Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout012301 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to padicipate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE JANUARY 23, 2001 - 7:00 P.M. At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 P.M. 6:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Government Code Sections: 1. Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1) with respect to one matter of potential litigation. With respect to such matters, the City Attorney has determined 'that a point has been reached where there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City based on existing facts and circumstances and the City will decide whether to initiate litigation. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk. CALL TO ORDER: Prelude Music: Invocation: Flag Salute: ROLL CALL: Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2001-01 Resolution: No. 2001-06 Mayor Jeff Comerchero Aaron Breid Rabbi David Barnett of Congregation B'Nai Chaim of Murrieta Councilman Pratt Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, Stone, Comerchero PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Ron Packard Presentation Press Enterprise Presentation to the Temecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival (Inland Empire's Readers' Choice Award of Favorite Festival} R:~Agenda\012301 1 Proclamation to Van Avery Prep School for the receipt of the Bravo Award Presentation of 10-year service pins to Mayor Pro Tem Roberts and Mr. Jeff Nimeshein PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed wi-~-the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item. There is a five (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. 2 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. Resolution Approvin,q List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A R:~Agenda\012301 2 3 Purchase of Compaq Proliant Server RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Authorize the purchase of a dual Compaq Proliant Server and Disk Storage Array System from Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc., of Riverside, California, for the total amount of $57,618.72. 5 Maintenance Facility Modification Project- Phase Ill - Proiect No. PW00-16 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Reject all bids received August 29, 2000, for the Maintenance Facility Modifications - Phase III - Project No. PW00-16; 4.2 Approve the revised Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Maintenance Facility Modifications - Phase III - Project No. PW00-16. Disadvantaqed Business Enterprise (DBE) Pro,qram RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO, 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2000, TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE ELEMENTS OF TITLE 49, PART 26, OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR) ENTITLED PARTICIPATION BY DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES IN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS AND DESIGNATING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER AS THE DBE LIAISON OFFICER AND AUTHORIZING THE DBE LIAISON OFFICER TO CONDUCT A REVIEW OF THE ANNUAL OVERALL GOAL PERCENTAGE AND ADJUST SUCH PERCENTAGE EACH FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR AS NECESSARY ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTING AND MONITORING OF THE DBE PROGRAM R:~Agenda\012301 3 6 Authorize Temporary Street Closures for Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event in Old Town (Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road and Second Street and other related streets) RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING STREET CLOSURES FOR TEMECULA ROD RUN 2001 EVENT AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT 7 8 Amendment to Annual A,qreements - CIP Proiects approved for FY 2000-2001 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve Amendment No. 1 of the annual agreement with Kleinfelder, Inc., to provide as needed geotechnical and materials testing services by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000; 7.2 Approve Amendment No. 1 of the annual agreement with Converse Consultants to provide as needed geotechnical and materials testing by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000; 7.3 Approve Amendment No.1 of the annual agreement with Kevin Cozad & Associates to provide as needed survey services by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000; 7.4 Approve Amendment No.1 of the annual agreement with O'Malley Engineering Corporation to provide as needed survey services by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000; 7.5 Approve Amendment No.1 of the annual agreement with Robert Shea Purdue Real Estate Appraisal to provide as needed appraisal services extending the agreement through June 30, 2001, and increase the amount of the agreement by $25,000; 7.6 Authorize the Mayor to execute these amendments. Records Destruction Approval RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the scheduled destruction of certain City records in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy. R:~Agenda\012301 4 9 Resolution of Support (Requested by Mayor Comerchero) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 0l- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA URGING STATE SUPPORT TO PRESERVE AND EXTEND ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLE (ZEV) PROGRAMS 10 Letter of Support for Riverside County Transit A.qency (RTA) Grant Application (Requested by Councilman Councilman Pratt) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Authorize the Mayor to sign a Letter of Support for the Riverside County Transit Agency (RTA) to include in an upcoming application to receive grant funds for transit planning. 11 The 2000 General Plan Implementation Report RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO, 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION REPORT 12 Community Service Fundinq Proqram - Veterans of Foreiqn Wars RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve a reallocation of Community Services Funding to the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) in the amount of $5,000. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY R:~Agenda\012301 5 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING ************************************************************************************************************ Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2001-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2001-01 CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Robeds, Stone PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item no.~t on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of January 9, 2001. R:~Agenda\012301 6 2 Ratification of Election Results ~ Tract Map No. 23513 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT RECITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAIL-IN BALLOT ELECTION HELD ON JANUARY 18, 2001 DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW 3 Ratification of Election Results - Tract Map No. 29036 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a reso'lution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT RECITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAIL-IN BALLOT ELECTION HELD ON JANUARY 18, 2001 DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW 4 Aqreement for Beveraqe Services RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve an agreement between the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the Public Enterprise Group to develop and negotiate a soft drink beverage agreement for soft drink sales at City facilities. DISTRICT BUSINESS 5 City of Temecula Wall of Honor RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the recommended honoree for placement on the Wall of Honor. R:~Agenda\012301 7 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, February 13, 2001, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\012301 8 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2001-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2001-01 CALLTO ORDER: Chairperson Ron Roberts ROLLCALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of January 9, 2001. 2 Lease of Property at 27500 Jefferson Avenue (Richardson's) RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Authorize the Chairman to execute the lease agreement with Richardson's RV Center for property located at 27500 Jefferson Avenue. R:~,genda\012301 9 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, February 13, 2001, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\012301 10 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public Hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the Approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 13 Wolf Creek Specific Plan RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 0i- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98- 0482) AND RELATED ACTIONS, AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. 13.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98- 0484 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMA LINDA AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD (FORMERLY FAIRVlEW AVENUE), AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950- 180-001, -005, -006 AND -010, BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT R:~Agenda\012301 11 13.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98- 0481) 13.4 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING ZONING STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. '12, THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481) 13.5 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00- 0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, THE SUBDIVISION OF 557 ACRES INTO 47 LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE, SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, - 033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010 13.6 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND S-P MURDY, LLC" (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0029) R:~Agenda\012301 12 COUNCIL BUSINESS 14 Selection of City Council Committee Assiqnments RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Appoint a member of the City Council to serve as liaison to each of the City Commissions and Committees and to the Pechanga Tribal Council: · Community Services Commission · Old Town Local Review Board · Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee · Planning Commission · Public/Traffic Safety Commission · Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison 14.2 Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following external committees: · City of Murrieta Liaison (2 Members) · County General Plan Update Committee- RCIP · French Valley Airport Committee (2 Members) · League of California Congress - Voting Delegates (Member and Alternate) · Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Committee · Murrieta Creek Advisory Board (Member and Alternate) · National League of Cities Annual Congress - 2001 Voting Delegate (Member and Alternate) · Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency · Riverside County Transportation Commission (Member and Alternate) · Riverside Transit Agency Representative (Member and Alternate) · Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors · Temecula/Murrieta Transportation/Traffic Committee (2 Members) · Trails Master Plan Development Committee · WRCOG Representative · Senior Center Expansion Design Committee (Member and Alternate) 14.3 Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Advisory Committees: · City's General Plan Update Committee · Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Committee · Economic DevelopmentJOId Town Steering Committee · Finance Committee · Joint City Council/Temecula Valley Unified School District Committee · Library Task Force · Old Town Temecula Community Theater Ad Hoc Committee/Theater Advisory Committee · PublicWorks/Facilities Committee R:~Agenda\012301 13 14.4 Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Council Subcommittees: · Children's Museum Ad Hoc Subcommittee · Development Overlay Subcommittee · Electrical Needs Ad Hoc Subcommittee · Hotel Conference Center Ad Hoc Council Subcommittee · Lennar Project Subcommittee · Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee · SAF-T-NET Subcommittee (one Councilmember and one Commissioner) · Sports ParkAd Hoc Subcommittee · Via Cordoba Subcommittee · Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee · Water Park Subcommittee · Wolf Creek Development Agreement Council Ad Hoc Committee Public/Traffic Safety 15 State Ballot Initiative (Requested by Councilman Stone) RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Provide direction to the City Attorney and staff regarding drafting of a State Ballot Initiative which would provide funding for public transportation projects. 16 City Council Meeting Adiournment Time (Requested by Councilman Stone) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Provide direction to staff whether to amend Ordinance No. 2.04.020 regarding the time of adjournment for City Council meetings. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, February 13, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\012301 14 PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS ITEM 1 ITEM 2 RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the Office of the City Clerk, have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $1,587,176.23. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 23rd day of January, 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] Resos2001- STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2001- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 23rd day of January, 2001 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: C©UNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Resos 2001- 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 01/04/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 01/11/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 01/23/01 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 01/04/01 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 01/2310t COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 165 190 192 193 194 210 280 3OO 320 33O 340 GENERAL FUND RDA-LOW/MOD INCOME HOUSING COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL S TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND RDA-REDEVELOPMENT iNSURANCE INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES $ 1,112,158.69 10,917.98 127,653.55 45.77 32,668.87 399.72 36,666.24 14,431.88 584.71 20,252.93 3,267.72 13,105.45 $ 255,969.75 94,081.04 1,022,102.72 215,022.72 $ 1,587,176.23 $ 1,372,153.51 001 165 190 192 193 194 280 300 320 330 34O GENERAL FUND RDA-LOW/MOD INCOME HOUSING COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D RDA-REDEVELOPMENT INSURANCE INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES TOTAL BY FUND: SHAWN NELSON, CITY MANAGER 157,968.93 3,773.95 35,699.19 59.26 2,520.33 519.45 1,894.06 764.99 6,632.41 1,732.02 3,458.13 215,022.72 $ 1,587,176.23 , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. VOUCNRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 13 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 300 iNSURANCE FUND 320 iNFORMATION SYSTEMS 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 340 FACILITIES AMOUNT 167,388.87 5,084.80 41,928.27 45.77 5,362.18 399.72 4,890.94 6,684.34 584.71 11,572.85 3,267.72 8,759.58 TOTAL 255,969.75 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41063 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41863 01/04/01 000246 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 ,41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 41953 01/04/01 000245 588070 01/02/01 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERB EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERB EMPLOYEES" RETIRE 000246 PERB EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERB EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERB EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERB EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERB EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES" RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PER5 EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIRE 000246 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH IRSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH IMBUE. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERB HEALTH INBUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTN INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS HEALTH INSUH. PRE 000245 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) PERS RET 001-2390 25,695.37 PERS RET 165-2390 651.49 PERS RET 190-2390 4,639.01 PERS RET 192-2390 11.61 PERS RET 193-2390 371.27 PERS RET 194-2390 98.47 PERS RET 280-2390 282.59 PERS RET 300-2390 127.82 PERS RET 320-2390 1,066.72 PERS RET 330-2390 206.18 PERS RET 340'2390 535.50 PERS-PRE 001-2130 140.96 SURVIVOR 001'2390 95.66 SURVIVOR 165-2390 1.87 SURVIVOR 190'2390 18.42 SURVIVOR 192-2390 .05 SURVIVOR 193-2390 1.54 SURVIVOR 194-2390 .36 SURVIVOR 280-2390 .92 SURVIVOR 300-2390 .46 SURVIVOR 320-2390 3.72 SURVIVOR 330'2390 1.39 SURVIVOR 340-2390 2.65 AETNA 001-2090 2,554.42 AETNA 165-2090 254.63 AETNA 190-2090 1,141,89 AETNA 280'2090 84.87 AETNA 330'2090 96.97 AETNA 340-2090 244.17 BLSNIELD 001-2090 1,090.60 BLSNIELD 190-2090 468.53 CIGNA 001-2090 890.72 HELTHNET 001-2090 4,804.09 HELTHNET 190-2090 1,398.91 EELTHNET 193-2090 98.63 HELTHNET 194-2090 29.59 HELTHNET 340-2090 768.95 KAISER 001-2090 2,120.00 PACCARE 001-2090 4,149.17 PACCARE 190-2090 525.22 PACCARE 340-2090 144.45 PC 001-2090 702.00 PERS CHO 001-2090 4~576.44 PERS DED 001-2090 1,132.11 PERS-ADM 001-2090 154.74 UNI 001-2090 2,204.14 UNI 190-2090 166.98 000283 MEDICARE/MANUAL CHECKS 001-2070 15.08 33,954.03 29,802.22 15.08 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597~44 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597544 597597 597597 59~597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 597597 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX ([RS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 [NSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 IRSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 [NSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTATAX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTA?AX (IRS) 01/04/01 000283 INSTA?AX (IRS) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 IRSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 [RSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 [NSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 [NSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 01/04/01 000444 IRSTATAX (EDD) 00/00/00 000245 PERS 00/00/00 000245 PERB 00/00/00 000245 PERS 00/00/00 000245 PERS 00/00/00 000245 PERS 00/00/00 000245 PERS 00/00/00 000245 PERS 00/00/00 000245 PERS 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 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 HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA HEALTH [NSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 AETNA HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD HEALTH IRSUR. PRE 000245 BLSHIELD HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 CIGNA HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 RELTHNET ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070, 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 193-2070 280-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2070 165-2070 190-2070 192-2070 193-2070 194-2070 280-2070 300-2070 320-2070 330-2070 340-2070 001-2090 165-2090 190-2090 280-2090 001-2090 190-2090 001-2090 001-2090 ITEM AMOUNT 24,531.34 468.25 5,101.80 15.84 380.01 125.99 177.87 74.25 1,048.36 218.99 487.89 6,053.34 148,10 1,324.84 2,62 93.76 21.73 67.69 29.24 275.90 59.98 124.96 153.25 2.75 81.38 2.80 .36 8.40 4.07 1.20 6,656.32 132.44 1,173.20 4.68 82.89 36.05 53.22 15.32 221.60 52.89 104.99 356.73 160.86 43.40 53.62 38.70 103.67 113.80 468.03 CHECK AMOUNT 40,832.75 0,787.81 VOUCHRE2 01/04/01 11:04 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOOCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 HELTHNET 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 KAISER 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH ]HSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PACCARE 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS CHO 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 PERS REV 000 00/00/00 000245 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE 000245 UNI ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 190-2090 340-2090 001-2090 001-2090 001-2090 ITEM AMOUNT 103.18 39.20 66.99 292.45 200.33 16.92 324.87 2,463.32- 80.57 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 CANCER 001-2330 405.50 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 CANCER 190-2330 47.80 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 CANCER 193-2330 16.73 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 CANCER 194-2330 4.78 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 CANCER 340-2330 26.29 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 EXP PROT 001~2330 175.00 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 EXP PROT 190-2330 55.80 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 EXP PROT 320-2330 27.90 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 HOSP lC 001-2330 17.50 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 STD 001-2330 692.00 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 STD 190-2330 155.20 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F I A C 003552 STD 193-2330 9.60 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 STD 194-2330 3.20 66680 01/04/01 003552 A F L A C 003552 STD 340-2330 20.80 66681 01/04/01 004148 A I & T 66681 01/04/01 004148 A I & T 66682 01/04/01 66683 01/04/01 66683 01/04/01 66683 01/04/01 66683 01/04/01 66683 01/04/01 66683 01/04/01 66683 01/04/01 000745 A T & T WIRELESS SERVIC DEC LONG DISTANCE PHONE SVC:PD NOV LONG DISTANCE PHONE SVC:PD DEC CELLULAR PHONE SVC:TEM PD 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 000116 A V P VISION PLANS 000116 AVP 002038 ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPL 002877 ALTA LOMA CHARTER LINES 002877 ALTA LOMA CHARTER LINES 004033 AMERICAN LEGION POST 85 66684 01/04/01 004022 AMERICAN MINI STORAGEf 003520 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF COM CRC POOL MAINT SUPPLIES BUS TOUR-HOL LITES/SITES-12/17 BUS TOUR-HOL LITES/SITES-12/17 FY 00-01COMM SVC FUNDING AWRD RENTAL UNIT-B&S STORAGE ANNUAL MUSIC LICENSE-OLD TOWN 66685 01/04/01 66685 01/04/01 66686 01/04/01 001-170-999-5208 001-170-999-5208 001-170-999-5208 001-2310 165-2310 190-2310 194-2310 280-2310 330-2310 340-2310 190-186-999-5212 190-183-999-5370 190-183-999-5370 001-101-999-5267 001-162-999-5250 280-199-999-5362 66687 01/04/01 66688 01/04/01 47.00 6.75 214.22 706.03 17.60 83.44 1.68 5.86 5.58 42.23 56.00 315.79 315.79 2,000.00 248.00 1,402.00 PAGE 3 CHECK AMOUNT ,00 1,658.10 53.75 214,22 862.42 56.00 631.58 2,000.00 248.00 1,402.00 66689 01/04/01 004316 AN WIL BAG COMPANY TEMPORARY A.C. "COLD MIX" 001-164-601-5218 595.00 66689 01/04/01 004316 AN WIL BAG COMPANY SALES TAX 001-164-601-5218 46.11 641.11 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 4 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CNECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 66690 01/04/01 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 66690 01/04/01 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 66690 01/04/01 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 66690 01/04/01 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 66690 01/04/01 000101 APPLE ONE, INC. 66691 01/04/01 003984 BENOIT, VINCENT H. 66692 01/04/01 003048 BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF TE 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 66693 01/04/01 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 D G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C 0 N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A 003553 C G N A ITEM DESCRIPTION TEMP HELP W/E 12/09 ROSA TEMP HELP W/E 12/09 BRUNER TEMP HELP W/E 12/09 FIDERO TEMP HELP W/E 12/09 REID TEMP HELP 12/09 BIMPKINS/WAYME SANTA-DICKENS BOL-11/25-12/23 FY 00-01 COMM SVC FUNDING AWRD 003553 LTD 003553 LTD 003553 LTD 003553 LTD OO3553 LTD 003553 LTD 003553 LTD 003553 LTD 003553 LTD 003553 LTD 003553 LTD 003553 STD 003553 BTD 003553 STD 003553 STD 003553 STD 003553 STD 003553 STD 003553 STD 003553 STD 003553 STD 003553 STD 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66695 01/04/01 003554 CANADA LIFE ASSURANCE C 003554 LIFE INS 66696 01/04/01 004203 CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTIO 004203 AR CHILD 66697 01/04/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 66697 01/04/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 66697 01/04/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 66697 01/04/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-162-999-5118 001-162-999-5118 190-180-999-5118 001-110-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 280-199-999-5362 001-101-999-5267 001-2380 165-2380 190-2380 192-2380 193-2380 194-2380 280-2380 300-2380 320-2380 330-2380 340-2380 001-2500 165-2500 190-2500 192-2500 193-2500 194-2500 280-2500 300-2500 320-2500 330-2500 340-2500 001-2360 165-2360 190-2360 192-2360 193-2360 194-2360 280-2360 300-2360 320-2360 330-2360 340-2360 190-2140 001-2120 190-2120 193-2120 194-2120 ITEM AMOUNT 214.08 291.18 119.60 183.30 752.66 675.00 5,000.00 1,600.41 39.10 289.95 .71 23.30 6.08 17.29 7.99 66.99 13.45 37.68 2,233.88 54.57 404.73 .99 32.51 8.49 24.15 11.15 93.49 18.78 52.60 638.63 13.01 128.71 .33 10.73 2.59 6.49 3.24 26.00 9.75 18.52 10.46 123.50 5.60 .60 .20 CHECK AMOUNT 1,560.82 675.00 5,000.00 5,038.29 858.00 10.46 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 66697 01/04/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 66697 01/04/01 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARIT 004405 CHC 66698 01/04/01 002329 COMPULINK MANAGEMENT CE 66699 01/04/01 CORONA, CITY OF 66700 01/04/01 001264 COSTCO WHOLESALE 66701 01/04/01 004003 CRISP, ALBERT K. 66701 01/04/01 004003 CRISP, ALBERT K. 66702 01/04/01 004398 CUSTOM PUZZLE CRAFT 66702 01/04/01 004398 CUSTOM PUZZLE CRAFT 66702 01/04/01 004398 CUSTOM PUZZLE CRAFT 66703 01/04/01 001233 DANS FEED & SEED INC 66704 01/04/01 001393 DATA TICKET INC 66705 01/04/01 002701 DIVERSIFIED RISK 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66706 01/04/01 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 66707 01/04/01 001380 E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S i EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 66708 01/04/01 003959 EVERETT & EVERETT PAINT ACCOUNT NUMBER 330-2120 340-2120 DOCUMENT CONVERSION & INDEXING 320-199-999-5250 SCCCA MTG:JONES/GALLREICH:1/18 001-120-999-5260 CERTIFICATE(EMP YEAR)L.SALAZAR 001-150-999-5265 DEC 2000 WORKERS COMP PREMIUM 001-1182 DEC 2000 ENG CONSULTING SVCS 001-163-999-5248 CUSTOM PUZZLE TEAM BLDG - H&S SHIPPING SALES TAX 001-162-999-5250 001-162-999-5250 001-162-999-5250 PROPANE GAS - PW MAINT CREWS 001-164-601-5218 NOV PARKING CITATION PROCESS 001-170-999-5250 DEC SPECIAL EVENTS PREMIUMS 300-2180 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-164-601-5263 001-163-999-5263 001-165-999-5263 001-161-999-5263 190-180-999-5263 001-162-999-5263 001-164-601-5263 001-163-999-5263 001-165-999-5263 190-180-999-5263 001-162-999-5263 001-161-999-5263 TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/15 SALAZAR TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/15 EBON TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/15 EBON TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/15 HANSEN TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/15 HANSEN TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/15 HANSEN TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/15 HANSEN 001-162-999-5118 340-199-701-5118 340-199-702-5118 001-164-604-5118 190-180-999-5118 001-161-999-5118 001-120-999-5118 TEMP HELP (2)W/E 11/17 THURSTO 190-186-999-5118 TEMP HELP (2)W/E 11/17 THURSTO 190-186-999-5118 TEMP HELP (2)W/E 12/01 THURSTO 190-186-999-5118 RES IMPRV PRGM: CHAVEZ 165-199-813-5804 ITEM AMOUNT 5.50 .60 3,000.00 60,00 100.00 2.10- 720.00 80.00 3.20 6.20 37.60 400.00 174.36 202.84 106.54 64.98 78.64 196.79 65.29 99.19 166.37 57.93 214.66 32.68 76.98 836.64 853.80 284.60 320.36 81.36 833.93 391.55 1,205.60 260.00 1,456.44 1,500.00 CHECK AMOUNT 136.00 3,000.00 60.00 100.00 717.90 89.40 37.60 400.00 174.36 1,362.89 6,524.28 1,500.00 66709 01/04/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE LDSCP MAINTENANCE @ CITY HALL 340-199-701-5415 528.00 66709 01/04/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION REPAIRS:MARTINIQUE 193-180-999-5212 148.28 66709 01/04/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION REPAIRS:RIVERTON PK 190-180-999-5212 119.53 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 6 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 66709 66709 66709 66710 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 002037 EXPANETS IRRIGATION REPAIRS:N/S FIELDS IRRIGATION REPAIRS:VINTAGE NIL IRRIGATION REPAIRS:RANCHO VIST DEC PHONE MAINTENANCE AGRMRT 190-180-999-5212 193-180-999-5212 190-180'999'5212 320-199-999-5215 150.75 140.80 196.06 752.00 1,283.42 752.00 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 66711 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS IRC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS [MC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS IRC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS IRC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS [NC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS [NC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS [NC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS [NC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS IRC 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS INC EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAiL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-110-999-5230 001-165-999-5230 001-164-604-5230 001-162-999-5230 001-140-999-5230 001-161-999-5230 001-150-999-5230 190-180-999-5230 001-162-999-5230 001-120-999-5277 001-165-999-5230 001-150-999-5230 190-180-999-5230 001-111-999-5230 12.20 10.52 12.20 9.13 26.43 16.05 12.20 43.07 11.11 10.62 12.20 12.20 20.75 14.02 223.50 66712 66712 66712 66712 66712 66712 66712 66712 66712 66712 66712 66712 66713 66713 66713 66714 66715 66715 66715 66715 66715 66715 66715 66715 66715 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 002528 GLASS BLASTERS 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARD~ARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE IRC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC LITIGATION GUARANTEES:HOFF INV 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:JUBELA 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:MADISON 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:COLEMAN 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:BASICS 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:HOFF INV 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:HOFF INV 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:BOFF INV 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:FOUND CO 210-165-719-5801 LITIC~TION GUARANTEES:FOUND CO 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:FOUND CO 210-165-719-5801 LITIGATION GUARANTEES:HOFF IHV 210-165-719-5801 FRANKLIN DAY PLANNERS SNIPPING & HANDLING SALES TAX 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 001-162-999-5220 GLASS MUGS FOR NEW EMPLOYEES 001-150-999-5265 HARDWARE SUPPLIES - POLICE DPT 001-170-999-5242 CITY HALL MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 340-199-701-5212 CRC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-182-999-5212 VAR PARKS MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5242 SALES TAX 190-180-999-5242 VAR PARKS MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5212 CRC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-182-999-5212 MAINT FAC MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 340-199-702-5212 MISC EQUIPMENT FOR INFO SYS 320-199-999-5242 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 400.00 168.00 10.8o 13.86 82.97 11.50 29.03 187.97 104.98 8.14 369.06 33.42 5.38 32.78 4,800.00 192.66 82.97 782.26 66716 01/04/01 004242 HARMONY ARTISTS INC ENTERTAINMENT:OLD TOWN:9/22/O0 280-199-999-5362 300.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNF 66716 01/04/01 004242 NARMONY ARTISTS IBC ENTERTNMNT-DICKENS HOL'12/02 280'199-999-5362 300.00 600.00 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VL REVER 001-2510 229.55- 66717 01/04/01 002107 NIGNMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 001'2510 209.05 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK IBC 002107 VOL LIFE 190-2510 11.87 66717 01/04/01 002107 NIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 193-2510 2.22 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 194-2510 .74 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 300-2510 .BO 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 340-2510 4.87 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VL ADVAN 001-2510 215.30 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMAEK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 001-2510 194.80 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 190-2510 11.87 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 193'2510 2.22 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK IBC 002107 VOL LIFE 194'2510 .74 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGNMARK INC 002107 VOL LIFE 300-2510 .80 66717 01/04/01 002107 HIGHMARK [NC 002107 VOL LIFE 340'2510 4.87 430.60 66718 01/04/01 004399 HOPE LUTHERAN CHURCH ENTERTNMNT:DICKENS HOL:12/10 280-199-999-5362 100.00 100.00 66719 01/04/01 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 001-2080 2,593.59 66719 01/04/01 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 165-2080 445.85 66719 01/04/01 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUB 000194 DEF COMP 190-2080 474.05 66719 01/04/01 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 193-2080 40.00 66719 01/04/01 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 194-2080 16.51 66719 01/04/01 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 280-2080 166.79 66719 01/04/01 000194 I C M A RETIREMENT TRUS 000194 DEF COMP 300'2080 50.00 66720 01/04/01 001517 INTEGRATED INSIGHTS DBA B&S TEAM BLDG TRAINING 12/05 001'162'999'5250 66721 01/04/01 001407 INTER VALLEY POOL BUPPL CRC POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS 190-186-999-5250 2,200.00 160.56 3,786.79 2,200.00 160.56 66722 01/04/01 004079 JENKENB & GILCHR1BT NOV 2000 H.R. LEGAL SERVICES 001-130-999-5247 66723 01/04/01 004281 K T M K F.M. NOV BROADCAST DICKENS HOLIDAY 280-199-999-5362 66724 01/04/01 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/17 KELLY 001-140-999-5118 66724 01/04/01 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/17 KELLY 001-140-999-5118 66724 01/04/01 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 12/17 KELLY 001-140-999-5118 126.00 250.00 415.90 31.30 31.30 126.00 250,00 478,50 66725 01/04/01 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASBOCIAT 66725 01/04/01 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIAT 66725 01/04/01 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ABBOCIAT 66725 01/04/01 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIAT 66726 01/04/01 000206 KINKOS SEP PROF SVCS:WELTY BLDG 280-199-999-5250 OCT PROF SVCS:WELTY BLDG 280-199-999-5250 NOV PROF SVCS:WELTY BLDG 280-199-999-5250 OCT-NOV PROF SVC:AFFIRMED HOUB 165-199-999-5250 PRINTING SVCS:D1CKENB HOLIDAY 280-199-999-5362 66727 01/04/01 004087 LOWERS MISC SUPPLIES FOR FIRE DEPT 001-171-999-5212 66727 01/04/01 004087 LOWE~S MISC SUPPLIES FOR FIRE DEPT 001-171-999-5212 66727 01/04/01 004087 LONERS MISC SUPPLIES FOR FIRE DEPT 001-171-999-5212 785.00 391.25 155.00 572.50 213.35 15.39 42.87 68.01 1,903.75 213.35 126.27 66728 01/04/01 004141 MAINTEX INC SR CTR CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES 190-181-999-5212 11.10 VOUCHRE2 01/04/01 11:04 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 8 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 66728 01/04/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 66728 01/04/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 66728 01/04/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 66728 01/04/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 66728 01/04/01 004141 MAINTEX INC 66729 01/04/01 000217 MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS 66730 01/04/01 004107 MASSA-LAVITT, SANDRA 66731 01/04/01 002046 MASTER K 9 INC 66/32 01/04/01 003935 MELAD & ASSOCIATES ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER SR CTR CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES TLC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES TV MUSEUM CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES VAR PARKS CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES CRC CUSTODIAL SUPPLIES DEC SPORTS PRGM UMPIRE SVCS 190-181-999-5212 190-184-999-5212 190-185-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 190-182-999-5212 190-187~999-5250 CONSULTING SVCS 12/19-26/00 001-161-999-5248 BASIC K-9 RNDLR COURSE/BOARD 001-170-999-5261 NOV BLDG INSPECTION SVCS 001-162-999-5118 ITEM AMOUNT 346.68 211.22 127.45 321.63 270.24 220.00 1,091.00 2,520.00 4,818.12 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENT REV 001-2090 24.16- 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 001-2340 24.16 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 001-2340 3~785.82 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 165-2340 200.93 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMp 003076 DENTALML 190-2340 630.05 66}33 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 193-2340 18.15 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 194-2340 5.44 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 280-2340 100.45 66/33 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 330-2340 18.14 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP 003076 DENTALML 340-2340 130.62 66733 01/04/01 003076 MET LIFE INSURANCE COMP COBRA JAMES ZINN/01 01 MEDICAL 001-1180 36.30 66}34 01/04/01 000228 MOBIL CREDIT FINANCE CO 667'34 01/04/01 000228 MOBIL CREDIT FINANCE CO 66735 01/04/01 002139 NORTR COUNTY TIMES- ATT 66735 01/04/01 002139 NORTH COUNTY TIMES- ATT 66736 01/04/01 004401 NU VISION PRODUCTIONS 66737 01/04/01 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS S FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-170-999-5262 001-164-604-5263 NOV DISPLAY ADS:WATER SLIDE 190-180-999-5254 NOV DISPLAY AD:DICKENS HOLIDAY 280-199-999-5362 DEPOSIT:EVERY 15 MIN PRG VIDEO 001-170-999-5371 OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR FINANCE 001-140-999-5220 CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT 001-164-601-5214 001-164-601-5214 190-180-999-5214 001-162-999-5214 001-162-999-5214 190-180-999-5214 MISC CELLULAR PNONE EQUIPMENT 320-199-999-5242 AUTO PARTS & MISC SUPPLIES 001-164-601-5214 66738 01/04/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 66}r38 01/04/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 66/38 01/04/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 66738 01/04/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 66738 01/04/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 66/38 01/04/01 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 66739 01/04/01 003735 PACIFIC BELL 001-2122 66740 01/04/01 002331 PEP BOYS INC 001-170-999-5222 66741 01/04/01 001958 PERS LONG TERM CARE PRO 001958 PERS L-T PRINTING SET-UP CHARGE 66742 01/04/01 002354 POSITIVE PROMOTIONS 28.80 24.02 165.67 546.86 913.75 82.26 29.85 64.74 93.48 145.46 128.48 128.39 11.55 72.25 154.60 42.30 CHECK AMOUNT 1,288.32 220.00 1,091.00 2,520.00 4,818.12 4,925.90 52.82 712.53 913.75 82.26 590.40 11.55 72.25 154.60 42.30 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 9 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 66743 66743 66744 66745 66746 66746 66746 66746 66747 66748 66749 66750 66750 66751 66752 66753 66753 66754 66755 66756 66757 66758 66758 66758 66758 66758 66758 66758 667~8 66750 66758 66758 66759 66759 66759 CHECK DATE 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT 002612 RADIO SHACK INC 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C 000262 RAHCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 003517 REBEL EQUIPMENT RENTAL 003102 REDDY ICE COMPANY 002940 RIVERSIDE CO OF (GIB SY 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF BW 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SNERIFF SW ROBINSONS-MAY 000277 S & S ARTS & CRAFTS INC 003576 S Y S TECHNOLOGY INC 003576 S Y S TECHNOLOGY INC SALAZAR, MARIANNE 000434 SIERRA COMPUTER SYSTEMS 003804 GKYHAWKS SPORTS ACADEMY 003002 SMOOTHILL SPORTS DIBTRI 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 00D537 BO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR 000519 SOUTH COUNTY PEST CONTR ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER TCSD MAIRT EQUIPMENT RENTAL VAR PARKS EQUIPMENT RENTAL 190-180-999-5238 190-180-999-5238 MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES 320-199-999-5221 DUPL BLUEPRINTS - SR CTR EXPAN 210-190-163-5802 DEC 01-99-02003-0 FLOATING MTR 001-164-601-5250 DEC 02-79-10100-1 NW SPRTS PRK 190-180-999-5240 VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-180-999-5240 VARIOUS WATER METERS 193-180-999-5240 LIGHT TOWERS FOR PARADE 190-180-999-5238 SNOW FOR WINTER WONDERLAND 190-183-999-5370 GIB CONSULTING SERVICES 001-161-610-5248 PATROL SVCS-SAFETY EXPO-II/18 001-170-999-5370 PATROL SVC-BAR PRGM-OCT 2000 001-170-999-5280 CERTIFICATE (EMP YEAR) J.DAUER 001-150-999-5265 MISC CRAFT SUPPLIES-TCSD 190-183-999-5320 VIEWSONIC VP151 MONITORS 320-1970 SALES TAX 320-1970 REIMB:SCACEO GERT PRGM:11/30 001-161-999-5261 PERMITS PLUS SYSTEM SVCS 320-199-999-5248 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183-999-5330 SKATE PARK EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES 190-183-999-5305 DEC 2-11-007-0455 6TN ST 001-164-603-5240 DEC 2-10-747-1393 VARIOUS MTRS 190-180-999-5240 DEC 2-14-204-1615 FRNT ST ROlO 340-199-701-5240 DEC 2-18-937-3152 MUSEUM 190-185-999-5240 DEC 2-02-351-4946 BR CTR 190-181-999-5240 DEC 2-00-397-5042 CITY BALL 340-199-701-5240 DEC 2-18-049-6416 FRONT ST PED 001-164-603-5319 DEC 2-21-911-7892 O.T. PRK LOT 210-165-828-5804 DEC 2-19-171-8568 WEDDING CHPL 190-185-999-5240 DEC 2-20-817-9929 FRONT BT STN 001-170-999-5229 DEC 2-18-528-9980 SANTIAGO RD 190-180-999-5319 CITY HALL PEST CONTROL SERVICE 340-199-701-5250 CRC PEST CONTROL SERVICES 190-182-999-5250 TCC PEST CONTROL SERVICES 190-184-999-5250 ITEM AMOUNT 118.48 359.35 45.18 77.98 259.16 79.23 1,227.54 3,716.36 603.18 2,133.45 1,522.18 3,776.21 2,076.38 100.00 117.74 2,727.00 211.34 12.77 175.00 228.20 1~063.98 306.17 27.34 18.26 350.99 584.75 3,981.95 296.10 12.96 46.26 189.74 164.49 56.00 90.00 36.00 CHECK AMOUNT 477.83 45.18 77.98 5,282.29 603.18 2,133.45 1,522.18 5,852.59 100.00 117.74 2,938.34 12.77 175,00 228.20 1,063.98 5,979.01 182.00 VOUCHRE2 01/04/01 11:04 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 10 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 66760 01/04/01 003840 STRONGS PAINTING 66761 01/04/01 000305 TARGET STORE ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER WATER SLIDE MAINTENANCE @ CRC 190-186'999-5416 REC SUPPLIES FOR PARADE 190-183-999-5370 ITEM AMOUNT 2,800.00 103.46 66762 01/04/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 001-2125 472.50 66762 01/04/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 190-2125 85.50 66762 01/04/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 193-2125 6.75 66762 01/04/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 194-2125 2.25 66762 01/04/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 320-2125 22.50 66762 01/04/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 330-2125 22.50 66762 01/04/01 001547 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911 001547 UN DUES 340-2125 40.50 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66763 01/04/01 000642 TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE 66764 01/04/01 001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P 66764 01/04/01 001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P 66765 01/04/01 003677 66765 01/04/01 003677 66765 01/04/01 003677 66765 01/04/01 00367/ 66765 01/04/01 003677 66765 01/04/01 003677 66765 01/04/01 003677 66765 01/04/01 003677 66765 01/04/01 003677 66766 01/04/01 003067 TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL TEMECULA MOTORSPOHTS LL TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL TEMECULA MOTORSPORTS LL TEMECULA R V 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY 000314 TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM 001687 TEMECULA VALLEY PONY CO 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 000919 TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED 66767 01/04/01 66767 01/04/01 66768 01/04/01 66769 01/04/01 66770 01/04/01 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 001-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 165-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 190-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 194-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 192-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 193-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 280-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 330-1020 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION TO FLEX 340-1020 TCC PLUMBING SERVICES TCC PLUMBING SERVICES 190'184-999-5250 190~184-999-5250 MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT:TEM PD 001-170-999-5214 MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT:TEM PD 001-170-999-5214 MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAIMT:TEM PD 001'170-999'5214 MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT:TEM PD MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT:TEM PD MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAIBT:TEM PD MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT:TEM PD MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MAINT:TEM PD MOTORCYCLE REPAIR/MA[NT:TEM PD 001-170-999-5214 001'170'999-5214 001'170-999-5214 001-170-999-5214 001-170'999-5214 001'170-999-5214 REPAIR TEM POLICE COMMAND POST 001'170~999-5214 MAYOR'S GAVEL FOR JEFF STONE 001'100'999'5265 PLAQUES-LITES & SITES WINNERS 190-183-999-5370 TEM HISTORIC BK FOR VOORBURG 001-101-999-5280 FY 00-01COMM SVC FUNDING AWED 001-101-999-5267 VAR PARKS LOCKSMITH SERVICES 190'180-999-5212 NOV VEHICLE FUEL USAGE NOV VEHICLE FUEL USAGE NOV VEHICLE FUEL USAGE NOV VEHICLE FUEL USAGE 001-162-999-5263 190-180-999-5263 001-164-601-5263 001-170-999-5262 66771 01/04/01 66771 01/04/01 66771 01/04/01 66771 01/04/01 5,548.68 225.00 934.00 3.75 1.25 9.75 75.00 466.66 11.25 55.00 95.00 805.10 342.45 133.49 917.17 302.59 182.66 91.62 86.30 319.00 807.87 87.41 140.64 38.74 2,000.00 45.00 118.53 353.97 337.67 22.14 CHECK AMOUNT 2,800.00 103.46 652.50 7,275.34 150.00 3,180.38 807.87 228.05 38.74 2,000.00 45.00 832.31 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 11 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 66772 66773 CRECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER 01/04/01 01/04/01 003598 TEMECULA VINTAGE SINGER ENTERTAINMENT:DICKENS HOLIDAY 280-199-999-5362 002578 TEMEKU HILLS REC LLC DEPOSIT:LEAGUE OlV MTG:I/08/01 001-2640 ITEM AMOUNT 100.00 500.00 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 001-2360 147.38 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 165-2360 3.01 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 190-2360 29.71 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 192-2360 .08 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 193-2360 2.48 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 194-2360 .59 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 280-2360 1.49 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 300-2360 .74 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 320-2360 6.00 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 330-2360 2.25 66774 01/04/01 003560 TRANSAMERICA 003560 AD&D 340-2360 4.27 004313 TRI-COUNTY OFFICIALS IN 12/01-15 SPORTS OFFICIAL SVCS 66775 190-187-999-5250 01/04/01 275.00 66776 01/04/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 001-2080 10,347.78 66776 01/04/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 165-2080 101.16 66776 01/04/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 190-2080 2,206.44 66776 01/04/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 192-2080 7.50 66776 01/04/01 001065 U B C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 193-2080 125.22 66776 01/04/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 194-2080 30.00 66776 01/04/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 280-2080 117.36 66776 01/04/01 001065 U B C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 300-2080 88.54 66776 01/04/01 001065 U S C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 320-2080 1,416.68 66776 01/04/01 001065 U B C M WEST (DEF COMP) 001065 DEF COMP 340-2080 125.94 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 001-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 165-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 190-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 193-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 280-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 320-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RET[R 330-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) 000389 PT RETIR 340-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) OBRA DEC 2000 MANUAL CHECKS 001-2160 000389 U S C M WEST (OBRA) OBRA DEC 2000 MANUAL CNECKS 190-2160 002702 U B POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:OMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 002702 POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT U B POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT U S POSTAL SERVICE:OMRS POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 66777 66777 66777 66777 66777 66777 66777 66777 66777 66777 001-100-999-5230 001-110-999-5230 001-120-999-5230 001-162-999-5230 190-180-999-5230 280-199-999-5230 001-140-999-5230 001-150-999-5230 001-161-999-5230 001-164-604-5230 320-199-999-5230 66778 66778 66778 66778 66778 66778 66778 66778 66778 66778 66778 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 1,697.14 82.93 758.14 23.38 23.01 69.94 33.94 10.04 1.20 1.32 6.27 66.89 115.88 71.27 424.04 54.35 2,970.58 101.36 875.28 192.38 57.64 CHECK AMOUNT 100.00 500,00 198.00 275.00 14,566.62 2,701.04 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 12 01/04/01 11:04 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 66778 66778 66779 66780 66780 66780 66780 66780 66780 66780 66780 66780 66780 66781 66782 66782 66782 66782 66783 66784 66785 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 01/04/01 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002702 U S POSTAL SERVICE:CMRS 002065 UNISOURCE 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 000325 UNITED WAY 003497 VAIL RANCH MIDDLE SCHO0 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZOH CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 003850 WET PAINT GRAPHIC DESIG 003756 WHITE HOUSE SANITATION 003607 XPECT FIRST AID ITEM DESCRIPTION POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT POSTAGE METER DEPOSIT PAPER FOR COPY CENTER 000325 UW 000325 UW 000325 UW 000325 UN 000325 UW 000325 UN 000325 UW 000325 UW 000325 UN 000325 UW ENTERTAINMENT:DICKENS HOLIDAY DEC XXX-2626 PD SATELLITE STN DEC XXX-3526 FIRE ALARM DEC XXX-5857 GENERAL USAGE DEC XXX-9897 GENERAL USAGE GRAPHIC DESIGN FOR CIP DEPT DEC CLEANING SVCS:BTRFLD STAGE FIRST AID KIT SUPPLIES - PW ACCOUNT NUMDER 001-171-999-5230 001-111-999-5230 330-199-999-5220 001-2120 165-2120 190-2120 192-2120 193-2120 194-2120 280-2120 320-2120 330-2120 340-2120 280-199-999-5362 001-170-999-5229 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 001-165-999-5250 190-180-999-5250 001-164-601-5218 ITEM AMOUNT 8.25 30.49 2,025.70 127.05 8.75 27.60 .11 2.20 .49 2.50 5.00 5.00 .60 150.00 286.31 82.48 42.84 75.84 195.00 50.00 269.07 CHECK AMOUNT 4,974.68 2,025.70 179.30 150.00 487.47 195.00 50.00 269.07 TOTAL CHECKS 255,969.75 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 01/11/01 11:26 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 340 FACILITIES TOTAL AMOUNT 47,455.17 5,833.18 18,574.34 3,078.69 6,210.96 7,747.54 1,376.29 3,804.87 94,081.04 VOUCHRE2 01/11/01 11:26 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR NUMOER DATE NUMOER 66786 01/08/01 000413 66787 01/08/01 001183 66792 01/11/01 002038 66792 01/11/01 002038 66792 01/11/01 002038 66792 01/11/01 002038 66793 01/11/01 003304 66794 01/11/01 003865 66795 01/11/01 003266 66796 01/11/01 001323 66796 01/11/01 001323 66796 01/11/01 001323 66797 01/11/01 004386 66797 01/11/01 004386 66797 01/11/01 004386 66798 01/11/01 002541 66798 01/11/01 002541 66799 01/11/01 002099 66800 01/11/01 001193 66801 01/11/01 004408 66802 01/11/01 001924 66803 01/11/01 002954 66804 01/11/01 004393 66804 01/11/01 004393 66804 01/11/01 004393 ~804 01/11/01 004393 66805 01/11/01 004192 66805 01/11/01 004192 66805 01/11/01 004192 66805 01/11/01 004192 66805 01/11/01 004192 66805 01/11/01 004192 6~06 01/11/01 001945 66807 01/11/01 001380 VENDOR NAME CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GA CALIF REGIONAL WATER QU ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPL ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPL ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPL ACTION POOL & SPA SUPPL ADAMS ADVERTISING INC ANDYS GLASS COMPANY ARCUS DATA SECURITY ARROWREAD WATER INC ARROWHEAD WATER INC ARROWHEAD WATER INC BEAR COM BEAR COM BEAR COM BECKER, WALTER IC~RL BECKER, WALTER KARL BUTTERFIELD ENTERPRISES COMP U S A INC CUB SCOUT PACK #148 G M G MAXIMUS DIAMOND GARAGE DOWNING DISPLAYS INC DOWNING DISPLAYS INC DOWNING DISPLAYS INC DOWNING DISPLAYS INC DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELIN E A MENDOZA CONTRACTING E S I EMPLOYMENT SERVIC CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMOER PERMIT:LOW FLOW CROSS MUR CRK 210-165-707-5804 PERMIT FEE:LOW FLOW CROSSING 210-165-707-5804 POOL SANITIZING CHEMICALS CRC POOL LGNT FIXTURES POOL LGHT GASKETS BALEB TAX 190-186-999-5212 190-186-999-5212 190-186-999-5212 190-1(~5-999-5212 OLD TWN BILLBOARD AD:JAN 280-199-999-5362 RESID IMPRV PRGM:CHAVEZ,ADRIAN 165-199-813-5804 OFFSITE RECORDS STORAGE 001-120-999-5277 BOTTLED WTR SVCS: MNTC FAC BOTTLED WTR SVCS: CRC BOTTLED WTR 5VCS: CITY HALL 340-199-701-5250 190-182-999-5250 340-199-701-5250 RENTAL OF 4 RADIOS W/HEADSETS 190-183-999-5370 RADIO RENTALS:HOLIDAY PARADE 190-180-999-5238 HEADSET RENTALS:HOLIDAY PARADE 190-180-999-5238 VETERANS PRK SIGN FOOTING PRGS$ PMT:CONCRETE V-DITCH 190-180-999-5212 001-164-601-5401 JAN OLD TWN RESTROOM RENTAL MISC COMPUTER SUPPLIES 00-01 COMM SERVICE FUNDING DEC SVC:OPEN SPACE IMPACT FEE 280-199-999-5234 320-199-999-5221 001-101-999-5267 001-140-999-5248 RES IMPR PRGM:REESE,KATHLEEN 165-199-813-5804 PUBLIC EDUCATION DISPLAY BOARD STENCIL CITY LOGO ON BOARD FREIGHT SALES TAX 001-171-999-5296 001-171-999-5296 001-171-999-5296 001-171-999-5296 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-162-999-5263 001-1990 190-180-999-5263 001-164-601-5263 001-163-999-5263 001-165-999-5263 REL STOP NOTICE:J&S SIGN CO TEMP HELP W/E 12/2~ NANSEN 210-2038 001-120-999-5118 ITEM AMOUNT 772.75 500.00 53.14 381.98 95.94 37.03 1~751.00 263.18 825.50 64.33 56.17 172.41 68.00 250.00 30.00 1,585.00 5,000.00 826.00 528.01 1,000.00 1,638.55 640.00 1,062.00 90.00 48.69 89.29 16.24 78.43 151.62 67.36 163.47 25.53 2,797.OO 330.52 PAGE 1 CHECK AMOUNT 772.75 500.00 568.09 1~751.00 263.18 825.50 292.91 348.00 6,585.00 826.00 528.01 1,000.00 1,638.55 640.00 1,289.98 502.65 2,797.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PACE 2 01/11/01 11:26 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NUMBER ITEM AMOUNT CHECK AMOUNT 66807 01/11/01 66807 01/11/01 66807 01/11/01 66807 01/11/01 66807 01/11/01 66807 01/11/01 66807 01/11/01 66808 01/11/01 66809 01/11/01 66810 01/11/01 66811 01/11/01 66812 01/11/01 66812 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66813 01/11/01 66814 01/11/01 66815 01/11/01 66815 01/11/01 66815 01/11/01 66815 01/11/01 66815 01/11/01 66815 01/11/01 66815 01/11/01 66815 01/11/01 66816 01/11/01 66817 01/11/01 66817 01/11/01 66817 01/11/01 66817 01/11/01 66817 01/11/01 66817 01/11/01 66818 01/11/01 001380 E S EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S EMPLOYMENT SERVlC 001380 E S EMPLOYMENT SERVlC 001380 E S EMPLOYMENT SERVlC 001380 E S EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 001380 E S EMPLOYMENT SERVIC 004409 EVEN START FAMILY LITER 003959 EVERETT & EVERETT PAINT 002037 EXPANETS FACTS 000478 FAST SIGNS 000478 FAST SIGNS 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 003249 FUELMAN OF CALIFORNIA 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIEB OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT 000177 GLENNIE8 OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT GUZON, ALVIN 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC 000186 HANKS HARDWARE 000186 HANKS HARDWARE 000186 HANKS HARDWARE 002372 HARMON, JUDY TEMP HELP W/E 12/29 RUSH TEMP HELP W/E 12/29 EBON TEMP HELP W/E 12/29 EBON TEMP HELP W/E 12/29 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 12/29 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 12/29 HANSEN TEMP HELP W/E 12/15 THURSTON 001-161-999-5118 340-199-701-5118 340-199-702-5118 001-164-604-5118 001-161-999-5118 190-180-999-5118 190-186-999-5118 00-01 COMM SERVICE FUNDING 001-101-999-5267 RES IMPRV PRGM:PINO,VINCENT 168-199-813-5804 PHONE MNTC & REPAIRS:CITY HALL 320-199-999-5215 REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 16 "FIELD CLOSED" PRK SIGNS SALES TAX 190-180-999-5244 190-180-999-5244 X-7824 COMERCHERO:CONF EXPENSE 001-100-999-5258 X-9798 J.BTONE:SHERATON HOTEL 001-100-999-5258 X-9277 R.ROSERTS:CALED CONF 001-100-999-5258 X-9277 R.ROBERTS:NAT'L LEAGUE 001-100-999-5258 X-9277 R.ROBERTS:HYATT HOTEL 001-100-999-5258 X-2292 G.ROBERTS:HUNGRY HUNTER 001-~40-999-5260 X-6165 YATES:INFOPLACE USA 001-150-999-5265 X~1405 UBNOSKE:PROF MTGB 001-161-999-5260 X-0432 T.ELMO:THE GRILL ROOM 001-162-999-5261 FUEL FOR CITY VEHICLES 001-1990 MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-C.M. MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-TCSD MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES'SR CTR MISC OFFICE SUPPL[ES'TCSD MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-MUSEUM MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES-SR CTR MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES~MPSC M[SC OFFICE SUPPLIES-MPSC 001-110-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-181-999-5220 190-180-999-5220 190-185-999-5220 190-181-999-5220 190-181~999-5301 190-181-999-5220 REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 TRENCH PANEL MATERIALS:BTN 73 SALES TAX HARDWARE SUPPLIES ' MNTC FAC HARDWARE SUPPLIES - TCSD HARDWARE SUPPLIES - PW TRFFC HARDWARE SUPPLIES - PW MNTC 001-171-999-5242 001-171-999-5242 340-199-702-5212 190-180-999-5212 001-16/*-602-5242 001-164-601-5218 TCSD INSTRUCTOR EARNINGS 190-183~999-5330 1,852.03 853.80 284.60 355.95 900.05 40.68 1,465.60 2,000.00 1,600.00 404.00 100.00 366.88 28.43 2,502.69 484.90 312.38 645.37 148.96 79.01 100.00 66.55 204.79 21.75 327.93 68.04 32.47 661.99 74.36 51.80 I00.00 100.00 100.00 270.68 20.98 93.91 6.54 23.35 136.52 336.00 6,083.23 2,000.00 1,600.00 404.00 100.00 395.31 4,544.65 21.75 1,416.59 100.00 551.98 336.00 VOUCHRE2 CiTY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3 01/11/01 11:26 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 66819 66820 66821 66821 66822 66822 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66823 66824 66825 66825 66825 66826 66827 66827 66827 66827 66827 66827 66827 66827 66828 66828 66828 66828 66828 66828 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 IMANI TEMPLE OF TEMECUL LAWLER, JUDITH 003800 MELAUGHLIN ENGINEERING 003800 MCLAUGNLIN ENGINEERING 063448 MELODYS AD WORKS 003448 MELODYS AD WORKS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS 001986 MUSICAL AUDIO ENVIRONM 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS 004388 NATIONAL SURVEY SYSTEMS NEXTEL NEXTEL NEXTEL NEXTEL NEXTEL NEXTEL NEXTEL NEXTEL 002105 OLD TOWN TiRE & SERVICE 002105 OLD TOWN TiRE & SERVICE 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE ITEM DESCRIPTION REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT NOV PRG PMT:TOT LOT UPGRD:O004 RET.W/H PMT:TOT LOT UPGRD:O004 MRKT/PUBLIC RELATIONS:OLD TOWN MRKT/PUBLIC RELATIONS:OLD TOWN BUSINESS CARDS: J. COMERCHERO BUSINESS CARDS: J. STONE BUSINESS CARDS: R. ROBERTS SALES TAX BUSINESS CARDS: M. CASEY SALES TAX BUSINESS CARDS: P. SMITH BUSINESS CARDS: A. ADAMS BUSINESS CARDS: D. LANIER BUINESS CARDS: B. OUTIERREZ BUSINESS CARDS: G. YATES BUSINESS CARDS: J. O'GRADY BUSINESS CARDS: S. STEFFEN BUSINESS CARDS: R. HRUSIC~ SALES TAX SALES TAX BUSINESS CARDS: D. HAZEN JAN MUSIC BROADCAST:OLD TOWN AUTO PARTS &MISC SUPPLIES AUTO PARTS & RISC SUPPLIES AUTO PARTS & RISC SUPPLIES CONSULT SVCS:LOW/MOD HOUSING REFUND:APP WITHDRAWN:PAO0-0386 REFUND:APP WITHDRAWN:PAO0-0386 REFUND:APP WITNDRAWN:PAO0-0386 REFUND:APP WITHDRAWN:PAO0-0386 REFUND:APP WITHDRAWN:PAO0-0386 REFUND:APP WITNDRAWN:PAO0-0386 BEFUND:APP WITHDRAWN:PAO0-0386 REFUND:APP WITHDRAWN:PAO0-0386 CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VENICLE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEHIELE REPAIRS & MAINT CITY VEH~q~E REPAIRS & MAINT ACCOUNT NUMBER 190-2900 190-2900 210-190-145-5804 210-2035 280-199-999-5250 280-199-999-5250 001-100-999-5222 001-100-999-5222 001-100-999-5222 001-100-999-5222 001-120-999-5222 001-120-999-5222 001-162-999-5222 001-110-999-5222 001-150-999-5222 001-150-999-5222 001-110-999-5222 001-110-999-522~ 001-110-999-5222 001-110-~9-5222 001-110-999-5222 001-150-999-5222 001-161-999-5222 001-16/*-603-5250 001-164-601-5215 001-164-601-5215 001-164-601-5215 165'199-999-5250 001-162-4216 001-171-4036 001-161-4129 001-161-4116 001-163-4129 001-163-4388 001-163-4116 001-170-4125 001-162-999-5214 001-164-601-5214 190-180-999-5214 001-165-999-5214 001-165-999-5214 001-161-999-5214 ITEM AMOUNT 100.00 100.00 128.04 12.81- 1,500.00 2,000.00 102.50 102.50 102.50 23.06 38.25 2.87 110.19 102.50 102.50 102.50 102.50 102.50 38.25 33,13 !1.o~ 110.19 59~50 286.25 122.66 124.68 2,250.00 30.00 601.00 568.00 3,777.00 45.00 266.00 1,048.00 115.00 64.95 77.97 72.71 338.39 309.16 489.3~ CHECK AMOUNT 100.00 100.00 115.23 3,500.00 1,225.23 59,50 533.59 2,250.00 6,450.00 1,352.53 VOUCNRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 4 01/11/01 11:26 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 66829 66830 66831 66832 66833 66834 66835 66835 66836 66836 66836 66837 66838 66838 66038 66839 66839 66840 66840 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66841 66842 66842 66842 66842 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 002668 OMEGA LAKE SERVICES 004389 OUT OF THE ORDINARY 005762 P M X MEDICAL SPECIALTY 002331 PEP SOYS INC 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPAN 002110 PRIME EQUIPMENT 002027 PRINCIPE & ASSOCIATES 002027 PRINCIPE & ASSOCIATES 002483 PRO TECH SERVICES 002483 PRO TECH SERVICES 002483 PRO TECH SERVICES 003493 PRO-CRAFT OVERHEAD DOOR 000635 R & J PARTY PALACE 000635 R & J PARTY PALACE 000635 R & J PARTY PALACE 001364 R C P SLOCK & SRICK INC 001364 R C P BLOCK & BRICK INC 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C 000947 RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 PJ~NCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DIST 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER JAN DUCK POND WATER MAINT SVCS 190-180-999-5250 PW TRAINING/TEAM BUILDING 001-164-601-5261 MED SUPPLIES - PARAMEDIC UNIT 001-171-999-5311 AUTO PARTS & MISC SUPPLIES 001-164-601-5214 VARIOUS RECRUITMENT ADS FOR HR 001-150-999-5254 RENTAL EQUIP FOR PW MAINT CREW 001-164-601-5238 CONSULTING SVCS:DESILTING POND 190-180-999-5250 CONSULTING SVCS:DESILTING POND 190-180-999-5250 CRC POOL HEATER HAINTENANCE FREIGHT SALES TAX 190-186-999-5212 190-186-999-5212 190-186-999-5212 RES IMPRV PRGM: VASQUEZ 165-199-813-5804 CANOPY RENTAL:HOLIDAY PARADE RENT SUPPLIES:DICKENS HOLIDAY CANOPY-PARK DEDICATION-12/12 190-183-999-5370 280-199-999-5362 190-180-999-5250 SUPPLIES FOR PUBLIC WORKS SALES TAX 001-164-601-5218 001-164-601-5218 DUPL BLUEPRINTS:MARC~ARITA RD 210-165-706-5801 DUPL BLUEPRINTS:MARG/WINCH RDS 210-165-721-5802 DEC 01-08-00037-1 PALA RD/79S DEC 01-06-81000-10.T.PRK LOT DEC 01-06-84860-5 PUJOL ST DEC 01-02-98000-0 BTR #84 DEC 01-02~98010-0 STN #84 VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS VARIOUS WATER METERS 190-180-999-5240 210-165-828-5804 280-199~807-5801 001-171-999-5240 001-171-999-5240 001-164-603-5240 001-165-999-5250 190-180-999-5240 190-181-999-5240 190-182-999-5240 190-184-999-5240 190-186-999-5240 193-180-999-5240 340-199-701-5240 190-185-999-5240 CITY VEHICLE DETAILING CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING & GAS CITY VEHICLE DETAILING 001-162-999-5214 001-110-999-5214 001-110-999-5263 001-165-999-5214 ITEM AMOUNT 800.00 1,934.55 338.84 25.77 2,652.51 64.44 2,200.00 600.00 219.00 7.05 17.58 1,080.00 165.00 1,3~3.00 150.00 502.80 38.97 23.27 28.02 18.18 35.14 44.26 9.96 147.56 275.01 55.68 3,770.15 98.18 491.41 160.86 148.63 2,185.33 386.98 57.41 12.00 18.00 65.61 20.00 CHECK AMOUNT 800.00 1,934.55 338.84 25.77 2,652.51 64.44 2,800.00 244.43 1,080.00 1,688.00 541.77 51.29 7,884.74 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5 01/11/01 11:26 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK NUMBER DATE 66842 01/11/01 66842 01/11/01 66842 01/11/01 66843 01/11/01 66844 01/11/01 66845 01/11/01 66846 01/11/01 66847 01/11/01 66847 01/11/01 66847 01/11/01 66847 01/11/01 66847 01/11/01 66847 01/11/01 66848 01/11/01 66848 01/11/01 66848 01/11/01 66849 01/11/01 66849 01/11/01 66850 01/11/01 66850 01/11/01 66851 01/11/01 66851 01/11/01 66851 01/11/01 66851 01/11/01 66851 01/11/01 66851 01/11/01 66852 01/11/01 66852 01/11/01 66853 01/11/01 66854 01/11/01 66855 01/11/01 66856 01/11/01 66856 01/11/01 66856 01/11/01 66857 01/11/01 VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER NAME 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000907 RANCHO CAR WASH 000266 RIGHTWAY 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & RE 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF S~ 000271 ROBERT BEIN WM FROST & 000271 ROBERT BEIN WM FROST & 000271 ROBERT BEIN WM FROST & 000271 ROBERT BEIN ~M FROST 000271 ROBERT BEIN WM FROST & 000271 ROBERT BEIH ~1 FROST & 001942 S C SIGNS 001942 S C SIGNS 001942 S C SIGNS 004014 SAN DIEGO SPORTS ARENA b04014 SAN DIEGO SPORTS ARENA 000278 SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE 000278 SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 BO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 000293 STADIUM PIZZA 000293 STADIUM PIZZA 000305 TARGET STORE 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY COMPANY TEMECULA VALLEY LADY HO 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PiPE & 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PlPE & 000306 TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE & TEMECULA VALLEY pOP WAR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT CITY VEHICLE DETAILING CITY VEHICLE DETAILING CITY VEHICLE DETAILING 001-163-999-5214 001-161-999-5214 001-164-601-5214 JAN EQUIP RENTAL - RIVERTON PK 190-180-999-5238 NOTICE OF EXEMPTION:EA-76 001-164-604-5224 NOTICE OF EXEMPTION:EA-77 001-164-604-5224 ASSIST CAL TRANS SVCS:9/IO/O0 001-170-999-5279 AUG PROF SVCS:SANTIAGO/795/I15 210-165-662-5802 AUG PROF SVCB:BANTIAGO/79B/I15 210-165-705-5802 SEP PROF SVCS:SANTIAGO/79B/I15 210-165-662-5802 BEP PROF SVCS:BAHTIAGO/79B/115 210-165-705-5802 OCT PROF SVCS:SANTIAGO/795/I15 210-165-662-5802 OCT PROF BVCS:SANTIAGO/~gS/I15 210-165-705-5802 NOV 2000 POSTING PUBLIC NTCS OCT 2000 POSTING PUBLIC NTCS SEPT 2000 POSTING PUBLIC NTCS 001-161-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 001-161-999-5256 ~cSD EXCURSION:DISNEY ON ICE 190-183-999-5350 TCSD EXCURSION:RARLEM GLOBETRO 190-183'999'5350 DEC RECRUIT AD:ENGINEERING DEC RECRUIT AD:ENGINEERING 001-150-999-5254 001-150-999-5254 JAN 2-10-331-2153 TCC 190-184-999-5240 DEC 2-20-792-2444 VARIOUS MTRS 190-180-999-5319 DEC 2-19-683-3255 FRONT ST PED 001-164-603-5319 DEC 2-19-683-3263 FRONT BT PED 001-164-603-5319 DEC 2-00-397-5067 VARIOUS MTRS 193-180-999-5240 DEC 2-D2-502-8077 MAIHT FAD 340-199-702-5240 REFRESHMENTS:O.T.MTG:11/07/O0 280-199-999-5362 REFREBHMENTB:O.T.TREE TRIMMING 280-199-999-5362 HOLIDAY RED SUPPLIEB:TCSD 190~183-999-5370 RECOGMITION PLAQUE: PATTISON 001-140-999-5250 EY O0-Ot COMM SVC FUNDING AWRD 001-101-999-5267 NAINT/REPAiR EQUIP:CITY HALL SALES ~AX VAR PARK~ MAINT SUPPLIES 340-199-701-5215 340-199-701-5215 190-180-999-5212 REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 12.00 6.00 12.00 62.88 78.00 78.00 816.00 548.52 204.53 305.93 114.07 558.32 208.18 325.00 260,00 520.00 668.75 635.00 227.84 539.80 563.93 278.54 944.44 774.55 893.36 739.22 163.40 89.88 59.48 51.67 1,000.00 263.10 20.39 14.01 100.00 145.61 62.88 78.00 78.00 816.00 1,939.55 1,105.00 1,303.75 767.64 4,194.04 253.28 59.48 51.67 1,000.00 297.50 100.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMEEULA PAGE 6 01/11/01 11:25 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK NUMBER 66858 66858 66858 66858 66858 66858 66858 66859 66859 66859 66859 66859 66859 66859 66860 66861 66862 66862 66862 66863 66863 66863 66863 66863 66864 66865 66865 66866 66867 66868 CHECK VENDOR VENDOR DATE NUMBER NAME 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 01/11/01 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURIT 004274 TEMEOULA VALLEY SECURIT 003862 THYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR 003862 THYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR 003862 TRYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR 003862 TNYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR 003862 THYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR 003862 THYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR 003862 THYSSEN DOVER ELEVATOR 000320 TOWNE CENTER STATIONERS 004394 U C REGENTS 000409 VALLEN SAFETY SUPPLY IN 000409 VALLEN SAFETY SUPPLY IN 000409 VALLEN SAFETY SUPPLY IN 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZOM CALIFORNIA 004261 VERIZOM CALIFORNIA 001342 001342 003?30 002109 VILLANUEVA, THOMAS WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY I WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY I WEST COAST ARBORISTS IN WHITE CAP INDUSTRIES IN WREN, ANTHONY ITEM DESCRIPTION SCHLAGE LOCK C.H. A/V ROOM NORTON 1601 DOOR CLOSER KEY SCHLAGE TO MASTER KEY SYS INSTALL SCHLAGE LEVER INSTALL DOOR CLOSER SERVICE CALL CHARGE SALES TAX NOV CITY HALL ELEVATOR INSPECT NOV CITY HALL ELEVATOR INSPECT DEC C.H./MUS. ELEVATOR INSPECT DEC C.N./MUS. ELEVATOR INSPECT JAN C.N./MUS. ELEVATOR INSPECT JAN C.H./MUS. ELEVATOR INSPECT JAN C.H./MUS. ELEVATOR INSPECT OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR LAND DEV CITY ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP DUES REPAIR MAINT EQUIP - PW FREIGHT SALES TAX DEC XXX-1289 PRATT DEC XXX-2629 NAGGAR DEC XXX-3539 GENERAL USAGE DEC XXX-5509 GENERAL USAGE DEC XXX-5759 GENERAL USAGE REFUND:SPORTS BB MENS LEAGUE VARIOUS SITES MAINT SUPPLIES SALES TAX CITYWIDE TREE TRIMMING SVCS RAINT SUPPLIES FOR PW CREWS REFUND: SECURITY DEPOSIT ACCOUNT NUMBER 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5212 340-199-701-5250 340-199-701-5250 340-199-701-5250 190-185-999-5250 340-199-701-5250 190-185-999-5250 190-185-999-5250 001-163-999-5220 001-111-999-5226 001-164-601-5215 001-164-601-5215 001-164-601-5215 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 32D-199-999-5208 320-199-999-5208 190-187-4961 190-180-999-5212 190-180-999-5212 001-164-601-5402 001-164-601-5218 190-2900 ITEM AMOUNT 150.03 148.00 11.00 30.00 60.00 20.00 23.10 118.66 95.34 135.00 135.00 135.00 120.29 14.71 172.87 1,000.00 49.00 5.58 3.~ 54.88 78.20 37.93 132.02 141.25 40.00 337.00 26.12 3,900.90 78.42 100.00 CHECK AMOUNT 442.13 754.00 172.87 1,000.00 58.37 444.28 40.00 363.12 3,900.90 78.42 100.00 TOTAL CHECKS 94,081.04 VOUCHRE2 01/11/01 12:24 CITY OF TEMECULA VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS PAGE 3 ' FUND TITLE 001 GENERAL FUND 190 COHMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 340 FACILITIES TOTAL AMOUNT 897,314.65 67,150.94 24,228.00 25,564.34 7,303.79 541.00 1,022,102.72J VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1 01/11/01 12:24 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME 66871 01/23/01 002187 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF TEE V 66872 01/23/01 003376 ARTS COUNCIL, THE 66873 01/23/01 001923 CONVERSE CONSULTANTS 66874 01/23/01 000161 EDEN SYSTEMS INC 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66875 01/23/01 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE 66876 01/23/01 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIA 66876 01/23/01 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIA 66876 01/23/01 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ASSOCIA 66876 01/23/01 003815 GFB FRIEDRICH & ABBOCIA 66877 01/23/01 004404 GODBE RESEARCH & ANALYS 66877 01/23/01 004404 GODBE RESEARCH & ANALYS 66878 01/23/01 000711 GRAPHICS UNLIMITED LITH 66879 01/23/01 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW 66879 01/23/01 000955 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFF SW 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D ITEM ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION NUMBER NOV 2000 ANIMAL CONTROL BVCS 001-172-999-5255 COMMUNITY GRANT AGREEMENT 190-180-999-5286 DEC GEOTECH SVC:MURR CRK CROSS 210-165-707-5802 EDEN SYSTEM ANNUAL SUPPORT 320-199-999-5211 DEC LDSCP SVC:CHILDRENB MUSEUM DEC LDSCP SVC:NEIGBBORHOOD PRK DEC LDSCP SVC:BPORTS PARKS DEC LDSCP SVC:MEDIANS DEC LDSCP SVC:SOUTB SLOPES DEC LDSCP SVC:NORTH SLOPES DEC LDSCP SVC: CRC DEC LDSCP SVC: M.P. SR CTR DEC LDSCP SVC:C.HALL/MNTC FAC DEC LOSCP SVC: TCC DEC LDSCP SVC: FiRE STN 84 DEC LDSCP SVC:OLD TWN PRKLOT DEC LDSCP SVC:OLD TNN STRTSCPE DEC LDSCP SVC: MUSEUM 190-180-999-5415 190-180-999-5415 190-180-999-5415 193-180-999-5415 193-180-999-5415 193-180-999-5415 190-182-999-5415 190-181-999-5415 340-199-701-5415 190-184-999-5415 001-171-999-5212 001-164-603-5415 001-164-603-5415 190-185-999-5415 AUG-NOV SVCS:MARGARITA IMPRV AUG-NOV SVE$:MABGARITA IMPRV AUG-NOV SVC:~RGARITA IMPBV AUG-NOV BVC:MARGAR1TA IMPRV 210-165-706-5802 210-165-713-5802 210-165-706-5802 210-165-713-5802 CONSULT SVCS:TRACKING SURVEY 001-110-999-5248 CONSULT SVCS:TRACKING SURVEY 001-110-999-5248 PRINTING SVCS:TCSD REC BROCNUR 190-180-999-5222 PATROL SVC-TRACTOR RACE-lO/6-8 001-170-999-5370 NOV 2000 BIKE PATROL SVCS 001-170-999-5326 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 1AW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 8/24-9/20/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 LAW ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 LAg ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 001-170-999-5288 001-170-999-5299 001-170-999-5298 001-170-999-5294 001-170-999-5303 001-170-999-5291 001-170-999-5281 001-170-999-5262 001-170-999-5279 001-170-999-5297 001-170-999-5288 001-170-999-5299 001-170-999-5298 001-170-999-5294 001-170-999-5303 ITEM AMOUNT 6,194.51 10,002.00 5,775.00 7,303.79 155.00 11,635.00 25,325.00 1,975.00 13,375.00 8,878.00 1,444.00 361.00 541.00 193.00 400.00 250.00 987.00 285.00 2,849.71 270.29 15,225.28 1,444.06 9,592.50 9,592.50 17,750.94 9,727.47 5,605.17 220,566.50 58,938.90 30,220.80 10,208.90 20,147.20 12,844.00 31,038.32 20,501.68 8,584.82 15,312.00 212,893.01 60,938.20 30,220.80 10,073.60 20,147.20 CHECK AMOUNT 6,194.51 10,002.00 5,775.00 7,303.79 65,804.00 19,789.34 19,185.00 17,750.94 15,332.64 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 01/11/01 12:24 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D LAW ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D LAM ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D LAW ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D LAW ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 66880 01/23/01 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS D LAW ENFORCEMENT 9/21-10/18/00 ACCOUNT NUMBER 001-170-999-5291 001-170-999-5281 001-170-999-5262 001-170-999-5279 001-170-999-5297 ITEM AMOUNT 13,182.00 31,474.94 19,940.04 12,420.59 15,312.00 CHECK AMOUNT 854,965.50 TOTAL CHECKS 1,022,102.72 ITEM 3 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council ~usan W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services January 23, 2001 Purchase of Compaq Proliant Server Prepared by: Thomas Hafeli, Information Systems Administrator Gus Papagolos, Senior Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the purchase of a dual Compaq Proliant Server and Disk Storage Array system from Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc., of Riverside, California for the total amount of $57,618.72. DISCUSSION: The purchase of this server will allow for the interoperability and expansion of essential City financial and permit systems utilized by City staff. These systems require periodic upgrades to ensure accurate and efficient operations and a solid platform for reliable service and growth. All of the components of the server arrangement are available on the State of California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) under information technology contracts. The competitive quoted price is provided by an authorized CMAS contractor. Under this agreement it is within the City's discretion to take advantage of the pricing on another governmental entity contract. The contract is made available for use by State of California agencies and any city, county or local governmental agency empowered to expend public funds. Therefore, this purchase is exempt from competitive bidding requirements. Staff's research has determined that the CMAS price is the most competitive and that there are no local venders on the CMAS suppliers list. Also, it has been determined that the CMAS program is consistent with the City's procurement policies and regulations and that it is used by many Cities as an industry standard. The below information detail~ the purchase of the server from Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc. Please note, that the lowest quote, MicroAge of Sacramento, does not include a 3 year "on site" warranty which is included in the other quotes. Contractor MicroAge of Sacramento (quote is provided without 3 year on-site warranty) CMAS Contract #s 3-98-70-0681A 3-98-70-0681 B 3-00-70-0681 G Price $54,368.49 Jaguar Computer Systems 3-98-70-0681A 3-98-70-0681 B 3-00-70-0681G $57,618.72 Contractor Government Sales Associates IKON Office Solutions CMAS Contract #s 3-98-70-0681A 3-98-70-0681B 3-00-70-0681 G 3-98-70-0681A 3-98-70-0681 B 3-00-70-0681 G Price $64,788.23 $65,400.7O FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds were appropriated in the 2000-01 Fiscal Year Budget for the Information Services Internal Services fund. Attachment: Jaguar Computer Systems Quote Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc. 4135 Indus Way Riverside, CA 92503 Ph: 909-273-7950 FAX: 909-734-5615 http'J/www.j aguar.net I - I II~i January 12, 2001 Tom Hafli City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temcula, CA 92590 Subject: Compaq Server Quote Jaguar/MicroAge, since 1978, has established a reputation in the Local Government community by providing a single vendor solution set approach to marketing and supporting its product offerings. As strategic networking Business Partner with our clients, our corporate mission has provided the oppommity to offer information technology, office automation, responsive on-site technical support, and educational/consulting services at cost effective rates. Part of the professional network support team that Jaguar MicmAge fields from our 17,000' facility in Riverside. All products listed below are available on Jaguar's CMAS contracts listed below. All Compaq equipment listed below has a 3 year manufactaring warranty unless otherwise stated. All Hewlett Packard equipment is 3 years manufacturing warranty unless otherwise stated. All other equipment is I year unless otherwise stated. Compaq 3-98-70-068 lA Exp. 6/18/2003 HP 3-98-70-0681B Exp. 3/31/2002 Consulting 3-00-70-0681G Exp. 9/22/2002 Item Description Qty Price Extended Price 193706-001 Proliant DL380 Pentium III 2 $4,648.00 $9,296.00 1GHz/128MB/32K/256K/Array 3 year limited warranty 187602-B21 Pentium III 1GHzProcessorKit(ML370 2 $1,566.00 $3,132.00 and DL380) 128280-B21 1024-MB PC133-MHz Registered ECC 4 $2,901.00 $11,604.00 SDRAM DIMM Memory Option Kit 159763-B21 9.1-GB 1" 10Krpm Wide Ultra3 4 $374.00 $1,496.00 SCSI Hard disk. Two disk mirrored m each server. 174818-B21 Compaq NC6134 Gigabit NIC 64 2 $622.00 $1,244.00 PCI 1000SX 176479-B21 Compaq PCI to Fiberchannel Host 2 $2,196.00 $4,392.00 bus adapter 030-255 Microsoft Advanced Server - GOV 2 $2,114.00 $4,228.00 030-258 Microsoft Advanced Server CAL 25 $27.00 $675.00 User - GOV 146013-001 Compaq RA 4100 Storage Array 1 $6,754.00 $6,754.00 Sales Description - Rack Mountable Fibre Channel Army Storage System - 3 Year On-site Warranty Key Buying Poiats - Holds up to 12 1" high Universal Ultra2 pluggable drives - 4 U High - Integrated SMART-2 RAID adapter - 64 MB cache 06 MB read, 48 MB user selcctablc re. ad/write battery-hacked) - Online Capacity Expansion - Hot-Pluggable Support - Supports Raid Levels 0,1,4,5 & 0+1 188122-B22 18.2GB Wide Ultra2 SCSI 10K 6 $906.00 $5,436.00 RPM Drive (1") 234453-00l Fiber Channel Storage Hub 7 (US) 1 $1,053.00 $1,053.00 JC3MFB Fiber Patch cables 4 $40.00 $160.00 J4813A HP 2524 24pon switch, Managed I $849.00 $849.00 Consulting Network Design and Project 40 $85.00 $3,400.00 management Sub Total $53,719.00 Tax (7.75%) Excluding labor $3,899.72 Total $57,618.72 All pricing is good for 30 days from the date of this quote. All products listed above are available and can be delivered within 7 to 15 working days from date of order unless otherwise stated above. All hardware products have a 1 years warranty unless otherwise stated above. Thank You Roy Finch Roy Finch Area Sales Manager 01/08/~1 05:11 FA~ 9092737955 JAGUAR Department of General Services Procurement Division P.O Box 942804 Sacramento, CA 94204-0001 State of California MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc. 3-98-70-0681A - Brand-Compaq; LAN-Component, System; PC-Component, Laptop, Laptop Accessory, Desktop, Monitor, System. ICONTRACT NUMBER: GSA TERM: DISTRIBUTION: 3-98-70-0681A 6/19~98 through 6/18/2003 STATEWIDE CMAS Schedule A - GSA #GS-35F-$234H (COMPAQ FEDERAL, LLC) This renewal supp{ement replaces in its entirety Jaguar Computer Systems, thc.'$ existing California Multiple Award Schedule (CMAS) which expired on March 31,2000. The most current contract provisions, ordering instructions, policies, and DMAS terms and conditions applicable to this CMAS conb'act are incorporated herein. This contract is available for use by State of California agencies and any city, county, city and county, district or other local governmental body or corporation empowered to expend public funds. While the State makes this contract available, each local agency should make its own determination whether the CMAS program is consistent with their CMAS Contractors are required to provide all CMAS and Federal contract terms and conditions with the list(s) of products, services, and prices Ti~ese terms and conditions may include guarantees and other important provisions nol included on the contract cover page. PLEASE REQUEST FROM CONTRACTOR A COPY OF ALL CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS IF NOT PROVIOED INITIALLY. REPLACE "COMPAQ FEDERAL, LLC" WITH "JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC." WHERE COMPAQ FEDERAL, LLC" IS REFERENCED IN THE FEDER~AL TERMS AND CONDITIONS. Effective Date: 4/30/2000 DAWN FORD, Program Analyst, California Multiple Award Schedule Unit Federal GSA award schedule The State w~ll procure new information technology equipment. All equipment must be new and the latest model in current production Used, shopworn, demonstrator, prototype, or discontinued models are not acceptable 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~03 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. CMAS I~0. 3-98-70-0681A, SUPPLEMENT 1 CMAS CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS The attached CMAS contract terms and conditions dated 12/20199 are incorporated into this conbact. PURCHASE ORDERS All individual purchase orders issued against this CMAS contract incorporate these ordedng provisions as well as ail terms and conditions. The supplier must imrnediately reject orders that are not accurate. Discrepancies are to be negotiated and incorporated into the order prior to the products end se~vicas being delivered. ISSUANCEOFPURCHASEORDER Purchase orders must be issued before the expiration of the CMAS contract. Performance (delivery of product and/or services) of the purchase order may be performed and completed after the expiration of the CMAS contract but must be performed within the delivery date(s) requirement(s) as stated on the purchase order. SELF-DELETING FEDERAL G~iA TERMS AND CONDITIONS Instructions, or terms and conditions appearing in the Special Items or other provisions of the Federal GSA which are intended to apply to the purchase, license, or rental (es applicable) of the products or services by the U.S. Government in Ihe United States, and/or to any overseas location shall be self-deleting. (Example: "Examinations of Records" provision) Federal regulations and standards, such as Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Federal Information Resources Management Regulation (FIRMR), Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS), General .Services Administration Regulation (GSAR), er Federal Instalrment Payment Agreement (FIPA) shall be self- deleting. Federal blanket orders and small order procedures are not applicable. ORDEROFPRECEDENCE The California Multiple Award Schedute terms and conditions shall prevail if lhere is a conflict between the terms and conditions of the Contractor's federal GSA (or other multiple award contract), packaging, invoices, catalogs, brochures, technical data sheets or other documents (see CMAS Terms and Conditions, CONFLICT OF TERMS). EXCEPTIONS TO THE ATTACHED FEDERAL GSA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE # GS-3SF~234H This CMAS contract provides for the purchase and warranly of hardware and software Only products from the listed manufacturer(s) are available within the scope of this contract. Compaq Leasing: Except as stated below, Federal GSA Lease provisions are NOT acceptable, and cannot be sold through CMAS because the rates and contract terms are unacceptable, and not applicable to the State. Federal Lease to Own Purchase (LTOP) and hardware rental provisions with no residual value owed at end term are acceptable ($I residual value is acceptable). As an alternative, agencies may consider financing through the State's financial marketplace GS SMarlTM. All terms end conditions and lenders are pre-appraved for easy financing. The GS SMarlTM Internet address is http://www.pd.dCls.ca.qov then click on GS SMartTM. Buyers without Inlemet access may contact Ihe GS SMartTM AdminisLrator, Pat Mullen by phone at 916/327-2600 or via e-mail at oat. mullen~d(~s.ca.(~ov for further information. SMALL BUSINESS ORDERING CONSIDERATION Effective January 1, 1999, pursuant to Assembly Bill No 2405, prior to placing orders under the California Mulfipie Award Schedule program, State agencies shall whenever prachcable firsl consider offers from small businesses that have established CMAS contracts iGC Section 14846(b)]. NOTE: Substantiation of compliance with this requirement will be requested by the Department of General Services auditors when your files are reviewed. The following website lists CMAS Small Business Padners: www.pd.dgs.ca.gov (click on CMAS; go to Small Business Partners) ORDER FORM State agencies shall use a ContractfDelegalion Purchase Order (Std. 65) for purchases and services. Local governments shall, in lieu of the State's Purchase Order (Std. 65), use their own purchase order document The Procurement Division will bill each state and local agency for use of CMAS contracts, equal to 1.21% of the value of each order. The Procurement Division will state and local agencies directly. The 1 21% fee should NOT be included in the order total, or remitted before a bill is received from us Updated 5/25/00 2 01/05/0! 00:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~04 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. CMAS NO. 3-98-70~68tA, SUPPLEMENT I Ort~ copy of each order shell be forwarded to the Department of General Services fDGS'I. Procurement Division, CMAS Unit~ 1500 - 5th Street~ Suite 116v Sacramento, CA 95814, Attention: Carol Umfleet pMS# C-39). ORDERING PROCEDURES The ordering entity ia required to complete and distribute the order form. For services, the ordedng entity shall modify the information contained on the form to include the service period (start and end date), and the monthly cost [or other intermittent cost), and any other information pertinent to the services being provided. The cost for each line item should be included on the order, not just system totals. CONTRACT PRICING Contract prices for products and/ar services are maximums. The ordering agency is encouraged to negotiate lower prices. STATE POLICY USE OF CMAS IS OPTIONAL, AGENCIES ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO OPTIMIZE THE BENEFITS OF THE CMAS PROGRAM BY COMPARING DIFFERENT SCHEDULES FOR VARYING PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND PRICES, AND CAREFULLY REVIEWING ALL CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS, TO OBTAIN THE BEST VALUE AVAILABLE. THE CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE DOES NOT REDUCE OR RELIEVE STATE AGENCIES OF THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO MEET STATEWIDE REQUIREMENTS REGARDING CONTRACTS OR PROCUREMENTS OF GOODS OR SERVICES. Special attention should be given to the Automated Accounting System requiremenls of State Adminisbative Manual (SAM) Sectioo 7260-62, the Productive Use Requirements of SAM Section 5203. Agencies should be aware that approval from the Depadment of Information Technology (DOIT) is required for: · procurement of major Information Technology systems pursuant to SAM Section 4819.39; * purchase of imaging equipment which exceed 525,000; and · purchase of used Information Technology equipment. Special atleetion is to be given to the following: · SAM Section 481941 and 4832 certifications for Information Technology procurements and compliance with policies. · Services may not be paid for in advance. · Agencies must adhere to the guidelines in SAM Section 212012121 for servicing office equipment. · Agencies are required to ~e with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) a Contract Award Report Std. 16 for each order over $5,000 within 10 days of award, including amendments which exceed $5,000. · Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 10359 state agencies are to report all Consulting Services Cantract activity for the preceding fiscal year Ia DGS and the six legislative committees and individuals that are lisled on the annual memorandum from DGS. YEAR 2000 COMPLIANCE Contract language pertaining to Year 2000 Compliance is addressed ie the attached CMAS Terms and Conditions. PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS A public works contract is defined es an agreement for "the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement of any kind~ in accordance with the Public Contract Code (PCC) Section 1101. State agencies planning these types of projects need to review the State Contracting Manual (SCM) Section 10 for applicable guidelines and regulations. Agency CMAS orders may allow for a public works component only when it is incidental to the overall project requirements. Agencies are to ensure that the applicable laws and codes pertaining to the Contractor and sub-Contractor licensing, prevailing wage rates, bonding, labor code requirements, etc~ are adhered to by the prime Contractor as well as any sub-Contractor during the per[ormance under the agency's CMAS order Note: In accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.2, the ordering agency Js responsible for determining the appropriate craft, classification or type of worker needed for any contract for public works Also. the agency is to specify the applicable prevailing wage rates as determined by the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). In lieu of specifyiog the prevailing wage rates, the agency may include a stalement on the order that the prevailing wage rates are on file at the agency's office, and will be made available upon request. The prevailing wage rates are available from the DIR al (415) 972-8628. LEASE/PURCHASE ANALYSIS State agencies must complete a Lease/Purchase Analysis (LPA) to determine best value when contemplating a lease/rental, and retain a copy for future audit purposes (SAM 3700). The LPA is not required to be approved by the Department of General Services. Updated 5/25/00 3 01/08/01 06:11 F~ 9092737955 JAGUAR PRICE ANALYSIS CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC, CMAS NO. 3-98-70-068'1A, SUPPLEMENT CMAS contracts are considered "price analyzed" because they are based upon federal government multiple award schedules on which a price/cost analysis was already performed, or upon other multiple award schedules where the products have been competitively bid and the prices compared and/or assessed. Therefore, additional analysis is not required by the Procurement Division or individual agencies. ORDER LIMITS The maximum amount of each transaclion pieced under the award contract is $500,000.00. Sptitting of contracts to avoid any monetary limitations is prohibited (SAM 1215)~ Do not circumvent normal procurement methods by spliffing purchases into a series of delegated pumhase orders (SAM 3572) Splitting a project into small projects to avoid either fiscal or procedural controls is prohibited (SAM 4819.34) MINIMUM ORDER LIMITATION There is no minimum doltar value limitation on orders placed under this contract. MULTIPLE CONTRACTS ON STD. 68 ORDER FORM Agencies may include multiple contracts from the same supplier on a single Std. 65 Contract/Delegation Purchase Order. Agencies wishing to cmale a single purchase order using multiple CMAS contrac~ numbers must adhere to the following guidelines, w~thout exception. 1 All contracts must be for the same CMAS supplier. 2 The order must go to one supplier location. 3 Place the word "CMAS" in the space usually reserved for the contract number. On Std. 65s, this is at the top oflhe form The word "CMAS" signifies that the order contains items from multiple CMAS contracts. The purchasing agency may only use one (1) bill code, For each individual contract (as differentiated by alpha suffix), the agency must identify and group Jogether the contract number with line items and subtotal per contract number (do not include tax in the subtotal), AND sequentially identify each individual contract as Sub #1~ Sub #2, Sub #3, otc This facilitates accurate billing by the Procurement Division. 7. Do not combine items from both commodity and information technology contracts. Commodity contracts begin with the number 4 and information technology contracts begin with the number 3, The order limits are different for these types of contracts MAINTENANCE TAX Section 1655 of the Sates and Use Tax Regulations of the Business Taxes law Guide under Optional Warranties rule is thai sales tax shall not be charged on optional warranties and therefore Ihe Contractor is considered the end user and liable for the sales lax. Prices charged for service are not subject to sales tax and neither can sales tax be assessed the State for any pad or consumable supply installed that is included in the full service maintenance. OPEN MARKETIINCIDENTAL~ NON-SCHEDULE ITEMS The only time that open market/incidental, non-schedule items may be included in a CMAS order is when they fall under the paramelers of the Not Specifically Priced (NSP) items provision, If the NSP provision is not included in the schedule, or the products and/or services required do not qualify under the parameters of the NSP provision, the products and/or services must be procured separate from CMAS. NOT SPECIFICALLY PRICED ~'NSP) ITEMS Contractors must be authonzed providers of the hardware/software or services they offer under the Not Specifically Priced (NSP) Items provision; or, otherwise, risk contract termination CMAS Contractor has the option of accepting orders for non-contract products and services (NSP ilems), subject to the following requirements. Agency orders containing only NSP items are prohibited. To be included on an order issued under this contract, NSP items must adhere to the following provisions and limitation. The Contractor agrees to specifically monitor all schedule orders received to ensure adherence to this provision, A schedule order containing NSP items may be issued only if such an order results in the lowest overall alternative to meet the needs of the Government. NSP items shall be clearly identified in the schedule order. Any product or service already specifically priced and included in the schedule contract may not be identified as a NSF' item. 6 The total of all items on the purchase order must not exceed the order limit identified in lhe CMAS contract. Updated 5/25/00 4 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~06 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. CMAS NO. 3-98-70-068¶A, SUPPLEMENT I 4 Maximum Order Limitation: For orders $250,000.00, or less, the total dollar value of all NSP items included in a schedule order shall nol exceed $5,000 00. For orders exceeding $250.000.00. and at the option of the supplier, the total dollar value of all NSP items in a schedule order shall not exceed 5% of the total cost of the order, or $25,00000 whichever is lower. This includes orders with approved "exception" limits. 5. An NSP item included in an order issued against a schedule contract is subject to all of the terms and condilJons set [odh in the schedule contract. Refer to the previous Public Works Projects provision as well as the CMAS Terms and Conditions. Provision #7. j) Products or services the supplier is NOT factory authorized or otherwise cerlified or trained to provide. k) Follow-on consultant services that were previously recommended or suggested by the same supplier for information tachnoiogy projects. Refer to the CMAS Terms and Conditions. Provision #33. The following NSP items ARE SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED from any order issued under this contract: a) items which are not intended for use in directly supporting the priced items included in the same order. An item must be subordinate to the specifically-priced item that the NSP item is supporting. For example, a cable, which is not otherwise specifically priced in the contract, is subordinate to a specifically p~iced printer or facsimile machine, and is eligible to be an NSP item Sublect to that cable meeting the remaining NSP requirements. However, a printer or facsimile machine, which is not otherwise specifically priced in the contract, is not subordinate to a specifically pdced cable, and is not eligible to be an NSP item, b) Supply type items, except for the minimum amount necessary to provide initial support to the priced schedule items included in the same order. c) Software, except operating software. d) Computers, Computer Systems. Workstations and Terminals. e) External Peripherals f) Trade-ins, Upgrades, involving the swapping of boards, are permissible, where the schedule contract makes specific provisions for this action. In those instances where it is permitled, the schedule order must include the replacement item and an order notation that the purchase involves the swapping of a board. g) Items which do not meet the Productive Use Requirements. h) Any other item or class of items which is specifically excluded from the scope of this schedute contract. i) Public Works components which are NOT incidental to the overall project requirements. The Contractor will not accept any order under the contract containing NSP items which does not conform to these lerms. The Contractor will promptly notify the Customer agency issuing the non conforming order of its non acceptance and the reasons for its non acceptance. PRODUCTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS Each equipment or software component must be in current operation for a paying customer and the paying customer must be external to the Contractor's organization (not owned by the Contractor and not owning the Contractor). To substantiate compliance with the Productive Use Requirements, tho Contractor must provide the name and address of e customer installation and the name and telephone number of a contact person. The elapsed time such equipment or software must have been in operation is based upon the importance of the equipment or software for system operation and its cost. The following designates product categories and the required period of time for equipment or software operation prier to approval of the replacement item on CMAS. Category I - Critical Software: Critical software is software that is required to control the overall operation of a computer system or peripheral equipment, Included in this category are operating systems, data base management systems, language interpreters, assemblers and compilers, communications software, and other essential system software. Cost prior Operation More than $100,000 6 months $10,000 up lo $100,000 4 months Less than $10.000 I month Category 2 - All Information Technology Equipment and Non-Critical Software: information technology equipment is defined in SAM Section 4.819.2. Cost Prior Operation More than $100,000 6 months $10~000 up to $100,000 4 months Less than $10,000 1 month Updated 5/25/00 5 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGU,U~ ~07 CREDIT CARD CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. CMAS NO. 3-98-70-068'1A, SUPPLEMENT 1 CONTRACT DISTRIBUTION AND UPDATES Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc. accepts the State of California credit card (CAL-Card). Agencies are NOT required to submit support documentation to CMAS for CAL-Card transactions, and the CMAS Unit will not bill agencies for CAL-Card transactions. REMINDER: SERVICES CAN NOT BE PAID IN ADVANCE CONTRACTOR TRAVEL State agencies (not local governments) should refer to SAM Section 0774 "TRAVEL AND RELATED REIMBURSEMENT OF PERSONS NOT STATE EMPLOYEES," when transportation and per diem costs are to be reimbursed by the State. Jf the contract provides for travel, State agencies may pay travel and per diem expenses according to state travel time and per diem rules (represented employee rates) and verified receipts. Local government, education and special districts will pay travel time and per diem according to their statutoP/requirements. All travel and per diem expenses must be within conb'act parameters, and incorporated into the agency's order. tf travel is NOT addressed or is not covered in the contract, then the agency cannot include it as a line item on the order. SHIPPING INSTRUCTIONS F O.B (Free On Board) Destination. PAYMENT TERMS Net 45 days. Each State accounting office muet have a copy of the attached Vendor Data Record (Std. 204) in order to process payment of involces. Agencies should for~vard a copy of the Std. 204 to their respective accounting office(s). W'tthout the Std. 204, payment may be unnecessarily delayed. DELIVERY 30 days after receipt of order, or as negotiated be[ween agency and Contractor. WARRANTY See award schedule for warranties. OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc, is a large business enterprise. Contractors will provide to agencies a copy of their catalog(s) or listing(s), contract terms and conditions, and ali updates upon request SUPPLIER QUARTERLY REPORTS Contractors are required to submit a detailed report quarterly to the DGS Procurement Division, CMAS Unit, 1500 - 5th Street, Suite 116, Sacramento, CA 958'14, Attention: Carol Umfleet. A separate report is required for each contract, as differentiated by a~pha suffix (if applicable). Suppliers w~th resellers are responsible for reporting reseller ordedng actwity. Any raped that does not follow the required fen"hal or that excludes information will be deemed incomplete. Effective September 30~ t997, new schedules for suooliers with existin,q schedules, and extensions or renewals of exisfinR schedules, will be approved ONLY if the s~pplier has submitted to the CMAS Unit all auarterlv reoorts due. Copies of purchase orders are no Ionqer acceptable. Each quarterly repgr~ i~ required within two weeks of the end of March, June~ September, and December of each calendar year. Subseouent to September 3g~ 1997~ reports which become two months past due will result in automatic contract revocation. A report is required even when ther~ is no acfiviW. The report musl include the agency name, purchase order number, purchase order date, agency billing code, pre-tax total order cost, agency contact name, address and phone number, and total dollars for the quarter. Tax must NOT be included in the quarterly report, even if the agency includes lax on the purchase order. A sample qua~ledy report (Atlachmen! A) indicating required format and information is attached for your reference AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended; TJlle Vi and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; Americans wilh Disabilities Act, 42 USC 12101; California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Title 22; California Government Code, Sections 11135, et seq; and other federal and state laws, and Executive Orders prohibit discrimination. All programs= activities, employment opportunities, and services must be made available lo all persons, including persons with disabilities. See Attachment B for Procurement DivJsion=s ADA Compliance Policy of Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability. Individual government agenc,es are responsible for self- compliance with ADA regulations. Supplier sponsored events must provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. Updaled 5/25/00 6 01/05/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE {CMAS) JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC. CMAS NO. 3-98-70-0681A, SUPPLEMENT 1 ALTERNATIVE MEDIA AND ON-LINE ACCESS TO SCHEDULES Contact Contractor directly regarding the availability of schedules or listings on CD ROM, or access to electronic Bulletin Board Systems (BBS). CONTRACTOR MAILING ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER Orders may be mailed to the following address, or faxed to 9091734-5615; DGS PROCUREMENT DIVISION CONTACT AND PHONE NUMBER Carol Umfleet DepartmeNt of General Services Procurement Division, CMAS Unit 1500- 5th Street, Suite 116 Sacramento. CA 95814 Phone # 9161324-8045 Fax # 9161323-1441 Coiner # 81454-8045 Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc. 4135 Indus Way Riverside, CA 92503 Attn: A.B (Bert) Perkins Agencies with questions regarding products and/or services may contact the contractor as follows: Phone: 800t540-054B or 9091273-7940 E-math bperkins~jaguar, net Want to know more about CMAS? We welcome the opportunity to present the details of this program to your agancy or group. Please contact the California Multiple Award Schedule Unit at 9161324-8045 or Coiner 81454- 8045 to arrange a date and time. Updated 5/25/00 7 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUA~ ~09 Contractor: Contractor Contact: ATTACHMENT A CMAS QUARTERLY BUSINESS ACTIVITY REPORT Calendar Quarter Number: (Quarter # and Year) CMAS Contract Number: XX-XX-XX-YO(X,vO( (including alpha suffix if applicable) Company Name Address Name Phone Number Agency Name Purchase Order Purchase Agency Total Dollars Agency Agency Phone Number Order Date Billing Code per Order Contact Address Number Total dollars for quarter: $ Tax must NOT be included in the quarterly report~ even if the agency includes tax on th~ purchase order. NOTE: A report is required even when there is no activity. Upda[ed 5/25/00 s 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~10 ATTACHMENT B ADA NOTICE Procurement Division (State Department of General Services) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COMPLIANCE POLICY OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF' DISABILITY To meet and carry out compliance with the nondiscrimination requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), it is the policy of the Procurement Division (within the State Department of General Services) to make every effort to ensure that its programs, activities, and services are available to all persons, including persons with disabilities. For persons with a disability needing a reasonable modification to participate in the Procurement process, or for persons having questions regarding reasonable modifications for the Procurement process, please contact the Procurement Division at (916) 445-2500 (main office); the Procurement Division TTY/TDD (telephone device for the deaf) or California Relay Service numbers which are listed below. You may also contact directly the Procurement Division contact person that is handling this procurement. IMPORTANT: TO ENSURE THAT WE CAN MEET YOUR NEED, IT IS BEST THAT WE RECEIVE YOUR REQUEST AT LEAST 10 WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE SCHEDULED EVENT (i.e., MEETING, CONFERENCE, WORKSHOP, etc.) OR DEADLINE DUE-DATE FOR PROCUREMENT DOCUMENTS. The Procurement Division TTY telephone numbers are: Sacramento Office: (916) 322-7535 Fullerton Office: (714) 773-2093 The California Relay Service Telephone Numbers are: Voice: 1-800-735-2922 or 1-888-877-5379 TTY: 1-800-735-2929 or 1-888-877-5378 Speech to Speech: 1-800-854-7784 Updated 5/25/00 9 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR EXHIBIT T - PAYSE DATA PJSCORD ~AYEE OATA RECORD JAGUAR CO~PUTE_~_ S¥ST~M.q. 4135 INDUS WAY RIVERSIDt~ CA 92503 01/08/01 06:11 F~I 9092737955 JACUAR ~lZ CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS b. State agrees that if Provision a above is invoked, equipment shalt be returned to contractor in substantially subjecl (o normal wear and tear State further a§rees to and crating. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION By signing this contract, the Contractor hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Califomta that the Contracte~ will comply with the requirements of the Drug- Free Workplace ACt of 1990 [Government Code Section 8350 et seq } and will provide a drug-free workplace by taking the foItewin g actions: Government Code Section 8355(b) to inform employees 1) the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace: 3) any available counseling, rehabfiitafion and employee assistance programs; and, 4) penalties Ihat may be imgo~ed up(~ employees for c. Provide, as required by Government Coda Section 8355 (c), that every employee who works on the proposed 1) will receive a copy of the company's drug free policy determines that any of the following has occurred: (1) the Contmcter has made false certification, or (2) violates /he certif~cafion by failing to carP/DUI the requirements as holed above. pedury that no more than one final, unappealable finding of the Contractor withi~ the immediately preceding two-year period because of the Contractor's laiture to comply with an order of the National Labor Relations Board. This provision is required by. and shall be construed in accordance wti~ Public Contract Code Section 10296. 4. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The Contractor's signature affixed hereon and dated shall consfitrde a cerbfication under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Calilornia that the Con[racter has, ur~less exempted, compiled with the nondisc~iminafion program requirements of Government Code Secfion 12990 and TitJe 2, California Administra~ve Code. Section 8103. 5. EXAMINATION AND AUDIT a. StateAnditer Audit The conlracti~g parties shall be subject to the three (3) years after I]nal payment under the conVact in b. Disabled Veteran Business Enteq3nse Audit delegatee, will have the dghl to review, obtain, and copy ils detegatee, with any relevanl information requested and Section 999 et seq. and Title 2, California Code of Regulations, Section 1896,60 et seq. Contractor further agrees to maintain such records for a pedod of three (3) Contracts which include installation, or the wc~ding "Furnish and Install" require at the time of cc~tract award that suppliers possess a valid Califo~nta State Contractor's License. If sub- contractors are used, they must also posses a valid California State Contractor's License. All businesses which construct or alter any building, h~ghway, road. parking facility, railroad, excavation, or other structure in California must be licensed by the California State License Board (CSLB} if the total cost (labor and materials) of the project is $500.00 or more, Failure to be licensed or to keep the license current and in good standing shall be grounds for contract mvocabon. SPECIAL CONDITIONS PUBLIC WORKS REQUIREMENTS (APPLICABLE TO INSTALLATION ONLY) a. Prio~ to the commencement of performance, the Conh'actor must obtain and provide to the State, a payment bond, on Standard Form 807, when the contract involves a public works expenditure (tabo~/~nstallation costs) in excess of $5,000. Such bond shall be in a sum not less than one-half the contract price. Forms shall be provided to the Contractor. Revision 12/20;1999 Page I of 15 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~13 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLEAWARDSCHEDULE(CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND COND~IONS b. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1773 of the California Labor Code. the Contractor shall, conform and stipulates to the general prevailing rate of wages, including employer benefits as defined in Section 1773,1 of the California Labor Code. Applicable Io the classes of labor Io be used far public ~rks such as at the delivery site for the assembly and installation of the equipment or materials under the contract. Pursuant to Sectio~ t770 of the California Labor Cede, the Depadment of industrial Relations has ascertained the general prevailing rate of wages in the county in which the work is th be done, Io be as [isled in the Department of Transportation booklet er, titled General Prevailing Wage Eales The booklet is compiled monthly and copies of the same are available Wage Unit at (415) 972-8628 The booklet is required lo c. The Conlracfor hereby cedriies by signing this contract that: 1) Contractor has met or will comply with the standards Clause Requirements included heroin. of the Labor Code which require every employer to be d. Laws t~ be Observed 1) Labor Pursuant [o Section11775 of the California Labor Code made Or awarded. Iorfeit not more than fifty werker paid by him or subcontractor under him. less than the prevailing wage 5o stipulated; and in addition, Ihe difference between the eclat amount paid for stipulated prevailing wage rate for the same. This pro,sion shall not apply to properly indentured Labor Code, inclusive, it is further agreed that the maximum hours a worker is to be employed is limited to eighl hours a day and fody hours a week and the Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the State. twenty-five (325) for each worker employed in the execution of the conbact for each calendar day during which a workman is requited or permilted fo labor than forty hours in any calendar week, in violation of of compensation fo its employees in accordance with 3) Travel and Suhei~tence Payments Travel and subsistence payments shall be paid to applicable collective bargaining agreements riled in accordance w~fh Labor C~de Section 1773.8. 4) Apprentices Special attention is directed to Sections 1777.5, 1777.6. and 1777.7 of the California Labor Code and Title 8, California Administrative Code Section 200 et seq Each Contractor and/or subcontractor must, prior to commencement of the public works co~tract, contact the Division of Apprenticeship Siandards, 525 Golden Gate Avenue, San Fra. ncisco, CA, or one of ils branch offices to insure compliance and complete understanding of the law regarding apprentices and specifically the required ratio thereunder. Responsibility for compliance with this section lies with the pr[me confiactor. 5) Paymll Tbe contractor shall keep an accurate payroll record showing the name. social security account, work classification specific and straight time and ovedime hours worked by each employee. A certified copy of the employee's payroll record shall be available for inspection as specified in section 1776 of the California Labor Code. DISPUTES a. The parties shall deal in good faith and attempt to resolve potential disputes informally, tt the dispute persists, contractor shait submit to the Department Director or designee a written demand for a final decision regarding the disposition of any dispute beb~veen the parties arising under, related to or involving this contract, unless the State, on its own initiative, has already rendered such a final decision. Contractor's written demand aha0 be fully supported by factual information, and if such demand involves a cost adjustment lo the contract, contractor shall include with the demand a written statement signed by an authorized person indicating that the demand is made in good faith, that the supporting data are accurate and complete and that the amount requested accurately reflecta the contxact adjustment tar which contractor believes the State is liable. If the contractor is not satisfied with the decision of the Department Director or designee, the contractor may he appealed to an Executive Committee of State and agf'ees to diligently proceed with the performance of this confl-act, including the delivery of goods or proceed in accordance with the State's instructions signed by the Department Director m' designee or Deputy Director, Procurement Division if an appeal within g0 days after receipt of contractor's demand, it shall be deemed a final decision adverse to shall be conclusive and binding regarding the dispute competent jurisdiction to contest such decision Revision 12/20/1999 Page 2 of 15 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~14 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS or one (1) year following the accrual of the cause of action, whichever is later. 9 CONTRACTOR EVALUATION (CONSULTING SERVICE CONTRACTS OVER ~5.000} In accordance with the California Government Code. the guidelines of the State Administrative Manual, Section t2§3. The State contracting agency, upon contract m positlo~s funded by this contract to qualit~ed recipienl$ of aid under Welfare and Insthudons Code Section 11200 (Public Contract Code 10353). 11. ASSIGNMENT OF ANTITRUST ACTIONS Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. sec. 15) or unde¢ the Cede,fight Act [Chapter 2 (commenting with Section 16700) of Part 2 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code]. arising from purchases of gcods, materials, or services by the payment 1o the Contractor. Upon demand in writing by the assignor, the assignee shall, actio~ assigned under this part if the assignor has been or may have been injured by the vi01abon o1 law f~- which the cause of acdon arose and (a) the assignee has not been iniured thereby, or (b) the assignee declines 1o file a court 12. REQUIRED PAYMENT DATE Unless o~henmise specified, [aaymeot will be made in a. During the 0edormance of this cc~tract, Conlractor and its subcontractors shall ~'~t unlawfully discriminate, harass or allow harassment, against any employee or applicant religious creed, national orig~n, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS). mental disability, medical condition (cancer). age (over 40). marital status, and L, eat~nent of their employees and applicants for 14. 15. Act (Government Cede. Section 12900 et seq.) and the Code of Regulations, Tthe 2. Section 72850 et seq.). must indicate their residency status along with their vendor completed Vendor Data Record. Std. 204 (attached), to the DGS Procurement Division before entedng into this contract SERVICE CONTRACTS OVER St 0.O00) The prospective recipient of Federal assistance funds is required to cerbfy (attac~ed). that neither it no~' it~ principals are presently debarred, suspended, proposed fac debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from padicipation in this transaction by any Federal department or agency. Tne Conb'actor is required 83 complete the attached certification before entering into this contract. 16. TERM]NATION O F CONTRACT b. If the Contractor's GSA Multiple Award Schedule is 17. UPDATES AND/OR CHANGES a. Federal GSA Multiple Award Schedules Updates and/or changes to the GSA Mulbple Award Schedule prices and/or catalog sha!l be avaitabta to the services BEFORE they may be sold under the CMAS Revision 12/20/1999 Page 3 of 15 01/05/01 06:11 F~ 9092737955 JAGUAR ~15 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD$CHEDULE(CMAS) CONTRACTTERMSANDCONDITIONS 3) For contracts with products requiring Prison Industry Authority (Pla) approval, the CMAS Unit must approve an amendment adding new products BEFORE they may be sold under the CMAS contract. b. Non-Federal GSA Multiple Award Schedules Updates and/or changes to the No~-GSA Multiple Award c. Software Volume License Agreements New soft,,vare products, when added by the authorized resellom, shall be available to the Slats of California ,Mtheut the need for an amendment from tie CMAS UniL of Contractor's products or services by the State. 19. PURCHASE ORDF-R LIMITS 20. NO ADDITIONAL COSTS 24. 25. 26. 27. format or /hat excludes Jnfurmafion will be deemed incomplete approved ONLY if the supplier has submitted to the CMAS Unit all quarterly repo~ due ICopies of purchase orders a~e no tanger acceptable.] Each quarterly report is re(]uired wiliin two weeks of the end of March, june. September, and A repod is required even when there is no active. TAXES The State of California is exempt from Federal exd~e taxes and no payment shall be made for any personal propec[y employee w~ges. The State will only pay for any State or equipmer~t, pads o¢ software supplied to lie State pursuant to Invoices for purchases and software tees are not due and payable until successful completion of any applicable payable, and do not constitute an obligatJon of the State. until lie month I'ollowing the month for which charges accrue. considered a subscription, may b~ paid in advance it a provision addressing payment in advance is included in the This contract may be ame~ded by mutual consent pi the par§es An amendment shall not be effective unfi~ approved exemption from such approval has been signed by the understanding or agreement not incorporated herein shall be b~nding on any of the parties hereto. ASSIGNMENT This contract shall not be assignable in whole or in pad without written consent of the State. It is the policy of the State of Ca;ifornia to withheld consent from proposed of responsibility w~uld operate 1o decrease lie State's like}ihood of recelwng pedormance on the contracL The State does not normally object to the granting of assignments for financial purposes provided liar the original Conbactor retains all of its responsibilities and ol~ligatJons under the contract, in the e~nt of any assignment herein to which lie State has c~'~se~tad, each such assignment shall c~ntain a provision that further assignments shall no[ be made to any third or subsequent party without additional written consent of the State unless otherwise stipulated in the State selected financing plan. Shouid the State desire financing of lie assets provided hereunder through GS SMad. the Stats's financial desigr~ated Jeeder its dght to receive payment from the State for the assets in exchange for payment by lie lender of the cash purchase pdse for the assets. Upon notice to do so from the State--des~gnated tender at any time pdor to payment Revision 1212011999 Page 4 of 15 01/08/0! 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~16 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS deliver to the RIMe designated lender an asslgnment Sla~e selected linancing plan The Slete~esignated lender State. 28 GENERAL INDEMNITY The Contractor agrees Ia indemnify, defend and save pedormance of this conIract and from any and all claims and negligence or inten~onafly tedious acts of the Contractor provided that the Contractor is notified in writing w~thin 30 days thai the State has knowledge of such claims This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with, and California. conditions shall prevail [f there is a con[licl between the terms and conditions of the Contractor's federal GSA (or other mu~tipJe award contract), packaging, invoices, and are subject to the fol~owing: ~scertaining the availability of congressional appropriation b. This contract (order) is valid and enforceable only if which may affect the provisions, terms or funding of this appropriate suh3cient f~nds fac the program, this contract (o~der) shall be amended to reflect any reduction in funds. 33. FOLLOW-ON CONTRACTS FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES IN FEASIBILITY STUDIES AND EDP AcquIsITION (SAM 5202) No person, firm, or subsidiary thereof who has been awarded a consuding services con,reeL or a contract which includes a consulting component, may be ~warded a contract for the provislon of services, delivery of goods or supplies, or any other related action which is required, suggested. otherwise deemed appropriate as an end product of the consulting services con~ract. Therefore, any consultant that conlracts with a state agency to develop a feasibility study or provide fonmal recommenda'Jons for the acquisitio~ of EDP products or services is predoded from contracting for any work recommended in the feasibility study or the formal 34 COVENANT AGAINST GRATUmES The Contractor warrants that no gratuities (in the form of entertainment, gifts, or otherwise) were o~fered or given by the Contractor or any agent or representative of the Co~tractor. to any officer or employee at the State with a view with respect to any determinations concerning the performance of the conb'act, For breach or viola/ion of this warranty, the State shall have the dght to terminale the conb'act, either in who~e or in pad, and any loss c~' damage sustained by the State in procuring on the open market any items which Contractor agreed to supply 5hall be borne and paid for by the Contractor. The dghts and remedies of the State provided in this clause shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or 35. CONFLICTOF INTER~,~T a. Current State Employees (Public Contract Code Secflc~n 10410): 1)No officer or employee shall engage in any financial interest and which is sponscred or funded by 2) No officer or empthyee shall contracl 03 his or her own b. Former State Employees (Public Contract Code Section 10411): arrangements or any part of [he decision-making process relevant lo the contract while employed in any c~pacity by any State agency 2) For the Iwelve-month period from the date he or she left Sb3te employmenl, no former Slat~ officer or agency if he or she was employed by that State agency in a pohcy-making position in the same general subject area as the proposed contract within the twelve-month period pricr to his or her leaving State service PROTECTION soitware supplied by the Contractor. or the operation States patent, or copyright or violates a trade secret. The 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~17 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS teltewing: provided, however, that when principles of government b. Should the machines or software, or the operation thereof, become, or in the Contractor's opinion are likely to become, the subject of a claim of infringemenl Df a United Stales patent, copyright or a t~ade secret, the Stale shall permit the Conlractor at its option and modify the same so that they become noninldnging and injunction, the Contractor agrees to take back such equipment or software, and refund any sums the State or damage and make every reasonable effort to assist the State in procuring subslitute equipment or software. If, in the sole opinion of the State, the return of such infringing of equipment o~ software acquired from the Cenlractor [he option af tem~inating the contract, or applicable po~ons Ihereof, without penalty or terminatJo~ charge sot{ware and refund any sums the State has paid d~mage. c, The C~tractor shall have no liability to the Stat~ under claim of patent, copyright, or trade secret infringernenl which is based upon; 1)The combined<an or utilization gl machines furnished hereunder with machines or devices not made or furnished by the Contractor. 2)The operation of machines furnished by the Contractor under the conknl of any operating sohware other than, 3)The medi§catlon by the State of the machines 4)The combination or utilization of soft, yore furnished hereunder with non~ontractods supplied software. d. The foregoing states the entire liability of the Contractor with respect te infringement of patents, copyrights and Contractor shall not be liable for any damages caused by the State's l'aJlure [o tuifitl any State responsibilities of the machines and programs, audit ceeb'dis, operating methods, and office procedures, and for establishing all proper checkpoints necessary for the S~te's intended use of the machines. b. Contractor's liability for damages te the State for any 38. 39. 40. greater Ct ~200,000 or the purchase price stated herein for Ihe specific machines that caused the damages o~ that ere the subject matter of or are directly totaled to the cause Ct action The foregoing limiLation of liability shall nol apply to the provisions m311ing lot liquidated damages or specifying a different limit of liability, or to claims for injury to persons This limitatio~ of tiabiJity does not appty Id the fecalpl of c State's tlabtlity for damages for any cause whatsoever, grealer of $2D0,000 or the purchase pdce stated heroin are the subiect matter of or are directly related to the given as ~o the possibility of such damages, any}. FORCE MAJEURE arises out of a default of its subcontractor, and if such default State. following warranty language and the warranty language provided in the federal GSA Multiple Award Schedule or other base contract used to establish this CMAS ccntract, the following warranty language overrides. Rewsion 12/20tt999 Page 6 of 15 01/08/01 OU:ll F~ 90927U7955 JAGUAR CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS put'suant to detailed designs furnished by the State, under this warranty. b. All warranties, including special warranties specified elsewhere herein, shall inure to the State, its fulfilling the requirements of this conttacVorder, and which is expected to receive mom thai ten (10) percent of value of the and technical requirements of the c~tr~ct, as app)icable. 42. FORCED, CONVICT, AND INDENTURED LABOR Contractor or grantee certifies that no foreign-made pursuant to the contractJagreeme{~t will be produced in whole or in part by focced ledor, convict ~abor. or indentured labdr comply with the requirements of Public Contract Code (PCC), Sectton 6108. Any contractor contracting with the state who knew or sh(3~Jd have knov, nn lhat the loreign-made equipment, matsrials or supplies furnished to the stats were produced in who~e or pad by [orced labor, convict labor, or indentured labor under penal may, subject to PCC, Section 6108, subdivision (c), have any or all of the toltewing sancedns imposed: 1) 3'he contract under which the prohibited equipment. materials or supplies were provided may be voided al the option Df the stere agency te wthch the equipment. matepats or supplies were provided. be the greater ut one thousand dollars ($1,000) or an amount equaling 20 percent of the value of the equipment rnatedats or supplies that th~ s[e~e agency penal sanction. 3) The cc~tractor may be removed from the bidder's list a period not to exceed 360 days. quo[etlon provided [or a CMAS order or project is not made in sham: that the conEactor has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other c~nt/aclor to put in e false sham quotation, and has not direclly or indirectly coat.led. else to put in a sham quotation, or that anyone shall reEain from bidding: that the contractor has not in any manner. directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or element of the quoted price, of thai of any other contractor, or to secure any advantage against tiaa public body awarding the all statements in the quofalion are true; and, further, that the contractor has not, directiy or indirectly, submitted ils quoted pr[ce or any breakdown thereof, of the contents thereof, or divulged [nformatton or data relative thereto, or paid. and not pay. any fee to any corpora[ton, partnership, company. association, organization, bid depesite~J, or to any member of Technotogy IDOJT) information technology used )n combination wilh the inforrnatlon technolcx~y being acquired, properly performance.(5/5/98) services sold, leased or licensed to the State of California, contractJpurchase (~der are ~Year 2000 compliant." For provided by or through Contractor.(515/gS) a. The State may terminate performance of work under this time, in part if the Department Director or designee specifying the extent of termination and the effective date remain in effect un'~l such time as the termination seltlement, if any, is concluded and the contract shall net be void. directed by the Department Director Or designee, {he obliga~nos, as apaficab)e, regardless of any delrw in 2) Plac~ no farther 6uhcontra~s for matedals, services, or the ~3rk terminated, Revision 12J2011999 Page 7 of 15 01/08/01 06:11 F~I 9092737955 JAGUAR ~19 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS 5)As directed by the Department Director or designee, transfer title and deliver to the State (e} fabricated or unfabricatod oarts, work in process, completed work, supplies, and other material produced or acquired for the work terminated, and (b) completed or parhblly 6) Complete performance of the work not terminated: and 7) Take any action that may be necessary or as the Stats may direct for the protection and preservation of the propady related to this contract that is in the or termination sedlement to the maximum practical c. At the completion of the Contractor's tsrrninaflon efforts, the Contractor may submit fo the Department Director or designee a list, indicating quantity and quality of requesl instruction for disposition of the residual d. After termination, the Contractor shaw submit a final termination settlement proposal to the Depadment Direcfor or designee in the form and w;th the certification prescribed by the Department Director or designee. The Contractor shall sut)mri the proposal promptly but no ~atsr than ninety (90) days from the effective date of tsrmination, unless extended in wdting by the Ststs upon written request of the ConVector within the ninety (90) day ported. Howe, er. if the Department Director ~- designee determines that the facts justify it, a termination settlement proposal may be received and acted on after allov,~d, the Department Director o~ designee may determined. ~. The Contractor and the State may agree upon the whole or any part of the amount to be paid because of the allowance for profit on work done. {ndudieg a reasonable amounl for accounting, legal, clerical and other expenses reasonably necessary for the preparation of termination se~ement proposals and supposing data; and storage. reduced by (1) the amount of payments previously made f If the Contractor and the State fail to agree on the whole State shall pay the Contractor the amounts determlaed by acceptsd by the State (or sold or acquired) not previously paid for. adjusted for any saving of freight The total of: a)The costs incurred in the performance of the work terminated, including iblUal costs and pmporafory attributable to supplies o~ services paid or to be paid; and subcoolracts that are properly ~hargeable to the c) Storage, t~'ansportatioth and other casts incurred. g. Except for normal spoilage, and except to the exlent thai shall exclude from the amounts payable to the Co~tractor, the tek value, as detormined by the Depadrnent Director or designee, of properly that is desfroyed, lost, stolen, or a buyer. prinsiptss and sound business practices in determlning all Such costs sbefi be allocable to the termirmted contract c~ portion thereof, allowable under appticaole laws, regulations, generally accepted accounting ~riociples and good business judgment and objectively reasonable, i. The Contractor shall have the right of appeal, under the Stsle: except that if the Contractor ~'atied to submit the termtsafion settlement proposal within the lime provided and failed to request a ttme extension, there is no right of appeal, if the Department Director or designee has made a determination of the amount due, the Stale shall pay the Conlractsr (1) the amount deten~ioed it there is no right of appeal or if no timely appeal has been taken, or (2) the amount finEdty determleed on appeal. Feilowing any Director of designee, the Cont~acter may proceed in j. In arriving at the amount due the Contractsr under this clause, there shati be deducted: 1)Att payments to the Contractor under the terminated portion of this contract; 2) Any claim which the State has against the Conb'actor 3)The agreed price for, ¢~' the proceeds of sale of, rnatedets, supplies, or olher things acquired by the Contractor or sbld under the provisions of this clause aed not recovered by or credited to the State, k. I! the termination is pa~ei, b~e Contractor may file a proposal with the Department Director or designee for an equitable adjustment of the pdce(s} of the continued portion of the contract. The Department Director or upon. Any proposal by the Contractor for an equitable adjustment under this clause shall be requested within 30 days from the effective date of terminatio~ unless extended in writing by the Department Director or designee. fi The State may: partial payments and payments against costs incurred by the Con~ractor f~ the terminated portion of the confract, if the Stafo believes that total of these payments will not exceed the amouot to which the Contractor will be entitled, 2)If the total payments exceed the amounl finally dat~rmfoed to be dc~e. the Conf~actor shall repay the excess to the State ~po~ demand, together with Revision 12/20/1999 Page 8 of 15 01/08/01 06:11 F~ 9092737955 JAGUAR ~20 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS interest computed at [he rate established by the California Treasurer's Pooled Money Inveslmenl Fund Rate. Interest shall be compuled loc the period from the date the excess payment is received by the Contractor to the date the excess is repaid, interest shall not be charged on any excess payment due to a reduction in the Contractor's termination settlement m. in determining the amounl payable to the Co~tractor and indicated rate of loss. 40. STOP WORK costs atiocabfe to the work covered by the stop work order 1 )Cancel the stop work ordes-; or provided tor lo the termidatic~ for default or the State shall make an equitable adjustment in the delivery shaft be modified, in wdting, accordingly, iff required for. or in the Contractor's cost properly 2)The Contracto¢ asserts its right to an equitable work stoppage; provided, that if the State decides the facts justify the action, the State may receive and act related contract of the Contracto~ that provides for ac~justment and is affected by any.stop work order under this clause. The State shall not be liable to the contractor Assume responsibility for matters beyond ils control; The State's responsibility for repairs and liability tot damage or loss is restricted to that made necessar~ by or resulting ~easing equipment (SAM 8736) family support obligations and shall fully compty with all applicable state and federal laws retating to child and assignment orders, as provided in Chapter B. (commencing w~th Section 5200) ef pall 5 of Division 0 of If an agency desires to tease through Lease SMart. the price as they agree to sell Io the State. a. If the eqolpment to be installed requires special site preparation sgedfications for equipment within a equipment, if installed according to these specifications. shall operate efficiently, from an en~ronmental point of b. The State may prepare a site g~an shoving the Iocatio~t of Revision 12/20/1999 Page 9of 15 01/08/01 06:11 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~21 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS the site plan. and will be permitted free access to the site for this purpose, d. Any subsequent alterations or modifications lo the site which are directly addbutable to incomplete o¢ erroneous specifications provided by the Contractor and which of the Contractor, to the extent thai such costs would not specifications been initially provided. delay in the installation, Paragraph 50. Liquidated Damages, shall apply. modems, etc.) necessary for the remote transmission of data are the responsibility of the State In addition, if requested by the Contractor, the State shall provide one telephone, with appropriate coupling devices for the Iransm[ssion of data. for the Co,atracter's use in installation and maintenance ct the equipment. Any tell charges resulting froth the use of this instrument by the equipmenl will be borne by the Contractor. 49. INSTALLATION AND DELIVERY DATES a. Equipment (Hardware and Operating Software) 1) Except as otherwise provided in Paragraph 49,a. (7), the Contractor shall install equipment ready for use on Time is the essence of this ac~reement 2) Installation DAtes may be changed by mutual consent of the Contractor and the State by amendment; least §0 days prior lo the Instalislion Date, the State Installation Date will be established by mutual 3) The State shall provide the Contractor access to the site for the purpose of installing equipment pdor to the Installation Date. The Contractor shall specify in writing the §me required to install the equipment. 4) Except as otherwise provided in Paragraph 49, a. (7), the Contractor shall determine that the equipment is Coetractor's published spedfications. The Conl~acfor shall then certify in wr~tiog to the State that the equipment is installed and ready to be turned over to the operational control of the State. The Contractor documentation to suppoct the above certification, at which hme the State will accept contro~ of the equipment for the purpose of validating its installation 5) Notwithstanding certification by the Contracto¢ that the equipment has been installed and is ready for use, the equipment shall not be deemed installed within the terms of this Contract until such installaticn is confirmed by the SLate through testing as prescdbed in the orde¢ or by performance of other suitable tests mutually agreed to by both parties as being adequate tot this purpose Ii the test is successlulJy completed. the equipment sh~all be deemed installed and ready for within five (5) working days. that the State co~curs that the equipment was installed. If the equipment tails to Paragraph 50. Liquidated Damages, shall apply. requinm:j a cer~fication of installation as set forth in b Software (other that10peratinq Software) I) The Contractor shall provide those programming aids, purposes of this Paragraph, 'delivered" also means received by the State. if such soflware is mailed by the 2) It, in the opinion of the Contractor, the services of the State equipment. "delivery" of the software, for the 3) In the event the Contractor fails to deliver the agreed- upon software by the dates specified, Paragraph 50, 50. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES a. General Revision 12/20/1999 Page 10 of 15 01/08/01 05:11 F~ 9092737955 JAGU,~R ~22 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS specified in the order, the delay will interfere with the proper implementation of the State's programs, la the loss wou~d be impraclioabis a~d extremely difficult to fix the The State and Contractor. therefore, presume [hat in the event of any such delay the amount of damage which will be sustained from a delay will be the amounts set forth in the order, and the State and the Contractor agree that in the event of any such detay, the C(~tractor shall pay such amounts as liquidated damages and not as a penalty. Similedy, a unilateral deferment by the State of equipment readying the ladlity interferes with the installation resulting in damages to the Contractor. The Shale and amount of damage which will be sustained will be the event of such a delay, the State wifi pay such amount as liquidated damages and not as a penally. Amounts due the State as tiquidatad damages may be deducted by the liquidated damages pursuant to this paragraph on or b. EquipmentthstanafionDelaysCausedbytheContractor (designated by Ihs Contractor's type and model number), and spedal features included with the equipment (or s~itable subshtutes acceptable to the software, all as listed in the order, on or before the Installation Date(s) specified in the o~er. or in the case ol- the equipment delivered to the State in time for other damages for such noninstafiation. Liquidated damages sbelf acc'ua for each calendar day between the equipment is certified ready for use or 180 calendar for use, dudng a period of lime when fiquidatad 3) If the delay is more than thirty (30) Calendar days. then by ~.t~len notice to the Cont~ctor. the State may provision of Paragraph 56. R~ghta and Remedies of the State for Detauth In this event, the Con, tractor shall ready for use, o~ for 180 days Eom the inslellaben dale. c. Other Delivery Delays Caused by the Co~bacfor 1)If the Conb'acler does not deliver all the programming aids. program products, and applications I~ted in the Con~actoCs spaciflcabeias, o~ or before the Delivery Dates specified in the order, the Contractor shall be Itab,~ for liquidated damages in the amounts specified in the order, in lieu of all olher damages for such nondelivery. Liquidated damages shall accrue for each calendar day between the Delivery Date specified and the actual date of the delivery of such software or for 180 days, whichever occurs first. If Ihs Contracter fails to provide the software listed in the order by the specified Delivery Date, but provides suitable substitution of software acceptable to [he State, liquidated damages shall not apply to listed sofNvare for which substituted software is provided. 2) If the State ~s unable to use the equipment on the instaltafion date because Contractor failed to deliver the software listed in the order by the delivery date specified in the order, and Contractor do~s not furnish suitable substitute software acceptable to the State, liquidated damages for equipment noninstallalion as specified in Paragraph 50, b. (1), shall pe paid to the Stale in lieu of damages for software nondelivery as specified in Paragraph 50. c (1). Such liqu(datad damages shelf apply until the State uses the equipment or until Contractor provides the programming aJda or applications which wouJd render Iha equipment usable. whichever occurs first, but not for more than 180 caiondar days d. Installation o~ Delivery Delays Caused bv the State 1) In the event lbs equipment cannot be Instaltsd because the State has failed to prepare the facility by the Futility Readiness Date specified in the order, the State shall be I~,bta for fixed liquidated damages specified in the order for each day between the Facility Readiness Date specified in the order and the actual readiness date. but not to exceed t80 calendar days, in lieu of all other damages for such delay. 2) In the event a change directed by the State requires a later installation date of certain equipment and the State has foiled to noti~ the Contractor of the delay at least 60 days prior to the original Installation Date. the State shall be Itabta, in lieu of all other damages, for liquidated damages as specified in Paragraph 50. d. {1), for each day between the original Insfal~tion Date and the new installation Date. but not to exceed 180 calendar days. 3) The State shall not be liable tor liquidated damages under both Paragraph 50, d, (1) and d, (2) above dudng the same padod of time with respect to the same equipment. 51. ACCEPTANCE TESTING FOR EqUiPMENT (in(;ludinq Oaeradn~ Software~ a Acceptance testing is inlended to ensure that the equipment acquired agecetes in substantial accord with the Contractor's tachblcal specifications, is adequate iD perform as warranted by the Contractor. and evidences a satisfactory level of performance reliability, priDe to its acceptance by the State. II~ the equipment to be installed includes operating software as bsfod in the order, such operating software shall be present for the acceptance Revision 12~20/1999 Page 11 of 15 01/08/01 21:21 F,~,~ 9092737955 JAGU~ ~03 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS consecutive days. Operation of the equipment to confirm its instatiatidn, as provided in Paragraph 49, a, (5), Installation and Delivery Dates, ~hall be considered to be a pad of the acceptance test performance within ninety (90} consecutive days after the start of the acceptance testing, the Stale shall have the thereof) and seek relief as provided by Paragraph 56, Rights and Remedies of State for Default. The State's whichever occurs first. If the equipment has not met the standards of performance by 180 days after installation. the contract shall be canceled or the defective equipment deleted from the contract and ',he provisions of Paragraph 56. Rights and Remedies of State for Default shall apply, e. Al the reque.st Gl the Contractor, the Stale shall make available not only the failed equipment, but also [hose machines which must be utilized by the Contracto~ to identify the cause of failure and to accomplish the repair. f. Equipmenl shall not be accepted by the Stata and no charges associated with such equipment shall be paid by the State until the equipment has satisfactorily compietsd the acceptance tests. In addition, if required in the order. no charges shall be paid until specified Contractor- suppl}ed software has been accepLed by [he State. g, Immediately upon successful completion of the acceptance tests, the Slate shall notify the Con~ractor in wd~Jng of acceptance of the equipmenl and authobze appropdata payment. The State shall maintain adequate daily records to satisfy the requirements of acceptance 52. ACCEPTANCE TESTING FOR SOFTWARE tether than OperaMnq Software) a, Acceptance testing may be required as specified in the order for all Contractor-supelied software as specified and listed in the order, thdud[hg all software initially installed. improved versions (new releases) of this software, any such software which has been altered Imothfied) by the Contractor to satisfy State requirements, and any substitute software provided by the Contractor in lieu thereof, unless the order provides otherv~ise. The purpose of the acceptance test is to ensure that the sof~are operates in substantial accord with the Contractor's technical specifications and meets the State's performance specifications. The procedures for the accomplishment of such tests are contained in the accordance with Paragraph 49, Installation and Delivery Dates. b. (t), the State shall begin acceptance testing on specified in the order. remain in effect until such time as the tests are successfully perCormed, er 180 days after certification, whichever occurs first. If the acceptance tests have not unaccepted software shall be canceled, unless both (or its tunctional equivalent) is crucial to the accomplishment of the work for which the equipment was acquired, and is so identified in the order, the State shall be accepted by the State and ne charges assodated with such software shall be paid by the State until the software has satisfactorily completed the acceptance tests 54. 55. OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY a. The Contractor shall be liable for damages arising out of injury to the person and/or damage to Ihe property of the State, employees of the State, persons designated by the State for training, or any other person(s) other than agents or employees of the Contractor, designated by Ihe State for any purpose, pdor to, during, or subsequent to delivery, installation, acceptance, and use of the equipment either at [he Contractor's site or at the State's place of business, provided that the injury or damage was caused by the fault or negligence of the Contractor. b. Contractor shall not be liable for damages arising out of or caused by an sJtsratk)n or an altachment net made or installed by the Contractor, or for damage to alterations or attachments that may result from the normal operation and maintenance of the Contractor's equipment. ENGINEERING CHANGES Engtaeedng changes, determined applicable by Contractor, w~ll be controlled and installed by Contractor on equipment covered by this contract- The State may elect to have only mandatory changes, as determined by Contractor, installed on machines so designated. A written notice of this election must be prov~led to the Contractor for written confirmation. There shall be no charge for engineering changes made. Any Contraclor-initiatod change shall be installed at a time mutually agreeable to the State and the Contractor, Contractor reserves the right to charge, at its then current time and material rates, lot additional service time and effort to secure time to instal[ such changes, CONNECTION POINTS FOR CENTRAL PROCESSOR 56. EVALUATION EQUIPMENT If requested by the State, the Contractor agrees to identify, on ail items of equipment supplied under this contract, all aperopdate test points for connecting one of the commercially available hardware m~itors designed to measure system activity. RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OF STATE FOR DEFAULT by the Contracta¢ in the porfo~mance of this contract should fail ta ~onform to the specifications therefore, the Revision 12/20/1999 Page 12 of 15 01/08/01 21:21 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~04 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS immediately to replace all such rejected equipment, sof~ware, or service with others conforming to such spedfications; provided that shc~uld the Contractor fail, the right te purchase in the open market, in Jleu thereof, a between the price named in this contract and the actual cost thereof to the State. b. In the event the Contractor shall fail to make prompl delivery as specified of any equipment, software, or service. Re same condi;Jons as to the dghfa of t~e State forth above shall apply, except as otherwise provided in Paragraph 38, Force Majeure. whole or in part, by reason of the delault or breach thereof by the Contractor, any loss o~ damage sustained by the borne and paid for by the Contractor. d. The rights and remedies of the State prey/dad above shaft not be exclusive and are in addition to any other dghts and remedies provided by law or under the contract. 57. CONTRACTOR'S POWER AND AUTHORITY The Contractor warrants Ihs1 it has full power and authority to grant the rights herein granted and will hold Ihs State hereunder harmless from and against any loss, cost, liability, of any breach of this warranly. Further. Contractor avers that it will not enter Jnte any arrangement with any third pady which might abridge any bghts of the State under this if any, until such time as the fuji purchase prices, appticabIe Title to each machine will be transferred to the Stile when its purchase price, taxes, and associated interest charges, if any, are paid. Title tea special feature installed on a machine and for which only a single installation charge was paid shall pass to the State at no addiSonai charge, together with title to the machine on which it was installed. 59, WAIVER OF BREACH No term or provision of this contract shall be deemed waived be in writing and signed by an individual authorized to so waive or cor~sent. Any consent by either party to, or wmver of, a breach by the other, whether express or implied, sha{I breach or subsequenl breach, except as may be expressly provided in the waiver or consenh 60. CONFLICT WITH EXISTING LAW The Contractor and the State agree that if any provision of this contract is tiund te be illegal or unenforceable, such term the contract shall remain in full force and effect. Either party having knowledge of such term or provision shaft prom;atly inform the other of lhe presumed non applicabitRy of such provision. Shculd the offending provision go to the heart of be brought by either party more than two years after the more than two years from the date of the last payment, then known by the notifying party concerning such cause of action, then the notif~thg party may bdng an action based on the matter sc) disclosed at any time prior to the expiration of Definitions (from STATE MODEL PURCHASE CONTRACT 2Jga) a. Data Processing System (System)~The total complement of Contractor-furnished machines, including processors) and operating soRware, which are acquired b. Data Proc~$inq Subsystem A complement of ConYactor-fumished individual machines, including the necesea~/ controlling elements (or the functional acquired to operate as an integrated group, and which or subsystem, separately identified by a type and/or model number, comprised of but no1 limited to microcode, and special features installed thereon and processing unit, memory module, tape unit, card reader. etc. any). e. Equipment Failure-A malfunction in the equipment, excluding all external factors, which prevents the accomp(ishment of the equipment's intended function(s). equipment, is necessary for the proper operation of the equipment, a failure of such mlcrocode or operating equipment's intended functions shall be deemed to be pu~oses, that time during which equipment is in actual operation by the State, g. Preventive Maintenance--That maintenance, performed on a scheduled basis by the Contractor, which is designed to keep the equipment in proper operating condition. by tho Contractor which results from equipment (including operating software) failure, and which is pedormed as required; i.e., on an unscheduled basis. i. Princioal Period of M3~ntenance--Any nine consecutive hours per day (usually between the hours of 7:00 and 6:00 p.m.) as selected by the State, including an official meal period not to exceed one ho~r, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays observed at the instatiatlon. j. Pedod of Maintenance Covera~--The period of time, monthly charge, as opposed to an hourly charge for Revision 12120/1990 Page 13of 15 01/08/01 21:21 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAI~ ~05 k L CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS} CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS holidays. equipment for proper functioning and reliability. ready (ce~§ed) for use by the State. Performance Period~A period of time dudng which the State, by appropriate tesls and production runs. evaluates the performance of newty installed equipment which are intended to determine compliance of Machine Alteration-Any change to a Contractor-supptiod mechanical electrical, or eleclronJc (including microcode) desfgn, whether or no/additional devices or [nterconnectJon to the Contractor-suppliod machine or programming aids, application programs, and program idenfiCied as program products, that reside in the its intended hJncdonis), and which interface the opera[or, other Contractor-supplied programs, and user programs Programminq Aids~ontractor-supplied programs and modules, data base management systems, and utility etc.) APPlication Proorarr~-A computer program which is for the pecpose of performing useAJl work for the user of are usually developed o,- otherwise aoquired by the user oI the hardware/software system, but Ihey may be equipmen[ (including its operating software) may still be tailure, see delinition of equipment faiJure, Information Technoloqy Services--Are defined as flnmware, and software including, bu~ not limited to, c~mputer programming, information storage and software licensing, and training. Also included are technology support functions. Revision 12/20/1999 Page 14ot 15 01/08/01 21:21 F~ 9092737955 JAGUAR ~06 CALIFORNIA MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE (CMAS) CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS Attachment for Personal Services (applicable when CMAS contract allows Personal Services) 1. The State may terminate this agreement and be relieved at the payment of any consideration to Cat, tractor should Contractor tail to perform the covenants herein contained at the time and in the manner herein provided tn the event of such termination the Slate may proceed with the work in any manner deemed proper by the SLate. The cost to the State shall be deducted from any sum due the Contractor under this agreement, and the batance, if any, shalt be paid the Contractor upon demand. 2. Time is of the essence in this agreement. a. Contractor personnel shall perform their duties on the personnel provided to the State under this Agreement. providing that such use does not co~ilict with the performance of services under this Agreement 4. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE STATE The State shall provide normal office working facilities and Agreement. Any special requirements (e.g., reprographic services, computer t~me, keydata enhy, etc.) must be identified. 5. RIGHTS iN DATA prepared by the Contractor pursuant to this Agreement including papers, repeals, cherts, computer programs, and other documentation, but not including Contractor's Agreement shall be delivered to and shall become the exclusive property et the State and may be copyrighted by the State. 7 additional persons on the same royalty-free basis. d. This Agreement shall not preclude the Cc~tractor from Agreement. not exceed 90 percenl al the ceiling amount of the performance bond is reduired by law, The bond is issued to the name of the contracting agency, if the agency is issuing the contract under delegated authority or CMAS they hotd the bend. otherwise DGS hi)Ids the bond. The amount of the LIABILITIES FOR DAMAGES to the performance of work as outlined in each order when completed. consequential damages even if neff§cation has been given as to the possibility of such damages. tortuous act. the fault o¢ negligence of the offending party. Such causes may include, but are not restricted to. Acts of God or of the fires, ~oods. power failure, disabling sthkes, epidemics. Revision 12/2g/t999 Page 15 of 15 8~ Pc ° 12/29/00 10:38 t'909-273-7¥55 Jaguar computer bys~ems tidy r inca-* loin ~ale~l ztz t2/28/00 22:02 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~]01 Department of General Services Procurement Division P.O. Box 942804 Sacramento, CA 94204-0001 State of California MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc. t-98-70-0681 B - .Brand-Epson, Hewlett Packard,Toshiba LAN-System; Network-System PC-Laptop, Desktop, Monitor; Printer-Laser. CONTRACT NUMBER: GSA TERM: DISTRIBUTION: 3-98-70-0681B 4/1/96 through 3/31/2002 STATEWiDE CMAS Schedule B -GSA #GS-35F-3013D (GE CAPITAL IT SOLUTIONS) This renewal supplement replaces in its entirety Jaguar Computer Systems, Inc.'s existing California Multiple Award Schedule (CMAS) which expired on March 31, 2000. The most current contract provisions, ordering instructions, policies, and CMAS terms and conditions applicable to this CMAS contract ara inco~oratsd herein. This contract is available for use by State of California agencies and any city, county, city and county, distdct or other local governmental body or corporation empowered to expend public funds. While the State makes this contract available, each local agency should make its own de[ermination whether the CMAS program is consistent with their procurement policies and regulations. CMAS Contractors are required to provide all CMAS and Federal contracl terms and conditions with the list(s) of products, services, and prices. These terms and conditions may include guarantees and other important provisions not included on the contract cover page. PLEASE REQUEST FROM CONTRACTOR A COPY OF ALL CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS IF NOT PROVIDED INITIALLY. REPLACE 'GE CAPITAL IT SOLUTIONS" WITH "JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS, INC." WHERE ~GE CAPITAL IT SOLUTIONS" IS REFERENCED IN THE FEDERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS. /~ ~2~ ;.~'~ ~_~/~...~_~ Effective Date: 413012000 DAWN FORD, Program Analyst, California Multiple Award Schedule Unit 12/29/00 10:39 ~'909-273-7955 Jaguar Computer Systems Roy Finch-+Tom rial'eli 2/2 12/28/00 22:07 FAX 9092737955 JAGUAR ~01 Department of General Services Procurement Division P.O. Box 942804 Sacraroento, CA 94204-0001 State of California MULTIPLE AWARD SCHEDULE Jaguar Computer Systems, .Inc. 3-00-70-0681G - Consulting-IT Project Management Consulting-IT Project Planning Consulting-Programming Consulting-System Analysis Consulting-Network Design Consulting-System Design CONTRACT NUMBER: 3-00-70-0681G GSA TERM: 9/23/1996 through 9/22/2002 DISTRIBUTION: STATEWIDE CMAS Schedule G - GSA #GS-35F-4194D (WORLD WIDE TECHNOLOGY, INC,) THERE IS NO LEGAL AUTHORITY FOR CONTRACTORS TO PROVIDE NON-INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES UNDER THE CMAS PROGRAM. AGENCIES SHOULD NOT ENTER INTO CMAS AGREEMENTS FOR NON-INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES. This contract is available for use by State of California agencies and any city, county, city and county, district or other local governmental body or corporation empowered to expend public funds. While the State makes this contract available, each local agency should make its own determination whether me CMAS program is consistent with their procurement policies and regulations. CMAS Contractors are required to provide all CMAS and Federal contract lerms and conditions with the list(s) of products, services, and prices. AI~. APPLICABLE FEDERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THIS DOCUMENT. ATTACHMENT C INCLUDES CONTRACT SERVICE OFFERING, SKILL CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AND PRICE LIST. /~/~o~ ~ ~/-__2 EfectiveDate: 4~30~00 DAWN FORD, Program Analyst, California Multiple Award Schedule Unit Z w w 0 © r~ 0 © uJ © Orr 0 © © © © 0 © © 0 I.- 0 0 © 0 Z Z LU > Pr' © © 0 n,' mmm I-- 0 0 z 0 © n © © ITEM 4 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL ClTYATTORNEY ~11 DI RECTOR OF FINANCE._~_~ ClTYMANAOER City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 23, 2001 Maintenance Facility Modification Project - Phase III - Project No. PW00-16 PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Senior Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Reject all bids received August 29, 2000 for the Maintenance Facility Modifications - Phase III, Project No. PW00-16. Approve the revised Construction Plans and Specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Maintenance Facility Modifications - Phase ilk Project No. PW00-16. BACKGROUND: On August 29, 2000 seven (7) bids for the original plans and specifications were publicly opened with bid results ranging from $471,000 to $861,400. The work included in the original plans and specifications involved modifying the existing maintenance facility by adding approximately 3000 square feet to provide sufficient workspace for City Hall staff, and have the ability to accommodate future staff. The project would have completed the second floor over the remainder of the building, including the installation of an elevator and restrooms, but did not include any interior walls. The first floor would also have been expanded with an approximate 900 square foot addition. The engineer's estimate was $475,000.00. The space planning committee finalized the workspace assignments after bids for the original modifications were opened. The final workspace plan required that three (3) additional office spaces and a conference room be constructed. In addition, the City Clerk requested that a high- density modular filing system be installed in the new record storage area. This request resulted in the need to modify the building's structural support system. In an attempt to expedite the project and avoid delays required to re-bid the project, the City requested a cost proposal for these minor changes from the lowest responsible bidder. Upon receipt of the $75,000+ cost proposal, it was determined that the changes were more significant than anticipated and warranted rejection of all bids and re-advertisement of the project to insure competitive bids. The revised plans and specifications are available for review in the City Engineer's office. The estimated total cost for the project, including revisions, is $510,000. 1 FISCAL IMPACT: The Maintenance Facility Modification Project is a Capital Improvement Project and will be funded by Capital Project Reserves. These funds have been appropriated in Account No. 210-190-158-5804 for Project No. PW00-16. The total project budget is $662,000, including $150,000 for furniture, fixtures and equipment. In order to completely fund the construction contract, it is anticipated that staff will have to utilize funds from the furniture, fixture and equipment budget line item. Therefore, once the space plan is complete, staff will bring back a request for an additional appropriation for furniture, fixtures and equipment. ATTACHMENT: 1. Project Location 2. Project Description 2 R:~AGDRPT~2.001 ~0123\PW00-16 REJ_REBID.DOC ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 23, 2001 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 200t- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1,2000 TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE ELEMENTS OF TITLE 49, PART 26 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR) ENTITLED "PARTICIPATION BY DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES IN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS", AND DESIGNATING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER AS THE DBE LIAISON OFFICER AND AUTHORIZING THE DBE LIAISON OFFICER TO CONDUCT A REVIEW OF THE ANNUAL OVERALL GOAL PERCENTAGE AND ADJUST SUCH PERCENTAGE EACH FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR AS NECESSARY ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTING AND MONITORING OF THE DBE PROGRAM. BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula, in accordance with regulations of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Title 49, Part 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) entitled "Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Department of Transportation Financial Assistance Programs" has established a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program. This program for the Federal Fiscal Year 2000/2001, effective October 1,2000, provides an Annual Overall Goal of 10%. The annual goal was based on review of federally funded projects for our Fiscal Year 00/01, the type of work each project required, the work category necessary to complete the work and the registered DBE contractors located in our market area including Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Each Federal Fiscal Year the City of Temecula will review the current year's project list and our federal funding awards and revise and update our annual overall goal to be reviewed and approved by the District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE) within the Caltrans Local Assistance Office, District 8, San Bernardino, California. 1 R:~Agdrpt~2001~0123\DBE Program Reso.jcd It is the responsibility of the City of Temecula to develop an annual overall goal and submit for approval to Caltrans each year, ensure contractor compliance with the prompt payment clauses of the contract, designate a DBE Liaison Officer and perform compliance monitoring to administer the Title VI and Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1968 on all Federal-aid projects. Our DBE Program has been submitted and has been approved by Caltrans. A Public Notice has been advertised per the requirement of the Department of Transportation and the 30-day comment period has been satisfied. No comments were received during this period. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2001- Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program (including all exhibits) 2 R:~Agdrpt~2001\O123\DBE Program Reso.jcd RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 1, 2000 TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE ELEMENTS OF TITLE 49, PART 26 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR) ENTITLED "PARTICIPATION BY DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES IN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS", AND DESIGNATING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER AS THE DBE LIAISON OFFICER AND AUTHORIZING THE DBE LIAISON OFFICER TO CONDUCT A REVIEW OF THE ANNUAL OVERALL GOAL PERCENTAGE AND ADJUST SUCH PERCENTAGE EACH FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR AS NECESSARY ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTING AND MONITORING OF THE DBE PROGRAM. The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows: WHEREAS, before the U.S. Department of Transportation will further obligate federal funds for federal-aid transportation programs the CITY OF TEMECULA is required to adopt a new Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program and the CITY OF TEMECULA will designate a DBE Liaison Officer to monitor such program. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula, as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby approves the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program, effective October 1,2000. Section 2. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer is hereby designated as the DBE Liaison Officer. Section 3. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer is hereby authorized to review the annual overall goal percentage and adjust such percentage each fiscal year as necessary according to the requirements of the U.S. Department of Transportation. