The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About062502 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (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 JUNE 25, 2002- 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 11:00 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 11:00 P.M. 5:30 P.M. - Closed Session of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Government Code Sections: Conference with City Attorney and legal counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 regarding real property acquisition negotiations of property located at the northwest corner of Diaz Road and Dendy Lane (32-acre parcel). Under negotiation is the price and terms of the real property interests. The negotiating parties are the City of Temecula and A.G. Kading. City negotiators are Shawn Nelson, Jim O'Grady, and John Meyer. 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 matter, 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. 3. Conference with City Attorney pursuant to Government Code Sections 54957 and 54957.6 with respect to City Manager's Evaluation. 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: R:~Agenda\062502 Mayor Ron Roberts Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 2002-03 Resolution: No. 2002-54 Eve Craig Pastor Ron Alsobrooks of New covenant Fellowship Center Cub Scout Pack No. 337 ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS ICMA Certification to Assistant City Manager O'Grady Receipt of Gift - Sectional Map of Southern California PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak" form must be fi[ed 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. 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Approval of Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of May 28, 2002. R:~Agenda\062502 2 3 4 Resolution Approving List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Contract Inspection Services for Buildinq and Safety RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve an agreement for Consultant Services with P & D Consultants in an amount not to exceed $112,666.00, to provide supplemental building inspection services to the Building and Safety Department. Fourth Amendment to Aqreement for Law Enforcement Services RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the fourth amendment to the agreement for Law Enforcement Services between the County of Riverside and the City of Temecula to include the hiring of five sworn officers. Authorize Temporary Street Closure of Pauba Road between Marqarita Road and Ynez Road for the July 4, 2002, Fireworks Show and delegate authority to issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to Director of Public Works/City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD FOR THE JULY 4, 2002, FIREWORDS SHOW AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES R:~Agenda\062502 3 7 Authorize Temporary Street Closure of Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road and Second Street; Main Street from the bridqe to Old Town Front Street; Second Street; Third Street; Fourth Street; Fifth Street; and Sixth Street for the Star Spangled Fourth of July Parade and delegate authority to issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to Director of Public Works/City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF OLD TOWN FRONT STREET BETWEEN MORENO ROAD AND SECOND STREET; MAIN STREET FROM THE BRIDGE TO OLD TOWN FRONT STREET; SECOND STREET; THIRD STREET; FOURTH STREET; FIFTH STREET; AND SIXTH STREET FOR THE STAR SPANGLED FOURTH OF JULY PARADE AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES Tract Map No. 29928-1 - Harveston Erosion Control Agreement and Bond (located south of Margarita Road, west of Harveston School Road, and north of Harveston Drive and Ysabel Barnett Elementary School) RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Accept the Erosion Control Agreement for Tract Map No. 29928-1 and the Erosion Control Bond collected to secure erosion control improvements. Tract Map No. 29929-1 - Harveston Erosion Control Agreement and Bond (located north of the proposed lake, west of Village Road, east of Harveston Drive, and south Ysabel Barnett Elementary School) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Accept the Erosion Control Agreement for Tract Map No. 29929-1 and the Erosion Control Bond collected to secure erosion control improvements. 10 Substitute Aqreements and Bonds for Public Improvements in Tract Map No. 23143-7 (located east of Butterfield Staqe Road and Crowne Hill Drive, south of Pauba Road, and north of Old Kent Road) RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Accept the Substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Subdivision Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds as security for improvements and labor and materials for Tract Map No. 23143-7; 10.2 Accept the Substitute Monument Agreement and Subdivision Monument Bond as security for monumentation for Tract Map No. 23143-7; R:~Agenda\062502 4 11 10.3 Acknowledge that original bonds collected by the original subdivider will be released once transfer of title ownership to the new subdivider is completed; 10.4 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. Substitute Aqreements and Bonds for Public Improvements in Tract Map No. 23143-9 (located east of Butterfield Sta,qe Road, south of Royal Crest Place, and west of Crowne Hill Drivel RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Accept the Substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Subdivision Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds as security for improvements and labor and materials for Tract Map No. 23143-9; 11.2 Accept the Substitute Monument Agreement and Subdivision Monument Bond as security for monumentation for Tract Map No. 23143-9; 11.3 Acknowledge that original bonds collected by the original subdivider will be released once transfer of title ownership to the new subdivider is completed; 11.4 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. 12 Public Works Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Annual Maintenance Aqreements RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve the minor annual maintenance and construction contracts for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 with: 1. Becker Engineering in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 2. Imperial Paving Company, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 3. Minnesang Pest Specialists in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 4. Monteleone Contractors, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 5. Murrieta Development Co. in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 6. NPG, Inc. (Nelson Paving & Sealing) in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 7. Pacific West Construction in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 8. Rene's Commercial Management in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 9. Torah Development & Construction in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 13 Award the Construction Contract for Project No. PW02-03 - Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Rancho California Road RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Award a construction contract for Project No. PW02-03 - Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Rancho California Road to R.J. Noble Company in the amount of 593,194.85 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 13.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $59,319.49 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. R:~Agenda\062502 5 R:~Agenda\062502 14 Completion and Acceptance for Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2000-2001 - Proiect No. PW01-01 RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Accept the Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2000-2001 - Project No. PW01-01- as complete; 14.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 14.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. 15 Resolution of Support for the creation of a Federal Cabinet level agency to oversee Homeland Security (Placed on the agenda at the request of Councilman Comerchero) RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE CREATION OF A CABINET LEVEL AGENCY TO OVERSEE HOMELAND SECURITY 16 Lease Agreement with County of Riverside for properly at Redhawk Parkway and Overland Trail (Interim Fire Station No. 92) RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Approve the lease agreement. 17 City Attorney Services Contract Amendment No. 3 RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Approve Amendment No. 3 to the agreement with Richards, Watson, and Gershon, Attorneys at Law, to increase the hourly rates for City Attorney services provided. 18 First Amendment to the Facility Alarm Systems Service and Monitorinq Agreement with Computer Alert Systems for FY 2002-03 RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Approve the first amendment to the Facility Alarm Systems Service and Monitoring Agreement with Computer Alert Systems, Inc. to extend the term of the agreement to June 30, 2003; 18.2 Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $25,000.00 for alarm monitoring and repair services; 6 19 18.3 Approve a 10% contingency in the amount of $2,500.00. Fire/EMS Protection A,qreement for Fiscal Year 2002-03 RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Approve the three-year contract for Fire/EMS protection including Exhibit A for the cost of services for Fiscal Year 2002-03. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY R:~Agenda\062502 7 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 2002-01 Resolution: No. CSD 2002-07 CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Stone ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comercherol Naggar, Pratt, Roberts, 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 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 Tract Map No. 23209 - Service Level B, Service Level C, and Service Level D Rates and Char.qes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO SERVICE LEVEL B, SERVICE LEVEL C, AND SERVICE LEVEL D RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NO. 23209 BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH R:~Agenda\062502 8 2 Authorize the expenditure of funds for the Landscape Maintenance Contract with Excel Landscape, Inc. for FY 2002-2003 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $1,110,440.00 for the base contract and an additional amount not to exceed $120,000.00 for the supplemental and new areas that may be brought on line during the term of the contract; 2.2 Approve a contingency of 10% in the amount of $123,044.00 for extra work items. Third Amendment to the Tree Maintenance Services Contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 3.2 Approve the third amendment for the extension of the Tree Maintenance Services Contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. through June 30, 2003 in an amount of $75,000.00; Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $7,500.00 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, July 9, 2002, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\062502 9 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. RDA 2002-01 Resolution: No. RDA 2002-09 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson JeffComerchero ROLLCALL AGENCY MEMBERS: Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts, Comerchero 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 Exclusive Negotiatin,q A,qreement with AGK Group, LLC RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between the Agency and AGK Group, LLC. DEPARTMENTAL REPORT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBERS'REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, July 9, 2002, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\062502 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. 2O Appeal of Mitiqated Neqative Declaration, Tentative Parcel Map, and Development Plan for Temecula Creek Villages on Hi.qhwa¥ 79 South (Planninq Application Nos. 01-0610 & 01-0611) RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0610, A 14-LOT TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AND 01- 0611, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 400-UNIT MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX; 108,100 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A 15,000 SQUARE-FOOT CHILD CARE CENTER, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETWEEN JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONES, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 961- 010-006, AND DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION 21 Villa~les of Temecula - General Plan Amendment (PA00-0138); Change of Zone (PA00- 0139); Development Plan (PA00-0140); Tentative Parcel Map (PA00-0152) RECOMMENDATION: 21.1 Continue this public hearing to either the July 23, or August 13, 2002, City Council meeting. R:~Agenda\062502 11 COUNCIL BUSINESS 22 Pala Road Name Chanqe RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Approve a name change for Pala Road to either Pechanga Road or Pechanga Parkway; 22.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CHANGING THE STREET NAME OF PALA ROAD TO PECHANGA ROAD OR RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CHANGING THE STREET NAME OF PALA ROAD TO PECHANGA PARKWAY 23 Consideration of Sponsorship Request for The Great Tractor Race RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Consider the sponsorship request for The Great Tractor Race. 24 Planninq Commission Appointment RECOMMENDATION: 24.1 Appoint one applicant to serve on the Planning Commission for a full three-year term through June 4, 2005. 25 Con,qestion Mana~qemen! Program Update (Placed on the agenda by Councilman Pratt) RECOMMENDATION: 25.1 Discuss the matter and receive and file. R:~Agenda\062502 12 26 CalPERS Contract Amendment - Fourth Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits RECOMMENDATION: 26.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF TEMECULA 26.2 Introduce and read by title only: ORDINANCE NO, 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETVVEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CiTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: City Council, Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:~Agenda\062502 13 ITEM 1 ITEM 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL MAY 28, 2002 After the Closed Session that convened at 5:30 P.M., the City Council convened in Open Session at 7:00 P.M., on Tuesday, May 28, 2002, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Present: Councilmembers: Comerchero, Naggar, Pratt, Stone, Roberts Absent: PRELUDE MUSIC Councilmember: None The prelude music was provided by Eve Craig. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Father Sean Cox of St. Thomas Episcopal. ALLEGIANCE The flag ceremony was presented by Cub Scout Troop No. 324. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Gift Givin~q Campaign Recognition Thanking the City for its continued support, Ms. Karl Hollis, representing United Way, recognized the City and its employees on its achievement and presented to the Mayor the 2001 Outstanding Municipality Campaign Award and presented the 2001 Outstanding Campaign Coordinator Award to Recreation Supervisor Lawrence. Accepting the award, Recreation Supervisor Lawrence commended and recognized the City's Gift Giving Campaign team members, as follows: Jill Dickey Nadra Miles Lorene Rosa Kathy Simpkins Julie Tidwell Susan Williams Clean Air Month Proclamation Mr. Denny Zane of the American Lung Association of California accepted the proclamation and commented on the monumental task and the progress made to achieve clean in Southern California. R:\Minutes\052802 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Commenting on his services to provide transportation from the City of Temecula to downtown San Diego, Mr. Kevin Fonseca, 1061 South 41s~ Street, San Diego, representing Friendship Transportation Services, relayed his desire to meet with the City Council to discuss alternative transportation and park and ride facilities. B. Wanting to discuss with the City Council a state-of-the-art child care center as well as a riding academy, Mr. Andrew Hernandez, 28187 Tierra Vista Road, President of Kidz World Corporation, was encouraged by the City Council to set up an appointment to discuss his desires. C. Speaking as a private citizen, Mr. Henry Miller, 29240 Stonewood Drive, No. 47, apprised the City Councilmembers of a City history project, part of the third grade curriculum, and requested that a $100 savings bond be presented, by the City Council, to the third grader that produces the best City History Report. D. In response to Mr. Miller's request to award a $100 savings bond to the third grader, Ms. Joan Sparkman, 40213 Colony Drive, advised that Temecula Valley Bank would be willing to assist. In light of the historical presence of the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians in this community and the Indians' community service, generous contributions to road improvements, and involvement in this community, Ms. Sparkman proposed to the City Council that the current name of Pala Road be changed to Pechanga Road. She as well suggested that SR 79 South be changed to Temecula Parkway. In closing, Ms. Sparkman proudly advised that Mr. Brandon Boyce, a former Temecula student, will be graduating from West Pointe University and has chosen Naval Aviation as his career. In response to Ms. Sparkman's request, Mayor Pro Tern Stone, echoed by Councilman Comerchero, requested that staff explore the matter with Caltrans and that the matter be agendized for the June 25, 2002, City Council meeting. E. Mr. Jimmy Moore, 43557 Savona Street, thanked the City Council, staff, and citizens for their efforts associated with making the Mayor's Ball a successful fundraising evening. Mr. Moore as well apprised the City Council and public of the Arts in the Country Program, Festival for 2002, and the many upcoming events. F. Ms. Debra Wise, 43483 Tylman Road, representing Inland Gold Aquatics Team, relayed the team's dismay with the summer aquatics schedule as it relates to the use of pools. Mayor Pro Tem Stone requested that the aquatics schedule and the allocation of time be agendized for City Council review. G. Mr. Stuart Clark, P.O. Box 2449, Temecula, representing Inland Gold Aquatics Team, as well relayed his dismay with the aquatics schedule. H. Mr. Scott Phillips, representing Inland Gold Aquatics Team, 39715 Highbury Road, Murrieta, questioned whether there may be sexual discrimination, as it relates to the aquatics schedule, because the coach for Inland Gold Aquatics Team is a female and the coach for the Temecula Swim Team is a male. R:\Minutes\052802 2 I. Ms. Sheri Davis, 39712 Barberry Road, representing Inland Gold Aquatics Team, as well relayed her opposition with the aquatics schedule and noted that two of the team's swimmers are national swimmers and that they require more swim time. In response to Ms. Davis, City Manager Nelson stated that the matter will be forwarded to the Community Services Commission and the City Council for review but clarified that the City's aquatics schedule would be based on the interest of all children in this community, not solely on that of two national swimmers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Having attended a recent event at the Community Recreation Center amphitheater, Councilman Naggar invited the public to an upcoming ballet at the amphitheater on June 7, 2002, and extended his appreciation to the Arts Council in their effor[s to provide entertainment throughout the summer months. B. Having recently toured the newly constructed Pechanga Casino, Councilman Pratt commended the Pechanga Band on a job well done. Councilman Pratt applauded those individuals that organized the Memorial Day Celebration. In closing, Mr. Pratt informed the City Council that he has spent weeks in preparing his comments for the CIP Budget Workshop, Wednesday, May 29, 2002, as it relates to traffic/transportation issues. C. Commenting on his recent trip to Leidschendam-Voorburg (Sister City), Councilman Comerchero apprised the public of the overwhelming support to the United Stated and the City of Temecula has received as a result of September 11, 2001. In remembrance of this event, Mr. Comerchero advised that the City of Leidschendam-Voorburg raised monies in order to commission an artist to create a sculpture. By way of pictures, Mr. Comerchero commented on the almost completed sculpture called Singing in the Rain, advising that representatives from the Sister City will officially present this sculpture to the City of Temecula at a ceremony on September 11, 2002. D. Viewing his invitation to the inauguration of the new Mayor of Leidschendam-Voorburg as a privilege, Mayor Roberts further, by way of pictures, elaborated on the bronze sculpture. E. Mayor Pro Tern Stone informed the public that the City of Temecula has three new members in its community, noting that these three individuals have sought political asylum. Mr. Stone noted that the individuals are professional musicians and have requested to provide a free City concert on September 11, 2002. Having recently visited Europe on City business as well as pleasure, Mr. Stone commented on the comprehensive underground transportation system throughout many of the European countries and requested that such an underground system be explored for the City in an effort to address future transportation needs. City Manager Nelson noted that Councilman Stone's request could be addressed at the upcoming CIP Workshop. R:\Minutes\052802 3 CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Approval of Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the minutes of April 9, 2002. 3 Resolution Approvin.q List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 Community Facilities District No. 88-12 (Ynez Corridor) initiation of actions necessary to foreclose delinquent Special Tax Liens RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ORDERING ACTION TO TRANSMIT TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO CREDIT THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TAX COLLECTOR UPON THE TAX ROLL AND TO RELIEVE THE TAX COLLECTOR OF FURTHER DUTY THERETO IN COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-12 AS REQUIRED BY LAW; ORDERING ACTIONS TO FORECLOSE THE DELINQUENT SPECIAL TAX LIENS; AND ORDERING THE RECORDATION OF A NOTICE OF INTENT TO REMOVE DELINQUENT SPECIAL TAX INSTALLMENTS FROM THE TAX ROLLS R:~Minutes\052802 4 5 Contract Inspection Services for Buildinq and Safety RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve a First Amendment to an Agreement for Consultant Services with P & D Consultants in an amount not to exceed $51,600.00 to provide supplemental building inspection services to the Building and Safety Department. 6 Resolution adopting FY 2002~2003 Solid Waste Rates RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-40 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE SOLID WASTE RATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 (It was noted by Mayor Roberts that for the third year in a row, the solid waste rates were not increased.) 7 Memorandum of Understanding RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MO.U.) between the City and the represented employees of Teamsters Local 911. (Councilman Comerchero abstained with regard to this item.) 8 Mana!qement Compensation Plan - Auto Allowance Resolution RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Management Compensation Plan, effective July 1,2002; 8.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02-41 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMEOULA INCREASING THE MONTHLY AUTOMOBILE ALLOWANCE OF MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL (Councilman Comerchero abstained with regard to this item.) R:\Minutes\052802 5 9 Tract Map No, 23209 (located west of Butterfield Staqe Road at La Serena Way) RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve Tract Map No. 23209 in conformance with the Conditions of Approval; 9.2 Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and accept the Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bond as security for the agreement; 9.3 Approve the Subdivision Monument Agreement and accept the Monument Bond as security for the agreement. (Councilman Pratt abstained with regard to this item.) 10 Award the Construction Contract for Proiect No. PW02-05 - FY2001-02 - Slurry Seal Project RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Award a construction contract for FY2001-2002 Slurry Seal Program to American Asphalt South, Inc. in the amount of $343,269.12 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract; 10.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $34,326.91, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. 11 Completion and Acceptance of Construction Contract for the Pala Road Brid¢]~ Environmental Mitiqation/Median & Parkway Landscapin~q - Proiect No. PW97-15 (Landscape) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Accept the project, Pala Road Bridge Mitigation Restoration & Median Landscaping, Project No. PW97-15LS, as complete; 11.2 File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 11.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. 12 Solicitation of Construction Bids for Pavement Rehabilitation Proqram - Citywide, Project No. PW02-03 RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Approve the project plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit bids for the construction of the Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Citywide, Project No. PW02-03 R:\Minutes\052802 6 13 HVAC Preventative Maintenance Service Contract for all City Facilities RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Award a twenty-five (25) month contract to EMCOR Service to provide heating, ventilating, and air condition (HVAC) preventative maintenance and repair services, commencing on June 1, 2002 and continuing through June 30, 2004; 13.2 Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $100,000.00 for preventative maintenance, repair and supplemental services; 13.3 Approve 10% contingency in the amount of $10,000.00 14 Harveston Proiect - Approval of Consent to Assi,qnment of Lennar Homes, Inc., interest in the Harveston Project Development A,qreement approved on August 28, 2001 to a ioint venture consistinq of Lennar Homes of California, Inc. and Lehman Brothers Real Estate. Partners, L.P. RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Approve the Consent to Assignment in the form as recommended by the City Attorney. MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 - 14. The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Stone and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Comerchero who abstained, with regard to Item Nos. 7 and 8 and Councilman Pratt who abstained with regard to Item No. 9. At 8:03 P M., the City Council convened as the Temecula Community Services District and the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. The City Council Meeting resumed at 8:05 P.M. COUNCIL BUSINESS 15 Old Town Local Review Board Appointments RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Appoint three applicants to serve full three-year terms on the Old Town Local Review Board. (Mayor Pro Tem Stone abstained with regard to this item.) Having reviewed the submitted applications, Councilman Pratt relayed his recommendation to nominate Mr. Carl Ross to the Board. Mayor Roberts reiterated and clarified his recommendation to reappoint Mr. Walt Allen, appoint Mrs. Peg Moore, and reappoint Mr. Fred Perkins (alternate). MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to reappoint Mr. Walt Aflen. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Pro Tern Stone who abstained. R:\Minutes\052802 7 MOTION: Councilman Naggar moved to reappoint Mr. Fred Perkins as the Board alternate. The motion was seconded by Councilman Comerchero and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Mayor Pro Tem Stone who abstained. Having helped with the formulation of the Old Town Specific Plan, Councilman Comerchero offered the following motion: MOTION: Councilman Comerchero moved to appoint Mrs. Peg Moore. The motion was seconded by Councilman Naggar and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Councilman Pratt and Mayor Pro Tern Stone who abstained. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS No additional comments. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Nelson advised that the potentially affected property owners and associated Homeowners Association would be noticed of the proposal to change the name of Pala Road will be considered at the June 25, 2002, City Council meeting. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that under the Brown Act, there were no reportable actions to report. ADJOURNMENT At 8:08 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Wednesday, May 29, 2002, at 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, for the purpose of a Budget Workshop ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:\Minutes\052802 8 ITEM 3 RESOLUTION NO. 02- 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 $1,690,628.18. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 25th day of June, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos2002/Resos 02- 1 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. 02- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 25th day of June, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos2OO2/Resos 02- 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 06/06/02 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 06/13/02 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 06/06/02 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 06/25/02 COUNCIL MEETING: DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 165 190 192 193 194 210 28O 3OO 310 32O 33O 340 GENERAL FUND RDA-LOW/MOD INCOME HOUSING COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ. FUND RDA-REDEVELOPMENT iNSURANCE VEHICLES INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES $ 537,406.98 26,330.29 212,075.53 38,138.18 61,209.95 457.30 329,188.92 156,383.89 1,948.77 538.75 50,350.76 10,361.91 19,013.19 $ 1,044,245.28 399,169.14 247,223.76 $ 1,690,628.18 $ 1,443,404.42 001 165 190 192 193 194 280 30O 32O 330 340 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: 172,390.69 4,640.19 48,542.27 66.24 4,197.88 560.19 2,080.65 854.46 7,160.55 2,000.47 4,730.17 247,223.76 $ 1,690,628.18 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. ~ ~ ~oo.o 00000 000 ~ ~o ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 J ~ ~ o o ~ oooooooo 88o o o o o o _ooooooo~~ oo~~~ o ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o W 0 ~ ~ 0 0 - o ~'- ~ ....~ e" ~ ~ ~ ........ ~ ~ o ~o~ ~ ~ o · e~--.= ...... ~ o oo8 3~3 330030000 o o 00000000030 ooo 88__ o8 ~o~ n ~ I ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ -- 0 0 0 ~ ~ J ~ ,,, ~ ~ < = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z Z ~ Z Z .. ~ _ ~o~.= = ~ < < < < ~ ~ E ~ oo oooo oo : ~o~o~o ~o~o~o - ,.. 0, o~ o o · ' ~ ' ' 'Ur ~Of ~ C~ ~ ~ ' ' . · I- t~~,.:. o ~.~,..o ~.o~. o.o.008.08088 08 I ~ ~ ,_,, _ ~. ~.~ .. ~zzzzz z ~ ._o .~, LIJ ~~ 0 ZZZZ-- Z _~'~ Jm ~ ~ ~_o.~ _o. _o._o. oo ~ z ~ ~ n I ~ -r' >. c~ - m ~ o co u. r, "' _z ¢0 u.I 0 ,~ Ltl U.I 0 n n I:> ~ ~m' 3: 3:: ~ CD ...m ~ Z m~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ,',< o >- z z '"" 0 Z 0 n' 0 0 0 0 0 0 n I~ 0 0 0 0 ,.~ ,~- ILl <: n- ~- . 0 0 n- 0 I- >- I.~ < ~ · '" '" "' "' '" ' z o < < I Z ~ ~ ~> > > > > 0 0 _e, ~ o o o ~ o ~o 0 ~ ~ ~ Z _ ~ Z w 0 0 0 ~o o 0080 88 o 8 ~ R°°°°~ 8 080000 o 8°0°°§ o o o o o o 000000 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 5 ~ ~ ~ z z z z z z ~ ~ 8 o o ~ o ~o~o o>8> o>~>~>o>~ ,tO m · -~ e ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ oo< ~ ~ ~=°~ °~°°~°o°~° ° ~ o ~ o ~ o o o o o o~o~o ~' ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~OOZ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~<. ~ 00': ooooooo o ooooooooo ~ ~ ~ ~0000000 0 0 0 000000000 0 0 0 oo~ooooo ~ ~ ~ o ooooooooo ~ ~ ITEM 4 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINAN~E~ CITY MANAGER L/p TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Anthony Elmo-Director of Building and Safet~ June 25, 2002 Contract Inspection Services for Building and Safety RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve an Agreement for consultant Services with P & D Consultants, in an amount not to exceed one hundred twelve thousand six hundred sixty six ($112,666) dollars, to provide supplemental building inspection services to the Building and Safety Depadment. DISCUSSION: The Building and Safety Department has utilized the services of P & D Associates, for approximately three (3) years to provide building inspectors to supplement our regular full time staff. The City Council recently approved the conversion of two (2) full time temporary building inspector positions to full time regular status as part of Fiscal 2002-2003 Operating Budget. This proposed agreement would provide continued full time temporary inspection staff through the estimated five (5) month recruitment period needed to fill the newly converted positions. FISCAL IMPACT: There are adequate funds budgeted in Fiscal 2002-2003 Operating Budget in Account # 001-162-999-5118, "Temporary Help", for this purpose. ATTACHMENTS: Agreement V:\My Documents~p and D 2002-2003 Reportl.doc CITY OFTEMECULA AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, is made and effective as of July 1, 2002, between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and P & D 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 July 1, 2002, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2003, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set fodh in full. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. 3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, bompetently 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 set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed One Hundred Twelve Thousand Six Hundred Sixty Six ($112,666) DOllars for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall such sum exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council. c. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice 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. r:brockm ei~agmt s~P&DO0 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 3. 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 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 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, 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, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer flies. -2- 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, 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 in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the negligence of the City. 9. 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, office or employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non- contractural, 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. 10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. (4) Errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to 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) Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4) Errors and omissions liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. 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: 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. f. Verification of Coveraqe. 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. r:bro¢ kmei~a ~qnt s~P&DO0 11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees 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 City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. 13. RELEASE OF INFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition1 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. 14. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: r:broc kmei~agmt s~P&DO0 To City: City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Consultant: P & D Consultants 999 Town & Country Road 4th Floor Orange, CA 92868 15. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. 9. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. '17. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event of litigation between the parties concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. 18. 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. 19. 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 By Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk r :brockmei~agmls~P& DO0 Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT P & D Consultants By. Steven L. Patterson, Associate V.P. r:broc km ei~ag~msLO&DO0 EXHIBIT A TASKS TO BE PERFORMED Perform combination building inspection on an as-needed basis. r:brockme~ag~nt s~P&DO0 EXHIBIT B PAYMENT SCHEDULE For and in consideration of the Contractor's services, inspection services shall be provided at the rate of $65.00 per hour, plus $.32 per mile for each mile accumulated while performing inspection services for the City. Should the City provide vehicular transportation for Contractor's use, no fees shall be charge for mileage. r:brockmei~agmt s\P&DO0 ITEM 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE ~ CITY MANAGER ~') CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance ~ Jim Domenoe, Chief of Police June 25, 2002 Fourth Amendment to Agreement for Law Enforcement Services RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the fourth amendment to the agreement for law enforcement services between the County of Riverside and the City of Temecula to include the hiring of five (5) sworn officers. BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula has contracted with the County of Riverside Sheriff's Department for law enforcement services since incorporation. On July 25, 2000, the City Council approved the existing five-year contract for law enforcement services with the County of Riverside. On November 14, 2000, the City Council approved the first amendment to the contract to address field-training costs associated with the addition of new officers. On February 27, 2001, the City Council approved the second amendment to the contract to provide for the addition of five patrol officers as a result of the Vail Ranch annexation. On July 24, 2001, the City Council approved the third amendment to the contract, which added one lieutenant, one motorcycle officer for the Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET), and one Community Service Officer. Temecula Police Department staffing levels are driven by a target ratio of one sworn officer for every one thousand residents. Department of Finance population information recently released indicated that the current population of Temecula is 72,700. In an effort to maintain this ratio, the Police Department proposes to add five new officer positions. It is expected that in addition to these officers, an additional sergeant will be added to maintain the Department's recommended ratio of supervision to line personnel. This addition of personnel will bring the total number of sworn officers to 73 and will meet the target ratio of officers to population. The following contract modifications are requested in order to meet the needs of our growing city and to ensure sufficient staffing resources to provide appropriate response times to calls for service. Two motorcycle officers will be added to supplement the existing complement of six motorcycle officers. Two of these motorcycle officers are dedicated to the Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET), which provides dedicated traffic enforcement to the many neighborhoods in Temecula. The additional two motorcycle officers would enhance the ability of the Police Department to respond to the many requests for service within the city. The two additional patrol officers will be used to enhance our commitment to overall public safety and will help maintain our target for response to priority one calls for service at six minutes. The Riverside County Sheriff's Department hosts a regional narcotics task force, known as the Southwest Corridor Task Force. The task force includes officers from the Sheriffs Department and the cities of Lake Elsinore and Perris. The Police Department proposes to dedicate one officer to this task force. Currently, the task force is unable to provide enforcement and investigation of narcotics related crimes committed in Temecula due to federal funding rules regulating their operation. Inclusion of an officer on this task force ensures that Temecula will receive proactive policing by the task force, which will curb narcotics related crimes and activity within Temecula. This specialized service provided by the task force is one that cannot be rendered by patrol or any existing special team. FISCAL IMPACT: The projected cost of the five positions that will be added as a result of this contract amendment is approximately $527,960 for FY 2002-03 at the estimated 2002-03 contract rates. Adequate funds have been included in the FY 2002-03 operating budget to cover staffing and other costs related to these positions. ATTACHMENT: Fourth Amendment to Agreement for Law Enforcement Services between County of Riverside and City of Temecula. ORIGINAL FOURTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND CITY OF TEMECULA IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED that the Agreement for Law Enfomement Services between the County of Riverside and the City of Temecula, approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 19, 2000, for services effective July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2005, as amended December 19, 2000, March 27, 2001 and August 14, 2001 is hereby amended in the following respects only: 1. Attachment A is amended to read as follows: ATTACHMENT A CITY OF TEMECULA LEVEL OF SERVICE Average Patrol Services 141.5 supported hours per day. (Approximate equivalent of twenty-nine (29) Deputy Sheriff positions @ 1,780 annual productive hours per position standard.) Dedicated Positions One (1) Sheriff's Lieutenant Two (2) Sheriff's Sergeant positions Two (2) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported) positions-Special Enforcement Team Six (6) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported) positions-Community Policing Team Eleven (11) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported) positions-Traffic/Motorcycle Team One (1) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported) position-K-9 Deputy One (1) Deputy Sheriff (fully supported) Southwest Corridor Task Force Two (2) Deputy Sheriff (unsupported) positions-School Resource Officers (year-round) 1 Eleven (11) Community Service Officer II positions One (1) Community Service Officer I position IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Temecula, by minute order or resolution duly adopted by its City Council, has caused this Agreemem to be signed by its Mayor and attested and sealed by its Clerk, and the County of Riverside, by order of its Board of Supervisors, has caused this Agreemem to be signed by the Chairman of said Board and sealed and attested by the Clerk of said Board, all on the dates indicated below. CITY OF TEMECULA Dated: By: ATTEST: Name Title Ron Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Peter M. Thorson, City Manager COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Dated: ATTEST: By: Chairman, Board of Supervisors Gerald A. Maloney Clerk of the Board By:. Deputy 2 JUN 1 8 ZOOZ ITEM 6 APPROVAL ~'"~,/, .~.-"~ CITY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council /~.~ William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 25, 2002 Authorize Temporary Street Closure of Pauba Road between Margarita Road and Ynez Road for the "July 4th, 2002 Fireworks Show" and Delegate Authority to Issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to Director of Public Works/City Engineer. PREPARED BY: ¢¢ Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works (~'~ Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECU LA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD FOR THE "JULY 4TM 2002, FIREWORKS SHOW", AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES BACKGROUND: The Annual City-sponsored "July 4th 2002 Fireworks Show" necessitates temporary street closures to protect the participants and facilitate this event. The subject special event requires the closure of a portion of a major City highway and the streets abutting this highway for a period of 11:00 AM until 11:00 PM on July 4, 2002. 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 podion 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 rights-of-way. This resolution set forth processes for staff reviewing applications, denying approval or approving subiect to conditions including events requiring changes in normal traffic patterns, and an appeal 1 r:~agdrpt~002~625\4 of July 2002 fireworks.street closure process to the City Manager. However the resolution did not delegate authority to temporarily close streets for these special events. The subject resolution delegates the authority to approve temporary street closures for the specific event, the Temecula Community Services Department sponsored "July 4th 2002 Fireworks Show" to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. All other special events requiring temporary street closures, construction-related closures, etc, shall 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. Some partial closures, such as limiting lane widths for construction purposes or partial closures for block parties on cul-de-sac streets only do not require full street closures. These and similar partial street closures or restrictions are not submitted for similar resolutions in order to reduce or eliminate the administrative impact on City Council and staff time. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs of police services, and for provision, placement, and retrieval of necessary warning and advisory devices by the Temecula Community Services Department and the City Public Works Maintenance Division are included in budgetary items. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2002- 2. Location Map 2 r:~agd rpt~2002~O625~A of July 2002 fireworks.street closure RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN MARGARITA ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD FOR THE "JULY 4TM 2002 FIREWORKS SHOW", AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES. 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 sponsors the annual "July 4th 2002 Fireworks Show", for which such temporary street closures promote the safety and protection of persons using or proposing to use that street or streets for the special event; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to facilitate the issuance of permission to temporarily close public streets for this annual "July 4th 2002 Fireworks Show" on July 4~h, 2002; and, NOW, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to approve temporary street closures for annual "July 4th 2002 Fireworks Show", 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 Director of Public Works/City Engineer to permit temporary street closures for the annual "July 4~h 2002 Fireworks Show" on July 4, 2002, and affirms 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 25th day of June, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk 3 r:~agdrpt~002\0625'¢? of July 2002 fireworks.street closure [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. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 25th day of June, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 4 r:~gdrpt~002\0625~t~ of July 2002 fireworks.street closure ITEM 7 APPROVAL ~.~ CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~:~ CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council ~,~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 25, 2002 Authorize Temporary Street Closure of Old Town Front Street between Moreno Road and 2"d Street; Main Street from the Bridge to Old Town ,F, ront Street; 2nd Street; 3rd Street; 4~h Street, 5th Street, and 6th Street for the Star Spangled 4th of July Parade" and Delegate Authority to Issue Special Events/Street Closures Permit to Director of Public Works/City Engineer. PREPARED BY: ~/~_ Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works (~Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF OLD TOWN FRONT STREET BETWEEN MORENO ROAD AND 2ND STREET; MAIN STREET FROM THE BRIDGE TO OLD TOWN FRONT STREET; 2ND STREET; 3RD STREET; 4TM STREET; 5TM STREET; AND 6TM STREET FOR THE "STAR SPANGLED 4TM OF JULY PARADE" AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES BACKGROUND: The Annual City-sponsored "Star Spangled 4t~ of July Parade" necessitates temporary street closures to protect the participants and facilitate this event. The subject special event requires the closure of entire and portions of streets in the Old Town area on July 4, 2002 from approximately 8:00AM until 11:15 AM. The parade hours are from 10:00 AM to approximately 11:15 AM. However, staging for the parade will begin at 8:00 AM. The approximate hours of street closures are from 8:00 AM till 11:15 AM. The police department will determine the exact hours of street closures. Aisc, no parking will be allowed on these subject streets from 5:00 AM till 12:00 noon. 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 1 r:~agdrpt~002\0625~star spangled 4"' of july, 2002 parade.street closures 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 rights-of-way. This resolution set forth processes for staff reviewing applications, denying approval or approving subject to conditions including events requiring changes in normal traffic patterns, and an appeal process to the City Manager. However the resolution did not delegate authority to temporarily close streets for these special events. The subject resolution delegates the authority to approve temporary street closures for the specific event, the Temecula Community Services Department sponsored "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade" to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. All other special events requiring temporary street closures, construction-related closu res, etc, shall 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. Some partial closures, such as limiting lane widths for construction purposes or partial closures for block parties on cul-de-sac streets only do not require full street closures. These and similar partial street closures or restrictions are not submitted for similar resolutions in order to reduce or eliminate the administrative impact on City Council and staff time. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs of police services, and for provision, placement, and retrieval of necessary warning and advisory devices by the Temecula Community Services Department and the City Maintenance Division are included in budgetary items. ATrACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 2002- 2. Location Map 2 r:'agdrpt~002\0625~star spangled 4"' of july, 2002 parade.street closures RESOLUTION NO. 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE OF OLD TOWN FRONT STREET BETWEEN MORENO ROAD AND 2ND STREET; MAIN STREET FROM THE BRIDGE TO OLD TOWN FRONT STREET; 2ND STREET; 3RD STREET; 4TM STREET; 5TM STREET; AND 6TM STREET FOR THE "STAR SPANGLED 4TM OF JULY PARADE" AND AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT INCLUDING STREET CLOSURES 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 sponsors the annual "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade", for which such temporary street closures promote the safety and protection of persons using or proposing to use that street or streets for the special event; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to facilitate the issuance of permission to temporarily close public streets for this annual "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade; and, NOW, WHEREAS, the City Council desires to authorize the Director of Public Works/City Engineer to approve temporary street closures for the annual "Star Spangled 4th of July Parade", 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 Director of Public Works/City Engineer to permit temporary street closures for the annual "Star Spangled 4~ of July Parade" on July 4, 2002, and affirms 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 25th day of June, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk 3 r:~agdrpt~002\0625~star spangled 4"' of july, 2002 parade.street closures [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) ~, Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 2002- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 25th day of June, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk 4 r:~agdrpt~OO2\O625~star spangled 4a of july, 2002 parade.street closures i , > ITEM 8 APPROVAL CiTY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~_~_~[~ CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council ~.///~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 25,2002 Tract Map No. 29928-1, Harveston Erosion Control Agreement and Bond located south of Margarita Road, west of Harveston School Road, and north of Harveston Drive and Ysabel Barnett Elementary School PREPARED BY: {/~¢Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works (~Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council ACCEPT the Erosion Control Agreement for Tract Map No. 29928-1 and the Erosion Control Bond collected to secure erosion control improvements. BACKGROUND: The mass grading plans for Tract Map No. 29928-1 have been approved, a grading permit issued, and grading is underway. Erosion Control is required as part of the grading operation. Per Condition No. 44 of the approved Conditions of Approval, the developer for Tract Map No. 29928-1, is responsible for posting security and entering into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements. An Erosion Control Bond was posted by The American Insurance Company as follows: Erosion Control Bond No. 111 2750 7884 in the amount of $29,500 as security for grading and erosion control improvements. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATrACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Agreements and Bonds (On File) 1 r:~gdrpt~O02\0625\trn29928-1 .erosionbond&agmt ITEM 9 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL F///,.,¢-~ II CITY ATTORNEY ~ II DIRECTOR OF FINANC£__/¢~--'~- CITY MANAGER ~ Il CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 25,2002 Tract Map No. 29929-1, Harveston Erosion Control Agreement and Bond located north of the proposed lake, west of Village Road, east of Harveston Drive, and south of Ysabel Barnett Elementary School PREPARED BY: jV~Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works ~lement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council ACCEPT the Erosion Control Agreement for Tract Map No. 29929-1 and the Erosion Control Bond collected to secure erosion control improvements. BACKGROUND: The mass grading plans for Tract Map No. 29929-1 have been approved, a grading permit issued, and grading is underway. Erosion Control is required as part of the grading operation. Per Condition No. 43 of the approved Conditions of Approval, the developer for Tract Map No. 29929-1, is responsible for posting security and entering into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements. An Erosion Control Bond was posted by The American Insurance Company as follows: Erosion Control Bond No. 111 2750 7876 in the amount of $13,000 as security for grading and erosion control improvements. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Agreements and Bonds (On File) 1 r:~agdrpt~002\0625\trn29929-1 .erosionbond&agmt DATE STREET DATE STREET 44 m BAY COURT'-- ITEM 10 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ClTY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT .City Manager/City Council ,'~-'J(William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 25, 2002 Substitute Agreements and Bonds for Public Improvements in Tract Map No. 23143-7 (East of Buttedield Stage Road and Crowne Hill Drive, South of Pauba Road, and North of Old Kent Road) PREPARED BY: ¢t/f/Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works O-.~Clement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: ACCEPT substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Subdivision Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds as security for improvements and labor and materials for Tract Map 23143-7. ACCEPT substitute Subdivision Monument Agreement and Subdivision Monument Bond as security for monumentation for Tract Map 23143-7. ACKNOWLEDGE that original bonds collected by the original subdivider will be released once transfer of title ownership to the new subdivider is complete. 4. DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. BACKGROUND: On August 14, 2001, the City Council approved Tract Map No. 23143-7, and entered into Subdivision Improvement Agreements with: Crowne Meadows, LP c/o Communities Southwest 181 Old Springs Road Anaheim, CA 92808 for the purpose of securing the improvements and monumentation within Tract Map 23143-7. Accompanying the agreements were the following bonds posted by American Motorists Insurance Company: Bond No. 3SM96425300 in the amount of $1,140,000 as security for subdivision improvements. Bond No. 3SM96425300 in the amount of $570,000 as security for labor and materials. 1 R:~agdrpt~2002\O625\tm 23143-7.sub bond & agmt Bond No. 3SM96425400 in the amount of $34,375 as security for subdivision monumentation. The original subdivider, Crowne Meadows, LP, has decided to sell the land within Tract Map 23143-7 to KB Home Coastal, Inc. Therefore, KB Home Coastal, Inc. has elected to submit substitute bonds and agreements that will replace the ones on file from the original subdivider as follows: KB Home Coastal Inc. 12235 El Camino Real, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92130 Attn: Lisa Gordon Accompanying the agreements were the following bonds posted by American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania: Bond No. 929 232 821 in the amount of $1,140,000 as security for subdivision improvements. Bond No. 929 232 821 in the amount of $570,000 as security for labor and materials. Bond No. 929 232 822 in the amount of $34,375 as security for subdivision monumentation. The sale is in process and Crowne Meadows, LP is the current owner. The release of the original bonds posted by Crowne Meadows, LP will follow with a separate staff report once the sale is complete and KB Home Coastal, Inc. submits proof of ownership. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2 R:\agdrpt~002\0625\tm 23143-7.sub bond & agmt TRACT NO. 25145-7 ~ROJECT SITE TO SAN DIEO0 VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE ITEM 11 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council APPROVAL CItYattORNEY ~--~I DiReCtOR OF fiNanCe CITYMANAGER ~")~ I ~.,~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 25, 2002 Substitute Agreements and Bonds for Public Improvements in Tract Map No. 23143-9 (East of Butterfield Stage Road, South of Royal Crest Place, and West of Crowne Hill Drive) PREPARED BY:~Ronald J. Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works '~-~lement M. Jimenez, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: ACCEPT substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Subdivision Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds as security for improvements and labor and materials for Tract Map 23143-9. ACCEPT substitute Subdivision Monument Agreement and Subdivision Monument Bond as security for monumentation for Tract Map 23143-9. ACKNOWLEDGE that original bonds collected by the original subdivider will be released once transfer of title ownership to the new subdivider is complete. DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. BACKGROUND: On August 14, 2001, the City Council approved Tract Map No. 23143-9, and entered into Subdivision Improvement Agreements with: Crowne Meadows, LP c/o Communities Southwest 181 Old Springs Road Anaheim, CA 92808 for the purpose of securing the improvements and monumentation within Tract Map 23143-9. Accompanying the agreements were the following bonds posted by American Motorists Insurance Company: Bond No. 3SM96425700 in the amount of $1,550,500 as security for subdivision improvements. Bond No. 3SM96425700 in the amount of $775,250 as security for labor and materials. 1 R:\agdrpt~2002\0625\tm 23143-9.sub bond & agmt Bond No. 3SM96425800 in the amount of $52,375 as security for subdivision monumentation. The original subdivider, Crowne Meadows, LP, has decided to sell the land within Tract Map 23143-9 to KB Home Coastal, Inc. Therefore, KB Home Coastal, Inc. has elected to submit substitute bonds and agreements that witl replace the ones on file from the original subdivider as follows: KB Home Coastal Inc. 12235 El Camino Real, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92130 Attn: Lisa Gordon Accompanying the agreements were the following bonds posted by American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania: Bond No. 929 232 823 in the amount of $1,550,500 as security for subdivision improvements. Bond No. 929 232 823 in the amount of $775,250 as security for labor and materials. Bond No. 929 232 824 in the amount of $52,375 as security for subdivision monumentation. The sale is in process and Crowne Meadows, LP is the current owner. The release of the original bonds posted by Crowne Meadows, LP will follow with a separate staff report once the sale is complete and KB Home Coastal, Inc. submits proof of ownership. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2 R:~agdrpt~2002\0625\tm 23143-9.sub bond & agmt TRACT NO. 2,314,3-9 TO SAN DIEGO SITE VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE ITEM 12 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council ,'~illiam G. Hughes, Director of Public Works June 25,2002 Public Works Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Annual Maintenance Agreements PREPARED BY: Bradley A. Buron, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the minor annual maintenance and construction contracts for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 with: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Becker Engineering in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 Imperial Paving Company, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 Minnesang Pest Specialists, in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 Monteleone Contractors, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 Murrieta Development Co., in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 NPG, Inc. (Nelson Paving & Sealing), in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 Pacific West Construction, in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 Rene's Commercial Management, in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 Torah Development & Construction in an amount not to exceed $100,000.00 BACKGROUND: Each year the City enters into numerous maintenance and construction agreements with various contractors that perform minor (small job) maintenance and construction jobs. These jobs usually range in cost from over $1,000 to under $25,000 and involve miscellaneous repairs to drainage areas, sidewalks, curbs, cutters, and storm drains to include excavation. Nevertheless, each job requires an agreement between the City and the contractor. In an effort to streamline these contractual requirements, staff has taken measures to place under agreement nine (9) contractors that are very capable of performing these routine jobs with little notice. Essentially, these agreements will give staff administrative tools needed to efficiently execute minor maintenance and construction work by having executed agreements which satisfy insurance, prevailing wage requirements, terms and conditions as well as a general scope of work. This contracting technique is widely used by cities to employ a higher more responsive maintenance capability. Aisc, in the event of harsh weather that can impinge the safety of the City roadways, and other City maintained areas, these agreements can facilitate an expedient reaction and resolution to advise conditions without jeopardizing administrative requirements. It is important to understand that the not to exceed $100,000.00 amount does not necessarily mean.it will be spent but rather is a ceiling to operate below on an as needed basis. 1 r:~agdrpf~?.002\0625V~nnua102-03 Maint Agreements.AGN/ajp Although some jobs may be better accomplished by one contractor because of equipment availability, timing issues and job location, every effort will be made by staff to distribute the work load evenly between the three contractors. The contractor wil~ be responsible for providing a work proposal for each job, which must be approved by staff before any work is staded. Staff mailed letters to eleven (11) contractors in the local area that could meet the described minor maintenance and construction needs. The letters requested time and material pricing for both labor and equipment rates. It also included holiday and overnight rates. Nine (9) out of the eleven (11 ) contractors responded and provided competitive labor and equipment rates as seen in Exhibit "B" of each agreement. Review of these rates has determined they are consistent with current prevailing wages and current hourly equipment rates previously paid by the City. The contractors listed below responded to the request for time and material rates and are recommended for not to exceed $100,000.00 agreements for a one (1) year term. Company Amount not to Exceed Term Walter K. Becker (dba Becker Engineering) Imperial Paving Company, Inc. Minnesang Pest Specialists Monteleone Contractors, Inc. Murrieta Development Company NPG, Inc. (Nelson Paving & Sealing) Pacific West Construction Rene's Commercial Management Toran Development & Construction $100,000.00 1 year $100,000.00 1 Year $100,000.00 1 Year $100,000.00 1 year $100,000.00 1 year $100,000.00 1 Year $100,000.00 1 year $100,000.00 1 year $100,000.00 1 year FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Public Work's, Maintenance Division Operating Budget for; Drainage Facility Maintenance Account No. 001-164-601- 5401; Routine Street Maintenance Account No. 001-164-601-5402; Old Town Repair & Maintenance Account No. 001-164-603-5212; and Other Outside Services Account No. 001-164-603-5250. ATTACHMENT: 1. Contractor Mailing List 2. Contracts 2 r:~agdrpt~2002\0625~Annua102-03 Maint Agreements. AGN/ajp Contractor Mailin,q List 10. 11. Becker Engineering P.O. Box 890365 Temecula, CA 92589-0365 Del Rio Enterprise 42181 Avenida Alvarado Temecula, CA 92590 Cajer Equipment Rental P.O. Box 585 Temecula, CA 92593 Imperial Paving Co., inc. 13555 E. Imperial Highway Whittier, CA 90605 Minnesang Pest Specialists 27636 Ynez Rd., L-7, #101 Temecula, CA 92591 Monteleone Contractors, Inc. 39054 Camino Hermosa Murrieta, CA 92563 Murrieta Development 42540 Rio Nedo Temecula, CA 92590-3727 N P G Corporation (Nelson Paving & Sealing) P.O. Box 1515 Perris, CA 92575 Pacific West Construction 637 N. Emerald Dr. Vista, CA 92803 Rene's Commercial Management 1002 Luna Way San Jacinto, CA 92583 Toran Development & Construction 37110 Mesa Rd Temecula, CA 92592-8633 3 r:~agdrpt~2002\0625~Annua102~03 Maint Agreements. AGN/ajp CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYWIDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and BECKER ENGINEERING ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the right to hire other contractors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A", Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A". The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00, unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in wrihng and request for payment. 1 R:~naintain\workorders~Becker 02~)3 Agrmth-naster const agrmt Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of Califomia, 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 Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rotes 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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. 8. 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 Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. 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 Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder ahses out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor 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, 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions/n performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the city. P-Amaintain\workordcrs~Becker 024)3 Agrmt~aster const agvmt 11. LIABILITY IBISURANCE. 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 hereunder by the Contractor, 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 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of Califomia and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor 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) Employer's Liability: $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 elirff~nate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, 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. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile 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 arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor'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 Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3 R:hnaintain\workorders~Becker 024)3 Agrmt~rnaster const agrmt (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 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. (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' pr/or 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. f. Vehfication of Coverage. Contractor shall fumish 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 District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF TIlE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive ffn:ection and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 RAmaintain\workorders~Becker 02-03 Agrmt~mster const agrmt examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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. 17. 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the 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. 21. DISCRIMINATION. Contractor represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not, discriminate in its employment practices on the basis o£race, creed, relig/on, national origin, color, sex, age, or handicap. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Becker Engineering P.O. Box 890365 Temecula, CA 92589-0365 (909) 731-3991 5 R:h~aintain\workorders~Beck~r 02~)3 Agrmthnmster const agrmt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temeeula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 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 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. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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 other, vise, 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. 27. 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. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 6 R:hmaintain\workorders~Becker 024)3 Agnnth-naster const agrmt IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved AstoForm: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR BECKER ENGINEERING P.O. Box 890365 Temecula, CA 92589-0365 (909) 731-3991 Wal~er K. Becker, Owner 7 R:hmain tain\workorders~Becker 024)3 Agrmthmster const agrmt EXHIB1T "A" Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the propose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director') or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work undertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 8 RAmaintain\workorders~Becker 02-03 Agrmt~naster const agnnt EXHIBIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES 9 RAmaintain\workorders~Becker 02-03 Agrmt~a.ster eonst agrmt BECKER .ENGINEERI[NG CA License #683396-A RECEIVED MAY 0 2002 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT P.O. Box 890365, (909) 712-2341 GRADING · PAVING · CONCRETE · DEMOLITIONS PROPOSAL & CONTRACT ,WNER / CONTRACTOR PUONFg09/694/6411 CITY OF TEMECULA NAME: LEGAL JOB LOCATION: BRAD BURON/ PUBLIC WORKS STREET: 43200 BUSINESS PARK DR. ITREET: CITY: TEMECULA I STATE: CA :ITY: We propose to furnish all equipment and perform all labor necessary to complete the following: PLEASE REVIEW SHEET #2 AS PER YOUR REQUESTED TIME AND MATERIAL SHEETS REFLECTING PREVAILING WAGE HIKES FOR YEARS 2002 TO 2003. This contract does not include any damage or repairs to underground facilities not visible from the surface or otherwise designated by owner / contractor and stated in this agreement. Any extra work or delays will result in contract reverting to Time & Material. All of the above work to be completed in a substantial and workmanlike manner according to standard practices for the sum of DOLLARS ($ .) Terms of Payment: Any alteration or deviation from the above specifications involving extra cost of materials or labor will only be executed upon written orders for same, and will become an extra charge over the sum mentioned in this contract. All agreements must be made in writing. It is further understood and agreed that Workmen's Compensation and Public Liability Insurance will be provided, however, coverage applies only to work actually performed by Becker Engineering in accordance with terms and conditions of this contract. Certificates of Insurance will be furnished upon request. 3 6 5 DAYS FROM THE ABOVE DATE Authorized Signature: ~////'~"~~ BECKER ENGINEERIlNG :: CA License # 683396-A P.O, Box 890365 · Temecula, CA 92589-0365 (909) 731-3991 GRADING · PAVING · CONCRETE · DEMOLITIONS PROPOSAL & CONTRACT SHEET #2. LABOR RATES S.T. O.T. SUPERINTENDENT W/1 TON TRUCK $60.05 $89.55 FOREMAN W/3/4 TRUCK $55.55 $81.05 GENERAL LABORER $46.05 $66.05 NOTE: THESE LABOR RATES REFLECT LATEST RAISES IN P.W. SCALE. BARE EQUIPMENT 450 DOZER SKIPLOADER 310 BACKHOE 763 BOBCAT 763 BOBCAT W/BREAKER 863 BOBCAT 863 BOBCAT W/BREAKER BOBTAIL DUMP 1TO3 TON ROLLER 3T05 TON ROLLER VIBRATORY PLATE WACKER TAMP WATER TRUCK AREA MOVE INS $50.00 P.H. $38.50 " $50.00 " $42.50 " $65.50 " $50.00 " $73.00 " $50.00 " $26.00 " $38.50 " $21.00 " $21.00 " $55.00 " $80.00 " ALL MATERIALS AND RATES AT A.P.W. STANDARD BOOK RATES. CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYWIDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and IMPERIAL PAVING CO., INC. ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or constraction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the right to hire other contractors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A", Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A'. The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00) unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. 1 R:~maintain\wor korder s~Irnpe~5 al Paving 024)3 Agrmthmster coast agrmt Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of Califomia, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rote 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 Contractor 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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. 8. 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 Conh'actor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. 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 termmated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with whtten notice of the default. The Contractor 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 Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor 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, 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 2 RSmaintain\workordersXlmpefial Paving 02-03 Agrmt~master const agrmt 11. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 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 hereunder by the Contractor, 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 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of Califomia and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor 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) Employer's Liability: $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, 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. 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 Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained bythe City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3 R:~naintain\wor kor ders~Imperial Paving 024)3 Agrmthnaaster const agrmt (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 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. (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. f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall fumish 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 District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the Citynor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 ~maintain\workordersXlmpefial Paving 02-03 Agrmt~master const agrmt examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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. 17. 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Govemment Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the 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. 21. 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. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Imperial Paving Co., Inc. 13555 E. Imperial Highway Whittier, CA 90605 (562) 944-0975 5 R:~nainlain\workorder s~Imperial Paving 024)3 Agrmflmaster const agrmt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temecula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 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 of litigation between the parties concerning this Contract, the prevailing pat~ as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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 Arf~cle 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. 27. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement eontains 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 fu~er force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each partes own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 6 R:~naintain\workorders~nperial Paving 02413 Agrmt~aster const agrmt IN WITNESS WltEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR IMPERIAL PAVENG CO., INC. 13555 E. Imperial Highway Whittier, CA 90605 (562) 523-0975 Fritz Coy, Secretary/Treasure 7 R:Lmaintain\workorder s~Imperial Pa~ing 02-03 Agrmt~mster const agrmt EXHIBIT "A" Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director") or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work undertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 8 R:~naintain\workorders~Imperial Paving 02-03 Agrmt~aster const agrmt EXHIBIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES 9 R:~rnainlain\workorders~Imperial Paving 02d)3 A~cmt~master const agrmt IMPERIAL PAVING CO., INC. 13555 E. Imperial Hwy. Whittier, California 90605 (562) 944-0975 (714) 523-4492 Fax (562) 944-0984 CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. BOX 9033 TEMECULA, CA 92589-9033 RE: TIME AND MATERIAL SHEET ATTN: BRAD LABOR BREAKDOWN ALL LABOR ............................................ $ OVERTIME 1 V2 TIME (Avrb;R 8HRS/SATURDAYS) ............... $ DOUBLETIME 2 TIME (SUNDAYS/HOLIDAYS) .................. $ 45.00 PER HOUR 67.50 PER HOUR 90.00 PER HOUR EQUIPMENT BREAKDOWN (DOES NOT INCLU1)E LABOR} FLATBED TRUCK WITH COMPRESSOR MOUNT ................ $ 325.00 PER DAY BOB TAIL TRUCK 9 -11 YARDS ............................. $ 315.00 PER DAY CONCRETE FLATBED TRUCK .............................. $ 300.00 PER DAY DUMP TRUCK & PUP TRAILER ............................. $ 390.00 PER DAY AIR COMPRESSOR ...................................... $ 150.00 PER DAY WATER TRUCK .......................................... $ FLATBED TRUCK WITH 3-5 TON ROLLER COIvlBO (MINIMUM) .... $ DUMP TRUCK WITH SK1PLOADER & TRAILER COMBO ......... $ 10-12 TON ROLLER INCLUDING TRAILER .................... $ 3-5 TON ROLLER INCLUDING TRAILER ....... 2 ..............$ BERM MACH1NE MINIMUM CHARGE ............... ' ........ $ BOBCAT WITH BUCKET ................................. $ BOBCAT WITH GRINDER ............................ '~ - - - $ ARROW BOARD W1TH TRUCK ............................. $ 275.00 PER DAY 505.00 PER DAY 505.00 PER DAY 250.00 PER DAY 245.00 PER DAY 150.00 PER DAY 500.00 PER DAY 550.00 PER DAY 250.00 PER DAY STANDARD SET (COMMON REPAIR CREW) FOUR MAN CREW SKIPLOADER DUMPTRUCK 3-5 TON ROLLER FLATBED WITH COMPRESSOR & TOOLS .................... $ 2,600.00 PER DAY LESS THAN 8 HRS (2HR MINIMUM) ........................ $ 400.00 PER HOUR MATERIALS ASPHALT ................. : .......................... $ ASPHALT PLANT OPENING ON SATURDAYS ................ $ EASE ROCK CLASS II ................................... $ TACK MATERIAL ...................................... $ CONCRETE .......................................... $ CONCRETE AFTER 4 YARDS ............................. $ NOTE: ABOVE PRICES SUBJECT TO PUC CHANGE. 20% MARK LIP ON SUBCONTRACTORS. NOTE: IMPERIAL PAVING PROVIDES THE FOLLOWING SERVICES: EXCAVATION, GRADING~ PAVING CONCRETE, SEAL COATING AND STRIPING. 44.10 PER TON 1,000.00 12.50 PER TON 1.60 PER GAL 425.00 MIN. LOAD 75.00 PER YARD CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYVflDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE Tins CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and MINNESANG PEST SPICIALISTS ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the right to hire other contractors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A", Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A". The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00) unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days ofreeeipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. R:~maintain\workorders~vlinnesang 024)3 Agrmt~aster const agrmt Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. 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 Contractor 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 complywith the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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. 8. 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 Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. 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 Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with whtten notice of the default. The Contractor 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 Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without ftather notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor 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, 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 2 R:~-naintain\workorders~vlinnesang 024)3 Agrmt~master const agnnt 11. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 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 hereunder by the Contractor, 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 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code I (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor 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) Employer's Liability: $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 elimtnate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, 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. 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 Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor'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 Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3 RAmaint~in\workorderskMinnesang 024)3 Ag~ntkmaster const agrmt (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 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. (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. f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall fumish 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 bythe City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Conlractor for performing services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 R:hnaintain\workorders~Vlinnesang 024)3 Agnnt~master const agrmt exarrfmations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal will be accepted as an excuse for any failure or ormssion 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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. 17. 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the 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. 21. 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. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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, cextified mail, postage prepaid, rettun 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: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Minnesang Pest Specialists 27636 Ynez Rd., L-7, #101 Temecula, CA 92591 (909) 699-2661 5 R:~naintain\workordersXMinnesang 02-03 Agrmt~naster const agnnt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temecula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full fome and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 Agreement and also govem the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation conceming this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with 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. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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 Govemment Code of the State of California. 27. 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. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Conlxactor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 6 RSmaintain\workord ershMinnes ang 024)3 Agnntkmaster const agrmt IN VqITNESS WltERE OF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey CONTRACTOR MINNESANG PEST SPECIALISTS 27636 Ynez Rd., L-7, #101 Temecula, CA 92591 (909) 699-2661 David Minnesang, Owner 7 R:~naintain\workordersXMinnesang 02-03 Agnnth'-nas~er const agrmt EXHIBIT "A' Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temeeula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director") or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work undertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. $ R:~naintain\workorders~vlinnesang 024)3 Agrmt~naster const agrmt EXHIBIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES 9 R:~naintain\workorders~¥1innesang 02-03 Agrmt~oaaster const agrmt Minnesang Pest Specialists 27636 Ynez Road L-7, ,9 101, Tesnecula, CA 9'2591 Telephone: (909) 699-2661 Fax: 699-6008 ¢-maik pes~speciallst @juno.corn City of Temecula Service Quote June 4, 2002 RECEIVED JUN 4 ~00~ CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Minnesang Pest Specialists is a locally owned and operated small business that offers a vadety of pest control, tree and shrub care, and weed control services. Under another name, we have been serving the City of Temecula for over 10 years (primarily providing right- of-way weed control). Listinq of Services · Right-of-way (ROW) weed control · Channel weed control · Pavement crack weed control · ExoticJinvasive weed eradication (Arundo, tamarisk, yellow star thistle, perennial pepperweed, etc.) · Tree and shrub spraying · Tree and shrub injecting (systemic) · Gopher control · Ground squirrel control · General structural pest control (ants, spiders, etc.) Price quotes 1. ROW Weed Control - broadcast application · Pre-emergent herbicide application $166.2§/acre · Post-emergent herbicide application (pre-emergent treated sites) §8.75/acre · Post-emergent herbicide application (untreated sites) 12§.00/acre 2. Channel Weed Control - handgun application · Pre-emergent herbicide application (banks only) $332,50/acre · Post-emergent herbicide application (bottoms) 125,00/acre Note: post-emergent herbicide application to treated banks is included in the above quote. 3. Pavement Crack Weed Control · Roadsides (curbs/gutters) - broadcast application · Asphalt cracks - spot application 4. ExoticJInvasive Weed Eradication · In drainage channels $1,300.00/acre · In other areas $ 425.00/acre $ .10/linear foot 1.00/linear foot City of Temecula Service Quote June 4, 2002 5. Tree Spraying Per tree pdce based on tree height Tree Injection Per tree price based on trunk width in inches at 4 feet above the ground 7. Gopher Control Elimination of existing gophers in fiat areas 8. Ground Squirrel Control Elimination of existing colonies Structural Pest Control · Control of ants, spiders, earwigs, etc. in and around structures · Control of rats & mice in and around structures 10. Professional Consulting For all of the above services and many others $2.25/foot $4.00/inch $175.00/1000 sq. ft. $250.00/colony Estimate required Estimate required $95.001hr. CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYWIDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and MONTELEONE CONTRACTORS, INC. ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the fight to hire other contractors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A', Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A". The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00) unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approvat of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year fi.om date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. 1 R:~maintain\workorders~Monteleone 024}3 Agrmtkm~ster const agrmt Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. 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 Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rotes 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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. 8. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or termmate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. 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 Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. ~l~e Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at taw, in equity or under this Agreement. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor 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, 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 2 R:~uaintain\workorders~vlonteleone 024)3 AgnmLmaster const agrmt 11. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 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 hereunder by the Contractor, 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 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor 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) Employer's Liability: $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, 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. 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 Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor'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 Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3 R:~naintain\workordersXlVlonteleon¢ 024)3 Agrmthmaster const agnnt (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 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. (s) 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. f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor 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 District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workmaffs Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF TIlE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTORtS INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 RSmaintain\workorders~lonteleone 02-03 Agrmth-naster const agrmt examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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. 17. 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the 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. 21. 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. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Monteleone Contractors, Inc. 35245 Briggs Road Murrieta, Califomia 92563 (909) 677-6403 5 R:~naintain\workorders~Monteleone 024)3 Agrmt~naster const agrmt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temecula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 Agreement and also govem 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 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. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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 Govemment Code of the State of California. 27. 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. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 6 R:~maintain\workorders~vlonteleone 024)3 Agrmt~master const agrmt IN WITNESS WI-IEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, CityClerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR MONTELEONE CONTRACTORS INC. 35245 Briggs Rd. Mumeta, CA 92563 (909) 677-6403 Ryan Monteleone 7 R:~'naintain\workorders~lonteleone 024)3 Agnnt~master const ag'mt EX~41~IT "A" Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director") or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work tmdertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 8 R:¥naintain\workordersWIonteleone 024)3 Agrmtknmster const agrmt EXHIRIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES 9 R:~maintain\workorders~Vlonteleone 02-03 Agrmt~naster const agrmt RECEIVED MAY 2 ZOO? CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 35245 Briggs rd Murrieta,CA 92563 U.S.A Phone 9094774403 Fax 909-926-1998 Cell (909) 5384537 Time and equipment rate for 2002- 2003 Equipmcnt Rate per hr Saturday/+8hrs Holiday/Sunday regular rate *per hour overtime ovcrtime rate 450 dozer $100.00 $115.50 $131.00 D6LGP $130.00 $145.50 $161.00 D6H $115.00 $130.50 $146.00 834 dozer $170.00 $185.50 $201.00 824 dozer $160.00 $175.50 $181.00 D8k dozer $140.00 $155.50 $171.00 DSN dozer $140.00 $155.50 $171.00 DSR dozer $150.00 $165.50 $181.00 DgL dozer $190.00 $205.50 $221.00 650komatsu $280.00 $295.50 $311.00 400 excavator $183.00 $198.50 $214.00 300 excavator $150.00 $165.50 $181.00 220 excavator $125.00 $140.50 $156.00 446 backhoe $1010 $116.50 $132.00 30Mfskip/mower $77.50 $93.00 $108.50 450 C loader $145.00 $160.50 $176.00 950 loader $130.00 $145.50 $161.00 977 loader $130.00 $145.50 $161.00 973 track ~ader $140.00 $155.50 $171.00 963 track loader $130.00 $145.50 $161.00 12G motor grader $110.00 $125.50 $141.00 623 scraper $150.00 $165.50 $181.00 860 scraper $i40.00 $155.50 $171.00 657 push pull $240.00 $255.50 $271.00 637 E push pull $200.00 $215.50 $231.00 10 wheel dump/pup $80.00 $95.50 $111.00 Hi-side semi $85.00 $100.50 $116.00 4,000 gal wAruck $75.00 $90.50 $106.00 Lowbed truck $90.00 $105.50 $121.00 Foreman $63.00 $78.50 $94.00 Pick-u p $30.00 $45.50 $61.00 Grade checker $51.00 $66.50 $82.00 Laborer $43.00 $58.50 $74.00 ~Notc- Overtime wages begin after 3:00P.M. with a 6:30 A.M. starting time. Rate used beyond 8 hours on weekdays and all hours on Saturday. Ryan Monteleone Ceii(909) 538-6537 Office(909) 67%6403 Pager (909) 694-7028 CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYWIDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and MURRIETA DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set fo~h herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or conslmctiun upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the right to hire other contractors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A", Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A". The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00 ~ unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and setwices shall be fumished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making fmal request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall const/tute a waiver of all claims against the R:~maintain\workordershMurrieta 02-03 Agrmt~naster const agrmt City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. 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 Contractor 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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 rotes for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 8. 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 Contractor at least ten (I0) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor 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 Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the 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. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers fi.om and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. Pc ~main tain\workordets~Vlurrieta 02-03 Agrmthnaster const agrmt 11. LIABILITY INSURANCE. Contractor shall procure and rnffmtain 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 Contractor, 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 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maint~fin 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) Employer's Liability: $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, 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. d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to cont,Vm, 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 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 sh~ll 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 Contractor'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 Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3 R:~naintain\wo[kordersXMurrieta 02-03 AgrmtXmaster const agrtnt (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 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. (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 o f 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. f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor 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 District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 RSmaintain\workorders~M urrieta 02-03 AgrmtLmaster const agrmt examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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. 17. BOOKS AND RECORDS. Contractor's books, records, and plans or such pa~t 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Govemment Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the 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. 21. 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. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, Califomia 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Murrieta Development Co., Inc. 42540 Rio Nedo Temecula, Califomia 92590 (909) 719-1680 R:~naintain\workordersLMurrieta 02~)3 Agrmthraster const agrmt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temecula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 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 of litigation between the parties concerning this Contract, the prevailing party as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to actual and reasonable attomey fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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 whting, 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. 27. 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. