was appropriats to allow the most flexibility in the final dmign of the project components. This scenario may mean that the site is mass graded and padded with low priorit), ~ven w utilizing the natural tefiain and topography that exist. We will also assume that thc preliminary western bypass design, which was provided to us by you, will be used. The n~sult of this effort will be ~e following delivffabtes. 1. A Sitz Plan at I :50 scale, dcpicling building footprinu, parking lots, landscaped trees, significant site cin:ulation and sugared grading modifications. 2. Building Messing Elevations and/or W'i~ Diagrams at 1:50 scale, which convey ~e vertical height and possible roof configurations of each Fojeet component. 3. Indicative Architectural El~atioas at l/J6 - 1/32'-1'0' scale, showingpoffions of the proposed architectu~ for each building component. This will include suggestions for building color, materials, fenaswation, roof lines and other significant architectual detuiis that visually impact the view. it was agreed, ~nt ~ese elevations Would be created along the norffi/south frontage facing Old Town, where the majority of the visual imp,,~t study photographs will be taken. Our effort will also includes time m r~view thes~ Pre-Concepmal designs with the Ctv/, Zev Buffman and Gene Hancock as ~ey develop. In addton, we will coord inst~ with C.~Faphics fnroughout the process and particularly during our final pmssntetion phase. Please let me know if ~u have any further questions. PROFESSIONAl. The fees for this work have been divided into two pans, since there is concern abom the total amount or fees expanded in addition to soma question regarding the level of detail which should be shown on the photographs. For Items numbered I and 2 described above, the fee will be $8,500.00. For Item 3, ~e fee will be $3.500.00. The estimated reintbursable expenses will be $1.000.00. ITEM 3 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY MANAGER~ TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT Redevelopment Agency Board Ronald E. Bradley, Executive Director October 11, 1994 Appropriation and Authorization to Release Funds for Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sign Lease Prepared by Harwoood Edvalson: RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council appropriate $20,000 to Redevelopment Agency Account # 280-199- 999-5264,and authorize payment of the Old Town Specific Plan Billboard Sign Lease for two billboards in an amount not to exceed $20,000. BACKGROUND: On February 8, 1994, the City Council took action to adopt the Old Town Specific Plan. One of the plan's components is an implementation plan. As part of the implementation plan, the Old Town Capital/Promotional Improvements Program - 1994-2000 identifies a four year program for assistance in leasing billboards along Interstate 15. The assistance program is designed to use diminishing City participation to help promote the Old Town business district through billboard advertising. The City has received a request from the Old Town Temecula Main Street Association for release of funds to assist with the billboard lease. The billboard basic lease in FY 93-94 was $2,000 per month. In that fiscal year, the Agency contributed 50% of the base rate for the billboard lease totalling ~12,000. As seen on the attached pages of the plan, the Agency's contribution for Fiscal Year 1994-95 is estimated at $20,000. The Old Town Specific Plan anticipates two billboards along the Interstate, one north and one south. With the current lease rate of $1600 per month, the amount requested by the Main Street Association will pay for 50% of the annual lease rate for two signs, or 100% of the annual lease rate for one sign. The Agency's contribution of 100% for one sign would be contrary to the concept of diminishing Agency participation as identified in the specific plan. Future years of the plan anticipate reduced annual assistance of fifteen thousand, and seventy five hundred dollars (see attached). In a separate action, Staff has additionally recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution requesting Caltrans to install freeway guide signs identifying the Temecula Old Town business district. FISCAL ANALYSIS: If the Council desires to fund this program, it is necessary to appropriate $20,000 from RDA Unreserved Fund Balance to Account # 280-199-999-5264. 1. Year One - 1994 (Cont'd.) First Street Bridge/Alignment Improvements Conduct first year design studies for intersection realignment and construction of a bridge over Murrieta Creek with two lane facility and installation of traffic signals at Front Street Old Town Sixth St:feet Parking Area Provide public parking at Sixth and Front Streets area of Old Town. First year dgsign studies. b. Economic Development Programs/Descriptions Old Town Facade Improvement Program* Provides grants or loans to eligible rehabilitation work to commercial facades. *Program described in greater detail in previous section of Specific Plan Establish Main Street Organization/ Coordinator/Office Organization of Board of Directors, Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws. Salary for coordinator. Office lease/office costs. Billboard Sign Lease The City in conjunction with the Old To'am Merchants or Chamber of Coiiimerce seek to lease and advertise Old Town on two billboards along 1-15 - one to the north of Old Town and one to the south. City provides 50% of billboard's base rate for first year, with decreasing involvement in future years. Merchants contribute other 50% of billboard lease rate and all administrative costs and sign design. City approval necessary. V-37 Estimated Cost $100,000 $65,315 $50,000 $75,000 City of Temecula Old Town Specific Plan m m 3. Year Two - 1995 a. Studies Title/Description Circulation - Traffic Study New by-pass route along Diaz Road, Felix Valdez Avenue and Pujol Street Feasibility