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of January 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 3 R:~Agdrpt~2.001\0123\DBE Program Reso.jcd [SEAL] STATE Of CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CiTY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting therefore held on the 23"d day of January, 2001 by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 4 R:~Agdrpt~2001\0123\DBE Program Reso,jcd 1989 CITY OF TEMECULA DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 00/01 ' DBE Program Prepared: September 30, 2000 Updated: December 19, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. XX. I. Definition of Terms II. Objectives/Policy Statement IlL Nondiscrimination W. DBE Program Updates V. Quotas VI. DBE Liaison Officer VII. Federal Financial Assistance Agreement Assurance VIII. DBE Financial Institutions IX. Directory X. Over-concentration XI. Business Development Programs XIL Required Contract Clauses 1) Contract Assurance 2) Prompt Payment XIII. Monitoring and Enforcement Mechanisms 1) After Contract Award 2) Pre-construction Conference 3) Construction Contract Monitoring 4) Substitution 5) Record Keeping and Final Report of Utilization of DBE's Overall Goals Contract Goals Transit Vehicle Manufacturers Good Faith Efforts Counting DBE Participation Certification Information Collection and Reporting 1 1 1-2 2 2 2-3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4-7 %9 9 9 9-11 11 11 11-12 CITY OF TEMECULA DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 00/01 City of .... City of Temecula I. Definitions of Terms The terms used in this program have the meanings defined in 49 CFR §26.5. (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49, Part 26, enclosed for reference) II. Objectives/Policy Statement (§§26.1, 26.23) The City of Temecula has established a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program in accordance with regulations of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), 49 CFR, Part 26. The City of Temecula has received Federal financial assistance from the DOT, and as a condition of receiving this assistance, the City of Temecula will sign an assurance that it will comply with 49 CFR, Part 26. It is the policy of the City of Temecula to ensure that DBE's, as defined in Part 26, have an equal opportunity to receive and participate in DOT-assisted contracts. It is also our policy: · To ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts; · To create a level playing field on which DBE's can compete fairly for DOT-assisted contracts; · To ensure that the DBE Program is narrowly tailored in accordance with applicable law; · To ensure that only firms that fully meet 49 CFR, Part 26 eligibility standards are permitted to participate as DBE's; · To help remove barriers to the participation of DBE's in DOT-assisted contracts; and · To assist the development of firms that can compete successfully in the market place outside the DBE Program. The Director of Public Works/City Engineer has been delegated as the DBE Liaison Officer. In that capacity, the Director of Public Works/City Engineer is responsible for implementing ail aspects of the DBE program. Implementation of the DBE program is accorded the same priority as compliance with all other legal obligations incurred by the City of Temecula in its financial assistance agreements with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The City of Temecula has disseminated this policy statement to the Executive Staff and City Council Members and all the components of our organization. We have distributed this statement to DBE and non-DBE business communities that perform work for us on DOT-assisted contracts by publishing this statement in general circulation, minority-focused and trade association publications. III. Nondiscrimination (§26.7) The City of Temecula will never exclude any person from participation in, deny any person the benefits of, or otherwise discriminate against anyone in connection with the award and performance of any contract covered by 49 CFR, Part 26 on the basis of race, color, sex, or national origin. In administering its DBE program, the City of Temecula will not, directly or through contractual or other arrangements, use criteria or methods of administration that have the effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the DBE program with respect to individuals of a particular race, color, sex, or national origin. IV. DBE Program Updates (§26.21) The City of Temecula will continue to carry out this program until the City of Temecula has established a new goal setting methodology or until significant changes to this DBE Program are adopted. The City of Temecula will provide to Caltrans a proposed overall goal and goal setting methodology and other program updates by June 1 of every year. V. Quotas (§26.43) The City of Temecula will not use quotas or set-asides in any way in the administration of this DBE program. VI. DBE Liaison Officer (DBELO) (§26.25) The City of Temecula has designated the following individual as the DBE Liaison Officer: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590, hughesb@cityofiemecula.org. In that capacity, William G. Hughes (DBELO) is responsible for implementing all aspects of the DBE program and ensuring that the City of Temecula complies with all provisions of 49 CFR, Part 26. This is available on the Intemet at osdbuweb.dot.gov/main.cfm. William G. Hughes (DBELO) has direct, independent access to the City Manager concerning DBE program matters. Resources available to DBELO include three support personnel. A Senior Project Manager/Engineer, a Management Analyst and a Project Analyst who devote a portion of their time to the program. An organizational chart displaying the DBELO's position in the organization is found in Attachment 1 to this program. The DBELO is responsible for developing, implementing and monitoring the DBE program, in coordination with other appropriate officials. Duties and responsibilities include the following: 1. Gathers and reports statistical data and other information as required. 2. Reviews third party contracts and purchase requisitions for compliance with this program. 3. Works with all departments to set overall annual goals. 4. Ensures that bid notices and requests for proposals are available to DBE's in a timely manner. 5. Identifies contracts and procurements so that DBE goals are included in solicitations (both race-neutral methods and contract specific goals) and monitors results. 6. Analyzes City of Temecula's progress toward goal attainment and identifies ways to improve progress. 7. Participates in pre-bid meetings. 8. Advises the CEO/governing body on DBE matters and achievement. 9. Chairs the DBE Review Committee. 10. Participates with the legal counsel and project director to determine contractor compliance with good faith efforts. 1 I. Provides DBE's with information and assistance in preparing bids, obtaining bonding and insurance. 12. Plans and participates in DBE training seminars, 2 13. Provides outreach to DBE's and community organizations to advise them of opportunities. VII. Federal Financial Assistance Agreement Assurance (§26.13) The City of Temecula will sign the following assurance, applicable to all FHWA-assisted contracts and their administration as part of the program supplement agreement for each project: The recipient shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of any DOT-assisted contract or in the administration of its DBE Program or the requirements of 49 CFR, Part 26. The recipient shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR, Part 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. The recipient's DBE Program, as required by 49 CFR, Part 26 and as approved by DOT, is incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of this program is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the recipient of its failure to carry out its approved program, the Department may impose sanctions as provided for under Part 26 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.). VIII. DBE Financial Institutions It is the policy of the City of Temecula to investigate the full extent of services offered by financial institutions owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals in the community, to make reasonable efforts to use these institutions, and to encourage prime contractors on DOT-assisted contracts to make use of these institutions. Information on the availability of such institutions can be obtained from the DBE Liaison Officer. The Caltrans Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program may offer assistance to the DBE Liaison Officer. IX. Directory (§26.31) The City of Temecula will refer interested persons to the DBE directory available from the Caltrans Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program website at www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep. X. Over-concentration (§26.33) The City of Temecula has not identified any types of work in DOT-assisted contracts that have an over-concentration of DBE participation. If in the future the City of Ternecula identifies the need to address over-concentration, measures for addressing over-concentration will be submitted to the DLAE for approval. XI. Business Development Programs (§26.35) The City of Temecula does not have a business development or mentor-prot6g6 program. If the City of Temecula identifies the need for such a program in the future, the rationale for adopting such a program and a comprehensive description of it will be submitted to the DLAE for approval. 3 XII. Required Contract Clauses (§§26.13, 26.29) Contract Assurance The City of Temecula ensures that the following clause is placed in every DOT-assisted contract and subcontract: The contractor or subcontractor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this contract. The contractor shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR, Part 26 in the award and administration of DOT-assisted contracts. Failure by the contractor to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this contract, which may result in the termination of this contract or such other remedy as recipient deems appropriate. Prompt Payment The City of Temecula ensures that the following clauses or equivalent will be included in each DOT- assisted prime contract: Satisfactory Performance The prime contractor agrees to pay each subcontractor under this prime contract for satisfactory performance of its contract no later than 10 days from the receipt of each payment the prime contractor receives from the City of Ternecula. Any delay or postponement of payment from the above referenced time frame may occur only for good cause following written approval of the City of Temecula. This clause applies to both DBE and non-DBE subcontractors Release of Retainage The prime contractor agrees further to release retainage payments to each subcontractor within 30 days after the subcontractor's work is satisfactorily completed. Any delay or postponement of payment from the above referenced time frame may occur only for good cause following written approval of the City of Temecula. This clause applies to both DBE and non-DBE subcontractors. XIII. Monitoring and Enforcement Mechanisms (§26.37) The City of Temecula will assign a Resident Engineer (RE) or Contract Manager to monitor and track actual DBE participation through contractor and subcontractor reports of payments in accordance with the following: After Contract Award After the contract award the City of Temecula will review the award documents for the portion of items each DBE and first tier subcontractor will be performing and the dollar value of that work. With these documents the RE/Contract Manager will be able to determine the work to be performed by the DBE's or subcontractors listed. Pre-construction Conference A pre-construction conference will be scheduled between the RE and the contractor or their representative to discuss the work each DBE subcontractor will perform. Before work can begin on a subcontract, the City of Temecula will require the contractor to submit a completed "Subcontracting Request," (Exhibit 16-B, LAPM) or equivalent. When the RE receives the completed form it will be checked for agreement of the first tier subcontractors and DBE's. The RE will not approve the request when it identifies someone other than the DBE or first tier subcontractor listed in the previously completed "Local Agency Bidder DBE Information," (Exhibit 15-G). The "Subcontracting Request" will not be approved until any discrepancies are resolved. If an issue cannot be resolved at that time, or there is some other concern, the RE will require the contractor to eliminate the subcontractor in question before signing the subcontracting request. A change in the DBE or first tier subcontractor may be addressed during a substitution process at a later date. Suppliers, vendors, or manufacturers listed on the "Local Agency Bidder DBE Information" will be compared to those listed in the completed (Exhibit 16-I,LAPM) or equivalent. Differences must be resolved by either making corrections or requesting a substitution. Substitutions will be subject to the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act (FPA). The City of Temecula will require contractors to adhere to the provisions within Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act (State Law) Sections 4100-4144. FPA requires the contractor to list all subcontractors in excess of one half of one percent (0.5%) of the contractor's total bid or $10,000, whichever is greater. The statute is designed to prevent bid shopping by contractors. The FPA explains that a contractor may not substitute a subcontractor listed in the original bid except with the approval of the awarding authority. The RE will give the contractor a blank (Exhibit 17-F, "Final Report Utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, First Tier Subcontractors") and will explain to them that the document will be required at the end of the project, for which payment can be withheld, in conformance with the contract. Construction Contract Monitoring The RE will ensure that the RE's staff (inspectors) know what items of work each DBE is responsible for performing. Inspectors will notify the RE immediately of apparent violations. When a firm other than the listed DBE subcontractor is found performing the work, the RE will notify the contractor of the apparent discrepancy and potential loss of payment. Based on the contractor's response, the RE will take appropriate action: The DBE Liaison Officer will perform a preliminary investigation to identify any potential issues related to the DBE subcontractor performing a commercially useful function. Any substantive issues will be forwarded to the CaltranS Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program. If the contractor fails to adequately explain why there is a discrepancy, payment for the work will be withheld and a letter will be sent to the contractor referencing the applicable specification violation and the required withholding of payment. 5 If the contract requires the submittal of a monthly truck document, the contractor will be required to submit documentation to the RE showing the owner's name; California Highway Patrol CA number; and the DBE certification number of the owner of the truck for each truck used during that month for which DBE participation will be claimed. The trucks will be listed by California Highway Patrol CA number in the daily diary or on a separate piece of paper for documentation. The numbers are checked by inspectors regularly to confirm compliance. Providing evidence of DBE payment is the responsibility of the contractor. Substitution When a DBE substitution is requested, the RE/Contract Manager will request a letter from the contractor explaining why substitution is needed. The RE/Contract Manager must review the letter to be sure names and addresses are shown, dollar values are included, and reason for the request is explained. If the RE/Contract Manager agrees to the substitution, the RE/Contract Manager will notify, in writing, the DBE subcontractor regarding the proposed substitution and procedure for written objection from the DBE subcontractor in accordance with the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act. If the contractor is not meeting the contract goal with this substitution, the contractor must provide the required good faith effort to the RE/Contract Manager for local agency consideration. If them is any doubt in the RE/Contract Manager's mind regarding the requested substitution, the RE/Contract Manager may contact the DLAE for assistance and direction. Record Keeping and Final Report Utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises The contractor shall maintain records showing the name and address of each first-tier subcontractor. The records shall also show: 1. The name and business address, regardless of tier, of every DBE subcontractor, DBE vendor of materials and DBE trucking company. 2. The date of payment and the total dollar figure paid to each of the firms. 3. The DBE prime contractor shall also show the date of work performed by their own forces along with the corresponding dollar value of the work claimed toward DBE goals. When a contract has been completed the contractor will provide a summary of the records stated above. The DBE utilization information will be documented on (Exhibit I7-F) and will be submitted to the DLAE attached to the Report of Expenditures. The RE will compare the completed (Exhibit 17-F) to the contractor's completed (Exhibit 15-G) and, if applicable, to the completed (Exhibit 16-B). The DBE's shown on the completed (Exhibit 17-F) should be the same as those originally listed unless an authorized substitution was allowed, or the contractor used more DBE's and they were added. The dollar amount should reflect any changes made in planned work done by the DBE. The contractor will be required to explain in writing why the names of the subcontractors, the work items or dollar figures are different from what was originally shown on the completed (Exhibit 15-G) when: There have been no changes made by the RE. The contractor has not provided a sufficient explanation in the comments section of the completed (Exhibit 17-F). The explanation will be attached to the completed (Exhibit 17-F) for submittal. The RE will file this in the project records. The City of Temecula's Liaison Officer will keep track of the DBE certification status on the Internet at www.dot.ca.gov/hqPoep and keep the RE informed of changes that affect the contract. The RE will require the contractor to act in accordance with existing contractual commitments regardless of de-certification. The DLAE will use the PS&E checklist to monitor the City of Temecula's commitment to require bidders list information to be submitted to the City of Temecula from the awarded prime and subcontractors as a means to develop a bidders list. This monitoring will only take place if the bidders list information is required to be submitted as stipulated in the special provisions. The City of Temecula will bring to the attention of the DOT through the DLAE any false, fraudulent, or dishonest conduct in connection with the program, so that DOT can take the steps (e.g., referral to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution, referral to the DOT Inspector General, action under suspension and debarment or Program Fraud and Civil Penalties roles) provided in §26.109. The City of Ternecula also will consider similar action under our own legal authorities, including responsibility determinations in future contracts. XIV. Overall Goals (§26.45) Amount of Goal The City of Temecula's overall goal for the Federal fiscal year FY2000-2001 is the following: 10 % of the Federal financial assistance in FHVqA-assisted contracts. The City of Temecula will make a determination, based on contract tracking requirements incorporated into the new DBE Program, as to the percentage of the overall goal which will be reached through race-neutral means and the percentage which will be met through contract specific goals in the forthcoming fiscal years. (FY01/02 and beyond) Methodology 1) Projecting DOT Assisted Contract Expenditures: The City of Temecula in conjunction with the preparation and adoption of the annual budget for each fiscal year and in coordination with executive staff and departments responsible for contracting activities, shall conduct a thorough analysis of the projected number, type of work, and dollar amounts of contracting opportunities that shall be funded, in whole or part, by DOT federal assistance for that fiscal year. This analysis will benefit in the determination of DOT funded contracts and expenditures by Work Category Code (WCC) and corresponding Standard Industry Classification (SIC Code) for each fiscal year. (See attached Schedule A) 7 2) Establishing the Base Figure: To establish the City of Temecula's base figure of the relative availability of DBE's in relation to all comparable firms available for the City of Temecula's FY00/01 DOT assisted contracting program, the City of Temecula has elected to utilize the Caltrans DBE Directory of certified firms (queried to represent only DBE firms within the relevant market area) for calculating the numerator and the County Census Bureau Data within the same geographical market area to calculate the denominator. (See attached Schedule A) 3) Adjustments to the Base Figure: Upon establishing the Base Figure for Fiscal Year 00/01, the City of Ternecula will review and assess other relevant evidence to determine what adjustments, if any, will be needed in the forthcoming fiscal years. Based on a lack of current information including actual DBE utilization in prior years, disparity studies or utilization ratios relative to DBE's in our market area the City of Temecula will make no adjustment to the 10% utilization of DBE's with regard to federal assisted contracts for FY 00/01. Prior to the development and implementation of a proposed overall goal, goal setting methodology and program updates due June 1 of each year, a thorough review of statistical data within the current fiscal year will be analyzed to determine these adjustments, if any, to the percentage of DBE utilization. Breakout of Estimated Race-Neutral and Race-Conscious Participation The City of Temecula will utilize good faith efforts necessary to accomplish our overall DBE goal of 10%. Because the City of Temecula has only tracked DBE participation based on race-neutral participation contracts in prior years, the overall goal of 10% will be met using race-neutral methods for Fiscal Year 00/01. In forthcoming years, the overall goal will be adjusted based on documentation to support all DBE participation as race-neutral or race-conscious. Process Starting with the Federal fiscal year 2002, the amount of overall goal, the method to calculate the goal, and the breakout of estimated race-neutral and race-conscious participation will be required annually by June 1 in advance of the Federal fiscal year beginning October 1 for FHWA-assisted contracts. Submittals will be to the Caltrans' DLAE. An exception to this will be if FrA or FAA recipients are required by FFA or FAA to submit the annualxinformation to them or a designee by another date. FHWA recipients will follow this process: Once the DLAE has responded with preliminary comments and the comments have been incorporated into the draft overall goal information, the City of Temecula will publish a notice of the proposed overall goal, informing the public that the proposed goal and its rationale are available for inspection during normal business hours at the City of Temecula's principal office for 30 days following the date of the notice, and informing the public that City of Ternecula comments will be accepted on the goals for 45 days following the date of the notice. Advertisements in newspapers, minority focus media, trade publications, and websites will be the normal media to accomplish this effort. The notice will include addresses to which comments may be sent and addresses (including offices and websites) where the proposal may be reviewed. The overall goal resubmission to the Caltrans DLAE will include a summary of information and comments received during this public participation process and City of Ternecula's responses. This will b6 due by September 1 to the Caltrans DLAE. The DLAE will have a month to make a final review so the City of Temecula may begin using the overall goal on October 1 of each year. If there is a design build please refer to Appendix B of this DBE Program. XV. Contract Goals (§26.51) The City of Temecula will use contract goals to meet any portion of the overall goal the City of Temecula does not project being able to meet by the use of race-neutral means. Contract goals are established so that, over the period to which the overall goal applies, they will cumulatively result in meeting any portion of the overall goal that is not projected to be met through the use of race-neutral means. Contract goals will be established only on those DOT-assisted contracts that have subcontracting possibilities. Contract goals need not be established on every such contract, and the size of contract goals will be adapted to the circumstances of each such contract (e.g., type and location of work, availability of DBE's to perform the particular type of work). The contract work items will be compared with eligible DBE contractors willing to work on the project. A determination will also be made to decide which items are likely to be performed by the prime contractor and which ones are likely to be performed by the subcontractor(s). The goal will then be incorporated into the contract documents. Contract goals will be expressed as a percentage of the total amount of a DOT- assisted contract. XVI. Transit Vehicle Manufacturers (§26.49) If DOT-assisted contracts will include transit vehicle procurements, the City of Ternecula will require each transit vehicle manufacturer, as a condition of being authorized to bid or propose on transit vehicle procurements, to certify that it has complied with the requirements of 49 CFR, Part 26, Section 49. The City of Temecula will direct the transit vehicle manufacturer to the subject requirements located on the Intemet at http://osdbuweb.dot.gov/programs/dbe/dbe.htm. XVII. Good Faith Efforts (§26.53) Information to be Submitted The City of Temecula treats bidders'/offerors' compliance with good faith effort requirements as a matter of responsiveness. A responsive proposal is meeting all the requirements of the advertisement and solicitation. Each solicitation for which a contract goal has been established will require the bidders/offerors to submit the following information to the City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Ternecula, CA 92590 no later than 4:00 p.m. on or before the fourth day, not including Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, following bid opening: 1. The names and addresses of known DBE firms that will participate in the contract; 2. A description of the work that each DBE will perform: 3. The dollar amount of the participation of each DBE firm participation 4. Written and signed documentation of commitment to use a DBE subcontractor whose participation it submits to meet a contract goal; 5. Written and signed confirmation from the DBE that it is participating in the contract as provided in the prime contractor's commitment; and 6. If the contract goal is not met, evidence of good faith efforts. Demonstration of Good Faith Efforts The obligation of the bidder/offeror is to make good faith efforts. The bidder/offeror can demonstrate that it has done so either by meeting the contract goal or documenting good faith efforts. Examples of good faith efforts are found in (Appendix A to Part 26), which is attached. The following personnel are responsible for determining whether a bidder/offeror who has not met the contract goal has documented sufficient good faith efforts to be regarded as responsive: the DBE Review Committee. The City of Temecula will ensure that all information is complete and accurate and adequately documents the bidder/offeror's good faith efforts before a commitment to the performance of the contract by the bidder/offeror is made. Administrative Reconsideration Within 10 days of being informed by the City of Temecula that it is not responsive because it has not documented sufficient good faith efforts, a bidder/offeror may request administrative reconsideration. Bidder/offerors should make this request in writing to the following reconsideration official: Management Analyst, Beryl Yasinosky, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590, (909)694-6411, yasinobk@cityoftemecula.org. The reconsideration official will not have played any role in the original determination that the bidder/offeror did not make document sufficient good faith efforts. As part of this reconsideration, the bidder/offeror will have the opportunity to provide written documentation or argument concerning the issue of whether it met the goal or made adequate good faith efforts to do so. The bidder/offeror will have the opportunity to meet in person with the reconsideration official to discuss the issue of whether it met the goal or made adequate good faith efforts to do so. The City of Temecula will send the bidder/offeror a written decision on reconsideration, explaining the basis for finding that the bidder did or did not meet the goal or make adequate good faith efforts to do so. The result of the reconsideration process is not administratively appealable to Caltrans, FHWA or the DOT. Good Faith Efforts when a DBE is Replaced on a Contract The City of Temecula will require a contractor to make good faith efforts to replace a DBE that is terminated or has otherwise failed to complete its work on a contract with another certified DBE, to the extent needed to meet the contract goal. The prime contractor is required to notify the RE immediately of the DBE's inability or unwillingness to perform and provide reasonable documentation. 10 In this situation, the prime contractor will be required to obtain the City of Temecula's prior approval of the substitute DBE and to provide copies of new or amended subcontracts, or documentation of good faith efforts. If the contractor fails or refuses to comply in the time specified, the City of Temecula's contracting officer will issue an order stopping all or part of paymentJwork until satisfactory action has been taken. If the contractor still fails to comply, the contracting officer may issue a termination for default proceeding. XVIII. Counting DBE Participation (§26.55) The City of Temecula will count DBE participation toward overall and contract goals as provided in the contract specifications for the prime contractor, subcontractor, joint venture partner with prime or subcontractor, or vendor of material or supplies. See the Caltrans' (Sample Boiler Plate Contract Docutnents, enclosed for reference). Also, refer to XIII, "After Contract Award." XIX. Certification (§26.83(a)) The City of Temecula ensures that only DBE firms certified by Caltrans' or the Metropolitan Transportation Authority prior to submitting of the proposal to the City of Temecula will participate as DBE's in our program. XX. Information Collection and Reporting Bidders List The City of Temecula will create and maintain a bidders list, consisting of information about all DBE and non-DBE firms that bid or quote on its DOT-assisted contracts. The bidders list will include the name, address, DBE/non-DBE status, age, and annual gross receipts of firms. Monitoring Payments to DBE's Prime contractors are required to maintain records and documents of payments to DBE's for three years following the performance of the contract. These records will be made available for inspection upon request, by any authorized representative of the City of Ternecula, Caltrans, FHWA or DOT. This reporting requirement also extends to any certified DBE subcontractor. Payment to DBE subcontractors will be reviewed by the City of Temecula to ensure that the actual amount paid to DBE subcontractors equals or exceeds the dollar amounts stated in the schedule of DBE participation. Reporting to Caltrans The City of Temecula - Final utilization of DBE participation will be reported to the DLAE using (Exhibit 17-F) of the Caltrans' LAPM. 11 · Confidentiality The City of Temecula will safeguard from disclosure to third parties information that may~:easonably be ~~business information, consistent with Federal, state, and local laws. Shawn D. Nelson - City Manager Date: William G. Hughes - Director of Public Works/City Engineer Date: 'D This Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Program is accepted by: [Signature of DLAE] Date: 12 This Program is in accordance with Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 26 13 ANNUAL OVERALL GOAL INFORMATION TO: CALTRANS DISTRICT 8 District Local Assistance Engineer The amount of overall goal, methodology, breakout of estimated race-neutral and race-conscious participation, and any DBE program updates are presented herein in accordance with Title 4-9 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 26, and as described in the Local Assistance Procedures Manual. Thc City/County/Region of City of Temecula submits o~r annual overall goal information (and any needed updates of our DBE program) for your review and comment. We have established an annual overall DBE goal of 10 % for the Federal Fiscal Year 00 / 01--,beginning on October 1, 2000 and ending on September 30, 2001 Methodology Please refer to Schedule A (enclosed) Breakout of Estimated Race-Neutral and Race-Conscious Participation Please refer to section XIV: Overall goals DBE Program Updates No changes at this time DBE Liaison Officer-William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer t To be used for submittal due June 1 of every year. 2 To be used for submittal due September 1 of every year. Date GUIDELINES FOR CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLIANCE REVIEWS OF LOCATION PROCEDURES GENERAL In accordance with Title VI and Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1968, local agencies are required to follow certain location procedures on Federal-aid highway projects. This guideline may be used to suggest areas for review. As a result of the choice of highway locations or the procedures used in arriving at the choice, has the Agency, State, or Federal Highway Administration received any civil rights complaints? If so, what were the complaints and what has been done to resolve them? 2.a. To what extent does the agency employ minority staff personnel in the location program under review? Are these personnel involved in the following: · Developing and comparing alternatives, · Assessing impacts, and · When used, operating through consultant contracts? Are they involved in any other related areas? If not, what is being done to recruit and hire minority personnel? What training or education sessions are conducted to increase the skills of minorities as well as non-minorities? Are promotional opportunities available for minorities? Does the Agency fill professional as well as nonprofessional positions with minorities? If not, what is being done to rectify these situations? Does the Agency choose consultant firms without discrimination on the basis of race, sex, color, or national origin? Is there evidence that minority consultant and consultants with minority staffs offered equal employment opportunity? How many of these firms have contracts and what type are they? Does the process for preparation of Environmental Impact Statements, or do the Environmental Impact Statements themselves, reflect any indication of a violation of any of the provisions of Title VI or Title vm? If so, elaborate. LOCATION DETERMINATION When reviewing the process leading to location determination on a specific project, the following questions are to be used: To what extent has the agency or consultant compiled the following information for use in the location determination? The racial character of the portion of the area through which the alternate locations pass, including the approximate number by race of persons and families affected by each alternate (affected means all persons directly displaced or located in areas directly adjoining the road.) The social and economic character of the area thiough which alteroates pass, including levels of income, whether the area is commercial or residential, and the 10. approximate number of minority and non-minority owners of businesses and residences in the area. The racial character of the people employed in the area affected by each alternate. How was the racial and ethnic data used to identify possible problem areas and adverse impacts, such as relocation difficulties or possible changes in minority income capabilities, mobility, or community cohesion? What efforts have been made to rectify these problem areas and minimize the adverse impacts? Will a minority area be bypassed or separated from contiguous areas by an of the alternatives, and if so, what effect will this have on the minority community? To what extent will it perpetuate patterns of segregation? How will each of the alternates affect the use of various community facilities and services such as hospital, libraries, shopping areas, fire stations, police installations, schools, churches, parks and recreation centers by minority groups in the area? To what extent will each of the locations produce an adverse effect of residential, commercial and industrial development existing or planned within minority communities? What attempt has the Agency made to satisfy minority community planning goals and needs? To what extent were the goals and needs determined utilizing input from the minority community? Have the gradeline, safety considerations, cross-street treatment, pedestrian overpasses, and other design features been established for alternatives to the same degree in minority areas as in nonminority areas?: Is access to and from the various alternates provided without discrimination? Would the alternates have an effect on traffic volumes on adjacent streets within minority communities? To what extent has the Agency studied the effect of increased or decreased traffic on residences and businesses? To what extent have aesthetics, noise, and air quality been considered within minority communities? 11. Has all the above information been adequately tabulated and mapped for use in the location determination? COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION In any review of projects, a determination should be made that the minority groups have had an opportunity to provide meaningful input into the decision-making process regarding their goals and needs as they pertain to the location determination. The following questions should be used: 1. To what extent do the Agency's procedures provide for consultation with and dissemination of information to minority community and groups? 2. Where non-English speaking minorities are involved, what provisions are made to overcome language barriers? 3. How are the minority leaders identified and encouraged to provide suggestions and ask questions about locations? 4. To what extent are informal hearings and meetings held with the affected minority communities and groups? 5. To what extent does the Agency respond to questions asked and consider comments made by minorities? To what extent are minority community and groups represented on the various councils, boards, and committees, etc., that provide input to the location determination? How were these representatives selected and have they been given an equal voice? PUBLIC HEARINGS When reviewing the conduct of public hearings, the following questions should be used: 1. Are hearing(s) held at a place and time convenient to minority communit~y and groups? 2. Are advertisements of the hearing(s) (i.e., newspapers, posters, radio, etc.) adequate to provide notification to minorities? 3. Where non-English speaking minorities are involved, what provisions are made to overcome language barriers both in advertisements and at the heating(s) ? 4. Are minority leaders specifically invited to attend and present their views? Do they attend? Do they make comments? 5. To what extent does the Agency respond to questions asked and consider comments made by minority persons at the hearing(s)? 6. To what extent are fair housing requirements and the availability of hardship acquisition discussed at public hearings when minorities are to be relocated. Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 15-G Local Agency Bidder DBE Information LOCAL AGENCY BIDDER-DBE -INFORMATION IThis information may be submitted with your bid proposal. If it is not, and you are the apparent low bidder or the second or third low bidder, it must be submitted and received by the administering agency no later than the time specified in the special provisions. CO./RTE./P.M.: BIDDER'S NAME: CONTRACT NO.: ADDRESS: BID AMOUNT: $ BID OPENING DATE: DBE GOAL FROM CONTRACT __ % ITEM OF WORK AND NAME OF DBE ** DOLLAR PERCENT CONTRACT DESCRIPTION OF WORK OR (Name of DBEs, Certification Number, AMOUNT *** ' ITEM NO. SERVICES TO BE and Telephone Number) * ** DBE SUBCONTRACTED OR MATERIALS DBE TO BE PROVIDED Total Claimed $ $ Participation % % If 100% of item is not to be performed or furnished by DBE, describe exact portion, including planned location of work to be performed, of item to be performed or furnished by DBE ** DBEs must be certified by Caltrans on the date bids are opened. Subcontractors and suppliers certified State-funded only cannot be used to meet goals on federally funded contracts. *** Credit for a DBE supplier, who is not a manufacturer is limited to 60% of the amount paid to the supplier. (See Section "Disadvantaged Business" (DBE) of the special provisions) IMPORTANT: Names of DBE subcontractors and their respective item{s) of work listed above. should be consistent with the name and items of work in the "List of Subcontractors" submitted with your bid pursuant to the Subcontractors Listing Law. Signature of Bidder Date (Area Code) tel. No. Person to Contact (Please type or print) Distribution for all Projects: DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION (1) Original-Caltrans DLAE for NHS Projects, (2) Copy-Local Agency project file (FED DBE) MODIFIED DC-OE-19 (REV 09-18-95 Page 15-3.~ February 1, 1998 Local Assistance Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 16-B Subcontracting Request STATE OF CALIFORNIA - DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUBCONTRACTING REQUEST DC-CEM-1201 (REV. 4/94) (OLD HC-45) CT# 7541-3514-7 FRONT See Instructions On Back [REQUEST NUMBER ROUTE CONTRACTOR NAME BUSINESS ADDRESS CITY/STATE SUBCONTRACTOR (Name, Business Address, Phone) Categories: 1) Specialty I Certify That: BID ITEM NUMBER(S) COUNTY CONTRACT NO. ZIP CODE CHECK IF: BID ITEM SUBBED 2) Listed Under Fair Practices Act FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. {From Special Provisions) DESCRIBE WORK WHEN LESS THAN 100% OF WORK IS SUBBED SAMOUNT BASED ON BID $ AMOUNT 3) Certified DBFdMBE/WBFdDVBE · The Standard Provisions for labor set forth in the contract apply to the subcontracted work. · · If applicable, (Federal Aid Projects only) Section 14 (Federal Requirements) of the Special Provisions have been inserted in the subcontracts and shall be incoEporated in any lower-tier subcontract. Written contracts have been executed for the above noted subcontracted work. CONTRACTOR'S SIGNATURE DATE NOTE: This section is to be completed by the Resident Engineer 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Total (lines 6+7) .......................................................................... $ 9. Balance of work Contractor to perform (lines I minus 8) ........................ $ Total of bid items ............................................................................................................. $ Specialty items (previously requested) ............................................... $ Specialty items (this request) .......................................................... $ Total (lines 2+3) .......................................................................... $ Contractor must perform with own forces (lines I minus 4) x % ................................ $ Bid items previously subcontracted ................................................... $ Bid items subcontracted ( this request) ............................................... $ RESIDENT E N Giiq EEP:,' ~ S iON~TUKE CEM-1201 (HC-46 REV, 4~94) COPY DISTRIBUTION: 1. Original - Contractor 2, Copy - local agency Resident Engineer 3, Copy - local agency Labor Compliance Officer 4. Contractor'a Information Copy Page 16-51 February 1, 1998 EXHIBIT 16-B Subcontracting Request Local Assistance Procedures Manual B ack NOTE: INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING SUBCONTRACTING REQUEST FORM All First-tier subcontractors must be included on a subcontracting request. Submit in accordance with Section 8-1.01 of the Standard Specifications. Type or print requested information. Information copy is to be retained by the contractor. Submit other copies to project's Resident Engineer. After approval, the original will be returned to the contractor. When an entire item is subcontracted, the value to be shown is the contractor's bid price. When a portion of an item is subcontracted, describe the portion, and show the % of bid item and value. THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE USED FOR sUBSTITUTIONS. Prior to submittal of a DC-CEM-1201 involving a replacement Subcontractor, submit a separate written request for approval to substitute a listed subcontractor. Section 4107 of the Government Code covers the conditions for substitution. Submit a separate written request for approval of any DBE/MBE/WBE/DVBE substitution. Include appropriate backup information and state what efforts were made to accomplish the same dollar value of work by other certified DBE/MBE/WBF_./DVBEs. For contractors who will be performing work on railroad property, it is necessary for the contractor to complete and submit the Certificate of Insurance (State Form DH-OS-A10A) naming the subcontractor as insured. No work shall be allowed which involves encroachment on railroad property until the specified insurance has been approved. Page 16-52 February 1, 1998 Local Assistance Procedures Manual FORM CEM-Sl01 (Old HC-30(R~V3-$1) EXHIBIT 16-I Notice of Materials To Be Used (Form CEM-3101) STATE OF CALIFORaNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NOTICE OF MATERIALS TO BE USED Resident Engineer You are hereby notified that materials required for use under Contract No. for construction of Date: 19 in Dist. , Co. will be obtained from sources herein designated. , Rte. CONTRACT KIND OF MATERIAL NAME AND ADDRESS WHERE ITEM NO. MATERIAL CAN BE INSPECTED It is requested that you arrange for sampling, testing and inspection of materials prior to delivery in accordance with Section 6 of the Standard Specifications where the same is practicable and in accord with your policy. It is understood that source ' inspection does not relieve me of the full responsibility for incorporating in the work materials that comply in all respects with the contract plans and specifications, nor does it preclude the subsequent rejection of materials found to be unsuitable. Distribution: White Office of Materials Engineering & Testing Services 5900 Folsom Blvd. Sacramento, California 95819 Yellow Resident Engineer Green Contractor' ~ File Yours truly, Address Phone No. ( ).__ Page 16-6~ February 1, 1998 EXHIBIT 16-I Notice of Materials To Be Used (Form CEM-3101) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ° DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NOTICE OF MATERIALS TO BE USED DC-CEM-3101 (OLD HC-30 REV. 10/92) 7541-3511-1 Local Assistance Procedures Manual INSTRUCTIONS TO CONTRACTOR Section 6 of the Standard Specifications states that, "Promptly after the approval of the Contract, the Contractor shall notify the Engineer of the proposed sources of supply of all materials to be furnished by him, using a form which will be supplied by the Engineer upon request." In order to avoid delay in approval of materials, the Department of Transportation must receive notice as soon as possible. Please comply with the following as closely as possible: The Contract number and job limits should be the same as appears on the Special Provisions. The column headed "Contract Item No." should show all the item numbers for which the material is to be used. The column headed "Material Type" should be a description of the material and not necessarily the name of the contract item. The column headed "Name and Address of Inspection Site" should be that of the actual source of supply and not subcontractor or jobber. If the sources of all materials are not known at the beginning of a Contract, report those known. Supplemental "Notices of Materials to Be Used" should be submitted for the others as soon as possible thereafter. Do not delay submitting the original notice until all information is known. All changes in kinds and/or sources of materials to be used should be reported on supplemental "Notices of Materials to Be Used" immediately. Retain your copy and mail ail other copies to the Resident Engineer. Note: When placing orders for materials that required inspection prior to shipment, be sure to indicate on your order that State inspection is required. Page 16-66 February 1, 1998 APPENDIX A TO PART 26 -- GUIDANCE CONCERNING GOOD FAITH EFFORTS I. When, as a recipient, you establish a contract goal on a DOT-assisted contract, a bidder must, in order to be responsible and/or responsive, make good faith efforts to meet the goal. The bidder can meet this requirement in either of two ways. First, the bidder can meet the goal, documenting commitments for participation by DBE firms sufficient for this purpose. Second, even if it doesn't meet the goal, the bidder can document adequate good faith efforts. This means that the bidder must show that it took all necessary and reasonable steps to achieve a DBE goal or other requirement of this part which, by their scope, intensity, and appropriateness to the objective, could reasonably be expected to obtain sufficient DBE participation, even if they were not fully successful. · IL In any situation in which you have established a contract goal, part 26 requires you to use the good faith efforts mechanism of this part. As a recipient, it is up to you to make a fair and reasonable judgment whether a bidder that did not meet the goal made adequate good faith efforts. It is important for you to consider the quality, quantity, and intensity of the different kinds of efforts that the bidder has made. The efforts employed by the bidder should be those that one could reasonably expect a bidder to take if the bidder were actively and aggressively trying to obtain DBE participation sufficient to meet the DBE contract goal. Mere ~ro forma efforts are not good faith efforts to meet the DBE contract requirements. We emphasize, however, that your determination concerning the sufficiency of the firm's good faith efforts is a judgment call: meeting quantitative formulas is not required. III. The Department also strongly cautions you against requiring that a bidder meet a contract goal (i.e., obtain a specified amount of DBE participation) in order to be awarded a contract, even though the bidder makes an adequate good faith efforts showing. This rule specifically prohibits you from ignoring bona fide good faith efforts. IV. The following is a list of types of actions which you should consider as part of the bidder's good faith efforts to obtain DBE participation. It is not intended to be a mandatory checklist, nor is it intended to be exclusive or exhaustive. Other factors or types of efforts may be relevant in appropriate cases. A. Soliciting through all reasonable and available means (e.g. attendance at pre-bid meetings, advertising and/or written notices) the interest of all certified DBEs who have the capability to perform the work of the contract. The bidder must solicit this interest within sufficient time to allow the DBEs to respond to the solicitation. The bidder must determine with certainty if the DBEs are interested by taking appropriate steps to follow up initial solicitations. B. Selecting portions of the work to be performed by DBEs in order to increase the likelihood that the DBE goals will be achieved. This includes, where appropriate, breaking out contract work items into economically feasible units to facilitate DBE participation, even when the prime contractor might otherwise prefer to perform these work items with its own forces. C. Providing interested DBEs with adequate information about the plans, specifications, and requirements of the contract in a timely manner to assist them in responding to a solicitation. D. (1) Negotiating in good faith with interested DBEs. It is the bidder's responsibility to make a portion of the work available to DBE subcontractors and suppliers and to select those portions of the work or material needs consistent with the available DBE subcontractors and suppliers, so as to facilitate DBE participation. Evidence of such negotiation includes the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of DBEs that were considered; a description of the information provided regarding the plans and specifications for the work selected for subcontracting; and evidence as to why additional agreements could not be reached for DBEs to perform the work. (2) A bidder using good business judgment would consider a number of factors in negotiating with subcontractors, including DBE subcontractors, and would take a firm's price and capabilities as well as contract goals into consideration. However, the fact that there may be some additional costs involved in finding and using DBEs is not in itself sufficient reason for a bidder's failure to meet the contract DBE goal, as long as such costs are reasonable. Also, the ability or desire of a prime contractor to perform the work of a contract with its own organization does not relieve the bidder of the responsibility to make good faith efforts. Prime contractors are not, however, required to accept higher quotes from DBEs if the price difference is excessive or unreasonable. E. Not rejecting DBEs as being unqualified without sound reasons based on a thorough investigation of their capabilities. The contractor's standing within its industry, membership in specific groups, organizations, or associations and political or social affiliations (for example union vs. non-union employee status) are not legitimate causes for the rejection or non-solicitation of bids in the contractor's efforts to meet the project goal. F. Making efforts to assist interested DBEs in obtaining bonding, lines of credit, or insurance as required by the recipient or contractor. G. Making efforts to assist interested DBEs in obtaining necessary equipment, supplies, materials, or related assistance or services. H. Effectively using the services of available minority/women community organizations; minority/women contractors' groups; local, state, and Federal minority/women business assistance offices; and other organizations as allowed on a case-by-case basis to provide assistance in the recruitment and placement of DBEs. V. In determining whether a bidder has made good faith efforts, you may take into account the performance of other bidders in meeting the contract. For example, when the apparent successful bidder fails to meet the contract goal, but others meet it, you may reasonably raise the question of whether, with additional reasonable efforts, the apparent successful bidder could have met the goal. If the apparent successful bidder fails to meet the goal, but meets or exceeds the average DBE participation obtained by other bidders, you may view this, in conjunction with other factors, as evidence of the apparent successful bidder having made good faith efforts. APPENDIX B TO BE USED FOR DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACTS The following are hereby incorporated into the Agency's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Prografn: II Objectives/Policy Statement (§§26.1, 26.23) At the end of the first paragraph, add the following: The Agency recognizes that certain modifications are necessary to adapt the program for use in connection with design-build contracts, and has therefore established certain procedures applicable to design-build DBE contracts under the DBE Program. Public Contract Code Section 4109 requires subcontractors to be identified by the prime contractor for the subletting or subcontracting of any portion of the work in excess of one-half of 1 percent of the prime contractor's total bid. Exceptions are only in the cases of public emergency or necessity, and then only after a finding reduced to writing as a public record, of the awarding authority setting forth the facts constituting the emergency or necessity. The written public record of the awarding authority/Agency as to either emergency or necessity is attached hereto (See Appendix C for sample). XIII Monitoring and Enforcement Mechanisms (§26.37) At the end of the first paragraph below "After Contract Award", add the following paragraph: After Design-Build Contract Award As described in the Section entitled "GOOD FAITH EFFORTS" below, each proposer for an Agency design-build contract will be required to submit a DBE Performance Plan as part of a responsive proposal. Following award of a design-build contract and during both the design and construction portions of the project, the design-build contractor will be required to submit documentation, in the form of progress reports described below, to show that the design-build contractor is meeting the contract goal for the project, or if the goal is not being met, the design-build contractor must submit satisfactory evidence that it has made good faith efforts, in accordance with that Section, to meet the goal. Evidence of good faith efforts, as described in 49 CFR Part 26 Section 26.5349 and Appendix A, will be tnonitored by the Agency throughout the duration of the design-build project. At the end of the first paragraph below "Preconstmction Conference", add the following sentence: The contractor will promptly provide the Agency with the information required by the form entitled "Local Agency DBE Information" upon selection of any DBE or other subcontractor not previously identified by the design-build contractor. During the course of the contract, differences must be explained and resolved by either making corrections or requesting a substitution. At the end of the fourth paragraph below "Constmction Contract Monitoring", add the following paragraph: The contractor will provide DBE Progress Reports to the Agency with each invoice and will provide 'an annual report, on or before August 1 of each year of the design-build contract. Each report must also include a narrative summary stating whether the contractor is on target with respect to the DBE goal set forth in the design-build contract, whether the goal has been exceeded (stating the amount of the excess), or whether the contractor is behind target (stating the amount of the deficit). XVII Good Faith Efforts (§26.53) At the end of the third paragraph below "Information to be Submitted", add the following items: 7. A DBE Performance Plan containing a detailed description of the design-build contractor's planned methodology for achieving the DBE goal stated in the contract, including a description of the good faith efforts the design-build contractor intends to undertake to achieve that goal. 8. A design-build proposal must also include an affidavit that the proposer will either attain the DBE goals for the design-build contract or will exercise good faith efforts to do so. At the end of the first paragraph below "Demonstration of Good Faith Efforts", add the following sentence: · lfit is a design-build contract, each contractorproposing will be required to submit a DBE Performance Plan as part o fa responsive proposal and good faith efforts. [Signature of Local Agency Recipient's Chief Executive Officer] Date:/7_~2- I--~ This Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program for design-build contracts is accepted by: [Signature of DLAE] Date: CITY OF TEMECULA PLANS,SPECIFICATIONS, AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 (909) 694-6411 BID PACKET I - OVER $25,000 FEDERAL AID PROJECTS ONLY MOST RECENT REVISION November 22, 2000 R:~ID-DOCSW, ASTERS',Document2 CITY OF TEMECULA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE PREPARED AT THE DIRECTION OF: William G. Hughes, R.C.E. 36617 Director of Public Works/City Engineer APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney R:~I D-DOCS',MAST ERS~ocument2 CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE NOTICE iNViTING BIDS ........................................................................................................................... NB-2 INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS .................................................................................................................. lB-5 CONTRACT ............................................................................................................................................... CA-1 LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND ............................................................................................................. LM-1 PERFORMANCE BOND ........................................................................................................................... PB-1 MAINTENANCE BOND .............................................................................................................................. M-1 CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE ............................................................................... R-1 PROPOSAL ................................................................................................................................................. P-1 BID SHEET .............................................................................................................................................. P-1 SUBCONTRACTORS LiST ..................................................................................................................... P-6 STATEMENT OF TECHNICAL ABILITY AND EXPERIENCE ................................................................ P-7 BIDDER'S STATEMENT OF .................................................................................................................... P-9 PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS .............................................................................................. P-9 NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT .............................................................................................................. P-10 BIDDER'S AGREEMENT ....................................................................................................................... P-11 GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS .................................................................................................................. GS-1 SCOPE OF WORK ................................................................................................................................ GS-1 TIME OF COMPLETION ....................................................................................................................... GS-1 UTILITY REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................... GS-1 FLOW AND ACCEPTANCE OF WATER ............................................................................................. GS-3 REMOVAL OF WATER ......................................................................................................................... GS-3 TRENCH SAFETY AND SHORING EXCAVATION ............................................................................. GS-3 STANDARD SPECIFICATION .............................................................................................................. GS-5 WAGE RATES AND LABOR CODE REQUIREMENTS ....................................................................... GS-6 SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES ....................................................................................................... GS-7 SPECIAL PROVISIONS ............................................................................................................................ SP-1 TERMS, DEFINITIONS, ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS ............................................................... SP-1 SCOPE AND CONTROL OF THE WORK ............................................................................................. SP-2 CHANGES IN WORK ............................................................................................................................. SP-6 PROSECUTION, PROGRESS AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK ................................................. SP-6 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CONTRACTOR ..................................................................................... SP-7 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ............................................................................................................... TS-1 EXHIBIT "A" - INSURANCE ENDORSEMENTS & CERTIFICATES .......................................................... A-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS .[- R:~ID-DOCS~IASTERS~EWBID 3 4 CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT NOTICE INVITING BIDS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California, will receive sealed bids up to 4:00 p.m., on Thursday, the day of , 2000, in the office of the City Clerk: 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590, Post Office Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033, at which time said bids will be publicly opened and read. All of said work is to be performed in accordance with Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW00-00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE, which are available for purchase from the Public Works Department. The nonrefundable cost is $25.00 per set of Plans, Specifications and Contract Documents. The nonrefundable mailing fee is $5.00 per set (mail your check to the attention of the "Public Works Department", P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590, referencing the Project No. and Name). Telephone: (909) 694- 6411. The classification of Contractor's license required in the performance of this Contract is a Class (this Class # is also to be inserted in Paragraph 14 of "Instructions to Bidders." Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor code of the State of California, the City has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general prevailing rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification or type of workman needed to execute the contract from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's Office, City of Temecula. They are also available from the California Department of Industrial Relations' Internet web site at http://www.dir.ca.gov. The Federal minimum wage rates for this project as predetermined by the United States Secretary of Labor are set forth in the book issued for bidding purposes entitled "PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS," and in copies of this book that may be examined at the offices described above where project plans, special provisions, and proposal forms may be seen. Addenda to modify the Federal minimum wage rates, if necessary, will be issued to plan holders. Future effective general prevailing wage rates which have been predetermined and are on file with the California Department of Industrial Relations are referenced but not printed in the general prevailing wage rates. Atte[3tion is directed to the Federal minimum wage rate requirements in the book entitled "PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS," If there is a difference between the minimum wage rates predetermined by the Secretary of Labor and the general prevailing wage rates determined by the Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations for similar classifications of labor, the Contractor and subcontractors shall pay not less than the higher wage rate. The City will not accept lower State wage rates not specifically included in the Federal minimum wage determinations. This includes "helper" (or other classifications based on hours of experience) or any other classification NOT[CE INVITING BIDS NB-2 R~ID-DOCS~V~ASTERS~N EWBID 5 7 8 not appearing in the Federal wage determinations. Where Federal wage determinations do not contain the State wage rate determination otherwise available for use by the Contractor and subcontractors, the Contractor and subcontractors shall pay not less than the Federal minimum wage rate which most closely approximates the duties of the employees in question. The successful bidder shall be required to furnish a labor and materials bond and a faithful performance bond in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the amount of the Contract. Pursuant to Section 4590 of the Government Code of the State of California, the Contract will contain provisions permitting the successful bidder to substitute securities for any monies withheld by the City of Temecula to ensure performance under the Contract. Each bidder must submit the following documents with his/her sealed bid: Proposal Subcontractors List/Bidders List Statement of Technical Ability and Experience Bidder's Statement of Past Contract Disqualifications Non-Collusion Affidavit Bidder's Agreement The work to be done consists of furnishing all materials, equipment, tools, labor, and incidentals as required by the Plans, Specifications, and Contract Documents for the above stated project. The general items of work to be done hereunder consist of: *******FILL IN THE FOLLOWING ******* THIS SAME VERBIAGE GOES ON PGE GS-1 UNDER The general items of work include: 9 The Engineer's estimate for the proposed project is $ (Use the following statement if DBE goals are specified and a prebid meeting is required) A prebid meeting is scheduled for~,Prebid_T,,, ,,Prebid D,, , at ,,Prebid_L,,. This meeting is to inform DBEs of subcontracting and material supply opportunities. Bidder's attendance at this meeting will be considered in determining the bidder's good faith effort to obtain DBE participation. NOTICE INVITING BIDS NB-3 R:~BIO-DOCS',MAST E RS',N EWBID 9 10 (Use the following statement if DBE goals are specified) This project has a goal of percent disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) participation. (Use the following paragraph if no DBE goals are specified) Bidders are urged to obtain disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE) participation on this project, although there is no specific project goal for DBE participation. The City of Temecula hereby notifies all bidders that it will affirmatively insure that in any contract entered into pursuant to this advertisement, disadvantaged business enterprises will be afforded full opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation. THIS PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO THE "BUY AMERICA" PROVISIONS OF THE SURFACE TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1982 AS AMENDED BY THE INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1991. 11 12 The City Council reserves the right to reject any or all bids, to delete portions of the work, or to waive any defect or informality in any bid received. Questions pertaining to this project shall be directed to Engineer at (909) 694-6411. ,Project Dated: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk NOTICE INVITING BIDS NB-4 R:~BID-DO CS'WIASTERS"N EWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE SECURING DOCUMENTS Plans, Specifications and Contract Documents will be available for purchase at the City of Temecula, Public Works Department. The nonrefundable cost of $25.00 per set of Plans, Specifications and Contract Documents. The nonrefundable mailing fee of $5.00 per set. Telephone: (909) 694-6411. When mailing a check, please send to the attention of the Public Works Department referencing the Project No. and Name (Public Works Department, City of Temecula, P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 - 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590). DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE} This project is subject to Part 26, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations entitled "Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Department of Transportation Financial Assistance Programs." The Regulations in their entirety are incorporated herein by this reference. (Use the following through "J" if DBE goals are specified) Bidders shall be fully informed respecting the requirements of the Regulations and the City's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program developed pursuant to the Regulations; particular attention is directed to the following matters: A. A DBE must be a small business concern as defined pursuant to Section 3 of U.S. Small Business Act and relevant regulations promulgated pursuant thereto; B. A DBE may participate as a prime contractor, subcontractor, joint venture partner with a prime or subcontractor, vendor of material or supplies, or as a trucking company; C. A DBE bidder, not bidding as a joint venture with a non-DBE, will be required to document one or a combination of the following: 1. The bidder will meet the goal by performing work with its own forces. 2. The bidder will meet the goal through work performed by DBE subcontractors, suppliers or trucking companies. 3. The bidder, prior to bidding, made adequate good faith efforts to meet the goal. A DBE joint venture partner must be responsible for specific contract items of work, or portions thereof. Responsibility means actually performing, managing and supervising the work with its own forces. The DBE joint venture partner must share in the capital contribution, control, management, risks and profits of the joint venture. The DBE joint venturer must submit the joint venture agreement with the proposal or the DBE INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER lB-5 R:~BID-DOCS~IAST E R S',N EWBID Information form required in the Section entitled "Submission of DBE Information" of these special provisions; A DBE must perform a commercially useful function, i.e., must be responsible for the execution of a distinct element of the work and must carry out its responsibility by actually performing, managing and supervising the work; DBEs must be certified by either the California Department of Transportation, or by a participating agency which certifies in conformance with Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 26, as of the date of bid opening. It is the Contractor's responsibility to verify that DBEs are certified. Listings of certified DBEs are available from the following sources: 1. The Department's DBE Directory, which is published quarterly. This Directory may' be obtained from the Department of Transportation, Materiel Operations Branch, Publication Distribution Unit, 1900 Royal Oaks Drive, Sacramento, California 95815, Telephone: (916) 445-3520; 2. The Department's Electronic Information Bulletin Board Service, which is accessible by modem and is updated'weekly. The Bulletin Board may be accessed by first contacting the Department's Business Enterprise Program at Telephone: (916) 227-8937 and obtaining a user identification and password; 3.The Department's web site at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep/index.htm; G. Credit for materials or supplies purchased from DBEs will be as follows: 1. If the materials or supplies are obtained from a DBE manufacturer, 100 percent of the cost of the materials or supplies will count toward the DBE goal. A DBE manufacturer is a firm that operates or maintains a factory or establishment that produces, on the premises, the materials, supplies, articles, or equipment required under the contract and of the general character described by the specifications. 2. If the materials or supplies are pumhased from a DBE regular dealer, 60 percent of the cost of the materials or supplies will count toward the DBE goal. A DBE regular dealer is a firm that owns, operates, or maintains a store, warehouse, or other establishment in which the materials, supplies, articles or equipment of the general character described by the specifications and required under the contract are bought, kept in stock, and regularly sold or leased to the public in the usual course of business. To be a DBE regular dealer, the firm must be an established, regular business that engages, as its principal business and under its own name, in the purchase and sale or lease of the products in question. A person may be a DBE regular dealer in such bulk items as petroleum products, steel, cement, gravel, stone, or asphalt without owning, operating, or maintaining a place of business as provided in this paragraph G.2. if the person both owns and operates distribution equipment for the products. Any supplementing of regular dealers' own distribution equipment shall be by a long-term lease agreement and not on an ad hoc or contract-by-contract basis. Packagers, brokers, manufacturers' representatives, or other persons who arrange or expedite transactions are not DBE regular dealers within the meaning of this paragraph G.2. 3. Credit for materials or supplies purchased from a DBE which is neither a manufacturer nor a regular dealer will be limited to the entire amount of fees or commissions charged for assistance in the procurement of the materials and supplies, or fees or transportation charges for the delivery of materials or supplies required on a job site, provided the fees are reasonable and not excessive as compared with fees charged for similar services. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER lB-6 R:~BID -DOCS'tMASTERS'~!EWB[D H. Credit for DBE trucking companies will be as follows: 1. The DBE must be responsible for the management and supervision of the entire trucking operation for which it is responsible on a particular contract, and there cannot be a contrived arrangement for the purpose of meeting the DBE goal; 2. The DBE must itself own and operate at least one fully licensed, insured, and operational truck used on the contract; 3. The DBE receives credit for the total value of the transportation services it provides on the contract using trucks its owns, insures, and operates using drivers it employs; 4. The DBE may lease trucks from another DBE firm, including an owner-operator who is certified as a DBE. The DBE who leases trucks from another DBE receives credit for the total value of the transportation services the lessee DBE provides on the contract; 5. The DBE may also lease trucks from a non-DBE firm, including an owner- operator. The DBE who leases trucks from a non-DBE is entitled to credit only for the fee or commission it receives as a result of the lease arrangement. The DBE does not receive credit for the total value of the transportation services provided by the lessee, since these services are not provided by a DBE; 6. For the purposes of this paragraph H, a lease must indicate that the DBE has exclusive use of and control over the truck. This does not preclude the Leased truck from working for others during the term of the lease with the consent of the DBE, so long as the lease gives the DBE absolute priority for use of the leased truck. Leased trucks must display the name and identification number of the DBE. I. Noncompliance by the Contractor with the requirements of the regulations constitutes a breach of this contract and may result in termination of the contract or other appropriate remedy for a breach of this contract; J. Bidders are encouraged to use services offered by financial institutions owned and controlled by DBEs. (USE THE FOLLOWING IF NO DBE GOALS ARE SPECIFIED) It is the policy of the City that disadvantaged business enterprises (DBEs), as defined in Part 26, Title 49 CFR, shall be encouraged to participate in the performance of contracts financed in whole or in part with Federal Funds. The Contractor should ensure that DBEs, as defined in Part 26, Title 49 CFR, have the opportunity to participate in the performance of this contract and shall take all necessary and reasonable steps, as set forth in Part 26, Title 49 CFR, for this assurance. The Contractor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of subcontracts. Failure to carry out the requirements of this paragraph shall constitute a breach of contract and may result in termination of this contract or other remedy the City/County may deem appropriate. Bidders shall be fully informed respecting the requirements of the Regulations and are urged to obtain DBE participation in this project, although there is no specific goal for DBE participation. Caltrans has engaged the services of a contractor to provide supportive services to contractors and subcontractors to assist in obtaining DBE participation on federally funded construction projects. Bidders and potential subcontractors should check the Caltrans website at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep to verify the current availability of this service. ~NSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER lB-7 R:~BID-DOCS',MASTER S~ EWBID (USE THE FOLLOWING SECTION IF DBE GOALS ARE SPECIFIED) 2.1 DBE GOAL FOR THIS PROJECT The City has established the following goal for Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation for this project: Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE): percent Caltrans has engaged the services of a contractor to provide supportive services to contractors and subcontractors to assist in obtaining DBE participation on federally funded construction projects. Bidders and potential subcontractors should check the Caltrans website at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep to verify the current availability of this service. (Use the following section If DBE goals are specified) 2.2 SUBMISSION OF DBE INFORMATION The required DBE information shall be submitted on the "LOCAL AGENCY BIDDER - DBE INFORMATION" form included in the "PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS" book. If the DBE information is not submitted with the bid, the DBE Information form shall be removed from the documents prior to submitting the bid. It is the bidder's responsibility to make enough work available to DBEs and to select those portions of the work or material needs consistent with the available DBEs to meet the goal for DBE participation or to provide information to establish that, prior to bidding, the bidder made adequate good faith efforts to do so. If DBE information is not submitted with the bid, the apparent successful bidder (Iow bidder), the second Iow bidder and the third Iow bidder shalt submit DBE information to the City of Temecula address so the information is received by the City no later than 4:00 p.m. on the fourth day, not including Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, following bid opening. DBE information sent by U.S. Postal Service certified mail with return receipt and certificate of mailing and mailed on or before the third day, not including Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, following bid opening will be accepted even if it is received after the fourth day following bid opening. Failure to submit the required DBE information by the time specified will be grounds for finding the bid or proposal non-responsive. Other bidders need not submit DBE information unless requested to do so by the City. The bidder's DBE information shall establish that good faith efforts to meet the DBE goal have been made. To establish good faith efforts, the bidder shall demonstrate that the goal will be met or that, prior to bidding, adequate good faith efforts to meet the goal were made. Bidders are cautioned that even though their submittal indicates they will meet the stated DBE goal, their submittal should also include their adequate good faith efforts information along with their DBE goal information to protect their eligibility for award of the contract in the event the City, in its review, finds that the goal has not been met. The bidder's DBE information shall include the names, addresses and phone numbers of DBE firms that will participate, with a complete description of work or supplies to be provided by each, the dollar value of each DBE transaction, and a written confirmation from the DBE that it is participating in the contract. A copy of the DBE's quote will serve as written confirmation that the INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER lB-8 R:~BID-DOCS'~IASTERS",NEWBID DBE is participating in the contract. When 100 percent of a contract item of work is not to be performed or furnished by a DBE, a description of the exact portion of that work to be performed or furnished by that DBE shall be included in the DBE information, including the planned location of that work. The work that a DBE prime contractor has committed to performing with its own forces as welt as the work that it has committed to be performed by DBE subcontractors, suppliers and trucking companies will count toward the goal. The information necessary to establish the bidder's adequate good faith efforts to meet the DBE goal should include: A. The names and dates of each publication in which a request for DBE participation for this project was placed by the bidder. B. The names and dates of written notices sent to certified DBEs soliciting bids for this project and the dates and methods used for following up initial solicitations to determine with certainty whether the DBEs were interested. C. The items of work which the bidder made available to DBE firms, including, where appropriate, any breaking down of the contract work items (including those items normally performed by the bidder with its own forces) into economically feasible units to facilitate DBE participation. It is the bidder's responsibility to demonstrate that sufficient work to meet the DBE goal was made available to DBE firms. D. The names, addresses and phone numbers of rejected DBE firms, the firms selected for that work, and the reasons for the bidder's choice. E. Efforts made to assist interested DBEs in obtaining bonding, lines of credit or insurance, and any technical assistance or information related to the plans, specifications and requirements for the work which was provided to DBEs. F. Efforts made to assist interested DBEs in obtaining necessary equipment, supplies, materials, or related assistance or services, excluding supplies and equipment the DBE subcontractor purchases or leases from the prime contractor or its affiliate. G. The names of agencies contacted to provide assistance in contacting, recruiting and using DBE firms. H. Any additional data to support a demonstration of good faith efforts. 3. PROPOSAL To receive consideration, bids shall be made in accordance with the following instructions: Bids shall be made on the proposal form contained herein. All items shall be properly filled in; numbers shall be stated both in writing and in figures. The signatures shall be in longhand. The completed form shall be without alterations, interlineations, or erasures. Bids shall be submitted only on the items of bid stated in the Specifications; bids upon other bases will not be considered. Bids that do not reference all addenda or that are not submitted on the prescribed forms may be rejected. The City reserves the right to accept bids on work and alternatives listed in the bid form in sum total or individually or in any combination, unless the bid form makes specific provision to the contrary. d. Unless called for, alternative bids will not be considered. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER IS-9 R:~BID- DOCS'~V~ST ER S~I~BID Modification of bids already submitted, will be considered if received at the office designated in the invitation for bids by the time set for opening of bids. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 4100 through 4113 of the Public Contracts Code of the State of California, every bidder shall, in his/her bid, set forth: The name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the bidder in or about the work in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent of the bidder's total bid. ii. The portion of the work which will be done by each such subcontractor. In the event that alternative bids are called for and bidder intends to use different or additional subcontractors on the alternative or alternatives, he shall fill out additional forms of the Subcontractors List and shall indicate on such forms whether they apply to the base or alternative bids. If the bidder fails to specify a subcontractor for any portion of the work to be performed under the Contract in excess of one-half of one percent of the bidder's total bid, he agrees to perform that portion himself. The successful bidder shall not, without the consent of the City, either: Substitute any person, firm, or corporation as subcontractor in place of the subcontractor designated in the original bid, or ii. Permit any subcontract to be assigned or transferred or allow it to be performed by anyone other than the original subcontractor listed in the bid. Bids shall be accompanied by a certified or cashier's check, or an acceptable bidder's bond for an amount not less than ten percent (10%) of the bid, made payable to the City of Temecula, California. Said check or bond shall be given as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into a Contract if awarded the work, and in case of refusal or failure to enter into said Contract, the check or bond, as the case may be, shall be forfeited to the City of Temecula, California. Before submitting a bid, bidders shall carefully examine the Plans, Specifications, and Contract, shall visit the site of work, and shall fully inform themselves as to all existing conditions and limitations, and shall include in the bid a sum to cover the cost of all items included in the Contract. Bidders shall give unit prices for each and all of the items set forth. No aggregate bids will be considered. The bidder shall set forth for each item of work, in clearly legible figures, a unit item price and a total for the item in the respective spaces provided for this purpose. The quantities listed in the Bid Sheets are supplied to give an indication of the general scope of work, but the accuracy of figures is not guaranteed and the bidder shall make his/her own estimates from the Plans and Specifications. In case of a variation between the unit price and the totals shown by the bidder, the unit price will be considered to be the bid. Bids and modifications thereof, if any, shall be delivered to the office of the City Clerk, City of Temecula, County of Riverside, California, on or before the day and hour set for the opening of bids in the Notice inviting Bids, enclosed in a sealed INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER lB-lO R:~iD-DOCS'~ViASTERS'~IEWBID envelope, and bearing the Project No. and Title of the work and the name of the bidder. MODIFICATIONS AFTER BID OPENING A modification which is received from an otherwise successful bidder and which makes the terms of the bid more favorable to the City will be considered at any time it is received and may thereafter be accepted. WITHDRAWAL OF BIDS Bids may be withdrawn by written request received from bidders prior to the time set for opening of bids. INTERPRETATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS Should a bidder find discrepancies in, or omissions from the Plans or Specifications, or should he be in doubt as to their meaning, he shall at`once notify the City Engineer. Should it be found that the point in question is not clearly and fully set forth, a written addendum will be sent to all persons receiving a set of documents. The City will not be responsible for any oral instructions. ADDENDA OR BULLETINS Any addenda or information issued during the time of bidding, or forming a part of the documents loaned to the bidder for the preparation of his/her bid, shall be covered in the bid and shall be made a part of the Contract. OPENING BIDS Bids will be publicly opened and read, at the time and date set in the Notice Inviting Bids, in the City Clerk's Office, City of Temecula. AWARD OR REJECTION OF BIDS The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, accept or reject alternates, and waive irregularities or informalities in the bid and bidding. (Use the following paragraph if NO DBE goals are specified) The award of the Contract, if it be awarded, will be to the lowest responsible bidder whose proposal complies with the requirements prescribed. (Use the following paragraph if DBE goals are specified) The award of the contract, if it be awarded, will be to the lowest responsible bidder whose proposal complies with all the requirements prescribed and who has met the goal for DBE participation or has demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the City/County, adequate good faith efforts to do so. Meeting the goal for DBE participation or demonstrating to the satisfaction of the City/County, adequate good faith efforts to do so is a condition for being eligible for award of contract. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER lB-/1 R:~BID-DOCS'~,~STERS"N EWBID 10. All bids will be compared on the basis of the Engineer's estimate of the quantities of work to be done. CONTRACT BONDS 10.1 General. Before execution of the Contract by the City, the Contractor shall file with the Engineer surety bonds satisfactory to the City in the amounts and for the purposes noted below. Bonds shall be duly executed by an admitted corporate surety, authorized to issue such bonds in the State of California and secured through an authorized agent with an office in California. The Contractor shall pay all bond premiums, costs, and incidentals. Each bond shall be signed by both the Contractor and surety, and the signature of the authorized agent of the surety shall be notarized. The Contractor shall provide two good and sufficient surety bonds. Surety companies shall familiarize themselves with all of the conditions and provisions of the Contract, and shall waive the right of special notification of change or modification of the Contract, or of any other act or acts by the City or its authorized agents under the terms of the Contract. Failure to notify the surety companies of change shall in no way relieve them of their obligations under the Contract. 10.1.2 10.1.3 Payment Bond. The Payment Bond (material and labor) shall be for not less than one hundred percent (1OO%) of the Contract price to satisfy claims of material suppliers and of mechanics and laborers employed by them on the work. The bond shall be maintained by the Contractor in full force and effect until the completed work is accepted by the City and until all claims for materials and labor are paid. Faithful Performance Bond. The Faithful Performance Bond shall be for one hundred percent (100%) of the Contract price to guaranty faithful performance of all work, within the time prescribed in a manner satisfactory to the City, and that all materials and workmanship will be free from original or developed defects. 10.1.4 Bond Renewal and Extension. Should any bond become insufficient, the Contractor immediately shall replace the bond with a substitute upon request from the City, and the effective date of the bond shall be from the commencement of work on the project. Should any surety at any time be unsatisfactory to the City, notice will be given the Contractor to that effect. No further payment shall be deemed due or will be made under the Contract, until a new surety shall qualify and be accepted by the City. Changes in the work or extension of time, made pursuant to the Contract, shall in no way release the Contractor or surety from their obligations. Notice of such changes or extensions shall be waived by the surety. 1 1. SPECIAL NOTICE INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER IB-12 R:~BID-DOCS~",~ASTERS"N EWBID Bidders are required to inform themselves fully of the conditions relating to construction and labor under which the work will be performed, and the Contractor must employ, so far as possible, such methods and means in the carrying out of its work as will not cause any interruption or interference with any other Contractor. 12. BIDDERS INTERESTED IN MORE THAN ONE BID No person, firm, or corporation shall be allowed to make or file or be interested in more than one bid, as Prime Contractor for the same work. A person, firm, or corporation who has submitted a sub-proposal to a bidder, or who has quoted prices on materials to .a bidder, is not hereby disqualified from submitting a sub-proposal or quoting prices to other bidders. 13. BIDS TO BE LEFT ON DEPOSIT Unless otherwise required by law, no bid, nor any part thereof, may be withdrawn by the bidder for a period of sixty (60) calendar days after the opening of the bids. 14. MANDATORY NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT The City will, before any award of the Contract is madel require any bidder to whom it may make an award of the principal Contract, to execute a Non-Collusion Affidavit. The City may require that the principal Contractor shall, before awarding any subcontract, secure from the proposed subcontractor a Non-Collusion Affidavit. 15. CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE No bid may be considered from a Contractor who, at the time the bids ara opened, is not licensed to perform the project in accordance with Division 3 Chapter 9, of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California. In the event of a dispute as to the classification of license required, the decision of the Contractor's State License board shall prevail. This requirement is not a mere formality, and it will not be waived by the City. The Classification of Contractor's license required in the performance of this Contract is a Class (take this from Paragraph 3 of Notice Inviting Bids). 16. PERMITS The City will obtain building, plumbing, electrical, and encroachment permits necessary for the construction of the work herein set forth. The Contractor shall obtain and pay for all other permits, including but not limited to Caltrans permits and City business licenses. 17. PREVAILING WAGES The Contractor is hereby notified that this project is subject to Federal and/or State prevailing wage guidelines as referenced in the Wage Guideline sections of the Contact Specifications. Where both Federal and State Guidelines are listed, the greater of the two listed general prevailing wages shall apply. The prime Contractor and all subcontractors INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER lB-13 R:~BID-DOCS',MASTERS~EWBID 18. are required to pay their laborers and mechanics employed under this Contract, a wage not less than the wage applicable for their work classification, as specified in the wage guidelines contained in the specifications. TIME LIMITS OF WORK The work to be performed shall be completed within ( ) working days after execution of contract and Notice to Proceed has been issued. 19. WARRANTY 20. 21. 22. All work, except landscaping, shall be warranted for a period of one (1) year from the date of acceptance by the City. The Contractor shall promptly make all needed repairs arising out of defective materials, workmanship and equipment. Landscaping shall be guaranteed during the 90-day maintenance period. The City is hereby authorized to make such repairs if within ten (10) days after giving written notice to the Contractor, or its agent, the Contractor should fail to make or undertake with due diligence the aforesaid repairs; provided, however, that in case of an emergency, where, in the opinion of the City, delay would cause serious loss or damage, repairs may be made without notice being sent to the Contractor, and the Contractor sha!l pay the costs thereof. The Contractor shall, upon completion of the Contract and prior to filing of the Notice of Completion, post a Maintenance Bond in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the Contract value. The Maintenance Bond shall remain in full force and effect through the guaranty period of one (1) year. EXECUTION OF CONTRACT The Contract shall be signed by the successful bidder and returned, together with the contact bonds and insurance certificate, within ten (10) working days of the date of the Notice To Award. ASSIGNMENT The performance of the Contract may not be assigned, except upon the written consent of the Engineer. Consent will not be given to any proposed assignment which would relieve the original Contractor or its surety of their responsibilities under the Contract, nor will the Engineer consent to any assignment of a part of the work under the Contract. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions or difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure on initial investigations or reports prepared by CITY for purposes of letting this Contract out to bid, will be accepted as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the CONTRACTOR to fulfill in every detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER IB-14 R:~BID-DOCS~IASTERS~IEWBID 23.0 SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR Corporations: The signature must contain the name of the corporation, must be signed by the President and Secretary or Assistant Secretary, and the corporate seal must be affixed. Other persons may sign for the corporation in lieu of the above if a certified copy of a Resolution of the Corporate Board of Directors so authorizing them to do so, is on file in the City Clerk's office. Partnerships: The names of all persons comprising the partnership or co-partnership must be stated. The bid must be signed by all partners comprising the partnership unless proof in the form of a certified copy of a certificate of partnership acknowledging the signer to be a general partner is presented to the City Clerk, in which case the General Partner may sign. Joint Ventures: Bids submitted as joint ventures must so state and be signed by each joint venturer. Individuals: Bids submitted by individuals must be signed by the bidder, unless an up-to-date power of attorney is on file in the City Clerk's office, in which case said person may sign for individual. 24. SUBSTITUTED SECURITY In accordance with Section 22300 of the Public Contracts Code, CONTRACTOR may substitute securities for any monies withheld by the CITY to insure performance under the Contract. At the request and expense of the CONTRACTOR, securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the CITY or with a State or Federally chartered bank or an escrow agent who shall pay such monies to the CONTRACTOR upon notification by CITY of CONTRACTOR's satisfactory completion of the Contract. The type of securities deposited and the method of release shall be approved by the City Attorney's office. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDER IB-15 R:',BID -DOCS',MAST E RS',N EWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the day of ,2000 __ ,by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and , hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WlTNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as foltows: ,8, CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents, to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW00- 00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction., including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated General. Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW00-00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building New, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, California 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the General Specifications, Special Provision, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT NO. PW00- 00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents, the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over, and be used in lieu of, such conflicting portions. Where the Contract Documents describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. CONTRACT CA-1 R:~ID-DOCS'~iAST E R S~Docume nt2 The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract. SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the following: PROJECT NO. PW00-00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision, and subject to the approval of CITY or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHDULE. The CITY agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: DOLLARS and CENTS ($ ), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRAcToR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed ( working days, commencing with delivery of a Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY. CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the City Council. PAYMENTS LUMP SUM BID SCEHDULE: Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to the City Engineer a schedule of values allocated to the various portions of the work, prepared in such form and supported by such data to substantiate its accuracy as the City Engineer may require. This schedule, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be used as the basis for reviewing the CONTRACTOR's payment requests. UNIT PRICE BID SCHEDULE: Pursuant to Section 20104.50 of the Public Contract Code, within thirty (30) days after submission of a payment request to the CITY, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid a sum equal to ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed according to the bid schedule. Payment request forms shall be submitted on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be CONTRACT CA-2 R:'~ID -DOCS'~t4AST E R S~Document2 made sixty (60) days after acceptance of final payment and the CONTRACTOR filing a one-year Warranty and an Affidavit of Final Release with the CITY on forms provided by the CITY. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work. Interest shall be paid on all undisputed payment requests not paid within thirty (30) days pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contract Code Section 7107 is hereby incorporated by reference. In accordance with Section 9-3.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and Section 9203 of the Public Contract Code, a reduction in the retention may be requested by the Contractor for review and approval by the Engineer if the progress of the construction has been satisfactory, and the project is more than 50% complete. The Council hereby delegates its authority to reduce the retention to the Engineer. WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the CITY shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty pedormance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following schedule: CONTRACT AMOUNT $25,000 0 $75,000 RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE 180 days 3% $75,00 - $500,000 180 days $2,250 + 2% of amount in excess of $75,000 Over $500,000 One Year $10,750 + 1% of amount in excess of $500,000 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for unforeseeable delays beyond the control of, and without the fault or negligence of, the CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly notify CITY of any such delay. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the CONTRACT CA-3 R:~BID.DO CS'~IASTERS~Docu rnent2 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. payment, the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the CITY related to the payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit, release, and indemnity agreement with each claim for payment. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Section 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone. CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the CITY for any and all costs incurred by the CITY as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The CITY shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the CITY. GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager, its affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an CONTRACT CA~ R:~ID-DOCSW, ASTERS~ocumenE 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actua~ or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, ' including all relevant information with respect thereto, to CITY. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers. CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be made within a reasonable time after completion of the work. DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin, color, sex age, or handicap. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Contractor understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Contract and also govern the interpretation of this Contract. Any litigation concerning this Contract shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event of litigation between the parties concerning this Contract, the prevailing party as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temecula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the contract of the proceeds thereof during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. Furthermore, the contractodconsultant covenants and agrees to their knowledge that no board member, officer or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual, financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the contracting party other than the City of Temecula, and that if any such interest comes to the knowledge of either party at any time, a full and complete disclosure of all such information will be made, in writing, to the other party or parties, even if such interest would not be considered a conflict of interest under Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) or Article 4.6 (commencing with Section 1220) of Division 4 of Title I of the Government Code of the State of California. ADA REQUIREMENTS. By signing this contract, Contractor certifies that the Contractor is in total compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101- 336, as amended. CONTRACT CA-5 R:~BID.DO CS'tMASTERS~ocume nt2 23. WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and to the CITY addressed as follows: Witiiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 CONTRACT CA-6 R:~BID-DOCS'tMASTERS~Docu ment2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR Name Address City Phone By: Print or type NAME Print or type TITLE CITY OF TEMECULA By: , Mayor DATED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-7 R:~BID.DO CS',J,4AST E RS~ocument2 CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BOND NO. LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0..O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE KNOW ALI. PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT, WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has awarded to CONTRACTOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS Hereinafter called "Contractor," a contract for the work described as follows: PROJECT NO. PW00-00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE, hereinafter called "Contract," and WHEREAS, said Contractor is required by the provisions of Sections 3247-3252 of the Civil Code to furnish a bond in connection with said Contract, as hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the undersigned Contractor, as Principal, and NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, hereinafter called "Surety," are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, and other persons employed in the performance of the aforesaid Contract and referred to in Title 15 of the Civil Code, in the penal sum of DOLLARS and CENTS ($ ), lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than one hundred (100%) of the estimated amount payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDiTiON OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that, if said .Contractor, or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, or subcontractors, shall fail to pay for any materials, provisions, provender or other supplies, or teams, implements or machinery, used in, upon, for, or about the performance of the work under the Contract to be done, or for any work or labor thereon of any kind or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to such work or labor, as required by the provisions of Chapter 7 of Title 5 of Part 4 of Divisien 3 of the Civil Code, and provided that the claimant shall have compiled with the provisions of said Civil Code, the Surety shall pay for the same in an amount not exceeding the sum specified in this bond, otherwise the above obligation shall be void. LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND LM-1 R:~BID-DOCSff,~ASTERS~NEWBID As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. This bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Section 3181 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond, and shall also cover payment for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of the Contractor or its subcontractors pursuant to Section 13020 of the Unemployment Insurance Code. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond. The Surety hereby waives notice of any such change, extension of time, a~teration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on ,2000. (Seal) By: (Name) (Title) By: (Name) (Title) By: (Name) (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney LABOR AND MATERIALS BOND LM-2 R:~ID.DOCS'~,,tASTERS~IEWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BOND NO. PERFORMANCE BOND FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE THAT, WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California, entered into a contract dated ,2000, hereinafter called "Contract," with: NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR hereinafter called "Principal," for the work described as follows: PROJECT NO. PW00-00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE; and WHEREAS, the said Principal is required under the terms of said Contract to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Principal, and NAME OF SURETY duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, hereinafter called "Surety," are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula in the penal sum of DOLLARS and CENTS ($ ), lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that, if the Principal, its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and agreements in the said Contract, and in any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on its part to be kept and performed, at the time and in the manner therein specified, in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers and agents, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain infull force and virtue. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. PERFORMANCE PB-I R:~ID-DOCSV, IASTERS~N EWBID The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications. ~N WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on ,2000. (Seal) SURETY PRINCIPAL By: (Name) (Title) By: (Name) (Title) By: (Name) (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney PERFORMANCE PB-2 R:~BID-DOCSW, ASTER S~ EWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MAINTENANCE BOND PRO~IECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: a NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S , hereinafter called Principal, and (fill in whether a Corporation, Partnership or individual) NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of DOLLARS and CENTS ($ ) in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten (10%) of'the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the day of , 2000, a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PW00- 00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE. WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of one (1) year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER, against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period; and WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and was the final estimate approved on ., 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work, and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract, or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this instrument shall be void. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. MAINTENANCE BOND M-1 R:~BID- DOCS'~k. IAST ERS',N EWB[D The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications. Signed and sealed this day of ,2000. (Seal) SURETY PRINCIPAL By: By: (Name) (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney (Name) (Title) By: (Name) (Title) MAINTENANCE BOND M-2 R:~iD -DOCS~MASTERS~IEWBID CITYOF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE This is to certify that , (hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW00-00, INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE, situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute Pursuant to Public Contracts Code {}7200, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. CONTRACTOR Dated: By: Signature Print Name and Title RELEASE R-1 R:~BID 'DO CS'~IASTERS'~IEWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PROPOSAL BID SHEET FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE DATE: TO THE CITY CLERK OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA: BIDDER: Contact: Firm Name: Address: Phone: The undersigned hereby proposes and agrees to furnish any and all materials, labor, and services for the following: PROJECT NO. PW00-00 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE All in accordance with Plans and Specifications on file at the office of the City Clerk, City of Temecula. PROPOSAL P-I R:~ID~DOCS~CASTERS~EWBID PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE SCHEDULE OF PRICES - BASE BID TOTAL AMOUNT OF BASE BID: ($ __.) DOLLARS AND CENTS PROPOSAL P-2 R:~BID 'DOCS~,MAST E R S~!EWBID PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE SCHEDULE OF PRICES - ADDITIVE BID i'rEM ' ' TOTAL AMOUNT OF ADDITIVE BID: ($ __) DOLLARS AND CENTS PROPOSAL P-3 R:~JD-DOCSW, ASTERS~IEWBID TOTAL AMOUNT OF BASE BID AND ADDITIVE BID: DOLLARS and CENTS ($ ) The undersigned hereby certifies that he/she has an appropriate license, issued by the State of California to provide this work; that such license will be in full force and effect throughout the duration of construction; and that any and all subcontractors to be employed on this project will be similarly licensed. Dated: California Contractor's License No. CONTRACTOR Signature Print or Type Name and Title The above bid proposal includes Addenda No's REJECTION OF BIDS: The undersigned agrees that the City of Temecula reserves the right to reject any or all bids, and reserves the right to waive informalities in a bid or bids not affected by law, if to do so seems to best serve the public interest. TIME: if the proposal is accepted, the undersigned agrees to execute the required agreement and furnish the required bonds within ten (10) working days from the date of signing of this Contract. BID DEPOSIT: There is enclosed herewith, a certified check or surety bond in the sum of ten percent (10%) of the base DOLLARS and CENTS ($ ), made payable to the City of Temecula, and the undersigned agrees that in case of his/her failure to execute the necessary contract and furnish the required bonds, the certified check or surety bond, the money payable thereon, shall be and remain the property of the City of Temecula. NOTE: The estimated quantities listed in the Proposal Bid Sheet(s) are supplied to give an indication of the general scope of work, but the accuracy of these figures is not guaranteed and Bidder shall make his/her own estimates from the drawings. In case of a variation between the unit price and the totals shown by Bidder, the unit price will be considered to be the bid. PROPOSAL P..4 R:',BIO- DO CS~,'IASTERS"N EWBIO The unit price or lump sum prices to be paid for the items listed in the Proposal Bid Sheet shall include full compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools, and equipment, and doing all work involved in furnishing and installing the materials complete and in p~ace, in accordance with the details as shown on the Plans and as specified herein. Any items shown on the Plans, but not included in the bid items, shall be considered as appurtenant items. All costs shall be included within the various items of the Contractor's bid. PROPOSAL P-5 R:~ID-DOCS~tASTERS~NEWBID i_o CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STATEMENT OF TECHNICAL ABILITY AND EXPERIENCE FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE The Bidder is required to state what work of a similar character to that included in the proposed Contract he/she has successfully performed, especially for public agencies, and give references which will enable the City to judge his/her responsibility, experience, skill, and business and financial standing. Detail any involvement, past or current, relative to litigation or other disputes, if any, concerning Bidder's performance. Date Signature of Bidder PROPOSAL P-7 R:~ID-DOCS'~ASTERS~N EWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BIDDER'S STATEMENT OF PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE The Bidder is required to state any and all instances of being disqualified, removed, or other wise prevented from bidding on or completing any contract for construction. 1. Have you ever been disqualified from any contract? Yes No 2. If yes, explain the circumstances: Date Signature of Bidder PROPOSAL P-9 R:~I D -DOCS'WIASTERS'~ EWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT TO BE EXECUTED BY BIDDER AND SUBMI'I-rED WITH BID PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE State of California ) County of Riverside )ss City of Temecula ) , being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he or she is of , the party making the foregoing bid; that the bid is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the bidder has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other bidder to put in a false or sham bid, and has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any bidder or anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone shall refrain from bidding; that the bidder has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone, to fix the bid price of the bidder or any other bidder, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the contract of anyone interested in the proposed contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and, further, that the bidder has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his/her bid price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged the information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid depository, or any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid. Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of ,2000 By: Notary Public Title Date: PROPOSAL P-lO R:',BID-DOCS',MAST ERS~ EWBiD CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BIDDER'S AGREEMENT PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE The undersigned also agrees as follows: FIRST: Within ten (10) working days after the date of the Notice to Award of Contract, to execute the Contract, and to furnish to the City of Temecula, two (2) satisfactory bonds in the amounts specified in the Notice Inviting Bids guaranteeing the faithful performance of the work and payment of bills. SECOND: To begin work within ten (10) calendar days after the date specified in the Notice to Proceed. Accompanying this proposal is cash, a cashier's check, or a cedified check of a bidder's bond for not less than ten percent (10%) of the total amount of the bid payable to the City which is to be forfeited, as liquidated damages, if, in the event the Contractor does not execute the Contract and furnish satisfactory bonds under the conditions and within the time specified in this proposal, otherwise said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond is to be returned to the undersigned. Within fifteen (15) calendar days after award of the Contract, the City will return the bidder's bond accompanying such proposal not considered in making the award. All other bidder's bonds will be held until the Contract has been finally executed. They will then be returned to the respective bidders whose proposal they accompany. BIDDER'S NAME BIDDER'S ADDRESS IMPORTANT NOTICE: If bidder is a corporation, state legal name of corporation and names of the president, secretary, treasurer, and manager; if co-partnership, state true name of firm and names of all individual co-partners composing firm; or, if individual, state first and last names in full. Contractor is licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of Contractors, LICENSE NO. Officer's Signature Title Date Officer's Signature Title Date Officer's Signature Title Date Signature and title of the officer(s) set forth above shall be authorized to sign contracts on behalf of the corporation, co-partnership, or individual. If signature is by an agent, other than an officer of the corporation or a member of a partnership, a Power of Attorney must be on file with the City prior to or at time of bid opening; otherwise, the bid will be subject to rejection by City Council. PROPOSAL P-11 R:~I D-DOCS~,~ASTE RS~IEWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE SCOPE OF WORK The work to be done consists of furnishing all materials, equipment, tools, labor and incidentals as required by the Contract Documents to construct for the above-stated project. The general items of work include: * * * * * * * FILL IN THIS SECTION * * * * * * * * VERBIAGE IDENTICAL TO PARAGRAPH 8 OF "NOTICE INVITING BIDS" Be sure to specify "Base Bid" and/or "Additive Bid" TIME OF COMPLETION The Contractor shall complete all work in every detail within the time limits specified in the Contract. UTILITY REQUIREMENTS The Contractor is advised of the existence of the utility notification service provided by UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT (USA). USA member utilities will provide the Contractor with the precise locations of their substructures in the construction area when the Contractor gives at least two (2) working days notice to the Underground Service Alert by calling (800) 422- 4133. CONTRACTOR shall contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4216.2 The Contractor shall notify the following agencies at least two (2) working days in advance of excavating around any of their structures. The utility companies listed below can be contacted as indicated. Southern California Gas Company 1981 W. Lugonia Avenue P.O. Box 3003 Redlands, CA 92373 Attn: James Ming, Planning Associate (909) 335-7730 / (909) 335-7827 GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS GS-1 R:~ID-DOCS'iMASTERS~EWBID General Telephone 150 S. Juanita St. Hemet, CA 92543 Attn: Jeff Haser, Senior Designer (909) 929-9485 / (909) 929-9438 Southern California Edison Company 26100 Menifee Road Romoland, CA 92585 Attn: Rudy Bargas (w/o 1-15) or Pamela Bierl (e/o 1-15) (909) 928-8272 (909) 928-8272 Rancho California Water District 42135 Winchester Road Temecula, CA 92591 Attn: Bud Jones, Development Engineering Manager (909) 296-6900 Eastern Municipal Water District P.O. Box 8300 Perris, CA 92572-8300 Attn: Chuck Schmidt (909) 928-3777 ext 4478, FAX (909) 928-6146 Adelphia 4077 West Stetson Hemet, CA 92545 Attn: Joe Salters, Engineer (909) 766-4270 Metropolitan Water District of So. California 700 N. Alameda St. (Los Angeles 90012-2944) P.O. Box 54153 Los Angeles, CA 90054-0153 Attn: Kieran M. Callanan (213) 217-7474 Underground Service Alert (USA) 1-800-422-4133 The California Public Utilities Commission mandates that, in the interest of public safety, mainline gas valves be maintained in a manner to be readily accessible and in good operating condition. The Contractor shall notify the Southern California Gas Company's Headquarters Planning Office at (714) 634-3258 at least two (2) working days prior to the start of construction. UTILITY LOCATION CITY acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS GS-2 R:~BID-DOCSVvlASTERSff4 EWBID FLOW AND ACCEPTANCE OF WATER it is anticipated that storm, surface, or other waters will be encountered at various times during the work herein contemplated. The Contractor, by submitting a bid, acknowledges that it has investigated, the risk arising from such waters and has prepared its bid accordingly; and Contractor submitting a bid assumes all said risk. The Contractor shall conduct its operations in such a manner that storm or other existing waters may proceed uninterrupted along their existing street or drainage courses. Diversions of water for short reaches to protect construction in progress will be permitted if public and/or private properties, in the opinion of the Engineer, are not subject to probability of damage. The Contractor shall obtain written permission from the applicable public agency or property owner before any diversion of water outside of public right-of-way will be permitted. REMOVAL OF WATER The Contractor shall provide and maintain at all times during construction ample means and devices to promptly remove and properly dispose of all water entering the excavations or other parts of the work. No concrete footing or floor shall be laid in water, nor shall water be allowed to rise over them until the concrete or mortar has set. De-watering for the structures and pipelines shall commence when ground water is first encountered and shall be continuous until such time as water can be allowed to rise in accordance with the above paragraph. De-watering shall be accomplished by well points or some other method which will insure a dry hole and preservation of final lines and grade of the bottoms of excavation, all subject to the approval of the Engineer. Disposal of water from de-watering operations shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor. Disposal methods shall conform to the Porter-Cologne Water quality Control Act of 1974, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, and the California Administrative Code, Title 23, Chapter 3. Full compensation of de-watering shall be considered as included in the contract prices paid for the related items of work, and no additional compensation will be allowed therefor. TRENCH SAFETY AND SHORING EXCAVATION In accordance with Section 6500 of the Labor Code, the Contractor is required to obtain a permit from the Division of Industrial Safety for any trench or excavation which is five (5) feet or more in depth and into which a person is required to descend. The Contractor shall furnish all labor, equipment, and materials required to design, construct, and remove all sheeting, shoring, and bracing or other equivalent method of support of this project. Excavation for any trench five (5) feet or more in depth shall not begin until the Contractor has received approval from the City Engineer of the Contractor's detailed plan for worker protection from hazards of caving ground. Such plan shall be submitted at least five (5) days before the Contractor intends to begin excavation and shall show the details of the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection during excavation. No such plan shall allow the use of shoring, sloping, or a protective system less effective than required by Construction Safety Orders of the Division of Industrial Safety; and if such plan varies from the shoring system standards established by the Construction SafetY Orders, the plan shall be GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS GS-3 R:~BID-DOCS',MAST ER S',N EWBID prepared and signed by the Engineer who is registered as a Civil or Structural Engineer in the State of California. Prior to the beginning of excavations requiring shoring, the Contractor shall designate in writing to the Engineer someone whose responsibility it is to supervise the project safety measures and someone whose responsibility it is to supervise the installation and removal of sheeting, shoring and bracing. In addition to shoring the excavations in accordance with the minimum requirements of Industrial Safety Orders, it shall be the Contractor's responsibility to provide any and all additional shoring required to support the sides of the excavation against the effects of Icad which may exceed those desired by using the criteria set forth in the Industrial Safety Orders. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for any damages which may result from its failure to provide adequate shoring of the excavation under any and all of the conditions of loading which may exist or which may arise during construction of the project. The Contractor shall include in its bid all costs for the above requirements. Full compensation for sheeting, shoring, bracing, and all other things necessary shall be considered as included in the appropriate bid items of work, and no additional allowance will be made therefor. TRENCH PROTECTION AND EXCAVATION. CONTRACTOR shall submit its detailed plan for worker protection during the excavation of trenches required by the scope of the work in accordance with Labor Code Section 6705. CONTRACTOR shall, without disturbing the condition, notify CITY in writing as soon as CONTRACTOR, or any of CONTRACTOR's subcontractors, agents, or employees have knowledge and reporting is possible, of the discovery of any of the following conditions: The presence of any material that the CONTRACTOR believes is hazardous waste, as defined in Section 25117 of the Health and Safety Code; ii. Subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those indicated in the specifications; or iii. Unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different materially for those ordinarily encountered and generally r.ecognized.as inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract. Pending a determination by the CITY of appropriate action to be taken, CONTRACTOR shall provide security measure (e.g., fences) adequate to prevent the hazardous waste or physical conditions causing bodily injury to any person. CITY shall promptly investigate the reported conditions. If CITY, through, and in the exercise of its sole discretion, determines that the conditions do materially differ, or do involve hazardous waste, and will cause a decrease or increase in the CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the work, then CITY shall issue a Change Order. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS GS-4 R:'~ID-DO CS'~v~ASTER S~ EWBID In the event of a dispute between CITY and CONTRACTOR as to whether the conditions materially differ, or involve hazardous waste, or cause a decrease or increase in the CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the work, CONTRACTOR shall not be excused from any scheduled completion date, and shall proceed with all work to be performed under the contract. CONTRACTOR shall retain any and all rights which pertain to the resolution of disputes and protests between the parties. STANDARD SPECIFICATION The Standard Specifications of the City are contained in the most recent edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association and the Southern California District of the Associated General Contractors of California. Copies of those Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building New, Incorporated 3055 Overland Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90034 (213) 202-7775 The Standard Specifications set forth above will control the general provisions, construction material, and construction methods for this contract except as amended by the Plans, Special . Provisions, or other Contract Documents. The Section numbers of the following Special Provisions coincide with those of the Standard Specifications for Pubtic Works Construction. Only those sections requiring amendment or elaboration, or specifying options, are called out. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the Special Provisions, The Special Provisions shall take precedence over and be used in lieu of such conflicting portions. References in the Special Provisions to "Caltrans Standard Specifications" or "State Standard Specifications" shall mean the Standard Specifications, latest edition, of the State of California, Department of Transportation. Copies of these specifications may be obtained from: State of California - Department of Transportation Central Publication Distribution Unit 6002 Folsom Boulevard Sacramento, California 95819 Where the Plans or Specifications describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed complete and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise specified, the Contractor shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS GS-5 R:',BID -DOCS',MAST E RS',N EWBID WAGE RATES AND LABOR CODE REQUIREMENTS Wa.qe Rates The Contractor and all Subcontractors shall be required to adhere to the general prevailing rate of per diem wages as determined and published by the State Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, pursuant to Section 1770, 1773, and 1773.2 of the California Labor Code. Copies of these rates and the latest revisions thereto are on file in the Office of the Secretary of the Board of Directors and are available for review upon request. Attention is directed to the provisions of Sections 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, and 1777.6 of the State Labor Code, excerpt copies of which are contained in Appendix II of these Specifications. Sections 1774 and 1775 require the Contractor and all Subcontractors to pay not less than the prevailing wage rates to all workmen employed in the execution of the Contract and specify forfeitures and penalties for failure to do so. The minimum wages to be paid are those determined by the State Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Section 1776 requires the Contractor and all Subcontractors to keep accurate payroll records, procedures and certain notices required of the Contractor pertaining to their location. Apprentices Section 1777.5 requires the Contractor or Subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprenticeable occupation to apply to the Joint Apprenticeship Committee nearest the site of the Public Works project which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a Certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen to be used in the performance of the Contract. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if it employs registered apprentices or journeymen in any apprenticeable trade and if other Contractors on the public works site are making such contributions. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, contributions, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the State Director of Industrial Relations or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards. Clayton Act and Cartwriqht Act Section 4551 of the State Government Code specifies that in executing a Public Works contract with the City to supply goods, services, or materials, the Contractor or Subcontractors offer and agree to assign to the City all rights, title and interest in and to all causes of action it may have under Section 4 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 15) or under the Cartwright Act (Chapter 2 commencing with Sec. 16700) of Part 2 of Division 7 of the Business and Professional Code arising from purchase of goods, services, or materials pursuant to the Contract or subcontract. This assignment shall become affective when the City tenders final payment to the Contractor without further acknowledgment by the parties. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS GS-6 R:~BID-DO CSW, AST E R S~IEWBID SUBSTITUTION OF SECURITIES In conformance with the State of California Government Code Chapter 13, Section 4590, the Contractor may substitute securities for any monies withheld by the City to ensure performance under the Contract. At the request and expense of the Contractor, securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the City or with a State or Federally chartered bank as the escrow agent who shall pay such monies to the Contractor upon notification by City of Contractor's satisfactory completion of the Contract. The type of securities deposited and the method of release shall be approved by the City Attorney's office. SUBCONTRACTING In the event a Subcontractor requests a hearing on being substituted out of the work covered by this Contract pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 4107(a), City hereby designates JAMS AND DISPUTE, formerly JAMS 500 N. State College Bid., Suite 600, Orange, CA 92668 (714) 939-1300, as its hearing officer. Contractor and the requesting Subcontractor shall be responsible for splitting equally the costs of such hearing by making an advance deposit with JAMS AND DISPUTE as a precondition to subcontract bid submittal. DISPOSAL OF MATERIALS Waste materials, debris, vegetation, and other rubbish removed as part of this project or as directed by the Engineer shall be disposed of at an approved off-site disposal site and recycling center. All concrete, asphalt, aggregate or sand base material, cement block, trees, shrubs, bushes, and all other recyclable material generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or other phases of the work shall be disposed of at appropriate recycling centers. The City of Temecula has an exclusive franchise agreement for solid waste hauling services with CR&R Incorporated ("Franchisee"). The Contractor shall be responsible for makinq arranqements for all re,qular solid waste services throu,qh the Franchisee. The Contractor may also contract with CR&R Incorporated for recycling and storage container services. The Contractor may elect to use the services of another recycling vendor provided that the recyclable materials are either donated or sold to the vendor. Under no circumstances may a vendor, other than the Franchisee, charge the Contractor for recycling bin rental, recycling services, consultation, or any other service related to recycling or solid waste disposal. Unless the Contractor is using the Franchisee for recycling services, Contractor shall supply proof of disposal at a recycling center, including verification of tonnage by certified weighmaster tickets. If weighmaster tickets are not available, the Contractor and the Engineer shall agree on an estimate of the tonnage prior to disposal at the recycling center. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS GS-7 R:~ID-DOCS'WtAST ER S',N EWBID Asphalt & Concrete Disposal Solid Waste Disposal Copp Materials 46848 Pala Road Temecula, CA 92592 (909) 694-9590 CR&R Incorporated P.O. Box 1208 Perris, CA 92572 (800) 755-8112 DISTRIBUTION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS The City shall issue any remaining sets of Plans and Specifications not purchased during the bid process to the Contractor. Any additional sets will be at the expense of the Contractor. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS GS-8 R:~ID -DO(~SWIASTE R S',N EWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE The following sections of the Standard Specifications are hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION I - TERMS, DEFINITIONS, ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 1-2 DEFINITIONS. [Add the following]: Agency Board Caltrans City County Engineer Federal Standard Specification Caltrans Standard Specifications, State Standard Specifications Caltrans Standard Plans E.M.W.D. M.W.D. R.C.W.D. R.C.F.C.D. City of Temecula City Council California Department of Transportation City of Temecula County of Riverside Director of Public Works/City Engineer or Authorized Representative United States of America Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, Latest edition Standard Specifications, State of California, Department of Transportation, latest edition State of California Business, Transportation and Housinq Agency, Department of Transportation, Standard Plans, latest edition Eastern Municipal Water District Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Rancho California Water District Riverside County Flood Control District SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-1 R:~]D- DOCS'~tASTERS',N EWBID SECTION 2 - SCOPE AND CONTROL OF THE WORK 2-1 AWARD AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT. [Replace with the following]: Within ten (10) working days after the date of the Notice to Award, the Contractor shall execute and return the following Contract Documents to the Agency: · Contractor · Faithful Performance Bond · Payment Bond · Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance Certificates and Endorsements · Worker's Compensation Insurance Certificate · Vendors' Statements · Bidder's Agreement Failure to comply with the above will result in annulment of the 'award and forfeiture of the Proposal Guarantee. The Contract shall not be considered binding upon the Agency until executed by the authorized Agency officials. A corporation to which an award is made may be required, before the Contract Agreement is executed by the Agency, to furnish evidence of its corporate existence, of its right to enter into contracts in the State of California, and that the officers signing the Contract and Bonds for the corporation have the authority to do so. 2-3SUBCONTRACTS 2-3.2 Additional Responsibility [Add the following]: PERFORMANCE OFDBESUBCONTRACTORSANDSUPPLIERS The DBEs listed by the Contractor in response to the provisions in Section 2.2, "Submission of DBE Information," and Section 9, "Award or Rejection of Bids" of the Instructions to Bidders, which are determined by the City to be certified DBEs, shall perform the work and supply the materials for which they are listed, unless the Contractor has received prior written authorization to perform the work with other forces or to obtain the materials from other sources. Authorization to use other forces or sources of materials may be requested for the following reasons: A. The listed DBE, after having had a reasonable opportunity to do so, fails or refuses to execute a written contract, when such written contract, based upon the general terms, conditions, plans and specifications for the project, or on the terms of such subcontractor's or supplier's written bid, is presented by the Contractor. B. The listed DBE becomes bankrupt or insolvent. C. The listed DBE fails or refuses to perform the subcontract or furnish the listed materials. D. The Contractor stipulated that a bond was a condition of executing a subcontract and the listed DBE subcontractor fails or refuses to meet the bond requirements of the Contractor. E. The work per[ormed by the listed subcontractor is substantially unsatisfactory and is not in substantial conformance with the plans and specifications, or the subcontractor is substantially delaying or disrupting the progress of the work. F. It would be in the best interest of theCity/County. SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-2 R:~ID-DOCS~t~STERS~EWBID The Contractor shall not be entitled to any payment for such work or material unless it is performed or supplied by the listed DBE or by other forces (including those of the Contractor) pursuant to prior written authorization of the Engineer. SUBCONTRACTING Pursuant to the provisions in Section 1777.1 of the Labor Code, the Labor Commissioner publishes and distributes a list of contractors ineligible to perform work as a subcontractor on a public works project. This list of debarred contractors is available from the Department of Industrial Relations web site at http://www.dir.ca.gov/dir/Labor_law/DLSE./Debar, htmL The provisions in this section, that the Contractor shall perform with the Contractor's own organization contract work amounting to not less than 50 percent of the original contract price, are not changed by the Federal Aid requirement specified under "Required Contract Provisions Federal-Aid Construction Contracts" in Section 14 of these special provisions that the Contractor perform not less than 30 percent of the original contract work with the Contractor's own organization. Each subcontract and any lower tier subcontract that may in turn be made shall include the "Required Contract Provisions Federal-Aid Construction Contracts" in Section 14 of these special provisions. This requirement shall be enforced as follows: A. Noncompliance shall be corrected. Payment for subcontracted work involved will be withheld from progress payments due, or to become due, until correction is made. Failure to comply may result in termination of the contract. Delete the remainder of this section if no DBE goals are specified. In conformance with the Federal DBE regulations Sections 26.53(0(1) and 26.53(f)(2) Part 26, Title 49 CFR: A. The Contractor shall not terminate for convenience a DBE subcontractor listed in response to Section 2.2, "Submission of DBE Information" of the Instructions to Bidders, and then pedorm that work with its own forces, or those of an affiliate without the written consent of the Department, and B. If a DBE subcontractor is terminated or fails to complete its work for any reason, the Contractor will be required to make good faith efforts to substitute another DBE subcontractor for the original DBE subcontractor, to the extent needed to meet the contract goal. The requirement in Section 2-1.02, "Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE)," of these special provisions that DBEs must be cedified on the date bids are opened does not apply to DBE substitutions after award of the contract. PROMPT PROGRESS PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 10262 and 10262.5 of the Public Contract Code and Section 7108.5 of the Business and Professions Code concerning prompt payment to subcontractors. PROMPT PAYMENT OF WITHHELD FUNDS TO SUBCONTRACTORS The Contractor shall return all moneys withheld in retention from the subcontractor within 30 days after receiving payment for work satisfactorily completed, even if the other contract work is not completed and has not been accepted in conformance with Section 6-8, "Completion, Acceptance and Guarantee," of the Standard Specifications. This requirement shall not be construed to limit or impair any contractual, administrative, or judicial remedies otherwise available to the Contractor or subcontractor in the event of a dispute involving late payment or nonpayment by the Contractor or deficient subcontract performance or noncompliance by a subcontractor. 2-3.3 Status of Subcontractors. [Add the following]: SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-3 R:~BID-DO CS~,~ASTERS~N EWBID SUBCONTRACTOR AND DBE RECORDS The Contractor shall maintain records showing the name and business address of each first-tier subcontractor. The records shall also show the name and business address of every DBE subcontractor, DBE vendor of materials and DBE trucking company, regardless of tier. The records shall show the date of payment and the total dollar figure paid to all of these firms. DBE prime contractors shall also show the date of work performed by their own forces along with the corresponding dollar value of the work. Upon completion of the contract, a summary of these records shall be prepared on Form CEM-2402 (F) and certified correct by the Contractor or the Contractor's authorized representative, and shall be furnished to the Engineer. The form shall be furnished to the Engineer within 90 days from the date of contract acceptance. $10,000 will be withheld from payment until the Form CEM-2402 (F) is submitted. The amount will be returned to the Contractor when a satisfactory Form CEM-2402 (F) is submitted. Use the next two paragraphs if DBE goals are specified. Prior to the twentieth of each month, the Contractor shall submit documentation to the Engineer showing the amount paid to DBE trucking companies listed in the Contractor's DBE information. This monthly documentation shall indicate the portion of the revenue paid to DBE trucking companies which is claimed toward DBE participation. The Contractor shall also obtain and submit documentation to the Engineer showing the amount paid by DBE trucking companies to all firms, including owner-operators, for the leasing of trucks. The DBE who leases.trucks from a non-DBE is entitled to credit only for the fee or commission it receives as a result of the lease arrangement. The records must confirm that the amount of credit claimed toward DBE participation conforms with Section 2.2 of the Intructions to Bidders. The Contractor shall also obtain and submit documentation to the Engineer showing the truck number, owner's name, California Highway Patrol CA number, and if applicable, the DBE certification number of the owner of the truck for all trucks used during that month for which DBE participation will be claimed. This documentation shall be submitted on Form CEM-2404 (F). Use the next two paragraphs if no DBE goals are specified. Prior to the twentieth of each month, the Contractor shall submit documentation to the Engineer showing the amount paid to DBE trucking companies. This monthly documentation shall indicate the portion of the revenue paid to DBE trucking companies. The Contractor shall also obtain and submit documentation to the Engineer showing the amount paid by DBE trucking companies to all firms, including owner-operators, for the leasing of trucks. The DBE who leases trucks from a non-DBE is entitled to credit only for the fee or commission it receives as a result of the lease arrangement. The Contractor shall also obtain and submit documentation to the Engineer showing the truck number, owner's name, California Highway Patrol CA number, and if applicable, the DBE certification number of the owner of the truck for all trucks used during that month. This documentation shall be submitted on Form CEM-2404 (F). DBE CERTIFICATION STATUS If a DBE subcontractor is decertified during the life of the project, the decertified subcontractor shall notify the Contractor in writing with the date of decertification. If a subcontractor becomes a certified DBE during the life of the project, the subcontractor shall notify the Contractor in writing with the date of certification. The Contractor shall furnish the written documentation to the Engineer. Upon completion of the contract, Form CEM-2403 (F) indicating the DBE's existing certification status shall be signed and certified correct by the Contractor. The certified form shall be furnished to the Engineer within 90 days from the date of contract acceptance. SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-4 R:',BID-DO CS~vlASTE R S~I EWBID 2-5 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 2-5.1 General. [Replace the first paragraph with the following]: The Contractor shall maintain a control set of Plans and Specifications on the project site at all times. All final tocations determined in the field, and any deviations from the Plans and Specifications, shall be marked in red on this control set to show the as-built conditions. Upon completion of all work, the Contractor shall return the control set to the Engineer. Final payment will not be made until this requirement is met. Adjustments to the layout of this plan may be necessary due to the unknown existing conditions. It is the Contractor's responsibility to retain the design intent. If a layout discrepancy should occur, the Contractor is to contact the City's representative. 2-9 SURVEYING 2-9.2 Surveying Service. [Replace with the following]: Except for private contracts, the Engineer will perform and be responsible for the accuracy of surveying adequate for construction. The Contractor shall preserve construction survey stakes and marks for the duration of their usefulness. If any construction survey stakes are lost or disturbed and need to be replaced, such replacement shall be by the Engineer at the expense of the Contractor. The Contractor shall notify the Engineer in writing at least 2 working days before survey services will be required in connection with the laying out of any portion of the work. The Contractor shall dig all holes necessary for line and grade stakes. Unless otherwise specified, stakes will be set and stationed by the Engineer for curbs, headers, sewers, storm drains, structure, and rough grade. A corresponding cut of fill to finished grade (or flowline) will be indicated on a grade sheet. 2.11 INSPECTION 2.11.1 Landscape and Irrigation Inspection. [Add the following]: The City of Temecula contracts with qualified landscape architects to perform landscape and irrigation inspections of its projects. The landscape architect must be present and must sign off the ten inspections listed on the TCSD job inspection card attached to these specifications. The City will only be responsible to pay for ONE inspection for each ten inspections. To request the presence of the landscape and irrigation inspector, the Contractor shall give a 48 hour advanced notice to the project's Public Works Inspector. The contractor will be required to present "As- Builts" irrigation drawings to the Inspector prior to any test or site observation. Failure to present these "As-Builts", or to provide any other item listed in this section, will result in the immediate cancellation of the test or site observation. In the event that a scheduled test or a site inspection is cancelled due to the site not being ready or the required information/material is not present on site, the Contractor will be responsible for all costs associated with the additional landscape inspector site visit(s). SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-5 R:~ID- DOC S'¢/IASTERS~N EVVB ID SECTION 3 - CHANGES IN WORK 3-3 EXTRA WORK 3-3.2.3 Markup. [Replace with the following]: (a) Work by Contractor. The following percentages shall be added to the Contractor's costs and shall constitute the markup for all overhead and profits: 1) Labor 20 2) Material 15 3) Equipment Rental 15 4) Other items and Expenditures 15 To the sum of the costs and markups provided for in this subsection, compensation for bonding shall be at the rate specified by the bonding company. (b) Work by Subcontractor. When all or any part of the extra work is performed by a Subcontractor, the markup established in 3-3.2.3(a) shall be applied to the Subcontractor's actual cost of such work. A markup of 10 percent on the first $5,000 of the subcontracted portion of the extra work and a markup of 5 percent on work added in excess of $5,000 of the subcontracted portion of the extra work may be added by the Contractor. SECTION 6 - PROSECUTION, PROGRESS AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK 6-1 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. [Replace with the following]: The Contractor's proposed Construction Schedule shall be submitted to the Engineer within ten (10) working days after the date of the Notice of Award of Contract. The schedule shall be supported by written statements from each supplier of materials or equipment indicating that all orders have been placed and acknowledged and setting forth the dates that each item will be delivered. The schedule shall be in the form of a tabulation, chart, or graph. Prior to issuing the Notice to Proceed, the Engineer will schedule a pre-construction meeting with the Contractor to review the proposed Construction Schedule and delivery dates, arrange the utility coordination, discuss construction methods, and clarify inspection procedures. The Contractor shall submit periodic Progress Reports to the Engineer by the tenth day of each month. The report shall include an updated Construction Schedule. Any deviations from the original schedule shall be explained. Progress payments will be withheld pending receipt of any outstanding reports. SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-6 R:~BID -DO CS',MASTER S~ EWBID 6-7 TIME OF COMPLETION 6-7.1 General [Add the following]: The time for completion shall be as set forth in the Contract. 6-7.2 Working Day. [Add the following]: The Contractor's activities shall be confined to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Deviation from these hours will not be permitted without the prior consent of the Engineer, except in emergencies involving immediate hazard to persons or property. In the event of either a requested or emergency deviation, inspection service fees will be charged against the Contractor. The service fees will be calculated at overtime rates, including benefits, overhead and travel time. The service fees will be deducted from any amounts due the Contractor. 6-9 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. [Replace last sentence with the following]: Liquidated damages shall be as set forth in the Contract. SECTION 7 - RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CONTRACTOR 7-1 CONTRACTOR'S EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES. [Add the following]: A noise level limit of 86-dba at a distance of fifty (50) feet shall apply to all construction equipment on or related to the job whether owned by the Contractor or not. The use of excessively loud warning signals shall be avoided except in those cases required for the protection of personnel. 7-2 LABOR 7-2.2 Laws. [Add the following]: The Contractor, and all subcontractors, suppliers, and vendors shall comply with applicable Agency, State, and Federal orders regarding affirmative action to ensure equal employment opportunities and fair employment practices. Failure to file any report due under said orders will result in suspension of periodic progress payments. The Contractor shall ensure unlimited access to the job site for all equal employment opportunity compliance officers. 7-3 LIABILITY INSURANCE [Replace section with the following]: The Contractor shall procure and maintain, for the duration of the Contract, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-7 R:~BID-DO CS'~IAST E R S~IEWBID Minimum Scope of Insurance Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (Occurrence Form CG-0001). 2. Insurance Services Office Form No. CA-0001 (Ed. 1/.87) covering Automobile Liability, Code I (any auto). 3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 4. Course of Construction insurance form providing coverage for "all risks" of loss. Minimum Limits of Insurance The Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: $2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Course of Construction: Completed value of the project. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the Agency. At the option of the Agency, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self- insured retentions as respects the Agency, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. Other Insurance Provisions The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: The Agency, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to 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 Agency, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Agency, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Agency, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-8 R:~iD-DO CSff,,~,AST ER S~IEWBID Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the Agency, its officers, officials, employees, agent or volunteers. The Contractor'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. 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 a thirty (30) day prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Agency. Course of construction policies shall contain the following provisions: 1. Agency shall be named as loss payee. 2. The insurer shall waive all rights of subrogation against entity. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII. Verification of Coveraqe Contractor shall furnish the Agency with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the Agency. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the Agency before work commences. As an alternative to the Agency's forms, the Contractor's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. Subcontractors Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. 7-5 PERMITS. [Replace the first sentence with the following] Prior to the start of any work, the Contractor shall take out the applicable Agency permits and make arrangements for Agency inspections. The Contractor and all subcontractors shall each obtain any and all other permits, licenses, inspections, certificates, or authorizations required by any governing body or public utility. SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-9 R:~ID-DOCS~,~ASTERS~EWBID 7-9 PROTECTION AND RESTORATION OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS. [Add the following after the second paragraph]: Protect existing building, paving, and other services or facilities on-site and adjacent to the site from damage caused by site work operations. Cost of repair and restoration of damaged items shall be at the Contractor's expense. 7-10 PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY 7-10.1 Traffic and Access. [Add the following paragraphs]: Maintaining traffic shall conform to the provisions 7-1.02 '~Neight Limitations", 7-1.06 "Safety and Health Provisions", 7-1.08 "Public Convenience", 7-1.09 "Public Safety", and 12-3.04 "Portable ' Delineators", of the State Standard Specifications and these Special Provisions. All existing traffic control signs and street name signs shall be maintained in visible locations as directed by the Engineer. No detours will be allowed. The Contractor will be required to conduct its operation in such a manner that traffic will be permitted to pass through the work with as little delay as possible. All warning lights, signs, flares, barricades and other facilities for the sole convenience and direction of public traffic shall be furnished and maintained by the Contractor. All signs shall conform to and be placed in accordance with the current "Manual of Traffic Controls", issued by the California Department of Transportation for construction and maintenance of work zones. The Contractor shall utilize Solar Powered Equipment to maintain and control existing traffic. Battery operated equipment shall be utilized for night time operations. Ali construction signs shall be either covered or removed when not required by the nature of the work, or if no present hazard to the motorists exists. No payment for extra work will be allowed for work performed as specified in Section 12-2.02 "Flagging Costs" of the State Standard Specifications. Payment for implementing traffic controls as required by these Special Provisions shall be made at the contract lump sum price paid for traffic control systems and shall include full compensation for all labor, materials, and equipment necessary to install and maintain traffic controls throughout the construction period. 7-10.4.1 Safety Orders. [Add the following paragraph]: The Contractor shall comply with the provisions of any Agency ordinances or regulations regarding requirements for the protection of excavations and the nature of such protection. 7-15 PAYROLL RECORDS. [Add the following section]: Payroll records, shall be submitted to the Agency by the tenth day of each month. Progress payments will be withheld pending receipt of any outstanding reports. SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-10 R:'SD- DOCS'CJASTER S'~IEWBID 7-16 SIGN POST. [Add the following paragraphs]:The sign post assembly ("Quick Punch" or approved equal), shall consist of a 2-inch square non-perforated galvanized steel tube with anchor assembly. The anchor assembly will consist of 2 1~ inch square steel tubes 2 foot 6 inches long or 3 foot long. The steel tubes shall be 12 gage and fully galvanized inside and outside. The anchor shall be driven into the ground such that 4 inches to 6 inches remains above the ground level. The square sign post shall then be installed 4 inches to 6 inches into the anchor assembly and secured in place with two 5/16 inch carriage bolts 3.5 inches in length and theft proof nuts or rivets. SPECIAL PROVISIONS SP-11 R:~BiD-DOCS'WIASTERS~EWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE (INSERT VERBIAGE PARTICULAR TO EACH PROJECT HERE) TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS TS-1 R:~BID -DOCSff, tASTERS~N EWBID CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT "A"- INSURANCE ENDORSEMENTS & CERTIFICATES FOR PROJECT NO. PWO0-O0 INSERT TITLE OF WORK HERE INSERT THE PRE-PRINTED INSURANCE FORMS HERE GET CLEAN FORMS FROM ANITA, IF NEEDED THERE ARE FOUR (4) 2. 3. 4. CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE GENERAL LIABILITY SPECIAL ENDORSEMENT AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY SPECIAL ENDORSEMENT WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY SPECIAL ENDORSEMENT. If questions, ask Anita. EXHIBIT "A"- INSURANCE ENDORSEMENTS & CERTIFICATES A-1 R:~ID-DOCS'tMASTERSV, IEWBID ITEM 6 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN(~E CiTY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council /~fJ~ Bill Hughes, Works/City Engineer Director of Public January 23, 2001 Authorize Temporary Street Closures for Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event in Old Town. (Old Town Front Street, between Moreno Road and Second Street, and other related streets) ~_~.~ Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works PREPARED BY: ~/Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING STREET CLOSURES FOR TEMECULA ROD RUN 2001 EVENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT BACKGROUND: The Annual Rod Run necessitates the physical closure of certain streets in the Old Town area, and related detouring, to accommodate and provide the "Street Scene" ambience that allows the free movement of pedestrian traffic by minimizing potential vehicular- pedestrian conflicts. Under Vehicular Code Section 21101, "Regulation of Highways", local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution for, among other instances, "temporary closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes, when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing". The City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-96 on September 10, 1991, which provided standards and procedures for special events on public streets, highways, sidewalks, or public right of way. While a process was established for reviews and approvals, no mechanism was provided for delegating authority to temporarily close streets, or portions of streets, for these special events. 1 r:~agdrpt~2001\0123\rodru nclosu re The recommended resolution delegates the authority to approve temporary street closures for the Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event sponsored by the Temecula Town Association. This authority is limited to and delegated to the City Engineer (or an authorized representative) only. Any other special events requiring temporary street closures, construction related closures, etc., remain subject to the approval of the City Council subject to rules and regulations established by the City Council These rules and regulations shall also be adopted by resolution in accordance with California Vehicular Code Section 21101. This years Rod Run Event sponsors propose street closures as follows: Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road (E) to First Street from 6:00am to 5:00pm on Saturday February 17th, 2001, and from 6:00 am to 4:00pm on Sunday, February 18th, 2001; Sixth Street, Fifth Street, Fourth Street, Third Street, and Second Street between Mercedes Street and Old Town Front Street, and Main Street from Mercedes Street to the southwesterly side of the Main Street Bridge from 6:00am Saturday to 4:00pm Sunday. However, access to one of this event's handicap parking lot, to be located at the corner of Mercedes Street and Sixth Street, will be provided despite the closure of Sixth Street. Also, parking spaces will be reserved on Fifth Street, Fourth Street, Main Street, Third Street, and Second Street for essentially half the length of these streets for merchant owners. However, these streets will remain closed as stated above. Furthermore, No Parking Signs will be placed on Moreno Road (E) for an approximate 150-foot length to allow for bus loading and unloading that would normally take place on the corner of Old Town Front Street and Sixth Street. Some partial closures, as limiting lane widths for construction purposes or partial closures for "Block Parties" on cul-de-sac streets only, have not been submitted for City Council action in order to reduce the impact on City Council and staff time. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated costs for the Public Works Department Maintenance Division support is estimated at $3,800.00. Adequate funds are available in Account No. 001-164-601-5402. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2001- 2. Location Map 2 r:~agdq~t~2001\O123\rodrunclosure RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURES FOR TEMECULA ROD RUN 2001 EVENT, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE A PERMIT FOR THIS SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, The California State Vehicular Code provides for the promulgation of rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets by local authorities by Resolution; and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish rules and regulations for the temporary closure of public streets in the interest of promoting safety and protection; and, WHEREAS, The City of Temecula desires to authorize the closure of public streets for the Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event sponsored by the Temecula Town Association, for which such temporary street closures promote the safety and protection of persons using or proposing to use those streets for the special event: and, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to facilitate the issuance of permission to temporarily close public streets for the Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event; and, NOW, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the City Engineer to approve temporary street closures for the Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event sponsored by theTemecula Town Association, and to establish the general rule that all other proposed temporary street closures shall be reviewed and approved subject to conditions, or disapproved, by the City Council; and, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula, hereby authorizes the City Engineer to permit temporary street closures for the Temecula Rod Run 2001 Event, and establishes the general rule that all other temporary public street closures shall be approved or denied approval by the City Council. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of January 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W.Jones, CMC, City Clerk 3 r:\agdrpt~OO1\O123\rodrunclosure [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby cer/ify that Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular'meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of January 2001, by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: 4 r:\agdrpt~2001\0123\rodrunclosure Rod Run 2001 Temecula Town Association Vendor Local~ons Rod Run 2001 Temecula Town Association February 17 (7.'00 AM - 5:00 PM) Februa~J 18 ('/.'00 AM - 5.'00 PM) CP) ITEM 7 APPROVAL CITY Ai-I'ORN EY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~_~::~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 23, 2001 Amendment to Annual Agreements - ClP Projects Approved for FY 2000-2001 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Senior Engineer - Capital Projects RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Approve Amendment #1 of the annual agreement with Kleinfelder, Inc. to provide as needed geotechnical and materials testing services, by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001 and increasing the amount of the agreement by $25,000. Approve Amendment #1 of the annual agreement with Converse Consultants to provide as needed geotechnical and materials testing services, by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001 and increasing the amount of the agreement by $25,000. Approve Amendment #2 of the annual agreement with Kevin Cozad & Associates to provide as needed Survey Services, by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001 and increasing the amount of the agreement by $20,000. Approve Amendment #1 of the annual agreement with O'Malley Engineering Corporation to provide as needed Survey Services, by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001 and increasing the amount of the agreement by $20,000. Approve Amendment #1 of the annual agreement with Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal to provide as needed Appraisal Services, by extending the agreement through June 30, 2001 and increasing the amount of the agreement by $25,000. 6. Authorize the Mayor to execute these amendments. BACKGROUND: On February 8, 2000 the City Council approved the annual agreements for the above referenced consultants to provide geotechnical and material testing, land surveying services and real estate appraisal services on an as needed basis for the approved Capital Improvement Program Projects for Fiscal Yearn 2000-2004. I r:~agdrpt~001\0123~Annual Contracts Amendment Last year, there were many approved projects that required survey, geotechnical, and appraisal services. Many of these projects utilized the approved annual agreements to have these services performed. These annual agreements were proven to be extremely effective in expediting the work done. Numerous staff hours were saved by not having to request a number of proposals every time a service is required for one of the projects. The approved annual agreements for the various services will expire On February 8, 2001. In addition, many of the agreements are close to exhausting the not to exceed amount approved by the City Council. Staff is recommending the amendment of all annual agreements by extending them to June 30, 2001, to make their duration coincide with the City's fiscal year. Subsequent to June 30, 2001, the annual agreements will run parallel to the City's fiscal year. The amendment also includes increasing the limit of each agreement as follows: Geotechnical Services: 1. Kleinfelder, Inc.: Increase the limit by $25,000 2. Converse Consultants: Increase the limit by $25,000 Survey Services: 1. Kevin Cozad & Associates: Increase the limit by $20,000 2. O'Malley Engineering Corporation: Increase the limit by $20,000. Appraisal Services: 1. Robert S. Perdue: Increase the limit by $25,000 The agreements will continue to provide services for projects approved in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) or for special projects that come up through out the year. The actual number of projects and costs are not known at this time. Payment will be based on actual time spent on tasks as directed by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. FISCAL IMPACT: Consultants will continue to submit cost proposals for each service request. Once a scope of service and a schedule of fees are negotiated, funds are allocated from the corresponding project budget. Only approved CIP projects will utilize the services under these agreements, unless directed otherwise by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: 2. 3. 4. 5. Amendment #1 to the Annual Agreement with Kleinfelder, Inc. Amendment #1 to the Annual Agreement with Converse Consultants Amendment #2 to the Annual Agreement with Kevin Cozad & Associates Amendment #1 to the Annual Agreement with O'Malley Engineering Corporation Amendment #1 to the Annual Agreement with Robert S. Perdue 2 r:\agdrpt~2001\0123~Annual Contracts Amendment FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND KLEINFELDER, INC. FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BE'I'VVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND KLEINFELDER, INC. ANNUALAGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL GEOTECHNICAL& MATERIALS TESTING SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of January 23, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Kleinfelder, Inc. ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On February 8, 2000 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). B. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: TERM. The term of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the Agreement and shall commence on February 8, 2000 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2001. 3. Exhibit A of the Agreement is hereby amended to include the work described in Exhibit A-1 to this Agreement. 4. Section 4.a. PAYMENT of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Sixty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($60,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 5. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 1 r:~agmts\masters~annual masters\kleinfelder AMEND1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor A'CI'EST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Kleinfelder, Inc. 43218 Business Park Dr., Suite E4 Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 506-1488 BY: Michael P. Kesler, Area Manager BY: John Moossazadeh, Vice President (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 r:~agmts\masters~annual masters~kleinfeider AMEND1 ~1~ KLEINF.ELDER December 28, 2000 Mr. Amer Attar City of Temecula, Department of Public Works 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92589-9033 RECEIVED DEO ~ 8 2000 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Subject: Request for Extension of Annual Agreement Professional Geoteehnical and M~terials Testing Serv,-'_'ces Effective February 8, 2000 Dear Amer: Pursuant to your request, we have prepared this letter requesting that the City of Temecula extend our Annual Agreement through to their fiscal year of June 30, 2001. Our fee schedule for both professional services and laboratory costs will remain intact through that period with the exception of our technician rates which will need to be increased due to the prevailing wage laws related to public works project. Our technician rates will be revised as follows: TECHNICIAN LEVEL PREVIOUS RATE NEW RATE Technician Associate Technician Senior Technician Supervisory Technician $48/hour $69/hour $48/hour $69/hour $58/hour $69/hour $69/hour $69/hour We trust this information is as requested. Should questions arise, please feel free to contact our office at your convenience. We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service. Respect~lly submitted, KLEINFELDER, INC. , PE ~otechnical Group Manager Copyright 2000 Kl,i:felder, Inc. KLEINFELDER 43218 Business Park Drive, Suite E4, Temecula, CA92590 (909) 506-1488 (909) 506-1491fax AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND KLEINFELDER, INC. CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL GEOTECHNICAL and MATERIALS TESTING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of February 8, 2000, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Kleinfelder, Inc., ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on February 8, 2000, and shall remain and continue in effect until February 8,' 200'1, unless terminated or extended pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. This is an annual contract for Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services on an as needed basis. Consultant can perform any of the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. When there is a need for Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services on an as needed services, the City will identify the specific scope of work, and request a fee schedule from the consultant. The City will instruct the consultant to proceed with the work once the exact scope of work and the associated fees are negotiated. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as negotiated and as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the tasks as directed by the City on an as needed basis. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates are null and void. The total cumulative annual amount shall not exceed Thirty Five Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($35,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in wdting by the City. Consultant shall be compensated for services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. Any additional work in excess of the amount above shall be approved by the City Coundl. c. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 1 r:tagrrnts~nasters~annual contract~leinfelder agrmt SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSF, a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City. shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the perfom3ance 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 (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. 7. OWNERSHIP OFDOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identi- fied and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer flies containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make 2 r:~agrrnts~masters~annual contract~kleinfelder agrmt available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. c. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the wdtten consent of the Consultant. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, 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 adsing out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability adsing out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) Insurance Sen/ices Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's liability Insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees, (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this projectJlocation or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3 r:~agrrnts~masters~annual contract~leinfelder agrmt (3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars (:$1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability coverage: Two million ($2,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retention~ Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions, The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be pdmary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this 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 by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Venfication of Coveraqe. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signe(~ by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on 4 forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness adsing out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the dght, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, headng or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the dght by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. S 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: To Consultant: City of T. emecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Ddve Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager Kleinfelder, Inc. 43218 Business Park Drive, Suite E4 Temecula, California 92590 Attention: Michael P. Kesler, Area Manager 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without pdor written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Michael P. Kesler, Area Manager shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Michael P. Kesler may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice pdor to the departure of Michael P. Kesler from Consultant's employ. Should he or she leave Consultant's employ, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in wdting between the City Council and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic junsdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or wdtten, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into 6 r:~agnmts~masters~annual contract~kleinfelder agrmt this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above wdtten. CITY OF TEMECULA E~p~Mayor'-' .-~- ~s~Jones, CMC/'AAE, City Clerk Approved As to Form: CONSULTANT Kleinfelder, Inc. 43218 Business Park Dr, Suite E4 Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 506-1488 Mich/ael P.,/~sler, Area Manager Name: ,..~-O,~,,,x /t/t ~P--~'-~,~--~--~. (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) 7 r:~agrmts',masters~annual contract~kleinfelder agrmt EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED 8 r:~grmts~rnasters~annual contract~kteinfelder agrmt ~1~ KLEINFELDER November 19, 1999 Proposal No. 51-YP9623 City Clerk's Office City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92589-9033 Subject: Statement of Qualifications Annual Contract For Geotechnical a~d Materials Testing Services Kleinfelder is pleased to present our proposal to provide geotechnical and materials testing services to the City of Temecula, in response to your Request For Statement of Qualifications (RFQ) No. 01, dated November 2, 1999. Kleinfelder is an employee-owned, multi-disciplinary consulting firm specializing in laboratory testing and inspection, geotechnical and environmental engineering, as well as construction management. Kleinfelder's overall capabilities and staff size allow us to perform testing and inspection services to meet critical time schedules in a cost-effective manner. The size of our firm and multiple office locations in southern California provide the ability to quickly add staff as necessary. Locally, Kleinfelder's southern California region includes offices in Temecula, San Diego, Irvine, Long Beach, Diamond Bar, and Redlands. The City will benefit from our ability to provide mm-key, "one-stop-shop" services locally and in-house. We are pleased to report that we provide all the following testing services required by the City of Temecula, as outlined in your RFQ. We are proud to have provided and are currently providing high quality, testing and inspection services to the City of Temecula. As a local business of the City, Kleinfelder is commined to building our relationship by continuing provide quality engineering, testing and inspection services. We look forward to meeting with you to discuss our qualifications and your upcoming needs in greater detail. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact either of the undersigned at (909) 506-1488. Sincerely, Geotechnical Group Manager . . g Area Manager Attachments: Geotechnical/Matefials Testing Statement of Qualifications Fee Schedule Resumes of Key Personnel ~.~ KLEINFELDER CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS REQUEST FOR STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) NO. 1 ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR GEOTECHNICAL AND MATERIALS TESTING SERVICES PROJECT DESCRIPTION We understand that the City of Temecula (City) wishes to obtain the services of a professional engineering firm to provide geotechn/cal and materials testing services for various Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) throughout the City during the fiscal year FY1999-2000. We understand, once an annual contract is ex. ecuted, each service request will be negotiated separately and may contain some or all of the items outlined within the RFQ. Our technical staff is capable of performing the following tasks: 1. Subsurface Exploration. 2. Prepare field logs &exploratory borings, summarizing subsurface conditions ~ncountered. 3. Seismicity of a particular region or site. 4. Geotechnical evaluation and recommendations for site development and/or mitigation. 5. Pavement evaluations. 6. Soil Ferrous corrosivity and Portland Cement Concrete attack 7. Environmental concerns. 8. Review of available geologic maps and reports for the region. 9. Preparation of rough grade and final compaction reports. 10. Review of project plans and specifications, with respect to geotechnical and material testing. 11. Attend progress meetings. 12. Geotechnical field services during all phases of site or roadway grading. 13. Field observation and testing during trench backfilling operations. 14. Field compaction testing during subgrade and base compaction. 15. Field sampling and testing of base, concrete and asphalt concrete. 16. All necessary laboratory tests to support field services and to satisfy Caltrans and other regulatory agency requirements. 17. Batch plant inspections. 18. Consulting services requiring corrective and/or remedial recommendations, if necessary. 19. Bridge inspection services during construction of new bridges. EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS Kleinfelder is ideally suited to provide engineering and on-call testing services for the City of Temecula. Our Temecula office is located near the City Hall and we can respond rapidly to requests for service. Our Temecula laboratory is capable of performing common soil and materials testing with support from our San Diego and Redlands laboratories, which are capable of pertbrming some of the more specialty soil and materials testing. Our Redlands laboratory is inspected and certified by Caltrans to perform soil, concrete and asphalt testing. Most of our technicians are certified by Caltrans to perform soil, concrete and laboratory, testing. We ~,1~ KLEINFELDER participate in the Caltrans laboratory Reference Samples Program. Our Redlands laboratory is one of the few in Southern California to be accredited by AASHTO in hot mix asphalt. Our experience and qualifications are detailed below. Kleinfelder is an employee-owned, multi-disciplinary consulting firm specializing in air, earth, and water sciences as related to the geotechnical, geological, environmental, construction management, and materials testing/inspection disciplines. Established in 1961, Kleinfelder has since expanded to its current size of over 1,150 employees in more than 53 offices and testing laboratories throughout the western United States. Our Southern California Region includes offices and/or laboratories within the Counties of Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego, with more than 160 qualified engineers, geologists, managers, field and administrative staff. Our capabilities and staff size allow us to perform geotechnical and testing services to meet critical, and at times unpredictable, time schedules in a cost-effective manner. Public Works Ex erience Kleinfelder has a long, successful track record of providing services on public works-related projects. Approximately 60% of our current projects in Southern California are public works related, either being performed directly for public agencies or through design/civil engineering firms. As a result, Kleinfelder is well versed in the requirements for timeliness and efficiency when working on public sector projects. After 38 years in the business, we have worked with many federal, state and local agencies and are knowledgeable of the applicable codes, regulations and ordinances associated with public works design and construction. As a result, we are experienced in the requirements for timeliness and efficiency when working on public sector projects. Our services on these projects typically include: · Analysis and approval of imported backfill material; · Inspecting preparation of existing surfaces to receive fill; ' · Monitoring placement and compaction of fill including required tests; · Advancement of exploratory borings; · Obtaining and testing samples for a variety of properties; · Preparation of soils, foundation and geo-seismic reports; · · Emergency response to soil failure, flood or earthquake damage; · Other miscellaneous soils engineering services. We have also performed independent review of consultant repons for development projects on behalf of our clients. A summary of recent, relevant experience is presented below. k~ KLEINFELDER Caltrans Expertise Kleinfelder has provided construction and testing services directly for Caltrans projects in Districts I, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 59, and has worked routinely on projects that require Caltrans oversight for other owners, consultants or contractors. Local projects requiring Caltrans oversight have been per, brined for the City of Coruna and Temecula, Riverside County Transportation Department, San Bernardino County Transportation and Flood Control Department, San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), Orange County Public Facilities and Resources Department, Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA), and numerous local agencies and municipalities. Through these projects and hundreds for cities and counties, our personnel are well versed in Caltrans procedures, documentation, plans and specifications. Field inspection, sampling and testing, .laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and report preparation follow Caltrans specifications, as required. The resulting knowledge of these procedures along with our experience with construction materials, construction practices, and local experience promotes a high quality of service while optimizing the efficiency of project- related tasks. Materials Construction Testine and Observatio,, Kleinfelder's objective is to reduce the uncertainty in dealing with construction materials. This objective is achieved through our in-house testing and qualification program to assure that qualified personnel are assigned to each project, and that registered engineers supervise the field and laboratory technical activities. Kleinfelder technicians and/or inspectors are certified by or encouraged to obtain advanced certification from local and nationally recognized programs, and are cross-trained to provide field observation and testing services on a wide variety of projects. Many are certified by various agencies such 'as Caltrans, southern California Counties and Cities, International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), National Institute for the Certification of Engineering Technicians (NICET), and American Welding Society (AWS). · Placement of Reinforcing Steel ' Site Grading · High Strength and Exp.',,~sion Bolting· Pile Driving · Asphalt and Concrete Paving ' Drainage Systems · Drilled Pier Constr~ction · Subgrade Preparation · Rock Anchor Placement · Batch Plant Inspection · Reinforcement Placement · Load Tests · Field Instrumentation (inclinometers. · Foundation Excavations · Concrete Placement · Backfill Placement · Steel Construction · Masonry Construction · Soil Improvemem ~ KLEINFELDER Laboratory Testing Kleinfelder laboratories are fully equipped for testing soil, rock and construction materials. Kleinfelder has an in-house quality assurance program to maintain a high level of accuracy and reproducibility in testing services performed by the firm. Experienced technicians perform the laboratory tests, and re~stered professional engineers review the results. Ail gauges, proving rings, scales, and other equipment used for testing, are calibrated on a regular basis by certified independent agencies. Kleinfelder's own quality assurance program is supplemented with regular inspection by governmental agencies. Periodic inspection of our testing equipment and testing techniques is conducted by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, U. S. Navy, and U.S. Forest Service to verify acceptance of our testing labora[ories for work performed for the respective agencies. The most significant outside quality assurance inspe~:tion of our firm is by the National Bureau of Standards through the Commercial Testing Laboratory Accreditation Program. · Soil Classification and Indices · Consolidation · Dispersion · Permeability · Swell · Hydraulic Conductivity · Direct shear · Triaxial shear Soil and Aggregate Concrete Masonry Asphalt Metals Roofing Epoxy Timber PROPOSED STAFF Kleinfelder's project manager will be Mr. Gary Goldman, PE. Mr. Goldman has over 10 years experience in geotechnical engineering, preparing preliminary soils, foundation and percolation reports, and special repons dealing with specific geotechnical challenges. Projects have included bridges, roads, highways, railroads, landslides, buried structures, water facilities and buried conduits. He develops conclusions and recommendations for site grading, static and seismic foundation design, slope stability, retaining walls, soil mitigation methods, pavement evaluations and street structural section design. The organizational chart for our Temecula office is shown on the following page. Kay staff available for project assignment from our Temecula office include. Paul Roppo - Senior Staff Engineer, Rick Bel 1 - Supervisory Technician, .lames Westerman - Senior On-Site Technician, Chuck Nieto - Field Technician, and Ruben Roque and Phil Httrris - Laboratory Managers Other staff from our San Diego and Redlands office that are available to assist Mr. Goldman include ,'-l#en Evans, P£~ G[: - Quality Assurance, Rick Larson, P£; GE - Senior Engineer, and Ron Thompson - Operations Manager. Resumes of key personnel are attached. ~,~ KLEINFELDER SUB-CONSULTANT OR SUB-CONTRACTORS Kleinfelder does not foresee the need for sub-consultant or sub-contractor services. We are capable of performing all anticipated services in-house. OTI:IE.R CONDITIONS This proposal will remain in effect for a minimum of ninety (90) days from the date shown on the proposal. EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE 9 r:~aormts~nasters~annual contract~kleinfelder aQrmt ~k~ KLEINFELDER 1999 CALIFORNIA FEE SCHEDULE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECHNICAL/MATERIALS TESTING SERVICES ( DISCOUNTED AT 15% ) ANNUAL CONTRACT, CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS PROFESSIONAL STAFF RATES* Professional ................................................................................................................ $ 64/hour Staff Professional .......................................................................................................... $ 81/hour Senior Professional .............................................. .; ....................................................... $ 891hour Project Professional ....................................................................................................... $ 98/hour Project Manager ........................................................................................................... $10?./hour Senior Professional .............................................................................. . .........................$11S/hour Senior Project Manager ................................................................................................. $125/hour Principal Professional .................................................................................................... $140/hour Senior Principal/Expert Witness ...................................................................................... $ 275/hour Program Manager/Senior Consultant ................................................................................ $175/hour Senior Program Manager ................................................................................................$195/hour ADMINISTRATIVE/TECHNICAL STAFF RATES Administrative/~Vord Processor ........................................................................................ $ 47/hour Technician ................................................................................................................... $ 48/hour Associate Technician ..................................................................................................... $ 48/hour Senior Technician .......................................................................................................... $ 58/hour Supervisory Technician ................................................................................................... $ 69/hour Oraftsperson ................................................................................................................. $ 55/hour CADD Operator ............................................................................................................. $ 63/hour Minimum Charges For Office Time Per Day ......................................................................... One Hour at Application Rate · Applies to all professional rates including but not limited to civil, mechanical, chemical, electrical, geotechnical, and environmental engineers; industrial hygienist; geologists; hydrogeologists; and computer specialist. ~,,~ KLEINFELDER GEOTECH~qCAL/MATERIALS TESTING EQUIPMENT CHARGES MATERIALS TESTING EQUIPMENT Skidmore Wilhelm Bolt Tension Cai brator Torque Wrench ........................................ ' ........................... $ 42.00 / day Schmidt Hammer ...................................................................... $ 42.00 / day R Meter (Pachometer) ........................ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ........... i ........ ii'"""i ..................... $ 68.00 / day wind,or Probe ..................................................................... i.....Z..ZZZL.ZLZZZZZi $ 68.00/day Anchor Bolt Testing Device ............................................... $ 21.00 / shot Concrete Vapor Transmission Test Kit-Floors & Slabs ....... :i::... :i::i:i:. ":i:ii ......... ~ $ 136.00 / day $ 58.00 /test Thin Lift Nuclear Asphalt Gange ........... . .............. iii.....iiiiiii~i ......... $ 74.00 /day Nuclear Asphalt Content Gauge ................................................................................................... $ 73.00 / day Coring Maclxine with Generator .............................................. $ 147.00 / day rZoorrla essTe,Ung Device ................................................ Z:.ZZZZZ: :ZZZ:Z2' $ 95.00/day Diamond Bit Core Barrel Charge Asphalt Concrete or Masonry 2" Diameter ...................................................... $ .6 00 / rich 3 .......................................... $ 4.75 / inch Dxameter ........ $ 7.50 / inch ............................................... $ 5.25 / inch D~ametar ....................................................... $ 9.00 / inch ............................................... $ 6.30 / inch 86::Diameter ...................................................... $12.50 / inch ............................................... $ 7.50/inch Diameter ............................................... $15.75 / inch ................................................ $ 10.50 / inch Minimum bit charge-6" per job SOIL AND AGGREGATE TESTS COMPACTION CURVES ndard 4 Mold Standard 6 Mold D 698 Method , Modified, 4" Mold ..................................................................... ~ ...... B .C I~j~fol~i.t 6i~Mna°cld~.'"":":'T;'"'; ................................................................... D-1557 Method B, C p t, Dry Memoo .................................................................................. CAL-216-F California Impact, Wet Method. .................................................................................... CAL-216 $ 147.00/each Check Point .......................................................................... $ 105.00/each Relative Density (Maximum and Minimum) ................................. ~'~'~ $ 273.00/set SOIL AND AGGREGATE STABILITY R-Value, Untxeated Material or field Sample ...... . ................. CAL-301 $ 220.00/each R-Value, Reprnportioned or Chemically -Treated .............................. CAL-301 $ 265.00/each Correction for oversized material in sample ........................................... CAL~301 $ 63.00/each C.B.R. 100% Compaction (Includes compaction curve) .....................................D-I883, T-180 $ 515.00/each C.B-R. Other Compaction Effort (Includes compaction curve) ........................................ D-1883 $ 672.00/each Soil Cement, C.T.B., Mix Design ................................................................................... On Request C.T.B. Compression Test, (Includes Preparation) ........................................... D-l~3, ~'~L-~'~2 $ 798.00/each Lime-Treated Compression Test (Includes Preparation) ............................................... CAL-373 $ 795.00/each Check Point ................................ CAL-373 $ 220.00/each Cement-Treated Compression Test..................... BASIC SOIL AND AGGREGATE PROPERTIES Sieve Analysis, Coarse and Fine Including Wash ............................................................... C-136 $ 116.00/each Sieve Analysis, Coarse (Retained on No. 4 Sieve) .............................................................. C-136 $ 68.00/each Sieve Analysis, Fine Includin~ Wash (Passine No. 4 Sieve) .............................................. C-136 $ 100.00/each Sieve Analysis, Wash (% Finer than No. 200~Sieve) .......................................................... C-117 $ 68.00/each Hydrometer (Without Sieve Analysis) ................................................................................ D-422 $ 137.00/each Hydrometer (Including Sieve Analysis) .................................. D-422 $ 205.00/each Specific Gravity ............................................................................... C-127, C-t28, D-854 Sand Equivalent, Average of 2 ......................................................... CAL-217 S 79.00/each Sand Equivalent, One Point Method .................................................... 1'111111"1511'" . .......... $ 89.00/each $ 74.00/each Plasticity Index ......................................................................... ' .... "... ""'..D'~318 $ 138.00/each Liquid Limit ....................................................................... D-4318 Expansion Index Test .......................................................... :.....Zi.'~3'g'~'~'b'i'~)'~C i8-2 $ 8~.00/each Swell Pressure, Per Point .......................................................................................... $ 136.00/each Moisture Determination and Unit Weight ........................................... D-22 6. D-2937. D-4643 S 84.00/each Moisture Determination Only .......................................................... D-2216; D-464 S 42.00/each Resistivity of Soil (Laborato~., Measurement) ................................................. CAL-'~ .2 or 64.~ S 21.00/each S 135.00/each $ 168.00leach $ 189.00/each $ 168.00/each $ 178.00/each $ 189.00/each 90-SAC\LDAM CO\'R VA":\ 99' FEE :EF99Zg)(;co i (Revised 1/1/99i ~1~ KLEINFELDER pH Test (Laboratory Measurement) ........................ .... EPA-9045 pH Test, Lime Treated Soils ............................................................................ C-977 $ 47.00/each $ 90.00/each Organic Content-Soils ............................................................ ' .................i~-2974 $ 84.00/each Pinhole Teat for Dispersive Soils ..................................... ~' ~'"'~ii ................. /)-4647 $ 210.00/each Dielectric Constant .................................................. . ...... $ 50.00/each HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIV]Fry Flexible Wall, Falling Head ................................................................ D-5084 EM 1110-2-1906 $ 315.00/each Rigid Wall Permeability of Undisturbed Sample, up to No. 4 S ¢v¢ Size .................................... $ 158.00/each Rigid Wall, Constaut Head, Gravel ........................ . ................ $ 158.00/each SAMPLE PREPARATION Remolding ...................... ' .............................................. $ 48.00/each Splitting .................. ~ .................................................................................................. $ 63.00/each ..... $ 47.00/each SITAR STRENGT'[I AND CONSOLI])ATION TESTS Unconfined Compression, Including Moisture Content and Unit Weight .......................................................................................................... D-2166 Triaxial Compression Teat $ 95.00/each Quick Per Point ...................................................................................................................... UU Saturated .............................................................................................................. D-2850 $ 121.00/point CD Saturated ....................................................................................... EM-1110-2-1906 $ 200.00/point CU Saturated ................... ' D-4767 $ 305.00/point Direct Shear (Quick) Per Point (Dry) ................................................................................ D-3080 $ 347.00/point /)irect Shear (3 point staged test) (Saturated) ................................................................................ $ 100.00/each Direct Shear (Residual) Per Point (Saturated) ............................................................................... $ 265.00/each $' 105.00/point Consolidation, With Two Time Rates ........................................................................................... $' 340.00/test Constant Rate of Strain Consolidation, With Time Rate ................................................... Da*186 $ 525.00/test Consolidation, Without Time Rate, Six Load Increments ................................................. D-2435 $ 262.00/test Collapse Potential .......................................................................... . ....... $ 95.00/each Note: Special testing procedures ' expense basis, that dcvtate from standard will be charged on a time and AGGREGATE QUALITY Injurious Organic Matter ............................................................................................ C-40 Absorption, Gravel ....................................................................... C-127 Absorption Sand ....................... C 128 Unit Weight, Average of 3 ........... ; ................................................................................. C-29 Unit Weight, One Point Method ............................................................................................ C-29 Los An eeles Abrasion Test-500 Revolutions .................................................... CAL-211, C-131 Los Angeles Abrasion Teat-l,000 Revolutions ............................................ CAL-211, C-535 Sulfate Soundness (5 Cycles) Per Sieve Size ...................................................... CAL-214, C-88 Mortar Making Properties of Sand (2 ages) ........................................................ CAL-515, C-87 PotentiaI Reactivity Test ..................................................................................................... C-289 Cleanness Test (Referee Test) .................. CAL 227 Crashed Panicles on Sieved Sample ......... i. ' ............................................... ~:" .... Flat and Elongated Particles on Sieved Sam~]'~' iiiiiii ........... iiiii~']i'~'~'i~ CE.Ll-1290~'~.-~29~ Clay Lumps and Friable Panicles ...................................................................... C-142 Lightweieht Pieces in Aggregate .......................· ........ C-123 Durability, Pine .................................... CAL-229 D-3744 53.00/each 53.00/each, 79.00/each 89.00/test 58.00/each 142.00/each 185.00/each 89.00/each 357.00/each On Request 131.00/each 131.00/each 131.00/each 95.00/each 210.00/each 105.00/each 158.00/each 235.00/test ( Revised I / I/99 ) ~k~ KLEINFELDER CONCRETE Concrete Mix Design Review ................................... $ 185.00/each Laboratory Trial Batch, Including Compression Testing of Six Specimens ................................. $ 525.00/each Concrete Cylinder Cured and/or Compression Tested .......................................................... C-39 Compression Test, Lightweight Insulating Concrete .......................................................... C-495 $ 23.00/each Unit Weight of Concrete Cylinders ........ C 1 $ 47.00/each Flextwal S~ength Concrete Beam ........................................................................ - 38 $ 47.00/each ............................................................................ C-78. C-293 $ 90.00/each Compression Test, Gunite/Shotcrete ................................................................................. ~ ........... $ 58.00/each Compression Test, Guaite/Shotcrete Panel, Set of 6 Cores .............................................. $ 205.00/set Compression Test on Cored Specimens (Includes End Preparation) .............................. ~...~.C-42 $ 53.00/each* Cylinder Molds ............................. Drying Shrinkage Test, set of 3 ....... i ......... i .... ' ......................... ~7~'~;~"~'~'~'"~:~3; $ 2.70/each Modulus of Elasucity of 6 x 12" Concrete C lin ............ .,.,u $ 370.00/each . . . y der ..................... Sphttmg Tensile Strength ....... ' ............................. C469 $ 210.00/each Cement Content of Hardened C~'~i~ii ~ .................................................................. C496 $ 68.00/each ,D. ensity of Spray Applied F reproofmg .................................................................... C-85 On Request unit Weight of Li£htwei~ht Concrete ........................ : ...................................................... E-605 $ 63.00/each .................................................................................... C-567 Concrete Permeability CRD C48 $ 63.00/each Mortar Bar Expansion C 227 $1165.00/each ......................................................................... - $1165.00/each * Does not include coring MASONRY Grout or Mortar Specimen Cured and/or Compression Tested ............................. C-579, C- I 019, c-7g0, C-942, C- 109 Compression Test, Masonry Units ................................... C140 $ 23.00/each ............................................... orsmall,e.r ............................................. UBC24-~g~'E447 $ 84.00/each ~ . ,, x-n~ma or smaner ............ UBC 24 26TM ~.ompre~smn Test, 12 x 8 x 16 Prisms or smal er ............................... UB,.~ ,,~-,,~, ~ ~ $ 95.00/each .................................. ,-- a'*-~o, ~: ,~,~/ $ 105.00/each ^osorpnon and Received Moisture, Masonry Unit .................................................... C 140 Lineal Shrinkage Masonry Units . C-4~'~ "~;'3}e1~. ,! $ 63.00/each Compression Strength, Brick ............. ' ..................................................... , ...... $ 142.00/each Modulus of Rupture, Brick ............................................................................... C-67 $ 52.00/each Absorption Test, Brick, 5-~'~'t~'~'a'a'~'~;i~'~'; .................................................................. c-67 $ 63.00/each Shear Test on Masonry or Brick Cores .................................................................. C-67 $ 78.00/each Grout or Mortar Mold ......................................................................... CAL-644 $ 84.00/each Breaking Load, Roof Tilc-i~]iiiii::iiiiil]:ii::il];:i]]i:i:i: ......................................................................... $ 2.651 each Absorpuon, Roof Tile .................. ' ..................................................... UBC 32-12 $ 37.00/each Permeability, Roof Tile .................. ....iJiiill ................................................................. UBC 32-12 $ 63.00/each $ 105.00/each ASPHALT Specification Tests-AR Grades ............................ . -Liquid Asphalt Grades .... ' .................................................................... On Request -Emulsions ........... ' ................................................................................... On Request Other ^sphalt Tests .................... 111-1111111111111111111111111111117'11'"11 ....................................................... On Request Centrifuge Kerosene Equivalent ........ ' ........................................................... On Request Exa'action % Bmmen ................................................................. CAL-303 $ 210.00/each o ............................................................. D-1856 D-2172 orCAL-310 $ 132.00/each Extraction, % Bitumen, with Gradation ........................ . - Film Stripping ............................. ' ................................. ~',~'I'"~:'3 $ 210.00/each - $ 100.00/each Stabi~meIerTestandMixing~fSamp~.~~.~.~.~.~CAL~366 $ 195.00/each Stabilometer Test on Premixed Sample ........................ Swell ....................... - ........................ CAL-366 $ 131.00/each ....................................................................................................... CAL-305 $ 105.00/each Moisture Vapor Susceptibility, in Addition to Stabilometer ............................. CAL-307 $ 210.00/each Complete Desien of Wearing Surface for a Given Asnhalt and Aegregate, Hveem or Marsha I Method ....... ' ............................................................... Marshall S'[~bilirv and Flow-Set of 3 (W thout M x ne) ........................... : ....................... D-1559 Marshall Stabilit4/and Flow-Set of 3 (Lab Mixed)...~ ..................................................... D-1559 Unit Weight of ~ore or Compacted Sample Moisture Content (Xylene Reflux ............................................................... D2726 Method) ........ .. . ........... D-1461 90'SAC[I.DA M I(JO\PRIVA ]'E\I 999\FEE\FEE99_Z99.Gco_3 On Request 294.00/set 378.00/set 42.00/each 195.00/each k~l KLEINFELDER Maximum Density of Mix by Marshall Method, Set of 3 (Without Mixing) ................................ $ 173.00/set Maximum Density of Mix by Hreem Method, Set of 3 (Without Mixing)..... CAL-304, D-1561 $ 175.00/set Maximum Theoretical Speci'fic Gravity (Rice Method) ................ D-2041 Index of Retained Stxength ................. ...................... . ............ D-1074, D-1075 $ 120.00/each $ 860.00/each Index of Retained Strength ..................................................................... US Army Corps Method $ 588.00/each METALS Tensile, Up to 0.5 sq. in. Cross Sectional AXed 0.5 sq. in. to 1 8 sq ...... $ 63.00/each* Greater tha~ ! 8 sq in ........................................................................... $ 74.00/each" ...................................................................................................... On Request Bend Only ..................................................................................................................................... Tensile and Bend, Up to 0.5 sq. in. Cross Sectional Area ...................................................... $ 31.00/each Tensile and Bend, 0.5 sq. in. to 1.8 sq. in ............................................................................... $ 74.00/each $ 84.00/each Tensile and Bend, Greater than 1.8 sq. in .......... Pre-Stress Smmds, Tensile and Elongation.. ~-"-' ~ ............ ii~iiiiiiiiii]iiiiiii~ ........ ~ii~'~ On Request Pre-Stress Wire, Tensile and Elongation ............................................................................. A421 On Request On Request Machining Costs ......... ' Weight ° f C°ating (Set o f 3 ) .....~;~~;~~.~3 At Cost+20% $ 110.00/set Bolts, Nuts & Washers, Hardness, & Load Tests ............................................... ~ .......................... On Request * Does not include machining costs, if required. Side Bend Test .................................................................................. Free Bend Test ..................................................................... i.....iii....iiii...i~.iiii~ii~ii~i~i~ii~ $ Tensile Test (reduced section) ................................................................................................ $ Macroetch Test .................................................................................... .... $ Fracture Test ................. $ Notch Test ............................................. $ $ WELDING QUALIFICATIONS-STRUCTURAL STEEL (PHYSICAL TEST METHOD-ASME, AW$, API, TITLE 21 ) Operator Performance and Procedure Tests .................. Laboratory Testing .................................................................... Guided Bend Test, face or root ' On Request $ 42.00/each 42.00/each 42.00/each 74.00leach* 68.00/each 47.00/each 63.00/each 53.00l each Fusion Qualification Test on High Pressure Polyethylene Pipe .................................................... On Request Qualification tests also available by X-ray procedures ................................................................. On Request * Does not include mackining costs, if required. ROOFING TESTS Standard Quantitative Analysis ....................................... Weight of Bitumen, Ply Structure Diagram ......................................................... $ 153.00/each Standard Quantitative Analysis With Gravel .................................................... Includes Weight of Grave $ 185.00/each Quantitative Analysis ............................................................................................ D-2829 $ 265.00/each Quantitative Analysis (New Roofs) ........................................................ii......ii..iiD-3617 $ 185.00/each Unit Weight of Surfacing ............................................ Unit Weight of Sample ............................................ ii.. '"ii""'i ................................................ $ 79.00/each Dianram &Sample ................................................................................................................... S 74.00/each Voi~t Analysis ...................................................................................................................... $ 79.00/each PlyTvpe Identification ....................................... $ 79.00/each Mat ]:ype Identification ....................................i. ii ........................................................ $ 55.00/each Bitumen Sample Recovery ...................................... ' .............................................................. $ 58.00/each Bitumen Type Identification (Softening Point) ..............................i...iiii..ii iiiii'iiiiii .... $ 210.00/each Compliance Report .................. · .... $ 142.00/each Technical Photograph ............................... ilJ..JiilJiiill ...................................................................... On Request Roof Moisture Survey ....................................................... ' ...................................On Request On Request TIMBER ~k~ KLEINFELDER Moisture Content Measurements ................... . ........... $ 21 each, + technician's Strip Tension Test ................. hourly rate .......................................... $ 95 each, + machining Truss Load Teat ....................... cost Shear Test ........... ' .......................... On Request Qualmcation Test For Adhesives ................... ~ ~ ~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~ii~i On Request Face Joint Bonding Test ................................................................................................................ On Request End 3oint Bonding Test ................................................................................................................. On Requ~t On Request OTti~R EQUIPMENT CHARGES GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION EQUIPMENT . Seismograph, Single Channel BJzon Model 1570C or Nimbus Model ES-125 ....................................................................................................................... $189.00 /day Seismograph, Twelve Channel Nimbus Model ES 121 OF ........................................................ Resistivity Meter, Bison Model #2390 ..................................................................................... ~ .. $ 495.00 /day $165.00 /day Soil Test Model R-40C ........ . ...... Megger Earth Tester ........................................ ' ............................................................ $135.00 /day Magnetometer, Portable Proton-Geometries Model 681~'iiiiiiiiii"iiiiii .......................................... $105.00 /day $190.00 /day Electromagnetics ................................................. Terrain Conductivity Meter ............................................................... $ 220.00 /day Geonies Model EM 31 ..................................................... Downhole Shear Wave Velocity Measurement ....................... ii~iiiii:~ ............................................ $ 200.00 /day Blast and Vibration Monitor, VM. 1 O0 (Normal set up and takedo~5.11111111111111111111111111111111111111~i On Request $ 400.00 /day Slope Indicator (4-hour r~ninimlnn'~ Pneumatic Piezo'meter Indicator ....................................... $ 4'/.00 /hour Sin¢o Model 51411-A .................................................. Sealed Double Ring Inftl~'ometer .................. $1 g0.00 /day Test Equipment .............. Ou Request VEHICLES Vehicle 2 Wheel Drive . $ 8.50 /hour Vehicle, 4 Wheel Drive .......................... iiiiiiii"iiiii ....................................................................... $ 16.00 /hour Mileage, 2 Wheel Drive ..................................... $ .53 /mile Mileage, 4 Wheel Dxive .......................................... ' ......................................................... $ 1.05 /mile Vehicle Equipped with Standard Field Testing Equi~i'iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiill $ 16.00 /hour Vehicle Equipped with Nuclear Density Testing Equipment ........................................................ $ 21.00 /hour Vehicle Equipped with Ultrasonic, Magnetic Particle, and Dye Penetrant Testing Equipment ................................................................................... $ 21.00 /hour Utility Trailer ..... .. $ 37.00 /day Hydraulic Hand Lift ........................... iiiii ................................. iiii~i~i~ii~ $ 32.00 /day OFFICE EQUIPMENT Microcomputer, basic software systems and supporting hardware .............................. $ 21.00 /hour Mainframe Computer Time-Sha~ing (per CPU minute) ............................................................... $ 9.00 /minute Camera and Film ......................................................................... Computer Connect Time ........................................ ' .......................................... $ 21.00 /week Disk Storage (per megabyte) ............................. i .............................................................. $ 7.50 /hour Environmental Information Manaeement System Software Surcharge ............................. i ...... $ 74.00 /month Project Management and CPM So~frware Surcharge ........................................ ·. ... $ 16.00 /hour $ 16.00 /hour Reproduction ...................................................... Telephone ................................................................... iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii $ 0.50 /page Facsimile Copies ..................................................................... $ 0.50 /minute Report Surcharge .......................................................... ' ................................... $ 2.50 /page Large Format Drawing Copies, 20-lb Bond ........................ i. · ........................................ $ 37.00 /copy Large Format Drawing Copies, Erasable Vellum ...................... i ...... ii17'""i ........................... i' $ 2.65 /sq ft Large Format Drawing Copies, Precision Trim · $ 3.70 /sq ft 1.60 /each Mylar Reproductions .......................................... i"ii'i .................................................................... $ Autocad Drafting, Hardware and Software ............................... "ii.' ............................................ $ 16.00 /sheet Autocad Drawing Plots $ 32.00 /hour Video Camera ................................................................................................................ $ 1.60 /minute .............................................................................................................................. $ 74.00 /day 90'SAC\I.D.'\ M ICO\P RIVA'FE\1999\FEE' F E E99-Z99.Gco_5 (Revised [11/99) FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND CONVERSE CONSULTANTS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND CONVERSE CONSULTANTS ANNUALAGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL GEOTECHNICAL& MATERIALS TESTING SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of January 23, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Converse Consultants ("Consultant"). In consideration ofthe mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On February 8, 2000 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). B. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: TERM. The term of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the Agreement and shall commence on February 8, 2000 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2001. 3. Exhibit A of the Agreement is hereby amended to include the work described in Exhibit A-1 to this Agreement. 4. Section 4.a. PAYMENT of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Sixty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($60,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 5. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 1 r:~agmts\masters~annual masters~onverse AMEND1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CiTY OF TEMECULA BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Converse Consultants 10391 Corporate Dr. Redding, CA 92374 (909) 796-0544 BY: Hashmi S.E. Quazi, Ph.D.P.E. Senior Vice President/Principal Engineer NAME: Richard Gilbert, CEO (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 r:~agmts\masters~annual masters\converse AMEND1 Converse Consultants Over 50 Years of Dedication in Geotechnical Engineering and Environmental Sciences December 15, 2000 Mr. Amer Attar, P.E. Senior Engineer, Capital Projects City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 RECEIVED DEC '1 9 Z000 OITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Subject: ANNUAL CONTRACT EXTENSION REQUEST Geotechnical and Material Testing Services City of Temecula, California Converse Project No: 99-81-295-00 Dear Mr. Attar: Converse Consultants (Converse) has prepared this letter to request an extension to our contract for the above referenced services. Our agreement was from February 8, 2000 to February 8, 2001 for a budget amount of $35,000.00. We request the City to extend our contract till the end of the 2000-2001 fiscal year, which will be June 30, 2001. Also, we request the City to amend our budget as deemed appropriate. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of Temecula. If you have any question please call the undersigned at (909)-796-0544. Hashmi S. Quazi, Ph.D., P.E. Sr. Vice President/Principal Engineer Dist: 2/Addressee 10391 Corporate Drive, Redlands, California 92374 Telephone: (909) 796-0544 · Facsimile: (909) 796-7675 * e-mail: ccieconv(~aol.com AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND CONVERSE CONSULTANTS CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL GEOTECHNICAL and MATERIALS TESTING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of February 8, 2000, between the City of Temecuta. a municipal corporation ("City") and Converse Consultants ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on February 8, 2000, and shall remain and continue in effect until February 8, 2001, unless terminated or extended pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. This is an annual contract for Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services on an as needed basis. Consultant can perform any of the services and tasks desc~bed and set forth in Exhibit A, attachect hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. When there is a need for Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services on an as needed services, the City will identify the specific scope of work, and request a fee schedule from the consultant. The City will instruct the consultant to proceed with the work once the exact scope of work and the associated fees are negotiatecL 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform ail tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as negotiated and as set forth in Exhibit B. Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the tasks as directed by the City on an as needed basis. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates are null an(3 void. The total cumulative annual amount shall not exceed Thirty Five Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($35,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement unless such additional services are authonzed in advance and in wdting by the City. Consultant shall be compensated for services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and Consultant at the time City's written au~orization is given to Consultant for the performanco of said services. Any additional work in excess of the amount a(3ove shall be approved by the City Council. c. Consultant will suDmit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous m(3nth. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to ail non(~sputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days (3f receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise, if the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by wdtten notice to the Consultant. if such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with wdtten notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (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 penod of time, the City shall have the dght. 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. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be cleady identi- fied and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the dght to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and st3all allow inspection of all work, data. documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a penod of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon comr~letion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement. all onginal documents. ~esigns, drawings, maps. models, computer flies containing oata generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepare0 in the course of prowding the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sote property of the City and may be used. reused or otherwise 0isposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer flies c,~ntaining data generated for the work. Consultant shall make 2 available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software an0 hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transfemng and pdnting computer files. c. With respect to the design of public imorovements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property 0amage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, inciuciing attomey fees and expert witness fees, 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 ansing out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance.. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA O0 O1 06 92 covedng Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's I lability Insurance. if the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: General Liability: $1,0001000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personat injury and property damage. If CommerCial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the ~eneral aggregate !im~t shall apply sebaratety to this project,'location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. Automobile Liability: Sl,000.C00 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3 Worker's Compensation as required by the State of C~lifomia; Employer's Liability:. One million dollars ($1,000,000) per =cc:dent for bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability coverage: Two million ($2,000,000~ per claim and in aggregate. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or soil-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and relateci investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automoDile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability adsing out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products ancl c~mpleted operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no spec. iai limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be pnmary insurance as respects the City, its officel~, officials, employees and volunteers. ,Any insurance or seif-insurad maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim ~s made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be enoorsed to state that coverage si~all not be suspended, voided, c~nceled by either party, reducecl in coverage or in limits except after :,~irty (30) days' prior wntten notice by certified mail, return receipt ~e~uested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. ',nsurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A M. Eest's rating of no less than A:Vll. unless otherwise acceptable to me City. Self insurance snail not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Coveraee. Consultant shall furnish the City w,[n original endorsements effecting coverage required by this c;ause. The endorsements are to ce s~gned by a person autr~orized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements -~;e to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of ail required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have central over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness adsing out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local. State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations w~ich in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's pdor written authonzation. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for oocuments, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant sgrees to cooperate fully with City anO to provide City with the opportunity to review any response ,.o discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the nght by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may oesire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may De given either By (I) personal service. (ii) clelivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limiteo to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the part*/as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: To Consultant: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecuta, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager Converse Consultants 103901 Corporate Ddve Redlands, California 92370 Attention: Hashmi S.E. QuaTJ, Ph.D, P.E. 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without i~dor written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Hashmi S.E. QuazJ, Senior Vice President shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Hashmi S.E. Quazi may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice pnor to the departure of Hashmi S.E. Quazi from Consultant's emptoy. Should he or she teave Consultant's employ, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice pedod. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to. and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At ali times dudng the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the Fedormance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant uncerstand and agree that the laws of the State of Califom=a shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement ,-~ny litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the munmipal, supenor, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of TemectJla. In the event such litigation is fileQ Dy one party against the ottler to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as cetermfned by the Court's judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attomey fees ancl litigation ex=er~ses for the retief granted. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanciing between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described m this Agreement. Ail prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations ano s'.atements, oral or wntten. are merged into this Agreement ane shall be of no further force or effect. --ach party is entering 6 this Agreement based solely upon the reeresentations set forth herein one u~on each party's own im3ependent investigation of any aha a~l facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants anti represents that he or she has the autl~ority to execute this Agreement on t3ehalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind C~,nsultant to the performance of its oPiigations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the Cay and year first above wdtten. CITY OF TEMECULA J y . t e, M or Susan W. Jon,es, CtvT'CIAAE, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Converse Consultants 10391 Corporate Dr. CA 92374 Redding, Senior Vice PresidentJPdncipal~Engine~ By~ ~/ ,' .- . me: Title: ~ ',~%¢" (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) 7 EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED Converse Consultants November ! 9, i999 Mr, Amer Attar, P, E, Senior Engineer, Capital Projects City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: STATEMENTOF QUALIFICATIONS Annual Contract for Geotechnical and Materials Testing Services City RFQ No, 01 Temecula, California Converse Project No, 99-81-295-00 Dear Mr. Attar; Enclosed is our Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) to provide Geotechnical and Materials Testing services to the City of Temecula under an annual contract. This SOQ is submitted in response to the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) No, 01 issued by your office dated November 2, 1999. Converse Consultants (Converse) has the resources and experience to provide the City of Temecula with quality services in a cost effective and timely manner. We have extensive experience providing geotechnical, ~eologic, and environmental engineering, as welt as soils and materiais testing and inspection in the Temecula area. We are very familiar with the geotechnical and geologic conditions and constraints that will face your projects. The team ,we have assembled to provide the required services has recent experience working in Temecula for both the city and private enterprise. We have an excellent working relationship with your office and other city departments, Thank you for the cscortunity to provide this SOQ. Please feet free to call the undersigned or Ms. Beth Calcaterra at (909) 796-0544 if you have any questions or would ',ike to discuss this SOQ in further detail. Hashmi ~ E. Quazi. :h.D., P. E. Sen~or './!:e President ~rinc~pal Engineer 99-81-295-00 November ~ 9. ~ 999 Page 1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES Based on the information in the RFQ our scope of services for the City of Temecula projects will likely inctude: 1. I Project Set-up and Coordination Under the direction of the project manager a staff professional from Converse will set-up the project to provide the services outlined under our scope of work. The assignment under the project set-up will include; coordinate with the design firm and the city representative to schedule the field investigation; stake the boring location prior to drilling; notify Underground Service Alert (USA) to ctear the borings for locations of underground utilities and arrange for a drill rig. 1.2 Site Reconnaissance A certified engineering geologist will conduct a geologic reconnaissance of the site and surrounding areas to evaluate geologic structure and faulting, as well as to map the areal distribution of the geologic units exposed at or near the surface. The purpose of the reconnaissance and mapping will be to identify: · Drainage · Geomorphic and geologic conditions · Fault and seismic hazard As part of the site reconnaissance, we will review all readily available geologic maps and reports for the region. 1.3 Subsurface Explorations Our proposed geotechnicai investigation will provide personnel, equipment and materials to drill exploratory borings/test pits, conduct seismic refraction surveys if necessary, and geotechnical laboratory testing of soil samples. This information will be used to present the geotechnical/geologic issues that should be considered during the proposed development. The various ~asks generally associated ~vith geotechnical/geoiogic investigations are described betow: ~-'~ Converse Consu~tar, ts CC[ENT~OFFIC E'.JC -~FILE~,1999\8 l' 99-2~5\99-295-0.pr0 99-81-295-00 Noveml~er 39, 1999 Page 2 Exploration Borings: The number of borings is determined based on the area of the project and the number of faciiities to be constructed. The depth of the borings will, in general, range from five (5) to fifty (50) feet below existing ground surface or to refusal, whichever is shallower. Shallow borings will be drilled within the proposed access road and parking areas. Deeper borings are placed within the footprint of the proposed structures. In general, borings will be drilled using an 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger drill rig. Ring and bulk samples will be obtained from each boring. Our field personnel will record driving blow counts and continuous logs of subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings. Borings will be backfilled with native materials. Test Pits: If deemed necessary, a backhoe equipped with a 24-inch wide bucket will be used to excavate any necessary test pits. Information from the test pits will be used to evaluate excavation wall stability, removal depths and excavatability of site soils. The maximum depth of the test pits will be between five (5) and 15 (feet) feet below existing ground surface. Seismic Refraction Survey: We will perform seismic refraction surveys if necessary to evaluate depth to bedrock. The seismic refraction survey investigates the subsurface conditions by generating arrival time and offset distances to determine the path and velocity of an elastic disturbance in the ground. Shot, hammer, and weight drop or some comparable method of putting impulsive energy into the ground creates the disturbance. Detectors are laid out at regular intervals in a line to measure the first arrival energy and the time of arrival. The data are plotted in time rs. distance graph, from which velocity of, and depth of layers can be calculated. The information will be used to evaluate the excavatability and rippability of the bedrock and the thickness of the alluvium. Laboratory Testinq Soil samples obtained in the subsurface exploration ,.viii be transported to our geotechnical laboratory. Geotechnicai :esting will likely include, but are not limited to, the following: · In-place moisture and density tests · Laboratory maximum density and oc~imum moisture ~,ests · Sieve analysis · R-value tests ] ::F_N T~O FFtCE',,JC aF!LE ! 999 a 1',99-225'.,99-2 ~ 5-O.pro -:9-81-295-00 Novemc-.r ]9, ~999 Page 3 · Direct st, ear tests · Consolidation or collapse tests · pH, resistivity, and soluble sulfate and chioride tests Samples will be stored in our laboratory for at least 30 days after the repor~ is completed. At that time, samples will be aisposed of unless we receive notification to do otherwise. Geotechnical Analyses and Report Preparation Data obtained from the exploratory borings, test pits, seismic refraction survey and the laboratory testing program will be evaluated. A report will be prepared that will include The geotechnical/geologic issues :hat should be considered during development of the project. The report will include the following items: · Field ane laboratory procedures used in the investigation · Description of the existing site and/or pavement conditions · A discussion of the materials encountered in the borings and test pits and rneasured engineering properties · Logs cf the exploratory borings and :est pits summarizing the subsurface conditions encountered, results of laboratory testing, and a plan indicating the locations of the explorations · A discussion of site-specific geologic hazards including faulting and seismicity · Flood Potential · Depth of groundwater and its impact on [he proposed development · Liquefac',ion potential · Collapse, expansive soil · Rerneeiai grading and earthwork recornnrnencJation · Shrinkage and subsidence coefficient · Excava;snility of site soils SC~ENT'; =:;,;E'..JOBFILE\I 999\8 l' 99-295\99-295.0 st: 99-81-295-00 Novemeer 19, 1999 Page · Surface and subsurface drainage · Preliminary foundation, column, retaining wall, pavement and slab design recommendations inciuding lateral earth pressures · Pile design and construction recommendations, if necessary · Slope Stability evaluations · Soil Sulfate content implications · Soil ferrous corrosivity and Portland Cement attack potential · Utility Trench Backfill Recommendation · Environmental concerns/hazards · Recommendations for the removal of unsuitable material · Pavement design · A review of the Graaing and Foundation plans 1.4 Services During Construction During the construction of the projects, Converse will provide observation and testing of the grading operations and materials. Converse ,,viii ensure that testing is in accordance with the project specification and applicable industry standards. The testing and inspection services that we will provide for the city of Temecula projects may include, but are not limited to: · Observation and field testing during all phases of site grading, to include removal of unsuitable soils, aoproval of areas to receive fill and mass fill placement · Field observation ano testing during trench backfilling operations · Field density testing :uring subgrade and base compaction · Field sampling and testing of base and asphalt concrete : :~ENT',OFFICE:.JOSFILE ' ~9.81 99-295~,99-295-0.aro 99-81-295-00 November 19, 1999 Page 5 · Laboratory testing to support field services and satisfy Caltrans and other regulatory requirements · Batch plant inspections · Structure backfill observation and testing · Concrete sampling and testing · Attendance at progress meetings as requested · Consulting services requiring corrective and/or remedial recommendations 1.5 Additional Services Provided Converse Consultants offers a broad range of services in geotechnical engineering, earthquake engineering, applied earth sciences (engineering geological/hydro- geological and environmental), and construction inspection and materials testing. Geotechnical and Geologic Investigations: GEOTECHNICAL AND EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING: · Dynamic Properties Evaluation · Earthquake Response Spectra · · Foundation Design & Recommendation · · Ground Improvement Design · Ground Motion Response Spectra · · Instrumentation and Monitoring · · Lateral Earth Pressure Analyses Liquefaction Analyses Settlement Analyses Stope Stability investigations Seismic Risk Analyses Seismic Hazards Evaluation Seismic Retrofit ENGINEERING GEOLOGICAL/HYDRO-GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS: · Applied Geological Mapping · Groundwater Studies · Fault Hazard Investigations · Feasibility Studies (Dams, Tunnels) · Field Testing and Monitoring · Hazard Assessments · Image (space & airbornel interl~retation · Instrumentation and Monitoring · Liquefaction Investigations · Slope StabiiityiLandslide Analyses · Grading Recommendations · Geophysical Investigations · Water Resources Oeve~oDment · Watershed Management c C[EN T'~O FFICE',.J C-= FILE", ~ 999:8 i' 99-295\99-295-0.pro 99-81-295-00 November ~9, 1999 Page 6 Geophysical Investigations: Geophysical surveys involve non-destructive investigations for the identification of structural features/patterns and prope.qies of geological formations. Converse staff has provided geophysical services to several clients in the government, public and private sectors including United States Air Force, Department of Energy (DOE), United States Navy, airports, county lanrffill facilities, hospitals, hotels, schools, and property owners. Converse utilizes a range of ~ceophysical methods including seismic refraction, etectromagnetics, magnetic, ground penetrating radar, utility line tracing, downhole inauction, and natural gamma logging methods for the acquisition of data to conduct the following: · '.dentiflcation of Faults & Fractures · Measure Groundwater Elevations · Map Subsurface Voids & Old Stream Channels · Locate Metallic & Nonmetallic Utilities/Obiects & Determine Their DeDths · Delineate Saltwater/Fresh Water interface in Coastal Aquifers · Delineate Thin Aquifers & General Lithology between Borehotes · Rippabiiity Studies & Bedrock Delineation for Engineering Projects Construction Inspection and Materials Testing Services: A majority of municipalities require strict guidelines to be followed during construction of structures and adherence must be documented by approved geotechnical consultants, licensed inspectors, ~nd certified laboratories. Converse provides inspection and testing services including: CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS Concrete Structural Steel · ~atch Plant · Bolting · :re-stress/ Post-Tension · Erection · Site · Welding · Welding Qualifications ~ ;,;nverse Consultants _-,~IEN T~O FFIC E\JO BFI L E~. ~ Non Destructive Methods · Dye Penetrant · Magnetic Particle · Ultrasonic · Visual · Radiographic · Ground Penetrating Radar · Concrete Penetrating Radar In-place Concrete Soundness FIELD TESTING Construction Materials · Asphalt · Aggregates · Concrete · Masonry · Fireproofing -~9-81-295-00 Novemoer 19, 1999 Page 7 Load · Compression · Ftexural · Tension · . Shear · Strain Geotechnical Monitorinq & Testinq · Asphalt Laydown · Caissons · Density Testing · Driven Piles · Foundation Observation · Hillside Grading · Mass Grading · Pavement subgrade testing · Soil Nailing · Shoring · Stability evaluation of excavations · Testing of borrowed materials CCIENT~OF.=:CS\JOBFILE\1999 B 1'.99-2~5~99.295_0 crc 99-81-295-00 November 19. 1999 Page 8 Laboratory Testing Services: Converse offices nave in-house laboratories enabling all tests to be conducted and results within the required time line. The tests are performed in accordance with ASTM and other s~plicable standards. Our laboratories are approved as materials testing agencies ~y the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the Cement Concrete Reference Laboratory (CCRL), the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), DSA, ICBO, and Caltrans. GEOTECHNICAL TESTING MATERIALS TESTING · Atterberg Limits · California Bearing Ratio · ComDaction · Consolidation · Collapse · Density · Expansion index · Hydrometer Analyses · Los Angeles Abrasion · Permeability · R-Value · Shear · Sweil · Unconfined Compression · Sieve Analyses · Sane Equivalent Concrete & Masonry · Beams · Blocks · Cubes · Cylinders · -Grout/Mortar · Prisms · Shrinkage · Shotcrete/Gunite Other .Materials · Asphalt Extraction (three Methods) · Corrosion & Failure Analyses · Concrete & Steel Plant Fabrication · Fireproofing · Kneading Compaction · Marshall, Hveem, Theoretical · Metallurgy · Stability & Flow Analyses C C:E~!T 0 FFiCE~,jC EF!LE",1999\81 \99-295\99-£~ 5-O.cro 99-81-295-00 November ~9, 1999 Page Environmental Services: Converse provides a wide variety of environmental snd risk management services including site assessments, site characterization, remediadon of ground and groundwater contamination, hazardous materials management, air quality monitoring and control, and removal and retrofitting of un(Jerground storage tanks, Our service capabilities include the following: Phase h Environmental Site Assessments-initial Due Diligence · Site Reconnaissance · Review of Regulatory Records · Historical Research & Profiling · Interviews (facility staff & neighbors) · Site Description Phase I1: Environmental Site Assessments- Site Characterization · Preparation of Health & Safety Plans · Sampling (Geol2robe7, auger, drill) · Installation & Monitoring of Groundwater Wells · Laboratory Testing & Data Analyses Phase Ill: Environmental Site Assessments- Rernediation · In-situ & ex-situ Soil Venting & Vacuum Extraction · Excavation/Fixation of Contaminated Soils · Groundwater Air Sparging & Vacuum Extraction · Total Fluids Pump & Treat Systems · Free Product Recovery · Combined Soil Venting & Groundwater Recovery Asbestos/Lead-Based Paint Management · Initial Survey & Sampling · Abatement Plans & Specifications · Abatement Design, Cost Estimation & Monitoring · Bulk/Air/Clearance SamDdng · Laboratory Analyses · Operation & Managemen,, P!anning · Regulatory Comofiance Ccnsultations Underground Storage Tanks · F. eview Documents/Historical Usage · Preparation of HazMat & Work Plans · Soil Sampiing& Testing · !nstallation of Monitoring Wells · ADproved Precision Tank Testing · ;nstallation of Va~or Monitoring Systems · Development & Implementation of Remediation · Coordination & Management of Tank, Removal · Coordination & Management of Tank, Replacement Air Quality Surveys · ;,ir Pollution Equipment Permitting · Pilot & Bench Scale Emission Stuaies · Chronic & Acute Health Risk Assessments · Indoor Air Quality Evaluations · Tracer Release Studies · New Source Review · Air Pollution Modeling · Air Quality impact Assessment · Upset or Accidental Chemical Release Scenarios 99-81-295-00 Novernoer 19. 1999 Page ~ 0 SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND KEVIN COZAD & ASSOCIATES SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND KEVlN COZAD & ASSOCIATES ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SERVICES THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of January 23, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Kevin Cozad & Associates (uConsultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On February 8, 2000 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). B. The Agreement was amended on April 11, 2000. The Agreement as amended shall be referred to as the "Agreement." C. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: TERM. The term of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the Agreement and shall commence on February 8, 2000 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2001. 3. Exhibit A of the Agreement is hereby amended to include the work described in Exhibit A-1 to this Agreement. 4. Section 4.a. PAYMENT of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Sixty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($60,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this AgreemenL 5. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. I r:~agmts~nasters~3nnual masters\cozad AMEND2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECUI~.A BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Kevin Cozad & Associates, Inc. 151 S. Girard St. Hemet, CA 92544-4662 (909) 652-4454 BY: Kevin Cozad, President NAME: TITLE: (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 r:~agmts\masters~annual masters~cozad AMEND2 Coz o &AssOCIATES, December 15, 2000 RECEIVED DEC 1 8 2000 CITY OF TEMECULA , ENGINEERING DEPARTMEN1 ~ILAND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS JNIClPALCONSULTANTS IRVE¥ORS/GPS .ANNERS Amer Attar, P.E., MBA Senior Engineer - Capital Projects City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 RE: ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING SERVICES Dear Amer, I would like to request that the City of Temecula extend our Annual Agreement for Surveying Services through June 30, 2001. The City may also choose to increase the amount of the Annual Agreement. In addition, Kevin Cozad & Associates, Inc. can also provide civil engineering services including; road and utility design, traffic engineering, flood control and drainage, grading, structural engineering, planning, environmental analysis, erosion control, inspection and other municipal consulting services. We are eager to continue providing municipal civil engineering services to the City of Temecula and we always appreciate the City's input and suggestions on how we may improve our services. Thank you for selecting Kevin Cozad & Associates, Inc. If we can provide any additional information, please don't hesitate to call me. S~incerely Kevin B. Cozad President cc: Julie Dauer 151 South Girard Street · Hemet, CA 92544-4462 909 / 652~4454 · FAX: 909 / 766-8942 · cozad@ivic.net FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETXVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND COZAD & THOMSEN. INC. ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of April 11. 2000. by and betxveen the City of Temecula. a municipal corporation F'City") and Kevin Cozad & Associates/Cozad & Thomsen. Inc. ,"Consuhant"). In considerauon or'the mutual covenants and conditions set forth here~n, the part~es agree as tblloxvs: 1. This Amendment ~s made with respect to the following facts and purposes: On December 7. 1999, the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). All sccuons of the agreement that refer to the Consultant as Cozad & Thomsen. Inc. shall now be changed to "Kevin Cozad & Associates. inc.", pursuant to name change of Consultant on April 3. 2000 Except for the changes specifically sct forth hcrcm, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain m full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the pames hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and ear tirst above xvnttcn. BY: _X..I~. /...2. YW-'A-- Shax~n D. Nelson. City Manager Attest: Approxcd As to Form: x-..~/ Peter M Thorson. City Attomc5 CONSULTANT Kevin Cozad & .-\ssocmtes. [nc 151 S G,rard St Hcmct. C..:. u2544-4662 {9091 t,52-4454 '~ Kcxln (~ozad. President [ KmN Cozen &AssOCIATES, April 3. 2000 Amer Afar City of Temecula Post Office Box 9033 Temecuia, California 92589-9033 Dear Amen I would like to take a moment of your time to update you on changes occurring at Coz, e~ .¢ Thom~en. Inc. Some hap~y, some sad. After nineteen years, Rick Thomsen has decided to fulfill a personal long-term goal and join his brother in business. Rick will be greatly missed. The toss of one member of the team often constitutes opportunities for others. Fortunately, that is what rios occurred in our office. Several of our staff engineers are eager to accept more responsibility and increase trieir commitment to assist our clients. In particular, Bdan Fox, Registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor, who first came to our company in 1989 is now a Prinmpal with the company. Finally, we are changing our name back to K~,in Cozad & Associ~, Inc., which is ,,he name we used prior to 1992. Needless to say our Staff is excited about our increased opportumt~es. We are Committed to providing you with the same high caliber of service that you have come to expect from our firm throughout the years. If you Dave not had the opportunity to meet Bdan or if you would like to meet the rest of our staff, please give me a call. Sincerely, Kevin Cozad President _..a,c ....,' · .m_t. C.-, :u~,','aa-a942 · cozac: . AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND KEVIN COZAD & ASSOCIATES CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of February 8, 2000, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Cozad & Thomson, Inc., ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on February 8, 2000, and shall remain and continue in effect until February 8, 2001, unless terminated or extended pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. SERVICES. This is an annual contract for Surveying Services on an as needed basis. Consultant can perform any of the services ancl tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. When there is a need for Surveying Services on an as needed services, the City will identify the specific scope of work, and request a fee schedule from the consultant. The City will instruct the consultant to proceed with the work once the exact scope of work and the associated fees are negotiated. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing simitar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as negotiated and as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the tasks as directed by the City on an as neecied basis. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates are null and void. The total cumulative annual amount shall not exceed Forty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($40,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compen,sated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in wnting by the City. Consultant shall be compensated for services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. Any additional work in excess of the amount above shall be approved by the City Council. c. Consultant wilt submit invoices monthly for actual services performed, tnvoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each ~nvoice as to all nondisputeCl fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. r:~agrmts~mas~ers~annual contract'.CczaQ&Thomsem agrrnt 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time. for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days pnor written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant snail immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the won( performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by wdtten notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder anses out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultallt with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendenng a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such penod of time, the City shall have the dght, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this A~.,]reement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting pnnciples and shall be cleady identi- fied and reaaity accessible. Consultant shall prowde free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books anci records, shall give City the dght to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of ail work, data. documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such recoras, together with supporting c~ocuments, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of. or ~n the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other cocuments prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shatl become tt~e sote property of the City and may De usea. reused or otherwise disposecl of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer fifes containing data generated for the work, Consultant snail make available to the City, upon reasonable wntlen request by the City, the necessary computer software an0 hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transfemng and pnnting computer files. c. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the wdtten consent of the Consultant. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees an0 volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, 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 or wTongful acts or omissions adsing out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consuitant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto), tf the Consultant ow~s no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement. worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liaPility for The Consultant's profession. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 :er occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used. either the general aggregate lim~! snail apply separately to this project, location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1.000,000 ~er accident for bodily inlury and property damage. 3 WorkeCs Compensation as requireo by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for booity injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability coverage: Two million ($2,000.000) per claim and in aggregate. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager. either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers: or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (2) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insure{3s as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. For any claims related to this proiect, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. ,Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom'r_Jaim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) 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 by certified mail. return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance ~s to be placed with insurers with a current -' M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII. unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurar:ce snail not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Ccveraoe. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage reou~red by this ctause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an aiternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at ali times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indernnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service purs~ant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written- authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily p,rovide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or proper'W located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not De considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or suPpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant. its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, suPpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within tiae City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any resoonse to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the nght by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 5 ~:,agrmtsV~a$1er$~annual ccr~tract~Cc,7.ao&Thornsem agrmt 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other parw. unqer this Agreement must be in wining and may be given either by (I) personai service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as Put not limited to, Fecierai Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) maiiing in the Uniteci States Mail, certified mail. postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or Uniteq States Mail as provided above. To City: To Consultant: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecuta, Califomia 92590 Attention: City Manager Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. 151 South Girard Street Hemet, California 92544-4662 Attention: Kevin B. Cozad, President 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Kevin B. Cozad, President shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Kevin B. Coz. ad may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Kevin B. Cozad from Consultant's employ. Should he or she leave Consultant's employ, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said not.ce period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to. and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in wnting between the City Council and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At all times duhng the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services descnbed in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand anci agree that the laws cf the State of California shall govern the nghts, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municioal, superior, or federal district court w~th geographic junsoiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation ~s filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determine(3 by the Court's jur~gement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the ~:ar~ies relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or ccntemDoraneous agreements, understandings, reoresentations and statements, crai or wntten, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each par~' ,s entering into 6 :his Agreement based solely upon the reDresentations set forth herein and uoon each paFty's own n~:epenaent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has tl3e autnonty to execute this Agreement on Denalf of the Consultant and has the authonty to bind Consultant to the performance of its ontigations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the part~es hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Susan W.~j~MCT'AAI=, City Cler~ Approved As to Form: CONSULTANT Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. 151 S. Girard St. Hemet, CA 92544-4662 (909) 652-4454 Title: ~"~ ~' (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED CIV!L AND 5TF, UCTURAL MUNICIPAL JZ HSULTANTS SURVEYORS. RLANNERS STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS November 19, 1999 Annual Contract for Survey Services RFQ#03 Prepared for: AMER ATTAR, P.E., MBA SENIOR ENGINEER - CAPITAL PROJECTS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY OF TEMECULA 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE P O BOX 9033 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92589-9033 _ . _ 'h'D STRUCT'~Ri; November 19. 1999 Amer Attar. P.E.. MBA Senior Engineer - Capital Projects City of Temecuia P O Box 9033 Temecuta. CA 92589-9033 (909) 694-6411 Fax (909) 694-6475 RE: STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR RFQ # 03 FOR SURVEYING SERVICES - HOW WE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH EXCELLENT SERVICE AND QUALITY CONTROL Deer Mr. Attar. The City of Temecuta's Annual Contract for Survey Services intrigues us because it is exactly the type of service we believe we do best. Cozacl & 7homsen, inc. has a unique method of staffing and managing projects to maintain quality control. Cur licensed land surveyors are also engineers. 'Ne assign one of our engineers as the party chief on the survey crew for the initial topographic survey. The designated engineer then aesigns the project. Later, during the construction phase the same engineer returns to the field as party chief to provide construction surveying. For our own projects we have found that this process keeps the same person closeiy involved in all aspects of the project and provides an effective method of maintaining quality control for our cJients. Although, design services are not a part of the City of Temecula's Annual Contract for Survey Services. [ believe our party cmeFs design experience will be an added benefit to the City during e~ther m~tial topographic surveying or construction surveying. Cozad & Thomsen, inc. has focused on providing cur municipal clients with excellent service Dy maintaining a manageable staff and work back log..Ye have provided consulting englneehng and surveying services to most of the cities, mumcmaiities and water distncts in western Riverside County However. I think you would be most interested in our work with Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). Since 1994. Cozad & Thornsen, Inc. has been selected as one of only a few firrns designated as "Qualified Consultants" to provide annual surveying services to EMWD. Upon our interview I can prowde you with additiona; cetails on how we have successfully provided sur.,ey~ng services to our mumcipal clients :n time and within eu~2get. Sincerely, . ~ , ../~ ..??d~:'~" 'i Kewn B Cczaa ~res~dent :roposal for Annua~ Surveying Services City Of Temecuia Statement of Qualifications November 19, 1999 SURVEYING SERVICES It is well known that the City of Temecuta has implemented an aggressive Capital Improvements project Program to expand and improve the city's infrastructure. As part of the program, the City of Temecula requires professional surveying services for the planning, design and construction of new facilities and the improvement and maintenance of existing facilities. This may include researci~, boundary and control surveys, topographic surveys, aenat topographic surveys, and construction surveying. INTRODUCTION TO COZ. AD & THOMSEN, INC. Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. is a full service consulting engineering firm located in Hemet. Since 1977, Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. has provided civil engineenng, structural engineering, planning, surveying, and project management consulting services to a wide range of public agencies throughout Southern California. Coza~t & Thornsen, Inc. is a highly qualified team of principles and professionals with extensive consulting expenence. Our staff of civil and structural engineers and surveyors will apply their expertise along with the leading computer aided design, drafting and surveying data collecting technology to your projects. Utilizing 100% CAD-based design and analysis, we can provide to or utilize fully compatible computerized flies from the City of Temecuia. Currently, Cozad & Thomsen, Inc.-is working with the Eastern Municipal Water Oistnct as a "Qualified Consultant" orovidinq enqineerinq, surveyinq and envircnmental services for proiects on an annual bas~s. During the past 20 years, we have also prowded services to other water agencies including Rancno California Water District and Eisinore Valley Municipal Water District: the City of Hamer. San Jac~nto. Perris. and Riverside; the County cf Riverside: school distncts; hospital districts: recreation districts; the University of Redlan(~s: Mt. San Jacinto Community College: and the Umvers~ty of California Riverside. 1 Cozad & Thomsen. Inc. Proposal fcr Annual Surveying Services City Of Temecu~a Statement of Quaiifications November 19. t999 Cozacl & Thomsen, Inc. performs our own in-house surveying w~th staff members that are licensed lane surveyors and that also have significant office design experience. The survey crew uses "state of the art" survey equipment including one-second Topcon electronic total stations with vertical axis compensation and full data collection interface with TbS data collection software for fast and efficient data collection, stake-out and transfer to office computers. Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. also utilizes GPS software for large scale control and aenal targeting surveys. The GPS software, base stations and receivers are rented on an "as-needed" basis for specific projects to reduce overhead costs. Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. staff are not only very familiar with the in-house equipment but are also proficient with the advantages and limitations of GPS surveying. FIRM DESCRIPTION AND ORGANIZATION , Cozad & Thomsen, Inc.'s staff of nine includes two civil engineers dual licensed in surveying, one licensed land surveyor and two surveyors with Land Surveyor-in-training certificates. All staff members have both extensive professional design and surveying experience. Cozad & Thomsen. Inc. believes the key to qualit7 controt is to assign the same professional to the survey crew that wdl be performing the in-house design for projects. In this way our staff becomes intimately familiar with the type and accuracy of control and topographic data required by tt~e design professional to prepare improvement plans and the requirements of the contractor during construction, Cozad & Thomsen. Inc. Prooosai for Annual Surveying Servtces City Of Temecula Statement of Qualifications November 19, 1999 AVAILABLE SERVICES Preliminary Research & Surveying - Survey research at the City of Temecula, the County of Riverside. Riverside County Flood Control and local utilities to obtain both recorded and unrecorded survey maps, monument ties and benchmarks. Research and analyze the existing recorded and unrecorded survey maps and compare to field monuments and field conditions. Review title reports and deeds to determine property boundaries and control. Obtain traffic control and encroachment permits from the City, the County and /, Caltrans to enter the public nght-of-way during construction surveying. ¥ Provide traffic control dunng construction surveying in the public fight-of-way. Perform boundary and control surveys using record information and monument ties to locate existing monuments for street centedine and property lines for control mapping. At Coza~ &Thomsen, Inc.'s option, global positioning system (GPS} equipment may be used for either control .or topographic surveying. Utilizing Riverside County benchmark NGVD 29 datum obtained from the County, the City or MWD, Cozad &Thomsen, Inc. can establish and venfy vertical control and provide topographic surveying, construction surveying or large scale aenal mapping. Set 4-inch wide 4' X 4' aedal targets with X, Y, Z coordinates for honzontal and verticat control for aenal topographic surveying. Provide closure and reference maps to aenal survey firm for preparation of the aerial topographic survey map. Perform field topographic survey to collect field data, spot elevations and surface features of utilities wtth sufficient overlap for design of improvements for construction utilizing total stations with TDS data collection software. Hardscape physical features will be IocateQ both horizontally and vertically within ,02+ foot accuracy. Natural ground features will be located within .10 +_. foot accuracy. Digital data reduction of topographic information, record utility locations, and aerial topographic data to a three-dimensional AutoCAD 14 or Intergraph .DGN compatible file. Perform construction surveying for road and facility imorovements utilizing the design engineers CAD file, if available. Meet with the City and the contractor and determine the exact staking requirements for the project. Set off-set stakes, blue tops and other construction stakes required by the contractor to perform the grading and the construction of facilities. Perform office calculations for field stake out and provide cut sheets ana ccmrol information to the City and the contractor. Cozad &Thomsen, Inc. Proposal for Annual Surveying Services City Of Temecuia Statement of Qualifications NovemBer 19. 1999 · Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. will also submit to the City: Utility location maps signed and stamped by Rick Thomson. Professional Land Surveyor No. 6413, coior coded per Caltrans utility mapping standarOs. B. Survey notes for the project route. C. Record maps collected from utility companies or public agencies for the project route. Cozad & Thomson,/nc. can also provide the following additional services to the City: Utility Research - Obtain available maps for water, sewer, electricity, gas, telephone, cable TV, and otl~er known utilities in the project area. The results of the utility research can be added to the digital survey data file containing the topography. Field Locating of Existing Utilities -venfy surface utility markings along the project route. Above ground power and telephone poles can be field verified. Ovemead wires can be located per record information. Research for the Acquisition of Right-of-Way - Research and obtain existing right- of-way documents and plot the existing ngt~t-of-way for review by the City. Prepare legal descriptions and plat maps for additional right-of-way and coordinate acquisition of right-of-way with the City. Coordination w~th Utility Purveyors - Meet with utility purveyors to coordinate the design of utilities that must be relocated for new construction. Redesign factlities, prepare construction cost estimates and prepare legals and plat macs for additional easements. Potholing - Additional subsurface utility exploration can be performed by potholing to accurately verify location and elevation of underground cross~ngs. All topographic information and utility locations will be submitted to City staff for review in order to determine the alignment and to assign pothole locations. Assist City staff in determining location and ultimate number of potholes. Three-Dimensional Utility File - PIct available record and field venfied underground and overhead utility information on the utility location map. Utility information will be plotted as a separate 3-dimensional digital file representing utility locations within the project limits. Utilities can be color coded per Caltrans Utility Maoping Standards. State Plane Ccordinates - Assignment of state plane coordinates NAD-83 ;CCS- 83, EPOCH 92.9} Zone 6, California State Plane Coordinate System, can se used at control points along the route 4 Cozad & Thomsen, /nc, Proposal for Annual Surveying Servmes City Of Temecula Statement of Qualifications Novem0er 19, 1999 Overall Project Feasibility - ~,eview preliminary ~nformation to determine the overall feasibility of project, considering topography, existing utilities and conceptual design. Prepare preliminary construction cost estimates for City review. Project Management - Prowde project management and coordination services of design consultants and processing through agencies for the City. Construction Administration and Inspection Services - Monitor compliance with plans, contracts and specifications. Review change orders, determine percentage completion and verify quality control. Prepare traffic control and barricade plans for construction. Full color photographic exhibits of facility or project routes. Video tape records of routes or sites before and after construction. SUBCONSULTANTS Topographic Mapping by Areo Tech Surveys, Inc Provide AutoCAD and Intergraph format digital aerial mapping at a scale of 1" = 40' with one-foot contour intervals, and computer plotted final mylar sheets at a scale of 1" = 100' with a 1' contour interval as determined by the City: Design file shall be to National Map Accuracy Standards. Utility Field PothoLes by Saf-R-Dig Utility Surveys, Inc. Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. shall contract with SAF-r-DIG Utility Surveys, [nc. for construction equipment and manpower necessary to excavate potholes, provide traffic control, and measure location and depth of existing underground utilities at potential conflicts. Traffic Control by Allied Barricade Provide traffic control and traffic control flags during field surveying. Cozacl & Thomsen, Inc. ~roposat for A. nnua~ Surveying City Of Temecula Statement cf Qualifications November 19. 1999 TEAM ORGANIZATION All City of Temecula projects awarded to Coza~l & Thomsen, Inc. will be read either by Kevin Cozad or Rick Thomsen, Project Manager. When a Request for Proposal is received, the project manager develops a scone of services including a task outline, a man-hour estimate for budgeting purboses, and a project schedule for completion of tasks. Project engineers and sun~eyors are assigned during the proposal phase in accordance with the specific needs of the project. The field crew will be lead by a licensed land surveyor. [ PROJECT MANAGEMENT I Upon award cf contract, an initial meeting is held between the project manager and City staff to confirm the scope of services and project schedule and to identify any special requests or additional services. An in-house "project kick-off' meeting between the project manager and the project survey staff is held to review the scope of services and task outline. Routine and unique tasks are identified during the kick-off meeting, the man-hour budget is discussed, and goals are set to meet specific milestones. Duties and responsibilities of all staff members are discussed and confirmed and the project schedule is reviewed. A bar chart may be developed to further assist staff in meeting ',ask deadlines. The project manager will rewew me project during in-house review at the significant milestones. Depending on the s~ze and duration of the project, the project manager may update the C;ty of Temecula's F,oject Engineer. either by telephone or fax. on a weekly basis. All telephone correspondence w,th the City will be noted in the project file. Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. stnves ts maintain close communication between our project surveyor and clients curing the course cf each project in order to keep the project on task and schedule. 6 Cozad & Thornsen, Inc. Proposal for Annua~ Surveying Services City Of Temecuia Statement of Qualifications November 19. 1999 PROJECT SCHEDULING Typically, Coza~ & Thomsen, Inc. can commence WOrK on projects within 3 days from authorization to proceed. Upon request, a detailed schedule, including bar chart representation, can be provided for specific projects. Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. tries to maintain a small manageable staff of engineers who are also land surveyors. This provides us with flexibility to assign any of are staff members to the survey crew. Because we have aisc focused on providing consulting services to only a small number of municipal clients we have been able to maintain a manageable work back Icg so that we'can quickly respond to client requests. INSURANCE COVERAGE Cozad & Thornsen, Inc. currently possesses Professional Liability insurance coverage in the minimum amount of $1,000,000.00. Coverage can be increased to $2,000,000, if required by the City of Temecula. Cozad & Thomsen, Inc. also possess $2,000,000 general liability insurance and $1,000,000 automobile insurance and $1,000,000 of workers compensation insurance. Evidence of insurance is being forwarded to The City of Temecula. CONFLICT OF INTEREST To the best of our knowledge, no personal or organizational conflicts of interest exist which would prohibit us by law from working on City of Temecula projects. We have previously supplied structural engineenng, civil engineering and surveying services to other municipalities in western Riverside County and we are set to begin services on the City of Temecula's Paid Road Sound Wall Project. CURRENTHOURLYFEESCHEDULE See attached Schedule of Fees. QUALIFICATIONS OF STAFF Brief resumes of company principals and other staff are included for your review. SIMILAR PROJECTS J See attached summary. 7 Coza~l & Thornsen. Inc. EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE SCHEDULE OF FEES October 1, 1999 GENERAL SCOPE OF SERVICES Cozad &Thomsen, Inc. provides services in the fields of rJvii engineering, structural engineenng, and land surveying in accordance with presently accepted professional practices. Cozad & Thornsen, Inc. does not provide services relating to construction safety and shall be held harmless by tt~e contractor from any liability in this regard. In the event that the client requests termination of work pnor to its completion, we reserve the right to complete, at the client's expense, suc~ analysis and records as are considered necessary by us to place our files in order and/or to protect our professional reputation. PERSONNEL CHARGES-RATES PER HOUR Principal Engineer/Principal Surveyor/Structural Engineer ...................... 135.00 Project Manager ....................................................... 120.00 105.00 Civil Engineer ......................................................... 95.00 Project Engineer ........................................................ 85.00 Project Coordinator ...................................................... Design Engineer ........................................................ 85.00 65.00 Drafting ............................................................ Computer Design or Drafting - Staff rate plus $15/hour ......................... 105.00 75.00 Administrative ......................................................... 45.00 Typing, printing ........................................................ 105.00 Survey - Office time .................................................. Two Man Survey Crew with Equipment (4 hr. minimum) ......................... 170.00 (Travel time charged portal to portal) OTHER CHARGES Expert Witness - Deposition and/or Court appearance ............. Two times houdy rate Expert Witness - Research, Case Review and/or Preparation .......... Normal houdy rate Mileage to anq from meetings or project site ....................... S0.35/mile Blueprints, Dudicating, Photography, Binding, otc ........................ Cost + 20% Telephone ca~ls, Postage ............................... Cost + 20% Field Supplies (stakes. monuments, etc.) Cost + 20% TERMS OF PAYMENT All services wdl be procress billed weekly, and ali invoices are due and payable when issued unless othervvme aoreed. Ret'a~ners are required for all projects. Our fee sche(~ule is based upon prompt 2ayment of f~es. Interest w~il accnJe at the rate of 1;/: percent of the invoice total per month on ~nvoices 30 days old or older, f su~t or action ~s instituted to collect any sum due, the client shall be liable for a~torney's fees and court costs. FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of January 23, 200t by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and O'Malley Engineering Corporation ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On February 8, 2000 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). Amendment. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this 2. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: TERM. The term of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the Agreement and shall commence on February 8, 2000 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2001. 3. Exhibit A of the Agreement is hereby amended to include the work described in Exhibit A-1 to this Agreement. 4. Section 4.a. PAYMENT of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Sixty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($60,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 5. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. I r:~agmts~rnasters~annual masters~o'malley AMEND1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT O'Malley Engineering Corporation 720 W. Sixth St. Corona, CA 91720 (909) 734-0633 BY: Jim O'Malley PE, President BY: Luis Gomez, Vice President (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 r,~agmts~masters~annual masters\o'malley AMEND1 O' MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION PLANNING / ENGINEERING / SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT December 29, 2000 Subject: Tract 258Y£ Amer Attar City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Tcmecula, CA 92589 Dear Mr. Attar: I hereby request that the city extend our contract to provide engineering and / or land surveying services to June 30, 2001 and increase the amount of the contract as deemed appropriate by the city. Best regards O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPOPO-TION President 720 WEST SIXTH STREET, CORONA CA 91720 / FAX: (909) 737-9487 PHONE: (909) 73443633 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SURVEYING SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of February 8, 2000, between the City of Temecula, a munidpal corporation ("City") and O'Malley Engineering Corporation, ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on February 8, 2000, and shall remain and continue in effect until February 8, 2001, unless terminated or extended pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. This is an annual contract for Surveying Services on an as needed basis. Consultant can perform any of the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. When there is a need for Surveying Services on an as needed services, the City will identity the specific scope of work, and request a fee schedule from the consultant. The City will instruct the consultant to proceed with the work once the exact scope of work and the associated fees are negotiated. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform ali tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as negotiated and as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the tasks as directed by the City on an as needed basis. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates are null and void. The total cumulative annual amount shall not exceed Forty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($40,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in wdting by the City. Consultant shall be compensated for services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. Any additional work in excess of the amount above shall be approved by the City Council. c. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. if the City disputes any of consultant fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. 1 r:~agrmts~masters~annual contracBo'malley agrmt 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or ten~inate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days pdor written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the previsions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consuitant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (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 fight, 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. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identi- fied and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make 2 r:~agrmts~masters~annual contractmaster20(X) available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. c. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, 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 or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as.' (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. (2) (3) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covedng Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) (2) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3 r:~agrmts~masters~annual contractmaster2000 (3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability coverage: Two million ($2,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. c. Deductibles and Self-lnsurad Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Previsions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability adsing out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be pdmar~ insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) (4) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this 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' pdor wdtten notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current AM. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Covera.qe. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on 4 r:~agrmtsVnasters~annual contractmaste~'2000 forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of ali required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. t 1. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with ali such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly noti~ City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the dght, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the fight by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 5 r:~grmts~masters~annual contractmaster2000 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: To Consultant: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager O'Malley Engineering Corporation 720 West Sixth Street Corona, California 91720 Attention: Jim O'Malley PE, President 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Jim O'Malley, President shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Jim O'Malley may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice pdor to the departure of Jim O'Malley from Consultant's employ. Should he or she leave Consultant's employ, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of Califomia shall govem the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal distdct court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. Ail prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into 6 r:~agrmts~rnasters~annual contrac~'naster2OOO this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT,. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA (,,,,~~ne,~ayor ~, Susa~W. J.o~es, C~C/AAE, City Clerk Approved As to Form: ~e~ CONSULTANT O'Malley Engineering Corporation 720 W. Sixth St. Corona, CA 91720 (909) 734-0633 Name: Title: (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) 7 r:~agrmts~masters~annual contractmasted2000 EXHIBIT a TASKS TO BE PERFORMED 8 r:~agrmts~nasters~annual contractmaster2000 O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION pLANNING / ENGINEERING / SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT November 18, 1999 Mr. Amer Attar PE, MBA Senior Engineer-Capital Projects City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 Temecul~h CA 9258%9033 Dear Mx. Attar: The attached Statement of Qualifications describes our firm and the services we provide. The scope of the statement is broader than your request required because we believe that the depth of the firm improves the quality of our surveying services. As experienced engineers and land surveyors, we know what needs to be included in a survey to acquire information for a design project We currently have two survey crews in the fidd and capacity for two mom Mr. Gomez LS, Vice President supervises the survey work. He joined this firm about ten years ago. His 30 plus year, career included working for the county of Riverside and serving as principal of Northstar Engineering, in Temecula~ We are a stable company. We started in 1970 and the only significant changes in that time were adopting state of the art tools to aid out work. Our commimaent to client service remains our paramount objective. The tasks you listed on the Request for Statement of Qualifications are common to the practice of land surveying and we have the expertise and capacity to do them all. The following provides some detail about those tasks as specifically requested. Research Information obtained from records must be the basis for all surveys. There is the isolated case where an assumed datum and reference to existing features ~ do but I doubt the City would ever have such a projec~ V~ have an extensive libtm'y of record materials and fidd note~ in our office, including coverage in Temecula. We can re,eve other information from appropriate sources as needed. We have prepared what are sometimes called 'Detour Plava" many of our design projects and are famih~r with the W~_.T.C.H. Manual and the needs of the public and contracrors tt~ing to schedule and coordinate thei~ ~ork. 1.2..Lo~t¢ .F_.~ri~.M'onu~ezzta The key to Ioca6ng exis6ng monuments is carefi~lly studying the notes of the earlier surveys, using effective metal detectors and not giving up the search too soon. The ezisting monuments often determine the true location of the point they reference even if they are not where we ezpect them to be. It is crucial to sezreh diligently for existing monuments. 1.~. ~Wst~bfa'sh Hor;.zontM and VerdcM Control The intended use of thc control network w~ll determine i~ precision. Most pro}ects cover less than a mile. An accuracy ratio of 1:10,000 is precise enough for those proiec~. We can work with greater precision but the results usually do not iu~ti6/the additional cost. Control networks that cover a large area must be more precise because of the large distances and elevation d~ffcrential involved. Tbese more precise surveys require instrumenm adequare to do the task, repeated measurement and dctxiled aradysis. These surveys require more 6mc and therefore more expex~e. XX~ have CONTRACTORS LICENSE NO. A HAZ 715910 FAX: (909) 737-9487 720 WEST SIXTH STREET, CORONA, CA 91720 PHONE: (909) 734~633 mail@om-e ngir~eering.cam November 18, 1999 S.~: S~auo~ra of ~2~a~ficado~ LadSmvejng p~e2of2p~ equipment and experience to conduct surveys-~s precise as 1:500,000. We also have the experience to know ~,hat will meet the client's objecrve. 1.4. iLo~at~L~d~t~Facilltl'es '~de murnely conduct surveys to r~ko a computer model of a street surface or to locate items for engineering design. We record the field information with dam collectors and download it to a computer. ~k~ use the computer to mal,o cross secfons of the existing surface and to design new,~0ork to match existing, We use a "Total Station" and prism to make these measurements and the accuracy is always closer than +/-0.1 feet. 1.5. Construction Construction swldng was a foundation of the business when it began and remains so today. Our surveyors spend most their time setting sval~a for construction and working with contractors. The list of things ~e set stakes for includes virtually everything built at a specific location or elevation. 2. Description of the Firm 2~1. Attacfied Statement o£ Qv~li£catlon~ The attached "Statement of Qualifications" describes the firm. We currently have ten employees including two survey crews. We can quickly increase to four crews if the workload demands it. The principals of the firm will work on projects for the city. The statement includes brief resumes of their experience. 22. Sub-consultants We do use sub-consultants for such fixings as aerial mapping or those occasions where xve need an exlza crew for just a day or two. In either ca~e, the consultant Will vary because we will select one that can raeet the schedule or stay Within the anticipated cost. It is not practical to list ali the fa'ms we do business With here. We will discuss and sub-consultants with City Staff as the need arise. 3. Billing Rates The attached Billing Rate Schedule shows our billing rates and practices. 4. Excepdons As described on our Billing Rate ~-,.hedule, our billing rates do not indude blueprints, overnight v~ail~qg cost and similar items. We can transmit our survey data via email to anyone that has that capability. There is no charge for emailin§ drawings or other material capable of using that service. Since this request is to consider firms for several, yet, undefined projects we have no exclusions or exceptions. Proposals or estimates for specific projects will precisely describe that work, including exclusions. $. Conformance with the Terms of the S.O.Q. This offer to provide services shall remain open for at least 90 days. Other items contained herein are intended to conform to the terms of the S~O.Q. In case of conflict between this document and the terms of the S.O.Q., we will defer to the S.O.Q Best regards O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION / O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION PLANNING J ENGINEERING J SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT ',ntroduction: O'Malley Engineering Corporation began operating in 1971. Our fa'st office opened in Anaheim and moved to Corona in 1978. Our staffindudes individuals of diverse experience and we assign them the tasks they do best. Most ofoux work is done to develop, or redevelop, land for residential, commercial or industrial building projects. The following statement of qualifications briefly describes the ~ and its principals. Description of S~rvlces We prepace and process applic:~fions for real estate entitlements. That indudes applications to subdivide, change zoning, Conditional Use Permits, General Plan amendments, create a Specific Plan, others. We process these applications for many types of projects including commercial and industrial construction. · We designed many projects. Our designs always seek a balance between the highest yidds and speediest sties. The city of Corona selected us design pilot projects to test ne~ matesitis. We use that experience to the benefit of our clients. La~d 3'~n9~ We field survey crews for boundaries, topography, gathering information for infrastsucture design, construction stoking and other work requiring such services. Survey Crew: The number of survey crews available vary with the volume of business. Currently we felid t~o news and have eqUipment for four. The crows are all equipped with "Total Stations" by Wild Insets. Mt. Gomez directly supervises the survey work including onsite inspections of the work area before the project stacts and during the work. Representative Projects: During the past 30 years we surveyed, designed and staked many projects. These projects included designing freeway tamps, land devdopments, storm drains, water distributions systems and other projects that tequi~ed civil engineering or land survey expertise. Our prima~ goal is providing the service the client needs and providing it when it will do the most good. That usually means responding promptly when called. And delivering the work product when promised. ¢omme...cJM-lndustdM Land Development: paeesetter Brain,s Park, Corona, CA. Click' pa~$etttr Bminess Pmperti~. Entitlements: .4nnexation, Land exchange ~dth Fed~val Land, Subdivision, Assessment District and Caastrua~n Permits. This project ~ an industrial park covering about 50 acres that required a land exchange with the Corps of Engineers and earthwork volume of about 1.2 million yards. An assessment district ~as fomaed to finance part of the construction. The engineering problems included a pressure reducing station for the water system, avoiding a high psessure gas line that crossed the property, annexation to the city and securing various easements and agreements with Federal agtmcies. Statement of (~ualifications O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION PLANNING J ENGINEERING J SURVEYING CONSIRUCTION MANAGEMENT Indusu~al DevelopmenU E,~lag-l~3cE,& C~'r, R,'~dd¢, CA, C~,~t: E,,gd~fR~d,'~.~. Entitl~ratt: Con~dtional Use Permit, IY/aste l~lanagemcat Permits for l~ndfll~ Air ~uak'~ and Co~tructio~ per. ts. The site was a quarry that left a hole from which 500,000 cubic yarda of material was mk~. We secured permits from several agencies to take in constzuction waste, process it and sell it for road base. The proiect also included asphaltic concrete and cmmem concrete balr_.h plants. It is now an established, profitable business. Con,~e. tc. iM Developme.~' .El $obra~t.e Commerdal Center, Corona, C,'i. Cliff: glmd Enter~dse..c Beslde.~al Developmene C C Rash, Co~'~a, C.,4, Cllr~t Fr,'lid. de DaiO, £~tlt~:.M~m:d. palRto~a~i~at~on, Zont Cha~:ge, Gc~eralPl~n.,4mrdment, ,Yut~'~'on and Comtm't~ The site was a daky on 110 acres, w~th a common boundasy w~th Federal Land and hduded a municipal rent~fizafion that changed city boundafes. The proiect c~a~1354 residential lots and a yet undeveloped commercial site. U, fidening existing su'eets induding retaining wails and ~econstrucfing driveways to confon'n w~th new wo~k- The p~oiect was included accommodating public access and ~estorMg damaged knprovements made by homeowners. These proiects have many ~aps ~at can escalate the cost if the designer refisses some existing features. This proiect requbed draffng detailed contracts and coordh~afing the work w~th affected propen'y owne~. Resumes of the Principals .~4r../~e 0 ~d/ty, P.E.I.D., Mr. O'Malley started designing and building land development projects over thirty years ago. He is ou~ principal engineer and founder of the fm~ He is licensed to practice both Civ/l Engineering and Land Surveying and General Engineering Contracting. He holds and Juris Doctor degree from California Southern Law School (1999) He is di~ctly responsible for entitlements and enginec6ngdesigo. Air. Luis Gomer~ L.S. Via Pmident, Mr. Gomez, Principal Surveyor directly responsible for all survey operations, brought thirty years experience in land survey/rig and land development to the fimx His experience includes most of the various categories of land surveying including aerial mapping, precise control surveys, consU'uction staking, federal land sur~eys and assessment districts. His projects included GPS surveys and extensive Statement of Qualifications O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION PLANNING J ENGINEERING J SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT Mr. K~ O ~Nei/L Urbaa Pl~ur, Vice-pt'esidem of O~ey ~ee~ h~ e~sive ex~fience ~& ~evelo~t ~d ~c ~vdop~nt effom ~ cities ~ ~ifo~ ~ng ~ ~e G~ of Notco ~ere he se~ ~ ~o~ Pl~er ~d ~ono~c ~vel~t ~a~r ~s~l~g p~ for ~e ~ev~t A~n~. Sof~are We co~fiy ~u~ n~ ~nt ;~ice ~ o~ ~i~. We ~e so~e fr~ ~o~ so~es ~ ~e ~ ~at co~ly ~i~ ~e ~ienfs prefer~ce. ~ost ~o~k ~ ~ ~ Auc~, ve~ion 14. We ~e WSPG ~fi ~ for ~y~a~ic c~afio~, ~V for ~y~lo~, ~. for s~c~es ~d ~ for ~a~t Quali~ We ~o~k ~d ~ ~s~e ~at o~ ~i~ ~t ~fo~ ~d a~r ~fi fi~g ~e job. ~ · e ~t one ~ ~eve ~e ~ient's o~j~e. To ~fi jufi~nt. ~e ~t ~es~ is not ~e one ~t cost less ~ ~fi ~ut ~e ~e ~t no one no6c~ ~a~e ~ere is no p~le~ us~g ic We ~ ~ co~ to a jo~si~ to ~s~ to a c~ ~ ~ a ~onfiict or o~et p~l~ is r~ol~. We rio not ~ for work ~ ~solve issues if ~ey shoed ~a~e ~ resolv~ ~h~ desi~g o~ s~;~g ~e p~je~ ~e reset of ~ese p~es ~ a sm~er ~g pro~ ~ less cost for eye.one ~s~d [nBurance~ O~ey ~ p~vi~ i~ ~i~ for ~ess ~ud~ P~fessi~ ~fii~ Statement of Quaiification~ O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION PLANNING / ENGINEERING /SURVEYING CONSTRUCI'ION MANAGEMENI PARTIAL L~ST OF CUENTS Calvert Real Properties, Corona, CA City of Corona, Corona, CA City of Son Jocinto, Son Jacinto, CA Corona Medical Center, Corona, CA Engelauf Recycling, Riverside, CA Equity Directions, Inc. Newport Beoch, CA Ei $obrante Landfill, Riverside County Frahm Dodge, Norco, CA Gilmore Development Compony Hemborg Ford, Norco, CA Hillside Dairy, Corona, CA Hunsaker Company, Irvine, CA Investment Building Group, Newport Beach, CA McCune & Associates, Corona, CA McGrath Rentcorp, San Leandro, CA Mercury Rubber Company, Corona, CA Meyer Business Properties, La Habra, CA Mission Clay Company, Corona, CA Montrose Chemical Company, Stamford, CT Pacer Development Company, Newport Beach, CA Pacesetter Business Properties, Newport Beach, CA Robertshaw Corporation, Corona, CA Shea Homes, Walnut, CA The McGuire Corporation U.S. Tile, Corona, CA Western Community Bonk, Corono, CA US Home, Riverside, CA Curtis Development, Temecula, CA Slotement of Qualifications EXHIBIT B PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE 9 r:~agrmts~masters~annual contractmaster2000 O'MALLEY ENGINEERING CORPORATION PLANNING / ENGINEERING ! SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT STANDARD BIn.lNG RATES FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES Effec6m dam ]anuary t, ~ 999 Billln~ R~tes: P~d ..................................................................................... t ~ 50.00 lx, r hour Anhi~ ............................................................................................ 95.OO i~r hour La~ea~ An'hit~t ........................................................................ 95.00 per ?mfes~aal Engineer / Su~yor ..................................................... 95.00per horn' Constmaio~ E~i~r, Supoi~und~ .............................................. 85.00 per Smior Dedgner .............................................................................. 85.00per D~gner ............................................................. ~ ............................. 75.00 per Plaa Check stoles ........................................................................... 65.00 l~r hosm DrafU'n& senixes ............................................................................... 60.00 per hour Ckticd or M~sseng~r smi~s .............................................................. 40.00 t~t hour ~ Witat~$ Testimony ly Pd#dpab ......... i. ............................... 180.00 per ho~r Fidd Sum] Cram T~v ~ ~'~ .................................................................... ~140.O0 i~r hour Thm~ Man m'~ ........................................................................ 170.OOd~'r hour Smic~s ar~ off, nd under the fo&~dng ~ and conditions: I. Fidd survej omm am tdlkd a minimmn offour (4) hoursper day, eoa~pt mhen mo~ ~ 2. F.x/err ~itness t~ti~o~j i~ lfflled a ~inlmum of 4 houm jVer da~ ind~ddn& traml ti~e. 3. Est~amt en~needngf~s do not indud~ iadd~tal apentes such a~ blueim'ntr, tOk company charges, plan check fetr, mileage exprnses, messenger or overnight ddiverj cost wind similar items. Costs advaned by this offu~ on beha~Cof the cl;ent an billed at eo~tplus t~,!~ (~o%) t~r ut. Invoices are due andpajabk upon presentation. Unpaid bilfl'ngs are sue'eot toflnance chard of O.83 3% per month of the u~t~id balance, beginning 30 dos ~fter involve date. 720 WESI SIXTH ~l~-~-l, CORONA, CA 91720 / FAX: (909) 737-9,48i PHONE: (909) 734-0633 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETVVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of January 23, 2001 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal ("Consultant"). In consideration ofthe mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On February 8, 2000 the City and Consultant entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consultant Services" ("Agreement"). B. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: TERM. The term of the Agreement is hereby amended to extend the Agreement and shall commence on February 8, 2000 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2001. 3. Exhibit A of the Agreement is hereby amended to include the work described in Exhibit A-1 to this Agreement. 4. Section 4.a. PAYMENT of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Fifty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($50,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 5. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 1 r:~agmts\masters\annual masters\Robert Shea Perdue AMEND1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year flint above written. CITY OFTEMECULA BY: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal 43020 Blackdeer Loop, Suite 204 Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 296-2900 BY: Robert Shea Perdue, MAI, Owner (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) 2 r:~agmts~nasters~annual masters\Robert Shea Perdue AMEND1 ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPI 43020 Blackdeer Loop, Suite 204, Temecula, CA 92590 Serving The Inland Empire Appraisal Consultants to Government, Financial, Legal and Agricultural lnd RECEIVED ~ISAL D~C 1 9 ~000 CITY OF TEMECULA ~,~GINEERING DEPARTMENT Mr. Amer Attar, P.E., MBA Senior Engineer-Capital Projects City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 December 19, 2000 Subject: Annual Contract Dear Mr. Attar: Please extend our annual contract for appraisal services to coincide with the City of Temecula's fiscal year, July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2001. Additionally, please increase the total contract amount to reflect the City's appraisal needs. Sincerely, ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL Robert S. Perdue, MAI RSP:cla AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL CiTY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of February 8, 2000, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal, ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on February 8, 2000, and shall remain and continue in effect until February 8, 2001, unless terminated or extended pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. This is an annual contract for Real Estate Appraisal Services on an as needed basis. Consultant can perform any of the services and tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. When there is a need for Real Estate Appraisal Services as needed, the City will identify the specific scope of work, and request a fee schedule from the consultant. The City will instruct the consultant to proceed with the work once the exact scope of work and the associated fees are negotiated. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as negotiated and as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the tasks as directed by the City on an as needed basis. Any terms in Exhibit B other than the payment rates are null and void. The total cumulative annual amount shall not exceed Twenty Five Thousand Dollars and No Cents {$25,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City. Consultant shall be compensated for services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. Any additional work in excess of the amount above shall be approved by the City Council. c. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 1 r:~agrmts~masters~annualcontract~Robert Shea Perdue agrmt/ajjp 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days pdor written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 4. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by wdtten notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (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 pedod 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. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identi- fied and readily accessible.. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the dght to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the work, Consultant shall make 2 r:~agrmtsYnasters~annualcontmct~Robert Shea Perdue agrmt/ajjp available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and pdnting computer files. c. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injudes or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the wdtten consent of the Consultant. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, 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 or wrongful acts or omissions adsing out of or in any way related to the perl'ormance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may adse from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance.. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial Genera! Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or88. (2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liabilify Insurance. If the Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. (4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be wdtten on a policy form providing professional liability for the Consultant's profession. b, Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3 r:~agrmts~masters~annualcontract'~Robert Shea Perdue agrmVaiip (3) Worker's Compensation as required by the State of California; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Professional Liability coverage: One million ($1,000,000) per claim and in aggregate. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, oCCupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5) Each insurance policy required by this 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 by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the city. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. 4 r:~agrmts~masters~annualcontract~Robert Shea Perdue agrmt/ajjp f. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. NO employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall ' be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's pdor written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 5 r:~agrmts~mastemtannualcontract~Robert Shea Perdue agrrnt/ajjp 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in wdting and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. To City: To Consultant: City of Temecula Mailing Address: P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Ddve Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal 43020 Blackdeer Loop, Suite 204 Temecula, California 92590 Attention: Robert S. Perdue, MAI 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Robert S. Perdue, MAI shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Robert $. Perdue, may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Robert S. Perdue from Consultant's employ. Should he or she leave Consultant's employ, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgement, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 6 r:~agrmts~masters~annualcontmct~Robert Shea Perdue agn~t/ajjp 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All pdor or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entedng into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant wan'ants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Susan ~/~ CMC/AAE, City Clerk Approved As to Form: CONSULTANT Robert Shea Perdue Real Estate Appraisal 43020 Blackdeer Loop, Suite 204 Temecula, CA 92590 (909) 694-6904 Robert Shea Perdue, MAi, Owner By:. Name: Title: (Signatures of two corporate officers required for Corporations) 7 r'~nrmts~rnasters~nnualcontract~Robert Shea Perdue aarmt/aiiP ,EXH BIT a TASKS TO BE PERFORMFD AND PAYMENT RATES 8 r:~agrmtsV~asters~annualcontract~Roberl Shea Perdue agrmt/ajjp ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL 43020 Blackdeer Loop, Suite 204, Temecula, CA 92590 Serving The Inland Empire Appraisal Consultants to Government, Financial, Legal and Agricultural Industries Mr. Amer Attar, P.E., MBA Senior Engineer-Capital Projects City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 November 19, 1999 Subject: RFQ #02 - Public Works Department - ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR APPRAISAL SERVICES, Various-CIP Projects Approved for FY 1999-2000 Dear Mr. Attar: Thank you for considering ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL for the Temecula Annual Contract for Appraisal Services. Pursuant to your request, we are including specific information relative to the appraisal qualifications of ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL. I have responded to each question under "General Requirements" in RFQ No. 02 in a question-by-question format. Please contact me directly if you require additional information. Sincerely, ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL Robert S. Perdue, MAI RSP:cla Telephone: (909) 694-6904 Fax: (909) 694-6964 RESPONSES TO GENERAL REQUIREMENTS l.a. A detailed list of the task that can be performed. APPRAISAL METHODOLOGY IDENTIFICATION AND SUMMARY Cover Letter Certificate of Appraiser Summary of Conclusions Narrative Report: Item 1 - Owner Item 2 - Address (or location) of Subject Property Item 3 - Legal Description Item 4 - Delineation of Title Item 5 - Purpose of Appraisal and Function Item 6 - Summary of Appraisal Problems (and Scope) DESCRIPTION 1. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 2. Neighborhood Location and Description 3. Description of Subject Property 'A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. Jo K. L. M. N. Present Use Accessibility and Road Frontages Land Contour and Elevations Land Area Land Shape Utilities Present Zoning Highest and Best Use of Land if Vacant Improvements Specialty Items Real Estate Taxes Assessments Existing Lease or Rental Data Highest and Best Use Improved and As Vacant Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 1 Valuation of Property A. Site Analysis and Evaluation 1. Cost Approach a. Land analysis b. Improvement analysis Sales Comparison Approach a. General Discussion o 1) Relationships 2) Sales that are Comparable b. Comparative Analysis c. Correlation and Conclusion by Comparative Approach 3. Income Approach a. Data b. Analysis Correlation and Conclusion by Income Approach 4. Correlation and Final Conclusion Approaches to Value 1. Cost Approach a. Cost New b. Accrued Depreciation c. Land Value d. Indicated Value by Cost Approach Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 2 go Comparative [Market Data] Approach a. General Discussion bo 1) Relationships 2) Sales that are Comparable COmparative Analysis 1) 2) Whole Property Comparisons Comparative Units Correlation and Conclusion; Comparative [Market Data] Approach Income Approach a. Data b. Analysis c. Correlation Approach and Conclusion, Income C. Correlation of Value Indications fi-om All Approaches The specific process of the consultant's approach to most condemnation projects is as follows: Pre-Valuation · Meet with the client to review and discuss project overview. · Review existing or proposed project. · Review CEQA and other reports on proposed or existing project. · Review proposed time frame for project completion as well as intermediate meetings and deadlines. · Review client concems on proposed acquisitions (relative to property owner's accommodations). · Request a copy of title report. Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 3 Send letters of introduction to property owners for initial property owner contact. Valuation Meet with property owner and/or representative to inspect the property and understand the property owners concerns about acquisition and the project's impact on the owner's property. Also, introduce any selected consultants at this meeting for inspection and investigation of a) soils, b) land use potential, c) engineering, d) consideration of water well improvements, e) consideration of agricultural improvements, 0 consideration of' unusual or non-conforming structural improvements. · Identify real estate, property rights and appraisal problem. Commence preliminary data survey including complete inspection and verification of all land sales, improved sales (including agricultura.! improvements), and rental comparables (if applicable). Proceed with analysis including general data'on region, city and neighborhood as well as local and regional economic trends. Proceed with specific data collection on subject property including review of title report, site conditions, building conditions (review public records, building and safety records, assessors data (if permitted) and any other concerns relative to environmental constraints such as endangered species, wetlands, habitat, btueline streams (Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, and Fish and Wildlife etc.), hazardous materials, etc. · Estimate highest and best use as vacant and as improved. Valuation of the larger parcel relative to the three approaches to value. · Reconciliation of value. · Final estimation of value. Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 4 If applicable - analysis and valuation of part to be acquired and consideration of Severance Damages, General and Benefits; writing of report. The standard narrative appraisal report (Limited, Restricted; Complete, Summary or Complete, Self-Contained) will be organized and formatted according to the guidelines of USPAP, Appraisal Institute, California Code of Civil Procedure and Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions. (1) A description of the consulting firm, (2) organization structure, (3) location of principal offices, (4) number of professional personnel, and (5) other pertinent information, including the names and experience of all staff members who will work on this contract. (1) ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL is based in Temecula and is the largest real estate valuation firm in Riverside County. The finn specializes in eminent domain for mostly Riverside County municipalities. (2) ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL is a sole proprietorship owned by Robert Shea Perdue. (3) ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL 43020 Blackdeer Loop, Suite 204 Temecula, CA 92590 Phone: (909) 694-6904 Fax: (909) 694-6964 (4) Five full time; six part time (5) Robert Shea Perdue directs litigation, eminent domain and agricultural appraisals, office operations, professional ethics and quality control. Mr. Perdue has a breadth of knowledge in agricultural, special use, eminent domain and litigation valuation. As a 43-year resident of Inland Southern California, he also has a distinct familiarity with the local market. Mr. Perdue obtained a Bachelor of Science degree from San Diego State University and has completed post-graduate work in Real Estate Appraisal and Demographics. He maintains a California Real Estate Brokers license, has been awarded the MAI designation from the Appraisal Institute, is an active member of International Right-of-Way Association (Chapter 57 Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 5 President) and the American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers. Mr. Perdue's qualifications are attached as Exhibit A. Stephi Villanueva is a veteran staffappraiser. She has over 14 years of real estate appraisal experience and has successfully completed several courses offered by the Appraisal Institute in her quest for MAI designation. Her duties range from office administration to market research and appraisal. She is also an active member of International Right-of-Way Association. Ms. Villanueva's qualifications are attached as Exhibit A. Courtney Atnip is the office manager and supports the firm's research efforts. Orville Suemnick brings real estate development and brokerage experience to his staff appraiser position. Beverly Ortega is a licensed and experienced real estate agent and provides staff support and research for the firm. 1. c. Related project experience and client references. References - Recent Public Agency and Dairy Clients Mr. Neal L. Warren, SR/WA Chief Appraiser County of Orange 300 N. Flower Street PO Box 4048 Santa Ana, CA 92702-4048 (714) 834-2594 1996- Present 1991-1994 Valuation Assignments: Nine dairies, one pig and sheep ranch, txvo alfalfa ranches, hay lot and truck terminal, cattle auction yard, real estate brokerage office and several large farm parcels. All partial and full acquisitions for flowage easement interests - Prado Dam Project. Contract value - $30,000, $60,000 and $120,000. Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 6 Mr. A. Louis Schnepp, ASA, CRA Appraisal Manager County of San Bernardino 825 E. Third Street San Bemardino, CA 92415 (909) 387-2774 1990 - Present Valuation Assignments: Full acquisitions by the County of San Bemardino: two horse ranches, parcels of vacant land, eight dairies, four calf ranches, flooding value diminution study and a nudist resort. Conlxact value approximately $100,000. Mr. Chuck Hale Executive Director So. Cal. Ag. Land Foundation (County of San Bemardino) 13839 Bon View Avenue Chino, CA 91710 (909) 464-0186 1990 - Present 1983 - 1987 Valuation Assignments: Various full acquisition appraisals for dairies, ranches and vacant land. Contract value approximately $90,000. Also completed numerous appraisal assignments for Mr. Hale when he was the Assistant City Manager for the City of Vista (Community Development Director - 1983 to 1987). Assignments included numbered several hundred full and partial acquisitions relative to commercial, industrial and residential properties for street widening, utility easements and floodway channels; single and multiple partial acquisitions. Contract value in excess of $200,000. Ms. Janet Parks Real Property Agent County of Riverside Department of Building Services 3133 Mission Inn Avenue Riverside, Califomia 92507-4199 (909) 955-9275 1996 - Present Valuation Assignments: Over one dozen eminent domain assignments including Highway 74 (72 parcels) right-of-way project. Contract value approximately $80,000. Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 7 Mr. Tim Crough District Engineer Murrieta Water District 42290 Ivy. Murrieta, CA 92562 (909) 677-7667 1995-Present Valuation Assignments: Easement acquisitions for water transmission lines - partial easement acquisition and full acquisition of well and pump. Assessment District appraisals. Contract value approximately $40,000~ Ms. Cynthia A. Pank Senior Right of Way Coordinator Riverside County Flood Control 1995 Market Street Riverside, CA 92501-1719 (909) 788-9965 1996-Present Valuation Assignments: Commercial site in floodway, industrial lot in flood zone, floodway acquisition through horse ranch and 83 properties in flood plain. Contract value approximately $45,000. Valuation Assignments - Other Clients 1991 - Present · City of Temecula - Redevelopment Agency · City of Murrieta - Engineering Department · Rancho California Water District olntemal Revenue Service · Best, Best & Krieger, LLP · Orange County Water District Please refer to Robert Shea Perdue's Qualifications for additional client listings. Valuation Assignments - Summary Since 1978 have appraised thousand of properties in Southern California for eminent domain acquisition and litigation. Property types range from residential and vacant land to commercial and industrial. Partial acquisitions include street, utility, flood, avigation and conservation easements. Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 8 l.f. The name of the principal or project manager in the firm who will serve as Project Engineer and have direct and continued responsibility for the contract. This person will be the City Staff contact On all matters dealing with each project and. will handle the day-to-day activities through to completion. Please contact Bob Perdue, the owner, on all matters dealing with this contract and any projects which result fromthis contract. His phone number is (909) 694-6904. The names of any sub-consultants or sub-contractors to be utilized, along with an experience and project resume. It is unlikely we will utilize sub-consultants; however, if so, we have previously utilized the following individuals: 1. Ted Mullen - civil engineer and real estate develoPer. 2. Earle Brooks - developer and appraiser. 3. Roger Doverspike, MAI - appraiser. 4. Tisha Roripaugh - appraiser. 5. Adrian Lawrence - appraiser. 6. Mark Routh - appraiser. Professional quali, ftcation and type of equipment available. The qualifications of Robert Shea Perdue, MAI and Stephi Villanueva are attached as Exhibit A. ROBERT SHEA PERI)LIE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL utilizes state-of-the-art appraisal technology including all standard valuation services, ARCVIEW for project and data management and digital exhibits and reports. Current billing rate schedule for all personnel and equipment. Appraisals are quoted and billed on a lump sum case-by-case basis. Should additional appraisers' time be required for updated estimates of value, attorney/client conferences, deposition or expert witness testimony, this time will be billed at our standard rates of $125 and $190 per hour, respectively. Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 9 l.h. Any exceptions, additions, or suggestions which will aid us in our selection process. ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL is the only MAI condemnation appraisal firm located in Temecula. While we have been based in the City since 1993, our familiarity with the local market dates to 1983 when we performed appraisals for Kaiser-Aetna, Kemper Insurance, etc. We are situated near the City Hall and have been available on short notice for appraisal meetings with the City staff. 2. The proposal shall be signed by an authorized ofj~tcial of the consuitant firm. 3. The proposal shall be valid for a minimum of ninety (90) days. Consultant is obligated to provide evidence of insurance liability and abide by the City's Risk Management Procedures in accordance with Exhibit "A ': ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL currently holds a $1 million business liability insurance policy, standard 300/100 automobile policy and Workers' Compensation. We are currently' in the process of obtaining the insurance policies necessary to comply with the City of Temecula requirements. Consultant will maintain required professional licenses and registration during the life of the Contract with the City. Robert S. Perdue currently holds the MAI appraisal designation, is a licensed general appraiser and is a licensed real estate broker. Respectfully submitted, ROBERT SHEA PERDUE REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL Robert S. Perdue, MAI RSP:cla Response to RFQ No. 2 Page 10 ITEM 8 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk January 23, 2001 Records Destruction Approval APPROVAL ~//y CITY ATTORNEY _/,~ ~ FINANCE DIRECTOR_~ CITY MANAGER ~ PREPARED BY: Gwyn R. Flores, Records Coordinator RECOMMENDATION: approve the scheduled destruction of certain City records in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Records Retention Policy. BACKGROUND: On Mamh 22, 1992, the City Council approved Resolution No. 92-17 which authorizes the destruction of certain City records which have become outdated, obsolete or are excess documents, in compliance with State of California Government Code, Sections 34090 through 34090.7. Attached Exhibit A, lists records from the Public Works Department, Boxes 32-41, 44 and 45, consisting of various Project, Tract and Encroachment Permit files. These records have been imaged and identified within Group IV of the Records Retention Schedule. The imaging of these records complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 34090.5. The City Attorney has reviewed this request and has signed the Exhibit, as provided for in Resolution No. 92-17. ATTACHMENTS: Destruction of Records Request, Public Works Department Exhibit a, List of Records recommended for destruction TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Gwyn R. Flores, Records Coordinator January 23, 2001 Request for Destruction of Records Attached is a listing of records, boxes 32-41, 44 and 45, maintained in the Public Works Department that that have been imaged into the City's LaserFiche Imaging System and are eligible for destruction in accordance with the City of Temecula approved Retention Policy. The imaging of these records complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 34090.5 The attached list of records has been identified within Retention Group IV, as outlined in "Exhibit 1", Schedule A, of Resolution No. 92-17. The undersigned have reviewed and approved this destruction request. Pursuant to the requirements of Govemment Code Section 34090.5, 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. APPROVED: Department Head: APPROVED: City Attorney: William Hughes, Director of Public Works Date / Dat~ EXHIBIT 'A' Box #32 Box #33 Box #34 Box #35 Box #36 Box #37 Box #38 Box #39 Box #40 Box #41 Box #44 Box #45 1990-1993 Various Tract Files: Tract24186,24186-1,24186-2,24186-3, 24186-4,24187,24187-1,24187-F, 24188,24188-F, 24188-1,24188-3, 24188-5,25320, 25321, 25322,25323, 25324, 25418,25599,25603, 25640,25722,25892, 26036, 26521,26549,26828,26828-1 1992 Encroachment Permits (E92-106 thru E92-157) 1991 Encroachment Permits (E91-41 thru E91-69) 1993 & 1994 Various PA Files: PA93-0018, 93-0030 Minor Conditional Use Permit, 93-0080, 93-0137 Zono's, 93-0138/0139 (PM26232), 93- 0141 (PM 26232), 93-0156 Lot Line Adjustment, 93-0157 TVUSD, 93- 0172 Stampede, 93-0179 Calle Girasol Second Unit, 93-0180, 93-0187 New Community Lutheran Chumh, 93-0189 Minor Use Permit, 93-0193 Jan Weilert RV Park, 93-0195 Public Use Permit Pro-school, PA94-0037 New Covenant Church, 94-0039 Chardonnay Hills, 94-0042 Hope Lutheran Church, 94-0043 Billiard Parlor, 94-0044 St, Cathemines Church, 94-0048 Rancho Ford, 94-0050 Esthetics Salon, 94-0051 Double D Pipeline 1991 & 1992 Encroachment Permits E91-070 thru E91-147, E92-01 thru E91-105 1997 Encroachment Permits 1994 PA Files: PA94-0060, 94-0072, 94-0078, 94-0079, 94-0081, 94- 0087, 94-0090, 94-0102, 94-0107, 94-0112, 94-0113, 94-0128 1994 Encroachment Permits 1994 Encroachment Permits 1993 Grading Utility & Construction Permits Old Town Improvement Project: -1993 Old Town Specific Plan Traffic Study Revised -1994 Site Traffic Impact Ananlysis of the Proposed Old Town Redevelopment Project - Phase I -1994 Congestion Management program Traffic Impact Analysis of Proposed Old Town Redevelopment Project -1996 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (1995) PW95-09 (1995) PW95-09, (1994) PW94-16, (1997) PW97-04, (1997) PW97-09 ITEM 9 APPflOVAL j~, ~'~'~"-' CITY ATTORNEY //. CITY MANAGER ~ ' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT (~City Council Shawn Nelson, City Manager January 23, 2001 Resolution of Support PREPARED BY: Aaron Adams, Sr. Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider adopting the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OFTHECITYCOUNCIL OFTHE CITY OF TEMECULA URGING STATE SUPPORT TO PRESERVE AND EXTEND ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLE(ZEV) PROGRAMS BACKGROUND: In October of this year the California Air Resources Board (CARB) unanimously reaffirmed its intention to move ahead with its groundbreaking Zero Emission Vehicle program. However, at the same time, CARB directed its staff to return in January with recommended modifications to the program to address some concerns raised by automakers. The automakers plan to pressure CARB and Governor Davis to reconsider their continued support for Zero Emission Vehicle programs. For this reason, the American Lung Association of California (ALAC) is turning once again to the community leaders of Southern California to help convey a message that the health of our children and healthy air in our communities requires that the Air Resources Board hold firm in their resolve to implement a successful Zero Emission Vehicle program. At the request of Mayor Comerchero, the attached resolution of support has been developed for City Council consideration. The City of Riverside, City of Corona, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) have all previously adopted similar letters and resolutions of support. FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time Attachments: Resolution 01- RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA URGING STATE SUPPORT TO PRESERVE AND EXTEND ZERO-EMISSION VEHICLE (ZEV) PROGRAMS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND REQUEST AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, Zero-Emission Vehicles and the ZEV program are important to the State of California; and WHEREAS, more than 2/3 of our air pollution comes from mobile sources, such as cars, trucks, and buses; and WHEREAS, traditional gasoline powered cars, even the newest cleanest cars, degrade with use and become serous sources of pollution; and WHEREAS, as our population grows, the gains we have made in cleaning our air with cleaner new cars and trucks will inevitabIy erode-and quickly; and WHEREAS, "upstream emissions" from gasoline, including those from refineries and from diesel trucks delivering the fuel, and from evaporating and spilled fuel are significant contributors to unhealthy air; and WHEREAS, increasingly we understand that the petroleum-based fuel system we now rely upon poisons not only our air but also our water supplies and our oceans; and WHEREAS, if the future price of gasoline and other petroleum-based fuels is to be reasonable and within reach of working families, it is imperative that we develop alternative technologies to compete with gasoline-powered vehicles; and WHEREAS, we now know that electric vehicles, the only ZEV yet made available, provide a successful and practical alternative to gasoline-powered cars NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Temecula urges continued support of the Governor and State Legislature to move forward, preserving and extending the ZEV program. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of January 2001. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Resos\99-40 I ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 00- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of January, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Resos\99~.0 2 ITEM 10 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER ~ ' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council / City Manager James O'Grady, Assistant City Manage~-' January 23, 2001 Letter of Support for Riverside County Transit Agency (RTA) Grant Application RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter of Support for the Riverside County Transit Agency (RTA) to include in an upcoming application to receive grant funds for transit planning. BACKGROUND: Councilmember Pratt has been advised by Steve Oiler, Acting General Manager of the RTA, that the RTA is planning to submit a grant application for transit planning funds under the Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program (TCSP). Furthermore, Mr. Oiler has advised Councilmember Pratt that a letter from the City of Temecula could be helpful in obtaining funding under this program. This item has been placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Pratt. See attached letter dated January 16, 2001 for further information. In a discussion with Mr. Oiler on January 17, staff was advised that the grant application is currently being developed, and the submittal deadline is January 31, 2001. Mr. Oiler will be providing staff with additional information on the grant program and the RTA's application. This will be transmitted to the City Council promptly upon receipt. Staff recommends that the Council consider this request and authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for this grant application. FISCAL IMPACT: support. ATTACHMENT: No direct fiscal impact is anticipated by providing such a letter of Letter from Councilmember Pratt dated January 16, 2001 R:IOGRADYJIETCP - LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR RTA GRANT APPLICATION, AGENDA REPORT ?-23-01.D0C 1 1/17/01 Jan 16 O1 12:31p Sam Pratt, Councilman (909) 308-1289 p.2 C~omia Registrmic~: ~.vil ~%o~c~r No. 76~7 · a~c~und Engim~t No. 650 ALBERT S. PRATT Since 1.9!9.. 40470 Bfixton Cove Temecula, CA 92591 (Email: sampratt~netimes.net) (909) 699-8689 Tuesday, January 16, 2001 James O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: Emergency Traffic Circulation Plan - Phase I. Dear Ynn: This letter will up date the ETCP with a defmilive plan for a local and interurban bus system and a data base support systen~ I m requesting this Emergency Traffic Circulation Hah - Phase I be placed mx the Com~eil Agenda of January 23, 2001. It is my hope that Traffic/Safety Commission and Staffprompfly review this letter mid tho ~commendations so that it can be placed on the Cooncil Agenda for approval on the above date. Please note the urgency of this nmtter in the bold print below. This could bo a uaique opportunity for Temeoula to start aa important "safety net" for traffic mitigation required in speoific plan approvals. J'm, your prompt interest in this matter has nothing, but positive results for Temecula's future! Please distribute this request to Staff, Transportalion/Safety commission and follow members of tho Cooncil. Quoting flora past correspondence: "I am ~oquesting a computer data base be prepared matching up the daily working Temecula residents with other urban areas (Ex: San Diego, Corona, Riverside) for an effective share the fide program, and the use of an initial Temecula inter urban bus system, u~der the direction oftha Traffic/Safety Commission. Such a plan might also be applied to residents working locally and to mothers using share the fide to take their children to and from school." "The Traffc/Safoty Commission is the agency to direct and to coordinate public transportation overseeing a Transportation Agency setup and funded to operate the systenx 3an 16 01 12:31p Sam Pratt, Councilman (9091 308-1289 p.3 AI.BERT S. PRATT ,Since 1919 40470 Bfixten Cove Tomecula, CA 92591 (Em,ail: sampratt~ncfimesdlet) (909) 699-8689 California R~istrafi~: C~ F~.~ N~ %~ ~ ~ No. 650 No~ing ~o~ of a complote profosdm~y epormod ~em ~ bo of ~/~afim v~o." ~ ~ m~o~ ~e Com~s~'s effo~s to promote ~ ~d ~e ealm~g now m~r way, ~d a "~o~ net" f0i'CEQA mfigafi~ ~g for a ~or~ PI~ ~od ~v01 of So~ - LOS "D". The computer database would match up rider ship with home aad work allowing tho citizens a choice between ride sharing and interarban transportation connections firom "park and ride" locations. It would update RTA bus~schedales and provide a roond Uip route designation and cost from Temecula to out of town work, ente~t,~inment or personal service locations accessed from tho City of Temecula web page. Staffing would bo two full time computer database qualified personnd with required equipment and an initial budgeted annual cost of $150,000. Reallocate one of the proposed computer specialists to do on and off tho bus survey to determine what tho most successful allocation of fixed and smmt shuttle service would be in your commlality. Most of the data matching with origin :md destinations can be provided through other ag0ncy's: and we would only need to promote people filling out the' datacards. Contact Mr. JeffMorales at Caltrans to soo if ho has any demo route money to ease congestion, l%{r. Morales used to work at tho Chicago Transit Agency and should be supportive at least in concept. Tho required RTA local and inter urban system must be initiated by Cooncil through Staff on an emergency basis compatible with RTA requirements. Subsidized public/private funding must be authorized at the outset until rider ship is acceptable and/or the annual contribution is determined. The public/private funding partnership will bo augmented with Development Impact Fees sufficient to cover a minimtlm five-year period of operation. I have been advised by Mr. Steve Oiler, Deputy General Manager of the RTA that the RTA is oxploling the possibility of filing a TCSP (Transportation and Comm~lity and System Preservation Pilot Program) grant. Those grants are specifically intended for "research to investigate and address the relationship botwoan transportation and oomm!~lity and system preservation...to improve tho efficiency of the trm~sportalion, reduce the impacts of transportation on'tho ellVironment; redaco tho nend for cosily future public infrastructure, ensure efficient access to jobs, services and 3an 16 O1 12:32p Sam Pratt, Councilman AI,BERT S. PRATT Since 1919 40470 Brixton Cove Temecula, CA 92591 (Email: sampratt~nctimes.net) (909) 699-8699 C~v~ ~nE~n~ex No. 7697 Stract~al Engin~-x No, 6~0 centers of trade, and encourage private sector development patterns." Crrent pfiorilios include: "Commitment of no-Federal resources, a project evaluation plan with spec'fflc mensuremant criteria, equitable distribution to diverse populations and commitment to public and private involvement, including participation of nontraditional panners." "RTA can try for a pl~mln8 8rant and behove that Temecula would be an excellent project area. But, RTA would no~l nontradltiona] partners" such as the BIA~ the City, &/or maybe some devdopers who do a lot there. It would get good poln/s if we can stress the 'future infrastructure needs' aspeet~ ~inc~ Temecula's infrastructure is curren/iy inferior for i/s needs. Would tho City bo interested in being a partner or spenser in such an endeavor?. I believe '!soi%-match" contributions such as time/labor are acceptable as a portion of the local match requirements. If the City would be interested then we would need a letter of support very qulddy as the deadline for the grant submittal is January 31. If you are interest~l or deslra moro information please contact C-is Leroy, RTA's Manager of Planning, or me at (Steve O~er) 909.654.0850." LET'S NOT MISS THIS OPPORTUNITY! I am recommending the following: (and all of the above!) 1. Staffprepares the required documents requesting RTA' s assistance in tho effective execution of Phase I'and ~bmits t6 tho Council for approval. 2. Detormino the negotiated required subsidized City of Temecula portion of tho funding. 3. With RTA assistance, determine tho initial scope of Phase I that is feasible and can bo successfiflly executed and tho extent that a Tomecula publio/pfivato parmorship with RTA is feasible. 4. Contact the RTA and request a smart shuttle system using buses to cover all of tho areas outside 1/4 of a mile of the existing routes in Temocula immediately with the possibility of using RTA money allocated under demonstration projects with the necessary documentation for Council approval and submit to RTA for processin~ 5. When RTA approval is obtained, activate those approved Routes using the authorized RTA buses noted in Item 7. 3an 16 01 12:32p Sam Pratt, Councilman (909) 308-1289 ALBERT S. PRATT Since 1919 40470 Btixton Cove Temecula, CA 92591 (Email: sampratt~ac6mes.net) (909) 699-8689. California Rggim, mioa: Crnfil En~r No. 7697 Shqgtaxal En~cot bio. 650 6. Setup and activate computer database system compatible and integrated with RTA and the proven San Diego rider database and other "in place" area programs. 7. Referencing the Potential Bus Route system of May 24, 2'000: · a. Haco in service Back Bone Routes - 8 buses require& b. Place in service Neighborhood Service Routes- 4 Buses required. c. Place in service Commercial/Industrial "Shuttle Bus Routes" - 2 Buses required servicing employees fxom work to and from "park andfide" locations. This "shuttle service" will allow major savinss in infrastructure construction across Murrieta Creek with "park and fide" locations near Western Bypass with public/employer/employee cooperation. & Place in service North/South Inter urban Connecting Routes - 8 Busses required and provide "park and fide" locations. e. Place in service increased convenient Dial-A-Ride service for handicapped. f. Consider Dial-A-Ride concept for Temecula employees to and from work in western industrial areawest of I-15.and north of grmchestor Road. Consumers Power Company in Midland, Michigan over 20 years ago when I was superintendent on the Nuclear Plant construction~ used this concept successfully. This initial program, which is designed to "safety net" Temecula traffic mitigation, will require 22 buses in Phase I. h. When rider ship dem~mds increase - to keep a conv~aient 15-,,,;,,ate local bus system "headway" - request additional RTA service. i. BUs service provided 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m~ It is my hope that the above will act as a guide to minimi?~ the timer required for this initial investigation to take advantage of this unique opportunity to provide a "safety net" for Temecula's present and future traffic mitigation. Respectfully, Sam Pratt ITEM 11 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City ManagedCi t~y(~ i I Debbie Ubnoske~13irector of Planning January 23, 2001 The 2000 General Plan Implementation Report Prepared By: Saied Naaseh, Project Planner IV RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2001-._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION REPORT BACKGROUND: Section 65400 of the State Planning and Zoning Law requires that cities track the implementation of their General Plans and their progress in meeting the regional housing needs. The purpose of this Staff Report is to introduce the 2000 General Plan Implementation Report (Report) to the City Council for their review, comment, and adoption. Following the Council's adoption, staff will file the Report with the Governor's Qffice of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development. This final Report will have all the strikeout and bolded removed and will reflect the City Council's input. The Planning Commission reviewed and commented on the Report at their July 19, 2000 meeting. A copy of the meeting minutes is included as Attachment No. 2. The Commission's comments and clarifications are incorporated into the attached Report (please refer to Attachment No. 1, A). The attached Report evaluates the status of each of the implementation measures identified in the General Plan by Element. The Planning Commission added the bolded information to the Report and deleted the striked-out language. DISCUSSION The Report provides the following information for each item: · A description of the specific Implementation Action; R:\GENPLAN~nnual Implementation Report\2000~Annual Repor[ 2000 CCla.doc ! · The progress at accomplishing the item; and · Additional information on the item's completion or ongoing status. In general, the Commission supported the document. However, they recommended that the Report be presented in a more positive manner by adding appropriate comments to the Report. For example, the Commission indicated that the City through reviewing specific plans on a case-by -case basis has encouraged and obtained additional parkland, recreational amenities, and natural open space. However, the Report indicates that no action has been taken (Land Use/ #8). The Commission had similar recommendations for Open Space/#9, Growth MangementJ#1 and #8, Public Safety/#8, Air Quality/flA. The Commission recommended that in the future the City place a high priority on three implementation measures for developing Recreation Trails Master Plan, a Citywide Bicycle System, and developing incentives to encourage additional open space, and park and recreational facilities. In addition, the Commission had the following discussions that required City Council input: Open Space and Conservation Element #11, Utilizing the Village Center concept to reduce urban sprawl into agricultural areas, Progress Status: No Action The Commission questioned whether we need this implementation measure since no agricultural preserve areas exist within the City Limits. However, there are several pockets of Agricultural Preserves within the Sphere of Influence. The closest of these Agricultural Preserve lands identified in the General Plan to the City Limits is the Roripaugh Specific Plan area which has been removed from the preserve area. Staff would agree that this implementation measure is not applicable within the City Limits but maybe used in the future within the Sphere of Influence. Does the Council want to keep this item as is or indicate that it is no longer appropriate? Growth ManagementJPublic Facilities Element #5, Encouraqe water district programs that promote water conservation, Progress Status: Ongoing The Commission felt that using the word encourage is not appropriate for an implementation action. Furthermore, Commission believed that the City needs to be more proactive in using reclaimed water for parks and promoting other water conservation measures. Does the Council agree with this direction? #7, Establish quidelines for the development of regionally compatible flood control facilities, Progress Status: Ongoing The Commission felt that in this case the "Ongoing" designation in the Progress column is not appropriate since the Murrieta Creek Advisory Board has not been able to accomplish its goals and has not met for several years. However, since the time when the Commission originally considered this item, the Murrieta Creek solution process has resumed. As a result, staff recommends that the "Ongoing" status description be retained. This has been changed in Exhibit A. R:\GENPLAN~Annual Implementation Report~000~Annual Report 2000 CCla.doc 2 FISCAL IMPACT: None. Attachments: Resolution - Page 4 A. 2000 General Plan Implementation Report - Page 7 July 19, 2000 PC Minutes - Page 8 R:\GENPLAN~Annual Implementation Report\2000~Annual Report 2000 CCla.doc 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 PROPOSED RESOLUTION R:\GENPLAN~Annual Implementation Report~2000~Annual Report 2000 CCla.doc 4 Attachment No. I RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE 2000 GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION REPORT WHEREAS, Section of the State Planning and Zoning Law requires that local governments report on the status of implementing the adopted General Plan; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the draft Annual Report on July 19, 2000, and provided comments; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the draft Annual report January 23, 2001; and WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff Report regarding the 2000 General Plan Implementation Report; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER: Section 1. The 2000 General Plan Implementation Plan. The City Council hereby adopts the 2000 General Plan Implementation Plan, Attachment A, and directs staff to forward a copy to the Governor's Office of Planning and Research and the Department of Housing and Community Development. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. R:\GENPLAN~Annual Implementation Report~2000~Annual Report 2000 CCla.doc 5 Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 23rd day of January 2001. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, Mayor Susan W. JoneS, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the __ day of , 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:\GENPLAN~Annual Implementation Report~000~Annual Report 2000 CCla.doc 6 EXHIBIT A GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION REPORT R:\GENPLAN~Annual Implementation Report~000~Annual Report 2000 CCla.doc 7 0 0 Z Z < 0 0 0 © ..o ATTACHMENT NO. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R:\GENPLANV~nnual Implementation Report~2000~Annual Report 2000 CCla.doc g respect to page 2, under Item No. 3, Commissioner Webster relayed that the a continuance should reflect that it was due to the need for additi to g the Negative Declaration; and noted that 13, the word, replaced with the word Quit. With respect to page 9, in and paragraph, the phrase Forest Hills should b~ .3hiniaeff relayed that Forest City. Commissioner Telesio noted that or his concluding remarks, the minutes should reflect that he apptaud~,d't~liv~rsity the context of the mall. MOTION. Com?~sefO~ner Mathewson moved to th ~ as revised. The motion waste ..o_nded by Commissioner Webster and voice vote approval with the exc,,ept3on of Commissioner Chiniaeff who abstained. COMMISSION BUSINESS 3 General Plan Annual (Implementation) Report - Senior Planner Dave Ho,cia,, Senior Management Analyst Brown provided an overview of the staff report (of record), noting that the General Plan (Implementation) Report was a requirement of State Planning Law. Referencing the Land Use Element portion of the report, specifically Item No. 8 (regarding provision of park and recreation facilities), Commissioner Mathewson queried the denotation of No Action regarding the progress of the implementation action. In response, Senior Management Analyst Brown relayed that due to a shortage of staff personnel the implementation action had not been implemented; and confirmed, for Commissioner Chiniaeff, that the issue had been addressed on a project-by-project basis. Referencing the Open Space/Conservation element portion of the report, specifically Item No. 5 (regarding adoption of a hillside-grading ordinance), Commissioner Mathewson queried the timeframe of the development of the ordinance. In response, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that in approximately 60 days the ordinance would be presented to the Planning Commission, clarifying that the ordinance would be a general grading ordinance, inclusive of hillside grading. Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that staff would take note of any comments from the Commission regarding hillside grading in the interim period in order to incorporate the remarks into the ordinance. In response to Commissioner Mathewson's queries, with respect to the Open Space/Conservation Element portion of the report, specifically Item No. 11 (regarding the Village Center concept), Senior Management Analyst Brown noted that the implementation measure would most likely be revised or deleted; and confirmed that it could be reported that it was no longer applicable. Referencing the Public Safety Element portion of the report, specifically Item No. 4 (regarding adoption of a hillside development ordinance), Commissioner Mathewson queried whether this ordinance would be developed in conjunction with the hillside- grading ordinance. Senior Management Analyst Brown confirmed that this was referencing the same ordinance. For Chairman Guerriero, Director of Planning Ubnoske provided information regarding the focus of discussions for the upcoming Joint City Council/Planning Commission Workshop. Commissioner Chiniaeff commended staff for their efforts with respect to the overall report; recommended presentation to the State, in a positive manner, of what the City has accomplished, specifically recommending that with respect to the Public Safety Element portion of the report, Item No. 8 (regarding routes for conveyance of hazardous materials) that the report indicate that this issue was addressed on a case-by-case basis, recommending that alternate portions of the report reflect progress as on a case* by-case basis when applicable (i.e., Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, Item Nos. 1, and 8). For Commissioner Chiniaeff, with respect to the Air Quality Element portion, Item No. 4, Senior Management Analyst Brown provided additional information regarding efforts associated with energy conservation standards. Commissioner Webster noted that since he would be unable to attend the Joint Workshop that he would provide his comments at this time to be forwarded to the City Council, as follows: with respect to the Land Use Element, Item No. 8 (regarding incorporating incentives within the Development Code for park and recreation facilities) recommended that this issue be given a higher priority level; with respect to the Housing Element, recommended that there be consideration to incorporate additional implementation actions per the General Plan; with respect to the Open Space/Conservation Element, Item Nos. 3, and 4 (regarding recreation trails and a Citywide bicycle system) recommended that these items be prioritized at a higher level in order to not further restrict the availability of trails as development progresses; with respect to Item No. 9 (regarding energy conservation guidelines), recommended that staff investigate adding additional specificity to the Development Code or at the Specific Plan level in order to provide stricter regulations; with respect to Item No. 11 (regarding Agricultural Areas), recommended that this issue be addressed in the Roripaugh Ranch and Wolf Creek areas; with respect to the Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, Item No. 5 (regarding the comments associated with installation of park reclaimed water systems) queried the use of the word encourage with respect to the implementation action, noting that the City could be making greater strides with respect to this issue; with respect to Item No. 14 (regarding the Growth Management Program) noted that the action plan was not in conformance with actions items that the Growth Management Program was intended to accomplish, noting that numerous specific goals and policies within the General Plan were in direct conflict with the action plan, querying the term completed regarding the progress of the Growth Management Program, advising that the process was not complete due to the inconsistencies. With respect to the Public Safety Element, Item No. 8 (regarding transportation routes for conveyance of hazardous materials) Chairman Guerriero recommended that the City investigate establishment of a singular route (from the freeway) northbound and southbound that would enter the west side area, noting that a hazardous material incident could be better confined on the west side of the freeway. 3 With respect to the Open Space/Conservation Element, Item No. 11 (regarding the Village Center concept), Commissioner Mathewson noted that he had interpreted the language differently than Commissioner Webster. Senior Management Analyst Brown relayed that this issue could be better addressed at the Joint Workshop. Since this Agenda Item required no formal action, the Commission moved forward with Agenda Item No. 4. ~ ERACIT (Enforce Responsible Alcohol Consumption in Temecula) Pro.qram 1 - Police Officer Robert Alexander an overview of the ERACIT program, noting that ly four years ago; provided additional regardin! the DUI checkpoints, and the liquor store ~. invited the issioners to attend a DUI checkpoint, noting that the published relaying that the Commissioners could obtain the date~ scheduled DUI checkpoints; for Chairman additional informati, 3arding the history of the ERACIT the sting operations a business was cited three time., over to the ABC, at the use could have its lic( majority of arrests at the ~ were adult that alternate cities had simil~ noting that t for driving under the influence !cohol were about advised that there was a re( I to publish newspaper; noted that since the Sh; specific area with a concentrated Commissioner Mathewson, relayed the wineries; for Commissioner Telesio were also investigatir~g for drivers Director of Public Works Parks, under the influence of alcohol in the program. ram him to o, provided relayed that during 3uld be turned noted that the er Webster, relayed in the City of Temecula 9 with alternate cities; checkpoint dates in the Ihtclub had closed, there was not a lying under the influence; for been checkpoints set up proximate to sed that at the checkpoints the Officers 'the influence of drugs; and for Deputy it 3 him that the drivers driving , of Tem~ decreased since the onset of Since this Agenda Item Agenda Item No. 5. I action, moved forward with PUBLIC HEARIN~ Planni )lication No. 99-0371 - GENERAL PLAN AMI RE ON: Adopt a resolution entitled: IMENT ITEM 12 APPROVAL CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance~'- January 23, 2001 Community Service Funding Program - Veterans of Foreign Wars RECOMMENDATION:That the City Council approve a reallocation of Community Services Funding to the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) in the amount of $5,000. DISCUSSION: At the City Council meeting of October 24, 2000, the City Council awarded $162,500 in Community Services Funding to 43 non-profit organizations that provide community services to the citizens of Temecula. At that time, the VFW was awarded funding in the amount of $5,000 to be used for the installation of a water meter at their current leased facility. The VFW has recently notified the City that they will not be renewing the lease at their current location and, therefore, will not be in need of the funds to install the water meter. However, the VFW would like the City Council to consider reallocating the grant funds of $5,000 toward relocation and storage costs. The VFW has not identified a new location, but they must vacate their building by January 31, 2001. These grant funds will be used to pay for the costs of moving and storing their furniture, supplies, and equipment. FISCAL IMPACT: The Community Service Funding grant of $5,000 was previously allocated to the VFW, so there would be no additional fiscal impact for the reallocation of these funds. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT JANUARY 9, 200t A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 7:56 P.M., at the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. President Comerchero presiding. ROLLCALL PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, and Stone ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Also present were General Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of December 19, 2000. MOTION: Director Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Director Comerchero and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT President Stone commended Community Services Director Parker and the Community Services Department on a job well done with regard to the many City Holiday Festivities. Community Services Director Parker proudly announced that the Community Services Department has received the following four State Awards from the National Recreation and Parks Association: · First Place for the Community Services Recreation Brochure · First Place for the Media Communication for the video produced for the Temecula High Hopes Program · Second Place for the Temecula High Hopes Program · Second Place for the Marketing Campaign for the Temecula Valley Museum Minutes.csd\010901 I GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT No comments. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS President Stone sadly apprised the District and the attending audience of the passing of 15-year old Daviana Hogan. He requested that a tree be planted in her memory at Veterans Memorial Park and suggested that consideration be given to establishing a City tradition whereby a tree would be planted in memory of the passing of any City child. ADJOURNMENT At 8:00 P.M., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, January 23, 2001, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Jeffrey E. Stone, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] Minutes.csd~010901 2 ITEM 2 APPROVAL DC I ~ cATg(~ ~)NFEF'~ N A N~ .E~ CITY MANAGER .,~ ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Shawn D. Nelson, General Manager Susan W. Jones City Clerk/Director of Support Services January 23, 2001 Ratification of Election Results - Tract No. 23513 PREPARED BY: Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 01-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, RECITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAIL-IN BALLOT ELECTION HELD ON JANUARY 18, 2001 DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW BACKGROUND: At the meeting of November 28, 2000, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. CSD 2000-17, which called for a Special Election to be held among the property owners of the parcels within Tract No. 23513. The purpose of this election was to establish Service Level B rates and charges for fiscal year 2001-02. This election was conducted by mail with a final date for acceptance of ballots to be no later than 3:30 p.m. on January 18, 2001. At 4:00 p.m. on that date, the City Clerk acting in her capacity as the City's Election Official and as the Secretary of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District declared the receipt period for receiving ballots closed. At 4:00 p.m., the Elections Canvassing Board duly appointed and consisting of City Clerk Susan Jones, Deputy City Clerk Michaela Ballreich and Administrative Secretary Cheryl Domenoe, conducted the canvass of the results. The results of the votes cast, returned within the time allowed and publicly counted, are included within the body of the proposed resolution. Agenda Reports~Election CSD Tract 23513 I Staff recommends adoption of the resolution ratifying the results of this election. FISCAL IMPACT: election results. ATTACHMENTS: There is no direct fiscal impact as a consequence of the ratification of the Resolution No. CSD 2001- Official Tally of the Votes Agenda Reports\Election CSD Tract 23513 2 RESOLUTION NO. CSD 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, RECITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAIL-IN BALLOT ELECTION HELD ON JANUARY '18, 200'1 DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW WHEREAS, a Special Mail-in Ballot Election was held and conducted in the City of Temecula, California, on January 18, 2001, as required by law; and WHEREAS, notice of the election was given in time, form and manner as provided by law; that the special election was for the purpose of obtaining approval by property owners within Tract No. 23513, for establishment of the annual levy for Service Level B rates and charges at $25.68/per lot on the parcel was properly established; that election officers were appointed and that in all respects the election was held and conducted and the votes were cast, received and canvassed and the returns made and declared in time, form and manner as required by the provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. CSD 2000-17, adopted November 28, 2000, the ballots were returned to the office of the City Clerk/Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District; the results were received, canvassed in public and are herein set forth in Section 2. NOW THEREFORE, THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the whole number of ballots cast in the homeowners election was one (1) and the whole number of provisional ballots cast in the election was none (0). Section 2. That the whole number of ballots cast for establishment of the annual levy for Service Level B rates and charges at $25.68/per lot on the parcel identified on the ballot were as follows: Yes No Incomplete One (1) None None Section 3. The Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District does declare and determine that as a result of the election, a majority of the voters voting on the measure relating to the establishment of Service Level B Rates and Charges for Fiscal Year 2001-02 pursuant to Article XIIID, Section 6 of the California Constitution, did vote in favor of the measure and that the measure was carried, and shall be deemed adopted and ratified. Section 4. The City Clerk/Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) shall enter in the minutes of the TCSD Board of Directors, a statement of the result of the election, showing: (1) The whole number of ballots cast in the City; (2) The votes in favor, (3) The votes in opposition and (4) Those received incomplete. Resos. CSD\01- 1 Section 5, The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTEDi this 23'd day of January, 2001. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, President Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk/District Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 01- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District on the 23rd day of January, 2001, by the following roll call vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DISTRICT MEMBERS: DISTRICT MEMBERS: DISTRICT MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary Resos. CSD\01- 2 OFFICIAL TALLY OF THE VOTES FOR TCSD LEVY/SPECIAL TAX TRACT NO 23513 BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2001/02 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT SERVICE LEVEL B, PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING RATES AND CHARGES Yes N..~o ELECTION BOARD Susaq w. aonel~ CMC, qity Clerk '~FAe~on Office~..~ Miehaela A. Ballreie~, Election Officer ~eryl~Do e~noe,~V~ Election Officer R:~PUBLIC HEARINGS\CSD - CANVASS FOR CSD RATES & CHARGES VOTE.DOC SITE SANTIAGO DE STATE HIGHWAY 79 VICINITY MAP N.T.S. TRACT NO. 23513 ITEM 3' APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~I~._.~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Shawn D. Nelson, General Manager Susan W. Jones City Clerk/Director of Support Services January 23, 2001 Ratification of Election Results - Tract No. 29036 PREPARED BY: Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 01-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, RECITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAIL-IN BALLOT ELECTION HELD ON JANUARY 18, 2001 DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW BACKGROUND: At the meeting of November 28, 2000, the Board of Directors adopted Resolution No. CSD 2000-18, which called for a Special Election to be held among the property owners of the parcels within Tract No. 29036. The purpose of this election was to establish Service Level B rates and charges for fiscal year 2001-02. This election was conducted by mail with a final date for acceptance of ballots to be no later than 3:30 p.m. on January 18, 2001. At 4:00 p.m. on that date, the City Clerk acting in her capacity as the City's Election Official and as the Secretary of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District declared the receipt period for receiving ballots closed. At 4:00 p.m., the Elections Canvassing Board duly appointed and consisting of City Clerk Susan Jones, Deputy City Clerk Michaela Ballreich and Administrative Secretary Cheryl Domenoe, conducted the canvass of the results. The results of the votes cast, returned within the time allowed and publicly counted, are included within the body of the proposed resolution. Agenda Reports\Election CSD Tract 29036 1 Staff recommends adoption of the resolution ratifying the results of this election. FISCAl_ IMPACT: election results. ATTACHMENTS: There is no direct fiscal impact as a consequence of the ratification of the Resolution No. CSD 2001- Official Tally of the Votes Agenda Reports~Election CSD Tract 29036 2 RESOLUTION NO. CSD 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, RECITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MAIL-IN BALLOT ELECTION HELD ON JANUARY 18, 2001 DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW WHEREAS, a Special Mail-in Ballot Election was held and conducted in the City of 'Temecula, California, on January 18, 2001, as required by law; and WHEREAS, notice of the election was given in time, form and manner as provided by law; that the special election was for the purpose of obtaining approval by properly owners within Tract No. 29036, for establishment of the annual levy for Service Level B rates and charges at $25.68/per lot on the parcel was properly established; that election officers were appointed and that in all respects the electio, n was held and conducted and the votes were cast, received and canvassed and the returns made and declared in time, form and manner as required by the provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. CSD 2000-18, adopted November 28, 2000, the ballots were returned to the office of the City Clerk/Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District; the results were received, canvassed in public and are herein set forth in Section 2. NOW THEREFORE, THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the whole number of ballots cast in the homeowners election was one (1) and the whole number of provisional ballots cast in the election was none (0). Section 2. That the whole number of ballots cast for establishment of the annual levy for Service Level B rates and charges at $25.68/per lot on the parcel identified on the ballot were as follows: Yes One (1) No Incomplete None None Section 3. The Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District does declare and determine that as a result of the election, a majority of the voters voting on the measure relating to the establishment of Service Level B Rates and Charges for Fiscal Year 2001-02 pursuant to Article XIIID, Section 6 of the California Constitution, did vote in favor of the measure and that the measure was carried, and shall be deemed adopted and ratified. Section 4. The City Clerk/Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) shall enter in the minutes of the TCSD Board of Directors, a statement of the resutt of the election, showing: (1) The whole number of ballots cast in the City; (2) The votes in favor, (3) The votes in opposition and (4) Those received incomplete. Resos,CSD\01- 1 Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 23rd day of January, 2001. ATTEST: Jeffrey E. Stone, President Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk/District Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. CSD 01 - was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District on the 23rd day of January, 2001, by the following roll call vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DISTRICT MEMBERS: DISTRICT MEMBERS: DISTRICT MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/District Secretary Resos. CSD\01- 2 OFFICIAL TALLY OF THE VOTES FOR TCSD LEVY/SPECIAL TAX TRACT NO 29036 BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2001/02 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT SERVICE LEVEL B, PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL STREET LIGHTING RATES AND CHARGES Yes N._Ro \ TOTAL \ TOTAL ELECTION BOARD Susan ~V. Jon~s, CMC, (~ity Clerk ~.lec. ti6n O ffice~.~ Mic-h~ela A. B~'lr~ich,,.~le~ti~ Offi;er C h ~w_~i~o men o ~Electlon Officer R:~PUBLIC HEARZNGS\CSD - CANVASS FOR CSD PATES & CHARGES VOTE.DOC VICINITY MAP TRACT 29036 Fq:tOd~T L~ATIONM~ (NO SCALE) ITEM 4 APPROVAL)'~/,, ~ CITY ATTORNEY I/l/)ddl FINANCE D I RECTO R/.~,_,j~3,_ CITY MANAGER /'~)' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services~ January 23, 2001 Agreement for Beverage Services RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve an agreement between the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) and the Public Enterprise Group, to develop and negotiate a soft drink beverage agreement for soft drink sales at City facilities. BACKGROUND: The Community Services Department seeks creative methods to generate revenues that will offset the cost of providing parks, recreation and youth services, and to maintain a high level of service deliveries. In an attempt to generate revenues to meet this goal, the department is recommending that the Board of Director consider entering an agreement with the Public Enterprise Group to evaluate City programs, events, facilities and services; prepare an analysis of services and facility assets; and negotiate a non-alcoholic beverage agreement with a major soft drink beverage company. The Public Enterprise Group is a corporation that specializes in working with municipalities to develop beverage agreements with major beverage companies for the exclusive sale of these beverages at City facilities and events. The sale of these beverages can generate substantial revenues to offset the cost of providing needed services and programs. The Public Enterprise Group has successfully negotiated these agreements for the Cities of Huntington Beach, Lancaster and Garden Grove. Mr. Don Schulte and Mr. Pat Saign, of Public Enterprise Group, have several years of corporate marketing experience in the soft drink beverage industry. The agreement would provide $7,500 to the Public Enterprise Group to assess City facilities, programs, and the corporate marketing value of these programs and services to major beverage corporations. Once this analysis has occurred, Public Enterprise Group will begin negotiations with the major soft drink beverage corporations on behalf of the City of Temecula. Upon approval by the Board of Directors of the beverage agreement, the Public Enterprise Group will be compensated an additional $7,500 plus 8.5% of the approved beverage contract. The agreement also provides a not to exceed amount of $3,800 for the preparation of the analysis document, video and promotional materials prepared. R:~IGLERG\REPORTA012301 Public Enterprise Group.doc FISCAL IMPACT: $7,500 would be provided for the preparation of the analysis and negotiation services. These funds are currently available in the TCSD's operating budget in account 190-180-999-5250. If a beverage agreement is reached with a soft drink beverage company, Public Enterprise Group will receive an additional $7,500 plus 8.5% of the negotiated contract. An amount not to exceed $3,800 is also available to the consultant for expenses incurred such as printing, marketing material production, and video production. R:~IGLERG',~EPORT~012301 Public Enterprise Group.doc CITY OF TEMECULA AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND PUBLIC ENTERPRISE GROUP FOR NEGOTIATION OF A CORPORATE SALES AND USE AGREEMENT FOR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT CITY FACILITIES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of January 23, 2001, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Public Enterprise Group, a California partnership ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall conunence on February 1, 2001 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than January 31, 2002, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the following services and tasks for the City of Temecula: a. City agrees to retain Consultant to represent it in carrying out its negotiation and procurement of one corporate agreement for non-alcoholic beverage promotion, sales and distribution at City facilities subject to the terms of this Agreement. (For convenience this agreement shall be referred to as the "Beverage Agreement.") b. The specific strategies, services and timing of work is set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. c. Consultant shall keep the Director fully informed of the progress of the negotiations. Consultant shall discuss the progress of the negotiations with the Director not less that once each calendar month and shall submit a written progress report to the Director detailing the extent of its activities not less than once every calendar month. d. Consultant shall have no power or authority to contract directly with any third party. Consultant shall inform all prospective parties seeking a sales and use agreement that the Board of Directors of the TCSD retains the sole, unfettered discretion to enter into a marketing agreement. e. The Board of Directors retains full, absolute and unfettered discretion to approve the Beverage Agreement which Consultant may negotiate and present to the Board of Directors. Consultant understands and acknowledges that the Council must make its decision based on what is best for the City and its residents. Consultant further understands and acknowledges that the Council may decline to approve any Beverage Agreement or may decline to approve a more RSZIGLERGLXAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage Al~reement. DOC lucrative agreement or may delay its decision, for any reason, with or without good cause, despite the efforts of Consultant in negotiating a Beverage Agreement. f. Consultant shall inform the Director of Community Services ("Director") in writing of any fact or occurrence that affects City interests, and shall disclose to City in writing any personal, business, or financial interest, including but not limited to, any ownership interest in, representation of, or employment by any person or business entity providing any product or service that competes with any product or service for which Consultant will be seeking a sales and use agreement on behalf of the City. Pursuant to the California Political Reform Act, Consultant shall be considered a "consultant" subject to the terms of the Act, within the meaning of the Act and various regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission adopted pursuant to the Act. Consultant shall comply with Government Code Section 1090. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4. PAYMENT. City shall compensate Consultant as follows a. Within five (5) working days of the Council's approval of this Agreement, City shall pay Consultant the sum of seven thousand five hundred dollar ($7,500.00). b. Within five (5) working days of the Council's approval of the Beverage Agreement pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, City shall pay Consultant the sum of seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500.00). c. Following the approval of the Beverage Agreement, Consultant shall receive eight and one-half percent (8.5O/o) of the annual revenue to the City from the Beverage Agreement for the term of the Beverage Agreement. The "term" of the Beverage Agreement shall be the initial term and any extension thereof, but the compensation period for Consultant shall in no event to exceed twelve (12) years. "Annual revenue" shall mean the cash payment and the value of services or donations which are actually received by the City from a business pursuant to the Beverage Agreement, but excluding general and special taxes, assessments and fees paid to the City or any other governmental entity by the business which is a party to the Beverage agreement. Consultant's commission pursuant to this subsection shall be paid to Consultant on the last business day of January of each year for the previous calendar year. This subsection shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. RSZIGLERGLXAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage A~reement. DOC d. City shall pay Consultant's expenses related to its work under this Agreement including, without limitation, travel expenses, video, website, presentations, brochures, flyers or merchandising materials in an amount not to exceed three thousand eight hundred dollars ($3,800.00) provided such expenses are approved in advance and in writing by the Director. 5. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any mason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the sum of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00). The parties agree that this sum would be fair compensation for the value of Consultant time incurred between approval of the Agreement and termination. City agrees that if within six months of termination of this Agreement it enters into a corporate sales and use agreement for non-alcoholic beverages with a business with whom Consultant had engaged in substantial negotiations, it will be presumed Consultant is responsible for bringing the business to the City and shall receive the percentage commission for that agreement pursuant to Section 4.c. of this Agreement. Consultant shall receive such commission after termination only for one qualified business. 6. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (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 R:~ZIGLERG~XAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage A~reement. DOC 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. c. Upon termination for a default, Consultant shall not be entitled to ~tny compensation under Sections 4.b. or 4.c. 7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. 8. INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City and the TCSD, its officers, officials, and employees from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, including attorney fees and expert witness fees, or liability of any kind or nature which the TCSD, 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 or wrongful acts or omissions arising out of or in any way related to the performance or non-performance of this Agreement, excepting only liability attributable to the active negligence of the City and TCSD. 9. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. Minimum Coverage. Coverage shall be at least as broad i. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No. CG 00 01 11 85 or 88. ii. Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable. iii. Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the RSZ1GLERG~XAGREEMNLPublic Ent Group Beverage Ahlreement. DOC Consultant has no employees while performing under this Agreement, worker's compensation insurance is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits on the policies described in Subsection a. of no less than: i. General Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. ii. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Workers' Compensation as required by the State; Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. c. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City and TCSD, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: i. The TCSD, 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, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. ii. For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees or RSZIGLERGLXAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage Afgeement. DOC volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the TCSD, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv. 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. v. 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 by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the TCSD. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements. f. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalfi The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the TCSD's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the TCSD. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against TCSD, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or RSZIGLERG~XAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage A~rcement. DOC other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for TCSD. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and regulations. The TCSD, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without TCSD's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or. subcontractors be served with any sununons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding, except for litigation between the Consultant and the TCSD. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests directed Consultant. However, TCSD's right to review .any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below o~ at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above. R:~ZIGLERGLXAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage A~reement. DOC To City: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Consultant: Public Enterprise Group 18685 Main Street, Suite A #630 Huntington Beach, Ca. 92648 Attention: President 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the TCSD. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Donald R. Schulte shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Donald R. Schulte may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Donald R. Schulte from Consultant's employ. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full rome and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. GOVERNING LAW~ LITIGATIONI ATTORNEY FEES. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as determined by the Court's judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation expenses for the relief granted. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. RSZIGLERGLXAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage ASreement. DOC IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. Temecula Community Services District Jeff Stone President Attest: Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson City Attomey CONSULTANT THE PUBLIC ENTERPRISE GROUP, a California partnership By: Donald R. Schulte President By: John A. Scott Chief Executive Officer RSZIGLERGLXAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage A~eement. DOC EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Phase I Within 30 day of date of Agreement: a. List of Opportunities. Consultant shall develop a list of business opportunities via partnerships and sponsorships that may warrant private funding. Consultant shall develop a list of business entities that potentially could become corporate partners. Both lists shall be presented to the Director for approval. Consultant shall send press release to existing corporate contacts announcing its representation of the City pursuant to this Agreement. b. Site Visitation. Consultant's staff shall personally inspect and evaluate all City facilities as well as undertaking a search for unique marketing opportunities throughout the City. c. City Interviews. Consultant shall meet with City officials to gain a better understanding of respective departments. 2. Phase II Within 60 days of date of Agreement: a. Bundling City Assets. Consultant shall meet with key City employees for an interactive "brainstorming session" that both maximizes marketing opportunities and creates a better understanding and relationship with designated City officials. Consultant shall gather and summarize "brainstorming session" for marketing plan and distribute to participants as well as key officials. b. Finalize Research and Analysis Phase. Consultant shall document findings and prepare for product packaging. 3. Phase III Within 90 days of date of Agreement: a. Consultant shall develop a marketing plan for each business opporttmity describing the types of marketing applications which the City may be willing to accept and identifying businesses to be interested in the marketing opportunities. The marketing plan may include brochures, presentations, models, and site visits. approval. The marketing plan shall be presented to the Director for final plan 4. Phase IV. Within 120 days of date of Agreement: a. Partnership Sales. Consultant shall research the identified qualified candidates for the partnership program. Consultant shall meet with identified candidates and present the partnership program. RSZIGLERGLXAGREEIvlN~ublic Ent Group Beverage ~0eemcnt. DOC b. Management of Request for Proposal Process. Consultant shall develop a customized Request for Proposal for candidates which shall include a schedule for filing a proposal, the information needed by Consultant and Staff to evaluate the proposals and the significant terms which will be included in the sales and use agreement. The RFP shall be reviewed by the City Attorney and approved by the Director prior to distribution. c. Site Visitations and Consulting. Each interviewed partnering candidate shall be escorted through key City venues and facilities for site visitations by Consultant and designated City officials. 5. Phase V. Within 180 days from date of Agreement. a. Review and Analysis of Proposals. Consultant shall evaluate the merits of the proposals submitted by the candidates with the Director. b. Negotiation. Consultant shall manage all phases of negotiation with the candidates. c. Presentations. Consultant shall organize and manage presentations by candidates of their proposals to City staffand to the City Council. d. Final Agreement. Consultant shall present the final terms of the proposal selected by the City Council to the City Attorney for preparation of a final agmement. RSZIGLERG~XAGREEMN~ublic Ent Group Beverage ~t'eement. DOC ITEM 5 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service~ January 23,2001 City of Temecula Wall of Honor PREPARED BY: Gall L. Zigler, Administrative Secretary RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve the recommended honoree for placement on the Wall of Honor. DISCUSSION: On September 28, 1999, the Board of Directors approved the amended procedures for the selection of entries to be honored by placement of their names on the Wall of Honor. The Wall of Honor is intended to honor and recognize individuals who have made an outstanding contribution to the City of Temecula. The names of the designated individuals will be permanently displayed in a prominent location in the Tony and Mildred Tobin Rotunda in the Temecula Valley Museum. Staff solicited nominations from the community for persons to be recognized on the Wall of Honor. Five nominations were received, reviewed and ranked by a sub-committee made up of Council Members Jeff Comerchero and Jeff Stone. Based upon the threshold of ninety percent (90%), one honoree was selected by the sub-committee for induction to the Wall of Honor for the year 2000. The sub-committee's recommendation for the Wall of Honor inductee was forwarded to the Community Services Commission on January 8, 2001 for their approval. The Community Services Commission recommends the following individual to be recognized on the Wall of Honor for 2000. Grace Mellman FISCAL IMPACT: The cost for adding the name to the Wall of Honor and awarding a plaque is approximately $60. These funds are available in account number 190-185-999-5250. R:~_IGLERG'~REPORT~wall of honor inductees 2000 - bod.doc PROCEDURE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND CONTINUING OPERATION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA WALL OF HONOR WALL OF HONOR To honor and recognize individuals who have made an outstanding contribution to the City of Temecula over a significant period of time; To commemorate the contribution, the names of these individuals will be placed on a wall of honor in the Tony and Mildred Tobin Rotunda in the Temecula Valley Museum. BASIC CRITERIA FOR SELECTION To be eligible, an individual must have made a major contribution to improve the quality of life for the residents of the City of Temecula over a significant pedod of time. Members of service dubs, City Councilmembers and Commissioners, City Staff, and residents are all eligible for nomination. METHODOLOGY Names will be added to the wall on an annual basis. The inaugural group of honorees will be selected and placed on the wall when the wall is dedicated. This group will consist of 10 individuals. One or more honorees will be placed on the wall in each succeeding year. · 'The City will solicit nominations for the Wall of Honor each september. Announcements will be placed in local newspapers and posted on public buildings. The process will also be publidzed by mailings to community groups and announcements by elected and appointed officials of the City. · Anyone can submit a nominee or nominees utilizing a form provided by the City. The form will require some background information and a short statement (not to exceed fifty words) in support of the nomination. A Wall of Honor Subcommittee will review the nomination forms. This Subcommittee will be made up of two City Councilmembers. Each Subcommittee member will rank all the nominees in numerical order from one to the total number of nominatiDns, with one being the lowest ranking. City staff will tabulate the results. The points assigned to each of the nominees will be totaled and the results compared to a minimum threshold number. All nominees who meet or exceed the threshold number will be recommended for placement on the Wall of Honor and taken forward to the Community Services Commission for approval. The Commission's nominee(s) will be presented to the City Council for final approval. CITY OF TEMECULA PROCEDURE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND CONTINUING OPERATION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA WALL OF HONOR 9~28~99 Page Two · It is anticipated that the final approval of the nominee(s) and the induction ceremony will take place in December. · The inaugural group will be selected in the manner described above, except that the ten individuals with the highest number of points will be placed on the Wall of Honor. No threshold will be applied to the inaugural group. · A threshold has not been included in this procedure. Subsequent to the inaugural selection, a threshold will need to be set before the next round of balloting. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS · The Wall of Honor will be located in the Tony and Mildred Tobin Rotunda at the Temecula Valley Museum. The Wall of Honor will occupy one wall panel to the left of the doorway into the exhibit area. · Each name will be placed on a large acrylic panel mounted on the wall of the rotunda. The panel will appear as if the names were sandblasted on a sheet of glass. The panel will include large lettering stating "City of Temecula Wall of Honor" with a brief explanation about the purpose of th.e wall. This display configuration will be integrated into the design of the other elements in the rotunda. · A short statement describing each honoree and the nature of the her/his contribution will be placed in an archive and/or in an interactive computer station at the museum. TCSD DEPARTMENTAL REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR Of FINAN,.~CE CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services.~, January 23,2001 Departmental Report PREPARED BY: Gall L. Zigler, Administrative Secretary On December 1, 1999, staff released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for a Citywide Multi-Trail System. Interviews were held on February 14, 2000 and the committee selected KTU& Associates as the top ranked firm. The Board of Directors awarded a contract to KTU&A on March 28, 2000. A trails questionnaire was mailed out to the residents in mid-September with approximately 450 responses returned. A community workshop was held on September 21, 2000, and a second community workshop was held on October 28, 2000. The consultant is currently concentrating on specific areas for trails and puffing together the first draft of the master plan. Staff released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the design of an aquatic facility to be constructed at Chaparral High School. The Board of Directors approved a Scope of Services Agreement on December 7, 1999, with the number one ranked firm, RJM Design Group. The architect and project design committee has completed the schematic design of the project. The Board of Directors approved the Master Plan on June 27, 2000, and awarded a contract to RJM Design Group on July 1 t, 2000, for the Phase II of the Design Contract. The architect is currently working on construction documents in preparation for submittal to DSA. Staff released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for the design of a sports complex to be constructed on the City's northwest sports park site. Statements of Qualifications were received on February 16, 2000, and interviews were held of the four top ranked firms on March 28, 2000. A design contract was awarded to RJM Design Group at the May 23, 2000, Board of Directors meeting. The first sub-committee was held on November 7, 2000. Staff is currently waiting for confirmation on the location for this project. The Master Plan for the Temecula Public Library was adopted at the September 26, 2000 City Council Meeting. Staff has negotiated a contract with LPA for the final construction documents and specifications for the Temecula Public Library. LPA is currently working on construction documents for submittal for first plan check. R:~ZIGLERGLXDEPTRPT~0101 .doc On June 15, 2000, staff released an RFQ requesting a Statement of Qualifications to prepare a feasibility study for the development of a Water Park. A contract was awarded to the Natelson Company at the September 27, 2000 City Council Meeting, for the preparation of the Water Park Feasibility Study. A community workshop was held and the consultant completed the intercept surveys. The consultant will be compiling the information received from the community workshop and intercept surveys and a second committee meeting will be held in February 2001. Staff released an RFQ for the children's museum interior space planning, exhibit design, fabrication, construction and installation. Interviews were held of the four top ranked firms on October 17, 2000. Staff began negotiations with the top ranked firm, Sparks Exhibits and Environments. The Agreement and Scope of Services was approved by the City Council on December 12, 2000. A committee meeting will be held on January 23, 2001. The Maintenance Division continues to oversee the maintenance of parks and recreation facilities, as well as all other City owned public buildings and facilities. In addition, the Maintenance Division assists in all aspects of Citywide special events. The Recreation Division finalized the programs, classes and special events for the Winter/Spring edition of the Guide to Leisure Activities. The brochure was mailed to the residents of Temecula the last week of December 2000. The Recreation Division continues to program classes, activities and excursions at all City recreation facilities. The Community Services Department is pleased to announce the City of Temecula received four state awards from the California Parks and Recreation Society (CPRS). The City of Temecula has won a first place award for the Temecula High Hopes video and a first place award for the SummedFall edition of the Guide to Leisure Activities for 2000; and, a second place award for the Temecula High Hopes Program and a second place award for the Temecula Valley Museum Marketing Program. The City will receive their awards at the Annual CPRS conference to be held in Sacramento in March 2001. R:~ZIGLERGXXDEPTRPT~0101 .doc J anua~- 16, 2001 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY JANUARY 9, 200'1 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 8:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. ROLLCALL PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBER: None Also present were Executive Director Nelson, City Attorney Thorsen, and City Clerk Jones. PUBLIC COMMENTS No input. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of December 19, 2000. MOTION: Agency Member Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Agency Member Stone and voice vote reflected unanimous approval. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT No comment. AGENCY MEMBERS' REPORTS No comments. R:~vlinutes.rda\010901 1 ADJOURNMENT At 8:01 P.M., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, January 9, 2000, in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Ron Roberts, Chairman A"I-I'EST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] R:\Minutes.rda\010901 2 ITEM 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members Jim O'Grady Assistant City Manager January 23, 2001 Lease of Property at 27500 Jefferson Avenue (Richardson's) RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Chairman to execute the lease agreement with Richardson's RV Center for property located at 27500 Jefferson Avenue. BACKGROUND: For the past several years, the Redevelopment Agency has leased property to the Norm Reeves Supergroup. For approximately the past two years, Norm Reeves has sub- leased this property to Richardson's RV Centers. Richardson's had previously entered into a purchase agreement with the Agency for this property. Richardson's has previously notified us that they are not able to execute this purchase. Richardson's had also notified us that they would be vacating the property on or before January 25, 2001, when the current lease expired. On January 19, we were notified by Ray Richardson that Richardson's they cannot vacate by January 25, and they wish to lease directly from us. They are agreeable to the rate of $14,000 per month. This is an increase from the $10,000 per month that the Agency currently receives from Reeves. Because of the extremely short notice, a lease agreement is not presently available for your review. Staff is currently working with the City Attorney's office on such an agreement, and will provide an update at your meeting. The agreement will follow standard City and Agency format. FISCAL IMPACT: Agency. Lease of this property would provide $14,000 per month revenue to the R:[OGRADYJIAGENCY REPORT - RICHARDSONS LEASE, JAN 23, 2001.D0C I 1/19/01 RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN~CE CITY MANAGER ,,v~,- TEMECULAREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members John Meyer, Redevelopment Director ~/~/I January 23, 2001 Monthly Departmental Report Attached for your information is the monthly report as of January 23, 2001 for the Redevelopment Department. HOUSING First Time Homebuyers Pro,qram Funding in the amount of $200,000 is available for FY 00-01. One loan has closed for $24,000. Residential Improvement Programs The program budget for FY 00/01 is $250,000 and $145,300 has been funded. Affordable Housing Two projects have been submitted for preliminary review. One project is from the Agency's development partner, the other from a property owner who is also interested in developing affordable housing. Staff is analyzing these proposals. Senior Housing Agency staff is negotiating with a development partner to rehab 96 units for affordable senior housing. A senior housing demand study is being conducted. Old Town Community Theater The architect, Fisher Merdman Sehgal and Yanez Inc., has conducted stakeholder and community interviews and has completed the schematic phase of the project. Preliminary floor plans and elevations were reviewed by the Community Theater Advisory Committee, Old Town Local Review Board, Community Services Commission and the City Council at a meeting on January 22. R :~SYERS K~NIONTH LLYVepor t .jan01 .doc Old Town Trading Post Agency staff is handling the acquisition and relocation of tenants of the Trading Post property. Escrow closed on August 25, 2000. Facade Improvement/Non-Conforming Sil:ln ProRram The following facade improvement/sign projects have recently been completed: · Mad Madeline's Front Deck and Paint · Butterfield Inn Paint and Sign · Grace Garden Gift Shop Signs · Romans Sew & Vac Signs The following facade improvements are underway: · The Country Goose Signs · Rooster Creek Crossing Signs · Old Town PromotionslMarketinf~ The Agency is sponsoring several events over the next few months. The events include the Bluegrass Festival scheduled for Mamh 24 and 25 featuring 3-4 bands daily on two stages; Western Days scheduled for April 7 & 8; Dixieland Jazz Festival scheduled for May 12 and 13 featuring 3-4 bands daily on two stages; and the Street Painting Festival scheduled for June 2 & 3 featuring numerous artists displaying their chalk art on the streets of Old Town. R:~SYE RSKWIONTHLLYVeport janO1 .doc ITEM 13 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF F NANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City ManageflCity Council Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning January 23, 2001 Wolf Creek Specific Plan PREPARED BY: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council: 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0482) AND RELATED ACTIONS, AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. 2. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 0% A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0484 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD (FORMERLY FAIRVlEW AVENUE), AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010, BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT P:\C|TY CLERK\Casey~Wolf Creek staff report 1-23~)1.doc 1 3. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481) Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING ZONING STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. t2, THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481) Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, THE SUBDIVISION OF 557 ACRES INTO 47 LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE, SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMA LINDA AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND S-P MURDY, LLC" (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0029) BACKGROUND: On January 9, 2001 the City Council opened the public hearing for the project and took testimony from eight (8) residents, six (6) of whom were in favor of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, and two (2) in opposition. The Council briefly discussed recommended changes to the Conditions of Approval without taking specific action. The Council discussed the Development Agreement Deal Points in depth and took a straw vote on all of the items, with the exception of the Level of Service D issue, which was left for further discussion. P:\CITY CLERK\Casey~Wolf Creek staffreport 1-234~1.doc 2 Specific Plan Conditions of Approval · Staff recommended that the Council delete Condition No. 1 la. regarding the augmentation to the Mitigation Monitoring Program because Condition No. 6 is sufficient. · Staff recommended that Condition No. 16 be amended as follows: "When courtyard homes are implemented, Planned Development (A,,eday-(FZDG9 guidelines shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission ~"~'~"~ *C *~' ...... ~ ..... ~" C~ ~'~'"'"*"~ ~7 2° C* *~ m .... ~ ..... * ~ ~ Staff and Councilman Naggar recommend that Condition No. 18 regarding the "Split Garage" Option be replaced in order to provide all alternatives within the specific plan, as follows: · :. "The "Split Garage" option in the Design Guidelines shall be designed with the front door of each home visible from the street." · Staff recommends that Condition No. 19 requiring fully enclosed garages in the senior option be deleted in order to provide all alternatives within the specific plan. · Staff recommends that Condition No. 17 requiring Planning Commission review of residential products be deleted in order to be consistent with existing processing of Product Review for other sites in the City. · Councilman Stone requested that Condition No. 12 be corrected to replace"church site"with "religious institutions." · Councilman Stone requested that Condition No. 24 regarding the feasibility of using reclaimed water include all Temecula Community Services District parks, particularly the City Sports Park. · Councilman Stone recommended and the applicant concurred that a condition be added requiring where feasible the installation of earthquake proof gas valves at the discretion of the City's Chief Building Official. · The Council supported Condition No. 15 and its requirement that parkways for the narrow streets option be maintained by an appropriate homeowner association. Development Aqreement The results of the Council's discussion of the deal points are reflected in the Development Agreement text attached to this staff report. A summary is as follows: · The acreage for the Community Park is 6.0 acres, not 6.5 acres. · The design of the Fire Station shall commence immediately upon the Council approval of the Development Agreement. · The 1.63 acres identified in Planning Area 14 shall be set aside for a transit center. · The developer shall provide a 2-lane, 24-foot wide, all-weather paved access roadway, from Pala Road to the access drive of the City Sports Park in the event that the high school does not complete Deer Hollow improvements prior to the opening of the Park. The location of the access drive for the Park is at the discretion of the Director of the Temecula Community Services District and the Director of Public Works. · The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with any interim fire station. · No TUMP fee requirement shall be included in the Development Agreement. P:\CITY CLERK\Casey~Wolf Creek staff report 1-234}1.doc 3 · No MSHCP fee requirement shall be included in the Development Agreement because the developer is already paying an open space/habitatJpublic arts fee. · The term of the Development Agreement shall be for ten (10) years from the date of the issuance of the first building permit or 24 months from the effective date of the Development Agreement, whichever occurs first. · The sound wall shall be constructed along Pala Road in conjunction with the widening of that roadway. · The City shall support the developer's best efforts to form the Community Facilities District proposed for the project. · Permanent improvements to Pala Road shall be constructed for four (4) lanes from Via Gilberto to Deer Hollow. The only outstanding issue that the Council did not conclude is the LOS D requirements: Requirements to maintain a Level of Service D at the intersection of Interstate 15 and Highway 79 South shall include the intersections of Bedford Court and La Paz with Highway 79 South. Prior to approval of tentative tract maps or any time extensions for the tentative maps, the developer shall submit traffic studies that demonstrate a Level of Service D or better for the intersection of 1-15 and SR-79. The Development Agreement shall provide assurances that the future owners of the tracts are aware of this restriction. The applicant has submitted correspondence dated January 16, 2001, providing additional information and a revised Condition of Approval for consideration by the Council as an altemative to the Development Agreement language. Environmental Determination On October 13, 1999, a Notice of Completion and a Notice of Availability were prepared and the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan was circulated by the California State Clearinghouse under SCH#99101094. A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was submitted August I, 2000, incorporating public written comments and responses, and two Addendums were subsequently added. The environmental analysis identified thirteen (13) areas where impacts were not considered to be significant, and five (5) areas where potentially significant impacts were identified which could be avoided or mitigated. These five areas are: soils and geology, hazards, drainage, traffic, and noise. One area was identified where the project causes an unavoidable, significant impact, namely air quality. In accordance with Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations prior to approving the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. The Statement of Overriding Considerations states that any significant adverse project effects are acceptable if expected project benefits outweigh unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. FISCAL IMPACT: In addition, to Development Impact Fees (DIF), this project will be paying a Development Agreement Fee and a fee for purchase of open space/habitatJpublic art. The developer has received credits in exchange for land dedications and improvements for many aspects of the project. The following summarizes these fees and credits: P:\CITY CLERK\Casey~Wolf Creek staff report 1-23-01 .doc 4 Development Impact Fees Residential DIF o Street Improvement-100% credit for the $535.91 per attached unit and $764.53 per detached unit. o Traffic Signal-100% credit for the $80.75 per attached unit and $114.31 per detached unit. o Corporate facilities, · No credit if the City does not exercise the option or purchases the site · Partial credit of $297,522.00 towards the $123.75 per attached unit and $232.82 per detached unit if City accepts the 1.63-acre Civic Use site. o Fire-100% Credit for the $44.05 per attached unit and $57.68 per detached unit. o Park and Recreation-100% credit for the $1394.34 per attached unit and $1858.49 per detached unit including a 10% escalator. o Libraries-No credits for the $163.61 per attached unit and $218.14 per detached unit. Commercial DIF o Street Improvement-100% credit for the $2.895 per commercial retail square footage fee. o Traffic Signal Improvement-100% credit for the $0.440 per commercial retail square footage fee. o Fire-No credits for the $0.024 per commercial retail square footage fee. o Corporate facilities-No credits for the $0.121 per commercial retail square footage fee. Development Aqreement Fees · Development Agreement Fee-100% credit for the $1085.00 per residential unit shall apply towards dedication of approximately 12 acres for the 40-acre Sports Park. · Open Space/HabitatJPublic Art -No credits for the $200 per residential unit fee. ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Council Resolution No. 01- certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan (Planning Application No. 98-0482) - Page 7 Exhibit A - Text and Addendum Nos. 1 and No. 2 - Provided under separate cover- Page 8 Exhibit B - Mitigation Monitoring Program - Page 9 2 City Council Resolution No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment - Page 10 Exhibit A - General Plan Comparison - Page 11 3. City Council Resolution No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 - Page 12 Exhibit A - Text - Provided under separate cover Exhibit B - Land Use Plan Exhibit C- Conditions of Approval for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 P:\CITY CLERK\Casey~Wolf Creek staff report 1-23-01 .doc 5 City Council Ordinance No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Zoning Standards for Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 - Page 13 Exhibit A - Text - Provided under separate cover Exhibit B - Residential Development Standards Matrix City Council Ordinance No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 00-0029 - Development Agreement for Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 - Page 14 Exhibit A - Text of the Development Agreement Response letter from the applicant regarding Level of Service D - Page 15 City Council Resolution No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 00-0052 -Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Page 16 Exhibit A - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Page 17 Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Page 18 City Council Staff Report dated January 9, 2001 - Page 19 Planning Commission Resolution No. 00- Draft Excerpts from the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of December 6, 2000 Planning Commission Staff Report dated December 6, 2000 Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 4, 2000 Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 20, 2000 Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 6, 2000 p:\CITY CLERK\Casey~Wolf Creek staffreport 1-23-01,doc 6 ATTACHMENT NO. I CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 01- CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0482) R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\cc staffreport 1-234) 1.doc 7 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0482) AND RELATED ACTIONS, AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. Statement of Findings and Fact Wolf Creek Specific Plan Project Description WHEREAS, the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and related actions' ("Specific Plan" or the "Project"), initiated and prepared on behalf of the City of Temecula. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan proposes the development of a 557-acre planned community in the City of Temecula. The Project site is located at the southern end of the City of Temecula, approximately two miles east of Interstate 15, along the east side of Pala Road, south of State Highway 79 South, between Loma Linda Road and Fairview Avenue. The Specific Plan includes two options for development. The Project with School Sites option includes 1,881 residential dwelling units at a range of densities, commercial development within a "Village Center," two public school sites, one City Sports Park, one neighborhood park, improvements to Kent Hintergardt Park, one linear parkway with three linear park activity areas, and a five-acre site re~erved for public institutional uses such as churches a fire station, library or multi-use facilities.1 The Project with Residential Use of School Sites option allows school sites to be developed with residential uses, resulting in a maximum total of 2,158 dwelling units.2 The Specific Plan also includes plans for roadways, drainage, water, and sewer to support the level of development proposed; and ~ Under the Project with School Sites option, the number of residential units built may range between 1,881 and 2,022 depending upon whether Planning Area 18 is developed as 169 single-family courtyard style units or as 310 multi-family senior housing units. 2 Under the Project with Residential Use of School Sites option, the number of residential units built may range between 2,017 and 2,158, depending upon whether Planning Area 18 is developed as 169 single-family courtyard style units or as 310 multi-family senior housing units. Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 1 January 2001 Environmental Review Process WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the City is the lead agency for the Specific Plan as the public agency with both general governmental powers and the principle responsibility for implementing the Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report ("Draft EIR") was issued in 1989 inviting comments from responsible agencies, other regulatory agencies, organizations and individuals pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15082; and WHEREAS, written statements were received by the City in response to the Notice of Preparation, which assisted the City in narrowing the issues and alternatives for analysis in the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared by the City pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15168 to analyze potential adverse environmental impacts of Specific Plan implementation pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, upon completion of the Draft EIR dated October, 1999, the City initiated a 45-day public comment period by filing a Notice of Completion with the State Office of Planning and Research in October, 1999; and WHEREAS, the City also published a Notice of Availability for the Draft E1R in a newspaper of general circulation. Copies of the Draft EIR were sent to public agencies, organizations, and individuals. In addition, the City placed copies of the Draft EIR in public libraries in Riverside County and made copies available for review at City offices; and WHEREAS, during the official public review period for the Draft EIR, the City received written comments, all of which were responded to by the City. Those comments and the responses are included as part of the Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR"); and WHEREAS, in September 1999, a Planning Commission workshop was conducted to provide information about the Specific Plan; WHEREAS, on December 6, 2000, the Planning Commission, following a series of public hearings, voted to recommend certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and approval of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, as revised per the Planning Commission's directives and as presented to the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21092.5, the City provided its responses to all coinmentors on August 14, 2000; and Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 2 City of Temecula Statutory Requirements for Findings WHEREAS, Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines prevents the City from approving or carrying out a project for which an EIR has been completed that identifies any significant environmental effects unless the City makes one or more of the following written finding(s) for each of those significant effects accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the final EIR; or (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency; or (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR; and WHEREAS, Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that if the Specific Plan will cause significant unavoidable adverse impacts, the City must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations prior to approving the project. A Statement of Overriding Considerations states that any significant adverse project effects are acceptable if expected project benefits outweigh unavoidable adverse environmental impacts; and WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR which the City Council finds are less than significant and do not require mitigation are described in Section 2 hereof; and WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant, but which the City Council finds can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the imposition of mitigation measures and/or conditions identified in the Final EIR and Specific Plan and set forth herein are described in Section 3 hereof; and WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final E1R as potentially significant but which the City Council finds cannot be fully mitigated to a less than significant level despite the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures described in Section 4 hereof, and WHEREAS, alternatives to the Specific Plan that might eliminate or reduce significant environmental impacts are described in Section 5 hereof, and Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 3 January 2001 WHEREAS, a discussion of Specific Plan benefits identified by City staff and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the environmental impacts that cannot be fully mitigated to a less than significant level are set forth in Section 6 hereof; and WHEREAS, Public Resources Code section 21081.6 requires the City to prepare and adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for any project for which mitigation measures have been imposed to assure compliance with the adopted mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, prior to taking action, the City Council has heard, been presented with, reviewed and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record including the Final E1R, and all oral and written testimony presented to it during meetings and heatings. The Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council and is deemed adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Specific Plan and related actions. No comments or any additional information submitted to the City have produced any substantial new information requiring circulation or additional environmental review of the Final EIR under CEQA, nor do the minor modifications to the Final EIR made by the City Council require additional public review because no new significant environmental impacts were identified, no substantial increase in the severity of any environmental impacts would occur and no feasible Project mitigation measures as defined in State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 were rejected. Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 4 City of Temecula NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, DOES FIND AND DECLARE THAT: Section 1- Findings The City Council of the City of Temecula, in meetings assembled on January 9, 2001, and January 23, 2001, determined that based on all of the evidence presented, including the Final EIR, written and oral testimony given at meetings and hearings, and submission of testimony from the public, organizations, and regulatory agencies, the following environmental impacts associated with the Wolf Creek Specific Plan are potentially significant unless otherwise indicated and each of these impacts will be avoided or substantially lessened by the identified mitigation measures: Section 2 - Environmental Impacts Considered Less Than Significant The City Council hereby finds that the following potential environmental impacts of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan are less than significant and therefore do not require the imposition of mitigation measures: 2.1 Population and Housing 2.1.1 Population The proposed Project will provide a maximum of between 1,881 and 2,158 new housing unit in Temecula (Final EIR, p. 27). Based on the City's current average household size of 3.338 persons, this new housing has the potential to generate a maximum of between 6,279 to 7,203 new residents (Final EIR, p. 27). Even though not anticipated, the proposed Project is consistent with the regional population projections of the Southern California Association of Government ("SCAG"), as set forth in the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide and the Subregional Comprehensive Plan prepared by the Western Riverside Council of Governments ("WRCOG"). According to the General Plan, at buildout, the area within the City limits will have 39,658 dwelling units and a population of 112,254 persons (Final EIR, p. 27). By providing between 1,881 and 2,158, the Project will enable to the City to provide housing to meet the needs of this expected population growth. Therefore, the level of population generation are consistent with the General Plan and are not considered significant (Final EIR, p. 27). 2.1.2 Housing The Project will add between 1,881 (Project with School Sites option) and 2,158 (Project with Residential Use of School Sites option) new housing units to the City's existing housing stock (Final EIR, p. 27). The Project is consistent with the City's land use policies contained in the City of Temecula General Plan ("General Plan"). Though primarily a single-family housing development, the Project also proposes the development of multi-family housing. Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 5 January 2001 The Project will provide housing opportunities for a range of people. The provision of housing of this type is consistent with the City's objective to encourage the provision of adequate sites for housing (City of Temecula, 1994-1999 Housing Element, p. 4-42). In addition, the development of the housing units proposed in the Project would help the City to achieve its 1998-2005 Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RI-INA") number as determined by SCAG and WRCOG. The RHNA is a key tool for SCAG and WRCOG to plan for projected growth in the region. As specified by the RI-INK, the City of Temecula has a projected housing need for 7,798 housing units during the 1998-2005 period (WRCOG, July 23, 1999). Since the Project is consistent with the Temecula General Plan and City land use policies, impact will be less than significant. 2.1.3 Jobs/Employment In a regional context, the Wolf Creek site lies within the WRCOG subregion, which is defined by SCAG to be housing-rich and jobs-poor (Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide, SCAG, 1994). SCAG projects a jobs/housing ratio of 0.99 for the year 2015 (Final E1R, p. 28). Assuming an employment generation factor of 2 employees per 1,000 square feet of commercial space, the Project can he expected to create approximately 600 jobs in the neighborhood retail businesses of the Village Center (Final EIR, p. 28). Although the Project will result in the development of residential units in an already housing-rich subregion, S CAG projects a housing- rich ratio for the subregion in 2015. Therefore, the proposed Project is not in conflict with the SCAG projections. Furthermore, SCAG's regional growth management policies are based on adopted General Plan development projections. As discussed above, the Wolf Creek Project is consistent with the City of Temecula's General Plan. Lastly, according to the General Plan EIR, the jobs/housing balance is measured on a citywide basis rather than a project-specific basis, and as a whole, Temecula's land use policy works toward achieving regional jobs/housing goals (City of Temecula General Plan EIR, p. 199). With regard to the Project with School Sites, in addition to the approximately 600 jobs that are anticipated to be created due to the commercial development in the Specific Plan area, development of the schools will result in approximately 200 new jobs. As mentioned previously, the City of Temecula's land use policy is designed to achieve regional jobs/housing goals, and this Project is consistent with the City's land use policy. Therefore, no impact is anticipated for either scenario for the Specific Plan (Final EIR, p. 28). 2.2 Water Resources The Rancho California Water District ("RCWD") provides water service to the site currently for agricultural use and will be responsible for providing domestic water service. In 1997, RCWD adopted an update to its Water System Master Plan. The current plan provides for water service facilities and resource development to meet projected demands over the next 20-year period based on the City's General Plan. The population density proposed under the Wolf Creek Specific Plan is less than anticipated with development of the site under the General Plan. Therefore, the Wolf Creek development has been factored into the Water System Master Plan (Ibid., p. 42). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 6 City of Temecula Furthermore, since the Wolf Creek Specific Plan proposes population density and building intensity less than that provided under the City of Temecula General Plan, it is exempt under Water Code Section 10910(b) (Final EIR, p. 42). Project implementation will permanently eliminate agricultural use of the Project site and thereby serve to reduce agricultural runoff, including any associated fertilizer and/or pesticide residue. This impact is considered positive with respect to groundwater quality (Ibid., p. 43). All construction activity associated with the Project will comply with NPDES requirements, as implemented and enforced by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. Also, all commercial development will comply with NPDES requirements for stormwater runoff control, as implemented and enforced by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the City will ensure that any required permanent facilities are in place. Compliance with these standard requirements will be mandated for the Project. Thus, no mitigation is required (Ibid., p. 44). 2.3 Biological Resources Implementation of the Project will replace current invasive weeds and any associated wildlife with structures, roadways, and other types of urban development. The structures and introduced landscape vegetation will limit potential re-establishment of native plant and animal species on the site. However, this is not considered a significant impact, given that native species have previously been displaced by agriculture (Ibid., p. 72). Existing eucalyptus trees may be removed to facilitate site development. Per the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, these trees cannot be removed during nesting season if raptors or other sensitive bird species maintain nest sites. Compliance with existing regulations will avoid potential impact (Final EIR, p. 72). Prior studies revealed no evidence of Stephens' Kangaroo Rat ("SKR"; a federally listed endangered species) occupation on the site or in the immediate vicinity. The City has not required the 1988 survey to be updated because historically, SKR has not been located in the area, the Temecula General Plan EIR did not identify suitable habitat in the area, and no change in conditions has occurred that would suggest the presence of SKR. Therefore, no significant impacts to this species will result from Project implementation (Ibid., p. 73). According to a letter provided by the United States Fish and Wildlife Services ("USFWS"), the Project will not result in any adverse impact to the endangered Quino Checkerspot Butterfly. Therefore, no significant impact will result from Project implementation (Final EIR, p. 73). 2.4 Energy Resources Southern California Edison ("SCE") provides electric power service to the Project site and region. Overhead power lines along Pala Road and roads accessing surrounding subdivisions provide electric power to development in the area. The SCE line on the south side of Pala Road Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 7 January 2001 is a 12 kilovolt line, as is the line extending across the property from Pala Road to Kent Hintergardt Park (Ibid., p. 75). According to average electric power usage factors published by the South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD"), the Project with School Sites will use an average of 18,688 megawatt of electricity per year and the Project with Residential Use of School Sites will consume an average of 19,207 megawatt hours of electricity per year. SCE indicates that at both local and regional scales, both levels of usage are less than significant (Ibid., p. 76). Natural gas service is provided by the Southern California Gas Company ("Gas Company"). The Gas Company maintains a four-inch gas main in Pala Road (Ibid., p. 75). According to natural gas factors also published by the SCAQMD, the Project with School Sites will use an average of 184 million cubic feet and the Project with Residential Use of School Sites will use 213 million cubic feet of average natural gas per year. Gas Company officials indicate that at both local and regional scales, both levels of usage are less than significant (Ibid., p. 77). As required by state regulations, the Project will incorporate state building standards for energy conservation outlined in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code as well as energy-saving devices as required by law. These standards are therefore considered part of the Project. The mandatory incorporation of these standards into the Project will further reduce the energy impact of the Project below a level of significance. As a result, no mitigation is required (ibid., pp. 78- 9). 2.5 Public Services 2.5.1 Fire Protection The Riverside County Fire Department ("RCFD"), which operates in conjunction with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection ("CDF"), provides fire protection services on a contract basis to the City of Temecula. Projected population increases are monitored and personnel levels are adjusted periodically during the contract renewal process (Ibid., p. 101). Currently, there are three permanent fire station sites (Station 73, Station 12, and Station 84) in Temeeula. The fire station closest to the Wolf Creek site is Station 84 on Pauba Road, approximately three miles from the Project site (Final EIR, p. 101). Station 73, located on Enterprise Circle, houses a track company and an engine company and is staffed by seven full-time fire personnel. Station 12 has an engine company with three full-time firefighters, as well as volunteer engine and a wildland fire engine. Station 84 maintains an engine company with three full-time firefighters. Response time from all stations is estimated at two minutes per mile (Final EIR, p. 101). According to the RCFD, current contract personnel provide adequate levels of service to the City. Three new fire stations, including one located within the Wolf Creek site are proposed by the Riverside County Fire Master Plan. RCFD's 2001/2 capital improvement plan provides for Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 8 City of Temecula such a station to be established irrespective of whether the Wolf Creek development proceeds (Final EIR, pp. 101-2). Current RCFD Fire/Emergency Medical Service response time objectives for urban category II land uses (defined as general commercial uses and residential densities of 2 to 8 dwelling units per acre) is a 10-minute response time for 90 percent of all fires, and a 5-minute response time for emergency medical services. The response time objectives for heavy urban land uses (residential densities of 8-20 dwelling units per acre) is an 8-minute response time for fire and a 5-minute response time for emergency medical service. Policy 3.2 of the City General Plan provides that the City will "strive to provide a minimum response time of between 7 and 10 minutes of an alarm for 90 percent of all fires, in accordance with the Riverside Cotmty Fire Protection and Emergency Master Plan" (Final EIR, p. 102). The southem portion of the Project area lies within a high-fire-hazard area, as designated by California Department of Forestry. This designation reflects the prior undeveloped nature of the area, and hazard area boundaries are currently being redrafted to respond to and reflect development in the adjacent Rainbow Canyon and Redhawk commtmities. Until such redistricting, however, properties within the designated high-fire-hazard area are required to provide brush clearance zones around structures (Final EIR, p. 102). Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Under this development scenario, most of the Project site will be developed at 3.5 to 4.7 du/ac. Thus, the objective will be a 10-minute response time. Only 43.1 acres of the 557-acre site will be developed at higher density, and that portion of the site should have an 8-minute fire response time and a 5-minute emergency medical response time. In general, satisfaction of these objectives requires location within a three-mile radius of a fire station (Final EIR, p. 102). The Project site is located within the three-mile maximum travel distance from the existing fire station on Pauba Road. RCFD plans call for construction of an additional station within the Wolf Creek property. This station is planned to be constructed during fiscal year 2001/2 (Final EIR, p. 103). The City and RCFD review projects on a case-by-case to identify service needs and have adopted a development fee program to fund required facilities. Developers within the Wolf Creek Project will be required to pay the fees to fund station improvements citywide and construction of the new station within the Wolf Creek Project. The Specific Plan includes within Planning Area 14 an option for a fire station (Final EIR, p. 103). The Project applicant has committed to providing a portion of the available 5 acres for construction of the fire station, and the Specific Plan and Project conditions of approval will reflect this commitment (Final EIR, p. 103). The developer(s) will be required to pay Development Impact Fees established by the City to fund long-term capital improvements related to fire protection services, and a fire station site will be provided consistent with RCFD's plans. No impact on fire services will result (Final EIR, p. 103). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City o f Temecula 9 January 2001 Project with School Sites: The development of residential use of school sites is considered the worst-case scenario. No additional analysis is required since this has been addressed in the preceding discussion (Final E1R, p. 103). With regard to exposure to high-fire hazards, the Project incorporates several features which provide a buffer between undeveloped brushland on the adjacent Pechanga Indian lands and proposed urban development at Wolf Creek. First, Pala Road will be widened to four lanes, creating an approximate 134-foot paved roadway. Second, the planned grass-lined drainage channel along Pala Road will be up to 120 feet in width. According to City Building staff, this 200+ foot buffer zone provides a level of protection consistent with California Department of Forestry standards. Exposure to fire hazards will be less than significant (Final EIR, p. 103). 2.5.2 Police Protection The City of Temecula contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department for law enforcement services. The contract provides for assignment of 31 sworn officers and 7 non- sworn officers to the City. These officers are supported by 2 lieutenants, 7 sergeants, and 6 investigators. The Sheriffs Department/County Justice Center serves the Temecula area. This facility is located north of Auld Road and east of Leon Road, outside the City limits but within its sphere of influence (Final EIR, p. 104). Under Policy 3.1 of the General Plan, the City strives to provide a minimum of one full-time officer for 1,000 residents for police protection services. Police protection services are funded through general fund revenues of the City (Final EIR, p. 104). Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Under this development scenario, the proposed Project will result in a population of 7,203 persons, based on an average household size of 3.338 persons. At a ratio of 1 officer per 1,000 population, the Project will generate demand for 7 additional full-time officers Project buildout. All staffwill be based at existing sheriff facilities. No physical environmental impact will result from Project implementation (Final E1R, p. 104). Project with School Sites: In this scenario, the proposed Project will result in a population of 6,279 persons. At a ratio of 1 officer per 1,000 population, the Project will generate demand for 6 additional full-time officers at the end of Project build out. All staff will be based at existing sheriff facilities. No physical environmental impact will result from Project implementation (Final EIR, p. 104). 2.5.3 Schools The Wolf Creek Specific Plan site lies within the Temecula Valley Unified School District (TVUSD). The District currently operates 10 elementary schools (grades K-5), 3 middle schools (grades 6-8), 2 comprehensive high schools (grades 9-12), and a continuation high school. The District's enrollment has been rapidly growing. Total enrollment was 16,065 as of April, 1999. According to District staff, the District has been using portable classrooms as temporary buildings to accommodate the rapidly growing student population.. A total of 49% of the District's classrooms are portable and interim facilities (Final EIR, p. 105). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 10 City of Temecula Policy 4.1 of the City's General Plan commits the City to supporting the District in providing adequate school facilities for students from new development to the extent permitted by law. The primary mechanisms to sustain quality educational services, in cooperation with the School District, are the provision of school sites, imposition of statutory development fees, negotiated development fees as permitted by law, and the provision of information to the School District. To implement this policy, the City has adopted a school mitigation resolution and has adopted the school mitigation plan of the TVUSD. Developers are required to pay a per dwelling unit fee for new residential construction to offset impact. Any dedication of land for school purposes can be credited against the total required school fee (Final E1R, p. 105). Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Based on the student generation cited in the Final EIR and assuming the worst-case scenario for student generation whereby the school sites are developed with residential uses, the project's proposed 1,848 detached single family traits and 310 attached multi-family units will generate up tol,666 new students. Approximately 896 will be elementary students, 384 will be middle school students, and 386 will be high school students. This number of students is equivalent to 10 percent of the entire 1999 enrollment within the District (Final EIR, p. 106). SB50 and Proposition IA, which addressed class size reduction and construction/maintenance of facilities, were passed in November of 1998. Proposition lA includes a variety measures, such as the sale of public bonds and allowing local governments to assess fees on development, to ensure that enough schools and related infrastructure are built/maintained. Therefore, schools will be built to meet future demand. Under this scenario, future school sites have not been identified. Environmental review will be required by the District for any new school construction. Physical environmental impact cannot be assessed at this time. Per Section 15165 of the CEQA Guidelines, further analysis is not appropriate (Final EIR, p. 106). Project with School Sites: Under this scenario, the proposed Specific Plan designates 2 school sites within the Project site: a 12-acre elementary school site and a 20-acre middle school site:. No final determination has been made by the District as to whether any or all of these sites will be acquired and developed as District schools, although the District has identified a clear need for these facilities (Final EIR, p. 106, with numbers revised to reflect reduced project size). Based on the generation factors cited above, the project's proposed 1,881 detached single family units will generate up to 1,496 new students. Approximately 801 will be elementary students, 339 will be middle school students, and 356 will be high school students. This number of students is equivalent to 9 percent of the entire 1999 enrollment within the District (Final EIR, p. 106, with numbers revised to reflect reduced project size). As described above, SB50 and Proposition lA include a variety measures, such as the sale of public bonds and allowing local governments to assess fees on development, to ensure that enough schools and related infrastructure are built/maintained. The proposed school sites will provide school facilities for Wolf Creek residents and other students in the area. The new schools will help address ovemrowding and long-term growth needs (Final E1R, p. 106). Construction of new schools on the Project site will result in physical changes to the local environment. These changes and associated impact are examined throughout this EIR. Impacts Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Councd Findings City of Temecula 11 January 2001 on air quality and cumulative impact on agricultural resources are identified as significant and unavoidable. All other impacts can be reduced to acceptable levels. Once precise design plans for the schools have been prepared, TVUSD may be required to conduct further environmental review to determine whether any additional future mitigation may be necessary (Final EIR, p. 107). The Temecula Valley Unified School District, upon completion of preliminary plans for each proposed school within the Wolf Creek Specific Plan area, will undertake any required subsequent environmental review pursuant to CEQA and the District's CEQA Guidelines (Final E1R, p. 107). The impacts associated with the location of schools within the Specific Plan area are considered less than significant; however, the impact on air quality and the cumulative loss of agricultural lands will continue to be significant and unavoidable (as discussed in Sections 4.2 and 4.3). All other physical environmental impacts related to school construction, as identified in Section 3.3, can be mitigated to less-than-significant levels (Final EIR, p. 107). 2.5.4 Libraries The City of Temecula is a member of the Riverside County Library District. One facility, the 15,000 square-foot Temecula Library located in the Walt Abraham Administrative Center, serves the residents of Temecula and Murdeta. Plans for a new library branch on Pauba Road is being considered (Final E1R, p. 107). Revenue for thc District is obtained from a Special District tax collected by the County. In addition, a portion of the City's Development Impact Fees go towards the provision of library facilities (Final EIR, p. 107). Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Under this development scenario, the proposed Project will generate a residential population of approximately 7,203 persons. Based on the adopted service standards of the Library District, this population could result in the need for an additional 10,418 volumes and 4,341 square feet of library space. The developer will be required to pay Library Mitigation Fees to offset the cost of providing any additional library facilities (Final EIR, p. 108). This Project, in itself, will not require construction of any new library facilities. The Library District has already initiated plans to construct a new facility on Pauba Road absent the Wolf Creek Project. No physical environmental impact will result due to the Project (Final EIR, p. 108). Project with School Sites: Development of residential use of school sites is the worst-case scenario. No additional analysis is required. Thus, the analysis listed above applies to this development scenario (Final EIR, p. 108). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 12 City of Temecula 2.6 Utilities and Service Systems 2.6.1 Water The Rancho California Water District ("RCWD") currently provides water service to the site for agricultural use and will be responsible for providing domestic water service. In late 1997, RCWD adopted a comprehensive update of its Water System Master Plan. The Master Plan addresses water resource management. The plan provides for water storage and distribution facilities, water resource development, and acquisition of imported water supplies to meet anticipated needs for the next 20 years based on the City's General Plan. The Plan recognizes urban development densities on the Wolf Creek site similar to or more intensive than that proposed the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. Furthermore, since the Wolf Creek Specific Plan proposes population density and building intensity less than provided under the General Plan, it is exempt under Water Code Section 10910(b) (Final EIR, p. 119). Water facilities on the Project site include a 24-inch steel water main along Pala Road fi:om Loma Linda to Wolf Valley Road, 12-inch and 16-inch water mains on the northeast boundary, and a 16-inch main located on the northwest boundary along Loma Linda Road. The major source of potable water distributed by the RCWD is groundwater fi:om the Murrieta-Temecula basin. The groundwater is supplemented with imported water from the Metropolitan Water District ("MWD"). The RCWD has a current annual supply capability of 59,000 acre-feet per year, which is adequate to meet current demand for potable water (Final EIR, pp. 119-20). The proposed new development will require construction of a new on-site water distribution system to serve the proposed uses. Since the proposed Project includes the provision of the necessary water infrastructure subject to appropriate approvals, impact on water facilities is considered less than significant (Final EIR, p. 120). Development under the proposed Specific Plan will create demand for additional potable water fi:om residences, commercial uses, and for irrigation of greenbelts, parks, and other landscaped areas. The proposed Project is estimated to require approximately 1,343 acre-feet per year ("AFY"). With the school sites, the proposed Project will consume approximately 1,162 AFY of water (Final EIR, p. 120). The actual use of water on the site will be lower than the above estimates because the Project is required to comply with existing mandatory state requirements for water-conserving toilets, shower heads, faucets, and other appliances in all development, which will reduce the average daily consumption below 400 gallons per day per dwelling unit. The RCWD indicates that water service is available to the Project, and water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an agreement to assign water management rights, if any, to RCWD. In addition, the RCWD's 20-year water service master plan assumes development of the Wolf Creek area with residential and commercial uses (Final EIR, p.121). Since the RCWD indicates that it has adequate supplies of water to service the proposed Project and the water service master plan assumes development of the site, impact on water facilities and resources will be less than significant (Final EIR, p. 121). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 13 January 2001 2.6.2 Sewer Sewer service to the Project site will be provided by the Eastern Municipal Water District ("EMWD"). EMWD is under the jurisdiction of the San Diego Water Quality Control Board. EMWD is currently meeting treatment demand in Temeeula and is treating approximately 5.5 million gallons ofwastewater per day at the Rancho Califomia Treatment Plan. The facility was expanded in 1996 to provide tertiary treatment capacity of 8 million gallons of wastewater per day ("mgd"), with secondary treatment capacity of 10 mgd. This capacity is considered adequate to accommodate new development within the District's service area (Final EIR, p. 121). Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Development pursuant to the proposed Wolf Creek Specific Plan will generate, up to 868,200 gallons of wastewater per day from residential uses and commercial uses will generate, on average, an additional 60,000 gallons per day. The Rancho Califomia Treatment Plan has adequate capacity to treat this amount of additional sewage. Project impact on treatment facilities will be less than significant (Final E1R, p. 122). The proposed Specific Plan includes a sewer plan for the site. The sewer plan proposes a system layout that is based on EMWD's overall system master planning for the Rancho Villages Assessment District No. 159, which sized and financed the sewer infrastructure based upon up to 2,700 units within Wolf Creek, or more units than currently proposed under the worst-case scenario. Since the proposed Project will provide sewer system improvements in accordance with existing requirements, Project impact on sewer infrastructure will be less than significant (Final EIR, p. 122). Project with School Sites: With schools, the proposed Plan will generate up to 792,064 gallons of wastewater per day. This represents a lesser amount of wastewater than would be generated under the development of residential uses on the school sites. Therefore, the residential use of school sites is considered the worst-case scenario. This scenario also will not result in a significant impact on sewer infrastructure (Final EIR, p. 122). 2.6.3 Solid Waste Solid waste from the Wolf Creek area is hauled by CR&R, Inc. under contract to the City of Temecula. The waste is disposed of at the Badlands Sanitary Landfill or other facility in the vicinity accepting domestic waste. The landfill encompasses approximately 1,081 acres, with a current disposal area of 141 acres and an annual capacity of 432,000 tons. The estimated closure date is 2010 (Final EIR, p. 123). Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Based on the factors identified in the Final EIIL the proposed Specific Plan, without school sites, will generate up to 5,586 tons of waste per year (Final EIR, p. 123). This waste will be picked up and once recyclable materials have been extracted, disposed of at the Badlands Sanitary Landfill or other regional facility. The Project, similar to all other development in the City of Temecula, is subject to mandatory City requirements, policies, and programs for solid waste reduction developed in conformance with the Integrated Waste Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 14 City of Temecula Management Act of 1989, and amendments. Since the Project is required to include these mandatory programs and procedures, Project impact will be less than significant (Final EIR, pp. 123-4). Project with School Sites: If schools are provided, the proposed Plan will generate approximately 2,060 tons of waste per year (based on 0.136 tons of waste per person, 1,062 students, and 200 staff). This represents a lesser amount of waste than that associated with residential use of the school sites. As a result the Project impact would be less than significant (Final EIR, p. 124). 2.7 Recreation Five public parks exist within a five-mile radius of the Wolf Creek site: Three in the City of Temecula and two within unincorporated Riverside County. The City parks are Loma Linda Park, Kent Hintergardt Park, and Pala Community Park. County parks in the area include Paseo Park in the Redhawk community near Redhawk Elementary School (Final EIR, p. 133). Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Implementation of the Wolf Creek Plan will increase the demand for park and recreation facilities in the City of Temecula. Pursuant to the City's General Plan policy and Quimby Act Ordinance, the mandatory park dedication requirement for 2,158 dwelling units is 27.06 acres, based on 5 acres per 1,000 population. (The Quimby Act Ordinance establishes population factors of 2.59 persons per single-family unit and 2.34 persons per multi-family unit (Final EIR, p. 134). Per the revised Specific Plan, land credits totaling 54.2 acres have been applied to the overall park land dedication of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. The scenario involving 2,158 residential units would require a total of 27.06 acres of park land and open space, or 2.7 acres more than the Project with School Sites scenario. In addition, the Specific Plan includes the development of a City Sports Park that is 40 acres. Given the land credits and the City Sports Park, both scenarios exceed the requirements of the Quimby Act Ordinance. Thus, impact will be less than significant (Final EIR, pp. 134-5). Project with School Sites: Under this development scenario, park dedication requirements for 1,881 dwelling units is 24.36 acres. Land credits and credits anticipated from private recreation facilities total 54.2 acres. As a result, this scenario complies with City requirements and with the development of the City Sports Park will exceed the requirements. Thus, impact is less than significant. 2.8 Local Agricultural Resources The 557-acre Project site historically has supported agricultural operations. The Murdy family operated a livestock ranch on the property for over 30 years dating back to the 1940s and up tmtil 1972, conducted farming operations. Since 1972, a majority of the property has been leased for the commercial production of turf and groundcover, as well as minor field crops. The Agricultural Preserve status of the property expired in 1989 through the Notice of Nonrenewal Process (initiated in 1979) (Final EIR, p. 137). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 15 January 2001 Today, agricultural activity has virtually disappeared from this area of the Temecula Valley, with the remnant fanning operations on the Wolf Creek site representing the only such use. As described in Section 2.1 (Land Use and Planning) of the Final EIR, surrounding properties have been developed with and/or have pending development plans for residential subdivisions, golf courses, and the Pechanga Casino and its related uses. The City of Temecula General Plan Land Use map designates the subject property and all surrounding lands within the City's sphere of influence for urban uses (Final E1R, p. 137). The Williamson Act contract applicable to the property expired in 1989. Thus, the Project will not result in the cancellation ofa Williamson Act contract (Final EIR, p. 138). At the local level, the existing agricultural use of the property is anomalous, given that surrounding properties support urban-type uses. City land use policy provides for the eventual development of the Wolf Creek site with residential, commercial, school, and open space uses. The conversion from agricultural to urban use is not inconsistent with land use policy. Current on-site agricultural activities are considered a temporary use of the property, particularly in light of the fact that the property owner receives no Williamson Act property tax benefits. Thus, in a local context, the site does not appear to represent a prime agricultural property (Final EIR, p. 138). To identify the significance of this land in a more regional context, a Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) was conducted using a model developed by the California Department of Conservation, Office of Land Conservation. The analysis indicated that, based on the scoring thresholds contained in the LESA manual, the loss of this agricultural resoume represents a significant impact. Since the Agricultural Preserve status of the site expired in 1989 and since the General Plan Land Use map designates the property and all surrounding lands for urban uses, the impact on local agricultural resources. However, the cumulative impacts due to the loss of agricultural lands are significant and are discussed in Section 4.3 (Final EIR, p. 137-9). 2.9 Cumulative Impacts (except for Air Quality and Agricultural Land) The Temecula General Plan EIR examined impacts associated with build out within the corporate city limits, its sphere of influence, and a larger "area of interest." The entire study area encompasses approximately 60 square miles and at build out (40-year time period), will provide for up to 79,299 housing units. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan is accounted for within the total unit count. Regional growth plans were also examined in evaluating cumulative impacts on a regional basis (Final EIR, p. 157). The General Plan policies and standards which serve as mitigation measures for the potential cumulative effects of all development under the General Plan have been applied to the Wolf Creek Specific Plan whenever applicable. Among the many General Plan policies applied to the Wolf Creek Specific Plan are the following (Final EIR, p. 158): Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 16 City of Temecula · Establishing setbacks along Alquist-Priolo Special Studies zones; · Incorporating the village concept into large master-planned developments; · Incorporating pedestrian and bicycle trails into project design; · Providing adequate circulation improvements to support the level of development proposed; and · Providing development standards that ensure high quality design. The incorporation of the General Plan policies and standards in the Specific Plan from the start have ensured that cumulative impacts associated with the development are less than significant with the exception of air quality and the loss of agricultural land (Final EIR, p. 157-8). Section 3 - Environmental Impacts Mitigated to a Less than Significant Level The City Council hereby finds that mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR have been incorporated into the Wolf Creek Specific Plan that avoid or substantially lessen the following potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Specific Plan Final EIR to a less than significant level. The potentially significant Project impacts and the mitigation measures which have been adopted to mitigate them to a less than significant level are as follows: 3.1 Land Use Planning 3.1.1 Potential Significant Impact- Land Use Compatibility Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Residential land uses at suburban densities currently exist immediately north, northeast, and west of the Wolf Valley Ranch site. Additional subdivision activity and development are anticipated consistent with the specific plans that have been approved for these areas. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan proposes residential densities similar to the densities currently existing and planned in the immediate vicinity, with a circulation system planned to tie into existing roads and trails. The level of commercial development proposed is similar to other commercial businesses currently operating in other areas of the City, such as the retail complex on Rancho California Road near 1-15. As such, the Project continues the existing physical arrangement of the established and planned community (Final EIR, p. 24). On the adjacent Pechanga Indian Reservation, the closest development consists of the gambling casino located on Pala Road at Wolf Vailey Road, directly across from the Wolf Creek property. The casino, which began operations in 1995, is open 24 hours a day and offers card games, slot machine play, and video poker. No alcohol is served. The associated gas station/mini-market is east of the casino on Pala Road. A golf course and resort hotel are planned west of the casino (Final EIR, p. 24). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 17 January 2001 The 24-hour operation of the casino has the potential to create compatibility concerns with regard to the residential uses proposed along Pala Road. Potentially adverse impacts include traffic and parking lot noise, and light and glare from the parking lot. The width of Pala Road, the proposed 100- to 128-foot wide flood control greenbelt, and buffers which will be incorporated into residential site design (for noise control) will provide a 200- to 300-foot buffer and thereby minimize impact (Final EIR, pp. 24-5). The mini-market located across the street from the City Sports Park also has the potential to create compatibility concerns with regard to safety issues if park users, especially children, cross Pala Road to patronize the mini-market. The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has committed to design the City Sports Park to incorporate measures to ensure safety and minimize potential impacts. Land use compatibility impacts with respect to the mini-market and casino will not be significant. Project with School Sites: This scenario presents the same issues identified under the development of residential use of school sites scenario. No additional analysis is required. Thus, the analysis listed above applies to this development scenario. 3.1.2 Findings The Project will not result in any significant land use impacts. However, to minimize potential secondary impacts on residential, the following mitigation measures are recommended to further reduce impact: For any residential development abutting Pala Road across from the casino, subdivision and site design shall incorporate noise attenuation walls if project-specific noise studies indicate that such features are necessary to achieve noise standards. If such walls are provided, landscaping shall be provided along the walls to achieve aesthetic improvements and to reduce potential for vandalism. Any such required walls and landscaping shall be provided prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for affected development (Final EIR, p. 26). The Temecula Community Services District will ensure that the design of the City Sports Park incorporates safety features such as fences, walls, and landscape buffers to discourage dangerous pedestrian traffic and instead route it to safer locations for those who wish to traverse Pala Road to get to the mini-market. 3.1.3 Supporting Explanation A General Plan Amendment application has been filed to amend the Land Use Plan to reflect the pattern of land uses proposed by the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. The principal change involves rearranging the pattern of residential uses, locating commercial uses on both sides of Wolf Valley Road, establishing new park locations, and accommodating potential school sites (Final EIR, p. 25). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 18 City of Temecula Project with Residential Use of School Sites: The Wolf Creek Specific Plan proposes land use types and development intensities consistent with the designations shown on the existing General Plan Land Use Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendment will rearrange the land use pattern designated for the site but retain the same overall maximum densities and dwelling units allowed on the site. The Project incorporates the "Village Center" concept described in the Land Use Element by providing central commercial, institutional, and recreational facilities and higher- density residential uses linked by pedestrian/bicycle paths. The Project is consistent with General Plan land use policy (Final EIR, p. 25). Project with School Sites: As discussed above, the proposed land use types and intensities are consistent with General Plan land use policy. The General Plan also anticipates the development of public/institutional uses in the Wolf Creek Plan area. Therefore, development under this scenario is consistent with General Plan land use policy (Final EIR, p. 25). 3.2 Geotechnical Issues 3.2.1 Potentially Significant Impact Detailed geotechnical investigations revealed the following: · Presence of Wildomar fault trace across Planning Areas 21 and 22; · No evidence of Wolf Valley fault on the site; and · No evidence of subsidence. The development standards for Planning Areas 21 and 22 include a requirement for a 75-foot setback from the Wildomar fault for all structures. This requirement assures avoidance of potential impact (Final EIR, pp. 31-39). Grading and soil recompaction will require further review at the subdivision stage. Mitigation is required to avoid potential impact (Final EIR, p. 39). 3.2.2 Findings The following mitigation measure is required to avoid site-specific impact at the subdivision level: As specific development proposals are advanced for individual planning areas, construction-level geological and soils analyses will be performed as required by the City (Final EIR, p. 39). Incorporation into the Specific Plan of these mitigation measures will result in changes or alterations to the Specific Plan that will reduce geotechnical impacts to a less than significant level. Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 19 January 2001 3.2.3 Suppoding Explanation Groundshaking and Surface Fault Rupture Project with Residential Use of School Sites: The Project site is subject to earthquake groundshaking hazards typical of the California seismic environment. During the life of the Project, on-site development likely will be subject to ground accelerations generated fxom earthquakes produced along area faults (Final EIR, p. 37). Structures in the proposed development will be located on alluvial materials underlying the site, which generally tend to amplify ground motion. Secondary ground displacements in response to a nearby seismic event or a large regional earthquake are possible. Future seismic events could result in structural damage to buildings within the Project area. However, these effects would be expected under similar conditions throughout the region. State and local building codes require seismic hazard mitigation features to be incorporated into building design and construction. All Project construction will comply with these codes. Impacts relative to groundshaking will thereby be reduced to a less-than-significant level (Final EIR, p. 37). Within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, habitable structures must maintain a minimum 50-foot setback distance from the fault trace per State law. Project specific geotechnical studies recommend a 75-foot setback zone or either side of the fault trace on the property (Figure 9, Final EIR, p. 38). The Specific Plan includes language for Planning Areas 21 and 22 to address this potential hazard and the required setback. Planning Areas 21 and 22 are the only two areas containing the fault trace (Final EIR, p. 37). Due to the lack of evidence of suggesting the presence of the Wolf Valley segment on the site, and because a 75-foot no-build buffer zone will be provided for the Wildomar segment, surface fault rupture hazards are less than significant (Final EIR, p. 37). Project with School Sites: The above analysis and conclusion for Project with Residential Use of School Sites applies to this alternative. None of the school sites lies within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (Final EIR, p. 37). L~ue~c~n Project with Residential Use of School Sites: The Project geotectmical reports concluded that liquefaction potential on the site is Iow. Under "worst case" conditions, the soils engineer indicates that liquefaction would be limited in occurrence and manifested as minor potential settlements of a uniform nature. No special mitigation for liquefaction is necessary. Therefore, potential impact will be less than significant (Final E1R, p. 39). Project with School Sites: The above analysis and conclusion for Project with Residential Use of School Sites applies to this alternative (Final EIR, p. 39). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 20 City of Temecula Topography Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Because the site is relatively level, minimal landform alteration will be required to prepare the site for development. Project implementation will require some grading to create building pads, parking facilities, parks, and utilities, as well as to complete circulation and drainage system improvements. Overall landform alteration will be less than significant (Final EIR, p. 39). Project with School Sites: The above analysis and conclusion for Project with Residential Use of School Sites applies to this alternative (Final EIR, p. 39). Ground Subsidence Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Subsidence and settlement monitoring on the site has revealed no evidence of vertical movement indicative of subsidence. Thus, no impact on development is expected (Final EIR, p. 39). Project with School Sites: The above conclusion for Project with Residential Use of School Sites applies to this alternative (Final EIR, p. 39). 3.3 Air Quality (Short-Term Construction-Related) 3.3.1 Potential Significant Impact The estimated average amount of quarterly construction is below the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. However, during certain quarters, market demand has the potential to result in a greater level of construction, which may result in a significant impact (Final EIR, p. 48). 3.3.2 Findings Incorporation into the Specific Plan of the following mitigation measures will result in changes or alterations to the Specific Plan that will reduce short-term construction-related air quality impacts to a less than significant level: 1. Construction contractors will maintain and service construction equipment to minimize exhaust emissions (Final EIR, p. 52). 2. SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 shall be adhered to, reducing airborne particulate matter and ensuring the cleanup of construction-related dirt on approach routes to construction sites (Final EIR, p. 53). 3. During grading activities, topsoil mounds shall be stabilized to prevent wind erosion and release of dust and particulates. This may be accomplished through regular watering, Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Councd Findings CiO, of Temecula 21 January 2001 hydroseeding, netting, chemical applications, and other methods determined acceptable by the City (Final EIR, p. 53). 4. All unpaved roads and parking areas will be watered down or chemically treated to control dust. Such mitigation shall occur on a daily basis or as otherwise appropriate, given weather conditions as determined by the City of Temecula. The City will monitor the construction site on a regular basis to ensure compliance (Final EIR, p. 53). Trucks leaving construction sites will be washed off. A Monitoring Program of the construction site to ensure compliance shall be the responsibility of the developer (Final E1R, p. 53). 3.3.3 Supporting Explanation Project with Residential Use of School Sites: The amount of construction-generated air pollutant emissions is generally proportional to the size of the Project under construction. The proposed Wolf Creek Specific Plan anticipates development to occur in two phases over a period of ten or more years, depending upon market conditions (Final EIR, p. 48). Over the next 10 years, development within the Wolf Valley Ranch site will consist of between 1,881 and 2,158 dwelling units, 300,000 square feet of commercial use, two schools (if so determined by the Temecula Valley Unified School District), and supporting infrastructure, including major roadways. If schools are not built on the two sites provided in the Specific Plan and the multi-family senior housing option is chosen, 2,158 residential units will be built (Final EIR, p. 48, with numbers adjusted to reflect revised Specific Plan). The 557-acre site is level land, and extensive grading will not be required for this development. Mass grading in excess of the quarterly emissions threshold is not planned. The developer plans to construct the proposed 1,881 to 2,158 units over a 5- to 10-year period. Based on past development trends in the region during aggressive building cycles, the average level of development in any given quarter can be estimated at 56 to 65 units (Final EIR, p. 48). According to the Project applicant, commemial development probably will occur following the residential development. The estimated average amount of quarterly residential development, which is considered aggressive, is below the SCAQMD thresholds. During certain quarters, market demand has the potential to result in a greater number of units being constructed. However, compliance with standard SCAQMD requirements can reduce potentially significant impacts to acceptable levels (Final EIR, p. 48). Project with School Sites: The above analysis for Project with Residential Use of School Sites is valid for this scenario because the residential component represents the worst-case analysis for short-term impacts (Final E1R, p. 48). Implementation of the above referenced mitigation measures will reduce impacts to air quality impacts (with the exception of long-term air quality) to a less than significant level (Final EIR, p. 48). For a discussion of long-term air quality and the cumulative impacts to air quality please refer to Section 4.1 and 4.2. Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 22 City of Temecula 3.4 Transportation and Circulation 3.4.1 Potential Significant Impact At buildout, the proposed Project with schools is forecast to generate up to 42,036 new vehicle trips, while the scenario involving no schools would generate up to 38,527 (Final E1R, p. 56). The traffic impact analysis for the Specific Plan indicates that the Project will significantly impact levels of service at several intersections in the Project area, one during the morning peak hour, two during the evening peak hour, and one during both the morning and evening peak hour. In the absence of any roadway improvements, Project traffic impacts will be significant (Final EIR, p. 63). 3.4.2 Findings The traffic study indicates that the following on-site roadway improvements must be incorporated into the Project to reduce impacts to acceptable levels: On-site Improvements The traffic study indicates that the following on-site roadway improvements must be incorporated into the Project to reduce impacts to acceptable levels: In conjunction with Project development, Pala Road from 300 feet south of Loma Linda Road to Fairview Avenue will be constructed at its ultimate half-section width as an Arterial Highway (110-foot fight-of-way). Pala Road should be improved at a half- section width as an Urban Arterial Highway (134-foot fight-of-way) from Loma Linda Road to a point 300 feet south of the Loma Linda intersection, and then transition to the Arterial Highway section. A 14-foot-wide landscaped median shall be constructed in accordance with City standards (Final EIR, p. 67). In conjunction with Project development, Wolf Valley Road from Pala Road to the eastern Project boundary will be constructed at its ultimate cross-section width as a Secondary Highway (88-foot right-of-way) in conjunction with adjacent development (Final E1R, p. 67). In conjunction with Project development, construct Loma Linda Road from Pala Road to Via Del Coronado to its ultimate half-section width as a Collector (66-foot right-of-way) in conjunction with adjacent development, or a 78-foot roadway if the Circulation Element Update of the General Plan is approved (Final EIR, p. 67). In conjunction with Project development, Fairview Avenue from Pala Road to the eastern Project boundary will be constructed at its ultimate half-section width as a Secondary Highway (88-foot fight-of-way) (Final EIR, p. 67). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 23 January 2001 Site distance at each entrance to the Project shall be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans/City of Temecula sight-distance standards at the time of preparation of tentative maps (Final EIR, p. 67). Off-site Improvements The traffic study and Circulation Element Update of the General Plan indicate that the following off-site roadway improvements must be accomplished to reduce impacts to acceptable levels: o Property owner(s) within the Project area, or the developer(s), shall contribute to the construction of the Pala Road bridge crossing of Temecula Creek on a fair-share basis through Assessment District No. 159 (Final EIR, p. 68). Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, the Pala Road bridge crossing of Temecula Creek shall be constructed to accommodate four travel lanes, consistent with plans approved by 'the City of Temecula. At the time of tentative subdivision map approval or commemial development plan approval, traffic volumes at the Pala Road bridge shall be monitored and approval may be subject to confirmation of available bridge-carrying capacity (Final EIR, p. 68). Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the following improvements shall have been completed to the satisfaction of the City (Final EIR, p. 68): · Interim interchange improvements at I-15/SR 79S, · Widening of SR 79S between Pala Road and 1-15, and · Widening of Pala Road to 4 lanes from Clubhouse Drive to Loma Linda Road. The developer(s) shall design and install traffic signals for project-impacted intersections when warranted, as determined by the Department of Public Works (Final EIR, p. 68). Transportation System Management Actions 10. To accommodate transit services within the specific plan, bus turnouts shall be provided at locations designated by Riverside Transit Agency or the City of Temecula Department of Public Works. Safe pedestrian access to and from the bus turnout shall be provided (Final EIR, p. 68). Additional Measures 11. Subsequent focused traffic studies may be required as the Project develops to identify actual future conditions and to determine whether additional improvements are required of the Project to meet City Level of Significance ("LOS") objectives (Final EIR, p. 68). 12. Phased on-site street improvements will be identified and prioritized at the subdivision map stage (Final EIR, p. 68). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 24 City of Temecula The incorporation of the roadway and intersection improvements into the Specific Plan and their implementation as planned over the short and long terms, Project impacts in the short-term (year 2002) and in the long-term (year 2015) will be less than significant (Final EIR, p. 69). 3.4.3 Suppoding Explanation In order to lessen the need for vehicle trips and to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle movement throughout the Project, the Specific Plan provides system of bikeways and pedestrian pathways. These amenities will be provided along Wolf Valley Road, "A" Street, Pala Road, Fairview Road, Loma Linda Road, Via Del Coronado, and within the linear park to link neighborhoods within Wolf Creek as well as to other nearby development (Final EIR, p. 11). Furthermore, with respect to automobile circulation, no interior road system has been designed for the Plan, with the exception of roadways providing access to the entire site (Figure 2, Final EIR, p.5). The Interior Loop Road, which will be the primary circulation route through Wolf Creek, is envisioned as a landscaped parkway, with a right-of-way width of 85 feet. This accommodates a 44-foot road width, with wide parkway strips on either side. "A" Street will be constructed as a collector street with a 66-foot right-of way or, if the City's currently proposed General Plan Amendment is adopted, a 78-foot principal collector. Roadways adjacent to the site will be improved to provide efficient access. All other residential road, cul-de-sac, and alley designs will be developed in conjunction with tentative tract maps for individual planning areas (Final EIR, p. 11). 3.5 Hazards 3.5.1 Potential Significant Impact Asbestos and possibly contaminated soils exist on the site (Final EiR, pp. 81-83). 3.5.2 Findings The following mitigation measure will be implemented to reduce potential impacts to hazards at the proposed site to a less than significant level. Soil underneath and adjacent to the concrete slab where it is suspected that contaminated soil from the waste-oil UST lies within Planning Areas 2 and 3 shall be tested to determine if it is contaminated. If identified as contaminated, the soil shall be removed off site for disposal in accordance with state and federal regulatory requirements (Final EIR, pp. 84-5). All known asbestos-containing materials on the site, including the transite pipe and materials in the four structures, shall be removed or stabilized pursuant to EPA requirements by a certified asbestos-removing contractor. Such remediation shall occur prior to the issuance of any grading permits, other than those that may be necessary to facilitate underground pipe removal (Final EIR, p. 85). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City o f Ternecula 25 January 2001 3.5.3 Supporting Explanation The Wolf Creek site currently is in agricultural use and has been since at least as early as the 1960s. Over the course of this agricultural use, a variety of potentially hazardous materials and substances may have been deposited on the site (Final EIR, p. 81). Project }Fith Residential Use of School Sites Underground Storage Tanks ("USTs "): All on-site USTs in the vicinity of Planning Areas 2 and 3 have been removed. However, soil remediation for the six USTs removed in 1988 may not have been sufficient to reduce levels of hydrocarbon contamination to less-than-significant levels. It is suspected that contaminated soil may exist underneath a concrete slab at this location. This is a potentially significant impact (Final EIR, pp. 83-4). Additional soil contaminated with hydrocarbons from gasoline and diesel fuel that was aerated in 1988 may exist elsewhere on the property at an unknown location or locations. There is no way to determine where this soil may be because there is no record of where this soil was moved. However, aeration, oxidization, and photo-reduction since 1988 will have reduced contamination levels in this soil to less-than-significant levels (Final EIR, p. 84). Pesticides: The concentrations of p,p-dichloro-diphenyl-dicloroethelyene ("4,4'-DDE) detected at the site are well below state and federal regulatory limits. Only 8 out of the 40 soil samples obtained across the site have been found to be impacted by one pesticide at very low concentrations. According to state and federal standards, these levels do not pose a risk due to either dust inhalation or direct skin contact. Potential impact and risk to human health are less than significant (Final EIR, p. 84). Asbestos: Four structures on the site and the existing irrigation pipes contain asbestos. Federal regulatory standards require that asbestos-containing materials, where they will be disturbed, must be removed in accordance with strict procedures. Developer compliance with existing regulations will reduce impact to a less-than-significant level (Final EIR, p. 84). Project }Yith School Sites The conclusion for the no school site alternative is the same for the Project with school sites scenario. State requirements for school construction include provisions for safeguarding school children against any known or suspected health hazards. Prior to acquisition of any site for school construction, the Temecula Valley Unified School District ("TVUSD") will conduct further, independent studies to ensure that each school site is environmentally sound and free of contaminants that pose potential health hazards. TVUSD compliance with existing regulatory requirements will reduce potential impact to a less-than-significant level (Final EIR, p. 84). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 26 City of Temecula Future land uses on the site include residential, commercial, and institutional development. None of these land use types involve the use, storage, or production of hazardous materials other than materials generally used for cleaning. Any cleaning or similar substance used will consistent of approved household, commercial, or institutional products approved by state and federal agencies. No impact will result due to establishment of these uses (Final EIR, p. 84). 3.6 Noise 3.6.1 Potential Significant Impact Construction noise and traffic noise will result in potentially significant adverse impacts. Noise associated with events at the Neighborhood Park and City Sports Park can be controlled via existing City and Temecula Community Services District regulations. 3.6.2 Findings The following mitigation measures will bc implemented to reduce potential noise impacts to a less than significant level: Short-term Construction Noise Thc following measure is required to reduce short-term construction noise impacts: All construction activities will comply with applicable City noise regulations designed to protect quiet residential areas from stationary noise sources. The City will be responsible for ensuring compliance (Final EIR, p. 99). Long-term Traffic Noise The following measures arc required to achieve compliance with City standards for land use compatibility with respect to interior and exterior noise: All new construction will incorporate insulation features designed to achieve interior noise standards established by State and local ordinances (Final EIR, p. 99). Any residential planning area within the Project adjacent to Pala Road or Wolf Valley Road, and where such areas will lie within a noise environment projected to exceed 65 CNEL, the property owner and/or developer shall provide a detailed noise assessment. The noise assessment shall evaluate Project and cumulative noise impacts and as necessary, describe noise reduction measures to be incorporated into the Project to comply with state and local exterior noise standards. The noise assessment shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City prior to the approval of a tentative subdivision map or development plan, whichever is appropriate for the type of development proposed (Final EIR, p. 99). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 27 January 2001 Noise reduction measures may include, but are not limited to, noise attenuation walls or other barriers, increased setbacks, or other measures which will effectively achieve the City's desired level of mitigation (Final EIR, p. 99). As directed by the City, a property owner and/or developer may be required to provide the noise assessment described in mitigation measure #3 for any residential development located along the proposed Interior Loop Road within the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. If such assessment shows that projected traffic noise will create noise levels in residential neighborhoods inconsistent with City policies and standards, the City will require noise reduction features in the form of sound walls, increased setbacks, or any combination of measures that will achieve City standards (Final EIR, p. 99). The City plans to undertake noise mitigation in conjunction with plans to widen Pala Road south of the Pala Road bridge crossing of Temecula Creek. The developer shall be required to participate in any noise mitigation program established by the City and shall pay toward a fair share of mitigation commensurate with noise impacts attributable to Wolf Creek traffic (Final E1R, p. 99). The Temecula Valley Unified School District will ensure that school design achieves the interior and exterior noise standards established by the State for new school construction (Final EIR, p. 99). Site design techniques will be used as the primary means to minimize noise impacts. Developers will be required to consider alternative architectural layouts as a means of meeting noise reduction requirements (Final EIR, p. 100). Neighborhood Park/City Sports Park Facilities Noise If deemed necessary, the City shall limit the hours of operation of the facility or place other restrictions on the use of amplified sound at the two park facilities in order to protect adjacent uses fi.om noise impacts (Final EIR, p. 100). 3.6.3 Suppoding Explanation Short-term Construction Noise Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Construction activities on the Project site could cause noise/land use compatibility standards to be exceeded in surrounding residential subdivisions. During the construction period, noise levels typically range fi.om 75 to 105, according to the A-weighted decibel scale ("dBA") at a distance of 50 feet fi.om the source (Final EIR, p. 93). Project with SchoolSites: The timing of school construction is not known. The potential exists, however, for construction of residential units within Planning Areas adjacent to school sites to occur once a school has been completed and is operational. Schools will be built per Department Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 28 City of Temecula of Education requirements for sound proofing. Also, potential noise from construction activity will be short-term, though as in the no school scenario, construction activities could cause noise/land use compatibility standards to be exceeded in surrounding residential subdivisions (Final Em, p. 93). Long-term Noise Impact Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Development with school uses is considered thc worst-case scenario since a school represents a noise-sensitive land use (Final EIR, p. 93). Project with School Sites: Project and cumulative traffic levels on collector and arterial roadways have the potential to generate significant noise impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoods and schools (Final E1R, p. 93). As part of the traffic impact analysis, noise level projections were estimated for 2002, the start date of the Project, and 2015, the estimated date of Project buildout (Final EIR, p. 93). Year 2002. For residences and school structures located close to Pala Road, noise impacts will be potentially significant in the absence of any mitigation. Existing homes west of Pala Road will experience an increase in noise levels. This level of increase due to Project traffic is significant (Final EIR, pp. 93-5). Year 2015. Impacts similar to those reported for year 2002 will result. Sensitive land uses within the Project along Pala Road and Wolf Valley Road may be located in noise environments where exterior ambient noise levels exceed the California Noise Equivalent Level CCNEL") of 65. Existing residences along Pala Road will experience an increase in traffic noise levels. In the absence of any mitigation, impacts will be significant (Final EIR, p. 95). The Wolf Creek Project will also continue to contribute to high traffic volumes along SR 79S and Redhawk Parkway, although in the longer term, the pementage contribution will decline. However, because Project traffic will contribute a 0.5 CNEL increase or greater, Project impacts on surrounding uses will be significant (Final EIR, p. 95). Neighborhood Park Facility The Neighborhood Park, located in the Village Center, will have a concessions building, four lighted tennis courts, a tot lot, two lighted ball fields, and surface parking and supporting facilities. The Neighborhood Park will be dedicated to the City of Temecula. The City will have the ability to design the park to incorporate buffers, landscaping, and setbacks, and to limit the hours of operation to mitigate potential noise impacts on surrounding uses. If amplified sound is used in the park facility, adjacent residences could experience noise impacts (Final EIR, p. 98). In addition to the mitigation measures identified above, additional discussion outlines additional restrictions and guidelines that in combination with the measures above will reduce noise impacts to a level that is less than significant. Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Councd Findings City of Temecula 29 January 2001 The City Sports Park will be located in the southeastern comer of the Specific Plan area, adjacent to Pala and Fairview Roads. Facilities for the park may include a community center, restroom buildings, baseball/sofiball, soccer and football fields, tennis courts, playground equipment, surface parking and supporting facilities. Some or all of the fields may be lighted for use with night games. As with the Neighborhood Park, the City Sports Park will be dedicated to the City of Temecula. The City will have the ability to design the park to incorporate buffers, landscaping, and setbacks, and to limit the hours of operation to mitigate potential noise impacts on surrounding uses. If amplified sound is used in the park facility, adjacent residences could experience noise impacts. Short-term Construction Noise Construction activities will be short-term and will occur generally between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. All construction activity will be required to comply with the City of Temecula noise ordinance. Thus, impacts will be less than significant (Final EIR, p. 93). Long-term Noise As part of the proposed Project development, the proposed Pala Creek greenbelt channel will create a minimum 100- to 128-foot buffer between Pala Road and the nearest residences, so residences will be set back at least 115 feet (100-foot wide channel plus 15-foot rear yard setback). At a distance 200 feet fi:om the Pala Road centerline, noise levels will drop off substantially (Final EIR, p. 95). Neighborhood Park and City Sports Park Facilities Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Under this scenario, single-family residential uses would surround two sides of the Neighborhood Park facility. Other uses, including commercial and public facility, would be separated from the site by the proposed Interior Loop Road and Wolf Valley Road, respectively. The City Sports Park is bordered by residential uses on one side. One additional residential area would be separated fi:om the park by the Interior Loop Road. The City has the ability to control design and use of both parks to guard against potential noise impacts (Final EIR, p. 98). If amplified sound is used at either park facility, adjacent residences could experience noise impacts. However, per City ordinance, the use of amplified sound is not permitted in public parks unless approved in advance by the Temecula Community Services District. As a result, potential impact will be less than significant (Final EIR, p. 98). Project with School Sites: Under this development scenario, the Neighborhood Park will be surrounded by single-family, elementary school, commercial, and public facility uses. The City Sports Park, as described above, is bordered by one residential area and Pala, Fairview, and the Interior Loop Road. As indicated above, City design and use control over the parks will avoid impact (Final EIR, p. 98). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 30 City of Temecula If amplified sound is used in the Neighborhood Park Facility, single-family and school uses may experience noise impacts. The State building code requires schools to be designed to meet interior and exterior noise standards. Therefore, school design will incorporate necessary noise reduction measures to reduce potential noise impacts on the elementary school to a less-than- significant level. Also, as discussed above, existing City ordinances will work to avoid impact associated with amplified sound (Final EIR, p. 98). The City Sports Park is not located near any proposed school site. Other Noise Sources Other sources of noise within the new community will include ambient noise in residential neighborhoods (e.g. lawnmowers, outdoor activity, stereos), mechanical equipment and loading activities associated with commemial uses, and ongoing construction activity. All such use and activity will be required to comply with City noise regulations. Enforcement of existing standards and regulations will work to avoid impact (Final EIR, p. 98). 3.7 Drainage 3.7.1 Potential Significant Impact The development of the site will increase runoff into existing inadequate flood control facilities. The Specific Plan includes provisions for on-site drainage facilities to correct existing problems and to accommodate project-related runoff. However, improvements beyond those incorporated into the project are necessary to avoid impact. 3.7.2 Findings In addition to the drainage improvements included in the Specific Plan, implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce impacts to drainage and flood control to a less than significant level: All storm drainage and flood control facilities will be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Riverside County Water Conservation and Flood Control District, and in accordance with any required permits and conditions that may be required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to the Clean Water Act (Final EIR, p. 117). Final drainage system designs for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan shall be consistent with the provisions of the Wolf Valley Drainage Basin Regional Drainage Analysis Report approved by the City, with supporting Project hydrology and drainage studies. Design flow rates will be based on City of Temecula and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District standards for 10- to 100-year storm runoff (Final EIR, p. 117). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Councd Findings City of Temecula 31 January 2001 The proposed Pala Creek Road channel will be sized for on-site and off-site storm flows to include the Pechanga Creek overflow at Fairview Road. This facility must be designed to accommodate 100-year flows, as well as to coordinate or mitigate the connection with existing regional facilities previously approved by the County of Riverside and City of Temecula (Final EIR, p. 117). The collector storm drain in Wolf Valley Road will be sized to include off-site flows from the adjacent Redhawk Project (Final EIR, p. 117). The 100-year level of protection shall meet National Flood Insurance program standards as administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and development of the site shall comply with the provisions of the City of Temecula's Floodplain Management Ordinance. The developer will coordinate with the City Public Works Department and FEMA to amend the Flood Insurance Rate Maps on the basis of proposed drainage plans in order to withdraw the property from any floodplain designations (Final EIR, p. 117). As development of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan area proceeds, interim flood control facilities and/or measures will be implemented, pending phasing and the need for and completion of proposed backbone improvements (Final EIR, p. 117). All storm drains and flood control devices will be extended to suitable points of disposal for proper control of storm mnoffon and off the site (Final EIR, p. 117). The channel downstream of Loma Linda Road to Temecula Creek will require reconstruction to provide capacity for 100-year flows. The timing of such improvements shall be as directed by the Director of Public Works. The Project applicant may be required to prepare designs and proceed with such reconstruction, with a possibility of reimbursement from Assessment District No. 159 or other approved funding mechanisms (Final EIR, p. 117). Erosion control and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans ("SWPPP") incorporating Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be prepared and implemented for the Project grading and construction phases in accordance with City and San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") requirements (Final EIR, p. 118). 3.7.3 Supporting Explanation The Wolf Creek site lies within the lower Wolf Valley watershed, adjacent to Pala Road Creek. Pala Road Creek is a largely nnimproved stream channel extending south and west of the site, and ultimately joining Temecula Creek via an earthen channel parallel to Jedediah Smith Road. Most of the upstream area is undeveloped (Final EIR, p. 111). Project with Residential Use of School Sites: Development of the proposed Wolf Creek Specific Plan will result in increased runoff due to covering of currently vacant land with impervious surfaces such as roadways, buildings, parking lots, and driveways. New local and Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 32 City of Temecula regional drainage facilities will be required to accommodate both Project rtmoff and cumulative runoff of development within the Wolf Valley watershed, to protect properties downstream from the Project site from increased runoff, and to provide improved regional flood control (Final EIR, p. 113). In general, existing facilities are inadequate to accommodate existing flows (Final EIR, p. 112). In the absence of the facilities, Project impacts will be significant (Final EIR, p. 113). Furthermore, the Loma Linda Road/Temecula Creek channel is inadequate to handle 100-year storm flows and will require removal and replacement with an adequately sized facility. In the absence of improvements to the Loma Linda Road/Temecula Creek channel, the Wolf Creek Project will contribute to existing drainage problems. Cumulative impact is considered significant (Final EIR, p. 114). Project with School Sites: Similarly, in the absence of the facilities and improvements, Project impacts will be significant. Therefore, the same drainage/flood control approach will be used for the Project with School Sites scenario. Given the high debris production potential and the existing drainage and flooding problems at the site, the Project applicant prepared a drainage analysis and plan for the Wolf Valley watershed, to assess Project drainage requirements at both the local and regional levels [Wolf Valley Drainage Basin Regional Drainage Analysis Report, April 1999 (Revised)] (Final EIR, p. 111- 13). The plan addresses both on-site improvements and improvements required to address existing off-site problems (Final EIR, p. 113). The drainage report proposes a plan for collecting stormwater runoff and conveying it across the property to off-site, regional drainage facilities. The proposal involves channelizing Pala Road Creek within a grass-lined swale with a slope of about 4:1, within a varying easement width of 100 to 128 feet. Existing drainage will be captured at the south end of the property at Pala Road and Fairview Avenue, through a storm drain system constructed as part of the Redhawk development or other system approved by the City Engineer, and then discharged into the proposed grass-lined swale along Pala Road. The grass-lined swale will connect to the existing Pala Road channel at the north end of the Project site. The swale, parallel to Pala Road, will have grass-lines side slopes and bottom section, with a 4-foot-wide, concrete-lined, low-flow "V" channel in the center. A series of drop structures are proposed to limit flow velocities to 8 feet per second or less. No fencing or other barriers will be erected along the channel. Box culverts will be constructed under Fairview Road, Wolf Valley Road, and Loma Linda Road (Final E1R, p. 113). The existing 293 cfs of flow that enters the property fi.om the Redhawk development at Wolf Valley Road at present will be conveyed to the Pala Road channel via underground facilities. Additional facilities planned include all on-street and underground facilities required to capture runoff within residential subdivisions and other planned development, and to convey those flows to the Pala Road Channel. These facilities will be sized according to calculated demand, and all plans will require City approval. Standard engineering practices will mitigate localized drainage impact to a less-than-significant level (Final EIR, p. 113-4). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 33 January 2001 A small area in the northeast comer of the property is tributary to an existing storm dram constructed by the Redhawk Development, which discharges directly into Temecula Creek. Project drainage to the northeast will tie into this existing facility (Final EIR, p. 114). The greenbelt Pala Road Channel represent the primary regional drainage facility requiting improvements to accommodate increased flows from the Wolf Creek development and to mitigate existing flooding problems related to prior urbanization in the area. As such, the following will be required: The main channel drain will be sized for on-site and off-site storm flows to include the Pechanga Creek overflow at Fairview Road. The channel will be financed by Assessment District No. 159. This facility must be designed to accommodate the 100-year flows, as well as to coordinate or mitigate the connection with existing regional facilities previously approved by the County and City of Temecula (Final EIR, p. 114). Of major concem is the future connection of the Pala Road swale to the existing undersized trapezoidal channel between Loma Linda Road and Temecula Creek, parallel to Jedediah Smith Road. The channel's capacity is inadequate to handle 100-year storm flows and will require removal and replacement with an adequately sized facility. The Project drainage report recommends two alternatives to widen the existing earthen channel, as well as a proposal for a box culvert improvement at Loma Linda Road and other locations (undefined). In the absence of such improvements, the Wolf Creek Project will contribute to existing drainage problems. Cumulative impact is considered significant (Final EIR, p. 114). However, the incorporation of the mitigation measures identified above and improvements identified in the Specific Plan will reduce these drainage and flood control problems to a less than significant level (Final EIR, p. 118). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 34 City of Temecula 3.8 Cultural Resources 3.8.1 Potential Significant Impact The surrounding area has been occupied historically by native peoples. Though no historic or prehistoric resources have been identified on the site, the potential exists for subsurface artifacts to be uncovered during grading operations (Final E1R, p. 131). 3.8.2 Findings The following measure is required to avoid potential impact on any subsurface deposits: If, during construction, cultural resoumes are encountered, work shall be halted or diverted in the immediate area while a qualified archaeologist evaluates the finds and makes recommendhtions. In addition, the developer will coordinate with the Pechanga Band of Luisefio Mission Indians to allow a representative of the Pechanga to monitor and participate in archaeological investigations if and when resources are encountered, including participation in discussions regarding the disposition of cultural items and artifacts (Final EIR, p. 132). The incorporation of this mitigation measure will reduce any potential impact to cultural resources to a less than significant level. 3.9 Aesthetics 3.9.1 Potential Significant Impact Aesthetic compatibility and light pollution are potentially significant impacts. While the Specific Plan includes provisions to ensure quality design and compatibility, ongoing review and monitoring will be required to avoid impact. In addition, roughly one-third of the southeastern portion of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan site lies within a City-restricted nighttime lighting area that is within a 15-mile radius of Palomar Observatory. A potential exists for a significant aesthetic impact if the Project results in substantial light and glare (Final EIR, p. 126). 3.9.2 Findings Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce aesthetic impacts control to a less than significant level: All development within thc Project area will conform to the development standards and design and architectural guidelines contained in the Wolf Creek Specific Plan (Final EIR, p. 129). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 35 ,]anuary 2001 All outdoor lights in the Wolf Creek Specific Plan area shall consist of low-pressure sodium lamps oriented and shielded to minimize sky glow interference in accordance with applicable City ordinances and regulations (Final EIR, p. 129). All development in the Wolf Creek Specific Plan area shall comply with the City's Light Pollution Control Ordinance to minimize nighttime light interference and light impacts on light-sensitive uses (Final EIR, p. 129). The following measure is required to reduce lighting impacts: All athletic field and security lighting at all parks and schools shall be designed and constructed to avoid adverse light and glare effects on any adjacent residential use (Final EIR, p. 129). 3.9.3 Supporting Explanation The following details from the Final EIR and Specific Plan illustrate that the Project will not have any significant impact upon aesthetics and that any potential aesthetic impact will be reduced to a less than significant level through requirements and standards in the Specific Plan and the mitigation measure identified above. The Specific Plan contains detailed development standards and design guidelines aimed toward ensuring land use compatibility and providing "the City of Temecula, developers, and ultimately residents of Wolf Creek with the necessary assurance that proposed individual developments will conform to the same high standards of design proposed (in the Specific Plan)" (Final EIR, p. 126). The Plan includes requirements for entryway, intersection, and median and parkway landscape treatments to enhance the visual environment and to create edges and linkages throughout the development. Site planning guidelines emphasize pedestrian-scale development within the village center, as well as coordinated architectural treatment of buildings and other features (e.g. lighting fixtures, street furniture, kiosks, signage). The design guidelines for residential development provide for community theme walls and accent landscaping, streetscape variety through varying setbacks and a mix of one- and two-story residences, and pedestrian throughways connecting the neighborhoods (Final EIR, p. 126-7). Architectural guidelines are also provided in the Plan. The architectural guidelines call for articulated building facades, pomhes and balconies on single-family residences, and paving accents (Final EIR, p. 127). The standards and guidelines contained in the Specific Plan will provide the City of Temecula with the tools necessary to ensure that development within Wolf Creek will complement surrounding development and will not result in any unappealing aesthetic conditions, as viewed from Pala Road or surrounding properties. The Project will not result in any significant adverse aesthetic impact (Final EIR, p. 127). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 36 City of Temecula In addition, this scale of development, and the fact that the site topographically lies lower than development to the north, will ensure that views toward the Palomar and San Jacinto Mountains are maintained fi:om surrounding properties (Final EIR, p. 126). Furthermore, the Wolf Creek Specific Plan area currently does not create a light and glare impact on surrounding areas because the site does not have any significant light sources. The Project site is located within the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting Area, which requires unique nighttime lighting restrictions (Final EIR, p. 126). Section 4 - Significant Environmental Impacts Not Fully Mitigated to a Less- Than-Significant Level The City Council hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR, the following impacts cannot be fully mitigated to a less than significant level, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is therefore included herein: 4.1 Air Quality (Long Term) 4.1.1 Potential Significant Impact Under both Project options, long-term operational emissions (due to vehicular travel and on-site energy consumption) of carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, and reactive organic gases will exceed the SCAQMD thresholds of significance (Final EIR, pp. 49-51). 4.1.2 Findings Implementing the following mitigation measures will reduce long term air quality impacts to the extent feasible: Transportation-related Emissions The following measures 1 through 4 are required to reduce mobile and stationary source emissions. Upon identifying a demand for bus service to the Project area, the Riverside Transit Agency, or other responsible public transit provider, will establish bus routes and stops to service the residents in the specific plan area (Final EIR, p. 53). The developer shall provide bus turnouts at strategic locations throughout the Project as determined by the Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the City of Temecula (Final EIR, p. 53). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 37 January 2001 Energy Conservation Measures The developer shall comply with applicable energy conservation guidelines for construction in accordance with the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and any other City requirements (Final EIR, p. 53). The developer shall install energy-efficient lighting for all lighting systems (Final EIR, p. 53). With implementation of the above mitigation measures, air quality impacts will be slightly lessened, and the Project will be consistent with the AQMP. However, the project's level of average daily pollutant emissions will continue to represent a significant and unavoidable impact (Final E1R, p. 53). 4.1.3 Suppoding Explanation The Project includes a mix of complementary residential and local-serving commercial uses in close proximity to one another. This land use pattem works to reduce vehicle trips, a primary goal of the Air Quality Management Plan ("AQMP"). Development of the schools in the Wolf Creek area would generate approximately 344 more new jobs in the area than residential use of the school sites. Also, placing schools within easy walking or biking distance to residential uses further meets AQMP objectives to reduce vehicle trips (Final EIR, p. 52). The Specific Plan provides system of bikeways and pedestrian pathways that are designed to lessen the need for vehicle trips and to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle movement throughout the Project. These amenities will be provided along Wolf Valley Road, "A" Street, Pala Road, Fairview Road, Loma Linda Road, Via Del Coronado, and within the linear park to link neighborhoods within Wolf Creek as well as to other nearby development (Final EIR, p. 11). 4.2 Cumulative Impact on Air Quality 4.2.1 Potential Significant Impact The Temecula General Plan EIR concludes that cumulative air quality impacts will be regionally significant and constitute an unavoidable significant impact. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan will contribute incrementally to this cumulative effect (Final EIR, p. 157). 4.2.2 Findings The same mitigation measures identified in Section 4.1 above will help to slightly lessen the cumulative air quality impacts. Yet, no feasible mitigation measures exist which would reduce the cumulative impact of average daily pollutant emissions to a less than significant level (Final Em, p. 53). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 38 City of Temecula 4.2.3 Supporting Explanation With implementation of the above mitigation measures, air quality impacts will be slightly lessened, and the project will be consistent with the AQMP. However, the project's level of average daily pollutant emissions will continue to represent a significant and unavoidable impact (Final EIR, p. 53). 4.3 Cumulative Impact on Agricultural Uses 4,3.1 Potential Significant Impact The Temecula General Plan E1R states that development will result in a significant cumulative impact on agricultural uses within the San Jacinto/Temecula Valley District. The removal of the Wolf Creek property from agricultural use will contribute incrementally to this unavoidable cumulative impact (Final EIR, p. 158). 4.3.2 Findings No feasible mitigation exists (Final EIR, p. 158). 4.3.3 Suppoding Explanation Though the Project results in a significant cumulative impact on agricultural uses within the San Jacinto/Temecula Valley District, both the Project scenarios are consistent with the City's General Plan land use policy. The City of Temecula General Plan Land Use map designates the subject property and all surrounding lands within the City's sphere of influence for urban uses. Agricultural activity has essentially disappeared from this area of the Temecula Valley. The properties adjacent to the Wolf Creek site have been developed or are planned to be developed with urban uses (e.g. residential, commercial, and recreational uses) (Final EIR, p. 137). Section 5 - Alternatives The City Council hereby declares that it has considered and rejected as infeasible the alternatives identified in the Final EIR and described below. CEQA requires that an EIR evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives to a Project, or to the location of the Project, which: (1) offer substantial environmental advantages over the Project proposal, and (2) may be feasibly accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time considering the economic, environmental, social and technological factors involved. An EIR must only evaluate reasonable alternatives to a Project which could feasibly attain most of the Project objectives, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. In all cases, the consideration of alternatives is to be judged against a "rule of reason." The lead agency is not required to choose the "environmentally superior" alternative identified in an EIR if the alternative does not provide substantial advantages over the proposed Project and (1) through the imposition of mitigation measures the environmental effects of a Project can be reduced to an acceptable level, or (2) Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 39 January 2001 there are social, economic, technological or other considerations which make the altemative infeasible. The City's General Plan identifies goals and policies that are relevant to the Specific Plan and the City as a whole, which are to provide for the orderly development of Temecula, in general, and also specifically for the Wolf Creek site. These include: A complete and integrated mix of residential, commemial, industrial, recreational, public and open space land uses (Goal 1, City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-9). Including such policies as: Review all proposed development plans for consistency with the community goals, policies, and implementation programs of the General Plan (Policy 1.1, Final EIR, p. 2- 9). Promote the use of innovative site planning techniques that contribute towards the development of a variety of residential product styles and designs, including housing suitable to the community's labor fome (Policy 1.2, City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-9). Require the development of unified or clustered community-level and neighborhood- level commemial centers and discourage development of strip commercial uses (Policy 1.3, Final EIR, p. 2-9). Consider the impacts on surrounding land uses and infrastructure when reviewing land uses and infrastructure when reviewing proposals for new development (Policy 1.4, Final E1R, p. 2-9). Require the preparation of specific plans as designated on the Specific Plan Overlay to achieve the comprehensive planning and phasing of development and infrastructure (Policy 1.7, Final EIR, p. 2-9). Encourage flexible zoning techniques in appropriate locations to preserve natural features, achieve innovative site design, achieve a range of transition of densities, provide open space and recreational facilities, and provide necessary amenities and facilities (Policy 1.9, Final EIR, p. 2-9). · A land use pattern that will protect and enhance residential neighborhoods (Goal 3, Final EIR, p. 2-10). Including such policies as: Consider the compatibility of proposed projects on surrounding uses in terms of the size and configuration of buildings, use of materials and landscaping, preservation of existing vegetation and land form, the location of access routes, noise impacts, traffic impacts, and other environmental conditions (Policy 3.1, Final EIR, p. 2-10). · A development pattern that preserves and enhances the environmental resources of the Study Area (Goal 4, Final EIR, p. 2-11). Consider alternative flood control methods to reduce capital and maintenance costs and provide recreational and open space opportunities (Policy 4.6, Final EIR, p. 2-12). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 40 City of Temecula A land use pattem and intensity of development that encourages alternative modes of transportation, including transit, bicycling, and walking (Goal 5, Final EIR, p. 2-12). Including such policies as: Require the provision of pedestrian and bicycle linkages from residential areas to open space/recreation facilities, commercial, and employment centers (Policy 5.2, Final EIR, p. 2-12). Encourage variety in the design of sidewalks and trails with respect to alignment and surface materials to provide a convenient and enjoyable experience for the users (Policy 5.3, Final E1R, p. 2-13). Designate Village Centers on the Land Use Plan to provide areas within the community that are urban in character, contain a mixture of compatible uses, and are designed to reduce or eliminate the need for automobile in traveling to or within Village Centers (Policy 5.5, Final EIR, p. 2-13). Encourage higher density residential, mixed-use development, and support public and community facilities within Village Centers (Policy 5.6, City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-13). Insure that adequate public gathering areas or plazas are incorporated within Village Centers to allow for social interaction and community activities (Policy 5.10, City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-13). Discourage the development of strip commercial centers that increase auto-dependency (Policy 5.11, City of Te. mecula Land Use Element, p. 2-13). · A City which is compatible and coordinated with regional land use patterns (Goal 8, City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-15). Strive to maintain a Level of Service "D" or better at all intersections within the City during peak hours and Level of Service "C" or better during non-peak hours (Goal '1, City of Temecula Circulation Element, p. 3-8). · Safe and efficient alternatives to motorized travel throughout the City (Goal 6, City of Temecula Circulation Element, p. 3-12). Including such policies as: Adequate linkages shall be provided for non-motorized modes, between residential areas and commercial/employment activity centers, public institutions, and recreation areas (Policy 6.5, City of Temecula Cimulation Element, p. 3-13). A diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social and economic needs of existing and future residents of Temecula (Goal 1, City of Temecula Housing Element, p. 4- 42). Including such policies as: Provide an inventory of land at varying densities sufficient to accommodate the existing and projected housing needs in the City (Policy 1.1, City of Temecula 1994-1999 Housing Element, p. 4-42). Require a mixture of diverse housing types and densities in new developments around the village centers to enhance their people-orientation and diversity (Policy 1.3, City of Temecula 1994-1999 Housing Element, p. 4-42). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 41 January 2001 A high quality parks and recreation system that meets the varying recreational needs of residents (Goal 1, City of Temecula Open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-25). Including such policies as: Require developers of residential projects greater than fifty dwelling units to dedicate land based on the park acre standard of five (5) acres of usable parkland to one thousand (1,000) population, or the payment of in-lieu fees in accordance with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan (Policy 1.3, City of Temecula Open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-25). Maximize pedestrian and bicycle access to existing and new parks as an alternative to automobile access (Policy 1.10, City of Temecula Open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-26). Conservation and protection of surface water, groundwater and imported water resources (Goal 2, City of Temecula Open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-26). Including such policies as: Conserve potable water by requiring water conservation techniques in all new development (Policy 2.3, City of Temecula open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-26). · Conservation of energy resources through the use of available technology and conservation practices (Goal 4, City of Temeeula open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-28). · A trail system that serves both recreational and transportation needs (Goal 8, City of Temecula open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-32). · Protection of dark skies from intrusive light sources which may impact the Palomar Observatory (Goal 9, City of Temecula Open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-32). Orderly and efficient patterns of growth within Temecula that enhance the quality of life for residents (Goal 2, City of Temecula Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, p. 6-25). Including such policies as: Encourage development of Village Centers, as defined in the Land Use and Community Design Elements, to reduce public service costs and environmental impacts through compatible land use relationships, and efficient circulation and open space systems (Policy 2.4, City of Temecula Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, p. 6-25). Effective and cost efficient sheriff, fire and emergency medical services within the City (Goal 3, City of Temecula Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, p. 6-26). Including such policies as: Require new development to address fire and police protection in a proactive and preventative way through street design, orientation of entryways, siting of structures, landscaping, lighting and other security features (Policy 3.3, City of Temeeula Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, p. 6-26). Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 42 City of Temecula A quality school system that contains adequate facilities and funding to educate the youth of Temecula (Goal 4, City of Temecula Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, p. 6- 27). Including such policies as: Provide information to the Temecula Valley Unified School District, when considering General Plan amendments, specific plans, zone changes, or other legislative land use policy decisions, to support the School District in providing adequate school facilities for students for new development to the extent permitted by law (Policy 4.1, City of Temecula Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, p. 6-28). · An effective, safe and environmentally compatible flood control system (Goal 7, City of Temecula Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, p. 6-30). · Protection from natural hazards associated with geologic instability, seismic events, and flooding (Goal 1, City of Temecula Public Safety Element, p. 7-16). · Consider noise issues in the planning process (Goal 3, City of Temecula Noise Element, p. 8- 17). Including such policies as: Encourage the use of site design and building design techniques, including the use of landscaped setbacks or berms, building orientation, and buffering of noise sensitive areas, as a means to minimize noise impacts (Policy 3.3, City of Temecula Noise Element, p. 8- 17). · Enhanced mobility to minimize air pollutant emissions (Goal 2, City of Temecula Air Quality Element, p. 9-7). · A streetscape system that provides cohesiveness and enhances community image (Goal 4, City of Temecula Community Design Element, p. 10-6). 5.1 "No Development" Alternative 5.1.1 Description The "no development" alternative assumes continued use of the site for agricultural purposes since this represents the most recent use of the subject property. Implementation of this alternative would not result in any of the environmental impacts associated with construction and development of the proposed Project. The land use, hydrologic, and circulation characteristics of the site would remain in their present state, and any cimulation and traffic impacts associated with the Project development would not occur. In addition, noise and air quality impacts due to increased traffic development would not be generated (Final EIR, p. 142). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 43 January 2001 5.1.2 Findings The City Council finds that the "No Development" Altemative is fails to address many of the Goals identified in the City's General Plan. 5.1.3 Supporting Explanation Under the No Development Alternative, the Specific Plan would not be adopted or implemented. Therefore, the No Development Alternative is contrary to several of the City's goals as identified in the Land Use Element. In particular, the failure to adopt a Specific Plan for the area would be in contradiction to Land Use Policy 1.7 which requires the preparation of specific plans to achieve the comprehensive planning and phasing of development and infrastructure (City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-9). Continued use of the site for agricultural production would not be consistent with General Plan land use policy (City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-9). In the long term, as urban development continues to surround the site, land use conflicts between agricultural activity and urban uses could be significant. Dust generation (fi.om plowing), pesticide use, and farm equipment noise would represent potential irritants to the adjacent residential neighborhoods (Final EIR, p. 142). The No Development Alternative would also not be consistent with Goal 2 and Goal 4 of the Growth Management/Public Facilities Element since this alternative would not provide growth that "enhances the quality of life for residents" nor would it provides sites for schools to serve the neighboring communities (City of Temecula Growth Management/Public Facilities Element, pp. 6-25-6). Furthermore, the infrastructure improvements associated with the Project would not occur. Some of these improvements include the construction of Fairview Avenue as a Secondary Highway (88-foot fight-of-way), the construction of Pala Road to its ultimate half-section width as an Arterial Highway (ll0-foot fight-of-way), the construction of Loma Linda Road as a Collector (66-foot fight-of-way), and the construction of Wolf Valley Road as a Secondary Highway (88-foot fight-of-way) (Final E1R, p. 67). Without these improvements, the No Development Alternative would fails to address Goal 4 of the Community Design Element, which emphasizes a need for a cohesive streetscape system (City of Temecula Community Design Element, p. 10-6). In addition, the existing flood and drainage infrastructure is insufficient or has inadequate capacity to properly handle runoff from the upstream watershed (Final EIR, p. 111). The Project applicant prepared a drainage analysis and plan for the Wolf Creek watershed, which identified existing problems. Without development of the Project and the flood control and drainage improvements associated with it, the existing problems would continue (Final EIR, pp. 111-3). No development of residential housing units on the Wolf Creek Site may also make more difficult for the City to achieve its present Regional Housing Needs Assessment number of 7,798 housing units or future number as identified by SCAG and WRCOG (WRCOG, July 23, 2000, p. 5). The No Development Alternative would fail to meet the Goal 1 of the 1994-1999 Housing Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan Janua~ 2001 44 City of Temecula Element, which calls for a diversity of housing oppommities that meet the existing needs of existing and future residents (City of Temecula 1994-1999 Housing Element, p. 4-42). Thus, the No Development Alternative would be infeasible because it is in contradiction to the City's Goals as identified above. 5.2 All Single-Family Development Alternative 5.2.1 Description The Specific Plan provides for the option of developing planning area 18, which is designated for multi-family use, with single-family courtyard residential subdivisions at an average density of 12 units per acre. In addition, the City Sports Park (plaiming area 24) could be developed with 200 detached single-family traits at a density of approximately 8 units per acre. Under this scenario, up to 2,358 units could be constructed on the site, assuming that the two schools are not constructed (Final EIR, p. 145). 5.2.2 Findings The City Council finds that the All Single-Family Development Altemative is not environmentally superior to the Specific Plan and is infeasible because the alternative is contrary to one of the key goals of the City's Housing Element and is also not consistent with the City's General Plan. 5.2.3 Suppoding Explanation The All Single Family Development Alternative would not be consistent with the General Plan land use designations for the site. The General Plan envisions a "village" concept, whereby a range of residential densities and rental versus owner/occupied uses, together with complementary commercial and institutional uses are developed in an integrated manner. Unlike the proposed Project, this alternative may not achieve General Plan land use goals and for this reason would be considered inferior to the Project (Final EIR, p. 145). Since this alternative would eliminate multi-family housing as part of the Specific Plan, this alternative would also not be consistent with Goal 1 of the 1994-1999 Housing Element (identified above). In addition, this alternative contradicts Policies 1.1 and 1.3 which identify the need for a diversity of housing types and densities (including rental units) and the development of diverse housing types around village centers (City of Temecula 1994-1999 Housing Element, p. 4-42). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Councd Findings City of Temecula 45 January 2001 5.3 Low-Density Alternative 5.3.1 Description The low-density residential alternative assumes less than one unit per acre across the entire site, yielding 500 units, or 1,658 fewer units than the Wolf Creek Specific Plan (assuming no school sites). This altemative is considered to be the environmentally superior alternative due to its ability to minimize air quality impacts (Final EIR, p. 147). 5.3.2 Findings Though the Low-Density Altemative is environmentally superior to the Specific Plan, the City Council finds that it is infeasible because it fails to meet the City's goals, identified in the General Plan. 5.3.3 Supporting Explanation Since this alternative would not "provide a balance of uses with commercial and public uses serving the surrounding area" (Temecula General Plan, p. 2-37), this alternative would not be consistent with objectives defined in the City of Temecula General Plan. Furthermore, this alternative would not be consistent with surrounding development patterns. In addition, a reduction in the number of housing units constructed would make it more difficult for the City to meet its current or future Regional Housing Needs Assessment number of housing units as required by the Western Riverside Council of Governments and the Southern California Association of Governments (WRCOG, July 23, 1999, p. 5). The Low-Density Alternative would fail to provide a diversity of housing opportunities for current and future Temecula residents, as stated in Goal 1 of the 1994-1999 Housing Element. This alternative would also be contrary to Policy 1.1 which requires a variety of densities in new developments around village centers (City of Temecula 1994-1999 Housing Element, p. 4-42). With regard to air quality effects, this altemative would have the potential to result in less-than- significant Project impacts on air quality, however, the cumulative air quality impacts would remain significant (Final EIR, p. 149). In addition, the alternative might not provide the same level of flood control improvements associated with the Project nor generate property assessment fees adequate to fund regional improvements. In this regard, the alternative is inferior to the Project (Final EIR, p. 150). Though, the Low-Density Altemative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it fails to meet important goals identified in the Temecula General Plan. Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 46 City of Temecula 5.4 "No Project" Alternative 5.4.1 Description The "no Project" alternative considers the case whereby the site is developed in accordance with existing General Plan policy. The General Plan land use map designates the site for a range of urban uses, with a "village center" as a community focal point (Figure 5, Final EIR, p. 20). The Plan designates similar types of uses, intensities of use, and site design as the proposed Wolf Valley Ranch Specific Plan, analyzed in this EIR. Existing policy provides for development under two scenarios: one with schools and one without schools. For the purpose of this analysis, under the option with schools and no senior multi-family housing development, up to 1,881 housing units is assumed. Under the option without schools and the development of senior multi-family housing units, this alternative is assumed to result in 2,158 housing units. Under both options, 20 acres of land would be developed with commercial uses (Final EIR, p. 150). 5.4.2 Findings The City Council finds that though this altemative is environmentally comparable to the Project and similar in many respects to the proposed Project, the alternative is infeasible because it fails to meet the goals identified in the City's General Plan. 5.4.3 Supporting Explanation One of the most important differences between the No Project Altemative and the proposed Project is that it lacks several key features -features that are identified repeatedly as part of the City's General Plan goals and policies. The No Project Alternative does not have a linear parkway that ties together a variety of land uses. Thus, development of the No Project Alternative is contrary to Goal 5 of the Temecula Land Use Element, which encourages a land use pattern that "encourages alternative modes of transportation, including transit, bicycling, and walking" (City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-12). The use of the linear parkway for walking and bicycling that connect the parks, schools, and the commercial uses in the Village Center are designed to reduce the need for automobiles in traveling to or within these areas, which is consistent with Policy 5.5 of the Land Use Element (City of Temecula Land Use Element, p. 2-13). The No Project Alternative lacks this means of reducing vehicle trips. Similarly, Goal 6 and, in particular, Policy 6.5 of the Cimulation Element call for adequate linkages for non-motorized modes of transportation between residential and commercial areas in the City (City of Temecula Circulation Element, p. 3-13). Again, Policy 1.10 of the City's Open Space Element emphasizes the need to "maximize pedestrian and bicycle access to existing and new parks" and Goal 8 identifies the need for a trail system that serves both recreational and transportation (City of Temecula Open Space/Conservation Element, p. 5-26). As shown in Figure 4 and Figure 2 of the Final EIR, the proposed Project develops a streetscape system that is provides cohesiveness and enhances community image," consistent with the Goal 4 of the Community Design Element (City of Temecula Commtmity Design Element, p. 10-6). In addition, the linear park system proposed in the Specific Plan creates enhanced resident mobility without the need for additional vehicular trips and the air pollutants associated with those trips. Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 47 January 2001 This is consistent with Goal 2 of the Air Quality Element. (City of Temecula Air Quality Element, p. 9-7). Again, this is a key feature that the No Project Alternative lacks. Finally, according to goals and policies in the Temecula Noise Element, a Project should encourage the use of site design and building techniques including "building orientation and buffering of noise sensitive areas, as a means to minimize noise impacts" (City of Temecula Noise Element, p. 8-17). As shown in Figure III-2 of the Specific Plan, three residential areas (2 high density uses and one median density use) are located on Pala Road which may expose these future residents to unnecessary noise impacts from the traffic on Pala Road. In the proposed Project, commercial uses are located adjacent to Pala Road and Wolf Valley Road, increasing their access and removing more of the residential uses to the interior of the site (Figure 1II-2, Wolf Creek Specific Plan). Though similar in nature to the Specific Plan, the No Project Alternative fails to address many of the identified goals of the City's General Plan and overall is not a superior alternative. 5.5 Other Alternatives Not Analyzed With regard to alternative locations for a Project, the CEQA Guidelines state that such analysis should be performed if "significant effects of the Project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the Project in another location" (Section 15126[d][5][B]). This EIR does not consider an altemative site for the following reasons: (a) Since the Project covers such a large area (557 acres), a similar site with existing infrastructure improvements, and one that is not already master planned for urban development, does not exist within the City of Temecula; (b) the significant, unavoidable impacts associated with the Project result largely fi'om the intensity of development; and (c) the Project proponent could not reasonably acquire an alternative site. Locating the same Project at another site would not avoid or lessen the identified unavoidable significant effects of the Project (Final EIR, p. 141). Section 6 - Project Benefits and Statement of Overriding Considerations Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council must balance the benefits of the Specific Plan against any unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to recommend approval of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. If the benefits of the Specific Plan outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts may be considered "acceptable." The City Council hereby finds that the Final EIR has identified and discussed significant effects that will occur as a result of the Specific Plan. With the implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the Final EIR and Specific Plan, these effects can be mitigated to a less than significant level except for the unavoidable significant impacts as discussed in Section 4 of these Findings. Thc City Council declares that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Specific Plan. Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 48 City of Temecula The City Council finds that to the extent any mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR and/or Specific Plan could not be incorporated, such mitigation measures are infeasible because they would impose restrictions on the Specific Plan that would prohibit the realization of specific economic, social, and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh the unmitigated. The City Council further finds that except for the Specific Plan, all other alternatives set forth in the Final EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of Specific Plan objectives and/or of specific economic, social, and other benefits that this Council finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives, or have greater environmental impacts. The City Council declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Specific Plan to the extent feasible by recommending adopting of the proposed mitigation measures, having considered the entire administrative record on the Specific Plan, and having weighed the benefits of the Specific Plan against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation, the City Council has determined that the following social, economic, and environmental benefits of the Specific Plan outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable based upon the following overriding considerations: The Specific Plan will allow the orderly, well planned development of the Wolf Creek site, providing a range of housing types complementary to existing development in the City. The Specific Plan will provide for the development of a Village Center concept that centralizes activities, consistent with General Plan policy (Final EIR, p. 4). The Specific Plan will provide active and passive recreational park space as a basic community theme (Final EIR, p. 11). The Specific Plan will integrate into the community an open space network comprised of parks, greenbelts, and connecting pedestfiangoicycle routes (Final EIR, p. 11,134-5). The Specific Plan will provide for the development of neighborhood and community commercial centers to provide needed services and reduce the number of cars traveling across the City for these services (Final EIR, p. 4). The Specific Plan will provide housing to meet anticipated population growth throughout the Temecula Valley (Final EIR, p. 4, 11, 27-8). 7. The Specific Plan will provide for new school sites (Final EIR, p. 4, 105). The Specific Plan will provide a site for the construction of a new fire station to provide fire protection to residents at the Wolf Creek site and surrounding areas (Final EIR, p. 11, 101-2). Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 49 January 2001 10. The Specific Plan will provide for the improvement of currently inadequate regional flood control facilities to provide 100-year storm protection Final EIR, p. 13, 117-8). The Specific Plan will provide road improvements consistent with the General Plan Cimulation Element (Final EIR, p. 12, 67-8). 11. The Specific Plan accomplishes and implements the Temecula General Plan goals and policies. The City Council finds that the foregoing benefits provided to the public through approval and implementation of the Specific Plan outweigh the identified significant adverse environmental impacts of the Specific Plan which cannot he mitigated. The City Council further finds that each of the Specific Plan benefits outweighs the unavoidable adverse Environmental effects identified in the Final EIR and therefore finds those imPacts to be acceptable. Each of the benefits listed above, standing alone, is sufficient justification for the City Council to override these unavoidable environmental impacts. The City Council finds that it has reviewed and considered the Final E1R in evaluating the Specific Plan, that the Final EIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with the CEQA, State CEQA Guidelines and the City's local CEQA Guidelines and that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The City Council hereby certifies the Environmental Impact Report based on the following findings and conclusions: 6.1 Findings The following significant environmental impacts have been identified in the Final EIR and will require mitigation as set forth in Section 4 of this Resolution but cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance: air quality (long-term), the cumulative impact on air quality, and the cumulative impact on agricultural uses. 6.2 Conclusions All significant environmental impacts from implementation of the Specific Plan have been identified in the Final EIR and, with implementation of the mitigation measures identified, will be mitigated to a level of insignificance, except for those impacts listed in Section 6.1 above. Other reasonable alternatives to the Specific Plan, which could feasibly achieve the basic objectives of the Specific Plan, have been considered and rejected in favor of the Specific Plan. Environmental, economic, social and other considerations and benefits derived from the development of the Specific Plan override and make infeasible any alternatives to the Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 50 City of Temecula Specific Plan or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the Specific Plan. Section 7 - Adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. In the event of any inconsistencies between the mitigation measures as set forth herein and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program shall control. Section 8 - Location of Records The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these Findings have been based are located at the City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 92590. The custodian for these records is the City of Temecula Planning Director. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6. Section 9 - Effective Date The Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTION this twenty-third day of January, 2001. Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Wolf Creek Specific Plan City Council Findings City of Temecula 51 January 2001 ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 01-__ was passed, approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the twenty-third day of January, 2001, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk Findings Wolf Creek Specific Plan January 2001 52 City of Temecula EXHIBIT A TEXT AND ADDENDUM NOS. 1 AND NO. 2 - PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\cc staffmport 1-23-01.doc 8 EXHIBIT B MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP\cc staffreport 1-23-01.doc 9 Exhibit B Mitigation Monitoring Program Planning Application No. PA98-0481 (Specific Plan) Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 Revised December 6, 2000 AIR QUALITY 1. General Impact: Long-term operational emissions due to vehicular travel will exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Mitigation Measure: Establish bus routes and stops to service the residents within the specific plan area. Specific Process: The City shall notify the Riverside Transit Agency or other responsible public transit provider of pending development applications within the specific plan, in order that the agency may assess and identify demand for bus service. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the approval of development plans or tentative tract maps Responsible Monitor: Planning Department AIR QUALITY 2. General Impact: Long-term operational emissions due to vehicular travel will exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Mitigation Measure: The developer shall provide bus turnouts at strategic locations throughout the project. Specific Process: The City shall review and condition project entitlements which are adjacent to or include identified bus routes that serve the residents in the specific plan area. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the approval of development plans or tentative tract maps Responsible Monitor: Department of Public Works and Planning Department R:~S P\WolfCreek SP~Mitigafion Monitoring Program.doc 1 ENERGY CONSERVATION 3. General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Long-term operational emissions due to on-site energy consumption will exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Compliance with applicable energy conservation guidelines for construction in accordance with the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and any other City requirements. The developer shall submit planchecks that include compliance with energy conservation guidelines for City review and approval. Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: ENERGY CONSERVATION 4. General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Prior to the issuance of building permits. Building Department Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Long-term operational emissions due to on-site energy consumption will exceed SCAQMD thresholds. The developer shall install energy-efficient lighting for all lighting systems. The developer shall submit planchecks that include energy- efficient lighting. Prior to issuance of building permits. Building Department LAND USE PLANNING 1. General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Conflict with habitat conservation plans Compliance with the Stephens Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Long° Term Habitat Conservation Plan Payment of $500.00 per acre SKR mitigation fee Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works and Planning Department R:\S P\Wolf Creek SPWiitigation Monitoring Program.doc 2 LAND USE PLANNING 1. General Impact: Conflict with Metropolitan Water District plans for the San Diego Pipeline No. 6 alignment and related construction and operation activities Mitigation Measure: Coordination of design activities between the Developer and Metropolitan Water District Specific Process: Clearance from MWD Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or approval of the Final Map Responsible Monitor: Department of Public Works and Planning Department GEOLOGY AND SOILS General Impact: Exposure to seismic ground shaking Mitigation Measure: Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards Specific Process: A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit Responsible Monitor: Department of Public Works and the Building and Safety Department General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to seismic ground shaking Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform Building Code Submit construction plans to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a building permit Building and Safety Department RSS P\Wolf Creek SP~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 3 General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to soil erosion, subsidence and expansion Ameliorate hazards from unstable soils Compliance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical report Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to soil erosion, subsidence and expansion Identify adverse soil conditions and implement measures to ameliorate impacts Submit a Soils Report for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to soil erosion Stabilize slopes and unstable soils by the planting of slopes consistent with Ordinance No. 457 Submit an Erosion Control Plan for review and approval Prior to the issuance ora grading permit Department of Public Works General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to soil erosion Stabilize slopes and unstable soils Submit a Slope Planting Plan for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Planning Department RSS P\WolfCreek SPhMitigation Monitoring Program.doc 4 General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Affecting the capacity of soils to adequately support the use of septic systems Conduct a Soils Percolation Test The submittal of the results of the Soils Percolation Test and clearance from the Department of Environmental Health for septic sewage disposal systems Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: The degradation of water quality and/or waste discharge Compliance with water quality and waste discharge requirements Obtain clearance from the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board and comply with the requirements of the NPDES permit fi.om the State Water Resources Board. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Create excessive runoff exceeding the capacity of existing facilities Identify drainage impacts and implement measures to mitigate impacts Submit a Drainage Study for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works R:\S P\WolfCreek SPhMitigation Monitoring Program.doc 5 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC General Impact: An increase in traffic in relation to existing traffic and the capacity of the existing street system Mitigation Measure: Payment of fees to contribute to City-wide traffic improvements Specific Process: Payment of the Development Impact Fee (DIF) for commercial development Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a building permit RespQnsible Monitor: Department of Public Works BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES General Impact: Alter federally protected wetlands Mitigation Measure: Compliance with the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department ofFish and Game, and the Army Corps of Engineers Specific Process: Obtain a 1601-1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the Department offish and Game and a 404 Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers Prior to the issuance of grading permits Planning Department Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds) Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works and the Planning Department RSS P\WolfCreek SP~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 6 HAZARDS General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: NOISE General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: PUBLIC SERVICES General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to significant hazard Obtain clearances from the Department of Environmental Health, Fire and Building Departments for the use of hazardous substances, their storage, quantities, security and handling Submit clearance letters and/or signatures to the Building Department Prior to the issuance of building permits Building and Safety Department and the Fire Depamnent Exposure to significant noise levels The developer shall participate in any noise mitigation program established by the City. Payment of fair share costs of mitigation measures commensurate with noise impacts attributable to Wolf Creek traffic. Prior to the roadway widening construction on Pala Road Public Works Department and the Planning Department Need for new/altered governmental services regarding fire or police protection Payment of Development Impact Fees for Fire and Police Mitigation Payment of DIF to the Building Department Prior to the issuance of building permits Building Department R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~vlitigation Monitoring Program.doc 7 General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Need for new/altered schools. Payment of School Fees Payment of current mitigation fees to the Temecula Valley Unified School District Prior to the issuance of building permits Building Department UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: AESTHETICS General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Adequate capacity of existing downstream drainage facilities Verify the adequacy of existing facilities and require upgrading or upsizing of these facililties where necessary Prepare and submit a Hydrology Report to the Public Works Department for review and approval Prior to the issuance of grading permits Department of Public Works The creation of new light sources will result in increased light and glare that could affect the Palomar Observatory Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655 Submit lighting plans that conform to the requirements of Ordinance No. 655 to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval Prior to the issuance of building permits Building and Safety Department; Planning Department R:XS P\WolfCreek SP~Vlitigation Monitoring Program.doc 8 CULTURAL RESOURCES General Impact: Adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource Mitigation Measure: Identify, recover, preserve and document resources of historical and archaeological significance Specific Process: Condition the project upon the requirement that if any cultural resources or human remains are exposed during grading, ground disturbance activities in the vicinity of the discovery shall be terminated immediately and the City shall be contacted and a qualified archaeologist shall be brought to the site to evaluate the resource. If discovered resources merit long-term consideration, adequate funding shall be provided to collect, curate and report these resources. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of grading permits and during grading operations Responsible Monitor: Planning Department and Department of Public Works R:~S P\WolfCreek SPhMitigation Monitoring Program.doc 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 01- APPROVING APPLICATION NO. 98-0484 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PLANNING R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\cc staffrepoft 1-23-01.doc 10 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA98- 0484 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND DEER HOLLOW, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950- 180-001, -005, -006 AND -010. WHEREAS, SP Murdy, LLC filed Planning Application Nos. PA98-0484 (the "Application"), in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code, CEQA Guidelines and California State CEQA Guidelines; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Application on September 6, 2000, September 20, 2000, October 4, 2000, October 18, 2000, and December 6, 2000, at duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearings and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on January 9, 2001, and on January 23, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by Jaw, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified the Environmental Impact Report and adopted the Mitigation Monitoring Program after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The project as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The project has been reviewed by agencies and staff and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\RESO CC GPA.doc 1 B. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes similar residential neighborhoods adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods, with interface buffers and full roadway improvements. Project commercial development is proposed within a Village Center, across Pala Road from the Pechanga Casino. C. The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The project does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses for the site. The General Plan Amendment is a relocation and reallocation of existing land use designations that conforms to the design of the specific plan. Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The City Council of the City of Temecula has certified the Final Environmental Impact Report and adopted the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan in order to approve the Application. Section 4. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council approves the Application, changing the general plan designations on 557 acres of land in order to comply with the design of a mixed use specific plan known as the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12, on property located on the east side of Pala Road, between Loma Linda and Deer Hollow, and known as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950-110-002, -005, -033 and 950-180-001, -005, -006 and -010. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this twenty-third day of January, 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the twenty-third day of January 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNClLMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\RESO CC GPA.doc 2 EXHIBIT A GENERAL PLAN COMPARISON R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\cc staffrepor~ 1-23-01.doc 11 Z ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 01- APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481 -WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 R:\S P\WolfCreek SP\cc staffreport 1-23-01.doc 12 RESOLUTION NO. 0l- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PA98-0481) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: a. S-P Murdy LLC ("Owner") filed Planning Application No. PA98-0481 in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code for Specific Plan No. 12 and other land use approvals for a 557 acre planned community along the east side of Pala Road, south of State Highway 79 South between Loma Linda Road and Fairview Avenue in the City of Temecula ("Project"). The area subject to the application consists of Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950-110-002, 950-110-005, 950-110-033, 950-180-001, 950-180-005, 950-180- 006, and 950-180-010. b. On September 6, 2000, October 4, 2000, and December 6, 2000 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held duly noticed public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the proposed Specific Plan No. 12 and the other land use applications for the Project at which time all persons interested in the Draft EIR, proposed Specific Plan No. 12 and the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. c. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Development Agreement and the Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-037A recommending to the City Council that Specific Plan No. 12 be approved, subject to certain recommended conditions. d. On January 9, 2001, ,and January 23, 2001, the City Council of the City of Temecula held duly noticed public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the Draft EIR, proposed Specific Plan No. 12, and the other land use applications for the Project at which time all persons interested in the proposed Specific Plan No. 12 and the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. e. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council, and due consideration of the proposed Draft EIR, Specific Plan No. 12 and the Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2001- , entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula Certifying the Environmental Impact Report Prepared for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 (Planning Application No. 98-0482) and Related Actions, and Adoption of the Environmental Findings Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in Connection Therewith." Section 2. and declares that: The City Council of the City of Temecula further finds, determines R:Resos2001- 1 a. Specific Plan No. 12 implements the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and provides balanced and diversified land uses, and imposes appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overal~ quality of life and the environment within the City. b. The City has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of Specific Plan No. 12 as well as the various potential benefits to the City by the development of Specific Plan No. 12 and concluded that Specific Plan No. 12 is in the best interests of and is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the City. c. Specific Plan No. 12 is consistent with the City's General Plan, and each Element thereof, the City's Growth Management Program Action Plan and constitutes a present valid exercise of the City's police power. d. Specific Plan No. 12 is compatible with surrounding land uses. It proposes similar residential neighborhoods adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods, with interface buffers and full roadway improvements. Commercial development is proposed within a Village Center, across Pala from the Pechanga Casino. e. Specific Plan No. 12 will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. f. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. Section :3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves Specific Plan No. 12 (Wolf Creek Specific Plan), PA98-0481, which approval includes the Conditions of Approval for the Project, which conditions are deemed incorporated into Specific Plan No. 12. Specific Plan No. 12 is attached hereto as Exhibit A, Land Use Plan for Specific Plan No. 12 is attached hereto as Exhibit B, and the Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan No. 12 are attached hereto as Exhibit C. Section 4. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Resolution and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. Section 5. Council The City Clerk shall cedify to the adoption of this Resolution by the City R:Resos2001- 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 23r" day of January, 2001. Jeff Comerchero Mayor A'I-I'EST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, Califomia, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 01- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on this 23~ day of January 2001, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R;Reses2001 - 3 EXHIBIT A SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN R:Resos2001- 4 EXHIBIT B LAND USE PLAN WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN R:Resos2001- 5 ]! EXHIBIT C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN R:Resos2001- 6 EXHIBIT C CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Revised January 9, 2001 Planning Application No. PA98-0481 - (Specific Plan) - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 Project Description: A mixed use specific plan which provides a full range of residential uses and product types, school sites, park sites, open space and drainage greenbelt, roadways, private recreation center, fire station site and commercial sites, specifically as follows: From 1,881 to 2,022 (2,158) dwelling units for an overall density of 3.4 to 3.6 (3.9) dwelling units per acre. Residential product includes ¼ acre estate lots, 7,200 square foot to 5,000 square foot lots, courtyard homes, and an option for multi-family senior housing. School sites totaling 33 acres for an elementary and middle school. A 6-acre neighborhood park that is a component of the Village Center, a 6.7 acre linear park with three activity nodes that traverses the entire length of the project, and an additional 1.5 acre parking area for the Kent Hintergardt Park. Park sites were selected and coordinated for joint use with the Temecula Valley Unified School District facilities. A 40-acre City Sports Park with lighted ballfields, soccer fields, large-group picnic areas, tot lot, parking facilities, restrooms, and snack bar. A 25-acre drainage greenbelt along the full length of Pala Road, designed as passive open space. Roadways and circulation system that provide pedestrian linkages, bicycle paths and interconnected uses throughout the project. Private recreation canter, fire station and other public facility uses on 5 acres at the Village Center. Neighborhood and Community Commercial areas totaling 20 acres at the Village Center. Development Impact Fee Category: All categories Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950-110-002, -005, -033 950-180-001, -005, 006 and -010 Approval Date: January9,2001 PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project The applicant shall deliver to the Community Development Department - Planning Division a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Nine Hundred Twenty-Eight Dollars ($928.00) which includes the Eight Hundred and Fifty Dollar ($850.00) fee, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Environmental Impact Report required under Public Resources Code R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP~COA-SP.doc Section 21151 and California Code of Regulations Section 15904. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the Applicant has not delivered to the Community Development Department - Planning Division the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition (Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c)). General Requirements The permittee/applicant shall indemnity, defend with counsel of City's own election, and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notity the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notity or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnity, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. All development within this site shall be in accordance with the requirements of all City ordinances, except as expressly modified herein or by development agreement, 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. Approval of this Specific Plan is contingent upon and shall not become effective nor shall it vest until a General Plan Amendment (GPA) is approved by the City Council, and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or any other environmental review under, the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) are certified by the City Council. The applicant shall pay his fair share of the costs for sound attenuation measures adjacent to Pala Road. The applicant shall comply with all applicable mitigation measures contained in the adopted City of Temecula General Plan. A ~A~.A.^ ~=.,^ =~,, ,~;~ ~ Appliances shall be energy efficient as defined by the U S Environmental Protection Agency's "Energy Star" or Edison's" Comfort Wise" Programs. Renewable energy such as solar roof panels, or other devices that offer maximum energy/utility efficiencies shall be required. B. ~^~.~.~ ~;~.,~ :.^,,,~:A~ ^~ ' g d ' ig ............................. Landscap~n es/gn and irr ation devices that conform to the California Model Water Conservation Ordinance shall be required, such as Iow flow toilets, faucets and showerheads, shade tree selection and placement. (Amended by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000) R:\S P\Wolf Creek SFSCOA-SP.doc 2 A detailed noise assessment, evaluating project and cumulative noise impacts, shall be provided for any residential planning area within the project adjacent to Pala Road or Wolf Valley Road, and where such areas lie within a noise environmental projected to exceed 65 CNEL. As necessary, the assessment shall describe noise reduction measures to be incorporated into the project to comply with state and local exterior noise standards. The assessment shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City prior to the approval of a tentative subdivision map or development plan, whichever is appropriate for the type of development proposed. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program. Prior to issuance of permits for any development or activities within the site, the developer shall demonstrate by submittal of a written report, that all mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program within the Wolf Creek Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report have been satisfied. 10. The applicant shall deposit sufficient funds with the City of Temecula to retain the services of a qualified consultant to administer and implement the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved for this project as part of the Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report, in compliance with Assembly Bill 3180. The selection of the consultant shall be approved by the Planning Director. 11. Prior to final City Council approval of the Mitigation Monitoring Program for this project, the applicant shall update the Program to reflect all conditions of approval as approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. The Mitigation Monitoring Program shall be augmented to include the applicable portions of the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (E/R). (Amended by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 12. Planning Area 12 shall be designated to accommodate a church site, for a period of one year from the issuance of the first building permit on the north side of Wolf Valley Road. At the end of the one year period, the developer may either continue to designate a portion of Planning Area 12 for church use, or revert back to neighborhood commercial uses in accordance with the specific plan zoning ordinance. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 13. Planning Area 12 shall be amended to allow a "tavern or ba~' use as conditionally permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 14. Planning Area 24 shall be revised to show the alternative to the 40 acre City Sports Park as "SFD - 7,200 s.f. lot option." (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 15. Where the Option 2 street sections are used in the Specific Plan, the developer shall provide evidence that the parkways will be maintained by an appropriate homeowner association. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP,doc 3 a. Sidewalks shall be a minimum of five feet in width on both sides of the street. Applicant shall demonstrate that average daily trips utilizing the street is less than 250 vehicular trips. The road right-of-way shaft be thirty-six feet (36') with a parkway separating the sidewalk from the curb. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 16. When courtyard homes are implemented, a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission, subject to the requirements of Chapter 17.22 of the Development Code. An independent architect consultant shall review the PDO program and provide findings to the Commission. The Development Plan shall include an architectural design package including fioorplans and elevations for all product types. The Development Plan must demonstrate a minimum of 200 square feet of usable private yard space for each lot. (Amended by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 17. Any new residential product shall require Planning Commiss. ion review and approval. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 18. The "Split Garage" option shall be deleted from Figure IV-34B of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan Design Guidelines. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 19. The multi-family senior housing option, if implemented in Planning Area 18, shaft be required to provide fully enclosed garages in lieu of carports, and shaft be so noted within the specific plan zoning ordinance. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 20. The developer shall submit for review and approval by the Director of Planning Construction Landscape Drawings for perimeter landscaping and irrigation systems along the perimeter of every school site which fronts General Plan and Specific Plan designated roadways. Upon approval of these Drawings, the applicant shall install landscaping and irrigation systems prior to the occupancy of the site by the school district. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000) 21. Within thirty (30) days of the final approval of the project by the City Council, the Specific Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) 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 Planning Commission and City Council. A master print copy (8.5" X 11") and four (4) copies of the documents shall be submitted. a. The final form shall matchup acreages as accurately as possible with approved Tentative Tract Map No. 29305. R:\S P\Wo[f Creek SFSCOA-SP.doc 4 b. The final form shall correct any discrepancies as a result of final approvals by the city. The project description for the Environmental Impact Report shall be amended to include the Development Agreement. 22. Prior to approval of any development projects, appropriate clearances, conditions and approvals from all agencies with jurisdiction on project review shall be obtained by the developer. These agencies shall be determined by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. 23. 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. 24. Prior to approval of any development projects, the developer shall investigate the feasibility of a reclaimed water system, to irrigate landscaping within the roadway medians, parkways, drainage channel, schools, community park, linear park, neighborhood parks, and other common open space areas. The developer shall provide evidence that compliance with this condition is in accordance with Senate Bill 2095. (Amended by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 25. Subsequent residential subdivision maps shall require that the applicant provide a Disclosure Statement, signed by a new property owner whose residence is adjacent to the Pechanga Indian Reservation, including those across Pala Road and the drainage channel. Prior to the Issuance of Grading Permits 26. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. 27. A qualified paleontologist/archaeologist shall be chosen by the applicant for consultation and comment on the proposed grading with respect to potential paleontological/archaeological impacts. A meeting between the paleontologist/archaeologist, Community Development Department- Planning Division staff, and grading contractor prior to the commencement of grading operations and the excavation shall be arrar)ged. The paleontologist/archaeologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. 28. The applicant shall sign both copies of the final conditions of approval that will be provided by the Community Development Department- Planning Division staff, and return one signed set to the Community Development Department - Planning Division for their files. Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 29. For any residential development abutting Pala Road the applicant shall provide project- specific noise studies which shall determine whether noise attenuation walls are necessary to comply with noise standards. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations that result from these studies. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 5 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative site plan all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission will subject the project to further review and may require revision. General Conditions 30. 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. 31. 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. 32. Landscaping and permanent irrigation facilities shall be installed with street improvements. Perimeter walls, where required, shall be treated with graffiti-resistant coating and shall be installed adjacent to street improvements within each phase. 33. 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 application. 34. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. 35. The Developer shall ensure coordination with Metropolitan Water District on projects over which the City has jurisdiction (i.e., construction of Fairview Road, Pala Road Improvements, and improvements to the Pala Road channel). Circulation 36. 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. Additional rights-of-way at entries to the aforementioned sites may be required to provide for turning lanes as directed by the Department of Public Works. 37. The exact location and number of access points shall be subject to review and approval by the Department of Public Works upon future tentative map and/or development plan approvals. 38. 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 or as approved with the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 6 39. All intersection intervals shall comply with City standards and requirements. 40. 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). Additional rights-of-way dedications associated with bus bays shall be provided by the Developer. 41. Necessary improvements have been/will be conditioned based on the project traffic studies and the conceptual phasing plan shown on Section III. 8. of the Specific Plan. Any substantive rephasing of the development must be approved by the Planning and Public Works Director through a rephasing application. 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 herein, or as set by conditions on individual tracts, must be constructed and/or bonded as required by the Department of Public Works. 42. Ensuing Traffic Reports, analyzing traffic impacts associated 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. 43. If the City has a Capital Improvement Project to design and construct Pala Road from Rainbow Canyon Road to Fairview Road to its ultimate configuration including environmental mitigation, the Developer shall pay their fair share and reimburse the City for their street improvement obligation. Drainage 44. 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). 45. 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. 46. 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. 47. All drainage facilities shall be designed to convey 100 year storm flows, subject to the approval of the Department of Public Works and RCFC&WCD, as applicable. 48. The Developer shall construct the proposed on and offsite drainage facility improvements and the interim 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. 49. 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. 50. The Developer shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto or through the site. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 7 51. 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 52. 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. 53. 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. 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. Grading 55. 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. 56. Prior to Final Map recordation or issuance of Grading Permit, the Developer is responsible to bond for and construct the traffic signals at the project's accesses, as required, including the associated street improvements, based on traffic signal warrants analysis relative to subsequent tentative maps and/or development applications. 57. 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. 58. 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. 59. 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. 60. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps as Flood Zone "A" and is subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans, the Developer shall demonstrate that the project complies with Chapter 15.12 of the Temecula Municipal Code for development within Flood Zone "A". Residential subdivisions shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Commercial subdivisions may obtain a LOMR at their discretion. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 8 61. 62. A Flood Plain Development Permit and Flood Study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The flood study shall be in a format acceptable to the Department and include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: Drainage and flood protection facilities which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm drain facilities. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard map and any necessary mitigation to protect the site. d. Identity and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. 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 will be graded during the rainy month~. Hydrology and hydraulic concerns and mitigations. 63. Major grading activities shall be scheduled during the dry season wherever possible, or as otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works. 64. 65. Soils stabilization, which may include revegetation of graded areas, shall occur within 30 days of completion of grading activities as directed by the Department of Public Works. The site shall be watered during grading operations to control dust. 66. Temporary drainage and sediment control devices shall be installed as directed by the Department of Public Works. 67. 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. 68. 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. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP~COA-SP.doc 9 69. 70. 71. A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 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. 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 72. 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. 73. 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. 74. Infrastructure Phase A a. Circulation The following improvements shall be complete prior to the first building permit i. Improve Pala Road from Loma Linda Road to Via Gilberto (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median. ii. Improve Pala Road from Via Gilberto to Wolf Valley Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' PJW) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median iii. Improve Pala Road from Wolf Valley Road to Fairview Road to accommodate a 60 foot wide pavement (four vehicular travel lanes including a center turn lane), signing and striping. iv. Via Del Coronado from Via Cordoba to Loma Linda Road (Collector Road Standards - 66' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus twelve feet, installation of the remainder of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) R:~S P~Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 10 vi. vii. In the event that the interim improvements on Pala Road from Rainbow Canyon Road to Loma Linda Road are not complete prior to the first building permit, the Developer shall improve Pala Road to accommodate a 60 foot wide pavement (four vehicular travel lanes including a center turn lane), signing and striping. The City may reimburse the Developer for their fair share'of the street improvement obligation as determined by the Director of Public Works. Intedor Loop Road from Pala Road to Wolf Valley Road (Modified Residential Collector Street - 85' RAN) to include dedication of full-width right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) Wolf Valley Road from the northerly Specific Plan boundary to Pala Road (Modified Secondary Highway - 110' RAN) to include dedication of full-width right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Loma Linda Road from Via Del Coronado to Pala Road (Principal Collector Highway - 78' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus six feet, installation of half-width street improvements plus six feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Prior to the 473rd Building Permit: ix. An approved funding and implementation mechanism/fair share contribution program as approved by the Director of Public Works shall be in place to guarantee the improvement of Pala Road from Highway 79 South to Loma Linda Road (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) to include acquisition of street right-of-way, installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median. x. Street "A" from Interior Loop Road (NoAh) to Loma Linda Road (Principal Collector Highway - 78' RNV) to include dedication of full-width street right-of- way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) b. Drainage i. Construct backbone channel and/or drainage facilities and all associated improvements per Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the City of Temecula requirements for the following: (1) Pala Road north of Wolf Valley (2) Wolf Valley Road from the northerly Specific Plan boundary to Pala Road (3) Loma Linda Road from Via Del Coronado to Pala Road (4) Interior Loop Road (NoAh) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road (5) Street "A" from Interior Loop Road (North) to Loma Linda Road R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 11 (6) Interior storm drain facilities Water and Sewer i. Install water mains per Rancho California Water District requirements and sewer mains per Eastern Municipal Water District requirements for the following roadways: (1) Pala Road north of Wolf Valley Road (2) Wolf Valley Road from the northerly Specific Plan boundary to Pala Road (3) Interior Loop Road (North) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road (4) Street "A" from Interior Loop Road (North) to Loma Linda Road (5) Interior Loop Road (North) (6) Interior facilities Traffic Signals i. Prior to the first building permit, the developer shall install a traffic signal with conduits for future interconnect at the following intersections: (2) (3) Pala Road and Loma Linda Road Pala Road and Wolf Valley Road including provisions for a dual southbound left turn pocket from Pala Road to Wolf Valley Road Pala Road and Interior Loop Road (North) ii. Prior to the 100TM Building Permit, the following signal shall be installed and operational: (1) Pala Road and Clubhouse Drive (2) Pala Road and Muirfield Drive Infrastructure Phase B The following improvements shall be complete prior to the 823'~ building permit a. Circulation i. Improve Pala Road from Wolf Valley Road to Fairview Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' RAN) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median ii. Interior Loop Road (South) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road (Modified Residential Collector Street - 85' RAN) to include dedication of full-width right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) iii. Prior to the opening of the City Sports Park or the 1557th building permit, the Developer shall improve Fairview Road from Pala Road to the Specific Plan boundary (Secondary Road Standards - 88' RNV) to include dedication of half-width right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, R:\S P\Wo[f Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 12 75. (2) (3) (4) Traffic Signal curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) Drainage i. Construct backbone channel and/or drainage facilities and all associated improvements per Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the City of Temecula requirements for the following: (1) Pala Road from Wolf Valley Road to Fairview Drive (2) Interior Loop Road (South) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road (3) Fairview Drive from Pala Road to the Specific Plan boundary (4) Interior storm drain facilities Water and Sewer i. Install water mains per Rancho California Water District requirements and sewer mains per Eastern Municipal Water District requirements for the following roadways: Pala Road from Wolf Valley Road to Fairview Drive Interior Loop Road (South) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road Fairview Drive from Pala Road to the Specific Plan boundary Interior facilities The following traffic signal shall be installed and operational with conduits for future interconnect at the following intersection: i. Prior to the 823r~ Certificate of Occupancy (1) Wolf Valley Road and Interior Loop Road (South) ii. Prior to the 1,557th Certificate of Occupancy or opening of the High School, whichever occurs first (1) Pala Road and Interior Loop Road (South) (2) Pala Road and Fairview Road An approved funding and implementation mechanism /fair share contribution program such as a City administered community facility district may be considered in lieu of completed improvements for Public Works conditions as follows: · COA # 74 - INFRASTRUCTURE PHASE A, a. CIRCULATION, i., ii., ix. · COA # 74 - iNFRASTRUCTURE PHASE A, b. DRAINAGE, i. · COA # 74- INFRASTRUCTURE PHASE A, d. TRAFFIC SIGNALS, i. and ii. · COA # 74 - INFRASTRUCTURE PHASE B, a. CIRCULATION, i. Regardless if a financing mechanism is established, no occupancies will be allowed that will result in a service level of less than "D" on Pala Road, or at any of the Pala Road intersections from Rainbow Canyon Road to Wolf Valley Road. R:\S P\Wolf Creek Sl::SCOA-SP,doc 13 FIRE DEPARTMENT The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 76. Prior to the first building permit issued in Planning Areas 7-24, the developer shall dedicate a 1.5 acre Fire Station site southeasterly of the intersection of Wolf Valley Parkway and Wolf Creek Loop Road, and prior to the first final inspection in Planning Areas 7-24, the developer shall construct a fire station as approved by the Fire Department on the site described within Planning Area 14. 77. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 78. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land division per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure with a 2-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 79. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix III.B, Table A-III-B-1. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 80. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for commercial land division per CFC Appendix Ill-A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure with a 4 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 81. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. Super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 82. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 600 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul- de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.3) 83. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 14 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access reads for use until permanent reads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVVV. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVVV with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) Prior to building construction, dead end road ways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be: signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3, 901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 ) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, approved numbers or addresses shall be provided on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall be of a contrasting color to their background. Commercial, multi-family residential and industrial buildings shall have a minimum twelve (12) inches numbers with suite numbers a minimum of six (6) inches in size. All suites shall gave a minimum of six (6) inch high letters and/or numbers on both the front and rear doors. Single family residences and multi-family residential units shall have four (4) inch letters and/or numbers, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 901.4.4) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 15 93. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 94. Prior to final inspection of any building, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating Fire Lanes with appropriate lane painting and or signs. Special Conditions 95. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the wildland-vegetation interface. (FC Appendix II-A) 95. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A). TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) provides the following conditions of approval for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan: General Requirements: If any of the following conditions of approval differ from the Specific Plan text or exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedent. 96. The current park dedication requirement (Quimby) of 28.23 acres (based on 2,022 dwelling units) shall be satisfied with the credits identified in the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12. Additional park acreage or equivalent in-lieu fees shall be required, if proposed school sites are not acquired by the school district and additional residential units are constructed. In the event that the parkland credits fall short, the developer will increase the size of the private recreation facility in Planning Area 14, receive 50% credit for the private recreational facilities in the multifamily areas, or increase the size of the 6.0-acre park in Planning Area 11. The developer may pay in-lieu fees to satisfy park requirements, if approved by the Director of Community Services. 97. Upon final approval of the specific plan, certification of the EIR and the end of any appeal process the developer shall convey the 1.5 acres in Planning Area 4 to the City by grant deed free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public purposes. A policy of title insurance and a soils assessment report shall also be provided at the time of conveyance. 98. The actual design of the neighborhood park in Planning Area 11 and the linear park along the Interior Loop Road shall be in substantial conformance with the conceptual design identified within the Specific Plan. Prior to submittal of construction plans, the developer shall meet with the Director of Community Services to determine the location and specifications of the park amenities to be provided on site. 99. All park and slope/landscape plans submitted for consideration shall be in conformance with the City of Temecula Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 16 100. The design of the park in Planning Area 11 and the linear park along the Interior Loop Road shall provide for pedestrian circulation and access for the disabled throughout the park. 101. Construction of the public park sites and proposed TCSD landscape maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and TCSD Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance programs. 102. The developer, the developer's successor or assignee, shall be responsible for all maintenance of the park sites and slopes/landscaping areas until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. 103. The parks shall be improved and dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public purposes. A policy of title insurance and a soils assessment report shall also be provided with the dedication of the property. 104. All exterior slope/landscape areas contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to single family residential development shall be offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance purposes following compliance to existing City standards and completion of the application process. All other landscape areas, entry monumentation, signage, pedestrian portals, bus shelters, walls and the drainage channel along Pala Road shall be maintained by the Homeowners Association (HOA), private maintenance association or property owner. 105. A ten (10) foot wide pedestrian pathway/Class I bike lane will be constructed within the linear park (east side) and the paseo (west side) of the Interior Loop Road. 106. Class II bicycle lanes will be included on both sides of"A" Street, Wolf Valley Road, and the adjacent portion of Pala Road, Loma Linda Road and Fairview Road. Class II bike lanes, shall be constructed in concurrence with the street improvements. 107. The developer is entitled to receive a credit against the park component of the City's Development Impact Fee (DIF) based upon the actual cost of improving the neighborhood park (Planning Area 11 ). No DIF credits shall be provided for the development of the linear park other than the specific amenities proposed by the developer and approved by the Director of Community Services. The fee/credit issue shall be addressed pursuant to the execution of a Developer Agreement or a Park Improvement Agreement between the applicant and the City prior to approval of the final map. Prior to Approval of the Final Map: 108. The developer, or his assignee, shall offer for dedication, enter into an agreement and post security with the TCSD to improve the proposed parkland located in Planning Areas 11 and the linear park along the Interior Loop Road in accordance with the City standards. 109. All TCSD slope/landscaping maintenance areas shall be offered for dedication on the final map. 110. All areas intended for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance shall be identified on the final map by numbered lots and indexed to identify said lots numbers as a proposed TCSD maintenance area. 111. The subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve all proposed TCSD maintenance areas. R:\S FAWolf Creek SP~COA-SP.doc 17 112. Construction drawings for all proposed TCSD slope/landscape maintenance areas and the public park sites shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD. 113. A notice of intention to annex into the Temecula Community Services District Service Levels B, C, and D shall be submitted to the TCSD prior to approval of the final map. The property owner election costs involved in the district formation or annexation shall be borne by the developer. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits: 114. Prior to the installation of street lights or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the developer shall file an application and pay the appropriate fees to the TCSD for the dedication of arterial and residential street lights into the appropriate TCSD maintenance program. 115. The linear park including one activity node, north of Wolf Valley Road, shall be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 400th residential building permit for the overall project. 116. The 6-acre neighborhood park in Planning Area 11 shall be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 800th residential building permit for the overall project. Upon execution of the Development Agreement for this project, this condition shall be modified for a 6-acre neighborhood park prior to the issuance of the 600~h residential building permit. (Amended by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 117. The 40 acres in Planning Area 24 will be offered for dedication on the effective date of the Development Agreement and shall be free of liens within six (6) months after the effective date of the Development Agreement. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 118. The linear park including two activity nodes, south of Wolf Valley Road, shall be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 1400th residential building permit for the overall project. 119, The 4.5-acre neighborhood park in Planning Area 19 will be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 1,600th residential building permit for the overall project. Upon execution of the Development Agreement for this project, this condition shall be deleted. (Amended by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy: R:~S P~Wolf Creek SFSCOA-SP.doc 18 120. 121. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phase map, the developer shall submit the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence of TCSD and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant Name R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-SP.doc 19 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 01- APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481 -ZONING STANDARDS FOR WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 R:\S P\WolfCreck SP\cc staffrgport 1-23-01.doc 13 ORDINANCE NO. 01- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING ZONING STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PA98-0481) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: a. S-P Murdy LLC ("Owner") filed Planning Application No. PA98-0481 in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code for Specific Plan No. 12 and other land use approvals for a 557 acre planned community along the east side of Pala Road, south of State Highway 79 South between Loma Linda Road and Deer Hollow (formerly Fairview Avenue) in the City of Temecula ("Project"). The area subject to the application consists of Assessor's Parcel Nos. 950-110-002, 950-110-005, 950-110-033, 950- 180-001,950-180-005, 950-180-006, and 950-180-010. b. On September 6, 2000, September 20, 2000, October 4, 2000, October 18, 2000 and December 6, 2000 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held duly noticed public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the proposed Specific Plan No. 12 and the other land use applications for the Project at which time all persons interested in the Draft EIR, proposed Specific Plan No. 12 and the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. c. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Development Agreement and the Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-037A recommending to the City Council that Specific Plan No. 12 be approved, subject to certain recommended conditions. d. On January 9, 2001, and January 23, 2001 the City Council of the City of Temecula held duly noticed public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, proposed Specific Plan No. 12, and the other land use applications for the Project at which time all persons interested in the proposed Specific Plan No. 12 and the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. e. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council, and due consideration of the proposed Draft EIR, Specific Plan No. 12 and the Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2001- __, entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula Certifying the Environmental Impact Report Prepared for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 (Planning Application No. 98-0482) and Related Actions, and Adoption of the Environmental Findings Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in Connection Therewith." R:Ords2001- 1 Section 2. and declares that: The City Council of the City of Temecula further finds, determines a. Specific Plan No. 12 implements the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and provides balanced and diversified land uses, and impose appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within the City. b. The City has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of Specific Plan No. 12 as well as the various potential benefits to the City by the development of Specific Plan No. 12 and concluded that Specific Plan No. 12 is in the best interests of and is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the City. c. Specific Plan No. 12 is consistent with the City's General Plan, and each Element thereof, the City's Growth Management Program Action Plan and constitutes a present valid exercise of the City's police power. d. Specific Plan No. 12 is compatible with surrounding land uses. It proposes similar residential neighborhoods adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods, with interface buffers and full roadway improvements. Commercial development is proposed within a Village Center, across Pala from the Pechanga Casino. e. Specific Plan No. 12 will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. f. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the zoning and the residential land use matrix for Specific Plan No. 12 (Wolf Creek Specific Plan), PA98-0481, which approval consists of the zoning section of Specific Plan 12. Specific Plan No. 12 is attached hereto as Exhibit A and the Residential Development Standards Matrix is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Section 4. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. Section 5. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. R:Ords2001- 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th of February, 2001. A'I-rEST: Jeff Comerchero Mayor Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 01- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day of January, 2001, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 13~ day of February, 2001 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:Ords2001- 3 EXHIBIT A SPEC:IFIC; PLAN NO. 12 WOLF CREEK SP£CIFIC PLAN ZONING STANDARDS R:Ords2001- 4 EXHIBIT B RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MATRIX TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN R:Ords2001- 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 01- APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0029 - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 R:\S I~Wolf Creek SP\cc staffreport 1-23~01.doc FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE NO. 01- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND S-P MURDY LLC" (PA 00-0029) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: a. S-P Murdy LLC ("Owner") filed Planning Application No. PA00-0029 in accordance with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code for land use approvals for a 557 acre planned community along the east side of Pala Road, south of State Highway 79 South between Loma Linda Road and Deer Hollow (formerly Fairview Avenue) in the City of Temecula ("Project"). development development development development housing and b. Government Code Section 65864 authorizes the City to enter into binding agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of other development to the consumer; provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development; and provide for economic assistance to Owner for the entitlements authorizing development related improvements. c. On September 6, 2000, September 20, 2000, October 4, 2000, October 18, 2000 and December 6, 2000 the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held duly noticed public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the proposed Development Agreement and the other land use applications for the Project at which time all persons interested in the Draft EIR, proposed Development Agreement and the Project had the opportunity and did address the Planning Commission on these matters. d. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings and due consideration of the proposed Development Agreement and the Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-037A recommending to the City Council that the Development Agreement be approved, subject to certain recommended conditions. e. On January 9, 2001, and January 23, 2001 the City Council of the City of Temecula held duly noticed public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the Draft EIR, proposed Development Agreement and the other land use applications for the Project at which time all persons interested in the proposed Development Agreement and the Project had the opportunity and did address the City Council on these matters. R:Ords 2001- I f. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council, and due consideration of the proposed Draft EIR, Development Agreement and the Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2001- , entitled "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula Certifying the Environmental Impact Report Prepared for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 (Planning Application No. 98-0482) and Related Actions, and Adoption of the Environmental Findings Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in Connection Therewith." Section 2. and declares that: The City Council of the City of Temecula further finds, determines a. In consideration of the substantial public improvements and benefits to be provided by Owner and the Project, in further consideration of the implementation of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and in order to strengthen the public financing and planning process and reduce the economic costs of development, by the Development Agreement, the City intends to give Owner assurance that Owner can proceed with the development of the Project for the Term of the Development Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement and in accordance with the City's General Plan, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations existing as set forth in the Development Agreement. In reliance on the City's covenants in the Development Agreement concerning the development of the Property, Owner has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities in order to make the Project feasible. b. The Development Agreement and the Existing Project Approvals, as defined in the Development Agreement, implement the goals and policies of the City's General Plan, and the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, provide balanced and diversified land uses, and impose appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within the City. c. The City has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of the Project as well as the various potential benefits to the City by the development of the Project and concluded that the Project is in the best interests of and is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the City. d. The Development Agreement Es consistent with the City's General Plan, and each Element thereof, and the City's Growth Management Action Plan, and constitutes a present valid exercise of the City's police power. e. The Development Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Government Code Section 65867. f. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves certain agreement entitled "Development Agreement by and Between the City of Temecula and S-p Murdy LLC" and authorizes the Mayor to execute said agreement in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. R:Ords 2001- 2 Section 4. If any sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. Section 5. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of February, 2001. ATTEST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby cedify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 01- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day of January, 2001 and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 13th day of February, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:Ords 2001- 3 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT R:Ords 2001- 4 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT By and Between THE CITY OF TEMECULA, City, and S-P MURDY, LLC, OWNER. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is entered into as of the __ day of ,2000 ("Agreement Date"), by and between S-P MURDY, LLC, a California limited liability company (hereinafter "OWNER"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (hereinafter "CITY"), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the "Development Agreement Legislation") and Article Xl, Section 2 of the California Constitution. RECITALS This Agreement is predicated upon the following facts: A. These Recitals refer to and utilize certain capitalized terms which are defined in this Agreement. The parties intend to refer to those definitions in conjunction with the use thereof in these Recitals. B. The Development Agreement Legislation authorizes the CITY to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of development projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of housing and other development to the consumer; provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development; and provide for economic assistance to OWNER for the entitlements authorizing development related improvements. C. OWNER is the owner of certain real property within the City of Temecula, the County of Riverside, State of California (the "Property"), as more particularly described in Exhibit"A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the applicable regulations of the City of Temecula and those regulations of other agencies exercising jurisdiction upon the project. The Scope of Development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement is described in the Agreement in Section __ D. OWNER has applied for, and the CITY has granted, this Agreement in order to create a beneficial project and a physical environment that will conform to and complement the goals of the CITY, create a development project sensitive to human needs and values, facilitate efficient traffic circulation, and develop the Property. As part of the process of granting this entitlement, the City Council of the CITY (hereinafter 641123 01/19/2001 - 1- the "City Council") has required the preparation of an environmental review and has certified the specific Plan EIR as regards any significant effects arising from the Development and has otherwise carried out all requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") of 1970, as amended. Project: The following actions were taken with respect to this Agreement and the 1. On ., following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the City Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement; pursuant to CEQA, and the Project; On ., after a duly noticed public hearing and the City Council adopted the Specific Plan EIR for this Agreement 3. On ., after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council determined that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the General Plan of the CITY; 4. On , after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. __ approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement and on , the City Council adopted the Ordinance, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department at the CITY, and adopted the findings and conditions pertaining thereto, including those relating to the environmental documentation for the Project. F. The CITY has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of the Project as well as the various potential benefits to the CITY by the development of the Project and concluded that the Project is in the best interests of the CITY. G. In consideration of the substantial public improvements and benefits to be provided by OWNER and the Project, in further consideration of the implementation of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and in order to strengthen the public financing and planning process and reduce the economic Costs of development, by this Agreement, the CITY intends to give OWNER assurance that OWNER can proceed with the development of the Project for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and in accordance with the CITY's General Plan, ordinances, policies, rules and regulations existing as of the Effective Date. In reliance on the CITY's covenants in this Agreement concerning the Development of the Property, OWNER has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities in order to make the Project feasible. H. Pursuant to Section 65867.5 of the Development Agreement Legislation, the City Council has found and determined that: (i) this Agreement and the Existing 641123 01/19/2001 -2- Project Approvals implement the goals and policies of the CITY's General Plan, and the Wolf Creek Specific Plan provide balanced and diversified land uses and impose appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within the CITY, (ii) this Agreement is in the best interests of and not detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare of the CITY and its residents; (iii) adopting this Agreement is consistent with the CITY's General Plan and constitutes a present exercise of the CITY's police power; and (iv) this Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Legislation. I. The CITY and OWNER agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or to modify this Agreement with respect to the implementation of the separate components of the Project when more information concerning the details of each component is available, and that this Agreement should expressly allow for such contemplated additional agreements or modifications to this Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Legislation, as it applies to the CITY, pursuant to Article XI, Section 2 of the ' California Constitution, and in consideration of the foregoing recitals of fact, all of which are expressly incorporated into this Agreement, the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement and for the further consideration described in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions. The following words and phrases are used as defined terms throughout this Development Agreement and each defined term shall have the meaning set forth below. No, 1.1. Authorizing Ordinance. The "Authorizing Ordinance" means Ordinance approving this Agreement. 1.2. CITY. The "CITY" means the City of Temecula, a California municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California, and all of its officials, employees, agencies and departments. 1.3. City Council. "City Council" means the duly elected and constituted city council of the CITY. 1.4. Development. "Development" means the improvement of the Property for purposes consistent with the Project's land use authorization as set forth in the Development Plan, including, without limitation: grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Off-site Improvements and On-Site Improvements, the construction of structures and buildings and the installation of 641123 01/19/2001 -3- landscaping. 1.5. Development A.qreement Le.qislation. The "Development Agreement Legislation" means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Effective Date. 1.6. Development Fees. "Development Fees" means Development Impact Fees and defined hereunder and processing fees imposed on the Development as conditions of development as more particularly set forth in Section 4.2. 1.7 Development Impact Fees. Except as set forth herein and for purposes of this Agreement, Development Impact Fees (sometimes D.I.F.) shall mean individually and in the aggregate, the City's currently adopted D.I.F. fees as set forth in Ordinance No. __ in effect as of the Effective Date together with a ten (10%) percent increase to the Parks and Recreation Component of the DJ.F. 1.8 Development Plan. The "Development Plan" consists of this Agreement, the City of Temecula General Plan, the Specific Plan, Tentative Tract Map No. __, the Specific Plan EIR (including mitigation monitoring program) prepared for the General Plan and Specific Plan the Existing Regulations, and those Future Development Approvals, if any, contemplated, necessary, and requested by OWNER to implement the land uses authorized by the Project. 1.9 Effective Date. "Effective Date" means the date the Authorizing Ordinance becomes effective. 1.10 End User. "End User" means a buyer, assignee, or transferee of one or more individual subdivided single occupancy unit/lot(s) of the Project, acquiring such lot or lots with the intention of occupying and using such lots or I units for its own permanent purposes and not for resale, development or further subdivision. 1.11 Existincl Re(3ulations. "Existing Regulations" means those ordinances, rules, regulations, policies, requirements, guidelines, constraints or other actions of the CITY, other than site-specific Project Approvals, which purport to affect, govern or apply to the Property or the implementation of the Development Plan(s) in effect on the Effective Date. Existing Regulations shall also include the text of the zoning district designations of any zoning district applicable to the site of the Project in effect on the Effective Date. 1.12 Future Development Approvals. "Future Development Approvals" means those entitlements and approvals contemplated, necessary, and requested by the CITY or OWNER to cause the Development to occur upon the Property subsequent to completion of the Project and approved by the City currently upon or after the Effective Date. The parties hereto expressly anticipate Owner will institute mixed uses on the property that may include some combination of residential, institutional, commercial, recreational, and other uses. 641123 01/19/2001 -4- 1.13 Non-end User. "Non-end User" means a buyer, assignee, or transferee of one or more individual lots or tracts of the Project, acquiring such lots or tracts with the intention of developing, improving, or using such lots or tracts for development and/or resale. 1.14 Off-site Improvements. improvements set forth on Attachment __ Development Plan. "Off-site Improvements" means the as more specifically described in the 1.15 On-site Improvements. "On-site Improvements" means physical infrastructure improvements or facilities that are or will be located on the Property as described in the Development Plan. Certain On-site Improvements may be specifically addressed in this Agreement, which are identified on Attachment __. All others will be dependent upon the Development and the required Future Development Approvals. 1.16 OWNER. "OWNER" is initially S-P MURDY, LLC, a California limited liability company, and all successors in interest, in whole or part, to this entity. 1.17 Plannin.q Commission. "Planning Commission," means the duly appointed and constituted planning commission of the CITY. 1.18 Project. "Project" means the adoption of this Agreement thus securing and refining the scope and intensity of the Development Plan, including the land uses to be developed upon the parcel which is approximately Five Hundred Fifty-Seven (557) acres in area and which is generally located adjacent to Pala Road between Loma Linda Road and Deer Hollow Road. The uses permitted and scope of the Development shall be consistent with the development standards set forth in the Development Plan (excepting Future Development Approvals) and any applicable zoning district in effect on the Effective Date (copies of which are attached hereto as Exhibits "B" and "C" and are incorporated herein by this reference) subject to the express limitations in this Agreement. 1.19 Project Approval. "Project Approval" means the accomplishment of the actions as described in Section 1.18. 1.20 Specific Plan. approved by the CITY on time to time. "Specific Plan" means the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, and as thereafter amended from 1.21 Specific Plan E.I.R. "Specific Plan E.I.R." means that environmental impact report prepared for the Specific Plan and as certified on 1.22 Street and Right-of-Way Improvements. "Street and Right-of-Way Improvements" shall mean, and include, but not limited to, all required pavement, base, 641123 01/19/2001 - 5- curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, irrigation, landscaping, fire hydrants, utilities, and all other routinely required improvements within public rights-of-way. 2. General Provisions. 2.1. Bindin.q Covenants. The provisions of this Agreement to the extent permitted by law, constitute covenants which shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and all successors in interest to the parties hereto. 2.2. Interest of OWNER. OWNER represents that OWNER has a legal interest in the Property that satisfies California Government Code Section 65865(b). 2.3. Term. This Agreement shall become effective on the Effective Date, and shall have a term (the "Term") of ten (10) consecutive calendar years. The Term shall commence on the eadier of either the date the CITY issues the first (1st) building permit for a residential dwelling unit within the Project or the second (2d) anniversary of the Effective Date, and shall terminate at 11:59 p.m. of the day preceding the tenth (10th) anniversary of the commencement of the Term, subject to specific extensions, revisions, and termination provisions of this Agreement. 2.4. Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further effect upon the occurrence of any of the following events: 2.4.1 If termination occurs pursuant to any specific prevision of this Agreement; 2.4.2 Completion of the total build-out of the Development pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and the CITY's issuance of all required occupancy permits and acceptance of all dedications and improvements required to complete Development; or 2.4.3 Entry after all appeals have been exhausted of a final judgment or issuance of a final order directed to the CITY as a result of any lawsuit filed against the CITY to set aside, withdraw, or abrogate the approval of the City Council of this Agreement for any part of the Project. 2.4.4 The lapse of the Term as set forth in Section 2.3. The termination of this Agreement shall not affect any right or duty arising independently from entitlements issued by the CITY or other land use approvals approved prior to, concurrently or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement, except as may be provided in this Agreement. 2.5. Transfers and Assi.qnments. 641123 01/19/2001 - 6- 2.5.1. Ri.qht to Transfer or Assi.qn to End User. OWNER shall, without the consent of the CITY, have the right from time to time and on such number of occasions as it chooses, to sell, assign or otherwise transfer any or all individual lots on final maps approved on the Property or any portion thereof, to any End User at any time during the Term of this Agreement. Upon the sale, assignment, or other transfer to an End User of one or more individual lots, this Agreement shall terminate with respect to such lots; provided, however, that nothing in this Section 2.5.1 shall release OWNER from completing any On-site Improvements related to such lots or any Off-site Improvements required by this Agreement or the Development Plan. 2.5.2. Ri.qht to Assi.qn to Non-End User. OWNER shall, without the consent of the CITY, have the right from time to time and on such number of occasions as it chooses to sell, assign or otherwise transfer all or any portion of its interests in the Property together with all its right, title and interest in this Agreement, or the portion thereof which is subject to transfer (the "Transferred Property"), to any Non-end User at any time during the Term of this Agreement; provided, however, that any such transfer or assignment must be pursuant to a sale, assignment or other transfer of the interest of OWNER in the Property, or a portion thereof and shall be subject to the following mandatory criteria and conditions. In the event of any sale, assignment, or other transfer pursuant to this Section 2.5.2, (i) OWNER shall notify the CITY within twenty (20) days prior to the transfer of the name of the Non-End User, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such Non-End User and (ii) the agreement between OWNER and Non-End User pertaining to such transfer shall provide that the Non-End User shall be liable for the performance of those obligations of OWNER under this Agreement which relate to the Transferred Property, if any. Each Non-End User and OWNER shall notify the CITY in writing which of the two entities shall be liable for the performance of each obligation. Upon any sale, assignment, or other transfer under this Section 2.5.2, the CITY shall in writing release OWNER from all obligations, if any, of OWNER under this Agreement which relate to the Transferred Property, and in addition shall acknowledge and agree in writing that the CITY's sole recourse for any refusal or failure to perform such obligations shall be solely against the Non End User. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent the CITY reasonably determines that OWNER's Development of the Project or a portion thereof is dependent upon the performance of obligations assumed by a Non-End User, which obligations have not been performed, the CITY may, in its reasonable discretion, withhold any approvals, including, without limitation, certificates of occupancy, from OWNER and/or the Non End User until such obligations have been substantially performed. 2.5.3. Ri.qhts and Duties of Successors and Assigns. Any, each and all and assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits, duties and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement. 2.6. Amendment of Development A.clreement. 641123 01/19/2001 -7- 2.6.1. Initiation of Amendment. Any party may propose an amendment to this Agreement and both parties agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or modifications of this Agreement in connection with the implementation of the separate components of the Project. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no amendment to the Specific Plan or to any conditions of approval contained therein shall require an amendment of this Agreement unless such amendment causes an inconsistency with the Development Plan and this Agreement. Unless and until this Agreement is amended to remove such inconsistency, the provisions of the Specific Plan and/or conditions of approval shall be superior and shall control and this Agreement shall be without fome or effect only as to such inconsistencies. 2.6.2. Procedure. Except as set forth in Section 2.6.4 below, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Agreement in the first instance. 2.6.3. Consent. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, any amendment to this Agreement shall require the written consent of both parties. No amendment to all or any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each of the parties. 2.6.4. Operating Memoranda. The parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the parties under this Agreement. The parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to the details of the Development Plan and with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement. if and when the parties mutually find that changes, adjustments, or clarifications are appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Agreement, and such are not inconsistent with the Development Plan they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes, adjustments, or clarifications without amendment to this Agreement through one or more operating memoranda mutually approved by the parties, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto as addenda and become a part hereof and may be further changed and amended from time to time as necessary, with further approval by the City Manager, or designee, on behalf of the CITY and by any corporate officer or other person designated for such purpose in a writing signed by a corporate officer on behalf of OWNER. Unless otherwise required by law or by the Project Approvals, no such changes, adjustments, or clarifications shall require prior notice or hearing, public or otherwise. 3. Description of Development. 3.1. Development and Control of Development. 3.1.1. Project. While this Agreement is in effect, OWNER shall have the vested right to implement the Development authorized by the Project by and through 641123 01/19/2001 -8- the Development Plan pursuant to this Agreement and the Project Approval, including, without limitation, specific uses, densities, and types of development provided for in the Specific Plan, and the CITY shall have the right to control the Development in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and all regulations, permits and entitlements established in or under the Development Plan. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, the Existing Regulations shall control the design and development, Future Development Approvals and all On-Site Improvements and Off- Site Improvements and appurtenances in connection therewith. 3.1.2. Timing of Development. A.) Except as set forth in Section 3.1.2B below, regardless of any future enactment, by initiative, or otherwise, OWNER shall have the discretion to develop the Development in one phase or in multiple phases at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment and as the same is in accordance with the Development Plan. Specifically, the CITY agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to apply for and receive permits, maps, occupancy certificates and other entitlements to develop and use the Property at any time, provided that such application is made in accordance with this Agreement and the Existing Regulations. The parties hereto expressly reject the holding of Pardee Construction Company v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), as regards any authority regulating the phasing of the Development and authorize the phasing of the construction on the Property to be consistent with the Development Plan. B.) Restriction on Development. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, either express or by inference, no building permit shall be issued within the area shown on Exhibit __ and no building permits in excess of four hundred (400) total building permits shall be issued unless and until the fire station referenced in Section 4.4.2 of this Agreement is operational or the temporary station referenced in Section 4.5.1 is operational as established by the Fire Chief. OWNERs conformance to Section 4.4.2 and/or Section 4.51 shall be deemed satisfaction of the conditions of approval in the Development Plan regulating the development of Fire Station improvements and the OWNER shall not have building permits withheld on the basis of no satisfaction of such condition of approval. 3.1.3. Entitlements, Permits and Approvals - Cooperation. 3.1.3.1. Further Mitigation. In connection with the completion of the Project, OWNER shall be responsible for the satisfaction of any mitigation measures that depend on, act upon, or relate to Future Development Approvals. In connection with the issuance of any Future Development Approvals which are subject to review under CEQA, unless required under CEQA, the CITY shall not impose any environmental land use project alternatives or mitigation measures in addition to those referenced in the Project Approvals or deemed by City reasonably necessary in light of the development activity proposal. 641123 01/19/2001 -9- 3.1.3.2. Other Permits. The CITY further agrees to reasonably cooperate with OWNER, at no cost to CITY, in securing any County, State and Federal permits or authorizations which may be required in connection with development contemplated by the Development Plan. This cooperation shall not entail any economic contribution by the CITY. 3.2. Rules, Regulations and Official Policies. Except as otherwise specified in this, Development Plan,, and the Project Approvals, the rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the previsions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to Development of the Property shall be the Existing Regulations. In connection with any subsequent approval or action which the CITY is permitted or has the right to make under this Agreement relating to the Project, the CITY shall exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which complies and is consistent with this Agreement, the Existing Regulations and such other standards, terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. An overview and non-exhaustive list of Existing Regulations is listed in Attachment The CITY has certified two copies of each of the documents listed on Attachment The CITY has retained one set of the certified documents and has provided OWNER with the second set. 3.3. Reserved Authority. 3.3.1. Uniform Codes. This Agreement shall not prevent the CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies relating to uniform codes adopted by the State of California, as State Codes, such as the Uniform Building Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Mechanical Code or Uniform Fire Code, as amended, and the application of the aforementioned uniform codes is hereby approved including as the same may be amended by the CITY from time to time in CiTY's sole discretion. 3.3.2. State and Federal Laws and Regulations. In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations 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. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the CITY shall not adopt or undertake any regulation, program or action, or fail to take any action which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Agreement until the CITY makes a finding that such regulation, program action or inaction is required (as opposed to permitted) to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations after taking into consideration all reasonable alternatives. 3.3,3. Re,clulation for Health and Safety. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, the CITY shall have the right to apply the CITY regulations (including amendments to the Existing Regulations) adopted by the CiTY 641123 01/19/2001 -10- after the Effective Date, in connection with any Future Development Approvals, or deny, or impose conditions of approval on, any Future Development Approvals in the CITY's sole discretion if such application is required to protect the physical health and safety of existing or future occupants of the Property, or any portion thereof or any lands adjacent thereto. 3.4. Vested RiRht. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, OWNER is obtaining the vested rights to proceed with the Development anticipated by the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Project Approvals. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereupon, the CITY is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and welfare, a partial listing of which benefits is set forth in Section 4.1. The CITY therefore agrees to the following: 3.4.1. No Conflictin.q Enactments. Except as provided in Section 3.3 bf this Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of the CITY shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance or other measure (collectively "law") applicable to the Property which is inconsistent or in conflict with this Development Plan. Any law, whether by specific reference to the Development Agreement or otherwise, shall be considered to conflict if it has any of the following effects: (i) Limits or reduces the density or intensity of the Development as regulated by the Existing Regulations or otherwise requires any reduction or increase in the number, size or square footage of lot(s), structures, buildings or other improvements; or (ii) Applies to the Property, but is not uniformly applied by the CITY to all substantially similar development within the CITY. 3.4.2. Consistent Enactments. By way of enumeration and not limitation, the following types of enactments shall be considered consistent with this Agreement and Existing Regulations and not in conflict: (i) Relocation of structures within the Property pursuant to an application from OWNER; (ii) Changes in the phasing of the development pursuant to an application from OWNER and as approved by the City Planning and Public Works Departments; and (iii) Any enactment authorized by this Agreement. 3.4.3. Initiative Measures. It is the intent of OWNER and the CITY that no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the development of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), site development 641123 01/19/2001 -11- permits, precise plans, site development plans, building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use approved, issued or granted within the CITY, or portions of the CITY, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other limitation would restrict OWNER's right to develop the Development authorized by the Development Plan in such order and at such rate as OWNER deems appropriate as limited or regulated by this Agreement. The CITY agrees to cooperate with OWNER in all reasonable manners in order to keep this Agreement in full force and effect. In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the parties hereby agree to cooperate in defending such action. In the event of any litigation challenging the effectiveness of this Agreement, or any portion hereof, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while such litigation, including any appellate review, is pending. 3.4.4. Consistency Between This Agreement and Current Laws. The CITY represents that at the Effective Date there are no rules, regulations, ordinances, policies or other measures of the CITY in force that would interfere with the Development and use of all or any part of the Property according this Agreement and the Development Plan. 3.5. Future Amendments to Development Plan. The following rules apply to future amendments to the Development Plan: 3.5.'1. Owner's Written Consent. Any Development Plan amendment to which OWNER does not agree in writing shall not apply to the Property or the Project while this Agreement is in effect. 3.5.2. Concurrent Development A.qreement Amendment. Any Development Plan amendment requiring amendment of this Agreement shall be processed concurrently with an amendment to this Agreement. 3.5.3. Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly set forth within this Agreement, a Development Plan amendment will not alter, affect, impair or otherwise impact the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under this Agreement. 4. Obligations of the Parties. 4.'1. Benefits to CITY. The direct and indirect benefits the CITY (including, without limitation the existing and future residents of the CITY) will receive pursuant to the implementation of the Agreement generally include, but are not limited to, the following: 4.1.1. Growth Mana.qement. The Project conforms to the CITY's effort to manage growth through the use of, among other things, comprehensive planning and design, Project-wide continuity of landscaping and architectural design, design standards and layout concepts exceeding the CITY's standards for residential development, and the village-center concept. 641123 01/19/2001 -12- 4.1.2. Traffic and Circulation. The Traffic and Circulation elements of the Project conform to the proposed regional plan under consideration by the County of Riverside and to the CITY's General Plan, and are designed to reduce the impact of the average daily trips generated by the Project on arterial roads and thoroughfares by, among other things, encouraging the use of streets internal to the Project for school- related trips. 4.1.3. Schools. The provision of sites for new schools and the construction of such schools on an "up front" basis rather than "as needed" and phased to coincide with the build out of the Project, which early provision and construction will assist local school districts in meeting current area needs as well as creating adequate capacity for future needs. 4.1.4. Parks and Recreation. The public parks and other recreational facilities to be dedicated and/or constructed as provided for herein exceed the CITY's requirements for open space and parks, and contribute to meeting the need for open space and parks in the area, including, without limitation, a 40-acre regional sports park (the "Regional Park"), parking for existing CITY facilities, a potential for joint-use facilities with adjacent schools, and lighted parks and recreational facilities. 4.1.5. No Habitat Impact. Development of the Project has no presently known adverse impact on area habitat in light of the prior long term agricultural use of the Property. 4.2. Development Fees. Certain presently uncalculable or unadopted processing fees will be imposed on the Future Development Approvals as conditions of approval. OWNER shall be responsible for payment of such fees as they may become due at the charge then applicable. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the CITY agrees as follows: 4.2.1. Fee Rates. The presently adopted Development Impact Fees, as defined in Section 1.7 herein, and currently charged by the CITY shall be imposed upon Development within the jurisdiction of this Agreement at the rate in effect as of the Effective Date. The CITY hereby agrees that neither the Property nor the Development shall be subject to any new or revised fees or charges, including, without limitation, Development Impact Fees, or any land use regulations (excluding Section 3.3 and 3.4.1) that the CITY may enact, adopt, or impose on or after the Effective Date; provided, however, that nothing in this Section 4.2.7 shall, or shall be construed to, prohibit or prevent the CITY from enforcing fees, charges, or land use regulations relating to retail purchasers or End Users, including, without limitation, trash can placement and limitations on vehicle parking and End Users improvements to property; and provided further that on a case-by-case basis and subject to the CITY's consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, OWNER may elect to have the Development and the Project governed by land use regulations made available to other 641123 01/19/2001 - 13- owners and developers after the Effective Date. 4.2.2. Future Development Approval Fees/Processin.q and Application. OWNER shall pay the application and processing fees customarily imposed on the type of entitlement sought at the rate, and in the amount, imposed by CITY pursuant to the fee schedule, resolution or ordinance in effect at the time the application is deemed complete and accepted by CITY for action. 4.2.3 Fees for Public Art Open Space and Habitat Preservation. Regardless of whether the CITY enacts, adopts, or imposes on or after the Effective Date any fees of any kind or description with respect to art in public places or to preservation of open space, OWNER agrees to pay the CITY the sum of Two Hundred Dollars ($200) per individual residential dwelling unit, which funds the City shall use, in its discretion, in connection with art in public places ,open space preservation and/or habitat preservation. 4.2.4 TUMF Fees. The CiTY and OWNER acknowledge that a Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee (the "TUMF") program is currently being considered and that no such TUMF has been adopted by the County of Riverside or by the CITY. To the extent a TUMF is adopted by the CITY, the CITY and OWNER agree that OWNER's obligations under TUMF shall be deemed satisfied through: (i) OWNER's or the Property's participation in and payment of prior assessments assessed under Assessment District 159; (ii) any future assessments or assessment liens paid by OWNER or the Property assessed under Assessment District 159; (iii) all Off-site Improvements to be constructed or financed by OWNER under this Agreement; (iv) OWNER's participation in the CFD provided for in Section __ of this Agreement or in any other financing mechanism mutually agreed upon by the CITY and OWNER; {v) OWNER's agreement to dedicate to the CITY and/or a district such rights of way as may be required for Off-site Improvements including, but not limited to, drainage and roadway facilities, including, Pala Road, Deer Hollow Road, Wolf Valley Road, and Loma Linda Road; and (vi) OWNER's agreement to waive any right of or claim for reimbursement from the TUMF program with respect to the payment of such assessments, the construction of such improvements, and/or the dedication of such rights of way. 4.2.5 Credit for Development Impact Fees. Provided all condition precedents imposed on each of the credits for the various DJ.F. components set forth below are satisfied, CITY shall, upon the Effective Date or upon the date specified hereunder, credit OWNER for such D.I.F. component and consider the same components paid in full. All other D.I.F. not referenced hereunder shall be paid in full by the OWNER at the time such fee is customarily due and payable to CITY. The D.I.F. credits are: 641123 01/19/2001 - 14- (i) Fire Protection Facilities Fee Component- Residential Component Only. CITY shall credit to OWNER, and deem paid the Fire Protection Facilities fee attributable only to residential development immediately after CITY has been offered, and has accepted a grant deed to the 1.5 acre site, which site is referenced in Section 4.4.2 of this Agreement. OWNER shall pay One Hundred percent (100%) of the Fire Protection Facilities Fee component assessed against commercial development. (ii) Corporate Facilities Residential Fee Component. Provided that CITY has accepted a grant deed to the certain 1.63 acre site in Planning Area 10 (described on Attachment __) that OWNER has offered CITY, CITY shall require OWNER to pay the sum of Eighty-one Dollars and Fifty-seven Cents ($81.57) per residential unit in full satisfaction of the Corporate Facilities Fee residential component. In the event CITY does not accept the OWNER's offer of the grant deed, OWNER shall pay One Hundred percent (100%) of the Corporate Facilities Fee - Residential component. Regardless of CITY acceptance or not of the offered real property, OWNER shall pay the commercial component of the Corporate Facilities Fee. Unless and until the CITY accepts OWNER's offer, OWNER shall pay the Corporate Facilities Fee for both the residential and commercial components when each is customarily due and payable. If CITY accepts the offer any monies paid by OWNER on account of the residential component shall, at the election of OWNER, be returned to OWNER or remain on account as a credit against other fees due CITY. Notwithstanding the foregoing OWNER agrees, upon CITY's request, to sell CITY merchantable fee title to the 1.63 acre site at a price that is the equivalent of the Corporate Facilities Residential Fee Component credit as discussed in this Agreement. If CITY purchases the 1.63 acre site then OWNER shall not be accorded any credits. (iii) Park Fee Component (Reqional Park). Provided OWNER has provided a grant deed to CITY to the contiguous forty acre site described on Attachment __ and improved the site with reasonable the satisfaction of the Director of Community Services as referenced in Section 4.4.3, in conformance with this Agreement and has satisfied all condition precedents expressly relating to the Regional Park in the Development Plan, CITY shall credit to OWNER the sum of Two Million Eight Hundred Sixty-four Thousand One Hundred Twenty-seven Dollars ($2,864,127.00) against the total park fee of Three Million Six Hundred Fourteen Thousand One Hundred Twenty-seven Dollars ($3,614,127.00). (iv) Park Fee Component (Neiqhborhood and Linear Parks). Provided OWNER has improved, as required by the Development Plan and, has offered and CITY has accepted a grant deed to the six (6) acre neighborhood park and the six and seven tenths acre (6.7) Linear Park, as described in the Development Plan, CITY shall credit to OWNER the total sum of Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($750,000.00) against the total Park fee component of Three Million Six Hundred Fourteen Thousand One Hundred Twenty-seven Dollars ($3,614,127.00). The credit shall be allocated as follows: 641123 01/19/2001 -15- Six Hundred Thousand Dollars for the Neighborhood Park One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars for the Linear Park City agrees that the OWNER shall not be obligated to expend monies in excess of the respective credits to improve the neighbor and linear parks. (v) Street and Traffic Signal Fee Component. One hundred percent (100%) of the street and traffic signal fee component shall be credited to OWNER in consideration of OWNER's contribution to the Off-site Improvements related to Pala Road and Deer Hollow as described on Exhibit 4.3. Dedications and Exactions. Future Development Approvals will be reviewed in a manner consistent with the general review procedures of the CITY accorded the particular type of Future Development Approval being sought and necessary conditions imposed in a manner consistent with this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the health, safety and general welfare based mitigation measures arising from the future Development Approvals shall not be limited by this Agreement. 4.4. Related Real Property Conveyances; Conditions to Development Agreement. 4.4.1. Intent of the Parties. The CITY and OWNER agree that the timely completion and performance of the real estate transactions and the related agreements described hereafter are a material component of the consideration each party has relied upon in its respective decision to enter into this Agreement. OWNER and the CITY, individually and collectively, represent that neither party would have entered into this Agreement but for the promises of the other to transfer the interests in real property described hereunder to the other party and to enter into the related agreements. Further, OWNER and the CITY, individually and collectively, agree that the failure of any one of the conveyances or related agreements to be completed or performed in a timely manner will be an event of default under Section 10 of this Agreement. OWNER expressly acknowledges that the Street and Right-of-Way Improvements adjacent to the real property to be conveyed shall be completed to CITY's reasonable satisfaction as described in this Agreement. 4.4.2. Fire Station and Civic Use Sites. OWNER has agreed to dedicate to the CITY approximately 1.5 acres net of the public right of way and useable for the CITY's purposes of raw land in Planning Area 14 of the Specific Plan to be used as a location for a fire station ("Fire Station Parcel") improved only with Street and Right-of-Way Improvements. OWNER further agrees to grant an option to the CITY to accept OWNER's offer to grant an additional 1.63 acres of raw, unimproved land in Planning Area 10 and contiguous to the 1.5 acre fire station site to be used for civic uses ("Civic Use Parcel"). Both the Fire Station Parcel and the Civic Use Parcel are shown on Attachment 641123 01/19/2001 -16- A. Fire Station Parcel. The Fire Station Parcel conveyance is subject to the following conditions and condition precedent. (i) The OWNER shall convey the parcel by grant deed to the CITY, free and clear of all liens, encumbrances and all other matters of record to which CITY has not consented. The condition of title shall be demonstrated by an CLTA title insurance policy, without exceptions, provided to CITY by OWNER in the amount of $273,793.00. (ii) OWNER shall convey the parcel on or before One Hundred Eighty (180) days have lapsed after the Effective Date. (iii) OWNER shall, on or before thirty (30) calendar days prior to the date the permanent fire station become operations, improve the public right-of-way adjacent to the parcel to the condition required by the Development Plan this agreement including but not limited to the street and right of way improvements, and standard CITY specifications. (iv) OWNER shall designate a site to be used for a temporary fire station. The OWNER shall improve equip and fund the operations of the temporary fire station as set forth in Section (v) OWNER shall provide monies to complete the CITY's construction of the permanent Fire Station upon CITY proof, by reasonable evidence, that CITY does not have adequate monies in its D.I.F. -Fire facilities fund to complete the construction and equipping of the station. OWNER shall deliver the monies, in an amount not to exceed Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000.00), upon request by CITY. CITY agrees to repay OWNER the full amount of the sums advanced, without interest, from monies actually collected by CITY from the D.I.F. Fire Facilities Fee component (both residential and commercial components) or any monies provided to City from any source, which monies are earmarked for the construction of the subject fire station. CITY agrees that it shall not, subsequent to the effective date; pledge guarantee or other reallocated the subject fee to any other person or entity. CITY agrees that it shall execute necessary documents to demonstrate the foregoing grant of a secured interest in the subject DIF fees. CITY shall, on a quarterly basis, deliver the collected monies to OWNER. CITY shall have no obligation to pay OWNER monies from any source other than the D.I.F. - Fire Facilities Fee and shall not be obligated to cause OWNER to be reimbursed by any specific date. In further consideration of the acceptance of the Fire Station Parcel the CITY will accord the credits set forth in Section and further shall: (vi) CITY shall be solely responsible for the costs and expenses to design, construct and outfit the permanent fire station except as set forth in the Development Plan and this Agreement. 641123 01/19/2001 -17- (vii) CITY shall begin the design of the permanent fire station on the Effective Date of this Agreement and further shall use its best efforts to cause the Fire Station to be constructed at the earliest possible date. B. Civic Use Parcel. CITY shall have twelve (12) calendar months from the Effective Date to exercise its acceptance of the option to accept fee title to the Civic Use Parcel. OWNER shall ensure that the condition of title of the Civic Use Parcel is free and clear of all encumbrances and matters of record and shall demonstrate the same by delivery of an CLTA title insurance policy, without exceptions, to the benefit of CITY, in the amount of either the acquisition price or the fee credit. CITY may elect to purchase the Civic Use Parcel pursuant to the terms specified in this Agreement. C. CITY's Right of Entry. OWNER agrees to grant CITY a right of entry effective on the Effective Date of this Agreement for purposes of real property inspection, survey, grading and all activities CITY deems necessary to further the construction of the Fire Station. All activities conducted by CITY on the real property shall be at CITY's sole cost and expense. CITY shall indemnify and hold Owner and the real property harmless from any loss, claim or damage (including without limitation reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses of litigation) arising out of, or resulting from, CITY's work and activity upon the real property or mechanics' liens or claims of liens based thereon. CITY shall be entitled to contest any mechanics' lien or claim of lien provided the CITY shall post and record a bond satisfying the requirements of the laws of the State. 4.4.3. Parks. OWNER is required pursuant to the Development Plan to dedicate certain acreage of the Project to the City for use as public parks. Additionally OWNER has agreed to dedicate additional land and as described below, to construct, at its sole expense, the improvements for certain public parks and facilities, and to devote certain acreage of the Project for use as recreational facilities for the residents of the Project. OWNER's mandatory and voluntary dedication and/or construction of such public parks and facilities and private recreational facilities shall be subject to the . following terms and conditions: (i) All real property shall be conveyed free and clear of any encumbrance of record. OWNER shall demonstrate the condition of title pursuant to CLTA title insurance policies, without exemptions, in amount equal to the fair market value of the land. (ii) OWNER agrees to convey fee title to the CITY on or before One Hundred Eighty (180) days have lapsed after the Effective Date, as is and without constructing any park improvements, 1.5 acres in Planning Area 4 of the Specific Plan for Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park. Additionally, and prior to the conveyance to CITY, OWNER shall complete all Street and Right-of-Way Improvements required by the CITY pursuant to its standard street specifications. (iii) Owner agrees to convey fee title to the CITY after the 641123 01/19/2001 -18- improvement, and the lapse of the ninety (90) day maintenance period, 6 acres in Planning Area 11 of the Specific Plan for the Neighborhood Park. The six-acre neighborhood shall be improved to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Community Services, the ninety (90) day maintenance period shall have lapsed and the conveyance shall have occurred on or before the issuance of the six hundredth building permit within the Property. (iv) Owner agrees to convey fee title to the CITY and improve, per the conditions in the Development Plan, 6.7 acres for Linear Park and the Activity Nodes. The first phase north of Wolf Valley shall be completed and the ninety (90) day maintenance period shall have lapsed prior to the issuance of the 400th building permit within the Project. The second phase, comprised of the area south of Wolf Valley Road shall be improved and the ninety (90) day maintenance period shall have lapsed prior to the issuance of the 1400th building permit in the Project. (v) OWNER agrees to devote approximately 3.5 acres in Planning Area 14 of the Specific Plan for a recreational facility to be used by the residents of the Project. (vi) OWNER agrees to convey fee title by Grant Deed to the CITY of 40 acres in Planning Area 24 of the Specific Plan for a regional park (the "Regional Park") as shown on Attachment__. Except for the following the CITY shall be solely responsible for the costs and expenses of the design and construction of the Regional Park, which design and construction shall be commenced immediately following OWNER's conveyance of the 40 acres to the CITY. OWNER shall, at its own cost, upon request by CITY construct a twenty-four foot wide (24') all weather roadway to the standards established by the CITY, within the Deer Hollow Road right-of-way. The two lanes shall commence at Pala Road and shall terminate at the point that the Community Services Director of City shall designate. This requirement shall terminate if the school district, or any third party, completes the full improvement of Deer Hollow Road. OWNER shall convey the above-described parks to the City in the required condition of title, known on or before one hundred eighty day (180) have lapsed after the Effective Date unless the Community Service Director authorizes an alternate date to transfer title. Of the 40 acres comprising the Regional Park, OWNER's dedication of 15.69 acres shall satisfy OWNER's obligations under the park component of the development impact fee as provided for in Section .... (iii), and OWNER's dedication of the remaining 12.02 acres shall constitute a gift to the CITY. 641123 01/19/2001 - 19- 4.4.4. Quimby Credits. Upon improvement, actual conveyance to and acceptance by CITY of the parkland referenced above the CITY hereby agrees to credit OWNER's obligations of 28.23 acres under CITY's subdivision/Quimby parkland acreage requirements as satisfied and CITY shall not exact any further contribution from OWNER. (i) Regional Park - 12.29 acres of the total 40 acres. (ii) 1.5 acres in Planning Area 4 of the Specific Plan at Kent Hintergardt Memorial Park. Neighborhood Park. 6 acres in Planning Area 11 of the Specific Plan for the (iv) 6.7 acres in Planning Area __ of the Specific Plan for Linear Park and the Activity Nodes. 4.4.5 Liens~ Encumbrances and Environmental Conditions. All real property dedicated to the CITY pursuant to this Agreement shall be free and clear of any and all matters of record (excepting all non delinquent taxes and assessments), including but not limited to, deeds of trust, liens, or other encumbrances of record that would prevent the CITY from using such dedicated facility for its intended use as identified herein. Further the real property shall be warranted to be free of any known environmental conditions that would prevent, restrict or cause CITY to fund hazardous material/contamination/toxic remediation activities so as to allow the real property to be used as intended by CITY. Owner shall provide CITY copies of all reports, investigations and analysis that the environmental condition of the real property. 4.5. Additional Public Improvements/Performance Standard. 4.5.1. Temporary Fire Station. In the event OWNER desires to obtain building permits for any improvements outside of Planning Area 1 through 6 of the Specific Plan prior to the completion of the permanent fire station then OWNER shall, prior to the issuance of the building permits in Planning Areas 7 through 24 of the Specific Plan, at its own sole cost and expense complete the following: (i) Obtain the Fire Chief's approval of the (a) site selected for temporary station and (b) the scope of improvements, on and offsite for the temporary station; (ii) Obtain all necessary permits and entitlements for the improvement of the temporary fire station; (iii) Construct/improve the site consistent with the approvals and permits issued for the temporary station; 641123 01/19/2001 -20- (iv) Provide and/or fund, at the sole discretion of the Fire Chief, the equipment and personnel made necessary to appropriately operate the temporary fire station. The temporary station shall operate until the permanent fire station is deemed sufficiently operational, by the Fire Chief, so as to respond to the five-minute service needs within the specific plan. 4.5.2. Sound Wall. In the event the CITY determines a sound wall is required after review of the acoustic study discussed below the, OWNER shall be solely responsible, for funding the cost of constructing a minimum six-foot high wall intended to buffer and attenuate sound, along the Pala Road corridor from Wolf Valley Road to Club House Road. The specific location, height and construction materials shall be determined by the recommendations set forth in a noise attenuation acoustical study to be commissioned by and funded by OWNER as approved by the CITY. The study shall utilize the standards and criteria set forth in the City's General Plan as the standard that noise level must be mitigated to conform with. The study shall be commenced not less than thirty (30) calendar days after the Effective Date. The CITY shall present the findings of the study to the effected residents and, upon the consent of the necessary property owners, shall determine if the sound wall should be constructed. In the event all necessary property owners do not consent to the construction of the sound wall then the wall shall not be constructed. The construction of the sound attenuation wall described as necessary by the study shall be constructed by the OWNER and the construction shall commence not less than ninety (90) calendar days after the study is completed and approved by the CITY. CITY, to the extent available, shall contribute funds derived from third parties to OWNER to assist in funding the attenuation wall construction and further shall use its best efforts to cause third parties to contribute to the cost of the attenuation wall construction. 4.5.3. Pala Road/Draina.qe Facilities. CITY acknowledges that Pala Road (as defined in the Development Plan) and drainage facilities from Deer Hollow Road to Temecula Creek shall be constructed by OWNER consistent with the Development Plan. 4.6. Offsite Improvement Fundinq. CITY and OWNER agree that the improvements defined in Section 1.7 of this agreement are necessary for the beneficial development of the Development. Both further agree that the funding of the OFF SITE improvement is anticipated to be as set forth hereunder: (i) OWNERS share. The OWNERS fair share of the necessary funding shall be derived from a community facilities district (C.F.D.) or some other mutually acceptable funding mechanism. The OWNERS fair share shall be utilized to fund that podion of the OFF SITE improvements shown, by a benefit assessment engineering study, to be attributable to the impacts arising from OWNERS 641123 01/19/2001 -21- Development. The CFD or other funding mechanism shall be in place prior to the issuance of the first building permit to the OWNER. (ii) Remainder share. The remainder of the monies necessary to construct the OFF SITE improvement not funded by the OWNER shall come from non City sources legally responsible of who otherwise elect to participate is such funding. (iii) In the event OWNER elects, or is required to contribute funds that are not supported by the engineering study discussed in Subsection (i) above, then OWNER shall be reimbursed the principal amount of those excessive expenditures from the monies actually collected under Subsection (ii) above. 4.7. Entitlements. 4.7.1 Tentative Tract Map. The CITY hereby agrees that tentative tract maps for the Project approved by the CITY shall have an initial term of five (5) years and may be extended upon prior written request of OWNER, for two additional terms of two (2) years each; provided, however, that the term of such tentative tract map, as extended, shall not exceed the term of this Agreement. 4.7.2 Lot Line Adjustments. Adjustments to lot lines required for purposes beneficial to the Project, including, without limitation, refinement and enhancement of the specific plan and grant deeds, shall be processed on an "administrative approval" basis only. 4.8 Use Restrictions. OWNER agrees to place such restrictions, prohibitions, etc. as are reasonably necessary on the title to the real property located in Planning Areas 12 and 13 such that an anchor tenant or End User in one such Planning Area cannot restrict, prohibit, or otherwise limit the land use by a tenant or End User in the other such Planning Area. 5. Further Assurances to OWNER Re.qardin.q Exercise of Reserved Authority. 5.1. Adoption of General Plan and Grantin.q of Other Project Approvals. In preparing and adopting any general plan amendment, zoning district change 'and in granting the other Project Approvals, the CITY reserves its right to and shall consider the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the CITY. 5.2. Assurances to OWNER. The parties further acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to the CITY pursuant to this Agreement are in consideration for and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement. Accordingly, while recognizing that the Development of the Property may be affected by exercise of the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. ("Reserved Authority") or this Agreement, OWNER is concerned that normally the 641123 01/19/2001 - 22- judiciary extends to local agencies significant deference in the adoption of land use regulations which might permit the CITY in violation of the Reserved Authority, to attempt to apply regulations which are inconsistent with the Project Approvals pursuant to the exercise of the Reserved Authority. Accordingly, OWNER desires assurances that the CITY shall not and the CITY agrees that it shall not further restrict or limit the development of the Property in violation of this Agreement except in strict accordance with the Reserved Authority. 5.3. Judicial Review. Based on the foregoing, in the event OWNER judicially (including by way of a reference proceeding) challenges the application of a future land use regulation as being in violation of this Agreement and as not being a land use regulation adopted pursuant to the Reserved Authority, OWNER shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that such rule, regulation or policy is inconsistent with the Existing Regulations and the Project Approvals and the CITY shall thereafter bear the burden of proof in establishing that such regulation was adopted pursuant to and in accordance with the Reserved Authority and was not applied by the CITY in violation of this Agreement. 6. Indemnification. Except to the extent of the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties (as defined below), OWNER, and with respect to the portion of the Property transferred to them, the transferee agree: (i) to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against each and every claim, action, proceeding, cost, fee, legal cost, damage, award or liability of any nature arising from alleged damages caused to third parties and alleging that the CITY is liable therefore as a direct or indirect result of the CITY's approval of this Development Agreement. OWNER's duties under this Section 6(i) are solely subject to and conditioned upon the Indemnified Parties' written request to OWNER to defend and/or indemnify the CITY. Without in any way limiting the provisions of this Section 6(i), the parties hereto agree that this Section 6(i) shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 2778 in effect as of the Agreement Date. (ii) during the term of this Agreement, to defend the CITY and its agents, officers, contractors, attorney, and employees (the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any claims or proceeding against the Indemnified Parties to set aside, void or annul the approval of this Development Agreement. The CITY shall retain settlement authority with respect to any matter provided that prior to settling any such lawsuit or claim, OWNER shall provide the CITY with a minimum ten (10) business days written notice of its intent to settle such lawsuit or claim. If the CITY (in its reasonable discretion) does not desire to settle such lawsuit or claim, it may notify OWNER of the same, in which event OWNER may still elect to settle the lawsuit or claim as to itself, but the CITY may elect to continue such lawsuit, but at OWNER's cost and expense, so long as the CiTY's decision is predicated upon a legitimate and articulated threat to either the exercise of its police powers or a risk of harm to those present within the CITY. 641123 01/19/2001 - 23- 7. Relationship of Parties. The contractual relationship between the CITY and OWNER is such that OWNER is an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of the CITY. The CITY and OWNER hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained in this Agreement or in any document executed in connection with the Project shall be construed as making the CITY and OWNER joint ventures or partners. 