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. R:huaintain\~vorkordersWlurrie~a 024)3 Agnn6master const agrmt IN WITNESS WltEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Attest: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey CONTRACTOR MURRIETA DEVELOPMENT CO., INC. 42540 Rio Nedo Tcmccula, CA 92590 (909) 719-1680 Dennis T. Cissell, President RSmaintain\workorders~Murrieta 024)3 Agrmt~master const agrmt EXHIBIT "A" Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director") or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work undertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. RSmaintain\workordershMurrieta 024)3 Agrmt~a~ster const agrmt EXHIBIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES R:Wnaintain\workorders~v[urrieta 02-03 Ag~nt~naster eonst agrmt MURRIETA DEVELOPMENT CO.., INC. RENTAL BATE8 - OPERATED DENNIS T. CISSELL, PRESIDENT TODD K. CLOSE, VICE PRESIDENT 330 CAT 345 CAT 420 CAT 4300LINEBELT $ 175.00 /HR $ 205.00 /HR $ 95.00 /HR $ 175.00 /HR COMPACTION F.,~UIPM~I~T COMPACTION WHEEL-ON ANY EQUIPMENT REX COMPACTOR STOMPER WACKER /VIBRATORY PLATE 40.00 /HR 11o.oo /HR 105.00 /HR 100.00 /DAY 650 JOHN DEERE w/SLOPE BOARD $ 105,00 /HR D-4HCATw/SLOPEBOARD $ 105.00 /HR D-6M CAT $ 125.00 /HR D*6R CAT $ 135.00 /HR LOADEI~ 926 CAT (1/2 Yard Bucket) $ 105.00 /HR 950 CAT (3/4 Yard Bucket) $ 115.00 /HR JOHN DEERE 210-L MASSONRY-FERGUSON MFS0 $ 85.00 /HR $ 85.00 /HR AIR COMPRESSORS / JACK RAMMERS $ 150.00 /DAY AIR TESTING/PRESSURE TESTING (Equipment Only) $ 150.00 /DAY BLOWER $ 75.00 /DAY CEMENT MIXER $ 50.00 /DAY CHOP SAW $ 100.00 /DAY CREW TRUCK $ 25.00 /HR DUMp TRUCK $ 75.00 /HR DUMP TRUCK w/TRAILER $ 95.00 /HR END DUMP $ 95.00 /HR FOREMAN $ 65.00 /HR GAS DETECTION (Equipment On/3J $ 50.00 /DAY GENERATOR RAMMER DRILL $ 55.00 /DAY GRADE CHECKER $ 40.00 /HR GRINDER $ 25.00 /DAY HYDROSTATIC POMP $ 100.00 /DAY LABORER $ 40.00 /HR LEAK LOCATING (Equipment Only) $ 150.00 /DAY LOWBED $ 95.00 /HR OPERATOR $ 43.00 /HR REED SCREEN ALL $ 50.00 /HR ROLLER $ 200.00 /DAY SILVER SOLDERING $ 55.00 /HR TRASH PUMPS & HOSES $ 100.00 /DAY TRUCK & TRANSFER $ 90.00 /HR WATER TRUCK $ 75.00 /HR WAYNE'S BALL (Equipment On/y) $ 75.00 /DAY WELDER $ 65.00 /HR ALL HOURS IN EXCESS OF 8 HOURS PER DAY AND/OR 40 HOURS PER WEEK WILL BE CHARGED AT TIME AND A HALF. THERE WILL BE NO CHARGE FOR OPERATOR WITH RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF OVERTIME. OPERATOR OVERTIME WILL BE CRARGED AT RALF TIME HOURLY RATE TO DEVELOPEI~ TIME & MATERIAL SERVICES WILL BE BILLED AT COST PLUS 15% PROFIT AND OVERHEAD. 42540 RIO NEDO, TEMECULA, CA 92590 * CALIF. LIC.//558592 * (909) 719-1680 · FAX (909) 719-1684 MURRIETA DEVELOPMENT CO.., INC. RENTAL RATE~ - OPERATED DENNIS T. CISSELL, PRESIDENT TODD K. CLOSE, VICE PRESIDENT 330 CAT 345 CAT 420 CAT 4300 LINKBELT POWER BROOM 150.00 /HR 185.00 /HR 75.00 /HR 150.00 /HR 280.00 /DAY COMPACTION E~IPMENT COMPACTION WHEEL-ON ANY EQUIPMENT REX COMPACTOR STOMPER WACKER/VIBRATORY PLATE $ 25.00 /HR $ 100.00 /HR $ 90.00 /HR $ 85,00 /DAY 650 JOHN DEERE w/SLOPE BOARD $ 90,00 /HR D-4H CAT w/SLOPE BOARD $ 90.00 /HR D-6M CAT $ 110.00 /HR D-6R CAT $ 120.00 /HR LOADER~ 926 CAT (1/2 Yard Bucket) $ 85.00 /HR 950 CAT (3/4 Yard Bucket) $ 100.00 /HR JOHN DEERE 210 L MASSONRY-FERGUSON MFS0 7O.OO /HR 70.00 /HR AIR COMPRESSORS / JACK HAMMERS $ 125.00 /DAY AIR TESTING /PRESSURE TESTING (Equyment O~y) $ 150.00 /DAY BLOWER $ 75.00 /DAY CEMENT MIXER $ 45,00 /DAY CHOP SAW $ 100.00 /DAY CREW TRUCK $ 20.00 /HR DUMP TRUCK $ 65,00 /HR DUMPTRUCKw/TRAILER $ 75.00 /HR END DUMP $ 75.00 /HR FOREMAN $ 55.00 /HR GAS DETECTION (Equipment Only} $ 50.00 /DAY GENERATOR - HAMMER DRILL $ 50.00 /DAY GRADE CHECKER $ 40,00 /HR GRINDER $ 25.00 /DAY HYDROSTATIC PUMP $ 100.00 /DAY LABORER $ 30.00 /HR LEAK LOCATING (Equipment On/y) /4 150.00 /DAY LOWBED $ 85.00 /HR OPERATOR $ 33.00 /HR REED SCREEN ALL $ 50.00 /HR ROLLER $ 200.00 /DAY SILVER SOLDERING $ 50.00 /HR TRASH PUMPS ~ HOSES $ 85.00 /DAY TRUCK ~ TRANSFER $ 70.00 /HR WATER TRUCK $ 60.00 /HR WAYNE'S BALL (Equ/!~xlent On]y) $ 75.00 /DAY WELDER $ 60.00 /HR ALL HOURS IN EXCESS OF 8 HOURS PER DAY AND/OR 40 HOURS PER WEEK WILL BE CHARGED AT TIME AND A HALF. THERE WILL BE NO CHARGE FOR OPERATOR WITH RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF OVERTIME. OPERATOR OVERTIME WILL BE CHARGED AT HALF TIME HOURLy RATE TO DEVELOPEP~ TIME & MATERIAL SERVICES WILL BE BILLED AT COST PLUS 15% PROFIT AND OVERHEAD, 42540 RIO NEDO, TEMECULA, CA 92590 · CALIF. LIC. ~358592 · (909) 719-1680 · FAX (909) 719-1684 CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYXVIDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and NPG, Inc. ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the paxties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Cuntmctor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the right to hire other cuntmctors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A", Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A". The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00) unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. R:~rnaintain\workorders~qPG 02-03 Agrmt~aster const agrmt Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. 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 Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rotes 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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 rotes for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 8. 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 Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. 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 Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers fi'om and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in perfomaing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. R:~main tain\workorder shNPG 024)3 Agrmt~master const agrmt 11. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 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 hereunder by the Contractor, 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 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor 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) Employer's Liability: $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, 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. 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 Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primmy 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 Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. R:hnaintain\workorders2qPG 024)3 Agrmthnaster const agrmt (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 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. (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. f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor 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 District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for perfonmng services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 R:~naintain\workorders~qPG 024)3 Agrmt~naster const agrmt examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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. 17. 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the 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 faeihties and assistance for the safety and convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as to not unduly delaythe 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. 21. 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. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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 patty as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: NPG, Inc. P.O. Box 1515 Perris, Califomia 92572 (909) 940-0200 5 R:~maintain\workordershNPG 024)3 Agrmt~master const agnnt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temecula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 Agreement and also govem 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 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. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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 Govemment Code of the State of California. 27. 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. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contmctur warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 6 Rzh-naintain\workorders~NPG 024)3 Agrmt~aster const agrmt IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR NPG, INC. P.O. Box 1515 Peres, CA 92572 (909) 940-0200 Jeff S. Nelson, President RAmaintain\workorders~NPG 02-03 Agrmfinmster const agrmt EXHIBIT "A" Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director") or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work undertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 8 R:~naintain\workordershNPG 024)3 Ag~nt~aaster const agrmt EXHIBIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES R:krnaintain\workordershNPG 02~)3 A~nnt~tnaster ¢onst agrmt PH. (909) 940-0200 FAX (909) 940-9192 Cont. Lic. #664779 ESTIMATE TO (Client) City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 RECEIVED 0 4 007. cn~ o~ T~a~CUL~ 1~354 JET WAY PE~S, CA 92572 ESTIMATE Cont. Lic. g~779 DATE: April 18, 2002 PROJECT: Time and Material Rates LOCATION: Temecula, California Attention: Mr. Brad Buron We Handle AH Phases of Asphalt Tele hone: 909-694-6411 Fax: 909-694-6475 Estimator: Jeff S. Nelson NELSON PAVING & SEALING (hereinafter called Contractor) quotes the following estimate to Client for furnishing the material and labor and performing the work hereinafter specified, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. T & M Rate Sheet GENERAL LABOR Standard Overtime .Double Time Traffic Control 42.50 63.75 85.00 Shovel - Lute Laborer 42.50 63,75 85.00 PCC / Form Setter 42.50 63.75 85.00 _OPERA_TORS Tractor Operator 50.00 75.00 100.00 Screed Operator 50.00 75.00 100.00 Roller Operator 50.00 75,00 100.00 Crack Fill Machine Operator 50.00 75.00 100.00 Paving Machine Operator 50.00 75.00 100.00 ~ Hour Rate Day Rate Blaw Knox 180 (Rubber) 125.00 Cat AP 1050 Paving Machine (Track) 130.00 BG 220 Paving Machine (Rubber) 100.00 Asphalt Roller (3-5 Ton) Asphalt Roller (4-6 Ton) Asphalt Roller (5-8 Ton) Asphalt Roller (8-10 Ton) Ford 4 Wheel Drive Skip Loader 445 Operated 62.50 John Deere 210LE Skip Loader Operated 65.00 JD 670 Blade or CAT t2G Blade Operated 105.00 Asphalt Crew Truck (with all tools) Asphalt Berm Machine 200 Gallons Tack Rig 863 Bobcat Operated 85.00 105.00 Breaker 150.00 Grinder 18" 105.00 Sweeper 10 Wheel Dump Truck (4 Available) 70.00 International Dump Truck* 80.00 *Truck has Compressor & Jack Hammer Crafco Hot Crack Fill Machine DA 350 Seal Buggy Operated 70.00 25.00 Automatics Ski Control 25.00 Compressor Bare with 90 lb. Hammer Traffic Control Arrow Board MOVES Hour Rate 215,00 225.00 300.00 400.00 200.00 250.00 100.00 250.00 250.00 150.00 Day Rate CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYWIDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and PACIFIC WEST CONSTRUCTION ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the propose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the right to hire other contractors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A", Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A". The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00) unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making fmal request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the £mal payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. R:~main tain\workor d er s\pacific West 024)3 Agrmt~naster eonst agrmt Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of Califomia, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rote 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 Contractor 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 complywith the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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 conlract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 8. SUSPENSION OR TERMENATION 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 Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. 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 Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to tcrrmnate 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. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor 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, or liability of any k/nd 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 2 R:hnaintain\workorders\pacific West 02-03 Agrmt~master const agrmt 11. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 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 fi.om or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of Califomia and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall rmfmtain limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commemial 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. 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 Contractor 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 Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor'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 Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3 R:hnaintain\workorders\pa¢ific West 024)3 Ag~nthmaster const agrmt (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 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. (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. f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor 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 District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 R:hnaintain\workorders~pacifie West 024)3 Agrmt~naster const agrmt examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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. 17. 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the City and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places, including without limitation, thc 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. 21. 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. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Pacific West Construction 637 North Emerald Drive Vista, Califomia (760) 639-1729 5 RAmaintain\workorders~pacific West 024)3 Agrmfimastex const agrmt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temecula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 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 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. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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 Govemment Code of the State of Califomia. 27. 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. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor wan'ants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 6 R:h-naintain\workordersXpacific West 02-03 Agrmt~naster const agrmt IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Attest: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR PACIFIC VOgST CONSTRUCTION 637 N. Emerald Dr. Vista, CA 92083 (760) 639-1729 Arthur R. Coltram, Jr. 7 RSmaintain\workorders\pacifi c West 02-03 Agrmt~aasta- const agrmt EXHIBIT "A' Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director") or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work undertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 8 R:~naintain\workordersXpacific West 02-03 Agrmth-naster const agrmt EXIHBIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES 9 R:~maintain\workorders\pacific West 02-03 Agrmt~master const agrmt City of Temecula Public Works Brad Buron May 29, 2002 Re: TimeJMaterinl rates for providing stemn-cle~ning services Dear Brad, PACIFIC WEb-'T CONb-'TRUCTION CA LICENSE 475022 637 NORTH EMERALD DRIVE VIb-'TA,CA 92083 (75O) 639-1729 FAX (760) 639-1904 Art Coltrain 909-721-6766 Based on our recent conversations and per your request, I am submitting rates as indicated below for providing steam cleaning services. The rates are based on city wide service, which allows us to provide quality service at a lower price due to lhe large volume of work. Pacific West Construction will perform the following services at your request: High pressure steam cleaning 0- 500 SF $0.95/SF 500-1000 SF $0.75/SF 1000-2000 SF $0.65/SF over 2000 SF $0.50/SF Chemically strip areas of concrete or block as needed. Removal of paint, soda, food stains, oil, rust and other miscellaneous stains. (Chemicals are necessary to remove stains without damaging new concrete.) 0- 500 SF $2.75/SF 500-1000 SF = $2.65/SF 1000-2000 SF = $2.60/SF over 2000 SF = $2.50/SF Concrete bleaching process to allow for a uniform curing process, aRer the removal of stains to eliminate possible discoloration. 0- 500 SF -- $1.20/SF 500-1000SF = $1.15/SF 100Qr2000 SF = $1.10/SF over 2000 SF = $1.05/SF NOTES: City of Te~necula to furnish floating water & meter fur use during cleaning. Add 50% of square footage price for weekends and holidays Cleaning will be performed within 48 hours of Notice to Contractor. Requested emergency cleaning will be performed within 4 hours of Notice to Contractor, with a 20% increase to unit prices. PACIFIC WEST CONSTRUCTION CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYWIDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the right to hire other contractors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A", Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in fall. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B', Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A". The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00) unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submi~ed between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. R:~naintain\workordersXRenes 024)3 Agrmt~raaster const agrmt Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. 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 Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rotes 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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 rotes for any work done under this contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 8. 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 Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. 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 Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 10. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor 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, 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. RSmaintain\workordersW, enes 02-03 Ag~nt~naster const agrmt 11. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 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 hereunder by the Contractor, 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 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of Califomia and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor 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) Employer's Liability: $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, 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. 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 Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor'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 Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. R:~mintain\workorders~Renes 02-03 Agnnthnaster const agrmt (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 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. (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, retum 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% rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall fumish 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 District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIlgS. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 R:~naintain\workordersh°,enes 02-03 Agrmt~aster const agrmt examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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 Califomia. 17. 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the 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. 21. 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. 22. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Rene's Commercial Management 1002 Luna Way San Jacinto, California 92583 (909) 487-0247 R:~naintain\workorders~enes 02-03 AgrmtXmaster const agrmt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temecula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses reqff~red of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal dislrict court with 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 attomey fees and litigation costs incurred in the litigation. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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. 27. 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 whtten, 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. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 6 R:hnaintain\workorderskRcnes 02-03 Agrmtknmster const agrmt IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT 1002 Luna Way San Jacinto, CA 92583 (909) 487-0247 Rene Martinez, Owner 7 R:hnaintain\workordersW, enes 024)3 Agrmth-naster const agrmt EXHIBIT "A' Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director") or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work undertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. RSmaintain\workordershRenes 02-03 Agrmt~naster const agrmt EXHIBIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES 9 R:~naintain\workorders~Renes 024)3 Agrmt~'naster const agrmt CLIENT: Rene's Commercial Management 1002 Luna Way * San Jacinto, CA 92583 * TeL (909) 487-0247 * Fax (909) 487-0479 City of Temecula, CA DATE: May 15, 2002 TIME AND MATERIAL RATES FOR JULY 2002/2003 WEED SPRAYING: 1) Pre-emergent Applications: a) Sensitive Areas (Landscape areas): b) Non-sensitive Areas (Roadside): 2) Post-emergent Applications: (Older, larger weeds, higher rate) MECHANICAL WEED ABATEMENT: Man / Equip. Foreman & Pick-up $195.00/Ac $175.00/Ac $125.00 - $175.00/Ac Per Hour Sat./+8 hrs. Emergency RespOnse Rate $21.50 $25.50 $29.95 $27.00 $30.00 $33.50 GENERAL LABOR, TRASH PICK-UP~ HAULING~ ETC.: Per Hour Sat./+8 hrs. Emergency Response Rate Per Man $19.50 $22.50 $27.50 TRACTOR / MOWING: Man / Equip.: $55.00/Hr. (Rate, includes transportation cost) (Minimum 3 Hours) All of these rates, reflect current Prevailing Wage and Certified Payroll Rene Martinez - Cellular Phone: (909) 830-0239 - 24 Hours CITY OF TEMECULA ANNUAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 FOR CITYVflDE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, ("City") and TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION ("Contractor"). In consideration &the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The work under this Agreement is non-exclusive and City reserves the right to hire other contractors to perform similar work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth in Exhibit "A", Scope &Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The Director of Public Works ("Director"), or his designee, is authorized to approve the work in accordance with the procedures of this Agreement. 2. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall commence as of July 1, 2002 and shall terminate as of June 30, 2003 unless sooner terminated as provided in this Agreement. 3. PAYMENT. a. Contractor shall be compensated for actual work performed on the basis of the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B", Labor and Equipment Rates, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full, the cost of materials approved by the Director pursuant to the procedures set forth in Exhibit "A". The maximum amount of payment under this Agreement shall be One Hundred Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($100,000.00) unless a higher amount is approved by the City Council by amendment to this Agreement. b. Contractor will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth day of each month for services provided during the previous month. The invoice shall describe the approved work assignment under which the work has been performed. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of the Contractor's fees, it shall give written notice to the Contractor within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice of the disputed fees on the invoice. 4. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. Contractor shall cause a full time experienced Superintendent to be present on the site during all construction and to oversee and supervise the Work. 5. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives, and the quality of the workmanship shall be guaranteed for one year from date of acceptance. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making final request for payment under Paragraph 2., above, Contractor shall submit to the City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this contract; the acceptance by Contractor of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against the R:~maintain\workorders\Tomn 024)3 Agrmt~nastcr const agrmt City under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 7. PREVAII[.ING 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 Contractor 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 complywith the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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. 8. 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 Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. 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 Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 9. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or negligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Contractor with written notice of the default. The Contractor shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 10. INDEM/NIFICATION. The Contractor 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, 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 Contractor's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. R:~raaintain\workorders\Toran 024)3 AgrmtXmaster const agrmt 11. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 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 hereunder by the Contractor, 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 coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor 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) Employer's Liability: $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, 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. 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 Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2) For any claims related to this project, the Contractor'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 Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. Rz~naintain\workorders\Toran 024)3 Agrmt~naster const agrmt (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 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. (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. f. Verification of Coverage. Contractor 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 District before work commences. As an alternative to the City'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. g. Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Worm's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 12. TIME OF I'HE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind the City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for the City. The City shall not be liable for compensation or Indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 14. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 15. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary independent 4 R:~main tain\workorders\Toran 02-03 Agrmt~taster const agent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 16. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated by this Contract, Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work 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 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. 17. 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. 18. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 19. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 20. INSPECTION. The Work shall be subject to inspection and testing by the 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. 21. 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. 22. WIlITTEN NOTICE. 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: To City: City of Temecula P O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, Califomia 92590 Attention: City Manager To Contractor: Toran Development & Construction 37110 Mesa Road Temecula, California 92592-8950 (909) 302-5965 R:~naintain\workorders\Toran 02-03 Agrmfimaster const agrmt 23. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance ofthis Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City of Temecula. 24. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 25. 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 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 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. 26. 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 contractor/consultant 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. 27. 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. 28. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority to bind Contractor to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 6 R:~naintain\workorders\Toran 02-03 Agrmt~raaster const agrmt IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Attest: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attomey CONTRACTOR TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUL'IION 37110 Mesa Rd. Temecula, CA 92592-8950 (909) 302-5965 Gary D. Clapp, Owner 7 R:~naintain\workorders\Toran 024)3 Agrmthmastcr const agrmt EXHIBIT "A" Contractor recognizes' and agrees that this Agreement is for the purpose of establishing a contractual relationship between the City and the Contractor for the future repair, improvement, maintenance and/or construction upon real and personal property of the City of Temecula. Work will include emergency repairs, emergency maintenance, maintenance work, and/or minor construction work. The procedure for assigning work is set forth as follows: 1. Director of Public Works ("Director") or his designee shall submit to Contractor a written "Request for Work". The Request for Work shall include a description of the work to be completed, the time for completion of the work, and the plans and specifications, if any, work. 2. Within five (5) business days of the date of the Request for Work, Contractor shall respond in writing to the Request for Work and advise Director whether it can perform the work and specify the cost of material which will be required and the estimated cost of labor and equipment necessary to complete the work in accordance with the labor and equipment rates set forth in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. 3. In the event emergency work is required, the Director may transmit the Request for Work orally to the Contractor. As soon as practical following the emergency, the Contractor and Director shall in good faith confirm in writing the scope of the emergency work undertaken. 4. Upon acceptance of the Contractor's response by the Director, the Contractor shall proceed with the work. The performance of the work shall be pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. $ R:~mainlain\workorders\Toran 02-03 Agrmtkmaster const agrmt EXHIBIT B LABOR AND EQUIPMENT RATES R:~maintain\workordecs\Toran 02-03 Agrmt~master const agrmt TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION 37110 Mesa Rd. Temecula, Ca. 92592-8950 Phone-909-302-5965 UPDATED TIME & MATERIAL City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Dr. Att: Brad Buron 05/14/02 To Whom It May Concern: As per your request on 5/06/02 concerning an updated time and material sheet from our company- Forman w/tmck- $62.50 Labor- $54.50 All material is cost + 15% Commemial General Liability and Worker's Compensation Insurance is already on file with your office. Sincerely, Gary D. Clapp Toran Development & Construction Th~nk I/rill fnr th~ nnnnrt,,nitu tn ha nf e,~fltir, a fr~ ~tr~H ! TORAN DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION 37110 Mesa Rd. Temecula, Ca. 92592-8950 Phone-909-302-5965 UPDATED TIME & MATERIAL City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Dr. Temecula, Ca. 92590 Att: Brad Buron Old Town Boardwalk, all streets Temecula, Ca. SCOPE: Old Town price break down. 05/14/02 1 .) Paint: a. light poles ................................................................................................................... $110.00 ea. b.map structures ............................................................................................................... $85.00 ea. c.boxes ............................................................................................................................. $35.00 ea. d.archcs .......................................................................................................................... $225.00 ea. e.buss stop ..................................................................................................................... $185.00 ea. f. telephone structure ........................................................................................................ $95.00 ea. g.repaint restroom exterior only .................................................................................. $5,810.00 ea 2.) Boardwalk(aprox. 20,000 sq.fl.) a. seal only ...................................................................................................................... $1.35 sq.ft. b. sand any high,or bad spots ........................................................................................... $.50 sq.fi. c. add wood plugs ........................................................................................................... $1.00 sq.ft 3.) Clean, pressure wash and paint Main Street bridge ...................................................... $4,978.75 4.) Steam clean, pressure wash and seal coat with City supplied sealer 7,985 1.£. of city walk, curb and gutter ..................................................................................................................... $2.28 1.f. 5.) To cut and add hardware to make old whiskey barrels in to trash barrels ................ $138.75each Gary D. Clapp ITEM 13 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~" CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: City Manager/City Council ~l~v/William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: June 25, 2002 SUBJECT: PREPARED BY: Award the Construction Contract for Project No. PW02-03 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Rancho California Road Er~er Atter, Senior Engineer c Weck, Assistant Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: Award a construction contract for Project No. PW02-03 Pavement Rehabilitation Program - Rancho California Road to R.J. Noble Company in the amount of $593,194.85 and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $59,319.49 which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: On May 28, 2002 the City Council approved the Construction Plans and Specifications and authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the subject project. The program includes the rehabilitation of deteriorated city streets by reconstructing the roads and replacing the associated pavement delineation, and traffic signal detection loops. The Pavement Management System Project for FY2001-2002 is included in the City's Capital Improvement Program. This project will rehabilitate Rancho California Road between Hope Way and Cosmic Drive. A subsequent project, FY2002-2003, will continue the rehabilitation of Rancho California Road east of Cosmic Drive. Five (5) bids were received and publicly opened on June 18, 2002, the results were as follows: 1. R.J. Noble Company $593,194.85 2. All American Asphalt $619,182.00 3. Road Builders, Inc. $644,944.50 4. Holland-Lowe Construction $738,032.20 5. McLaughlin Engineering & Mining $791,318.75 A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office. 1 R:~AGENDA REPORTS~002~)62502\PW02-03awd. DOC Staff has reviewed the bid proposals and found R.J. Noble Company of Orange, California to be the lowest responsible bidder for this project. R.J. Noble Company has extensive experience in read construction projects, and have successfully completed similar projects for the City in the past. The Engineer's estimate for this project was $820,000. FISCAL IMPACT: The Pavement Rehabilitation Program is a Capital Improvement Project funded through Measure A and Assembly Bill 2928 funds. Adequate funds are available for the Pavement Rehabilitation - Rancho California Road, Project No. PW02-03 in Account No. 210-165- 655-5804. The total project cost is $652,514.34 which includes the contract amount of $593,194.85 plus 10% contingency of $59,319.49. A'rrACHMENT: 1. Location Map 2. Project Description 3. Contract 2 R:~AGENDA RE PORTS~002~062502\PW02-03awd. DOC CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACT FOR PROJECT NO. PW02-03 PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROGRAM - RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 25th day of June, 2002, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and R.J. Noble Company, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: ,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. PW02- 03, PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROGRAM - RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD, 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. PW02-03, PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROGRAM - RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher: Building News, Incorporated 1612 South Clementine Street Anaheim California 92802 (714) 517-0970 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. PW02- 03, PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROGRAM - RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD. 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 tieu 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:\C[P/PROJ ECTS~PW02~PW02-03 Rehab~CONTRACT.d0cCONTRACT 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. PW02-03, PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROGRAM - RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD 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 SCHEDULE. The CITY agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: FIVE HUNDRED NINETY THREE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED NINETY FOUR DOLLARS and EIGHTY FIVE CENTS ($593,194.85), the total amount of the base bid. CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed Seventy five (75) 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 SCHEDULE: 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. CONTRACT CA-2 R:\CI P,P ROJ E CTS\PW02~PW02-03 Rehab\CONTRACT.docCONTRACT The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be 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. 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 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. CONTRACT CA-3 R:ICIP~ ROJ E CT S~PW02~PW02-03 Rehab\CONTRACT.docCONTRACT 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. 10. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this contract. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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 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. 15. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual 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. 16. 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 reasonabte times be subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. 17. 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 CONTRACT CA~ R:\ClP~PROJECTS\PW02~PW02-03 Rehab\CONTRACT.docCONTRACT 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 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 contractor/consultant 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. 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: Mailing Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Street Address: William G. Hughes Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 CONTRACT CA-5 R:\CIP, PROJECTS\PWOLAPW02-03 Rehab\CONTRACT.docCONTRACT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONTRACTOR R.J. Noble Company 15505 E. Lincoln Ave P.O. Box 620 Orange, CA 92856 (714) 637-1550 Stan Hilton, Secretary DATED: CITY OF TEMECULA Ron Roberts, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk CONTRACT CA-6 R:\CIP, PROJ ECTS\PW02~PW02-03 Rehab\CONTRACT,docCONTRACT ITEM 14 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council APPROVAL ~"~/f,, ~ CITY ATTORNEY _,Z~_~_ II DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ..,L_G¢~'11 CITY MANAGER ~William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 25, 2002 Completion and Acceptance for Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2000-2001 - Project No. PW01-01 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Senior Engineer Steven Beswick, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Accept the Citywide Asphalt Concrete Repairs for FY2000-2001-Project No. PW01-01, as complete. 2. File a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract. 3. Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after filing of the Notice of Completion, if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On June 26, 2001, the City Council awarded the contract to Cunningham- Davis Corporation for an amount of $117,587.20. This asphalt repair project for FY2000-2001 is part of the Annual Street Maintenance Program. This program involves fixing portions of streets that require minor repairs and the associated pavement striping and legends. The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and within the allotted contract time to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The construction retention for this project will be released on or about 35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded. FISCAL IMPACT: The bid price for this project was $117,587.20. Change orders increased the contract amount by $10,929.40, bringing the total cost of the project to $128,516.60. This project was funded through the Public Works Department, Maintenance Division, FY2001-02, from Account No. 001-164-601-5402 for Routine Street Maintenance. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Maintenance Bond 3. Contractor's Affidavit 1 R:~GENDA REPORTS~2002\O62502\PW01-01ACCEPT,DOC RECORDING REC~UESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. Box 9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92589-9033 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. 92590. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California 3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to Cunningham-Davis Corp. to perform the following work of improvement: CITYVVlDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01 Project No. PW01-01 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on June 25, 2002. That upon said contract the American Motorists Insurance Company was surety for the bond given by the said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: Citywide A.C. Repairs FY2000-01, Project No. PW01-01 The location of said property is: Various Citywide Streets, Temecula, California Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of June 2002. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. th Dated at Temecula, California, this 25 day of June 2002. Susan W. Jones CMC, CityClerk R:~CIPtPRO JECTS~W01\PW01~1 \CO M P LETN.N OT.doc 05/29/2002 00:47 909-795-5200 CU~INGH~M DAVIS PAGE 02 CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MNNTEN~NCE BoND Bond No. 3SM 989 428 00 - A PROJECT NO. pW01-01 CITYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000..01 KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: Premium Is Included In The Performance Bond Cunninsham-Davis Corporation, P 0 Box 729, Calimesa CA 92320 NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S a Corporation , hereinafter called Principal, and American Motorists Insurance Company, 7470 N Figueroa, Los Angeles CA 90041 NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY hereinafter called SURETY, are held end firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER, In the penal sum of One Hundred ~enty-eight thousand" '" five hundred sixteen DOLLARS an~J sixty CENTS ($ ... 128,516.60 ) 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 26 day of June , 2001, a copy of which is hereto attached and made a parl hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PW01- 01, ClTYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01. 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 .'~'-~,',~ January 1. ,200~. 2 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 tull force and virtue, otherwise this inslrument 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 Jn any judgment rendered. UANTENANC;E BONO U,1 R.~CIP~ROJECTSlPW~1~ 1~ EW BID DOC 05/29/2802 00:47 900-795-5280 CUNNINGHAN DAVIS PAGE 03 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 a~companying the same, shall in an)/way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any eueb change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the Contract. or to the work, or lo the Specifications. Signed and sealed this 4th day of June ,2001~2 (Sea{) American Motorists Insurance Company ~Iudith K. Austin (Name) At t orne¥-±n-Facl;: (Title) Cunningham-Davis Corporation/~ PRINClPA~L. / / (Name) .~ . ~ {Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ,, Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney (Name) (Title) MNNT~"NANCE BOND M.2 R;~:Ila~PROJ ECTS"PW01~ 1~ EW BI0 DOC ALL PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF CALiFORNiA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SS On June 4, 2002 before me, LYN M. ROWLEY, a Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally appeared Judith K. Austin, personally known to me, and acknowledged to me that SHE executed the same in HER authorized capacity and that by HER signature on the instrument, the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. ~1/~ Public, S~te of California ~ Commission # 1316102 ~ Notary Public - California This area for O~cial Notarial Seal OPTIONAL Although the information below is optional, it could prevent fraudulent attachment of this certificate to unauthorized document. Capacity claimed by Signer: __ Individual(s) __ Corporate Officer(s) __ Partner(s) X Attorney-in-Fact __ Trustee(s) __ Subscribing Witness Guardian/Conservator Other: Signer is representing (name of person(s) or entity(s): American Motorists Insurance Company Description of Attached Document: Maintenance Bond - Cunningham Davis - City of Temecula Title or type of document 2 Number of pages June 4, 2002 Date of Document Signer(s) other than named above: POWER OF ATTORNEY Know All Men By These Presents: That the Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company, the American Motorists Insurance Company, and the American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company, corporations organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, having their principal office in Long Grove, Illinois (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Company") do hereby appoint Scott Lihme, Judith K. Austin and Karen M. Adcock of SAN BERNARDINO, CA (EACH) their true and lawful agent(s) and Attorney(s)-in-Fact, to make, execute, seal, and deliver from the date of issuance of this power for and on its behalf as surety, and as their act and deed: Any and all bonds and undertakings EXCEPTION: NO AUTHORITY is granted to make, execute, seal and deliver any bond or undertaking which guarantees the payment or collection of any promissory note, check, draft or letter of credit. This authority does not permit the same obligation to be split into two or more bonds in order to bring each such bond within the dollar limit of authority as set forth hei'ein. This appointment may be revoked at any time by the Company. The execution of such bonds and undertakings in pursuance of these presents shall be as binding upon the said Company as fully and amply to all intents and purposes, as if the same had been duly executed and acknowledged by their regularly elected officers at their principal office in Long Grove, Illinois. This Power of Attorney is executed by authority of resolutions adopted by the Executive Committees of the Boards of Directors of the Company on February 23, 1988 at Chicago, Illinois, true and accurate copies of which are hereinafter set forth and are hereby certified to by the undersigned Secretary as being in full force and effect: "VOTIE3, That the Chairman of the Board, the President, or any Vice President, or their appointees designated in writing and filed with the Secretary, or the Secretary shall have the power and authority to appoint agents and attorneys~in~fact, and to authorize them to execute on behalf of the Company, and attach the seal of the Company thereto, bonds and undertakings, recognizances, contracts of indemnity and ether writings, obligatory in the nature thereof, and any such officers of the Company may appoint agents for acceptance of process." This Power of Attorney is signed, sealed and certified by facsimile under and by authority of the following resolution adopted by the Executive Committee of the Boards of Directors of the Company at a meeting duly called and held on the 23rd day of February, 1988: "VOTED, That the signature of the Chairman of the Board, the President, any Vice President, or their appointees designated in writing and filed with the Secretary, and the signature of the Secretary, the seal of the Company, and certifications by the Secretary, may be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney or bond executed pursuant to resolution adopted by tl~e Executive Committee of the Board of Directors on February 23, 1988 and any such power so executed, sealed and certified with respect to any bond or undertaking to which it is attached, shall continue to be valid and binding upon the Company." FK 09 75 (Ed. 09 01) Page '1 of 2 Printed in U.S,A. CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE PROJECT NO. PWOl-Ol ClTYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01 This is to certify that ~.-~p(hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, t~at 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. PW01-01, ClTYWlDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01, situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: PROJECT NO. PW01-01, CITYWIDE A.C. REPAIRS FY2000-01 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. Dated: CONTRACTOR Signature Print Name and Title RELEASE R-1 R:CIP~PROJ ECTS~PW01-01~NEW BID DOC ITEM 15 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANfCE__~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council James B. O'Grady, Assistant City Manager June 25, 2002 Resolution of Support-Creation of a Federal Cabinet level agency to oversee Homeland Security PREPARED BY: Aaron Adams, Sr. Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider adopting the following resolution: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE CREATION OF A CABINET LEVEL AGENCY TO OVERSEE HOMELAND SECURITY BACKGROUND: The President's most important job is to protect and defend the American people. The changing nature ofthe threats facing America requires a new government structureto protect against enemies that can strike with a wide variety of weapons. Today no one single government agency has homeland security as its primary mission. In fact, responsibilities for homeland security are dispersed amonq more than 100 different .qovernment orqanizations. America needs a single, unified homeland security structure that will improve protection against today's threats and be flexible enough to help meet the unknown threats of the future. The President proposes to create a new Department of Homeland Security, the most significant transformation of the U.S. government in over a half-century by largely transforming and realigning the current confusing patchwork of government activities into a single department whose primary mission is to protect our homeland. The creation of a Department of Homeland Security is one more key step in the President's national strategyfor homeland security. As proposed, the Department of Homeland Securitywould have a clear and efficient organizational structure with four divisions: · Border and Transportation Security · Emergency Preparedness and Response · Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Countermeasures · Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection This item has been placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Jeff Comerchero. In addition, support for this proposed depadment is consistent with resolutions adopted as part of the National League of Cities (NLC) National Municipal Policy last December as well as NLC's testimony before Congress. FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time Attachments: Resolution 02- RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TEMECULA SUPPORTING THE CREATION OF A CABINET LEVEL AGENCY TO OVERSEE HOMELAND SECURITY WHEREAS, the President's most important job is to protect and defend the American people; and WHEREAS, since September 11, all levels of government have cooperated like never before to strengthen aviation and border security, stockpile more medicines to defend against bioterrorism, improve information sharing among our intelligence agencies, and deploy more resources and personnel to protect our critical infrastructure; and WHEREAS, responsibilities for homeland security are dispersed among more than 100 different government organizations; and WHEREAS, the President proposes to create a new Department of Homeland Security which would make Americans safer; and WHEREAS, One department whose primary mission is to protect the American homeland; and WHEREAS, One department to secure our borders, transportation sector, pods, and critical infrastructure; and WHEREAS, One department to synthesize and analyze homeland security intelligence from multiple sources; and WHEREAS, One department to coordinate communications with state and local governments, private industry, and the American people about threats and preparedness; and WHEREAS, One department to coordinate our efforts to protect the American people against bioterrorism and other weapons of mass destruction; and WHEREAS, One department to help train and equip for first responders; and WHEREAS, One department to manage federal emergency response activities; and WHEREAS, More security officers in the field working to stop terrorists and fewer resources in Washington managing duplicative and redundant activities that drain critical homeland security resources; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Temecula favors and supports the creation of a Cabinet level agency to oversee homeland security and urge prompt bipartisan action to make that happen; and PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 25th day of June 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, 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. 01- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 25th day of October, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: 0 NOES: 0 ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk ITEM 16 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC_E CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council James B. O'Grady, Assistant City Manager~./--~ June 25, 2002 Lease Agreement with County of Riverside for Property at Redhawk Parkway and Overland Trail (Interim Fire Station//92) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the attached agreement. BACKGROUND: On November 19, 2001, the City of Temecula began operating Interim Fire Station #92, located at the northeast corner of Redhawk Parkway and Overland Trail. This Fire Station provides fire and emergency medical services for the Vail Ranch and the southerly portion of Temecula, as well as residents of the Redhawk and other nearby unincorporated areas. This station is located on land currently held in title by Riverside County through a temporary license agreement. City of Temecula and Riverside County staffs have developed an agreement to provide a longer-term arrangement for this property. The attached agreement provides the following: · Allows use of the property for the Interim Fire Station · Provides for the ultimate use of property for park purposes. City agrees to work with the County in planning these improvements. · County will transfer ownership of the property to the City for a nominal fee prior to award of construction for park purposes. · Term is for 24 months, with a one-year option period. · Rent is $1.00 per year. FISCAL IMPACT: Operational costs of Fire Station 92 are approximately $844,000 per year. The City was budgeted $59,000 in the FY 02/03 Capital Improvement Budget for design of the ultimate park improvements. ATTACHMENT: Proposed lease agreement Cou IDlg FACILITIES MANAGEMENT MICHAEL J. SYLVESTER DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION REAL ESTATE MAINTENANCE CUSTODIAL June 5,2002 James B. O'Grady Assistant City Manager 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 JUN i Re: Lease Arrangement Redhawk Parkway and Overland Trail Dear Jim: Enclosed please find three copies of the revised Lease Arrangement per your April 29, 2002 request. Please sign and return the original and one copy for further processing. The third copy is for your files. I will provide you with a fully executed Lease Arrangement upon its approval by the County. I may be reached at (909) 955-4824 if I may be of further assistance. Sincerely, Susan Echito Senior Real Property Agent SE:js Enclosure: Lease Arrangement cc: File TM023 3133 MISSION INN AVENUE ° RIVERSIDE, CA 92507 · (909) 955-4800 ° FAX (909) 955-9289 1 2 § 6 ? 8 9 10 11 15 16 15 19 ~0 21 23 26 ~? LEASE ARRANGEMENT COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE AND CITY OF TEMECULA The COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, County, leases to the CITY OF TEMECULA, City, the property described below upon the following terms and conditions: 1. Description. The real property hereby leased consists of that certain parcel located in the unincorporated area of the County at Redhawk Parkway and Overland Trail, legally described as Lot 2 of Tract No. 23174, as shown on map on file in Book 230, pages 1 through 4 inclusive, of Maps in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Riverside, State of California, as more particularly described in the legal description herein attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference made a part of this Lease. 2. Use. (a) The property is leased to City for the convenience and desire of County to provide City real property to utilize this site for an interim fire station to provide fire protection to the communities of Vail Ranch and Redhawk on an interim basis. (b) City plans to construct' permanent park improvements on the property upon the termination of this Lease and City agrees to work with the County and local residents in the planning of such improvements. (c) City shall notify County no less than sixty (60) days prior to the date of anticipated award of construction for the park improvements. County agrees to transfer ownership of the property to the City for a nominal fee prior to the award of construction for said park improvements. 3. Term. The term of this Lease shall be for a period commencing upon execution of this Lease by County and ending twenty-four (24) months from the date of commencement. 4. Option to Extend. (a) County grants to City'one option to extend the Lease 'term for a period of one year subject to the condition§ 'described in this Section 4. (b) The extension option shall be exercised by City delivering to County written notice thereof no later than sixt~ (60) days prior to expiration of the original term. 5. Rent. City shall pay the SUm of One Dollar ($1100) per year to County as rent for the property, payable, in ~l.~/ance for the entire term of this lease upon execution of this Lease by County. Page 1 of 3 1 6 ? 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 2! 25 26 6. Improvements. (a) City shall construct improvements on said property mutually agreeable to City and County as part of the interim fire station improvements. (b) Improvements performed by City on said property shall be in accordance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, codes and regulations including, but not limited to, fire, health and safety. City agrees to bear all costs and expenses related to the improvements. (c) City shall remove improvements and debris from the property prior to the termination of this Lease and leave the surface of the property in a neat condition. 7. Hold Harmless. City agrees to indemnify County and William Lyon Homes (formerly Presley Homes) for liability or claim for damage for personal injury, death, or property damage resulting from the City's negligent acts or omissions on the property during the term of this Lease. 8. Notices. County of Riverside: Department of Facilities Management Real Estate Division 3133 Mission Inn Avenue Riverside, California 92507-4199 City of Temecula: Assistant City Manager 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 9. Quiet Enjoyment. County covenants that Lessee shall at all times during the term of this Lease peaceably and quietly have, hold and enjoy the use of the property so long as City shall fully and faithfully perform the terms and conditions that it is required to do so under this Lease. 10. Binding on Successors. The terms and conditions herein contained shall apply to and bind the heirs, successors in interest, executors administrators, representatives and assigns of all the parties hereto. 11. Severability. The terms and conditions in this Lease as determine( by a court of competent jurisdiction shall in no way affect the validity of='any other provision hereof. ' ~:' 12. Venue. Any action at law or in equity brought by either of the parties hereto for the purpose of enforcing a right or rights provided for by this Lease shall be tried in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Riversidel State ot California, and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for. a .change of venue in such proceedings to any other county. .. Page 2 of 3 SE:js 6/4/02 TM023 7.474 I 13. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any litigation or arbitration between City and County to enforce any of the provisions of this Lease or any right of 2 either party hereto, the unsuccessful party to such litigation or arbitration agrees to pay to the successful party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, 3 incurred therein by the successful party, all of which shall be included in and as a part of the judgment rendered in such litigation or arbitration. 4 5 14. County's Representative. County hereby appoints the Director of Facilities Management as its authorized representative to administer this 6 Lease. ? 15. Entire Lease. This Lease is intended by the parties hereto as a final expression of their understanding with respect to the subject matter hereof and $ as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions thereof and 9 supersedes any and all prior and contemporaneous leases, agreements and understandings, oral or written, in connection therewith. This Lease may be changed or 1-0 modified only upon the written consent of the parties hereto. 1_! 16. Interpretation. The parties hereto have negotiated this Lease at arms length and with advice of their respective attomeys, and no provision contained 12 herein shall be construed against County solely because it prepared this Lease in its 1_3 executed form. 17. Authority. The authority for the Director of the Department of Facilities Management to execute this lease is contained in Resolution No. 97-252, heretofore approved by the County's Board of Supervisors on December 9, 1997. 16 18. This Lease shall not be binding or consummated until its approval 1.?. by the County's Director of Facilities Management. 18 Dated: CITYOF TEMECULA 19 By: 21 Title/Name 2~ Dated: 23 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 24 By:. 25 MICHAEL J. SYLVESTER, Director Department of Facilities Management 26 27 28 Page 3 of 3 ITEM 17 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council Shawn Nelson, City Manager June 25, 2002 City Attorney Services Contract Amendment #3 PREPARED BY: Aaron Adams, Sr. Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Amendment #3 to the Agreement with Richards, Watson and Gershon, Attorneys at Law, to increase the hourly rates for City Attorney services provided. BACKGROUND: On June 27, 2000 the City Council approved an Amendment #2 to the Agreement for City Attorney Services with Richards, Watson and Gershon Attorney's at Law (RWG). At that time, rates were negotiated for both basic retainer services as well as for additional services provided by members of the firm other than the City Attorney/Assistant City Attorney. All hours provided by the City Attorney/Assistant City Attorney in addition to the retainer were set at $140 and $135 per hour, respectively. In accordance with Section 4.A. and 4.B. of the agreement with the City, Richards, Watson and Gershon, Attorneys at Law are proposing an increase of fees for legal services beginning July 1, 2002 with the new fiscal year. The proposed fees establish a new rate structure in which the routine work will be billed at separate rates from the specialized work. This structure reflects the competitive market for legal services in California. While the market rates for routine city attorney work are comparable to our current and proposed rate for routine services, the market rates for specialized municipal legal services are significantly higher than our current and proposed retes for these services. RWG has also simplified the rate structure with only three categories of rates for attorneys rather than each attorney having an individual rate. Even in the specialized areas, the maximum rates, except for environmental work, will only be $10 per hour higher than the highest current hourlyrate. The proposed rates in the specialized areas reflect a nearly 40% discount for the City from RWG's standard rates. Additionally, due to the complex nature of the City's work, Peter Thorson and Bill Curley are personally handling the majority of the City's advisory work. The City is currently receiving a 60% discount on the firm's standard rates for Mr. Thorson and Mr. Cudey. Adjustment of the hourly rate schedule by approval of this contract shall be increased byfive dollars ($5.00) per hour on July 1 of each year beginning on July 1, 2003. Any other adjustments in the rates shall require approval of the City Council. The proposal and hourly rates for all attorneys are attached for the Council's information. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2002-03 Annual Operating Budget to accommodate the proposed hourly rate increases. Approximate fiscal impact to the General Fund is estimated at $42,000 per year. Staff will monitor and evaluate the legal budget at mid-year for any necessary modifications. Rate increases within areas such as financing (CFD's) and development agreements will be reimbursed by the developers for their respective projects. Attachments: 1. Third Amendment to Agreement to CityAttorney Services 2. Richard, Watson & Gershon Hourly Rates for the City of Temecula THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR CITY ATTORNEY SERVICES THIS THIRD AMENDMENT to Agreement for City Attorney Services is made and entered into by and between the City of Temecula, a general law city (hereafter "City"), and Richards, Watson & Ger~hon, Attorneys at Law, a professional corporation (hereafter "RWG"), and shall be dated as of June 25, 2002. In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. On April 24, 1996 the parties entered into that certain agreement entitled "Agreement for City Attomey Service." This Agreement was amended June 24, 1997 and on June 27, 2000. The April 24, 1996 Agreement, as amended, shall be known as the "Agreement". The parties now desire to amend the Agreement to provide for an adjustment in the fees for city attorney services. follows: Sections 4.A. and 4.B.1. of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as "SECTION 4. COMPENSATION. RWG shall be compensated for the performance of such services as follows: "A. Hourly Rates. RWG shall be compensated for the performance of legal services in accordance with the hourly rates for service set forth on the Hourly Rate Schedule, attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. The terms of this Agreement and the Hourly Rate Schedule shall apply to legal services performed for entities affiliated with the City, including the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, the Temecula Community Services District, and the Temecula Public Financing Authority. "1. Administration of Hourly Rate Schedule. RWG shall, subject to the approval of the Director of Finance, designate the appropriate rate schedule for a matter being handled by RWG. In July and January of each year, and as may be needed during the remainder of the year, RWG shall provide to the Director of Finance a revised Hourly Rate Schedule showing the addition or deletion of attorneys, the change in status of the Associate attorneys, and any rate adjustments, if applicable. Upon approval of the revised Hourly Rate Schedule by the Director of Finance, the Revised Hourly Rate Schedule shall be deemed an amendment to this Agreement. "2. Adjustment of Hourly Rate Schedule. The rates set forth on Exhibit A shall be increased by five dollars ($5.00) per hour on July 1 of each year beginning on July 1, 2003. Any other adjustments in the rates shall require approval of the City Council. 645747.1 June 17, 2002 1 "B. Cost Reimbursement and Payment for Services. Reimbursement for costs incurred in the representation of the City and the payment for services rendered shall be in accordance with the following requirements: [Intentionally Deleted.] [Intentionally Deleted.] [Intentionally Deleted.] 3. The amendments to the Agreement described in this Third Amendment to Agreement shall not be effective until July 1, 2002 4. Except as specifically amended by the provisions of this Agreement, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this First Amendment to Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA, a General Law City Ron Robe,s Mayor Attest: Susan Jones, CMC City Clerk 645747.1 June 17,2002 2 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON ATTORNEYS AT LAW, a professional corporation By: Kayser O. Sume Chairman of the Board By: Secretary 2/28/01 645747.1 EXHIBIT A HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE 2/28/D1 645747.1 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON HOURLY RATES FOR CITY OF TEMECULA EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2002 General Municipal Work. This work consists of providing legal advice on municipal law matters, attendance at City Council and Planning Commission meetings, office hours at City Hall and review and approval of standard agreements,. This work shall not include work on other categories of work listed in this Exhibit. The hourly rates for this work are: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney William P. Curley, III, Assistant City Attorney Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $145 $145 $185 $170 Standard Tort Defense Litigation. Defense or prosecution of personal injury, death or property damage litigation based on alleged negligence or dangerous conditions of public property. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $180 $165 Standard General Litigation. Litigation involving defense or prosecution of writs of mandate, injunctions, breach of contract, inverse condemnation, eminent domain, election proceedings, or administrative proceedings, except as otherwise provided in this Exhibit. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $210 $185 Standard Land Use Projects. The drafting and negotiation of all development agreements and the drafting and negotiation of land use entitlements for significant land use projects in excess of five (5) acres. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $210 $185 Standard Redevelopment and Real Estate Matters. General advice relating to legal matters of the Redevelopment Agency and real estate matters for the City, the drafting and negotiation of agreements relating to real estate matters for the Redevelopment Agency and the City, including owner participation agreements and disposition and development agreements, easements, covenants, conditions and restrictions, housing assistance matters, and the sale or acquisition of interests in real property. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $200 $185 Standard Financings. Legal work involving the drafting, review and negotiation of agreements and documents related to financings in which the City or one of its affiliated entities are involved, including tax allocation bonds, community facilities districts, certificates of participation, and assessment districts. Work of the firm as bond counsel or disclosure counsel would be subject to a separate compensation agreement between the City and the fn'm. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $210 $185 Standard Personnel and Labor Relations. Advice concerning employee hiring and termination, compensation and benefits, labor negotiations, administrative hearings relating to personnel and labor matters. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $195 $175 Smndard Environmental. Legal work concerning state and federal hazardous waste laws, including CERCLA and NPDES, compliance audits, appearance before state and federal agencies concerning enforcement actions or permit applications, and litigation relating to such issues. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $230 $195 Standard Attorneys Designated as Shareholders. The following attorneys are the firm's senior attorneys with more that seven years experience in their respective fields: Glenn R. Watson (GRW) Mark L. Lamken (MLL) Erwin E. Adler (EEA) Darold D. Pieper (DDP) Steven L. Dorsey (SLD) William L. Strausz (WLS) Mitchell E. Abbott (MEA) William B. Rudell (WBR) Gregory W. Stepanicich (GWS) Rochelle Browne (RB) William K. Kramer (WKK) John J. Harris (JJH) Martha M. Escutia (MME) Peter M. Thorson (PMT) James L. Markman (JLM) Quinn M. Barrow (QMB) Carol W. Lynch (CWL) Sayre Weaver (SW) Gregory M. Kunert (GMK) Thomas M. Jimbo (TM J) Jim Grayson (JG) Amy Greyson (AG) Roy A. Clarke (RAC) Sayre Weaver (SW) Steven H. Kaufmann (SHK) Gary E. Gans (GEG) Kevin G. Ennis (KGE) Robin D. Harris (RI)H) Michael Estrada (ME) Laurence S. Wiener (LSW) Steven R. Orr (SRO) William P. Curley, III. (WPC) Craig A. Steele (CAS) T. Peter Pierce (TPP) Robert C. Ceccon (RCC) Deborah R. Hakman (DRH) B. Tilden Klm (BTK) Saskia T. Asamura (STA) Kayser O. Sume (KOS) Terence R. Boga (TRB Lisa Bond (LB) Janet E. Coleson (JEC) Claudio R. Chavez (CRC) D. Craig Fox (DFC) Michael F. Yoshiba (MFY) Regina N. Danner (RND) Attorneys Designated as Senior Associates. The following attorneys are the fu'm's senior associates with between four and seven years experience in their respective fields: Eric M. Alderete (EMA) Theresa Ho-Urano (THU) Elana A. Luber (EAL) Robert H. Pittman (RHP) Roxanne M. Diaz (RMD) Chandra Gehri Spencer (CGS) Ann M. Mauer (AMM) Peter K. Kim (PKK) Paula Gutierrez Baeza (PGB) Associate Rates. The following are the firms associates in their first through third years of practice: Third Year Associates (1999) Alexander Abbe (AA) Amy Alderfer (ABA) Tom K. Ara (TKA) Effie K. Turnbull (EKT) Carrie H. Ahn (CHA) Juliet E. Cox (JEC) 155 Second Year Associates (2000) Patrick K. Bobko (PKB) Mark E. Mandell (MEM) Robert Watson (RW) George M. Yin (GMY) 140 First Year Associates (2001) Kelly M. Casillas Matthew De Ferranfi Sonali Sarkar Jandial David M. Snow 125 Legal Assistants/Paralegals Kerry Liberty (KL) Mona Krane (MK) Belinda Olmos (BO) 90 Note: Associate year changes on January 1st of each year corresponding to Bar admission dates. -4- RICHARDS I VVATSON j GERSHON ATTORNEYS AT LAW - A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 355 South Grand Avenue, 4oth Floor, Los An§ekes, CaLifornia 9oo7~-3~o~ Telephone 213.626.8484 Facsimile 213.626.oo78 Peter M. morso. February 28, 2002 pthorson@rwglaw.coro 213.253.0216 Shawn Nelson City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, Ca. 92589-9033 Reference: City Attorney Rate Increase Dear Shawn: In accordance with Section 4.A. and 4.B. of our agreement with the City, we are proposing an increase of our fees for legal services beginning on July 1, 2002 with the new fiscal year. The proposed fees establish a new rate structure in which the routine work will be billed at separate rates from the specialized work. This structure reflects the competitive market for legal services in California. While the market rates for routine city attorney work are comparable to our current and proposed rate for routine services, the market rates for specialized municipal legal services are significantly higher than our current and proposed rates for these services. We have also simplified the rate structure with only three categories of rates for our attorneys rather than each attorney having an individual rate. Even in the specialized areas, the maximum rates, except for environmental work, will only be $10 per hour higher than the highest current hourly rate. Thc proposed rates in the specialized areas reflect a nearly 40% discount for the City from our firm's standard rates Additionally, due to the complex nature of the City's work, Bill Curley and I are personally handling the majority of the City's advisory work. The City is currently receiving a 60% discount on the firm's standard rates for Bill and me. It has been a great pleasure for me both personally and professionally to serve as City Attorney for the last eight years. I and each of my colleagues who have worked for the City are extremely proud of our work in helping the Council and Staff create such a great city. While we are always reluctant to propose a increase in fees, we believe RICHARDS I WATSON I GERSHON Shawn Nelson February 28, 2002 Page 2 the proposed increase is a fair one and appropriate at this time. As always, if you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call me. Very truly yours, Peter M. Thorson CC: Genie Roberts Craig Steele William P. Curley, III RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON HOURLY RATES FOR CITY OF TEMECULA EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2002 General Municipal Work. This work consists of providing legal advice on municipal law matters, attendance at City Council and Planning Commission meetings, office hours at City Hall and review and approval of standard agreements,. This work shall not include work on other categories of work listed in this Exhibit. The hourly rates for this work are: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney William P. Curley, III, Assistant City Attorney Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $145 $145 $i85 $170 Standard Tort Defense Litigation. Defense or prosecution of personal injury, death or property damage litigation based on alleged negligence or dangerous conditions of public property. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $180 $165 Standard General Litigation. Litigation involving defense or prosecution of writs of mandate, injunctions, breach of contract, inverse condemnation, eminent domain, election proceedings, or administrative proceedings, except as otherwise provided in this Exhibit. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $210 $185 Standard Land Use Projects. The drafting and negotiation of all development agreements and the drafting and negotiation of land use entitlements for significant land use projects in excess of five (5) acres. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $210 $185 Standard Redevelopment and Real Estate Matters. General advice relating to legal matters of the Redevelopment Agency, the drafting and negotiation of agreements for the Redevelopment Agency, including owner participation agreements and disposition and development agreements, drafting and negotiation of agreements, housing matters, and the drafting and negotiation of agreements and related documents for the sale or acquisition of interests in real property. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $20O $185 Standard Financings. Legal work involving the drafting, review and negotiation of agreements and documents related to financings in which the City or one of its affiliated entities are involved, including tax allocation bonds, community facilities districts, certificates of participation, and assessment districts. Work of the firm as bond counsel or disclosure counsel would be subject to a separate compensation agreement between the City and the firm. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $210 $185 Standard Personnel and Labor Relations. Advice concerning employee hiring and termination, compensation and benefits, labor negotiations, administrative hearings relating to personnel and labor matters. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $195 $175 Standard Environmental. Legal work concerning state and federal hazardous waste laws, including CERCLA and NPDES, compliance audits, appearance before state and federal agencies concerning enforcement actions or permit applications, and litigation relating to such issues. The hourly rates for this work are: Shareholder Rate Senior Associate Rate Associate Rate $23O $195 Standard Attorneys Designated as Shareholders. The following attorneys are the firm's senior attorneys with more that seven years experience in their respective fields: Glenn R. Watson (GRW) Mark L. Lanflcen (MLL) Erwin E. Adler (EEA) -2- Darold D. Pieper (DDP) Steven L. Dorsey (SLD) William L. Strausz (WLS) Mitchell E. Abbott (MEA) William B. Rudell (WBR) Gregory W. Stepanicich (GWS) Rochelle Browne (RB) William K. Kramer (WKK) John J. Harris (JJH) Martha M. Escutia (MME) Peter M. Thorson (PMT) James L. Markman (JLM) Quinn M. Barrow (QMB) Carol W. Lynch (CWL) Gregory M. Kunert (GMK) Thomas M. Jimbo (TM J) Jim Grayson (JG) Amy Greyson (AG) Roy A. Clarke (RAC) Sayre Weaver (SW) Steven H. Kaufmann (SHK) Gary E. Gans (GEG) Kevin G. Ennis (KGE) Robin D. Harris (RDH) Michael Estrada (ME) Laurence S. Wiener (LSW) Steven R. Orr (SRO) William P. Curley, III. (WPC) Craig A. Steele (CAS) T. Peter Pierce (TPP) Robert C. Ceccon (RCC) Deborah R. Hakman (DRH) B. Tilden Kim (BTK) Saskia T. Asamura (STA) Kayser O. Sume (KOS) Terence R. Boga (TRB Lisa Bond (LB) Attorneys Designated as Senior Associates. The following attorneys are the firm's senior associates with more that three to seven years experience in their respective fields: Jay F. Golida (JFG) Michael F. Yoshiba (MFY) -3- Regina N. Danner (RND) Theresa H. Buchheit Janet E. Coleson (JEC) Eric M. Alderete (EMA) Elana A. Luber (EAL) Robert H. Pittman (RHP) D. Craig Fox (DCF) Roxarme M. Diaz (RMD) Chandra Gehri Spencer (CGS) Ann M. Mauer (AMM) Peter K. Kim (PKK) Paula Gutierrez Baeza (PGB) Effie K. Turnbull (EKT) Associate Rates. The following are the firms associates in their first through third years of practice: Third Year Associates (1999) Alexander Abbe (AA) Amy Alderfer (ABA) Tom K. Ara (TKA) Carrie H. Ahn (CHA) 155 Second Year Associates (2000) Patrick K. Bobko (PKB) Matthew A. Portnoff (MAP) Mark E. Mandell (MEM) Robert Watson (RW) 140 First Year Associates (2001) Kelly M. Casillas Matthew De Ferranti Sonali Sarkar Jandial David M. Snow 125 Legal Assistants/Paralegals Kerry Liberty (KL) Mona Krane (MK) Belinda Olmos (BO) 90 Note: Associate year changes on January 1st of each year corresponding to Bar admission dates. ITEM 18 APPROVAI,I~,4,. CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service~/ DATE: June 25, 2002 SUBJECT: First Amendment to the Facility Alarm Systems Service and Monitoring Agreement with Computer Alert Systems for FY2002-03 PREPARED BY: ~'evin T. Harrington, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Approve the Facility Alarm Systems Service and Monitoring Agreement First Amendment with Computer Alert Systems, Inc. to extend the term of the Agreement to June 30, 2003. 2. Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $ 25,000.00 for alarm monitoring and repair services. 3. Approve a 10% contingency in the amount of $2,500.00. BACKGROUND: The Temecula Community Services Department (TCSD) released a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Facility Alarm Monitoring, Inspection and Repair Services on October 25, 2000. Computer Alert Services, Inc. (CASI)was determined to be the lowest qualified vendor for the required services. An eighteen-month agreement was awarded to CASI effective January 1,2001, in the amount of $18,000.00. Since the contracts inception the City has added additional sites for monitoring and inspection services as well as completing extra work items. Thus increasing the contract amount to $20,345.00. Staff is requesting that the term of the agreement with CASI be extended for one year, as allowed for in the original agreement. The one year extension will increase the contract amount to $45,345.00 thus exceeding the $25,000.00 approval threshold of the City Manager and will require Council approval. The base contract amount for extending monitoring services for Fiscal Year 2002-03 is $ 6,636.00. In addition an estimated $18,364.00 v~ll be required for repair and installation se~ces. R:\HARRINGK\AGENDA.RPT\Computer Alert First Amend FY 02-03.doc FISCAL IMPACT: The amount of the contract with CASI for alarm monitoring, inspection and repair services, including the 10% contingency for Fiscal Year 2002-03 is $27,500.00. Sufficient funds have been included in the Annual Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2002-03 in accounts 190- 180, 190-181, 190-182, 190-184, 190-185, 193-180, 340-701,340-702 and 001-164. ATTACHMENTS: Original Agreement Contract Change Order No. 1 Contract Change Order No. 2 Contract Change Order No. 3 Amendment No. 1 R:\HARRINGK\AGENDA.RPT\Computer Alert First Amend FY 02-03.doc FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETVVEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS, INC. THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Computer Aled Systems, Inc. ("Contractor"). 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: On November 29, 2000 the City and Computer Alert Systems, Inc. entered into that certain agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement Maintenance Services" ("Agreement"). The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. The City desires to exercise its option to extend the Agreement term for one year, which will subsequently require an increase in payments. 2. TERM. The term of the Agreement is extended to June 30, 2003. PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Contractor 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 Forty Five Thousand Three Hundred Forty Five Dollars and No Cents ($45,345.00) for alarm monitoring, inspection and repair services for the term of the Agreement, unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R:IHARRINGK~AGREEMNI~COMPUTER ALERT ISTAMEN, DOC I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Ron Robeds, Mayor ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR: COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS~ INC. BY: NAME: TITLE: BY: NAME: TITLE: EXHIBIT "B" SCHEDULE OF PAYMENT FACILITY LOCATION Monthly Fee Fire Monthly Fee Yearly Total Fee Per System Monitoring & Security System Location Inspection Monitoring Monitoring & Inspection City Hail, 43200 Business Park $45.00 $25.00 $840.00 Drive Maintenance Facility, $45.00 $0.00 $540.00 43210 Business Park Drive Community Recreation Center, $45.00 $37.00 $984.00 30875 Rancho Vista Road Temecula Community Center, $45.00 $37.00 $984.00 28816 Pujol Street Mary Phillips Senior Center, $45.00 $15.00 $720.00 41845 6th Street Temecula Skate Park, $0.00 $25.00 $300.00 42569 Margarita Road Temecula Valley Museum, $45.00 $0.00 $540.00 28314 Mercedes Drive Temecula Children's Museum $45.00 $37.00 $984.00 (Trading Post), 42801 Main Street Temecula Wedding Chapel, $0.00 $37.00 $444.00 28300 Mercedes Drive . 6th Street Restroom/Parking $0.00 $25.00 $300.00 Lot, 41952 6TM Street Total $6,636.00 Costs for repair or extra work authorized by City MARK-UP ADDED TO VENDOR'S WHOLESALE PRICE OF PARTS & EQUIPMENT 40% HOURLY RATE PER REGUALR MAN HOUR-8am To 5pm $65.00/HR. Monday through Friday HOURLY RATE PER OVERTIME MAN HOUR-After-hours, $85.00/HR. Weekends, Holidays, etc. Invoices will be submitted on a qumterly basis; one month prior to beginning of each quarter. R. INARRINGKbt GREEMNTICOMPUFER ALERT/STAMEN. DOC 3 CITY OF TEMECULA CONTRACT AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE SERVICES MAINTENANCE CONTRACT, made THIS and entered into as of, November 29;- 2000q>wand between: the42-ity=of-Temecuta; and*Computer-Atert-Systemsclnc: ........... ("Contractor"). in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 2001, and shall remain and continue in effect until June 30, 2002, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. The City reserves the option to extend the contract(s) under the same terms and conditions for a maximum of two (2) additional one-year terms per the attached pricing schedule in "Exhibit B". 2. SCOPE OF WORK. Contractor shall perform all of the work described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. ("Work") and shall provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required for the Work. All of said Work to be performed and materials to be furnished for the Work shall be in strict accordance with the specifications set forth in the Scope of Work. 3. PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and schedules and terms as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed Eighteen Thousand Dollars ($18,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment or change order is approved as provided in this Agreement. a. Contractor shall submit invoices monthly for actual services performed detailing the work performed in a form acceptable to the Director of Finance. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of contractor's fees it shall give written notice to Contractor within 30 days of receipt of invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. 4. CHANGE ORDERS. The City Manager may approve additional work provided such work does not exceed the sum of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00). Change orders exceeding these limits shall be approved by the City Council. 5. PERFORMANCE. Contractor shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Contractor shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Contractor hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. R\vollmum~agreements.all\minormaintenance. O0 6. CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipmem, and services shall be furnished and work performed and completed subject to the approval of the City or its authorized representatives. 7. W-AliCER OF CL~iMS~-On 6ib~?0rfi maki~-'fihal requeswfor-paymem ander Paragraph 3., above, Contractor shall submit to District, in writing, all claims for compensation under ' or arising out--of-this~ontractvthe acceptance-by~Contractor-cff~theffinal .......... payment ~hall constitute a waiver of all claims against the City under Or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. Contractor shall be required to execute an affidavit, release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment. 8. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section .1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the District 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 Contractor from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are oa 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Contractor shall forfeit to the District, 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. 9. 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 Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder 9f this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Contractor 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 Contractor will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 10. DEFAULT OF CONTRACTOR. a. The Contractor's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Contractor is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Contractor R\vollmum\agreements.all\minormaintenance.00 for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Contractor. If such failure by the Contractor to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Contractor's control, and without fault or n~egligence of the Contractor, it shall not be considered a default. ........................ 5 ..~2~ 571 ..... ___ b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Contractor is in -defatiltfin~he performancemf~any~f~the=terms~0r~onditiuiis'-~f-t~g~e~t, it'-~lJalt~e ..... - the Contractor with written notice of the defanlt. The Contractor 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 Contractor fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 11. INDEMNIFICATION. The Contractor 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, 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 Contractor's-negligent or,-w-rong-ful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the 'City. 12. LIABILITY INSURANCE. 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 hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees. a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (0 Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3) Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor 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 R\vollmum~agreements.all\minormaintenance. O0 (2) this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. Automobile Liability: $1_,_..0~_0~0?~0__p? ac~id~ent for bo~d_il3~_injury -:: andp~0~eny'~fiYnhge. or disease. c. 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. d. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with original endorsements effecting coverage required b~y this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer tobind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. · e. - Contractor, by executing this Agreement, hereb, y certifies: "! :am aware of the.provision-of-Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workman's Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." 13. TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract. 14. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor 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 Contractor shall at all times be under Contractor's exclusive direction and control. Neither the City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or any of Contractor's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Contractor 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. Contractor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against the City, or bind City in any manner. No employee benefits shall be available to Contractor in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Contractor as provided in the Agreement, the City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Contractor for performing services hereunder for City. District shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Contractor for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 15. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Contractor shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance' of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its R\vollmum~agreements.all\minor maimenance.00 officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Contractor to comply with this section. 16. CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTI(~TiON;-: No:-piea~%~ ignorance of conditions that exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that mayrbe-encountered-in~the~execution~of~he~,vork -under~his~ontr act, as-a ,~esutt~o f-faiture-~o make the necessary independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations or reports prepared by the City for purposes of letting this Contract out to proposal 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. 17. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the Work contemplated:by this-Contract; Contractor shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors on the Work have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the project for either labor or materials,, except certain i~ems, if any, to be set forth in an affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been filed under .the provisions- of-the-la~vs of the.State of California: ..... .... 18. 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 contractor 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. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 20. 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. 21. UTILITY LOCATION. The City acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. R\vollmum\agreemen~s. all\minormainteaanc~.00 22. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. Contractor agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4215. 23~-: DISC~ATION; CSn~r-a$]~i: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,~col~r ;' sex~age~ndieap~ . 24. WRITTEN NOTICE. 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: ..... To City: City of Temecula -43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 ..... Attention: City-Manager .... -- To COntractor: Computer Alert Systems, Inc. 28465 Old Town Front Street, Suite 324 Temecula, CA 92590 Attention: Nathan Gans, President 25. ASSIGNMENT. The Contractor shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. 26. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 27. GOVERNING LAW. The District 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 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. 28. 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 R\vollmum~agr eements, al l~ninormainlenanc~ .00 forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 29. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executin~ ~h'is'-Agreement on behalf Of~acior'warrants ~i/ti-~ep~sent~ thai~he-or ..... she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Contractor and has the authority~o~bind~ntraetor~o~he p~ifd~ance t,f iiS-Oi~li-gationsrhereunder~ /Ill IIII RXvolltnum~agreemenCs.all\minormaintenance. O0 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. ......... CITY OFTEMECUL.~. Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager Attest: Approved As to Form: ~orney CONTRACTOR: Computer Alert Systems, Inc. Title: Secretary/Treasurer (Two Signatures Required for Corporations) R\vollmum~a~eements.all\minormaintenance. O0 EXHIBIT "A" (Page 1 of 2) CITY OF TEMECULA SPECIFICATIONS/SCOPE OF WORK ALARM MONITORING, INSPECTIONS AND REPAIR These specifications and scope of work applies to each City location listed in this exhibit. 1. Contractor will monitor both fire and security _a_l~ _sy~te~ms seven da~y_s, a .~veek, twenty-four (24) h-ou~s"a'day at~ll-ifih~-lrCations, listed in~th-i~--~xtfil~it. Monthly monitoring fee excludes all monthly phone line fees. q~he -q2 or~mctor~witt~be~sponsible~T~dng: syst¢~t~ted- Contractor's central office, this includes costs for any modification of City equipment or any other fees, which may be required to transfer, system monitoring to the Contractor's central office. 3. All fire and security equipment, wiring, panels, detectors, keypads, etc. will remain the City's property. The Contractor will maintain the systems, system programs and equipment in an "unlocked state", thereby allowing the City or any other contractor the City my choose to service or program the equipment. No equipment or system program modifications may be made without first receiving written approval from the City. 4. The monitoring fee will include any costs for changing security access codes and training supervisory staff, from time to time, throughout the term of the agreement, as directed by the City. 5. Monitoring fee will include monthly "opening & closing" reports for each location. 6. Fire sprinkler monitoring and alarm systems at all facilities will be inspected in accordance with the California Fire Code Article 10 and NFPA 72. Fire sprinkler and alarm system inspections will be reported on the National Fire Alarm Code form with a copy sent to the City for its records. 