Study and Preliminary Cost Estimates. CLrculation - Alignment Study Santiago/First Street/Front Street Study to provide engineering level alignments and preliminary Cost Estimates. First Street Bridge/Alignment Improvements Conduct second year studies for intersection realignment and construction realignment and construction of a bridge over Murrieta Creek. b. Economic Development Programs/Descriptions Old Town Facade Improvement Program - Year Two Maintain Main Street Manager Salary/Office - Year Two City contribution deereases while merchant . (BID) contribution increases. Billboard Sign Lease - Year Two City contffbution decreases while merchant (BID) contribution increase. Estimated Cost $40,000 $30,000 $150,000 $50,000 $60,000 II City of Temecula Old Town Specific Plan V - 40 Estimated Cost 1 n il d. Business Recruitment and RetenMon Continue BRAG Team - Year Two The BRAG Team needs to continue for several years to be successful. Business Atlzaction Program Once the Old Town Main Street Coordinator has developed a program of incentives to attract and assist new businesses to locate in Old Town, implementation must 'be started. Loans and loan application assistance with City Pei,iiit processing, and assistance in meeting design guidelines need to be provided. 4. Year Three - 1996 a. Studies Title/Descrivt~on None Antidpated b. Economic Development Programs/Description Maintain Main S~zeet Manager Salary/Office - Year Three City contribution decreases while merchant (BID) contribution increases. Old Town Facade Improvement Program - Yeaz Three Billboard Sign Lease - Year Tkree City contribution decreases while merchant (BID) contribution increases. In-Kind Services In-Kind Services $40,000 $50,000 City of Temecula Old Town Specific Plan V - 42 V - 45 Year Four - 1997 (Cont'd.) First Street Bridge/Alignment Improvements Conduct final construction drawings/ documents. Felix Valdez Realignment Design studies for realignment proposal. Reassessment of the feasibility of allowing Sidewalk Vendors in Old Town. b. Economic Development Billboard Sign Lease - Final Year Maintain Main Street Manager/Office - Year Four Old Town Facade Improvement Program - Final Year Nonconforming Sign Removal Program - Year Two c. Phvsical Improvements Front Street Reconstruction Project The City should target a centralized portion of Front Street (between Fourth and Third) for a similar paving and sidewalk program to the improvements on West Main Street. Improvements would include new paving, curb and gutter, the board sidewalk program,.special intersection art/paving, and trees. Estimated Cost $250,000 $62,500 Unknown $30,000 $50,000 $20,000 $370,000 City of Temecula Old Town Specific Plan ! [ ITEM 4 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT City Council/Redevelopment Agency Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager October 11, 1994 Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee Prepared by Marilyn Whisenand: RECOMMENDATION: 1) That the Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee retain the existing committee structure of three appointed members and four elected members; and; 2) That staff be directed to seek applications for the three appointments to the committee and to prepare election procedures for the four elected representBtives. 3) That the City Council appropriate $15,000 to Account #280-199-999-5225 RDA elections from Unreserved Fund Balance. BACKGROUND: The Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee was formed in accordance with a stipulated judgment which resulted from a law suit between the Redevelopment Agency of the County of Riverside and Robert Dawes (Save Historic Old Temecula Association) which was filed when the County first adopted the redevelopment plan. The Temecula Redevelopment Agency became a party to the lawsuit when they activated the Agency and assumed responsibility for the redevelopment plan in July of 1991. The original stipulated judgment requires the formation of an Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee consisting of seven residents and/or business owners. Three Committee members are to be appointed by the Council and four elected. The purpose of the Committee is to review redevelopment actions proposed to be undertaken by the City/Agency within the Old Town area and provide an advisory report to the City/Agency. In February of 1994, an interim stipulation was prepared which proposed to modify the original judgement with respect to the makeup of the committee by decreasing the number of members from seven to five and requiring that all members be appointed by the City Council Although these changes were agreed upon by the parties to the lawsuit, the revised stipulation has not been filed with the Court and it is still possible to make adjustments. The Committee has reviewed the proposed changes to the stipulated judgement and has expressed their strong preference to remain a seven-person body; four elected by Old Town residents/business persons and three appointed by the City Council. Staff has researched the procedures to be followed for an election which would be designed after elections held by other redevelopment agencies for project area committees. Costs are estimated at $2,000 for staff time and from $12,000to $15,000for additional expenses such as advertising, election management end oversight. The election would occur on a two year cycle. Attached is a description of the current committee makeup. Since terms have expired for all but one of the existing committee members, it is important that staff receive direction regarding the method the Council prefers for the appointment and/or election of the committee. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimates of the cost required to hold an election for Old Town Advisory Committee members is $2,000 for staff services and $12,000to $15,000 of associated costs. P:%eyersk\rdacom.old