8. Amendment or Cancellation of A.qreement. This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. No amendment or modification of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each party hereto. This provision shall not limit the CITY's or OWNER's remedies as provided by Section 10. 9. Periodic Review of Compliance with A.qreement. 9.1. Periodic Review. The CITY and OWNER shall review this Agreement at least once every 12-month period from the date this Agreement is executed. The CITY shall notify OWNER in writing of the date for review at least thirty (30) days prior thereto. Such periodic review shall be conducted in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1. 9.2. Good Faith Compliance. During each periodic review, OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. OWNER agrees to furnish such reasonable evidence of good faith compliance as the CITY, in the exercise of'its reasonable discretion, may require. If requested by OWNER, the CITY agrees to provide to OWNER, a certificate that OWNER or a Development Transferee is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement, provided OWNER reimburses the CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by the CITY with respect thereto. 9.3. Failure to Conduct Annual Review. The failure of the CITY to conduct the annual review shall not be an OWNER default. Further, OWNER shall not be entitled to any remedy for the CITY failure to conduct this annual review. 9.4. Initiation of Review by City Council. In addition to the annual review, the CITY Council may at any time initiate a review of this Agreement by giving written notice to OWNER. Within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the CITY Council of OWNER's good faith compliance with this Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the same manner as provided for the annual review. The City Council shall initiate its review pursuant to this Section 9.4 only if it has probable cause to believe the CITY's general health, safety or welfare is at risk as a result of specific acts or failures to act by OWNER. 641123 01/19/2001 -24- 9.5. Administration of A.qreement. Any final decision by the CITY staff concerning the interpretation and administration of this Agreement and Development of the Property in accordance herewith may be appealed by OWNER to the City Council, provided that any such appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after OWNER receives written notice that the staff decision is final. The City Council shall render, at a noticed public hearing, its decision to affirm, reverse or modify the staff decision within thirty (30) days after the appeal was filed. 9.6. Availability of Documents. If requested by OWNER, the CITY agrees to provide to OWNER copies of any documents, reports or other items reviewed, accumulated or prepared by or for the CITY in connection with any periodic compliance review by the CITY, provided OWNER reimburses the CITY for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by the CITY with respect thereto. The CITY shall respond to OWNER's request on or before ten (10) business days have elapsed from the CITY's receipt of such request. 10. Events of Default: Remedies and Termination. Unless amended or canceled as provided in Section 8, or modified or suspended pursuant to Government Code Section 65869.5 or terminated pursuant to this Section 10, this Agreement is enforceable by either party hereto. 10.1. Defaults by Owner. If the CITY determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the CITY shall, by written notice to OWNER, specify the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply and state the steps OWNER must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from the CITY specifying the manner in which OWNER has failed to so comply, OWNER does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then OWNER shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this Agreement. The CITY may terminate this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1. OWNER agrees that its default hereunder is a conclusive representation that it is consenting to the cancellation of this Agreement. In event of default by OWNER, except as provided in Section 10.3, the CITY's sole remedy for any breach of this Agreement by OWNER shall be the CITY's right to terminate this Agreement. 10.2. Defaults by CITY. If OWNER determines on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence that the CITY has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, OWNER shall, by written notice to the CITY, specify the manner in which the CITY has failed to so comply and state the steps the CITY must take to bring itself into compliance. If, within sixty (60) days after the effective date of notice from OWNER specifying the manner in which the CITY has failed to so comply, the CITY does not commence all steps reasonably necessary to bring itself into compliance as required and thereafter diligently pursue such steps to completion, then the CITY shall be deemed to be in default under the terms of this 641123 01/19/2001 - 25- Agreement and OWNER may terminate this Agreement and, in addition, may pursue any other remedy available at law or equity, including specific performance as set forth in Section 10.3. 10.3. Specific Performance Remedy. Due to the size, nature and scope of the Project, it will 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 and provide for other benefits. 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. For the above reasons, the CITY and OWNER agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if the CITY fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement and that OWNER shall have the right to seek and obtain specific performance as a remedy for any breach of this Agreement. The CITY and OWNER further acknowledge that, if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement, the CITY shall have the right to refuse to issue any permits or other approvals which OWNER would otherwise have been entitled to pursuant to this Agreement. Therefore, the CITY's remedy of terminating this Agreement shall be sufficient in most circumstances if OWNER fails to carry out its obligations hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the CITY issues a permit or other approval pursuant to this Agreement in reliance (explicitly stated in writing) upon a specified condition being satisfied by OWNER in the future, and if OWN,ER then fails to satisfy such condition, the CITY shall be entitled to specific performance for the sole purpose of causing OWNER to satisfy such condition. The CITY's right to specific performance shall be limited to those circumstances set forth above, and the CITY shall have no right to seek specific performance to cause OWNER to otherwise proceed with the Development of the Project in any manner. 10.4. Institution of Le.qal Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, OWNER or the CITY may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof to recover damages for any default, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Such legal action shall be heard by a reference from the Riverside County Superior Court pursuant to the reference procedures of the California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 638, et seq. OWNER and the CITY shall agree upon a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances of the controversy before him. If OWNER and the CITY are unable to agree on a referee within ten (10) days of a written request to do so by either party hereto, either party may seek to have one appointed pursuant to the California Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of such proceeding 641123 01/19/2001 - 26- shall initially be borne equally by the parties. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section 10.4 shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. 10.5. Estoppel Certificates. Either party may at any time deliver written notice to the other party requesting an estoppel certificate (the "Estoppel Certificate") stating: 10.5.1 The Agreement is in full rome and effect and is a binding obligation of the parties. 10.5.2 The Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended, identifying the amendments. 10.5.3 No default in the performance of the requesting party's obligations under the Agreement exists or, if a default does exist, the nature and amount of any default. A party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting party within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. The City Manager or any person designated by the City Manager may sign Estoppel Certificates on behalf of the CITY. Any officer of OWNER may sign on behalf of OWNER. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees and mortgagees. 10.5.4 In the event that one party requests an Estoppel Certificate from the other, the requesting party shall reimburse the other party for all reasonable and direct costs and fees incurred by such party with respect thereto. 11. Waivers and Delays. 11.1. No Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the previsions of this Agreement by the other party, and failure by a party to exercise its rights upon a default by the other party hereto, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to demand strict compliance by such other party in the future. 11.2. Third Parties. Non-performance shall not be excused because of a failure of a third person, except as provided in Section 11.3 11.3. Force Majeure. OWNER shall not 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 OWNER's control, government regulations (including, without limitation, local, state and federal environmental and natural resoume regulations), voter initiative or referenda, moratoria (including, without limitation, any "development moratorium" as that term is applied in Government Code Section 66452.6) or judicial decisions. 641123 01/19/2001 -27- 11.4. Extensions. The Term of this Agreement and the time for performance by OWNER or the CITY of any of its obligations hereunder or pursuant to the Project Approvals shall be extended by the period of time that any of the events described in Section 11.3 exist and/or prevent performance of such obligations. In addition, the Term shall be extended for delays arising from the following events for a time equal to the duration of each delay which occurs during the Term: 11.4.1. Litigation. The period of time after the Effective Date during which litigation related to the Project Approvals or having the actual effect of delaying implementation of the Project is pending, including litigation pending on the Effective Date. This period shall include any time during which appeals may be filed or are pending. 11.4.2. Government Agencies. Any delay resulting from the acts or omissions of the CITY or any other governmental agency or public utility and beyond the reasonable control of OWNER except those related to the normal and customary processing of Future Development Approvals or any modifications to the Development Plan. 11.5. Notice of Delay. OWNER shall give notice to the CITY of any delay which OWNER believes to have occurred as a result of the occurrence of any of the events described in Section 11.3. For delays of six months or longer, this notice shall be given within a reasonable time after OWNER becomes aware that the delay has lasted six months or more. In no event, however, shall notice of a delay of any length be given later than thirty days after the end of the delay or thirty days before the end of the Term, whichever comes first. 12. 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, return receipt requested. Notices required to be given to the CITY shall be addressed as follows: City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: City Planner With a copy to: Richards, Watson & Gershon Thirty-Eighth Floor 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, CA 90071-1469 Attention: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney 641123 01/19/2001 - 28- Notices required to be given to OWNER shall be addressed as follows: S-Pacific Murdy, LLC 10630 Town Center Drive, Suite 129 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attention: William Griffith With a copy to: AIhadeff & Solar, LLP 41530 Enterprise Circle South, Suite 120 Temecula, CA 92590-4677 Attention: Samuel C. Alhadeff, Esq. Any notice given as required herein shall be deemed given only if in writing and upon delivery personally or by independent courier service. A party may change its address for notices by giving notice in writing to the other party as required herein and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 13. Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is brought by either party against the other for breach of this Agreement, including actions derivative from the performance of this Agreement, or to compel performance under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of its costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and shall also be entitled to recover its contribution for the costs of the referee referred to in Section 10.4 above as an item of damage and/or recoverable costs. 14. Recordinq. This Agreement and any amendment or cancellation hereto shall be recorded, at no cost to the CITY, in the Official Records of Riverside County by the City Clerk within the period required by Section 65868.5 of the Government Code. 15. Effect of A,qreement on Title. 15.1. Effect on Title. OWNER and the CITY agree that this Agreement shall not continue as an encumbrance against any portion of the Property as to which this Agreement has terminated. 15.2. Encumbrances and Lenders' Ri.qhts. OWNER and the CITY hereby agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit any owner of any interest in the Property, or any portion thereof, at any time or from time to time in any manner, at its or their sole discretion, from encumbering the Property, the improvements thereon, or any portion thereof with any mortgage, deed of trust sale and leaseback arrangement or other security device. The CITY acknowledges that any Lender (as hereinafter defined) may require certain interpretations of or modifications to the Agreement or the project and the CITY agrees, upon request, from time to time, to meet with the property owner(s) and/or representatives of such Lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. The CiTY further agrees that it will not 641123 01/19/2001 -29- unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification to the extent such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. A default under this Agreement shall not defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Lender. The mortgagee of a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust or holder of any other security interest in the Property or any portion thereof and their successors and assigns, including without limitation the purchaser at a judicial or non-judicial foreclosure sale or a person or entity which obtains title by deed-in-lieu of foreclosure ("Lender") shall be entitled to receive a copy of any notice of Default (as defined in Section 10.1 hereof) delivered to OWNER and, as a pre-condition to the institution of legal proceedings or termination proceedings, the CITY shall deliver to all such Lenders written notification of any default by OWNER in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement which is not cured within sixty (60) days (the "Second Default Notice") and shall allow the Lender(s) an opportunity to cure such defaults as set forth herein. The Second Notice of Default shall specify in detail the alleged default and the suggested means to cure it. After receipt of the Second Default Notice, each such Lender shall have the right, at its sole option, within ninety (90) days to cure such default or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within that ninety (90) day period, to commence to cure such default, in which case no default shall exist and the CITY shall take no further action. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default shall be a default which can only be remedied by such Lender obtaining possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, and such Lender seeks to obtain possession, such · Lender shall have until ninety (90) days after the date obtaining such possession to cure or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within such period, then to commence to cure such default. Further, a Lender shall not be required to cure any non-curable default of OWNER, and any such default shall be deemed cured if any lender obtains possession. 16. Severability of Terms. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be determined invalid, void or unenfomeable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby if the tribunal finds that the invalidity was not a material part of consideration for either party. The covenants contained herein are mutual covenants. The covenants contained herein constitute conditions to the concurrent or subsequent performance by the party benefited thereby of the covenants to be performed hereunder by such benefited party. 17. Subsequent Amendment to Authorizin.q Statute. This Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation in effect as of the Agreement Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 3.3.2 above, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Agreement unless necessary for this Agreement to be enfomeable or required by law or unless this Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Agreement Date. 641123 01/19/2001 - 30- 18. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms. 18.1. Interpretation and Governing Law. The language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties understand and agree that this Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of the CITY, and in particular, the CITY's police powers. In this regard, the parties understand and agree that this Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of the CITY's governmental powers over the Property. 18.2. Section Headings. All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement. 18.3. Gender. The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine; "shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive. 18.4. No Joint and Several Liability. At any time that there is more than one OWNER, no breach hereof by an OWNER shall constitute a breach by any other OWNER. Any remedy, obligation, or liability, including but not limited to the obligations to defend and indemnify the CITY, arising by reason of such breach shall be applicable solely to the OWNER that committed the breach. However, the CITY shall send a copy of any notice of violation to all OWNERS, including those not in breach. 18.5. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 18.6. Recitals. All Recitals set forth herein are incorporated in this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. 18.7. Entire A.qreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and the Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussion and agreements between the parties, and no parol evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof. 19. Extension of Maps. In accordance with Government Code Section 66452.6(a), any tentative map approved which relates to all or a portion of the Property shall be extended for the greater of (i) the Term of the Agreement or (ii) expiration of the tentative map pursuant to Section 66452.6. 641123 01/19/2001 -31- 20. Not for Benefit of Third Parties. This Agreement and all provisions hereof are for the exclusive benefit of the CITY and OWNER and its Development Transferees and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any third party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year dated below. Dated: ,2001 "CITY" CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation By:. Name: Title: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney Dated: .,2001 "OWNER" S-P MURDY, LLC, a California limited liability 641123 01/19/2001 - 32- company By: Name: Title: 641123 01/19/2001 -33- State of California ) ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , 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(/es), 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 of Notary State of California ) ) ss County of Riverside ) On before me, , 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(/es), 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 of Notary 641123 01/19/2001 -34- EXHIBIT "A" (Legal Description) 641123 01/I9/2001 -35- EXHIBIT "B" (Specific Plan Development Standards) 641123 01/19/2001 - 36- EXHIBIT "C" (Zoning District Development Standards) 641123 01/19/2001 -37- EXHIBIT "D" (Existing Regulations) 641123 01/19/2001 -38- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. Definitions ................................................................................................................... 3 1.1. Authorizing Ordinance ............................................................................................ 3 1.2. CITY ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. City Council ............................................................................................................ 3 1.4. Development ........................................................................................................... 3 1.5. Development Agreement Legislation ..................................................................... 4 1.6. Development Fees ................................................................................................... 4 1.7. Development Plan ................................................................................................... 4 1.8. Effective Date ......................................................................................................... 4 1.9. End User .................................................................................................................. 4 1.10. Existing Regulations ........................................................................................... 4 1.11. Future Development Approvals .......................................................................... 4 1.12. Non-end User ...................................................................................................... 5 1.13. Off-site Improvements ........................................................................................ 5 1.14. On-site Improvements ......................................................................................... 5 1.15. OWNER .............................................................................................................. 5 1.16. Planning Commission ......................................................................................... 5 1.17. Project ................................................................................................................. 5 1.18. Project Approval ................................................................................................. 5 1.19. Specific Plan ....................................................................................................... 5 2. General Provisions ...................................................................................................... 6 2.1. Binding Covenants .................................................................................................. 6 2.2. Interest of OWNER ................................................................................................. 6 2.3. Term ........................................................................................................................ 6 2.4. Termination ............................................................................................................. 6 2.5. Transfers and Assignments ..................................................................................... 6 2.5.1. Right to Assign to End User ........................................................................... 7 2.5.2. Right to Assign to Non-End User ................................................................... 7 2.5.3. Rights of Successors and Assigns ................................................................... 7 2.6. Amendment of Development Agreement ............................................................... 7 2.6.1. Initiation of Amendment ................................................................................. 8 2.6.2. Procedure ........................................................................................................ 8 2.6.3. Consent ........................................................................................................... 8 2.6.4. Operating Memoranda .................................................................................... 8 3. Description of Development ....................................................................................... 8 3.1. Development and Control of Development ............................................................ 8 3.1.1. Project ............................................................................................................. 8 3.1.2. Timing of Development .................................................................................. 9 3.1.3. Entitlements, Permits and Approvals - Cooperation ....................................... 9 184051/6 2000.001/DRAFT 011901 39 3.2. Rules, Regulations and Official Policies .............................................................. 10 3.3. Reserved Authority ............................................................................................... 10 3.3.1. Uniform Codes .............................................................................................. 10 3.3.2. State and Federal Laws and Regulations ...................................................... 10 3.3.3. Regulation for Health and Safety .................................................................. 10 3.4. Vested Right .......................................................................................................... 11 3.4.1. No Conflicting Enactments ........................................................................... 11 3.4.2. Consistent Enactments .................................................................................. 11 3.4.3. Initiative Measures ........................................................................................ 11 3.4.4. Consistency Between This Agreement and Cra-rent Laws ............................ 12 3.5. Future Amendments to Development Plan ........................................................... 12 3.5.1. Owner's Written Consent ............................................................................. 12 3.5.2. Concurrent Development Agreement Amendment ....................................... 12 3.5.3. Effect of Amendment .................................................................................... 12 Obligations of the Parties .......................................................................................... 12 4.1. Benefits to CITY ................................................................................................... 12 4.1.1. Growth Management ..................................................................................... 12 4.1.2. Traffic and Circulation .................................................................................. 13 4.1.3. Schools .......................................................................................................... 13 4.1.4. Infrastructure Improvements .......................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.1.5. Parks and Recreation ..................................................................................... 13 4.1.6. No Impact Habitat ......................................................................................... 13 4.2. Development Fees ................................................................................................. 13 4.2.1. Fee Rates ....................................................................................................... 13 4.2.2. Facilities Fees ................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.2.3. Credit for Fees ............................................................................................... 14 4.2.4. Future Fees ..................................................... Error.* Bookmark not defined. 4.3. Dedications and Exactions .................................................................................... 16 4.4. Related Real Property Conveyances; Conditions to Development Agreement.... 16 4.4.1. Intent of the Parties ....................................................................................... 16 4.4.2. Fire Station Location ..................................................................................... 16 4.4.3. Parks .............................................................................................................. 18 4.4.4. Quimby Fees ................................................................................................. 20 4.4.5. Development Impact Fees .............................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.4.6. Liens and Encumbrances .............................................................................. 20 4.5. Streets .................................................................................................................... 20 4.5.1. Wolf Valley Road ......................................................................................... 20 4.5.2. All Other Streets ............................................ Error.* Bookmark not defined. 4.6. Off-site Improvements ........................................... Error.* Bookmark not defined. 4.6.1. Timing of Construction .................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.6.2. Owner's Contribution to Construction Costs. Error.* Bookmark not defined. 4.6.3. Deductions Against Owner's Contributions..Error! Bookmark not defined. 4.6.4. Community Facilities District ....................................................................... 21 184051/6 2000.001/DRAFT 011901 40 4.7. Entitlements .......................................................................................................... 22 4.7.1. Tentative Tract Map ...................................................................................... 22 4.7.2. Lot Line Adjustments .................................................................................... 22 5. Further Assurances to OWNER Regarding Exercise of Reserved Authority ........... 22 5.1. Adoption of General Plan and Granting of Other Project Approvals ................... 22 5.2. Assurances to OWNER ......................................................................................... 22 5.3. Judicial Review ..................................................................................................... 23 6. Indemnification ......................................................................................................... 23 7. Relationship of Parties .............................................................................................. 24 8. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement .............................................................. 24 9. Periodic Review of Compliance with Agreement ..................................................... 24 9.1. Periodic Review .................................................................................................... 24 9.2. Good Faith Compliance ........................................................................................ 24 9.3. Failure to Conduct Annual Review ....................................................................... 24 9.4. Initiation of Review by City Council .................................................................... 24 9.5. Administration of Agreement ............................................................................... 25 9.6. Availability of Documents .................................................................................... 25 10. Events of Default: Remedies and Termination ........................................................ 25 10.1. Defaults by Owner ............................................................................................ 25 10.2. Defaults by CITY .............................................................................................. 25 10.3. Specific Performance Remedy .......................................................................... 26 10.4. Institution of Legal Action ................................................................................ 26 10.5. Estoppel Certificates ......................................................................................... 27 11. Waivers and Delays .................................................................................................. 27 11.1. No Waiver ......................................................................................................... 27 11.2. Third Parties ...................................................................................................... 27 11.3. Force Majeure ................................................................................................... 27 11.4. Extensions ......................................................................................................... 28 1'1.4.1. Litigation ....................................................................................................... 28 11.4.2. Government Agencies ................................................................................... 28 11.5. Notice of Delay .................... ............................................................................. 28 12. Notices ...................................................................................................................... 28 13. Attorneys' Fees .......................................................................................................... 29 14. Recording .................................................................................................................. 29 15. Effect of Agreement on Title .................................................................................... 29 15.1. Effect on Title ................................................................................................... 29 15.2. Encumbrances and Lenders' Rights .................................................................. 29 16. Severability of Terms ................................................................................................ 30 17. Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute ....................................................... 30 18. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms ..................................................... 31 18.1. Interpretation and Governing Law .................................................................... 31 18.2. Section Headings .............................................................................................. 31 18.3. Gender ............................................................................................................... 31 184051/6 2000.001/DRAFT011901 18.4. No Joint and Several Liability .......................................................................... 31 18.5. Time of Essence ................................................................................................ 31 18.6. Recitals .............................................................................................................. 31 18.7. Entire Agreement .............................................................................................. 31 19. Extension of Maps .................................................................................................... 31 20. Not for Benefit of Third Parties ................................................................................ 32 2000.001/DP~FT 011901 42 II~T~RIOR LOOP ROAD ATTACHMENT NO. 6 RESPONSE LETTER FROM THE APPLICANT REGARDING LEVEL OF SERVICE D R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\cc staffreport 1-23-01.doc ALHADEFF & SOLAR, LLP A LIMITED LLABIL~FY pARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 41530 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE SOUTH, SUITE 120 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 MAIN TELEPHONE: (909) 296-5000 FACSIMILE: (909) 296-5006 Offices in San Diego and Temecula. California RECEIVED CITY OF TEMEC'LIL~ jAN 1 6 2001 January 16, 2001 ~WJEL C. ALHADEFF SALHADEFF(~.ASLAW1 .COM (9O9) 29~5000 Mr. Shawn Nelson City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Re: The Wolf Creek Commumty ( Commumty ) Dear Mr. Nelson: During the last City Council meeting on the Community it became apparent that there was only one issue to be resolved. That issue relates to a Level of Service D Condition for certain intersections on State Ronte 79 South ( "SR 79 South"). Upon review and further work, Mr. Griffith has asked that I submit this information to you for distribution to the City Council and the appropriate department heads. We would be happy to meet with you and the various staff members to discuss the attachments. There are a series of attachments to this letter, which we believe are extremely helpful in solving this issue. Those attachments are as follows: 1. Exhibit "A" is a copy of certain pages from the City of Temecula's General Plan concerning the circulation element, as it specifically relates to SR 79 South and Interstate 15 ("I-15"). I am certain that everyone will acknowledge that both of these improvements are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State of California and administered by CalTrans. Accordingly, the City has to deal with a State Route and an Interstate bisecting its city limits. The pages attached from the Circulation Element acknowledges this particular issue and acknowledges some of the critical features that relate to the two intersections of Bedford Court and La Paz. The General Plan also recognizes certain functional design issues and guidelines with regard to the I-15. We have underlined what we consider to be critical statements from the relevant pages of the General Plan. 2. Exhibit "B" is a review by RI( Engineering Group, Inc., the traffic engineer for the Community. As I am sure Mr. Hughes will acknowledge, Mr. Kahn is a well known and recognized expert with regard to these issues and has a great deal of practical and professional experience in dealing specifically with issues in Southwest Riverside County with an emphasis on areas in and contiguous to Temecula. Mr. Kahn's letter report of January 12, makes it very clear that the capacity on SR 79 South will not reach a Level of Service D for Mr. Shawn Nelson January 16, 2001 Page 2 ALHADEFF & SOLAR~ LLP another twelve years. This analysis even includes an annual growth rate of 5% compounded annually, a significantly high assumption with regard to this kind ora report. We would ask that Mr. Hughes specifically review this document. Mr. Kahn would be pleased to meet with Mr. Hughes and answer any questions concerning this analysis, 3. Exhibit "C" to this letter is a revised "Condition for Level of Service D at Interstate 15 and State Ronte 79 South". We have attached both an original and a redlined copy to show the changes from the original exhibit, which we submitted with our letter of January 5, 2001. We were compelled to make these changes as a result of comments made at the City Council meeting of Tuesday, January 9, 2001. I cannot sufficiently emphasize the fact that this condition is one that we still have a challenge with even accepting. Also, please understand that this condition does not mean that we acknowledge or agree that the City has any jurisdiction or control over SR 79 South, 1-15, or any of their respective improvements. However, the condition as presently drafted would be agreeable to Mr. Griffith. This condition, we believe, carefully tracks the information we received at the City Council meeting. 4. Exhibit "D", the fourth and final exhibit to this letter is a review of what is considered, by everyone we have discussed this with, as the special benefits of the Community. Indeed, the Community answers a number of deficiencies that exist within the City as to infrastructure, schools, parks and services. At issue here is a Community that provides the solutions to a number of challenges that exist. Finally, we believe in working together with your staff and the community. Mr. Griffith has brought to the City Council a project that truly is a significant one, and one that will provide lasting benefits to the City of Temecula. SCA:sld Enclosures as noted ~Samfiel C. Alhadeff, of ~ ALHADEFF & SOLAR, LLP C:\DATA\CLIENTS\SPRING PACIFIC PROPERTIES~NELSON LETTER 01.16,DOC EXHIBIT CITY OF TEIVIE~ Circulation Element IV', CIRCULATION PLAN The Circulation Plan developed for the City of Tcmecula has been designed to meet the following objectives: To provide adequate capacity to accommodate the travel needs resulting from the General Plan Land Use Element as well as from anticipated development in adjacent Rivemide County and City of Mun'ieta areas; and · To maintain a positive quality of life in Temecula. The proposed Circulation Plan for the City of Temecula, Sphere of Influence, and Environmental Study Area, is illustrated in Figure 3-1. The aliLmments shown for future planned roadways are preliminary and are subject to refinement based on future engineering studies. Figures illustrating the planned continuity and interaction of the City's Circulation Plan with the surrounding circulation system are included in the Genera! Plan EIR Appendicies. A. Principal Plan Features While all components of the Circulation Plan arc important, some of thc Plan features are being highlighted in th/s section. These features have been selected based on one or more factors: The facility serves as a primary traffic carrying arterial within the City; The facility represents a significant change from the previous SWAP Circulation Element; and/or · The facility/corridor includes spec/al design features or serves a special function. The principal features of the Circulation Plan include: Designation of Winchester Road, east of Jeffemon Avenue, as an "access rest~'ieted" Urban Arterial with special added easements reserved for future transit or travel demand management use. Designation of State Route 79 (south), east of 1-15, as a " '" Urban Arterial to Butterfield Stage Road and an "access restricted" Arterial east of Butterfield Stage Road. Designation of Butterfield Stage Road as an "access restricted" Arterial north of State Route 79 (south) except for the segment between Nicolas Road and Borel Road which would be an "access restricted" Urban Arterial. TEM-01~3Gp-c~R. Cl./I.. * Date: Novemb~ 9, 1993 Page 3-14 CITY OF TEMECLK~ Circtdat!on Element V. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS This section of the Circulation Element discusses a broad range of topius related to transportation improvement implementation strategies and pro,rams which collectively work towards the reallzation of the Circulation Element goals and objectives. A. Roadway Functional Design Guidelines The following functional design guidelines are recommended for roadway classifications depicted on the Cimulation Plan. Figure 3-2 shows the typical cross- sections for the Circulation Plan roadways. 1. Freeway Interstate 15 freeway design standards are dictated by Caltraus District 8. The ultimate facility planned by Caltrans (as defined in the Route Concept Report for Interstate 15) through the City of Temecula will add one High Occupancy Vehicle (I-IOV) lane to the current four mixed flow lanes in' each direction. )nterc!h~n_oe imprnvement.~ identified in the ~ire..lntlnn Plan will ne'~d tn h~, coordinated and approved by Caltrans. It is likely that all interchanges on-ramp~. along Interstate 15 within Temecula will be subject to peak period ramo meter/nL.' within the next ten ycam Thc City should support the ct~neurrent imnl~rnentation .ofHOV bypass lanes at the ramps ('where possible) to promote ride sharing and .express transit usage by area commuters. 2. Urban Arterial Highway Features include: A six to eight-lane high speed highway with raised landscaped median (use for'left turn movements) and striped shoulders. Access restriction may vary depending on where the facility is located within the City and the degree to which the roadway serves through traffic. Generally, one-quarter mile intersection spacing should be considered as a minimum although one-third mile would be a desirable target. Where overriding circumstances will not allow the desired intersection spacing policy to be met, left turn restrictions should be considered at all unsignalized intersections and "high-speed" design features should be incorporated into the intersection design (e.g. curb radii and acceleration/deceleration lanes where appropriate. Urban Arterials designated as "access restricted" on the Circulation Plans should maintain a_minimum one-third mile spacing and a desirable targ,, t sDacin~ of one-half mile, Raised medians should be used on "access restricted" Urban Arterials. TEM-~I~r~GP.C~P,.CUL * Date: November 9, 1993 Page 3-17 CITY OF TEMECULA Circulation Element Curbside parking is generally not considered approprial~ along a heavily traveled facility o£ this type. Riverside County design standards should be used as a basis for develo.ninE ~ty standards. State Route 79 is subject to Caltrans District 8 dasi~'r~ ~.. A segment of Ynez Road is classified as an Urban Arterial primarily due to its' planned six-lane section. Right.of-way constraints and existing development will not allow :for the typical cross section to be provided or desired access controls m be achieved. Additional right-0f-way/easemem dedications should be considered at all key intersections with other Urban Arterials, Arterials, and Major streets for the accommodation of full width auxiliary turn lanes. ~ Traffic carrying capacities of 53,000 to 70,000+ vehicles per day (at Level of Service D) can be achieved depending on the degree pf aecess control and peak period traffic loadings. 3. Arterial Ffi~hway Features include: A four-lane cross section with raised landscaped median (used for left-turn movements). Desirable minimum spacing for major street intersections along an arterial is approximately one quarter mile. Minor street and driveway access may be allowed at shorter intervals but consideration should be given to left turn restrictions at these locations. Arterials des.ignated as "access restricted" on the Circulation Plan should maintain a minimum one.quarter mile spacing and a desirable target spacing of one-third mile. Raised medians should be used an "access restricted" arterials. As a primary traffic carrier, curbside parking may not be considered appropriate along the more heavily traveled Arterial segments within the Ci~. Additional right-of-way/easement dedications should be considered at key intersections with Urban Arterials, other Arterials, and Major streets for the accommodation of full-width auxiliary turn lanes. Traffic carrying capacities of 34,000 to 45,000+ vehicles per day (at Level of Service D) can be achieved depending on the degree of access control and peak period loadings. i I I I I I ! ! II Il TE~.OI~3GP-C. IP,.(~OL" Date: November 9, 1993 Page 3-19 CIRCULATION PLAN Thc City of TEMECULA General Plan Program ,. .' : %%, . EXHIBIT B engineering group, Inc. RKJK PAGE ~_. January 12,2001 transportation planning · traffic engineering acoustical / air qualify studies Mr. Camille Bah~ SPRING PACIFIC PROPERTIES, LLC 15751Roc~ield Blvd., Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92653 Subject: Wolf Creek SR-79 Condltlone of Approval Dear Mr. Bahri: As a result of the recent City of Temecula City Council meeting, the City has raised concern regarding the future Level of Service along SR-79 from the 1-15 Freeway to Pala Road. The Wolf creek property along with other properties within Assessment District No. 159 have contributed substantially to the widening of SR-79 which is currently under construction and will be in placa prior to the occupancy of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. The City has requested that some form of Level of Service criteria be utilized for future assessment of SR-79 with respect to the Wolf Creek project. The purpose of this letter is to demonstrate that the proposed project can be accommodated, based upon current growth pattams on the eR-79 Corridor. While City staff has suggested that future Level of Service analysis to be determined by extracting out "non-local" or other traffic generated by projects which currently do not have land use entitlement. This is extremely difficult to quantify and any changes in regional land use approvals and circulation system conditions would make this difficult to accurately calculate, At this time, it is possible to project future traffic along SR-79 based upon historical growth trends Jn the area. A review of Caltrans traffic counts indicates that the average growth rate has been approximately 5% per year. The average daily traffic on SR-79 west of Pala Road was approximately 32,200 ADT in 1998. The current improvements b. eing constructed along the SR-79 will increase the daily capacity substantially as an Urban Arterial Highway. The six-lane highway has a capacity of 74,000 ADT (Level of Service E) and 66,600 ADT (Level of Service D), according to the City's traffic consultant, WILBUR SMITH & ASSOCIATES. Assuming an annual growth rate' of 5% (compounded annually), the SR-79 Corridor west of Pala Road will not reach Level of Service D (66,600 ADT) for another 12 years. A summary of this analysis is shown in the attached Table 1. Since the Wolf Creek Deve opment is anticipated to be completed within the next 8 to 12 years, it could be entirely accommodated, based upon the currently proposed improvements along SR- 79. , 81/12/2881 89:15 9494748982 RKJK PAGE 84 Mr. Camille Bahd SPRING PACIFIC PROPERTIES January 12, 2001 Page 2 In the future, it is anticipated that SR-79 will require an eight-lane cross section which would accommodate the long-term buildout traffic conditions in this area, unless alternative regiona; highway facilities are provided. This may occur as a result of the County of Riverside's ongoing transportation studies in this area. There are opportunities for restriping SR-79 to eight (8) lanes and prOviding other intersection modifications which could accommodate buildout conditions. RK engineering group, inc. appreciates this opportunity to work with SPRING PACIFIC PROPERTIES, LLC on this project. If you have any questions regarding this, please give me a call at (949) 474-0809. Sincerely, RK engineering group, inc. Robert Kahn, P.E. Principal RK:wg/32 JN:1.065-98-02 xc: Mr~. Sam Alhadeff (ALHADEFF & SOLAR, LLP) EXHIBIT C CONDITION FOR LEVEL OF SERVICE D AT INTERSTATE 15 AND STATE ROUTE (HIGHWAY) 79 SOUTH Prior to the approval of Tentative Maps for Planning Areas 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24, inclusive, and while recognizing State Route 79 South (SR 79S) and Interstate 15 are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State of California as acknowledged in the General Plan, the City may consider the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the City. The City may then authorize the Director of Public Works of the City to make a reasonable determination based upon traffic studies then conducted or authorized by the City that the Level of Service for traffic at the intersection of: (a) Interstate 15 Freeway Southbound ramps (North/South) and Highway 79 South (East/West) has fallen below Level of Service D (b) Interstate 15 Freeway Northbound ramps (North/South) and Highway 79 South (East/West) has fallen below Level of Service D. (c) Bedford Court and SR 79S has fallen below Level of Service D; and (d) La Paz and SR 79S has fallen below Level of Service D. Such traffic studies shall be based on traffic generated only by (1) land uses of projects that are currently existing as approved by the City or the County of Riverside as of the date of the approval of this Project and (2) traffic circulation patterns existing as of the date of the approval of this Project. The traffic studies shall use (1) documentation of existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the project using the traffic analysis study area applicable to the project; and (2) evaluate traffic conditions as applicable to the Project using the current (now existing) Temecula General Plan Traffic Model. This action shall be taken after the City makes a finding that such condition exists that is detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the City of Temecuia or its residents. C:~)ATA\CLIENTS\SPRING PACIFIC PROPERTIES\LOS D CONDITION REVISED 1.16.DOC This redlined draft, generated by CompareRite (TM) - The Instant Redliner, shows the differences between - original document : C:\DATA\CLIENTS\SPRING PACIFIC PROPERTIES\LOS D CONDITION EXHIBIT 3.DOC and revised document: C:\DATA\CLIENTS\SPRING PACIFIC PROPERTIES~LOS D CONDITION REVISED 1.16.DOC CompareRite found 9 change(s) in the text Deletions appear as Overstrike text Additions appear as Bold+Dbl Underline text CONDITION FOR LEVEL OF SERVICE D AT INTERSTATE 15 AND H.~ ....... STATE ROUTE (HIGHWAY) 79 SOUTH · ; ........ ~ ~,,.~;-~ ~ ......... Tentative Maps for Planning Pr or to the approval of ................... = Areas 20, 21,22, c,-.d 23, L-.c!uc!':c, 23, and 24, inclusive, and while recoRnizinq State Route 79 South (SR 79S) and Interstate 15 are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State of California as acknowledged in the General Plan, the City may consider the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the City. The City may then authorize the Director of Public :':crkc Works of the City to make a reasonable determination based upon traffic studies then conducted or authorized by the City that the Level of Service for traffic at the intersection of: (a) Interstate 15 Freeway Southbound ramps (North/South) and Highway 79 South (EastJWest) has fallen below Level of Service D (b) Interstate 15 Freeway Northbound ramps (North/South) and Highway 79 South (East/West) has fallen below Level of Service D. (c) Bedford Court and SR 79S has fallen below Level of Service D; and La Paz and SR 79S has fallen below Level of Service D. Such traffic studies shall be based on traffic generated only by {1) land uses of projects that are currently existing c.-.d as approved by the City or the County of Riverside as of the date of the approval of the-this Project and (2) traffic circulation patterns existinq as of the date of the approval of this Project. The traffic studies shall use (1) documentation of existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the project using the traffic analysis study area applicable to the project; and (2) evaluate traffic conditions as applicable to the Project using the current (now existing) Temecula General Plan Traffic Model. This action shall be taken after the City makes a finding that such condition exists that is detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the City of Temecula or its residents. C:\DATA\CLIENTS~SPRING PACIFIC PROPERTIES~LOS D CONDITION REVISED 1.16,DOC ...................... REVISION LIST ...................... The bracketed numbers refer to the Page and Paragraph for the start of the paragraph in both the old and the new documents. [1:2 1:2] Changed [1:3 1:3] Changed [1:3 1:3] Changed [1:3 1:3] Changed [1:6 1:6] Add Paras [1:6 1:8] Changed [1:6 1:8] Changed [1:6 1:8] Changed [1:7 2:2] Add Para "HIGHWAY "to "STATE ROUTE (HIGHWAY)" "issuance of building permits "to "Tentative Maps" "and 23, inclusive, "to "23, and 24, ... General Plan," "works "to "Works" "(c) Bedford Court ... Level of Service D." "by land" to "by (1) land" "existing and approved" to "existing as approved" "of the Project." to "of this Project ... this Project." "C:~DATA\CLIENTS\SPRING ... REVISED 1.16.DOC" EXHIBIT D The Special Benefits of Wolf Creek · Application Density of 1900 units well below target density of 2700 units in General Plan. · Although density reduced - Road improvements have increased · Project will have infrastructure funding mechanisms in place in advance of development i.e. School C.F.D., A.D. 159 and City C.F.D. · Project has participated in A.D. 159 funding of $6.4 million for Hwy 79 expansion and $1.2 million for Hwy 79/1-15 interchange prior to any development. (Future Supplemental assessments authorized under A.D. 159 can produce an additional $5.2 Million for Hwy. 79 south and an additional $1.0 million for the interchange.) Fire station site dedication of 1.5 acres with loan of up to $700,000 for completion of construction. · Offer of dedication of Public Facilities site of 1.6 acres for Civic uses. · Commitment by developer to fund as necessary the sound wall along Pala Road with interim widening of Pala Road as part of ultimate improvements. · Provision of both Elementary and Middle school sites for school construction. · Developer accepted condition of making a 4-acre site available for a Church within the Village core. · Developer to dedicate and improve village recreation center of 3.5 acres within the Village core, Facilities to include Jr. Olympic pool, water play area and meeting room facilities. · Developer to dedicate to the City an additional 12.4 acres of land for the city sports park over the standard requirements per Quimby and Park DIF. · Developer to construct grass lined channel at a total cost of 25 acres of land as an alternative to the conventional concrete trapezoidal channel · Community plan includes extensive dedications of 6.7 acres of land for village lineal park system including activity nodes without DIF credit. Developer is also providing wider parkways along main area roadways. · Developer to dedicate without compensation right of way necessary for area roadways including sufficient width.for median construction along Pala Road and Wolf Valley Road. · Developer to implement extensive design standards by far exceeding current standards within the City. · 40 acre sports park 25-acre grass lined channel 20-acre middle school 12-acre elementary school 7-acre paseo system 6-acre community park 3-acre private recreation center of parks, schools, and open space received the endorsement of certain environmental 113 acres The project has groups · Traffic Mitigating Land Uses: · Village center services - commercial and service functions · Parks and schools within walking distance of homes · City Sports Park to serve local residents · Community Paseo System - connections within the community - Safe - "eyes on the street" · Provision of local community based recreation facilities (private recreation center) · Village structure placing density, amenity, and services in close proximity. · Existing Area Deficiencies addressed in the Specific Plan and Development Agreement: · Park Deficiencies · Roadway and Traffic Deficiencies - Pala Rd. · School Deficiencies - Middle School · Drainage Deficiencies - Pala Drainage Corridor · Fire Station Deficiencies · Commercial/Community Service Deficiencies · Senior Housing Deficiencies ATTACHMENT NO. 7 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 01- APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305 R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\cc staffreport 1-23-01.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 7 RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00- 0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, TO SUBDIVIDE 557 ACRES INTO 47 PARCELS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS, SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETVVEEN LOM ALINDA ROAD AND DEER HOLLOW, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, - 006 AND -010. WHEREAS, SP Murdy, LLC filed Planning Application No. PA00-0052 (the "Application") in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan, Development Code and Subdivision Ordinance; WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application on September 6, 2000, September 20, 2000, October 4, 2000, and December 6, 2000, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did, testify either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission headngs and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Application subject to and based upon the findings set forth hereunder; WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Application on January 9, 2001, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testity either in support or opposition to this matter; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Council approved of the Application, and certified the Environmental Impact Report and adopted the Mitigation Monitoring Program after finding that the project proposed in the Application conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan; WHEREAS, all legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. by reference. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated Section 2. Findings. That the City Council, in approving the Application, hereby recommends the following findings as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\RESO CC TTM29305.DOC 1 A. The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent with the Development Code, General Plan, any applicable specific plan and the City of Temecula Municipal Code for the following reasons: 1. The proposed subdivision map is consistent with the subject specific plan and related General Plan Amendment. B. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, or the land is subject to a Land Conservation Act contract but the resulting parcels following division of the land will not be too small to sustain their agricultural use; C. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map as proposed by the Applicant; D. The design of the proposed subdivision and the proposed improvements, with appropriate conditions of approval, is not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an inflll site; An environmental impact report has been prepared and cerlified prior to action on the Application; F. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; H. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. (Quimby). The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements Section 3. Environmental Compliance. The City Council of the City of Temecula approves and adopts the Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan in order to approve the Application. Section 4. Conditions. The City Council of the City of Temecula approves the Application (Tentative Tract Map No. 29305) for the subdivision of a 557 acre parcel for all of the foregoing reasons and subject to the project specific conditions set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all other necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. R:\S P~Wolf Creek SP\RESO CC TrM29305.DOC 2 Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this twenty-third day of January, 2001. A']-I'EST: Jeff Comerchero, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA) SS I, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the twenty-third day of January 2001, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\RESO CC TTM29305.DOC 3 EXHIBIT A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305 R:\S P\WolfCreek SP\cc staff report 1-23-01.doc 17 diillll Ii ii ,lfllflhl EXHIBIT B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305 R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\cc staff report 1-234)1.d~c 18 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Revised January 9, 2001 Planning Application No. PA00- 0052 - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 Project Description: Tentative Tract Map No. 29035 subdivides 557 acres into 47 lots, delineating the planning areas within the specific plan and lots for parks and schools. The Map is divided into two phases. Phase I is that portion of the project north of Wolf Valley Road, and Phase II is that portion of the project south of Wolf Valley Road. Assessor's Parcel Nos.: Approval Date: Expiration Date: 950.110-002,-005,-033 and 950-180-001,-005,-006 and-010 January9,2001 January9,2003 PLANNING DIVISlON General Requirements The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance No. 460, unless modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the expiration date. The permittee/applicant shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees, and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 13, Chapter 4 (Section 21000 et seq., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21152 and 21167). The City shall promptly notify the permittee/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought forth within this time period. The City shall estimate the cost of the defense of the action and applicant shall deposit said amount with the City. City may require additional deposits to cover anticipated costs. City shall refund, without interest, any unused portions of the deposit once the litigation is finally concluded. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, permittee/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. Should the applicant fail to timely post the required deposit, the Director may terminate the land use approval without further notice to the applicant. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Specific Plan No. 12. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SI~COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 1 The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within the Final Environmental Impact Report for Wolf Creek, and the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program thereof. The Developer shall ensure coordination with Metropolitan Water District on projects over which the City has jurisdiction (i.e., construction of Fairview Road, Pala Road Improvements, and improvements to the Pala Road channel). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Division. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. A qualified paleontologist/archaeologist shall be chosen by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed grading with respect to potential paleontological/archaeological impacts. A meeting between the paleontologist/archaeologist, Community Development Department- Planning Division staff, and grading contractor prior to the commencement of grading operations and the excavation shall be arranged. The paleontologist/archaeologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. Prior to Recordation of the Final Map A reciprocal ingress/egress agreement will be entered into with the Temecula Community Services District for parcels which are land locked as a result of the linear park lots. 10. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: a. A copy of the Final Map. b. A copy of the Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) with the following notes: 1) This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory recommendations, Ordinance No. 655. 2) The Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project and is on file at the City of Temecula Community Development Department - Planning Division. 3) An Alquist-Priolo Zone has been identified which affects the construction of habitable buildings. c. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) 1) CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, exterior of all buildings and all landscaped and open areas including parkways. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 2 2) No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty to maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the city prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 3) Every owner ora dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such dwelling unit or lot, either (1) an undivided interest in the common areas and facilities, or (2) a share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association owning the common areas and facilities. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 11. The following shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division: Three (3) copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans. The location, number, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The cover page shall identify the total square footage of the landscaped area for the site. The plans shall be accompanied by the following items: 1) Appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal). 2) One (1) copy of the approved grading plan. 3) Water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance). 4) Total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with the approved plan). 5) The locations of all existing trees that will be saved consistent with the tentative map. 6) Automatic irrigation for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from the view of the public from streets and adjacent property for: a) Front yards and slopes within individual lots prior to issuance of building permits for any lot(s). b) Private common areas prior to issuance of building permits. R:~S P~Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 3 c) All landscaping excluding Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) maintained areas and front yard landscaping which shall include, but may not be limited to private slopes and common areas. d) Shrub planting to completely screen perimeter walls adjacent to a public right-of-way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger. All street frontage of school sites along General Plan and Specific Plan designated roadways. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 7) Hardscaping for the following: a) Pedestrian trails within private common areas Wall and Fence Plans consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the following materials for all walls and fences: 1) Decorative block for the perimeter of the project adjacent to a Public Right- of-Way equal to sixty-six (66) feet or larger and the side yards for corner lots. 2) Wrought iron or decorative block and wrought iron combination to take advantage of views for side and rear yards. 3) Wood fencing shall be used for all side and rear yard fencing when not restricted by a and b above. Precise Grading Plans consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. 12. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Planning Manager approval. Prior to Issuance of Occupancy Permits 13. If deemed necessary by the Planning Manager, the applicant shall provide additional landscaping to effectively screen various components of the project. 14. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall be installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning Manager. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. 15. Front yard and slope landscaping within individual lots shall be completed for inspection. 16. Private common area landscaping shall be completed for inspection prior to issuance of occupancy permits. 17. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Manager, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings within private common areas for a period of one year, in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan, shall be filed with the Community Development Department - Planning Division for one year from R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 4 final certificate of occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning Manager, the bond shall be released. 18. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The Department of Public Works recommends the following Conditions of Approval for this project. Unless stated otherwise, all conditions shall be completed by the Developer at no cost to any Government Agency. General Requirements 19. It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative map all existing and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. 20. There is no phasing proposed by the Applicant as part of this Tentative Tract Map. However the Wolf Creek Specific Plan includes four phases. Any future phasing applications shall be consistent with the approved Wolf Creek Specific Plan phasing. 21. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works pdor to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. 22. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right-of-way. 23. All improvement plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. 24. If the City has a Capital Improvement Project to design and construct Pala Road from Rainbow Canyon Road to Fairview Road to its ultimate configuration including environmental mitigation, the Developer shall pay their fair share and reimburse the City for its street improvement obligation. Prior to Approval of the Final Map, unless other timing is indicated, the Developer shall complete the following or have plans submitted and approved, subdivision improvement agreements executed and securities posted: 25. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Rancho California Water District Eastern Municipal Water District Riverside county Flood Control and Water Conservation District R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP~COA-TENT MAP 29305.dec 5 e. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau f. Planning Department g. Department of Public Works h. Riverside County Health Department i. Cable TV Franchise j. Community Services District k. General Telephone I. Southern California Edison Company m. Southern California Gas Company n. Fish & Game o. Army Corps of Engineers p. Metropolitan Water District 26. The following public improvements shall be designed to City of Temecula Public Works standards unless otherwise noted. These plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works: Improve Pala Road from Loma Linda Road to Via Gilberto (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median Improve Pala Road from Via Gilberto to Fairview Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half- width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median Wolf Valley Road from Pala Road to the northerly Specific Plan boundary (Modified Secondary Highway - 110' RNV) to include dedication of full-width right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median Loma Linda Road from Via Del Coronado to Pala Road (Principal Collector Highway - 78' R/VV) to include to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus six feet, installation of half-width street improvements plus six feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). e. Fairview Road from Pala Road to the Specific Plan boundary (Secondary Road Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half-width right-of-way, installation of R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 6 full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) Interior Loop Road (Modified Residential Collector Street - 85' RNV) to include dedication of full-width right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) Via Del Coronado from Via Cordoba to Loma Linda Road (Collector Road Standards - 66' RNV) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus twelve feet, installation of the remainder of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) Street "A" from Interior Loop Road (NoAh) to Loma Linda Road (Principal Collector Highway - 78' RNV) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per Caltrans standards for transition to existing street sections. Traffic signals with conduits for future interconnect at the following intersections: 1) Pala Road and Loma Linda Road 2) Pala Road and Wolf Valley Road 3) Pala Road and Interior Loop Road (NoAh) 4) Pala Road and Clubhouse Drive 5) Pala Road and Muirfield Drive 6) Wolf Valley Road and Interior Loop Road 7) Pala Road and Interior Loop Road (South) 8) Pala Road and Fairview Road Construct backbone channel and/or drainage facilities and all associated improvements per Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the City of Temecula requirements for the following: 1) Pala Road 2) Wolf Valley Road 3) Loma Linda Road 4) Interior Loop Road R:~S P~Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 7 27. 28. 29. 30. 5) Fairview Drive 6) Street"A" 7) Interior storm drain facilities Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteda shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. Paving. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard Nos. 207, 207A and/or 208. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets shall be designed in accordance with Ordinance No. 461. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard Nos. 400 and 401. Design of street improvements shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries to ensure adequate continuity of design with adjoining properties. f. Minimum centerline radii shall be in accordance with City Standard No. 113. g. All reverse curves shall include a 100-foot minimum tangent section. h. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. All units shall be provided with zero clearance garage doors and garage door openers if the driveway is less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. Landscaping shall be limited in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance and visibility. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided underground. Easements shall be provided as required where adequate right-of-way does not exist for installation of the facilities. All utilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. Relinquish and waive right of access on all roadways with the exception of the openings as delineated on Tentative Tract Map. Corner property line cut off for vehicular sight distance and installation of pedestrian facilities shall be provided at all street intersections in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 805. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP~COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 8 31. All easements and/or right-of-way dedications shall be offered for dedication to the public or other appropriate agency and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of Public Works. 32. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to City Council approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. 33. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 34. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Final Map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be recorded with the map. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The following information shall be on the ECS: a. The delineation of the area within the 100-year floodplain. b. Special Study Zones. c. Geotechnical hazards identified in the project's geotechnical report. d. Archeological resources found on the site. 35. The Developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 36. The Developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the Developer shall, prior to submittal of the Final Map for recordation, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462 and Section 66462.5. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the Developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the Developer, at the Developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. 37. A copy of the grading and improvement plans, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for approval prior to recordation of the Final Map or the issuance of any permit. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their right-of-way. 38. All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in the residence. 39. The Developer shall notify the City's cable TV Franchises of the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to cable TV Standards at time of street improvements. 40. Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the Department of Public Works. R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 9 41. 42. 43. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted for review and recorded as directed by the Department of Public Works. On-site drainage facilities located outside of road right-of-way shall be contained within drainage easements and shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating, "drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions." Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 44. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District c. Planning Department d. Department of Public Works e. Metropolitan Water District 45. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any grading. The plan shall incorporate adequate erosion control measures to protect the site and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. 46. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered Civil or Soils Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 47. A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engineering geologist and submitted to the Department of public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study zones and identify any geotechnical hazards for the site including location of faults and potential for liquefaction. The report shall include recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 48. A Drainage Study shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The study shall identity storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identity all existing or proposed off-site or on-site, public or private, drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. Runoff shall be conveyed to an adequate outfall capable of receiving the storm water runoff without damage to public or private property. The study shall include a capacity analysis verifying the adequacy of all facilities. ,Any R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP~COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 10 upgrading or upsizing of drainage facilities necessary to convey the storm water runoff shall be provided as part of development of this project. The basis for analysis and design shall be a storm with a recurrence interval of one hundred years. 49. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. No grading shall be permitted until an NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed or the project is shown to be exempt. 50. The Developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 51. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. 52. The Developer shall obtain letters of approval or easements for any off-site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters or easements shall be in a format as directed by the Department of Public Works. 53. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps as Flood Zone "A" and is subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of any plans, the Developer shall demonstrate that the project complies with Chapter 15.12 of the Temecula Municipal Code for development within Flood Zone "A". Residential subdivisions shall obtain a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Commercial subdivisions may obtain a LOMR at their discretion. 54. A Flood Plain Development Permit and Flood Study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The flood study shall be in a format acceptable to the Department and include, but not be limited to, the following criteria: Drainage and flood protection facilities, which will protect all structures by diverting site runoff to streets or approved storm, drain facilities. Adequate provision shall be made for the acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas. The impact to the site from any flood zone as shown on the FEMA flood hazard map and any necessary mitigation to protect the site. d. Identify and mitigate impacts of grading to any adjacent floodway. The location of existing and post development 100-year floodplain and floodway shall be shown on the improvement plan. 55. Ail lot drainage shall be directed to the driveway by side yard drainage swales independent of any other lot. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 56. Final Map shall be approved and recorded. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SFSCOA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 11 57. 58. 59. A Precise Grading Plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the approved grading plan, the conditions of the grading permit, City Grading Standards and accepted grading construction practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan. The Developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. 60. Prior to the first building permit, the following improvements shall be complete: Improve Pala Road from Loma Linda Road to Via Gilberto (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' RNV) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median. Improve Pala Road from Via Gilberto to Wolf Valley Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' P/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median Improve Pala Road from Wolf Valley Road to Fairview Road to accommodate a 60 foot wide pavement (four vehicular travel lanes including a center turn lane), signing and striping. Via Del Coronado from Via Cordoba to Loma Linda Road (Collector Road Standards - 66' PJW) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus twelve feet, installation of the remainder of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) In the event that the interim improvements on Pala Road from Rainbow Canyon Road to Loma Linda Road are not complete prior to the first building permit, the Developer shall improve Pala Road to accommodate a 60 foot wide pavement (four vehicular travel lanes including a center turn lane), signing and striping. The City may reimburse the Developer for their fair shara of the street improvement obligation as determined by the Director of Public Works. f= Interior Loop Road from Pala Road to Wolf Valley Road (Modified Residential Collector Street- 85' R/W) to include dedication of full-width right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 12 61. 62. Wolf Valley Road from the northerly Specific Plan boundary to Pala Road (Modified Secondary Highway - 110' R/W) to include dedication of full-width right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). Loma Linda Road from Via Del Coronado to Pala Road (Principal Collector Highway - 78' R/W) to include to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way plus six feet, installation of half-width street improvements plus six feet, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). The developer shall install a traffic signal with conduits for future interconnect at the following intersections: 1) Pala Road and Loma Linda Road 2) Pala Road and Wolf Valley Road including provisions for a dual southbound left turn pocket from Pala Road to Wolf Valley Road 3) Pala Road and Interior Loop Road (North) Construct backbone channel and/or drainage facilities and all associated improvements per Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the City of Temecula requirements for the following: 1 ) Pala Road north of Wolf Valley 2) Wolf Valley Road from the northerly Specific Plan boundary to Pala Road 3) Loma Linda Road from Via Del Coronado to Pala Road 4) Interior Loop Road (North) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road 5) Street "A" from Interior Loop Road (North) to Loma Linda Road 6) Interior storm drain facilities Prior to the 100TH Building Permit, the following signal shall be installed and operational: a. Pala Road and Clubhouse Drive b. Pala Road and Muirfield Drive Prior to the 473rd Building Permit: An approved funding and implementation mechanism/fair share contribution program as approved by the Director of Public Works shall be in place to guarantee the improvement of Pala Road from Highway 79 South to Loma Linda Road (Urban Arterial Highway Standards - 134' R/W) to include acquisition of street right-of-way, installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SFSCOA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 13 Street "A" from Interior Loop Road (North) to Loma Linda Road (Principal Collector Highway - 78' RAN) to include dedication of full-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) 63. The following improvements shall be complete prior to the 823rd building permit 64. Improve Pala Road from Wolf Valley Road to Fairview Road (Arterial Highway Standards - 110' R/W) to include dedication of half-width street right-of-way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer), and a 14 foot wide raised landscaped median Interior Loop Road (South) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road (Modified Residential Collector Street - 85' RAN) to include dedication of full-width right-of- way, installation of full-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) Construct backbone channel and/or drainage facilities and all associated improvements per Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the City of Temecula requirements for the following: 1 ) Pala Road from Wolf Valley Road to Fairview Drive 2) Interior Loop Road (South) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road 3) Fairview Drive from Pala Road to the Specific Plan boundary 4) Interior storm drain facilities Install water mains per Rancho California Water District requirements and sewer mains per Eastern Municipal Water District requirements for the following roadways: 1) Pala Road from Wolf Valley Road to Fairview Drive 2) Interior Loop Road (South) from Wolf Valley Road to Pala Road 3) Fairview Drive from Pala Road to the Specific Plan boundary 4) Interior facilities Prior to the opening of the City Sports Park or the 1557th building permit The Developer shall improve Fairview Road from Pala Road to the Specific Plan boundary ((Secondary Road Standards - 88' R/W) to include dedication of half- width right-of-way, installation of half-width street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP~COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 14 65. An approved funding and implementation mechanism / fair share contribution program such as a City administered community facility district may be considered in lieu of completed improvements for Public Works conditions as follows: · COA # 59- a., b., i., j. · COA#60-a.,b. · COA#61-a. · COA#62-a. Regardless if a financing mechanism is established, no occupancies will be allowed that will result in a service level of less than "D" on Pala Road, or at any of the Pala Road intersections from Rainbow Canyon Road to Wolf Valley Road, Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy 66. Prior to the 823rd Certificate of Occupancy a. The traffic signal at the intersection of Wolf Valley Road and Interior Loop Road (South) shall be installed and operational with conduits for future interconnect at the following intersection 67. Prior to the 1,557th Certificate of Occupancy or opening of the ~ City Sports Park, whichever occurs first, the following traffic signals shall be installed and operational with conduits for future interconnect at the following intersection: a. Pala Road and Interior Loop Road (South) b. Pala Road and Fairview Road 68. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the Developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. Rancho California Water District b. Eastern Municipal Water District c. Department of Public Works 69. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as raquired by the Department of Public Works. 70. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, 71. ' The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken due to the construction operations of this project shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SF~COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 15 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) provides the following conditions of approval for Wolf Creek - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305: General Requirements: 72. If any of the following conditions of approval differ from the Specific Plan text or exhibits, the conditions enumerated herein shall take precedent. 73. The current park dedication requirement (Quimby) of 28.23 acres (based on 2,022 dwelling units) shall be satisfied with the credits identified in the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12. Additional park acreage or equivalent in-lieu fees shall be required, if proposed school sites are not acquired by the school district and additional residential units are constructed. In the event that the parkland credits fall short, the developer will either increase the size of the private recreation facility in Lot No. 18, receive 50% credit for the private recreational facilities in the multifamily areas, or increase the size of the 6.0-acre park (Lot No. 15). The developer may pay in-lieu fees to satisfy park requirements, if approved by the Director of Community Services. 74. Upon final approval of the specific plan, certification of the EIR and the end of any appeal process the developer shall convey the 1.5 acres of Lot No. 4 to the City by grant deed free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public purposes. A policy of title insurance and a soils assessment report shall also be provided at the time of conveyance. 75. The actual design of the neighborhood park (Lot No. 15), and the linear park (Lot Nos. 30, 45, 46 and 47) shall be in substantial conformance with the conceptual design identified within the Specific Plan. Prior to submittal of construction plans, the developer shall meet with the Director of Community Services to determine the location and specifications of the park amenities to be provided on site. 76. All park and slope/landscape plans submitted for consideration shall be in conformance with the City of Temecuia Landscape Development Plan Guidelines and Specifications. 77. The design of the parks (Lot Nos. 15, 30, 45, 46 and 47) shall provide for pedestrian circulation and access for the disabled throughout the park. 78. Construction of the public park sites and proposed TCSD landscape maintenance areas shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the developer and TCSD Maintenance Superintendent. Failure to comply with the TCSD review and inspection process may preclude acceptance of these areas into the TCSD maintenance programs. 79. The developer, the developer's successor or assignee, shall be responsible for all maintenance of the park sites and slopes/landscaping areas until such time as those responsibilities are accepted by the TCSD. 80. The parks shall be improved and dedicated to the City free and clear of any liens, assessment fees, or easements that would preclude the City from utilizing the property for public purposes. A policy of title insurance and a soils assessment report shall also be provided with the dedication of the property. 81. All exterior slope/landscape areas contiguous to public streets that are adjacent to single family residential development shall be offered for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 16 82. 83. 84. purposes following compliance to existing City standards and completion of the application process. All other landscape areas, entry monumentation, signage, pedestrian portals, bus shelters, walls and the drainage channel along Pala Road shall be maintained by the Homeowners Association (HOA), private maintenance association or property owner. A ten (10) foot wide pedestrian pathway/Class I bike lane will be constructed within the linear park (east side) and the paseo (west side) of the Interior Loop Road. Class II bicycle lanes w II be 'ncluded on both s'des of 'A" Street, Wolf Valley Road, and the adjacent portion of Pala Road, Loma Linda Road and Fairview Road. Class II bike lanes, shall be constructed in concurrence with the street improvements. The developer is entitled to receive a credit against the park component of the City's Development Impact Fee (DIF) based upon the actual cost of improving the neighborhood park (Lot No. 15). No DIF credits shall be provided for the development of the linear park other than the specific amenities proposed by the developer and approved by the Director of Community Services. The fee/credit issue shall be addressed pursuant to the execution of a Developer Agreement or a Park Improvement Agreement between the applicant and the City prior to approval of the final map. Prior to Approval of the Final Map: 85. The developer, or his assignee, shall offer for dedication, enter into an agreement and post security with the TCSD to improve the proposed parkland (Lot No. 15) and the linear park (Lot Nos. 30, 45, 46 and 47) in accordance with the City standards. 86. All TCSD slope/landscaping maintenance areas shall be offered for dedication on the final map. 87. All areas intended for dedication to the TCSD for maintenance shall be identified on the final map by numbered lots and indexed to identify said lots numbers as a proposed TCSD maintenance area. 88. The subdivider shall post security and enter into an agreement to improve all proposed TCSD maintenance areas. 89. Construction drawings for all proposed TCSD slope/landscape maintenance areas and the public park sites shall be reviewed and approved by TCSD. 90. A notice of intention to annex into the Temecula Community Services District Service Levels B, C, and D shall be submitted to the TCSD prior to approval of the final map. The property owner election costs involved in the district formation or annexation shall be borne by the developer. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits: 91. Prior to the installation of street lights or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the developer shall file an application and pay the appropriate fees to the TCSD for the dedication of arterial and residential street lights into the appropriate TCSD maintenance program. 92. The linear park including one activity node (Lot Nos. 45 and 46) shall be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 400th residential building permit for the R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 17 overall project. 93. The 6-acre neighborhood park (Lot No. 15) shall be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 800th residential building permit for the overall project. Upon execution of the Development Agreement for this project, this condition shall be modified for a 6-acre neighborhood park prior to the issuance of the 600~h residential building permit. (Amended by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 94. The linear park including two activity nodes (Lot Nos. 30 and 47) shall be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 1400th residential building permit for the overall project. 95. The 4.5-acre neighborhood park (Lot No. 30) will be improved and dedicated to the City prior to the issuance of the 1,600th residential building permit for the overall project. Upon execution of the Development Agreement for this project, this condition shall be deleted. (Amended by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). 96. The 40 acres in Planning Area 24 will be offered for dedication on the effective date of the Development Agreement and shall be free of liens within six (6) months after the effective date of the Development Agreement. (Added by the Planning Commission on December 6, 2000). Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy: 97. Prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy within each phase map, the developer shall submit the most current list of Assessor's Parcel Numbers assigned to the final project. 98. It shall be the developer's responsibility to provide written disclosure of the existence or TCSD and its service level rates and charges to all prospective purchasers. FIRE DEPARTMENT The following are the Fire Department Conditions of Approval for this project. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions shall be referred to the Fire Prevention Bureau. 99. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. 100. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for residential land division per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 1500 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure with a 2-hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 101. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 18 Appendix III.B, Table A-III-B-1. Standard fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 500 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 250 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access read(s) frontage to a.hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2,903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 102. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for commercial land division per CFC Appendix Ill-A, Table A-III-A-1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4000 GPM at 20-PSI residual operating pressure with a 4 hour duration. The required fire flow may be adjusted during the approval process to reflect changes in design, construction type, or automatic fire protection measures as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. The Fire Flow as given above has taken into account all information as provided. (CFC 903.2, Appendix Ill-A) 103. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. Super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) shall be located on Fire Department access roads and adjacent public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access read(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. The upgrade of existing fire hydrants may be required. (CFC 903.2, 903.4.2, and Appendix Ill-B) 104. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 600 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul- de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.3) 105. If construction is phased, each phase shall provide approved access and fire protection prior to any building construction. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2) 106. Prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved temporary Fire Department vehicle access roads for use until permanent roads are installed. Temporary Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface for 80,000 lbs. GVW. (CFC 8704.2 and 902.2.2.2) 107. Prior to building final, all locations where structures are to be built shall have approved Fire Department vehicle access roads to within 150 feet to any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the building(s). Fire Department access roads shall be an all weather surface designed for 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 108. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than twenty-four (24) feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches. (CFC 902.2.2.1) 109. Prior to building construction, dead end read ways and streets in excess of one hundred and fifty (150) feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 110. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all- weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) 111. Pdor to issuance of building permits, the developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. Plans shall be: signed by a registered civil engineer; contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\COA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 19 block; and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. After the plans are signed by the local water company, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Prevention Bureau for signatures. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on an individual lot. (CFC 8704.3,901.2.2.2 and National Fire Protection Association 24 1-4.1 ) 112. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, "Blue Reflective Markers" shall be installed to identify fire hydrant locations. (CFC 901.4.3) 113. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access reads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by flreflghting personnel. (CFC 902.4) Special Conditions 114. Prior to issuance of building permits, fuel modification plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval for all open space areas adjacent to the wildland-vegetation interface. (FC Appendix II-A) 115. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans for structural protection from vegetation fires shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval. The measures shall include, but are not limited to, enclosing eaves, noncombustible barriers (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A) BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 116. All design components shall comply with applicable previsions of the 1998 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 1998 National Electrical Code; California Administrative Code, Title 24 Energy and Disabled Access Regulations and the Temecula Municipal Code. 117. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plans showing compliance with Ordinance No. 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All street lights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and directed so as not to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. 118. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. 119. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. 120. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings prior to submittal for plan review. 121. Disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of any public building is required. The path of travel shall meet the California Disabled Access Regulations in terms of cross slope, travel slope stripping and signage. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 1998) R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP~COA-TENT MAP 29305,doc 20 122. All public building and facilities must comply with applicable disabled access regulations. Provide all details on plans. (California Disabled Access Regulations effective April 1, 123. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans submitted for plan review. 124. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan for plan review. 125. Truss calculations that are stamped by the engineer of record and the truss manufacturer engineer are required for plan review submittal. 126. Provide precise grading plan for plan check submittal to check for handicap accessibility. 127. Showall building setbacks 128. Post conspicuously at the entrance to the project the hours of construction as Allowed by City of Temecula Ordinance #0-90-04, and specifically Section G (1) of the Riverside County Ordinance # 457.73, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. Construction hours are as follows: Monday - Friday 6:30 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Saturday 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sunday or Government Code Holidays OTHER AGENCIES 129. Flood protection shall be provided in accordance with the Riverside County Flood Control District's transmittal dated April 5, 2000, a copy of which is attached. The fee is made payable to the Riverside County Flood Control Water District by either a cashier's check or money order, prior to the issuance of a grading permit (unless deferred to a later date by the District), based upon the prevailing area drainage plan fee. 130. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated February 22, 2000, a copy of which is attached. 131. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated February 15, 2000, a copy of which is attached. By placing my signature below, I confirm that I have read, understand and accept all the above Conditions of Approval. I further understand that the property shall be maintained in conformance with these conditions of approval and that any changes I may wish to make to the project shall be subject to Community Development Department approval. Applicant Signature R:\S P\Wolf Creek SFACOA-TENT MAP 29305.doc 21 DAVID P. ZAPPE General Manager-Chief Engineer RIVERSidE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT City of Temecula Planning Deparlment Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Ladies and Gentlemen: 1995MARKET STILE RIVERSIDE. CA 9~__: 909.955.1200 909.788.9965 FAX 51180.1 The District does not normally recommend conditions for land divisions or other land use cases in incorporated cities..The District also does not plan check city land use cases, or provide State Division of Real Estate letters or .oth.er rlDedohaza~, rep.orts for su..ch ~_.ses. District comments/recommendations for such cases are normal y limited to items o~ specmc ~merest to me uislrict inciud ng D strict Master Drainac!e Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a log cel componenfor extension of a master plan system, and District Area urainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees). In addition, information of a general nature is provided. The District has n. ot_m. viewed the proposed project in detail and the following checked comments do not in any way .con.s.,fitute,or !m.p~y uistri~, approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public neaim ana satety or any omer such issue: This pm. ject would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities nor are other facilities of regional Interest proposed. ~ ~r~ect i~ol.~..ee D_i..st~ct_M~.~er Plan facilities. The District will accept ownership of such facilities on · · ..raque..,~.o! me ~;ity: .Pa~lj~e.s must be constructed to District standamls and District plan check and ~lPu~O.n wm De requires ror uls~ict e_~'?_ptance. Plan check, inspection and administrative fees will be i..,/' This p.roje~t, pm. pos.es channels, storm drains 36 inches or larger in diameter, or other facil ties that cou d be _co_n..s[~ _r~. ~reg2o.,.~2 in nat~..m... The qi .~'ict woHld consi~:ler_a, cceptin.g ownership of such facilities on written inm~s~_?..?~?y, raFLmes_.mu~ De co.nss-ucted_. ~o uistr:ict standards, and District plan check and ~lPu~r~d..n wm ue requires TOr ulsmct accel~ance..lan checK, inspection and administrative fees will be reea iS. project is located within the limits of the District's Area ge Plan for .which .drainage f_Des have been adopteo; appllcal~le tees si~oulo De pafo Dy cashier's or money oroer on y to the ~-iood Control District prior to issuance of building or grading permits, whichever comes first. Fees to be paid should be at the rate in effect at the time of issuance of [he actual GENERAL INFORMATION This project_may r~luire a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water R_.e. so, uroe.s .uon.lrol ,B. oard Clearance for grading recordation, or other final approva/shou d not be given until the ~cy nas oetermlnee mat me project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt. If thi.s pm. ject Inv~..Ivee. a. Fede .r~. Emerg.an..cy Man.agemant Agency (FEMA) mapped flood plain, then the City should _r~_.u.?_m__e._app_lLca.~ to,~p, ro~..De all .stua!.es,...calcula~.'.ons,. i~!aps and_ other lhformation r_~_ uired to meet FEMA r__~l._U_ ~m_e_m~.., anu anO,Ul.~, mnner.raqu[re .mat me a, pp~.].cgm obtain a uonditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior m grau]ng, recoroa~on or omer nnal approva~ ~ me project, and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy. If p ~atural watercourse or mapped flood plain is impacted _by this project, the City should require the applicant to* o. bm).n a .S_ .e~_on 16.~)1.11603. Ag.r.~_me. nt from_ the California Department of Fish and Game and a Clean Water Act ~ ..e~o,.n ~ ~'e.r~..~rom me..u.~...Army ~orps of Engineers, or written correspondence from these agenc es ~nmc~. sng me pm. [ec~ ts exeml~ ~om mese ~redu rements. A Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Qua ty Ce~]ication may ~ requires ~rom the local California Regional Water Quality Control Board pdor to issuance of the Corps 404 permn. ~.Ve.ry truly yours, ~ E. MC~lRBifq Sanior CMl ~n~in~r Date: ~f '~' CG~FY OF RIVERSIDE · HEAE~.. SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEAL ' February 22, 2000 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temeeula, CA 92589-9033 ATTN: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305 0aA00-0052) BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THAT PORTION OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 8 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, S.B.M., A PORTION OF RANCHO TEMECULA IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AS SHOWN IN BOOK 1 OF PATENTS AT PAGE 37 RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND A PORTION OF THE LITTLE TEMEDULA RANCHO AS SHOWN BY MAP OF PARTITION OF SAID RANCHO ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK OF SAID COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, IN ACTION NO. 5756 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAID COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. (31 lots) Dear Gentlemen: 1. The Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 and recommends: 2. A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one-inch equal's 200 feet, along with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe dimneter. location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and joint specifications, and the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, and Chapter 7 of the California Health and Safety Code, Caliibrnia Administrative Code. Title 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Comrnission of the State of · California. when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system in Tentative Tract Map No. 29305, is in accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the water services, storage, and distribution system will be adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map". This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Tract Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fare protection or any other purpose. This certification shall be signed by a responsible official of the water company. The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula to review at least TWO WEEKS PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final map. ~FEB 2 ~000 5 Local ~ntorcement Agency * g:O. Box 1280. Rive~ide. CA 92.502-1280 ~ 1909} 95,5-8982 ~ FAX (909} 781-9653 ~ 4080 I ~mon ~treet. 9th ~- oor. t~lver~lae. CA Land Use and Water En~tnem, in9 ~ I~O. Box 1206. Rive~ide. CA 92502-1206 ~ (909} 955~9~0 o FAX (909) 955-8903 * 4080 Lemon Street. 2nd Floor. Rivemde. CA Page Two Attn: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP February 24, 2000 3. This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District a~eeing to serve domestic water to each and even., lot in the subdivision on demand providing satislictory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider. It will be necessaO' for financial arrangements to be made PRIOR to the recordation of the tinal map. 4. This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the Eastern Municipal Water District, the City of Temecula and the Health Deparmaent. Permanent prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing, to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the jtmction of the new system to the existing system. A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and waterlines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "I certify that the desi~ of the sewer system in Tract Map No. 29305, is in accordance with the sewer syster~ expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed Tract Map". The plans must be submitted to the City of Temecula to review at least two weeks PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the fmal map, 5. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized PRIOR to recordation of the final map. 6. It will be necessary., for the annexation proceedings to be completely finalized PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. 7. Additional approval from Riverside Count3, Environmental Health Department will be required all tenants operating a tbod facility or generating any hazardous waste. Sincerely, nce Harrison, Environmental Health Specialist Ill CH:dr (909) 955-8980 February 15, 2000 Carole Donahoe, Case Planner City of Temecula Planning Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY, TRACT NO. 29305 APNS 950-110-002, 950-110-005, AND 950-110-033; APNS 950-180-001,950-180-006, AND 950-~180-010; PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA00.0052 Dear Ms. Donahoe: Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service, therefore, would be available upon completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. If fire protection is required, the customer will need to contact RCWD for fees and requirements. Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. If you have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 00~SB:mc057~012-T3~CCF ATTACHMENT NO. 8 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATED JANUARY 9, 2001 R:\S P~Wolf Creek SP\cc staffreport 1-23-01.doc 19 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City~ ,~), ~3~[,u~ cil Debbie UbnoskaL~Director of Planning January 9, 200i Wolf Creek Specific Plan PREPARED BY: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends that the CityCouncil: 1. ADOPT a resolution entitled:" RESOLUTION NO. 0t- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. t2 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 99-0482) AND RELATED ACTIONS, AND ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CQNSlDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. ~ 2. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0484 - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD (FORMERLY FAIRVlEW AVENUE), AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-1'10-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010, BASED UPON THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT R:~PLANNING\S P\Wolf Creek SP~CC Saff Report l-9~)l.doc 1 3. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01-~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481 - WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETVVEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110- 002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AN D -010, BASED UPON THE FINDINGS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK READ by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 01- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481 - THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MATRIX FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETVVEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950- 180-001, -005, -006 AND -010 ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 01- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, THE SUBDIVISION OF 557 ACRES INTO 47 LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS, SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETVVEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND DEER HOLLOW ROAD, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950- 180-001, -005, -006 AND -010 R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC Staff Report 1-94)1.doc 2 BACKGROUND: The proposed mixed use specific plan provides a full range of residential uses and product types, school sites, park sites, open space and drainage greenbelt, roadways, private recreation center, fire station site and commercial sites, specifically as follows: · A variety of residential products totaling 1881 units with the single family dwelling court yard option or 2022 units with the multi-family senior housing option. · Two school sites. · A neighborhood park, a linear park with three activity nodes that traverses the entire length of the project, 1.5 acre parking area for the Kent Hintergardt Park, and the 40 acre Sports Park. · A 15-acre drainage greenbelt along the full length of Pala Road. · Roadways and circulation system that provide pedestrian linkages, bicycle paths and interconnected uses throughout the project. · Private recreation center, fire station on 5 acres at the Village Center. · Neighborhood and Community Commercial areas totaling 20 acres at the Village Center. Planninq Commission Action - Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map On December 6, 2000, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and its related cases, subject to twelve (12) modifications. The Conditions of Approval for the Specific Plan have been revised to include these modifications, and are attached to the Council Resolution, as Exhibit No. 3b. Staff has compared the modifications with staff's original recommendations as follows: Differs Staff can Modification from Staff's Support Recommendation the Change Add TCSD conditions per the supplemental agenda X Delete if feasible to energy and water conservation conditions X Add that reclaimed water condition be in accordance with SB 2095 X Augment the Mitigation Monitoring Program with the General Plan EIR mitigations X Specify only one option for narrower streets X Require that the City hire an architect consultant to review X the PDO Revise the residential alternative to the City Sports Park at X 7,200 s.f. lots Specify a church site in Planning Area 12 for a specified X period of time Permit a tavern or bar use by conditional use permit in X Planning Area 12 Delete the split garage option X Require garages in lieu of carports in the multi-family X senior housinq projects Require Product Review approval from the Planning X Commission R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC Staff Report 1-9-01.doc 3 Consistency with the Growth Management Prof:lram Action Plan With respect to the project's consistency with the Growth Management Program Action Plan, the Commission felt they could support the proposed densities in conjunction with the numerous amenities proposed, i.e., the 40-acre City Sports Park, land dedication for the fire station, the linear park. They believed that the amenities would not solely benefit the project itself, but the community as a whole. General Plan Amendment The Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 proposes no new general plan designations or densities for the property. The General Plan Amendment is necessary to relocate and reallocate existing land use designations, in order to align these designations to the design of the Specific Plan planning areas and amenities. The reallocation of acreages can be considered minimal and consistent with the original intent of the General Plan. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan Design The Wolf Creek Specific Plan offers a strong pedestrian orientation. Integral to the design is the Interior Loop Road which is the project's north-south spine road: It provides a meandering Class I bike lane/pedestrian pathway on both sides of the street. The linear parkway includes activity nodes and passive areas with benches, drinking fountains, and tot lots, as amenities for active residents who live anywhere in the project, maximizing their exercise experience. Joggers or cyclists can stop at the par courses, parks, or the commercial centers at the hub. This Loop Road connects both ends of the project to the Village Center at the intersection of Wolf Valley Road and the Loop Road (See Figures 111-4B, 111-34) and is accessible to non-residents as well. The Village Center not only offers neighborhood and community commercial services, but is designed in proximity to the elementary school and neighborhood park at one corner, and the private recreation facility, fire station and other civic uses at the other corner, to create a main focal point for the project. The intersection of Wolf Valley Road and the Loop Road has enhancements such as decorative pavement, landscaped medians, corner monumentation and landscaping, to form the "hub" of Wolf Creek. The commercial centers provide pedestrian plazas or gathering places, as well as linkages to the residential development directly adjacent to them. (See Figures II1-16, IV-l, IV-2, IV-27, IV-41A) Linkages between the various residential planning areas are also provided to ensure that children have a safe route to school and parks. Grid road systems are incorporated where feasible to offer alternative vehicular routes. Single-loaded streets are incorporated where feasible to provide eyes on the street for school playgrounds and parks. (See Figures Ill-4B, 111-12, 111-16, IV-32, IV-33) Drainage for the project and upstream users will be handled by a grass-lined drainage channel along the length of Pala Road that varies in width from 100-feet to 128-feet. The developer has taken the opportunity to design this channel as a greenbelt, passive open space that is a pleasing visual buffer from existing residential uses and the existing Pechanga gaming casino and related uses across Pala Road. (See Figures 111-6 and IV-37, IV-41C) The developer proposes a semi- meandering sidewalk for this stretch of Pala Road, where parkway "pop-outs" will bring trees and foliage to the street at appropriate intervals. Coupled with the raised landscaped median proposed for Pa~a Road, the streetscape softens this major roadway. R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC S~aff Report l-9-01.doc 4 Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 The applicant has mapped the entire 557 acres into 47 lots for financial purposes. The lots. conform to the specific plan land use map, with planning areas further subdivided into neighborhood areas. The map delineates major street widths, cross-sections and access restrictions, as well as the lots designated for the drainage channel, schools and parks. Planning Commission Action - Development Aqraement Due to time constraints, the final Development Agreement document has not been included as part of this Staff Report. The City Attorney is still fine-tuning the details of this legal document. Instead, the Deal Points presented with this Staff Report represent the most important component of the Development Agreement and basically lay out the City's and the applicant's obligations under the Development Agreement. The City Council Subcommittee made some recommendations to the Planning Commission in regards to the Deal Points. The Planning Commission considered the Deal Points and the Subcommittee's recommendations. The Deal Points as recommended for approval by the Planning Commission have been included as Attachment No. 5. The following provides a summary of the Subcommittee's recommendations to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendations to the City Council. The City Council Subcommittee, consisting of Council members Pratt and Naggar, met a number of times on the Deal Points. The following were their additional recommendations to the Planning Commission that were presented at the hearing: The timing of the completion for the fire station should not be changed since it will compromise the City's 5-minute response time. The developer shall advance 100% of the cost of the sound wall if the City is unable to secure funds to construct the sound wall. The City may reimburse the applicant, as funds are made available by other sources to the City for this sound wall. The applicant shall be responsible to pay the future Multi Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Fee when it is adopted. Prior to approval of tentative tract maps or any time extensions for the tentative maps within Planning Areas 20, 21, 22, and 23, the developer shall submit traffic studies that demonstrate a Level of Service D or better for the intersection of 1-15 and SR~79. The Development Agreement shall provide assurances that the future owners of the tracts are aware of this restriction. The Planning Commission considered and discussed the Subcommittee's recommendations on the Deal Points. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Deal Points with a 3-1 vote with Commissioner Webster in opposition (Commissioner Chiniaeff was absent). Additionally, the Planning Commission recommended the following change to the Deal Points: "Prior to approval of tentative tract maps or any time extensions for the tentative maps, the developer shall submit traffic studies that demonstrate a LOS D or better for the intersection of 1-15 and SR-79. The Development Agreement shall provide R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC Staff Report l-9-01.doc 5 assurances that the future owners of the tracts are aware of this restriction." By the recommending the above, the Planning Commission extended the LOS D requirement to the entire project instead of the initial proposal for Planning Areas 20, 21,22, and 23. In addition, the Planning Commission took a "straw vote" on the imposition of the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) fee. However, this vote failed to pass with a 2-2 draw. Attachment 6 is a letter submitted by the applicant in response to the Deal Points. Environmental Determination On October 13, 1999, a Notice of Completion and a Notice of Availability were prepared and the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan was circulated by the California State Clearinghouse under SCH#99101094. A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) was submitted August I, 2000, incorporating public written comments and responses, and two Addendums were subsequently added. The environmental analysis identified thirteen (13) areas where impacts were not considered to be significant, and five (5) areas where potentially significant impacts were identified which could be avoided or mitigated. These five areas are: soils and geology, hazards, drainage, traffic, and noise. One area was identified where the project causes an unavoidable, significant impact, namely air quality. In accordance with Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations prior to approving the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. The Statement of Overriding Considerations states that any significant adverse project effects are acceptable if expected project benefits outweigh unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of this project will be presented when the Development Agreement is before the City Council on January 23rd, 2001. R:kq P\Wolf Creek SP\CC Staff Report l-9-01.doc 6 ATTACHMENTS: 1. City Council Resolution No. 01- certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan (Planning Application No. 98-0482) - Page 8 Exhibit A - Text and Addendum Nos. 1 and No. 2 - Provided under separate cover- Page 9 2 City Council Resolution No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment- Page 10 Exhibit A - General Plan Comparison - Page 11 3. City Council Resolution No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 - Page 12 Exhibit A - Text - Provided under separate cover- Page 13 Exhibit B - Revised Land Use Plan - Page 14 Exhibit C- Revised Conditions of Approval for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 - Page 15 4. City Council Ordinance No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 - Page 16 Exhibit A - Text - Provided under separate cover - Page 17 Exhibit B - Residential Development Standards Matrix - Page 18 5. Development Agreement Deal Points - Page 19 6. Response letter from the applicant regarding the Deal Points - Page 20 7. City Council Resolution No. 01- approving Planning Application No. 00-0052-Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Page 21 Exhibit A - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Page 22 Exhibit B - Revised Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Page 23 8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 00- - Page 24 9. Draft Excerpts from the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of December 6, 2000 - Page 25 10. Planning Commission Staff Report dated December 6, 2000 - Page 26 11. Planning Commission Staff Report dated October 4, 2000 - Page 27 12. Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 20, 2000 - Page 28 13. Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 6, 2000 - Page 29 R:\S P\Wolf Crack SP\CC Staff Report 1-9~)l.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00- R:~PLANNING\S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC Staff Report l-9-01.doc 24 ATTACHMENT NO. 8 RESOLUTION NO. 2000 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE PLANNING APPLICATIONS RELATED TO THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN AND RELATED PLANNING APPLICATIONS. A. Recitals. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula has duly considered, after public hearing, the development proposed by the Wolf Creek Specific Plan (PA- 98-0481, PA-98-0484), together with (a) the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project (PA-98-0482); (b) the development agreement that serves to specifically define the implementation of the public improvements and amenities related to and arising under the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and the conditions of approval imposed on related entitlements (PA-00-0029) and (c) the first tier subdivision map (PA-00-0052) for the project. After deliberation, and pursuant to the authority established in California Government Code Section 65 , the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the various planning applications relating to the Wolf Creek development proposal upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Planning Commission Resolutions numbered 2000-37, 2000-38, 2000-39 and 2000-40, subject to certain modifications. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred as required by law. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula as follows: Section 1. In all respects as are set forth in Part A, Recitals, of this Resolution, which are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt resolutions and/or ordinances approving the submitted planning applications subject to the following revisions to the Planning Commission Resolutions attached hereto in consecutive order, as Attachments 1, 2, 3, and 4. 1. The Community Services Department conditions attached hereto as Attachment 5 shall be imposed on the subdivision map and included in the Specific Plan. 2. The proposed revisions to the text of the Specific Plan and the subdivision map condition set forth as conditions 6a and 6b be revised by deleting the words "if feasible." 3. Specific Plan resolution condition 17 compliance with SB 2095 be maintained. R:\S P~Wolf Creek SP~Resoluflon-PC Wolf Creek Spedfic Plan 12-6-00.DOC 1 should be reviewed to ensure that 4. That the mitigation monitoring program prepared for the EIR incorporate applicable provisions and obligations previously established in the City of Temecula General Plan EIR mitigation monitoring program. 5. The Specific Plan conditions 12, 12a, 31, and 75 should be revised to allow only one option for street sections that are narrower than current City standards. The recommended option is a street section having a thirty-six foot right-of-way with a landscaped parkway separating the sidewalk from the curb. 6. The Planned Development Overlay completed by the Specific Plan should be reviewed by an architect engaged by the City to assist the City in assessing the design proposal. 7. Specific Plan Planning Area 24, the regional park site, be restricted to residential development having a minimum lot size of 7200 square feet in the event the regional sports park is not developed upon the planning area. 8. Specific Plan Planning Area 12 provide a site offered exclusively for development by a religious organization for a church site for a reasonable period of time. 9. The Specific Plan Design Guidelines split-garage option be deleted. 10. The Specific Plan Design Guidelines and Standards applicable to the senior housing in Planning Area 18 require garages only and delete the carport option. 11. That the Specific Plan add a requirement that the Product Review providing architectural design of residential units in any planning area be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 12. That the permitted uses within the neighborhood commercial area in Planning Area 12 permit taverns and pubs with a conditional use permit. 13. That the development agreement add provisions ensuring that (i) uses within planning area 12 not be regulated by uses located in Planning Area 13; (ii) the City impose any future Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan fee on the portion of the project for which building permits have not been obtained at the time the fee is adopted and (iii) at no time the traffic level of service D be exceeded by the proposed development. Section 3. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. R:~PLANNING~S P\Wolf Creek SPa'Resolution-PC Wolf Creek Specific Plan 12-6-00.DOC 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula on December 6, 2000. Ron Guerriero, Chairperson ATTEST: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary I, Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the Resolution No. 2001- was duly and regularly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting hereof, held on December 6, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COMMISSIONMEMBERS: GUERRIERO, TELESIO, MATHEWSON NOES: COMMISSIONMEMBERS: WEBSTER ABSENT: COMMISSIONMEMBERS: CHINIAEFF ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONMEMBERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R:\S P~Wolf Creek S~Resolution-PC Wolf Creek Specific Plan 12-6-00.DOC 3 ATTACHMENT NO. 9 DRAFT EXCERPTS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 6, 2000 R:\PI~qNING\S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC S~affReport l-9-01.doc 25 EXCERPT OF THE DECEMBER 6. 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING REGARDING THE WOLF CREEK PROJECT (AGENDA ITEM' NO. 4) At this time Chairman Guerriero closed the public comment portion of the meeting. The applicant's representatives provided the following rebuttal comments in response to the Commission and community comments: Mr. Camille Bahri, representing the applicant, clarified the intent to have differentiated permitted uses in the two commercial areas (Planning Area Nos. 12, and 13.) Mr. William Griffith, representing the applicant, relayed the following: In response to previously made comments, specified the differences between the Wolf Creek Development and the Morgan Hill Development (which is in the County), noting that the Morgan Hill Project was currently zoned for one unit per ten acres, under the Regional County Plan, which would enable the Morgan Hill Developer to develop 45 units, with a total of 1300 units, relaying that by comparison, the target density under the General Plan for the Wolf Creek Project would be for 2601 units, clarifying that the presented proposal was for approximately 1900 units, or with the senior housing option, just over 2000 units; relayed that the Wolf Creek property was currently zoned for a combination of Low, Low Medium, Medium, and High densities, noting the applicant's determination to comply with the Growth Management Plan, proposing the lower end of the density range while still providing a broad spectrum of amenities (i.e., school site, fire station, civic centers); advised that the Morgan Hills Project would not be inclusive of an commensurate measure of amenities; With respect to traffic, noted staffs review and support of the traffic analysis; relayed that the road system in this portion of the City was designed based on the General Plan's target density of over 2600 units, advising that due to this particular project's proposal to develop substantially below that density that there was the creation of a potential excess capacity; Relayed that this property was not environmentally sensitive; Advised that in his opinion this particular project plan meets the guidelines of the City (per the General Plan documents, the GMP, and meeting all of the criteria with respect to issues that staff has raised regarding the project over the past three years); Noted the applicant's previous involvement in the development of numerous award- winning Master Planned communities; · Provided additional information regarding the circulation plan; In response to Mr. Broderick's, comments, reiterated that the project was being developed within the policies of the General Plan, and the GMP; in response to Mr. R; Draf~Excerpt/PCminutes/120600 Lucier's concerns, relayed that the applicant has held numerous meetings with Mr. Lucier, noting that it was the applicant's desire to work in cooperation with both the City and the neighborhood with respect to defining solutions to the noise on Pala Road, the widening of Pala Road, and the associated congestion relief; Advised that the assiduous efforts of the applicant, the staff, and the revisions incorporated in response to Commission comments have culminated into this proposed project plan; Thanked the Commission for its consideration of this matter, relaying hopes of support for this particular proposal. At 8:45 P.M. the meeting recessed, reconvening at 8:54 P.M. The Commission relayed the following closing remarks: Commissioner Mathewson noted the following: Relayed appreciation to the applicant for addressing the Commission's concerns since this project was last visited; For the record, noted that he had participated in ex-parte communications, meeting with the applicant and staff on December 4th in order to discuss the proposed modifications to the project plan; Advised that his primary concerns had been addressed with the proposed revisions to the project. With respect to the density issues, relayed that he was a strong advocate of following the GMP and the General Plan, noting that in comparison to what the minimum density designation allowed (per the General Plan), that this particular project proposed a seven percent (7%) increase from the minimum density, noting that if the senior multi-family element was implemented, the project would propose a thirteen percent (13%) increase in density above the absolute minimum density allowed; advised that he could support the proposed densities in conjunction with the numerous amenities proposed (i.e., a 40-acre park, land dedication for the fire station, the linear parkway), relaying that the proposed amenities would not solely benefit the project itself, but the community, as a whole; relayed that the sole multi- family area would be limited to senior housing, noting that the senior housing and the courtyard homes would have a significantly less negative impact with respect to school enrollment in this area; With respect to lot sizes, cladfied that the discussions pertaining to the smaller lots were regarding the minimum lot size and not the average lot sizes, noting that in the first two areas to be developed the average lot size would be dramatically higher than the minimum; With respect to the Village Center proposal, relayed that with the siting of the courtyard housing around this center, this planning element aided in achieving the ultimate purpose of a Village Center, as identified in the General Plan; advised that the permitted uses that have been identified for the commercial areas were 2 R: Draft/Excerpt/PC minutes/120600 adequate, noting that he could support Commissioner Webster's recommendation for adding a tavern, or bar use in the Neighborhood Commercial area, noting that with respect to the community concern expressed regarding excessive alcohol consumption, that in his opinion this issue was an enforcement matter, advising that to attract residents to the pedestrian center in the evening hours a tavern, or bar use would be appropriate; With respect to the architectural guidelines for the residences, and the issue of a mix of one-story, and two-story dwellings, relayed that after additional investigation of the voluminous Design Guidelines which were inclusive of language encouraging one-story homes, that it was his opinion that the Specific Plan was not the document best-suited for regulating these specific elements; recommended that if this project goes forward and is approved, that all product reviews come back to the Planning Commission for review and approval; with respect to Deputy City Manager Thornhill's previous comments regarding the option to hire an architect consultant for aid in the project review, recommended that this option be utilized; noted that these provisions would address garage setback issues and alternate architectural treatments that have been previously sited as concerns by the Commission; With respect to the proposed traffic improvements, advised that the data presented earlier in the meeting by staff addressed this issue, ensuring that this matter would be addressed adequately; noted that the Development Agreement (if it goes forward, as proposed) provided him with a groat level of confidence that the traffic issues would be properly addressed (inclusive of the sound wall); in response to a community resident's comments regarding concern with respect to funding issues and the potential for the interim traffic improvements to not be completed, for Commissioner Mathewson, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks provided additional information. Commissioner Mathewson relayed that the funding would ultimately be available due to the applicant's willingness to loan funds upfront for these improvements; in response to Commissioner Mathewson's request for confirmation of this agreement, the applicant's representative nodded affirmatively; and With respect to the previously expressed desire of the Commission to implement smaller streets and sidewalk setbacks, advised that he strongly recommended that these elements be incorporated into the project plan. Commissioner Telesio noted the following: Commended the applicant for continuing to work with staff and the Commission in order to meet the goals of the Commission, the General Plan, and the GMP; Noted that in his opinion, the applicant has met the standards relayed by the Commission with the recent revisions to the project plan; Relayed that he was comfortable forwarding this project to the City Council with a recommendation for approval; 3 R: Draff/Excerpt/PCminutes/120600 With respect to the community resident's expressed comments, noted that the majority of these concerns were based on misinformation, relaying hopes of the Commission or staff providing clarification to the community; Regarding the proposed courtyard homes, and the multi-family senior housing, noted the need for diversity with respect to the provision of housing preducts; Concurred with Commissioner Mathewson's recommendation with respect to the product reviews being brought forward to the Planning Commission; With respect to traffic issues, relayed that this matter had been adequately addressed; Regarding the concern with respect to allowing a bar or tavern use in the commercial area, relayed that he concurred with Commissioner Mathewson that the excessive use of alcohol was an enforcement issue, noting that in his opinion these uses should be permitted under a Conditional Use Permit (CUP); and Relayed that in his opinion, the applicant has done an excellent job planning a project appropriate for this area, noting that the preposal was well under the densities allowed for this area (per the General Plan). Commissioner Webster noted the following: For the record, relayed that he had not met with staff or the applicant to discuss the project plan since the Planning Commission's workshop, which was held on October 18, 2000, noting that the sole staff member he had discussed this issue with was the City Attorney. Noted his extreme disappointment with staff due to the exclusion of the Planning Commissioners in the Subcommittee that worked on this project. Advised that in order for this project to receive his support for conformance with the City's General plan, General Plan EIR, the Development Code, the Design Guidelines, and the GMP, that the project would need to incorporete the following elements: With respect to Condition No. 6a, and 6b (regarding the mitigation measures within the Specific Plan conditions), recommended that the language if feasible be deleted from the conditions due to violating the intent of the CEQA Act, noting that either this language could be deleted, or there would need to be previsions for a performance standard, recommending the deletion of this language; With respect to Condition No. 17 (regarding the feasibility of a reclaimed water system within the Specific Plan conditions), recommended that there be assurance that this condition was in accordance with Senate Bill 2095; With respect to traffic impacts and accumulative impacts, relayed that in order to agree with the analysis, that there should be assurance that the Deal Point Item (per the Development Agreement) stating that no additional occupancy is allowed when treffic reaches levels less than a Level of Service (LOS) D, for 1- 15 Intemhanges, as well as Highway 79 South (between the freeway and Pala 4 R: DraflJExcerpt/PCminutes/120600 Road), recommending that this requirement should be placed on all phases of the project; advised that if the project's EIR analysis, and the City's traffic analysis is correct, this is a mute point, while noting that in order to alleviate the concerns and issues expressed with respect to traffic impacts and cumulative impacts, it was his opinion this Deal Point should be included. Noted that this project should have a complete Mitigation Monitoring Program inclusive of the applicable portions of the General Plan EIR; With respect to the Specific Plan, regarding the street options referenced in Condition Nos. 12, 12a, 31 and 75, recommended that there should be one option for this element (rather than the two street options indicated), recommending that the one option be for narrower streets, specifically with a thirty-six foot (36') road right-of way which would previde for two eighteen foot (18') lanes, a four foot (4') sidewalk, and a six foot (6') parkway (with the sidewalk separeted from the curb); With respect to the GFD Deal Point (within the Development Agreement), regarding the Pala Road improvements, concurred with the inclusion of the requirement to widen Pala Road to six lanes to Wolf Valley Road, noting the applicant's requirement to provide the dedication of the right-of-way, and not to pay for all the improvements. Concurred that an architect consultant should be hired by the City to review the PDO, noting that an independent review would be beneficial. With respect to the Land Use Plan map, regarding Planning Area No. 24 (the proposed regional park area), recommended that if the park plan did not go forward, the option to construct 5500 square foot lots should be revised to require 7200 square foot lots; with respect to Planning Area No. 23, recommended that this be revised to require a 8,000 square foot lot minimum to previde a better transition between the Village Center core to less dense residential; with respect to Planning Area No. 21, recommended revising this to require 7200 square foot lot minimums, noting the lack of 7200 square foot lots which should be implemented to create consistency with the Development Code. Noted that he was pleased with the applicant's previous expressed response regarding the agreement to include a church site designation for a specified period of time, recommending that staff and the applicant work together to establish an appropriate period of time for this designation. Recommended that there be no allowance for zere lot line houses for the single-family residential area. With respect to the Zoning Ordinance, regarding the 5,000 square foot lots which stated the request to use the Zoning Ordinance of Medium Density Residential, noting that the City's Development Code for Low Medium Density is basically 5, 000 square foot lots and above, recommended that this be kept at the Low Medium Density zoning in order to be consistent with the Development Code. With respect to the minimum sideyard requirements, within the Residential Development Standards, relayed that for the 5,000 square foot lots, it was his recommendation that this standard be revised to be consistent with the City's Low Medium requirement which is a five foot (5') minimum sideyard, with a fifteen foot (15') minimum for the sum of the two sideyards; With respect to lot coverage, regarding the 6,000 and 7200 square foot lots, recommended that there be a maximum thirty-five pereent (35%) lot coverage for the lots with two-story dwellings, and forty-five percent (45%) maximum for 5 R: D r a ft/E.xcerptJPC min utes/120600 the lots with one-story dwellings; regarding the 5,000 square foot lots, recommended that there be a maximum lot coverage of forty percent (40%) for the lots with two story dwellings, and forty-five percent (45%) for the lots with one-story dwellings; With respect to architectural forward requirements that the Commission addressed in the past, recommended that on the exhibits denoting the garage options, that the split garage option be deleted which does not comply with an architectural forward element, noting that with this configuration the front door was tucked inside the house; and With respect to the Design Standards, regarding the option for multi-family senior housing in Planning Area No. 18, recommended that if this option is implemented that garages be a requirement for this development, in lieu of carports. Chairman Guerriero noted the following: Thanked all the citizens who came forward during the past months to address the Wolf Valley Project, noting that their comments were appreciated by the Commission, and specifically by him; Thanked the applicant for taking the time to meet with the community residents; and Advised that all of his concerns have been addressed by staff, the applicant, and the citizens that have relayed their comments, noting that in his opinion this was a good project, and his recommendation would be to pass it on to the City Council, recommending approval. Commissioner Telesio requested the applicant to address the recommendations setforth by Commissioner Webster. Addressing Commissioner Webster's previously mentioned recommendations (See pages 4-6 of the minutes.), Mr. Griffith, representing the applicant, relayed the following: With respect to the street option recommendation, and the church designation issues, relayed that the applicant had agreed to incorporation of these elements. Relayed that at this stage of the process, he would be reluctant to revise the Land Uses, noting that these elements have been carefully planned, advising that the 4,000-4500 square foot lots had been eliminated due to Commission concern; reiterated that the lot sizes denoted were minimums, noting that in the 6,000 square foot lot area, that the average lot size would be approximately 8,000 square feet. In response, Commissioner Mathewson noted that his concern was regarding Planning Area No. 24 (the potential sports park site). For Commissioner Mathewson, Mr. Griffith relayed that he was convinced that the City would go forward with the proposed sports park, noting that to accommodate the Commission's concern he would agree that for an alternative (if the sports park plan did not go forward) that Planning Area No. 24 could be revised to maintain a minimum lot size of 7200 square feet, reiterating that it was not his desire to revise 6 R: Draf~Excerpt/PCminutes/120600 Planning Area Nos. 21, and 23, providing additional information regarding the rationale for his reluctance. VVith respect to the church site designation, reiterated that the applicant would work with staff for an appropriate period of time for this designation. With respect to the Design Standards, specifically, regarding the recommendation for sideyard requirements, noted that he would be reluctant to agree to this element, relaying that the Design Standards are consistent from product category to product category. With respect to maximum lot coverage requirements, noted that it was the applicant's opinion that the critical variables are the setbacks which are internally consistent, relaying that he would not desire to agree to a lot coverage reduction without a clear understanding of the impact this element would have on other variables. With respect to the recommendation for narrower streets, relayed that the courtyard area would be a great opportunity for this element since the streets could be reduced further, noting that with respect to the neighborhood streets, the applicant would support the thirty-six foot (36') section that Commissioner Webster recommended. Advised that it was his opinion that this project package was well-defined, noting the new and modified criteria, recommending that the project go forward with the recommendations he has relayed. MOTION: (Ultimately the following motion died for lack of a second.) Commissioner Webster moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation, adopting PC Resolution Nos. 2000-037, -038, -039, and --040 with the following modifications: Add- That the three added Community Services conditions be added to the Conditions of Approval (as per supplemental agenda material via a memorandum from the Community Services Department). That all of his previously mentioned recommendations (see pages 4-6 of the minutes) be incorporated into the project plan. That Commissioner Mathewson's recommendation for the product review to be conducted at the Planning Commission level be implemented. It was noted that this motion was not seconded and therefore died. In response to Commissioner Mathewson's queries, Commissioner Webster relayed his desire to include the Land Use revisions for Planning Area Nos. 21, 23, and 24 in the motion for approval, providing additional information regarding the rationale for his recommendation. Commissioner Telesio reiterated that the minimum lot sizes would not be the average lot sizes, noting that Commissioner Webster's Land Use recommendation may restrict 7 R: Draft/Excerpt/PCminutes/120600 ~l~the variability in the h.ousing products, and may additionally discourage the development of one-story homes. Commissioner Webster was not in agreement that his recommended Land Use revisions would have an impact on the development of one-story homes. With respect to the one-story verses two-story dwelling units issues, Commissioner Mathewson noted that he, too, was of the opinion that the recommended lot coverage requirements would negatively impact the potential for one-story homes, although he shared Commissioner Webster's concerns, it was his desire to provide the flexibility in order to encourage the development of one-story dwellings, relaying that in his opinion the additional lot coverage issue could be addressed in the Design Guidelines. Commissioner Webster reiterated that the Development Code standard was basically a thirty-five percent (35%) maximum lot coverage, noting that he was opposed to some of the existing development in the City where there were houses filling the entire lot, located proximate to the neighboring houses (i.e., the Temeku Hills Development), relaying that in these developments the residents were unable to park their vehicles in their own driveway due to the housing unit filling the lot; and advised that his recommendation was to ensure that the general policy goal for design excellence on all developments be implemented, while still providing flexibility. Commissioner Telesio advised that by limiting the lot coverage, this standard would be encouraging the development of two-story homes. MOTION: (Ultimately the following motion was amended.) Commissioner Telesio moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation, adopting PC Resolution Nos. 2000-037, -038, -039, and -040 with the following modifications: Add- That the three added Community Services conditions are added to the Conditions of Approval (as per supplemental agenda material via a memorandum from the Community Services Department). That all of Commissioner Webster's previously mentioned recommendations (see pages 4-6 of the minutes) be incorporated into the project plan with the exception of the revisions to Planning Area Nos. 21, and 23. That Commissioner Mathewson's recommendation for the product review to be conducted at the Planning Commission level be implemented. Commissioner Webster seconded the motion. In response to Mr. Griffith's queries, Commissioner Telesio confirmed that the motion on the table was inclusive of the recommended revision in lot sizes in Planning Area No. 24 (to a minimum lot size of 7200 square feet) if the proposed sports park did not go forward, noting that Planning Area Nos. 21, and 23 would not be revised, additionally, noting that the lot coverage and the setbacks would not be revised. 8 R: Oraff/Excerpt/PCrninutesl120600 Commissioner Mathewson queried what the Commission's action should be with respect to the Development Agreement, which had not been finalized at this point in time. Commissioner Telesio relayed that the Development Agreement was still in the draft mode. Commissioner Mathewson noted that there were certain issues addressed in the Deal Points of the Development Agreement that he had strong opinions about, querying what action was expected by the Planning Commission with respect to this document. Commissioner Webster relayed that it was his opinion that the Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council should not be inclusive of the Development Agreement since the Planning Commission was not involved in the process, and due to the Development Agreement going before the City Council at a future point in time. Attorney Curley relayed that it was recommended that the Planning Commission provide comments in response to the Deal Points of the Development Agreement (as per the supplemental agenda material) in order to provide Planning Commission input to the City Council. For Commissioner Mathewson, Attorney Curley relayed that the Development Agreement would be a consensual document, noting that if the document was agreed to, it would become a legal document; and advised that proposing the Deal Points as Conditions of Approval would be problematic. Commissioner Mathewson noted that he would support the Development Agreement as proposed to the Planning Commission, strongly encouraging that the habitat fee be included in the Deal Points, providing additional information regarding previous comments the Commission presented regarding the Deal Points. With respect to the Development Agreement, Chairman Guerriero noted that the applicant had expressed several concerns, as follows: 1) the applicant was not in favor of accelerating on Deer Hollow, and 2) with respect to the CFD, the applicant had expressed concerns. Commissioner Webster relayed that during the ensuing process, these points of disagreement would be worked out. Commissioner Telesio requested confirmation that the Planning Commission was not supporting all of the Deal Points in the Development Agreement. Chairman Guerriero, echoed by Commissioner Telesio, relayed that this document should be excluded in the Planning Commission recommendation due to the existing contention on certain points, and since it was still a work in process. Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that a recommendation regarding the Development Agreement should be relayed by the Planning Commission to the City Council. 9 R: Dra fl/Excerpt/PC minutes/120600 Attorney Curley relayed that the numerous motions have become convoluted, advising that when there is a consensus to move forward with a motion, that the Planning Commission should provide clarification so that all parties had a clear idea of the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council, noting that it would be recommended that Commissioner Webster's recommendations be articulated in the final motion. Mr. Samuel Alhadeff, attorney for the applicant, specified his understanding of the motion. Attorney Curley relayed that as the Planning Commission discussed the motion it was clear that the specificities included in the motion needed to be clarified prior to the vote being taken. Commissioner Webster relayed that the motion was inclusive of all of his previous recommendations with the exception of revising the lot sizes for Planning Area Nos. 21, and 23. Commissioner Telesio relayed that the setback standards and lot coverage requirements were also excluded. Commissione'r Webster noted that the setback standards and lot coverage requirements were not excluded from the motion, clarifying the motion that he had seconded. For clarification, Attorney Curley provided the following elements included in the motion that he had noted, requesting that the Commission add additional input if there were alternate conditions desired to have included in the recommendation to the City Council, listing the elements, as follows: That staff's recommendation be approved with the attached modifications. With respect to Condition No. 6a, and 6b, to delete the phrase if feasible. With respect to Condition No. 17, to review conformance to S.B. 2095. With respect to the traffic and cumulative impacts, to ensure that the Deal Point in the Development Agreement was followed through regarding the maintaining of the Level of Service "D." The Mitigation Monitoring Program would be augmented. With respect to the street option concerns, requested specificity regarding these particular associated recommendations. In response, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that the recommendation was to not have options, but to implement a thirty-six foot (36')standard. To incorporate the Land Use Map revisions to Planning Area No. 24; and That the three added conditions from TCSD be added (per supplemental agenda material). Commissioner Webster relayed that the following recommendations were also included in the motion: The recommendation that the split garage option would be removed from the Design Guidelines, 10 R: Draft/Excerpt/P~minutesl120600 The recommendation to incorporate garages, in lieu of carports, for the multi-family senior housing. The recommendation for the City to hire an architect for the review of the PDO, and The recommendation for the Product Review to be presented to the Planning Commission for review and approval. In response to Attorney Curley, Commissioner Webster confirmed that all of the above elements were included in the motion. Commissioner Webster relayed that the lot coverage requirements were also included in the motion. In response, Commissioner Telesio noted that this recommendation had been excluded. Commissioner Webster advised that the sole exclusions were regarding Planning Area Nos. 21, and 23; advised that if Commissioner Telesio desired to modify the motion in order to exclude the residential Design Standards, the motion could be amended. For Commissioner Telesio, Commissioner Webster noted that there was a differential between the recommendation of minimum lot sizes for planning areas, and the recommendations for revisions to residential development standards for planning areas, clarifying that these were two separate recommendations, noting that if it was the desire to exclude these two recommendations, this exclusion would need to be denoted. The following discussion ensued regarding the Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council regarding the Deal Points of the Development A.qreements: Commissioner Mathewson noted that the Planning Commission recommendation had become convoluted, relaying that there appeared to be a consensus to approving the project plan with certain modifications; advised that he was concerned with respect to the recommendation regarding the Development Agreement; and queried the Commission for its desire with respect to recommending the Development Agreement in its conceptual form. Commissioner Telesio relayed that the Planning Commission was provided the Deal Points of the Development Agreement, and subsequently the Subcommittee's comments, noting that these comments had not been incorporated into the document. Commissioner Mathewson relayed that it was his opinion that it was expected that the Planning Commission would provide a recommendation regarding the Development Agreement in its conceptual form, noting that the Subcommittee comments were fairly straight forward, and that he was comfortable recommending approval with the attached comments. For clarification, Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that the Planning Commission had received the Deal Points of the Development Agreement in the agenda material, noting that the supplemental agenda material was inclusive of the same Deal Points with the Subcommittee's recommendations. 11 R: Draft/Excerpt/PCminutesl120600 Chairman Guerriero relayed that if the Planning Commission was to approve the conceptual form of the document, he could support that action, as long as the points could be rebutted with the City Council, noting that the developer was in disagreement with various Deal Points, advising that he was in agreement with the developer. Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that the developer would have an opportunity to relay his points of disagreement with the City Council. Commissioner Mathewson noted various Deal Points that the Planning Commission had commented on. For clarification, Attorney Curley relayed that the Deal Points of the Development Agreement were the core elements that would be placed in the final Development Agreement which would be a voluminous document, noting that the presented points were the planning elements that the Planning Commission needed to provide input on for the City Council's consideration; clarified that these points were more than mere concepts, noting that these points were the core elements that would be incorporated into the legal document; noted that the Planning Commission did not need to redraft the document, but to relay to the Council comments, clarifying that specific points could be recommended for removal. Commissioner Telesio relayed that he was not in agreement with the Subcommittee's comment regarding the multi-species issue, noting that he could support approval without this element, relaying that it was his desire for the applicant to have the opportunity to address this issue without the approval of the Planning Commission. Chairman Guerriero noted the applicant's disagreement with respect to permitted uses in Planning Area No. 12, relaying that he agreed with the developer. Commissioner Mathewson noted that with respect to the habitat issues, he was of the opinion that the plan should go forward. In response, Commissioner Telesio relayed that the applicant should have an opportunity to address the habitat issue without the weight of the approval of the Planning Commission. For clarification, Attorney Curley relayed that the Planning Commission could specify the points that were not supported, listing the elements of disagreement while approving the document in its entirety, in concept. Commissioner Mathewson relayed that there were differences of opinion within the Planning Commission. Mr. Alhadeff relayed that it was his opinion that the Development Agreement could be approved by the Planning Commission in concept and principle, relaying that the points of disagreement could be specified. Attorney Curley relayed that the Planning Commission has mentioned the following Deal Points as items of concern: the level of service, the habitat issue, and Planning Area No. 12; advised that if the previous three points were the sole elements to be addressed that 12 R: Draff/Excerpt/PCminutes/120600 the PLanning Commission could provide input regarding these specific elements, subsequently approving the remainder of the document. The Planning Commission relayed the following specified recommendations re;lardin~ the following listed elements of the Development Agreement, recommending approval regarding the remainder of the document: With respect to including habitat issue in the Development Agreement, it was noted that Commissioner Telesio and Commissioner Mathewson were proponents of having this element included, while Commissioner Webster and Chairman Guerriero were opposed to the inclusion of this element. With respect to the area in Planning Area No. 12, the developer provided additional information, noting that this issue could be worked out and that the Planning Commission need not address this matter. With respect to the recommendation regarding the requirement that the LOS not go below LOS "D" during any phase of the project it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that this element should be included. (It was noted that Commissioner Chiniaeff was absent.) At this time the Planning Commission resumed to the previous discussions, addressinq the motion for approval for the project, as follows: With respect to the motion, Commissioner Mathewson relayed that he could not support modifying the lot size coverage. AMENDED MOTION: (Ultimately the following motion died for lack of an amended second.) Commissioner Telesio moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation subject to the modifications clarified by Attorney Curley and subsequently by Commissioner Webster (see pages 10-11 of the minutes in the bulleted comments of Attorney Curley and Commissioner Webster), noting that Commissioner Webster's recommendation regarding lot coverage standards would not be included. For Commissioner Webster, Commissioner Mathewson relayed that he could not support Commissioner Webster's proposed modification to the maximum lot coverage, or the sideyard setback requirements. For Commissioner Mathewson, Director of Planning Ubnoske provided additional information regarding the setback standards implemented in the Temeku Hills Development, which had been referenced at an earlier point in the meeting. Commissioner Telesio relayed that with Commissioner Webster's recommended sideyard setbacks the houses would be smaller and stacked. Commissioner Webster noted that he would not amend his second on the motion to include these exclusions. 