7. It is recommended that Contractor and/or Contractor's technicians be NICET Level II certified and are also certified by the manufacture to service their alarm equipment. Facility Locations and System Types/Manufactures/Models Numbers Contractor has inspected the alarm systems at each location and confirms the accuracy of this list. Contractor has verified system condition, model number, and other aspects of the system to insure it is in good operation condition and that the Contractor is capable of providing monitoring and repair service for each system. City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive Fire Alarm: AFP 200 Notifire Security Alarm: DCS MAXSYS PC 4020 Key Pad-LCD 4500 Maintenance Facility, 43210 Business Park Drive Fire Alarm: Silent Knight 5204 Security Alarm: DCS MAXSYS PC 4020 Key Pad-LCD 4500 Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road Fire Alarm: Radionics Omegalarm D8112 Fire Alarm Annunciation: Radionics Security Alarm: Radionics D 7212 Key Pad-Radionics EXHIBIT A (Page 2 of 2) 4. Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street Fire Alarm: Si!~nt.~gh_t 5140 ....... S ~-Un~ty--Alarm: DSL-"~PC30~ORK ......... Maryq?hiltips~S eaior~C~iit~i'g-4t~t~53thgtreet Fire Alarm: Ademco/Vista 5140 XM Secruity Alarm: Ademco ' Key Pad Ademco Temecula Valley Museum, 28314 Mercedes Drive Fire Alarm: Vista 100 Security Alarm: Vista 100 KeyPad-6139 Temecula Wedding Chapel, 28300 Mercedes Drive Fire Alarm: Vista 30 Security Alarm: Vista 30 KeyPad-Ademco 16821 6th Street Restroom/Parking Lot, 41952 6th Street Fire Alarm: None Security Alarm: PC 1555 -~K~yPad-DSCPC 1555 RItz Temecula Children's Museum (Temecula Trading Post), 42081 Main Street Fire Alarm: Silent Knight 5107 Security Alarm: Radionics Key Pad- Radionics EXHIBIT "B" ~ SCHEDULE OF PAYMENT FACILITY LOCATION Monthly Fee Fire Monthly Fee Yearly Total System Monitoring & Security System Fee Per Inspection Monitoring Location Monitoring & ..................... "---' Inspection .... City Hall, 43200 Business Park $_45.00_ $25,00 ..... $8~40j00 Drive ...... Maintenance Facility, $45.00 $0.00 $540.00 43210 Business Park Drive Community Recreation Center, $45.00 $37.00 $984.00 30875 Rancho Vista Road Temecula Community Center, $45.00 $37.00 $984.00 28816 Pujol Street Mary Phillips Senior Center, $45.00 $0.00 _$$40.00 41845 6th Street Temecnla Valley Museum, $45.00 $0.00 $540.00 28314 Mercedes Drive Temecula Children's Museum (Trading Post), 42801 Main $45.00 $37.00 $984.00 Street Temecula Wedding Chapel, $0.00 $37.00 $444.00 28300 Mercedes Drive 6th Street Restroom/Parking $0.00 $25.00 $300.00 Lot, 41952 6th Street Total $6,156.00 Costs for repair or extra work authorized by City MARK-UP ADDED TO VENDOR'S WHOLESALE PRICE OF PARTS & EQUIPMENT 40% HOURLY RATE PER REGUALR MAN HOUR-Sam To 5pm $65.00/HR. Monday through Friday HOURLY RATE PER OVERTIME MAN HOUR-After-hours, $85.00/HR. Weekends, Holidays, etc. Invoices will be submitted on a quarterly basis; one month prior to beginning of each quarter. CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 CONTRACT NO. 00-254 PROJECT: Alarm System Monitoring and Maintenance Services Contract SHEET 1 TO CONTRACTOR: Computer Alert Systems, Inc. NOTE: This change 'order is not effective until approved by the City Manager. THIS CHANGE PROVIDES FOR: A. An INCREASE in the following services: of I Provide Alarm Monitoring Services for the Temecula Skate Park Facility: Contractor shall provide alarm monitoring services for the Temecula Skate Park pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement. The price per month is $25.00 beginning July 1, 2001. The total cost for Fiscal Year 2001-02 is .......................................... t~ 300.00 TOTAL ............................................................................... i ............ $ 300.00 Original Contract Amount For FY 2000-01 ......................................................... $ 18,000.00 Adjusted Contract Amount For FY 2000-01 ....................................................... $ 18,000.00 Change Order No. I (+) ................................................................................... $ 300.00 Total Contract Amount for FY 2001-02 ........................................................... $ 18,300.00 Ap p roved: ~/'~, 7'~/4~'~/v'~ c';)~-~,~- By: . _~.~ Date:~---~'-~ (Title) We the undersigned contractor have given careful consideration to the change proposed and hereby agree. If this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform all services necessary for the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above. Date Accepted: ///(~//' (si~J~f~re) Name: ///./- Contractor: //~/w/v',/"-~ .~,~t~--$~.,~ (company's name) Title:~'~ ~.$ / If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a written protest within the time therein specified, R:\HARRINGK~AGREEMNT~Change Order - Computer Alert CCO,01 ,doc CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 CONTRACT NO. 00-254 PROJECT: Alarm System Monitoring and Maintenance Services Contract TO CONTRACTOR: Computer Alert Systems, Inc. NOTE: This change order is not effective until approved by the City Manager. THIS CHANGE PROVIDES FOR: A. SHEET 1 of I An INCREASE in the following services: Provide Repair Services for the Keyless Entry System at City Hall & Maintenance Facility: Contractor shall provide repair services for the keyless entry/proximity card system at both facilities. Work will be performed on an as needed basis, as directed by City. The total cost for Fiscal Year 2001-02 is .......................................... $ 2,000.00 TOTAL ........................................................................................... $ 2,000.00 Original Contract Amount For FY 2000-01 ......................................................... $ 18,000.00 Adjusted Contract Amount For FY 2000-01 ....................................................... ~ 18,000.00 Change Order No. 1 (+) .................................................................................. $ 300.00 Change Order No. 2 (+) .................................................................................... $ 2,000.00 ................................................ $ 20,300.00 Total Contract Amount for FY 2001-02 Approved: ~/~//~,~'~,~_ By: ~ ~//° Date: (Title) We the undersigned contractor have given careful consideration to the change proposed and hereby agree. If this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform ail services necessary for the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above. Date Accepted: (s~n~'~) Na (print) Contractor: ~'"~/~/~'~"~'~' .~w -- /'-- S/kC' /~'( (company's name) Title: ~- ~,~.,~,,~.,~.~ If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the requirements of tho specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a written protest within the time therein specified. R:~HARRINGK~,GREEMNT~Change Order - Computer Alert CCO.02.doc CONTRA'CT CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 00-254 PROJECT: Alarm System Monitoring and Maintenance Services Contract TO CONTRACTOR: Computer Alert Systems, Inc. NOTE: This change order is not effective until approved by the City Manager. THIS CHANGE PROVIDES FOR: A. An INCREASE in the following services: 1. SHEET I of I Provide Alarm Monitoring Services for the Upgraded Security System at the Mary Phillips Senior Center: Contractor shall provide alarm monitoring services for the upgraded security alarm system at the Mary Phillips Senior Center pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement. The price per month shall be 915.00 beginning April 1, 2002. The total cost for Fiscal Year 2001-02 is .......................................... $ 45.00 TOTAL ................................................................................................ $ 45.00 Original Contract Amount For FY 2000-01 ......................................................... $ 18,000.00 Adjusted Contract Amount For FY 2001-02 ....................................................... $ 20,300.00 Change Order No. 3 (+) .................................................................................... $ 45.00 Total Contract Amount for FY 2001-02 ............................................................. t~ 20,345.00 (Title) We the undersigned contractor have given careful consideration to the change proposed and hereby agree. If this propose[ is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform all services necessary for the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above, Date Accepted: ~"--~,~" /~'/ "" -(~gnature)~ Name: ~/~r~ ~'~¢N_~ (print) Contractor: ~'~)~'~p~.~"~/' /~f/~/~/ (dompany's name) Title: ~f~/~ ~'~ / ~)'~'-~ If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with thC ordered work and filing a written protest within the time therein specified. R:\HARRINGK\AGREEMNT\Change Order - Computer Alert CC0.03.doc ITEM 19 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR.OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Manager/City Council Genie Roberts, Director of Finance ~ Howard Windsor, Fire Chief June 25, 2002 Fire/EMS Protection Agreement for Fiscal Year 2002-03 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the three-year contract for Fire/EMS protection including Exhibit A for the cost for services for Fiscal Year 2002-03. BACKGROUND: Since the City of Temecula's incorporation, Fire/EMS services have been provided through a Cooperative Fire Service Agreement with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDFFP) and Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD). Formalization of this agreement is required every three years to appropriately renew the required contract between the City of Temecula and the providing fire service agencies mentioned above. Service costs for Fiscal Year 2002-03 are shown on the attached Exhibit A. The increases for services are due to the following augmentations to the contract: · Twelve-month costs for the Vail Ranch Temporary Fire Station Addition of six FF/Paramedics for staffing the second Paramedic Assessment Squad (MS-73). This staffing will include one Captain/PM, two Fire Apparatus Engineer/PM, and three FireFighter II/PM · One additional Fire Safety Specialist The remaining personnel costs from the previous year remain relatively the same with minor increases for the Paramedic personnel salaries, due to the negotiated increases as part of the MOU bargaining contract. Also included on Exhibit A is the estimated Structural Fire Tax Credit which offsets the City's Fire/EMS costs. FISCAL IMPACT: The additional costs associated with the additional Paramedic Squad and Fire Safety Specialist is $612,000 for fiscal year 2002-03. Adequate funds have been appropriated in the fiscal year 2002-03 Fire Services budget. Attachment: Cooperative Agreement R:\Caravelli Denise~AGENDAS\01Agenda\Fire Service Contract amendment.doc 86/18/2882 11:23 99406910 PAGE 01 ? 8 -10 15 17 18 ~0 A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE FIRE PROTECTION, FIRE PREVENTION, RESCUE, AND. MEDICAL AID SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 25th d~y of June~ 2002 , by and between the' County of .Riverside, hereinafter called "County", and the City of Temecula, hereinafter called "City", whereby it is agreed as follows: I PURPOSE The purpose of the Agreement is to arrange for the County, through its Cooperative Agreement with the State of California, to provide City with fire protection, fire prevention, rescue, and medical aid services, hereinafter called fire protection services. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to the authority granted by Government Code Sections 55603, 55603.5, 55632, 55606 and 55642, and will mutually advantageous to City and County in that it will provide a unffied, cooperative, integrated, and effective fire protection, rescue, and medical aid system ~o protect lives, proper~y, ahd natural resou~ceS~ II COUNTY IN CHARGE A. The County Fire Chief shall represent both parties during the period of this Agreement and that Officer shall, under the supervision ahd direction of the County Board of Supervisora, have charge of the.organization described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, for the purpose of providing fire protection services as deemed necessary to satisfy the needs of both County and City, except' upon those iands wherein other agencies of government have responsibility for %he same or similar fire protection services. B. The County will provide the services (at the levels specified in Exhibit ~A") in return for the payments r~ade by the City under Paragraph III. C. The County will be allowed flexibility in the assignment of available personnel ahd equipment.in order to provide the fire protection services, rescue and medical aid services as agreed upon herein. 1 B6/18/2002 11:23 SS40~Si0 PAGE 82 8 9 -~0 14 16 ~0 2~ 25 25 D. The County provides fire personnel thru its contract with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and if during the term of this agreement City shall desire a reduction in STATE civil service employees assigned to the organization provided for in Exhibit "A", City shall provide one hundred twenty (120) days written notice of the. requested reduction- Proper notification shall include the fetlowing.(1). The total amount of reduction;' (2) The firm effective date Of the reduction; and (3) The null. er of _ employees, by classification, affected by a reduction. If such notice is not provided, City shall reimburse County for relocation costs incurred by STATE because of the reduction. Personnel reductions resulting solely due to an increase in STATE employee salaries or STATE expenses occurring after signing this agreement and set forth in Exhibit "A" to this agreement shall not be.subject to relocation expense reimbursement.by City. E. The City shall, appoint the County Fire Chief referred to under Paragraph A. above, to be the City Fire Chief. III pAYMENT FOR SERVICES A. ' The City has appropriated a sum of money to pay for fire protectio~ services within th~area Of responsibility of t~e..City for the peribd from.the date'of execution of th/is Agreement to June 30, 2003. B- The County shall make a claim to the City for the actual cost Of contracted services as shown on Exhibit "A" during each of the following periods: (1) July 1 through September 31, claLm in '~ct~ber (2) October 1 through December 31, claim in January (3) January 1 through March 31, claim in April and (4) April 1 through June 30, claim in April for the estimated cost of services after any deduction for,fire taxes, with final reconciliation to actual costs resulting in an additional claim or refund to City, in . July. City shall pay each claim within fifteen (15) days after receipt thereof-' The County shall allow a credit in the' amount of the Structural Fire taxes as determined by County to be collected in each Fiscal Year of this Agreement. The allowed credit shall not exceed th% cost of contracted' services. C. Any change of the salaries or expenses set forth in said Exhibit "A" made necessary by action of the Legislature or any other public agency with authority to direct changes in the level of salaries or expenses, shall be, paid from the funds represented therein or as said Exhibit.. "A"- There shall be no obligation on the part of the City to expend or appropriate any sum in excess of the total of 2 06/1@/20B2 11:23 9940G910 PAGE 03 ].9 ~0 Exhibit "A" which exceeds the appropriation of the City for the purposes of the Agreement. If within thirty (30) d~ys after notice in writing from the County to the City that the actual cost of maintaining the services specified in Exhibit "A" as a result of Legislative or other action has failed to agree to make available the necessary additional funds, the County shall have the right to reduce said services by a like amount a~d shall promptly notify the City specifying the services Go be reduced. If City desires to add funds to total included herein to cover the cost of increased salaries or services, such increase shall be accomplished by an amendment to this Agreement approved by the parties hereto- Iv HOLDING OVeR A. The initial term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 2002 to June 30, 2005. Either party to this Agreement may terminate this Agreement by providing a written notice oX termination to the other party hereto twelve(12)months prior %o the expiration of the term hereof. In no event shall this Agreement be terminated by either party prior to June 30, 2003. If no written notice of termination is received by either party prior to June 30, 2005, this Agreement shall be automatically renewed at the same level of service, but at the level 'of expense in effect for the year'of renewal, and otherwise on the.game t~ms'and conditions herein speoifie.d, so far as applicable until: (1) A new Agreement is fully executed, or (2) Termination of the Agreement following one year prior written notice of termination, or (3) New Exhibit '!A" is mutually agreed to by and between th9 parties- B. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual consent of the parties at any time after June 30, 2005. C. Nothing herein shall be constructed as excusing City's compliance with Government ~ode Section 25643.. V COOPERATIVE OPERATIONS All fire protection, res6ue, and medigal, aid.work contemplated under this Agreement shall be done by 66%% ~--~ 06/~8/2002 ~t23 994069~0 PA6E 84 9. '4 5 6 ? 8 9 -~0 '~8 3.9 20 ~5 28 parties to this Agreement working as one unit; therefore, personnel and equipment, regardless of whether they are. included in Exhibit "A" may be temporarily dispatched elsewhere from time to time for mutual aid. Coverage will be provided to City following the County's standard move-up and cover procedures- ~h :c C( the VI MUTUAl. AID When rendering mutual aid or assistance as authorized in Section 13050 and 13054, Health and Safety COde, the County may demand payment of charges and seek reimbursement of City costs for personnel as funded herein, under authority given by Section 13051 and 13054, Health and Safety code- The County in seeking such reimbursement County shall represent City in following the procedures set forth in Section 13052, Health and Safety Code. Any recovery of City costs, less collection expenses, shall be credited to city. VII PROPERTY ACCOUNTING Ail personal property provided by City and by the County.for the purpose of p~oviding fire'protectio~ and reslc~e services under the terms of this Agreement shall be ~rked and accounted for by the County Fire Chief in such a man,er as to conform to the standard operating procedure established by the County Fire Department for the segregation, care, and use of respective property of each. VIII' INDEMNIFICATION A. city shall inden%nify and hold County, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractors free and harmless from any claim or liability whatsoever, based or asserted upon any act or omission of City, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors a~d independent contractors, for property damage, bodily injury or death or any other element of damage of any kind or nature, occurring in the performance of this Agreement between the parties hereto to the extent that such liability is imposed on the County by the provisions of Section 895.32 of the' Government Code of the State of California, and City shall defend at its expense, including attorneys fees, County, its officers, .agent~.~' 05/18/2002 11:23 99406010 PAGE 05 employees and independent contractors in any legal actin or claim of any kind based upon such alleged acts of omissions. B. County shall indemnify and hold City, its officers, ~ agency, employees and independent contractors free and tiharmless from any claim or liability whatsoewer, based or asserted.upon any act or omission of County, its officers, agents, employees, subcontractors and independent contraQtors, for property damage,'bodily injury or death or any othe~ element of damage of any kind or nature, occurring in the performance of this Agreement between the parties hereto to the extent that such liability is imposed on the City by the provisions of Section 895.2 of the Government Code of the State of California, and County shall defend at its expense, including attorney fees, City, its officers, agents, employees and independent contractor in any legal action or claim of any 9 kind based upon such alleged acts or omissions. -10 IX 12 DMLIV~RY OF NOTICES 1~ Any notices to be served pursuant to this Agreement shall be considered, delivered when deposited in the United 14 States'mail and addressed to: ~5 COUNTY CITY OF TEMECULA 16 County Fire chief city Manager 17 210 W. San Jacinto Ave. 43200 Business Park Dr. Perris, CA 92570 P.O Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92590 19 Provisions of this s~ctioh do not preclude any notices being delivered in person' to the addresses shown g0 above. X ENTIRE CONTRACT This contract is intendeJ by the parties hereto as final expression of their understanding with respect to the subject matter hereof and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions thereof and supersedes any and all prior contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral or written, in. connection therewith. This contract may be terminated, changed, or modifie~..oilly, zt~ upon the written consent of the parties hereto. 86/18/2882 11:23 99486918 PAGE 86 1 4 6 ? 8 -10 11 lS IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the duly authorized officials of the parties hereto have, in their respective capacities, set their hands as of the date first hereinabove written. Dated: CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVED AS TO FOP~M By By ATTEST: Title ATTEST: GERALD A. MALONEY Clerk of the Board Title COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE By Chairman, Board 'of supervis°rJ g0 24 By Deputy (sEAL) F:AGR\~emecula Agr ~8 4/3O/2002 TEMECULA STAFFING LEVEL FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 - 3 PERSON ENGINE CO. PARAMEDIC TEAMS (2) ~ 4 PERSON TRUCK CO. SERVICE DELIVERY COST 1 - CAPT. STA.#12 STA.#73 STA.#84 STA.~92 245,634 93,408 264,818 93,4O8 256,023 93,408 256,023 93,408 1 - FC P/M STA. #73 STA. ~ EXHIBIT "A" "ESTIMATE" 1.6 - ENG. 5.2 - FF II TOTAL 130,700 363,815 833,558 130,700 363,815 852,742 130,700 363,815 843,947 130,700 363,815 843,947 STA #83-50% 2 - ENG. P.WI 3 - FF II P/M 3 - ENG. P/M 3 - FF II P/M Pararneclic Team 10~,860 188,816 248,638 544,314 Paramedic Team 283,224 248,638 531,861 SERVICE DELIVERY COST 1 - CAPT. 2 -ENG. 6 - FF II 46,704 65,350 209,894 454,357 SUBTOTAL $4,904,728 TRUCK COMPANY (50%) 1 - BA3~-ALION CHIEF FiRE MARSHALL (B/C) 1 - DEPUTY FlEE MARSHALL (F/C) 5 - FIRE SAFETY SPEC. 2 - FIRE SYSTEMS INSPEC 3-CAPT. 140ii13 3 - ENG. 6 - FF II's TOTAL 122,532 209,894 472,538 120,529 120,529 93,408 124,000 SUBTOTAL $1,271 ,(~O4 TOTAL DOLLARS FOR STAFFING TEMECULA TAX CREDIT NET CITY BILLING TAX CREDIT: FIRE TAXES REDEV. TAXES TOTAL 2,589,175 512,466 3,101,641 $6,175,732 (3,101,641) 3,074,091 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEM 1 APPROVAL ~Z.7~ CITY ATTORNEY ~ DIRECTOR OF FINAj~C_E ~ CITY MANAGER (J~ I" TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Servic~? June 25, 2002 Tract Map No. 23209 - Service Level B, Service Level C and Service Level D Rates and Charges PREPARED BY: Barbara Smith, Management Analyst RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO SERVICE LEVEL B, SERVICE LEVEL C, AND SERVICE LEVEL D RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NO. 23209 BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 AND SE'I-rING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH BACKGROUND: The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) operates under the authority of Community Services District Law and provides residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope landscaping maintenance and trash/recycling collection services to numerous residential subdivisions within the City of Temecula through Service Level "B", Service Level "C" and Service Level "D". The boundaries of the TCSD are coterminous with the City, and the City Council also serves as the Board of Directors of the TCSD. Tract Map No. 23209 is a future 220 lot residential development. The development consists of approximately 80.01 gross acres of vacant property located to the west side of Butterfield Stage Road and east of Walcott Lane. The property owner has requested that the TCSD establish the future parcel charges necessary to provide ongoing revenue for residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services within this development. R:~smithb\Elections\23209 Election\Staff-Notice of Hearing.dec 06/1812002 Beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004, the following TCSD rates and charges are proposed for residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services within Tract Map No. 23209: Service Level B $ 28.68 per residential parcel Service Level C $ 200.00 per residential parcel Service Level D $172.56 per occupied parcel Pursuant to the provisions of Proposition 218, the TCSD is required to hold a public hearing and obtain voter or property owner approval in order to establish certain new rates and charges. In addition, a report must be prepared and flied with the Secretary/City Clerk which identifies all of the affected parcels and the amount of the proposed rates and charges. A notice is mailed to the property owner identifying the proposed rates and charges and date of the Public Hearing. The Public Hearing is held at least 45 days after the mailing of the notices. If the proposed rates and charges are not rejected pursuant to a written protest, then the TCSD will conduct a mailed ballot proceeding not less than 45 days after the public hearing. The proposed rates and charges for Service Level B and Service Level C cannot be imposed unless the property owner has approved the new charges. In accordance with Proposition 218, property owners shall receive notice of the proposed charges for Service Level D, however, mailed ballot proceedings are not required to impose rates and charges for trash/recycling collection services. Staff recommends that the Board of Directors adopt the resolution to accept the filing of the report on the proposed residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance and trash/recycling collection services rates and charges for Tract Map No. 23209 beginning in Fiscal Year 2003-2004 and schedule a public hearing concerning this issue for August 13, 2002. Staff will then proceed with noticing the owner of Tract Map No. 23209 regarding the proposed rates and charges and the public hearing date. If there is no majority protest against the rates and charges on August 13, 2002 staff will then proceed with the mailed ballot process for Service Level B and Service Level C. FISCAL IMPACT: If voter approved, upon buildout of the development, the proposed rates and charges of $25.68 and 200.00 per parcel will generate an annual levy of $5,649.60, for the Service Level B and $44,000.00 for Service Level C. The proposed Service Level D charge of $172.56 per parcel will generate an annual levy of $37,963.20. (Pursuant to Proposition 218, this amount may be increased by the TCSD for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 after conducting an additional public hearing. However, mailed ballot proceedings are not required to increase Service Level D rates and charges.) Actual costs for providing long-term residential street lighting and perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance services within Tract Map No. 23209 will be absorbed into Service Level B and Service Level C upon installation of said improvements. The owner of Tract Map No. 23209 has paid the administrative and mailing costs associated with the public notices and ballot information required per Proposition 218. ATFACHMENTS: Vicinity Map TCSD Landscape Maintenance Area Resolution of Intention R:~smithb\Elections\23209 Election\Staff-Notice of Hearing doc 06/18/2002 PROJECT SITE AHERN HEll LAN SYMBOL DESCRIPTION TCSD LOT 223 I 41,812 rorA£ ] ~4a, lo,~ j i~I~iGN CONSULTAIYT~ LOT 224 AREA RESOLUTION NO. CSD 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGING THE FILING OF A REPORT WITH RESPECT TO SERVICE LEVEL B, SERVICE LEVEL C, AND SERVICE LEVEL D RATES AND CHARGES FOR TRACT MAP NO. 23209 BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 AND SETTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION THEREWITH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES, DECLARES, DETERMINES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Upon incorporation of the City of Temecula, effective December 1,1989, voters approved the formation of the Temecula Community Services District ("TCSD"), to provide specified services to properties within its jurisdiction. Section 2. The TCSD provides long-term residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope landscape maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services in numerous residential developments within the City of Temecula. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 61621 and 61621.2, the TCSD has prescribed, revised and collected rates and charges for residential street lighting (Service Level B), perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance (Service Level C), and trash/recycling collection (Service Level D) services furnished by it, and has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, its general taxes in the manner prescribed by Government Code Sections 61765.2 to 61765.6, inclusive. Section 3. The TCSD hereby initiates proceedings to provide residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services within Tract Map No. 23209 and its subsequent phases beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004. Pursuant to Government Code Section 61621.2, the TCSD has caused a written report ("Report") to be prepared and filed with the Secretary of the TCSD, (Exhibit A) which Report contains a description of the real property and the proposed amount of the Service Level B, Service Level C, and Service Level D rates and charges required for residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services provided to each parcel within Tract Map No. 23209 and its subsequent phases beginning fiscal year 2003-2004. The TCSD proposes to collect the rates and charges at the same time, in the same manner, by the same persons and together with and not separately from, the property taxes collected within the TCSD. These rates and charges shall be delinquent at the same time and thereafter be subject to the same delinquency penalties as such property taxes. All laws applicable to the levy, collection, and enforcement of property taxes, including, but not limited to, those pertaining to the matters of delinquency, correction, cancellation, refund and redemption, shall be applicable to these rates and charges, except for California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 4831. However, if for the first year the charges are levied, the real property to which the charge relates has been transferred or conveyed to a bona fide purchaser for value, or if a lien of a bona fide encumbrancer for value has been created and attaches thereon, prior to the date on which the first installment of such taxes appear on the roll, then the charge shall not result in a lien against the property, but instead shall be transferred to the unsecured roll for collection. R:~smithb~Elections\23209 Election~Resolution of Intertron.doc 3_ 06/17/2002 Section 4. The Board of Directors hereby acknowledges the filing of the Report, and appoints the day of August 13, 2002 at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as feasible, in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California, 92590, as the time and place for the public hearing on the Report and the proposed Service Level B, Service Level C, and Service Level D rates and charges. At the public hearing, the Board of Directors will hear and consider all objections or protests, if any, to the Report. The Board may continue the hearing from time to time. Section 5. The Secretary of the TCSD is hereby directed to give notice of the filing of the Report and of the time and place of hearing on the Report pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 61765.2 and Section 6 of Article XIIID of the California Constitution. Section 6. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District this June 25th of 2002. Jeffrey E. Stone, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC/AAE City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk/District Secretary for the Temecula Community Services District, do hereby certify that Resolution No. CSD 02-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District at a regular meeting thereof held on June 25th of 2002. AYES: BOARD MEMBERS NOES: BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS R:~smithbLElections\23209 Election\Resolution of Intention.doc 2 06 / 3_ 7 / 2002 Exhibit A CITY OF TEMECULA TRACT MAP NO. 23209 INITIAL LEVY REPORT Service Levels B, C and D Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) Commencing Fiscal Year 2003-2004 INTENT MEETING: PUBLIC HEARING: June 25, 2002 August 13, 2002 INTRODUCTION: Upon incorporation of the City of Temecula ("City"), effective December 1, 1989, voters approved the formation of the Temecula Community Services District ("TCSD") to provide specified services to properties within its jurisdiction previously provided by the County of Riverside ("County"). The boundary of the TCSD is coterminous with the City boundary, and includes all parcels within the City with the City Council acting as the Board of Directors ("Board") for the TCSD. The TCSD collects property-related fees and charges ("Charges") in order to provide services and maintain the improvements within the TCSD. The TCSD was formed, and Charges are set and established, pursuant to the Community Services District Law, Title 6, Division 3 of the California Government Code ("CSD Law"). Each fiscal year, an Annual Levy Report is prepared, filed and approved by the Board. This Annual Levy Report describes the TCSD, any changes to the TCSD and the proposed Charges for the fiscal year. The Charges contained in the Annual Levy Report are based on the historical and estimated cost to service properties within the TCSD. The services provided by the TCSD and the corresponding costs are budgeted and charged as separate Service Levels and include all expenditures, deficits, surpluses, and revenues. Each parcel is charged for the services provided to the parcel. The TCSD provides residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, and trash/recycling collection in numerous residential developments as well as road improvement and maintenance within specified areas of the TCSD. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 61621 and 61621.2, the TCSD has prescribed, revised and collected rates and charges for residential street lighting (Service Level B), perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance (Service Level C), trash/recycling collection (Service Level D), and road improvement and maintenance (Service Level R) services furnished by the TCSD, and has elected to have these rates and charges collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, its general taxes in the manner prescribed by Government Code Sections 61765.2 to 61765.6, inclusive. Pursuant to Government Code Section 61621.2, this Initial Levy Report ("Report") is prepared and presented to the Board to prescribe Service Level B, Service Level C and Service Level D Rates and Charges for the parcels and territory identified as Tract Map No. 23209 beginning in FY 2003-2004. The territory and properties identified and described in this Report includes all parcels within the Tract Map No. 23209, a future residential subdivision that consists of 80.01 gross acres of vacant property located on the west side of Butterfield Stage Road, east of Walcott Lane and north of Rancho California Road, with 220 planned residential units. The owner of record (sole property owner) has requested that the TCSD establish the parcel charges necessary to provide ongoing revenue for residential street lighting, perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance, and trash/recycling collection services within this future residential subdivision. Pursuant to Article XIIID of the California Constitution ("Proposition 218") and CSD Law, the TCSD is required to hold a protest hearing (the "Public Hearing") and a ballot proceeding in order to establish certain new rates and charges. In addition, a report must be prepared and filed with the District Secretary/City Clerk that identifies all of the affected parcels and the amount of the proposed rates and charges. A notice is mailed to the preperty owner identifying the proposed rates and charges and the date of the Public Hearing. The Public Hearing is held at least 45 days after the mailing of the notices. If the proposed rates and charges are not rejected pursuant to a majority written protest, then the CSD will conduct a mailed ballot proceeding not less than 45 days after the Public Hearing. The proposed rates and charges for Service Level B and Service Level C cannot be imposed unless the property owner has approved the new charges. Ballot proceedings are not required to impose rates and charges for trash/recycling collection services, Service Level D. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS A. General Description of TCSD Services The TCSD provides certain property related services consisting of four (4) separate Service Levels to parcels threughout the TCSD. Each parcel within the TCSD is charged for the proportional cost of the services attributable to the parcel. Each Service Level has differing costs depending upon the services provided. All parcels identified within a Service Level share in the cost of the service. The costs associated with the service are proportionately spread among all properties within that Service Level to which the service is provided. The Service Levels are identified as follows: · Residential Street Lighting · Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance · Trash/Recycling Collection Services · Road Maintenance (Not applicable to this Development) B. TRACT MAP NO. 23209 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Being a division of Parcels 4, 5, 6 & 7 of Parcel Map recorded in Book 1, of Parcel Maps, at Pages 44 through 46, inclusive, records of Riverside County, CA. Also being a portion of Section 29, Township 7 South, Range 2 West, S.B.B.M. Description of Service Levels The proposed services applicable to parcels within Tract Map No. 23209 for which the charges will be imposed beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004 include: residential street lighting; perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance; and trash/recycling collection. Service Level B, Residential Street Lighting - includes all developed single family residential parcels and residential vacant parcels for which the TCSD provides on-going servicing, operation, and maintenance of local street lighting improvements. The current rate for Service Level B is $25.68 per residential parcel and shall be applied to parcels within Tract Map No. 23209 beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004. Service Level C, Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance - includes all developed single family residential parcels and residential vacant parcels for which the TCSD provides on-going servicing, operation, and maintenance of perimeter landscaped areas and slopes within the public right-of-ways and dedicated easements adjacent to and associated with each development. The landscaped areas associated with this particular development include, but are not limited to, perimeter slope and landscaping, as follows: Within Tract 23209 the perimeter slopes within Lots 224 and 226 along Walcott Lane, the perimeter slopes within Lot 225 and portions of Lots 223 and 222 along La Serena Way and perimeter slopes within a portion of Lots 222 and 223 along Butterfield Stage Road. There are two (2) off-site areas located between Butterfield Stage Road and Lot 95 and between La Serena Way, Lot 225 and the bulb of Calle Elenita. The level of maintenance required and the associated operating costs will be at a new rate level within the Service Level C Rates and Charges. Rate Level C-8 will be established at a rate of $200.00 per residential parcel and shall be applied to parcels within Tract Map No. 23209 beginning in Fiscal Year 2003-2004. Service Level D, Trash and Recycling Services - provides for the operation and administration of the trash/recycling collection program including street sweeping services for ali single-family residential homes within the TCSD. The current rate for Service Level D is $172.56 per single family residential home (developed residential parcel) and will be applied to all parcels within Tract Map No. 23209 that have been identified as developed with a residential home, beginning in Fiscal Year 2003-2004. Pursuant to Proposition 218, the rate and charges for this service may be increased by the TCSD after conducting an additional protest heating on the matter. Mailed ballot proceedings are not required to establish Service Level D rates and charges. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT The cost to provide services within Tract Map No. 23209 will be fairly distributed among each assessable property by the same methods and formulas applied to all parcels within the various Service Levels of the TCSD. The following is the formula used to calculate each property's TCSD charges and is applied to Service Level B (Residential Street Lighting); Service Level C (Perimeter Landscaping and Slope Maintenance); and Service Level D (Trash/Recycling Collection): Total Balance to Levy/Total Parcels (in Service Level) = Parcel Charge The following tables (Table I through III) reflect the levy calculations for each Service Level. TABLE I Parcel Charge Calculation for Service Level B Parcel Charge Per Parcel Property Type Unit X Parcel -- Charge Multiplier Single family residential 1.00 $25.68 $25.68 Per Parcel Single family vacant 1.00 $25.68 $25.68 Per Parcel A charge is imposed on all residential parcels developed or undeveloped. Parks, open space areas, easements and non-buildable parcels are not assessed. TABLE II Parcel Charge Calculation for Service Level C Parcel Charge per Parcel Property Type Unit X Parcel = Charge Multiplier Single family residential 1.00 $200.00 $200.00 Per Parcel Single family vacant 1.00 $200.00 $200.00 Per Parcel A charge is imposed on all residential parcels developed or undeveloped. Parks, open space areas, easements and non-buildable parcels are not assessed. TABLE III Parcel Charge Calculation for Service Level D Property Type Single family residential Parcel Charge per Unit X Parcel = 1.00 $172.56 Parcel Charge $172.56 Multiplier Per Parcel This charge is imposed only on developed single-family residential parcels (with a residential home). Pursuant to Proposition 218, this amount may be increased by the TCSD after conducting an additional protest hearing. TCSD LEVY SUMMARY AND PROPOSED CHARGES Each Service Level within the TCSD provides different and specific services to various parcels within the TCSD. The rates and charges prescribed for each service and level of service are proportionately spread to only those parcels that are provided each respective service (Service Levels). Table IV below provides general levy information for the various Service Levels within the entire TCSD for Fiscal Year 2003-2004. TABLE IV TCSC Budget and Service Level Summary For Fiscal Year 2002-2003 TCSD Budget and Charges Adopted for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 SERVICE LEVEL Total Levy Charge Per Total Levy Budget Levy Unit Units Service Level B Residential Street Lighting $443,622 $25.68 17,275 Service Level C Local Landscaping and Slopes Rate Level #1 (C-l) $ 47,886 $ 46.00 1041 Rate Level #2 (C-2) $ 94,340 $ 89.00 1060 Rate Level #3 (C-3) $195,924 $116.00 1689 Rate Level 444 (C-4) $269,675 $175.00 1541 Rate Level #5 (C-5) $ 94,220 $ 70.00 1346 Rate Level #6 (C-6) $ 54,675 $225.00 243 Rate Level #7 (C-7) $228,201 $129.00 1769 Service Level D Trash/recycling Collection $3,188,219 $172.56 18,476 Service Level R Road Maintenance Rate Level #1 (C-l) $ 7,262 $115.26 76 Rate Level #2 (C-2) $ 5,547 $121.92 65 Service Levels proposed for Tract Map No. 23209 beginning Fiscal Year 2003- 2004 and will be added to this budget. TABLE V Proposed Service Level Charges For Tract Map No. 23209 Estimate Budget and Charges for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 SERVICE LEVEL Total Levy Charge Per Planned Total Budget Levy Unit Levy Levy Units Units Service Level B: Residential Street Lighting $5,649.60 $25.68 220 220 Service Level C: Local Landscaping and Slopes $44,000.00 $200.00 220 220 Rate Level #6 (C-6) Service Level D: $37,963.20 $172.56 220 220 Trash/recycling Collection The "Total Levy Units" and the resulting "Charge Per Levy Unit" (shown in Tables IV and V), reflect a method of apportionment that most fairly apportions the costs of the services to the parcels in that Service Level. APPENDIX A - LEGAL DESCRIPTION Land Use: Single Family Residential Subdivision Parcel MapBooks- 957-250-009-5; 957-250-010-5; 957-250-011-6; 957-250- 013-8; 957-250-014-9; 957-250-015-0; 957-250-016-1; 957-250-017-2; 957-250-018-3; 957-250-019-4; 957-250-020-4; 957-250-021-5; 957-250-022-6; 957-250-023-7; 957- 250-024-8; 957-250-025-9; 957-250-026-0; 957-250-027-1 Final Map No. 23209: Being a division of Parcels 4, 5, 6 & 7 of Parcel Map recorded in Book 1, of Parcel Maps, at Pages 44 through 46, inclusive, records of Riverside County, CA. Also being a portion of Section 29, Township 7 South, Range 2 West, S.B.B.M. PARCEL A: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, R.A_NGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 4 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COLrNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 4 LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 464 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 528 FEET OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, ~ LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 443 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE, FROM THE NORTh-WEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A poI~Fr ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 439 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 4 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 4 LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4, WHICH IS 464 FEET WEST OF .THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4, WHICH IS 528 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST COP,/~'ER THEREOF, AND LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4, WHICH IS 443 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE, FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON TEE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 439 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRD-MENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL C: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST., COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 4 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 4' LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 464 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 528 FEET OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 443 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE, FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 439 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPOP. ATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COI/NTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL D: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE' OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 4 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COLrNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 4 LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DP. AWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 464 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4, WHICH IS 528 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 4 WHICH IS 443 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE, FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF' SAID PARCEL 4, WHICH IS 439 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. pARCEL E: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 5 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 A_ND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF .PARCEL 5 LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 528 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 585 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DP~AW-N FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 395 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE, FROM THE NORTh-WEST CORNER THEREOF, OF A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 391 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC HAILROAD COMPAIN-Y, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINEP. ALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL F: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COLrNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 5 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 A/FD 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 5 LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5, WHICH IS 528 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 585 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 395 FEET MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE FROM THE NORTH-WEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 391 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS A_ND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOW-N AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 5 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COLrNTy, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 5 LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 528 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 585 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, A_ND LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 395 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE, FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 391 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINER-ALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL H: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 5 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 5 LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 528 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 585 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5, WHICH IS 395 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID WEST LINE., FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 5 WHICH IS 391 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED. MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS A_ND .THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRLTMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL I: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOW-NAS A PORTION OF PARCEL 7 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 7 LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 286 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 384 FEET NORTHWESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DP~AWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 634 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 890 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS A_ND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL J: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOW-N AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 7 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 7 LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 286 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 384 FEET NORTHWESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 634 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 890 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPOP~ATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COLrNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. · PARCEL K: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 6 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 A_ND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 6 LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 220 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 296 FEET NORTPIWESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 890 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 1,088 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPOP. ATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LA.ND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINER. ALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LA.ND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRD-MENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, P~A_NGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 6 ON FILE IN BOOK. P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 6 LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 220 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 296 FEET NORTHWESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DHAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 890 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST COP~NER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 1,088 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LA-ND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COU1TTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 7 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 7 LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 286 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 384 FEET NORTHWESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, A_ND LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 634 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 890 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED. MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINER3%LS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL N: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 7 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 7 LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 286 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 384 FEET NORTHWESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 634 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 7, WHICH IS 890 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHEP. N PACIFIC P. AILROAD COMPANY, A CORPOR3~TION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LA-ND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LA_ND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COIINTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL O: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL 6 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 6 LYING WESTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 220 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 296 FEET NORTh'-WESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 890 FEET SOUTH OF THE'NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 1,088 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE,' MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFOP. NIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINERALS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUi~Y, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL P: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, R.A_NGE 2 WEST, COI/NTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN AS A PORTION OF PARCEL '6 ON FILE IN BOOK P-1 PAGE(S) 44, 45 AND 46 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 6, LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DRAWN FROM A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 220 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 296 FEET NORTHWESTERLY, MEASURED ALONG THE SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FROM THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER THEREOF, AND LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE DP. AWN FROM A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF' SAID PARCEL 6, WHIC}{ IS 890 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL 6, WHICH IS 1,08.8 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL IRON, COAL, LIGNITE, ASPHALTUM, LEAD, TIN, COPPER, LIMESTONE, MARBLE AND OTHER DEPOSITS AND SUBSTANCES AS RESERVED BY SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED MAY 5, 1904 IN BOOK 185 PAGE 4 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 200.00 FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO PROSPECT, DIG, DRILL OR MINE FOR SAID MINER3%LS AND THE RIGHT OF ENTRY IN OR THROUGH THE FIRST 200.00 FEET IN DEPTH BENEATH THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND AS RELINQUISHED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 22, 1966 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 112999 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. APPENDIX B - PARCEL LISTING (FY 2003-2004) The actual parcels subject to rates and charges for Service Level B, Service Level C and Service Level D beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004 shall be those parcels within Tract Map No. 23209 identified on the Riverside County Secured Roll at the time all TCSD rates and charges are submitted to the County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the tax roll for that fiscal year. The rates and method of apportionment outlined in this Report are consistent with the rates and methods previously approved by the TCSD Board of Directors for each applicable Service Level contained herein. However, all rates and methods described in this Report are subject to revision and modification within the prescribed parameters of the law. The actual rates and charges applied on the tax roll each fiscal year shall be apportioned and submitted according to the rates and method described in the final TCSD Annual Levy Report presented and approved by the Board of Directors at an annual Public Hearing. The following pages encompass a complete listing of all parcels within Tract Map No. 23209 subject to the TCSD Service Level B, Service Level C and Service Level D rates and charges beginning Fiscal Year 2003-2004. The rates and charges applied to each newly subdivided residential parcel will reflect the services provided and the development of each respective parcel at the time the rates and charges are applied. The table below provides a summary of the total proposed rates and charges for all properties within Tract Map No. 23209 based on the existing rates and charges per subdivided single-family residential unit: Charge per Total Levy Total Levy SERVICE LEVEL Levy Unit Units Budget Service Level B: Residential Street Lighting $25.68 220 $5,649.60 Service Level C: Local Landscaping and Slopes $200.00 220 $44,000.00 Rate Level #3 (C-3) Service Level D: Trash/Recycling Collection $172.56 220 $37,963.20 ITEM 2 A P P R O VA~..4./....~¢----~ CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: Board of Directors Herman D, Parker, Director of Community Servic~--"~. June 25,2002 SUBJECT: Authorize the Expenditure of Funds for the Landscape Maintenance Contract with Excel Landscape, Inc. for FY2002-03 PREPARED BY: ~¢~¢~Kevin T. Harrington, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: 1. Authorize the expenditure of funds in the amount of $1,110,440 for the base contract and an additional amount not to exceed $120,000 for the supplemental and new areas that may be brought on line during the term of the contract. 2. Approve contingency of 10% in the amount of $123,044 for extra work items. BACKGROUND: Excel Landscape, Inc. (Excel) has been providing landscape maintenance services for the City under this agreement since July 1,1997. At the start of this contract Excel only provided maintenance services for approximately half of the City's sites. However, due to their exceptional performance over the past several years, they have assumed the landscape maintenance responsibilities of all City sites. Excel has consistently provided excellent service to the City and the residents of Temecula. On June 11,2001, the Board of Directors approved the Landscape Maintenance Services Contract Amendment with Excel extending the term for two years, until June 30, 2003. The amendment also had provisions that allowed for the addition of supplemental landscape maintenance contract areas and unforeseen areas to come on line during the remaining term of the agreement. Excel agreed to hold their current costs for the extended term on all existing maintenance areas. They will also utilize those base costs to establish costs for any new maintenance areas that may be added to the agreement after July I, 2002. Additional areas may include Crowne Hill Park, Meadows Park, Freeway On & Off Ramps and several median islands. R:\HARRINGK\AGENDA.RPT\Excel Authorize Expenditure FY 02-03.doc The base contract amount is $1,110,440 and the amount for the supplemental areas and new areas is $120,000. In addition to the General Landscape Maintenance Services Expenditure and the Supplemental Areas the TCSD is requesting the approval of a 10% contingency in the amount of $123,044 for extra work items. The required extra work items may include repairing, rehabilitating and improving City sites. FISCAL IMPACT: The amount of the contract for Excel Landscape, Inc. including the supplemental and new areas to be added during the term of the contract and the contingency for Fiscal Year 2002-03 is $1,353,484. Sufficient funds have been included in the TCSD Annual Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2002-03 in accounts 190-180, 190-181, 190-182, 190-184, 190- 185, 193-180, 340-701,340-702, 001-164 and 001-171. ATTACHMENTS: Original Agreement Ninth Amendment R:\HARRINGK\AGENDA.RPT\Excel Aulhorize Expenditure FY 02-03.doc AMENDMENT NO. 9 TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE. TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND EXCEL LANDSCAPE DATED JUNE 24, 1997 FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES THIS NINTH AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of June 12, 2001, by and between the Temeeula Community Services District ("District") and Excel Landscape, Inc., a California corporation ("Contractor"). 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, which the parties agree are true and correct: a. On June 24, 1997, the City and Contractor, for the benefit of the District, entered into an Agreement for landscape maintenance services within the City's greenbelts, landscape service areas, medians, open space areas, parks and rights -of-way. b. The origina! Agreement was amended on July 1, 1998, August 11, 1998, January 11, 1998, March 22, 1999, April 5, 1999, April 15, 1999, June 22, 1999 AND June 27, 2000, in order to add areas to the Contractor's Scope of Work. The June 24, 1997 Agreement, as amended, shall be referred to as the "Agreement." c. It is now the desire of the parties to amend this Agreemem to extend the term of the Agreement for an additional period of two (2) years to June 30, 2003, provide for revisions to the areas to be maintained mid establish pricing for maintaining these areas and new areas. · 2. Exhibit A, Landscape Maintenance Contract Areas, attached to this Ninth Amendment, is hereby substituted in place of Exhibit A to the Agreemem. 3. Exhibit B, Supplemental Landscape Maintenance Contract Areas, attached to this Ninth Amendment, is hereby substituted in place of Exhibit B to the Agreement. 4. District may add new areas to be maintained by Contractor ia accordance with the specifications and terms of this Agreement. District shall pay contractor for such new areas at the rates set forth in Exhibit C. 5. The term of the Agreement is extended to June 30, 2003. This Amendment shall be effective July 1, 2001. 7. Any litigation concerning this Contract shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temeeula. 8. Prohibited Interest. No member, officer, or employee of the City of Temeeula or of a local public body shall have any interest, direct or iadireet, in the contract of the proceeds thereof.during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter. R:V4ARRINGK'IAGRE~ Landscape F~01 Amend.g.do¢~~ Furthermore, the contractor/cousultant 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 Secfun 1220) of Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code of the State of California. 9. Written Notice. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract Departments 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: Herman D. Parker, Director of Comm~Hlity Services City of Temeeula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 P.O, Box 9033 10. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS Wl~REOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. TE_MECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Approved As to Form: City Attorney/District Counsel EXCEL LANDSCAPE, INC., a California Corporation "-~ritle: ~~~, (~o si~ of Co.orate Officers is r~r~). R:~IARRINGI~AG~ ! ~md~age ~01 Aim~.9.dac Site # P-1 P-2 P-3 P-4 P-5 P-6 P-7 P-9 P-10 P-11 P-12 P-13 P-14 P-15 P-16 P-17 P-18 P-19 C) EXHIBIT A Landscape Maintenance Contract Areas (Amended as of July 1, 2001) NEIGIIBORItOOD PARKS SERVICE AREA Site Name Veterans Park Sam Hicks Monument Park Calle Aragon Park Bahia Vista Park Loma Linda Park Riverton Park John Magee Park Voorburg Park Nicolas Road Park Butterfield Stage Park Temeeula Duck Pond Rotary Park Nakayama Park Winchester Creek Park Long Canyon Creek Park Vail Ranch Park A (Paseo Park) Vail Ranch Park B (Lot 115) Vail Ranch Park C (Lot169) Monthly Price Annual Price $1,55o.oo $18,6oo.oo 800.00 9,600.00 250.00 3,000.00 250.00 3,000.00 707.00 8,484.00 1,617.00 19,404.00 310.00 3,720.00 303.00 3,636.00 812.00 9,744.00 782.00 9,384.00 2,155.00 25,860.00 300.00 3,600.00 125.00 1,500.00 1,568.00 18,816.00 1,000.00 12,000.00 5,183.00 62,196.00 557.00 6,684.00 580.00 6,960.00 TOTAL ~ ~ EXHIBIT A, page 1 of 7 STREETSCAPE SERVICE AREA Site # Site Name SS-1 Via Eduardo S~'eetscape FC-1 Nada Lane TOTAL Monthl~ Price $165.00 Annual Price $1,272.00 $~,980.00 EXHIBIT A, page 2 of 7 R:~,ARRII~K'~AO~ ~4,~.~e~ 501 Amend.9.doc SPORTS PARK~ SERVICE ARI~& Site # SP-1 $P-2 SP-3 $P..4 SP-6 Site Name Rancho California Sports Park Paloma Del Sol Park Pala Community Park Kent Hintergardt Park Margarita Community Park Temelm Hills Park Monthly Price $9,294.00 3,592.00 2,333.00 3,359.00 3,147.00 3,600.00 Annual Price $111,528.00 43,104.00 27,996.00 40,308.00 37,764.00 43,200.00 TOTAL EXHIBIT A, page 3 of 7 l~dliOl~A~ ~ ,,,,a~. ~01 Am~d.9.doo MEDIA~S SERVICE Site # M-1 M-2 M-5 M-7 M-9 M-lO M-Il M-12 M-16 M-17 M-21 M-22 Site Name Rancho California Road Median Ynez Road Median (Solana Way/Overland) Butterfield Stage Road Median Margarita Road Median at Rancho Cal. Rd Margarita Road Median at 79 South Margarita Road Median at Solana Ridge Margarita Road Median at Tuscany Ridge Margarita Road Median at Winchester Rd. Margarita Road Median at Promenade Mall Margarita Road Median at Avenida Sonoma Winchester Road Median at Jefferson Rancho California Rd. Median at Portafino Rancho Cal. Rd. Median at Margarita Rd. Pala Road Bridge Median at 79S Margarita Road Median at Pauba Rd. Meadows Parkway Median at RC Rd. Monthly Price 575.00 150.00 100,00 100.00 50.00 100,00 50.00 300.00 75.00 100.00 100.00 150.00 50.00 Annual Price $4.800.00 6,900.00 1,800,00 1,200.00 1,200.00 600.00 1,200.00 600.00 3,600.00 900.00' 1,200.00 1,200.00 300.00 1,800.00 600.00 2,400.00 TOTAL $ 30.300.00 EXHIBff A, page 4 of 7 coMMUNITy FACILITIES SERVICE AREA Site # F-1 F-2 F-3 F-4 F-5 F-6 F-7 F-8 F-9 F-10 Site Name Community Recreation Center Senior Center City Hall/Maintenance Facility Temecula Community Center Fire Station//84 Old Town Parking Lot A Old Town Street.scape Temecuh Valley Museum Old Town Parking Lot B Temecula Childrens Museum Monthly Price $1,~. ~.~..00 361.00 541.00 193.00 400.00 250.00 987.00 285.00 250.00 155.00 Annual Price $17,328.00 · 4,332.00 6,492.00 2,316.00 4,800.00 3,000.00 11,844.00 3,420.00 1,860.00 TOTAL $ 4.866.00 $ S8.392.~ EXHIBIT A, page 5 of 7 SLOPE SERVICE AREA (sou'm) Si~# S-3a S-3b' S~ S-8 S-12 S-13 S-16 S-~ S~I Site Name Rancho Highlands Rancho Highlands - Ynez Road Slope The Vineyards The Villages A and B Vintage Hills Presley (Viranda, Coumry Glen, Bfidlevale) Tradewinds Crown Hill Ranch Monthly Price $515.00 255.00 4,734.00 4,600.00 1,408.00 863.00 1,428.00 10,753.00 Annual Price $6,180.00 12,000.00 3,060.00 56,808.00 55,200.00 16,896.00 10,356.00 17,136.00 129,036.00 TOTAL EXHIBIT A, page 6 of 7 R:~IARP, INOI~AGREEMN'I~.xcel I and~a~e 5-01 Amead.9,doc SLOPE SERVICE AREA (NORTH) Site # S-1 S-2 S-5 S..6 $-7 S-9 S-10 S-ll S-14 S-15 S-17 S-18 S-19 S-22 Site Name Saddlewood/Pavillion Point Winchester Creek I and H Signet Series Woodcrest Country Ridgeview Rancho Solana Martinique Meadowview Estates Mirada Barclay Estates Monte Vista Temeku Hills Campos Verdes Lennar Monthly Price $2,372.00 1,202.00 2,534.00 559.00 773.00 130.00 355.00 150.00 394.00 344.00 65.00 3,640.00 2,065.00 195.00 Annual Price 14,424.00 30,408.00 6,708.00 9,276.00 1,560.00 4,260.00 1,800.00 4,728.00 4,128.00 780.00 43,680.00 24,780.00 2,340.00 TOTAL $177.336.00 EXHIBIT A, page 7 of 7 sim # M-13 M-14 M-15 M-18 M-19 M-20 M -23 M-24 EXlHIIIT B Supplemental Landscape Maintenance Contract Areas (Amended as of July 1, 2001) MEDIANS SERVICE AREA Site Name Paseo Del Sol Median Islands Overland Dive Median at Ynez Rd. Margarita Rd. Median at Plo Pico Margarita Rd. Median at Date Street DePonola Rd. Median at Capanula PDS Butterfield Stage Rd. Median at Crown Hill Pala Rd. Medians Meadows Parkway Medians at Paseo Del Sol Monthly Price 500.00 100.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 250.00 200.00 TOTAL $ 1.550.00 Annual Price 6,000.00 1,200.00 2,400.00 1,200.00 1,200.00 1,200.00 3,000.00 2,400.00 EXHIBIT B, page 1 of 2 STREETSCAPE SERVICE AREA~q $$-2 SS-3 Site Name Pauba Road Streetscape at Rancho Calif. Sports Park Rancho Calif. Rd. $tr~etscape at 1-15 Monthly Price $ 200.00 $ lOO.OO Annual Price $ 2,400.00 $ ~,2oo.oo TOTAL $ 3.600.00 EXHIBIT B, page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT C New Landscape Contract Maintenance Services (Amended As of July 1, 2001) Maintenance Service Sports Park Maintenance (includes ballfield prep.) Park Maintenance Slope Area Maintenance Slope Area Maintenance (turf) Median Maintenance Facility Maintenance Ballfield Preperation (single field) Ballfield Preperation (two field or more) Price per Square Foot Monthly Annually .0085 / 0.102, .0100 / 0.12 .0070 / 0.084 . .0100 / 0.12 .0200 / 0.24 .0200 / 0,24 45.00 per week (Monday thru Friday) 35.00 ea. per week (Monday thru Friday) EXHIBIT C, page 1 of 1 R:~-RINGI~AG~ ! ~m~q~e 5-01 Ameod.9.doc AGREEMENT This Agreement, made and entered into this 24th day of June 1997. By and Between City ofTemecula, a Municipal corporation hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and Excel Landscape. Inc. a California Corporation hereinaf[er.referred to as "CONTRACTOR" RECITALS WHEREAS, CITY desires to obtain the services of a landscape maintenance Contractor to perform landscape maintenance within the CITY's greenbelts, landscape service areas, medians, open space areas, parks and rights-of-way. WIlE _P?EAS, Contractor is a firm that possesses the necessary equipment, licenses, insurance, and personnel to provide such services; and WHEREAS, CITY's Council has authorized execution of this AGREEMENT to retain the services of Contractor. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed that CITY does hereby retain Contractor to provide landscape maintenance under the following terms: 1. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS The complete Contract includes the following documents: 1) RFP and 2) General Landscape Specifications. When the Specifications describe portions of the work in general terms, but not in complete deta/l, 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. 2. 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 in accordance with "City of Temecula: General Landscape Maintenance Specifications" for slopes (north) and neighbo/hood parks tis described in the RFP. 3. CHANGE ORDERS All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that the City Manger 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. 4. PAYMENTS The City agrees to compensate monthly the Contractor for services actually performed in accordance with the pricing sheets attached hereto as Exhibits 1 and 2, and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Included with monthly billing will be the work functions accomplished during that period, (i.e., fertilization, pest control, etc.). The City shall review the invoices submitted by the Contractor to determine whether the services were performed.- Payment shall be made thirty-five (35) ~tays following submittal of the invoice, or City shall provide the Contractor with a written statement objecting to the invoice. Monthly invoices shall be sent to: City of Temecula Finance Department 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 LIOU1DATED DAMAGES: NONPERFORMANCE Contractor may be assessed penalties by City up to one hundred perceni (100%) of the monthly value of a site for nonperformance and up to sixty percent (60%) of the monthly value of a site for substandard performance. Such penalties shall be assessed at the discretion of the City. Contractor shall be notified of any penalties in accordance with the terms of this Contract. The Contract may be terminated by City for failure of Contractor to satisfactorily perform any corrective action after being notified of service failure on more than seven(7) occasions during the base term of the Contract. Contractor shall be notified of service failure by delivery of a "Performance Deficiency Notification" form to Contractor by City. Said notice will serve as formal notification that Contractor has incurred a service deficiency sufficiently material that contract termination may result if satisfactory corrective action is not taken by Contractor. The Performance Deficiency Notification will contain the acceptable time period for service correction. Upon Deficiency Notification, the correction will either be accepted or rejected. If accepted, part or all of the penalties may be waived, regardless of whether City has incurred loss as a result of said service failure. Contractor will be notified of correction acceptance status by delivery of a Performance Deficiency Status Memorandum. Should correction not be accepted, a separate additional Performance Deficiency Notification will be delivered to Contractor, thus increasing the number of Deficiency Notices received by Contractor. If Contractor should neglect or refuse or fail for any reason to perform the work, the City may terminate the Contract for nonperformance with five (5) days written notice to Contractor. In case of termination by the City for nonperformance, the City may contract or cause to be done any work not completed at'the time of the termination, and the Contractor shall pay for such work. 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS Unless 'a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Contract, on or before making each request for payment, Contractor shall submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Contract; the acceptance by Contractor of each payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims against CITY under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in writing and request for payment. Contractor shall execute an affidavit and release with each claim for payment. 7. 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 Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, 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 sub-contractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Contract. 8. LIABILITY INSURANCE CONTRACTOR, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies: "I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the L~bor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract. 9. TERM The Contract shall remain in full force and effect for a period of 24 months from the date of written notice to proceed, unless terminated by either party. City reserves ihe right to exercise its option to extend this Agreement for two one- year extensions within ninety (90) days prior to its expiration. Contract price shall be adju.sted at the beginning of each calendar year in accordance with the changes in the Consumer Pric~ Index for all Urban Consumers in the Los Angeles-Anaheim- Riverside Area published monthly by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (CPI). Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason, with or without cause within thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. 10. TIME OF THE ESSENCE Time is of the essence in this Contract. All time requirements stated herein shall be satisfied. 11. E FI TI N All work covered by this Contract done at the work site 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 pr indirectly out of the 9bligations 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. 12. 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 to make the necessary independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance 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. 13. GRATUITIES CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. 14. 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 provider of Specifications. Contractor further warrants that no person in his/her employ has been employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids. 15. CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT Simultaneously with submitting each monthly invoice, Contractor shall file with the City his affidavit stating that all workmen and persons employed, all finns supplying materials, and all sub-contractors 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 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. 16. SIGNATURE OF Contractor Com. orations The signature must contain the name of the corporation, must be signed by the President and Secretmy 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 proposal must be signed by all partners comprising the partnership unless proof in the form of a certified copy ora 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 Proposals submitted as joint ventures must so state and be signed by each joint venturer. Individuals Proposals 'submitted by individuals must be signed by the Contractor, 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 the individual. The above rules also apply in the case of the use ora fictitious firm name. In addition, however, where the fictitious name is used, it must be so indicated in the signature. 17. NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES Whenever Contractor has knowledge that any actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performanc~ of the Contract, Contractor shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant information with r6spect thereto, to CITY. 18. 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.~ubject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY. 19. T TYL T N CITY acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215. 20. REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS CONTRACTOR agrees to contact the appropriate regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4216.2. 21. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/CONDITIONS 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. A. CONTRACTOR shall, without disturbing the condition, notify CITY in writing as soon as Contractor, or any of Contractor's sub-contractors, 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: Subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those indicated in the specifications; or Unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different materially for those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized 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 measures (e.g., fences) adequate to prevent the hazardous waste or physical conditions from 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 Contractors cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the work, then CITY shall issue a change order. 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 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. 22. INSPECTION The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by authorized CITY personnel. 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. 23. 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. 24. GOVERNING LAW This Contract and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by the law of the State of California. Venue shall be the County of Riverside. In the event litigation is commenced by either party with respect to this contract, the prevailing party in such litigation, as determined by the Court, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees. 25. WRITTEN NOTICE Any written notice required to be given in any part of[he 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: Shawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: CONT.,eTOn, By: E~cel Landscape_Inc. rint type . Print or type TITLE DATED: CITY OF/~ECULA ' APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M Thorson, City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk EXHIBIT 1 City of Temecula P, equest for Proposal Pricing Sheet for Landscape Maintenance NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS SERVICE AREA Site # P-I P-2 P-3 P-4 P-5 P-6 P-7 P-9 P-10 P-11 P-12 P-13 P-14 Veterans Park Sam Hicks Monument Park Calle Aragon Park Bahia Vista Park Loma Linda Park Pdverton Park John Magee Park Voorburg Park Nicolas Road Park Butterfield Stage Park Temecula Duck Pond Rotary Park Nakayama Park Monthly Price $1.550.00 $ 8oo.o0 $ 250.00 $ 250.00 $ 707.00 $1,617.00 $ 310.00 $ 3~3.00 $ 782.00 $ 3oo.oo $ 3,000,00 $ 3,000.00 $ 8,484.00 $19,404.00 $ 3,720.00 S ~ 636_ f]~3 $ 9.744.00 $ 9,384.00 $13.860.00 $ 3,600.00 $1,500.00 TOTAL ~/ Autho~S-~,nature J EXHIBIT 2 City of Temecula Request for Proposal Pricing Sheet for Landscape Maintenance SLOPE SERVICE AREA (NORTFI) ' Site # S-I S-5 S-6 S-7 S-9 S-10 S-11 S-14 S-15 ~;ite Name Saddlewood/Pavillion Point Winchester,Creek I and II. Signet Series Woodcrest Country Ridgeview Rancho Solana Martinique Meadowview Estates Mirada Barclay Estates 559/oo 773.00 150.O0 394.oo 344.OO TOTAL ITEM 3 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCEI ?~¢.__ - CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service~ DATE: June 25, 2002 SUBJECT: Third Amendment to the Tree Maintenance Services Contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. PREPARED BY: 'J~qKevin T. Harrington, Maintenance Superintendent RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: 1. Approve the Third Amendment for the extension of the Tree Maintenance Services Contract with West Coast Arborists, Inc. through June 30, 2003 in an amount of $75,000.00. 2. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency amount of $7,500.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount. BACKGROUND: In June, 1999 Request for Proposals (RFP) and specifications for the Citywide Tree Trimming Contract were sent to twelve (12) tree trimming contractors. On July 6, 1999 three (3) bids were received for Citywide tree maintenance services. West Coast Arborists was selected as the lowest qualified contractor. On September 14,1999 the Board of Directors awarded the Tree Maintenance Services Contract to West Coast Arborists, Inc. in the amount of $50,000.00. The original Contract contains provisions that allow the Contract to be extended on a yearly basis by mutual agreement of both parties for up to three (3) additional ~ears. On August 22, 2000 the Board of Directors approved the First Amendment extending the Tree Maintenance Services contract with WCA through June 30, 2001, in the amount of $75,000.00. Thus bring the contract amount to $125,000.00. On August 14, 2001 the Board of Directors approved the Second Amendment extending the Tree Maintenance Services Contract with WCA through June 30, 2002, in the amount of $75,000.00. Thus bringing the total contract amount to $200,000.00. Staff continues to be extremely satisfied with the services provided to date and is requesting that the contract term be extended an additional year, through June 30, 2003. R:\HARRINGK\AGENDA.RPT\WCA Tree Maim Amend No.3.doc The work to be performed includes tree trimming, tree and stump removals, root pruning, tree planting, tree inventory and emergency work call-outs. This work is necessary to maintain park, facility and slope area trees, vCnich are part of the City's Urban Forest. The cost for these services for Fiscal Year 2002-03 is estimated at $75,000. This will bring the total contract amount to $275,000.00. West Coast Arborists are currently providing tree maintenance services for the Public Works Department under another agreement. FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds are available in the TCSD Annual Operating Budget in accounts 190-180 and 193-180. The contract amount for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 shall not exceed $82,500.00, which includes the base contract amount of $75,000.00 and the 10% contingency of $7,500.0O. Attachments: Third Amendment Second Amendment First Amendment Original Contract R:\HARRiNGK\AGENDA.RPT\WCA Tree Maim Amend No.3.doc THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND WEST COAST ARBORIST, INC. THIS THIRD AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of June 25, 2002 by and between the Temecula Community Services District, a municipal corporation ("District") and West Coast Arborists, Inc. ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the padies agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On September 15, 1999 the District and Contractor entered into that certain agreement entitled "Temecula Community Services District Agreement for Tree Maintenance Services" ("Agreement"). B. The original Agreement was amended on August 22, 2000, in order extend the term through June 30, 2001, again amended on August 11, 2001, in order to extend the term through June 30, 2002. The September 15, 1999 Agreement, as amended, shall be referred to as the "Agreement". Amendment. The padies now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this 2. The term of the Agreement is hereby extended through June 30, 2003. The District agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual services provided. This amount shall not exceed TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($275,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R:\HARRINGK~AGREEM NT~WCA3rdAmendment.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 BY: Jeffrey E. Stone, President ATTEST: BY: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk Approved As to Form: BY: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR BY: NAME: TITLE: BY: NAME: TITLE: (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) R:\HARRINGK~AGRE E MNT~WCA3rdAmendment.doc EXHIBIT "B" FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 ADJUSTED PRICES ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Grid Trimming Service Request Clearance Trimming Tree and Stump Removal Stump Removal Root Pruning w/Root Barrier Root Pruning w/o Root Barrier Plant 15 gal w/RB Plant 15 gal w/o RB Plant 24" box w/RB Plant 24" box w/o RB Crew Rental- 3 man Emergency Crew Rental Watering Tree Inventory The 2002-2003 prices reflect a 2.8% increase. 'Each Each Each Inch Inch Each Each Each Each Each Each Hour Hour Day Each 30.80 30.80 15.40 16.50 4.30 132.00 66.10 104.40 88.00 214.50 176.10 104.40 220.00 286.10 2.50 R:\HARRINGK~AGREEM NT~WCA3rdAmendment.doc SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETVVEEN TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND WEST COAST ARBORIST, INC. THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of August 14, 2001 by and between the Temecula Community Services District, a municipal corporation ("District") and West Coast Arborists, Inc. ("Contractor"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as bllows: 1. This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes: A. On September 15, 1999 the District and Contractor entered into that certain agreement entitled "Temecula Community Services District Agreement for Tree Maintenance Services" ("Agreement"). B. The original Agreement was amended on August 22, 2000, in order extend the term through June 30, 2001. The September 15, 1999 Agreement, as amended, shall be referred to as the "Agreement". B. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. The term of the Agreement is hereby extended through June 30, 2002. The District agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual services provided. This amount shall not exceed TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($200,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the padies hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. 'rEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ATTEST: / Susa. v~.Jo~es, CMC / Approved As to Form: BY: / NAME: Patrick Mahoney TITLE: BY: NAME: President TITLE: Vice President (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) EXHIBIT "B" FISCAL YEAR 200112002 ADJUSTED PRICES ITE'M DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Grid Trimming Service Request Clearance Trimming Tree and Stump Removal Stump Removal Root Pruning w/Root Barrier Root Pruning w/o Root Barrier Plant 15 gal w/RB Plant 15 gal w/o RB Plant 24" box w/RB Plant 24" box w/o RB Crew Rental - 3 man Emergency Crew Rental Watering Tree Inventory Each Each Each Inch Inch Each Each Each Each Each Each Hour Hour Day Each 30.00 30.00 15.00 16.00 4.20 128.40 64.30 101.60 85.60 208.70 171.30 101.60 214.00 278.30 2.50 The 2001-2002 prices reflect a 3.3% increase. FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND WEST COAST ARBORIST, INC. THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of August 22, 2000 by and between the Temecula Community Services District, a municipal corporation ("District") and West Coast Arborists, Inc. ("Contractor"). 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 September 15, 1999 the District and Contractor entered into that certain agreement entitled "Temecula Community Services District Agreement for Tree Maintenance Services" ("Agreement"). B. The parties now desire to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. The term of the Agreement is hereby extended through June 30, 2001. The Distdct agrees to pay Contractor monthly, in accordance with the payment rates as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual services provided. This amount shall not exceed ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($125,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. 4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. R:\F~RINGK\AGREEMNT\WCAlstAmendment.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 eff (~'~m'"~ch~ro, President Approved As to Form: BY: ~~-fforney CONTRACTOR NAME: Patrick ~M~ahoney TITLE: ~.President BY: NAME: Rose Epperson TITLE: Treasurer (Two Signatures Required For Corporations) R: \NARRI NGK\AGREEMNT\WCA1 stAmendment, doc EXHIBIT "B" FISCAL YEAR 200012001 ADJUSTED PRICES ITEM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 DESCRIPTION Grid Trimming Service Request Clearance Trimming Tree and Stump Removal Stump Removal Root Pruning w/Root Barrier Root Pruning w/o Root Barrier Plant 15 gal w/RB Plant 15 gal w/o RB Plant 24" box w/RB Plant 24" box w/o RB Crew Rental - 3 man Emergency Crew Rental Watering Tree Inventory The 2000-2001 prices reflect a 3.6% increase. UNIT Each Each Each Inch inch Each Each Each Each Each Each Hour Hour Day Each PRICE 29.00 29.00 14.50 15.50 4.10 124.30 62.20 98.40 82.90 202.00 165.80 98.40 207.20 269.40 2.50 R:\HARRINGK\AGREEMNT\WCAlstAmendment.doc TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CONTRACT FOR TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the 15th day of September, 1999, by and between the Temecula Community Services District, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT", and West Coast Arborists, Inc., herein referred to as "CONTRACTOR." WITNESSETH: That DISTRICT and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as follows: .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 TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California Depadment of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Techni~C,,'al 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 TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES. 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 TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES. 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. The Contracl 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: TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES 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 DISTRICT. DISTRICT 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 DISTRICT or its authorized representatives. CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. The DISTRICT agrees to pay, and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept, in full payment for, the work agreed to be done, the sum of: FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS and NO CENTS ($50,000.00) the total amount of the base bid. TERM: The term of the contract shall commence upon award by the District and continue through June 30, 2000. The District reserves the option to extend th,8 contract(s) for an additional three (3) years. No price adjustments will occur during the first thirty-six (36) months of this agreement. Upon request of the contractor and agreement by the District, the item prices may be adjusted by the amount equal to the increase or decrease, during the previous twelve (12) months, in the Riverside, San Bernardino ALL Urban Consumers Index to determine the percentage of increase or decrease, the term "previous twelve months" shall mean the twelve (12) month period ending June 30th of that year, or if not available, the prior month. CONTRACTOR: The work to be performed shall be completed within THIRTY FIVE (35) CALENDAR DAYS after execution of contract and Notice to Proceed has been issued. Work shall not commence until bonds and insurance are approved by the District, CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the District Board of Directors. except that the General Manager is hereby authorized by the District Board of Directors to make, by written order, changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as established by the District Board of Directors. PAYMENTS LUMP SUM BID SCHEDULE: Before submittal of the first payment request, the CONTRAC'fOR shall submit to the Community Services Director 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 Community Services Director may require. This schedule, as approved by the Community Services Director, 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 DISTRICT, 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 thidieth (30th) day of each successive month as the work progresses. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be 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 DISTRICT on forms provided by the DISTRICT. Payments shall be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate signed by the General 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. Padial 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 thi.rty (30) days pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20104.50. Public Contra~t 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. WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is recorded, the DISTRICT shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty performance 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 SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE. a The District may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this contract, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Contractor at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Contractor shall immediately cease all work under this Contract, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the District suspends or terminates a portion of this Contract such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Contract. 10. 11. 12. 13¸ b. In the event this Contract is terminated pursuant to this Section, the District shall pay to the Contractor the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the District. Upon termination of the Contract pursuant to this Section, the Contractor will submit an invoice to the District pursuant to Section 6. WAIVER OF CLAIMS. On or before making each request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall submit to DISTRICT, in writing, all claims for compensation as to work related to the payment. Unless the CONTRACTOR has disputed the amount of the payment, the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of each payment shall constitute a release of all claims against the DISTRICT 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 District Board of Directors has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and ovedime 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, CONTRAC'fOR shall forfeit to the DISTRICT, 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. CONTRAC'fOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend DISTRICT, its officers, employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons (CONTRAC-fOR's employees included) and damage to proper~y, arising directly or indirectly out of lhe obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigation arising through the sole active negligence or sole willtul misconduct of the DISTRICT. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and be responsible for reimbursing the DISTRICT for any and all costs incurred by the DISTRICT as a result of Stop Notices filed against the project. The DISTRICT shall deduct such costs from Progress Payments or final payments due to the DIS-I-RICT. GRATUITIES. CONTRAC'fOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to DISTRICT's employees, agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable treatment with respect thereto. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any District officer or employee, or any architect, engineer, or other preparers of the Drawings and Specifications for this project. CONTRACTOR fudher warrants that no person in its employ has been employed by the DISTRICT 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 General 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 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 DISTRICT OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any actual 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 DISTRICT. BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRAC'fOR's books, records, and plans or such p~rt 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 DISTRICT. INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by DISTRICT and its authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and places,Jncluding_without_limitation,_the_ plans-of-CONTRACTO R 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 District 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 Temecula Community Services District of the City of Temecula~ In the event of litigation between the padies 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. ADA REOUIREMENTS. By signing this contract, Contractor certifies that the Contractor is in lotal compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Public Law 101- 336, as amended. 22. 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 fodh in the Contract Documents, and to the DISTRICT addressed as follows: Herman Parker, Community Services Director City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the padies hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date first above written. DATED: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONTRACTOR WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC. 2200 E. Via Burton Street Anaheim, CA 92806r//7 (714) 991-1900 ....... Patri~/~O~ahone~Tl:~resident~- TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Comerchero. ~resiOent ones.