13 R: Draft/Excerpl/PCminutes/120600 FINAL MOTION: Commissioner Telesio moved to close the public hearing; to recommend approval of the presented Development Agreement with the exception of the specified comments relayed with regard to three of the Deal Points (denoted on page 13 of the minutes in bold print); and to approve staffs' recommendation, adopting PC Resolution Nos. 2000-037, -038, -039, and -040, subject to the following modifications: Add- That the three Community Service conditions (as per supplemental agenda material) be added into the Conditions of Approval. With respect to Condition No. 6a, and 6b (regarding the mitigation measures within the Specific Plan conditions) that the language if feasible be deleted. With respect to Condition No. 17 ( regarding the feasibility of a reclaimed water system within the Specific Plan conditions) that there be assurance that this condition was in accordance with S.B. 2095. That the Mitigation Monitoring Program be augmented to include the applicable portions of the General Plan EIR. With respect to the references in Condition Nos. 12, 12a, 31, and 75, that there be one option for narrower streets, specifically with a thirty-six foot (36') road right-of-way, with a parkway separating the sidewalk from the curb. That the City hire an architect consultant to review the PDO. That Planning Area No. 24 (the proposed regional park area) be revised to maintain a minimum lot size of 7200 square foot lots (if the proposed park plan does not go forward). That there be a church site designation in Planning Area 12 for a specified period of time (to be determined by staff and the applicant). That a tavern or bar use be added to the list of permitted uses in the commercial area (via a Conditional Use Permit). With respect to the garage options denoted in the exhibits, that the split garage option be deleted from the Design Guidelines. With respect to the Design Standards, regarding the option of multi-family senior housing in Planning Area No. 18, that garages be a requirement, in lieu of carports. That the product review be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and approval. Chairman Guerriero seconded the motion and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Webster who voted no, and Commissioner Chiniaeff who was absent. 14 R: Draff/Excerpt/PCminutes/120600 ATTACHMENT NO. '10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED DECEMBER 6, 2000 R:\PLANNING\S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC StaffReport 1-~}-01.doc 26 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION December 6, 2000 Reconsideration of the recommendation for denial of: Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 Planning Application No. 98-0482 - Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report Planning Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment for Wolf Creek Planning Application No. 00-0052 - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 And Consideration of: Planning Application No. 00-0029 - Wolf Creek Development Agreement Prepared By: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner and Saied Nasseh-Shahry, Project Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR WOLF CREEK (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0484), AND APPROVE THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 12 (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481) ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-062, -005, -633 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010. .ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, THE SUBDIVISION OF 557 ACRES INTO 47 LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS, SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVIEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, - 005, -033 AN D 950-180-001, -005, -006 AN D -016. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 1 3. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE WOLF CREEK DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DEAL POINTS (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0029) AS NOTED IN EXHIBIT A, ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN AND RELATED ACTIONS (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0482) AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FORTHE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -0t0. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: SP Murdy, LLC REPRESENTATIVES: STATUS Bill Griffith and Camille Bahri, Spring Pacific Properties, LLC Barry Burnell, T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. Donald Lohr and Tony Terich, Lohr + Associates, Inc. Sam Alhadeff, Alhadeff & Solar, LLP At the conclusion of Planning Commission hearings held on September 6, 20, and October 4, 2000, the Planning Commission voted to deny the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. On October 18, 2000, the Planning Commission considered the resolutions recommending denial which were prepared by the City Attorney's office. At the end of their deliberations, the Commission moved to reconsider the project at a later date. They asked the developer to address all items as specified in the three resolutions for the various portions of the project, and to return to the Commission. The applicant desired to bring the Development Agreement deal points before the Commission, for their recommendation to the City Council concurrently with the reconsideration. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 2 ANALYSIS Staff's summary of the disposition of all items as listed in the Resolutions follows. Resolution for the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Item No. 1: Zoning based Development Standards · The Specific Plan proposes residential lot sizes below those authorized by the Development Code. Utilize the existing 7,200 square foot minimum lot size. · The development proposal does not offer project amenities and innovative site planning techniques and certainty of design so as to justify deviation from the City's existing standards. · The overall development presents an overabundance of medium density residential development and an inadequate amount of Iow-medium housing densities. · Provide a maximum lot coverage of 35%. Disposition: The project has been redesigned, with the elimination of all "small lot" single family residential 4,000 and 4,500 square foot lots previously proposed (369 units). The Planning Areas have been reconfigurad to provide a transition of lot sizes from 7,200 square foot lots at the perimeter of the project, to 5,000 square foot lots and courtyard homes at the interior of the project. The revised Land Use Plan is provided as Attachment No. lA. The number of dwelling units proposed is 1,881 which is 263 units less than the originally proposed plan at 2,144 (and 496 units less than the originally proposed plan without the high school, at 2,377). The number of dwelling units at 1,881 is the same as last submitted by the developer on October 4, 2000. Comparison of Residential Lot Sizes Previous Acres Previous Units Revised Acres Revised Units 20,000 s.f. 4.1 8 4.1 8 7,200 s.f. 71.6 258 85.2 309 6,000 s.f. 80.7 346 90.6 390 5,500 s.f. 0 0 27.3 126 5,000 s.f. 130.7 617 129.6 612 4,500 s.f. 46.9 229 0 0 4,000 s.f. 23.3 140 0 0 SFD 12.0 114 29.0 267 Courtyard SFD 14.1 169 14.1 169 Courtyard or or or MF Sr. 310 310 Totals 383.4 1,881 379.9 1,881 or or 2,022 2,022 R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 3 Disposition: Item No. 2: Disposition: Disposition: Disposition: Item No. 3: Disposition: Disposition: Item No. 4: Single Family Dwelling Courtyard Planning Areas 7, 10, and 18 shall come forward as Planned Development Overlay (PDO) zones with their own Supplemental Design, Development Standards and Development Plan. Condition of Approval No. 13 has been added to the Specific Plan reflecting this requirement. The PDO application process, as provided within the Development Code, assures the opportunity for innovative site planning techniques and the City's ability to direct future residential developers with regard to the product offered. Design and Development Guidelines · Allow for narrower public streets by providing an alternate street section. · Provide criteria for alternate sidewalk locations both at back of curb and behind a landscaped right-of-way and identify homeowner association maintenance. · Develop amhitectural guidelines that assure diversity, a mix of one and two story housing, comprehensive architecture forward design and alternate garage configurations. · Define alternate roofing styles and materials, siding materials and treatments, front porches and alternate construction materials and technologies. · Provide detailed landscape and architectural standards for any parcel under 5,000 square feet. The applicant has submitted the exhibit entitled "Option 2 - Through Local Streets." See Attachment No. lB. Condition of Approval No. 12 has been added to the Specific Plan stating that, in the event Option 2 street sections are used, the parkways shall be maintained by homeowner associations. Furthermore, Condition No. 12a. requires that sidewalks be a minimum of five feet in width on both sides of the street. Alternate garage locations have been provided entitled "Front Yard Setbacks (Typical Condition)." See Attachment No. 1C. Single family residential lots less than 5,000 square feet are no longer proposed; therefore, no detailed standards were submitted. Land Use: The Land Use Matrix for the Neighborhood and Community Commercial zoning districts shall be modified. The Zoning Ordinance has been revised to reflect commercial uses as determined by the Commission. See Attachment No. 1E. The Residential Development Standards Matrix has been revised to reflect the latest redesign of housing products. See Attachment No. 1D. Lot coverage limitations have not been modified because the applicant argues that deviations from the Development Code are tradeoffs for the various project amenities. Please see the applicants 'Response to Planning Commission Findings," Attachment No. 6. Village Center: · Provide pedestrian and bicycle linkages from residential areas to open space/recreation facilities, commercial and employment centers, to encourage non-vehicular travel. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SFSSTAFFRPT,PC for 12-6-00,doc 4 · Establish a thorough and detailed set of design guidelines, development standards and incentive programs for uses within the Village Center, so as to provide reliable guidance to future users. · Ensure that adequate public gathering areas or plazas are incorporated to allow for social interaction and community activities. Disposition: The applicant discusses those elements already within the specific plan that addresses these concerns. Please see his "Response to Planning Commission Findings," Attachment No. 6, Pages 9 through 11. Resolution for the Tentative Tract Map Item No. la: The designation of the category of street improvement for Pala Road from State Route 79 South to Fairview Road must be resolved. Disposition: The City and the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement that replaces the Interim Pala Road improvements with 6-lane ultimate width improvements. See the Development Agreement Deal Points exhibit provided as Attachment 4A. Item No. lb: Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 600 feet. Disposition: Condition of Approval No. 103 of the Map and Condition of Approval No. 75 of the Specific Plan have been amended to replace "1320 feet" with "600 feet." Item No. lc: A condition of approval requiring payment of the applicant's fair share of the costs for sound attenuation measures adjacent to Pala Road shall be included. Disposition: Condition of Approval No. 5 has been added to the Specific Plan; a Mitigation Measure regarding noise has been added; the fair share contribution has been included in the Development Agreement Deal Points. Resolution for the Final Environmental Impact Report Item No. 2a: Traffic Impact Analysis should be examined and confirmed as being accurate and reliable. Disposition: The Traffic Engineering Division of the Public Works Department confirms that the data utilized is accurate and reliable. Item No. 2b: Interim Pala Road improvements should be confirmed as being adequate measures. Disposition: The Development Agreement Deal Points replace the Interim Pala Road improvements with 6-lane ultimate width improvements. See the Development Agreement Deal Points exhibit provided as Attachment 4A. Item No. 2c: Interstate 15 Interchange should be reevaluated to ensure the proposed mitigation measures and derivative conditions of approval are appropriate. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SFASTAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 5 Disposition: The Traffic Engineering Division of the Public Works Department confirms that the proposed mitigation measures are appropriate. Item No. 2d: General Plan mitigation measures should be incorporated as mitigation measures for the specific plan and conditions of approval should be added to implement the same. Disposition: Condition of Approval No. 6 has been added to the Specific Plan Conditions of Approval referencing the General Plan mitigation measures as applying to the specific plan. Disposition: Condition of Approval No. 6A. has been added to the Specific Plan requiring where feasible inclusion of Energy Star/Edison Comfort Wise Programs, solar roof panels, and programs that offer maximum energy/utility efficiencies. Item No. 2el: Augment the Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring Program to include coordination with Metropolitan Water District. Disposition: Metropolitan Water District has been added to Condition of Approval Nos. 25 and 44 of the Map requiring their clearance prior to the approval of the Final Map and the issuance of grading permits. Additionally, Condition of Approval No. 28 has been added to the Specific Plan to identify the need to coordinate design activities with MWD. Item No. 2e2: Landscaping and irrigation devices shall conform to the California Model Water Conservation Ordinance. Disposition: Condition of Approval No. 6B. has been added to the Specific Plan requiring where feasible inclusion of landscaping and irrigation devices that conform to the California Model Water Conservation Ordinance. Item No. 2e3: Disposition: Sound attenuation measures shall satisfy the General Plan and City ordinances. Condition of Approval No. 7 has been added to the Specific Plan requiring noise assessments as described in the EIR Noise Section, 3. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DEAL POINTS Staff and the applicant have reached consensus on the Deal Points for the Development Agreement. The Deal Points represent the most important part of the Development Agreement, basically laying out the City's and the applicant's obligations. These Deal Points are listed in Attachment 6 and include provisions for the land dedication of a 40-acre sports park, park improvements, an option for the City to accept a Community facility site, the land dedication and construction of a fire station, formation of the Community Facilities District for the permanent improvements to Pala Road, Development Agreement fees, and Level of Service D considerations. The City Attorney has determined that the Planning Commission can make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the Development Agreement by considering the Deal Points and without the benefit of the entire Development Agreement document. Due to time constraints, the final Development Agreement document has not been included as part of this Staff Report because attorneys representing both the City and the applicant continue to fine-tune the details of this legal document. The City Council Subcommittee for Wolf Creek, consisting of Council members Pratt and R:\S P\Wotf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 6 Naggar, has reviewed the Deal Points and will hold their final meeting on the Deal Points during the next week. Their final recommendations will be presented to the Planning Commission at the hearing on December 6, 2000. The Project Description for the Environmental Impact Report shall be amended to include the Development Agreement. This inclusion does not result in additional impacts since the Development Agreement is an implementing tool for the Specific Plan. Condition No. 14c. has been added to the Specific Plan noting this inclusion in the Final Environmental Impact Report. CORRESPONDENCE Staff has provided as Attachment No. 5a additional correspondence received since October 4, 2000, from Pamela Miod. FINDINGS Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 and Planninq Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment The project as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The project has been reviewed by agencies and staff and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes similar residential neighborhoods adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods, with interface buffers and full roadway improvements. Project commercial development is proposed within a Village Center, across Pala Road from the Pechanga Casino. The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The project does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses for the site. The General Plan Amendment is a relocation and reallocation of existing land use designations that conforms to the design of the specific plan. Planning Application No. 98-0482 - Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report See Attachment 3 for full text. Planning Application No. 00-0052 - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent with the Development Code, the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, the City of Temecula Municipal Code and Subdivision Ordinance. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. The Agricultural Preserve status of the property expired in 1989 through the Notice of Nonrenewal Process initiated in 1979. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed by the R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 7 tentative map. The site is generally fiat topographically, with no unique land features. It is surrounded by existing and developing residential uses, as well as commercial uses generated by the Pechanga Indian Reservation property across Pala Road. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. = An environmental impact report has been prepared and a finding has been made, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) (3), finding that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report; 6. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 7. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. 9. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). 10. Quimby fees have been determined for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, and the map has been conditioned to provide these fees. Planninq Application No. PA00-0029 - Development Aqreement 1. An environmental review has been conducted and approved for this Agreement in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. 2. The City desires to obtain the binding agreement of the Developer and Owner for the development of the property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. The Developer desires to obtain the binding agreement of the City to permit the Developer to develop the Developer's Project on the Developer's Parcels in accordance with the "Applicable Rules" (as hereinafter defined) and this Agreement. = The Owner desires to obtain the binding agreement of the City to permit the Owner to develop the Owner's Parcel in accordance with the "Applicable Rules" (as hereinafter defined) and this Agreement. Developer and Owner have applied to the City in accordance with applicable procedures for approval of this mutually binding Agreement. The Planning Commission and City Council of the City have given notice of intention to consider the Agreement, have conducted public hearings thereon pursuant to the Government Code, and have found that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the Specific Plan and the City's General Plan. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 8 = This Agreement is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare needs of the residents of the City and the surrounding region. The City has specifically considered and approved the impact and benefits of the development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement upon the welfare of the region. This Agreement will bind the City to the terms and obligations specified in this Agreement and will limit, to the degree specified in the Agreement and under State law, the future exercise of the City's ability to delay, postpone, preclude or regulate development on the Property, except a provided for herein. In accordance with the Development Agreement Statutes, this Agreement eliminates uncertainty in the planning process and provides for the orderly development of the Property. Further, this Agreement eliminates uncertainty about the validity of exactions imposed by the City, allows installation of necessary improvements, provides for public services necessary for the region with incidental benefits for the Property, and generally serves the public interest within the City of Temecula and the surrounding region. R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 9 Attachments: PC Resolution for the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan - Blue Page Exhibit A - Revised Wolf Creek Specific Plan Land Use Plan Exhibit B - Option 2 - Through Local Streets Exhibit C - Front Yard Setbacks (Typical Condition) Exhibit D - Revised Residential Development Standards Matrix Exhibit E - Revised Zoning Ordinance Exhibit F - Revised Conditions of Approval 11 PC Resolution for Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Blue Page 18 Exhibit A - Revised Conditions of Approval PC Resolution for the Final Environmental Impact Report - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit A - Revised Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 21 PC Resolution for the Development Agreement Deal Points - Blue Page 22 Exhibit A - City's Proposal for the Wolf Creek Development Agreement Correspondence received subsequent to October 4, 2000 - Blue Page 24 a. Pamela Miod, correspondence dated November 15, 2000. Applicants Responses to Planning Commission Findings, dated November 20, 2000. - Blue Page 25 R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00,doc 10 EXHIBIT A REVISED WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE PLAN R:~S P~Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT. PC for 12-6-00.doc 12 EXHIBIT B OPTION 2 - THROUGH LOCAL STREETS R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6,.00.doc 13 EXHIBIT C FRONT YARD SET BACKS (TYPICAL CONDITION) R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 14 Wolf Creek FRONT YARD SETBACKS (Typical Condition) STREET 2.C, JUR GARAGE HOUSE STANDARD RESIDENTIAL FRONT s'r'REET (~r. ge) HOUSE 3-C, AR GARAGE STANDARD RESIDENTIAL FRONT YARD SETBACK WITH SECOND-STORY OVERHANG (tv'meal1 Spring Pacific Properties L.L.C. 15751 ROCKI=IIELD BLVD. - SUI-Ik 100 - IRVINE, CA 92618 Page IV-36 Wol~ tree]a, FRONT YARD SETBACI~ (Typical Condition) 2-CAR GARAGE HOUSE HOUSE Spring Pacific Properties L.L.C. 15251 ROCKFIELD BLVD. - .c;Ull]: 100 - IRVINE, CA 92618 l:~e tv.32 Wolf Creek FRONT YARD SETBACKS (Typical Condition) STREET ARCHWAY (optional) HOUSE 2-CAR GARAGE ATTACHED REAR GARAGE SETBACK Spring Pacific Properties L.L.C. 15751 ROCKFIELD BLVD. - SUli~ 100 - IRVINE, CA 92618 Figure IV-34C FRONT YARD SETBACK~ (Typical Condition) STREET lO' J (optional) HOUSE 2-CAR GARAGE granny fiat permitted over garage DETACHED REAR GARAGE SETBACK Spring Pacific Properties L.L.C. 15751 ROCKFIELD BLVD. - Sbi il: 100 - IRVINE, CA 92618 l~ge lV-39 EXHIBIT D REVISED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MATRIX R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT. PC for 12-6-00.doc 15 EXHIBIT E REVISED ZONING ORDINANCE " R:~ P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 16 Wolf Creek Zoning City of Temecula Specific Plan No. 12 Zoning (1) (2) (3) Planning Area 1 - LM Zone Single Family Residential (7,200 s.f. lots) The uses permitted in Planning Area 1 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 1 of Specific'Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: C. D. E. F. H. I. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than seventy-two hundred (7,200) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than twenty feet (20'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20'). Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 40 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 1 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (3) Planning, Area 2 - LM Zone Single Family Residential (6,000 s.f. lots) The uses permitted in Planning Area 2 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 2 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. E. F. H. I. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than six thousand (6,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than twenty feet (20'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20'). Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 40 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 2 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (1) (2) (3) Planning Area 3 - PI District Middle School The uses permitted in Planning Area 3 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the PI Public Institutional District of Chapter 17.12 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 3 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PI Public Institutional District Zone in Section 17.12.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Plannim, Area 3 - LM Zone Single Family Residential (7,200 s.f. lots) (If school site is not acquired by District) The uses permitted in Planning Area 3 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 3 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: C. D. E. F. H. I. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than seventy-two hundred (7,200) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than twenty feet (20'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20'). Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 40 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 3 Wolf Creek (1) (2) Zoning Planning Area 4 - PR Zone Kent Hintergardt Park The uses permitted in Planning Area 4 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the PR Parks and Recreation District of Chapter 17.14 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 4 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PR Parks and Recreation District in Section 17.14.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 4 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (3) Planning Area 5 - LM Zone Single Familv Residential (6~000 s.f. lots) The uses permitted in Planning Area 2 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 2 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. E. F. H. I. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than six thousand (6,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than twenty feet (20'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35').. Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20'). Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 40 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 5 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (3) Planninc, Area 6 - M Zone Single Family Residential (5,000 s.f. lots) The uses permitted in Planning Area 6 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the M Residential District of Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. In addition, the permitted uses identified under Section 17.06.030 shall also include noncommercial community association recreation and assembly bu!ldings and facilities. The development standards for Planning Area 6 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. F. G. H. I. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than five thousand (5,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than forty-five feet (45'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum of ten feet (10'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than 5 feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than fifteen feet (15'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way for entrances that face the street. Roll-up type garage doors are required. A ten foot (10') setback is allowed if the garage is a side-entry garage. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The minimum rear yard square footage shall not be less than eight hundred square feet (800 sq. ft.). The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 55 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 6 Wolf Creek Zoning Planning Area 7 - M Zone Single Family Residential (Courtyard Homes) (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 7 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the M Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 7 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. E. G. H. I. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than three thousand (3,000) square feet. The minimum width at the front setback shall no be less than thirty feet (30'). The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than thirty feet (30'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than sixty-five feet (65'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum of ten feet (10% The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall have a minimum setback of zero feet (0). The rear yard shall be not less than five feet (5'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way entrances that face the street and ten feet (10') for a side-entry garage. Roll-up type garage doors shall be required. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the. same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (4) When courtyard homes are implemented, proper site design involves detailed integration of architectural floor plan design with plotting and site design. Therefore, a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) Plan approval by the Planning Commission subject to the requirements of Chapter 17.22 of the Development Code shall be required. The Development Plan submittal shall include an architectural design package including floorplans and elevations for all product types proposed. Minimum rear yard requirements are set at 5' for courtyard home products, however courtyard home site planning is highly dependent on integration of product design and placement of homes on the lots. The Development Plan must demonstrate a minimum of 200 square feet of usable private yard space for each lot. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 7 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (1) (2) plannino_ Area 8 - PI District Elementary School The uses permitted in Planning Area 8 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the PI Public Institutional District of Chapter 17.12 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 8 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PI Public Institutional District Zone in Section 17.12.020 of the City of Temecula Development Code. plannino, Area 8 - M Zone Single Family Residential (Option) (5,000 s.f. lots) (If school site is not acquired by District) The uses permitted in Planning Area 8 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the M Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 8 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: F. G. H. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than five thousand (5,000) square feet. The minimum width of a lot at the front setback line shall not be less than forty-five feet (45'). The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than forty-five feet (45'). The minimum lot depth shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum often feet (10% The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than fifteen feet (15'). The minimum rear yard square footage shall not be less than eight hundred square feet (800 sq. ft.). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way entrances that face the street and ten feet (10') for a side entry garage. Roll-up type garage doors shall be required. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (Iff) from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 8 Wolf Creek M. (3) Zoning The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 55 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 9 Wolf Creek Zoning Plannim, Area 9 - M Zone Single Family Residential (5,000 s.f. lots) (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 9 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the M Residential District of Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 9 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. F. G. H. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than five thousand (5,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than forty-five feet (45'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum often feet (10'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than fifteen feet (15'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way for entrances that face the street. Roll-up type garage doors are required. A ten foot (10') setback is allowed if the garage is a side-entry garage. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') fi.om the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The minimum rear yard square footage shall not be less than eight hundred square feet (800 sq. ft.). The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 55 percent of the lot coverage. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 10 Wolf Creek Zoning Planning Area 10 - M Zone Single Family Residential (Courtyard Homes) (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area I0 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the M Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 10 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. E. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than three thousand (3,000) square feet. The minimum width at the front setback shall no be less than thirty feet (30'). The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than thirty feet (30'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than sixty-five feet (65'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum of ten feet (iff). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall have a minimum setback of zero feet (0). The rear yard shall be not less than five feet (5'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way entrances that face the street and ten feet (10') for a side-entry garage. Roll-up type garage doors shall be required. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the propertY line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the city of Temecula Development Code. (4) When courtyard homes are implemented, proper site design involves detailed integration of architectural floor plan design with plotting and site design. Therefore, a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) Plan approval by the Planning Commission subject to the requirements of Chapter 17.22 of the Development Code shall be required. The Development Plan submittal shall include an architectural design package including floorplans and elevations for all product types proposed. Minimum rear yard requirements are set at five feet for courtyard home products, however courtyard home site planning is highly dependent on integration of product design and placement of homes on the lots. The Development Plan must demonstrate a minimum of 200 square feet of usable private yard space for each lot. Specific Plan No. 12 11/2812000 Page 11 Wolf Creek (1) (2) Zoning Planning Area 11 - PR Zone Neighborhood Park The uses permitted in Planning Area 11 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall bc thc same as those uses permitted in the PR Parks and Recreation District of Chapter 17.14 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 11 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for thc PR Parks and Recreation District in Section 17.14.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 12 Wolf Creek Zoning Plannino Area 12 - NC Zone Neighborhood Commercial (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 12 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the NC Neighborhood Commercial District of Chapter 17.08 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except that the following uses shall not be permitted: A. Auditoriums and Conference Facilities B. Automobile Sales C. Automobile Parts-sales D. Automobile Repair Services E. Automobile Rental F. Automobile Service Stations G. Banks and Financial Institutions with drive-throughs H. Bowling Alley I. Building Material Sales J. Car Wash, Full Service K. Communications Equipment Sales L. Convenience Market M. Discount/Department Store N. Dry Cleaning Plant O. Equipment Sales and Rentals P. Funeral Parlors, Mortuary Q. Furniture Sales R. Garden Supplies and Equipment Sales and Service S. Health and Exercise Clubs (greater than 5,000 square feet) T. Hospitals U. Hotels/Motels V. Kennel W. Libraries, Museums and Galleries X. Liquor Stores Y. Mini-Storage or Mini-Warehouse Z. Movie Theaters AA. Music and Recording Studios BB. Nightclubs/Taverns/Bars/Dance Club/Teen Club CC. Nurseries (Retail) DD. Offices, Administrative or Corporate Headquarters with greater than 50,000 sq. ft. EE. Paint and Wallpaper Stores FF. Pawnshops GG. Pest Control Services HH. Printing and Publishing II. Radio and Broadcasting Studios, Offices Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 13 Wolf Creek (2) (3) (4) Zoning Recycling Collection Facilities KK. Restaurants with Lounge or Live Entertainment LL. Rooming and Boarding Houses MM. Swimming Pool Supplies/Equipment Sales NN. Taxi or Limousine Service OO. Tile Sales pP. Wedding Chapels The following uses are conditionally permitted in Planning Area 12 of Specific Plan No. 12 subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Parcel Delivery Services Alcoholic Beverage Sales Liquor Stores The development standards for Planning Area 12 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the NC Neighborhood Commercial District in Section 17.08.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.08 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 14 Wolf Creek Zoning Planning Area 13 - CC Zone Community Commercial (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 13 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the CC Community Commercial District of Chapter 17.08 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except that the following uses shall be prohibited: A. Auditoriums - Conference Facilities B. Automobile Rental C. Automobile Sales D. Automobile Repair Services E. Automobile Services Stations F. Automotive Oil Change/Lube Services G. Automotive Service Stations Selling Beer and/or Wine With or Without an Automated Car Wash H. Banks and Financial Institutions with drive-throughs I. Bed and Breakfast J. Building Material Sales K. Car Wash, full service L Dry Cleaning Plant M. Equipment Sales and Rentals N. Funeral Parlors, Mortuary O. Garden Supplies and Equipment' Sales and Service P. Hotels/Motels Q. Mini-Storage or Mini-Warehouse R. Music and Recording Studios S. Nurseries (Retail) T. Offices, Administrative or Corporate Headquarters with greater than 50,000 sq. ft. U. Pawnshops V. Pest Control Services W. Printing and Publishing X. Radio and Broadcasting Studios, Offices Y. Recycling Collection Facilities Z. Restaurant, Drive-in AA. Rooming and Boarding Houses BB. Taxi or Limousine Service CC. Tile Sales DD. Wedding Chapels (2) The following uses are conditionally permitted in Planning Area 13 of Specific Plan No. 12 subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. B. C. D. Parcel Delivery Services Convenience Market Liquor Stores Restaurant, Fast Food Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 15 Wolf Creek Zoning (3) (4) The development standards for Planning Area 13 of Specific Plan NO. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the CC Community Commercial District in Section 17.08.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.08 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 16 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) Plannim, Area 14 - PI Zone Recreational~ Fire Station or Library The uses permitted in Planning Area 14 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the PI Public Institutional District of Chapter 17.12 of the City of Temecula Development Code. In addition, the permitted uses identified under Section 17.12.030 shall also include fire stations. The development standards for Planning Area 14 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PI Public Institutional District Zone in Section 17.12.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 17 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (3) Plannin~ Area 15 - M Zone Single Family Residential (5,000 s.f. lots) The uses permitted in Planning Area 15 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the M Residential District of Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 15 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. F. G. H. I. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than five thousand (5,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than forty-five feet (45'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not he less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum of ten feet (10'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (iff). The interior side yard shall be not less than five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than fifteen feet (15'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way for entrances that face the street. Roll-up type garage doors are required. A ten foot (10') setback is allowed if the garage is a side-entry garage. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum often feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The minimum rear yard square footage shall not be less than eight hundred square feet (800 sq. ft.). The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 55 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 18 Wolf Creek Zoning Plaonin2 Area 16 - L-2 Zone Single Family Residential (20,000 s.f. lots) (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 16 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the L-2 Residential District of Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 16 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the L-2 Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except the following: B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than twenty thousand (20,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than one hundred feet (100'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than ninety feet (90% The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than twenty-five feet (25'). The coruer side yard shall be not less than fifteen feet (15'). The interior side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20'). Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 25 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 25 percent of the lot coverage. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 19 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (3) planninu Area 17 - LM Zone Single Family Residential (6,000 s.f. lots) The uses permitted in Planning Area 17 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 17 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. E. F. H. I. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than six thousand (6,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of alot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than twenty feet (20'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (iff). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20'). Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum often feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 40 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 20 Wolf Creek Zoning Planning Area 18- M Zone Single Family Residential (Courtyard Homes) (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 18 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the M District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 18 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. E. G. H. I. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than three thousand (3,000) square feet. The minimum width at the front setback shall no be less than thirty feet (30'). The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than thirty feet (30'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than sixty-five feet (65'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum of ten feet (10'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall have a minimum setback of zero feet (0). The rear yard shall be not less than five feet (5'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way entrances that face the street and ten feet (10') for a side-entry garage. Roll-up type garage doors shall be required. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (4) When courtyard homes are implemented, proper site design involves detailed integration of architectural floor plan design with plotting and site design. Therefore, a Planned Development Overlay (PDO) Plan approval by the Planning Commission subject to the requirements of Chapter 17.22 of the Development Code shall be required. The Development Plan submittal shall include an architectural design package including floorplans and elevations for all product types proposed. Minimum rear yard requirements are set at five feet for courtyard home products, however courtyard home site planning is highly dependent on integration of product design and placement of homes on the lots. The Development Plan must demonstrate a minimum of 200 square feet of usable private yard space for each lot. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 21 Wolf Creek Zoning Planning Area 18 -H Zone Multiple Family Senior Housing (Option) (If courtyard homes are not implemented) (i) The uses permitted in Planning Area 18 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the H Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 18 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the H Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. The minimum width at the front setback shall no be less than thirty feet (30'). The minimum average width ora lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than one hundred feet (100'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of twenty feet (20') and a minimum often feet (10'). The comer side yard shall be not less than fifteen feet (15'). Variable interior side yard setbacks may be permitted provided the sum of the setbacks shall not be less than ten feet (10') and the distance between adjacent structures shall not be less than ten feet (i0'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20') from the right-of-way entrances that face the street and ten feet (10') for a side-entry garage. Roll-up type garage doors shall be required. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. '(3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11128/2000 Page 22 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (3) Planning Area 20 - M Zone Single Family Residential (5~000 s.f. lots) The uses permitted in Planning Area 20 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the M Residential District of Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 20of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the M Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code except for the following: B. C. D. F. G. H. I. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than five thousand (5,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than forty-five feet (45'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure Shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum of ten feet (103. The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than fifteen feet (15'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way for entrances that face the street. Roll-up type garage doors are required. A ten foot (10') setback is allowed if the garage is a side-entry garage. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The minimum rear yard square footage shall not be less than eight hundred square feet (800 sq. ft.). The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 55 percent of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 23 Wolf Creek Zoning (1) (2) (3) Planninq Area 21 - LM Zone Single Family Residential (6,000 s.f. lots) The uses permitted in Planning Area 21 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. The development standards for Planning Area 21 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. E. F. H. I. J. Minimum net lot ama shall not be less than six thousand (6,000) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than twenty feet (20'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20'). Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (iff) from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 40 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 50 pement of the lot coverage. Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 24 Wolf Creek Zoning Plannlm, Area 22 - LM Zone Single Family Residential (7,200 s.f. lots) (i) The uses permitted in Planning Area 22 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 22 of Specific Plan No. i2 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City Of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: C. D. E. F. H. J. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than seventy-two hundred (7,200) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than twenty feet (20'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be twenty feet (20'). Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (i0') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 40 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. (3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as those requirements identified in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 25 Wolf Creek Zoning Plannino Area 23-- LM Zone Single Family Residential (5,500 s.f. lots) (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 23 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 23 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than fifty-five thousand (5,500) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum of ten feet (I0'). The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way for entrances that face the street. Roll-up type garage doors are required. A ten foot (10') setback is allowed if the garage is a side-entry garage. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 55 percent of the lot coverage. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 26 Wolf Creek Zoning Planning Area 24 - City Sports Park (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 24 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the PR Parks and Recreation District of Chapter ! 7.14 of the City of Temecula Development Code and shall also include as permitted uses: B. C. D. E. F. G. Trails, including bicycle and pedestrian trails. Lighted athletic fields. Picnic group facilities. Parking areas and lots. Restrooms and snack bars. Restaurants (no alcoholic beverage sales or drive thrus). Skate parks. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 24 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the PR Parks and Recreation District in Section 17.14.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code. Planning Area 24 - LM Zone Single Family Residential (Option) (5~500 s.f. lots) (If City Sports Park option is not implemented) (1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 24 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those uses permitted in the LM Residential District in Chapter 17.06 of the City of Temecula Development Code. (2) The development standards for Planning Area 24 of Specific Plan No. 12 shall be the same as those standards identified for the LM Residential District in Section 17.06.040 of the City of Temecula Development Code, except for the following: B. C. D. Minimum net lot area shall not be less than fifty-five thousand (5,500) square feet. The minimum average width of a lot shall not be less than fifty feet (50'). The minimum depth of a lot shall not be less than eighty feet (80'). The front yard to a liveable structure shall not be less than an average of fifteen feet (15') and a minimum of ten feet (10% The comer side yard shall be not less than ten feet (10'). The interior side yard shall be not less than the sum of fifteen feet (15'); minimum five feet (5'). The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'). The maximum height shall not exceed thirty-five feet (35'). Minimum garage setbacks shall be eighteen feet (18') from the right-of-way for entrances that face the street. R011-up type garage doors are required. A ten foot (10') setback is allowed if the garage is a side-entry garage. Patio covers for side and rear yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of five feet (5') fi.om the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 27 Wolf Creek Zoning Patio covers for front yards with vertical supports shall be a minimum of ten feet (10') from the property line. Patio covers without vertical supports shall be a minimum of three feet (3') from the property line. The maximum percent of lot coverage for two story dwellings will be 50 percent of the lot coverage. The maximum percent of lot coverage for one story dwellings will be 55 percent of the lot coverage. Specific Plan No. 12 11/28/2000 Page 28 EXHIBIT A REVISED MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 21 Mitigation Monitoring Program Planning Application No. PA98-0481 (Specific Plan) Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 Revised December 6, 2000 AIR QUALITY 1. General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Long-term operational emissions due to vehicular travel will exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Establish bus routes and stops to service the residents within the specific plan area. The City shall notify the Riverside Transit Agency or other responsible public transit provider of pending development applications within the specific plan, in order that the agency may assess and identify demand for bus service. Prior to the approval of development plans or tentative tract maps Planning Department AIR QUALITY 2. General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Long-term operational emissions due to vehicular travel will exceed SCAQMD thresholds. The developer shall provide bus turnouts at strategic locations throughout the project. The City shall review and condition project entitlements which are adjacent to or include identified bus routes that serve the residents in the specific plan area. Prior to the approval of development plans or tentative tract maps Department of Public Works and Planning Department R:~S P~WolfCreck SPLMitigation Monitoring Program.doc 1 ENERGY CONSERVATION 3. General Impact: Long-term operational emissions due to on-site energy consumption will exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Mitigation Measure: Compliance with applicable energy conservation guidelines for construction in accordance with the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and any other City requirements. Specific Process: The developer shall submit planchecks that include compliance with energy conservation guidelines for City review and approval. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of building permits. Responsible Monitor: Building Department ENERGY CONSERVATION 4. General Impact: Long-term operational emissions due to on-site energy consumption will exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Mitigation Measure: The developer shall install energy-efficient lighting for all lighting systems. Specific Process: The developer shall submit planchecks that include energy- efficient lighting. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to issuance of building permits. Responsible Monitor: Building Department LAND USE PLANNING 1. General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Conflict with habitat conservation plans Compliance with the Stephens Kangaroo Rat (SKR) Long- Term Habitat Conservation Plan Payment of $500.00 per acre SKR mitigation fee Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works and Planning Department R:L5 P~Wolf Creek SPLMitigation Monitoring Program.doc 2 LAND USE PLANNING I. General Impact: Conflict with Metropolitan Water District plans for the San Diego Pipeline No. 6 alignment and related construction and operation activities Mitigation Measure: Coordination of design activities between the Developer and Metropolitan Water District Specific Process: Clearance from MWD Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or approval of the Final Map Responsible Monitor: Department of Public Works and Planning Department GEOLOGY AND SOILS General Impact: Exposure to seismic ground shaking Mitigation Measure: Ensure that soil compaction is to City Standards Specific Process: A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. Building pads shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit Responsible Monitor: Department of Public Works and the Building and Safety Department General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to seismic ground shaking Utilize construction techniques that are consistent with the Uniform Building Code Submit construction plans to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a building permit Building and Safety Department RAS P\Wolf Creek SP~4itigation Monitoring Progxam.doc 3 General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to soil erosion, subsidence and expansion Ameliorate hazards from unstable soils Compliance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical report Prior to the issuance ora grading permit Department of Public Works General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to soil erosion, subsidence and expansion Identify adverse soil conditions and implement measures to ameliorate impacts Submit a Soils Report for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to soil erosion Stabilize slopes and unstable soils by the planting of slopes consistent with Ordinance No. 457 Submit an Erosion ConU'ol Plan for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to soil erosion Stabilize slopes and unstable soils Submit a Slope Planting Plan for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Planning Department R:xS P~Wolf Creek SP~vlitiga~ion Monitoring P~ogram.doc 4 General Impact: Affecting the capacity of soils to adequately support the use of septic systems Mitigation Measure: Conduct a Soils Percolation Test Specific Process: The submittal of the results of the Soils Percolation Test and clearance from the Department of Environmental Health for septic sewage disposal systems Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Responsible Monitor: Department of Public Works HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY General Impact: The degradation of water quality and/or waste discharge Mitigation Measure: Compliance with water quality and waste discharge requirements Specific Process: Obtain clearance from the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board and comply with the requirements of the NPDES permit from the State Water Resources Board. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Responsible Monitor: Department of Public Works General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Create excessive runoff exceeding the capacity of existing facilities Identify drainage impacts and implement measures to mitigate impacts Submit a Drainage Study for review and approval Prior to the issuance of a grading permit Department of Public Works R:~S P~WolfCrcck SP~Mitigation Monitoring Program.doc 5 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC General Impact: An increase in traffic in relation to existing traffic and the capacity of the existing street system Mitigation Measure: Payment of fees to contribute to City-wide traffic improvements Specific Process: Payment of the Development Impact Fee (DIF) for commercial development Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of a building permit Responsible Monitor: Depaxhnent of Public Works BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES General Impact: Alter federally protected wetlands Mitigation Measure: Compliance with the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the Army Corps of Engineers Specific Process: Obtain a 1601-1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the Department ofFish and Game and a 404 Permit from the Army Corps of Engineers Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of grading permits Responsible Monitor: Planning Department General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds) Pay Mitigation Fee for impacts to the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Pay $500.00 per acre of disturbed area of Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat Prior to the issuance ora grading permit Department of Public Works and the Planning Department R:~S P',Wolf Creek SP~Mitignlion Monitoring Program.doc 6 HAZARDS General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: NOISE General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: PUBLIC SERVICES General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Exposure to significant hazard Obtain clearances from the Department of Environmental Health, Fire and Building Departments for the use of hazardous substances, their storage, quantities, security and handling Submit clearance letters and/or signatures to the Building Department Prior to the issuance of building permits Building and Safety Department and the Fire Department Exposure to significant noise levels The developer shall participate in any noise mitigation program established by the City. Payment of fair share costs of mitigation measures commensurate with noise impacts attributable to Wolf Creek traffic. Prior to the roadway widening construction on Pala Road Public Works Department and the Planning Department Need for new/altered governmental services regarding fire or police protection Payment of Development Impact Fees for Fire and Police Mitigation Payment of DIF to the Building Department Prior to the issuance of building permits Building Department R:~S P~Wolf Creek SPLMitigation Monitoring Program.doc 7 General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Need for new/altered schools. Payment of School Fees Payment of current mitigation fees to the Temecula Valley Unified School District Prior to the issuance of building permits Building Department UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: AESTHETICS General Impact: Mitigation Measure: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitor: Adequate capacity of existing downstream drainage facilities Verify the adequacy of existing facilities and require upgrading or upsizing of these facililties where necessary Prepare and submit a Hydrology Report to the Public Works Department for review and approval Prior to the issuance of grading permits Depmhiient of Public Works The creation of new light sources will result in increased light and glare that could affect the Palomar Observatory Use lighting techniques that are consistent with Ordinance No. 655 Submit lighting plans that conform to the requirements of Ordinance No. 655 to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval Prior to the issuance of building permits Building and Safety Department; Planning Department R:~S P~Wolf Creek SP~litigation Monitoring Program.doc 8 CULTURAL RESOURCES General Impact: Adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource Mitigation Measure: Identify, recover, preserve and document resources of historical and archaeological significance Specific Process: Condition the project upon the requirement that if any cultural resources or human remains are exposed during grading, ground disturbance activities in the vicinity of the discovery shall be terminated immediately and the City shall be contacted and a qualified archaeologist shall be brought to the site to evaluate the resource. If discovered resources merit long-term consideration, adequate funding shall be provided to collect, curate and report these resources. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to the issuance of grading permits and during grading operations Responsible Monitor: Planrdng Department and Department of Public Works R:~S P\WolfCreck SP~Ivlitigation Monitoring program.doc 9 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED SUBSEQUENT TO OCTOBER 4, 2000 R:~S P\Woff Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 24 Pamela L Miod 3199§ Via Sa/tio 9O9.302.6744 15 t~vember 2000 C~role Donahoe, AsSociate Planner City of Temecula Planning Del~tment 43200 Business park brive Temecula, CA 92§90 Wolf Creek 5pacific Plan Final Envi~onmen?al T4npoct Repo~t, $CH ~88030705, August 2000 l)ea~ Ms. Oonahoe, Due .to unexpected circumstances, T am unable to e~rend the Planning Commission meeting this. evening. However, ! would like to go on ~ecord once again in opposition of the aboVe-mentioned project. The reasons for my opposition m-e detailed in my previous lettees of 6 ~ptember 2000, 20 September 2000 and 4 October 2000. This project will bring sever~ impacts to the surrounding COmmunities. Furthermore, the cumulative impacts of this project have not be~n adequately addressed, as stated in my previous letters. Thank you for making my Comments a IXU't of the public ~ecord for this p~oJect. Respectfully, Pamela 1~ Miod ATTACHMENT NO. 6 APPLICANTS RESPONSES TO PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS DATED NOVEMBER 28, 2000 R:\S P\Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 12-6-00.doc 25 WOLF CREEK RESPONSES TO PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS November 28, 2000 INTRODUCTION The City of Temecula Planning Commission considered the Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 and EIR/EIR Addendums No. 1 and 2 and associated actions on September 6, 2000, September 20, 2000 and October 4,2000, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City Staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support or opposition to this matter. At the conclusion of the Commission heating and after due consideration of the testimony both oral and written, the Commission recommended that the City Council deny, collectively, the Application, Certification of the EIR and Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring Program on the basis that the project was not wholly in conformance with the City's General Plan and Growth Management Program Action Plan goals and policies. City Staff prepared draft findings in response to Planning Commission input. The Applicant has reviewed the draft findings and has modified and augmented the project to bring the Wolf Creek Specific Plan into conformance with the City's General Plan and Growth Management Action Plan. The following document includes the draft findings. The findings as drafted by staff are in italics. Each finding .is followed by a Project Consistency analysis that indicates why the revised project is in compliance with the City's General Plan and the Growth Management Action Plan. Page I NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. Findings. That the Planning Commission, in recommending denial of the Application, hereby makes the following findings as required in Section 16.09.140 of the Temecula Municipal Code: A. The project as proposed and conditioned is not compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The project has been reviewed by agencies and staff and determined to be in conformance, in part, with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. The overall concept and general development proposal is of high quality. The proposal has the potential of providing an enhancement to the quality of life for the City as a result of the proposed amenities and the foreseeable quality of design and improvements within the development. However, the specific plan (pa.98-0481) does not adequately address certain factors in relation to the General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Action Plan. This Commission has determined, after deliberation upon the testimony, and has identified the following matters, which it believes are not adequately addressed. The Planning Commission finds all matters not addressed in the following to be compatible with the regulatory documents of the City and finds that such matters will not be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community. The areas within the proposed specific plan that require either clarification or augmentation, or both, are: 1. Zoning Based Development Standards. The property development standards set forth in Specific Plan No. 12 are not consistent with the adopted City Development Code and Design Guidelines. The Specific Plan proposes residential lot sizes below those authorized by the Development Code. The Planning Commission has reviewed the standards and understands the Applicant's desire to offer a wide range of housing options. However, this Commission has not received testimony that it believes warrants a deviation from the City's current development standards. The City's development standards reflect the implementation of the mandates in the General Plan and should not be deviated from unless the alternate proposal substantially conforms to the goals and policies in the General Plan, provides first class design attributes and assists the community in achieving satisfaction of the intent of the Development Code. This Planning Commission is aware of and has balance the following policies within the City's General Plan for Land Use in reaching its conclusion that the project should not be approved. Pro}eot Consistency: The property development standards set forth in the Specific Plan do not have to be consistent in every last detail with the City's Development Code. Specific Plans are defined in the City's General Plan (Land Use Chapter, Section V. Implementation Programs) as an implementation tool that replaces the zoning as prescribed in the Development Code. The General Plan specifically states in Paragraph C, Specific Plans, "A specific plan is regulatory in effect and replaces the prescribed zoning for the specific plan area." Zoning is found in the Development Code. Therefore, it is intended that the Specific Plan replace the zoning standards of the Development Code. As long as the Goals of the General Plan are otherwise met by the Specific Plan, the actual standards contained in the Specific Plan Page 2 zoning may be more strict or more lenient or a combination thereof when compared to the Development Code. In point of fact, the Specific Plan development standards are in some cases more strict and in other cases more lenient than the City's zoning standards as contained in the Development Code. Section 17.06.050 (a), Residential Density Incentives, allows increases in the maximum residential density compared to the target density shown in the Development Standards for Residential Districts up the General Plan maximum. These increases are allowed if it can be shown that the project will "provide outstanding and exceptional benefits to the City, exceptional landscape design amenities [such as] landscaped entry features in the public right-of-way, public trail systems or public plazas [or] new public facilities which are needed by the Cio' [such as] community meeting centers, needed transportation improvements, offsite traffic signalization, police or fire stations, public recreation facilities...." Although not specifically stated, it must be assumed that some relief from the City's Development Standards would be granted or it would not be possible to achieve the higher density allowed by the General Plan in exchange for the additional public benefits. As City staff evaluations show, the Wolf Creek Specific Plan is developing at or below the General Plan minimums (except in the case that senior housing is constructed in which case the project only slightly exceeds the General Plan minimums) even though the project provides exceptional design amenities and needed public facilities. Instead, the Specific Plan allows reduced setback standards in a limited number of applications in exchange for providing the following significant benefits for the City: the City Sports Park including a community meeting center, transportation improvements (Pala Road widening and additional Right-of-Way for six lanes, Loma Linda Road, Wolf Valley Road, Deer Hollow Road), on- and off-site drainage facilities, noise mitigation for existing residents, elementary and middle schools, public trail systems (bicycle and pedestrian), public plazas, enWy landscaping, center median landscaping in Wolf Valley Road, creative mixtures of housing types (courtyard homes and seniors housing in addition to conventional single family dwellings) and a fire station site Policy 1.1 of Goal 1 of Section III of the Land Use Element in the General Plan requires this Commission to "review all proposed development plans for consistency with the community goals, policies and implementation programs of this General Plan," Policy 1.2 identifies the policy to "Promote the use of innovative site planning techniques that contribute towards the development ora variety of residential product styles and designs including housing suitable to the community's labor force "; and, Policy 3.1 "consider the compatibility of proposed projects on surrounding uses in terms of the size and configuration of buildings, use of materials and landscaping, preservation of existing vegetation and landform, the location of access routes, noise impacts, traffic impacts, and other environmental conditions." The development proposal does not offer project amenities and innovative site planning techniques and certainty of design so as to justify deviation from the City's existing standards. Pro[ect Consistency: The Planning Commission has conducted significant public review of the project by conducting a scoping session and four public hearings. In Page 3 addition, the project was presented to the surrounding community in a publicly advertised community workshop and several meetings with adjacent homeowners and homeowners associations. The project includes courtyard homes that utilize innovative site planning techniques to provide affordable single-family detached housing for the community's labor force. The project also provides an option for seniors housing in a village center setting. This situation occurs nowhere else in the City. The revised project is compatible with adjacent properties. Adjacent land uses east of the project in Redhawk and Vail Ranch consist of single family residential uses (5,000 minimum lot size), parks and schools. The City's General Plan Land Use Map shows these uses to be Low Medium residential and Public/Institutional Facilities. The same exact uses are shown on the City's General Plan for the adjacent portions of the Wolf Creek site. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan implements the Low Medium (3 - 6 du/ac) residential and Public/Institutional Facilities uses shown on the City's General Plan by providing a middle school, an expansion of Kent Hintergardt Park and single family residential housing of varying densities but with a minimum lot size of 5,000 Square feet. West of the project across Pala Road, the City's General Plan shows Low Medium residential uses north of Wolf Valley Road. The minimum lot sizes in this area range from 4,500 to 7,200 square feet as depicted in the Assessor's records. The City, in approving its General Plan, determined that Low Medium and High Residential and Neighborhood Commercial uses on the Wolf Creek site would be compatible with the existing residential areas west of Pala Road and north of Wolf Valley Road. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan as currently designed provides for minimum 5,000 and 7,200 square foot single family residential uses in the areas designated for Low Medium uses and reduces the density in the area shown for High Density residential uses to fit the Medium density residential categor~ of the General Plan. The project will implement the Neighborhood Commercial uses shown in the General Plan at the comer of Pala and Wolf Valley Road. The Wolf Creek project will further enhance compatibility for uses west of Pala Road by providing Open Space/Recreation use as defined by the General Plan in the form of the Drainage Greenbelt buffer that will be implemented along the Pala Road frontage. South of Wolf Valley Road and west of Pala Road, the General Plan depicts a Not a Part (the Pechanga Casino and associated uses) and Low Residential. The General Plan identifies Community Commercial, High and Low Medium Residential and Public/Institutional uses for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and determined that those uses would be compatible with the General Plan designations west of Pala Road. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan implements the Community Commercial, Low Medium Residential and Public Institutional uses by providing Village Center Community Commercial uses, single family homes at 5,000 and 5,500 square foot minimums and a City Sports Park. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan reduces the density of the area shown for High Residential uses to Medium Residential uses in order to meet the goals of the City's Growth Management Action Plan. The Drainage Greenbelt buffer will be implemented along the Pala Road frontage to further buffer these adjacent uses. Page 4 The north and south portions of Wolf Creek are consistent with the General Plan land use designations for those portions of the property and will therefore be consistent with adjacent uses to the south and north respectively. Further this Commission believes the overall development presents an overabundance of medium density residential development and an inadequate amount of Low-medium housing densities, thus failing to satisfy the goals inherent in Land Use Policy 1.2. Project Consistency: The revised project converts approximately half of the land designated by the adopted General Plan for High Residential to Medium Residential in order to comply with the City's Growth Management Action Plan and in response to land use compatibility issues raised by residents adjacent to the project. Furthermore. the Specific Plan proposes that the Courtyard Homes, an innovative and affordable site planning and product design concept, be implemented for all of the medium density areas unless High Residential development for seniors housing, which is specifically targeted as desirable in the General Plan (Section [ll.B. 1 of the Housing Chapter of the General Plan), is implemented. The project provides almost the same acreage of Low-medium housing as specified by the General Plan. Those areas will be implemented at an average density that yields the low end of the General Plan density range for the Low-medium category in order to implement the City's Growth Management Action Plan. In summary, the Planning Commission recommends utilizing the existing 7,200 square foot lot size with a minimum thirty-five (35)percent lot coverage standard based upon the testimony. Proiect Consistency: The project has been revised to eliminate 4,000 and 4,500 square foot product types and to further reduce the land allocated for High Density product types. In addition, the project contributes significant public benefits by providing exceptional design amenities and needed public facilities as identified in the General Plan and as specifically discussed under "Project Consistency" above. The project also results in implementation of the General Plan land uses at the low end of the density range in furtherance of the City's Growth Management Action Plan, even though the project provides significant public benefits that would otherwise allow the project to develop at densities higher than the low end of the General Plan density range. Therefore, it is appropriate for the Specific Plan to allow single family lots as small as 5,000 square feet with moderate increases in lot coverage standards as provided for in the Specific Plan Development Standards 2. Design and Development Guidelines. The Design Guidelines set forth in Specific Plan No. 12 present a valuable starting point but are inadequate. The inadequacy is the lack of detailed goals and policies that will direct those future persons developing the various tracts within Specific Plan No. 12. The deficiencies in the Guidelines are: Identify standards allowing for narrower public streets (revise Street sections). Proiect Consistency: The Wolf Creek Specific Plan includes several options for narrower local public streets. Cross sections of these sU'eets are depicted on Figure III-4C (page lIl-16)in the Specific Plan document. In addition, a separate exhibit entitled, Through Local Streets (Option 2), has been presented by the Applicant under Page 5 separate cover. The Specific Plan identifies potential options for narrower public streets include a street cross section with a 56-foot right-of-way for Through Local Streets, a 56-foot right of way for cul-de-sacs and short local streets, and a 50-foot right-of-way option for cul-de-sacs. However, both the City's Public Works and Public Safety departments have expressed concerns over fire safety relative to the use of narrower streets within Wolf Creek. Because the Wolf Creek Specific Plan allows for narrower streets as an option, it will be up to the City to determine whether to allow the narrower street options. The Applicant has agreed to construct streets to the widths ultimately determined by the City. B. Develop criteria for locating sidewalks both at back of curb and behind a landscaped right-of-way area and identify Homeowners Association maintenance alternative: Proiect Consistency: Using curbs adjacent to sidewalks on residential streets provides the following benefits over separated parkways: · Easier passenger access from on-street parking; · Enhanced front yard appearance with deeper lawn area; · Ability to plant trees with less concern over root intrusion and damage to hardscape; · Control of maintenance by homeowner with less likelihood that the parkway section will be ignored. Separated parkways are often poorly maintained; · Uniformity in use and appearance with front yard; and · Enhanced driveway depth will keep vehicles out of pedestrian right-of-way. As an alternative, however, incorporating a landscape parkway between the sidewalk and the curb offers several advantages: · There appears to be less pavement and more vegetation, creating a nicer street scene appearance. · Pedestrians are physically separated from automobile traffic, creating a greater sense of security for the pedestrians. · Parkways allow trees to be planted close to the street pavement, creating the appearance of a narrower streetscene. · Parkways can be uniformly maintained by an Homeowner's Association or other entity, ensuring a consistent streetscene appearance. Options for both curb/gutter/sidewalk and curb/parkway/sidewalk are depicted on Figure III-4C (page III-16) in the Specific Plan document. In addition, a separate exhibit entitled, Through Local Streets (Option 2), has been presented by the Applicant to you under separate cover. Potential options for narrower public streets Page 6 include a street cross section with a 56-foot right-of-way for Through Local Streets. a 56-foot right of way for cul-de-sacs and short local sa'eets, and a 50-foot right-of-way option for cul-de-sacs. C. Develop architectural guidelines that: 1. Provide for enhanced definition of architectural criteria to assure diversity rather than uniformity in housing type, including a mix of one and two stoo' housing, and comprehensive "architecture forward" design criteria and a variety of alternate garage configura- tions. Proiect Consistency: The comprehensive architectural design guidelines contained within the Wolf Creek Specific Plan will ensure that all dwelling units are designed to present an articulated, visually interesting facade from all streets. Special attention is given to comer lots. The residential design guidelines are comprehensive and cover an extensive array of information including: Building elevations/facade articulation/building elements -- pages IV-55 & 60 Architectural massing, height & scale -- pages IV49 & 53 Building siting & orientation -- pages IV43 & 59 Materials and colors -- pages IV-54 & 60 Roof-types and variations -- pages IV-55 & 60 Windows and doors -- pages IV-50 & 56 Patios, balconies and pomhes -- pages IV-51, 56 & 61 Architectural detailing -- pages IV-52, 57, 58 & 59 Walls and fences -- pages IV-57 & 60 Laundry facilities (Multi-Family Senior Residential only) -- see page 1'V-59 Handicapped Units (Multi-Family Senior Residential only) -- see pages IV-59 & 60 Security (Multi-Family Senior Residential only) -- see page IV-60 Patios and balconies (Multi-Family Senior Residential only) -- page IV-61 The design guidelines encourage single-story elements on comer lots: "The use of a mixture of one- and two-story elements are encouraged." (p. IV- 53) · "Varied roof forms are encouraged" (p. IV-53) Single-story elements are encouraged to reduce architectural massing when located on a comer lot." (p. IV-53) "Homes shall maintain low lines and horizontal forms as feasible, especially on comer lots." (p. IV-53) ~Building projections and recesses shall be provided on the front facade of each residential structure.~ (page IV-53) "The highly visible front, side, and rear elevations of home located adjacent to major circulation corridors shall include architectural enhancements. Page 7 Examples of possible enhancements to side and rear building elevations include: changing roof lines, incorporating dormers with windows into roofs. varying siding material(s) and/or color(s), installation of window trim on second stories, and using shutters to frame windows." (page IV-53) "Two-story elevations shall be visually broken up with offset stories, changes in materials, architectural banding or other similar accents, and/or sloping roof lines. This is especially important where two or more elevations of a residence are prominently visible, as at s~'eet comers." (page FV-54) A variety of alternative garage configurations are depicted on Figures IV-34A-D, Front Yard Setbacks, on pages IV-36 through IV-39 of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. These exhibits illustrate the following garage configuration options available in Wolf Creek: Front-Facing Garage (18' minimum setback) Side-Facing Garage (garage door does not face street) Attached Rear Garage with Optional Archway (this option places the attached garage at the rear of the lot) Detached Rear Garage Setback with Optional Archway (this option places the detached garage at the rear of the lot) Split Car Garage (2 car and 1 car garage are separated; 1 car garage is side- facing) 2. Provide for and define alternate roofing styles and materials, siding materials and treatments, front porches, and alternate construction materials and technologies; Proiect Consistency: The Wolf Creek Specific Plan allows for simple gable, hip or shed roof forms (see page IV-55). Page IV-55 also includes discussion of roofing materials, colors, pitches, and design. Front porches are discussed on pages IV-56 under Balconies and Porches. Building materials and usage are identified on pages IV-54 and 60. The Specific Plan does not preclude use of alternate consu'uction materials and technologies. 3. Provide detailed lan&cape and architectural standards for any parcel under five thousand (5000) square feet. Proiect Consistency: The current Wolf Creek project proposal does not include any residential lots smaller than 5,000 square feet in size. 3. Land-Use. The land use rnatrix for the Neighborhood Commercial and Community Commercial zoning districts shall be modified as set forth on Attachment 1. Pro[ect Consistency: The land use matrix will be modified to comply with Attachment 1. Page 8 4. Villaee Center. The city of Temecula General Plan identifies and encourages the creation of Village Centers. Village Centers are discussed within Goal 5 of Section 3 and within Section B of Part IV of the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Village Center proposed in Specific Plan No. 12 represents a valuable starting point for the ultimate design of a Village Center that conforms to the General Plan. However, this Commission cannot recommend approval until refinements are made to the proposed development. The necessao, refinements are consistent with the following General Plan policy statements: 5.2 "Require the provision of pedestrian and bicycle linkages from residential areas to open space/recreation facilities, commercial and employment centers." The proposed Village Center, as configured is not conductive to pedestrian and bicycle usage. The Applicant should consider a redesign that integrates higher density (medium density) residential in the area between Pala Road and the loop road together with low-medium density from residential areas to the Village Center must be integrated into the specific plan land use distribution so as to encourage non-vehicular travel. Proiect Consistency: Residential areas within Wolf Creek will be connected to the Village Center via a 10-foot .wide pedestrian path/Class I bike trail adjacent to the Interior Loop Road. In addition, sidewalks and on-street Class 11 bike lanes will al. low residents convenient non-vehicular access to the Village Center. A 30-foot wide "green necklace" linear park along the Interior Loop Road will connect residential neighborhoods with schools, parks, fire station, library/recreation center in the Village Center, and to double as a recreational amenity and a pedestrian link to surrounding off-site development. The community's pedestrian/bicycle trail system will offer residents convenient and safe access from their homes to nearby schools, parks and recreation facilities within Wolf Creek. The school sites will be readily accessible by students through a pedestrian/bicycle trail network designed to maximize pedestrian safety and facilitate pedes~ian movement on-site, thereby minimizing the need for unnecessary vehicular trips on the major arterials. 5.6 Encourage higher density residential, mixed use development, and supporting public and community facdities within Village Centers. The Applicant should reconsider the proposed density and mixture of uses in light of the foregoing policy. A greater mixture of uses should be considered so as to provide incentive for the residents to utilize the Village Center for service and commercial needs. Proiect Consistency: The "SP" zoning designation to accommodate a wide range of housing product types within the Specific Plan, including both single-family and multi-family housing. Wolf Creek is designed to provide a wide variety of housing types, lot sizes and price ranges to accommodate the needs of all income levels of the population, which will contribute to the City's fair share of low and moderate income housing. Conventional single-family housing types within Wolf Creek will range from 5,000 to 20,000 square feet, including: · Estate-type residential lots; Page 9 Conventional single-family lots; Zero lot line housing; and Patio homes. The community includes designated areas for innovative single-family detached courtyard homes at densities of up to 9.5 du/ac. As an option, multi-family senior housing may be provided at 22 du/ac in PA 18. The project also proposes some small lot single-family detached housing in the medium density, courly, ard home neighborhoods. These neighborhoods will providing ownership opportunities for seniors, first time home buyers, singles and busy professionals looking for smaller, less maintenance-intensive lots. Wolf Creek's variety of lot sizes and housing types will allow diversity in architectural expression, building massing and streetscenes not typically found in neighborhoods of homogeneous lots and houses. The WoLFCREEK Specific Plan includes standards and guidelines to promote architectural variation and articulation, while ensuring architectural continuity. It should be noted that the Wolf Creek project, while providing for residential diversity throughout the project as well as higher density housing near the Village Center, will not exceed the maximum for each residential density range as identified in the City's General Plan. In fact, the 1,881 to 2,022 dwelling units planned for Wolf Creek are significantly less than the 3,236 dwelling units City staff determined is permitted by the General Plan. 5. 7 "Establish design guidelines, development standards, and incentive programs for uses within Village Centers." The Specific Plan No. 12 standards must either conform to the Development Code or alternately, present a more thorough an detailed set of development code and architectural design standards. The present plan is without sufficient detail so as to provide reliable guidance to future users of the Specific Plan. Proiect Consistency: The project already contains a sn'ong and thorough set of design guidelines for the Village Center. These guidelines are present on pages IV-1 through IV-25 and are very detailed. The guidelines includes discussions of: Site planning (pages IV-I, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 13, 18 (Figure IV-17), 19 (Figure IV-18), 20, 23, 24 & 25) Land use variety (page IV-3) The Village Center's su'ong pedestrian orientation (page IV-3) Typical building facades (pages IV-4 & 5) Building scale and design (pages IV-7 & 8) Parking lot design (pages IV-9, 10, 11, 12, 13 & 17) Pedestrian nodes, plazas & linkages (pages IV-5, 6, 7 & 17) Landmark elements (page IV-8) Building and monument signage (pages IV-13, 14, 15 & 16) 5.10 "Ensure that adequate public gathering areas or plazas are incorporated within Village Centers to allow for social interaction and community activities." The proposed plan does not demonstrate the presence of adequate public assembly areas. Page I0 Pro}ect Consistency: Figure IV-1 in the Specific Plan is entitled, "Village Center Pedestrian Linkages and Gathering Place." It depicts one "Community Hub," two residential gathering places, three pedestrian plazas, several "Pedestrian Connections," a meandering Class I bike lane/pedestrian pathway, pedesu'ian secondary routes and Class II bike routes. The project provides a variety of public gathering areas and plazas within the Village Center. The most visible plaza is located at the intersection of Wolf Valley Road and the Interior Loop Road. This plaza is clearly depicted on Figure BI-1 on page 1II-32 in the Specific Plan. Other gathering areas include the City Sports Park with its gazebo, pergola, picnic tables and tot lot (see Figure BI-10 on page III-31), and the activity nodes (see Figure 111-12 on page Ili-34). There are three activity nodes located throughout the project along the Interior Loop Road. Figure IV-27 depicts a commercial pedeswian plaza/gathering place that is easily accessible from an adjoining single-family home subdivision. In addition, page IV-27 includes a statement that 'entry courtyards and plaza spaces are encouraged." Also, Figure IV-18 on page IV-19 depicts a public plaza at the southeast comer of the Wolf Valley Road/Interior Loop Road intersection. Figure IV-17 on page IV-18 depicts two commercial gathering plazas. The two school sites will also function as gathering places for social interaction and community activities, as will the private recreation center and the public neighborhood parks. B. The Project is not compatible with surrounding land uses because of the deficiencies identified in Section A above. The project does not propose, generally, residential development adjacent to existing, surrounding neighborhoods with interface buffers and to substantial to complete roadway improvements. The commercial component does attempt to implement the Village Center concept at a site located across from the Pechanga Casino. Proiect Consistency: Adjacent land uses east of the project in Redhawk and Vail Ranch consist of single family residential uses (5,000 minimum lot size), parks and schools. The City's General Plan Land Use Map shows these uses m be Low Medium residential and Public.flnstimtional Facilities. The same exact uses are shown on the City's General Plan for the Wolf Creek site. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan implements the Low Medium (3 - 6 du/ac) residential and Public/Institutional Facilities uses shown on the City's General Plan by providing a middle school, an expansion of Kent Hintergardt Park and single family residential housing of varying densities but with a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. West of the project across Pals Road, the City's General Plan shows Low Medium residential uses north of Wolf Valley Road. The minimum lot sizes in this area range from 4,500 to 7,200 square feet as depicted in the Assessor's Records. The City, in approving its General Plan determined that Low Medium and High Residential and Neighborhood Commercial uses on the Wolf Creek site would be compatible with the existing residential areas west of Pals Road and north of Wolf Valley Road. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan as currently designed provides for minimum 5,000 and 7,200 square foot single family residential uses in the areas designated for Low Medium uses and reduces the density in the area shown for High Density residential uses to fit the Medium density residential category of the General Plan. The project will implement the Neighborhood Commemial uses shown in the General Plan at the comer of Pals and Wolf Valley Road. The Wolf Creek project will further enhance compatibility for uses west of Pals Road by providing Open Space/Recreation use as defined by the General Plan in the form of the Drainage Greenbelt buffer that will be implemented along the Pals Road frontage. Page 11 South of Wolf Valley Road and west of Pala, the General Plan depicts a Not a Part (the Pechanga Casino and associated uses) and Low Residential. The General Plan identifies Community Commercial, High and Low Medium Residential and Public/Institutional uses for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and determined that those uses would be compatible with the General Plan designations west of Pala Road. The Wolf Creek Specific Plan implements the Community Commercial, LOw Medium Residential and Public Institutional uses by providing Village Center Community Commercial uses, single family homes at 5,000 and 5,500 square foot minimums and the City Sports Park. Wolf Creek Specific Plan reduces the density of the area shown for High Residential uses to Medium Residential uses in order to meet the goals of the City's Growth Management Action Plan. The Drainage Greenbelt buffer will be implemented along the Pala Road frontage to further buffer these adjacent uses. The north and south portions of Wolf Creek are consistent with the General Plan land use designations for those portions of the property and will therefore be consistent with adjacent uses to the south and north respectively. C. The proposed project will have adverse effect on the community because of the areas of inconsistency with the General Plan identified in Section A above. The General Plan Amendment is in a relocation and reallocation of existing land use designation that conforms to the design of the specific plan. In light of the identified need to augment the Specific Plan, no General Plan Amendment should occur unless and until Specific Plan No. 12 is revised consistent with these recommendations. Proiect Consistency: The Wolf Creek Specific Plan has been modified and augmented by the applicant to respond to Planning Commission consistency concerns as outlined in the analysis above. Page 12 ATTACHMENT NO. 11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED OCTOBER 4, 2000 R:\PI~NNING\S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC Staff Report 1-94)l.doc 27 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION October 4, 2000 Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 Planning Application No. 98-0482 - Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report Planning Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment for Wolf Creek Planning Application No. 00-0052 - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 Prepared By: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Communit7 Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1, ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR WOLF CREEK (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0484), AND APPROVE THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481) ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, THE SUBDIVISION OF 557 ACRES INTO 47 LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS, SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950.110-002, - 005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010. R:~,S P~Wolf Creek SF~STAFFRPT.PC for 10-4-00.doc 1 3. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN AND RELATED ACTIONS (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98- 0482) AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, - 006 AND -010. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: SP Murdy, LLC REPRESENTATIVES: Bill Gdffith and Camille Bahri, Spring Pacific Properties, LLC Barry Burnell, T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. Donald Lohr and Tony Terich, Lohr + Associates, Inc. Sam Alhadeff, Alhadeff & Solar, LLP STATUS At their last meeting on September 20, 2000, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, but asked the applicant to reassemble the various documents pertaining to the project for their final review. The applicant was asked to return on October 4, 2000, to address Commissioner's concerns regarding the 4,000 and 4,500 square foot lots, the mix of one and two-story homes in each subdivision, and the list of commercial uses for the neighborhood and community commercial sites. Staff received the reassembled documents on Wednesday, September 27, 2000, and the binder containing these documents is attached. Responses to the concerns noted above shall be presented verbally at the hearing on October 4, 2000. CORRESPONDENCE Staff has provided as Attachment No. 8 all correspondence received since the printing of the first Staff Report. These documents were previously distributed to the Commission as additional information, at the September 6 and September 20, 2000 hearings. They have been assembled here for your convenience, including letters from the same correspondent. Ba fie d L qhtinq at the Middle School The Notice of Public Hearing indicated that the Middle School ballfields would be lighted for evening play. Redhawk residents adjacent to the Middle School site have voiced opposition to this activity, as noted in the correspondence received. The Temecula Community Services District has confirmed that the ballfields at the Middle School site will not be lighted because adequate fields are available at the proposed community park and City sports park that located in other portions of the specific plan. R:\S FAWolf Creek SI:~STAFFRPT.PC for 10-4-00.doc 2 FINDINGS Planninq Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 and Planninq Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment The project as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The project has been reviewed by agencies and staffand determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes similar residential neighborhoods adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods, with interface buffers and full roadway improvements. Project commercial development is proposed within a Village Center, across Pala Road from the Pechanga Casino. The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The project does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses for the site. The General Plan Amendment is a relocation and reallocation of existing land use designations that conforms to the design of the specific plan. Planninq Application No. 98-0482 - Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report See Attachment 3 for full text. Planninq Application No. 00-0052 - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent with the Development Code, the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, the City of Temecula Municipal Code and Subdivision Ordinance. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965. The Agricultural Preserve status of the property expired in 1989 through the Notice of Nonrenewal Process initiated in 1979. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed by the tentative map. The site is generally fiat topographically, with no unique land features. It is surrounded by existing and developing residential uses, as well as commercial uses generated by the Pechanga Indian Reservation property across Pala Road. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. An environmental impact report has been prepared and a finding has been made, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a) (3), finding that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives R:\S P~Wolf Creek SP\STAFFRPT.PC for 10-4-00.doc 3 10. 11. 12. 13. identified in the environmental impact report; The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. The 'subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). Quimby fees have been determined for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, and the map has been conditioned to provide these fees. Attachments: 5. 6. 7. 8. PC Resolution for the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment- Blue Page 5 Exhibit A - Wolf Creek Specific Plan text - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit C - General Plan Amendment - Blue Page 6 PC Resolution for Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Blue Page 7 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit B - Revised Exhibit PC Resolution for the Final Environmental Impact Report- (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit A - FEIR text - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit B - FEIR Technical Appendices - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit C - Addendum to the FEIR dated August 23, 2000 - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit D - Addendum No. 2 to the FEIR dated September 14, 2000 - (Under Separate Cover) Exhibit E - Mitigation Monitoring Program - (Under Separate Cover Staff Report dated September 6, 2000 - Blue Page 8 Planning Commission Minutes of September 6, 2000 - Unavailable Staff Report dated September 20, 2000 - Blue Page 9 Planning Commission Minutes of September 20, 2000 - Unavailable Correspondence received subsequent to staff reports- Blue Page 10 a. Endangered Habitats League, Dan Silver, Coordinator, dated 9/3/00. b. William & Ted Lee Tams, E-mail received 9/4/00. c. Pamela Miod, correspondence dated 9/6, and fax received 9/20/00. d. Pamela J. Jones, M.D., fax dated 9/6/00. e. Stedyn & Janie Rigsby, correspondence dated 9/6/00. f. Pechanga Cultural Resource Center, John A. Gomez, Jr., Supervisor, fax dated 9/6/00, and correspondence delivered 9/20/00. g. Peter Lucier, correspondence delivered to the Commission dated 9/6/00. h. Tracy Luke, request to inform the Commission per telecon on 9/8/00. , R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for 10-4-00.doc 4 ATTACHMENT NO. '12 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 R:\PLANNING~ P\Wolf Creek SP\CC Staff Report I-9-01.doc 28 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 20, 2000 Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specifio Plan No. 12 Planning Application No. 98-0482 - Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report Planning Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment for Wolf Creek Planning Application No. 00-0052 - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 Prepared By: Carole K. Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR WOLF CREEK (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0484), AND APPROVE THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0481) ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PAI_A ROAD, BETWEEN LOMA UNDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010. 2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPMCATION NO. 00-0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, THE SUBDIVISION OF 557 ACRES INTO 47 LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS, SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVIEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-00t, -005, -006 AND --010. R;~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for 9-20-00.doc 1 3. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN AND RELATED ACTIONS (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0482) AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, - 005, -006 AND-010. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: SP Murdy, LLC REPRESENTATIVES: Bill Griffith and Camille Bahd, Spring Pacific Properties, LLC Barry Bumell, T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. Donald Lohr and Tony Tedch, Lohr + Associates, Inc. Sam Alhadeff, Alhadeff & Solar, LLP STATUS O.n September 6, 2000, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing and took testimony from nine citizens for, against or neutral to the project. Additionally, Planning Commissioners commented upon the following areas of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan: traffic signals and street widths, village center design, specific plan Zoning Standards and Design Guidelines, and the Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program. The Planning Commission continued the matter for two weeks, in order to receive additional information regarding the proposed regional spo~ls park for Planning Area 24, the former high school site. Commissioners requested that staff, the applicant, and consultants for the project respond to their concerns. The applicant was asked to submit a Revised Traffic Study, Specific Plan Land Use Map, Design Guidelines and Mitigation Monitoring Program no later than Wednesday, September 13, 2000. Staffwill review the revised documents and prepare a verbal response to the Planning Commission at their hearing on September 20, 2000. R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for 9-20-00,~oc 2 FINDINGS Plannin,q Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 and Planninq Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment 1. The project as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The project has been reviewed by agencies and staff and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. 2. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes similar residential neighborhoods adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods, with interface buffers and full roadway improvements. Project commercial development is proposed within a Village Center, across Pala Road from the Pechanga Casino. The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The project does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses for the site. The General Plan Amendment is a relocation and reallocation of existing land use designations that conforms to the design of the specific plan. Plannin,q Application No. 98-0482 - Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report See Attachment 3 for full text. Planninq Application No. 00-0052 - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent with the Development Code, the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, the City of Temecula Municipal Code and Subdivision Ordinance. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Califomia Land Conservation Act of 1965. The Agricultural Preserve status of the property expired in 1989 through the Notice of Nonrenewal Process initiated in 1979. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed by the tentative map. The site is generally fiat topographically, with no unique land features. It is sun'ounded by existing and developing residential uses, as well as commercial uses generated by the Pechanga Indian Reservation property across Pala Road. o The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. An environmental impact report has been prepared and a finding has been made, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) (3), finding that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report; R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC fa' 9-20-00.dec 3 10. 11. 12. 13. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. The subdivision is consistent with the City's partdand dedication requirements (Quimby). Quimby fees have been determined for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, and the map has been conditioned to provide these fees. Attachments: PC Resolution for the Specific Plan - Blue Page 14 Exhibit A - Wolf Creek Specific Plan text - Under Separate Cover Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval - Revised Conditions at Hearing Exhibit C - General Plan Comparison PC Resolution for Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Blue Page 16 Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval - Revised Conditions at Hearing PC Resolution for the Final Environmental Impact Report - Blue Page 18 Exhibit A - FEIR text - Under Separate Cover Exhibit B - FEIR Technical Appendices - Under Separate Cover Exhibit C - Addendum to the FEIR dated August 23, 2000 - See Staff Report of 9-6-00 Exhibit D - Mitigation Monitoring Program - Revised Program at Hearing Staff Report dated September 6, 2000- Blue Page 21 Planning Commission Minutes of September 6, 2000 - Unavailable R:~S P~Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC fo~ ~-20-O0,dee 4 ENDANGERED HABITATS LEAGUE Dedicated to Ecosystem Protection and Iral~roved l. amd Use Planning Dan Silver * Coordinator PMB 592 8424-A Santa Monica Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90069-4267 TEL 323-654-1456 · FAX 323-654-1931 · dsilver~exo.com VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL Planning Commission ATTN: Carole Donahoe City of Tcraecula PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 Sept. 3, 2000 RE: Wolf Creek Specific Plan Honorable Chair and Members of the Commission: In recognition of its many positive features, the Endangered Habitats League (EHL) wishes to support the Wolf Creek Specific Plan as proposed. For your information, EHL is a Southern California organization dedicated to ecosystem protection, improved land use planning, and collaborative conflict resolution. We serve on the Advisory Committees to the three components of the Riverside County Integrated Plan (RCIP), namely the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP), General Plan Update, and Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Program (MSHCP). EHL supports the project as proposed for the following reasons: · The in-filling of underutilized land within municipal boundaries represents an efficient use of land. · A diversity of housing opportunities is offered, all within a high quality setting. · The village center configuration, which also integrates parks and schools, will create a livable and vibrant community. · Walking and biking opportunities will reduce auto trips and pollution compared to other potential projects. · The design facilitates adaptation to accommodate a future n-ansit system. We stress, however, that all these positive qualities absolutely depend upon the provision of multifamily and smaller lot detac,h, ed housing. Absent these features, the proposed project would not produce a "smart growth' outcome. We thus most strongly urge you to retain the multifamily and smaller lot housing and, indeed, increase their relative proportions. EHL is, however, concerned over the additive traffic impacts of this and many other projects, both inside and outside of Temecula. We urge you to effectively address this problem, including through the CETAP process. In no case, should Temecula sacrifice its finest natural habitats for ill-conceived highway projects, such as a new Rainbow Canyon Road interchange. We look forward to working with you to make Temecula a regional leader in integrating land use and u'ansportation. Thank you for considering our views. Sincerely, Dan Silver, MD Coordinator From: "Mike Naggar" <mnaggar~citycounciLorg> To: "Sue Steffen" <STEFFENS~co.riverside.ca.us>, "Debbie Ubnoske" <UBNOSKDS@co.riverside.ca.us> Date; 9/4/00 4:04PM Subject: Fw: Road Sue, Debbie Please make sure all Planning Commissioners receive a copy of the attached letter. It is in regard to the Wolf Creek project that is going to be heard on Wednesday the 6th. Thanks, Mike .... Original Message ..... From: Bill Tams To: mnaggar@citycouncil.org Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2000 10:20 PM Subject: Road Hello Mike Naggar, My name is Terl Lee Tams, 31430 Loma Linda Road. My family and I live all most across from the area that will be home to the Middle School (VVolf Valley Development). I am in agreement we need these schools. So please understand I am not against the school issue, but have great concern about the ROAD these children and parents will be traveling on. The area where the turn around and parking lot will be is the run off water drain. During heavy rains that fills up like a large pond. Nothing has come out on what they (developers) plan on doing. Also the road (Loma Linda Road) between Pala Road and Via Del Coronado is a nightmare. Full of holes, narrow and No sidewalks. Most of the cars speed down that road in a hurry to beat the traffic going to 79 Highway. They do not care whether the children are walking on the side of the road or in some cases down the middle. They speed past the children barley missing other cars or local residents walking there pets. In the early morning it is heavy in fog. (This is of course not year round), but it is during most of the school year. The school bus stop for now is on Temecula Lane by the Pala Community Park. We have children from Via Cordoba and streets above as will as Loma Linda and all the streets off of it hitting the roacL What I am getting at is, what is going to take place first? I know is is a joke if the VOTERS think they have a say. But with the added cars we already 'are dealing with, and you put heavy trucks on this road, it will not hold up. Every couple of years the road gets a patch job, and it's way over due. The amount of TRAFFIC that cuts thru our area is increasing daily. Most of the cars do not live in this area, and those who so almost never stop at the stop signs, and they fly through as if it's Highway 79. The POLICE due give tickets, but we do not have that many officers to man the city, let alone this street. I plan on attending the meeting this coming sept. 6. But if you don't mind, please answer my questions if you can. I like my friends in Redhawk are having trouble understanding this mess. again thank you. William L. & Teri Lee Tams 31430 Loma Linda Road Temecula, California 92592 FAXED AND HAND DELZYERED 6 September 2000 Pamela L. Miod 31995 Via Saltio Temecula, CA 92592 euroconn:~.~e net 909.302.6744 S£P O ZO0O i-. Carole bonahoe, Associate Planner City of Temecula Planning Department City of Temecula 43200 Business park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: Wolf Creek 5pacific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, 5CH #88030705, August 2000 bear Ms. Oonahoe, After reviewing the Wolf Creek 5pacific Plan Final Environmental Zmpact Report (FEZR), ]: have the following comments and concerns which T respectfully request be made part of the public record for the project. CUMULAT'~VE TRAF~C IMPACT5: Tn my let-tar to the Planning Commission dated December 13, 1999 ]: raised as the primary issue the inadequacy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) with respect to traffic impacts. The DE'J:R and the FEZR fail to accurately describe impacts expected when the Wolf Creek Specific Plan is combined with other approved and planned projects. Considering how out of date the traffic studies are for this project, I request the city prepare an up to date trnffJc study that considers new cumulative impacts and recirculate it for public review and comment. The documents utilize and reference prior Environmental Impact Reports certified many years ago for the cumulative traffic impact analysis. The General Plan was certified almost seven years ago (1993) and the AD 159 E]:R over 12 years ago (1988). And yet these documents are the basis of the cumulative traffic impact analysis. The response to my comments suggests the project will "avoid traffic impacts over the long term" because baseline conditions were current. However, the response fails to mention if the 1993 study includes new projects approved or developed since then. The FETR also indicates the City is working on a new Circulation Element Update and has prepared a new study that is not included in the FEIR. The FEZI~ states the cumulative traffic analysis was based on a "worst case" scenario but the prior documents were prepared before new circumstances arose which could significantly increase the number of automobiles that will use $.R. 79, Pala road and Fairview Avenue. What about the Pachanga Casino, Morgan Hill and the P, CIP? What about the new casinos under construction on Pala Road in San Diego County? Are roads Pamela L. Miod Page 2 09/06/00 like 5R 79, Pale Rood and Fairview Avenue going to be wide enough if the FE-ZR doesn't include any of those projects in the cumulative traffic study or in light of the proposed Benumont-Banning/Temecula Corridor in the RC'ZP7 On pnge go of the FEZR, Table 18 indicates a cumulative ADT of 2g,800 on Polo Road north of Rainbow Canyon Road. Traffic figures supplied by the City Public Works Deportment indicate the rood is already carrying over 22,000 ADT before the project is even built. On page 66 it says the Pale Rood Bridge will handle 58,400 ADT but on page g0, Table 18 indicates S.R. 79 will only be et §2,200 ADT with project and cumulative impacts. Do the cars disappear after they cross the bridge? Somebody should double check the projections because there are thousands of new homes proposed to be built in this project and many others. There ore also the new casinos just getting started. The FEIR also fails to adequately describe and recommend realistic traffic mitigation measures for off site improvements and cumulative impacts. Pages 68, xv and xv/all reference old, out of date mitigation measures. Item No. 6 requires the owner to participate in the funding for Pale Bridge through AD 1§9 and yet the bridge is already constructed using other funds. How can the City force someone to buy improvements that are already paid for with an assessment district? All of the mitigation measures listed in Item NO.8 ore already paid for by the assessment district and ore almost complete. There is no indication how the city plans to pay for the clover leaf interchange that was recommended at Interstate l§ and S.R. 79 or what the City will require of the developer to help fund the interchange. Please also consider the fact that Item No. 7 is a clear reference to an out of dote document end is entirely inappropriate in light of the fact that Pale Road Bridge was already constructed for six lanes not four lanes. Why require the developer to study the adequacy of o four-lane structure when the decision to go with six lanes was made several years ago. That just shows you how out of date these documents are. Finally, there are several instances where mitigation measures for cumulative impacts ore deferred to a future date. Please refer to Item Nos. 7, 11 and 12 which all defer the analysis of cumulative impacts and mitigation measures to some future date when the city might have a better idea of what to expect in terms of cumulative traffic impacts. HOUSING DENSITIES: According to the DEIR the majority of single-family residential dwelling units, approximately 1,496 out of 2,1~, will be placed on lot sizes between 4,000 square feet and 6,000 square feet. The concentration of smaller lots creates a "high" density situation, which increases the cumulative impact situation. The high percentage of smaller lot sizes on this project is unacceptable. Environmental Impacts and Mitiqation Measures, paqe 60, 2.6 Transportation and Circulation, Threshold for Determining Significance: ~al 1 in the City'~ Genera/Plan (ircu/atian Element indicates that the City will "strive to maintain a LOS D or be~er at all inrersections within the Ci~ during peak hours and LO5 C or be~ter durin9 non-peak hours". Pamela L. Miod Page 3 og/06/O0 To "strive" is a weak and noncommittal term. Zt is not acceptable to assume the residents of Temecula are willing to settle for "severely restricted freedom to maneuver and a poor level of comfort and convenience when driving". Executive Summary, Impact Summary Matrix. Daae xv. Table S-1: The City traffic engineer has indicated that monitoring and follow-up studies may be required to assess and respond to the incremental impact associated with each project phase. ]:f "follow-up" studies indicate incremental impacts associated with this project, there are no provisions in this plan to mitigate tn~ffic once the project is already in progress and once uncalculated traffic impacts start affecting local and regional roadways. This plan does not address how many additional lanes would be needed to accommodate the uncalculated traffic impccts in order to maintain a level of service "D" or better after the project is underway, nor does it address the source of funding for additional road improvements at a later date. There must be a viable mitiqation plan that details implementation of plan and identifies means of fundinq for future road improvements. With an already congested situation on Pala Road and Hwy 795, additional truck traffic, prior to proposed road improvements, will increase traffic congestion cnd lower the already Iow level of service on these roods. The 'FIEZR does not address the addition of construction truck t~ffic in its traffic study and the effect it will have on the level of service during the construction period---5-10 years. Executive Summon, Unavoidable 5iqnificant Impacts, paqe viii: Such a statement finds that the Lead Agency hes reviewed theE'iR and has balanced the benefits of the project against its unavoidable, significant effects and has considered the adverse effects to be acceptable. The EZR identifies one area of UNAVOIDABLE, 5IGI~ZFZCANT IMPACT of the project: Air pollutant emissions (long-term) associated with vehicular traffic and energy consumption resulting from the project. This E~R also identifies two areas in which the project will contribute incrementally to UNA VOTDABLE CUMULATIVE SI~KJzFZCANT effects: · Regional air quality, and · The loss of agricultun~l land. Tt is irresponsible for the Lead Agency to put o higher value on "development" than the value of natural resources and the very element that keeps human beings alive--Clean Executive Summary, Impact Summary Matrix. Daae xi. Table S-1: Pomelo L. Miod Page 4 09/06/00 The FEZR states "Long term operational emissions (due to vehicular travel and on-site energy consumption) will exceed the $CAC~MD thresholds of significance. (The residents of the Wolf Creek community will use electricity and natural gas, resulting in increased air pollutant emissions from regional power plants and facilities generating the energy. Zn the long term, development pursuant to the proposed $pecific Plan will result in additional vehicular traffic and hence, additional vehicular air pollutant emissions.)" Tt further stated: "NO FEASIBLE MITIGATION EXISTS." This project will have a detrimental affect on the future health, safety and welfare of the residents of the Temecula Valley, especially those individuals located in the Southern region of Temecula and it is unconscionable and irresponsible to ignore this element. Furthermore, outdoor play areas may be affected by potential carbon monoxide (CO) hot spots, which directly affect the children living in the Wolf Valley region. Executive Summary, Impact Summary Matrix. Daae xiv, Table S-l: The FEaR states that construction contractors will maintain and service construction equipment to minimize exhaust emissions. However, the "monitoring program" of the constnuction site end equipment maintenance shall be the developer. The FEZR does not mention who will "monitor" the developer. Furthermore, the issue of controlling dangerous diesel pollutants, which a~e generated by heavy construction equipment, is not addressed. Tn addition, it is noted that during grading activities chemical applications may be used to prevent wind erosion and release of dust and particulates. The FETR does not address the health hazards that may be associated with chemical applications. Environmental Impact and Mitigation Measures, 2.2 Population and Housinq: The retail complex mentioned, "similar to other commercial businesses, such as the one on Rancho California Road near T-l§", (assuming the report is referring to the Target Center) is not compatible with adjacent residential uses and is not consistent with the General Plan land use patterns of protecting and enhancing residential neighborhoods. With the creation of approximately 600 jobs in the Village Center (commercial/retail complex) and approximately 344 new jobs created by the development of the schools, approximately 944 additional cars will be traveling to and from this site. What is the percentage of individuals living in the Wolf Creek project who ore expected to work in the commercial/retail center? Tt is ridiculous to assume that individuals living within the Wolf Creek and bordering developments will fill all the jobs created by this project. Teachers living in the already existing developments will most likely maintain their positions at the outlying schools of which they are already employed. Environmental Zmpact and Mitiqation Measures, 2.4 Water I~esources, paqe 42, and poqe 43. Water Manaqement: Both the EMWD and RCWD provide reclaimed water supplies to developers interested in using such resources within Temecula. However, the 5pacific Plan for the Wolf Creek project does not include provisions for irrigation of the porks, schools, or the greenbelt channel with reclaimed water. With the continued loss of natural resources due to over Pamela L. Miod Page 5 09/06/00 development, this developer should be mandated to provide for reclaimed water opportunities on park, schools, greenbelt channels and open space areas. Environmental Impact and Mitiqation Measures 2.12 brainaqe, paqe 113: · ~he swale, parallel to Pala I~oad, will have gross-mined side slopes and bottom section, with a 4- foot-wide, concrete-lined, Iow-flow "V" channel in the center. A concrete-lined, Iow-flow "V" channel is contrary to recognized methods of drainage for treating pollutants and run off. Keeping in mind that maintaining the "quality of life" that is so valued by the residents of the Temecula Valley, T thank you for the oppontunity to present my concerns for this project. Sincerely, Pamela L. Miod 3199§ Via Sattio Temecula, CA 92§92 I~e~nes~ay September 20r 1900 2:57~ -- From ,90~ 699'J~3~' -- Page Pamela I_ ~Alod 3]99§ ~rm 5altio Teme~la, CA 92592 909.302.6744. FAX~D AND 14AI'~D I:~EL.I:VEI~Eb 20 September 2000 cT~role Oon~hoe. Associate Pkmne~ City of Temecula Planning Department 43L:~0 Business park bHve Te~cuJo. CA 92590 Re: Wolf Creek Spe¢ific Plan fi~al Environmental Zmpact Report, 5CH #88030705, August 2000 ~:n addition to comments submitted in my last letter of 6 September 2000, 3: herewith submit th~ following comments and concerns which T respectfully request be made Ixu't of the public record for the project. CUMULAT]:V~ *TRAFFIC ]:MI>ACTS: Z request the city peepaee an up to date t~affic study that con~idees new cumullitive impacts and recirculote it foe public review and camment. This request is based on the fact that in my letter to the Planning ~ommission dated becemher 13, ]999 T raised aS the primary issue tim inadequacy of the Draft Environmental Zmpact Report (Db-ZR) with respect to traffic impacts. The Dk-ZR and the F~,R foil to accurately describe impacts expected when the Wolf Creek Specific Plan is combined with other approved and planned projects. The documents utilize and reference prior Environmental T_mpact Reports (EZR's) certified many years ago for the c~nulativg traffic impact analysis. The General Plan EZR wes c~tificd almost seven yem~ ago 0993) and the AD 159 ~ over 12 yem, s ~jo (t~)88:~ And yet the~e documents are the basis of the cumulative traffic iml:mct analysis. The respons~ to my comments sugge-~ts the project will 'ovoid traffic impacts over the long tom' because baseline conditions were current. However, the re~panse foils to mention if the 1993 study includes new projects approved or develo~d since the~ Zt is not sufficient to say, ~Zt will all work out in the long ru~' What about in the shaft and medium term7 Furthermore, it was noted at the planning commiss/on meeting 6 September 2000. that a draft of the Circulation Element Update is not a certified document and should only be used os background informatior~ The FE]:R nates on page xv that one of the mitigation meosurea (Loam Lindo Ro~d from Pala Rood to Vm Del Coronado to its ultimate half-section width as o Collector) will be met "Td~ THE C]:RCULATJ:ON ELEMENT UH:)ATE OF ~ ~EIxI~RAL PLAN TS APPROVED". zf the Circulation Element is nat apl~oved, when and how will this mitigation element be achieved?. The FE/R doe~ not address this issue. CE~A eequire~ dl phases of the project and it~ ~em- end long term impacts to be deseribed Ia detail. Deferred ~ is ia violation of CEQA. This proa~-~t will have a significant impact on traffic, during nil phases of the project, evea after ndtigotioe measures. Igednes~ay September ZOr 1900 Z:571:~ -- Fr~ '~0~ 6995513~ -- Page I~mel= L Miad Pr 2 20 5~pt~.~ber 2000 All ptXL~ of the p~oject, short term. mediu~ te.n~ and lo.j-term impacts hove not bee~ de~cHl~.d in accon:l~nce with T~nspoetation and Circulation Element, ~ ~ TI~ ~ly tr=f~'c ~¢e~ ~$ i~ic~t~ that ~rf the monitaring system indicates that the project can no lodge- suppart a LOS D or better, what plan is in place to stop the de~laper from pr~--edJng with furtbee develaprnent of the pra.ject? Tim FEZR does not addeess th~ issue Furthermore, if future traffic studies determine t~at additional improvements are required of the project to megt City LOS abatis, s, where will the funding for the new improvements came from? There must be a viable mitiea?lan Dian that det~il¢ implementation of plan end identifies means of funding fo~ futur~ r~d improvements, and that The ~ssuance o~ subd:~s~on maps to spec~f,c tr~hc p~--formanee star,~,. What are the tlme frames for the proposed "r~o~itoHng system'? Will there be monthly, quarterly, yearly monitoring? Which agency will be conducting the 'monitaring system'? Tlm FEZR does not address this issue. At what point in ti~ will the 'ultimate' Z-J5 and 5J~. 7)5 interchange is required and how is it going to be funded, constn.~ted and tragic congestion mitigated before it _r~nches that a-iticol point? What measures will be taken along the way fo ensuee that a 'critical point* does not occur? The FE-~I~ does nat disclose these details. CE~A t~equim ~ll p~ of th~ I~oJe~f c~ its nocu. ~1 k~j te~m impacts to be descnl>ed in detail. Deferred miti~tien is in vieletio~ of ~-~A. T further request a ~epo~t on average t~a~l times in the vicinity of this I~ro~ect and surrounding communities. Studies foe LOS standards at intersections do not adequately detail the impact on air quality. Mitigation measures such as ndditional traffic lights increase average travel times from point A to paint B. Regardless if LOS stendoJ~$ at each tn~ffic light are b or better, e~ch cycle t~.~ l-4 minutes. Multiply that by ~0 oe ~5 traffic light intoeseetions and ~ cm' could be sitting in traffic for up to an hou~. J~NJJtiply that by an av~age additional 5,000 vehicles 9ezmrated by this project, zn addition, an estimated 42,000 daily car trips ere proiected to be generated as a result of this proJect. The FEr_~ iclentifies 'Air pollutant missions (long-term) associated with vehicular traffic ~nd energy consumption resultJmj from the project' to have an UNAVOT~DAI~LE AI~D SZGt~ZFCANT ZI~PACT on the community. A result of the additional vehicles generated by this project, coupled with the ndditionul time s~ent gt traffic lights will severely, further, impact air quality in the community. Again, the cumulative effects of current and future projects on sJ~. 795 and Pole Road have nat been m~.quately addressed in the f~ Zf the 'proposed' mgionul Ix~k, middle school and project related mad construction is allowed to proem, ed ahead of the required on site ~d off-site (infrastructure) road improvements what measures will be taken to ensure that additional traffic congestion will not occur on an a~macly congested are~? AZR QUAI TTy: Statement of Ove~Hding Considerations. 5action 15093 of ~:EC~A ~.quires the decision-making ogellcy to JXtJOJlOe. O~ applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed p"aject against its unavoidable enviranmem'al risks when determining whether' to approve I~ednesda¥ September 20t 1900 2:5?pm -- Fr(~ '~ 69~' -- ~age 51~ Pamela L. ~iod Page 3 20.5~ptembe~ 2000 the p~oject. The statement of ov~idi~ c~i~?~ ~11 be sup~ted by sub.entel evid~e in the r~d. When t~ I~d ~ op~ ~ ~ whi~ will result in the ~c~e~e OF signifi~nt eff~s wh~h ~ idcntif~d in t~ f/~l ~ but ~ ~t o~ided ~d, the ~ ~ell ~te in ~iti~ t~ ~if~ ~ to ~p~t ~s ~ ~d ~ the fi~l ~ and/~ oth~ inf~t~ in the r~d. ~e 5taft ~e~ dated 6 ~ptem~ 6, ~at~ un~ F~Z~5, 7b t~t 't~ d~i~ of t~ ~ision ~t IJke~ to ~ s~Jo~ publ~ ~lth ~ob~7 C~n ~R j~ hap~ to k~ hu~n ~i~ ali~. T~ F~ d~ ~t li~ mit~t~n ~s whi~ ~id~ts in th~ ~ will ~ ~bj~ed to. /~iti~tion rneae~'es a'e stated as follows: 'Upon ident~fy,ng a dot.nd for bus sa-vice to the project ore4, the I~iver~ide T~r~jt Agency, o~ other- r~spor~ible public t~a~sit provide~ will establish bus ~oufes and stops to service tim ~esidents in the ~ecific plan a~ea.' Who will 'identify' the 'demand" Fa' bus se~vke? How will this identifying JDeOCess be dor~? When will t be done~ ];f the residents cha~e not to r/de a bus, m. if RTA is unable to provide thc equipment and fundir~j, what miti~cltion rnea~es will then be taken? Accepting a .Statement of Overriding Cor=side~ations on something as importam as A]~R is e violation of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of this community. ~,MPACT TO I~EbHAWK The FE~I~ does not address the impact thi~ project will have on the residents of the Redhawk community. Our neighborhood roads ore eL~eody heavily impacted by additional devebpment in the Redhawk asea as well as the Pachanga Casino expansio~ When Pale Road becomes iml;~s~3ble due to the con-~muction of r~ad iml~ovement~ and p~oject development (schools, homes, pa~ks, commercial/retail centers), the least frustrating r~ute will he thr~ucjh ou~ neighborhood streets. Wolf Valley I~o~cl and Redhowk Parkway ar~ already heavily 'maveled with school end top buses, vehicles, ~nd commercial vehicles. Traffic tm/lng to exit residential streets onto I~edhawk Partway is already I~.comJng dangerous. Additional traffic generated by this pea jeer will hove a detrimental Jm~ct on the community of Redhawk. How much money is left in Assessment #]§~?. Will the r~sidents of Redhewk be additionally ~e~ed for ndditional bende to fund road improvements associated with this project? Tn closing, it is noted that alta- reviewing PC RE,5OL. UIZON #2000, it does not comply with CEQA #15093 by showing the balances of Overriding Conside~ation~ end the benefits to the community. Critical impacts of this p~o.ject to the community have not been adequately addressed, no~ has detailed inforroation on mitigation measures been give~ Once again, Z ~-;quest the city prepare an up to date t~offic study that consider~ new cumulative imlx~ts ar~l ~eci~culate it fo~ public review and comment. Furthermore. T ~equest tho? o full investigation on how the health, safety and welf~r~ OF the community will be affected by the significant ai~ quality impacts this p~oject wJJl generate. Pamela L./Riod ~: City Ca~ncil Planning Commission It~ednesda¥ September 6f 1900 11:38a~ -- FrC~ '1 909 693 5250' -- Page O~ O0 12;2Sp ~ot~ Hoon HD R Hedical Sep V }9) -£93-S250 p.l TEMECULA PSYCWIATRIC CENTER, A MEDICAL CORPORATION DATE: TO: 29377 Rancho California Rd.. Ste. 204, Temec,,Ln CA 92591 Phone (909) 693-1181 Fax (909) 693-5250 PAGES (includes Cover Sheet) --~ COMMENTS: Confidentiality. Note: This tt~cenpy may contain confidential and or legally privileged information and is intended only for the u.ne of the individual or emtity, to whom it is ..,dd,-_t~.m{ If you are not the intended reeipienL fi~e cmplo.~ or agent responsible for delivering this telecopy to the intended recipient, b~ advised that any copying dissemination, distribution, or diaclosure of information finam this tclecopy is strictly prohibited. Persons disclosing c~mfidential information m'e subject to penalties under applicable law. If yon have received this teleenpy in error, please notify the sender immediately by. telephone and mail the entire t~imilc men, age back to us at the address above. I~ednesda¥ September 6f 1900 11::~a~ -- Fro,-..~'1 909 69~ 5250' -- Pa~e 21 06 OO 1Z:eGp ~'c Moon MD Iq Medical C bg)-6s3-szso Sep l~ecine$~y Septee~er 6t 1900 11:38am -- Fl'c* 'I 909 Sep OG O0 12:2Gp 693 5Z50~' -- Page 3I Fioon FID Iq Medical C -693-5250 September 6, 2000 Temecula Planning Commission 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Sterlyn & Janie Rigsby 45861 Classic Way Temecula. CA 92592 909-676-3188 Re: Wolf Creek Development To whom it may concern: I oppose the Wolf Creek project due to traffic concerns. I live in the Rainbow Canyon development and fight traffic on a daily basis. It is extremely difficult to get my child to and from school on Pauba Road. We also make six round trips to the sports park per week. We also exit Pala road to go grocer5.' shopping, movies, etc. I used to take the most direct route: Loma Linda to Via del Coronado to Via Cordova to Red Hawk Park~vay to Margarita Road. Because of all of the traffic problems in Red Hawk, I now go out to Highway 79 to Jedediah Smith (Thank you for the suggestion Mt. Pratt). Highway 79 near Jedediah Smith is an accident waiting to happen. Even after the much anticipated completion of Highway 79, Jedediah Smith is a residential street and not meant for everyone on Pala Road to use it to get across town. Considering what the people along Jedediah Smith in Los Ranchitos had to pay for their land, I think it is safe to assume that the5' do not want their front yards to be turned into a major thoroughfare. Pechanga Entertainment outdoor concert and boxing facilites alone can accomodate 6.000 people per event. Presently, during ever5.' shift change traffic is backed up both directions. On concert nights, traffic is backed up out to the freeway, dmxm the off-ramps and on the freeway itself. All life ceases to exist for homeowners on Pala Road because of this traffic problem. We cannot and have not been able to exit our housing developments because of lack of traffic management on the part of the Pechanga organization and the Ci~' of Tcmecula. The new high school presents a problem all its own. The present attendance at Temecula Valley High School is 3.000. Now. if the new high school has just half that attendance, one can expect 1,000 round-trips daily to get children to and from school, not to mention buses, teachers. deliver/es, etc. If attendance at a Friday night football game is 1.000 and Pechanga has a sold out crowd the same evening, there will be 7.000 people on Pala Road. Spring Pacific officials ma5' say that this sort of thing will never happen. I remember the week-end of the Rave party on thc reservation when traffic was deadlocked for hours. That wasn't supposed to happen either. It can happen and xxSll happen. We are being promised six lanes on Pala Road {talk about a thoroughfare in 5'our backyard!) and four lanes on Wolf Valley. Not eveo'one will take these routes, especially teen-agers frequenting the high school! The Sports Park on Rancho Vista Road presently accomodates at least 6,000 soccer and baseball participants per 5'ear. not including invitational tournaments. The new sports park which may bc on Pala Road will be similiarly used. Other plans for the development include housing for 7.000 new residents, apamnent buildings, an elementary school, a fire station...everyone v.511 have to get out of the ama some way and Pala Road with its man5' stop lights just isn't a viable solution When the Palomar fire this summer started getting close, if an evacuation was ordered, there is NO WAY we could have all gotten out of here. With the problems at the border patrol, hundreds of cars are using Rainbow Canyon Road. That two-lane, pot-holed road is not equipped to handle to traffic it presently holds much less additional usage. Homes bordering on Rainbow Canyon Road are not safe to even back out of their drive- way. People will take the shortest route from A to Z. even if it is through an already crowded street. Case in point: Avenida de la Reina (now road-blocked), Avenida Pina Colada (now have speed bumps), Calle Medusa (alternate road was constructed), and Via Cordova (median circles and stop signs failed, problem has yet to be solved). A plan needs to be set in motion to join Butteffield Stage to this end of town and extend Via del Coronado to Highway 79 or some other means in which to move traffic more efficiently. These roads need to be in place before Spring Pacific construction crews move in (as the5' apparently have already on Via del Coronado). Residents &the Pala Road area will not wind around the planned "internal loop road" or go out &their way (north) to get to Wolf Valley Road. onto Red Hawk Parkway then onto Margarita. New Wolf Creek residents on the southern portion of the addition and the traffic from the Middle School (proposed for the comer of Via del Coronado and Loma Linda) xx411 exit out Via Cordova. Haven't those people had enough grief already? The Planning Commission has the responsibility to manage growth in such a way that people will be enhanced by new projects. At the crowded Temecula Creek meeting (August 1999). a Spring Pacific official said that the traffic problems were here before he and his people got here. EyeD'one in the room agreed with him. The problems are STILL are here and Spring Pacific Properties are not part &the solution. The Wolf Valley plan would be a great plan if our infrastructure were in place. Right now. however, the project can only make matters worse. Thank you for 3'our time and consideratiou. Sincerely, Janie Rigsby .qEF' ,,1 2OOtl. . : 'i Iwedrmsciay September 6~ 1900 2:57FXZ -- Fram '~"~069&91' -- Page 11 09/~6/2000 V~D 15:~3 PAX ~09 J1 Pc~_~aaga Cu].zur81 [~001 Pechanga Cultural Resource Center Temeucla Band of Luisene Mission Tndians Pecfmng~ Reservation Pest Office Box Z183 Temecula, California 92593 Telephone: (909) 308-9295 Facsimile: (909) 506-9491 FRO~,~ Total Number of Pages Sent Induding ~ Page: NOTICE: SENT BY: DATE SENT: IF YOU DO NOT RECKIN~ LF-~IBLE COPW. q OF ALL ~ PAGKS, PL~-ASE CALL (909} 308-9295 ASAP AND ASK ~ transm;~don is intended only for fl~ use of the individual or entity to whl~ it is adRressed and may contain informafiou that i~ privileged, confidential and pTompt from disclosure under applleable [aw. Xft~e reader ofti~ m~ssage ~s uot the intended rec~pleut, or the employee or agent respoma'ble for delivering the message to the in~ended rec~plent, you ave hereby notified that any d;~em~tion, d~w~ufion or photocopying ofthls cnmmunir, xtion is strictly proh~blted. If you ~mve received this cnmmunlcation in crroc, please notify us EVIM~.~IA'I'F. LY by tdephone, and return the or~ nles~age to us at the above addre.~ v~a the U.~. Postal Serv{cr_ Thank you. ORIGI0~AL: CONFfRM RECEIPT: ~ NOT No 09/00/2000 WED 15:33 FAX 9095 ~1 Peebanga Cu/tural ~002 PECHANGA CULTURAL RE OURCE Temecula Band of Luise~o Missio~ Inv~anz Post Office Box 2183 o Temecula, CA 92593 Tdephme (909) 308-9295 · Fax (9O9) 506-9491 Cas d:-,~ng ~min C/ty of Temecu]a 43200 Bus/ness Park Dr/vt Temecula, CA 92590 R~. F/hal Env/wnmcn~l ~ Rqx~t fer TI~ Wolf Cr~k $1x~-ific Hah F. avimnmemal Impaci Repori (HIR) for th~ Wolf ~ Spcc~c Pla~_ The Pechanga Indian Res~atiea is ~e ctose~ reser~ion oflhe Luisc~o Indians ~o the proposod project s/~, and tl~ Pechanga Ba~d cons/ders any Lu/seno cultural iw~ns and any l~e~'s likely impacts on Native American cultural and archaeological resources. The disphced by ground-d/sturbi-~ work on ~he project, ~.,d on th~ proper and lawful lream~mt of cuttmal item.% Native American human ~mains and sacn~ ii,,ms lilccly to be discovcr~ in the SITES ~PACTED BY DEVELOPMI~T Pechanga Band also disagn::s with a number of th~ Cily,s rcspnm~ to our initial commcms (sec letter dated De~-mber 3, 1999) ns s~ated in the Final Ei~ In ~ae Draft e~L ~e lead agency. ~ City, ardves at tl~_- conclus/on that the there will be no impact on cutl~ntl rcsourccs based on the Sacred Is The Duty Trurted Unto Our Care And pgith Honor Pge Rs'se To The Nted t~e~lnesday Septe.~er 6~ 1900 Z:57F~ -- Frm. '~Ob~l' -- Page ~1 09/06/2000 ~ED 15;$4 FAX 901 Lt Pechan~a Cultu.rs! [~003 propos~! miti?tion me~un:s (DE/R.p. 132). Th~ Pec. hangaBand few~-ntlydis~rees ~ ~i~ fl~c impact this development will have on m~.heological sites that may bc found dudn_~ Shoed 1~ con~ und shoed hav~ a commhmeat fi~m 1/~ City m~:l Sprillg l~c PrOl~:r~ The City ~'ls to ideally who w~! ~ tt~ cktennir~ion, during comln~on of the project, ~,t a cultmal resource has bccn impacl~ Will an ar&atxdogi~ or ml~l mouitm'be I~ dur~ ~1 ~'ouud di.~ work ~o ~-,~,. ~ay im!~ ~ th~ o~ur'~ Will i~ be th~ du~, of ~utluml msom~e? If it is ~e duty ofthe bmvy cquipme~ o~ vn-ll lhey ~'h have the Expanding miligalion rn~_ _.nm~ # 1 to itmlud~ the Pec. hanga Band's pmiciimio~ after a culttwal resour~ has becn impacted may b~ Ioo ln~ in the ~me. It may take 2 or 3 or 4 pn.s~s ~a is as~--i-g ~ reach th~ realizalion at all An areoaeologi~al or tn~l monitor is lraimd and ~peci,~izes in field i&utificmion of cuttm-al msomoes and ~ m~ke such identi/i~mliom faster and move aexaua~ly ~ a heavy equipmmt Pechanga Cultural Resources · T~necula Band of LuiseSo Mission Indians Post Office Box 218:1 · Ternecula, CA 92592 Sacred Is The Duty Trusted Unto Our Care And With Honor We Rise To The Need J~/e~esday September Of 19~0 Z:5?pm -- Frma 'gallO69&91, o- Page 09/06/2000 WED 15:35 FAX 909 Comments to Re~onses 12-4~ 12-5~ Ind 12-6 The Pcchaaga Bami/s aware that thc project s/re has bee~ agr/cultural s/tc for 30+ years and ~ d~pth that 8radin~ and owr-cx~val~n will eccor on die project si~ Although grading may ~ot exceed th~ depth of previous h*llin2 ad/vily, over~xcavafio~ will most h'kcly go much deeper tlum the i~ev/ous t[lli,i act/v/ty and will im.nact Expand/~ m/t/~,~o~ mca~mc #1 la ioclude thc Pcchanga Band's pm'ficipa~on a~r a cuhural resource lu~ bee~ ~ may lx~/~o l::-- ia e,~ ~m~ It may lake 2 or 3 or 4 pn~sc~ ora scraper or bull dozcr for ~e op~a~' to realize tfiat they Imve impacted a ~ ~. Tl~s LS assumin~ l~y l'each the f~nli~ntiOll at nll who bas no ¢~cacc and is rid/~ along a~ 20- 30 mil~ an bot~. An archaeological o~ m~oal monitor steroid bc present during all lponnd-dismzbing and car&-mov~g activity so that Comments to Response 12-7 Thc Pochanga band daes aa/feel tl~ "Thc language of the c:cpanded mitigation is sufficicufly ,Vpec/flc Phm, F'ma/~,'~/~ 225J. Thc Pechan~ Band requests that the consultation occur prior .to any ground-disturbing or earth-moving ~ proceeds and prior t~ any discov~ies or Comments tQ,Rcsponse$12-8 and 12-9 '~e sens~vity ofpotemfial ~source~ based oa ~!~ ~aisto~ic ~on of lhe nativ~ peoples" p.22S). Given ~ location of h% project, thc Pccbanga Band apprec-i~,~ the opportunity to [u~fl~C~l:~c ~n ail phoning mglm~ imuivc~cnt dlscovctles a~ the ea~Jlest posslbic s~ge. Once n?in. the Pechanga Band requests that Tn~nl m~vcs assist thc C~v and thc ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~le ~ m~ f~ ~ ~ ~1~ ~ ~ ora ~ p~ fm ~ ~ ~ ~,~ of~ P~ga ~ R~ · T~cu~ ~ of ~e~ M~n i~ Po~r~e ~ 21~ I T~C~ ~ 92592 Iued~esday September 6t 1900 Z:$7~m -- Fr~ '~069&91' -o Page 5I 09/06/2000 ~ 15:35 F~[ 909, :1 Pecb~g8 Cultural cultural j*em~ or artifacts that may Im discovered duzing the dmmlopment oftl~ project and on REQUESTED INVOLVEMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES tequ~ tl~ following ctm~s: monitor, dm~g Su~, Pcchanga Cultural Resources Pechanga Cultural Re~outce~ · Temecula Band of Lui~ego Mimion Imtlnn:r Po~t Office Box 2183 · Temecula, CA 92592 Sacred I~ ~ Duty Tru. vted Unto Our Care And W~th Honor We Rize To The Nerd MARK A. MACARRO TRIBAL CHAIRMAN JOHN MAGEE TRIBAL COUNCIL PHILLIP I~ANEZ TRIBAL COUNCIL BILL {Wolf) TINSLE¥ TRIBAL COUNCIL BENJAMIN VASQUEZ TRIBAL COUNCIL BETTY BARRIENTOS TRIBAL COUNCIL RAYMOND BASQUEZ TRIBAL COUNCIL PECHANGA INDIAN RESERVATION Temecula Band of Luiseho Mission Indians 'VAV Post Office Box I~.77 · Temecula. CA 92593 Telephone (909) 676-2768 Fax (909) 695-1778 September 20, 2000 Ms. Carole K. Dona.hoe, AICP Associate Planner City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: Comments presented at public hearing on September 20, 2000, 6:30 p.m. for The Final Environmental Impact Report, Wolf Creek Specific Plan. Dear Ms. Donahoe: The Pechanga Band of Luisefio Mission Indians (hereinafter "Pechanga Band") submits the following comments regarding the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, through its Cultural Resources Committee and its counsel, John L. Macarro, Esq., Pechanga Tribal Attorney and Ms. Laura Miranda, Esq., of California Indian Legal Services. The Pechanga Band has received copies of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for this project. The Pechanga Band is not opposed to this project. The Band's primary concerns are with the project's potentially significant impacts on Native American, particularly Luisefio, cultural resources. The Pechanga Band is concerned with the lawful treatment of Native American remains and with the preservation of unique and irreplaceable Luisefio cultural resources, village sites and archaeological sites which would be displaced by gxound disturbing work. Testing Program/Surveys Christopher Drover conducted an archaeological survey of the 557- acre property. This survey consisted ora site records search through the UCR Archaeological Unit and a walk-over field survey of the project area. Based on this survey Drover concluded that there would be no significant potential impacts to cultural resources by the development of this project (Em, pg. 131). However, since the City has acknowledged that subsurface resources may exist within this project area (EIR, pg. 131) and there is no evidence to the contrary, the Pechanga Band believes that cultural resources will be uncovered during the development of this project. Because this project area is in a culturally sensitive area, as acknowledged by all parties, is in close proximity to the Pechanga Reservation, and is likely to contain subsurface artifacts, the Pechanga Band asserts that it is imperative to have tribal representatives monitor all the ground-brcaldng associated with the project, and that an agreement be executed between the Tribe and the City to address treatment of the cultural resources that will be found during development of the project. Recommended Mitigation Measure The Pechanga Band requests that the following mitigation measure #2 be add to the Wolf Crcek Specific Plan to bring this project into compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, including the California Public Resoume Code, section 21081 (a). That the developer enter into a PRE-EXCAVATION AGREEMENT and CONSTRUCTION MONITORING PLAN, specific to this project, to the satisfaction of the Pechanga Band, before approval of the site plans, any grading plan and prior to any grading permit being issued. The pre-excavation agreement would set forth the specific details regarding the Native American monitors, reburial of Native American remains, and treatment of Luise~o cultural items. Lastly, in previous comments the Pechanga Band has stated their opposition to the language in the NOP (see, page 222, FEIR), which calls for Native American participation only after it is determined by the applicant that Native American resources are involved. Unfortunately, those comments were not taken into account when drafting the FEIR. Again, the Pechanga Band is opposed to language in the FEIR mitigation measures which call for Native American involvement only "if and when resources are encountered." (FEll*,, 2.15 (1)). This is impractical because there will be no one monitoring the grading of this project with knowledge in Luiseno cultural resources to identify whether resources are actually encountered. The cultural resources can not be protected, in a manner sufficient under state law, iftherc is no one on-site during the grading to identify the resources which warrant protection. With the current plan the resoumes will likely be destroyed without anyone's knowledge that they were ever there. The Pechanga Band appreciates the opportunity to participate in this stage of the process. Allowing active tribal participation in these early stages will prevent misunderstandings and help your project move forward smoothly. Sincerely, __ /~ Laura Y. ~iranda California Indian Legal Services Macarro Pechanga Tribal Attorney September 6, 2000 Planning Co~missicn ATTN: Carole Donakoe City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92559 RE: Wolf Creek c ....... Plan Dear Ms. Donahoe; I am writing this letter on behalf of the Wolf Valley Hcmeowners Association and its residents. We have previously made cor~r, ents regarding the draft EiR for the above referenced project and have conducted meetings with the City Manager, Mr. Shawn Nelson, and the ~r. William Hughes, the Director of Public Works. We appreciate the ~ime the City staff has spent in addressing our concerns regarding this project. While we have not always seen eye-to-eye on the issues, we do appreciate the staff's willingness to listen to 5he concerns of the HOA and our members. We have, in the past, opposed this project for many of the issues .included in our original letter to the City. These issues involved housing density; the use of multi-family and cerr. ercia! zones directly across from homes in the HOA, the lack of any ~lan for the widening of Pala Road, speed and safety issues on Pala Road and, mos5 significantly, the existing and future noise levels on Pala Road. Our concerns have been "heard" by the developer of 5bls project and we have attended at least three separate meetings with Mr. Bill Griffith, Managing Director of Spring Pacific Properties, LLC, and his staff to discuss ~his project and its impacts on this area cf Temecula. During these discussions, we have come to learn that many of the concerns we have regarding Pala Road are issues that the City of Temecula has not yet addressed. For example, the City is presently only 70% completed in its plans for the final build out of Pala Road and, as a result, there is no answer to our questions regarding noise mitigation. Mr. Griffith has indicated on several occasions that he has informed the City of his willingness for the project to pay its ~air share of any costs to widen Pa/a Road ~i '~ noise mitigation measures. Unfortunately, there is presently nc ~ian for the final build out of Pala Road that we are aware of. The City's proposed _~sioen~s to be willing solution to this problem is for the HOA and the ~= ~ ' + to accept an interim widening of Pala Road tc four lanes from the Pala Bridge to Wolf Valley Road - without any regard ts noise or other possible mitigation measures that may be requlrec. We find this proposal unreasonable and unacceptable. Our resalve is strengthened by Mr. Nelson's statemen5 that the timing and nature of any final solution to this problem was indeterminate since the project may never be built or built much more slowly than anticipated at this time. Such a situation would result in less need to make "final" improvements to Pala Road for many years. I cannot believe that the City would ask it residents to support a temporary fix to a problem without knowing the probable "final" solution and it timing. We'also understand that the City is concerned with congestion, as we are. Fortunately, a~ present - and we believe for the fcreseeatle future - the congestion is a5 Loma Linda and Paia Roads. Onre 5rafflu clears this bottleneck it moves smscth!y south cn Fala Rrad an~ 5here is little or no congestion at Wolf Valley Road in either the i~M or Thus, we find that the best solution for concerns about Pala Road and this project should not be rushed through in the name cf solving a non- existent conges5ion problem. Regarding the project specifically i am pleased to tell you ~,~=~ we would support the project based on the following conditions: 1. The total residential density does not exceed 2!~O uniss (as indicated by Mr. Griffith on September 5:x); 2. Pala Road is widened to six lanes from the Paia Road Bridge to Wolf Valley Road ranher than to Via GilberTo, as presently proposed. This addJtiona! length of less than a quarter mile will prevent a future bottle neck (similar to nhe Lcma Linda problem now) at Wolf Valley Road after the final build out of this project and Pechanga Casino improvements; 3. That Pa!a Road not be temporarily widened tc four lanes without noise mitigation measures being taken to reduce the probable impact of noise from more and fast moving traffic. 4. We would again ask the City to consider options to improve traffic flow and speed on Pala Road. We do not want fatality motivated traffic control as we have in other parts of the City. 5. The multi-family area designated as PA-10 be limited to attached, fee ownership residential units, as proposed to us by Mr. Griffith. We would like to take this opportunity to thank you for permitting the HOA to participate in this process and we urge you to consider the issues we have raised. These are important to not only us, but also all the people living along Pala Road today and who live here in the future. Thank you. Peter Lucier, CPA/PFS Chair Person ./ Wolf Vall~y.~ome Owners Association Ad Hoc Committee on Wolf Creek Project CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: NOTE TO FILE Carole Donahoe September 8, 2000 Wolf Creek Specific Plan Tracy Luke, Via Quivera, Redhawk, Riverside County Called today because she has a "big concern" regarding the lights and noise from the proposed Middle School. The rear of her home looks out onto Wolf Creek, and 3 bedrooms would be affected. She is concerned about the brightness of the ballfield lights, and the noise that would emanate from the fields. ATTACHMENT NO. 13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 6, 2000 R:\PLANNING\S P\Wolf Creek SP\CC Staff Report l-9-01.doc 29 STAFF REPORT o PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION September 6, 2000 Planning Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 Planning Application No. 98-0482 - Wolf Creek Environmental Impact Report Planning Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment for Wolf Creek Planning Application No. 00-0052 - Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 Prepared By: Carnie K. Donahoe, AICP, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: 1. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR WOLF CREEK (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-041N), AND APPROVE THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (PLANNING APPECATION NO. 98-0481) ON PARCELS TOTALING 557 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMA ENDA ROAD AND FAIRVIEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010. 2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 00-0052 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 29305, THE SUBDIVISION OF 557 ACRES INTO 47 LOTS WHICH CONFORM TO THE PLANNING AREAS, OPEN SPACE AREAS, SCHOOL AND PARK SITES OF THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVIEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, -005, -006 AND -010. R:L5 P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 1 3. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN AND RELATED ACTIONS (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 98-0482) AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION THEREWITH FOR THE WOLF CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PALA ROAD, BETWEEN LOMALINDA ROAD AND FAIRVlEW AVENUE, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 950-110-002, -005, -033 AND 950-180-001, . 005, -006 AND -010. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: SP Murdy, LLC REPRESENTATIVES: Bill Griffith and Camille Bahri, Spring Pacific Properties, LLC Barry Bumell, T & B Planning Consultants, Inc. Donald Lohr and Tony Terich, Lohr + Associates, Inc. PROPOSAL: A mixed use specific plan which provides a full range of residential uses and product types, school sites, park sites, open space and drainage greenbelt, roadways, private recreation center, fire station site and commercial sites, specifically as follows: · From 2,144 to 2,601 dwelling units for an overall density of 3.8 to 4.7 dwelling units per acre. Residential product includes ~ acre estate lots, 7,200 square foot to 4,000 square foot lots, courtyard homes, an option for a senior community, and multi-family apartments. · School sites totaling 32 acres for an elementary and middle school. The middle school site includes lighted ballfields. · A 14-acre community park with lighted ballfields that anchors the Village Center, a 6.7 acre linear park with three activity nodes that traverses the entire length of the project, a 4.5 acre neighborhood park, and an additional 1.5 acre parking area for the Kent Hintergardt Park. Park sites were selected and coordinated for joint use with the Temecula Valley Unified School District facilities. · A 15-acre drainage greenbelt along the full length of Pala Road, designed as passive open space. · Roadways and circulation system that provide pedestrian linkages, bicycle paths and interconnected uses throughout the project. · Private recreation center, fire station and other public facility uses on 5 acres at the Village Center. · Neighborhood and Community Commercial areas totaling 20 acres at the Village Center. R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC fm SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 2 A General Plan Amendment that relocates and reallocates land use designations already approved for the property, in order to align these designations to the Wolf Creek Specific Plan planning areas and amenities. The relocation of designations is depicted in the Exhibit entitled ~General Plan Comparison" attached to this staff report. The reallocation details are as follows: Existing GP Proposed GP Acreage Acreage · Neighborhood Commercial 5 8 · Community Commercial 15 12 · Community & Neighborhood Parks 25 20 · Linear Park & Paseos 0 14.4 · Pdvate Recreation Facilities 0 5 · Drainage Greenbelt Open Space 0 15 · Major Roads 50 29 · Elementary School 10 12 · Middle School 20 20 · High School 46 0 · Low Density Residential 0 4.1 · Low Medium Density (3-6 dus/acre) 328 370 · Medium Density Residential (7-12 dus/acre) 21 19.5 · High Density Residential (13-20 dus/acre) 37 28 Total 557 557 Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 which subdivides 557 acres into 47 lots, delineating the planning areas within the specific plan and lots for parks and schools. The Map is divided into two phases. Phase I is that portion of the project north of Wolf Valley Road, and Phase II is that portion of the project south of Wolf Valley Road. LOCATION: At the southern end of the City of Temecula, approximately two miles east of Interstate 15, south of State Highway 79 South, on the east side of Pala Road, between Loma Linda Road and Fairview Avenue. EXISTING ZONING: SP Specific Plan SURROUNDING ZONING: North: PO Professional Office South: Riverside County - Redhawk Specific Plan East: LM Low Medium Residential, Park and Riverside County West: LM Low Medium Residential, Pechanga Reservation PROPOSED ZONING: N/A EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: LM Low Medium Residential - 3.0 to 6.0 dwelling units per acre M Medium Residential - 7.0 to 12.0 dwelling units per acre H High Residential - 13.0 to 20.0 dwelling units per acre NC Neighborhood Commercial CC Community Commercial P Pubic Institutional Facilities OS Open Space / Recreation R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: LM Low Medium Residential - 3.0 to 6.0 dwelling units per acre H High Residential - 13.0 to 20.0 dwelling units per acre NC Neighborhood Commercial CC Community Commercial P Pubic Institutional Facilities OS Open Space / Recreation EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant and light agricultural uses SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Vacant and rural home sites South: Vacant and rural home sites East: Brldlevale subdivision, Kent Hintergardt Park and the Redhawk community West: Wolf Valley subdivision and the Pechanga Indian Reservation with gaming casino, recreational vehicle park, mini-market and vacant property BACKGROUND City staff has worked on a specific plan proposal for the subject site for many years, initially with the former owner of the property who proposed the Murdy Ranch Specific Plan from 1995 to 1997. Spring Pacific Properties began discussions with City staff in early 1998 and formally submitted the Wolf Creek Specific Plan on December 10, 1998. At the request of staff, the applicant hosted a community meeting on August 17, 1999, at the Temecula Creek Inn. A workshop was held with the Planning Commission on September 1, 1999, at which time Commissioners provided comments and recommendations to the developer. The developer and staff worked through several screencheck reviews prior to the submittal of the fifth version of the specific plan dated August 2000. Three weeks prior to the public hearing on this case, the Temecula Valley Unified School District Board indicated their preference for a high school site on property not within the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. While the middle school and elementary school sites remain within the plan, the proposed high school that will serve the southeast area of the District will be located either directly across Fairview Avenue from the project, or at a site further east. Wolf Creek Specific Plan designers anticipated the uncertainty of school district selection, and provided an alternative land use for the 46.5 acre Planning Area 24, for 233 residential dwellings with a minimum lot size of 5,500 square feet. The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the plan considered environmental impacts of the project both with schools and with residential development on these sites. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Village Center Because the General Plan identifies property at the intersection of Wolf Valley Road and Pala Road as a Villag~ Center, the project was designed with all of the Village Center concepts in mind. The applicant chose to incorporate the Wolf Creek Village Center where Wolf Valley Road intersects with the project's loop road, thereby enhancing pedestrian access and community activities at all four comers of this project hub. The 14-acre community park and adjacent elementary school anchor one comer, while a private recreation facility, fire station and other public uses occupy another comer. The last two comers are slated for commercial development, both an 8 acre R:~S P~Wolf Creek SP~TAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map,doc 4 neighborhood center, and a 12 acre community commercial area across the street, sized to meet the needs of the local community. Immediately adjacent to the south, and with carefully designed linkages to these centers, are multi-family residential dwellings, situated to encourage non- automotive modes of transportation. The community hub is complete with gathering places and plazas, monumentation and a community landmark. It is the main focal point for Wolf Creek community activities, providing a concentrated, cohesive mixture of compatible uses. The Linear Park, Activity Nodes and Trail System Integral to the design of the Wolf Creek community is the internal loop road, which is bordered by a linear park along its entire length, and meandering Class I bicycle paths on both sides of the street. The linear park is an ideal recreation amenity for active residents who live anywhere within the project. The linear park is also accessible to non-residents. Benches, drinking fountains, tot lots and passive open spaces are provided at the activity nodes along the way. Joggers or cyclists can also stop at the par courses, parks, or the commercial centers at the hub. To complete the trail system for the project, Class II bicycle paths are also provided along Loma Linda Road, Via Del Coronado, Pala Road and Fairview Avenue, and both sides of Wolf Valley Road and Street "A". The Draina,qe Greenbelt Interface The Wolf Creek project proposes an open, grass-lined drainage channel along the length of Pala Road that varies in width from 100-feet to 128-feet. The developer has taken the opportunity to design this channel as a greenbelt, passive open space area that provides a visually pleasing buffer for existing development on the west side of Pala Road. The developer has proposed a semi- meandering sidewalk for this stretch of Pala Road, where parkway Ipop-outs" will bring trees and foliage to the street at appropriate intervals. Coupled with the raised landscaped median proposed for Pala Road, the streetscape softens this major roadway. The Redhawk Interface Similarly, the applicant paid attention to the interface with the existing Redhawk community along its east boundary. Below the slopes which provide an existing urban interface zone lies a jogging trail that is used by Redhawk residents. The Wolf Creek plan intends to support continued use of this trail, with project openings along its own edge that encourage surveillance rather than turning its back to it. Phasin,q The Wolf Creek Specific Plan is projected to develop land uses in four phases, with Phase I and II starting along the north side of Wolf Valley Road. A maximum of 472 dwelling units will be constructed in Phase I, along with the 8 acre neighborhood commercial center, the middle and elementary school, and the community park. Phase II will add another 350 dwellings along the south side of Loma Linda Road. Infrastructure for the project, however, will be constructed in two phases, the first phase on the north side of Wolf Valley Road, and the last phase on the south side. Infrastructure will be constructed ahead of and accommodate the development of land uses. R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~TAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.dec 5 Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 The applicant has mapped the entire 557 acres into 47 lots for financing purposes. The lots conform to the specific plan land use map, with planning areas further subdivided into neighborhood areas. Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 delineates major street widths, cross-sections and access restrictions, as well as the lots designated for the drainage channel, schools and parks. ANALYSIS Consistency with the Growth Management Program Action Plan General Plan Amendment Densities The proposed General Plan changes in residential densities are as follows: Density Existing Existing Proposed Proposed Range (~ Low end (~ High end (~Low end (~ High End Low ~ - 2 0 0 2 8 Low Medium 3 - 6 1,122 2,244 1,110 2,220 Medium 7- 12 147 252 137 234 High 13 - 20 481 740 364 560 Total 1,750 3,236 1,613 3,022 With respect to the range of dwelling units possible on the site, the proposed General Plan Amendment decreases the range numbers overall by 137 to 214 residential units. Specific Plan Densities The proposed Specific Plan offers the following allocation of dwelling units: Density Proposed Proposed Target Target Project Range (~ Low end (~ High end Density Units Units Low ~ - 2 2 8 1.3 22 8 Low Medium 3 - 6 1,110 2,220 4.5 1,665 1,833 Medium 7- 12 137 234 9.5 185 128 High 13 - 20 364 560 16.5 462 408 Total 1,613 3,022 2,334 2,377 The total number of dwelling units proposed at 2,377 is 43 units greater than the target density of 2,334 units. However, it is 764 units greater than the lowest allowable density of 1,613. Staff supports the breadth of residential product proposed with the project. By providing a wide spectrum of housing opportunities, the project complies with the General Plan Housing Element. By concentrating higher densities near the Village Center, the project offers the best opportunity to attract public transit altematives, such as bus service, smart shuttles or vanpools. Established Village Centers are more likely to be considered as connection points to larger forms of public transportation, such as express buses, light rail or Metrolink. R:~S P\Wo~f Creek SP~STAFFRPT. PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 6 Infrastructure Improvements As required by the Growth Management Program Action Plan, the project ensures that roadway improvements are in place prior to issuance of the first building permit. The project's Traffic Study recommends as mitigation that the following off-site improvements are completed pdor to issuance of the first building permit for either residential or commercial development within Wolf Creek: · Interim interchange improvements at 1-15 and State Route 79 South · Widening of State Route 79 South between 1-15 and Pala Road · Widening of Pala Road to four lanes from Clubhouse Ddve to Wolf Valley Road Additionally, the project is conditioned to provide the following on-site improvements pdor to the first building permit: · Ultimate improvements to Via Del Coronado from Via Cordoba to Loma Linda Road · Half-width improvements to Loma Linda Road from Via Del Coronado to Pala Road · Ultimate improvements to Wolf Valley Road from the easterly Specific Plan boundary to Pala Road · Ultimate improvements for six lanes to Pala Road from Loma Linda Road to Via Gilberto · Installation of traffic signals at Pala Road and Loma Linda Road, Pala Road and Wolf Valley Road, and Pala Road and the Interior Loop Road North Similarly, additional roadway, drainage and other infrastructure improvements are required in conjunction with project phasing. Given these mitigation measures, the project ensures that infrastructure is constructed ahead of the new development that it proposes. Coordination with other Agencies Project developers have coordinated their efforts with many outside agencies concerned with growth in the area. The City has assisted in the collaboration of efforts towards the widening of Pala Road with the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians. The developer has contributed to the Pala area drainage solution, resolving existing flooding conditions and proposing to replace existing undersized facilities. The developers have met numerous times with the Temecula Valley Unified School District to meet their need for school sites in the project area. Along with the park and open space amenities offered in the project, the school sites in Wolf Creek will provide an impressive list of recreational and cultural amenities not currently available in this area. R:~S P\Woff Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC f~ SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 7 WOLF CREEK MASTER COMMUNTTY Park Amenities Amenities Existinq Parks Wolf Creek (Community; (Kent Hintergardt; Pale Neighborhood; Linear; K- Community; Loma Linde; H addition; Private Rec.) 3ohn Magee) = 30 +/- acres - = 23 acres excludinc. I schools Snack Bar 0 1 (CP) Football Field I lit (Combined with soccer i lit (MS) field) Soccer Field 2 (KH) 3 lit (2-ES) (MS) Softball / Baseball Field 0 6 lit (2-MS) (2-ES) (2-CP) Basketball Courts 1 (Pale) 12 (8-MS) (~-ES) Basketball Half-Courts 2 (Pale) 2 (NP) Tennis Courts 2 (Pale) 12 (4-CP) (8-M$) Volleyball Courts 2 (Pale) 0 Restrooms at largest parks (K-H / Pale) at schools, and community and neighborhood parks Children's Play Areas (Tot4 8 (3-LP) (3-ES) (1-NP) (1- Lot) cP) Exercise / Par Course 0 1 (LP) Private Recreation Center 0 1 Swimming Pool 0 ! (PRC) Gymnasium 0 1 (PIS) Parking Spaces 108 (22 ~H) (86 Pa[a) 1653 (331 @ Parks & PRC) (lt322 @ Schools) Community Center 0 ! (PRC) Water Play Area 0 1 (PRC) CP = Community Park ES = Bernentary Schoo~ IGH = Kent Hintergardt LP = linear Park MS = Middle School NP = Neighborhood Park PRC = Private RecreaUon Center R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 8 With amenities at the schools, parks and commercial areas of the plan, it is entirely feasible that the project could reverse existing traffic patterns by creating desirable land uses that would reduce or eliminate out-of-neighborhood vehicle trips. Given the design of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan and the amenities proposed, staff believes that there are sufficient community benefits to warrant Planning Commission consideration of residential units above the lowest density. Specific Plan Design Guidelines, Zoning Standards, and Residential Development Matrix Planning Commissioners offered several suggestions to the applicant during the Commission Workshop in September, 1999, much of which has been addressed within the Design Guidelines, Zoning Standards and Residential Development Matdx. Senior Component The Wolf Creek Specific Plan allows for the opportunity to provide residential dwellings designed for seniors in Planning Area 18, which is adjacent to the commercial center and fronts Pala Road. The Design Guidelines specify pedestrian access to the commercial center and Loop Road, and identifies product design conducive to privacy, convenience and security. Residential Product Staff worked with the applicant to provide strong architectural guidelines for merchant builders in the specific plan text, including the mixture of one and two-story elements, vaded roof forms, structural enhancements, projections, recesses, articulated facades, treatment of comer lots, and the selection of materials for visual interest. A variety of garage alternatives are noted, in order to achieve a pleasing street scene. Staff had concerns regarding the smaller lots sizes proposed at 4,000 and 4,500 square feet. The applicant has provided a minimum 800 square foot rear yard for pdvate recreational use on these lots, as well as full access to the private recreational facility in Planning Area 14 for the homebuyers. These lot sizes will accommodate zero lot line product, which the applicant feels meets the market need for an alternative to conventional large single-family detached homes. Less yard maintenance, land, infrastructure and construction costs are attractive to that segment of the market with changing household requirements. The applicant is proposing lot coverage percentages greater than the City's Development Code. However, front, rear and intedor yard setbacks are consistent with Code for the 7,200 and 6,000 square foot lots. In the smaller lot sizes, the 800 square foot minimum private rear yard is required, which is greater than the Code requirement for 200 square feet. The project is conditioned to correct the zoning standard text to comply with the Residential Development Matrix. Local Street Sections The Local Government Commission, in reviewing the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, has requested that the project be revised to parkway sidewalks with greater pavement shading and street canopies. The applicant offers parkway sidewalks on the local streets within the residential planning areas as an alternative cross-section option, for consideration by the City. R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC f~ SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 9 Future changes to the Specific Plan The Wolf Creek Specific Plan text proposes that processing of modifications to the plan which do not change the general intent of the plan, be approved administratively by the Director of Planning. While this proposal was dedved from the Minor Exceptions section of the Development Code, staff has conditioned the project to add language as follows: ~At the sole discretion of the Director of Planning, any modification may be deemed a major or minor change to the specific plan. In any event, the Director of Planning may refer any request for modification to the Planning Commission or City Council." ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION A Screencheck Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and submitted for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan on December 10, 1998. On October 13, 1999, a Notice of Completion and a Notice of Availability were prepared and the Draft EIR was circulated by the California State Clearinghouse under SC1-1~99101094 for public review and comment from October 20, 1999 to December 3, 1999. A total of 21 written comments were received and considered in preparation of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), submitted August 1, 2000, with comments and responses to comments included within Section 8.0. An Addendum to the FEIR was also submitted on August 23, 2000 and is attached to this staff report as Attachment No. 5. The Addendum addresses updated information regarding active alcoholic beverage licenses at the Pechanga Casino. Previously, available information indicated that no such licenses had been issued. A summary of the FEIR analysis is as follows: Unavoidable, significant impact: Air Quality Potentially significant impacts that can be avoided or mitigated: Soils & Geology Traffic Hazards Noise Drainage Impacts considered but not found to be significant: Land Use & Planning Water Resources Energy Resources Utilities Aesthetics Recreation Cumulative Impacts Population & Housing Biological Resources Public Services Service Systems Cultural Resources Agricultural Resources Traffic Study A comprehensive Traffic Study was prepared by Robed Kahn, John Kain & Associates dated December 17, 1998, to analyze the impacts of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan upon the surrounding roadway system. The study analyzed 14 intersections, from the 1-15 Freeway interchange, along State Route 79 South, and Pala Road, focusing on peak travel periods between 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. The analysis concluded that the project would generate approximately 42,036 trips ends per day with ~chools, and 38,527 with residential development on the three school sites. R:~ P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC f~ SP,EIR,GPA, map.dec 10 The Traffic Study lists roadway improvements required for the area, with or without the Wolf Creek project in order to achieve an acceptable Level of Service D (LOS D) or better at the intersections studied. When these identified roadway improvements are in place, LOS D or better is predicted at all intersections at opening year of the project and at build-out in the year 2015. Therefore, the FEIR identifies the completion of certain roadway improvements as mitigation measures to reduce traffic impacts to a less than significant level. Because the timing of infrastructure improvements is critical, the project has been conditioned that no building permit can be issued for either residential or commercial development until certain improvements are completed. See the previous discussion under "Consistency with the Growth Management Program Action Plan - Infrastructure Improvements' above. Noise Study The City has included a Noise Study in conjunction with plans to widen Pala Road, to identify any impacts and mitigation measures associated with the Capital Improvement Project. The Wolf Creek project is conditioned to participate in any noise mitigation program established by the City and shall pay its fair share of mitigation commensurate with noise impacts attributable to traffic generated by the Wolf Creek Specific Plan. Sports Park There has been some discussion about the alternative use of the 46.5-acre Planning Area 24 former high school site as the City's Sports Park. While staff does not anticipate that any additional environmental impacts would occur that were not considered with the high school complex, staff does recommend that an addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report be prepared and assessed once a conceptual plan for the sports park and its amenities is designed. Statement of Overfidinq Consideration Required In accordance with Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission must recommend that the City Council adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations pdor to approving the Wolf Creek Specific Plan because the EIR has identified its impact to air quality as a significant and unavoidable adverse impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations states that any significant adverse project effects are acceptable if expected project benefits outweigh unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY The Wolf Creek Specific Plan project includes a General Plan Amendment which relocates and reallocates land use designations already approved for the property, in order to align these designations to the Wolf Creek Specific Plan planning areas and amenities. The reallocation of acreages can be considered minimal and consistent with the original intent of the General Plan. The proposed Wolf Creek Specific Plan is consistent with the SP - Specific Plan zoning on the property. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Staff recommends approval of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan because it is consistent with the General Plan and provides the Village Center as required by the General Plan Village Center Overlay designation. The project also provides a full range of residential product types in compliance with the General Plan Housing Element. The Wolf Creek proposal is a master-planned community offering schools, parks, commercial sites, and public facilities to serve its residents and R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 11 surrounding communities. The project design has provided carefully planned interfaces with surrounding development and offers unique open space and recreational amenities, such as the 100-foot to 124-foot wide grass-lined and landscaped drainage greenbelt along Pala Road, the linear park that runs the full length of the Wolf Creek Interior Loop Road, the 14-acre Community Park at the heart of the Village Center, and the neighborhood parks and activity nodes in the residential neighborhoods. FINDINGS Plannin,q Application No. 98-0481 - Wolf Creek Specific Plan No. 12 and Planninq Application No. 98-0484 - General Plan Amendment The project as proposed and conditioned is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community. The project has been reviewed by agencies and staff and determined to be in conformance with the City's General Plan, Development Code, Design Guidelines and Growth Management Program Action Plan. These documents set policies and standards that protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. Access and circulation are adequate for emergency vehicles. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The project proposes similar residential neighborhoods adjacent to existing surrounding neighborhoods, with interface buffers and full roadway improvements. Project commercial development is proposed within a Village Center, across Pala Road from the Pechanga Casino. The proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the community because it remains consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted General Plan. The project does not represent a significant change to the planned land uses for the site. The General Plan Amendment is a relocation and reallocation of existing land use designations that conforms to the design of the specific plan. Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision is consistent with the Development Code, the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, the City of Temecula Municipal Code and Subdivision Ordinance. The tentative map does not propose to divide land which is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of ;1965. The Agricultural Preserve status of the property expired in 1989 through the Notice of Nonrenewal Process initiated in 1979. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed by the tentative map.. The site is generally fiat topographically, with no unique land features. It is surrounded by existing and developing residential uses, as well as commercial uses generated by the Pechanga Indian Reservation property across Pala Road. 7. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are: Not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. There are no known fish, wildlife or habitat on the project site, and the project will not affect any fish, wildlife or habitat off-site. The site is surrounded by development and is an infill site. R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 12 b. An environmental impact report has been prepared and a finding has been made, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) (3), finding that air quality considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. 8. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likelyto cause sedous public health problems. 9. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible 10. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, or the design of the alternate easements which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public will be provided. 11. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). 12. Quimby fees have been determined for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan, and the map has been conditioned to provide these fees. Attachments: PC Resolution for the Specific Plan - Blue Page 14 Exhibit A - Wolf Creek Specific Plan text - Under Separate Cover Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval - Blue Page 15 Exhibit C - General Plan Comparison PC Resolution for Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 - Blue Page 16 Exhibit A- Conditions of Approval- Blue Page 17 PC Resolution for the Final Environmental Impact Report - Blue Page 18 Exhibit A - FEIR text - Under Separate Cover Exhibit B - FEIR Technical Appendices - Under Separate Cover Exhibit C -Addendum to the FEIR dated August 23, 2000 - Blue Page 19 Exhibit D- Mitigation Monitoring Program - Blue Page 20 Project Exhibits - Blue Page 21 B. C. D. E. F. Vicinity Map Zoning Map General Plan Maps Surrounding Land Use Land Use Plan Tentative Tract Map No. 29305 R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~TAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 13 CITY OF TEMECULA \ r,o_..x, · / VAIL RANCH PROJECT ~ ""~:= "~;~==~ ...... PECHANGA INDIAN RESERVATION CASE NO. - PA98-0481; PA98-0482; PA98-0484; PA00-0052 EXHIBIT - A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 6, 2000 VICINITY MAP RAS P~Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT. PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 14 CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT B - ZONING MAP DESIGNATION - SP Specific Plan EXHIBIT C - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION o NC Neighborhood Commercial, CC Community Commercial, OS Open Space, P Public Institutional Facilities, LM Low Medium, M Medium, H High Density Residential CASE NO. - PA98-0481; PA98-0482; PA98-0484; PA00-O052 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 6, 2000 R:\S P\Wo[f Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA, map.dee CITY OF TEMECULA ;' ~ : ~ ~ . -.: .Residential \ '~'- ,-" ~ . - - ' 4-5 du/ac ....~.~.*: -' ~ ": Stables" ~: - ... Ke~ · . . %.~ Hin~ard~'~ ~ Pa~ ~ Te~cula Cr~k Inn a~ Golf ~ume Rainbow : Canyon and R~id~tial ~ ~5 'd~ac . ~ .%(ex~sbng), ,/~. ~ ,_ ~_. /-, ' Pe~an~ · ' -"* ~.-/ ~ .'Casno ..... · .. *7 _ -~ ..... , -. ~. ~ Mini- .l .., I ...... .l-*l~--'''l 5 '29 · ,,] .. ,..1 ,.'~__ :~.~ *,~__ ~. l: Redhawl( Residential. 4.3 du/ac .... (developing) ' Redhawk Residential 10-11.9 du/ac (planned) Pechanga Indian .~Reservation CASE NO. -PA98-0481; PA98-0482; PA98-0484; PA00-O052 EXHIBIT- D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 6, 2000 SURROUNDING LAND USE R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC fo~ SP,EIR,GPA, map.doc 16 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA98-0481; PA98-0482; PA98-0484; PA00-0052 EXHIBIT- E PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - September 6, 2000 LAND USE PLAN R:~S P\Wolf Creek SP~STAFFRPT.PC for SP,EIR,GPA. map.doc ITEM 14 ITEM 15 APPROVAL CITY~Y DIRECTOR OF FINAI~ ,,/~:~ CITY MANAGER ./.,'~] TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council ~fi~Susan W. Jones t...'City Clerk/Director of Support Services January 23, 2001 Selection of City Council Committee Assignments RECOMMENDATION: Appoint a member of the City Council to serve as liaison to each of the City Commissions and Committees and to the Pechanga Tribal Council: · Community Services Commission · Old Town Local Review Board · Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee · Planning Commission · PublicFFraffic Safety Commission · Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison 2. Appoint member(s) of the City Council to serve on each of the following external committees: · City of Murrieta Liaison (2 Members) · County General Plan Update Committee- RCIP · French Valley Airport Committee (2 Members) · League of California Congress - Voting Delegates (Member and Alternate) · Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Committee · Murrieta Creek Advisory Board (Member and Alternate) · National League of Cities Annual Congress- 2001 Voting Delegate (Member and Alternate) · Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency · Riverside County Transportation Commission (Member and Alternate) · Riverside Transit Agency Representative (Member and Alternate) · Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors · Temecula/Murrieta Transportation/-rraffic Committee (2 Members) · Trails Master Plan Development Committee · WRCOG Representative · Senior Center Expansion Design Committee (Member and Alternate) Committee Assignments 2001 3. Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Advisory Committees: · City's General Plan Update Committee · Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Committee · Economic Development/Old Town Steering Committee · Finance Committee · Joint City Council/Temecula Valley Unified School District Committee · Library Task Force · Old Town Temecula Community Theater Ad Hoc Committee/Theater Advisory Committee · Public Works/Facilities Committee 4. Appoint two members of the City Council to serve on each of the following Council Subcommittees: · Children's Museum Ad Hoc Subcommittee · Development Overlay Subcommittee · Electrica~ NeedsAd Hoc Subcommittee · Hotel Conference Center Ad Hoc Council Subcommittee · Lennar Project Subcommittee · Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee · SAF-T-NET Subcommittee (one Councilmember and one Public/Traffic Safety Commissioner) · Sports ParkAd Hoc Subcommittee · Via Cordoba Subcommittee · Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee · Water Park Subcommittee · Wolf Creek Development Agreement Council Ad Hoc Committee BACKGROUND: The City Council has established the policy of appointing one of its members to serve as liaison to each of the City commissions and committees. This policy also included appointing councilmembers to serve as the Council's representatives to external organizations and on a number of Council ad-hoc sub-committees. These members will serve through calendar year 2001. Attached for your convenience is a list of the Committee Assignments for 2000. ATTACHMENTS: 2000 Committee Assignments List Committee Assignments 2001 TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL 2000 Committee Assiqnments Commission Liaison (One Member) Community Services Commission Old Town Local Review Board Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee Planning Commission Public/Traffic Safety Commission Pechanga Tribal Council Liaison Representative Assi.qnments (External Organizations) City of Murrieta Liaison County General Plan Update Committee - RCIP (attend meetings) French Valley Airport Committee League of Calif Congress - Voting Delegates Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Committee (attend meetings) Murrieta Creek Advisory Board National League of Cities Annual Congress - 2000 Voting Delegate Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Riverside County Transportation Commission Riverside Transit Agency Representative Temecula Sister City Corporation Board of Directors Temecula/Murrieta Transportation/Traffic Committee Trails Master Plan Development Committee WRCOG Representative Senior Center Expansion Design Committee Advisory Committees (Two Members) City's General Plan Update Committee Community Service Funding Ad Hoc Committee Economic Development/Old Town Steering Committee * Finance Committee * Joint City Council/TVUSD Committee * Library Task Force Old Town Temecula Community Theater Ad Hoc Committee/Theater Advisory Committee Public Works/Facilities Committee * * These meetings must be noticed at least 72 hours in advance. Council Subcommittees Children's Museum Ad Hoc Subcommittee Development Overlay Subcommittee (Council Meeting 9/26/00) Electrical Needs Ad Hoc Subcommittee Hotel Conference Center Ad Hoc Council Subcommittee Lennar Project Subcommittee (Council Meeting 8/8/00) Roripaugh Ranch Annexation Ad Hoc Subcommittee SAF-T NET Subcommittee (also Connerton) Sports Park Ad Hoc Subcommittee Via Cordoba Subcommittee (also Hughes & Domenoe) Wall of Honor Ad Hoc Subcommittee Water Park Subcommittee (Council Meeting 8/8/00) Wolf Creek Development Agreement Council Ad Hoc Committee Committee Assignments 2001 Comerchero Pratt Roberts Naggar Roberts Roberts Stone, Comerchero Comerchero Naggar, Pratt Stone, (Alternate Comerchero) Naggar Pratt, (Alternate Stone) Stone, (Alternate Comechero) Naggar Roberts, (Alternate Comerchero) Comerchero, (Alternate Pratt) Roberts Naggar, Pratt Naggar Stone Roberts, (Alternate Stone) Comerchero, Naggar Naggar, Stone Roberts, Comerchero Naggar, Stone Roberts, Naggar Roberts, Stone Comerchero, Pratt Naggar, Stone Comerchero, Roberts Comerchero, Naggar Comerchero, Naggar Stone, Roberts Roberts, Pratt Comerchero, Roberts Stone Stone, Comerchero Stone, Comerchero Comerchero, Stone Naggar, Comerchero Naggar, Pratt ITEM 16 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager January 23, 2001 State Ballot Initiative RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to the City Attorney and Staff regarding drafting of a State Ballot Initiative which would provide funding for public transportation projects. BACKGROUND: During discussion of the transit component of the Riverside County Integrated Program at your January 16, 2001 meeting, Councilmember Stone requested that the City Council consider this item at your next meeting. Attached for your information is material from the Secretary of State that describes the initiative process and procedural requirements. AgendaReports\State Initiative 1 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 1 of 16 Voter Information Guide · How to Reaister and Vote ~ · Candidates · · Ballot lnitlotive~ Updates ~ · Text of Ballot p~mnhlets ~ · Absentee Votino ~ Election Re~uR. · March 2000 ~ · March 2000 ~ · November 1998 ~ · June 1998~ · November 1996 ~ ·Harch 1996 ~ Repo~t~ of Reoi.tratlon, Running for Office · Candidate Deadlines and Reauirements ~ Candidate ~ How to Ounlify an Initiative ~ Voter Outreach ~ Pnrtlo~ · Oualified Political · How to Ouali~v a political Party ~ Re~all Handbook ~ Ca.tin. a Ballot ~ Election Fraud · Cnivoter Project ~ · Who is Mv County Election Official? ~ · Who Are My Reoresentatives? ~ · Freauentlv Asked Ouestions ~ · Conf;actina Us~ · Elections Code on- Initiative Guide The Secretary of State has prepared this brief summary of the statewide initiative procedure as required by Elections Code section 9015 to provide an understanding of the requirements for preparing and qualifying initiatives. This publication is for general information only and does not have the force and effect of law, regulation, or rule. In case of conflict, the law, regulation or rule will apply. I'nterested persons should obtain the most up-to-date information available because of possible changes in law or procedure since the publication of this summary. Please note: this guide is intended for statewide initiatives only, for information regarding the qualification of local initiatives, please contact your local elections official or city clerk. Introduction In a special election held on October 10, 1911, California became the 10th state to adopt the initiative process. That year, Governor Hiram Johnson began his term by promising to give citizens a tool they could use to adopt laws and constitutional amendments without the support of the Governor or the Legislature. The new legislature put a package of constitutional amendments on the ballot that placed more control of California politics directly into the hands of the people. This package included the ability to recall elected officials, the right to repeal laws by referendum and the ability to enact state laws by initiative. The initiative is the power of the people of California to propose statutes and amendments to the constitution (Cal. Const. Art. I1, §8 (a)). Generally, any matter that is a proper subject of legislation can become an initiative; however, no initiative addressing more than one subject area may be submitted to the voters or have any effect (Cal. Const. Art. 111[, §§8(d) and 12). An initiative is placed on the ballot after its proponents successfully meet a series of deadlines, which are described in this booklet. The Secretary of State has prepared this brief summary of the statewide initiative procedure as required by Elections Code section 9015 to provide an understanding of the requirements for preparing and qualifying initiatives. This publication is for general information only and does not have the force and effect of law, regulation, or rule. In case of conflict, the law, regulation or rule will apply. Interested persons should obtain the most up-to-date information available because of possible changes in law or procedure since the publication of this summary. [Please note: this guide is intended for http ://www. ss. ca.gov/elections/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 2 of 16 statewide initiatives only; for information regarding the qualification of local initiatives, please contact your local elections official or city clerk.] For historical information regarding initiatives please refer to The History of the California Initiative Process, which is produced by the Secretary of State. For current information about initiatives that are in circulation or have qualified for the ballot, please refer to our website at: www.ss.ca.gov or contact the Elections Division at 916.657.2166. Chapter I Step One - Writing the text of the law The first step in the process of qualifying an initiative is to write the text of the proposed law. The measure's proponents may obtain assistance from the Legislative Counsel in drafting the measure. To do so, the proponents must present the idea for the law to the Legislative Counsel, and 25 or more electors must sign the request for a draft of the proposed law. The Legislative Counsel will then draft the proposed law if it is determined that there is a reasonable probability the measure will eventually be submitted to the voters (Government Code §10243). Proponents also may seek the assistance of their own private counsel to help draft the text of the proposed law, or they may choose to write the text themselves. For more information contact: Office of Legislative Counsel, State Capitol, Room 3021, Sacramento, CA 95814 916.445.3057 ! www.leginfo.ca.gov Step two - Request for title and summary Once the text of the law has been written it then must be submitted to the office of the Attorney General. A written request for a title and summary of the proposed measure and $200 must accompany the draft (§§9002, 9004). The $200 is placed in a trust fund in the office of the State Treasurer and is refunded if the measure qualifies for the ballot within two years after the summary has been prepared. If the initiative fails to qualify within that period the money is put into the general fund of the state (§9004). For more information contact: Bill Lockyer, Attorney General A'I-I'N: Initiative Coordinator, Office of the Attorney General, 1300 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 916.324.5490 / caag.state.ca.us What the Attorney General does Upon receipt of the fee and request, the Attorney General prepares a title and summary which will be the official summary of the measure http ://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/init~guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretavj of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 3 of 16 (§9004). The Attorney General shall provide a copy of the titte and summary to the Secretary of State within 15 days after receipt of the final version of a proposed initiative measure (§9004). If during the 15 day period, the proponents of the proposed initiative measure submit amendments, other than technical, nonsubstantive amendments, to the final version of such measure, the Attorney General shall provide a copy of the title and summary to the Secretary of State within 15 days after receipt of such amendments (§9004). If a fiscal analysis is reqiured, additional time is allotted. See "Fiscal estimate" below. Fiscal estimate If the Attorney General determines that the measure requires a fiscal analysis, the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee are asked to prepare an analysis within 25 working days from the date they receive the final version of the proposed initiative. The fiscal analysis includes either the estimate of the amount of any increase or decrease in revenues or costs to the state or local government, or any opinion as to whether or not a substantial net change in state or local finances would result, if the proposed initiative is adopted. If in the opinion of the Department of Finance and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee a reasonable estimate of the net impact of the proposed initiative cannot be prepared within the 25 day period, the Department of Finance and the 3oint Legislative Budget Committee shall, within the 25 day period, give the Attorney General their opinion as to whether or not a substantial net change in state or local finances would result if the proposed initiative is adopted. The fiscal analysis is then included in the summary (§9005). When the official summary is complete, the Attorney General sends it to the proponent, the Senate, the Assembly, and the Secretary of State. The legislature may conduct public hearings on the proposed initiative, but cannot amend it (§§336, 9007). Official summary date The official summary date is the date the summary is sent to the proponent by the Attorney General, and is the date the Secretary of State uses to calculate calendar deadlines provided to the proponent (s) and elections officials (§336). No petition may be circulated prior to the official summary date. Step three - Circulation Calendar Based on the official summary date, the Secretary of State prepares a calendar of filing deadlines. The Secretary of State will send a copy of the filing schedule to the proponent the same day it receives the official title and summary from the Attorney General's office (§336). How much time do ! have to collect signatures? Proponents are allowed a maximum of 150 days to circulate petitions http ://www. ss. ca.gov/elections/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 4 of 16 and collect signatures (§336). However, the initiative measure must qualify at least 131 days before the statewide election in which it is to be submitted to the voters (§9013; Cal. Const. Art. II, §8(c)). As a result, proponents may want to shorten the circulation period in order to ensure that the proposed measure qualifies at least 131 days before the next statewide election. See appendix A for further information regarding filing deadlines. How many signatures do T need to collect? In order to qualify for the ballot the initiative measure must be signed by a specified number of registered voters, depending on the type of initiative submitted. Getting started Initiative Statute: Petitions proposing initiative statutes must be signed by registered voters whose numbers equal five (5) percent of the votes cast for all candidates for Governor at the last gubernatorial election preceding the issuance of the title and summary for the measure by the Attorney General (Cal. Const. Art. II, §8(b); §9035). The total number of signatures required for initiative statutes, which qualify for circulation before the November 2002 gubernatorial election, is 419,260. Initiative Constitutional Amendment: Petitions proposing initiative constitutional amendments must be signed by registered voters whose numbers equal eight (8) percent of the votes cast for all candidates for Governor at the last gubernatorial election preceding the issuance of the title and summary for the measure by the Attorney General. The total number of signatures required for such petitions, which qualify for circulation before the November 2002 gubernatorial election, is 670,816. Referenda Pursuant to Article II, Sec. 9 of the California Constitution, a referendum is the power of the electors to approve or reject any statute enacted by the Legislature except urgency statutes, those calling elections or those providing for tax levies or appropriations for current expenses of the state. Referenda on the ballot are fairly rare in comparison to initiatives, although a referendum has been certified as qualified for the March 7, 2000 ballot. Prior to that, the last four questions placed before the voters appeared on the June 1982 primary election ballot. All four were defeated. Since 1912, there have been approximately 50 attempts to qualify referenda for the ballot. Of the 50 attempts, 39 qualified for the ballot, 25 of which prevented legislative statutes from taking effect. if you are contemplating being a proponent of a referendum it is important to contact the Secretary of State. (See Appendix B). The circulation calendar, verification, timing, and the form of petition have different requirements than initiatives. For example, the California Constitution requires that the process must be completed within ninety days of the enactment of the bill that is being referred. http://www, ss.ca.gov/elections/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 5 of 16 The signature requirements are the same for a referendum as an initiative statute. Chapter 2 The format for the petition is specified by law. It is important to follow the prescribed format because the county elections officials will not accept nonconforming petition sections for filing (§9012). A petition may have several sections. Each section of the petition must contain the full title and text of the measure and each page on which signatures are to appear must contain a copy of the Attorney Generars summary in Roman boldface type not smaller than 12 point (§§ 9014, 9008). 'Heading The heading of each section of a proposed initiative petition shall be in substantially the following form: Initiative Measure to be Submitted Directly to the Voters [this heading must be printed in 12-point or larger Roman boldface type. (§9008)] Title & summary Immediately after the heading, insert the following statement: The Attorney General of California has prepared the following title and summary of the chief purposes and points of the proposed measure: [next set forth the title and summary prepared by the Attorney General. This title and summary must also be printed across the top of each page of the petition, whereon signatures are to appear, in Roman boldface type not smaller than 12-point (§9001)] Text of the measure The text of the proposed measure should be inserted immediately following the title and summary prepared by the Attorney General preceded by the following statement: We, the undersigned, registered, qualified voters of California, residents of County (or City and County), hereby propose amendments to [(the Constitution of California) (the Code, relating to )] and petition the Secretary of State to submit the same to the voters of California for their adoption or rejection at the next succeeding general election or at any special statewide election held prior to the general election or otherwise provided by law. The proposed constitutional (or statutory) amendments read as follows (§9001): [Insert full title and text of the measure] Signature section http://www, ss.ca.gov/el ections/init~guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secreta~ of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 6 of 16 Immediately above the portion of the petition where voters are to sign, a notice in 12-point type must appear containing this statement: Notice To The Public This petition may be circulated by a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer. You have the right to ask (§101). The petition must have room for the signature of each petition signer as well as his or her printed name, residence address, and city or unincorporated community name. Signature spaces must be consecutively numbered commencing with the number i for each petition section. A minimum one inch space shall be left at the top of each page and after each name for use by the county elections official. Pursuant to the Supreme Court's decision in Assembly v. Deukmejian (1982) 30 Cal.3d 638, 180 Cal. Rptr. 297, the petition form must direct signers to include their "residence address" rather than "address as registered" or other address. Each section of the petition must also contain the name of the county (or city and county) in which it was circulated. Each section shall be circulated among voters of only one county. See Attachment i for a sample petition. Step four - Circulating and signing Declaration of circulator Each section shall have attached thereto a declaration signed by the circulator of the petition, setting forth, in the circulator's own hand, the following (§§104, 9022): o The printed name of the circulator o The residence address of the circulator, giving street and number, or if no street or number exists, adequate designation of residence so that the location may be readily ascertained. o The dates between which all the signatures to the petition were obtained. Each declaration submitted pursuant to this section shall also set forth the following (§§104, 9022): o That the circulator circulated that section and witnessed the appended signatures being written. o That according to the best information and belief of the circulator, each signature is the genuine signature of the person whose name it purports to be. Who may circulate petitions? The petition may be circulated by a variety of individuals carrying separate, identical parts of the petition called "sections." Each petition circulator, however, who obtains signatures must complete the attached declaration to the petition. Preprinted dates, or generalized dates other than the particular range of dates during which the petition section was actually circulated, are not authorized (Assembly v. Deukmejian (1982) 30 Cah3d 638, 180 CahRptr. 297). http ://www. ss. ca.gov/elections/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 7 of 16 The declaration must be signed under penalty of perjury. It need not be sworn before a notary public or other officer authorized to administer oaths, but must include the circulators signature and date and place of signing (Code Civ. Proc. §2015.5). Who may sign the petition? Only persons who are registered, qualified voters at the time of signing are entitled to sign the petition. If the petition circulators are registered voters, they may, if otherwise qualified, sign the petitions they are circulating (§§102, 105, 9021). Each signer must personally place on the petition his or her signature, printed name, residence address (or physical description of the location if there is no street address), and the name of the incorporated city or unincorporated community. None of the above may be preprinted in the petition. Each signer may sign an initiative petition only once. Can an individual withdraw his or her signature? Any voter who has signed an initiative petition may withdraw his or her name by filing a written request for the withdrawal with the county elections official of the county in which the voter is registered prior to the date the petition is filed by the proponents (§9602). Criminal penalties The elections code imposes certain criminal penalties for abuses related to the circulation of initiative petitions. It prohibits circulators from misrepresenting the purpose or contents of the petition to potential petition signers, or intentionally making a false statement in response to a voter's inquiry as to whether the circulator is a paid signature gatherer or a volunteer (§18600) and from refusing to allow prospective signers to read the measure or petition or Attorney General's summary (§§18601, 18602). No person may offer or give payment to another in exchange for signing an initiative petition (§18603). The code also makes circulators, signers, and others criminally liable for signing or soliciting to sign false, forged, fictitious or ineligible signatures and names (§§18610-18614). The law provides criminal penalties for persons, including public officials, who make false affidavits (for example, the circulator's declaration is an affidavit), returns or certifications concerning any initiative (§§18660, 18661). Circulating petitions within 100 feet of polling places on election day is prohibited (§18370(a)). The law prohibits any person from soliciting or obtaining money to aid in unlawfully stopping circulation of an initiative (§§18620-18622). It also prohibits any person from stealing petitions and from threatening petition circulators or circulators' relatives with the intent to dissuade them from circulating the petition. Any person who is paid by the proponent to obtain signatures on any initiative petition is subject to severe penalties for refusing to surrender the petition to the proponent for filing (§18640). should be noted that the petition or Est of signatures may be used http ://www. ss.ca.gov/el ections/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 8 of 16 for no purpose other than the qualification of the initiative. This requirement prohibits using the names and addresses on petition sections for a mailing list for fundraising or other purposes (§18650). Step five - filing Once the requisite number of signatures has been collected they need to be turned in to the appropriate county elections official. Petitions may be submitted in sections, however all the sections submitted in a single county must be filed at the same time. Once submitted, petitions may not be amended except by order of a court of competent jurisdiction (§9030). To prevent unauthorized petitions from circulating and unauthorized persons from filing petitions, only the proponents of an initiative measure, and persons authorized in writing by one or more of the proponents, may file initiative petitions (§§9032, 18671). Any other petitions submitted will be disregarded by the county elections official of the county (or city and county) in which it was circulated (§9030). Chapter 3 nRew count" Within eight working days (excluding weekends and holidays) after filing the petition, the county elections officials determine the total number of signatures on the petition sections submitted in that county, and report the total to the Secretary of State (§9030). If the Secretary of State determines that the raw count of petitions submitted from throughout the state lack 100 percent of the signatures required, the Secretary of State shall immediately notify the county elections officials and no further action is taken on the initiative. Random sample If upon receipt of notifications from the counties it is apparent that the total number of filed signatures is 100 percent or more of the total number needed to qualify the measure (greater than 419,260 or 670,816), the Secretary of State reports this fact to the county elections officials. Upon receipt of this notification, the county elections official, within 30 working days, verifies the validity of the signatures filed with their office. County elections officials in checking petition signatures use a random sampling technique of verification. The elections official is required to verify 500 signatures or three percent of the number of signatures filed, whichever is greater. Counties receiving less than 500 petition signatures are required to verify all the signatures filed in their office. 95 percent_ 110 percent Upon completion of this random sample technique the county elections official immediately certifies to the Secretary of State the number of valid signatures appearing on the petition in his or her county. The Secretary of State adds together the signature count received from each county to determine a statewide total. http://www, ss.ca.gov/el ection s/init~guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 9 of 16 If the total number of valid signatures is less than 95 percent of the number of signatures required to qualify the petition, the petition will fail to qualify for the ballot. The Secretary of State will generate a failure notice and mail such copy to the proponent and county elections officials. If the number of valid signatures is greater than 110 percent of the required number, the petition is considered qualified without further verification (§9030). The Secretary of State will mail a certification letter to the proponent, county elections officials, the assembly chief clerk, and the secretary of the senate stating that the initiative measure has qualified for the next statewide election. Full Check However, if the result of this process indicates that the number of valid signatures represents between 95 percent and 110 percent of the qualified voters required to qualify the measure for the ballot, the Secretary of State directs the county elections officials to examine every signature on the petition. This process is referred to as a full check. County elections officials have 30 days, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, after the receipt of notice from the Secretary of State to determine the total number of qualified signatures and transmit this information to the Secretary of State (§9031). Resources Secretary of State, Elections Division 1500 llth Street, Fifth Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814 tel. 916.657.2166 ! fax 916.653.3214 / www.ss.ca.gov Attorney General - Initiative Coordinator 1300 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 tel. 916. 324.5490 / caag.state.ca.us Secretary of State, Political Reform Division 1500 llth Street, Fourth Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814 tel. 916.653.6224 ! www.ss.ca.gov Fair Political Practices Commission P.O. Box 807, Sacramento, CA 95814 tel. 916. 322.5660 ! www.fppc.ca.gov Legislative Counsel State Capitol, Room 3021, Sacramento, CA 95814 tel. 916.445.3057 ! www.leginfo.ca.gov Legislative Analyst's Office 925 L Street, Suite 1000, Sacramento, CA 95814 tel. 916. 445.5456 / www.lao.ca.cjov Chapter 4 The petition is deemed filed and qualified with the Secretary of State http://www, ss.ca.gov/elections/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 10 of 16 on the date the Secretary of State receives certificates from the county elections officials showing the petition has been signed by the requisite number of voters (§9033). The Secretary of State transmits a certificate to each county if the measure qualifies, if the measure fails to qualify, the Secretary of State must so notify the proponents and county elections officials. Upon certification of the initiative measure for the ballot, the Secretary of State will then transmit copies of the measure, together with the ballot title as prepared by the Attorney General, to the Senate and Assembly. Each house assigns the initiative measure to its appropriate committees which shall then hold joint public hearings on the subject of the measure, provided that no such hearing may be held within 30 days prior to the date of the election. The legislature has no authority to alter the initiative measure or prevent it from appearing on the ballot (§9034). When does the initiative take effect? An initiative measure approved by a majority vote takes effect the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise (Cal. Const. Art. II, § 10(a)). If the provisions of two or more measures approved at the same election conflict, those of the measures receiving the highest affirmative vote prevail (Cal. Const. Art. II, 10 (b)). The Legislature may amend or repeal an initiative statute by another statute that becomes effective only when approved by the electors, unless the initiative statute permits amendment or repeal without voter approval (Cal. Const. Art. II, §10(c)). Chapter 5 The county elections officials must preserve the initiative petitions until eight months after the certification of the results of the election for which the petition qualified or attempted to qualify for placement on the ballot. The petitions may then be destroyed unless legal action relating to the petitions is pending (§17200). Preservation Initiative petitions once filed with the county elections officials are not public records and are not open to the general public for inspection (Government Code §6253.5). However, if the initiative petition is found to be insufficient, the proponents of the petition or their designated representatives may inspect the initiative petition. They may also inspect all memoranda prepared by the county elections officials in the examination of such petition indicating which registered voters have signed in order to determine which signatures were disqualified and the reasons therefor. If the proponents of a petition are permitted to examine the petition and memoranda, the examination must commence not later than 21 days after certification of insufficiency (Government Code §6253.5). Chapter 6 http://www, ss.ca.gov/elections/init_guide .htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 11 of 16 Who qualifies as a recipient committee? Any person or combination of persons is considered to be a recipient committee (Government Code §82013 (a)), if contributions totaling $1,000 or more have been received in a calendar year for the purpose of influencing California's city, county, and/or state elections. Such persons must file the original and one copy of the Statement of Organization (Form 410) with the Secretary of State's Political Reform Division within ten days of qualifying as a recipient committee (Government Code §84101 (a)). [n addition, such persons must also file a copy of the Statement of Organization with their local filing officer, if any, with whom the committee is required to file the originals of its campaign reports (Government Code §84215). How is a measure committee required to use its funds? Persons or committees receiving money for promoting or defeating an initiative, referendum, or recall petition, or any measure that has qualified for the ballot must hold the money in trust and may only spend the money for the purpose for which it was entrusted to them (§~8680). What form is required for campaign disclosure? The Ballot Heasure Committee Campaign Disclosure Statement-Long Form 419-is the proper disclosure form for all ballot measure committees. What are the measure committee's reporting duties? Committees formed or existing primarily to support or oppose the qualification, passage, or defeat of a ballot measure, and proponents of a state ballot measure who control a committee formed to support the qualification of a measure must file semi-annual statements and pre-election statements, as well as quarterly ballot measure statements and late contribution reports, if required, as follows: quarterly ballot measure statements Committees primarily formed to support the qualification, passage, or defeat of a measure are required to file quarterly ballot measure statements before the election. However, quarterly statements are not required during any semi-annual period in which the committee is already required to file pre-election statements. Following the election, such committees are only required to file semi-annual statements unless they make contributions or expenditures to qualify, support, or oppose other similar measures, in which case they would have an ongoing duty to file quarterly statements (Government Code §84202.3). Pre-election statements Pre-election statements must be filed during the six month period when the measure is on the ballot. Pre-election statements must be filed (Government Code §§84200.7, 84200.8). http://www, ss.ca.gov/elections/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 12 of 16 Late contribution reports All late contributions totaling $1,000 or more must be filed within 24 hours during the 16-day period prior to the election (Government Code {}84203). The recipient of a late in-kind contribution must file a late contribution report within 48 hours of obtaining the benefit, possession or control of the late in-kind contribution (Government Code §84203.3). Semi-annual statements Semi-annual statements are required to be filed for each half of every year, regardless of the amount or level of activity. The closing dates for such semi-annual statements are June 30 (due July 31) and December 31 (due January 31) (Government Code §84200 (a)). If you would like more information on the Political Reform Act, please call the Fair Political Practices Commission at 916.322.5660 the Political Reform Division of the Secretary of State's office at 916. 653.6224. Chapter 7 Caution: In previous years some proponents have experienced problems in submitting initiative petitions by the statutory deadline to qualify the measure for a particular election. The proponent is encouraged to begin the process as early as possible to ensure that all deadlines are met. The following points, previously mentioned in this pamphlet, should be emphasized: · In addition to statutory deadlines, allowances must be made for transmittal of information since many of the time limitations begin when the proposed measure is received by the office and not when sent. Therefore, transmittal time could add several days to this procedure· · The Attorney General is allowed 15 days from the receipt of the final version of the measure in which to provide the Secretary of State a copy of the title and summary. If during the 15-day period the proponent submits amendments to the measure, other than technical, nonsubstantive amendments, the time is extended to allow an additional 15 days. · If the Attorney General determines that the measure requires a fiscal analysis, additional time is allowed. In addition to the 15 days, the Joint Legislative Budget Committee and the Department of Finance are allowed a total of 25 working days from the date of receipt of the final version of the proposed initiative in order to prepare a fiscal analysis. The Attorney General is then allowed 15 days after receipt of the fiscal analysis prepared by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee and the Department of Finance in which to transmit a copy of the title and summary. . Initiative proponents have a maximum of 150 days from the official summary date to file the completed and signed petition with the county elections official. . The proposed initiative measure must qualify at least 131 days prior to the statewide election. If the proposed measure fails to http://www, ss.ca.gov/elections/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 13 of 16 qualify by the 131-day deadline, the measure, after qualifying, sba%% be placed on the following statewide election ballot. Appendix a: suggested deadlines to qualify initiatives These documents should not to be considered substitutes for California election laws, regulations or policies. These suggested deadlines should be used for planning purposes only. Other factors, such as amending the initiative before circulation or the time length of circulation, will affect the time it takes to complete the process. In addition, current law may change. March 7, 2000, Primary Election By random sample · 1.19.99-Suggested last day for proponent to submit proposed measure to the Attorney General and request title and summary. · 3.12.99 (15 days) (25 w. days)*: Attorney General prepares and issues title and summary and proponent may begin circulation of petition (includes time allotted for fiscal analysis). .8.20.99 (150 days): Last day for proponent to file petition with county elections official. · 9.1.99 (8 w. days): Last day for county elections official to complete raw count totals and certify raw numbers to the Secretary of State· · 9.10.99 (9 days): Last day for Secretary of State to receive raw count total from each county elections official, determine whether initiative petitions meet the minimum signature requirement, generate random sample and notify each county elections official of results. · 10·24.99 (30 w. days ): Last day for county elections official to verify and certify results of the random sampling of signatures to the Secretary of State· .10.28.99 (4 days): Last day for Secretary of State to determine whether initiative qualifies for the ballot or 100 percent signature verification is necessary. · *note: days = calendar days w. days -- working days March 7, 2000, Primary Election By full check · 12·7·98: Suggested last day for proponent to submit proposed measure to the Attorney General and request title and summary. . 1·29·99 (15 days) (25 w. days): Attorney General prepares and issues title and summary and proponent may begin circulation of petition (includes time allotted for fiscal analysis). · 6·30.99 (150 days): Last day for proponent to file petition with county elections official. http ://www. ss.ca.gov/el ections/init~guide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 14 of 16 · 7.12.99 {8 w. days): Last day for county elections official to complete raw count totals and certify raw numbers to the Secretary of State. · 7.21.99 (9 days): Last day for Secretary of State to receive raw count total from each county elections official, determine whether initiative petitions meet the minimum signature requirement, generate random sample and notify each county elections official of results. · 9.1.99 (30 w. days): Last day for county elections official to verify and certify results of the random sampling of signatures to the Secretary of State. · 9.10.99 (10 days): Last day for Secretary of State to determine whether initiative petition qualifies for the ballot or 100 percent signature verification is necessary. · 10.24.99 (30 w. days): Last day for county elections official to certify to the Secretary of State results of the 100 percent signature check. · 10.28.99 (4 days): Last day for the Secretary of State to determine whether initiative qualifies for the ballot. · *note: days = calendar days w. days = working days November 7, 2000, General Election By random sample · 9.30.99: Suggested last day for proponent to submit proposed measure to the Attorney General and request title and summary. · 11.22.99 (15 days) (25 w. days)*: Attorney General prepares and issues title and summary and proponent may begin circulation of petition (includes time allotted for fiscal analysis). .4.21.00 (150 days): Last day for proponent to file petition with county elections official. · 5.3.00 (8 w. days): Last day for county elections official to complete raw count totals and certify raw numbers to the Secretary of State. · 5.12.00 (9 days): Last day for Secretary of State to receive raw count total from each county elections official, determine whether initiative petitions meet the minimum signature requirement, generate random sample and notify each county elections official of results. · 6.25.00 (30 w. days): Last day for county elections official to verify and certify results of the random sampling of signatures to the Secretary of State. · 6.29.00 (4 days): Last day for the Secretary of State to determine whether initiative qualifies for the ballot. http ://www. ss. ca.gov/el eclions/init_guide.htm 01/17/2001 California SecretaB, of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 15 of 16 · *note: days = calendar days w. days = working days November 7, 2000, General Election By full check · 8.11.99: Suggested last day for proponent to submit proposed measure to the Attorney General and request title and summary. · 10.15.99 (15 days) (25 w. days)*: Attorney General prepares and issues title and summary and proponent may begin circulation of petition (includes time allotted for fiscal analysis). · 3.1.00 (150 days): Last day for proponent to file petition with county elections official. · 3.12.00 (8 w. days): Last day for county elections official to complete raw count totals and certify raw numbers to the Secretary of State. · 3.21.00 (9 days): Last day for Secretary of State to receive raw count total from each county elections official, determine whether initiative petitions meet the minimum signature requirement, generate random sample and notify each county elections official of results. · 5.3.00 (30 w. days): Last day for county elections official to verify and certify results of the random sampling of signatures to the Secretary of State. · 5.12.00 (10 days): Last day for the Secretary of State to determine whether initiative qualifies for the ballot. · 6.25.00 (30 w. days): Last day for county elections official to certify to the Secretary of State results of 100 percent signature check. · 6.29.00 (4 days): Last day for the Secretary of State to determine whether initiative qualifies for the ballot. · *note: days = calendar days w. days = working days Appendix B: For more information Secretary of State Bill Jones, California Secretary of State Political Reform Division 1500 11th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 916.653.6224 / www.ss.ca.gov Legislative Counsel Office of Legislative Counsel Room 3021, State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 916.445.3057 www.leginfo.ca.gov http ://www. ss.ca.gov/elections/init~ouide.htm 01/17/2001 California Secretary of State - Elections Division - Initiative Guide Page 16 of 16 Secretary of State Bill Jones, California Secretary of State Elections Division 1500 llth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 916.657.2166 / www.ss.ca.gov Attorney General Bill Lockyer, Attorney General 1300 ! Street Sacramento, CA 95814 ATTN: !nitiative Coordinator 916.324.5490 caag.state.ca.us Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) Technical Assistance and Analysis Division P.O. Box 807 Sacramento, CA 95814 916.322.5660 / www.fppc.ca.gov Legislative Analyst's Office 925 L Street, Suite 1000 Sacramento, CA 95814 916.445.5456 www.lao.ca.gov Copyright ©2000 California Secretary of State. privacy Statement http ://www. ss. ca.gov/el ecfi on s/i nit~ouid e. htm 01 / 17/2001 ITEM 17 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAJ~,C~--~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: City Manager/City Council 5u~Susan W. Jones, City Clerk/Director of Support Services January 23, 2001 SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Adjournment Time RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to staffwhether to amend Ordinance No. 2.04.020, regarding the time of adjournment for City Council Meetings. It has been requested by Councilman Stone to revisit the adjournment time for City Council Meetings. Staff suggests that if Ordinance No. 2.04.020 is amended, that changes to adjournment time be determined by Resolution. Councilman Stone suggests that at 10:00 P.M., the Mayor examines the agenda and discusses which items can be continued to the next scheduled City Council Meeting. The maximum time of adjournment suggested is 11:00 P.M. Agenda Reports/Adjournment Time I DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR Of FINAN~_.~ CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer January 23, 2001 Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Reports for the month of December 2000. MOACTRPT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report December 2000 / January 2001 Prepared By: Amer Attar Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: January 23,2001 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. First Street Bridge This project will construct First Street from Pujol Street to Old Town Front Street, including the construction ora bridge over Murrieta Creek and the realignment of Santiago Road. The new intersection of First Street, Old Town Front Street, and Santiago Road will be signalized. The bridge deck was poured and stressed with the removal of falsework underway. The asphalt paving on the westside of Front Street is complete with paving of the eastside of Front Street and the southside of Santiago Road scheduled for the end of January. Installation of the RCWD 20" waterline is nearly complete. Construction of the EMWD lift station is continuing. Completion of this project is scheduled for March 2001. 2. Old Town Parking Lot This project will rehabilitate the Stampede parking lot. It includes resurfacing, landscaping, and Old Town Series lights. TruGreen began construction on the parking lot on October 2, 2000. Construction of concrete light pole bases, curb, gutter and asphalt paving is complete. Old Town Series lights are on back-order and are scheduled to be installed by the end of January. 3. Pala Road Bridge Environmental Restoration/Median and Parkway Landscape Improvements This project will install landscape improvements along Pala Road and Cupeno Lane and restore the wetlands in the construction zone. It includes the installation of an irrigation system, planting, and hydroseeding. Construction on the median and parkway improvements began 12/4/00. The contractor is ~ompleting the installation of the irrigation system. Construction should be completed by February 2001. 4. Pala Road Bridge Environmental Mitigation The wetlands creation site located approximately 1 ½ mile east of the bridge project has been planted and the five-year maintenance period began. 5. Pala Road Soundwalls Work on this project includes the construction of masonry block Soundwalls on Pala Road from west of Rainbow Canyon Road to east of Club House Drive. The wall averages 14' in height. Construction began 12/11/00. The wall footing has been poured and the blocks will begin going up the first week of February. R:\MonthlyActivityRepor t\CIP\2000\December 6. Sports Park Pond Desiltation The project will include the removal of 15,000 cubic yards of silt from the existing pond located along Rancho Vista Road. The contractor has completed the removal of 15,000 cubic yards of material from the de-siltation basin. Fencing will be installed around the basin and hydroseed will be placed on the basin slopes during the 3rd week of January. Project is scheduled for completion by the end of January 2001. 7. FY99-2000 Pavement Management System, Various Streets This is a new project to reconstruct roadway pavement on Ynez Road between Santiago Road and La Paz Street. The project is complete. City Council accepted this project and filed the Notice of Completion at the January 9, 2001 meeting 8. Rancho California Sports Park Field Lighting Under this project, new lights will be installed in all fields. Bids were opened on November 15, 2000. Lowest bidder is MEI with a bid of $494,990. Project was awarded at the November 28, 2000 Council meeting. Construction began on 12/11/00. PROJECTS BEING ADVERTISED FOR BIDS 1. Murrieta Creek Crossing Between Winchester and Rancho California Road - Low-flow Crossing at Via Montezuma This project will construct a low-flow crossing of Murrieta Creek connecting Diaz and Del Rio at Via Montezuma. This project is currently out to bid, with a bid opening date of January 30, 2001. Tom Dodson & Associates, an environmental consultant, has submitted the necessary applications for the permitting process. RCFCD is developing a cooperative agreement with the City for the construction and maintenance of the Low-Flow. We expect the draft to be sent to the City shortly. A meeting between the City and the RCFCD, Army Corps and the Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) took place on November 15, 2000. The City's Planning Department is in the process of completing the CEQA documentation. The Construction window is from September through March due to nesting season. 2. City Maintenance Facility Alterations, Phase III This project will modify the existing two story masonry block building to accommodate a new second floor of office space over the existing two-story maintenance bay, including the installation of an elevator, and two new second floor restrooms. Construction will also include a single story office space addition. Original bids will be rejected at 01/23/01 City Council meeting. Revised plans will be re~advertised for bids. The new bid opening date is set for February 20, 2001. PROJECTS IN DESIGN 1. Pavement Management System, Jefferson Avenue This project will rehabilitate Jefferson Avenue from the northerly City limits to Overland Drive. Areas to be rehabilitated were identified, and plans and specifications are being reviewed and completed. Design is about 90% complete. The Plans and Specifications should go out to bid in March 2001. 2 R:\Mont~lyActivityRepor t\CIP\2000\December 2. Diaz Road Realignment Under this project, Diaz Road will be realigned to Vincent Moraga Road at Rancho California Road. Business Park Drive will be a T-intersection at Diaz. The designer is currently preparing the improvement plans for 90% submittal. The design is scheduled for completion by February 2001. 3. Margarita Road Widening, Pauba Road to Dartolo Road This project will widen Margarita Road from Pio Pico to Dartolo Road. We are also including the pavement rehabilitation of Phase II (Pauba Road to Pio Pico) as part of this phase of the project. Final street plans plan check returned to City on 01/09/01. Design completion is expected at the end of January. Bidding is expected in February 2001. 4. Pala Road Improvements - Phase II (79 South to Pechanga Road) This project will widen Pala Road to its ultimate width from the Pala Road Bridge to Pechanga road. Plan check comments (70% Submittal) were returned to the consultant. Work is proceeding on the remainder of the design, which includes geotechnical, utility research, environmental, and final design. The approval of Wolf Creek Drainage Basin Study by RCFC & WCD has been delayed about a month because hydrology studies upstream of Wolf Creek require prior approval. Staff will be using an appraiser to assist in the preparation of the real estate appraisal report. The project is funded for design only at this time. 5. Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center and Adding a Right Turn Lane on Westbound Rancho California Road at Ynez The project will include the closing of the two median openings on Rancho California Road in front of the Town Center Drive, while lengthening the left turn lanes at Ynez Road, Town Center Drive, and Via Los Colinas. A new project to add a right turn lane on westbound Rancho California Road at Ynez is being combined with this project due to its close proximity and for efficiency. The project is currently in design. Right of way acquisition at the northeast comer of Rancho California and Ynez will be required. 6. Pauba Road Improvements - Phase II (Margarita Road to Showalter Road) This project will widen Pauba Road from Showalter to just west of Margarita Road to its ultimate width. The design process has begun and the work is being coordinated with design of the library project. 70% design plans were submitted to the City and were sent out to all utilities and other City departments for review. Staff will begin negotiations with properly owners to discuss driveway revisions and new easements. Potholing of utilities has been performed along Pauba to determine elevations of existing lines. 7. Senior Center Expansion The expansion will include an addition of 3000 square feet to the existing building. The expansion will be for recreational, office, and meeting purposes. The project is currently undergoing second plan check review. 8. Rancho Caliibrnia Road Bridge Widening Over Murrieta Creek This project will widen Rancho California Bridge over Murrieta Creek to provide additional traffic lanes. Design of the project began in September 2000. Design will take six months. The bridge widening will include four additional lanes. Submittal of 30% drawings is scheduled for the end of January 2001 for staff review. 3 R:\MontldyActivityRepor t\CIP\2000\December 9. Chaparral High School Swimming Pool The design committee decided upon the layout of the 25-yard x 25-meter pool at Chaparral High School. The facility will include a smaller recreation pool component and a bathhouse with locker room facilities, restrooms and showers. Spray-type play equipment will be included in the construction bid as an alternate. The design concept was completed. First design submittal is being reviewed by the City and TVUSD. 10. Starlight Ridge Southern Cross Road Sidewalk Project This Project will install approximately one mile of sidewalk on the northwest side of Southern Cross Road. Field survey is scheduled to be completed by January 30, 2001. Basemap preparation and design are underway. 11. Rancho California Sports Park Culvert Redesign In this project, the existing culvert will need to be modified to eliminate a slope erosion problem. Final plans, specifications and cost estimate are complete. TCSD has completed their 2nd review and their comments have been incorporated. We are awaiting final review and the environmental assessment from the Planning Department. This project should be advertised for bids in February. 12. Traffic Signal installation at Stonewood and Margarita In this project, a traffic signal will be installed on Margarita Road at Stonewood Drive. Consultant is work on final plan check comments and expects to submit final plans and specification by the end of January 2001. Advertisement for bids is expected in February. 13. Pavement Management System - Citywide This project will involve rehabilitating various streets in the City for FY 2000-01. A list of streets has been selected and staff is currently preparing the contract documents. In addition, the Pavement management System Program (PMS) for the City will be updated. 14. Margarita Road/Winchester Road Intersection Improvements Under this project, an additional left turn from eastbound Winchester to northbound Margarita will be added to accommodate increasing traffic. Design and construct a second east to north left turn at MargaritaFvVinchester intersection. Field survey is scheduled to be completed by January 26, 2001. Basemap preparation and design is underway. Project will be processed as a Caltrans Encroachment Permit. Coordination with Caltrans will be required since Winchester is a State route at this location. An 15. 1-15 Northbound On-Ramp Widening at Winchester Road This project will re-stripe the northbound on-ramp from westbound Winchester to I- 15 to allow for a better flow of traffic. A consultant has completed a preliminary layout plan for the new lane configuration. A final striping plan is in the process of being prepared. The City will be applying for an Encroachment Permit from Caltrans. 16. Overland Drive ExtensionfMurrieta Creek Bridge This project will entail alignment studies and design of an extension of Overland Drive, westerly to Diaz 4 R:\MontldyActivityReport\CIP\2000\December Road, which includes a new bridge over Murrieta Creek. On December 19, 2000, City Council approved the contract with Project Design Consultants to proceed with the design of Phase I, Alignment Study. The study consists of preparing an alignment study, initial environmental assessment, topographic base mapping, right- of-way research, and the preparation of preliminary cost estimates for the preferred alignment. The project includes the widening of Overland Drive from Jefferson Avenue to Commerce Center Drive, and the extension of Overland Drive across Murrieta Creek to Diaz Road. A kick off meeting was recently held and the study is underway. 17. Winchester Road Widening Between Enterprise Circle and Jefferson This project will add a right turn lane from eastbound Winchester to southbound Jefferson starting at Enterprise Circle. Preliminary utility research and data gathering is underway. Design survey RFP is scheduled to be completed by the end of the month. 18. AC Street Repairs - FY2001 This project will rehabilitate and reconstruct selected City streets during 2001. A list of streets has been selected and staff is currently preparing the contYact documents. 19. Light Emitting Diode (LED) Traffic Signal Conversion Program A grant award was obtained in the amount of $140,870.00 to replace incandescent traffic signal lights with Light Emitting Diode (LED). Program grant agreement is in process of final execution. Project bidding is anticipated in February with implementation expected April-June 2001. 20. Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements - Phase II This project will complete the knuckle at the intersection of Sixth Street and Felix Valdez. Data gathering, concept review, preliminary layout is underway. 21. Landscaping and Sidewalk On 79 South (Front Street to Pala Road) The project consists of the design and construction of new sidewalk and landscaping along the south side of State Highway 79 South between Pala Road and Old Town Front Street. Data gathering, concept review, preliminary layout is underway. 22. Temecula Library A full service library, approximately 34,000 square feet in area, will be designed and built on Pauba Road, just west of Fire Station #84. This project will provide the community with library resources and services. The design is progressing on schedule. The architect started on the final drawings after the committee completed its design and development meetings. The State Librarian is holding Public Hearings that include all agencies to develop the guidelines for the approved Bond measure. Letters were sent to all the utilities requesting service information. Utility services construction will be coordinated with Pauba Road, Phase II street improvement project. 23. Street Name Sign Replacement This project will entail removing the existing wooden signs and replacing them with plastic signs selected by the Public Traffic Safety Commission. Information is being gathered. The preparation of Plans and 5 R:\MonthlyActivityReport\ClP\2000\December Specifications will start shortly. 24. Traffic Signals Design at Pala Road and Loma Linda, and at Pala Road and Wolf Valley Two new traffic signals will be installed on Pala Road, one at Loma Linda and the other at Wolff Valley. The plans and specifications are complete. The project is being coordinated with Pechanga Development Corporation sewer project. This project is on hold due to environmental constraints. 25. Pala Road Interim Improvements - (Widening to accommodate four lanes from Loma Linda Bridge to Wolf Valley) Pala Road Interim Improvements (58 feet in width) will be completed with the second phase of construction of the Pala Road Trunk Sewer (Pechanga Development Corporation project). An encroachment permit was issued for the construction of the trunk sewer and the interim street improvements. Traffic signal and striping plans are complete. The construction of Pala Road Trunk Sewer (Phase Two) by the Pechanga Development Corporation from Clubhouse Drive to the new Pechanga Casino Driveway (600 feet southeast of Wolf Valley Road) started November 6, 2000 and the approximate completion date is Spring 2001. The interim project is on hold due to environmental constraints. 26. Santa Gertrndis Bridge Widening at 1-15 This is Phase II of the Southbound Auxiliary Lane project at the southbound exit ramp for Winchester Road. This project will widen the I~ 15 southbound exit-ramp at the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bridge to provide an additional lane on the exit ramp just north of Winchester Road. Consultant is working on 2nd plan check comments and expects to submit to RCFCD and Caltrans by the end of January. Staff is revisiting the merits of this project in light of the proposed Project Study Report for Cherry Street Interchange. The study shows that this bridge may have to be removed in the future to accommodate the Cherry Street Interchange. 27. Santiago Road/Ynez Road Intersection Improvements This project will widen, realign, and adjust the traffic signal timing of the existing intersection. This project has been delayed indefinitely. The Traffic Division will be doing some minor striping and signal adjustment that would minimize the current problem. 6 R:\MonthlyActivityRepor t\CIP\2000\December <, TO: FROM: DATE: MEMORANDUM Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent January 4, 2001 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - December, 2000 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of December, 2000: I. SIGNS A. B. C. Total signs replaced Total signs installed Total signs repaired 29 10 8 9 231 2 642 -0- II. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns IlL ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A, C. repairs B. Total Tons CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned VI. VII. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations B. Total S.F. STENCILING A. 10 New and repainted legends B. -~- L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping 19 2:571 Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 25 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 26 service order requests for the month of November~ 2000. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 123 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and response to street emergencies. The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of December~ 2000 was ~ 28~180,00 compared to ~ 220~943.86 for the month of November ~ 2000. Account No. 5402 $ 14,310.00 Account No. 5401 $ 13,870.00 Account No. 999-5402 $ - 0 - cc: Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer (CIP/Traffic) Greg Butler, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Amer Attar, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer (Land Development) STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of December, 2000 DATE DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK TOTALCOST SIZE CONTRACTOR: BECKER ENGINEERING Date: 12/0/100 # 5401 Date: 12/02/00 # 5402 VALLE JO CHANNEL JEFFERSON AVENUE BETWEEN RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND LAS HACIENDAS PLACE 30 YDS. OF 5 SACK SLURRY MIX TO REPAIR TOTAL COST [ $ 4,420.00 SAW CUT A.C. FOR REMOVE & REPLACE REPAIRS TOTAL COST I $ 2,860.00 CONTRACTOR: MONTELEONE EXCAVATING ~ Date: 12/I 1/00 # 5402 C1TYWlDE Date: 12/11/00 # 5401 Date: 12/11/00 # 5401 CONTRACTOR: JOHN WARNER DESILTING POND SANTIAGO ROAD RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT REMOVE SILT AND SANDBAG R.O.W.S WHERE NEEDED TOTAL COST I $ 4,500.00 CONSTRUCT DES1LT[NG PONDS TOTAL COST $ 4,500.00 CONSTRUCT DESILTING PONDS TOTAL COST $ 4,950.00 Date: 12/19/00 # 5402 ClTYW1DE TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT g99-5402 TRASH AND DEBRIS PICK-UP AND WEED ABATEMENT TOTAL COST ] $ 6,950.00 $13,870.00 $14,310.00 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2000 DATE LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK RECEIVED COMPLETED 12/04/00 30485 SIERRA MAI)RE DRIVE LOOSE GRAVEL IN ROAD 12/04/00 12/06/00 28497 PUJOL POTHOLE 12/06/00 12/11/00 31203 CAMINO DEL ESTE ROOT PRUNE 12/11/00 12/12/00 41966 HUMBER DRIVE TREE TRIMMING 12/12/00 12/12/00 24800 RAVENVIEW COURT GRAFFITI 12/12/00 12/12/00 31220 KAHWEA FENCE DOWN 12/12/00 12/13/00 43090 CORTE SALAMANCA PLUGGED STORM DRAIN 12/13/00 12/14/00 43185 MARGARITA ROAD USA MARKINGS IN STREET 12/14/00 12/14/00 30116 SANTA CECELIA SIDEWALK REPAIR 12/14/00 12/15/00 COOR POMEROL ~ RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. OIL SPILL 12/15/00 12/15/00 45552 CLASSIC WAY TREE REMOVAL 12/15/00 12/15/00 43132 CALLE VERONICA SIDEWALK REPAIR 12/15/00 12/18/00 45544 CALSSIC WAY TREE REMOVAL 12/18/00 12/18/00 45571 CLASSIC WAY TREE REMOVAL 12/18/00 12/18/00 30673 DEL REY ROAD FALLEN TREE 12/18/00 12/18/00 42751 TWILIGHT COURT ROOT PRUNE 12/18/00 12/18/00 39838 RUSTIC GLEN UNCOVERED TRENCHES 12/18/00 12/18/00 YNEZ ROAD AT K MART TREE TRIMMING 12/18/00 12/20/00 45630 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD REMOVAL OF USA MARKING 12/20/00 12/20/00 32219 CORTE DE CERRO TREE TRIMMING 12/20/00 12/26/00 44036 SHELDON COURT PAINT IN STREET 12/26/00 12/26/00 43325 CALLE NACIDO STORM SRAIN CLEANING 12/26/00 12/27/00 28312 T1ERRA VISTA ROAD STORM DRAIN REPAIR 12/27/00 12/27/00 31062 CORTE ALOMAR TREE TRIMMING 12/27/00 12/27/00 45394 TOURNAMENT LANE BROKEN FENCE 12/27/00 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 25 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2000 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 12/01/00 40570 WINCHESTER REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/04/00 MARGARITA AT WINCHESTER REMOVED 160 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/05/00 END OF RIO NEDO REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/05/00 27717 JEFFERSON REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/05/00 28111 JEFFERSON REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/0500 CALLE KATERINE AT WINDSOR REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/07/00 29000 MIRA LOMA (VINTAGE VIEW APARTMENTS) REMOVED 1,425 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/11/00 RANCHO CALIF. RD. 300 YDS. W/O BUSINESS PARK DR. REMOVED 30 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/13/00 WINCHESTER AT NICOLAS REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/14/00 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT LEENA WAY REMOVED 8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI ! 2/14/00 29000 MIRA LOMA (VINTAGE VIEW APARTMENTS) REMOVED 280 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/19/00 LAKE VILLAGE CLUBHOUSE REMOVED 211 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/20/00 29000 FRONT STREET REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/21/00 41925 YNEZROAD REMOVED 4 $.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/21/00 WINCHESTER AT JEFFERSON REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/21/00 OVERLAND AT JEFFERSON REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/26/00 CALLE CORTEZ AT JEFFERSON REMOVED 100 S.F. OF GRAFF1TI 12/28/00 YNEZAT WINCHESTER REMOVED 317 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 12/29/00 FRONT STREET AT 2~° STREET REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 2,571 TOTAL LOCATIONS 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2000 DATE LOCATION SCOPE OF WORK S.F. TOTAL TONS 12/05/00 NICOLAS ROAD AT CALLE MEDUSA FILL POTHOLES 70 TEMP A.C. 12/19/00 DIAZ SOUTH OF RANCHO WAY FILL POTHOLES 17 TEMP A.C. 12/19/00 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD EAST OF MORAGA FILL POTHOLES 8 TEMP A.C. 12/19/00 DIAZ ROAD SOUTH OF WINCHESTER FILL POTHOLES 38 TEMP A.C. 12/19/00 PALA ROAD SOUTH OF LOMALINDA FILL POTHOLES 18 TEMP A.C. 12/28/00 CITYWIDE (5 LOCATIONS) A.C. BERM REPAINT 80 2 TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 231 TOTAL TONS 2 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2000 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 12/18/00 47139 Z1NFINDALE TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 12/18/00 VIA PUERTA AT CAMINO VERDE TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES 12/20/00 30701 DEL REY TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 12/20/00 4TM STREET AT MERCEDES TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED ~9 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2000 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 12/04/00 MARGARITA NORTHBOUND 200' PAST OVERLAND INSTALLED 2 "45' LEGENDS 12/19/00 PALOMA DEL SOL REPA1NTED 8 LEGENDS TOTAL NEW & REPAlNTED LEGENDS 10 NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F. -0- CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2000 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 12/04/00 NICOLAS AT WINCHESTER CLEANED & CHECKED 2 CATCH BASINS 12/04/00 AREAS #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 35 CATCH BASINS 12/05/00 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 20 CATCH BASINS 12/05/00 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 6 CATCH BASINS 12/06/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 27 CATCH BASINS 12/06/00 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 64 CATCH BASINS 12/07/00 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 23 CATCH BASINS 12/07/00 AREA #2 AND AREA #3 CLEANED & CHECKED 23 CATCH BASINS 12/08/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 2 CATCH BASINS 12/11/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 9 CATCH BASINS 12/12/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 6 CATCH BASINS 12/12/00 AREA #1 CLEANED & CHECKED 54 CATCH BASINS 12/13/00 AREA #1 AND AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 67 CATCH BASINS 12/13/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 12 CATCH BASINS 12/14/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 13 CATCH BASINS 12/14/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 15 CATCH BASINS 12/18/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 19 CATCH BASINS 12/19/00 AREA #3 AND AREA #4 CLEANED & CHECKED 10 CATCH BASINS 12/20/00 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA CLEANED & CHECKED 3 CATCH BASINS 12/20/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 45 CATCH BASINS 12/26/00 AREA #4 CLEANED & CHECKED 15 CATCH BASINS 12/26/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 75 CATCH BASINS 12/27/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 64 CATCH BASINS 12/27/00 AREA #4 CLEANED & CHECKED 16 CATCH BASINS 12/28/00 AREA #2 CLEANED & CHECKED 17 CATCH BASINS TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 642 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 12/27/00 VIA LA VIDA AT SOLANA REPLACED R-I 4 R-I-A 12/28/00 CALLE MEDUSA AT NICOLAS REPLACED W- 17 12/28/00 LA SERENA AT NORTH GENERAL KEARNY REPLACED R-I 12/29/00 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT HUMBER REPLACED R-2 50 TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 29 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 10 TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 8 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION SIGNS MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2000 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 12/04/00 MARGARITA NORTH OF GEORGETOWN INSTALLED WT-A 2 R-2 "45" 12.04/00 JEFFERSON AT VIA MONTEZUMA REPLACED HIGHWAY PATROL SIGN T.C. 12/05/00 PALA ROAD AT CLUBHOUSE REPLACED S.N.S. 12/05/00 JEFFERSON AT CALLE CORTEZ REPLACED S.N.S. 12/05/00 DIAZ ROAD AT DMV REPLACED R-2 "45" T.C. 12/05/00 MARGARITA NORTH OF WINCHESTER INSTALLED R-96A 12/08/00 SOLANA AT DEL REY REPLACED R-1 T.C. 12/13/00 WINCHESTER AT NICOLAS INSTALLED W7-A 12/13/00 CALLE RESACA AT CORTE COLORADO REPLACED R-1 12/14/00 MEADOWS PARKWAY AT LEENA WAY REPLACED R-1 12/15/00 MARGARITA SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA REPLACED W-41 12/19/00 YNEZ NORTH OF SANTIAGO REPLACED R26 - 81 12/19/00 PREECE LANE AT VIA MONDO REPLACED R-I 12/19/00 VIA JUMILLA AT CORTE ILLORA INSTALLED R-1 & W53 12/19/00 LA SERENA AT MEADOWS PARKWAY REPLACED DELINEATOR 12/19/00 40863 CALLE MEDUSA REPLACED W-17 12/19/00 PAUBA AT MARGARITA REPLACED TYPE K 12/20/00 YNEZ AT MALL REPLACED W-74 12/20/00 WINCHESTER AT NICOLAS REPLACED R-7 12/20/00 MARGARITA AT RUSTIC GLEN REPLACED R-18 12/22/00 DIAZ AT AVENIDA ALVARADO REPLACED 3 DELINIATORS 12/22/00 BUTTERFIELD STAGE AT DE PORTOLA REPLACED TYPE K 12/22/00 SANATIAGO AT YNEZ INSTALLED 3 CARSONITES 12/22/00 YNEZ AT QUIET MEADOW REPLACED R-26-81 COMBO APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY /~ ~,'~"f~ DIRECTOR OF FINANC~_,~__ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Howard Windsor, Acting City Fire Chief January 23, 2000 Monthly Departmental Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Fire Department's Monthly Activity Report for the month of December 2000. Temecula Fire Services Monthly Activity Statistics Month DECEMBER Year 2000 Structure Fires 9 2 7 4 22 Vehicle Fires 1 5 1 0 7 Vegetation Fires 4 5 4 1 14 Other Fires 4 10 5 4 23 Medical Aids 64 45 37 109 255 Traffic Collisions 20 36 5 7 68 False Alarms 31 48 11 15 105 Fire Menace Standbys 5 7 0 9 21 Public Service Assists 2 8 4 3 17 Assists and Covers 4 30 5 25 64 Totals: 144 196 79 177 596 Community Activities 4 0 0 0 4 School Programs 4 0 0 2 6 Fairs and Displays 0 0 0 0 0 Company Inspections 15 0 0 0 15 LE-38 Dooryard Inspecti¢0 0 0 0 0 Fire Investigations 0 0 6 9 15 Burning Permits Issued 0 0 2 5 7 Preplans 0 0 2 1 3 I Totals: 23 0 10 17 50 Form B15-1 (4/99) By: Carl Calderon Date: 1/10/01 Total Runs for the Month: Medical Aids Traffic Collisions Public Service Assists Fire Menace Standby's Structure Fires Ringing Alarms Vegetation Fires Vehicle Fires Refuse feces HaJardous Materials Average Response Time Longest Response Time MEDIC SQUAD 84 MONTHLY RESPONSE SUMMARY DECEMBER20~ 15 Minutes: See comments Medic Squad Cancelled Prior To Patient Contact: 93 Times Medical Aid and Traffic Collisions with Medic Squad on scene prior to AMR: 90 Times Performed Advance Life Support prior to AMR arrival: 41 Times Total Responses for Year 2000: 2914 Comments: Medic Squad 84 responded to a total of 258 calls in the Month of December. 212 of those calls were for Medical Aids and Traffic Collisions of which the Squad was canceled 93 times or 44% of the time. The Medic Squad arrived on scene prior to AMR 85 times or 40% of the time and initiated ALS care on 41 calls or 48%. AMR's average response time to these calls was 4.7 minutes after the arrival of the Medic Squad. On 8 occasions, the Medic Squad was on scene greater than 10 minutes before the arrival of AMP,. The longest wait for an AMR unit was 16 minutes. Medic Squad 84 had 5 response times of over 10 Minutes for the month, the longest of which was 15 minutes. Three of these responses were to the North East End of the dry, utilizing Squad 10, MS84 was out of senrice for brake repair. The 15-minute response was a dispatch error, Highway 79 north versus Highway 79 soutk 258 172 40 4 3 5 26 1 0 4 0 5.0 Minutes APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA~ET~:~,._ CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManageflCity Council Jim Domenoe, Chief of Police January 23, 2001 Monthly Departmental Report The following report reflects special teams, traffic enfomement and miscellaneous activity occurring dudng December of 2000. Part One cdme statistics are displayed by reporting distdct within the City, providing stable parameters for monitoring criminal activity, and aiding in planning police resoume deployment. The Police Department responded to forty-five "priority one" calls for service during the month of December, with an average response time of approximately 7.4 minutes. A total of 1,262 calls for police service were generated in the City of Temecula during the month. During the month of December, the Temecula Police Department's storefront served a total of 212 customers. Fingerprinting services for this month showed forty-four prints taken, thirty-two people filed police reports, fifteen people had citations signed off and eleven oversized vehicle permits were issued. Crime Prevention Officer Lynn Fanene participated in a number of special events and community oriented programs during the month. Officer Fanene worked at the annual Christmas parade and at the Western Eagle Foundations annual Santa's Corner Christmas party for 1500 children. Officer Fanene conducted nine residential security visits and eleven business security visits during the month. He conducted four visits to businesses for crime follow-up information. Officer Fanene completed his article for the Valley Business Journal titled "Internal Theft Prevention- part 1 of 2." The POP Team of Officers John Anderson and Ead Quinata continued to work on the "Crime Free Multi Housing" project. The officers are working with two complexes, which are in the final stages of certification. They are also in the process of working to re-certify four complexes who are continuing with the program. The team continued their Warrant Apprehension Program (WAP) during the month, which resulted in two felony arrests and five misdemeanor arrests for suspects with outstanding warrants. Other programs conducted this month included working with the Alcoholic Beverage Control and the Department of Health on alcohol abuse and smoking related incidents in licensed businesses. As a result of this program, a total of five citations were issued for violations. Monthly Departmental Report Page 2 The team continued their Crime Free Parks program and held a meeting with the Public Works and Community Services Departments to discuss graffiti issues. High frequency patrols were conducted throughout the month with no arrests made. The team also worked the continuing homeless assistance program, which resulted in contacting five subjects who were offered and refused assistance. The Old Town Storefront has now been operational for eight months. This storefront has served as an office for the POP team and has greatly increased their availability to serve the Old Town area. This month the Old Town storefront served eighty-seven customers, six fingerprints were taken, eight reports were written and one citation was signed off. The traffic team reported that during the month of December there were 286 citations issued for hazardous violations, 106 citations were issued for non-hazardous violations and 114 parking citations were issued. There were eight injury traffic collisions, forby-nine non-injury collisions were reported and twenty-eight drivers were arrested for DUI. The monthly ERACIT program was not held this month due to a special enforcement program for DUI drivers held throughout the month. The Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) program resulted in fifty-two citations being issued. This program addresses traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods with a dedicated motor officer. The traffic team was responsible for the planning and operation of the annual Christmas parade. This event was an outstanding success with a crowd estimated at 20,000. There were no problems associated with the parade in regards to traffic and public safety. This event required the use of the Posse, Reserves and Explorers to maintain public and traffic safety. During the month of December, the POP officers assigned to the Promenade Malt handled a total of 198 calls for service (up from 130 last month). The predominant numbers of these calls were for shoplifting investigations. These calls resulted in the criminal arrest and filings on thirty-five misdemeanors and seven felony cases for various offenses. Twelve citations were also issued. Dudng the month a significant extra enforcement program was utilized to deal with the large crowds (estimated at over 30,000 per day). This required the use of the Reserves, Posse and Explorers to maintain public and traffic safety. During the holiday season the Department received many positive comments from the public for this extra effort. Officer Robles facilitated a bilingual presentation on "Tough Love" to a group of parents covedng such topics as, youth intervention and juvenile law. The mall officers are also planning their next session of training for the mall merchants titled "Handling Civil and Domestic Disputes" which will be presented during January. The school resource officers continue to remain active in their schools. During the past month, the officers conducted numerous presentations in areas such as narcotic identification, Stranger Danger, traffic safety etc. They also conducted counseling sessions with students. Seven arrests were made at Chaparral High School, and one arrest was made at Temecula Valley High School. The School Resource Officers also assisted with a planned speaking event that was held at Chaparral High School titled "Hate & Extremist Groups." A guest speaker from the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Tolerance gave a dramatic presentation to a group of Law Enforcement and School District Employees on this topic. The JOLT program (Juvenile Offender Law Enforcement Program) continues to be a success in part through its youth court program. During this month a new Probation Department employee was assigned to the program and received training from the JOLT officer. The JOLT officer assisted at other schools with truancy meetings and follow up with parents of juveniles in the JOLT program. During the month of December, the Special Enforcement Team of Officers Rich Holder and Mark Kdkava handled a total of twenty-one cases. These cases resulted in twenty-five misdemeanor and Monthly Departmental Report Page 3 fourteen felony arrests, primarily for narcotics violations. They also issued fifteen citations for vadous violations. This team continues to work street level narcotics and specialty patrol within the city on a pro-active basis. During this month the team arrested two suspects for possession of methamphetamine for sale, two for marijuana cultivation and two for possession of marijuana for sale. Volunteers from the community continue to be an integral part of the Temecula Police Department's staff. Under the guidance of volunteer coordinator Gayle Gerrish, the Police Department's volunteer staff contributed 682 hours of service in December (up over 100 hours from last month). Volunteer assignments include computer data input, logistics support, special event assistance and telephone answering duties. The reserve officer program and mounted posse are additional valuable volunteer resources available to the police department. The police department utilizes reserve officers to assist with patrol, traffic enforcement, cdme prevention, off road vehicle enforcement and a variety of special functions. Reserve police officers worked a total of 179 hours during the month (109 hours were specifically spent on patrol in Temecula during the Christmas parade and Promenade Mall program). The Reserves were also used for an off-road motorcycle enforcement program held during the month. This program targeted violators in the area of Butterfield Stage Road that has caused several citizens to complain. No violators were observed during this program. The posse contributed 138 hours during the month for both the Christmas parade and the Promenade Mall holiday program. CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC,~ CITY MANAGER TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager DATE: January 23, 2001 SUBJECT: Economic Development Monthly Departmental Report Prepared by: Gloda Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator The following are the recent highlights for the Economic Development Department for the month of December 2000. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Leads & Inquiries In the month of December, the City received 12 inquiries. In the month of December, the Southwest Riverside County Alliance responded to 8 leads from the Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP) on behalf of the City of Temecula. The Alliance received 15 inquiries from Expansion Management magazine. Attached is a copy of their activity report that gives a detailed account of the leads. Film Leads & Hinhlinhts In the month of December, the Film Council received 12 phone calls regarding the Film Festival and 32 calls regarding locations information requests. Please refer to the attached Film Council report for additional activities. Media/Outreach Materials Staff reviewed and edited the Temecula text for the Temecula Valley Newcomer & Relocation Guide, which is being published by Hedtage Media. There will be 40,000 guides pdnted and will be ready for distribution in February. This publication will be given out at various Chamber of Commerce facilities in Riverside County, City of Temecula, local businesses, real estate offices and will also be an in-room publication at Embassy Suites in Temecula. Staff wrote an article for the Chamber of Commerce monthly newsletter titled "Temecula's Capital Improvement Projects Well Underway." The Children's Museum, Community Theater, Public Library, Sport's Complex, Trails and Bikeways Master Plan projects were highlighted. Website A meeting was held with staff on December 6~ to review the Economic Development section of the City's website. This section is expected to be on-line within the next month or so. Meetings On December 5~, staff met with the Career Fair Committee to discuss details of the upcoming Southwest Riverside County Career And Manufacturers' Fair. Par'mers include The Press- Enterprise, EDCSWRC, the Cities of Temecula, Murdeta and Lake Elsinore, the Alliance, Manufacturers' Council and Riverside County EDA. The career fair is scheduled for Apdl 21~ at Chaparral High School. Staff attended the Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance meeting on December 6~. A leads report was given. The Alliance will host a Commercial Broker Breakfast in February at Temecula Creek Inn. Each City currently hosts a broker meeting on a quarterly basis and the committee felt it would be nice to hold one meeting with all of the Cities participating along with the Alliance, The Alliance marketing focus will shift from the San Diego area to the Silicon Valley. Meetings have been held with consultant Ron Nater to discuss marketing Southwest Riverside County to the Silicon Valley. The industries targeted will include biomed, biotech and telecommunications. An interactive CD-Rom of Southwest County will be produced by the Alliance. Cutting Edge Marketing will be presenting their proposal at the January 10t~ Alliance meeting. Staff attended the EDCSWRC Business Relations Committee Meeting on December 7~. The members gave company contact reports. A list of local companies that are currently downsizing was distributed to the members. Prospective visits will be scheduled for some of these companies. Staff attended the Inland Empire Economic Forecast Breakfast on December 8~ in Riverside. Keynote speakers included Dr. Michael Bazdarich, who spoke on the topic "Economic Forecast." He indicated that he does not see a recession in 2001 for the Inland Empire Region. Mr. Max Neiman reported on the findings of the Inland Empire Annual Survey. The survey revealed that Inland Empire residents view Riverside County as a good place to live. In regards to the Temecula/Murdeta area, the survey indicated traffic and overpopulation as the strongest negative factors, incomes ara higher, and the typical commuter times are longer here. The survey summary was forwarded to all Councilmembers and Executive Staff to review and staff has a copy of the complete survey. On December 8~, staff attended the Temecula CONNECT Meeting. Mr. David Ostroff spoke on "ASP Partnerships the Key to Next Generation Success." There is a shift away from desktop applications to applications hosted on the Intemet. The name of this emerging market is called Application Service Provider or ASP. The Technology Financial Forum 2001 scheduled for February in San Diego was announced. UCSD will be presenting this forum. Staff attended the monthly membership meeting of The Southwest Riverside Council Manufacturers' Council (SWRCMC) on December 13a. Beginning January 2001, the SWRCMC will hold their meetings quarterly. Staff attended the EDCSWRC Board of Directors Meeting on December 14~. Mr. David Rosenthal was appointed Director-at-Large to represent the Southwest Riverside County Manufacturers' Council on the EDC Board. Business items discussed included a report on the Manufacturers' Career Fair, newsletter update, and the 2001 Golf Tournament. TOURISM Media/Outreach Materials, Staff made arrangements and set up an itinerary for San Francisco travel writer Ellen Sarbone. She visited Temecula dudng the last week of December. She is the editor/publisher of eTraveller.com: including eTraveller Magazine and The Professional Media Network - a new travel magazine and networking/marketing/information exchange site on the intemet as of first quarter 2001. She was a former columnist for Lifestyle Magazine, On The Go Magazine; Radio show producer/host of "Time to Travel" a weekly show on Media One Radio Network and KEST in San Francisco. Staff made the final revisions to the Temecula section on the Sign on San Diego website (San Diego Union Tribune website). Temecula's quarterly calendar of events for the months of January - March 2001 was prepared and sent out to the media in December. Meetings On December 7th, staff met with a Temecula resident regarding a popular week long festival that is held each year in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. He felt that this event would also do well in Temecula and will be submitting a proposal for staff to review. Staff also gave him some local non-profit groups that may be interested in putting on this event. Staff met with Group One Productions on December 11~ to discuss the development of a Tourism CD Rom for Temecula. This will be coordinated with the Chamber of Commerce Toudsm Council. On December 13~, staff met with Tina Perry, Regional Manager of Days Inn, and the new general manager and marketing person for the Days Inn hotel in Temecula. This hotel was formerly the Temecula Valley Inn. Staff briefed them on the City's marketing program, gave them copies of Temecula's marketing materials and discussed PR opportunities that they could benefit from through some of the outreach materials and advertising that the City handles. On December 21't, Vicki Barnes of the Chamber and staff attended a lunch meeting with Jennifer Nutter with the Inland Empire Tourism Council (IETC). She distributed copies of the 2001 Inland Empire Regional Visitors Guide, which Temecula's ad is displayed on the back cover. This is the first Regional Visitors Guide published by the IETC (see attached). Jennifer went over the restructuring of the Inland Empire Tourism Council with us. Staff prepared and provided the Chamber of Commerce Tourism Council with a list of toudsm goals for 2001 for the committee to review, The goals were shared at the December Chamber Tourism Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Activities Report Economic Development Coq~oration of Southwest Riverside County Activities Report Temecula Valley Film Council Activities Report Inland Empire Economic Partnership Activities Report Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance Activities Report 2001 Inland Empire Regional Visitors Guide Ad 27450 Ynez Road, Suite 124 Temecula, CA 92591 Phone (909) 676-5090 · Fax (909) 694-0201 January 11, 2001 Shawn Nelson, City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Shawn: Attached please fred the Monthly Activity Report provided as per our contract with the City of Temecula. This is the month of December at a glance: Business Inquiry Highlights: 8 businesses requested information on starting or relocating their business in Temecula. They received a business packet which includes information on demographics, relocation, housing, rentals, maps, organizations, etc. Committee Highlights: Tourism & Visitors Council: Ken Westmyer of The Comfort Inn will serve as this year's chairperson. The following Temecula promotions were carried out in the year 2000: attendance at three trade shows, "Tourism Big Business Presentation" reception, a fall FAM Tour, and a tourism booth at the Balloon and Wine Festival. The committee has established the goals and obi ectives for 2001 and is looking forward to continuing its relationship with the City to market Temecula as a tourist destination. Designation of volunteers to attend the upcoming Los Angeles Times Travel Show, March 3-4, 2001 at the Long Beach Convention Center are currently being formulated. The tourism committee's "Tourism Big Business Presentation" has plans to be updated and promoted to service clubs. Education Committee: The committee has reviewed its accomplishments for the year 2000. The projects camcd out for the year were successful such as producing career videos, the book drive, and the scholarship program. The group has established the goals and objectives for 2001 and is looking forward to continuing its relationship with the school district, representatives from the colleges, ROP, and the businesses leaders. The job fair and workshops that lead up to the job fair will be organized by the committee over the next few meetings. Kathy Beauchamp of JCPenney will be this year's chairperson for the committee. Ways & Means Committee: The final stages for the B2B Technology Expo on January 26, 2001 are taking place. The February 17, 2001 Installation Banquet and Award Ceremony committee continue to meet and strive to make this a wonderful event. 550 guests will be present at this event. 2001 Golf Tournament has been expanded to 27 holes and will host up to 216 golfers. The tournament is scheduled for May 4t~ at Temecula Creek Inn. State of the City Committee has started to meet. This event will be held on Thursday, March 29, 2001 at the Edwards Cinema at the Promenade Mall with 350 guests in attendance. Local Business Promotions Committee: Sprint PCS was selected as the business for January for the "Chamber Spotlight" program that Froggy 92.9 sponsors. Texas Lil's was the WUmer for the Mystery Shopper Program in January receiving a perfect score after the Mystery Shopper paid them a visit. January Businesses of the Month selected by the Tourism Committee were Comfort Inn and Peirson's Country Place. The Local Business Committee was dark in December. Government Action Committee: The Temecula and Murrieta Chamber of Commerce's Government Action committee will be meeting at the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce beginning January 2001. The Lake Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District will be next months guest speaker.' The topic will be identifying the best use of our region's water resources. The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water district has reconvened the Recycled Water Task Force. Greg Morrison will continue to Chair the cornnuttee for year 2001. Membership Committee: Chamber staffand Ambassadors attended 11 Ribbon Cuttings the month of December. A successful membership appreciation night was held at Temecula Creek Inn on December 13th. Membership Committee is implementing a new program referred to as Round-Table Meeting. The objective is to educate members with solutions to common problems faced in the day-to-day operation of their business. Members of the specific topic will be invited to attend and provide informative information. Meetings will be the first Friday of the month starting February 2, 2001. A new format has been developed for the Ambassador Networking Breakfast. A focus has been placed on networking for business members and showcasing two businesses each month. Tourism Highlights (Bulk brochure distribution) · 150 Visitor Guides to the Pala Mesa Resort for distribution to guests. · 150 Winery Brochures to Tucalota Springs RV Park for distribution to guests. · I00 Temecula Brochures, 100 Visitor Guides and 100 Winery Brochures to Embassy Suites Hotel for distribution to guests. · 100 Winery Brochures to Outdoor Resorts for distribution to guests. · 60 Winery Brochures, 40 Visitor Guides and 30 City Maps for distribution at TVCC's Weekend Visitor Center. · 50 Temecula Brochures and 50 Winery Brochures to Warner springs Ranch for distribution to visitors. · 40 Visitor Guides to the Lawrence Welk Resort for distribution to guests. · 30 Winery Brochures to Temeku Hills for distribution to clients. * Marketing Highlights: * In response to the ad placed in the 2000 San Diego North Official Visitors Guide, 25 inquiries were requested and filled by Chamber staff. · Twelve of Temecula's major event applications were submitted by Chamber staff to be placed in the Califomia Celebrations 2001 publication. The 48-page publication, is California's official source of events and features more than 1,100 annual celebrations. We are proud to report all twelve events were accepted and placed in the California Celebrations 2001 ! A copy is enclosed in your packet. · Chamber staff provided Temecula's Calendar of Events 2001 to be placed in the Press-Enterprise Temecula Valley Community Calendar 2001. A calendar is enclosed in your packet. · Chamber staff has formulated a 55+ Recourse Guide featuring senior activities, facilities, housing, rental, mobile home parks etc. The guide will be provided upon request by phone or to Chamber walk-ins. Activity Report: · Total Tourism calls were 1,478 in December. · Total Phone calls were 2,919 in December. · Total Walk-ins were up 25.34 percent in December. · Mailings were up 31.55 percent in December. · E-mail requests were up 20.95 percent in December. Also attached are the meeting minutes for the Tourism and Visitors Council, Education, Ways & Means, Membership Committee, Governmerlt Actions, California Celebration 2001, Press-Enterprise Temecula Valley Community Calendar 200 land a January issue of Temecula Today! If you have any questions regarding this information, please feel free to call me. Thank you. van ~ PresidenffCEO CC; Mayor Jeff Comerchero Mayor Pro Ron Roberts Councilman Jeff Stone Councilman Sam Pratt Councilman Mike Naggar Shawn Nelson, City Manager Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager Gary Thomhill, Deputy City Manager Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator TVCC Board of Directors TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT FOR DECEMBER, 2000 PHONE CALLS TOURISM TOURISM REFERRALS Calendar of Events Special Events General Information TOTAL TOURISM CALLS Chamber Vis. Center This Month This Month 266 119 150 943 1,478 Total Year-To-Date 4,334 1,914 3,543 14,316 24,107 RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS CHAMBER MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL PHONE CALLS * CHAMBER REFERRALS 130 50 1,099 162 2,919 N/A 1826 750 18,640 2,468 47,801 N/A WALK-INS TOURISM CALENDAR OF EVENTS SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL INFORMATION RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS CHAMBER MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL WALK-INS 195 115 4O 839 170 74 815 182' 2,430 169 0 0 151 0 0 0 0 32O 4,412 1743 825 11,147 2,118 1156 10,211 2,029 33,641 MAILINGS TOURISM RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS TOTAL MAILINGS 63 84 74 221 1358 1119 1018 3,495 E-MAIL TOURISM RELOCATION MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL E-MAIL WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS 29 19 79 127 N/A 413 419 979 1,811 N/A GRAND TOTALS PHONE CALLS WALK-INS MAILINGS E-MAIL THIS MONTH 2,919 2,750 210 127 YEAR-TO-DATE 47,801 33,641 3,495 1,811 CHAMBER REFERRALS N/A 8,614 ANNUAL VOLUME COMPARISONS Chamber Chamber December, 1999 December, 2000 Percentage Increase PHONE CALLS TOURISM Tourism Referrals 323 266 -17.65 Calendar of Events 129 119 -7.75 Special Events 261 150 -42.53 General Information 1,001 943 -5.79 TOTAL TOURISM CALLS 1,714 1,478 -13.77 RELOCATION 108 130 20.37 DEMOGRAPHICS 42 50 19.05 CHAMBER 1,389 1,099 -20.88 MISCELLANEOUS 94 162 72.34 TOTAL PHONE CALLS 3,347 2,919 -12.79 CHAMBER REFERRALS N/A N/A N/A WALK-INS TOURISM 175 195 11.43 CALENDAR OF EVENTS 111 115 3.60 SPECIAL EVENTS 33 40 21.21 GENERAL INFORMATION 662 839 26.74 RELOCATION 131 170 29.77 DEMOGRAPHICS 101 74 -26.73 CHAMBER 696 815 17.10 MISCELLANEOUS 94 182 93.62 VISITOR CENTER WALK-INS 191' 320 67.54 TOTAL WALK-INS 2,194 2,750 25.34 MAILINGS TOURISM 64 63 -1.56 RELOCATION 53 84 58.49 DEMOGRAPHICS 51 74 45.10 TOTAL MAILINGS 168 221 31.55 E-MAIL TOURISM 27 29 7.41 RELOCATION 29 19 -34.48 MISCELLANEOUS 49 79 61.22 TOTAL E-MAIL 105 127 20.95 * Chamber referrals reflects faxes, walk-ins and phone calls Soutlnvest Riverside County__l I January 9, 2001 Jim O'Grady City of Temecula PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 RE: Activity Summary - December 2000 Activities of the EDC for the month of December were as follows: Business Development Staffresponded to the following two business development inquiries for the month of Deeember: A referral from Alice Sullivan for Doug Huegan of ACME Auto Headlining Company in Long Beach, CA, who requested an information packet of Southwest Riverside County demographics and commercial property availability. ACME Headlining Company makes automobile soft tops for convertibles and other auto accessories. Mr. Huegan is interested in relocating his business of 40 years to the area. An detailed information package was mailed to him on December 22. A meeting with Tina Perry of Cendant Corporation in Persipany, NJ. Cendant is a mega corporation on the New York Stock Exchange that owns an significant portion of the hospitality industry such as Days Inn, Knights Inn, Good Nite Inn (and other hotels), Hertz Car Rentals, Resort Condominium International (RCI - the largest worldwide timeshare exchange and reservations company), as well as Century 21 Real Estate, Coldwell Banker and Stewart Title. Days Inn Hotel recently purchased the Temecula Valley Inn located on Jefferson Avenue. They are very well-known for their Entertainment Books distributed throughout counties nationwide that offer numerous retail discounts. Ms. Perry was looking over the Southwest Riverside County region to make recommendations for future hotel projects. Staff provided demographics for the Cities of Lake Elsinore, Murfieta and Temecula, and workforce and employer information. Marketing Outreach Staff attended the following meetings/events: · December 7, 2000 - Murrieta Chamber of Commerce Mixer - Staff attended the Murrieta Mixer at Paradise Chevrolet. · December 8, 2000 - Inland Empire Economic Forecast Breakfast - Staff attended the seventh annual Inland Empire Economic Forecast Breakfast in Riverside. Keynote speakers included Drs. Michael Bazdarich, Steven Angle, and Max Neiman of UC Riverside and Drs. Peter Skerry and John Pittney of Claremont McKenna and The Rose Institute. The meeting topic was "A Cosmic Year of Change". · December 12, 2000 - California Bank & Trust Holiday Party - Staff attended the annual holiday party hosted by California Bank & Trust in Temecula. Jim O'G-rady City of Temecula Activity Summary - December 2000 Page 2 of 3 December 13, 2000 - Lake Elsinore Valley Connections EDC Lunch - Staff attended the quarterly luncheon hosted by Lake Elsinore Chamber/Connections EDC at the Cultural Center in Lake Elsinore. State Assemblyman Dennis Hollingsworth discussed the business climate in the 66th District and his goals as new representative in Sacramento. Business Relations December 7, 2000 - Staff attended the EDC Business Relations Committee Meeting. (See meeting minutes for details.) Administration/Organization · December 5, 2000 - Manufacturers' Career Fair Meeting - Staff coordinated a meeting with the Career Fair Committee to discuss details of the upcoming Southwest Riverside County Career and Manufacturers' Fair. Partners include The Press-Enterprise, Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County, the Cities of Lake Elsinore, Murdeta and Temecula, Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance, Southwest Riverside County Manufacturers' Council, and Riverside County EDA. The career fair is scheduled for April 21, 2001 at Chapparal High School in Temecula. · December 5, 2000 - Workforce Development Center Safety Team Meeting - Staff is a team member for the Temecula WDC Safety Team. Development of a standard safety manual that would include policies and protocol for all emergencies were discussed. · December 5, 2000 - Workforce Development Center All-Staff Meeting was held at the Temecula Center. Topics included mutual issues and discussions relative to each agency located in the Center. · December 6, 2000 - SWRC Economic Alliance Meeting - Staff met with Alliance partners. Discussions included regional marketing strategies. The EDC will assist the Alliance in obtaining needed information from local businesses in biomedical, biotech, telecommunications and medical industries. The EDC Business Relations Committee will call on the targeted companies to help increase the Alliance's marketing success in the Silicon Valley and other areas. December 14, 2000 - EDC Board of Directors Meeting held in the Workforee Development Center in Temecula. (See meeting minutes for details.) · December 5 - 20, 2000 - Workforce Development Center Giving Committee - Staff organized and chaired the Centers' Giving Committee. Agencies within the Center were asked to participate the Angel Tree Project to sponsor disadvantaged families in the community during the Holiday Season. Staff collected over 25 toys and clothing items for 6 young children. Items were delivered to Stadium Pizza Angel Tree. · During the month of December, staff managed the daily operations of the EDC office, coordinated details for the quarterly luncheon scheduled for February 15, and registered for three grant-writing and marketing classes at UC Riverside Extension in Riverside. Classes begin January 11 through late March. Jim O'Grady City of Temecula Activity Summary - December 2000 Page 3 of 3 This concludes the activity summary for December 2000. Should you have questions or need further detail, please call me at 600-6064. Sincerely, Diane Sessions Administrator EDC of Southwest Riverside County ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF DIRECTORS GENERAL MEETING Thursday, December 14, 2000 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA BOARD MEMBERS Marlene Best, City of Lake Elsinore Ron Bradley, Temecula CONNECT Dennis Frank, UCR Extension Bonnie Renz-Hanna, Diversified, The Staffing Solution Ron Holliday, City of Murrieta Keith Johnson, Mission Oaks National Bank Dick Kurtz, CDM Group, Inc. Michael Lewin, Mirau, Edward, Cannon, Harter & Lewin Rob Moran, Riverside County EDA Jim O'Grady, City of Temecula Gary Youmans, Community National Bank EDC STAFF ghonda Blacharski Diane Sessions MEMBERS AND GUESTS CALL TO ORDER · President Gary Youmans called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. MINUTES · Motion was made by David Phares, seconded by Ron Holliday and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the November 16, 2000 Board of Directors Meeting as amended by striking "the proposed Date Street access would not be built; and completion of the California Oaks Road interchange was in process." under Ci~ q£ Murrieta Update, and replacing with "the Interchange Project Study Report was almost complete and would be submitted to Caltrans soon." FINANCIAL REPORT · The Board reviewed the November 30, 2000 Financial Report that showed a total monthly income of $5,794.84, total expenses of $8,026.15, with total cash-in-bank of $98,053.12. The Board discussed revenue items under Quarterly Luncheons and Miscellaneous Income, and expense items under Personnel Services, and Website. Motion was made by Ron Holliday, seconded by Jim O'Grady and carded unanimously to approve the November 30, 2000 Financial Report as presented. NEW BUSINESSS · Appoint Director-at-Large to Represent the Southwest Riverside County Manufacturers' Council: Gary Youmans reported that Lon Brusegard was no longer active with the Manufacturers' Council. He recommended the appointment of David Rosenthal as the Council's representative on the EDC Board. Motion was made by Ron Bradley, seconded by Kick Kurtz and carried unanimously to appoint David Rosenthal as Director-at-Large to represent the SWRC Manufacturers' Council. Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting - December 14, 2000 Minutes - Page 2 of 3 North County EDC: Gary Youmans reported he was pleased that Bob Campbell and Mary Regan of North County Economic Development Committee 0NCEDC) attended the quarterly luncheon. He recommended the Board continue to foster a working relationship with North County EDC. Mr. Youmans stated he hoped to set up a meeting in January with NCEDC to discuss mutual issues. CONTINUING BUSINESS · Manufacturers' Career Fair: Diane Sessions reported the Southwest Riverside County Career Fair would be on Saturday, April 21 at Chaparral High School from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. The fair would include a separate manufacturers' pavilion that would host 45-50 exhibitors. The next committee meeting would be on January 16, 2001 at 10:30 a.m. Ms. Sessions invited board members to attend the meeting. · Newsletter Update: Diane Sessions reported the newsletter was not yet completed. The new deadline would be in January 2001. · 2001 Golf Tournament: Gary Youmans announced the golf tournament would be Monday, June 11, 2001 at Temecula Creek Inn.. · Board Meeting Schedule: Gary Youmans reminded the Board that meetings would take place on the fourth Thursday of each month beginning January 2001. OPEN DISCUSSION · EDC Administrative Update: Diane Sessions reported she had linked the EDC website to various economic development sites and had begun searching for grant and funding opportunities. Ms. Sessions further reported the article in the Valley Business Journal, submitted by the City of Temecula, mentioned the EDC. The Board agreed the EDC should regularly submit articles to the Valley Business Journal. · City, County and Chamber Updates: C/ty of Lake EIsinore - Marlene Best reported the City Council appointed Bob Schiffner as Mayor on Tuesday, December 12; the Redevelopment Agency approved a seven year agreement to manage Diamond Stadium; new management changes were in process at the Lake Elsinore Prime Outlet Center and several new stores would join the Center; the City Council joined the City of Mun-ieta in their concerns relative to the County's open-space habitat proposal, and Ms. Best asked the EDC to stay aware of the issues; the next Council meeting to discuss the habitat proposal was on December 26; the Lake Elsinore Chamber of Commerce EDC luncheon was scheduled today at 11:30 a.m. at the Lake Elsinore Cultural Center. C/fy ofMurrieta - Ron Holliday reported the Council had concerns regarding the County's habitat proposal due to the amount of designated open space that would affect Murrieta's future tax base; the widening of Jefferson Avenue would be delayed due to utility issues. City of Temecula - Jim O'Grady reported the City Council approved the revised version of the Temecula Ridge Apartments project; a draft slow-growth plan that limits the number of building permits issued would be reviewed by the Council in the future; the Planning Commission approved building plans for the Wolf Creek project, and Roripaugh, Lennar, and other projects were also working through the Planning Commission; the Council approved the final map for Scotts, with an anticipated opening date of July 2001; a '~qhat's New" section would be added to the City's website; a grant opportunity was available through the State Department of Housing and Community Development under the Jobs-Housing Balance Improvement Program, which could be used to fund a economic development project. Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting - December 14, 2000 Minutes - Page 3 of 3 · County of Riverside EDA - Rob Moran reported the Board of Supervisors were focused on the habitat issues relative to the Integrated Plan; any requests for county redistricting should be submitted immediately; residential expansion in the French Valley region was still under contention, although the County agreed not to restrict the current industrial zones. Murdeta Chamber of Commerce - Ron Holliday reported the Chamber may adopt a resolution to support county redistricting so the City was represented by only one Supervisor. Mr. Holliday asked the Board for their support. Gary Youmans suggested the Board discuss the issues further after the Chamber board meets in January. Rob Moran suggested that a meeting should have some urgency since the Government of Affairs Committee would also meet in January to discuss the same. ' Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce - Bonnie Hanna reported the election of officers would be held next week. gWRC Economic Alliance - Rob Moran reported that a consultant would be hired to help market Southwest Riverside County in the Silicon Valley. · SWRC Manufacturers' Conncii - Diane Sessions reported the Manufacturers' Council would no longer hold monthly workshops, but would hold them quarterly in 2001. · EDC Business Relations Committee Update - Michael Lewin reported that visits to local businesses were on track. He noted the Economic Alliance expressed an interest in working with the Committee to learn more specific information about the region's medical, biomedical, biochemistry, and telecommunication businesses. Other Updates: Diane Sessions reported a visit with a marketing person employed by Cendant Corporation. Cendant owns the Days Inn Hotel chain, which just purchased Temecula Valley Inn. They were researching the region to possibly build a new hotel. ADJOURNMENT · The Board adjourned the meeting at 1 O: 10 a.m. Respectively submitted by: Rhonda Blacharski Phil Oberhansley Recording Secretary Board Secretary ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BUSINESS RELATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, December 7, 2000 o 9:00 a.m. Workforee Development Center, Executive Board Room 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA Committee Members Present: Dennis Frank, UCR Extension Stevie Hirdler, SWRC Economic Alliance Keith Johnson, Mission Oaks National Bank Dick Kurtz, CDM Group, Inc. Michael Lewin, Miran, Edwards, Cannon, Harter & Lewin Loft Moss, City Of Murrieta David Rosenthal, SWRC Manufacturers' Council Alice Sullivan, Temecula Valley Chamber Of Commerce Judy White, US Bank Grant Yates, City of Temecula Gary Youman~, Community National Bank Diane Sessions Rhonda Blacharski Call To Order · Committee Chaff Michael Lewin called the meeting to order at 9:03 a.m. Welcome · Michael Lewin welcomed back Judy White of US Bank. Follow-up Action Reports Nuphoton Technology - Dennis Frank provided information on hiring and training of technicians. Company Contact Reports · Builder's Showcase - Grant Yates reported a phone conversation with Jack Domes. The company does interior design work and has relocated to Corona. Thek main customer base is in the Orange County area. · Waterfall Oasis - Lori Moss reported a visit on November 2, 2000. The company manufactures landscape waterfalls. They have been in business since 1989 and relocated to Murrieta in 1999. They were self-ranked as a medium-size company with 20 employees. The company has three permanent showrooms located in Atlanta and Dallas. The owner reported a 40% increase in sales this year. · Pool & Electric - Lori Moss reported a visit on November 2, 2000. The company is a pool equipment wholesaler and self-ranked small, with 6 employees. Ms. Moss reported they are building a warehouse in Ontario and would like to expand. The owners requested assistance with landscape/sprinkler problems. Ms. Moss referred them to the property owners. · Cryoquip - Loft Moss reported a phone interview with Frank Grillo, vice-president and general manager, on December 5, 2000. The company engineers and manufacturers heat transfer equipment for the cryogenic industry. They have been in operation since 1972 and in Murrieta since 1989. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - December 7, 2000 Page 2 of 3 They are self-ranked as a large company with a total of 160 employees. There are 80 employees locally. The company reported 65% of their employees live in TemeculaAVlurdeta. Ms. Moss reported they are happy doing business in Southwest Riverside County. North Star Tools, Inc. - Alice Sullivan reported a telephone interview with owner John Salzbrunn on November 27, 2000. The company is self-ranked as small with 12 employees, and has been in operation for 13 years. They relocated fi.om Orange County to Temecula 4 years ago. Ms Sullivan reported the company would like to expand in their current location and she would provide information to them. · Southwest Cycles - Alice Sullivan reported a telephone conversation with the owner, Allan Meadows. There were no issues and Mr. Meadows appreciated the call. No survey was done. · Prime EDM - Alice Sullivan reported a telephone conversation with the owner, Joel Alvarenga. Prime EDM is a small machine and wire-computer control company that has been in operation for 2 years. The company has been in Temeeula for 4 months. Mr. Alvarenga appreciated the call and had no issues at this time. · Apollo Tool - Keith Johnson reported a phone survey on December 5, 2000. The company does tooling for injection molders and has been in business for 22 years. They relocated to Temecula fi.om Arcadia 2 years ago. The company is self-ranked small with 2 employees. The company has no plans to expand at this time. · Canada's Finest Foods - Keith reported a phone survey on December 5, 2000. The company is a food distributor to specialty shops. They are self-ranked small with 5 employees. They plan to expand locally in about two years. The owner is happy living here and had no issues at this time. Goal Progress Report Michael Lewin thanked Keith Johnson, Lori Moss and Grant Yates for their successful visits and phone interviews. He announced year to date goal results as follows: YTD .VISIT PHONE POINTS Actual 11 11 44 Goal 27 33 114 Variance -16 -22 -70 New Committee Assignments · No binders or visits were assigned for December due to the holidays. Assignments and binder distributions to resume at the January 4, 2001 meeting. EDC/Citv/Count~ News and Information · EDC Board Update - Diane Sessions handed out a list of downs[zed companies that could make prospective visits. The Committee agreed that not all the companies would benefit fi.om a visit due to corporate restructuring. Dennis Frank and David Rosenthal would visit Magnacomp. Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - December 7, 2000 Page 3 of 3 · Ms. Sessions reported the quarterly luncheon went very well. The next quarterly luncheon topic would address higher education, with guest speakers fi.om Mt. San Jacinto College, Cai State University San Marcos and UC Riverside. City of Temeeula - Grant Yates reported the Wolf Creek project was approved. The Council would meet on December 12, 2000 to vote on the Temecula Ridge Apartments project. City of Lake Elsinore - No report available. City of Murrieta - No report available. Murrieta Valley Chamber of Commerce - No report available. Temeeula Valley Chamber of Commerce - No report available. Riverside County EDA - No report available. SWRC Economic Alliance - Stevie Hirdler reported that a consultant might be hired to help effectively market Southwest Riverside County to the Silicon Valley. The Economic Alliance would like the EDC to focus their visits on biomed, telecOmmunications, and biotech industries. Ms. Hirdler to provide a list to the committee of local companies within the target range. · SWRC Manufacturers' Council - David Rosenthal reported the Career Fair facilitated by The Press-Enterprise would be on April 21, 2001 at Chaparral High School. A separate manufactures' pavilion will host 45-50 exhibitors. The Career Fair Committee is currently looking for major sponsors. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m. TEMECULA VALLEY FILM COUNCIL ACTIVITIES REPORT December 2000 Members of the Temecula Valley Film Council are Maggi Allen, President; Sunny Thomas, Vice-President; Steve Phelps, Secretary/Treasurer; Sheri Davis, Stacy Sievek, Judi Staats, Eve Craig, Joe Hohenberger, Patty Slaton and Ellen Watkins The Business of the Film Council · This month we received 92 phone calls; 12 - Film Festival, 32- locations information requests, 48 - council business. · The TVFC web site. www.temeculafilm.org has received 625 "hits" since it opened on September 4, 2000. Photo and link updates are a continuous process. Links to local events and ballooning companies will be added in January. · Final publication of the Temecula Valley Locations Production Guide will be in February following the "Great Temecula Shoot Out". We are working with Gale Simmons of The Art Department. · Responses to TVFC ad fliers for the Production Guide and location suggestions in the Chamber's Magazine, "Temecula Today" are being processed and turning into ads and location photos. We are in the process of contacting individuals and businesses. · Plans are still under way for the "Great Temecula Shootout" to begin February 17 concluding February 24. We will be giving out disposable cameras to locals to take pictures of the special places they know of in the Temecula Valley for a week. Local response has been very favorable. New photos will be turned into Temecula Postcards and later an 18 month calendar of "Temecula Through Our Eyes". · TVFC is participating in AFCI "Locations 2001" which is being held February 23-25 in the LA Convention Center. We will being showing local photos and have invited local businesses to participate with us. · Temecula Valley Film "Festival 2001" is scheduled for September 13-16. Sponsorship procurement is under way. TVFC and TVIFF shared an ad in the Press Enterprise 2001 Calendar for the Month of September. Filming in Temecula We received a referral from Dan Glick of Sunrise Balloons for aerial filming to be done in February or March. We will be working closely to provide all services needed. This will include 2 nights stay for a crew of up to 35. · Responding to a City CouncilMeeting request by Councilman Sam Pratt for help in providing television coverage for Temecula Students of the Month presentations, TVFC contacted Sally Myers for details of their needs. She is providing us with a video copy of what is shown in Murrieta. We are arranging to have the presentations video taped and are in contact with Adelphia Cable to work out television airing time. · "Mountain Top" has received a script which is currently being researched for Temecula Valley production locations. TVFC is working closely to provided all the needed resources. We will continue to support the daily management of filmmaker's requests, and encourage the growing awareness of the industry in this community. It is our goal to generate a higher awareness of the Temecula Area within the context of filmmaking activities, and to present the opportunities and benefits of this production to local merchants and businesses. Respectfully, Maggi Allen President, TVFC For Period: January, 2000 to December, 2000 I December I Cumulative I CG~ents 1. Corporate · Public Speaking Engagements 4 59 · Community Outreach 22 190 · Membership Events 13 Legislative Reception, Technology Symposium, Vlembership Workshop · Public Policy Events 1 · Committee Meetings 7 · Potential Member Meetings 55 160 · Member Visits/Calls 5 98 · Potential Member Letters & Calls 42 535 · New Members 26 Stirling Prop, SCA Logistics Airport · Corporate Marketing 3 · Mailings 1 · Press Releases 2 · Tradeshows 7 Comdex, IDRC · Print Advertising Placements 13 · Other 3 Sacto Legis. Tdp/ 9 meetings; CA Speedway; Valley Group (legis. affairs) 2. Foundation · Grants 2 · Activities 2 3. Regional Marketing · Direct Mail 4 · Pdnt Advertising Placements 18 · TradeshowsFrrade Associations 5/3 · Press Releases 22 · Professional Articles 16 · Media Relations 9 Press Tdp · Television 1 4 CNBC, KVCR · Other 3 DSLTechnology, Education Electronic Town Hall 4. Economic Development · Prospect Missions 1 Frankfurt, Germany · Site Selector Outreach 130 521 · Foreign Attraction Activities 393 Letters & CD's sent · Leads/Sources of Leads 10 87 19-CATCA; 18-Site Selector, 8-Member Broker; 6- Tradeshow; 11-Magazines; 15-Phone Inquiry; 10-Other · Pros@ectsfTradeshows 424 · Site Tours 1 12 ~ · Inquiries 10 1,625 Page 1 of 3 For Period: January, 2000 to December, 2000 I December I Cumulative I Comments 4. Economic Development (cont'd) · Attractions 6 · Jobs Created 1,520 *REVISED · Retentions 2 7 Ticomp; Amedcan Maid · Jobs Retained 205 595 · Financial Investment $10,856,000 $123,987,015' *REVISED · Relocation/Expansion Assists 4 4 · BioTectVHighTech · Marketing (Direct Mail) 7 · Inquiries 11 · Leads 1 Licensing Request (UCR) 5. Education/I/Vorkforce Development · School Enrichment Stnd. Awards 9 $129,958 awarded to 9 Schools · "Caltpoint" 800 line: · Employees Requested 118 · Training Requests 90 · Business Referral Requests 5 · Other 3 Training Seminar; CSI Project; Sponsored speaker Robert Viscos 6. SBDC · Jobs Created/Jobs Retained 13/3 197/129 · Total Economiclmpact- $2,212,222 $19,453,758 SBDC and Export actions combined · Client Activity 96 2,223 · Client Hours 908.71 10,356.87 · Training Events 6 132 · Training Hours 72 7,885 · Training Attendees 64 2,255 · Inland Empire Trade: · Export Actions I 13 · Finandal ImpactI $5,079,162 7. Film Commission · Industry Outreach 1 18 · Request for Locations 287 2,380 · Permits: San Bemardino/Riverside 15/6 115/63 · Permits: BLM/US Forest Svc. 11 158/2 · Production Days 239 2,096 · Filming Credits 2 3 X-Files; Redline; Pdncess & The Marine · Economic Impact** $6,361,000 $53,629,520 **Preliminary Numbers · FILMING ACTIVITY: · Features 5 59 · Television 5 43 · Commercials 10 286 · Stills 56 448 · Music Videos 3 33 · Student Films 1 32 · Documentary/Indus. Videos 6 172 · Total Filming Activity** 62 1,073 ** Preliminary Numbers Page 2 of 3 For Period: January, 2000 to December, 2000 I December ICumulative I Comments Tourism Council · Industry Outreach 6 · Marketing Activity · Tradeshows 7 · Promotional Materials 3 New regional brochure Mailed to area Chambers of · Mailings · Travel Plan Guide 1,307 Commeme and Cities · IE Rack Brochures 1 1 50 · Global Mural Conference 20 · Weekend in Country mailing · Ads § CA Tourism Publications · Member Visits 14 · Leads 1,673 Visitor Guide; Travel Planning Guide · New Member Prospects 1 · New Members 1 · Toudsm Events 6 Page 3 of 3 TO: ECONOMIC ALLIANCE Marlene Best Assistant City Manager City of Lake Elsinore Jim O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula Lori Moss Assistant City Manager City of Murfieta FROM: Stevie Hirdler Marketing Coordinator DATE: SUBJECT: January 11, 2001 SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY MONTHLY MARKETING UPDATE Dear Partners: Please consider this an update on the marketing activities for the Alliance as required in the Southwest Riverside County Marketing for Business Attraction Agreement. Leads: As a result of a past ad placement with Expansion Management magazine in the fall, we have had 15 new leads. We also received a lead from an area broker. He has an interested golf manufacturer from San Diego who will be coming to tour the region on January 18th. I will provide an update after that meeting. Twenty-eight phone calls and/or attempts were made to follow-up on recent leads. IEEP As previously discussed, I have contacted IEEP and gathered the information and rates for advertising in Forbes magazine. The rates for a four-color ad are as follows: 1/2 page ad $27,780 1/3 page ad $17,890 1/3 page profile unit $15,329 1/2 page horizontal spread $51,320 I spoke with the representative in charge of this special advertisement opportunity and he stated that with the 113 page profile unit, Forbes would handle the layout of the ad, free of charge. All of this is subject to our approval before pdnt. He also stated that IEEP and Forbes make every attempt to place the ad next to text wdtten about your particular organization. It was mentioned that IEEP incorporates the participating agencies in their stodes. IEEP leads responded to for the months of December are as follows: # 378,379,334,380,382,383,384,385,386, and 387 Note: If a site wasn't available that met the specific requirements mentioned, a basic package was sent. Beginning in February, each paKner will receive the IEEP lead information in the regular lead packet format. Advertising After discussion during the December Alliance meeting, it was agreed that Phase II marketing efforts will focus on Southern California, described as San Diego, Los Angeles, Orange, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties. It was also agreed that an in-depth labor force study with an emphasis on the commuters is needed, as well as a study of the Biotech, Biomed and telecommunications companies, and their suppliers that are already located in our region. Each partner has been provided with a copy of the Labor Force Study RFP and it has been requested that any recommended changes be forwarded to me by Friday, January 19t~. Any additional advertising has been put on hold until the partners could review the expenses to date and the recommend budget with project allocations for the unused Alliance marketing budget. Consulting As mentioned in the December update, Jim, Sarah, and I met with Ron Nater, and discussed the idea of retaining Mr. Nater as a consultant to assist the Alliance with establishing Venture Capital in SWRC. This item will be discussed again at a future meeting, once each partner has had the opportunity to review the budget and recommended allocations of unused monies. CD-ROM Cutting Edge Marketing provided the partners with a presentation of their CD-ROM proposal. The cities of Temecula and Murrieta as well as the County agreed to move forward and execute a contract. Once confirmation that the City of Lake Elsinore is in agreement with this decision, I will email each partner and we will move forward. Trade Shows On behalf of the Alliance, I recently attended the MD & M trade show in Anaheim, CA. I will provide each partner with the lead information once it is received from IEEP. As of this date, the Alliance has committed to the following trade shows, which I will attend: · Nepcon West, February 27- March 1, Anaheim · Westec 2001, March 26-29, Los Angeles · BIO 2001, June 25-27, San Diego Direct Mail The postcard for the direct mail campaign will be mailed out this month. This postcard will be mailed to executives and decision makers in the medical device and medical manufacturing fields. Broker Breakfast It was discussed and agreed upon that the Alliance will host a "Broker Breakfast~. The date for this breakfast is February 14, from 8:30 am - 9:30 am. A postcard will be mailed out as a special invitation. The three cities, the County and the Alliance will provide an update as well as share our goals and how we, the Alliance and the brokers, can all work together in our business attraction efforts. On an ongoing basis I attend the following meetings: Manufacturer's Council Business Relations Committee EDC IEEP Partner meetings Economic Development meetings concerning the Southwest Riverside County region. If you need any additional information or have any questions, please contact me at (909) 600-6066. Sincerely, Stevie Hirdler Marketing Coordinator Copy: Brad Hudson Robin Zimpfer Sarah Mundy Robert Moran Teresa Gallavan Escape To Adventure Escape To Year Round Outdoor Activities a ecreation;: the Temecula's location, just 80 miles sot~th of Los Angele~ and 40 miles~' north of San Diego, makes it the perfect place to escape, whether it's for just a day or an extended vacation. Temecula offers: · wine tasting at Temecula's 15 merles · Shopping and dining in historic Old Town (over 640 antique dealers) · Tours and family programs at the Temecula Valley Museum · Unliraited shopping opportunities · Breathtaking hot air balloon adventures over lush vineyards · Seven championship golf comes in the Temecula Valley · Horseback riding, hiking, fishing, boating and camping · Special events every month of the year including: Temecula Rod Run Old Town Western Days Arts in the Country Festival/Design House Temecula Valley Wine Auction Great Temecula Tractor Race Temecula Balloon &.Wine Festival Wineries Spring Passport Tasting Temecula Valley Int'l Film Festival Harvest Barrel Tasting Weekly Old Town Farmers' Market ~).ooh Oesert - Mountain Lakes Region - Valley Areas . Low oesert" '[he In/,~r~d _E~mPi.r~. __i Temp.: Average High 64 - Average Low 36 Trout Season (Inland Empire Regional Parks) Martin Luther King Celebration (UC Riverside) APRIL Temp.: Average High 75° - Average Low 40° Renaissance Pleasure Faire (San Bernardino) Orange Blossom Festival (Riverside) Apple Blossom Festival (Oak Glen) Ramona Pageant Old Town Western Days (Temecula) Wineries Spring Passport Tasting (Temecala) JuLY Temp.: Average High 97° - Average Low 63° Fireworks Shows (Throughout Inland Empire) Redlands Bowl Smnmer Evening Concerts & Theater Low Rider Car Show (San Beroardino) Redlands Chili Cook-Off & Fire Master OCTOBER Temp.: Average High 83° - Average Low 47° Lake Perris Farmers Fair & Expo Banning Stagecoach Days CART FedEx Marlboro 500 (rontaan) Wine, Food &Jaz~ Show (San Bernardino) Great Temecula Tractor Race FEBRUARY Temp.: Average High 67° - Average Low 39° Riverside Dickens Festival Black History Parade (San ~rnardino) Low Rider Car Show (San Beruardino) Temecala Rod Run Wineries Winter Barrel Tasting (Temecaia) MAY Temp.: Average High 76° - Average Low 42° Renaissance Pleasure Faire (San Bernacdino) Ramona Pageant (Hemet) National Orange Show(San Bernard/no) San Bernardino County Fair (Victorville) California 500 (Fontana) Frontier Days Rodeo (Temecula) Arts in the Countr AUGUST Temp.: Average High 97° - Average Low 63° Shakespeare on the Square (San Bernardino) Red/ands Bowl Sununer Evening Concerts & Theater Glen Helen Blockbuster Pavilion: Live Concerts Temecula Valley Wine Auction NOVEMBER Temp.: Average High 74° - Average Low 40° Harvest Fair (San Bernard/no) Historical Frontier Encampment (Oak Glen) Christmas Tree Lighting (San Bernard/no) Toys for Tots Christmas Car Cruise (San Bernardino) Harvest Barrel Tasting (Temecula) Forest of Hope (Riverside) Temp.: Average High 71° - Average Low 39° Ramona Country Carvers Festival (San Jacinto) Red/ands Annual Bicycle Classic Crnisin' Main Street Car Show Series Kick-Off (San Bernard/no) Soap Box Derby Rally (San Bernard/no) Temp.: Average High 85° - Average Low 50° Cherry Festival (Beaumont) Renaissance Pleasure Fair (San Bernard/no) Main Street Music Festival (San Bernard/no) Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival SEPTEMBER Temp,: Average High 94° - Average Low 60° LoS Angeles County Fair (Pomona) Route 66 RendezvousTM (San Bernardino) Stagecoach Days (Banning) Oak GIea Apple Harvest Annual Baroque Festival (Yucaipa) Temecula International Film Festival Temecula Road Run Revisited DECEMBER Temp.: Average High 64° - Average Low 36° Santa's Electric Light Parade (Temecaia) Crafts Fair & Talent Show (San Bernardino) Old Fashioned Christmas in Old Town Temecala Festival of Lights (Riverside) For more information, visit our web site at: www. ieep.com Features, Events and Attractions Air Sports A Grape Escape Balloon Adventure Sunrise flights fi.om Temecula's wineries. Champagne is served as you float over vineyards and groves. (800) 965-2122. A Balloon Adventure by California Dreamin Fun sightseeing in Temectfia. For information (800) 373-3359. High Adventure Hang-gliding lessons, 4231 N. Sepulveda Ave., San Beruardino. (909) 883-8488. Lake Perris State Recreation Area Hshing, camping, swimnfing, etc. 17801 Lake Perris Dr., off Highway 60 east of Moreno Valley, Pen'is. (909) 657-2179. Lake Skinner Park Fishing, camping. 10 miles north of Temecula off Rancho California Rd. (909) 426-1541. Lake Elsinore This 3300 acre lake is perfect for boating and wake boarding, water shii~g and wind surfing. (909)674- 3124, ext 265. Sky Diving Adventures, Inc. Parachute instruction, 36155 Whittier Ave., tiemet- Ryan ALrport, Hemet. (800) 526-9682. Perils Valley Skydiving Sky-diving, 2091 Goetz Road, Perils. (800) 832-8818. Jim Wallace Skydiving School, inc. Sky-diving instruction, Lake Elsinore. (800) 795-D/VE. Festivals Riverside Dickens Festival February- performances of author Charles Dickens' works throughout downtown Riverside. (800) 430-4140. Sunkist Orange Blossom Festival April - celebrating Riverside's citrus heritage. Parade, circus, live entertainment. Downtown Riverside. (909) 715-3400. Boating Prado Regional Park A 56-acre lake stocked with trout, catfish. 16700 Euclid Ave., Chino. (909) 597-4260. Ramona Pageant April/May - annual outdoor pageant depicts roman- tic spectacle of early California. Ramona Bowl, 27400 Ramona Bowl Road, Hemet. (909) 658-3111. Lake Hemet/Lake Fuimor Scenic fishing lakes near Idyllwild. Off Highway 243. (909) 659-3259 Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival . June - balloon rides, wine tasting, classic car show, entertainment, fair. Lake skinner, 10 miles north of Temecula off Rancho California Road. (909) 676-4713. (more) Historic Route 66 Route 66 is perhaps the most famous road in American histoEa Established in 1926, "America's Main Street" spans a stretch between Chicago, Iilinois and Santa Monica, California. Now decommis- sioned and largely replaced by the inter- states, Route 66 lives on as a memorial to the nation's mid-century automobile cul- ture. It is nothing less than a trip into the past. Everywhere, there are renmants: old neon signage; the ruins of old river-rock buildings; vintage restaurants, many still in operation; former gas stations; oid motel cottage courts; numerous examples of goo- gie, deco, and ndssion-revival architec- ture.... The section of the Mother Road that runs through the Inland Empire (from approximately Claremont to Barstow, or vice versa) has a number Of notable sites. Driving Directions: Take Foothill Boulevard east fi.om Claremont, the beginning of the Inland Empire, near the border of Los Angeles County and San Beruardino Count~ See our Web site for a more detailed tour: www. ieep.com Edward-Dean Museum and Gardens 9401~Oak Glen Road, Cherry Valiey See furtuture and European and ksian decuratb,.e art from · . ~, .the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. Call (909) 845-2626 for information. Features, Events and Attractions Beaumont Cherry Festival Lake Elsinore June - arts and crafts, carnival, food and Boating, fishing, swimming, camping. dancing. 1-10 at the junction of Highway 22 miles southeast of Corona on Highway 60, Cherry Valley. (909) 845-9541. 15. (909) 674-3178. Oak Glen Apple Harvest Sept.-Dec. - Apple harvest at various ranches along Oak Glen Road, Oak Glen. (909) 797-6833. Lake Skinner Park Fishing, camping. 10 miles no~h of TemeculaoffRancho CaliforniaRd. (909) 426-1541. Grape Harvest Festival October - fea~res concerts, canfival rides and contests. Cucanxonga-Guasti Regional Park. (909) 987-1012. Fishing Rancho Jurupa Park Can~ping, hiking/equestrian trails, fishing, picnicking, nature center. 1.5 miles south of Mission Blvd. on Crestmore Road, Riverside. (909) 684-7032. Lake Perils Fishing, hiking, bicycle trails, camping. 17801 Lake Perris Drive, Perils. (909) 657-0676, (909) 657-2179forboatrentals. Tours Kimberly Crest House&Gardens French chateau overlooking Italian gar- dens with terrace and pools. 1325 Prospect Dn, Redlands. (909) 792-2111. Graber Olive House Gives a taste of old California with its shops, canning facilities and museum. 315 E 4th St., Ontario. (909) 983-1761. Gilman Ranch Historic Park and Wagon Museum History, interpretive programs. Wilson and 16th streets, Banning. (909) 922-9200. Jensen-Mvarado Ranch Historic Park 1880s Living h~sto~, interpretive programs. 4307 Briggs St., Rubidoux. (909) 369- 6055. Claremont Heritage Walking tour of Claremont's historic village area, Victorian homes and colleges. (909) 621-0804. Old Town Temecula Narrated walking tour of historic Old Town Temecula. (909) 676-4614. Wine Tasting Temecala The City of Temecula is the gateway to one of the premier winegrowing regions in CMiforrda. The area features 15 award- winning wineries where you can spend a relaxing day touring, talking with the wine- makers and tasting world-class wines. (800) 801 -WL~E. The Home of ~l~,Di~.m.~p~nd Valley Lake~ :~:~6lliFte~~ L,~888) 55-HEM~ Gilman Historic Ranch & Wagon Museum Interpretive exhibits and history of San Gorgonio Pass area, 16th & Wilson, Banning (909) 922-9200 The Air Musemn "Planes of Fame" Dedicated to the restoration and display of aviation artifacts. 7000 Merrill Ave., Chino (909) 597-3722 Glen Ivy Hot Springs Na'n~al mineral hot springs combined vdth body se~ces, salon treatments and red clay mud bath. 25000 Glen Ivy Road, Corona (909) 277-3529 Santa Rosa Plateau An 8300-acre nature reserve. 1-15 to Clinton Keidi Road, west 4 miles past Avenida La Cresta near Murrieta. (909) 677-6951 Accommodations Stay at one of the many fine establishments the Inland Empire has to offer to host you and your family for an evening or two. Canyon Lake · Canyon Lake Resort Inn: 31820 Railroad Canyon ......................... (909) 244-1164 Claremont · Claremont Inn: 555 N. Foothill Bird .................................. (909) 626-2411 · Howard Johnson: 721 S. Indian HiLl Blvd ............................... (909) 626-2431 · Ramada Inn: 840 S. Indian Hill Blvd .................................. (909) 621-4831 Hemet · Hearts Home Farm Bed & Breakfast: 32643 Highway 74 ................... 1-800-965-1606 · Ramada Inn: 3885 W. Horida Ave ..................................... (909) 929-8900 · Travelodge: 1201 W. HoridaAve ...................................... (909) 766-1902 Moreno Valley · Best Western Image Suites: 24840 Elder Ave ............................ (909) 924-4546 Ontario · Greater Ontario Hotel/Motel Association: .............................. www. gohma.com · Marriott ......................................... wve,v, marriott.com/mardott/ontca/ · Countryside Suites: 204 N. Vineyard Ave ................................ (909) 986-8550 · Country Suites by Carlson: 231 N. Vineyard Ave .......................... (909) 983-8484 · Doubletree Club Hotel: 429 N. VIneyard Ave ............................ (909) 391-6411 · Ontario Airport Hilton: N. Haven Ave ................................. (909) 980-0400 · Holiday Inn Innsuites Hotel: 3400 Shelby St ............................ (909) 466-9600 · Howard Johnson: 2425 S. ~chibaldAve ............................... (909) 923-2728 · Ramada Lhnited 1120 E. Holt Blvd ................................... (909) 984-9655 · Red Lion Hotel: 222 N. Vineyard Ave ................................. (909) 983-0909 · Red Roof Inn: 1818 E. Holt Bird .................................... (909) 988-8466 · Residance Inn by Marriott: 2025 East D Street .......................... (909) 983-6788 Pomona · Sheraton Suites Fairplex: 601W. McKhiley Ave .......................... (909) 622-2220 · Pomona Hotel: 3200 Temple Ave ......... (909) 598-7666 (suites) or (909) 598-0073 (hotel) Rancho Cucamonga · Best Western Heritage Inn, Rancho Cucamonga: 8179 Spruce Ave ............. (909) 466-1111 Rialto · Travelodge: 425 W. Foothill Blvd ..................................... (909) 820-0705 Riverside · Dynasty Suites: 3735 IowaAve ....................................... (909) 369-8200 · Hampton Inn: 1590 University Ave .................................... (909) 683-6000 · Holiday Inn Select: 3400 Market .................................... (909) 784-8000 · Mission Inn: 3649 Mission Inn Ave ................................... (909) 784-0300 San Bernardino · Comfort Inn: 111 South E St ........................................ (909) 889-0090 · Hilton: 285 Hospitality Lane ........................................ (909) 889-0133 · Holiday Inn: 2000 Ostrems Way ..................................... (909) 887-3001 · La Quinta Inn: 205 E. Hospitality Lane ................................. (909) 888-7571 · Radisson Hotel and Convention Center: 295 North E St ..................... (909) 381-6181 Temecula · Embassy Suites: 29345 Rancho California .............................. (909) 676-5656 · Temecula Creek Inn: 44501 Rainbow Canyon Road ....................... (909) 694-1000 · Loma Vista Bed & Breakfast: 33350 La Serenn Way ....................... (909) 676-7047 Notable RestaUrants Claremont · The Danson Restaurant/Espiau's: 109 YaleAve ........... (909) 621-1818 · Rarvard Square Cafe: 206 W. Bonita Ave ................ (909) 626-7763 · Tutti Mangia: Harvard at Hrst ........................ (909) 625-4669 · Walter's: Since 1958. 310 Yale Ave .................... (909) 624-4914 Fontana · Bono's Restaurant: 15395 Foothi~ Bird ................. (909) 822-4036 Ontario Benihana, 3760 E. Inland Empire Bird .................. (909) 483-0937 Dave & Busters: Ontario Mills ........................ (909) 987-1557 Panda Inn, 3223 E. Centrelake Dr. .................... (909) 390-2888 New York City Grill: Ontario Mills, . ................... (909) 484-8300 Rafnforest Cafe: 4810 Mills Circle, Ontario Milfs ........... (909) 341-7979 Rosa's: 425 N. VIneyard ............................ (909) 391-1971 · Wilderness Grill: Ontario Mi~s ....................... (909) 484-8300 · Wolfgang Puck Caf& Ontario Mills ..................... (909) 484-8300 Rancho Cucamonga · Magic Lamp Inn: 8189 FoothRi ...................... (909) 981-8659 · Old SpagheRi Factury, 11896 Foothill Blvd.... ........... (909) 980-3585 · Sycamore Inn: 8318 Foothill ........................ (909) 982-1104 Riverside Ancho's Southwest Grill & Bar: 10773 Hole Ave ........... (909) 352-0240 Duane's Prime Steaks & Seafood: 3649 Mission Inn Ave ..... (909) 341-6780 Grape Leaves: 4085 Vine St .......................... (909) 784-3033 Mario's Place: 1725 Spruce ......................... (909) 684-7755 Market Broiler: 3525 Merrill Ave ...................... (909) 276-9007 Mission Inn Restaurant: 3649 Mission Inn Ave ............ (909) 784-0128 Old Spaghetti Factory: 3191 Mission Inn Ave .............. (909) 784-4417 Pacific StLx: 3737 Main St ......................... .. (909) 782-0938 RiYerside Brew/rig Company: 3397 Missio~l Inn Ave ........ (909) 784-BREW Simple Simon, 3639 Main St ......................... (909) 369-6030 Tamale Factory: 3850 Main Street ................ ] .... (909) 342-3023 San Bernardino "Lotus Garden: 111 E. HospSaiityLane ................. (909) 381-6171 · Lucy's Mexican Restaurant: 4151 N. Sierra Way ........... (909) 883-4638 · Nena's: 642 N. 'D' Street ........................... (909) 885-4161 Temecula · Cafe Champagne: 32575 Rancho California Road .......... (909) 699-0088 · BailyWineCountryCafe: 27644YnezRoad .............. (909) 676-9567 · Scarcelia's Italian Gr~l: 27525 Ynez Road ............... (909) 676-5450 · Hsh House Vera Cruz: 26700 Ynez Road ................ (909) 506-2899 · Mexico Chiqnito Restaurant & Cantina: 41841 Moreno Rd.... (909) 676-2933 Upland · Buffalo Inn: 1814 W. Foothill Bird ..................... (909) 981-5515 Oak Glen One of Southern CMlfornia's largest apple- growing :a'eas. Oak Tree village has a live- animal park and fishing pond. 38480 Oak Glen Road, Oak Glen (909) 797-4020 pleasant climate, the In/and Empire offers plenty of public fairways that will fit golfers to a tee. Here's a sa~npling of great golf courses open to the public in the Inland Empire area. · Sun Lakes Count~ Club: Par 72,Banning ................ (909) 845-2135 · Oak Valley Country Club: Par 72, Beaumont .............. (909) 769-7200 · Calimesa Golf and Country CIub: Par 70,Calh'nesa ......... (909) 795-2488 · El Prado Golf Courses: Par 72, Chino .................. (909) 597-1753 · Los Serranos Country Club: South course, par 74, Chino .... (909) 597-1711 Claremont Golf Course: Par 31, Claremont .............. (909) 624-2748 Collon Golf Club: Par 57, Cnitun ...................... (909) 877-1712 Diamond Bar Goff Course: par 72, Diamond Bar .......... (909) 861-8282 Golden Era: Par 36, Gilman Hot Springs ................ (909) 654-0130 Echo Hills: par 35, Hemet ........................... (909) 652-2203 f-- Seven Bills: Par 72, Hemet .......................... (909) 925-481~ Marshall Canyon Country Club: Par 71, La Verne .......... (909) 593-8211 Menifee Lakes Country Club: Par 72, Menifee ............ (909) 672-3090 Moreao Valley Ranch Golf Club: Par 72, Moreao Val/ey ..... (909) 924-4444 Rancho California: par 72, Murrieta ................... (909) 677-7446 The Colony Country Club: Par 65, Murrieta .............. (909) 677-2221 Hidden Valley Goff Club: Par 72, Norco ................. (909) 737-1010 · Whispering Lakes: Par 72, Ontario .................... (909) 923-3673 Mountain Meadows Golf Course: par 72, Pomona ......... (909) 623-3704 Empire Lakes Golf Club: Par 72, Rancho Cocamonga ...... (909) 481-6663 El Rancho Verde Country Club: Par 72, Rialto ............ (909) 875-5346 Indian Hills Golf Course: Par 70, Riverside .............. (909) 360-2090 Jurupa Hills Golf Course: Par 70, Riverside .............. (909) 685-7214 Palm Meadows: Par 71, San Bernardino ................ (909) 382-2002 San Bernard. Mo Golf Club: Par 70, San Beruardino ......... 909) 825-1670 Shandin Hills Golf Club: Par 72, San Bemardlno .......... (909) 886-0669 San Dnims Canyon Golf Course: Par 72, San Dimas ........ (909) 599-2313 Soboba Springs Country Club: Par 72, San JacInto ........ (909) 654-9357 Red Hawk Golf Course: Temecula .................... (800) 451-HAWK Temeeala Creek Inn: par 72, Temecnia ................ (909) 676-5631 Temekal Hills Golf Club: Par 72, Tumecula .............. (800) 839-9949. Upland Hills Country Club: Par 70, Upland .............. (909) 946-4711 North Golf Course: par 61 Sun City .................... (909) 679-5111 Chert? Hills Golf Club: par 72, Sun City ................ (909) 679-1182 Or check out: w',vw, greatgolf, org