~~ TCSD DEPARTMENTAL REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT Board of Directors Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Service~r¢~, June 25, 2002 Departmental Report PREPARED BY: Gall L. Zigler, Administrative Secretary 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 11,2000, for the Phase II of the Design Contract. The City Council awarded a contract to California Commercial Pools on July 10, 2001 and construction began on August 13, 2001. This project is complete and a Grand Opening ceremony was held on May 30, 2002. The pool is now open for public use during summer swim hours. 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. Staff is resolving the final issue with the construction documents and they will be submitted for final plan check. Staff released an RFQ for grant writing services to apply for the California State Library's Bond Act 2000. Staff and the consultant worked tirelessly to complete the grant application, which was delivered in person by Phyllis Ruse and Aaron Adams to Sacramento on June 13, 2002. The Community Services Commission reviewed the design concept for the project and recommended staff take the design concept forward to the City Council. The Board of Directors approved the Master Plan at the March 26, 2002 City Council meeting. Staff is finalizing the plans for the general tenant improvements, which will be going out to bid in the near future. We met with RHA Landscape Architects regarding the improvements to Vail Ranch Park Site "C" adjacent to Pauba Elementary School. This project is identified in this year's CIP. The new amenities will include a tot lot, picnic shelter, tables, benches and walkways. The Community Services Commission reviewed and approved the conceptual master plan at their February 11,2002 Commission meeting. The architect is currently drafting the construction documents. R:kZIGLERG~X DEPTRPT~0602.doc June 19, 2002 The Development Services Division continues to participate in the development review for projects within the City including Wolf Creek, Roripaugh, Villages of Old Town and Harveston, as well as overseeing the development of parks and recreation facilities, and the contract for refuse and recycling, cable television services and assessment administration. The Maintenance Division continues to oversee the maintenance of all 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 completed the preparation of the SummedFall 2002 Guide to Leisure Activities, which was mailed to all City residents the first week of June. Staff is currently kicking off many of the summer programs including Summer Day Camp the SMART Prograt~, the Learn To Swim and Public Sw m Programs, the Summer Concert Series, and the Annual 4 of July parade and fireworks extravaganza. The Recreation Division continues to plan, program and implement a variety of classes and activities for the community. R:~Z/GLERGLXDEPTRPT~0602.doc .~une 19, 2002 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM 1 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER_,,'~ ~ CITY MANAGER /'~'¢Jf -~' TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: June 25, 2002 Executive Director/Agency Members John Meyer, Redevelopment Director.~/~l Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with AGK Group LLC. RECOMMENDATION: That the Redevelopment Agency Board approve an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement between Agency and AGK Group LLC. BACKGROUND: Over the past year, the Agency has been entedaining several options for the development of the northwest housing site. The 32 acre parcel, located at the northwest corner of Diaz Road and Dendy Lane, is owned by the Agency's Low-Mod Fund. On December 11,2001, Staff brought forth at Closed Session a proposal to consider potentially selling the subject property for the ultimate use as a site for a Community/State College. The Council was generally supportive of this concept. Since December, staff and representatives from Mount San Jacinto Community College (Mount San Jacinto) and University of California, Riverside (UCR) have met on several occasions to explore the development of a mixed-use project that would include college facilities, affordable housing and retail/office space. Mr. Kading has shown significant interest in developing such a project. On March 20, 2002, Mr. Kading presented his conceptual vision for a project to city staff and representatives from MSJCC and UCR as well as Cai State San Marcos (San Marcos). Mr. Kading's Architects, Keisker and Wiggle Architects, were also in attendance and made a brief presentation. Project Description The conceptual vision for the property includes the initial development of a 50,000 square foot classroom building to be leased by several colleges in the area. The balance of the property would include future educational facilities, a corporate meeting center, affordable housing and retail/office space that will support not only the educational and housing components, but also the surrounding industrial development. Agency Involvement The proposed vision represents an opportunity to accomplish several goals of the City/Agency as outlined below: 1. Relieves the General Fund from having to repay the $4 million to Low-Mod Fund. R:\Educationcomplex\ENA Staff Report.doc 2. Allows the City to attract a higher education facility, which will greatly balance Temecula's quality of life. 3. Provides a corporate training facility that would create a hub for economic development activities in the surrounding industrial parks. 4. Creates additional affordable housing to assist the City in meeting its housing element requirements. 5. Creates retail components that support both the educational facilities and the surrounding industrial parks, making the proposed complex a true village center. 6. Redirects predominate traffic patterns by placing housing west of the freeway. 7. Enhances support for French Valley interchange and extension west across Murrieta Creek. Agency Assistance Currently, the Low Mod Fund has just under $4 million into the property in acquisition and assessment district pay-off costs. Should any use be developed on the property other than affordable housing, the Low Mod Fund would need to be reimbursed the $4 million. By including affordable housing, the Agency can write off the basis in the property in the following manner. The Agency would pledge the property to the developer in return for a specific number covenant-restricted units. Should additional affordable housing be provided, the Agencycould make an additional cash contribution. Exclusive Negotiating Agreement In order to facilitate the proposed project, A. G. Kading has requested the Agency enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA). The ENA provides Mr. Kading with the assurance that the Agency is not out soliciting other development partners for similar projects on the subject property. The proposed ENA provides Mr. Kading a 180-day due diligence period. During this time, Mr. Kading will expend his resources to provide the Agency with the following: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. A detailed project description including two conceptual site plans A work schedule for the completion of the project Preliminary cost estimates Preliminary sources for private financing Confirmation in form of letters of intent from participating academic partners List of prospective retail tenants In addition, based upon Mr. Kading's ability to perform, draft deal points for a subsequent Development and Disposition Agreement (DDA) would be formulated through the end of the ENA period with the intent of drafting a DDA. The Agency has retained the services of Keyser Marston Associates Inc. to provide third-party analysis of the ENA, and would plan to use KMA to assist in the drafting of the DDA, as appropriate. The Exclusive Negotiating Agreement is the first step in the development of this project. No Agency commitment to sell the property can be made until a final agreement is approved following a public hearing. FISCAL IMPACT: As outlined above, the Low Mod Fund has a nearly $4 miJlion basis in the northwest property. Attachments: Exclusive Negotiating Agreement R:\Educationcompfex\ENA Staff Report.doc EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT This Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (this "Agreement") is made and entered into as of June 25, 2002, by and between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, a public body, corporate and politic (the "Agency") and AGK Group LLC, a California limited liability company (the "Developer"). RECITALS A. The subject matter of this Agreement is that certain real property consisting of approximately thirty-three (33) acres, generally located northwest of the intersection of Diaz Road and Dendy Parkway, in the City of Temecula, California (the "City"), shown on the "Site Map" and more particularly described in the "Legal Description", which are attached hereto as Attachment No. 1 and Attachment No. 2, respectively, and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Site"). The Site is outside of the Redevelopment Project Area. B. The Agency and the Developer wish to enter into this Agreement to negotiate with each other and establish certain information as to the terms and conditions which would be the basis for the parties entering into an Owner Disposition and Development Agreement (the "Disposition and Development Agreement") that would result in the acquisition of the Site by the Developer and the Developer's development of the Site as a master planned project with office, retail, educational, and low and moderate income housing uses (collectively, the "Project"). C. The Agency wishes to encourage the continued planning and economic, environmental, and financial evaluation of the Project and the Site. Recognizing that them will be a cost for such evaluation, the Developer and the Agency are willing to enter into this Agreement setting forth the terms pursuant to which the Agency will deal with the Developer on 696101.1 June 6, 2002 Page 1 an exclusive basis for a period of one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of this Agreement regarding the establishment of certain information and terms and conditions regarding the Developer's proposed development of the Site which would determine the basis upon the Agency and Developer would attempt to negotiate and enter into a Disposition and Development Agreement for the development of the Site. D. The Agency anticipates that following execution of this Agreement and through the ENA Period (as defined below), the staff, consultants and attorneys of the Agency will devote substantial time and effort in meeting with the Developer and its representatives, reviewing proposals, plans and reports, meeting with financial institutions and potential tenants, and discuss providing aid and assistance to the Developer in connection with the proposed Project, and in negotiating and preparing the key terms of a Disposition and Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Subject to Section 22, below, the term of this Agreement shall commence on the date hereof and shall end on the date one hundred eighty (180) calendar days thereafter (the "ENA Period"). 2. During the ENA Period the Developer shall deliver, at its sole cost and expense, the materials and information set forth below to the Agency for the Agency's review and approval: a. Materials to be delivered by Developer to the Agency within one hundred and twenty (120) days from the date of this Agreement: (1) A detailed Project description and two (2) conceptual land use plans identifying and setting forth the uses, product type and mix, square footage, building layout, parking and, as applicable, the phasing of the Project for the proposed development of the site (the "Land Use Plan"). 696101.1 June 6, 2002 Page 2 (2) A draft schedule of development together with a phasing plan, as applicable, setting forth the proposed timetable for the development of the Project, including offsite public improvements. (3) Completion of a Phase 1 environmental site assessment for the Site. b. Materials to be delivered by Developer to the Agency within one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of this Agreement: (1) A list of prospective major tenants for space at the Project, together with, letters of intent including a discussion of potential size and type of space requested. (2) A list identifying the Developer's sources of funding and status of financing commitments for the costs of development of the Project setting forth what percentage of such cost will be paid from equity, financing or other sources. (3) Cost estimates for the Project. (4) A draft application for the proposed Specific Plan for the Site. (5) A financial pro forma for the Project on a phase by phase basis, if applicable, reflecting all anticipated Project income and revenues (including property sales proceeds) reconciled against anticipated operating costs for the applicable period. (6) A financial analysis of the Project establishing the Developer's projected return on its investment in the Project. (7) Confirmation in form of a detailed Letter of Intent from participating Academic Partners. 3. During the ENA Period the Agency shall, at its sole cost and expense use commercially reasonable efforts to complete (or cause to be completed) the following matters set forth below: a. Agency tasks to be completed within ninety (90) days from the date of this Agreement: (1) Coordinate Agency resources to support development of Project. (2) Determination of per unit cost of affordable housing. 696101.1 June 6, 2002 Page 3 b. Agency tasks to be completed within one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of this Agreement: (1) Coordinate City/Agency to support development of the Project. (2) Develop all necessary legal documents for the Disposition and Development Agreement. 4. During the ENA Period the Agency shall not negotiate with any person or entity other than the Developer regarding the development of the Site. 5. Throughout the ENA Period, Agency staff shall be available to meet with the Developer to discuss the Project and the land use plan, financing, development schedule, and other issues relating to the Project or this Agreement. In addition, the Agency agrees to allow the developer reasonable access to the site. The developer shall provide the Agency at least a 24 hour notice requesting access to the site. The developer, at its sole cost and expense, shall be responsible for any permits or fees related to investigative work done on the site and will be responsible for returning the site to its original condition. 6. If, prior to the end of the ENA Period, the Developer and the Agency (each in the exercise of their sole discretion) have not entered into an disposition and development agreement in respect of the material terms of the development of the Project, then this Agreement shall automatically terminate and, except as expressly provided in Section 9 hereof, neither party hereto shall have any further rights or obligations under this Agreement. 7. The Agency and Developer acknowledge that all applicable requirements of California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") must be inet in order to execute and deliver the Disposition and Development Agreement, or develop the Site. The Agency and Developer acknowledge that an environmental review of the proposed development of the Site is required by CEQA and that any rights of Developer to develop the Project will be subject to such environmental review. 696101.1 June 6, 2002 Page 4 8. Provided that the Developer is not in default under this Agreement and that the Agency has not terminated this Agreement pursuant to Section 22, below, the ENA Period may be extended by the mutual written consent of the parties for an additional period of ninety (90) days. The Agency's Executive Director may grant such extension upon receipt of a written extension request and a report from the Developer indicating in specific detail the conditions, terms or issues which remain to be resolved order to comply with the terms of this Agreement. The granting of any extension pursuant to this Section shall be in the sole and absolute discretion of the Agency's Executive Director. No such extension shall be construed as to limit the exercise of the Agency's discretion to elect not to enter into a disposition and development agreement with Developer. 9. The Developer shall indemnify, defend, and hold the Agency and City harmless from any and all costs, losses, claims and other liability resulting from the execution of this Agreement or the Developer's performance under this Agreement. Such indemnity shall survive the expiration or other termination of this Agreement. In the event that any claim should be filed against the Agency or City which would require indemnification by Developer hereunder, the Agency or City shall notify Developer of such claim in a timely manner to permit Developer the opportunity to provide adequate representation to the Agency or City with respect to any such claim. 10. The parties anticipate that the Disposition and Development Agreement will include the following provisions: (a) Agency would convey the Site to Developer, conditioned on completion of fifty (50) to eighty (80) covenant restricted housing units affordable to persons of low and moderate income 696101.1June6,2002 Page 5 (b) The Developer shall develop and construct the Project on the Site, both at its own cost and expense. The Project shall include, as a minimum, fifty (50) to eighty (80) covenant restricted housing units affordable to persons of low and moderate income with requirements for the number of bedrooms to be constructed as well as the number of units to be affordable to persons of very low, low median income. The construction of the Project shall be commissioned and completed pursuant to a schedule of performance to be incorporated in the Disposition and Development Agreement and approved by the Agency in the exercise of its reasonable discretion. (c) Developer shall process a Planned Development Overlay zone change for the Site and obtain all applicable land use entitlements. (d) The obligations of the Developer contained in the Disposition and Development Agreement shall constitute covenants running with the land comprising the Site and shall bind any future owners or lessees. 11. Except as set forth in the Disposition and Development Agreement, the Agency and the City will not be obligated to provide any further public financial assistance to the Developer toward the development of the Project, including, without limitation, financial assistance to owners, developers, tenants or users in the Project. The Developer will secure all necessary tenants, developers, owners or users for the Project in compliance with ali applicable law, including the Community Redevelopment Law. 12. The Developer covenants and agrees that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the Site and the Project, nor shall the Developer or any person claiming under or through the Developer, establish or permit any such 696101.1 June 6, 2002 Page 6 practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees, or vendees in the Site and Project, and in compliance with this provision, shall cause to be contained in the Disposition and Development Agreement and in any contracts, leases or other agreements (as required by applicable law) respecting the Project, the foregoing provisions. 13. The Developer shall bear all costs and expenses of any title, environmental, engineering, financial, or other analyses incurred by the Developer. 14. The Developer and the Agency understand and agree that neither party is obligated to enter into a Disposition and Development Agreement; however, the Developer and the Agency shall negotiate in good faith with respect to the Disposition and Development Agreement. In the event of termination or expiration of this Agreement, the Agency shall be free at the Agency's option to negotiate with any persons or entities with respect to the acquisition and development of the Site. 15. The Developer represents that its undertakings pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of redevelopment of the Site and not for speculation in land holding. The Developer further recognizes that, in view of the importance of the redevelopment of the Site to the general welfare of the community; the public assistance to be made available by law and by the Agency and the City on the conditions stated herein, for the purpose of making such redevelopment possible; and the fact that a change in ownership or control of the Developer or of a substantial part thereof, or any other act or transaction involving or resulting in a significant change in ownership or control of the Developer or the degree thereof, is for practical purposes a transfer or disposition of the property then owned by the Developer, including Developer's right to acquire the Site under the Disposition and Development Agreement; the qualifications and identity of the Developer and its principals are of particular concern to the City and the Agency. Therefore, prior to completion of the Project, no voluntary or involuntary successor in interest of 696101.1 June 6, 2002 Page 7 Developer, except for a permitted mortgagee with respect to the Site, shall acquire any interest in or rights or powers under this Agreement except as expressly set forth herein or therein. This Agreement may not be assigned by the Developer without the express written consent of the Agency, which consent is subject to the sole and absolute discretion of the Agency. 16. The parties understand and agree that the public Disposition and Development contemplated by this Agreement may be required, in the Agency's sole discretion, to be arranged and delivered by a public agency other than the Agency, such as the City or a joint powers authority created by the City and the Agency. The Agency has the power and discretion to assign all or a portion of its rights and obligations under this Agreement to such other public agency as it deems appropriate to carry out the intent of this Agreement in the best interest of the Agency and the City. 17. Neither the submission of this Agreement by the Agency to the Developer, nor the execution of this Agreement by either party, shall constitute an option or offer to acquire or sell any real property by either party or a commitment by the Agency to expend any financial resources on the Project, it being intended hereby that obligations to acquire the Site or any portion thereof or any interest therein shall become effective only following the approval and execution of the Disposition and Development Agreement by the Agency. 18. The Agency may terminate this Agreement if the Developer should fail to comply with and perform in a timely manner to the satisfaction of the Agency all provisions hereof on the Developer' s part to be performed, or if progress is not being made in negotiations hereunder. The Agency shall provide thirty (30) days written notice to the Developer which specifies any dissatisfaction or belief and the Agency shall not terminate this Agreement if the Developer cures the deficiencies specified by the Agency to the satisfaction of the Agency within such thirty (30) day period. 696101.1 June 6, 2002 Page 8 19. Any notice, request, approval or other communication to be provided by one party to the other shall be in writing and provided by personal service or a form of express mail or service as well as by facsimile, and addressed as follows: If to the Developer: AGK Group LLC 35411 Paseo Viento Capistrano Beach CA 92624 With copy to: Paul C. Hegness Good, Wildman, Hegness and Walley 5000 Campus Drive Newport Beach California, 92660 Facsimile phone number: 949 833 0633 If to the Agency: 696101.1 June 6, 2002 Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589 Attention: John Meyer, Redevelopment Director P~e9 20. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. Them am no agreements or understandings between the parties and no representations by either party to the other as an inducement to enter into this Agreement, except as expressly set forth heroin. All prior negotiations between the parties are superseded by this Agreement. This Agreement may not be altered, amended or modified except by a writing executed by both parties. Subject to any express provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, the Agency shall have no obligation to enter into the Disposition and Development Agreement with the Developer and neither the Agency nor its officers, members, staff or agents have made any promises to the Developer other than to exclusively negotiate with the Developer during the ENA Period, and no statements of the Agency or its officers, members, staff or agents as to futura obligations shall be binding upon the Agency until the Disposition and Development Agreement is approved and adopted by the Agency and then duly executed by the officers of the Agency duly authorized to do so. 21. If either party should bring any legal proceeding relating to this agreement, or to enforce any provision hereof, the party in whose favor judgment is rendered shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses of litigation from the other. The interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 22. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously or in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. 696101.1June6,2002 Page 10 "Agency" Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, a public body, corporate and politic By:¸ Chairman Attest: "Developer" AGK Group, LLC, A California limited liability company By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: Susan Jones, Secretary Approved as to form: Richards, Watson & Gershon By:. Peter M. Thorson, Agency Counsel 696101.1 June 6, 2002 P~ell ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Site Map Page 12 Northwest Sports Park City of Temecula r:~gis~kelI~arcv~ev4xojects~tJ~west_don.apr ATTACHMENT NO. 2 Legal Description of the Site Page 13 ALL T~AT ~ ~ ~ IN -~'~ CITY OF T~LA~ COUNT~ OF ~ ~VX~O A ~ OF 4000.00 F~; ~E SO~y 461,3~ ~ P~] ~ 8~ 43~58~46" ~ 1387,89 ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ N~ 16, 1972~ ~ ~ ~X~XN~ OF A ~ ~~, ~ A ~ OF 850.00 ~ ~ ~o ~Z~ ~OXN~ A 1 OF ~D P~ ~ ~. 46461 ~ N~ 39o48ff320 ~ 690.00 4g°Oge3O~ ~ 4388,30 ~ ~G ~ ~ ~ 8A~D ~AR(~., 2.~, ~ZflTAN~ ],680060 ~z2~.' ~ ~ J(O~T ~ O~P fiAZD ~*~ ~L~'C:B ~0~ 48o0gf3Ou RAS~ 3,680.60 RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR ~ CITY MANAGER TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Executive Director/Redevelopment Age~,,~ ~/~ers John Meyer, Redevelopment Director ~__.~'-~/ I June 25, 2002 Monthly Departmental Report Attached for your information is the monthly report as of June 25, 2002 for the Redevelopment Department. First Time Homebuyers Program Funding in the amount of $200,000 is available for FY 01-02. Residential Improvement Programs The program budget for FY 01/02 is $250,000 and $226, 920 has been funded for 57 units. Affordable Housinq The Agency has entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with Affirmed Housing to develop a 17 affordable single-family housing project. Construction will begin in late June, 2002, with homes available for purchase in early 2003. Affirmed will market the homes during the construction period. Senior Housinq Agency staff is negotiating with a development partner to rehab units for an affordable senior housing project. Old Town Community Theater The Amhitect is working on the Construction drawings and is scheduled to complete them in August. R:\SYERSIGMONTH LLY~reportjunl2002.doc The Mercantile Buildin.cl Retrofit Staff anticipates bringing a contract for Council consideration within 30 days. Staff estimates about a 90-120 day construction period. Facade Improvement/Non-Conforrnin(3 Siqn Pro_qram The following facade improvement/sign projects are in process or have recently been completed: · Welty Building Sign Program · Country Porch Fire Suppression System · La Table De Provence Sign Program · Del Rio Cakes & Supply Sign Program Old Town Promotions/MarketinR Great Race and Street Paintin.q Festival - Once again, the Great Race returned to Temecula. This event was held in conjunction with our Street Painting Festival scheduled on June 22 & 23, 2002. The City of Temecula, along with The Temecula Chamber of Commerce, hosted a luncheon with the arrival of vintage cars driving through Old Town on Saturday, June 22. Throe participating restaurants provided lunch to the Great Race drivers served by the Drifters Car Club, Temecula Valley Car Club and Temecula Valley Model A Car Club. In addition, the Agency sponsored the 2nd Annual Street Painting Festival which featured over 100 artists painting murals ranging in size from 4 foot by 6 foot to a 10 foot by 12 foot blocks on the asphalt. Street painting originated in Italy with the artist gaining the title "Madonnari" after their historical practice of creating chalk paintings of the Madonna. Now the name Madennari implies Italian Street Painting that expands beyond the scope of its original religious nature. Children participated in the street painting fun at the Children's Art in the Park events held in Sam Hicks Park at the northern edge of Old Town Temecula. While a variety of programs were offered at the park, youth Street Painters were able to try out their creative talents on the sidewalks as part of the street Painting Festival. The event was free to the public and artists. Summer Ni,qhts - "First Friday Summer Nights" will kick off on July 5 in Old Town. It's Old Town Temecula's "Hot First Friday Summer Nights" which will feature a variety of live bands and a different theme each first Friday night. R:\SYERSK~MONTHLLY~reportjunl2002.doc 2 Our First Friday Night, July 5, will be themed Red, White & Blues. The evening will feature blues by Aunt Kizzy's Boyz, Rocky Zyarp & the Blues Crackers, and Gypsy Jazz by Club Django. This will include games for the kids, jolly jumps, craft and food vendors. R:\SYE RSKffvlONTH LLY~reportju nl2002.doc 3 Old Town Temecula June 22nd & 23rd GREAT RACE Saturday, June 22nd Artists Begin Painting at 8 a.m. Saturday Plus Aunt Kizzy's Boyz 2 p.m. Saturday and Trinidad Steel Drum Band Sunday lp .m. ARTISTS WELCOME Squares sho, uld be reserved by June 12, 20021 Call the office for street painter/artist application /'~...,,.%~ Umbrella s, breakfast, lunch and water provided for all Artists by FUI Natural Artesian Water / . My Buddies Pizza & Rosas Cantina I ~-.I ~IJ[ (909) 678-1456G';~%. / OUI?~';~_'~uUT or,909) 694-6412 ,,,~uL^ ~L~.te~j~?.~lrE / ¢,~ '~ji~:r;~ Old Town Temecula is located off the I- 15 Freeway ~ ~'~;/'Orni~ I Inland Southern California's Net~,spaper ITEM 20 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA~E CiTY MANAGER (_~ CITY OF TEMECULA ~ /AGENDA REPORT City Manager/C~/~o~incil Debbie Ubnoskr~, D~rector of Planning June 25, 2002 Appeal of Mitigated Negative Declaration for Temecula Creek Village (Planning Applications 01-0610 & 0611) PREPARED BY: Emery Papp, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. ADOPT a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0610, A 14-LOT TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AND 01-0611, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 400-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX; 108,100 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A 15,000 SQUARE- FOOT CHILD CARE CENTER, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETWEEN JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONES, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 961-010-006, AND DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION BACKGROUND: Planning Applications 01-0610 and 0611 originate from a proposal by the Old Vail Partners and Land Grant Development for the Temecula Creek Village project site. The original proposal was complicated when the City's first General Plan designated the property as Professional Office. Old Vail subsequently filed a series of state and federal actions against the City for inverse condemnation and related claims. The claims were settled in November 2000. The City Council adopted Ordinance 2000-13 that established Planned Development Overlay 4 (PDO-4), and Resolution 2000-13 that amended R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Repor~ CC 06-25-02.doc 1 the General Plan Circulation Map to remove a portion of Via Rio Temecula from the circulation map. The passage of the Ordinance and the Resolution led Cid Vail and the City to enter into a Settlement Agreement. The agreement was signed on November 28, 2000, and contained provisions for 400 mutti-family residential units and 123,000 square feet of commercial space. The negative declaration for the PDO was never appealed and, consequently, the intensity of the proposed use may not now be challenged. A Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Tentative Parcel Map (PA01-0610) and related Development Plan (PA01-0611) was prepared and circulated for public comment from April 1, 2002, through April 30, 2002. A public hearing was held on May 1, 2002 and the Planning Commission approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Tentative Parcel Map, and the Development Plan for Temecula Creek Village (Planning Commission Agenda Packet is included as Attachment 9; the minutes are included as Attachment 7). On May 8, 2002, "Citizens First of Temecula Valley" filed an appeal application to the City Council to rescind the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the associated approvals for the Tentative Parcel Map and Development Plan (Appeal Application is included as Attachment 3). It is the desire of the Appellant that the Applicant prepare a "legally adequate" EIR that addresses the issues of Traffic, Air Quality, Grading, and Noise. No other appeals have been filed and no other issues have been identified as not being adequately addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration that was prepared for this project. DISCUSSION: There are four key issues that the Appellant alleges are not adequately addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. They are traffic, air quality, grading, and noise impacts. These issues will be addressed individually in the sections that follow. Traffic In the Appeal Application, the Appellant claims that the Temecula Creek Village project will generate 10,775 vehicle trips per day; states that according to Ca~Trans, State Highway 79 South currently carries approximately 42,000 trips per day; and that cumulative impacts have not been considered in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Furthermore, the Appellant claims that cumulative traffic impacts will exceed the carrying capacity of Highway 79 South and that no mitigation is provided. In response to the Appellant's claims concerning traffic, staff offers the following: The most recently completed traffic analysis for Temecula Creek Village indicates a ne__t increase of 8,716 daily vehicte trips after discounting for "internal capture and retention" (see study, Attachment 6). Even the traffic study provided by the Appellant indicates a net average daily trip factor of 9,120 trips, which is 1,655 vehicle trips less than that claimed by the Appellant. If Highway 79 South currently carries 42,000 vehicle trips, and Temecula Creek Village will contribute an additional 8,716 vehicle trips (or 9,210 trips according to appellant's report), then at full-buildout of this project, the traffic count on 79 South would be 50,716 (or 51,210 based on appellant's report). The Genera~ Plan classifies 79 South as an Urban Arterial Highway, capable of carrying more than 70,000 vehicle trips per day at a Level of Service D. Goal 1 of the General Plan Circulation Element states that the City shall "Strive to maintain a Level of Service R:\P k,~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~,genda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 2 "D" or better at all intersections within the City during peak hours and Level of Service "C" or better during non-peak hours." The Appellant claims that the cumulative impacts of the projects identified in the traffic study provided by the Appellant indicates that the total number of vehicle trips on 79 South will exceed 82,500. However, it is not reasonable to assume that every vehicle trip generated by the projects listed in the cumulative list will end up on 79 South. Traffic from cumulative projects will be diverted onto cross streets such as Margarita Road, Meadows Parkway, Butterfield Stage Road and Redhawk Parkway. Staff fee~s that the cumulative traffic impacts along 79 South will be within the acceptability levels identified in the General Plan Circulation Element. Furthermore, the mixed-use Temecula Creek Village project will have fewer daily vehicle trips than was originally anticipated for the project site when the General Plan was adopted. The original Professional Office (PO) designation for the 32.6-acre site would have created a potential of 13,000 daily vehicle trips, averaging 400 daily vehicle trips per acre. Therefore, approval of the Temecula Creek Village project, as proposed, will cause a reduction of approximately 2,225 vehicle trips from what was anticipated in the General Plan EIR. The City's Public Works Department has reviewed and accepted the Traffic Study prepared for this project. For these reasons, staff feels that the resulting cumulative traffic impacts in this area are adequately addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration that was adopted by the Planning Commission on May 1,2002. Air Quality In the Appeal Application, the Appellant reaffirms that the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Temecula Creek Village project states that the project will create a condition where Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), Nitrates of Oxygen (NOx), and Carbon Monoxide (CO) will exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) recommended thresholds of significance. The Appellant also claims that painting two homes per day will exceed thresholds of significance for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), and that grading in excess of 10 acres will exceed thresholds of significance "even with implementation of all BACT's [Best Available Containment Technologies]." In response to the Appellant's claims concerning air quality, staff offers the following: In response to the claim that painting two homes per day will cause the air quality to exceed thresholds of significance for VOCs, staff feels this claim is unproven. The Appellant offers as evidence, a portion of an EIR from another project in the Inland Empire (Lytle Creek), which is within a different air sub-basin than Temecula. The air quality in Temecula is better than in Lytle Creek, and staff feels that the comparison is not appropriate. Furthermore, the section of the EIR provided by the Appellant states that painting two homes will use approximately 40 gallons of paint, and that will cause VOCs to exceed thresholds of significance. The Temecula Creek Village project will construct the residential portion of the project first. The majority of the apartment units will be approximately 820 square-feet in size, and share common walls. The largest units will be approximately 1,256 square-feet. Because the square-footage of the units is smaller than a typical single-family house, and because the units share common walls, it is not reasonable to assume that painting two units a day will cause VOCs to exceed thresholds of significance. Furthermore, when the Initial Study was routed to the State Clearinghouse for agency distribution and review, the Clearinghouse did not feel it necessary to route it to AQMD. The claim that grading in excess of 10 acres will exceed thresholds of significance will be discussed in the following Section. R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 3 Grading The Appellant claims that grading activity which disturbs more than 10 acres will cause the project to exceed the thresholds of significance, but the Appellant fails to identify which threshold of significance is being exceeded. From the excerpt of an EIR presented as evidence by the Appellant for a project in Buena Park, CA, staff has determined that the Appellant may be referring to Particulate Matter that is approximately 10 microns in size (otherwise known as PM- 10 and/or "fugitive dust." in response to the Appellant's claims concerning grading, staff offers the following: Staff disagrees with the Appellant that impacts "will not be reduced below a level of significance." The portions of the EIR submitted by the Appellant as evidence clearly states, "If strong dust control procedures are implemented, as much as 15 acres of the project site could be under disturbance to maintain a less than significant daily PM-10 emission rate." The Mitigation Monitoring Program that was a part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by the Planning Commission on May 1, 2002, contains an aggressive dust control program that will reduce the impacts to a level that is less than significant. The project can easily be monitored to ensure that no more 15 acres are disturbed at a time. Noise The Appellant asserts that the project will expose existing residents to significant noise impacts from the additional traffic and construction activity created by the project. The Appellant has submitted excerpts from a Subsequent EIR prepared for the Redhawk Towne Center as an example of noise impact analysis. The Appellant asserts that the Negative Declaration fails to analyze and mitigate noise impacts on existing residences in the area. The General Plan EIR and Noise Element contain existing and projected noise levels along Highway 79, using calculations based on road width and projected vehicle traffic levels. The General Plan also identifies sensitive receptors such as residences, and includes goals, policies, and criteria to properly protect those sensitive receptors. The applicant also submitted a noise study which was prepared by an acoustical consultant, Urban Crossroads. The report identified six (6) specific mitigation measures needed to ensure project compliance with the General Plan Noise Element, and those have been incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring Plan and conditions of approval. Staff believes that the noise impacts have been adequately addressed and mitigated, in addition, the project's contribution to the Highway 79 noise impact has been adequately addressed, because the traffic increase created by the project is well within the range projected in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the noise contours contained in the General Plan are still accurate. There is also a City-wide ordinance which regulates the hours of grading and construction activity to protect nearby residents from noise impacts. There would be no further benefit derived by requiring an EIR to address noise impacts. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact is anticipated. R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 4 ATTACHMENTS: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. City Council Resolution of Denial - Page 6 City Council Resolution of Approval - Page 9 Appeal Application - Page 12 Letter to Appellant, May 9, 2002 - Page 13 Supplemental information from the Appellant - Page 14 Mitigated Negative Declaration -Page 15 Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 2002 - Page 16 Planning Commission Resolution May 1,2002 - Page 17 Planning Commission Agenda Packet May 1,2002 - Page 18 R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION OF DENIAL 2002- R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 6 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REJECTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND DENYING PLANNING APPLICATION 01- 0610, A 14-LOT TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AND 01-0611, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 400-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX; 108,100 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A 15,000 SQUARE- FOOT CHILD CARE CENTER, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETWEEN JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONES, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 961-010-006 AND APPROVING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and On December 5, 2001, McComic Considated filed Planning Aplication 01- 0610 for a 14-1ot Tentative Parcel Map and Planning Application No. 01- 0611 for a Development Plan for the design, construction and operation of a 400-unit multi-family residential apartment complex, 108,100 square feet of retail/office uses, and a 15,000 square-foot child care center, generally located on the south side of highway 79 south, between Jedediah Smith Road and Avenida de Missiones, known as Assessor Parcel Number 961-010-006 ("Project"). The applications were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on May 1, 2002 to consider the application and environmental review. After considering the staff report and public testimony, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Plan, Tentative Parcel Map and Development Plan. An appeal of the Planning Commission decision was properly filed by Citizens First of Temecula on May 8, 2002, along with supplemental information requested by staff which submitted on May 17, 2002. The City Council considered the appeal, staff report, Planning Commission Minutes, and the complete public record at a duly noticed public hearing on June 25, 2002. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02- 1 Section 2. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds, determines and declares that: The Mitigated Negative Declaration was not prepared in compliance with CEQA as the Mitigated Negative Declaration is inadequate and fails to adequately assess and identify mitigation of the traffic, air quality, grading, and noise impacts associated with the project. There is substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment. The appeal raises valid and fair arguments about the environmental impacts associated with the project. The Planning Commission resolution of approval and findings of fact are not consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act. In order to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act, a focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared which addresses traffic, air quality, grading, and noise impacts associated with the Project. Section 3. The appeal of the Planning Commission approval of Planning Application Nos. PA 01-0610 and PA 01-0611 as described herein, is hereby approved and the decision of the Planning Commission is reversed, without prejudice, in order to allow the Applicant to prepare the appropriate environmental documents. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula City Council this 25th day of June, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk [SEAL] R:/Resos 2002JResos 02-_ 2 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. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 25th day of June, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-_ 3 ATTACHMENT NO, 2 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL 2002- R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 9 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0610, A 14-LOT TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AND 01-0611, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 400- UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX; 108,100 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIIJOFFICE USES; AND A 15,000 SQUARE-FOOT CHILD CARE CENTER, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETWEEN JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONES, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 961-010-006, AND DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. declare that: The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and On December 5, 2001, McComic Consolidated filed Planning Application 01- 0610 for a 14-1ot Tentative Parcel Map and Planning Application No. 01-0611 for a Development Plan for the design, construction and operation of a 400-unit multi-family residential apartment complex, 108,100 square feet of retail/office uses, and a 15,000 square-foot child care center, generally located on the south side of Highway 79 South, between Jedediah Smith Road and Avenida de Missions, known as Assessor Parcel Number 961-010-006 ("Project"). A Zone Change, Planned Development Overlay Zone (PDO-4) and a Settlement Agreement concerning the Property between the City of Temecula and the Property owner, were approved by the City Council on November 28, 2000 to allow 123,000 square feet of commercial use and 400 multi-family residential units to be built on the Project site. The applications for the Project were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on May 1, 2002 to consider the application and environmental review. After considering the staff report and public testimony, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-012 approving a Mitigated R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 1 Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Plan, Tentative Pamel Map and Development Plan. An appeal of the Planning Commission decision was properly filed by Citizens First of Temecula on May 8, 2002, along with supplemental information requested by staff and submitted on May 17, 2002. The City Council considered the appeal, staff report, Planning Commission Minutes, and the complete public record at a duly noticed public hearing on June 25, 2002. Section 2. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds, determines and declares that: Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment No. EA- ) of the potential environmental effects of the proposed Project. Based upon the findings contained in that Study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared. A copy of the Initial Study and Negative Declaration are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law and copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Community Development, located at City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, Ca. 92589. The City Council reviewed the Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Negative Declaration. The Project and the Negative Declaration were discussed at regularly scheduled public meetings of the Council held on June 25, 2002. The proposed Project is specifically designed to mitigate existing traffic problems and improve vehicular circulation. The Project will pay its fair share of the traffic improvements and mitigation measures described in the Environmental Impact Report for the Wolf Creek Specific Plan Project, approved by the City Council on January 23, 2001 which have been determined necessary to allow the building of new projects proposed in the area. The Project is consistent with the Zone Change, Planned Development Overlay Zone and Settlement Agreement approved by the City Council on November 28, 2000. The information presented by Appellant does not contradict the information on which the findings are based, does not add new or significant information concerning the environmental effects of the Project, and does not present a fair argument that the Project might have a significant effect on the environment. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-- 2 The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds that: (1) The Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project, as conditioned, will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan set forth in the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with law. Section 3. The City Council has reviewed the Application for the Tentative Map and all comments received regarding the Proposed Tentative Map and, based on the whole record before it, finds, determines and declares that: The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Development Code and General Plan. Each lot will conform to the minimum lot size requirement of the original zoning district, and as permitted by the Planned Development Overlay zone, may have parcels with access across other parcels created on the same site. Conditions of approval will ensure that the common-use facilities such as parking, sidewalks, and landscaping are maintained by a Property Owner's Association. 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 site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map. Based on environmental documents submitted with the application and an Initial Study which was prepared by staff in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development being proposed. Conditions of approval have been added to ensure that final soils reports are submitted with the construction plans. 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. Based on the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared which will provide conditions and requirements to reduce the impacts of the project to a less than significant level. City staff will ensure compliance of the mitigation measures as provided in the Monitoring Plan. The design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The Project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Safety Division, the Building and Safety Division, Public Works, Community Services, and Planning Staff. R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-_ 3 Further, provisions are made in the General Plan and Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The Project is consistent with these regulations and documents. All phases of construction will be inspected by appropriate City staff to ensure compliance with all construction and fire codes. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible. The project has been conditioned to comply with the Uniform Building Code, which contains requirements for energy conservation. 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. As conditioned, the project will be required to provide access easements across each lot to provide for parking and on-site circulation. H. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby). Section 4. The City Council has reviewed the Application for the Development Plan and all comments received regarding the Proposed Development Plan and, based on the whole record before it, as required in Section 17.05.010 of the Temecula Municipal Code finds, determines and declares: The proposed uses are in conformance with the General Plan and with ell applicable requirements of state law and local ordinances. The plan to develop 108,100 square-feet of commercial space and 400 multifamily apartment units on 32.6 acres is consistent with the PDO-4 policies and development regulations adopted by ordinance and the terms of the November 2000 Settlement Agreement between the owner of the Property and the City of Temecula concerning the Property. The proposed plan incorporates architectural and landscape designs, which will enhance land use objectives along Highway 79 South. The overall development of the land as conditioned, is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The development plan for the site is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and conforms to all of the applicable sections of the Development Code and related Planned Development Overlay zoning, PDO-4. The Project has been conditioned to comply with and conform to the Uniform Building Code. Provisions have been made to minimize the visual impact of the project, and all phases of construction will be inspected to ensure compliance with the applicable building and fire codes. Section 5. Negative Declaration Project. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves the Mitigated for the Project and approves the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-_ 4 Section 6. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves Planning Application 01- 0610 for a 14-1ot Tentative Parcel Map and Planning Application No. 01-0611 for a Development Plan for the design, construction and operation of a 400-unit multi-family residential apartment complex, 108,100 square feet of retail/office uses, and a 15,000 square- foot child care center, generally located on the south side of highway 79 south, between Jedediah Smith Road and Avenida de Missions, known as Assessor Parcel Number 961-010- 006 subject to the specific conditions of Approval set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. The Council hereby denies the appeal of the Planning Commission approval of Planning Application Nos. PA 01-0610 and PA 01-0611. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula City Council this 25th day of June, 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. 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 certify that Resolution No. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 25th day of June, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-~ 5 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:/Resos 2002/Resos 02-__ 6 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. pA00-0610 Tentative Parcel Map PA00-0611 Development Plan Project Description: PA00-0610: Tentative Parcel Map 30468 subdividing the site into 14 pamels, 12 for commercial uses and 2 for high-density residential use. PA00-0611: Construct 400 multi-family residential units on approximately 20.7 acres and 123,100 square feet of commercial space on approximately 11.9 acres. Development Impact Fee Category: Multi-Family Residential and Retail Commercial Assessor's Parcel No.: 961-010-006 Approval Date: TBD Expiration Date: TBD PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. 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 One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. 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 2. The parcel map shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of the City of Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance, 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. 3. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the R:\P M~2.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 1 City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the 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. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding tO which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 4. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and conditions set forth. 5. After grading, all slopes shall be planted in accordance with the City's Slope Planting Guidelines. Jute netting will be required on alt slopes greater than ten linear feet. 6. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department for buildings on Pads C1, C2, C3, C9 and C10, prior to issuance of building permits. 7. The final landscape plan shall indicate street trees planted along the Highway 79 South frontage as a minimum of 24-inch box for each variety shown. 8. The applicant is advised that Highway 79 South is a state highway, and that all landscape approvals are to meet CalTrans requirements. 9. Perimeter trees shall include some specimen trees of the varieties indicated on the final landscape plan. Specimens shall be a minimum of 36-inch box and shall be placed in a manner that vehicular and pedestrian entrances are accented and provide variation in canopy height. In addition to perimeter trees, please add three (3) 24-inch box Chinese Flame trees, and all eighteen (18) 36- inch box Red Crepe Myrtle trees to conform to the number of specimens identified in the planting legend. 10. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. 11. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 12. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the. approved floor plans, elevations and the Color and Material Boards on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. 13. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director shall have the R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Conditions of Approval.doc 2 14. 15. authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer, Property Owner's Association, or any successors in interest. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. Parapet walls shall be of sufficient height above the roofline to screen said equipment. The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly below and with the Color and Material Boards on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division (with the following changes made by the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on May 1, 2002). Areas A and C: Primary wall exterior: Stucco Accent 1: Stucco Accent 2: Stucco Accent 3: Trim and Bands: Roof Stone Veneer Frazee Desert Fawn (8222 W) Frazee Burnt Copper (8355 D) Frazee Safari Tan (7754 M) Frazee Lulled Beige (8232 W) Frazee Almond White (8180 W) Patina Green Metal Seam Roof CI3eyenne Limestone Area B: Primary wall exterior: Stucco Accent: (remove wood siding) Fascia, Trim, Bands and Railings: Garage Doors Roof Tile Stone Veneer Frazee Clay Beige (8721 W) Frazee Daplin (8234 M) Frazee Swiss Coffee (487) Frazee Lulled Beige (8232 W) Silhouette Slate (ISTCS 4930) Jackson Valley Quarrystone (SP 103) (wrap stone veneer around window frames) Area D: Primary wall exterior: Stucco Accent 1: Stucco Accent 2: Stucco Accent 3: Fascia, Trim, Bands and Railings: Roof Tile Stone Veneer Frazee Hay Seed (8220 W) Frazee Daplin (8234 M) Frazee Festoon (8274 W) Frazee Burnt Copper (8355 D) Frazee Swiss Coffee (487) Wolf Grey Shake (1 SKCB 5969) Oakridge Mountain Ledge 16. Added by Planning Commission on May 1, 2002 -The Clubhouse (Sub- R:\P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temec~Jla Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 3 Area D) in proximity to the Village Center shall Incorporate design elements that closely resemble those of the Village Center commercial buildings. The Clubhouse (Sub-Area B) adjacent to the public trail on the south side of project shall incorporate design elements that closely resemble the residential buildings. 17. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. 18. AII multi-family residential buildings shall meet the building separation requirements of Section 17.06.050 B of the City's Development Code. 19. The applicant shall submit a fence plan for review and approval for Sub-Areas B and D prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit. 20. The applicant shall redesign the trash enclosures such that no unattended rollout container(s) be left in the drive aisle during pick up. 21. Added by Planning Commission on May 1, 2002 - The driveway apron and drive aisle to/from Jedediah Smith Road shall be sufficiently widened to reduce vehicle stacking exiting the slte, and to facilitate emergency vehicle movement. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 22. Prior to issuance of building permits, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be approved by the Planning Department and recorded with the Riverside County Recorder. The CC&R's shall contain provisions for the creation of a Property Owner's Association for the maintenance of all landscaping on the commercial parcels, and maintenance of all internal roadway and hardscape sudaces within those pamels. 23. The applicant shall insure that ail trees planted along the Highway 79 South property line of the subject development be a minimum size of 24" box trees. The applicant shall revise the landscape plans and resubmit the plans for Planning Department approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to Issuance of an Occupancy Permit 24. All perimeter and slope landscaping, including the Highway 79 South landscape planter area shall be installed to the approval of the Planning Director, prior to the first certificate of occupancy. 25. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 26. A one-year landscape maintenance bond of sufficient amount shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 27. The applicant and owner of the real property represented by this approval shall join and maintain active membership in the Crime Free Multi-housing Program. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 28. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. R;\P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 4 29, 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. PUBLIC WORKs PA01-0610 (Tentative Parcel Map) 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 1. 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. 2. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. 3. 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. 4. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-way. 5. 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. 6, All on-site drainage facilities shall be privately maintained. 7, The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a right in/right out movement subject to approval by CalTrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. b, Highway 79 South at the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road shall be restricted to right in/right out movement subject to approval of CalTrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. Prior to Approval of the Parcel 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: 8. 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 c. Eastern Municipal Water District R:~P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval,doc 5 = 10. d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 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. CalTrans k. Community Services District I, Verizon Telephone m. Southern California Edison Company n. Southern California Gas Company o. Fish & Game p. Army Corps of Engineers The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a, Improve Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) b. Provide a lane drop transition per CalTrans standards to the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road c. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road. d. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Main Project entrance. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: a. Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard No. 207A c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 402 e. All street and driveway centeriine intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. 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. g, 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. h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33ky or greater, shall be installed underground R:'~P M'2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Ternecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval,doc 6 11. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. The Developer shall improve Jedediah Smith Road (60 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, raised median, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) as shown on the tentative parcel map. i) The raised median island on Jedediah Smith Road shall be 4 feet wide, 200 foot long ii) The roadway design shall be coordinated with the adjacent property owner b. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). 12. 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 cimulation as required by the Department of Public Works. 13. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Highway 79 South on the Parcel Map with the exception of five (5) openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel and approved by CalTrans. 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision that is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to City Council approval of the Pamel Map\Final Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. 17. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 18. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel 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. 19. The Developer shall comply with all constraints that may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. R:',P M'~2.001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 7 20. 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 Pamel 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. 21. 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. 22. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works 23. A minimum 24 foot wide easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and reciprocal ingress/egress access for all private streets and drives. 24. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 25. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 26. 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 27. 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. Community Services District 28. 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. 29. 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. R:\P M'~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 8 The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 30. A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engin, eering 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. 31. 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 identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site, It shall identify 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 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. 32. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resoumes 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. 33. 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. 34. 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. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 35. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded. 36. 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. 37. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California 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. 38. 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. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy R:\P M',2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temocula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 9 39. 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 40. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 41. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 42. 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. PUBLIC WORKS PA01-0611 (Development Plan) 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 site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 1. A Grading Permit for precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right- of-way. 2. 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. 3. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-way. 4. All improvement plans and grading 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. 5. All on-site drainage facilities shall be privately maintained, 6. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a right in/right out movement subject to approval by CalTrans, The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works, b. Highway 79 South at the driveway east-of Jedediah Smith Road shall be R:\P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 10 restricted to right in/right out movement subject to approval of CalTrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 7. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their right-of-way. 8. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property. 9. 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. 10. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of 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 pavement sections. 11. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study Jones and the geological conditions of the site, and sha!I provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 12. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identity all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer. 13. 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, 14. As deemed necessary by the Director of 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. Community Services District f. Fish & Game g. Army Corps of Engineers R:\P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval,doc 11 15. The Developer shall comply with all constraints that may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 16. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 17. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 18. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone A. This project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code which may include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood Plain Development Permit shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 19. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: a. Flowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 402. e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades. g. 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. 20. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) b. Provide a lane drop transition per CalTrans standards to the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road c. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road. d. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Main Project entrance. Unless 21. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval,doc 12 otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. The Developer shall improve Jedediah Smith Road (60 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, raised median, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) as shown on the site plan. i) The raised median island on Jedediah Smith Road shall be 4 feet wide, 200 foot long ii) The roadway design shall be coordinated with the adjacent property owner b. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). 22. All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per CalTrans' standards for transition to existing street sections. 23. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate b. Storm drain facilities c. Sewer and domestic water systems d. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines 24. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of 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. 25. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works. 26. All access rights, easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works and City Attorney and approved by City Council for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 27. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing Compaction and site conditions. 28. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 29. 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. R:\P M'~.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.dcc 13 Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 30. 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 31. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 32. All public improvements, including traffic signals, shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 33.The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES General Conditions: 1. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 2. Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 3. All perimeter walls, trail fences, entry monumentation, parkways, landscaping, pedestrian portals, private recreational amenities and all open space shall be maintained by the property owner or a private maintenance association. 4. The Developer shall provide to the City of Temecula an eight (8) foot multi-use trail easement deed for public access. 5. The Developer shall provide to the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) an eight (8) foot maintenance easement deed for the multi-use trail. 6. A multi-use trail will be constructed by the developer as indicated on the development plan. Specifications and standards to be approved by TCSD. 7, Prior to the 221st residential building permit the development of the trial shall be completed and accepted by TCSD. Prior to Building Permits: 8. The developer shall satisfy the City's park land dedication (Quimby) requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to 2.43 acres of park land, based upon the City's then current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50% credit .for private recreational opportunities provided on-site and shall be pro- rated at a per dwelling unit cost prior to the issuance of residential building permit requested. R:\P M\,?.001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 14 If additional arterial street lighting needs to be installed, prior to the first building permit or installation of arterial street lighting, the developer shall complete the TCSD application process and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program, FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. 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. 2. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-Ill-A- 1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2250 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 3100 GPM 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) 3. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum (based on the greatest hazard building)of 3 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off-site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 400 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an 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). 4. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 5. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Ord. 16.03.020) 6. 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) 7. 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) 8. 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. GV~N with R:\P M'~2.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 15 a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 9. 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) 10. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) 11. 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) 12. 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) 13. 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) 14. 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) 15. 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) 16. 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. 17. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10,. CBC Chapter 9) R:~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 16 18. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) 19. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box" shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) 20. 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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 21. 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. 22. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access reads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81 ) 23. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the Storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 24. 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 wild land-vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II-A) 25. 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) 26. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, and NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 27. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 28. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process R:~P M\2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 17 29. and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports, (CFC Appendix II-E) OUTSIDE AGENCIES 1. The applicant shall comply with all the mitigation measures identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan. (Environmental Mitigation Measures) 2. The applicant shall comply with all CaITrans requirements concerning signal lights for Highway 79 South. 3. The applicant shall comply with all CalTrans requirements concerning street trees along Highway 79 South. 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's Signature Date Name printed R:~P M'~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc t8 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 APPEAL APPLICATION R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 12 City of TemecCJa Community Development Department 43200 Business Park Drive · Temecula · CA * 92590 P.O. Box 9033, Temecula · CA * 92589-9033 (909) 694-6400 * FAX (909) 694-6477 Appeal A. P_IIRP_O~ Tbe'purpo~ of fl~e appeal procedure is to provide a method of recourse for persons aggrieved by or dissatisfied with an action talam by an administrative agency of the City in the administration or enforcement of any provisions of the Development Code. B. FILING REQUIREMEN2~ 1. Development Application. 2. Appeal Form. 3. Filing Fee. C. NOTICE OF APPEAL - TIME LIMIT ~ nolice of an ~ by any individual who is aggrieved by or dissatisfied with a decision made by him or in his behalf, or with any action, order, requirement, decision or determination ahall not be a~ed upon unle~ filed within fifteen (15) calendar days after service of written notice of the decision. D. NOTICE OF APPEAL - CONTEH~ Appealing the decision of: ~t.~a~, Dee {~ /~ ~V I: 3,t~o :~ ($]I~cify Ditegto£ of~nn n~ of plannm.,o Comm:s;loll ~ ActioD. Da~e) Specify exactly what is being appealed: Reason or juslification to support the appeal. Appellant must submit with this appeal each issue which the appellant alleges was wrongly determined together with every agreement and a copy of every item of evideace. (Attach separate sheet of paper if necessary). action to be t~kea: · .[ In the event .~.y Notice of Appeal applicant fails to answer any information set forth above, rhea [ the request will be returned to the appellant, .w? a statement of the deficiencies. The appellant [ shall be allowed five (5) calenda~ days in which to refile the notice of appeal. REPRESENTATIVE PHONE NO. ADDRESS The air quality analysis admits that operating emissions exceed thresholds of significance for ROG, NOx and CO. Operating impacts are thus significant and an EIR must be ?epared. No mitigation is proposed even though feasible mitigation exists. The Negative Declaration does not provide data on the construction impacts associated with the project. Painting of tWo homes per day will exceed thresholds of significance for VOC's. There is no discussion .of this impact. Similarly, active grading areas in excess often acres will exceed thresholds of significance even with implementation of all BACT's. This will result in significant conslxuction impacts and an EIR must be prepared. The MMCP states merely that mitigation will assist in reducing impacts, not that they will be reduced below a level of significance. The project will result in 10,775 daily trips generated by the project, all of which will entail turning movements on SR 79. This will amount to a 20% increase in current traffic on SR 79 which according to CALTRANS currently carries approximately 42,000 trips per day adjacent to the project. The Negative Declaration does not provide data as to the level of servico expected on area roads as a result of traffic from the project combined with other cumulative projects. No mitigation measures are required in the MMCP. Clearly, the introduction of the over 10,000 turning movements per day onto an already overcrowded SR79 will result in a significant impact. Based upon the traffic study for the Redhawk Town Center project ( hereby incorporated in full by reference) necessary improvements to SR 79 to achieve even an LOS "D" are uncertain because no source of adequate funding has been identified nor has a time .schedule been established for improvements. Traffic demand will thus exceed the capacity until at least such time as all necessary improvements can be installed, if ever. The traffic study also does not consider future traffic growth in the area and the inability of SR 79 to adequately handle the required traffic over the long term. Traffic impacts remain significant and an EIR must be prepared. Noise mitigation on page 30 (X-4) is uncertain as to whether it applies only during construction or on an ongoing basis. There is no discussion of the noise impacts of the additional traffic on existing residential properties in the vicinity. Noise studies prepared for the Redhawk Towne Center project (hereby incorporated in full by reference) indicate that traffic noise related impacts will be significant. This project will add more traffic than the Redhawk town Center project and noise impacts, at least cumulatively, will be significant and thus an EIR must be prepared. Mitigation is available to reduce off site noise impacts through the construction of sound walls and landscaping. Why shOUld residents in the area be subjected to increased and unhealthful noise levels as a result of this project when mitigation could and should be provided by the developer of this project? Mitigation is not proposed which is certain of mitigating project impacts. Mitigation is improperly deferred.. The project should be either downsized or denied to prevent significant environmental impacts. Because there is a fair argument that there will be significant impacts as a result of the project an EIR must be prepared if the project is to be approved. An EtR would allow the consideration of alternatives which could be tailored to reduce significant traffic, air quality and noise impacts of the project as proposed. Please notify me of any future hearings on this matter. City of TemeDula ~ 1909) 694-6444 · Fax (9091 694-1999 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. California 92590 · Mailing Mdress: P.O. BOX 9033 · Temecula. California 92589-9033 ~ay~ent JOHNSON & PA~HIp .T(Y'/'I~: tion 1-989- ACCOUF~ 'I:TEN LIST: Description Account Code Cuv=ent Pmts PLN~A~I~ALS 001.~61.4102 32~.00 P~-C~ ~N3 PORT 001.163.4388 26.00 ~1 351.00 P. ECEIPT ISSUED B¥:ALVAP~ZT INITIAL~: TDA EFI~D DATE:05/08/2002 TIME: ATTACHMENT NO. 4 LETTER TO APPELLANT MAY 9, 2002 R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 13 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive PO Box 9033 - Temecula - California - 92589-9033 (909) 694-6400 - FAX (909) 694-6477 Mayg, 2002. Citizens First of Temecula Valley c/o Raymond W. Johnson, Esq. Johnson & Sedlack Attomeys at Law 26785 Camino Seco Temecula, CA 92590 FILE COPY RE: Application to Appeal Planning Commission adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and related approvals for Planning Applications 01-0610 (Tentative Parcel Map 30468) and 01-0811 (Development Plan), Temecula Creek Village Dear Mr. Johnson: The Planning Department today has received your application to appeal the Planning Commission's decision of Wednesday, May 1,2002 with respect to the above referenced project. The request is to rescind the approval actions taken by the Commission for the above referenced project. In particular, the appeal application states the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Pregram do not adequately address several items and that an EIR must be prepared. The Planning Department has deemed the Appeal application to be complete pursuant to Section 17.03.090 F of the Development Code. Section 17.03.090 H states that the appellant "shall have the burden of establishing Cause why the action appealed from should be altered, reversed, or modified." A public headng to appeal this item to the City Council iS tentatively scheduled for June 11,2002. In order for staff to prepare a Council Agenda Report for this item that will address your concerns, we need the following supporting documentation within ten days (by May 20, 2002). The items we are requesting include: Identification of the acronym "MMCP" · Information to support claim that painting two .(2) homes per day will exceed thresholds of significance for volatile organic compounds · Information to suppert claim that grading in excess of ten (10) acres will exceed thresholds of significance · One (1) photo-reproducible copyof any supplemental traffic studies that you used in making your determination concerning traffic impacts · One (1) photo-reproducible copy of the Redhawk Towne'Center Project traffic study referenced in your application · One (1) photo-reproducible copy of the Redhawk Towne Center Project noise study referenced in your application · Information to support claim that the increase in ambient noise [evels impacting residents in the vicinity of the project will reach a level of significance The above requested items will be considered and addressed in the Council Agenda Report if they are received by May 18, 2002. Because the purpose of your appeal appears to be to demonstrate R:~P Iv~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\CC Appeal Lettc~ 05~84}2.doc to the City Council that the previous environmental documentation is not adequate, this additional information will be needed by the Council to fully consider your claims. As a result, items received · after May 20, 2002 will not be included in the report and may not be forwai'ded to the Council members for their consideration. If you have any questions or concerns with regard to this correspondence, please call me at (909) 694-6400. Sipcerely, Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Copy of dated Appeal Application 2. Payment Receipt Cc: R0n Finch Larry Markham R:\P lv~2001 \01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\CC Appeal Letter 05 -08-02,doc 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FROM THE APPELLANT R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 14 l~aymond W. Johnson, Esq. AICP Carl T. Sedlack, Esq. JohnsonOSedlack 26785 Calnino Seco · Vemecula CA 92590 · E-nmg: RWJ@Johnson--sedlack.cora CTS $ johnson--sedlack'.coln · Facsimile: 909.506.9725 · Off/c~: 909.506-9925 VIA PERSONAL DELIVERY Mr. Emery J. Papp City of Temecula, Planning Departm, ent PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-0933 May 173 2002 APPEAL APPLICATION FOR TEMECULA CREEK VILLAGE APARTMENTS, APPLICATIONS 01 ~0610 AND 01-0611 Dear Emery, In response to your letter of May 9, 2002, I Offer the following information: Identification of the acronym "MMCP" - These initials represent Mitigation and Monitory Compliance Program. Information to support claim that painting two (2) homes per day will exceed thresholds of significance for volatile 6rganic compounds: I enclose a copy of pages 4.6-11,4.6-12 from Lytle Creek North Planned development Project Draft EIR prepared April, 2001 by L.D. King, Inc. The reference to the VOC by painting is high-lighted. Information t6 support claim that grading in~ excess of ten (I0) acres will exceed thresholds of significance: I enclose a copy of Air Quality Analysis,.Redhawk Commercial Project, Temecula, CA page 15. Per our telephon~ conversation 6n May 16, 2002 concerning the supplemental traffic studies, none were used. In a Jetter dated January 4, 2002 from Urban Crossroads, included in your NOC and copy attached, it states "a total o~' 10,775 daily vehicle trips would be generated." We realize at this time, that number is incorrect. However, using this same letter, it states "approximately 10,260 trips per day" using the plan for 400 apartment units and 30,000 sq. ft. of office and 93,000 sq.'ft, of retail. · Copy of the Redhawk Towne Center Project Traffic Study, I enclose a copy of pages 4~ 23 through 4-71 of the Subsequent EIR produced by Tom Dodson'& Associates for the Redhawk Town Center. After reviewing this document should'you require further information on the traffic study, the entire study i:~ available through our office or by requesting a copy through Riverside County Plarming Department. The study is over 1,000 pages. Emery J. Papp City of Temecula May 17, 2002 Page 2 6. Copy of the Redhawk Towne Center Project Noise Study, I enclose a copy of pages 4-72 through 4-81 of the Subsequent EIR produced by Tom Dodson & Associates for the Redhawk Town Center. Again, should you require additional information, the full study is available through our office or Riverside County Planning Department. 7. Information to support claim that the increase in ambient noise levels impacting residents in the vicinity of the project will reach a level of significance. Page 28 of the Mitigation Measures, Item X-6 state "noise'standards specific to each business". No cumulative impact is provided for witti a combination of 400 apartments plus 123,000 sq. ft. of office/retail on site activity plns traffic activity. I trust this provides the information needed. However, should you have any questions or require additional informant!on, do not hesitate to contact this office. Also, we have marked our calendar to attend the June 11, 2002 Council Meeting. Sincerely,//~ JO~ SEDcLACK D/an~ Johnston/~ Assistant to Raymond W. Johnson, Esq., AICP Enclosures ATTACHMENT NO. 6 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02,doc 15 City of Temecula Plannin De artment Notice of Completion SCH # Project Title: Contact Person: Francisco J. Lead Agency: City of Temecula Urbina Street Address: 43200 Business Park Drive Title: Associate Planner City: Temecula, CA Zip: 92590 Phone: (909) 694-6400 Project Location Within 2 miles City of Temecula, Riverside County State Hwy #: Interstate 15 Cross Streets: State Highway 79 South Airports: n/a and Jedediah Smith Road Waterways: Murrieta Creek Railways: none Assessor's Parcel No.: 950-110-014 Schools: Temecula Valley High, Loma Linda Middle, Sparkman Elementary, and Redhawk Elementary Total Acres: 32.6 CEQA Document Type [ ]NOP [X]Mitigated Negative Declaration [ ]Supplement EIR [ ]EIR (Prior SCH [ ]Early Consultation [ ]Draft EIR [ ]Subsequent E1R [ ]Other Local Action Type [ ]General Plan Update [ ]Specific Plan [ ]Rezone [ ]Annexation [ ]GeneralPlan Amendment [ ]Master Plan [ ]Prezone [ ]Redevelopment [ ]General Plan Element [ ]Planned Unit Development [ ]Use Permits [ ]Coastal Permit [ ]Community Plan [ ]Site Plan/Plot Plan [ X ]Subdivision of Land [ ]City Development Project [ X ]Other Development Plan Application Development Type [X]Residential: Units:400 Acres:21.07__ [ ]Water Facilities: Type MGD.__ [ ]Office: Sq.ft. Acres___ Employees [ ]Transportation Type [ X ]Commercial: Sq.ft. Acresl 1.53 Employees [ ]Mining: Mineral [ ]Industrial: Sq.ft. Acres Employees [ ]Power: Type [ ]Educational: [ ]Waste Treatment: Type [ ]Recreational: [ ]Hazardous Waste: Type [ lOther: Project Issues Discussed in Document IX]Aesthetic/Visual [X]Flood Plain/Flooding [X]SchoolsfClniversities [X] Water Quality [ ]Agricultural Land [ ]Forest Land/Fire Hazard [ ]Septic Systems [X]Water supply/groundwater [X]Air Quality IX]Geologic/Seismic [X]Sewer Capacity IX]Wetland/Riparian [X]Archeological/Historical [ ]Minerals [X]Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grad [X]Wildlife [ ]Coastal Zone [X]Noise [X]Solid Waste [X]Growth Inducing IX]Drainage/Absorption IX]Population/Housing Balances [ ]Toxic/Hazardous IX]Land Use [ ]Economic/Jobs [X]Public ServicesfFacilities [X]Traffic/Circulation [X]Cumulative Effects [ ]Fiscal [X]RecreationfParks [X]Vet~etation [X]Other: Light & Glare Present Land Use: Vacant Current Zoning: PDO-4 (Planned Development Overlay Zoning District No. 4) General Plan Use: (PO) Professional Office Project Description: PA01-0610 is a Tentative Parcel Map application to divide 32.6 acres into 14 parcels (12 for commercial uses and 2 for residential uses) ranging in size from .21acres to 11.91 acres to accommodate a concurrent Development Plan application (PA01-0611) for a mixed use development containing 108,100 square feet of retail/office uses, 400 multi-family residential units, and a 15,000 square foot day care center building. PA01-0611 is a Development Plan application to construct a mixed-use project on 32.6 acres consisting of 108,100 square feet of retail/office uses, 400 multi-family residential units, and a 15,000 general retail building or optional children's day care. Mailto: State Clearinghouse, 1400 Tenth St~eet. Sacramento, CA 95814 R:~D P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VillagehNOT1CE OF COMPLETION Official Copy.doc (916) 445-0613 REVIEWING AGENCIES CHECKLIST T Resources Agency __ Boating/Waterways Coastal Commission __ Coastal Conservancy Colorado River Board T Conservation T Fish and Game __ Forestry Office of Historic Preservation Parks and Recreation Reclamation __ S.F. Bay Conservation & DeveloPment Commission __ Water Resources (DWR) Business, Transportation, & Housing Aeronautics S California Highway Patrol S Caltrans District No. 8 T Department of Transportation Planning (Headquarters) __ Housing & Community Development Other State & Consumer Services General Services __ OLA (Schools) S=Document sent by lead agency X=Document sent by SCH T=Suggested distribution Environmental Affairs Air Resources Board T APCD/AQMD __ California Waste Management Board T SWRCB: Clean Water Grants SWRCB: Delta Unit T SWRCB: Water Quality SWRCB: Water Rights T Regional WQCB #9 Youth & Adult Corrections Corrections Independent Commissions & Offices __ Energy Commission T Native American Heritage Commission Public Utilities Commission __ Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy State Land Commission __ Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Food & Agriculture Health & Welfare Health Services OTHERS: ...X California Indian Legal Services ~X U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency) Starting Date April 1, 2002 Ending Date April 30, 2002 Date March 2002 Lead Agency (Complete if Applicable): Consulting Firm n/a Address City/State/Zip Contact Phone 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA. 92590 Francisco J. Urbina (909) 694-6400 Applicant Address City/State/Zip Phone McComic Consolidated, Inc. 9968 Hilbert Street, Suite 102 San Diego, CA. 92131 (858) 653-3003, ext 26 For SCH Use Only: Date Received at SCH Date Review Starts Date to Agencies Date to SCH Clearance Date Notes: RAD PX2001\01-0611 Temeeula Creek Village'u'qOTICE OF COMPLETION Official Copy.doc 2 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Temecula Creek Village Lead Agency Name and City of Temecula Planning Department Address P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Number (909) 694-6400 Project Location 32.6-acres located south of State Highway 79, immediately east of the conceptual linear extension of Jedediah Smith Road and approximately 250 feet west of Avenida de Missiones Assessor's Parcel Number: 950-110-014 Project Sponsor's Name McComic Consolidated, Inc. and Address c/o Markham Development Management Group, Inc. 41635 Enterprise Circle North, Suite B Temecula, CA 92590 R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc General Plan Designation Planned Development Overlay (PDO-4) Zoning Planned Development Overlay (PDO-4) Description of Project Construct 400 residential units on approximately 20.7 acres. Residential Development will consist of two and three-story structures. Construct 123,000 sq.ft, of single story office/retai~ space on approximately 11.9 acres. Access to the project site will be from Jedediah Smith Road and State Highway 79. See more detailed description in the enclosure to this Initial Study. Surrounding Land Uses and (briefly describe the project's surroundings) State Highway 79 (SH 79) Setting serves as the north boundary of the project site, with Temecula Creek and associated flood control zoned for conservation located south of the project site. Surrounding land uses include vacant land to the west zoned for Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT), vacant land to the east zoned for Professional Office (PO), existing Low Medium Residential (LM) homes approximately 300-feet east of the project, vacant land immediately north of SH 79 zoned for Professional Office (PO), one existing single-family home zoned Very Low Density Residential (VL) located at the northeastern corner of SH 79 and Jedediah Smith Road and existing Very Low Density Residential (VL) homes located approximately 500-feet north of SH 79. Other pubic agencies (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) No whose approval is required stream channels or wetlands are located on this creek terrace located south of State Highway 79; therefore, no U.S. Corps of Engineers 404 Permit or California Department of Fish and Game 1603 Agreement appears to be required. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board approvals are required such as issuing a Notice of intent, review and approval of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program. RAD PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use Planning Hazards Population and Housing X Noise X Geology and Soils X Public Services Water X Utilities and Service Systems X Air Quality Aesthetics X Transportation/Cimulation X Cultural Resources X Biological Resources Recreation R:XD Px2001~01-0611 Temecu[a Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 3 i Energy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance None R:',D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA laitial Study.doc 4 A. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND McComic Consolidated, Inc. proposes to develop a 32.6-acre site in the City of Temecula for high density, multi-family residential and office/retail uses. This proposed project would contain a mixture of uses designed to allow residents to meet many service, employment and recreational needs onsite, thereby providing a focal point for neighborhood activity. The proposed project contains provision for a transit stop as well as an internal sidewalk system that integrates with existing pedestrian facilities, encouraging non-automotive modes of transportation. The criteria used to design this project are consistent with the Village Center concept presented in the City of Temecula General Plan. Please refer to Figure 1 for the Regional Location, Figure 2 for the Site Location and Figure 3 for the Site Plan. The Specific Plan for the project site indicates that structures are limited to 2-stories. It appears that this limit applies only to commercial structures. If this is correct, 3-story residences will not conflict with the key objectives of the Specific Plan. The Temecula City Council designated the project site as Planned Development Overlay (PDO- 4) by Ordinance 2000-13 on November 28, 2000. The project area is divided into Multi-Family Residential Areas, Village Commercial Area and Retail/ Support Commercial Area. The Supplemental Design and Setback Standards issued as part of the ordinance provide for either medium or high-density residential development in the Multi-Family Residential Area provided that the project is consistent with the guidelines for the density chosen. The project will be constructed accordingly to the guidelines of High Density Residential development. The General Plan descriptions of these land use designations state: High Density Residential (13-20 Dwellinq Units per Acre Maximum) The High Density Residential designation is intended to provide for development of attached residential developments. Typical housing types include multi-family or garden apartments. Congregate care facilities could be approved as a conditional use with the provisions of the Development Code. Increases in the density for congregate care may be allowed under special provisions of the Development Code and may be subject to additional environmental analysis. Professional Office (Floor Area Ratio of .3 to 1.0) The Professional Office designation includes primarily single or multi-tenant offices and may include: supporting uses. Office developments are intended to include Iow-rise offices situated in a landscaped garden arrangement and may include mid-rise structures at appropriate locations. Typical uses include legal, design, engineering or medical offices, corporate and governmental offices, and community facilities. Supporting convenience retail and personal service commercial uses may be permitted to serve the needs of the on-site employees. The development of mixed-use projects including compatible/complementary mixtures of office, support commercial, residential, and services, is allowed through the Planned Development Overlay process of the Development Code. B. LOCATION The proposed 32.6-acre Temecula Creek Village project is located on the south side of State Highway 79 (SH 79) immediately east of the theoretical extension of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of Temecula, California. Jedediah Smith Road is currently only located on the north side of SH 79. The southern boundary of the property is Temecula Creek and associated flood control and open space. Unsectioned land within T7S, R2W on the Temecula, California USGS 7.5' Topographic Quadrangle, San Bernardino Base and Meridian. (Please see Figure 1). R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA initial Study.doc 5 C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Objectives Construct 400 residential units in two and three-stow structures on approximately 20.7 acres. Construct 123,000 sq.ft, of one and two-story office/retail space on approximately 11.9 acres. Access to the project site will be from State Highway 79. State Highway 79 (SH 79) serves as the north boundary of the project site, with Temecula Creek and associated flood control zoned for conservation located south of the project site. Surrounding land uses include vacant land to the west zoned for Highway/Tourist Commercial (HT), vacant land to the east zoned for Professional Office (PO), existing Low Medium Residential (LM) homes approximately 300-feet east of the project, vacant land immediately north of SH 79 zoned for PO, one existing single- family home zoned Very Low Density Residential (VL) located at the northeastern corner of SH 79 and Jedediah Smith Road and existing VL homes located approximately 500-feet north of SH 79. The objective of the Temecula Creek Village project is to comprehensively plan and develop a 32.6-acre in-fill project within the City of Temecula applying the "Village Center" design concept. According to the City's General Plan, Village Centers are intended to contain a concentration and mixture of compatible uses including retail, office, public facilities, recreation uses and housing, designed to encourage non-automotive modes of transportation. The proposed project includes all of the above suggested compatible uses. Specific features of the project include: $ $ Specific permitted and conditional uses A comprehensive sidewalk plan within the proposed project site capable of being connected to a future pedestrian network in the surrounding area. $ Development scaled for pedestrian uses $ Gathering places for local residents to enhance neighborhood unity $ Transit opportunities to reduce reliance on private automobiles $ Buffers to protect residential uses from nuisance noise on existing streets Proposed Project The Temecula Creek Village Development is being designed and developed to consist of a range of neighborhood convenience uses that are compatible and complementary to the existing residential development in the vicinity and the high-density residential uses proposed for the site. For planning purposes, the proposed project site is divided into four sub areas (please refer to Figure 3). Sub Area A, the Retail/Support Commercial Area, encompasses the western 6.9-acres of the project site and is proposed to consist of offices and retail uses, a daycare center, restaurants and a drive-thru bank. Sub Area C, Village Commercial Area, encompasses the north-central 5-acres of the project site and is proposed to consist of offices, retail, restaurants and public transit facilities. Sub Areas B and D encompass the central and R:XD P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 7 south-central 9-acres and eastern 11.7-acres respectively and are proposed to consist of High Density Multi-Family residential areas and a private club house, pool and play area for residents. An 8-foot wide 3,380-foot long public, multi-purpose trail will constructed along the northern bank of Temecula Creek as part of the project and will form the southern boundary of the project. The project will provide four public access points to the trail within development. Uses in Sub Areas A and C have been selected that provide support services to existing and future area residents. Uses have been chosen that cater to both the pedestrian and the automobile customers. Permitted uses are indicated in Sections 17.22.130 through 17.22.138 of the Temecula Municipal Code for Planned Development Overlay District No. 4. Examples of permitted uses include professional and medical offices, specialty retail and services, banks and financial institutions, barber and beauty shops, health and exercise clubs, day care facilities and sit-down restaurants. Some auto-oriented uses are permitted in Sub Area A in order to reduce vehicle trips along SH 79 for auto-oriented services. The mix of actual uses may vary, but will remain within the respective ranges in the PDO-4 schedule of permitted uses for the Retail/Support Commercial and Village Commercial Areas. The estimated 123,000 square feet of retail and office space represents a Floor-Area Ratio (FAR) of approximately .237, well within the permissible FAR of .3 to 1.0. Sub Areas B and D are the residential component of the proposed project. A total of 400 multi- family residential units are proposed for development as 128 one-bedroom units, 254 two- bedroom units and 18 three-bedroom units. The gross density of this portion of the project will be 19.32 dwelling units per acre. The proposed density conforms with the range of density permitted in this residential land use category. The proposed multi-family residential area also includes a pool, clubhouse, and play area. If approved, the proposed 32.6-acre Temecula Creek Village project will result in the development of 11.9-acres of office/retail uses and 20.7-acres high-density multi-family residential uses. A minimum 24-foot set back from the eastern property line will be provided to buffer existing single-family development to the east. The buildings closest to SH 79 will be located at the minimum required front setback for SH 79. Parking for the Village and Retail/Support Commercial Areas will be provided at 1 space for every 200 square feet of facilities. Covered parking for the residential facilities will be provided at the required ratios of 1 space for each one or two-bedroom unit and 2 spaces for each three-bedroom unit. Uncovered parking for the residential facilities will be provided at the required ratios of .67 spaces for each one or three-bedroom unit and 1.17 spaces for each two-bedroom unit. Proposed Project Development The proposed project would be developed in the following manner: a. Site Clearance and Grading The developer will clear all portions of the site that will not remain in open space. Once the site is cleared, grading will proceed in accordance with the grading standards outlined in the proposed project grading plan, California Building Code Standards, and City standards. It is forecast that grading fill will balance material on the site, with approximately 50,000 cubic yards of cuts and a comparable amount of fill, minus shrinkage. Figure 4 shows the conceptual grading plan. Grading is expected to take place over a one to two month period. b. Construction of Infrastructure and Structures R:~D Px2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 8 FIGURE 2 Site Location i Source: 3.0 TopaQuads. Delom~e . Tom Dodson & Associates jEDEDi~I sMtTH RoAD As the proposed project is an urban infill development in a suburban/urban area, infrastructure connections are available for all utilities at the edge of the project site. Utility infrastructure will be extended to all areas of the project site from existing connections in SH 79. c. Occupancy With a total of 400 dwelling units, the proposed project is forecast to contain a population of 1,132 persons (400 x 2.83 persons per household). The 123,000 square feet of office/retail space will provide employment for onsite and local residents. Given the type of office and retail uses, an estimated six jobs per 1,000 square feet, or up to 738 new jobs, are forecast to be generated by the commercial/office portion of the project site. d. Procedural Considerations The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was adopted to implement the goal of maintaining the quality of the environment for the people of the State. Compliance with CEQA, and its implementing guidelines, requires that an agency making a decision on a project must consider its potential environmental effects/impacts before granting approval. An agency, in this case the City of Temecula, must examine feasible alternatives and identify feasible mitigation measures as part of the environmental review process where significant adverse environmental impacts are forecast to occur. The City of Temecula is required to identify the potential environmental impacts of the project and determine whether there are feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental effects of the project. The first step in this process, completion of an Initial Study to determine whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required, has been completed by The City for the proposed project. Based on information developed in the Initial Study, the City of Temecula has determined that implementation of the proposed project is not forecast to cause any significant adverse impacts to the environment and therefore no environmental analysis beyond the Initial Study and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is required. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Temecula will serve as CEQA Lead Agency for the Initial Study. The decision that will be considered by the City of Temecula is whether to approve or reject the proposed land use entitlements outlined above. This initial Study evaluates the potential effects to the physical environment from approval and implementation of the proposed project. The City of Temecula prepared this Initial Study. The Initial Study and Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration for the proposed project has been distributed directly to all public agencies and interested persons identified on the mailing list, as well as any other requesting agencies or individuals. All reviewers will be allowed 30 days to review the Initial Study and submit comments to the City. The Initial Study is also available for public review at: The City of Temecula Community Development Department- Planning Division 43200 Business Park Drive Temeoula, CA 92589-9033 Phone (909) 694-6400 Fax (909) 694-6477 R:~D I~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 9 After the 30~day Initial Study review period, the City of Temecula will take action to adopt or reject the Initial Study and make a decision regarding the proposed project and associated applications. The City of Temecula will review the comments received during the public review period and the information in the Initial Study for compliance with the CEQA. Information concerning the Initial Study, public review schedule, and meetings for this proposed project can be obtained by contacting the City of Temecula at the above address. Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have bee~ made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ErR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or . mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Printed Name Francisco J. Urbina Associate Planner Date: March 28, 2002 for Debbie Ubnoske, Planning Director R:~,D I~.O01\O1-061 I Temecula Crcek Village\CEQA Initial Study,doc 10 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Potentially Significanl Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? X b. Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, X specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan X or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a The project site is located in a rapidly developing urban/suburban area. Residential uses exist to the east and to the south across Temecula Creek; very Iow density residential development exists to the north of SH 79. The properties immediately west of the project and immediately north of SH 79 are vacant, disturbed lots. Interstate 15 is located approximately 1.5 miles west of the project site. The construction and occupancy of 400 residential units and 123,000 square feet of office/retail on this approximately 32.6-acre property is consistent with existing nearby commercial and residential uses and as specified in the approved Planned Development Overlay District 4 (PDO-4). The type of project proposed and the location of the project eliminate any possibility of causing adverse impact from physically dividing an established community. b The project site is designated on the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code as Planned Development Overlay No. 4 (PDO-4). Sections 17.22.130 through 17.22.138 were added to the Temecula Municipal code supplemental standards and requirements for PDO-4. The proposed project is fully compliant with these codes. Implementation of the proposed Temecula Creek Village project has no potential to conflict with any agency plans or policies that have been adopted in order to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. Site development will require mitigation to prevent erosion and sedimentation during construction and during occupancy, and mitigation may be required to compensate for potentially significant biological resources located on the property. With this mitigation no significant conflicts are forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project. Details of the mitigation measures for these issues are provided under the respective issue evaluations presented below. C The project site is heavily disturbed habitat dominated by ruderal vegetation. No habitat community represented on the site is listed in any agency plans as part of a habitat conservation plan or a natural community conservation plan. The project is located within the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Plan for Stephen's kangaroo rat. A mandatory development fee of $500 per acre will be assessed for the project. Based on the site's high density residential and professional office designations, and the infill character of the project site, the proposed Temecula Creek Village project is consistent with the village center and planned development overlay concepts presented R:~D P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc in the General Plan and Development Code. The proposed project does not pose any significant adverse land use impacts with implementation of required mitigation. Potential mitigation for other issues is discussed in the appropriate sections of this Initial Study. No mitigation is required for land use issues beyond those that are already included in the proposed project Planned Development Overlay. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant No Issues and Suppoding Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact impact a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new X homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement X housing elsewhere? c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement X housing elsewhere? Comments: a The City General Plan designates PDO-4 for the development of 340 to 400 multi-family units. The proposed project is designed with 400 units and is therefore within the established range. At an occupancy rate of 2.83 persons per unit, the maximum population that will occupy this project is forecast to be 1,132 persons. The proposed office/retail uses on site are only approximately two-thirds of the minimum FAR square footage anticipated in the General Plan for this site (.23 compared to a minimum of .3), and 23% of the maximum FAR (.23 compared to the maximum FAR of 1.0). Based on this evaluation, the proposed project is not forecast to cause significant growth within the City of Temecula beyond that which is planned for in the General Plan. Assuming 600 employable persons occur within the 400 units, the jobs/housing ratio for this project is 1.2:1, a net positive for the City. The project site is presently unoccupied and the proposed project has no potential to displace any existing housing. The project will provide critically needed apartment housing units for the City, and equally important, the adjacent professional and commercial development can reduce the overall trip generation by allowing pedestrian trips to replace vehicle trips. The project site is presently unoccupied and the proposed project has no potential to displace any existing population. The project provides essential rental housing that is currently in very short supply within the City and surrounding area. No mitigation is required. R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA initial Study.doc 3. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporling Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or X death involving: I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the X area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) ' Strong seismic ground shakin~l? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including X liquefaction? iv) Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site X landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1801-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), X creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soil incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water X disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Comments: a Fault investigation by Petra Geotechnicai, Inc. indicate that three active splays of the Wildomar Fault are located on the eastern portion of the project site. The project has been designed so that no structures are located within 50-feet of each side of the fault traces, as prescribed by Petra Geotechnical. The incorporated building setbacks are considered sufficient to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. A detailed description of the City's geology and soils is contained in Chapter 4.1 of the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report (GPEIR). According to the GPEiR, the City of Temecula is in Groundshaking Zone II which will experience moderate to intense groundshaking in the event of a major regional earthquake. Geologic mitigation measure 5 is identified in Section 4.1.3 of the GPEIR and it is deemed adequate to reduce potential groundshaking impacts to a level of nonsignificance. A review of the City's Subsidence/Liquefaction Hazards in the General Plan (Figure 7-2) and the geotechnical report prepared by EnGEN Corporation indicate that the project site is located within a zone of potential subsidence or liquefaction. R:\D PL2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 13 b C d II1-1 Site development with be conducted in accordance with the Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Study recommendations prepared by EnGEN Corporation on May 21, 2001. Implementation of this mitigation measure is considered sufficient to reduce potential impacts from liquefaction to a less than significant level. A geotechnical investigation by EnGEN Corporation indicates that there is a Iow potential for earthquake induced landslides or rockfalls on the project site because of the favorable geologic structure and topography of the area (its flat). A copy of this geotechnical study is available at the City Planning Department office for review if desired. Development of the project site will expose it to potential erosion and downstream sedimentation. The General Plan requires mitigation for projects to control erosion. Further, specific requirements have been established under the state-wide NPDES program that requires every project with ground disturbance greater than five acres to implement a Storm Water Poliution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction and over the long-term. Best Management Practices (BMPs) are identified in the SWPPP to control erosion on a site and any sedimentation generated by disturbing the site for development. Mitigation is required to control potential erosion and sedimentation. The following mitigation measure will be implemented. 111-2 The SWPPP prepared for this project will implement BMPs identified in the County's Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). The required performance standard is to minimize erosion on the site in accordance with DAMP BMPs and to contain all eroded sediment on the project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure II1-1 is considered sufficient to mitigate potentially significant impacts result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse as a result of the proposed project. No additional mitigation is required. According to the geotechnical report by EnGEN Corporation, preliminary tests indicate that the shrink/swell of potential of onsite soils is considered Iow. No change in the geotechnical recommendations is expected; however, the following mitigation measure will be required to ensure no significant impacts from soil expansion. lil-3 Upon completion of fine grading of the building pad, near surface samples will be obtained and tested to verify the preliminary expansion test results. If fine grading surface samples indicate that additional measures are required, the project developer's soils engineer will prepare the minimum of an addendum to document whether additional geotechnical mitigation measures cause an additional adverse impacts not already described in this initial Study. The project site will be served by a sewer collection system so there is no potential for the site to have adverse impacts related to use of subsurface wastewater disposal systems. RSD P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 4. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant No Issues and Su0por~ing Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste X discharge requirements? b. , Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table X level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which X would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially X increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite? e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm X water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g. Place housing within a 'iO0-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or X Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area structures X which would impede or redirect flood flows? I. Expose people or structures ~o a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including X flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: a The proposed project would permit development of 400multi-family residential dwelling units and 123,000 sq. ft. of office/retail space. This type of development does not typically generate any wastewater, other than domestic or municipal, which will require treatment or waste discharge requirements. No water quality standards are forecast to be violated by implementing the proposed project which will deliver its wastewater flows to the regional wastewater plant. Wastewater will be delivered to the regional treatment plant for treatment under waste discharge requirements established by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. During construction and occupancy R:~D Px2001~01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 15 b C d-f g,h implementation of BMPs as outlined in Supplement A of the Riverside County DAMP will be implemented which will control pollution to a level of nonsignificance. See mitigation measure 111-2. The project site is located on an old terrace which has no potential to serve as a recharge location for surface runoff. Therefore, the project has no potential to adversely interfere with groundwater recharge. The proposed project does not include any extraction of groundwater, so no adverse direct impact can result from implementing the proposed project. The GPEIR addresses water demand from development in the City of Temecula, including 772 acres of medium density residential uses and 520 acres professional office uses. The GPEIR concludes that cumulative water demand within the City can be met by the City's two purveyors without having a significant adverse impact on the environment, including depletion of the areas groundwater supplies. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan designation for the property and thus is considered consistent with the GPEIR. Therefore, the proposed project will not contribute to a significant cumulative, indirect adverse impact on the area groundwater aquifers. The project site presently drains via sheefflow in a southerly direction into Temecula Creek and ultimately the Santa Margarita River. After construction of the proposed project, drainage from the project site would be routed by underground pipes to an outlet of an existing double 6 x 12 ff. wide box culvert located south of Jedediah Smith Road. Erosion and siltation issues are addressed in previous discussions under geology and hydrology. The proposed project would increase runoff as a result of increasing the impervious surface on the project site. Currently, approximately 60 cubic feet per second of flows are created by storm events; after construction of the proposed project storm events would create flows of 80 cubic feet per second. The project will incorporate depressed landscaped areas or other measures at each sub area to prevent siltation downstream. Runoff will be reduced by onsite detention basins to a level comparable with the undeveloped value referenced above. No significant adverse impact is forecast to affect properties downstream of the site from developing the project as proposed. The project site is located on a terrace approximately 10 feet above the 100-year flood hazard area. The flood plain encroaches approximately 10 feet into the property for about 45 feet of length along the public trail at the southern extent of the property. Two more incursions of the 100-year flood plain occur at the southwestern corner of the property. In one location the 100-year flood plain enters about 16 feet into the public trail for about 24 feet. In the second the final approximately 70 feet of the western most portion of the trail are located in the flood plain as are portions of 3 parking spaces. No buildings or structures are located within the 100-year flood plain. No potential for exposure to significant flood hazards will occur from developing the project site as proposed. Buildings will be flood-proofed in accordance with Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) regulations by elevations finished floors above base flood elevations. According to Figure 7-4 the project site is located within a dam inundation flood hazard area downstream from Vail Lake. Rupture of the dam and release of flows could cause loss of life and property. The Office of Emergency Services is responsible for reviewing population control and evacuation procedures in areas designated as potential for loss of R:~D PL2001~01-0611 Teraecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study,doc 16 life in the event of a dam failure. Dams are over-designed to minimize potential failures. Typically within a city where a potential for dam inundation exists there are two measures implemented: 1. The City's Emergency Services agency develops and maintains dam failure evacuation plan 2. The City prohibits critical and essential uses within the designated dam inundation areas. The City has implemented a multi-hazard functional plan pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act. The proposed project does not contain critical or essential facilities. No mitigation is required. Due to the project area's distance from the ocean and elevation, there is no potential for a tsunami. The project area is not located near a large surface water body and there is no potential for inundation by seiche or mudflow. 5. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Un[ess Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the X applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality X violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state X ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial X number of people? Comments: a The proposed project meets the objective of providing adequate multifamily housing adjacent to a commercial and job generating development. The overall reduction in trip generation and vehicle miles traveled will be fully consistent with SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) and the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Development of the project site with mitigation measures as outlined in the SCAQMD "CEQA Air Quality Handbook" will not conflict with any applicable air R:~D P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 17 quality plan. A jobs/housing balance of 1.2:1 results in a net benefit for the project to the City's overall balance. Air quality within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) is improving, and development of the proposed project will be in full conformance with the RCPG and AQMP because it contains all of the elements identified in these plans to minimize trip generation and vehicle miles traveled. The proposed project's development will ensure that the emissions will be minimized to the maximum extent possible and will contribute to the regional programs being implemented to ensure that air quality emissions in the SoCAB will ultimately be brought within the carrying capacity of the Basin. The CEQA Air Quality Handbook contains a screening table for operations and construction impacts. Under Table 6-2 of the Handbook, the threshold for potential cumulative significant air emissions is 261 apartment units. The comparable threshold for development of office and commercial development is 96,221 square feet and 50,000 square feet respectively. Operational emissions include mobile sources, energy consumption, consumer products and miscellaneous other sources. According the California Air Resources Board URBEMIS7G model analysis conducted by Hans Giroux in February 2002 the project will exceed SCAQMD-recommended significance thresholds for ROG and Nox until beyond the year 2010. By 2015, attrition of older, more polluting cars from the vehicle fleet will allow all pollutants to remain below these thresholds. Table 1. URBEMIS7G Model Summary Report (Year 2003 Emissions; Pounds/Day; Summer Season) operational EmissiOns ROG NOx CO PM-10 Mobile Sources 78.7 75.3 559.3 48.8 Area Sources 20.4 4.1 4.9 <0.1 Year 2003 Total Emissions 99.1' 79.4* 564.2 48.8 SCAQM D Threshold 55 55 550 150 Year 2005 Total Emissions 85.9' 72.5' 511.4 48.8 Year 2010 Total Emissions 63.2' 56' 390.5 48.8 Year 2015 Total Emissions 46.4 44.2 286.0 48.7 '= exceeds SCAQMD- recommended significance threshold Soume: URBEMIS7G Computer Model, summary attached. According the California Air Resources Board URBEMIS7G model analysis conducted by Hans Giroux in 2002, construction related daily equipment exhaust emissions are predicted to fall well below significance thresholds as depicted in Table 2. The emissions calculations assume 10 pieces of 100 horsepower (HP) heavy grading equipment operating for 8 hours a day for a total of 8,000 HP/day R:XD PX2001~01-0611 Temccula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 18 Table 2. Daily Equipment Exhaust Emissions Pollutant EMFAC* EmissiOns SCAQMD Threshold CO 1.9 15 550 ROG 0.6 5 75 NOx 8.6 69 100 SOx 0.6 5 150 PM-10 0.3 2 150 ,missions in pounds/1000 HP, SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, Table A9-3-A Daily construction exhaust emissions do not include diesel equipment exhaust from grading equipment or fugitive dust (PM-10) emissions. According the California Air Resources Board URBEMIS7G model analysis conducted by Hans Giroux in 2002, construction related PM-10 impacts can be kept to a less than significant level with implementation of the following mitigation measures. v-1 The City will require contractors to apply water to the disturbed portions of the project site at least four times per day. On days where wind speeds are sufficient to transport fugitive dust beyond the working area boundary, the City will require contractors to increase watering to the point that fugitive dust no longer leaves the property (typically a moisture content of 12%), and/or the contractor will terminate grading and loading operations. V-2 The project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402 which would assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. Rule 402 requires dust suppression techniques to be implemented to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance offsite. These dust suppression techniques are summarized below. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized in a manner acceptable to the City. b. All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized. c. All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. d. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times. V-3 V-4 All material stockpiles subject to wind erosion during construction activities, that will not be utilized within three days, will be covered with plastic, an alternative cover deemed equivalent to plastic, or sprayed with a nontoxic chemical stabilizer. All vehicles on the construction site will travel at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. This will be enforced by including this requirement in the construction contract between the developer and the contracted construction company with penalty clauses for violation of this speed limit. R:kD Pk2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc V-5 The contractor will require all vehicles leaving the project site to use a wheel washer to remove dirt that can be tracked onto adiacent roadways. V-6 Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the work day to remove soil tracked onto the paved surface. V-7 The contractor will establish a car-pool program for construction employees which will include incentives with the goal of achieving a 1.5 persons per vehicle ridership for this construction project. V-8 All engines will be properly operated and maintained. These measures will be enforced through the monthly submission of certified mechanic's records. V-9 All diesel-powered vehicles and equipment will be operated with the fuel injection timing retarded 2 degrees from the manufacturer's recommendation and use high pressure injectors. V-10 All diesel-powered vehicles will be turned off when not in use for more than 30 minutes and gasoline - powered equipment will be turned off when not in use for more than five minutes. V-ll The construction contractor will utilize electric or natural gas powered equipment in lieu of gasoline or diesel powered engines, where feasible and where economically competitive. d None of the activities at the project site (multifamily residences or the commercial/office uses) have a potential to generate significant volumes of pollutants or create substantial pollutant concentrations that could harm sensitive receptors. e None of the activities at the project site have a potential to generate significant odors or create substantial odor concentrations that could harm sensitive receptors. 6. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact impact a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in X i either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county X congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in X location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous X intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? R:\D P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 20 e. Result in inadequate emergency access? X f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus X turnouts, bicycle racks? Sources: City of Temecula General Plan and Environmental Impact Report, Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis) for the proposed project in November of 2001, supplemental traffic analysis dated January 4, 2002 and March 12, 2002 prepared by Urban Crossroads for Temecula Creek Villlage, City of Temecula Public Works Department Memorandum dated February 13, 2002, and Planning Applications No. PA99-0261 (Planned Development Overlay Area No. 4 (PDO-4) and PA99-0371 (General Plan Amendment to the Temecula Circulation Bement Initial Study to delete a portion of Via Rio Temecula form the Circulation Element). Comments: a,b A Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis) for the proposed project in November of 2001 indicates that the intersection of the main project entrance at SH 79 and Jedediah Smith Road will warrant a traffic signal for the opening year. Based on the available data, the proposed project can be implemented without causing any significant adverse impacts to the circulation system. The project is conditioned to obtain encroachment permits and traffic signal warrant analysis from the California Department of Transportation prior to issuance of grading permits and prior to the construction and installation of two traffic signals along the project site's State Highway 79 South frontage (e.g. at the intersection of State Highway 79 South and the intersection of the project site's main village commercial driveway and State Highway 79 South. The proposed project is also conditioned to comply with the traffic mitigation conditions specified in the City of Temecula Public Works Department memorandum dated February 13, 2002 (copy attached) and conditioned to comply with. The project site is located approximately 5 miles from the nearest airport, French Valley, and therefore has no potential to adversely impact any air traffic patterns. d e Based on the available data, the proposed project circulation system improvements will not cause any roadway hazards. Emergency access to the project site will be via controlled non-public gated fire access located to the eastern most drive from SH 79 and via grass-crete along the public trail in addition to vehicular access provided by a private road entry at the western extent of the property, two entrances from SH 79 in the central portion of the property and the main entrance at SH 79 and Jedediah Smith Road. No mitigation is required. The applicant has provided adequate parking spaces to meet the City's Development Code requirements in both the commercial/office (Subareas A and C) and multifamily development (Subarea B and D) areas. No mitigation is required. R:\D Px2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study,dcc 21 The project provides a bus bay and seating with shelter designed to be used as a transit stop. Parking spaces will be provided for 12 motorcycles and 32 bicycles at the non- residential facilities. No conflict or adverse impact to adopted alternative transportation policies, plans or programs is forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project. No mitigation is required. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and SuppoMing Information Sources Impact Incorporated impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status X species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, X regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, X vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? R:~D P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 22 d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife X corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree X preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community X Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments: a The habitat assessment conducted by L & L Environmental, Inc. indicates that the project site is dominated by ruderal/disturbed lands with a mixture of native and non-native trees. No suitable habitat for any state or federally listed Threatened or Endangered species was found on the project site. No threatened or endangered species, including no Quino checkerspot butterflies (QCB), no Stephen's kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephenst} and no California gnatcatchers (CAGN) were identified on the property. The project site is located within the Riverside County HCP for the Stephen's kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephenst} and the project will be required to contribute $500 per acre to the HCP fund. At the time of completion of this initial study, the Riverside County Transportation and Land Management Agency (TLMA) had completed a Preliminary Draft Western Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). This preliminary draft plan shows a proposed wildlife corridor adjacent to the subject project site along Temecula Creek. The width of this proposed wildlife corridor had not been determined at the time of the preparation of this initial study. The paniculate tarplant (Hemizonia paniculata) was observed on the property and is listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as a List 4 species, indicating that it is on a watch list for plants of limited distribution, impacts to CNPS List 4 species is not considered significant under CEQA. Native trees present on the site include coast live oak, western sycamore, Fremont Cottonwood (Populus fremontiO and red willow (Salix laevigata). Most of these plants will be removed from the site, but due to their distribution R:\D PX200I\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 23 b, C d and small number on the site, no significant biological resource impacts are forecast to occur. According to the habitat assessment, no riparian or wetland resources occur on the project site. Therefore, development of the proposed project cannot adversely impact such resources. No mitigation is required. The project site is surrounded by urban/suburban development on three sides and is considered an infill parcel. The site has limited habitat value as it is currently ruderal land, old building pads and patchy trees along a well used highway. The project will not directly impact Temecula Creek, and indirect effects from development are being controlled to minimize impacts to riparian habitat values at the site. As such this site's development has very Iow potential to adversely impact wildlife movement. There are native and non-native tree species on the site that may require acquisition of a permit for removal. The developer is required to obtain such a permit and no mitigation is required to ensure that the permit will be obtained prior to removal of any trees on the property. Development of the proposed project does not conflict with the provisions of any habitat conservation plan and, in fact, with the mitigation outlined above should support implementation of such plans. No additional mitigation will be required for the proposed project. 8. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impacl a. Result in the toss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the X residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local X general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Comments: a There are no mineral resource designations nor any known mineral resources on this project site Because the site is located on a ridge, outside of alluvial deposits, no potential for sand and gravel resources exists on the project site. No mitigation is required. b Development of the site has no potential to lose access to known and available mineral resources because none occur on the project site, nor is access required across the site to such resources. No mitigation is required. R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek ViIIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 24 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Potentialry Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation SignificantNO Issues and Supporling Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, X or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Crate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset X and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely X hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, X would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, X would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people X residing] or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically inter[ere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency X evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including X where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: a-c The proposed project will consist of residential, office and retail uses that do not involve significant potential for routine transport or use of hazardous materials or routine generation of hazardous wastes beyond those normally encountered in urban/suburban "village center" type setting, typically termed "household hazardous wastes". The potential for significant impacts to the environment from upset or accidental release of chemicals is very Iow because no hazardous wastes other than "household hazardous wastes" are expected to be present on the site. No mitigation is required. d A review of the Leaking Underground Storage Facilities Information System available at https://geotracker2.arsenaultlegg.com/ found no hazardous sites located on or immediately adjacent to the proposed project site. Based upon the information available R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Tem¢cula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 25 to us, it appears that there are no hazardous sites on or near the site and that there will be no significant impact. e, f The project site is five miles from the nearest airport or private air strip and has no potential to adversely impact airport operations. g Development of the project site has no potential to modify or adversely affect an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. Minimal disturbance to SH 79 will occur from implementing the proposed project and adequate emergency access is being provided to the site from this highway. h The project site does contain a minimal wildland fire hazard onsite based on the presence of the ruderal habitat. The proposed project will eliminate the wildland fire hazard on the property if it is approved. The project has incorporated design features such as emergency access and fire truck turn arounds as required for fire safety. No adverse wildland fire hazard impact is forecast to occur and no mitigation is required. 10. NOISE. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact incorporated Impact Impact a. Exposure of people to severe noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other X agencies? b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X without the project? R:\D Px2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study,doc 26 d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above X levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within X two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working X in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a According to the Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Noise Study prepared by Urban Crossroads (November 15, 2001), the primary source of noise on the project site is SH 79. In order to comply with the City's 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard at the proposed multi-family residences, the following mitigation measures are required. X-1 A minimum 6.5 foot high above pad elevation wall barrier will be constructed ah the first floor patio areas for apartments facing SH 79. Where applicable, the barriers should wrap around the ends of the patio areas to prevent flanking of noise into the site. Barrier construction materials will comply with the standards presented in the Noise Study prepared by Urban Crossroads for the project. X-2 During construction, vehicle staging areas and stockpiling will be located as far as is practicable from existing residential dwellings. X-3 The applicant will require that construction activities be limited to no more than the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:00 a.m. 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays per City Noise Control Ordinance Section 8.32.020. X-4 The applicant will respond to any noise complaints received for this project by measuring noise levels at the affected receptor. If the noise level exceeds an Ldn of 65 dBA exterior or an Ldn of 45 dBA interior at the receptor, the applicant will implement adequate measures to reduce noise levels to the greatest extent feasible. X-5 The applicant will require that all construction equipment be operated with mandated noise control equipment (mufflers or silencers). Enforcement will be accomplished by random field inspections by applicant personnel during construction activities. R:~D P~2001\01-06I 1 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA laitial Study.doc 27 b The above mitigation measures will insure that the development of the proposed project will not expose current or future residents to excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels. C Future background noise levels will be dominated at the project site by noise generated from traffic on SH 79, directly north of the project site. The proposed project permits or conditionally permits the development of use such as restaurants, small health club, small dance/aerobics/martial arts studio (less than 5000 sq. ft.), laundromat, and specialty retail uses in Sub Areas A and C. These businesses may operate during evening hours causing nuisance noise to residents in the development and in the surrounding area. Therefore, the following mitigation measure will be implemented. X-6 In addition to ensuring compliance with the City of Temecula General Plan, noise ordinances, and other applicable regulations, the City will require noise standards specific to each business in the proposed development, that operates in the evening (7 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and night-time hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), as a component of a Conditional Use Permit. These noise standards will ensure that noise levels at the nearest residences do not exceed 50 dBA at the exterior wall facing the commercial area, or is below the background noise level. The noise study prepared for the project indicates that the proposed project will not have any significant impact to off-site noise levels along the study area roadways or other sensitive land uses in the area. Construction noise levels will be above background noise levels during daylight hours, but the City General Plan requires construction noise mitigation by restricting construction activities to daylight hours as reiterated in mitigation measure X-3. With implementation of this measure the short-term noise impacts are not forecast to be significant to the surrounding land uses. e-f The project site is located five miles from the nearest airport or a private airstrip and has no potential to be exposed to significant airport operation noise impacts. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered Government services in any of the following areas: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and $ uppor~ing Information Sources Impact focorpomted Impact Impact a. Would the project result in substantial adverse X physical impacts associates with the provisions of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 28 significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services? b. Fire protection? X c. Police protection? X d. Schools? X e. Parks? X f. Other public facilities? X Comments: a-d The proposed project is an infill development and all services are already available to the project site. The development of 400 apartment units and 123,000 sq. ft. of office/retail space will place a small increment of cumulative demand on the service systems (fire, police, schools, and parks). Based on a review of the GPEIR all of the service system impacts from developing the proposed project can be mitigated to below a significant level by implementing mitigation measures identified in that document. These measures include: Fire Service, Measures 1 and 2; Police Service, Measures 1-3, and Education Measures 1-3 and 5, as appropriate. The number of students generated at this site will be offset by payment of requisite fees by residential and commemial square footage mandated by State law. e For park and recreation services, the City requires developers of residential projects greater than fifty dwelling units to dedicate land based upon five acres of usable parkland R:\D P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 29 per one thousand residents or pay in lieu fees. The ultimate project buildout will house an estimated 1,132.5 people based upon a generation of 2.83 persons per unit. The proposed project will create a 3,380-foot long by 20-foot wide multi-use public trail. This is the equivalent of 1,55-acres of created parkland. However, the City of Temecula ordinance does not allow for the creation of trails to satisfy Quimby requirements, The project will also develop private play areas and private recreational facilities. The City has the discretion to allow qualified recreational facilities to fulfill up to half of the Quimby acreage requirements. The proposed project will be required to create or pay in lieu fees for a total of 5.66-acres of parkland. These fees are mandatory and no additional mitigation is required. The proposed project will be required to pay development impact fees. mandatory requirement of the City to mitigate impact to public facilities. mitigation is required. This is a No further 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of X existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or X are new or expanded entitlements needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the X project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existin~l commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste X disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and X re~lulations related to solid waste? Comments: The proposed project will deliver wastewater to the regional treatment wastewater reclamation plant in Temecula. The facility is operated by the Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD) and it has capacity to meet the demand from the proposed project within its authorized treatment capacity. This facility operates within its waste discharge R:XD P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 30 b d e g requirements. Therefore, the proposed project is not forecast to cause a violation of wastewater treatment requirements, either directly or indirectly. According to the GPEIR, adequate capacity exists within the EMWD water supply and wastewater treatment systems to provide water and wastewater capacity for the proposed project. This conclusion is also supported by urban water master plan adopted by the EMWD. The site currently drains via sheetflow into Temecula Creek. The proposed project would increase runoff as a result of increasing the impervious surface on the project site. Currently approximately 60 cubic feet per second of flows are created by storm events; after construction of the proposed project storm events would create flows of 80 cubic feet per second. The project will incorporate depressed landscaped areas or other means located at each sub area to prevent siltation downstream. The drainage analysis for the project site outlines the detailed information regarding existing and future storm water runoff. Adequate water supplies have been identified by the EMWD to meet the City of Temecula's current and immediate future demands, including the proposed project. See also 12.b above. Adequate wastewater treatment capacity has been identified by the EMWD to meet the City of Temecula's current and immediate future demands, including the proposed project. See also 12.b above. According to the General Plan and the County Solid Waste Management Plan adequate landfill disposal capacity exists within the regional landfills to meet current and future demands. Solid waste mitigation measures identified in the GPEIR (Measures 2 and 3) must be implemented by all projects in the City to meet the City's source reduction requirements. By participating in the City's source reduction and recycling element, the proposed project will comply with all statutes and regulations for management of solid waste. The proposed commercial and residential project does not pose any significant or unique management requirements. Regarding energy supplies to the project and region, the City of Temecula's General Plan identified adequate capacity for energy systems. Since this document was adopted electric and natural gas utilities have been deregulated and short-term shortages in electricity and natural gas will be experienced until new electrical generation and natural gas production have been installed and are in operation. This impact is not considered a significant adverse impact at the level of individual urban developments, because adequate capacity is available but at a higher costs than have occurred in the past, i.e., the commercial systems are functioning but at a much higher cost that forecast. The energy availability issue will cause short-term inconvenience during the higher electricity and natural gas consumption periods, specifically on the hottest summer days when air conditioning loads are the greatest or during the winter on cold days. The City has adopted building codes that require implementation of energy conservation measures for new development. Implementation of these design and construction standards are considered adequate compliance with energy conservation goals and R:~D 1~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 31 policies. The additional energy demand resulting from the project would normally be considered a less than significant impact. However, as noted above recent shortages in generation capacity may require the new residents to pay higher costs for electricity or to accept short-term rolling black outs in response to excessive short-term demand. These limitations will be resolved as new generating capacity is brought on line over the next few years. This short-term electricity constraint is not considered to be a significant adverse impact, particularly since the new structures will be constructed with an awareness of these constraints. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Potectial[y Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and X historic building within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views X in the area? Comments: a The proposed project is in an undeveloped area along the SH 79 urban corridor. No scenic vistas have been identified or will be adversely impacted at the project location from developing the proposed project based on the surrounding land uses, which are consistent with that proposed by this project. b No major rock outcroppings or historic buildings exist on the project site. The project site is not located on a scenic highway, but it will be required to meet design requirements along SH 79 to be consistent with existing development. Removal of trees larger than 6-inch diameter at base height will be required to be mitigated according to the City's Tree Protection Policy. This is a planning and design issue for which the City has established design guidelines and no adverse environmental impact or mitigation is required to ensure that the project conforms with local design guidelines. The proposed project will be located adjacent to existing single family units to the east of the project site. Design requirements will be imposed on the proposed project by application of standards in the Planned Development Overlay District in addition to the Community Design Element standards and design plan. Based on the City's requirement to meet these design guidelines, the proposed project has no potential to substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site and surroundings which is comprised of a combined urban/suburban visual setting. d The proposed project must meet the County's Ordinance 675 requirements for no conflict with Palomar Observatory. Due to proximity to residential uses, the project has a potential to create significant Fight and glare impacts onsite or impacting the surrounding area and uses. Therefore, the following mitigation measure will be implemented. R:\D F~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 32 XlII-1 All commercial and parking lighting within the project area will be directed so that no light or glare falls off the property boundary (except to the north on SH 79) to the east, south or west of the commercial portion of the project site. Implementation of this measure will ensure that no light or glare sensitive areas are exposed to significant light and glare impacts. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting Information Sources Impact incorporated Impact Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in X Section 1506.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant X to Section 1506.57 c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological X resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred X outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: a A Phase I cultural resources survey of the project site was conducted by L & L Environmental Inc. (October 7, 2001 ). As of March 20, 2002, a Phase II cultural resources survey was being conducted by L & L Environmental to determine the existence and significance of any subsurface (buried) cultural resources on the project site; this Phase II report will be completed and submitted to the City of Temecula Planning Department for review and acceptance prior to the issuance of any grading permits for the project site. Historic sites present on the site are considered mitigated for by the excavation and recording that has been conducted as part of this and previous surveys. If the Phase II report currently being prepared finds any subsurface cultural resources, mitigation and monitoring recommendations will be provided in the report. XlV-1 During initial grading and ground disturbance activities, a qualified cultural resources monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect ground disturbance activities to evaluate the significance of any cultural resources exposed. XIV-2 If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities the City will be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the resources. If discovered resources merit long-term consideration, adequate funding will be provided to collect, curate and report these resources in accordance with standard archaeological management requirements. XlV-3 The qualified cultural resources monitor will issue a second DPR523 site recordation form for Site CA-RIV-3410 after the completion of site monitoring. The report will include any additional site features detected during grading. The cultural resources survey of the project site conducted by L & L Environmental Inc. indicates that the potential for buried archaeological resources on the project site is high. With implementation of the mitigation measures in Section XIVa, the potential for significant cultural resoume impact is reduced to a level of nonsignificance. R:\D 1~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 33 The cultural resources survey of the project site conducted by L & L Environmental Inc. indicates that the potential for buried paleontological resources on the project site is high. Due to the potential for such resources to occur on the property, the following mitigation measure will be implemented: xIv-4 During excavation and hill-side cutting activities, a qualified paleontological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the significance of any paleontological resources exposed during the grading activity within the alignment. If paleontological resources are encountered, adequate funding will be provided to collect, curate and report on these resources to the ensure the values inherent in the resources are adequately characterized and preserved. d In the unlikely event that human remains are encountered on the project site, the mitigation measures presented in this section in addition to the following measure will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. XIV-5 If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the discovery will be terminated immediately and the County Coroner's office will be contacted to manage such remains. No additional mitigation is required. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Mitigation Significant NO Issues and Supporting tnformation Sources Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical X deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational X facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a, b The proposed project includes recreation areas as part of the project including a swimming pool, club house and play areas. The proposed project will also create a 3,380-foot long by an 8ofoot wide multi-use public trail. As discussed in Section 11 Public Services, the City requires developers of residential projects greater than fifty dwelling units to dedicate land based upon five acres of usable parkland per one thousand residents or pay in lieu fees. The proposed project will be required to create or pay in lieu fees for a total of 5.66- acres of parkland. The project is conditioned to comply with north bank of Temecula Creek trail improvement standards as specified by the City of Temecula Community Services Department. Based on the inclusion of these recreational features as part of the proposed project, existing neighborhood park utilization is not forecast to increase significantly. The residents of the development are likely to increase demand for regional facilities, such as baseball diamonds, basketball courts, etc. However, these are managed facilities where R:XD PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 34 the individual users are typically integrated into existing leagues and the cumulative demand for such facilities is not forecast to increase substantially from implementing the proposed project. No significant adverse impact to recreational resources is forecast to occur from implementing the proposed project. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Potentially Potemially Significant Less Than Significant Un~ess Mitigation Significant No Issues and Supporling Information Sources Impact Incorporated ~mpact Impact a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal X community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable X when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects? c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human X beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a-c The Temecula Creek Village Development consists of a 400 unit apartment complex and 123,000 sq. ft. office/retail space that is proposed to be constructed on an infill parcel of land located on the south side of State Highway 79 immediately east of Jedediah Smith Road. The proposed project is consistent with the details of the City of Temecula General Plan and zoning designations as delineated on current land use and zoning maps. It is also consistent with the concept of Village Center and Planned Development Overlay presented in the General Plan as a method of integrating multiple uses over a large site containing more than one land use or zoning designation. For eight of the environmental issues discussed in this Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form (Land Use and Planning, Population and Housing, Water, Energy and Mineral Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Biological Resource, Utilities and Service Systems, and Recreation) no potential for significant adverse impact has been identified and no project specific mitigation, other than standard conditions utilized by the City, will be required. For the remaining seven issues, project specific mitigation will be required to ensure that implementation of the proposed project does not cause significant adverse physical changes in the environment. Specifically, mitigation is identified to control erosion and sedimentation on the site and to control for possible expansive soils in the Geology and Soils Section. Mitigation to prevent fugitive dust from impacting adjacent uses during R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 35 construction and to address operational emissions is addressed under the Air Quality Section. The project's traffic is identified as having a potential to adversely impact the local circulation system and a combination of recently completed improvements and project specific improvements are required to ensure that the circulation system operates at acceptable levels of service in the future. The site is identified as having a potential for significant paleontological, archaeological and historical resources. Mitigation is identified to reduce the potential impacts to such resources to a nonsignificant level of impact. Mitigation is also provided to reduce the nuisance noise, from evening/night-time uses on the project site, to a less than significant level. Under the Public Services section, mitigation is required as indicated in the General Plan EIR to reduce potential impacts to reduce potential impacts to fire, police and schools. Finally, mitigation is identified to control potential commercial lighting impacts on adjacent residential property. Based on the evaluation contained in this Initial Study, the City proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration as the appropriate environmental determination to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a. Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above check list were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Planning Applications No. PA99-0261 and PA99-0371 Amendments to the City Zoning Map from Professional Office to Planned Development Overlay No. 4 (PO-4) and General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element passed, approved and adopted on September 26, 2001. Available at the City of Temecula. City of Temecula General Plan EIR, July 1993; available at the City of Temecula. R:~D P~2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 36 Mitigation Monitoring Program: Site development with be conducted in accordance with the Geotechnical/Geological Engineering Study recommendations prepared by EnGEN Corporation on May 21, 2001. The SWPPP prepared for this project will implement BMPs identified in the County's Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). The required performance standard is to minimize erosion on the site in accordance with DAMP BMPs and to contain all eroded sediment on the project site. Upon completion of fine grading of the building pad, near surface samples will be obtained and tested to verify the preliminary expansion test results. V-1 The City will require contractors to apply water to the disturbed portions of the project site at least four times per day. On days where wind speeds are sufficient to transport fugitive dust beyond the working area boundary, the City will require contractors to increase watering to the point that fugitive dust no longer leaves the property (typically a moisture content of 12%), and/or the contractor will terminate grading and loading operations. V-2 The project will comply with regional rules such as SCAQMD Rules 403 and 402 which would assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. Rule 402 requires dust suppression techniques to be implemented to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance offsite. These dust suppression techniques are summarized below. Portions of the construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized in a manner acceptable to the City. b. All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized. c. All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times. At no time will 32.6 acres or more of the project site be under construction simultaneously. V-3 All material stockpiles subject to wind erosion during construction activities, that will not be utilized within three days, will be covered with plastic, an alternative cover deemed equivalent to plastic, or sprayed with a nontoxic chemical stabilizer. V-4 All vehicles on the construction site will travel at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. This will be enforced by including this requirement in the construction contract between the developer and the contracted construction company with penalty clauses for violation of this speed limit. R:~D P~001~01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 37 V-5 V-6 V-7 V-8 V-9 V-10 V-11 X-1 X-2 X-3 X-4 X-5 X-6 The contractor will require all vehicles leaving the project site to use a wheel washer to remove dirt that can be tracked onto adjacent roadways. Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the work day to remove soil tracked onto the paved surface. The contractor will establish a car-pool program for construction employees which will include incentives with the goal of achieving a 1.5 persons per vehicle ridership for this construction project. All engines will be properly operated and maintained. These measures will be enforced through the monthly submission of certified mechanic's records. All diesel-powered vehicles and equipment will be operated with the fuel injection timing retarded 2 degrees from the manufacturer's recommendation and use high pressure injectors. All diesel-powered vehicles will be turned off when not in use for more than 30 minutes and gasoline - powered equipment will be turned off when not in use for more than five minutes. The construction contractor will utilize electric or natural gas powered equipment in lieu of gasoline or diesel powered engines, where feasible and where economically competitive. A minimum 6.5 foot high above pad elevation wall barrier will be constructed ah the first floor patio areas for apartments facing SH 79. Where applicable, the barriers should wrap around the ends of the patio areas to prevent flanking of noise into the site. Barrier construction materials will comply with the standards presented in the Noise Study prepared by Urban Crossroads for the project. During construction, vehicle staging areas and stockpiling will be located as far as is practicable from existing residential dwellings. The applicant will require that construction activities be limited to no more than the hours of 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 7:00 a.m. 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays per City Noise Control Ordinance Section 8.32.020. The applicant will respond to any noise complaints received for this project by measuring noise levels at the affected receptor. If the noise level exceeds an Ldn of 65 dBA exterior or an Ldn of 45 dBA interior at the receptor, the applicant will implement adequate measures to reduce noise levels to the greatest extent feasible. The applicant will require that all construction equipment be operated with mandated noise control equipment (mufflers or silencers). Enforcement will be accomplished by random field inspections by applicant personnel during construction activities. In addition to ensuring compliance with the City of Temecula General Plan, noise ordinances, and other applicable regulations, the City will require noise standards specific to each business in the proposed development, that operates in the evening (7 R:~D PX2001\01-0611 TcmecuIa Creek Village\CEQA Initial Study.doc 38 XIV-1 XIV-2 XIV-3 XIV-4 XIV-5 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and night-time hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), as a component of a Conditional Use Permit. These noise standards will ensure that noise levels at the nearest residences do not exceed 50 dBA at the exterior wall facing the commercial area, or is below the background noise level. All commercial and parking lighting within the project area will be directed so that no light or glare falls off the property boundary (except to the north on SH 79) to the east, south or west of the commercial portion of the project site. During initial grading and ground disturbance activities, a qualified cultural resources monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect ground disturbance activities to evaluate the significance of any cultural resources exposed. If any cultural resources are exposed during initial grading and ground disturbance activities the City will be contacted, and a qualified archaeologist will evaluate the resources. If discovered resources merit long-term consideration, adequate funding will be provided to collect, curate and report these resources in accordance with standard archaeological management requirements. The qualified cultural resources monitor will issue a second DPR523 site recordation form for Site CA-RIV~3410 after the completion of site monitoring. The report will include any additional site features detected during grading. During excavation and hill-side cutting activities, a qualified paleontological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities to evaluate the significance of any paleontological resources exposed during the grading activity within the alignment. If paleontological resources are encountered, adequate funding will be provided to collect, curate and report on these resources to the ensure the values inherent in the resources are adequately characterized and preserved. If any human remains are encountered during initial grading activities, all ground disturbing activities in the vicinity of the discovery will be terminated immediately and the County Coroner's office will be contacted to manage such remains. R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek Village\CEQA initial Study.doc 39 SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook 4. Temecula Creek Village Planned Development Overlay 5. Planning Applications No. PA99-0261 and PA99-0371 Planned Development Overlay Area No. 4 (PDO-4) and General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element Initial Study. 6. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) 1997 7. Southern California Association of Governments "Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide", 1996 8. Phase I Archaeological Resource Survey and a Paleontological Records Review of the Temecula Marketplace Project-Temecula, CA. L & L Environmental, Inc. October 7, 2001 9. Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Noise Study. Urban Crossroads, 2001 10. Geotechnical/ Geological Engineering Study Proposed Temecula Creek Village City of Temecula, EnGEN Corporation, 2001. 11. Fault Investigation, 39-acre site located on Highway 79 east of Jedediah Smith Road, City of Temecula. Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 2001. 12. Riverside County Flood Control District "Supplement A to the Riverside County Drainage Area Management Plans, and Attachment to Supplement A", 1996 13. A Habitat Assessment and Tree Survey for APN #961-010-006. L & L Environmental, Inc., 2001. 14. Preliminary Drainage Study: Temecula Creek Village. Trans-Pacific Consultants, 2001. 15. Temecula Creek Apartment/ Retail Development Trip Generation Comparison/Analysis and subsequent traffic analysis addendums dated January 4, 2002 and March 12, 2002. Urban Crossroads, 2001. 16. Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail Development Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis. Urban Crossroads, November 16, 2001. 17. City of Temecula Public Works Department Memorandum dated February 13, 2002. 18. City of Temecula Community Services Department Memorandum dated December 31, 2001. 19. City of Temecula Community Services Department Memorandum dated February 14, 2002 on desired Trail Improvement Standards along north bank of Temecula Creek. 20. City of Temecula Fire Prevention Bureau Memorandum dated February 3, 2002. 21. City of Temecula Police Department Prevention & Plans Unit Memorandum dated December 30, 2001 on "Officer and Public Safety" Measures regarding Temecula Creek Village. 22. Eastern Municipal Water District SAN53-Sewer Will Serve Letter dated March 6, 2002. 23. County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health Letter to Francisco J. Urbina, City of Temecula Associate Planner dated December 19, 2002. 24. Rancho California Water District Letter on Water Availability dated December 20, 2001. 25. Southern California Gas Company Letter dated January 3, 2002 stating they have no comments at this time. 26. Temecula Creek Apartment/ Retail Development Noise Study prepared by Urban Crossroads (November 15, 2001 ), R:~D PX2001\01-0611 Temecula Creek VilIage\CEQA Initial Study.doc 40 o ~-o ~ 5.0 c~ ~ o,O ~ ~ o,O o~ ~o~ ~_~oc ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-- c~ · ~ -m~ o o_ ~ ~ o ~ -- ~ ~ ~E o~'- ~ ~ o~ ~ ~ x° ~ ~ ~=_o o o_ c~ ~ o o.-,..~ o E m ~ ~ o- ~= E ° ° m- ~ ° ~ mE3= m ~ ~E~ E_-- ~'~ ~ ~ Z'°= ~ °'E °'~ 0 .=_ > ~ c6 o~~ .- .~ · ~oE omo ~ o'- ~ o ~ c~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ Eo~ ~E~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ > > 0 E ~.~ o~oEE~ 01-- (..) I- -- c :=n ~o o E e-- c~ ~ ~ ~ E o ~ ~ ~E o ~ o m >~z~ E~ ~E~ ~E~ '~o ~.~ o ~ zo~ ~ ~ o~o .- ~o ~ PROJECT TRAFFIC ANALYIS & AGENCY COMMENTS 1 8 ZOOZ ~ By URBAN CROSSROADS Tm~m"~'~a Creek '/~~ Devel~ Inilial SfuW, SR.79/Maln ;~Oje~ i~.tv~ I~ 'rmmc Cmwol r'l UIEi~ ri ~lIIII I'l ~ F. Iply -RECEIVED ~I~R I 2 ZOOZ' ~ CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT March 12, 2002 Mr, Ron Finch MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC. 9968 H~bert St., Suite 102 ..~. San Diego, CA 92131 MAR 1 3 ZOOZ( ,By Project Driveway Inteme~lon Tmfflc Dear Mr., Finch: The firm of Urban Crossroads: Inc. is pleased to submit this memorandum prepared for the Ternec~la Creek *-*-dine-'''~-!~ - . ~"affic ~tudy September 24, 2001. ~ .unem, uevmopment dated ~ off ~8 phnning I~ w~ ~fld~ ~r O~fling Y~r ~fldfUofls ~ ~e pm~ pm~ ~c ' . fight i~ght D~ny and ~R-~ ~th inked of ~m.~on m op~e ~. H~ .~ ........... I~ude ~nal U~ If.'you have any question? regarding the analysis presented in this report, ii!::.- p~ease oo not hesitate to gwe me a call at (949) 660.1994. Sincerely, Sate, P.E. · .. Senior Associate SS:~ Attachments ' ~ Pe~ 2055.0 ~h Bo~ R~ s~n MghCG ~ ~ ~de ........ [ ............... II ............... II .......... ~. - f, ..... · ..m ~el · ' '"l I ............... bee v~: 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 ~0~ .0 0 2358 ~t~ B~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~: 43 0 6' . ~m~Vo~: 0 o ~ ~ r~3 ~, 43 o ss ~ ~ o o o o ~ o Ole~: ~,00 ~,OO ~ .... ~ . ~ M~: 2 O0 I O0 ~.OO ~,Ofl ~ ~ ~: 43 0 6S . _ · .00 1.00 ~.00 u u 0 0 2074 34 ~ ~X: 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~.: 43_ 0 66 0 0 0 0 2074 ~Cz~ MP ~e: 34 ~tF ~, ...... ~ ............. 'Il ............... II ............... ~D.: - --' ~ ~ ............ ~ ............... I ........ ~.~,,~ ~~Aco~., ' ' ,i ............... Il ............... ~p.: ~~ "tZB££Lx 7.S.1015 (c) 3Qo0 DovJ~ ~N~8o~. ~ican~d Co 17P.&M~ C]K)SSROM~S, ZRVZNi MAR 1 3 ~002 ~Jl NI?ZGa - p/~ 2e~k IO'2'~,l~) MO~ .~r Z~, 2002 1~:37:40 ....................................... ~ge ~._~.;~ :~'~?*?'?'"'"*",-.-...--............._.. ............ ,_l o o o ~,. o ~o oo o.o ~ ~ o 1 o~:~ , ~l - 11 ..................... Vol: 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 276e 0 ~ 1832 I]~wth JtdJ: :]..06 LO6 · dded vol: 20 0 Ulez: A4:I: 1. O0 2. O0 1~? Volume~ 21 0 Jleduct Vol: 0 0 F'taa,T VoZ.: 21 0 1.06 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.06 LO6 LO6 1.06 1.06 1.06 0 0 0 0 0 2934 ' 0 O 3.942 O 30 0 0 0 0 1031 30 iS 843 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 3965 20 4S 2?85 0 1.O0 LO0 1.00 LO0 1.00 1.00 LQO 1.00 1.00 LO0 0.9S 0.9S 0.9S 0.9S 0.99 0.95 OJS 0.99 O,~S 0.95 32 0 0 0 0 42?4 23 49 2931 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Q 32 0 0 0 0 4374 MAR ! 3 ZOOZ Irvine, CA 92606 f: g~.660.1911 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING TRAVEL DEMAND .MODELING DATABASE DEVELOPMENT i TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ACOUSTICAL STUDIES PARKING STUDIES TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES John Kain, AICP Carleton Waters, RE. /Lawson, .~CP Sco~ Sato, P.E. January 4,2002 8 ZOOZ ~ By Mr. Ron Finch MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC. 9968 Hilbert St., Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92131 RECEIVE~ "* "* ~ ~01]~ SUBJECT: Temecula Creek Development Trip Comparison/Analysis Apartment/Retail Generation Dear Mr. Finch, INTRODUCTION The firm of Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this letter report documenting the previous and proposed trip generation estimates for the Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail development. The site is located south of Highway 79 between Jedediah Smith Road and Avenida De Missiones in the City of Temecula. The previous land use alternative (included in the February 29, 2000 traffic study) consisted of 400 apartment dwelling units, 30,000 square feet of office use, and 93,000 square feet of commercial retail use. Based on these land use estimates, approximately 10,260 trips per day are expected with 414 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 985 trips occurring during 'the PM peak hour. A supplemental analysis conducted in August 2000, concluded that if the project site were to be developed with 646,866 square feel of office uses and 65,341 square feet of support retail, a total of 10,775 daily vehicle trips would be generated with 945 trip occurring during the AM peak hour and 1,275 trips occurring' during the PM peak hour. Based on this land use proposal, approximately 495 fewer daily trips, 531 fewer AM peak hour trips, and 290 fewer PM peak hour trips are expected to occur in comparison to the February 2000 traffic study. TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS Based on comments provided by City staff, the trip generation for a 15,000 square foot day care center was requested. Table 1 Mr. Ron Finch MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC. Januar7 4, 2002 Page 2 indicates the rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 1997 edition for this use. Trip rates are also presented for a similar amount of commercial retail uses. Table 2 shows a comparison of trips generated by a day care and a commercial retail development of the same size. As indicated in Table 2, a commercial retail development of the same size would generate approximately 824 more trips per day, but 139 fewer trips during the AM .peak hour, and 19 fewer trips during the PM peak hour. If a 15,000 square food day care center is currently being proposed, and will replace a similar amount of commercial retail use, peak hour trips at the study area intersections will increase slightly. If you have any questions regarding the analysis presented in this report, please do not hesitate to give me a call at (949.) 660-1994. Sincerely, Scott Sato, P.f 00380-07 SS:jr Attachments TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION RATES~ LAND USE ay Care Center ommercial Retail ITE I I PEAKAM HOUR TRIP RATESpM CODE QUANTIT UNITSz IN OUT IN OUT DALLY RATE 820 15 TSF 2.10 1.34 5.74 6.22 134.19 Source; ITE (Institute ol*Transportation Engineers) Tdp Generation Manual, 6th Edition, 1997. TSF = thousand square feet UAUcJobstOO380~excel~[OO380*OS.xts]FJnalTGrams TABLE 2 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY LAND USE Da}, Care Center Commercial Retail Difference / 15I TSF 32 20 86 93 2,013 ' I I 69 I 70 I 7 I 12 I -824 ~ TSF = thousend square feet DU = Dwelling Units STU = Students z Nora = Nominal U:\UcJobs~00380\excel\[00380-05.xls) FinalTGra[es 41 John Kaj~ November 16, 2001 RECEIVED NOV l g ZO01 Mr. Ron Finch MDMG, INC. MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INC. ~ r~ ~ r~ fl 9968 .H. ilbert St., Suite 102 San Dwegll CA g2131 SUBJECT. Temecula Creek Apartme~,~[a~; Development Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Dear Mr. Finch, INTRODUCTION The firm of Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this letter report presenting the findings for the traffic signal wanant analysis conducted for the main ,entrance of the traffic signal warrant analysis of the Temecula Creek Apartment/Retail development. This site is located south of Highway 79 between Jedediah Smith Road and Avenida De Missiones in the City of Temecula. The proposed site will include a 400 dwelling unit apartment comPlex. and 123,000 square feet of commemial retail/office uses. The determination of whether a traffic signal is required at the project driveway is based on the anticipated traffic volumes for Opening Year with project conditions. Therefore, this letter report describes the anticipated traffic due to the proposed project and the expected traffic due to ambient growth (including cumulative projects). TRIP GENERATION Trip generation of this site was derived using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 1997 edition as shown in Table 1. Table 2 shows that this project would generate a daily total of 8,716 vehicular trips with 386 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 864 trips occurring during the PM peak hour. TRIP DISTRIBUTION Tdp distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the project site. Trip distribution is heavily influenced by the Mr. Ron Filch MCCOMIC CONSOLIDATED, INc November 16, 2001 Page 2 geographical location of the site, the location of residential, commercial, employment and recreational opportunities and the proximity to the regional freeway system. The directional orientation of traffic was determined by evaluating existing and proposed land uses and highways within the community and existing traffic volumes. The trip distribution pattem for the proposed project is graphically depicted on Exhibit A. TRIP ASSIGNMENT The assignment of traffic from the site to the adjoining roadway system has been based. upon the site's hip generation, trip distribution, proposed arterial highway and local street systems. Based on the identified project traffic generation and distribution, project related Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes are shown on Exhibit B. To assess Opening Year traffic conditions, project traffic is combined with existing traffic, other development and amawide growth. The study year (Opening Year) for analysis purposes in this report is 2004. Year 2004 traffic volumes have bean calculated based on a 2.0 percent annual growth rate of existing traffic volumes over a 3 year period for the Year 2001 traffic data. The areawide growth rate has bean provided by the City of Temecula staff. WARRANT ANALYSIS RESULTS For Opening ~Year with project traffic conditions, a.traffic signal is projected to be warranted at the intersection of the main project entrance and SR-79. Appendix 'A" contains the planning-level traffic signal warrants for this location. .......... Urban Crossroads, Inc. recommends the installation of a traffic signal at the site entrance and Winchester Road in conjunction with developmenL The results of the signal warrant indicated that the intersection of Winchester Road and the main project entrance meet the minimum warrants for a traffic signal. If you have any questions regarding the analysis presented in this report, please do not hesitate to give me~~91.660-1994. 00380-04 SS:ko Attachments Exhibit C shows the ADT volumes which can be expected for Opening Year with project · traffic conditions. TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION RATES PEAK HOUR AM PM UNITS~ IN I OUT IN I OUT DAILY LAND USE Apartments ' DU 0.08 0.43 0.42 0.20 6.63 Commercial Retail (93 TSFI TSF 1.00 0.64 3.09 3.35 69.96 Office (30 TSF) TSF 2.10 0.29 0.64 3.12 17.55 ~ DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet 2 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITL), Tdp Generation, Sixth Edition, 1997, Land Use Categories 220, 710 and 820. U:~UcJobs~OO380~excel~OO380-O4.xls]T 4-2 TABLE 2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION PEAK HOUR AM PM LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS~ IN I OUT IN I OUT DAILY ~,partment 400 DU 32 172 168 80 2,652 Commercial Retail (93 TSF) 93.0 TSF 93 60 287 312 6,506 Dffice (30 TSF) 30.0 TSF 63 9 19 94 527 Subtotal I I I 188 I 241 I 474 I 486 I 9,685 Internal Capture (10%) I I I -19 I -24 I -47 I -49 I -969 rota~ I I I 1691 217 I 427 I 437 I 8,716 ~ DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet U:~UcJobstOO380~xce6[O0380~4 ~ds]T 4-2 EXHIBITA PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION LEGEND: 10 - PERCENT TO/FROM TEMECULA CREEK APARTMENT/RETAIL, Temegula, California - 00380'24 EXHIBIT 8 PROJECi' AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (Ap_~) MAIN PRO.IEC'T SITE OVERLAND LEGEND: 28.7- VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'5) TEMECULA CREEK APARTM E~emecula, Cardomia - 00380:10 EXHIBIT C OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) MAIN PROJECT DRIVEWAY SITE OVERLAND' LEGEND: 28.7 - VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'5) TEMECULA CREEK APARTMENT/RETAIL, Temecula, CalJfomia - 0n'~ _mi_ TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS (Based on Estimated Average Daily T~.~c-See Note 2) Major St SR-79 (S) Minor St: Project Entrance Year = Volume = 46,800 Lanes= 3 Volume = 2,500 Lanes-- I (one-way) URBAN RURAL XX Minimum Requirements EADT 1. Minimum Vehicular Vehicles per day Vehicles per day on major street ~)n higher volume Satisfied Not Satisfied (both approaches) minor-street approach XX one direction only) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach, Major Street Minor Street Urban Rural Urban Rural 1 1 8.000 5,600 2.400 1,680 2+ 46,800 1 2,500 9,600 6,720 * 2,400 1,680 * 2 + 2 + 9,600 6,720 3,200 2~40 1 2 + 8,000 5,600 3,200 2,240 2. Interruption of Continuous Vehicles per day Vehicles per day traffic on major street :)n higher volume Satisfied Not Satisfied (both approaches) minor-street approach XX one direction only) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach. Major Street Minor Street Urban Rural Urban Rural 1 1 12,000 8,400 1,200 850 2+ 46,800 1 2,500 14,400 10,080 * 1,200 850 * 2 + 2 + 14,000 10,080 1,600 1,120 1 2 + 12,000 8,400 1,600 1,120 3. Combination 2 Warrants 2 Warrants Satisfied Not Satisfied No one warrant satisfied but following warrants fulfilled 80% or more.. 100% 100% 1 2 2004VVP NOTES: 1. Heavier left turn movement from the major street may be included with minor street volume ifa separate signal phase is to be provided for the leff-tum movement. 2. To be used only for NEW INTERSECTIONS or other locations where actual traffic volumes cannot be counted, TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Annie Bostre-Le, Assistant Engineer February 13, 2002 Tentative Pamel Map No. 30468 Temecula Creek Village 2~ submittal Please a) The Tentative Parcel Map dated January 25, 2002 has not address the following items that are shown in bold and italicize. Please have the applicant revise the site plan and conceptual grading plan, prior to .our setting the Conditions of Approval for the above project. Revise the Tentative Parcel Map to show the following: ~vuth ........ on Show reciprocal ingress/egress easement submit the following documents: Drainage analysis General comments: 10) Constance "A '~ has been identified as an uncontrolled full access driveway in the TIA. This access should be restricted to right-in, right-out unless it can be clearly demonstrated that a full access driveway is needed. In the event that a full access driveway is necessary at Constance 'A '; the intersection must be signalized by the applicant. The proposed project on the south side of State Route 79 South must also be included in determining the need for a traffic signal at Constance "A ". This project may be conditioned for the following: 11) Improve Jedediah Smith Road with a curb to curb dimension of 56 feet, installation of sidewalk, street lights and drainage facilities 12) Improve Highway 79 South to include sidewalk, and street lights along property frontage 13) Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road 14) All proposed driveway Openings shall be restricted to Right In/Right Out with exception of the intersection of Jedediah Smith Road and Highway 79 South. 15) The adequacy of the capacity of existing downstream drainage facilities shall be verified. Any upgrading or upsizing of those facilities shall be provided as part of the development of this project. 16) Reciprocal ingress and egress easement and reciprocal parking agreement between proposed parcels for Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468. 17) The Applicant shall pay all prevailing fees, i.e. Development Impact fee. By OF TEM CU COM U.n SERV,C S D P^R .T MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator .~~ December 31,2001 SUBJECT: PA 01-0610 Mixed Use on Highway 79 South and Jededia Smith Road (also see PA 01-0020) The TCSD has reviewed the Development Plan for the aforementioned project and provides the following comments: General Comments: The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debds. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. Installation of the landscape improvements within the medians shall commence pursuant to a pre-job meeting with the TCSD Maintenance Superintendent and mon tored in accordance with the TCSD inspection process. 4. 5. 6. The developer, the developer's successors or assignee, shall be responsible for all landscaping maintenance until such time as maintenance duties are accepted by the TCSD. A multi-use trail will be constructed by the~leveloper with a combination hard and soft surface. Location, specifications and standards to be approved by TCSD. What buffedng will be between the trail and the apartment? Ail perimeter walls, entry monumentation, parkways, landscaping, pedestrian accesses, trails, private recreational amenities and open space shall be maintained by the property owner or a pdvate maintenance association. 7. Will there be any children's play areas or tot lots? 8. Private recreational facilities floor plans need to be submitted. Prior to Final Map: 9. Prior to recordation of final map landscape plans for the proposed raised medians shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Services. 10. Pdor to recordation of final map the developer shall enter into an improvement agreement and post securities for the landscaped median on Highway 79 South. R:~SMITHBICONDITIONS~:~MMENTStPA01~iO MIXED USE 7~S & J SMITH. DOC 1/4/02 11. Obtain an agreement with Caltrans that addresses the maintenance of the raised landscaped median on Highway 79 South. 12. The developer shall satisfy the City's park land dedication requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equal to 4.86 acres of park land, based upon the City's then current appraised park land valuation. (2.43 X 400 units X .005 = 4.86 acres.) Said requirements may receive a credit up to fifty percent (50%) as allowed in Section 16.33.160 in the Temecula Subdivision Ordinance. Prior to Issuance of Buildin,q Permits 13. Pdor to the first building permit or installation of the arterial street lighting, whichever comes first, the developer shall complete the TCSD application process and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program. ' Prior to Certification of Occupancy: 14. The landscape improvements within the raised landscape medians shall be completed to TCSD standards including the 90 day maintenance pedod. R:tSMITHBICONDITIONS-COMMENTS~PA01.0610 MIXED USE 79S & J SMITH. DOC I/4/02 CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Francisco Urbina, Associate Planner Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator,,/ February 14, 2002 · PA 01,0610 Mixed Use on Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road (also see PA 01-0020) The TCSD has reviewed the resubmittal of the Development Plan for the aforementioned project and. provides the following comments in addition to the previously submitted comments on memorandum dated December 31, 2001. 1. The developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. A multi-use trail will be constructed by the developer with a combination hard and soft surface, as per the adopted Multi-Use Trails and Bikeways Master Plan. Location, specifications and standards to be approved by TCSD. (See the attached trails cross section.) 3. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (based on 400 multi.family units) requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to 2.43 acres of parkland, based upon the City's then currant land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50% credit for private recreational opportunities provided on-site and shall be pro-rated at a per dwelling ........ qnit cos~ pdor to the issuance of each building permit requested. R:tSMITHBiCONDITIONS-COMMENTStPA01.0~ iO MIXED USE 79S & J SMITH 2-02.DOC 2/14/02 Mul'd-UseTrails and Bikeways IVlaster.Plan ~ TRAIL City of Temecula Multi-use TYPES Trails and Bikeways Master Plan Separated path Multi-Use Trail ~L~ Pest&Rag Note: Skates and other small-wheeled uses not advised unless surface is concrete or asphalt CITY OF TEMECULA , FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 43200 Bus,ness Park Drive · Temecula, CA ~. 92590 · Telephone (909)694-640~ · fax (909)~06-$169 2; = ,4. o (February 3, 2002) PA01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages Fire Prevention 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. · 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. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commemial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-III-A-I. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2250 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 3100 GPM 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) ' The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-I. A minimum (based on the greatest hazard building)of 3 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off-site (6"x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 400 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an 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). As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-Site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Ord 16.O3.O2O) 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) P:~PLANNING\Coa devpl~.0Ol~A01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages - FIRE :- Conditions of Approval. DOC Pdor 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) 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) 10. 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) The gradient for a fim apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6Ord. 99-14) J 11. 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 tumareund capable of accommodating fire apparatus. (CFC 902.2.2.4) 12. Prior to building construction, this development shall have two (2) points of access, via all-weather surface reads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau. (CFC 902.2.1) 13. 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) 14. 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) 15. 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) · 16. 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 ccmpiex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicat'es the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit P:~LANNING\Coa devpl~2001~A01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages - FIRE - conditions of Approval.DOC 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 23. 24. 25. 26. 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 pdor to installation. ' Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval pdor to installation. (CFC Article 10) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a 'Knox-Box' shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) 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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 902.4) 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, Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose 'stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) ~Conditions 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. (CFC Appendix II-A) Pdor 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 barders (cement or block walls), and fuel modification zones. (CFC Appendix II-A) P:~PLANNING\Coa devplL2001~PA01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages - FIRE - Conditions of Approval.DOC 27. 28. 30, Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. P~ior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for ,~pproval. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process a'nd update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) P:~PLANNING\Coa devpl~001~A01-0611 Temecula Creek Villages - FIRE - Conditions of Approval.DOC CXTY OF T~MECULA TEMECULA POLICE DEPARTMENT PREVENTION & PIJ~NS UNIT DE LOP NT (T ecula Creek Village) Dec~ 30, 200~ Developmgnt ~1~ (T~ecu~a Creek village) (PA01-0611) Francisco J. Urbina ~he following comments are Sl~qtted by C. he Temecula Poi/ce Depart~ent with regards to ~Officer and Public Safety,- measures regard/rig Chis project. 1. Developers will ensure all hedging and shrubbery surrounding all retail/office areas and residentlal units within the scope of this project be malntain~d at a height no greate~ tha~ thirty-six (36} inches and below all windowsills of each building/unit. 2. Developers will further ensure that all trees plan=ed within close proximity of all buildings be kept at a safe distance so as to deter roof accessibility b~ would-be burglars. 3. All parking lots, ~riveways, and ~destrian walkways shall be illuminated with a mlnimu~ )maintained one (1) foot-candle of light at ground level, evenly dispersed, eliminating s~adows. A/1 exterior lighting fixtures shall he vandal resistant. Photocells, t/mere or other mans to prevent deactivation by unau~hori=ed persons shall control all exterior lighting. All lighting should be energy saving and m~nimized in the early morning hours and in compliance with Callfornia State Law on energ~ saving lightlng. 4. All ext~ior doors shall have their own vandal resistant light fixtures installed above. The door~ shall be illuminated w~th a minimum one (1) foot candle of light at ground level, evenly dispersed. 'A~i ~terior lighting fixcu=es ~hall conform to the d~cor of the exterior building. 5. Any public telephones located on the exterior of any buildings shall be pla=ed in a we~l-lighted, ....... highly visible.area, and ins=all, with a "Call-O~ Only" feature =o deter loitering. This feature is not rec~uired on public telephones located in the £nterior of the buildings. commercial or inet~tutional grade. 7. Any banking o= financial institut/on located on =he praises of ~his project shall provide the of operations, n~uaber of antry/exlt points, number of cameras and their loca~/ons, drive-up se~vic~ windows, a copy of the interior blue-print of the facility, name, telephone number and address of custodial services and all information pertaining to the alarm company. 8. Any ga~ed areas of this project {both business o= residentlal), shall install a standard gate code box at the entry gate with the stande=d ~,,~als ! through 0 including ~he * end 9 signs. The ~olice depar~ent will provide the en~ code to be installed prior ~o activa~ion and use of the 9. Day-care center sba11 have a ~/nim~m 6-fcc= fencing surrounding the ennire complex including the ).A~y graffiti painted o= marked u~n any building within Ch~ project sha~l be r~moved or pain=ed over within twenty-four (24) hours of being ~/scovered. ~l. Provide building address on roof-~op by chalking out a grid 9" on center and a heig~ of painting ~mer&ls ~ith e stand~rd 9~' paint roller using florescent yellow paint on normal build~up F~O~ : IrRX NO. : c. :38 2(~)! (~)~::36(:1/q P:) roofs, slngle 9" width be=ween numerals. Address shal~ be parallel to and facing the primary street. 13. SCreet add=ess shall be posted in a visible location, minimum 12 inches in height, on the street side of ~he building wi~h a contrasting background. 14.Upon completion of ~he inter, or of all commercial/r~tail/office buildings, a monitored alarm $¥s~ shall be installed and monitored 24-hours a day by a designated private alarm company, to noti£y tho ~olice department of any intrusion. Lynn N. ~anene Sr. Crime Prevention & Plans Officer , ) Board of Director~ President Rodger D. Siems IGce President RichaM R. Hall Marion V. Ashley Randy A. Record David J. Slawson Board Secretary Ma~ C. White General Manager Anthony J. Pack Director of the ~etro~olltan Water Di~trlct of $o. Calif. Marion V. Ashley Joseph J. Ku~bler, CPA Legal Counsel Redwine and Sherrill WATER DISTRIC March 6, 2002 Francisco J. Urbina City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Dear Colleague: Re: SAN53- Sewer Will Serve PA01-0611, located at the southeast comer'of Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road EMWD is willing to provide sewer service to the subject project. The provisions of service are contingent upon the developer completing the necessary arrangements in accordance with EMWD rules and regulations. EMWD expects the developer to provide proper notification when a water demand assessment is required pursuant to Senate Bill 221 and/or 610. EMVVD expects the developer to coordinate with the approving agency for the proper notification. Further arrangements for service from EMWD may also include plan check, facility construction inspection, jurisdictional annexation, and payment of financial participation charges. The developer is advised to contact EMWD's New Business Development Department early in the entitlement process to determine the necessary arrangements for service. EMWD's ability to serve is subject to limiting conditions, such as water shortages, regulatory requirements, legal issues, or conditions beyond EMWD's control. Thank you for your cooperation in serving our mutual customers. If you have any questions, please cell me at (909) 928-3777, ext. 4468. Sincerely, Corey FgWallaco Civil Engineering Associate II New Business Development Dept. CFW/jw Mailing ~lddress: G:~access~new_busi~lad~orms~WSWillServe.doc Post Office Box 8300 Perris, CA 92572-8300 Telephone: (909) 928-3777 Fax: (909) 928-6177 Location: 2270 Trumble Road Perris, CA 92570 Internet: www. ernwd,org g COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTh, SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEA : December 19, 2001 City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 DEL' £ 02001 ATTN: Francisco J. Urbina RE: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 30468: RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (14 LOTS) Dear Gentlemen: CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF Thc Department of Environmental Health has reviewed Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 and recommends: A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as approved by the wate' company and the Environmental Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the watl system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale not less than one-inch equal's 200 feet, along with the original clmwing to the City of Temecula. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, 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, California Administrative Code, Title 11, Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission 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 Parcel Map No. 30468 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 Parcel Map". This certification docs not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to such Parcel Map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire 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's Office to review at least TWO MrEEKS PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final map. This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory financl;.' arrangements are completed with'the subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. Local Enforcement Agency · RO. Box 1280. Riverside. CA 92502-I280 · 1909) 955-8982 · FAX [909) 781-9653 · ~0S0 Lemon Street. 9th Floor. Riverside. C.~3t af T~aecula Plaunin~ De~t. ff COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE · HEALTh SERVICES AGENCY '5. Th/s 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 District, the City of Temecula and the Environmental Health Department. 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 intemal pipe diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the size of the sewers at the junction 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 design of the sewer system in Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 is in accordance with the sewer system 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 Parcel Map". The plans must be submitted to the City Of Temecula's Office to review at least two weeks PRIOR to the request for the recordation of the final map. It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be completely finalized PRIOR to recordation of the final map. It will be necessary for the annexation proceedings to be completely finalized PRIOR to the recordation of the final map. Additional approval fi'om Riverside County Environmental Health Department will be required for all tenants operating a food facility or generating any hazardous waste. Sincerely, Martmez, Supe~onmental Health Specialist (909) 955~8980 Local Enforcement Agency · RO. Box 12801 Riverside. CA 92502-1280 · ~909} 955-8982 · FAX ~9091 781-9653 · 4080 Lemon Street. 9Ih Floor. Riverside. CA 92501 L~da M. r~.e~oeo December 20, 2001 Francisco Urbina, Case Planner City of Temecula Plann~ng Department 43200 Business Park Drive Post Office Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY PARCEL MAP NO. 30468 APN 961-010-006 PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA01:0610 Dear Mr. Urbina: 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 betxveen RCWD and the property owner including the construction of all required on-site and off-site ~vater thcilities. 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 should have any questions, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office. Sin.cerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT Steve Brannon, P.E. Development Engineering Manager 01 ~SB:at294\F012-T6\FCF J~The (~ompany, ^ ~-,~Sempra Energy'corn~am, Southern California Gas Company 1981 W. Lugonia Avenue Radlancls, CA 9237a-9720 Mailing Adclress: '! ~ PO Box 3003 Re~lanU$, CA 92373-O306 January3,2002 Gas Co. Reference No. 02-002 OM City of Temecula Planning Department P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Attention: Francisco Urbina Re: Case No. PA01-0611 (Dex~elopment Plan) located at the southeast comer of State Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road. Thank you for the opportunity to review your plans for the above referenced project. We have no comments or recommendations to submit on this particular development project. If you need any additional information, please call Gertman Thomas at (909) 335-7733. Steve Dunivin Technical Supervisor A'I-FACHMENT NO. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 1, 2002 R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 16 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 1, 2002 CALL TO ORDER The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:01 P.M., on Wednesday, May 1, 2002, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Telesio. ROLLCALL Present: Commissioners Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chiniaeff. Absent: Commissioner Guerriero. Also Present: Director of Planning Ubnoske, Assistant City Attorney Curley, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Development Services Administrator McCarthy, Senior Planner Hazen, Senior Planner Hogan, Associate Planner Papp, Associate Planner Thornsley, Project Planner McCoy, Project Planner Rush, and Minute Clerk Hansen. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Aqenda RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the Agenda of May 1, 2002. MOTION: Commissioner Telesio moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero who was absent. COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 2 Planninq Application No. 01-0309 (Development Plan) - Rick Rush Proiect Planner RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a Notice of Exemption for Planning Application No. 01~0309 pursuant to Section 15332 of the California Environmental Quality Act; 2.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-011 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0309, DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT, ESTABLISH AND OPERATE A 16,200 INDUSTRIAL/ WAREHOUSE BUILDING ON 1.09 VACANT ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED ON WINCHESTER ROAD NORTH OF COLT COURT AND SOUTH OF ZEVO DRIVE KNOWN AS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO. 909-360-020 Via color renderings, Project Planner Rush presented the staff report (of record), highlighting the project location, and the access; noted that this item had been continued from the April 3, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, and subsequently from the April 24, 2002 Planning Commission meeting; advised that the applicant has retained the services of a licensed architect since the continuance; relayed that there were no proposed changes to the site plan, the landscape plan, or the floor plan; noted the modifications to the architecture as follows: the office portion of the building has been raised three feet, two additional rows of windows have been added, the originally proposed roofing material has been eliminated, windows have been added along the entire front elevation, the southeast corner has been raised by two feet, spandrel windows have been added along the southeast elevation, a glass door was added, exposed aggregate concrete has been added to the southeast corner and the office portion of the project in order to create an overall design theme, the paint colors have been revised from the originally proposed earth tone colors to more gray and blue tone colors, and the glass color has been changed to a light blue color; with respect to the knockout panels which have been proposed on the east and west elevations, advised that staff was recommending that the knockout panels be replaced with spandrel glass in order to create consistency with the remainder of the building; and for Commissioner Telesio and Chairman Chiniaeff, reiterated the revisions in the project where windows were added, specifying that staff was recommending that the painted knockout panels be replaced with spandrel glass which will tie in with the remainder of the project. Mr. Walt Allen, architect representing the applicant, advised that per discussions with the applicant there was no opposition to complying with staff's recommendation to install spandrel glass at the location of the knockout panels. R:PlanComm/minute~050102 2 MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation, subject to the following revision: Add- , That the proposed painted knockout panels be replaced with spandrel glass. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Olhasso and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero who was absent. 3 Planninq Application No. 01-0610 (Tentative Parcel Map) and Planninq Application No. 01-0611 (Development Plan) - Emery Papp Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application No 01-0610 and 01-0611; 3.2 Adopt a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-012 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-06'10, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30468 TO CREATE 14 PARCELS ON 32.6 ACRES, AND PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0611 A RELATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 400 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX; 108,100 SQUARE-FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A 15,000 SQUARE-FOOT CHILD DAY CARE CENTER, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETWEEN JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONS, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 961-010-006. Staff presented the project plan By way over overheads, Associate Planner Papp provided a project overview (per agenda material), relaying the following: · That the proposal was to subdivide 32.6 acres into 14 parcels, 12 for commercial purposes, and the remaining two parcels for residential; · That a Settlement Agreement was signed on November 28, 2000 for the Temecula Creek Village Project site which allowed up to 400 apartment units, and up to 123,000 square feet of commercial space; relayed the location of the site, the Zoning [Planned Development Overlay (PDO)-4], the General Plan designation (Professional Office), the surrounding land uses; and specified that the site was divided into four subareas; R:Pla nComm/rninutes/050102 3 · That Subarea A would be a Service Commercial area, where two restaurants, a bank, a 15,000 square foot daycare facility or commercial use, andtwo retail buildings were proposed, relaying that the project has been conditioned to install a signal light, specifying the project's alternate access points; noted that the project would have a public trail which would extend along the southerly boundary of all the subareas; advised that there were four public access points along the southerly boundary of the project with respect to the trail; relayed that the concern of staff regarding Subarea A was that the drive aisle entry off of Jedediah Smith Road was too narrow, noting staffs request that the applicant remove a few of the parking spaces in order to widen the driveway, which the applicant has agree to do; · That Subarea C would be the Village Commercial area, noting the proposed bus turnout located off of Highway 79 (South) to facilitate pedestrian activity, the pedestrian plaza areas, the trail that would link to the public trail, and the location of an earthquake fault zone on the easterly portion of this planning area which resulted in the plan to install parking and drive aisles at this location; and relayed that the proposed gates would keep commercial traffic out of the residential areas; · That Subarea B was one of the two residential areas, noting that all of the apartment buildings in this area would be three stories in height, specifying the location of the buildings and the internalized parking; · That Subarea D was the other residential portion of the site, advising that each of the residential areas would have its own separate private recreation clubhouse with a pool and spa; relayed the two access points along the trail for this particular subarea and the one emergency vehicle access point; noted that the placement of the buildings in this area was designed to mitigate noise impacts from Highway 79 (South); and specified the buildings in this area which would be three stories in height; · Via exhibits and colored renderings, demonstrated the architectural treatments for each of the elevations, which wrapped around the buildings, noting the use of stone veneers, and varying roof lines; specified that the commercial area was differentiated from the residential area by the roofing material, noting the common themes throughout the project such as the use of heavy timbers, trellises, and the use of stone veneers; relayed the proposed garage treatments; specified that the buildings would primarily be stucco and accented by stone veneers, that the buildings in Subarea B would have a wood veneer siding and in Subarea D were proposed to have three accent color applications; and presented the commercial amhitectural design; · With respect to the clubhouse amenity, that the applicant had prepared two differing elevations for the two private clubhouses, one closely resembling the architecture at the commercial center; and advised that staff preferred the architecture design that more closely resembled the apartment buildings and not the commercial area, recommending that the roofing material of the clubhouse match the roofing material in each subarea as well as the stone veneer of the apartment buildings in that particular subarea; · Regarding parking provisions, that the project was over-parked by 73 spaces, that while the landscape plan exceeded the minimum requirements of the Development Code, staff was requesting that there be large specimen trees added on the perimeter of the project, and That there be additional landscaping in other areas, such as at the public entryways (both vehicular and pedestrian); · That while the residential component exceeded the lot coverage allowed for high density residential, the commercial component was well under the fifty percent (50%) allowed under the Professional Office (PO) designation, advising that staff was of the opinion that averaging the total site coverage was appropriate for a mixed use type of development, which enabled the project to meet the overall criteria for lot coverage. · With respect to environmental impacts, that a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared, relaying receipt of solely one comment regarding this matter which was from the Toxic Substances Division of the State, requesting soil samples during grading. For the record, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that today (May 1st), staff received two submittals regarding the project, both of which were facsimiles from a Mr. Raymond Johnson, and a Ms. Pamela Miod which indicated their concerns regarding the project, specifically the cumulative environmental, traffic, noise, and air quality impacts, additionally noting that a phone message was received by staff, from a Ms. Marsha Cotter, relaying her concern regarding traffic and noise impacts. Staff addressed the queries of the Planninq Commission For Commissioner Olhasso, Associate Planner Papp specified the architectural design for the clubhouse that was preferred by staff, which was the design that was consistent with the residential area and not the commercial area. For Commissioner Mathewson, Associate Planner Papp provided additional information regarding the lot coverage issue, advising that regarding this matter staff took into consideration the following: 1) The Settlement Agreement between the City and Old Vail Partners and LandGrant Development which calls for up to 400 apartment units and up to 123,000 of commercial space, 2) the fact that the General Plan designation for the site is Professional Office, the commercial component has proposed approximately thirty-one percent (31%) lot coverage, the residential has proposed approximately thirty-seven percent (37%) lot coverage, advising that the high density residential district allows up to thirty percent (30%) lot coverage, noting that the project was over by seven percent (7%) in the residential component if viewed as a separate component, and 3) that averaging the lot coverage throughout the site was considered appropriate since this was a mixed use development; clarified that if there had been no Settlement Agreement, most likely the applicant would have been directed to reduce the lot coverage which could be accomplished by removing hardscape elements, which in staffls opinion enhanced the project; and for Commissioner Telesio, clarified that the applicant could reduce the lot coverage without reducing the number of apartment units. Providing clarification regarding the lot coverage issue, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that the Development Code allows for a higher Floor Area Ratio (FAR) if there was enhanced landscaping, or enhanced building architecture, advising that staff was of the opinion the both these elements were addressed in this project plan; and relayed that if lot averaging was not conducted, the project met the criteria in the Development Code that would allow the project to exceed the target FAR. Referencing the Settlement Agreement (page 3 of the Settlement Agreement, in the third paragraph, in the last sentence) for Commissioner Mathewson, Assistant City Attorney Curley clarified that the "Entitlements" in the agreement included without limitation, a complete environmental clearance and all other official acts necessary to implement as closely as possible the four hundred (400) multi-family units and one hundred twenty-three thousand (123,000) square feet of commercial space under the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4 and Ordinance No. 2000-12; advised that if the Planning Commission was to deviate from this implementation then there would need to be a substantial rationale provided, noting that the approval should be as close as feasible to these numbers within the application of good planning theory and practice, and City policy; and confirmed that if after the Planning Commission addressed the rules and regulations of the City and approved a project proximate to the numbers stated in the agreement, that if not precisely the same, there would be no violation of the settlement agreement, advising that the goal was not a precise requirement but one that was strongly urged. The applicant's representatives provided a proiect overview Mr. Ron Finch, representing the applicant, introduced the development team for this project who were available for Planning Commission questions; provided a history of RNM, Inc., a large full service architectural and planning firm with major projects all over the United States and overseas, a firm which has won countless design awards (including awards for apartment design), advising that this company was chosen to work on this project due to the firm's strength in the design of apartments and retail, citing example's of the firm's projects; provided a history of McComic Consolidated, Inc., which was a diversified Real Estate company with a strong tract record of working well with city governments; and thanked Director of Planning Ubnoske, Planning staff, and particularly Associate Planner Papp for their efforts regarding this projec!. Via a PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Steve McCormick, representing the applicant, provided a project overview, relaying the following; · That the project site was relatively flat land, that the parcel was long and linear, and that Temecula Creek runs east and west on the northern portion of the site; · That the preposed project was for a mixed-use pedestrian-oriented village which was consistent with "Smart Growth" trends which mix uses in order to reduce the following: reliance on vehicles, pollution, and traffic; · That the street scene along Highway 79 (South) was carefully planned with a combination of uses, restaurant pads with setbacks, residential areas, and the Village Center, noting the meandering sidewalk and generous landscaping atong the edge of the project; · That the project plan allows for public access from Highway 79 (South) to the trail preximate to the creek; · That although the project will be gated, the gating will only restrict vehicular traffic and not pedestrian; · That there were alternate areas along the creek providing physical and visual access; · Provided a rendering of the proposed multi-use trail; for Chairman Chiniaeff, noted that there will be a three-foot rail fence separating the trail from the creek, advising that there would be landscaping and berming between the trail and various adjacent units with some native vegetation; · That the focal point of the project was the Village Center with the creation of a main street theme, substantial open space (which would be the central park) adjacent to Highway 79 (South), a bus turnout, pedestrian links to the shops/restaurants, the buildings, and to the creek; · That the clubhouse proximate to the retail area (which was part of the main street theme and had architectural design consistent with the commercial area) aided in the combining of various buildings to create a more lively atmosphere, advising that due to the location of this particular clubhouse it was the applicant's preference to maintain the proposed architectural design which was consistent with the Village Center with a standing seamed metal roof; and noted the trellis structure which tied the fa(;;ade of the Village Center; · That the architecture design of the commercial center was four-sided, relaying that the materials for this center were the standing seamed metal roofs, stone veneer, and stucco; · That the commercial center on the west side was primarily one story in height, noting the trail running along the south side proximate to the creek; · That the residential portion of the project in the middle of the site, and that Subarea B would be three-story apartment buildings which would provide individual garage spaces some which would have direct access from the unit; · That the elevations have been revised which include the elimination of the siding, the reduction in the use of stone, and the utilization of color blocking (providing a color rendering of the revisions, as well as a material sample board); and · That the residential area on the eastern portion of the project, Subarea D, was made up primarily of two-story buildings. Addressing the lot coverage issue, the applicant's representative, elaborated on the proposed Village Center, which was an inefficient use of land, specifically to place a small village in the middle of the project, advising that if there were a more traditional plan, particularly without the main street, the lot coverage issue would not exist; clarified the efforts of the applicant to maintain the concept of placing a Village Center at this location due to staff's and the City Council's vision; provided additional information regarding discussions with City staff, and Council during the development process regarding the allowable 400 units indicated in the Settlement Agreement. Mr. Larry Markham, representing the applicant, relayed the following information: Indicated a few typographical errors in the staff report, which referred to the trail width as twenty feet (20') in some places, and eight feet (8') in others, clarifying that the trail was eight feet (8') in width; Noted that in response to staff's concerns, the applicant implemented the following revisions: one setback on one of the apartment buildings was revised, the number of loading spaces was increased, as well as this area being relocated, the trash enclosures were relocated, the driveway at Jedediah Smith Road was modified, and additional trees would be installed on the perimeter of the project as well as at the entryways; · With respect to Jedediah Smith Road, noted that there would be a minor modification at this location due to the added median which was not reflected on the earlier version; · With respect to Public Works Condition Nos. 6 (of the Development Plan) and 7 (of the Parcel Map), clarified that the two driveways referenced were the emergency right-in/right-out located on the extreme eastern portion of the project and the right- in/right-out located on the western end of the project with the other two access points being signalized, relaying that it was his desire that this be clear. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks confirming that the Public Works Department concurred with this assessment. · With respect to Condition No. 7 of the Development Plan conditions (regarding flood control right-of-way), advised that the applicant would not be constructing any flood- controlled facilities, and that Riverside Flood Control & Conservation District has no right-of-way property within the project. In response, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks advised that if the condition were not applicable it would not render any mandates on the project. Mr. Markham clarifying that the language of the condition did not indicate, "as needed," which was his concern. · Regarding the clubhouse recreation building design options, noted that the applicant would be agreeable to complying with the Planning Commission's direction regarding this issue; · Noted that the original PDO did not have the benefit of the detailed fault hazard investigation, advising that based on the fault zone information since obtained, the current design plan was developed; with respect to the lot coverage issue, relayed that while the applicant could pursue development of smaller units, or fewer buildings with additional stories in order to reduce the lot coverage while maintaining the same number of dwelling units, it was the applicant's opinion that there would be no benefit to implementing those revisions, additionally noting that this issue was never a concern expressed by staff during the project's process; · Advised that the decorative hardscape elements were not calculated into the landscape plan, while it was his understanding that this element could have been calculated into the plan; and · For informational purposes, relayed that the property to the south of the project was open space. The applicant's representatives addressed the questions of the Commission For Commissioner Olhasso, Mr. Markham provided additional information regarding the median issue on Highway 79 (South), noting that the median project (Phase II) was originally included as part of the Assessment District (AD) No. 159 improvements (which the applicant was a part of), advising that the project was removed from the improvements plan by the County; and relayed that subsequently Caltrans has offered to provide one-third of the funding of the median project from the 1-15 Freeway to Butterfield Stage Road (up to $750,000), and was seeking like contributions from the City of Temecula and the County, advising that it was his understanding that the City would consider the funding of this project in this year's ClP. Deputy Director of Public Works Parks confirming that the project was proposed for inclusion in the CIP, but has not yet been approved; relayed that the County has rejected the offer to fund a third of the project; and for Commissioner Telesio, clarified that primarily the access to the creek was not to the creek, itself, but to the creek trail. R:P~anComm/minutes/050102 8 In response to Commissioner Telesio, Mr. McCormick specified the location of the two clubhouses, one of which was located in the residential area and was proposed to have an architectural design similar to the residential area, and one located adjacent to the commercial area and proposed to be architecturally consistent with the commercial architecture; for Commissioner Mathewson, provided additional information regarding the parking provisions for the Village Center, clarifying that the gating would ensure that the parking within the gates was for residential use only; confirmed that at the park site, picnic benches and tables would be installed; with respect to the carports, relayed that in response to staffs concerns, three carport buildings were now being proposed, in lieu of the previously planned seven carport buildings; and confirmed that there would be a meandering sidewalk between the carports and Highway 79 (South), as well as berming and landscaping in various locations. The public was invited to speak Mr. Mark Broderick, 45501 Clubhouse Drive, relayed his concern regarding traffic impacts, the proposed three-story apartment buildings (noting a preference for two-story buildings), the densities, and the fact that with the development of this particular project, a parallel route to Pala Road could not be constructed, relaying a desire to preserve the right-of-way for this route for future purposes; and for Chairman Chiniaeff, confirmed that it would be his desire for there to be a route perpendicular to Highway 79 (South) across the creek, and over to Loma Linda Road. Chairman Chiniaeff clarifying the area (from Avenida de Missiones towards Pala Bridge) which has been dedicated as permanent open space, which would prohibit a road from being constructed across it. In response to Mr. Broderick's comments, Associate Planner Papp clarified that the applicant could have proposed four-story buildings, but has opted to have a maximum three-story height; and with respect to the lot coverage issue, noted that the applicant could construct additional stories on the proposed two-story buildings to lower the lot coverage. The Planninq Commission relayed closinq comments With respect to the alternate residential design, Commissioner Olhasso noted that she preferred the revised elevation subject to the stone being added back around the window casings; emphasized the need for raised medians on Highway 79 (South); opined that the City was bound by the PDO; and advised that with respect to design, this was a beautifully planned project, noting that it would be her desire to see this level of design on all Temecula projects. Concurring with Commissioner Olhasso, Commissioner Mathewson acknowledged the need to respect the Settlement Agreement. For Commissioner Mathewson, Director of Planning Ubnoske confirmed that the permitted uses in the Village Center were approved at the time the PDO was approved. Commissioner Telesio commended the developer for the improvement in this particular project plan verses the Past project for this site; concurred with Commissioner OIhasso's comments regarding the revised elevation; with respect to the clubhouse located R:PlanComrNmin ut es/050102 9 adjacent to the commercial area, noted his support of the applicant's proposed design plan. For Commissioner Telesio, the applicant's representative relayed that in order to keep any potentially present animals from the open space area away from the trail there would be screening on the trail fence. With respect to Condition No. 7 (regarding the flood control right-of-way), Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed a preference to keep the condition in the Conditions of Approval, confirming that if there were no flood control right-of-ways, the condition would not be applicable. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to close the public hearing; and to approve staff's recommendation, subject to the following: Modify- · That the drive aisle off of Jedediah Smith Road be widened; · That the elevations be revised, as presented, with the exception of adding the stone back around the window casings; · That the two clubhouse designs as proposed by the applicant be constructed; and That the corrections and modifications relayed by Mr. Markham (denoted in the first four bullets on page 7 under Mr. Markham's comments) be implemented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Olhasso. (Ultimately this motion passed; see below.) Reopening the public hearing, Chairman Chiniaeff invited Mr. Fairchild to the podium in order for the Planning Commission to hear his comments. Mr. George Faimhild, 30435 De Portola Road, relayed his concern regarding traffic and the 400 units being proposed, advising that although the project was beautifhlly designed the number of units should be reduced. Chairman Chiniaeff closed the public hearing. At this time voice vote was taken regarding the motion reflecting approval with the with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero who was absent. At 7:35 P.M. the meeting recessed, reconvening at 7:46 P.M. R:PlanComrNminutes/050102 10 4 Villaqe of Old Town Workshop- Presentation by the Applicant The applicant's representatives presented an overview of the proiect plan Mr. Richard Haness, representing the applicant, noted that members of the development team were present and would be available for Planning Commission questions after the presentation; relayed the desire to receive input at tonight's hearing from the Planning Commission, as well as the public; advised that the project's market study which was recently updated revealed that there is a good market for the product types being proposed in this project; advised that there are ongoing discussions with the School District, noting that he anticipated an agreement soon with respect to a designated school site; relayed that the applicant has been working with the Community Services Department to address Quimby requirements and park designs, and with the Public Work Department, advising that staff's comments regarding the project were being incorporated into the traffic study; and noted that while he was unsure of the details of an affordable housing element, that the applicant was willing to work towards implementing this element into the project. Mr. Matthew Fagan, representing the applicant, provided a PowerPoint presentation regarding the Villages of Old Town Project, relaying the following: · That the project site was located west of Old Town, at the base of the hills; · That the Keyser Marston Study the City had commissioned to have prepared in 1998 revealed that up to 2,000 units could be developed in the Westside Specific Plan and that this type of development would provide benefits to Old Town; · That the project would be pedestrian-oriented with 1,631 dwelling units on a 152 acres, comprised of apartments and townhomes, with high quality architecture and a comprehensive park and open space system; · That the Land Use Plan consisted of the following: Planning Areas (PAs) 1, 5, 7, and 8 were designated as parks, PAs 2, 3, and 4 were designated as the Village Center which would encompass residential product as well as a Community Center Overlay which would allow up to 10,000 square feet of commercial uses and was not intended to compete with Old Town; · That the park plan would include a Village Park (three acres) located in PA 1 consisting of an amphitheater, and pedestrian and trolley links to Old Town; · That the Village Center (PA 2) would include the following: primarily multi-family buildings from two-four stories with two product types, a commercial area, private recreation facilities, and pedestrian and trolley links (noting that there have been discussions with RTA regarding this element); · With respect to the amhitectural design of the Village Center, that there would be garages at grade level, well-defined entrances, three distinctive architectural styles, four-sided articulation, balastrades, trellises, and enhanced staimase and mailbox elements, landscaping between the streetscape with street-faced entrances to the apartments, as well as windows, and balcony treatments facing the street, noting that the interior treatments would include pools, cabanas, and barbeque areas. · That the West and South Village (PAs 3 and 4) would encompass approximately 271 two- and three-story townhomes, private recreational facilities, pocket parks, links to the Village Center, three architectural styles, four-sided architecture, and detailed ' enhanced elements; · Displayed the relationship of the building with the slopes of the hillside; R:Plan Comn~rnin ules/050102 1 1 · That the Park and Open Space Plan additionally consisted of the following: a Native Park located adjacent to the Western Bypass Corridor (PAs 3 and 4) with seating areas, a Children's Park with shade structures and tot lots, the Rose Park (PA 7) which was inspired by a park located in the City of Santa Barbara, a View park (PA 8) which would have viewpoints to the east and a Natural Hillside Park (PA 9) which would be dedicated as open space; · With respect to traffic, provided a brief overview of the cimulation plan; noting the key circulation roadways such as: the Western Bypass Corridor, the Vincent/Moraga Drive Extension and the 1st Street Extension, advising that vehicular access would be from these three key circulation points; advised that the applicant would participate in the construction of new roadways and intersections as indicated in the traffic study, concurring with staff that installing infrastructure ahead of development was vital; · That there would be alternative modes of transportation provided; and · Noted that there was a two-scale model of the project available for viewing. Relaying concluding comments, Mr. Haness noted the significant community benefits associated with this project, as follows: · The traffic circulation would be enhanced via the applicant's participation in the construction of new roads and intersections; · Provision of a variety of housing types would be offered; and · Assistance in the economic benefits of Old Town merchants as well as the whole community would be provided; and relayed the project's timeline schedule, noting a desire to begin construction in late 2002. The public was invited to comment The following individuals were proponents of the project: Mr. Paul O'Neal Mr. David E. Rossenthau 32219 Benabarrie 27315 Jefferson Avenue The above-mentioned individuals were proponents of the project for the following reasons: The high quality of design elements; The pedestrian accessibility, in particular being able to walk to the business park from this project; The project would revitalize Old Town; and The transit opportunities. The following individuals relayed their concerns and comments regarding the project: Ms. Adrian McGregor Mr. Dave Gallaher Ms. Nancy Baron 34555 Madera de Playa 31350 Rancho Vista Road 28681 Pujol Street representing TVUSD The above-mentioned individuals commented on the project, as follows: · Concern regarding an inadequate water supply, in particular a potential drought condition, as well as concern regarding the existing fault zone and flooding issues; · Concern regarding the lack of a designated school site, noting the need for an elementary school in the Old Town area, specifically located in an area which would allow for pedestrian access from the neighborhoods; and · Concern regarding the Main Street bridge being open only for pedestrian and trolley travel, and closed for vehicular access. For Ms. Baron, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks relayed that if she left her name and phone number, he would contact her when discussions were held regarding Main Street. The following individuals were opposed to the project: Mr. Mark Broderick Mr. Al Rattan Mr. Fred Hayes Mr. George Demos Mr. Clif Hewlett 45501 Clubhouse Drive 28751 Rancho California Road represenling Renaissance Properlies 45400 Pintoresca ,.~..e.,., ~ho s..a u.~g.,~ Ranchos Pmpertyow'nem Asscctatlon 43860 East Calamar address not legible The above-mentioned individuals were opposed to the project of the project for the following reasons: Opposed to the degradation of the hillside view; Concern with respect to the densities, traffic, and school overcrowding; Expressed the opinion that the new residents would not be shopping in Old Town (i.e., antique stores), and thereby not reduce the generation of trips outside of this area; Complemented the Planning Commission on its vision and its diligent efforts regarding the City of Temecula; Commended Mr. Haness for his work in bring a new vision to Temecula; With respect to the demographics, noted that Temecula was not attracting enough commercial businesses, in particular regional offices which would bring better paying jobs to Temecula, recommending the attraction of improved employment opportunities; Suggested that the residential mix be significantly reduced, and that the commercial area be increased; Queried whether the development of apartments was the answer to renovating Old Town; Requested that there be consideration to develop a City Hall at this project site; Recommended that a university be developed in Temecula; Concern regarding decreased property values; Noted that the Board of Directors of the Santa Rosa Community Services District would be discussing the impact of this particular project at the next regular meeting on May 8, 2002 at 7:00 P.M., inviting a Planning Commissioner to attend; Concern regarding emergency access if this project were to be developed; and Queried where the Western Bypass Corridor would end on the north end, noting that it was his understanding that it would end at Moraga Road. For informational purposes, Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that tonight's presentation was solely an intreductory precess, advising that staff was still reviewing the project, and was not prepared for a formal hearing where there would be additional information regarding traffic, water, and air quality issues; and advised that this was an opportunity for the applicant to gain input frem the community; For the record, Chairman Chiniaeff noted receipt of Commissioner Guerriere's comments regarding the project (due to being unable to attend the meeting), relaying that this information would be forwarded to the applicant. Director of Planning Ubnoske additionally noting that staff received a phone message on May 1, 2002, from Ms. Marsha Cotter, regarding the project, citing her concerns with respect to traffic and noise impacts. The Planninq Commission relayed its closinq comments Commissioner Olhasso recommended that the applicant retain Keyser Marston to update the study in order to gain input from the consultant regarding recommended needed densities to revitalize Old Town; noted that she has always supported the concept of developing City facilities in Old Town, in particular a City Hall; with respect to design features, recommended improvement in the arehitectural elements; recommended that there be additional connection points in order to allow Pujol residents to utilize various park sites; noted concern regarding the lack of a designated elementary school; relayed the need for a promotional program to stimulate Old Town residents utilizing the businesses in Old Town; clarified that the only way new business was going to be attracted to Old Town was if additional densities were developed in this area; and concurred that the Western Bypass Corridor was essential. For informational purposes, Assistant City Attorney Curley advised that it would be more appropriate for staff to attend the preliminary meetings regarding the Board of Directors of the Santa Rosa Community Services District meeting. Noting that he would review the information packet received from Mr. Rattan, Commissioner Telesio advised that the concepts would idealistically be apprepriate for implementing; noted that for Old Town to be revitalized it would not only need additional proximate densities increased, but also a change in character which was a marketing process that could potentially be stimulated by a development of this type; noted his concern regarding accessibility, and the traffic impacts, as well as the overcrowding of the schools; concurred with the concept of developing a City Hall in the Old Town area, specifically a Civic Center locating the City facilities at one location; and for interested public members, recommended that names and addresses be provided in order for residents to be notified of future hearings regarding this project. Concurring with Commissioner Telesio's comments regarding the need to change the character of Old Town, Commissioner Mathewson noted that the key element would be attaining a balance between a population to stimulate Old Town with the circulation impacts associated with the addition of residents in this area; noted that he was pleased with the proposed development of townhomes, a much-needed product in Temecula; with respect to the school site location, noted that it was vital that this issue be addressed; relayed that according to his calculations the project was still lacking adequate park facilities (per Quimby requirements), recommending the pursuit of installation of a larger park with ball fields, if not on the project site, then located R:PI anCom nYminu [es/050102 14 elsewhere in the City; and concurred with the concern with respect to Main Street's access being limited, recommending that linkages to Old Town be strengthened. Chairman Chiniaeff questioned the relationship between the proposed units in the project and its ability to revitalize Old Town due to the types of businesses currently located in Old Town, advising that outdoor eating areas would aid in stimulating evening business; concurred with the need for a variety of dwelling unit opportunities offered in Temecula; recommended that the hillsides be less graded; noted the difficulty with planning a school site due to the hilly nature of the property unless there was grading or a planned tiered playground area; with respect to the Western Bypass Corridor, noted the need for this corridor to traverse past Rancho California Road; relayed that although the product appeared to be of a high quality, there were many issues needing to be addressed, advising that it may not be appropriate to locate this number of dwellings in one location; and noted that the Planning Commission looked forward'to additional public comments as this project's process continued. With respect to the circulation, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks noted that staff has been working with the applicant regarding this issue (i.e., the widening of Rancho California Road, the building of the Western Bypass Corridor, and the timing of these implementations), advising that the applicant had a complete slide presentation regarding this issue which was not presented at this introductory presentation, but that the presentation would demonstrate how this project would enhance the circulation through this area. With respect to the transition of Old Town from a retail perspective, Commissioner Olhasso advised that this was the type of information she would desire to receive from the Keyser Marston study update, specifically what are the anticipated transitions which would support the community, as well as Old Town. Mr. Haness relayed that all the information regarding the project was not presented at tonight's meeting, noting that he looked forward to the time when the project, in detail, could be presented, relaying the efforts of the applicant to address the concerns which have been expressed. Commissioner Telesio recommended that this project be presented to the Planning Commission incrementally, with one or two elements being presented at a time. Director of Planning Ubnoske concurred, noting that future workshops would focus on specific elements with additional detail. Mr. Samuel Alhadeff, representing the applicant, noted the applicant's hopes of weekly or biweekly meetings with Commissioner Olhasso, as the representative of the Planning Commission, in order to review specific product and address the alternate issues. It was noted that the Planning Commission received and filed this report. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS For informational purposes, Chairman Chiniaeff noted that he had provided a compact disc of the photographs taken while visiting in the City of Chicago when attending the Planning Convention, as well as haying provision of information which was distributed at the conference. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT No additional comments. ADJOURNMENT At 9:06 P.M. Chairman Chiniaeff formally adjourned this meeting to the next re.qular meetin,q to be held on Wednesday, May 15, 2002 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning R:Pla nCornm/minut es/050102 1 6 ATFACHMENT NO. 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION MAY 1, 2002 R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 17 PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-012 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0610, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30468 TO CREATE 14 PARCELS ON 32.6 ACRES, AND PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0611 A RELATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 400 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX; 108,100 SQUARE-FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A 15,000 SQUARE-FOOT CHILD DAY CARE CENTER, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETWEEN JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONS, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 961-010-006. WHEREAS, McComic Consolidated, Inc. submitted applications for a Tentative Parcel Map and a Development Plan on December 5, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Application was processed including, but not limited to public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Applications on May 1,2002, 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 hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the Commission recommended approval of the Applications subject to conditions after finding that the project proposed in the Applications conformed to the City of Temecula General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION 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. Tentative Parcel Map Findin.qs. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the Application, makes the following findings: The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 is consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. The tentative map does not 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; The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use. 3, The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map; R:\P M'G.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02,doc 12 The project consists of a Pamel Map on property designated for Professional Office uses, which is consistent with the General Plan, as well as, the development standards for the PDO-4 zoning designation. 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; Per the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. The proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program will ensure that the impacts are not likely to cause significant damage to the environment. 5. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Safety Division, the Building Safety Division, Public Works, Community Services and Planning Staff. As a result, the project will be conditioned to address all concerns. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents. 6. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; There are solar possibilities available to the tentative parcel map; however, the applicant has not submitted any information in regard to solar possibilities. 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 Public Works Department, expressed concerns regarding potential conflicts with easements or accesses during the project review stage. The concerns expressed by Publics Works have already been addressed, or will be addressed in the Conditions of Approval. 8. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby); The applicant is responsible for payment of fees, which will address the City's parkland dedication requirements. Section 3 Development Plan Findinqs. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the Application, makes the following findings: 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and other City Ordinances. The plan to develop 123,100 square-feet of commercial space and 400 multi-family apartment units on 32.6 acres is consistent with the PDO-4 policies and development regulations, and the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The proposed plan incorporates architectural and landscape designs, which will enhance land use objectives along Highway 79 South. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. R:'v° M~001',01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02,doc 13 The project has been conditioned to conform to the Uniform Building Code, and all construction will be inspected by City staff prior to occupancy. The Fire Department staff has also found that the site design will provide adequate emergency access in the case of a need for emergency response to the site. Section 4. Environmental Compliance. The initial environmental assessment for this project identified issues that could potentially have significant impacts without mitigation. A Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared for this project to reduce potential impacts to levels that are less than significant. Section 5. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby conditionally approves the Applications, a request to divide 32.6 acres into 14 lots, and to develop ten buildings totaling 123,100 square-feet of commercial space; and 25 multi-family apartment buildings totaling 400 residential units, as set forth on attached Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference together with any and all necessary conditions that may be deemed necessary. Section 6 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City of Temecula Planning Commission this Ist day of March 2002. ATTEST: Dennis Chiniaeff, Chairperson Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the lSh day of May, 2002 by the following vote of the Commission: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS: Debbie Ubnoske, Secretary R;'~P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 14 EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. pA00-0610 Tentative Parcel Map PA00-0611 Development Plan Project Description: PA00-0610: Tentative Parcel Map 30468 subdividing the site into 14 parcels, 12 for commercial uses and 2 for high-density residential use. PA00-0611: Construct 400 multi-family residential units on approximately 20.7 acres and 123,100 square feet of commercial space on approximately 11.9 acres. Development Impact Fee Category: Multi-Family Residential and Retail Commercial Assessor's Parcel No.: 961-010-006 Approval Date: TBD Expiration Date: TBD PLANNING DIVISION Within Forty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1. 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 One thousand three hundred and fourteen dollars ($1314.00) for the County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. 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 2. The parcel map shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of the City of Temecula's Subdivision Ordinance, 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. 3. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend with Legal Counsel of the R:~P M'~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 1 City's own selection, the City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, void, annul, seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the 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. City shall promptly notify the both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves its right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. 4. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and conditions set forth. 5. After grading, all slopes shall be planted in accordance with the City's Slope Planting Guidelines. Jute netting will be required on all slopes greater than ten linear feet. 6. An Administrative Development Plan application shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department for buildings on Pads C1, C2, C3, C9 and C10, prior to issuance of building permits. 7. The final landscape plan shall indicate street trees planted along the Highway 79 South frontage as a minimum of 24-inch box for each variety shown. 8. The applicant is advised that Highway 79 South is a state highway, and that all landscape approvals are to meet CalTrans requirements. 9. Perimeter trees shall include some specimen trees of the varieties indicated on the final landscape plan. Specimens shall be a minimum of 36-inch box and shall be placed in a manner that vehicular and pedestrian entrances are accented and provide variation in canopy height. In addition to perimeter trees, please add three (3) 24-inch box Chinese Flame trees, and all eighteen (18) 36- inch box Red Crepe Myrtle trees to conform to the number of specimens identified in the planting legend. 10. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this development plan. 11. This approval shall be used within two (2) years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two (2) year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. 12. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved floor plans, elevations and the Color and Material Boards on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division. 13. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. if it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director shall have the R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 2 authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer, Property Owner's Association, or any successors in interest. 14. All mechanical and roof equipment shall be fully screened from public view by being placed below the lowest level of the surrounding parapet wall. Parapet walls shall be of sufficient height above the roofline to screen said equipment. 15. The colors and materials for the project shall substantially conform to those noted directly below and with the Color and Material Boards on file with the Community Development Department - Planning Division (with the following changes made by the Planning Commission at a Public Hearing held on May 1, 2002). Areas A and C: Primary wall exterior: Stucco Accent 1: Stucco Accent 2: Stucco Accent 3: Trim and Bands: Roof Stone Veneer Frazee Desert Fawn (8222 W) Frazee Burnt Copper (8355 D) Frazee Safari Tan (7754 M) Frazee Lulled Beige (8232 W) Frazee Almond White (8180 W) Patina Green Metal Seam Roof Cheyenne Limestone Area B: Primary wall exterior: Stucco Accent: (remove wood siding) Fascia, Trim, Bands and Railings: Garage Doors Roof Tile Stone Veneer Frazee Clay Beige (8721 W) Frazee Daplin (8234 M) Frazee Swiss Coffee (487) Frazee Lulled Beige (8232 W) Silhouette Slate (ISTCS 4930) Jackson Valley Quarrystone (SP 103) (wrap stone veneer around window frames) Area D: Primary wall exterior: Stucco Accent 1: Stucco Accent 2: Stucco Accent 3: Fascia, Trim, Bands and Railings: Roof Tile Stone Veneer Frazee Hay Seed (8220 W) Frazee Daplin (8234 M) Frazee Festoon (8274 W) Frazee Burnt Copper (8355 D) Frazee Swiss Coffee (487) Wolf Grey Shake (1 SKCB 5969) Oakridge Mountain Ledge 16. Added by Planning Commission on May 1, 2002 -The Clubhouse (Sub- R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 3 Area D) in proximity to the Village Center shall incorporate design elements that closely resemble those of the Village Center commercial buildings. The Clubhouse (Sub-Area B) adjacent to the public trail on the south side of project shall incorporate design elements that closely resemble the residential buildings. 17. The construction landscape drawings shall indicate coordination and grouping of all utilities, which are screened from view per applicable City Codes and guidelines. 18. AII multi-family residential buildings shall meet the building separation requirements of Section 17.06.050 B of the City's Development Code. 19. The applicant shall submit a fence plan for review and approval for Sub-Areas B and D prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit. 20. The applicant shall redesign the trash enclosures such that no unattended rollout container(s) be left in the drive aisle during pick up. 21. Added by Planning Commission on May 1, 2002 - The driveway apron and drive aisle to/from Jedediah Smith Road shall be sufficiently widened to reduce vehicle stacking exiting the site, and to facilitate emergency vehicle movement. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 22. Prior to issuance of building permits, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be approved by the Planning Department and recorded with the Riverside County Recorder. The CC&R's shall contain provisions for the creation of a Property Owner's Association for the maintenance of all landscaping on the commercial parcels, and maintenance of all internal roadway and hardscape surfaces within those parcels. 23. The applicant shall insure that all trees planted along the Highway 79 South property line of the subject development be a minimum size of 24" box trees. The applicant shall revise the landscape plans and resubmit the plans for Planning Department approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to Issuance of an Occupancy Permit 24. All perimeter and slope landscaping, including the Highway 79 South landscape planter area shall be installed to the approval of the Planning Director, prior to the first certificate of occupancy. 25. All conditions shall be complied with prior to any occupancy or use allowed by this Development Plan. 26. A one-year landscape maintenance bond of sufficient amount shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. 27. The applicant and owner of the real property represented by this approval shall join and maintain active membership in the Crime Free Multi-housing Program. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits 28. A copy of the Rough Grading plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. R:\P M'~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 4 29. 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. PUBLIC WORKS PA01-0610 (Tentative Parcel Map) 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 1. 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. 2. A Grading Permit for either rough or precise grading shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way. 3. 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. 4. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-way. 5. 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. 6. All on-site drainage facilities shall be privately maintained. 7. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a right in/right out movement subject to approval by CalTrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. b. Highway 79 South at the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road shall be restricted to right in/right out movement subject to approval of CalTrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. Prior to Approval of the Parcel 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: 8. 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 c. Eastern MunicipaIWater District R:\P M~.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecufa Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 5 d. Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 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. CaITrans k. Community Services District I. Verizon Telephone m. Southern California Edison Company n. Southern California Gas Company o. Fish & Game p. Army Corps of Engineers 9, The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) b. Provide a lane drop transition per CalTrans standards to the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road c. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road. d. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Main Project entrance. 10. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of the street improvement plans: a. Street centerline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City Standard No. 207A c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 802 and 803. d, Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 402 e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. 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. g. 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. h. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground R:~P M'~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 6 11. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. The Developer shall improve Jedediah Smith Road (60 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, raised median, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) as shown on the tentative parcel map. i) The raised median island on Jedediah Smith Road shall be 4 feet wide, 200 foot long ii) The roadway design shall be coordinated with the adjacent property owner b. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). 12. 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. 13. Relinquish and waive right of access to and from Highway 79 South on the Parcel Map with the exception of five (5) openings as delineated on the approved Tentative Parcel and approved by CalTrans. 14. 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. 15. 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. 16. Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision that is part of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section. Prior to City Council approval of the Parcel Map\Final Map, the Developer shall make an application for reapportionment of any assessments with appropriate regulatory agency. 17. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid. 18. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the Parcel 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. 19. The Developer shall comply with all constraints that may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval,doc 7 20. 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 Parcel 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. 21. 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. 22. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works 23. A minimum 24 foot wide easement shall be dedicated for public utilities and reciprocal ingress/egress access for all private streets and drives. 24. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be required and shall be delineated and noted on the final map. 25. Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 26. 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 27. 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. Community Services District 28. 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. 29. 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. R:\P M~001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 8 The report shall address all soils conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and preliminary pavement sections. 30. A Geotechnical Report shall be prepared by a registered engineer or engin, eering 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. 31. 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 identify storm water runoff quantities expected from the development of this site and upstream of the site. It shall identify 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 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. 32. The Developer must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resoumes 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. 33. 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. 34. 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. Prior to Issuance of Building Permits 35. Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded. 36. 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. 37. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the California 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. 38. 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. Prior to Issuance of Certificates of Occupancy R:\P M~2.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of ApprovaLdoc 9 39. 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 40. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. 41. All improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 42. 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. PUBLIC WORKS PA01-0611 (Development Plan) 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 site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. General Requirements 1. A Grading Permit for precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City-maintained street right- of-way. 2. 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. 3. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the California Department of Transportation prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed State right-of-way. 4. All improvement plans and grading 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. 5. All on-site drainage facilities shall be privately maintained. 6. The vehicular movement for the following locations shall be restricted as follows: a. Highway 79 South at the easterly access to the site shall be restricted to a right in/right out movement subject to approval by CaITrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. b. Highway 79 South at the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road shall be R:\P M'~?.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 10 restricted to right in/right out movement subject to approval of CalTrans. The method of controlling this movement shall be approved by the Director of Public Works. Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit 7. A permit from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is required for work within their right-of-way. 8. A Grading Plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect adjacent public and private property. 9. 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. 10. A Soil Report shall be prepared by a registered Soil or Civil Engineer and submitted to the Director of 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 pavement sections. 11. A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address special study Zones and the geological conditions of the site, and shall provide recommendations to mitigate the impact of ground shaking and liquefaction. 12. The Developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered Civil Engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the Developer, 13. 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. 14. As deemed necessary by the Director of 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. Community Services District f. Fish&Game g. Army Corps of Engineers R:\P M'~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 11 15. The Developer shall comply with all constraints that may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. 16. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 17. The Developer shall obtain any necessary letters of approval or slope easements for off-site work performed on adjacent properties as directed by the Department of Public Works. 18. The site is in an area identified on the Flood Insurance Rate Map as Flood Zone A. This project shall comply with Chapter 15, Section 15.12 of the City Municipal Code which may include obtaining a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. A Flood Plain Development Permit shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit 19. Improvement plans and/or precise grading plans shall conform to applicable City of Temecula Standards subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. The following design criteria shall be observed: a. FIowline grades shall be 0.5% minimum over P.C.C. and 1.00% minimum over A.C. paving. b. Driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula Standard No. 207A. c. Street lights shall be installed along the public streets adjoining the site in accordance with City Standard No. 800, 802 and 803. d. Concrete sidewalks and ramps shall be constructed along public street frontages in accordance with City of Temecula Standard Nos. 400 and 402. e. All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees. f. Public Street improvement plans shall include plan and profile showing existing topography, utilities, proposed centerline, top of curb and flowline grades. g. 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. 20. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works: a. Improve Highway 79 South (Urban Arterial Highway Standards) to include installation of sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, signing and striping, and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) b. Provide a lane drop transition per CalTrans standards to the driveway east of Jedediah Smith Road c. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Jedediah Smith Road. d. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Highway 79 South and Main Project entrance. 21. Private roads shall be designed to meet City public road standards. Unless R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of ApprovaLdoc 12 22. 23. otherwise approved the following minimum criteria shall be observed in the design of private streets: a. The Developer shall improve Jedediah Smith Road (60 feet curb to curb) to include the installation of street improvements, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, raised median, drainage facilities, signing and striping, utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer) as shown on the site plan. i) The raised median island on Jedediah Smith Road shall be 4 feet wide, 200 foot long ii) The roadway design shall be coordinated with the adjacent property owner b. All intersections shall be perpendicular (90). All street improvement design shall provide adequate right-of-way and pavement transitions per CalTrans' standards for transition to existing street sections. The Developer shall construct the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Director of the Department of Public Works. a. Street improvements, which may include, but not limited to: pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control devices as appropriate b. Storm drain facilities c. Sewer and domestic water systems d. Under grounding of proposed utility distribution lines 24. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered Civil or Traffic Engineer and reviewed by the Director of 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. 25. Bus bays will be designed at all existing and proposed bus stops as directed by Riverside Transit Agency and approved by the Department of Public Works. 26. All access rights, easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be submitted and reviewed by the Director of the Department of Public Works and City Attorney and approved by City Council for dedication to the City where sidewalks meander through private property. 27. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered Civil Engineer, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. 28. The Developer shall obtain an easement for ingress and egress over the adjacent property. 29. 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. R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 13 Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 30. 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 31. Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805. 32. All public improvements, including traffic signals, shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. 33.The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Director of the Department of Public Works. COMMUNITY SERVICES General Conditions: 1. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul construction debris. 2. Developer shall provide adequate space for a recycling bin within the trash enclosure areas. 3. All perimeter walls, trail fences, entry monumentation, parkways, landscaping, pedestrian portals, private recreational amenities and all open space shall be maintained by the property owner or a private maintenance association. 4. The Developer shall provide to the City of Temecula an eight (8) foot multi-use trail easement deed for public access. 5. The Developer shall provide to the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) an eight (8) foot maintenance easement deed for the multi-use trail. 6. A multi-use trail will be constructed by the developer as indicated on the development plan. Specifications and standards to be approved by TCSD. 7. Prior to the 221st residential building permit the development of the trial shall be completed and accepted by TCSD. Prior to Building Permits: 8. The developer shall satisfy the City's park land dedication (Quimby) requirement through the payment of in-lieu fees equivalent to 2.43 acres of park land, based upon the City's then currant land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 50% credit for private recreational opportunities provided on-site and shall be pro- rated at a per dwelling unit cost prior to the issuance of residential building permit requested. R:\P M~2001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 14 If additional arterial street lighting needs to be installed, prior to the first building permit or installation of arterial street lighting, the developer shall complete the TCSD application process and pay the appropriate energy fees related to the transfer of street lighting into the TCSD maintenance program. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. 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. 2. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix III.A, Table A-Ill-A- 1. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 2250 GPM at 20 PSI residual operating pressure, plus an assumed sprinkler demand of 850 GPM for a total fire flow of 3100 GPM 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 3. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix Ill-B, Table A-III-B-1. A minimum (based on the greatest hazard building)of 3 hydrants, in a combination of on-site and off-site (6" x 4" x 2-2 1/2" outlets) on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 400 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 225 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to an 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). 4. As required by the California Fire Code, when any portion of the facility is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided. For this project on site fire hydrants are required. (CFC 903.2) 5. Maximum cul-de-sac length shall not exceed 1320 feet. Minimum turning radius on any cul-de-sac shall be forty-five (45) feet. (CFC 902.2.2.2.3 and Subdivision Ord. 16.03.020) 6. 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) 7. 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) 8. 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 R:\P M~.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Ternecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 15 a minimum AC thickness of .25 feet. ( CFC sec 902) 9. 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) 10. The gradient for a fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent. (CFC 902.2.2.6 Ord. 99-14) 11. 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) 12. 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) 13. 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 ) 14. 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) 15. 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) 16. 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. 17. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on square footage and type of construction, occupancy or use, the developer shall install a fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10, CBC Chapter 9) R:\P M~.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Viilage\Conditior~ of Approval,dcc 16 18. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or building final, based on a requirement for monitoring the sprinkler system, occupancy or use, the developer shall install an fire alarm system monitored by an approved Underwriters Laboratory listed central station. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation. (CFC Article 10) 19. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, a "Knox-Box". shall be provided. The Knox-Box shall be installed a minimum of six (6) feet in height and be located to the right side of the main entrance door. (CFC 902.4) 20. 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 fire fighting personnel. (CFC 9O2.4) 21. 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. 22. Prior to the building final, speculative buildings capable of housing high-piled combustible stock, shall be designed with the following fire protection and life safety features: an automatic fire sprinkler system(s) designed for a specific commodity class and storage arrangement, hose stations, alarm systems, smoke vents, draft curtains, Fire Department access doors and Fire department access roads. Buildings housing high-piled combustible stock shall comply with the provisions California Fire Code Article 81 and all applicable National Fire Protection Association standards. (CFC Article 81) 23. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final, the developer/applicant shall be responsible for obtaining underground and/or aboveground tank permits for the storage of combustible liquids, flammable liquids or any other hazardous materials from both the County Health department and Fire Prevention Bureau.(CFC 7901.3 and 8001.3) Special Conditions 24. 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 wild land-vegetation interface. (CFC Appendix II-A) 25. 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) 26. Prior to building permit issuance, a full technical report may be required to be submitted and to the Fire Prevention Bureau. This report shall address, but not be limited to, all fire and life safety measures per 1998 CFC, 1998 CBC, and NFPA - 13, 24, 72 and 231-C. 27. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or building final a simple plot plan and a simple floor plan, each as an electronic file of the .DWG format must be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau. Alternative file formats may be acceptable, contact fire prevention for approval. 28. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Fire Code permit process R:~P M~.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval.doc 17 29. and update any changes in the items and quantities approved as part of their Fire Code permit. These changes shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for review and approval per the Fire Code and is subject to inspection. (CFC 105) The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and City Fire Department an update to the Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and Fire Department Technical Report on file at the city; should any quantities used or stored onsite increase or should changes to operation introduce any additional hazardous material not listed in existing reports. (CFC Appendix II-E) OUTSIDE AGENCIES 1. The applicant shall comply with all the mitigation measures identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan. (Environmental Mitigation Measures) 2. The applicant shall comply with all CalTrans requirements concerning signal lights for Highway 79 South. 3. The applicant shall comply with all CalTrans requirements concerning street trees along Highway 79 South. 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's Signature Date Name printed R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\Conditions of Approval,doc 18 A'I-FACHMENT NO. 9 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PACKET MAY 1, 2002 R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village~Agenda Report CC 06-25-02.doc 18 STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION May 1,2002 Planning Application No. 01-0610 -Tentative Parcel Map Planning Application No. 01-0611 - Development Plan Prepared By: Emery Papp, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department - Planning Division Staff recommends the Planning Commission: ADOPT a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for Planning Application Nos. 01-0610 and 0611; 2. ADOPT a Resolution entitled: PC RESOLUTION NO. 2002-~ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CiTY OF TEMECULA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 01-0610, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30468 TO CREATE 14 PARCELS ON 32.6 ACRES, AND PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0611 A RELATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A400 UNIT MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT COMPLEX; 108,100 SQUARE-FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USES; AND A 15,000 SQUARE-FOOT CHILD DAY CARE CENTER, GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH, BETWEEN JEDEDIAH SMITH ROAD AND AVENIDA DE MISSIONS, KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 961-010-006. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANT: McComic Consolidated, Inc. PROPOSAL: Tentative Pamel Map 30468 (PA01-0610) is a proposal to create 14 parcels, 12 for commercial uses and 2 for multi- residential uses, ranging in size from 0.21-acres to 11.91- acres, on 32.6 acres. LOCATION: The Development Plan (PA01-0611) is a proposal to construct 108,100 square-feet of retail/office space, 400 multi-family residential units, and a 15,000 square-foot child day care center. South of Highway 79 South, north of Temecula Creek, east of Jedediah Smith Road, and west of Avenida De Missions EXISTING ZONING: Planned Development Overlay 4 (PDO-4) R:\P M~2001 \01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02,doc 1 SURROUNDING ZONING: North: South: East: West: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USES: North: Professional Office South: East: West: PROJECT STATISTICS (DEVELOPMENT PLAN) LOT AREA (gross): 32.60 Acres LOT AREA (net): 9.75 Acres FOOTPRINT: Professional Office and Very Low Density Residential Open Space/Conservation Professional Office Highway Tourist Commercial BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE: Vacant (Proposal for Rancho Community Church) Temecula Creek Vacant Vacant (Proposed TM 30180) BUILDING HEIGHT (max.): Commercial Component: 2.8 Acres Residential Component: 4.7 Acres LANDSCAPED AREA: Commercial Component: 123,100 Residential Component: 404,174 Attached Garages: 18,060 Remote Garages: 18,480 Carports: 48,400 Hardscape: 98,010 PARKING REQUIRED: Commercial Component: 39' Residential Component: 41 '-9" Overall: 31.4% Commemial Component: 27.3% Residential Component: 37.2% PARKING PROVIDED: Commercial Component: Residential Component: Commercial Component: 593 Total: includes 542 uncovered; 11 handicapped; 9 motorcycle; and 31 bicycle 831 Total: includes 17 handicapped; 396 uncovered; 96 attached garages; 80 remote garages; and 242 covered 674 Total: includes 615 uncovered; 15 handicapped; 12 motomycle; and 32 bicycle R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 2 Residential Component: 831 Total: includes 17 handicapped; 396 uncovered; 96 attached garages; 80 remote garages; and 242 covered LOT COVERAGE: Overall: 35.80% Commercial Component: 33.20% Residential Component: 37.20% FLOOR AREA RATIO: Overall: Commercial Component: Residential Component: .37 .24 .45 (reference only, no Code standard) BACKGROUND Planning Applications 01-0610 and 0611 originate from a proposal by the Old Vail Pariners and LandGrant Development for the Temecula Creek Village project site. The original proposal was complicated when the City's first General Plan designated the property as Professional Office. Old Vail subsequently filed a series of state and federal actions against the City for inverse condemnation and related claims. The claims were settled in November 2000. The City Council adopted Ordinance 2000-13 that established Planned Development Overlay 4 (PDO-4), and Resolution 2000-13 that amended the General Plan Circulation Map to remove a portion of Via Rio Temecula from the circulation map. The passage of the Ordinance and the Resolution led Old Vail and the City to enter into a settlement agreement. The agreement was signed on November 28, 2000, and contained provisions for 400 multi-family residential units and 123,000 square feet of commercial space. The applicant submitted a Pre-Application for Planning Department review on September 7, 2001. During this review period, staff was able to address a number of concerns that the applicant incorporated into the Development Plan. The applicant submitted a Tentative Parcel Map application and a Development Plan application on December 5, 2001. The applications were deemed incomplete on January 3, 2002 and the applicant was notified of the items needed to complete the application. The applications were deemed complete on April 22, 2002, and the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the settlement agreement (Attachment 4). PROJECT DESCRIPTION Environmental This project does not qualify for an exemption from CEQA review. An initial studywas prepared and it was determined this project could have potentially significant impacts on the environment unless mitigated. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared (Attachment 2). Tentative Parcel Map The applicant proposes to divide 32.6 acres into 14 parcels (12 for commercial uses and 2 for residential uses) ranging in size from .21 acres to 11.91 acres. The combined acreage of the commercial component is 11.9 acres and the combined acreage of the residential component is 20.7 acres. Three primary ingress/egress locations are identified, with a fourth, gated entryway near R:\P M~001 \01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 3 the easterly boundary for emergency vehicle access only. The Parcel Map also identifies a 20-foot wide easement along the southerly project boundary for the construction of a multi-purpose trail. Site Plan The applicant proposes to construct 123,100 square-feet of commercial space and 400 multi-family apartment units on 32.6 acres. The site is divided into four sub-areas. Sub-Area A is a retail and support commercial area encompassing the westerly 6.9 acres of the site. The proposed uses include two restaurants, office and retail space, a bank, and a child daycare facility. The restaurants and bank are oriented along the Highway 79 South frontage to encourage pedestrian access. The office, retail and daycare buildings are located along the rear of the site, which can be accessed from the public trail. Sub-Area C is the Village Commercial Area located in the north-central area of the site. This five- acre Sub-Area is proposed to contain offices, retail shops, a restaurant, and public transit facilities. Primary vehicular access will be from Highway 79 South via a signalized intersection at the easterly end of the sub-area. A bus turnout is proposed near the westerly end of the sub-area to encourage pedestrian traffic. The buildings along Highway 79 South are separated by a central green, which accents pedestrian plaza areas incorporated into the office and retail buildings in this sub-area. The majority of parking for the Village Center has been internalized and placed away from the highway frontage. The ends of the main driveways contain parking stalls that serve access points for the multi-purpose trail. Vehicular access to residential areas from the ends of the cul-de-sac bulbs is prevented through the use of gates at vehicular access points into the residential areas. Sub-Areas B and D'encompass the remaining portions of the site and are proposed to contain 25 multi-family apartment buildings containing 400 units ranging in size from 820 square-feet one- bedroom units to 1,256 square-feet three-bedroom units, two private clubhouses with pools and spas, and four play areas for residents. The buildings vary in height and are clustered to provide sufficient opportunities for landscaping and open space. The buildings are also oriented and staggered to provide varying offsets, which prevents an "institutional" look. The site layout incorporates an eight-foot wide multi-purpose trail along the southern perimeter of the site, adjacent to Temeeula Creek. The project will provide four public access points to the trail. Access/Circulation Vehicular access to the site will be from four locations. Full-turn movements will be permitted from the drive aisle located off of Jedediah Smith Road and from the main entryway for Sub Area C. The full-turn movement for the Village Commercial area off of Highway 79 South will be made possible by constructing a signal light approximately 1,100 feet from the easterly boundary of the project site. One of the other two vehicle access points will be right-in, right-out movements only, and the fourth access point is intended for emergency vehicle access only near the easterly boundary along Highway 79 South. Internally, the two commercial areas are separated by Sub-Area B, which is a gated residential area. Residents will have the ability to travel unrestricted through the site. Non-residents, however, will have to exit the site onto Highway 79 South and re-enter the site if driving from one commercial area to the other. Pedestrians can walk freely throughout the site. Based on the proposed uses, the site is required to provide 542 parking spaces for commercial uses; 814 combined parking spaces for residential uses, and to provide for handicapped, motorcycle and bicycle parking spaces. As proposed, the site contains 615 commercial parking spaces, 814 residential spaces and meets the Development Code requirements for handicapped, motorcycle and R:~P M~001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 4 bicycle parking spaces. Because the site is "over-parked" by 73 spaces, staff has requested the applicant remove some parking spaces near the drive aisle at Jedediah Smith Road to accommodate a wider driveway apron. A wider driveway apron would facilitate emergency vehicle access at this location. Staff has also requested the applicant remove some parking behind Pad C5 to relocate the loading zones in this area. Pedestrian access to the site will be facilitated by a traffic signal on Highway 79 South fronting the Village Center, a bus turnout also fronting the Village Center, a meandering sidewalk in the landscape zone fronting 79 South, and the multi-purpose trail at the southerly end of the site. The multi-purpose trail will have four entry areas that will enable pedestrians to walk along the creek and enter the site at a location of their choice. Internally, the site plan indicates ADA compliant access throughout the site. Building Design There will be a total of ten commercial buildings that will range in size from 3,529 square-feet to 27,272 square-feet. They will range in height from approximately 35 to 39 feet, with three of the buildings being two-stow. The commercial buildings will be distinguished from the residential buildings primarily by their roofing material. The commercial buildings feature a contemporary architectural style that incorporates classical and modern features. All of the commercial buildings will have a uniform patina green metal seam roof. Tower structures with heavy timber trellises will also be a common theme throughout the commercial components, and will accent building entrances. The building exteriors will consist of a painted stucco body with three accent colors, heavy use of stone veneer, and painted aluminum parapet wall caps. The applicant has submitted a material sample board that shows the proposed colors and materials. There will also be a total of 25 apartment buildings, each containing from eight to twenty "stacked" units. There are no town-home units being proposed, and floor plans range in size from 820 square-feet to 1,256 square-feet. Each unit will also have private patio or balcony space with a minimum size of 156 square-feet. The buildings will range in height from approximately 31'10" to 41 '9" feet, with 14 of the buildings being three-stow. The residential buildings will be distinguished from the commercial buildings by their hip roofs and use of roof tiles. The choice of materials also will differ slightly between the two residential Sub-Areas. Sub-Area B will use a faux slate roof tile, and the exterior of the buildings will combine a stucco body with one trim color, hardboard siding, and "Jackson Valley Quarrystone" veneer. Sub-Area D will incorporate a roof tile that resembles wood shake, and the exterior of the buildings will combine a stucco body with three accent colors in lieu of wood siding, and "Oakridge Mountain Ledge" stone veneer. The applicant has submitted a material sample board that shows the proposed colors and materials. In addition to the apartment buildings, the project will incorporate two private clubhouses with pool and spa areas for private recreation opportunities. The clubhouses blend elements from the commercial buildings and apartment buildings. The applicant proposes two elevations for the clubhouses. The first set of elevations closely resembles the architectural style of the commercial component of the project. It incorporates features such as the metal seam roof, towers, exposed heavy timbers and generous use of glass. The alternative set of elevations proposes asphalt composition roof tiles, towers, exposed heavy timbers, and wood siding. Landscaping The project site is divided into four sub-areas. Individually, each of the sub areas meets the minimum landscape coverage requirement. The commercial component of the project is required to have a minimum of 25% landscape coverage. The combined commercial landscaped area will R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 5 provide 27.3% of coverage. The residential component of the project is required to have a minimum of 30% landscape coverage, and 37.2% coverage is provided. Overall, 33.5% of the project site is dedicated for landscaping and open space. The frontage along Highway 79 South will be softened by a landscaped zone that will incorporate a meandering sidewalk. In addition, existing oak trees in this area will be protected in place. This landscape zone ensures that front setback requirements are maintained. Vehicular access points along the highway will be accented by a landscaped median in the driveway approach. The medians will also be functional in that they will be designed to indicate turn movements. Pedestrian access points have been conditioned to use 36-inch box specimen trees to accent their location (Planning Dept. Condition No. 9). The rear of the site will incorporate a twenty-foot wide landscaped easement that will contain an eight-foot wide multi-use trail. The trail will span the entire length of the southern boundary. There will be four public access points along the trail. The City's landscape architect has requested that the applicant plant native species along the south side of the trail along the creek. The landscaping plans indicate that existing vegetation along the slope of the creek will be undisturbed. A twenty-foot side setback along the easterly property line will be planted with trees and hydro seeded. This open space area allows the opportunity for pedestrians to access all portions of the site perimeter. The project perimeter will be planted with 15-gallon California Sycamores, and existing Oak Trees along the Highway 79 South frontage will be protected in place. The landscaped area along 79 South will also be planted with 15-gallon Mondell Pines, assorted shrubbery and lawn. The frontage along Jedediah Smith Road will be planted with 15-gallon Chinese Flame trees. The easterly boundary of the site will be planted with 24-inch box Fern Pines and 15-gallon Engelman Oaks. The rear of the project site will incorporate 15-gallon Engelman Oaks, 15-gallon Mondell Pines, various shrubs and groundcover. Internal landscape components of the site include the Village Center's Central Green, play areas, and open turf areas separating multi-family buildings. The Central Green fronts Highway 79 South, and invites pedestrian activity. Adjacent to the Central Green is a large pedestrian plaza area that incorporates a fountain and seating areas. The pedestrian plaza is also connected to a path that leads to the multi-use trail. The landscape plans also indicate several species of trees that are used to break up lengthy expanses of wall space in the commercial component. Buildings will be primarily accented with various 15-gallon trees and Queen Palmswitheight-feetofcleartrunk. Parking areas will utilize 24- inch box Fern Pines, Engelman Oaks, and 15-gallon Chinese Flame trees. ANALYSIS Environmental Determination This project does not qualify for an exemption from CEQA and an initial environmental assessment was prepared. The initial environmental assessment for this project identified issues that could potentially be significant without mitigation. These issues include Geology and Soils, Noise, Public Services, Utilities and Service Systems, Transportation/Circulation, Biological Resources, and Cultural Resources. As a result of the determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and a Mitigation Monitoring Program have been prepared. The key factors identified and the Mitigation Measures are summarized below: R:~P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 6 ISSUE MITIGATION Ground Rupture/Exposure to Risk Expansive Soils Air Pollutants Noise Levels Traffic Site development to be in accordance with report prepared by EnGen Corp., 5-21-01. Upon completion of final grading, near surface samples will be tested for expansion. The site will be watered at least four times a day, and comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. Measures to reduce noise shall be incorporated into the construction contract. Sound walls will be constructed as patio fences for ground floor units close to Highway 79. Construction of a traffic signal light, and right in, right out movements for other ingress/egress locations will address these concerns. Paleontological/Archaeological Resources Tentative Parcel Map Emergency Services City will strive to maintain current ratios for )rovision of police and fire services. School Impact Provide information to TVUSD concerning proposed number of new students, and a phasing plan. Field inspections during grading and construction shall be performed by City inspectors. This project conforms to all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and City application requirements. The Public Works Department has some concerns with respect to reciprocal access locations throughout the site. These concerns are addressed in the Conditions of Approval. Site Plan The project conforms to all of the PDO-4 requirements with two exceptions. The PDO-4 document refers to the High Density Residential portion of the Development Code in reference to the multi- family apartment buildings. Building separation requirements for multi-family units requirethattwo- story buildings be separated by at least 15 feet, and three-story buildings be separated by at least 20 feet. There is one occurrence where the separation is 12 feet, and the required separation is 15 feet. The applicant has been advised and concurs with a condition to meet the requirement (Planning COA No. 17). All other setbacks have been met. Another area where the project is deficient is in providing designated loading areas for the commercial buildings. There are too few loading areas and they have been placed in locations where they may be difficult to access due to circulation issues; or located in areas where they can potentially block drive aisles when being used. The applicant has been advised and is working to relocate the loading areas. Some parking spaces may be removed, but the site is over-parked based on the Development Code requirements, and removing parking spaces will not be an issue. Staff views this as a minor adjustment to the site plan and can verify acceptability on the construction plans. R:\P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 7 The proposed lot coverage for the commercial component of the project is within the allowable range. The PO designation allows up to 50% lot coverage and this component proposes 33.2%. The residential component allows up to 30% lot coverage and staff has determined the lot coverage for this component to be 37.2%. Staff feels that because the commercial component of the site is allowed up to 50% lot coverage (based on the PO designation) and only 33.2% is covered, and because this is a mixed-use project, it is appropriate to average lot coverage for the entire site. Furthermore, the settlement agreement supercedes the Development Code with respect to the development of the residential component. The overall lot coverage for the site is 35.8%. Staff feels this level of lot coverage for the mixed-use project is acceptable. Access and Circulation The Public Works Department has analyzed the projected traffic impact of the project and determined that the impacts are consistent with the traffic volumes projected for the site by the General P{an EIR. In fact, a General Plan Circulation Element amendment was approved on November 28, 2000 to abandon a street on the site, acknowledging that the traffic volumes on said street would be diverted onto Highway 79 South. The environmental determination on that action indicated that traffic impacts would be minimal. The Fire Department has also reviewed the site plan and determined that there is proper access and cimulation to provide emergency services to the site. Planning staff has minor concerns with aspects of the circulation plan and has added conditions to address those concerns. The trash enclosures in the commercial component are designed with side opening doors. Staff is concerned that the proximity of some of the enclosures to parked vehicles is such that rolling out the bins for pick-up could potentially damage parked vehicles. Also, in the residential component, the trash enclosures are designed to have roll-outs stacked three- deep, with doors opening on the end. Staff is concerned that when picking-up waste, the truck driver will need to leave unattended bins in the drive aisle while dumping the second and third roll- outs. This could cause circulation problems and potential for damage. The applicant has been advised and concurs with a condition to address these concerns (Planning Dept. COA No 19). Staff is also concerned that the drive aisle from/to Jedediah Smith Road is too narrow and may cause excessive vehicle stacking. Staff has advised the applicant to remove some parking spaces from the area adjacent to the westerly property line and toward Highway 79 South, and to widen the driveway apron at Jedediah Smith Road. This is not a requirement, but the applicant has expressed willingness to make the change. Building Design The design of the buildings is consistent with the requirements of the Development Code and the City's Design Guidelines. This project will make a statement of quality of design in a rapidly urbanizing area of the City. The variations in building forms, height, massing, materials and colors will create visual interest from the street and set a standard for future development in the area. The commercial component of the project is distinctive from the residential component primarily from the choice of roofing material. There are other common architectural themes that tie the two components together, such as the use of stone veneer and open heavy timber trellises. Because there are common themes in the building architecture, staff endorses the use of differing roofing materials for the commemial and residential components. Staff has some concerns with the proposed elevations for the private clubhouses for the residential sub-areas. The applicant has proposed two different sets of elevations for the clubhouses. Staff R:\P M~2001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecu~a Creek Village'~PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 8 prefers the alternative clubhouse elevations with some modifications. Staff recommends incorporating the same roofing material as proposed for the apartment buildings in each respective sub-area, and also matching the stone veneer used in each respective sub-area. Landscaping The landscape plan exceeds the minimum requirements for lot coverage. The City's landscape amhitect has reviewed the plan, and the applicant has incorporated the changes. Landscaped setback areas, finger planters in parking areas, and trees to soften the impacts of large wall expanses have been provided and placed to the satisfaction of staff, and meets the Development Code standards. Staff feels the landscaping could be enhanced by providing larger specimen trees (24-inch box minimum) along the frontage of Highway 79 South, and to incorporate even larger specimen trees (36-inch box) at access points and other areas of interest. Staff feels that varying the height of the tree canopy around the project perimeter would be more visually stimulating (Planning Dept. COA Nos. 7 and 9). The multi-purpose trail along the south side of the project will provide a visually pleasing passive recreation opportunity. The final design of the trail has been conditioned to be reviewed and approved by the Community Services Department. The easement for the trail also provides additional buffering away from the 100-year flood plain. The Community Services Department has conditioned the developer to construct the trail prior to the issuance of the 221 st residential building permit. The property owner or a private maintenance association has also been conditioned to maintain all open space and recreation areas. A condition of approval will require that a one-year landscape maintenance bond be submitted prior to occupancy of the first unit. Also, the project is conditioned to locate parking lot lighting such that it will not impede the growth potential of parking lot trees. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS Staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the City's Design Guidelines and conforms to all applicable development regulations, and is consistent with the Settlement Agreement. Staff recommends approval of Tentative Parcel Map 30468 and the associated Development Plan subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS Tentative Parcel Map (Section 16.09.140 A-H) The proposed subdivision and the design and improvements of the subdivision are consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance, Development Code, General Plan, and the City of Temecula Municipal Code; Staff has reviewed the proposal and finds that Tentative Parcel Map No. 30468 is consistent with the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Development Code, and the Municipal Code. The tentative map does not 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; R:'~P M~2001~1-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village'CC Staff Report 05-01-02.d0c 9 The proposed land division is not land designated for conservation or agricultural use. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development proposed by the tentative map; The project consists of a Parcel Map on property designated for Professional Office uses, which is consistent with the General Plan, as well as, the development standards for the PDO-4 zoning designation. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements, with conditions of approval, are not likely to cause significant environmental damage or substantially and avoidable injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; Per the CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. The proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program will ensure that the impacts are not likely to cause significant damage to the environment. 5. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems; The project has been reviewed and commented on by the Fire Safety Division, the Building Safety Division, Public Works, Community Services and Planning Staff. As a result, the project will be conditioned to address all concerns. Further, provisions are made in the General Plan and the Development Code to ensure that the public health, safety and welfare are safeguarded. The project is consistent with these documents. 6. The design of the subdivision provides for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision to the extent feasible; There are solar possibilities available to the tentative parcel map; however, the applicant has not submitted any information in regard to solar possibilities. 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 Public Works Department, expressed concerns regarding potential conflicts with easements or accesses during the project review stage. The concerns expressed by Publics Works have already been addressed, or will be addressed in the Conditions of Approval. 8. The subdivision is consistent with the City's parkland dedication requirements (Quimby); The applicant is responsible for payment of fees, which will address the City's parkland dedication requirements. Development Plan (Section 17.05.010 F) 1. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan and with all applicable requirements of state law and other City Ordinances. R:\P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 10 The plan to develop 123,100 square-feet of commercial space and 400 multi-family apartment units on 32.6 acres is consistent with the PDO-4 policies and development regulations, and the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The proposed plan incorporates architectural and landscape designs, which will enhance land use objectives along Highway 79 South. 2. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The project has been conditioned to conform to the Uniform Building Code, and all construction will be inspected by City staff prior to occupancy. The Fire Department staff has also found that the site design will provide adequate emergency access in the case of a need for emergency response to the site. Attachments: Initial Study- Blue Page 12 Under Separate Cover Exhibits- Blue Page 13 B. C. D. E. F. G. H. Vicinity Map General Plan Map / Zoning Map Tentative Parcel Map 30468 Site Plan Grading Plan Building Elevations Floor Plans Landscape Plan 3. Settlement Agreement (11-28-00) Blue Page 22 R:\P M"2.001 \01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Repoi105-01-02.doc 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 INITIAL STUDY R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02,doc 12 5/1/2002 4:47 PM FROM: Fax TO: 694-6477 PAGE: 001 OF 003 fidential Fax Number: 694-6477 Ci~ of Temecula lax Number: Business Phone: Home Phone: Raymond W..lohnson Esq. A~CP Pages: Date/Time: Subject: 3 5/1/2002 4:47:14 PM Temecula Creek Village Comments 5/1/2002 4:47 PM PROM: Fa~ TO: 694-6477 PAGE: 003 OF 003 May 1, 2002 City of Temecula Planning Commission 43200 Business Park Dr. Temecula, CA 92590 RE: PA01-0610 Greetings: This firm represents Citizens First of Temecula Valley and submits these comments on their behalf. The air quality analysis admits that operating emissions exceed thresholds of significance for ROG, NOx and CO. Operating impacts are thus significant and an EIR must be prepared. The Negative Declaration does not provide data on the construction impacts associated with the project. Painting of two homes per day will exceed thresholds of significance for VOC's. There is no discussion of this impact. Similarly, active grading areas in excess often acres will exceed thresholds of significance even with implementation of all BACT's. This will result in significant construction impacts and an EIR must be prepared. The MMCP states merely that mitigation will assist in reducing impacts, not that they will be reduced below a level of significance. The project will result in 10, 775 daily trips generated by the project. This will amount to a 20% increase in current traffic on SR 79 which according to CALTRANS currently carries apprgximately 42,000 trips per day adjacent to the project. The Negative Declaration does not provide data as to the level of service expected on area roads as a result of traffiC from the project combined with other cumulative projects. No miti9gationm measures are required in the MMCP. Clearly, the introduction of the over 10,000 turning movements per day onto an akeady overcrowded SR79 will result in a significant impact. Based upon the traffic study for the Redhawk Town Center project ( hereby incorporated in full by reference) necessary improvements to SR 79 to achieve even an LOS "D" are unceflain because no source of adequate funding has been identified nor has atime schedule been established for improvements. Traffic demand will thus exceed the capacity until at least such time as all necessary improvements can be installed if ever. The traffic study also does not consider future traffic growth in the axea and the inability of SR 79 to adequately handle the required traffic over the long term. Traffic impacts remain significant and an EIR must be prepared. Noise mitigation on page 30 (X-4) is uncertain as to whether it applies only during construction or on an ongoing basis. There is no discussion of the noise impacts of the additional traffic on existing residential properties in the vicinity. Noise studies prepared for the Redhawk Towne Center project (hereby incorporated in full by reference) indicate that traffic noise related 5/1/2002 4:47 PM FROM: Fax TO: 694-6477 PAGE: 002 OF 003 impacts will be significant. This project will add more traffic than the Redhawk town Center project and noise impacts, at least cumulatively, will be significant andthus an EIR must be prepared. Mitigation is available to reduce offslte noise impacts through the construction of sound walls and landscaping. Why should residents in the area be subjected to increased and unhealthful noise levels as a result of this project when mitigation could and should be provided by the developer of this project? The project should be either downsized or denied to prevent significant environmental impacts. Because there is a fair argument that there will be significant impacts as a result of the project an EIR must be prepared if the project is to be approved. An EIR would allow the consideration of alternatives which could be tailored to reduce significant traffic, air quality and noise impacts of the project as proposed. Please notify me of any future hearings on this matter. Sincerely, l~ymond?. Johnson, Esq. AICP Pamela L. Miod 31995 Via saltio Temecula, CA 92592 eur,9~Onn~ 909.302.6744 FAXEb 1 May 2002 Planning Commission City of Temecula 43200 Business Park brive Temecula, CA 92590 Re: Temecula Creek Villages, PA01-0610, Tentative Parcel Map 30468 and PA01- 0611 Honorable Commissioners, In reference to the above mentioned Planning Application end Tentative Parcel Map I respectfully request that my comments be made part of the public record for the project. My concerns for this project are related to CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC, NO.!SE AND AIR (~UALITY IMPACTS~, as well os the removal of mature trees and the establishment of o multi-use trail system linking already existing trails on the East side of the property. An additional traffic light at .Tedediah Smith Road to accommodate this project end it's over 10,000 dally car trips will only contribute to the stop and go fiasco on this "State" highway, as more trQffic lights are added up and down the road to take core of future commercial and residential growth Qlong Highway 795. The "stop and go" syndrome only ~dds to additional noise and air pollution. The infamous "Village Center" is being proposed to alleviate car trips for the approximately 1,!35 new residents. This is an assumption that this "Village Center" will meet most o~: the needs of these residents. ];t would seem this is a ~Carfetched assumption. More than likely, there will be more outsider residents using the facilities than residents of the project, thus creating more exiting off and entering onto Highway 795. At the 26 September 2000 Council Meeting, then Mayor ,Toff 5tone noted that the commercial area was "too small of an area to mal<c, a Village Concept work". Councilmen Mike N~ggo. r further noted that he didn't' "agree with the Village Concept and that this was the wrong area to experir~ent on". Several mature native and nan-native trees are located on the property including coastal oak. With residential, parks, child care and retail areas planned, the developer would be praised for thinking out of the box and incorporating already established mature trees within the project. Thus, the appearance would be rather unique to other "stick tree" projects. It is ir~perative that a multi-use trail system be created along Temecula Creek. There is already an existing trail et the eastern end of the project all the w~y down to Butterfield ,Stage Road, and if this project is not conditioned to extend the 'trail along the project property, the linkage of the Temecula Creek to the Murrieta Creek trail system wilt be lost. appreciate your time in reviewing and cor~idering my comments and concerns, Pamel~ L. Miod cc: Ci~/Council 2002 CITY COUNCIL HOTLINE RESPONSE REQUESTED Planning & May 1, 2002, 11:22 a.m. Building and Hi, my name is Tom Cotter, I'm at 44056 Quiet Meadow Road, Tcmecuta, Safety California. We live in the Rancho Highlands area. We've lived there since 1993, and we moved here specifically for Linfield School to put our children through Linfield School. We wanted to let you know that we really appreciate that school and anything the City Council can do to expedite the maintenance and improvements that Linfield School is going to be doing there in the City, we would really appreciate it. We just want to voice our support for that school and the expansion they are going to do there in the next few years. Thank you.'. Action Taken: Response By: Date & Time: Grant Yates, Assistant to the City Manager J'un Domenoe, Captain - Temecula Police Aaron Adams, Mana~,ement Analyst [ % 2002 CITY COUNCIL HOTLINE <9 ] RESPONSE REQUESTED Planning May 1, 2002, 12:36 pm Commission This.is Marsha Cotter, 44056 Quiet Meadow Road, Temecula 92592. Phone number is 694-1335. I'm calling in reference to'the two apa~aaent complexes that i are going to be discussed tonight at the Planning Commission meeting. Today is ~ May 1't. I just wanted to voice my opinion against those two. We happen to live right over the hill from Old Town and within walking distance to Old Town. At the intersection of Ynez near Santiago. We get a lot of ~affic going through our neighborhood. They are cutting through and going very fast. There are children in the neighborhood and we are concerned about that. If.you add more apartments that means more traffic. We are also concerned about the noise level. We can hear very clearly things that go on. Music that is done in Old Town, we can hear very clearly in our tract. So those are a few of the reasons. Also, we have a beautiful quality of life that we have here now. My husband and I are not in favor of an apartment complex being put there or on 79-South down by Jedediah Smith. I just wanted to voice my opinion about that. Thank you very much. We appreciate all the efforts that you do. You make our City a very beautiful place. We are thankful for your tenacity and concern for our beautiful way of life. Action Taken: Response By: Date & Time: Grant Yates, Assistant to the City Manager Jim Domenoe, Captain - Temecula Police Aaron Adam% Management Analyst ! Debbie Ubnoske - Fwd: Temecula Creek Village Appeal Page From: To: Date: Subject: Debbie, Shawn Nelson Ubnoske, Debbie 5/15/02 4:58PM Fwd: Temecula Creek Village Appeal Please send me something that has a little more detail (not too much), and I will forward this it to the City Council. Thanks, and sorry for being picky on this but I want to make sure the Council has enough background on this. ATrACHMENT NO. 2 EXHIBITS R:\P M~001 ~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Repor~ 05-01-02.doc 13 EXHIBIT NO. 2A VICINITY MAP R:\P M~001 \01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 14 CITY OF TEMECULA N CASE NO. - PA01-0610 &0611 EXHIBIT 3A - VICINITY MAP PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 5-1-02 EXHIBIT NO. 2B GENERAL PLAN MAP & ZONING MAP R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02,doc 15 CITY OF TEMECULA EXHIBIT 3B - ZONING MAP 'DESIGNATION- PDO-4 · :' ~ Temec creek vil.shp e~n_pCityparcelsl .shp Clty_s~eetsl.shp lan_city1 .shp ,OOOOOOO, EXHIBIT 3B - GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION - Professional Office CASE NO. - PA01-0610 &0611 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE- 5-1-02 EXHIBIT NO. 2C TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30468 (Large Exhibit) If you would like to review, please contact Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400. R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc EXHIBIT NO. 2D SITE PLAN (Large Exhibit) If you would like to review, please contact Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400. R:\P Mk2.001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc EXHIBIT NO. 2E GRADING PLAN (Large Exhibit) If you would like to review, please contact Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400. R:~P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Repor105-01-02,doc 18 EXHIBIT NO. 2F BUILDING ELEVATIONS (Large Exhibit) If you would like to review, please contact Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400. R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 19 EXHIBIT NO. 2G FLOOR PLANS R:\P M~2001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 20 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0610 & 0611 EXHIBIT 3Ga- FLOOR PLAN - UNIT A PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0610 & 0611 EXHIBIT 3Gb- FLOOR PLAN - UNIT B PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO, - PA01-0610 & 0611 EXHIBIT 3Gc- FLOOR PLAN - UNIT C PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02 CITY OF TEMECULA ( COMPOSITE 1ST & 2ND FLOOR PLANS CASE NO. - PA01-0610 & 0611 EXHIBIT 3Gd- COMPOSITE FLOOR PLAN - AREA "D" BUILDING 1 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02 CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. - PA01-0610 & 0611 EXHIBIT 3Ge - COMPOSITE FLOOR PLAN - AREA "D" BUILDING 4a PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02 CITY OF TEMECULA ? coMPosITE 2ND & 3RD FLOOR pLAN ' CASE NO. - PA01-0610 & 0611 EXHIBIT 3Gf - COMPOSITE FLOOR PLAN - AREA "B" BUILDING 1 PLANNING COMMISSION DATE - 05-02-02 EXHIBIT NO. 2H LANDSCAPE PLAN (Large Exhibit) If you would like to review, please contact Emery Papp at (909) 694-6400. R:\P M~2001~01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 21 ATFACHMENT NO. 3 SETrLEMENT AGREEMENT R:\P M~001\01-0610 TPM30468 Temecula Creek Village\PC Staff Report 05-01-02.doc 22 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of this 28t~ day of November, 2000 by and between the City of Temeenla ("City"), a municipal corporation of the State of.Califomia, and Old Vail Partners, a California general partnership ("Old Vail") (collectively the "Parties"). RECITALS WHEREAS, on or about June 28, 1988, the Board of Supervisors for the County of ' Riverside adopted Resolution No. 88-192 ~reating Special Assessment District No. 159, pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Streets & Highways Code §10200 et seq.). WHEREAS, located within Special Assessment District No. 159 is that certain real property, now commonly known as 30905 Highway 79 South, Temecula, California, Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-006 (the "Property"). The County of Riverside subsequently zoned the Property "CPS" - Scenic Highway Commercial. WHEREAS, on or about November 21, 1989, Old Vail purchased the Property. WHEREAS, on or about December 1, 1989, the City, in furtherance of its incorporation as a distinct political entity, included the Property within its municipal boundaries. WHEREAS, on or about November 9, 1993, the City adopted a General Plan, which designated the Property for "Office Professional" use. WHEREAS, on or about December 19, 1995, the City adopted a conformance Zoning Ordinance which, consistent with the General Plan, designated the Property within the "Office Professional" zone. WHEREAS, as a result of the City's General Plan and/or Zoning Ordinance designations and subsequent alleged actions or inactions with respect to the Property, Old Vail filed a series of stat~ and federal actions against the City, inter alia, for inverse cOndemnation and related claims, entitled: Old Vail Partners v. Count,/of Riverside et al, RSC Case No. 253598 and RSC Case No. 268973, which actions were dismissed as to the City by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside (Hon. Victor Miceli), and which dismissal of the City was ultimately affirmed by the Fourth District Court of Appeals. Old Vail Partners v. County of Riverside et al, RSC Case No. 278127, in which action, on or about April 25, 1996, the City and Old Vail executed a stipulation to dismiss the action without prejudice and to toll all applicable statutes of limitation. A:~e~e.006.DOC -1- November 28, 2000 Old Vail Parmers v. County of Riverside e(al, USDC So. Dist., Case No. 941228H (CM), which action was transferced to the U.S. Dislxiet Court, Central District, and redesignated as CV 94-6309 (CBM (Ctx). Old Vail Partners v. County of Riverside et al, USDC Central District, Case No. CV 94-6309-CBM (Ctx), which action was dismissed by the District Court (Hon. ConsUelo B. Marshall), and upon the appeal thereof by Old Vail, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal issued an opinion reversing the decision of the District Court but abstaining from jurisdiction under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). Old Vail's petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court was denied. Old Vail Partners v. City of Temecula, Case No. RIC 312020, which action was a reinstatement of Old Vail's prior action, Case No. RSC 278127, and which, following hearing on the City's demurrer, the City and Old Vail again executed a stipulation to dismiss the action without prejudice and to toll all applicable statutes of limitation. The totality of all litigation proceedings referenced in these recitals shall generally be denoted as the "Litigation". WltEREAS, on or about June 27, 2000, the Planning'Commission for the City of Temecula duly held a public hearing on Old Vail's Plann/ng Application No. 99-0261, and recommended that the City Council approve the petitioned amendments to the City Zoning Map and Municipal Code. : WI-IEREAS, on or about July 17, 2000, the Planning Commission for the City of Temecula considered Planning Application Nos. 99-0261 and 99-037.1 submitted by LandGrant and Old Vail at a duly noticed public hearing; at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support of or opposition to this matter. Planning Application No. 99-0261 is an application for approval of an amendment to the City's Development Code adding Sections 17.22.130 through 17.22:138 to the Temecula Municipal Code establishing the "Temecula Creek Village Planned Development Overlay District (PDO- 4)" upon the Property (hereinafter "T~mecula Creek Village PDO-4"). Planning Application No. 99-0371 is a General Plan Amendment removing the western portion of Via Rio Temecula from the General Plan Circulation Map. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and at~er due consideration of the testimony, the Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council of Old Vail's Planning Application No. 99-0261 and planning Application No. 99-0371. WIIEREAS, on or about September 26, 2000, the City Council for the City of Temecula convened at a duly noticed public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning Commission for the approval of Old Vail's Planning Applications 99-0261 and 99-0371. Upon A:~e~e.006.DOC November 28, 2000 -2- hearing all testimony either in support of or opposition to these matters, the City Council decided to further review these matters and continue hearing until October 24, 2000. WHEREAS, on October 24, 2000, the City Council for the'City of Temecula again considered Old Vail's Planning Applications 99-0261 and 99-0371 at a duly noticed continued public hearing, at which time City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in support of or opposition to these matters. At the conclusion of this hearing and after due consideration of the testimony, the City Counc~l unanimously introduced Ordinance No. 2000-13 approving Old Vail's Planning Application 99-0261, establishing the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4 and certifying the preparation of a mitigated negative declaration in accordance with applicable law.' WHEREAS, on November 28, 2000, the City Council unanimously adopted Ordinance No. 2000-13 approving Old Vall's Planning Application 99-0261, establishing the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4 and certifying the preparation of a mitigated negative declaration in accordance with applicable law and unanimously adopted Resolution No. 2000- t ~ approving the General Plan Amendment removing the western portion of Via Rio Temecula from the General Plan Circulation Map, Planning Application No. 99-0371. The rights, obligations and benefits conferred in connection with the approval of ordinance No. 2000-_13 and Resolution No. 2000- 1"1 shall hereinafter be referred to as "Entitlements" and include, without limitation, a complete environmental clearance and all other official acts necessary to implement as closely as possible the four.hundred (400) multi-family residential units and one hundred twenty three thousand (123,000) square feet of commercial space contemplaled under the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4 and Ordinance No. 2000-13. WHEREAS, the Parties now desire to reach a full and complete settlement of ail issues which were, or could have been, raised in the Litigation and Which were, or could have been, raised with respect to the City's alleged actions or inactions with respect to the Property. Nothing contained herein shall constitute a release of any claims arising after the date of this Agreement. NOW THEREFORE, the Parties, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual promises and covenants hereinafter set forth, hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE 1. TERMS OF SETTLEMENT Section 1.01. General Tenn. The Parties understand and agree that, in the context of processing land use applications rig_der Ordinance No. 2000-13, establishing the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4, the City cannot gdarantee the ultimate outcome of any public hearings before the City Council or other public bodies of the City or otherwise, nor prevent any opposition thereto by members of the public affected by or interested in future applications under the Temeenla Creek Village PDO-4. The Parties further understand that land use regulations involve the A:~Setlle,006.DOC November 28, 2000 exercise of the City's police power and, at the time of executing this Agreement, it is settled federal and California law that government may not contract away its right to exercise its police power in the future. Avco Community Developers Inc. v. South Coast Regional Com., 17 Cal.3d 785, 800 (1976); City of Glendale v. Superior Court, 18 Cal. App.4th 1768 (1993). subject to the foregoing, 'the'City; tothe m,~um extefit alt~Wed bYlaw, and Old Vail, shall each endeavor to faclhtate and pr:omote?ie~pmceedings'necessary to complete processing of the land use '~ aP~/~y~s ~6 impleihent.~i6sel~:as l~s~bl~ tho foiit hundred (400).mdlti~.i'~ly? reside/~ti~"~d~ and 6fie:~imdr~d tWenty thr~'th0Usand (123,000)Sqimre fee[ 6f c~rnfi/~ial ;-~ space contemplated under the 'Temecula Creek Village PDO-4. - The C~ty shall further dihgently and promptly process any future land use approval, environmental action and/or other act(s) necessary to the ultimate implementation of the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4. The City shall neither undertake, advocate nor promote the performance of any actions that would be inimical, injurious or counterproductive to the Entitlements set forth in the Temecula Creek Village PDO- 4 and the General Plan Amendment. Section 1.02. Legal Challenge to Project Approval. 'In the eveht .~.at a claim',:suit or ~ action of any nature whatsoever is undertaken;to 61iallenge th~ ad'0i3fion 'of Ordinanee~No. 2000- 13 and ReSOlution ~o~ J66b- : :br the Entitlement set forth therein, and subject to Section' 1.01 above, .th~Ci~ ~d Old'Vail covenant to diligent!y and jointly:defend, at thej~ separate egst; the app~val'of th~ Enfitlbmenf set forth in the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4 and the General Plan Amendment against any such claim, suit or action of any nature whatsoever seeking to challenge, overturn or in any manner impak the approval of the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4 and/or the Entitlements. Ifa court, tribunal or other body of competent jurisdiction renders a 'decision impairing or in any manner interfering with tho Entitlements conferred by the City's approval of Ordinance No. 2000-13 and Resolution No. 2000- ~ '} , then the City shall facilitate and support to the fullest extent allowed by law Old Vail's efforts to preserve, restore or rehabilitate those Entitlements granted by the adoption of Ordinance No. 2000-13 and Resolution No. 2000- ~ "b, but subsequently impaired by the court,'tribunal or other body of competent jurisdiction. The Parties agree that such facilitation and support does not in any way constitute a guarantee of the outcome thereof. ARTICLE 2. MUTUAL RELEASE OF CLAIMS Section 2.01. Scope of Release. The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that the mutual release and discharge of claims contained in Sections 2.02-2.03 is contingent upon the vesting of the Entitlements. Such "vesting" of Entitlements shall occur on the later of the folloWing dates: (1) The effective date of Ordinance No. 2000-13; A:~Setlle.006.DOC November 28, 2000 -4- (2) The date upon which the statute of limitations has nm on the time for filing a challenge to the approval of Ordinance No. 2000-13, the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4 and Resolution No. 2000- t '~ , provided that no claim, suit or legal action of any nature whatsoever, which seeks to overturn, impair or hinder any Entitlement, is pending at such time; or (3) The date upon which any claim, suit or legal action of any nature whatsoever has been finally determined in favor of those Entitlements pertaining to the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4. Section 2.02. Mutual Release and Discharge of Claims. In consideration of the promises of the Parties specified in this Agreement, and contingent and effective upon the vesting of the Entitlements as set forth in Section 2.01 ,above, the Parties shall fully and forever release, acquit, and discharge each other, their officers, elected officials, attorneys, sureties, agents, servants, representatives, employees, subsidiaries, affiliates, partners, predecessors, successors-in-interest, assigna, and all persons acting by, through, under or in concert with them of and from any and all past, present, or future claims, demands, obligations, actions, causes of action, including those for damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, or for relief by way of writ of mandate, for costs, losses of service, expenses, liability, suits, and compensation of any nature whatsoever, whether based on tort, contract, or other theory of recovery, known or unknown, that they now have, have asserted or could have asserted in the Litigation that relate to the Property or to the alleged actions or inactions taken by the City prior to, and including, the date of this Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall relieve any Party hereto of its/their continuing obligations imposed by law or by the provisions of this Agreement. Section 2.02.1 Easement on the Property. Nothing contained herein shall affect nor supersede, nor be deemed to affect nor supersede, in any way any agreement with respect to access easement across the property between the City and Old Vail. Section 2.03. Waiver of California Civil Code Section 1542. The Parties hereto acknowledge that they are familiar with Section 1542 of the California Civil Code which provides: A general release does not extend to claims which a creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor. The Parties being aware of the aforesaid code section, each hereby expressly waives any fights they might have thereunder. This release shall not operate to release any claims the Parties may later have for the enfomement of the obligations created by this Agreement. A:~Settle.006.DOC November 28, 2000 -5- Section 2.04. Dismissal of Litigation. The Parties acknowledge that, as of the execution of this Agreement, Old Vail does not have any legal action pending against the City. Rather, the preservation of Old Vail's rights as against the City in connection with the Property are generally memorialized in a "stipulation to dismiss without prejudice and toll all applicable statutes of rnnitations," executed by the Parties' respective legal counsel on or about September 15, 1998. The Parties intend these claims as well as all other legal causes of action and/or other rights of action existing at or before the execution of this Agreement to be mutually released in accordance with the provisions of Sections 2.02-2.03 hereto, but only after the vesting of Entitlements described in Section 2.01 hereto. No formal document filing with the any court of competent jurisdiction shall be necessary to effectuate this mutual release and discharge of claims upon the vesfmg of the Entitlements. However, upon the vesting of the Entitlements, the "stipulation to dismiss without prejudice and toll all applicable statutes of limitations" shall be deemed to be null and void, and instead, any and all Litigation against the City shall be deemed to be dismissed by Old Vail with prejudice. Section 2.05. No Assignment of Claims. Old Vail warrants and represents to the City tMt it has not assigned, conveyed or otherwise transferred any of its rights to the claims described in the Article to any other person, entity, firm or corporation not a party to this Agreement, in any manner, including by way of subrogation or operation of law or othenvise, and that Old Vail is the sole owner of all of the claims described ia this Article. In the event that any claim, demand or suit is made or instituted against the City because Old Vail made an actual assignment or transfer, Old Vail agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless against SUch claim, and to pay and satisfy any such claim, including necessary expenses of investigation, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. 2.06:~~:Gefieral Cov6nant fo Cooper:itc. ~erhe City covenants to' cogPerate ~th Old Vail, its successors-m-mterest, assigns, agents, or duly designated representataves thf0ugh all land use ' processing, environmental clearance measures, and any other official acts necessary to implement the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4, including, without limitation, employing all reasonable means to assist Old Vail, its successors-in-interest and assigns through those processes or procedures that may be under the jurisdiction of public agencies other than the City. 2.07. Incorporation of Recitals. The above-stated recitals are a material component of this Agreement, and incorporated into this Article as though fully set forth herein. ARTICLE 3 MISCELLANEOUS Section 3.01. Verbal Representations. This Agreement contains the complete expression of the whole agreement between the Parties hereto, and there are no promises, representations, agreements, warranties or inducements, either expressed verbally or implied, except as are fully set forth herein. This Agreement cannot be enlarged, modified, or changed in any respect except by written agreement between the Parties. A:',Settle.006.DOC November 28, 2000 Section 3.02. Severability of Provisions. Each provision of this Agreement, whether or not contained in separate paragraphs, shall be considered severable. If for any reason any such provision(s) or parts of such provision(s) thereof are determined to be invalid, unenforceable or contrary to any existing or future applicable law or judicial ruling, such invalidity shall not impair the operation of nor affect those portions of this Agreement which are Valid, but in such event, this Agreement shall be construed and enforced in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provision(s) or part of such provision(s) has been omitted. Section 3.03. Binding Effect. Each and all of the covenants, conditions and restrictions in this 'Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the Parties, their successors-in-interest, agents, representatives, assignees, l~ansferees or any party claiming by derivative right an interest in the Entitlements granted by the approval of the Temecula Creek Village PDO-4. Section 3.04. Representation of Comprehension. In entering into this Agreement, the Parties represent that they have relied upon the legal advice of their attorneys, who are the attorneys of their own choice, and that these terms are fully undertaken and voluntarily accepted by them. The parties further represent that they have no question with regard to the legal import of any term, word, phrase, or portion of this Agreement, or the Agreement in its entirety, and accept the terms of this Agreement as written. Section 3.05. Authority to Execute Agreement. The Parties hereto represent and warrant to each other that they have full authority to execute this Agreement, and that no individual, Corporation, partnership or other entity has any interest in the claims and/or potential claims described herein. The Parties further represent and warrant that they will indemnify and hold each other harmless from any and all claims, causes of action Or other rights asserted by any other person, corporation, parmership, or other entity with respect to any such assigned claims. Section 3.06. Draftsmanship and Headings. The headings employed to identify the provisions contained herein are solely for the convenience of the parties to this Agreement. If any ambiguity appears in either the headings or the'provisions attendant thereto, such ambiguity shall not be construed against any party to this Agreement on the grounds that such party drafted this Agreement. Section 3.07. Notices. Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, any and all notices or other communications required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be served on or given to either Party to this Agreement by the other Party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served and given when personally delivered to the party to whom it is directed or to any managing employee or officer of that Party, or, in lieu of personal service, on the fifth business day following deposit in the United States mail, Certified, postage prepaid, addressed to: A:~gettle.006.DOC November 28, 2000 -7- Old Vail Partners c/o RSCH Holdings, Inc. 5230 Carroll Canyon Rd., Suite 310 San Diego, California 92121 City Clerk for the City of Temecula City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92589-9033 Section 3.08. Legal Costs. If any litigation is commenced between the Parties to this Agreement concerning the fights and duties of either in relation to this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to, in addition to any other relief that may be granted in the litigation, reasonable attorneys fees as determined by the court presiding over the dispute. Section 3.09. Venue and Choice of Law. Any action at law, suit in equity, or other judicial proceeding for the enfomement of this Agreement or any provisions thereof, may only be instituted in the Superior Court of California.for the County of San Diego. The Parties further agree that this Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted according to the laws of the State of California. Section 3.10. Execution in counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this AGREEMENT in the State of California. CITY OF TEMECULA Attested to: s an Clerk A:~ettle.006.DOC November 28, 2000 OLD VAIL PARTNERS, a Partnership By: RSCH Holdings, Inc., a California corporation, General Partner/ By: ident ., By~ Ste~an, Secretary Approved as to Form: DETISCH & CHRISTENSEN Charles B. Christensen, Esq., Attorneys for OLD VAIL PARTNERS RICHARD, WATSON & GERSHON, a Professional Corporation By: /~/( · Peter M' Thor~ofi, E., q City Attorney for CITY OF TEMECULA A:~Se~e.006.DOC November 28, 2000 ITEM 21 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CiTY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINA~I~;.E CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning June 25, 2002 Villages of Temecula General Plan Amendment (PA00-0138); Change of Zone (PA00-0139); Development Plan (PA00-0140); Tentative Parcel Map (PA00- 0152) PREPARED BY: RECOMMENDATION: BACKGROUND: Rolfe Preisendanz, Assistant Planner That the City Council continue this public hearing to either the July 23, or the August 13, 2002, City Council Meeting. It is requested by the applicant's representative, Markham Development Management Group, Inc, that the following Planning Application(s): · PA00-0138 General Plan Amendment · PA00-0139 Zoning Amendment · PA00-0140 Development Plan · PA00-0152 Tentative Parcel Map be continued to either the July 23r~ or the August 13th, 2002 City Council Meeting. ATTACHMENT: 1. Letter requesting continuance R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Continuance Memo.doc 1 EXHIBIT A LETTER REQUESTING CONTINUANCE R:\D P~2000\00-0140 Village of Temecula\CC Continuance Memo.doc 2 M DEVELOPMENT fvt~AGF-MENI GRC~? ~NC. June 20, 2002 City ofTcmccula - Planning Dept. Aim: Rolfe Preisendanz 43200 Business Park Drive P.O. Box 9033 Tcmecula, CA 92589-9033 Subject: Request of Continuance - City Council hearing PA 00-01,10, Temecula Village #1085 Wirier Dear Rolfe, Owing to the ongoing negotiations with adjacent homeowners, and their homeowners association regarding the land use plan and architecture issues on the Temecula Village project, we would like to request a continuance of the Council hearing from Juue 25, 2002 to luly 23rd or August 13th, at the Council's discretion. We appreciate your consideration in tl~s matter. Sincerely, M.~k~am Development Management Group, Inc. Pre i~nt c: B. Buchaltcr, The MJW Property Group 41635 Enterpds~ Ci,cle Norlh, Suite Temccula, CA 92590-561,1 (9091296-3466 Fax: (909) 296-3476 w,,w,'.markha rn d m rj.cO m ~O'd 9Zt~E96E606 'ouI '~l, qOI,q dgE;EO ITEM 22 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: CiTY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Anthony Elmo, Director of Building and Safety June 25, 2002 Pala Road Name Change RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve: A name change for Pala Road to Pechanga Road or Pechanga Parkway RESOLUTION NO. 02-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CHANGING THE STREET NAME OF PALA ROAD TO PECHANGA ROAD OR RESOLUTION NO. 02-._. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CHANGING THE STREET NAME OF PALA ROAD TO PECHANGA PARKWAY DISCUSSION: At the regularly scheduled meeting of May 28, 2002, the City Council received a request to change the name of Pala Road to Pechanga Road. At that time the City Council directed staff to initiate proceedings so that the City Council may formally consider this request. Staff proceeded to notice property owners of existing property with Pala Road addresses, property owners of vacant property adjacent to Pala Road that could potentially be addressed to Pala Rd. and four (4) Homeowners Associations, with property adjacent to Pala Rd., to inform them of the proposed street name change. All affected property owners were asked to respond by phone or in writing by June 12, 2002, either in support, or against, the proposed street name change, or before the City Council at the June 25, 2002 regular meeting. As of June 12, 2002, staff has received a total of six (6) responses. These responses are from property owners of property not directly affected by the street name change but rather owners of property in adjacent residential developments. Ail six (6) responses were against the proposed action. The responses are included as an attachment to this report. While reviewing these requests, the Police and Fire Depadments noted that there is a road named Pechanga Road in the Rainbow Canyon neighborhood. Although this would not present a significant problem for emergency response, both Departments noted that the name R:~pela rd name c~ange.doc Pechanga Parkway would help avoid confusion and is preferable from their standpoint. Staff has prepared resolutions for both the name Pechanga Road or Pechanga Parkway. In the event that the City Council approves this name change, the official name change would be effective immediately. However, it will require from 30 to 45 days to obtain new street name signs and we will work with the Post Office, public utilities and other agencies to provide a transition period where both names will be recognized. FISCAL IMPACT: In the event the name change is approved, adequate funds are available in the Capital Improvement Program Budget for the Pala Road Improvement Project, Project No. PW99-11, Account No. 210-165-668-5804 for the street name sign changes. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolutions 2. Public Responses R:~pala rd name change.doc RESOLUTION NO. 02-._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CHANGING THE STREET NAME OF PALA ROAD TO PECHANGA ROAD The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows: WHEREAS, Section 3409.1 and 3408.1 and 34092 of the Government Code provides for changing the name of a public street, and: WHEREAS, there has been a request for a name change from Pala Road to Pechanga Road WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such a change is in the public interest NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula determines and orders that the name of Pala Road be changed to Pechanga Road PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25t~ day of June 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, 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. 02-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 25th Day of June, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 02-._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CHANGING THE STREET NAME OF PALA ROAD TO PECHANGA PARKWAY The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows: WHEREAS, Section 3409.1 and 3408.1 and 34092 of the Government Code provides for changing the name of a public street, and: WHEREAS, there has been a request for a name change from Pala Road to Pechanga Parkway WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that such a change is in the public interest NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Temecula determines and orders that the name of Pala Road be changed to Pechanga Parkway PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of June 2002. ATTEST: Ron Robeds, Mayor Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) ~, Susan W. Jones, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 02-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 25th Day of June, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC, City Clerk Pala Rd Name Change Public Response Against- James Wilson, 31176 LaHaton, (phone message) Pechanga has not done anything for them. They are loud, roads are bad, they have not done anything. Poor neighbors Against- Patty Caristinziani, 45932 Parcipany Ct. (phone message) She looks at Pala Rd everyday. Doesn't see the need to change the street (name). VERY OPPOSED. Traffic has become unbearable with the casino development. Her residential street open directly onto Via Eduardo and looks out at the Casino lights. She is upset that the residential atmosphere is changing and being disrupted by the casino. Pala Rd. has been Pala Rd. for a long time. She sees no reason to change it. Against- Jeffrey S. Stem, 45835 Jeronimo St. (letter attached) Against- Mr. & Mrs. Gorman They have lived in Rainbow Canyon for 15 years and do not want the name changed for sentimental reasons. She advised that she was going to call all of her neighbors and attend the council meeting on the 25th of June. Against - Mr. Linderman No way for Pechanga Rd. None of the Council Members live in this area, the traffic is outrageous for the casino. Has lived here since 1987 and wishes he could sell his home because of the traffic. Against - Danielle Burgess - 45385 Piute St. (letter attached). JEFFREY S. STERN 45835 JERONIMO STREET TEMECULA, CA 92592-5730 9O9.694.8079 STERN@NCTIMES.NET JUNE 8, 2002 Re: Proposed Pala road name change Mr. Anthony J. Elmo CDO Director of Building and Safety City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Mr. Elmo: Change the name? Why? Pala Road honors the Indians just south of the Perchanga's All I ever hear is how much the Perchanga's do for the city - actually I have never seen anything in print that they have done for the people of Temecula. Who paid for the new bridge, who paid to widen Pala Road, who paid for the two sets of signals that were Installed and who pays for the emergency vehicles that are sent to the casino? People will come to the new complex to gamble, dine and spend the night or more and never visit the city of Temecula. I realize that the Perchanga's contribute to the politicians of the area and therefor their wishes seem to be paramount, to the exclusion of the citizens of Temecula. The only reason for the name change is that the Perchanga's want to make it easier to find them, thereby taking away from the Pala Indians. They are buying up land and Incorporating into Reservation land, exempt from taxes and all other controls by the city, county or state. Why do we always do whal~ they want - they have done very little for us. Thank you RESPECTFULLY: JEFFREY S. STERN FtEC .IV .D CiTY OF TB~DULA Bui~Qing & safety Dept. Jun lB 02 O~:Ogp Rvalon M~mt 909-6~9-0522 p.1 June 18, 2002 Gt7 Of Temecula Attn: AnthonyJ. Elmo, CBO PO Box 9033 Temecula, Ca 92589.9033 Dear Mr. Elmo, I hope this isn't too late, and that it makes a difference. I have just learned that they propose to change the name of Pala Road to Pechanga Drive. I think this would be horrible. would only give visitors the imoression that we ' In my ophfion, this Hasn't Pechanga influenced ou~ ~; ......... t .~ar~,a,c.as~,no c{ty. Why not just call it casino drive? from here to her grandma's ~'v ~,JvuiSa as Ir ts.' ~y aaugnter counted nine Pechanga billboards house in Hermosa Beach. I think Pechanga is getting enough advertisement and we should be womed about preserving our city the way that it was. Enough growth already! Lets not give PARADISE". one more symbol that our once small town is nowa "GAMBLERS Sincerely, Danielle Burgess 45385 Piute Street Temecula, Ca 92592 ITEM 23 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT APPROVAL ~, ~ CITY ATTORNEY !'/lUll/ I DIRECTOR OF FINANC~E ~ ' CITY MANAGER /~....~ --'F='~'"~I TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager DATE: June 25, 2002 SUBJECT: Consideration of Sponsorship Request for The Great Tractor Race. PREPARED BY: Gloda Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator RECOMMENDATION: 1) That the City Council consider the sponsorship request for The Great Tractor Race. BACKGROUND: Staff has received a request from Southwest Events to sponsor and permit usage of the City's property at Diaz and Winchester Roads for the proposed Great Tractor Race event. This property is expected to be available for the event. This event will be held October 4 - 6, 2002. The "Parade of Tractors= through Old Town Temecula on October 4th will set the stage for The Great Tractor Race. The event features tractor races, Midway Carnival, Kid's Faire and mud games including mud surfing, mud volleyball and mud tug-of-war. The Temecula Tractor Race will serve as a fundraiser for the Assistance League of the Temecula Valley and Thessalonika Family Services, the Rancho Damacitos branch, local non-profit organizations benefiting Temecula youth. Both organizations are fully supportive of this arrangement. Southwest Events is the event organizer for the 2002 Great Tractor Race. The group is comprised of nine members, which have experience with organizing previous Tractor Races in Temecula. Southwest Events has submitted an application to the Internal Revenue Service to obtain its nonprofit status, which is now in process. Confirmation of their tax-exempt status is expected in August 2002 and the City's sponsorship will be conditioned that Southwest Events obtain their nonprofit status pdor to the event. Marketing and publicity will include newspapers, radio, cable television, direct mail, posters flyers and their website. In addition, a media day is tentatively planned for September 6, 2002, to promote the event. Southwest Events has agreed to repay the City support costs if The Great Tractor Race produces sufficient revenue. If not, the City would provide funding that would be the City's sponsorship amount, in addition to the use of the Diaz/Winchester property. If sufficient R:\Wolnlckg~Agendareports~Tractor Race 2002.doc I revenue exists to fully cover the support costs, the overage would be donated to the Assistance League of Temecula Valley and Rancho Damacitos charities. City support costs including police, fire, public works, community services and code enforcement, for the event is expected to be $8,800. This is somewhat less than the $13,7000 expended last year when the event was sponsored by the Temecula Town Association because there will not be evening events. Funds have been budgeted in the City's FY2002/03 Operating Budget for City support costs. There will be no commissions, consultant fees and/or salaries paid to any party from the City of Temecula's sponsorship. In addition to the fundraising for the local charities, the event has the potential to provide tourism and economic benefits to the City of Temecula. RECOMMENDATION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMI'I-rEE: After studying the issue, the Economic Development Sub-Committee feels that this event will have little if any economic benefit to the city or the region. The sub-committee has, therefore, elected not to forward a recommendation to the Council based on the merits of the event. Recognizing that the Tractor Race has long been a Temecula tradition, the sub-committee felt it was important to provide the Council with the framework of a viable agreement under which the event could continue but the City would not be exposed to any greater expense than is necessary. The following proposed agreement meets those objectives. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated city-support costs are $8,800. These costs may be repaid depending on overall event revenues. Funds are available in the FY 2002-03 budgets of the support departments affected. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Sponsorship Package Attachment B - City Support Services and Costs Attachment C - 2002 Event & Media Promotions Attachment D - 2002 Budget Attachment E - Key Event Management Qualifications Attachment F - Sponsorship Agreement R:\Wolnickg~Agendareports\Tractor Race 2002.doc 2 TEMECULA TRACTOR RACE ATTACHMENT A - SPONSORSHIP PACKAGE CITY OF TEMECULA SPONSORSHIP BENEFITS 2002 GREAT TRACTOR RACE As a Special Event Sponsor of The Great Tractor Race, the City of Temecula will receive: · Sponsor will be listed in all advertising including flyers, newspapers ads, promotional materials and the event program. · Sponsor receives ten (10) admission tickets for Saturday and Sunday performances at The Great Tractor Race. · Sponsor will have the first right of refusal for the next year's event. TEMECULA TRACTOR RACE ATTACHMENT B - CITY SUPPORT SERVICES AND COSTS City Support Services and Costs for The Great Tractor Race Below are the City generated services and their estimated costs provided to the Southwest Events for The Great Tractor Race event. Staffing in various classifications is dependent upon event configuration and anticipated needs. Police Services Service costs: $4,500.00 Fire Services Service costs: $3,000.00 Public Works Service costs: $800.00 Code Enforcement Service costs: $500.00 TOTAL SERVICE COSTS: $87800 TEMECULA TRACTOR RACE ATTACHMENT C - 2002 EVENT & MEDIA PROMOTIONS June 12, 2002 Mr. James B. O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: GREAT TRACTOR RACE 2002 PROMOTION OF EVENT Southwest Events hopes to sponsor the Great Tractor Race this year in the first week of October. We are writing to you to detail answers to the questions that have been raised about the promotion and handling of this fabulous event in the hopes that this will assure the assistance of the City of Temecula. As this is a long-standing event, we hope to continue many of the traditions of this event. First, we hope to have the event at the Northwest Sports complex at Winchester and Diaz Roads to assist our many returning spectators in finding the event again. We also plan to continue the tradition of holding this ev~t the first weekend of October; October 4*, 5~ and 6~ of this year. The tradition of the "Parade of Tractors" through Old Town Temecula on Friday the 4~ will start our event off. Timed trials will take place on that Friday ai~emoon. Starting Saturday at 8:00 a.m., the Tractor Races will continue throughout the day until 5:00 p.m. These fun races will be complimented by other family friendly activities such as a Midway Carnival, Kid's Faire Area, mud surfing, mud volleyball and mud tug-of-war. We will promote the Great Tractor Race through newspapers, radio, cable television, our dedicated Website, and local direct mailers. We hope to draw 5,000 to 10,000 people to this event. This unique event was of such interest to the television station "Outdoor Channel" that they recorded the full event last year to produce a special show of this event. Our tentative Media Day is currently September 6, 2002 to allow us to show all attending media the type of racing that will occur during the weekend long event. Wc believe that thc familiarity and fondness that the members of Southwest Events has for the Great Tractor Race will make this event a success! 'lhank you for your consideration in our request. Sincerely, Southwest Events Dave Johnson President 27860 Del Rio Road #A Temecula. CA 92590 Telephone: (909) 5064408 Fax: (909) 5064409 emaih greattractorraceC~yahoo. June 12, 2002 Mr. lam~s B. O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: GREAT TRACTOR RACE 2002 SPON$ORSHIP REQUEST TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA D~ar Mr. O'Grady, The members of Southwest Events respectfully request the sponsorship of the City of Temeeula toward the long-standing event now called the Great Tractor Race. The funding that our non- profit o~anization requests for this event follow: 1) We are requesting funding for all City-support services including Police, Fire and Public Works for the Great Tractor Race. The City of Temecula staff, the Police and Fire Departments will determine the dollar figure for these services. 2) The dates ofthe Great Tractor Race arc requested to be thc fum weekend of October; respectively October 4~, 5~ and 6~, 2002. 3) Please note, as we are a start-up non-profit organization, we currently have no Profit and Loss Statement to provide to you at this time. We thank you for your consideration in this matter. If you have any further questions, don't hesi~_ate to call me. Sincerely, Southwest Events Dave Ji& President 27860 Del Rio Road gA Temecula, CA 92590 Telephone: (909) 5064408 F~: (909) 5064409 Le:ai!: greattractorraceCWyahoo. TEMECULA TRACTOR RACE ATTACHMENT D - 2002 BUDGET June 18, 2002 Mr. James B. O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temceula, CA 92590 RE: GREAT TRACTOR RACE 2002- PROPOSED BUDGET The following table shows the Southwest Events proposed budget for the 2002 Great Tractor Race: REVENUE Gate Receipt~ $18,400 Beverage Sales $9,000 Enivd Fees $3,200 Parking $2,250 RV Parking $700 Sponsorships $9,950 Vendor Receipts $10,200 TOTAL REVENUE: EXPENSES: Advertising $9,200 Trophies, etc. $2,000 Adult Beverages $3,800 Contingencies $2,000 Donations for Sowices $2,000 Misc. Equipment Rental $3,000 Insurance $2,900 Licenses & Permits $600 Media Day $250 Restroom Facilities $2,750 Security $3,500 Signag¢ $1,400 Site Prepamtiun $1,500 Trash Removal $2,750 VIP Tent $400 Meals for Volunteers $850 : City Support Services $9,000 TOTAL EXPENSES I $47,900.00 PROFIT/LOSS $5,800 27860 [~el Rio Road #A Temecula, CA 92590 Telephone: (909) 5064408 Fax: (909) 5064409 email: greattractorraceOyahoo. June 18, 2002 Page 2 We thank you for your consideration in this matter, ffyou have any further questions, don't hesitate to call me. Sincerely, President SOUTHWEST EVENTS June 12, 2002 Mr. James B. O'Grady Assistant City Manager City of Temeeula 43200 Business Park Drive Temeeula, CA 92590 RE: GREAT TRACTOR RACE 2002 PRIMARY CHARI I I ~'S Attached you will find a letter of appreciation from Thessalonika Family Services, the Rancho Damacitas branch, expressing their appreciation that Southwest Events has chosen them as one of the charities to receive some of our profits fi.om our upcoming event, the Great Tractor Race. Our other chosen charity is the Assistance League~ of Temecula Valley. As of today, I do not have a letter fi.om them that states their desire to work with our non-profit organization. However, we are expecting to receive that letter atter the Assistance League's® Board Meeting to be held on June 20, 2002. We would be happy to forward a copy of this letter once we receive it. We have had numerous conversations with the current president of the Assistance League, Ms. Carol Thomas and she has verbally reassured us that not only would they appreciate any donation we can make to them, but she would also be happy to offer some volunteer time fi-om her Members. Please don't hesitate to call if you have any further questions about our children's charities that will benefit fi.om our profits. Sincerely, Southwest Events Dave Johnson President 27860 Del Rio Road gA Temecula, CA 92590 Telephone: (909) 5064408 Fax: (909) 5064409 email: greatt ractorrace~hoo. THESSALONIKA FAMILY SERVICES Rancho Damacitas Rancho Campus Rancho/itch Foster Homes lohoever welcomes a child in my name welcomes Me.' Matthew 18:5 May 22, 2002 Southwest Events Attn. Christy 27860 Del Rio Rd., Suite A Temecula, CA 92592 Dear Christy: It was a pleasure speaking with you on Wednesday. We at Thessalonika Family Services/Rancho Damacitas are very excited at the prospects of working with you and your agency. Many of our employees have enjoyed the Temecula Tractor Races for years and are pleased to know that an organization has picked up the mantel and is carrying on the tradition. Enclosed are the twenty five brochures as you requested. If you need additional brochures please don't hesitate to give me a call. I have also included a brief one page overview of our agency and five one page color mid-posters. Please feel free to use these materials as a reference or for promotional projects. Again, if you need additional materials, please don't hesitate to call. Thank you for this wonderful opportunity to share with others our mission and efforts to break the terrible cycle of child abuse. Working together, we will stop abuse, and heal the lives of our special children. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Sincerely, Clifford S. Nunn Director of Development CSN~d P.O. Box 890326 Temecula, CA 92589 (909)302-2317 FAX (909)302-2307 TEMECULA TRACTOR RACE ATTACHMENT E - KEY EVENT MANAGEMENT QUALIFICATIONS April 4, 2002 Mr. James O'Grady, Assistant City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 RE: SPONSORSHIP REQUEST INFORMATION Dear Mr. O'Grady: I hope the following information will answer the questions that you raised during our conversation yesterday. The Trustees of Southwest Events are: President: Dave Johnson Vice President: Jack Kay Board Members: 1) Dave and Sharon Johnson Both Dave and Sharon have owned a business for 10 years in the Temecula/Murrie~a area. Dave served as Chairman for the 2002 Temecula Rod Run and has volunteered for other Town Association events over the last five years. He has overseen track operations for The Great Temecula Tractor Race for the last two years. Most importantly, Dave has participated as an owner/driver in the race for 11 years. Sharon has been instrumental in coordinating ail VIP functions for the Tractor Race, Rodeo, and the Rod Run for the past three years. 2) Jack and Missi Kay Jack and Missi have lived in Temecula since 1991. Jack, with co-owner Scott Dittmer, holds the distinguished record of"Fastest Tractor" Class 6. He has been an owner/driver in this race for the past five years. He has worked countless hours in site preparation for the Tractor Race. Additionally, Jack has numerous hours volunteering as an emcee for the Jerry Lewis Telethon and the Temecula Rod Run. 27860 Del Rio Road #A Temecula, CA 92590 Telephone: (909) 5064408 Fax: (909) 5064409 email: greattractor raceCwyahoo. Page 2 April 4, 2002 3) Scott Dittmer Scott has been a resident of Temecula since 1984 and a native of Southern California. He has owned and operated a business in Temecula since 1987. Scott has been involved in the Tractor Race since 1986 racing as well as with site preparation. Last year at the 25~h Annual Race he served in the capacity of Grand Marshal. The tradition of the race is very important to him and he is hoping to see the day when his son, Christopher, will carry on the Dittmer Tractor Race tradition. 4) John and Cristie Shindelar John and Cristie have lived in Temecula for 14 years. Originally from the Midwest, they have transitioned quite easily to the Tractor Race tradition. They have done everything from pulling tractors out of the mud, to working in the VIP booth, to tracking racing times and hope to continue to share it with others. Cristie is employed as a Human Resources Director with a local company; John as a forklift mechanic. Both have volunteered with the Temecula Rod Run and Tractor Race in the past. 5) Tom Parnakian Tom has been a resident of Temecula for 11 years and is employed as an engineer with Opto 22. He has been participating as a driver in the garden tractor class for the last six years. Tom has extensive volunteer experience at Rancho Community Church with various community projects. 6) Rusty Hoenig Rusty has owned multiple businesses in the valley for several years. He has served in the capacity of both President and Board Member of the Temecula Town Association. Rusty has proudly participated in the Tractor Race as an owner/driver for 16 years. His son, Mitch, has also been involved with the Tractor Race since he was three. Rusty has logged numerous hours volunteering with other community events including the Rod Run and the Temecula Rodeo. If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to call me at (909) 506-4408 or (909) 334-1531. As always, thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, SOUTHWEST EVENTS Dave John~n President TEMECULA TRACTOR RACE ATTACHMENT F - SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT ADVERTISING AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND SOUTHWEST EVENTS This Agreement, made this 25th day of June, 2002, by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA, (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and SOUTHWEST EVENTS, a California nonprofit corporation. A. Southwest Events will operate "The Great Tractor Race" on October 4 - 6, 2002. The Great Tractor Race is a special event located at the Northwest Sports Complex at Winchester Road and Diaz. At this date, the Northwest Sports Park property is available for the event. In the event that this site is not available, this contract is null and void. The "Parade of Tractors" through Old Town Temecula on October 4th will set the stage for The Great Tractor Race. The event features tractor races, Midway Carnival, Kid's Faire and mud games including mud surfing, mud volleyball and mud rog-of-war. The event is expected to draw between 5,000 - 10,000 people for the 3-day event. B. The City of Temeeula desires to be a "Special Event Sponsor" of the 2002 Great Tractor Race. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties as follows: A. In exchange for providing property and potentially some or all city- support costs up to $9,000 for the costs of Public Works, Code Enforcement, Fire and Police, the City of Temecula shall be designated as a "Special Event Sponsor" of the 2002 Great Tractor Race. Southwest Events will repay the city-support costs if The Great Tractor Race produces sufficient revenue. If not, the City would provide funding that would be the City's sponsorship mount, in addition to the use oftbe Northwest Sports Park property. If sufficient revenue exists to fully cover the support costs and $2,000 reserves for Southwest Events for future events, the remaining profits would be donated to the local charities listed in item B. In exchange for being a "Special Event Sponsor," the City of Temecula will receive the benefits as listed in Attachment A. B. The Great Tractor Race will serve as a fundraiser for the Assistance League of Temecula Valley and Thessalonika Family Services, the Rancho Damacitos branch, local non-profit organizations benefiting youth. C. Within 60 days following The Great Tractor Race, Southwest Events shall prepare and submit to the Assistant City Manager a written report evaluating The Great Tractor Race, its attendance, and describing the materials in which the City was listed as a "Special Evem Sponsor." The report should also include samples of media press clippings, flyers, pamphlets, etc. in a presentation notebook format. D. In addition, Southwest Events will provide complete financial statements, which includes a balance sheet and income statement of The Great Tractor Race. This must be submitted to the City 60 days following the event. Financial statements must he compiled by a certified public accountant. E. Southwest Events shall file a Temporary Use Permit application with the City of Temecula no later than 60 days preceding the first day of The Great Tractor Race. F. Once the Temporary Use Permit application has been submitted and the event agreement has been executed in final form, Southwest Events will receive city- support services at the time of the event. G. Southwest Events agrees that it will defend, indemnify and hold the City and its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees bee and harmless from all claims for damage to persons or property by reason of Southwest Event's acts or omissions or those of Southwest Event's employees, officers, agents, or invites in connection with The Great Tractor Race to the maximum extent allowed by law. H. Southwest Events shall secure from a good and responsible company or companies doing insurance business in the State of California, pay for and maintain in full force and effect for the duration of this Agreement a policy of comprehensive general liability and liquor liability in which the City and Redevelopment Agency is named insured or is named as an additional insured with Southwest Evems and shall furnish a Certificate of Liability by the City. Notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy or any subsequent endorsemem attached hereto, the protection offered by the policy shall; 1. Include the City as the insured or named as an additional insured covering all claims arising out of, or in connection with, The Great Tractor Race. 2. Include the City, its officers, employees and agents while acting within the scope of their duties under this Agreement aga'mst all claims arising out of, or in connection with The Great Tractor Race. 3. Provide the following minimum limits: General Liability: $2,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage with a $2,000,000 aggregate. Liquor Liability: $2,000,000 combines single limit per occurrence for bodily injury personal injury and property damage. 4. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation again~ the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising fxom The Great Tractor Race. 5. Bear an endorsement or shall have attached a rider whereby it is provided that, in the event of expiration or proposed cancellation of such policy for any reason whatsoever, the City shall be notified by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, not less than thirty (30) days beforehand. 6. Any deductible or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductible or serf-insured retention as respects the City, its officers, officials and employees or Southwest Events shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. I. Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party concerning the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled. J. The City of Temecula's sponsorship for The Great Tractor Race will be conditioned that Southwest Events obtain their nonprofit status prior to the event. In the event that Southwest Events is not able to obtain their nonprofit status fi.om the Internal Revenue Service, this contract is null and void. 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. DATED: SOUTHWEST EVENTS CITY OF TEMECULA BY: Dave Johnson, President 27860 Del Rio Road, Suite A Temecula, CA 92590 Ronald H. Roberts, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter Thorson, City Attorney ITEM 24 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANC-~~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: City Manager/City Council usan W. Jones ity Clerk/Director of Support Services DATE: June 25, 2002 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Appointment PREPARED BY: Cheryl Domenoe, Administrative Secretary RECOMMENDATION: Appoint one applicant to serve on the Planning Commission for a full three-year term through June 4, 2005. BACKGROUND: The term of Commissioner Mathewson expired on June 4, 2002. The City Clerk's office has followed the Council's established procedure for filling a Commission vacancy by advertising the opening in two different local publications. When the deadline was reached for receiving applications, the applications were forwarded to the subcommittee comprised of Mayor Roberts and Councilmember Naggar for review and recommendation. Mayor Roberts and Councilmember Naggar have recommended the reappointment of Commissioner Mathewson. All applicants are registered voters and live within the city limits of Temecula. This term is through June 4, 2005. Attached are copies of the qualifying applications that were received by the filing deadline of June 6, 2002. ATrACHMENTS: Eight (8) Copies of .Applications for Appointment. Agenda Reports/Appointment Planning Commission 1 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-644~ 06-:76-07:i2 :' 5 2C'4[" ''' '. 'Forl~mPercoeaderatlon,.youmu.~,Ci~'~d~be,aresldeatofthe.. ,.-.. ii]i RECEIVED : ,, City ef Temec~la and a Reid!etak.ed ¥~,~.~l~y ofTeme~,ula,.', , - , , , , ., , . JUN-"o2002 Pl~e ~ 0~- CI~ CLERKS DEP~ I IPlannlng r-'~ Community Services r'--'] public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident --_ Are you a City Registamd Voter? NAME: .Charles Coe ADDRESS: 30554 Graenway Cimle OCCUPATION: Sales Manager DAYTIME PHONE: 909-851-4221 EMPLOYER NAME: OMNI Concepts EVENING PHONE: 909-676-7408 EMPLOYER ADDRESS: 1056 Old Taylor Rd, Vista, CA E-MAIL temchu~arthlink, net Educational Backgmund/Degraes: HS Diploma BS Toledo, University List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: Temecula traffic/safety Commission--8 Ust any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): Clubmakers assoc., Hotel Engineers assoc. State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of popor if necessary.) When I applied to the traffic com several years ago I stated my main reason was that I wanted to be on a commission where I could make a difference. During my tenure I HAVE made a difference. The same reason applies now. There is no questioning my dedication to this city, and as far as qualifications are concamed; my knowledge of the city, how it works, what the what the residents of Temecula want and a broad understand of the construction industry make ma every bit as qualified as some who have been on this commission before me. I understand that any or all In~rmatlon on this ~[n may be ven'fled. I censsnt to the release of this Information for puMIc Informstion. perj)eae~g./. Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-64~.~. (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.ciD/oflemecula.org (909) 694-6444 { Please Check One: I .×x Planning Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident Commission Appointment Application RECEIVED ForProper C°nsldeJafion,yOU~uStoi~rrentiybea m.~ident Of the, · ' { M~y 3 1 2002 City Of TernecU a a,)d a' Reg ,~e~ed Voter'in the d ' Teme u ' m' ' :~ -" · '''( 't~.1 · ¢ ~ , ~i[¢ cLERKS DEPT. Community Services E~ Public Traffic Safety ~ Are you a CiD/Reg stered Voter? Yes NAME: DARRELL L. CONNERTON ADDRESS: 31618 Corte Rosario OCCUPATION: Consultant Temecula, CA 92592 DAYTIME PHONE: (909) 693-1994 EVENING PHONE: (909) 693-9103 EMPLOYERNAME: Darrell L. Connerton Consulting & Construction Management EMPLOYERADDRESS: 31618 Corte Rosario Temecu la, CA 92592 E-MAIL dlc37@aol.com Educational Background/Degrees: I have a California Contractors "B" License High School and Trade Schools associated with Construction Listany City orCounD/Board, Commi~ee orCommission on which you have se~ed andtheyear(s)ofse~ice: I have served on the Traffic & Safety Commission for 4 years Member of the CAC General Plan Review Committee Listany organ~ations ~ which you belong (pm~ssional, ~chnical, community sewice): Chairman/Founder of the Lincoln Club of Southwest Riverside County Elected Member of Republican Central Committee (66th Assembly District) Temecula Valley Congress of Republicans, V.P. American Society of Professional Estimators (ASPE) / Member of ICBO State why you wishto se~e onthiscommission, and why you believe you are qualifiedforthe position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheetofpaperifnecessa~.) **SEE ATTACHED SHEET I understand they or all information on tJ~ form may be verified· I consent to the release of this information for public informa~for)/purp~l~,**p~t~*'*'*~,._.~ //J Signature: /_~_/~ Da Ma,, 30 2002 I~''~' ~r ' te: z ~, P ease return to' C Clerk's Office 4 ' ' · ty , 3200 Business Park Dnve (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline Darrell L. Connerton May 30, 2002 I wish to serve on the Planning Commission of Temecula to help continue the direction and quality of growth the City has experienced in the past 12 years. I feel I am qualified because I am a second generation contractor who has built or has managed many residential, commercial, industrial, and office building type of buildings. I have been involved in many aspects of governmental agencies during the processing of new construction, rehabilitation of buildings (which includes historical types of buildings). I am a Consultant in the construction industry (for construction defect litigation support) and have served as an expert witness in over 250 cases involving residential, commercial and office types of construction, representing approximately $400 million in claims. Please see attached resume' for additional information. & CM DARRELL L. CONNERTON CONSULTING & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CALIFORNIA OFFICE 31618 CORT~ ROSaRiO TEMECULA, CA 92592~6478 1909J 693-1994 OFFICE (909) 693-1943 FAX Email: dlc37@aol.com wwvv. dlcconsult, com NEVADA OFFICE 1405 W. SUNSet, #103 HENDERSON, NV 89014 1702] 547-1021 OFFICE (702~ 547-6233 PROFESSIONAL LICENSE / AFFILIATIONS California Contractors License -"B" EPA Certification for Asbestos ICBO - Professional Member American Society of Professional Estimators HUD 203 K Certified Consultant, Plan Reviewer, and Inspector BACKGROUND EXPERIENCE DLC, Consulting and Construction Management Lee Saylor, Inc. PM Realty Group Patscheck Development Mountain Meadows Development Kaufman & Broad Hedtage Development Department of Defense Connerton Construction Company BACKGROUND QUALIFICATIONS Responsible for daily management of operations and supervision of field staff and subcontracting trades on specific job sites. Provide estimating, scheduling, value engineering, claims preparation and contract negotiations on a wide range of projects. Pr~ct Mana~ Over 25 years of experience in managing construction projects with hands on experience in superintending, estimating, cost management, value engineering and litigation support for construction claims. Responsibilities include scheduling, developing bid packages, preparation and negotiation of construction contracts and project management operations. Projects range in size up to $18,000,000 including renovations of Iow and high-rise buildings including all tenant improvement. Other typical projects include shopping centers, industrial buildings and residential condominiums. Construction Manager Extensive experience in both on site and off site infrastructure improvements including building stabilization. Hot and cold water repiping, irrigation and fire sprinkler systems. Management responsibilities include purchase orders, project procurement, change order log and tracking and claims analysis. As director of engineering responsibilities include all off site purchases and management of construction for over 300 residential units. Environmental ManaRement Responsibilities include management of hazardous waste mitigation services including asbestos and contaminated soil. Mr. Connerton has worked with the City of Los Angeles and helped author "Regulation 68" which is the procedure used by contractors for asbestos removal and work in the subcommittee in the City of Los Angeles dealing with hi-rise residential fire sprinkler retrofit. He also has worked with the SCAQMD relating to their Rule 1403, dealing with construction and related asbestos removal. 2 Ex e___~._~_~itn es s Extensive experience in Construction Defect Litigation Support. Mr Connerton has assembled teams of Architects, Structural Engineers, Mechanical Engineers, Geologist, Soils Engineers and Roofing Specialist or has worked on an assembled team to evaluate construction defect report- and repair recommendations and prepare a report on repairing and cost for reported defects. He has been associated with over 125 cases amounting to in excess of $250 million in construction defect claims. Gove__rnmental Was employed by the Department of Defense, traveling to various governmental contractors, insuring compliance with contractual requirements. With Connerton Construction Company, acted as a superintendent and Project Manager on construction sites for structural steel buildings, commercial centers and single family homes. PROJECTS ( Partial List) Residential New Construction Monte Vista Townhomes Palm Terrace Townhomes Old Chapman Road Townhomes Rialto Meadows Mountain Meadows Daly Homes Victory Woods 45 Condos 32 Condos 72 Condos 67 Single Family 280 Single Family 274 Condos 328 Condos 3 High Rise Office and Residential Asbestos removal, sprinkler retrofit, tenant improvements and renovation Todd Towers Bunker Hill Towers Executive One Westwood Plaza Citi-National Bank Bldg. 11 Floors, Office 32 Floors, Residential 25 Floors / 8 Floors Office 10 Floors Office & Retail 25 Floors Office Remodel (Stabilization, rehab and repair) Quail Ridge La Sierra Manor Parsonage House 2617 7th Street 5611 Walter Street 5415 Walter Street 10661 Burton Street 10594 Burton Street Williams Building La Sierra Il 10590 Burton Street 1789 7~ Street 8957-8897 Indiana Ave (In Process) 3527 Main Steer 3350 Mulberry Street (In Process) 3441 Mulberry Street (in Process) 144 Condos 105 Apartments Historical Restoration Historical Restoration Rehab, Single Family Rehab, Single Family Rehab, Multi Family Rehab, Multi Family Historical Restoration 40 Unit Apartment, Rehab 16 Unit Apartment, Rehab 27 Unit Apartment, Rehab 13, 4-Plex bldgs Rehab Restaurant Renovation Single Family New Infill Single Family New Infill 3245 3227 3207 3275 3299 3362 3382 Orange Street Orange Street (In Process) Orange Street Lime Street Lime Street (in Process) Mulberry Street Mulberry Street Single Family Rehab, Historical Single Family Rehab, Historical Single Family Rehab, Historical Single Family Rehab, Historical Single Family Rehab, Historical Single Family Rehab, Historical Single Family Rehab, Historical 3406 3428 4250 3848 Welty Building, Temecula Mulberry Street Single Family Rehab, Historical Mulberry Street Single Family Rehab, Historical Brockton Ave Single Family Rehab, to Office Historical Fourth Street (In Process) House Move, Single Family Rehab, Historical (In process) Commercial Rehab, Historical Have worked with the City of Riverside and Riverside Housing Development Corporation on the Home and CDBG Programs as a Construction Manager and Inspector on more than 300 homes. Have also worked as a Construction Manager for the City of Riverside on other types of programs, including Hazmat problems which include Asbestos, Lead Base Paint and soil contamination. wpwJn\ccc~resume3.new 5 City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Ddve Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 P/ease Check One: II Commfssfon. Ap.p. ointment Appl~ca t~on City of TemecUla and a RegiStered Voter Iri th'; Cl~ of Temecula' .. RECEIVED HAY 2 8 2002 Or Proper cons deratlon,you must currpntly be a resident of the, CITY CLERKS DEPT. I,,X IPlanuing r---']Community Services J-~ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ~' Are you a City Registered Voter? _Z~-~ Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any o~nizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you am qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or al, l~o~a__,fiq~j~;h-I'~ may be verified I consent to the release of this information for Please'/retum to:City Cle~'~ce, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 6S4-6~.~.~, (OR) Mail to: P.~). Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Plea,~ be aware of the advertised deadline Steven L Dehlinger 41234 Sea Island Court Temecula CA 92591 909-699-5600 Fax 909-693-4824 Attachment to Commission Appointment Application Organizations/Memberships: 1. Temecula Chamber of Commerce 2. Southwest Riverside County Association of Realtors 3. California Real Estate Inspection Association 4. Federation of Real Estate Appraisers 5. International Conference of Building Officials I wish to serve on The Planning Commission because I am concerned about the future of Temecula. I believe it is important that Temecula develop well paying jobs while maintaining a fair balance of residential amenities. My family I have lived here for two years and we consider Temecula our permanent home. I feel that I possess a level of common sense and fairness that will serve the citizens of Temecula well. I believe I am qualified because of my sincere desire to do what is best for the citizens of Temecula. I grew up in Anaheim, where I owned a high tech manufacturing business for over thirty years. During that time I lived in Yorba Linda and Laguna Niguel. I've experienced first hand the problems and triumphs of community planning. I also understand that a vocal minority can sway the planning process aslmy from the overall good of the community. My tenure as a leader in business coupled with long term planning in that enterprise have endowed me with the experience needed to serve on The Planning C~/romission. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 06-04-02P05:00 RC'VD Commission Appointment Application ~ ~,,~ ~ ,~, ~ ................. ' ,~, RECEIVE , City ~f~emec~la a~d,~a~R~g~t~rea~Vgte~ ln~thg~tv~og~me~;? ~: ,~(~ 3UN - 4 2002 Please Check One: ~ Planning __ Community SedUces Public Tra~c Safety Number of years as a Ci~ of Temecula Resident ~,~ Are you a Ci~ Registered Voter? ~ .AME~ ~ OCCUPAT~O.:~ ~-~~ ADDRESS: "~/'~) l'-~ ~1~ ~-~ c~-)_~c~ ~ DAYTIME PHONE:"7(=,O~=,O'~ ~Z~-~'-'O'~ EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: EMPLOYER ADDRESS:~t Educational Background/Degrees: List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the' year(s) of service: List any organizations'to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): ~._.~.~ · 't.J.~.~l State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific.(You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) "~ -C~,=,~-.%~- ~- I ~nderstand that any or a11 information on this form may be'verified. I consent to the release of. this~information for public information purposes. ' Slgnature.~ ,~ Date: usines Mail to: P. OY~Sx 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 ' PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 06-05-02 ~,C;8: 1 ? RCVD Commission Appointment r Application 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula. CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 ·, ~F:~prope~r,~o~ilera~n~ ~ou ~u,.st~e~tl~J~ ~j~dc~if~e'~.,,~,~,-~-~JJN - § 2002 ~ ,' ';Cj~y'o~:~9~e~,Ol0'a~d-~R~i~e~te~ in~t~jt~:b~'m'~';/- ;~,,:~ [... :': ~... ' '~ ~,' :,¥ :'~' :::~*~, ~:~.'%.:- ~?~::~: ' ~:? :~t~.,~',.'· :< ~ ~,,;:~;:,?~,;,~[~CLERKS DEPT. Plea~cheCk One:' ,.. . , . // Planning __ Community Sewices __ Public Tra~c S~fety Number of years as a Ci~ Of ~Omeeula ~es~d°nt [ g Are you a Oi~ ~o~istored Voter.* F~ EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: E-M~ EduCational Babkgroun~Deg~ee~' / ] ' ' ' ',';' ~ ' ~ ' ' ." , List anY Ci~ or Coun~ Board, Commi~ee or commission on which you have sewed and the year(s) of semite: ADDRESS: DAYTIME pHoNE: '~ ~:~'_ ~//~ ' EMPLOYER NAME: ~27,~ List any organizations to which you belong iprofessibnal, technical, community sen/ice): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be spec~may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that. ~a~y^or aH inform~tio~ this fo,,,, may be verified. I consent to the r~lease of thi/~/~on ~lic p~//~natlon purposes, f) , S~gnature: ////ff~//* ~-~~ Date: ~/~-~.~ ~)~ Plea~se return to:/.~?_Clerk_'sj~ffice, 43202~Business Park Drive (~) 694-6444 (0") I~0: P.~. BOX 903/3~ Temecula, CA 92589-9033 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE My professional expedenco serves as the best summary of my qualifications. I have been a key player on both domestic and international projects for several fortune 500 companies in the engineering environment. Those projects include a portion of the L.A.M.T.A subway; Taiwan's High Speed Rail and several power generation projects. Currently, Temecula is scheduled for a terminal on the inland route of a proposed Califomia high-speed rail system between Sacramento and San Diego. I would like to be involved and feel I have much to offer. Our area also needs a link to the coast if we are to grow in an organized, vibrant city that is more than a commuting bedroom between San Diego and work centers in Orange County: ..... Having first moved to the area in the late 70's ~nd ~alling' it home, even when on foreign and other assignments, I have watched the mostly organized grOwth that has happened since then. We have moved from a small relatively rural community of ranches into well- planned unit developments that preserved much of the green.spaCe that others are now finding very attractive. During the mid-eighties I used the demographics available, and attendance figures from my pastor to plan an expansion/construction for our church. Since the completion of the project we have grown more than eleven-fold and our actual 'growth for the first 3 years remained within 2 persons of my projections. ' · Our future goals must include preserving of quality of living and preventing the area from becoming an asphalt parking lot and a haven for gangs and other non-law-abiding citizens. Although I am recently retired, I still have the energy and willingness to make this great place to live even better for the'future generations, and hope you will add me to the commission. 05-34-02P02:~5 R~VD 43200 Business Park Drive Commission Appointment Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula.org Application (909) 694-6444 · Fog oroper, co~deration~ ~ou~!u$~ e~ ntlJ~, ~ ~id~nt.of~g .... ~ . ~ty o~Temecula anda Rg~tgrediVo~ m:;the C~ o[~mec~. ' .'- 1 Please Check One: ~' Planning __ Community Services __ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident '~' Are you a City Registered Voter? ~/'~ NAME: _~ II~'d iT) ~/'~"['- ADDRESS: .~ [ ~-~ 3 DAYTIME PHONE: ~"~.~ to 7'57--5857 EVENING PHONE: EMPLOYER NAME: [[~)O ~'I- EMPLOYER ADDRESS: OCCUPATION: %. ~)~,t.O~ ~JI:E ,~[~. S"r' E-MAIL Educational Background/Degrees: ~- I~. ~Y~,ov'~o~-~ - t.)w~oz, w-~ [~ -~/ U ~ ~, og ~t ~ List any Ci~ or Coun~ Board, Commi~ee or C~mmission on which you have se~ed and the year(s) of List any organizations to which you belong (professional, te~hni~l, ~mmun~ se~i~): State why you wish to se~e on this commission, and why you believe you am qualified for the position. Please be specWic.(You may affach a separate she~ of paper if necessa~.) A~ ~ ~ ~~ I ~derst~d ~at ~y or ~ info~a~on on ~is foxn~ may be vexed. I consent to ~e rele~e of ~is ~o~mation for pubHc i~o,ma~on p~os~. Please retum to: Ci~ Cle~ Office, 43200 Business Pa~ Ddve (909J 694-6~4 (OR) Mai~ to~ P] 0] JO] J033~ Tem~cu~]j CA J25891JOJ3 PLEASE BE AWARE OF THE ADVERTISED DEADLINE City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www.cityoftemecula .org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application RECEIVED ;;. ~F,or'prqper ~co~?!deretion,.~;ou':m, US~.,C~n'gntly ~b~ares/dentof~h~. ~-'.. r j ' ~ · Cityof~etneculaandaRegisteredVoterintheCityofTeme~ua~ " ', JUN - 3 2002 Please Check One: CITY CLERKS DEPT. ~Planning ~-~Community Services ~ Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident __~_.__ Are you a City Registered Voter? NAME: ,~~ ~~"P )OCC U PATIO N: ADDRESS: _~~/_~ EMPLOYER NAME: EMPLOYER ADDRESS: E-.A,, i d o. Educational Back§round/Oegrees: · · L~t any C~ ~ ~n~ ~a~, ~mm~ ~ ~mmi~n on wh~h you have se~d and ~e y~s) of ~: List any on3anizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): State why you wish to serve on this commission, and why you believe you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this Information for public Information purposes. Please ~tum to~ City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Ddve ~09) 694.C~,~.~,' (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033. Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline 1. Temecula Old Tow~ Local Review Board 2002- Temecula City Council 1989-1992 Old Town Preservation Committee Chair 1992 French Valley Airport Committee 1991-1992 City Committee Secretary 1987-1989 Sam Hicks Monument Park Board of Directors 1987-1989 2. Friends of the Temecula Library life member Temecula Valley Arts Council Patron and volunteer Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce and Governmental Action Committee member Temecula Town Association member Temecula Historical Society member Temecula Valley Museum docent Temecula Valley Wine Society member and wineries volunteer 3. My qualifications for, and my desire to serve the City on the Planning Commission include, but are not limited to: My love of the City of Temecula My desire to see the City continue to grew into the model city we had envisioned at the time of incorporation in the following areas: Economic growth and development Public amenities Beautification Sense of community My wish to maintain the standards laid out in the General Plan It is incumbent upon the Planning Commission to present the best possible projects to the City Council for its consideration, in accordance with the desires of the members of the Council. City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 www,cityoftemecula.org (909) 694-6444 Commission Appointment Application CITY CLERKS DEPT. r~Check One: Planning __ Community Services Public Traffic Safety Number of years as a City of Temecula Resident ~ Are you a City Registered Voter?/~.~ w eeJ cg I' k Educational Background/Degrees: ~,~,1 ~¢_~'~ J~. ~-__~"~p(~/~ List any City or County Board, Committee or Commission on which you have served and the year(s) of service: List any organizations to which you belong (professional, technical, community service): y y is commission, ana wny you oe~ieve you are qualified for the position. Please be specific. (You may attach a separate sheet of paper if necessary.) I understand that any or all information on this form may be verified. I consent to the release of this information for public information purposes. Signature:~ Date: Please return to: City Clerk's Office, 43200 Business Park Drive (909) 694-6444 (OR) Mail to: P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Please be aware of the advertised deadline Why I would like to serve on the Temecula Planning Commission From 1970 to 1983 ! worked for the County of Boulder, Colorado Planning Department. ! held the positions of Operational (Current) Planner, Long Range (Future) Planner and finally, Building Development Coordinator. During my tenure with the county ! worked on the Boulder County Comprehensive (General) Plan, which incorporated eleven municipal plans, including the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. From 1985 to 2000 ! worked for the City of Santa Cruz. ! held the position of Assistant Planner with the Department of Community Development for two years. The balance of my time at the city was with the Parks and Recreation Department, where ! held the position of Park Planner. While with the City of Santa Cruz ! worked on the City of Santa Cruz General Plan. ! am familiar with zoning and subdivision regulations, planning concepts, growth management principals and design review. ! am also familiar with the California Map Act, CEQA and NEPA requirements as well as building codes. I have worked as a staff representative for the City Council, Board of County Commissioners, Planning Commissions, Zoning Boards and several advisory committees while employed by the County of Boulder and the City of Santa Cruz. ! would love to serve on the Temecula Planning Commission and feel ! could offer my experience and knowledge to the city and to the community. ITEM 25 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, CITY MANAGER /.JO /vr~'"'~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager June 25, 2002 Congestion Management Councilmember Pratt) Program Update (Requested by RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council discuss this matter, then receive and file. BACKGROUND: At your June 11 City Council meeting, Councilmember Pratt requested that this matter be placed on the agenda of June 25, 2002 for discussion. Councilmember Pratt has provided a copy of his comments to the City Council during the May 29 budget workshop, as well as a copy of his comments to the Council at the June 11 meeting. Councilmember Pratt has also provided a copy of sections 65070 through section 65089 of the Government Code which pertain to this. These materials are attached. In Riverside County, the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) has been designated as the Agency responsible for the development and implementation of the Congestion Management program. This plan was first established in 1990 and has been periodically updated. The most recent plan was adopted in December, 2001. This plan identifies key roadways and requires that when a segment falls to level of service "F", a deficiency plan must be prepared. Preparation of a deficiency plan is the responsibility of the appropriate agency. Roadways in the Temecula area covered by this plan include Interstate 15, Highway 79 North, and Highway 79 South. Segments of these roadways within Temecula currently operate above level of service "F", and thus a local deficiency plan is not currently required. A copy of the Executive Summary of this plan is attached, and a complete copy of the report is available in the City's Public Works Department. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: 1. Councilmember Pratt's comments at May 29 Council Workshop 2. Councilmember Pratt's comments at June 11 Council Meeting 3. Government Code sections 65070 through 65089 as provided by Councilmember Pratt 4. Executive Summary of 2001 Riverside County Congestion Management Program R:/Ogradyj~Agenda Reports\Congestion Managen'~nt Prooram - Pratt - June 25, 2002.doc Attachment #1 Councilmember Pratt's comments at May 29 Council Workshop Summary Wednesday, May 29, 2002 - Budget Workshop Comments before the Temecula City Council and Staff on the CIP Budget FY 2003-2007 In light of Mayor Pro Tem Stone's welcome comment at last night's Council Meeting of the possibilities that a subway system would provide to reduce traffic congestion and improve citizen mobility the following report, prepared over the last three weeks is timely: My ballot statement was to reduce traffic stagnation in our city, and I will continue to represent the voters who supported my election on this issue. Local, arterial and freeway traffic is at or near gridlock. ! have challenged our City's inadequate and inappropriate traffic and "alternate choice" transportation policies continuously since my election. My professional opinion is that the use of the Level of Service (LOS) is not appropriate in determining, traffic circulation or citizen safety in Temecula, and that the continuing increase in traffic will result in gridlock in many areas of the city. The multi-million dollar infrastructure improvements make no sense in the light of the existing traffic stagnation, guaranteed traffic gridlock and lack of convenient "alternate choice" public transportation. $239 Million to make traffic worse is impossible to justify! I am sure that many of our72, 000 citizens don't want to wait :LO years for completion of the infrastructure portion of the C~P. ! offer a positive interim step. Commenting on the 2003-2007, proposed 5 year CTP Budget for new infrastructure: To improve present traffic and "alternate choice" transportation for a period of 5 years would allow time for construction of a permanent monorail system, convenient, and attractive to citizens and the tourist trade. Excerpt from a Letter to the Editor of February 8, 2002: For excitement, fun, access to work, and play, ! envision two "backbone" Temecula owned and managed monorails (in the spirit of Disneyland) to improve convenient public transit and tourist access to the endless community amenities. One monorail east to west From Lake Skinner to the base of the Santa Rosa and the other monorail south to north from Pechanga Casino to Murrieta Hot Springs Road accessing two major shopping areas - the Promenade Mall and Margarita/SP,79S - and schools and sports facilities en-route. I am requesting the following to protect the health, safety, and economic welfare of all citizens during the 5-year period of the design, construction, and implementation of a permanent monorail system and to complement the system on completion: l0 full time additional motor patrol enforcement officers $ 5 Million (improper driving accounts for 69% of fatal accidents and 74% of injury accidents) 6 new high speed round trip interurban buses Temecula to Escondido/Corona 15 12 additional new public transit buses 8 Bus Shelters throughout city for local public transit 2 Multi-medal Transit Center 7.5 CSD trafficltransDortation advertisin(] and education oroorams 0.5 Total $ 38Million Savings $201 Million Percent saving 201/239 = 84% $201 Million/S38 Million = 5.26 times greater than the cost the Staff and Council of Temecula should provide for an interim budget for traffic and "alternate choice'' transportation mitigation for the relief of citizens now. Cap~l costs for a permanent transit system in ascending order: Environmentally designed bus system, surface light rail (has right of way restrictions, coupled with a noise factor), elevated monorail and a subway. The cost of a subway is over 5 times that of a monorail, construction time - two to three times, and it may not be feasible geologically in this area due to many minor earthquake faults. However, it certainly solves the traffic congestion problem! I propose that 16% percent of the LIP Budget immediately be earmarked to proceed with a new updated policy for traffic, and "alternate choice" transportation while the present LIP Budget for infrastructure proceeds with design and property acquisition. As a new updated traffic and transportation policy is implemented, present LIP Budget infrastructure projects can be reevaluated as to their worth in mitigating traffic. Our local traffic mitigation and "alternate choice"transportation must "catch up" and lead new residential, and commercial development. Our roads and streets are not over populated with people, they are over populated with cars. We must not be afraid of "what our neighbors will say" when the life we save may be our own. Temecula is a nice place to live. Let's not move away so that we can move around! The full report follows with detailed comments on the growing impact of the Pechanga Casino traffic on southwest Temecula and a suggesled solution. It is my hope that the Council and Stallwill carefully review the repml before making a final decision and approval of the CIP Budget. Attachment g2 Councilmember Pratt's comments at June 11 Council Meeting 061102 Report to Council on Agenda Imm No. 19 With the State of California eying an equalization of the sales tax fortunate cities like Temecula will have to look internally to offset the cost of traffic mitigation and transportation for the benefit of our citizens. This is what I offer instead of a $240 million CIP Budget for infra structure which in my opinion guarantees gfidlock: For 88 cents a day per residence this is what you can have now and continue indefinitely: The 5-year cost of the program - $40 million local and interurban transportation and traffic mitigation program while waiting for "better days" and connecting with Metro link and The Coaster available to every Temceula citizen. For $2.19 per day per residence you can have it all - a complete local and interurban traffic mitigation and transit system that is fun, t~equent and affordable and operating within 5 years a glamorous 16 mile monorail system. Temecula will be the transportation model for all of California - school children, working citizens, the elderly, and the infirm can go anywhere, anytime any place, and protect their health, safety and economic welfare. The cost breakdown follows: All figures are approximations of today's conditions No. Temceula residences Average number of vehicles per residence Total number of vehicles Average yearly operating and amortization cost/vehicle Average daily cost of operafmg a vehicle Average daily cost per residence 2.3 x 24.65 ($9,000) 25,000 2.3 57,500 24.65 56.71 Daily cost per residence for 5 year/S40 million transpfftraffic plan 0.88 The daffy use of the automobile is 56.71/0.88 is 64 times as much as using public transportation. Surely the citizens can see merit in such a plan. This seems like a small cost to protect the ambience of Temecula and the health, safety and economic welfare of the citizens as well providing daily safe traffic plan and affordable and convenient "alternate choice" local and interurban public transportation with long term cost and social benefits. For an additional $1.31 per day per residence ($240 million x 110%/20 yrs x 25 k residents x 365 days) within five years you can have a fun, frequent and affordable monorail system the envy of all of California and the model of a high speed rail system for southwest Riverside County (that they can connect) that goes eastIwest from Lake Skinner, through the Wine Country, Target Center, Old Town and to our present City Hall and a second north/south monorail connecting shopping centers adjacent to Margarita Road at SR79S and Winchester Road as well as our Rancho Vista Sports Park. Attachment #3 Government Code sections 65070 through 65089 as provided by Councilmember Pratt WAIS Document Retrieval Page 1 of 4 CALIFORNIA CODES GOVEBI~4ENT CODE SECTION 65070-65080 65070. (a) The Legislature finds and declares, consistent with Section 65088, that it is in the interest of the State of California to have an integrated state and regional transportation planning process. It further finds that federal law mandates the development of a state and regional long-range transportation plan as a prerequisite for receipt of federal transportation funds. It is the intent of the Legislature that the preparation of these plans shall be a cooperative process involving local and regional government, transit operators, congestion management agencies, and the goods movement industry and that the process be a continuation of activities performed by each entity and be performed without any additional cost. (b) The Legislature further finds and declares that the last attempt to prepare a California Transportation Plan occurred between 1973 and 1977 and resulted in the expenditure of over eighty million dollars ($80,000,000) in public funds and did not produce a usable document. As a consequence of that, the Legislature delegated responsibility for long-range transportation planning to the regional planning agencies and adopted a seven-year programming cycle instead of a longer range planning process for the state. (c) The Legislature further finds and declares that the Transportation Blueprint for the Twenty-First Century (Chapters 105 and 106 of the Statutes of 1989) is a long-range state transportation plan that includes a financial plan and a continuing planning process through the preparation of congestion management plans and regional transportation plans, and identifies major interregional road networks and passenger rail corridors for the state. 65072. The California Transportation Plan shall include all of the following: (a) A policy element that describes the state's transportation policies and system performance objectives. These policies and objectives shall be consistent with legislative intent described in Sections 14000, 14000.5, and 65088. For the plan to be submitted in December 1993, the policy element shall address any opportunities for changes or additions to state legislative policy direction or statute. (b) A strategies element that shall incorporate the broad system concepts and strategies synthesized from the adopted regional transportation plans prepared pursuant to Section 65080. The California Transportation Plan shall not be project specific. (c) A reconm/endations element that includes economic forecasts and recommendations to the Legislature and the Governor to achieve the plan's broad system concepts, strategies, and performance objectives. 65073. The department shall submit the California Transportation Plan to the Governor by December 1, 1993. The department shall make a draft of its proposed plan available to the Legislature, the comraission, and the regional transportation planning agencies for http://www.le~nfo.ca.gov/c~-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=OO13531533+3+O+O&WAISacti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 2 of 4 review and comment. The corm~lssion may present the results of its review and comment to the Legislature and the Governor. The Legislature intends to hold public hearings and submit its comments to the department and the Governor by conducting joint hearings of the Transportation Committees of the Senate and Assembly. The Governor shall adopt the plan and submit the plan to the Legislature and the Secretary of the United States Department of Transportation. 65074. The Department of Transportation shall prepare, in cooperation with the metropolitan planning agencies, a federal transportation improvement program in accordance with subsection (f) of Section 135 of Title 23 of the United States Code. The federal transportation improvement program shall be submitted by the department to the United States Secretary of Transportation, by October 1 of each even-numbered year. 65080. (a) Each transportation planning agency designated under Section 29532 or 29532.1 shall prepare and adopt a regional transportation plan directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system, including, but not limited to, mass transportation, highway, railroad, maritime, bicycle, pedestrian, goods movement, and aviation facilities and services. The plan shall be action-oriented and pragmatic, considering both the short-term and long-term future, and shall present clear, concise policy guidance to local and state officials. The regional transportation plan shall consider factors specified in Section 134 of Title 23 of the United States Code. Each transportation planning agency shall consider and incorporate, as appropriate, the transportation plans of cities, counties, districts, private organizations, and state and federal agencies. (b) The regional transportation plan shall include all of the following: (1) A policy element that describes the transportation issues in the region, identifies and quantifies regional needs, and describes the desired short-range and long-range transportation goals, and pragmatic objective and policy statements. The objective and policy statements shall be consistent with the funding estimates of the financial element. The policy element of transportation planning agencies with populations that exceed 200,000 persons may quantify a set of indicators including, but not limited to, all of the following: (A) Measures of mobility and traffic congestion, including, but not limited to, vehicle hours of delay per capita and vehicle miles traveled per capita. (B) Measures of road and bridge maintenance and rehabilitation needs, including, but not limited to, roadway pavement and bridge conditions. (C) Measures of means of travel, including, but not limited to, percentage share of all trips (work and nonwork) made by all of the following: (i) Single occupant vehicle. (ii) Multiple occupant vehicle or carpool. (iii) Public transit including commuter rail and intercity rail. (iv) Walking. (v) Bicycling. h~p://www.leginfo.ea.gov/cgi-bin/waisgme?WAISdo¢ID=0013531533+3+0+0&WAISa~i... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 3 of 4 (D) Measures of safety and security, including, but not limited to, total injuries and fatalities assigned to each of the modes set forth in subparagraph (C). (E) Measures of equity and accessibility, including, but not limited to, percentage of the population served by frequent and reliable public transit, with a breakdown by income bracket, and percentage of all jobs accessible by frequent and reliable public transit service, with a breakdown by income bracket. (F) The requirements of this section may be met utilizing existing sources of information. No additional traffic counts, household surveys, or other sources of data shall be required. (G) For the region defined in Section 66502, the indicators specified in this paragraph shall be supplanted by the performance measurement criteria established pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66535, if that subdivision is added to the ~vez~nt Cod~ by Section 1 of Senate Bill 1995 of the 1999-2000 Regular Session. (2) An action element that describes the programs and actions necessary to implement the plan and assigns implementation responsibilities. The action element may describe all projects proposed for development during the 20-year life of the plan. The action element shall consider congestion management programming activities carried out within the region. (3) (A) A financial element that sua~arizes the cost of plan implementation constrained by a realistic projection of available revenues. The financial element shall also contain recommendations for allocation of funds. A county transportation commission created pursuant to Section 130000 of the Public Utilities Co~ shall be responsible for recommending projects to be funded with regional improvement funds, if the project is consistent with the regional transportation plan. The first five years of the financial element shall be based on the five-year estimate of funds developed pursuant to Section 14524. The financial element may recommend the development of specified new sources of revenue, consistent with the policy element and action element. (B) The financial element of transportation planning agencies with populations that exceed 200,000 persons may include a project cost breakdown for all projects proposed for development during the 20-year life of the plan that includes total expenditures and related percentages of total expenditures for all of the following: (i) State highway expansion. (ii) State highway rehabilitation, maintenance, and operations. (iii) Local road and street expansion. (iv) Local road and street rehabilitation, maintenance, and operation. (v) Mass transit, commuter rail, and intercity rail expansion. (vi) Mass transit, commuter rail, and intercity rail rehabilitation, maintenance, and operations. (vii) Pedestrian and bicycle facilities. (viii) Environmental enhancements and mitigation. (ix) Research and planning. (x) Other categories. (c) Each transportation planning agency may also include other factors of local significance as an element of the regional transportation plan, including, but not limited to, issues of mobility for specific sectors of the com~aunity, including, but not limited to, senior citizens. (d) Each transportation planning agency shall adopt and submit, every three years, an updated regional transportation plan to the California Transportation Commission and the Department of Transportation. The plan shall be consistent with federal planning h~p:#www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=0013531533+3+0+0&WAISacfi... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 4 of 4 and prograr~aing requirements. A transportation planning agency that does not contain an urbanized area may at its option adopt and submit a regional transportation plan once every four years beginning by September 1, 2001. Prior to adoption of the regional transportation plan, a public hearing shall be held, after the giving of notice of the hearing by publication in the affected county or counties pursuant to Section 6061. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdoclD=0013531533+3+0+0&WAISacfi... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 1 of 6 CALIFORNIA CODES GOVERt~NT CODE SECTION 65080.1-65086.5 65080.1. Once preparation of a regional transportation plan has been con~nenced by or on behalf of a designated transportation planning agency, the Secretary of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency shall not designate a new transportation planning agency pursuant to Section 29532 for all or any part of the geographic area served by the originally designated agency unless he or she first determines that redesignation will not result in the loss to California of any substantial amounts of federal funds. 65080.2. A transportation planning agency which has within its area of jurisdiction a transit development board established pursuant to Division 11 (commencing with Section 120000) of the Public Utilities Code shall include, in the regional transportation improvement program prepared pursuant to Section 65080, those elements of the transportation improvement program prepared by the transit development board pursuant to Section 120353 of the Public Utilities Code relating to funds made available to the transit development board for transportation purposes. 65080.3. (a) Each transportation planning agency with a population that exceeds 200,000 persons may prepare at least one "alternative planning scenario" for presentation to local officials, agency board members, and the public during the development of the triennial regional transportation plan and the hearing required under subdivision (c) of Section 65080. (b) The alternative planning scenario shall accommodate the same amount of population growth as projected in the plan but shall be based on an alternative that attempts to reduce the growth in traffic congestion, make more efficient use of existing transportation infrastructure, and reduce the need for costly future public infrastructure. (c) The alternative planning scenario shall be developed in collaboration with a broad range of public and private stakeholders, including local elected officials, city and county employees, relevant interest groups, and the general public. In developing the scenario, the agency shall consider all of the following: (1) Increasing housing and corm~ercial development around transit facilities and in close proximity to jobs and commercial activity centers. (2) Encouraging public transit usage, ridesharing, walking, bicycling, and transportation demand management practices. (3) Promoting a more efficient mix of current and future job sites, co~ercial activity centers, and housing opportunities. (4) Promoting use of urban vacant land and "brownfield" redevelopment. (5) An economic incentive program that may include measures such as transit vouchers and variable pricing for transportation. (d) The planning scenario shall be included in a report evaluating all of the following: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdoclD=0013531533+4+0+0&WAISaefi... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 2 of 6 ~.. (1) The amounts and locations of traffic congestion. (2) Vehicle miles traveled and the resulting reduction in vehicle emissions. (3) Estimated percentage share of trips made by each means of travel specified in subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 65080. (4) The costs of transportation improvements required to accommodate the population growth in accordance with the alternative scenario. (5) The economic, social, environmental, regulatory, and institutional barriers to the scenario being achieved. (e) If the adopted regional transportation plan already achieves one or more of the objectives set forth in subdivision (c), those objectives need not be discussed or evaluated in the alternative planning scenario. (f) The alternative planning scenario and accompanying report shall not be adopted as part of the regional transportation plan, but it shall be distributed to cities and counties within the region and to other interested parties, and may be a basis for revisions to the transportation projects that will be included in the regional transportation plan. (g) Nothing in this section grants transportation planning agencies any direct or indirect authority over local land use decisions. (h) This section does not apply to a transportation plan adopted on or before September 1, 2001, proposed by a transportation planning agency with a population of less than 1,000,000 persons. 65080.5. (a) For each area for which a transportation planning agency is designated under subdivision (c) of Section 29532, or adopts a resolution pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65080, the Department of Transportation, in cooperation with the transportation planning agency, and subject to subdivision (e), shall prepare the regional transportation plan, and the updating thereto, for that area and submit it to the governing body or designated policy con~aittee of the transportation planning agency for adoption. Prior to adoption, a public hearing shall be held, after the giving of notice of the hearing by publication in the affected county or counties pursuant to Section 6061. Prior to the adoption of the regional transportation improvement program by the transportation planning agency if it prepared the program, the transportation planning agency shall consider the relationship between the program and the adopted plan. The adopted plan and program, and the updating thereto, shall be submitted to the California Transportation Commission and the department pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 65080. (b) In the case of a transportation planning agency designated under subdivision (c) of Section 29532, the transportation planning agency may prepare the regional transportation plan for the area under its jurisdiction pursuant to this chapter, if the transportation planning agency, prior to July 1, 1978, adopts by resolution a declaration of intention to do so. (c) In those areas that have a county transportation commission created pursuant to Section 130050 of the Public Utilities Code, the multicounty designated transportation planning agency, as defined in Section 130004 of that cod~, shall prepare the regional transportation plan and the regional transportation improvement program in consultation with the county transportation commissions. (d) Any transportation planning agency which did not elect to http://www.leginfo.ca, gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdoclD=0013531533+4+0+0&WAISacti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 3 of 6 prepare the initial regional transportation plan for the area under its jurisdiction, may prepare the updated plan if it adopts a resolution of intention to do so at least one year prior to the date when the updated plan is to be submitted to the California Transportation Co~mission. (e) If the department prepares or updates a regional transportation improvement program or regional transportation plan, or both, pursuant to this section, the state-local share of funding the preparation or updating of the plan and program shall be calculated on the same basis as though the preparation or updating were to be performed by the transportation planning agency and funded under Sections 99311, 99313, and 99314 of the Public Utilities Code. 65081.1. (a) After consultation with other regional and local transportation agencies, each transportation planning agency whose planning area includes a primary air carrier airport shall, in conjunction with its preparation of an updated regional transportation plan, include an airport ground access improvement program. (b) The program shall address the development and extension of mass transit systems, including passenger rail service, major arterial and highway widening and extension projects, and any other ground access improvement projects the planning agency deems appropriate. (c) Highest consideration shall be given to mass transit for airport access improvement projects in the program. (d) If federal funds are not available to a transportation planning agency for the costs of preparing or updating an airport ground access improvement program, the agency may charge the operators of primary air carrier airports within its planning area for the direct costs of preparing and updating the program. An airport operator against whom charges are imposed pursuant to this subdivision shall pay the amount of those charges to the transportation planning agency. 65081.3. (a) As a part of its adoption of the regional transportation plan, the designated county transportation commission, regional transportation planning agency, or the Metropolitan Transportation Commission may designate special corridors, which may include, but are not limited to, adopted state highway routes, which, in consultation with the Department of Transportation, cities, counties, and transit operators directly impacted by the corridor, are determined to be of statewide or regional priority for long-term right-of-way preservation. (b) Prior to designating a corridor for priority acquisition, the regional transportation planning agency shall do all of the following: (1) Establish geographic boundaries for the proposed corridor. (2) Complete a traffic survey, including a preliminary recommendation for transportation modal split, which generally describes the traffic and air quality impacts of the proposed corridor. (3) Consider the widest feasible range of possible transportation facilities that could be located in the corridor and the major environmental impacts they may cause to assist in making the corridor more environmentally sensitive and, in the long term, a more viable site for needed transportation improvements. http://www.~e~nf~.~a.g~v/c~-bin/waisgate?~AISd~cID=~353~533+4+~+~&~AISacfl... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 4 of 6 (c) A designated corridor of statewide or regional priority shall be specifically considered in the certified environmental impact report completed for the adopted regional transportation plan required by the California Environmental Quality Act, which shall include a review of the environmental impacts of the possible transportation facilities which may be located in the corridor. The environmental impact report shall include a survey within the corridor boundaries to determine if there exist any of the following: (1) Rare or endangered plant or animal species. (2) Historical or cultural sites of major significance. (3) Wetlands, vernal pools, or other naturally occurring features. (d) The regional transportation planning agency shall designate a corridor for priority acquisition only if, after a public hearing, it finds that the range of potential transportation facilities to be located in the corridor can be constructed in a manner which will avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts or values identified in subdivision (c), consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act and the state and federal Endangered Species Acts. (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a corridor of statewide or regional priority may be designated as part of the regional transportation plan only if it has previously been specifically defined in the plan required pursuant to Section 134 and is consistent with the plan required pursuant to Section 135 of Title 23 of the United States 65082. (a) (1) A five-year regional transportation improvement program shall be prepared, adopted, and submitted to the California Transportation Commission on or before December 15 of each odd-numbered year thereafter, updated every two years, pursuant to Sections 65080 and 65080.5 and the guidelines adopted pursuant to Section 14530.1, to include regional transportation improvement projects and programs proposed to be funded, in whole or in part, in the state transportation improvement program. (2) Major projects shall include current costs updated as of November 1 of the year of submittal and escalated to the appropriate year, and be listed by relative priority, taking into account need, delivery milestone dates, as defined in Section 14525.5, and the availability of funding. (b) Except for those counties that do not prepare a congestion management program pursuant to Section 65088.3, congestion management programs adopted pursuant to Section 65089 shall be incorporated into the regional transportation improvement program submitted to the commission by December 15 of each odd-numbered year. (c) Local projects not included in a congestion management program shall not be included in the regional transportation improvement program. Projects and programs adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be consistent with the capital improvement program adopted pursuant to paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) of Section 65089, and the guidelines adopted pursuant to Section 14530.1. (d) Other projects may be included in the regional transportation improvement program if listed separately. (e) Unless a county not containing urbanized areas of over 50,000 population notifies the Department of Transportation by July 1 that it intends to prepare a regional transportation improvement program for that county, the department shall, in consultation with the http://www, leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdoclD=0013531533 +4+0+0&WAISacti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 5 of 6 affected local agencies, prepare the program for all counties for which it prepares a regional transportation plan. (f) The requirements for incorporating a congestion management program into a regional transportation improvement program specified in this section do not apply in those counties that do not prepare a congestion management program in accordance with Section 65088.3. (g) The regional transportation improvement program may include a reserve of county shares for providing funds in order to match federal funds. 65084. In order to insure coordinated planning, development, and operation of transportation systems of all types and modes, the board of supervisors of each county may appoint a county director of transportation, and specify the extent of the responsibilities of such officer. 65085. The board of supervisors may designate any county officer who is properly qualified to serve as the county director of transportation. 65086. The Department of Transportation, in consultation with transportation planning agencies, county transportation co~missions, counties, and cities, shall carry out long-term state highway system planning to identify future highway improvements. 65086.4. Projects on the state highway system shall comply with applicable state and federal standards to ensure systemwide consistency with operational, safety, and maintenance needs. The department may approve exceptions to this requirement that it determines to be appropriate. 65086.5. (a) To the extent that the work does not jeopardize the delivery of the projects in the adopted state transportation improvement program, the Department of Transportation may prepare a project studies report for capacity-increasing state highway projects that are not included in the state transportation improvement program. Preparation of the project studies report shall be limited by the resources available to the department for that work, supplemented, as appropriate, by regional or local resources. The project studies report shall include the project-related factors of limits, description, scope, costs, and the amount of time needed for initiating construction. (b) Whenever project studies reports are performed by an entity other than the Department of Transportation, the department shall review and approve the report. (c) The Department of Transportation may be requested to prepare a project studies report for a capacity-increasing state highway project which is being proposed for inclusion in a future state transportation improvement program. The department shall have 30 days to determine whether it can complete the requested report in a h~p://www.leginfo.ca.gov/c~-bin/waisgate?WAISdoclD=0013531533 +4+0+0&WAISacfi... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 6 of 6 timely fashion. If the department determines that it cannot complete the report in a timely fashion, the requesting entity may prepare the report. Upon submission of a project studies report to the department by the entity, the department shall complete its review and provide its conu~ents to that entity within 60 days from the date of submission. The department shall complete its review and final determination of a report which has been revised to address the department's comments within 30 days following submission of the revised report. (d) The Department of Transportation, in consultation with representatives of cities, counties, and regional transportation planning agencies, shall prepare draft guidelines for the preparation of project studies reports by all entities. The guidelines shall address the development of reliable cost estimates. The department shall submit the draft guidelines to the California Transportation Commission not later than July 1, 1991. The commission shall adopt the final guidelines not later than October 1, 1991. Guidelines adopted by the commission shall apply only to project studies reports co~nenced after October 1, 1991. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdoclD=0013531533+4+0+0&WAISaeti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 1 of 10 CALIFORNIA CODES GO~NT CODE SECTION 65088-65089.10 65088. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) Although California's economy is critically dependent upon transportation, its current transportation system relies primarily upon a street and highway system designed to accommodate far fewer vehicles than are currently using the system. (b) California's transportation system is characterized by fragmented planning, both among jurisdictions involved and among the means of available transport. (c) The lack of an integrated system and the increase in the number of vehicles are causing traffic congestion that each day results in 400,000 hours lost in traffic, 200 tons of pollutants released into the air we breathe, and three million one hundred thousand dollars ($3,100,000) added costs to the motoring public. (d) To keep California moving, all methods and means of transport between major destinations must be coordinated to connect our vital economic and population centers. (e) In order to develop the California economy to its full potential, it is intended that federal, state, and local agencies join with transit districts, business, private and environmental interests to develop and implement comprehensive strategies needed to develop appropriate responses to transportation needs. 65088.1. As used in this chapter the following terms have the following meanings: (a) Unless the context requires otherwise, "regional agency" means the agency responsible for preparation of the regional transportation improvement program. (b) Unless the context requires otherwise, "agency" means the agency responsible for the preparation and adoption of the congestion management program. (c) "Commission" means the California Transportation Commission. (d) "Department" means the Department of Transportation. (e) "Local jurisdiction" means a city, a county, or a city and county. (f) "Parking cash-out program" means an employer-funded program under which an employer offers to provide a cash allowance to an employee equivalent to the parking subsidy that the employer would otherwise pay to provide the employee with a parking space. "Parking subsidy" means the difference between the out-of-pocket amount paid by an employer on a regular basis in order to secure the availability of an employee parking space not owned by the employer and the price, if any, charged to an employee for use of that space. A parking cash-out program may include a requirement that employee participants certify that they will comply with guidelines established by the employer designed to avoid neighborhood parking problems, with a provision that employees not complying with the guidelines will no longer be eligible for the parking cash-out program. (g) "Urbanized area" has the same meaning as is defined in the 1990 federal census for urbanized areas of more than 50,000 http://www.leginf~.ca.g~v/cgi~bin/waisgate?WAISd~cID=~~25489744+~+~+~&WAISacti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 2 of 10 population. (h) "Interregional travel" means any trips that originate outside the boundary of the agency. A "trip" means a one-direction vehicle movement. The origin of any trip is the starting point of that trip. A roundtrip consists of two individual trips. (i) "Multimodal" means the utilization of all available modes of travel that enhance the movement of people and goods, including, but not limited to, highway, transit, nonmotorized and demand management strategies including, but not limited to, telecommuting. The availability and practicality of specific multimodal systems, projects, and strategies varies by county and region in accordance with the size and complexity of different urbanized areas. (j) "Level of service standard" is a threshold that defines a deficiency on the congestion management program highway and roadway system which requires the preparation of a deficiency plan. It is the intent of the Legislature that the agency shall use all elements of the program to implement strategies and actions that avoid the creation of deficiencies and to improve multimodal mobility. (k) "Performance measure" is an analytical planning tool that is used to quantitatively evaluate transportation improvements and to assist in determining effective implementation actions, considering all modes and strategies. Use of a performance measure as part of the program does not trigger the requirement for the preparation of deficiency plans. 65088.3. This chapter does not apply in a county in which a majority of local governments, collectively comprised of the city councils and the county board of supervisors, which in total also represent a majority of the population in the county, each adopt resolutions electing to be exempt from the congestion management program. 6508~.5. Congestion management programs, if prepared by county transportation com~issions and transportation authorities created pursuant to Division 12 (cor~aencing with Section 130000) of the Public Utilities Code, shall be used by the regional transportation planning agency to meet federal requirements for a congestion management system, and shall be incorporated into the congestion management system. 65089. (a) A congestion management program shall be developed, adopted, and updated biennially, consistent with the schedule for adopting and updating the regional transportation improvement program, for every county that includes an urbanized area, and shall include every city and the county. The program shall be adopted at a noticed public hearing of the agency. The program shall be developed in consultation with, and with the cooperation of, the transportation planning agency, regional transportation providers, local governments, the department, and the air pollution control district or the air quality management district, either by the county transportation commission, or by another public agency, as designated by resolutions adopted by the county board of supervisors and the city councils of a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population in the incorporated area of the county. http://www.~eginf~.ca.g~v/c~-bin/waisgate?~AISd~c~D=~25489744+~+~+~&~AI~acti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 3 of 10 (b) The program shall contain all of the following elements: (1) (A) Traffic level of service standards established for a system of highways and roadways designated by the agency. The highway and roadway system shall include at a minimum all state highways and principal arterials. No highway or roadway designated as a part of the system shall be removed from the system. All new state highways and principal arterials shall be designated as part of the system. Level of service (LOS) shall be measured by Circular 212, by the most recent version of the Highway Capacity Manual, or by a uniform methodology adopted by the agency that is consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual. The determination as to whether an alternative method is consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual shall be made by the regional agency, except that the department instead shall make this determination if either (i) the regional agency is also the agency, as those terms are defined in Section 65088.1, or (ii) the department is responsible for preparing the regional transportation improvement plan for the county. (B) In no case shall the LOS standards established be below the level of service E or the current level, whichever is farthest from level of service A. When the level of service on a segment or at an intersection fails to attain the established level of service standard, a deficiency plan shall be adopted pursuant to Section 65089.4. (2) A performance element that includes performance measures to evaluate current and future multimodal system performance for the movement of people and goods. At a minimum, these performance measures shall incorporate highway and roadway system performance, and measures established for the frequency and routing of public transit, and for the coordination of transit service provided by separate operators. These performance measures shall support mobility, air quality, land use, and economic objectives, and shall be used in the development of the capital improvement program required pursuant to paragraph (5), deficiency plans required pursuant to Section 65089.4, and the land use analysis program required pursuant to paragraph (4). (3) A travel demand element that promotes alternative transportation methods, including, but not limited to, carpools, vanpools, transit, bicycles, and park-and-ride lots; improvements in the balance between jobs and housing; and other strategies, including, but not limited to, flexible work hours, telecommuting, and parking management programs. The agency shall consider parking cash-out programs during the development and update of the travel demand element. (4) A program to analyze the impacts of land use decisions made by local jurisdictions on regional transportation systems, including an estimate of the costs associated with mitigating those impacts. This program shall measure, to the extent possible, the impact to the transportation system using the performance measures described in paragraph (2). In no case shall the program include an estimate of the costs of mitigating the impacts of interregional travel. The program shall provide credit for local public and private contributions to improvements to regional transportation systems. However, in the case of toll road facilities, credit shall only be allowed for local public and private contributions which are unreimbursed from toll revenues or other state or federal sources. The agency shall calculate the amount of the credit to be provided. The program defined under this section may require implementation through the requirements and analysis of the California Environmental Quality Act, in order to avoid duplication. (5) A seven-year capital improvement program, developed using the http://www.~eginf~.ca.g~v/cgi-bin/waisgate?~AISd~~ID=~~25489744+~+~+~&~AISa~ti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 4 of 10 performance measures described in paragraph (2) to determine effective projects that maintain or improve the performance of the multimodal system for the movement of people and goods, to mitigate regional transportation impacts identified pursuant to paragraph (4). The program shall conform to transportation-related vehicle emission air quality mitigation measures, and include any project that will increase the capacity of the multimodal system. It is the intent of the Legislature that, when roadway projects are identified in the program, consideration be given for maintaining bicycle access and safety at a level comparable to that which existed prior to the improvement or alteration. The capital improvement program may also include safety, maintenance, and rehabilitation projects that do not enhance the capacity of the system but are necessary to preserve the investment in existing facilities. (c) The agency, in consultation with the regional agency, cities, and the county, shall develop a uniform data base on traffic impacts for use in a countywide transportation computer model and shall approve transportation computer models of specific areas within the county that will be used by local jurisdictions to determine the quantitative impacts of development on the circulation system that are based on the countywide model and standardized modeling assumptions and conventions. The computer models shall be consistent with the modeling methodology adopted by the regional planning agency. The data bases used in the models shall be consistent with the data bases used by the regional planning agency. Where the regional agency has jurisdiction over two or more counties, the data bases used by the agency shall be consistent with the data bases used by the regional agency. (d) (1) The city or county in which a com~ercial development will implement a parking cash-out program that is included in a congestion management program pursuant to subdivision (b), or in a deficiency plan pursuant to Section 65089.4, shall grant to that development an appropriate reduction in the parking requirements otherwise in effect for new commercial development. (2) At the request of an existing conunercial development that has implemented a parking cash-out program, the city or county shall grant an appropriate reduction in the parking requirements otherwise applicable based on the demonstrated reduced need for parking, and the space no longer needed for parking purposes may be used for other appropriate purposes. (e) Pursuant to the federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 and regulations adopted pursuant to the act, the department shall subrait a request to the Federal Highway Administration Division Administrator to accept the congestion management program in lieu of development of a new congestion management system otherwise required by the act. 65089.1. (a) For purposes of this section, "plan" means a trip reduction plan or a related or similar proposal submitted by an employer to a local public agency for adoption or approval that is designed to facilitate employee ridesharing, the use of public transit, and other means of travel that do not employ a single-occupant vehicle. (b) An agency may require an employer to provide rideshare data bases; an emergency ride program; a preferential parking program; a transportation information program; a parking cash-out program, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 65088.1; a public transit subsidy in an amount to be determined by the employer; bicycle h~p://www.le~nfo.ca.gov/c~-bin/w~sgate?WAISdoclD=OO25489744+O+O+O&WAISacli... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 5 of 10 parking areas; and other noncash value programs which encourage or facilitate the use of alternatives to driving alone. An employer may offer, but no agency shall require an employer to offer, cash, prizes, or items with cash value to employees to encourage participation in a trip reduction program as a condition of approving a plan. (c) Employers shall provide employees reasonable notice of the content of a proposed plan and shall provide the employees an opportunity to comment prior to submittal of the plan to the agency for adoption. (d) Each agency shall modify existing programs to conform to this section not later than June 30, 1995. Any plan adopted by an agency prior to January 1, 1994, shall remain in effect until adoption by the agency of a modified plan pursuant to this section. (e) Employers may include disincentives in their plans that do not create a widespread and substantial disproportionate impact on ethnic or racial minorities, women, or low-income or disabled employees. (f) This section shall not be interpreted to relieve any employer of the responsibility to prepare a plan that conforms with trip reduction goals specified in Division 26 (co~encing with Section 39000) of the Health and Safety C~, or the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 7401 et seq.). (g) This section only applies to agencies and employers within the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 65089.2. (a) Congestion management programs shall be submitted to the regional agency. The regional agency shall evaluate the consistency between the program and the regional transportation plans required pursuant to Section 65080. In the case of a multicounty regional transportation planning agency, that agency shall evaluate the consistency and compatibility of the programs within the region. (b) The regional agency, upon finding that the program is consistent, shall incorporate the program into the regional transportation improvement program as provided for in Section 65082. If the regional agency finds the program is inconsistent, it may exclude any project in the congestion management program from inclusion in the regional transportation improvement program. (c) (1) The regional agency shall not program any surface transportation program funds and congestion mitigation and air quality funds pursuant to Section 182.6 and 182.7 of the Streets and Highways Co~ in a county unless a congestion management program has been adopted by December 31, 1992, as required pursuant to Section 65089. No surface transportation program funds or congestion mitigation and air quality funds shall be progra~m~ed for a project in a local jurisdiction that has been found to be in nonconformance with a congestion management program pursuant to Section 65089.5 unless the agency finds that the project is of regional significance. (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon the designation of an urbanized area, pursuant to the 1990 federal census or a subsequent federal census, within a county which previously did not include an urbanized area, a congestion management program as required pursuant to Section 65089 shall be adopted within a period of 18 months after designation by the Governor. (d) (1) It is the intent of the Legislature that the regional agency, when its boundaries include areas in more than one county, http:#www.le~nfo.ca.gov/c~-bin/waisgate?WAISdoclD=0025489744+0+0+0&WAISacti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 6 of ! 0 should resolve inconsistencies and mediate disputes which arise between agencies related to congestion management programs adopted for those areas. (2) It is the further intent of the Legislature that disputes which may arise between regional agencies, or agencies which are not within the boundaries of a multicounty regional transportation planning agency, should be mediated and resolved by the Secretary of Business, Housing and Transportation Agency, or an employee of that agency designated by the secretary, in consultation with the air pollution control district or air quality management district within whose boundaries the regional agency or agencies are located. (e) At the request of the agency, a local jurisdiction that owns, or is responsible for operation of, a trip-generating facility in another county shall participate in the congestion management program of the county where the facility is located. If a dispute arises involving a local jurisdiction, the agency may request the regional agency to mediate the dispute through procedures pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 65089.2. Failure to resolve the dispute does not invalidate the congestion management program. 65089.3. The agency shall monitor the implementation of all elements of the congestion management program. The department is responsible for data collection and analysis on state highways, unless the agency designates that responsibility to another entity. The agency may also assign data collection and analysis responsibilities to other owners and operators of facilities or services if the responsibilities are specified in its adopted program. The agency shall consult with the department and other affected owners and operators in developing data collection and analysis procedures and schedules prior to program adoption. At least biennially, the agency shall determine if the county and cities are conforming to the congestion management program, including, but not limited to, all of the following: (a) Consistency with levels of service standards, except as provided in Section 65089.4. (b) Adoption and implementation of a program to analyze the impacts of land use decisions, including the estimate of the costs associated with mitigating these impacts. (c) Adoption and implementation of a deficiency plan pursuant to Section 65089.4 when highway and roadway level of service standards are not maintained on portions of the designated system. 65089.4. (a) A local jurisdiction shall prepare a deficiency plan when highway or roadway level of service standards are not maintained on segments or intersections of the designated system. The deficiency plan shall be adopted by the city or county at a noticed public hearing. (b) The agency shall calculate the impacts subject to exclusion pursuant to subdivision (f) of this section, after consultation with the regional agency, the department, and the local air quality management district or air pollution control district. If the calculated traffic level of service following exclusion of these impacts is consistent with the level of service standard, the agency shall make a finding at a publicly noticed meeting that no deficiency plan is required and so notify the affected local jurisdiction. (c) The agency shall be responsible for preparing and adopting http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgme?WAISdoclD=0025489744+0+0+0&WAISa~i... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 7 of 10 procedures for local deficiency plan development and implementation responsibilities, consistent with the requirements of this section. The deficiency plan shall include all of the following: (1) An analysis of the cause of the deficiency. This analysis shall include the following: (A) Identification of the cause of the deficiency. (B) Identification of the impacts of those local jurisdictions within the jurisdiction of the agency that contribute to the deficiency. These impacts shall be identified only if the calculated traffic level of service following exclusion of impacts pursuant to subdivision (f) indicates that the level of service standard has not been maintained, and shall be limited to impacts not subject to exclusion. (2) A list of improvements necessary for the deficient segment or intersection to maintain the minimum level of service otherwise required and the estimated costs of the improvements. (3) A list of improvements, programs, or actions, and estimates of costs, that will (A) measurably improve multimodal performance, using measures defined in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 65089, and (B) contribute to significant improvements in air quality, such as improved public transit service and facilities, improved nonmotorized transportation facilities, high occupancy vehicle facilities, parking cash-out programs, and transportation control measures. The air quality management district or the air pollution control district shall establish and periodically revise a list of approved improvements, programs, and actions that meet the scope of this paragraph. If an improvement, program, or action on the approved list has not been fully implemented, it shall be deemed to contribute to significant improvements in air quality. If an improvement, program, or action is not on the approved list, it shall not be implemented unless approved by the local air quality management district or air pollution control district. (4) An action plan, consistent with the provisions of Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000), that shall be implemented, consisting of improvements identified in paragraph (2), or improvements, programs, or actions identified in paragraph (3), that are found by the agency to be in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare. The action plan shall include a specific implementation schedule. The action plan shall include implementation strategies for those jurisdictions that have contributed to the cause of the deficiency in accordance with the agency's deficiency plan procedures. The action plan need not mitigate the impacts of any exclusions identified in subdivision (f). Action plan strategies shall identify the most effective implementation strategies for improving current and future system performance. Id) A local jurisdiction shall forward its adopted deficiency plan to the agency within 12 months of the identification of a deficiency. The agency shall hold a noticed public hearing within 60 days of receiving the deficiency plan. Following that hearing, the agency shall either accept or reject the deficiency plan in its entirety, but the agency may not modify the deficiency plan. If the agency rejects the plan, it shall notify the local jurisdiction of the reasons for that rejection, and the local jurisdiction shall submit a revised plan within 90 days addressing the agency's concerns. Failure of a local jurisdiction to comply with the schedule and requirements of this section shall be considered to be nonconformance for the purposes of Section 65089.5. (e) The agency shall incorporate into its deficiency plan procedures, a methodology for determining if deficiency impacts are hRp:#www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdoclD=0025489744+0+0+0&WAISacti... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 8 of 10 caused by more than one local jurisdiction within the boundaries of the agency. (1) If, according to the agency's methodology, it is determined that more than one local jurisdiction is responsible for causing a deficient segment or intersection, all responsible local jurisdictions shall participate in the development of a deficiency plan to be adopted by all participating local jurisdictions. (2) The local jurisdiction in which the deficiency occurs shall have lead responsibility for developing the deficiency plan and for coordinating with other impacting local jurisdictions. If a local jurisdiction responsible for participating in a multi-jurisdictional deficiency plan does not adopt the deficiency plan in accordance with the schedule and requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, that jurisdiction shall be considered in nonconformance with the program for purposes of Section 65089.5. (3) The agency shall establish a conflict resolution process for addressing conflicts or disputes between local jurisdictions in meeting the multi-jurisdictional deficiency plan responsibilities of this section. (f) The analysis of the cause of the deficiency prepared pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) shall exclude the following: (1) Interregional travel. (2) Construction, rehabilitation, or maintenance of facilities that impact the system. (3) Freeway ramp metering. (4) Traffic signal coordination by the state or multi-jurisdictional agencies. (5) Traffic generated by the provision of low-income and very low income housing. (6) (A) Traffic generated by high-density residential development located within one-fourth mile of a fixed rail passenger station, and (B) Traffic generated by any mixed use development located within one-fourth mile of a fixed rail passenger station, if more than half of the land area, or floor area, of the mixed use development is used for high density residential housing, as determined by the agency. (g) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings: (1) "High density" means residential density development which contains a minimum of 24 dwelling units per acre and a minimum density per acre which is equal to or greater than 120 percent of the maximum residential density allowed under the local general plan and zoning ordinance. A project providing a minimum of 75 dwelling units per acre shall automatically be considered high density. (2) "Mixed use development" means development which integrates compatible con~ercial or retail uses, or both, with residential uses, and which, due to the proximity of job locations, shopping opportunities, and residences, will discourage new trip generation. 65089.5. (a) If, pursuant to the monitoring provided for in Section 65089.3, the agency determines, following a noticed public hearing, that a city or county is not conforming with the requirements of the congestion management program, the agency shall notify the city or county in writing of the specific areas of nonconformance. If, within 90 days of the receipt of the written notice of nonconformance, the city or county has not come into conformance with the congestion management program, the governing body of the agency shall make a finding of nonconformance and shall submit the finding h~p :#www.le~nfo.ca.gov/c~-bin/waisg~e?W AISdocID=OO254897 44+O+O+O& W AISacfi... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 9 of 10 to the commission and to the Controller. (b) (1) Upon receiving notice from the agency of nonconformance, the Controller shall withhold apportionments of funds required to be apportioned to that nonconforming city or county by Section 2105 of the Streets and Highways Code. (2) If, within the 12-month period following the receipt of a notice of nonconformance, the Controller is notified by the agency that the city or county is in conformance, the Controller shall allocate the apportionments withheld pursuant to this section to the city or county. (3) If the Controller is not notified by the agency that the city or county is in conformance pursuant to paragraph (2), the Controller shall allocate the apportionments withheld pursuant to this section to the agency. (c) The agency shall use funds apportioned under this section for projects of regional significance which are included in the capital improvement program required by paragraph (5) of subdivision (b) of Section 65089, or in a deficiency plan which has been adopted by the agency. The agency shall not use these funds for administration or planning purposes. 65089.6. Failure to complete or implement a congestion management program shall not give rise to a cause of action against a city or county for failing to conform with its general plan, unless the city or county incorporates the congestion management program into the circulation element of its general plan. 65089.7. A proposed development specified in a development agreement entered into prior to July 10, 1989, shall not be subject to any action taken to comply with this chapter, except actions required to be taken with respect to the trip reduction and travel demand element of a congestion management program pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 65089. 65089.9. The study steering committee established pursuant to Section 6 of Chapter 444 of the Statutes of 1992 may designate at least two congestion management agencies to participate in a demonstration study comparing multimodal performance standards to highway level of service standards. The department shall make available, from existing resources, fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) from the Transportation Planning and Development Account in the State Transportation Fund to fund each of the demonstration projects. The designated agencies shall submit a report to the Legislature not later than June 30, 1997, regarding the findings of each demonstration project. 65089.10. Any congestion management agency that is located in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and receives funds pursuant to Section 44241 of the Health and Safety Code for the purpose of implementing paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 65089 shall ensure that those funds are expended as part of an overall program for improving air quality and for the purposes of this chapter. http://www.~eginf~.¢a.g~v/¢~.bin/waisgate?wAISd~¢ID=~25489744+~+~+~&wAISacfi... 6/13/2002 WAIS Document Retrieval Page 10 Of 10 http://www.~e~nf~.ca.g~v/c~-bin/waisgate?~AISd~cID=~25489744+~+~+~&~AISac~... 6/13/2002 Attachment #4 Executive Summary of 2001 Riverside County Congestion Management Program 2001 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Draft EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Congestion Management Program was first established in 1990 under Proposition 111, It established a process for each metropolitan county in california to designate a Congestion Management Agency (CMA) that would be responsible for development and implementation of the Congestion Management Program (CMP) Within c6untY boUndaries~ The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) was designated as the CMA in 1990, and 'therefore, prepares'the CMP updates in consultation with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which consists of local agencies, the County of Riverside; transit~agencies, and subregional agencies. The intent of the CMP is to more directly link land use, transportation, and air quality, thereby prompting reasonable growth management programs that will effectively utilize new transportation funds,' alleviate traffic Congestion and related impacts, and knprove air quality. Each county in California has developed a CMP with Varying methods and strategies to meet the intent of the CMP legislation. The Riverside County CMP was significantly modified in 19~97 io focus on federal Congestion Management System (CMS) requirements as well as incorporate elements of the State CMP requirements. The focus of the CMP is the development of an Enhanced Traffic Monitoring System in which real-time lraffic count data can be accessed by RCTC to evaluate the. condition of the CMS, as well as meet other monitoring requirements at the State and federal levels. This monitoring effort will be completed in 2002 on the State Highway system and will consist of installing traffic counters at Call Box and Caltrans' Traffic Management Center (TMC) sites. The program will provide for immediate communication between the Caltrans' TMC, located at the Caltrans District 8 office in the City of San Bemardino and the TMC Count istatioris. Monitoring of the CMS on local arterials will continue to occur through the Coachella Valley Associate of Governments' (CVAG) monitoring program and thrmigli local agency ~monitoring efforts. . Per the adopted Level of Service (LOS) Standard of "E',' when a CMS*sogment falls to'~'F",' a deficiency plan must be required. Preparation of a deficiency plan will be the responsibility of the local agency where the deficiency is located. Other agencies identified as contributors to the deficiency will also be required to coordinate with the development of the plan. The plan must contain mitigation measures, including Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies and transit alternatives, and a schedule for mitlgatitig the deficiency. ' TO insure that the' CMS is appropriately m~onitomd to redu~e.'the Occurrence of CMP deficiencies, it is the responsibility of local agenciO's, When reviOwing and approving development proposals, to. consider the traffic impacts on the CMS. Should the LOS fall to "F" on the CMP System, local agencies will be notified to prepare a deficiency plan in accordance with Riverside County CMP requirements, Chapter 6. Local agencies are also encouraged to Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies ES-1 2001 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Draft work with other affected agencies to mitigate the impacts considering California Environmental' Quality Act (CEQA) and Intergovernmental Review (IGR) requirements. In preparation of the 2001 CMP, there were no deficiencies found on the CMP SYstem based uPon this year's monitoring effort. OTHER PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS This document is prepared to address 'each element of the CMP legislation and federal CMS requirements. Therefore, each chapter corresponds to an element identified in the legislation. Below is a summary of each chapter .highlighting the Riverside County CMP's approach in meeting the State CMP and federal CMS requirements. Chapter I - Designation of the CMP Lead Agency: The Coufity Board of Supervisors, and a majority of citi~} representing a majority of population~ i~ the incorporated area, must desigt~ate by resolution, a public agency to Prepare and adopt the Congestion Management Program. ' The Riverside County Transportation Commission was designated as the CMA for Riverside County on June 11, 1990. The County Board of SUpervisors and a majority of the cities representing a majority of the population supported the designation. Chapter 2- Designation of the System of Highways and RoadwaYS: · The CMA must designate a system of highways and roadways to include, at a mihimum, all state , highways andprincipal arterials. RCTC has designated, based upon a set Of optional criteria referenced in Chapter 2, a system of Highways and Principal Arterials. All State highways within Riverside County have been included, in accordance, with, CMP statutes, and a set of Principal Arterials has been identified (reference Exhibit 2-2 and Table 2-1). : Chapter 3 - Transportation Modeling: The CMA is to provide a uniform database of traffic impacts "for use in a countywide transportation computer model." For 'pUrPoses of this Program, the'commission has recognized uS~ of the' Comprehensive Transportation Plan/Riverside-San Bernardlno (CTP/RIVSAN) Model, the Coachella Valley Area Transpgrtation System (CVATS) sub-regional transportation model, and. local agen~cy models'to anal, yze traffic impacts associated with development proposals or land use plan~s. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRP/I Technologies ES-2 2001 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Draft Chapter 4 - Multimodal System Performance Standards: AB 1963 identifies requirements in CMP legislation including development of multimodal system performance standards focusing on street and highway level of service and transit standards. This Chapter therefore incorporates minimum standards for both these important forms of ~ransportation. CMP Street and Highway Standards The methodology for measuring LOS must be ihat contained in Circular 212 or the most recent version of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM); and traffic standards must be set no lower than LOS "E" for any segment or intersection on the CMP system, unless the current LOS is lower (i. e., "F"). For purpo?es of this CMP, LOS analysis for inters6ctions and segments along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways, under current or' existing conditions, is required to be developed using HCM-based methods. Considering the tranSPortation financing program in Riverside County established through Measure A, there are no advantages to set a higher minimum LOS standard than required' by CMP legislation, LOS "E". As a result, :the minimm LOS standard for intersections and segments along the CMP System of Highways,and Roadways shall be '!E" unless the intersection or segment had a lower LOS (LOS "F") in 1991 (reference Exhibit 4-2). Such facilities are exempt from CMP deficiency plan requirements. Public Transit/Alternative Mass Transit System Standards Transit standards must be established for service frequency (i.e., headways), routing, and coordination among multipletransitagenciesoperatingwithintheCMPjurisdiction, ~;.., .. ~ ;.., Minimum frequency, routing and coordination standards have been identified for CMP'purposes in'.Riverside County. These standards are consistent with standards described in Short and/or Long Range Transit Plans (SRTPs or LRTPs) or have been established by SunLine Transit and the Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). Chapter 5- Enhanced Transportation System Management program: · The CMP must includeaprogram to analyZe the impact of land use decisions by jurisdictions on the regional transportation system, including an estimate ~f costs to mitigate those ~mpacts. This element is one of the most important processes in the CMP. The TIA process was eliminated in 1997 and replaced with the Enhanced Transportation System Management Program or Traffic Monitoring Program. under the neW pl:ogrthn, RcTC~ CVAG and Calt/ans would bethe agencies in Riverside County responsible for the count data collection process. The count data can also be. applied to comply xvith congestion Management Plan/C0ngestion Management System/Transportation Management System (CMP/CMS/TMS) data collection requirements. CVAG currently has a Traffic Monitoring Program in place that addresses CMP System Monitoring requirements and RCTC is currently implementing the Enhanced Traffic Monitoring Program/Smart Call Box/Caltrans' Traffic Management Center (TMC) Program to Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRP.4 Technologies ES-3 2001 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Draft be completed in 2002. This system will result in significant increases in the number and location of traffic counts. Chapter 6. LOS Deficiency Plans: AB 471 and AB 1791 provide for the development of deficiency plans. The bills state that "a city or county may designate individual deficient segments or intersections which do not meet the established level of service standards, if prior to the designation at a noticed public hearing, the city or county ha.~ adopted a deficienc3,'plan". Deficient segments or intersections will be identified through the biennial traffic monitoi-ing process..The local agency where the deficiency is located will be responsible for the preparation of the deficiency plan. RCTC will prePare deficiency plans on the State Highway System when deficiencies are identified by local jurisdictions. ~' Chapter 7 - Transportation Demand Management (TDM)/Air Quality: The CMP must include 'alternatives to single occupant auto use, such us transit, and 'van and carpooling; and must promote strategies to manage overall travel demand, such as a jobs/h~using balance, flextime, telecommuting and parking strategies. Local agencies must also adopt a transportation demand management (TDM) ordinance to comply with CMP statutes. RCTC will continue to work with other agencies toward development of transportation demand management (TDM) strategies that reduce reliance on.~the single-occupant vehicle. All local agencies in Riverside County have prepared and have adopted TDM ordinances. Chapter 8 - Capital Improvement Program (CIP): The .CIP is a 7-year program; projects in the CIP may be incorporated into the 'Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RT1P) for the programming of Flexible Congestion~ Relief (FCR) and Urban and Commuter Rail funds; CIP Projects must mainlain or improve LOS standards established for traffic and transit; and projects must conform to transPortation-related emission' air quality mitigation measures. To comply with the 'statutes; all 'regional ':and local projects, that improve or m~tain the minimum traffic level of service (LOS) or transit performance standards for CMP purposes Would be identified in the CIP. To streamline this procesS, CIP requirements Shall be the same as, and accomplished through the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) adopted by the Commission. ChaPter 9 - CMP COnformance and Monitoring Process; $CAG mUSt find the CMP consistent ~ith the Regional Transportation 'Plan (RTP). The CMP. l~ad . agency must make a deter'ruination that its member cities and the county are conforming to the CMP, including consistency with traffic LOS 'and transit peoeormance standards; adoption :and implementation of a trip reduction and travel demand ordinance; and adoption and implementat[on of a program to analyze land use impacts.on the transportation system. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRPA Technologies ES-4 2001 Riverside County Congestion Management Program Draft The specific requirements of each element of the CMP are described in Chapter 9. Chapter lO - CMP Development and Implementation Update Process: · This chapter focuses on the procedural, administrative, and coordination activities related to CMP development, adoption, and update in accordance with CMP legislation. The CMP includes a process that addresses each of the activities identified above including CMP development, adoption, and update. Environmental Assessment - An Environmental Assessment/Initial Study was conducted to assess the environmental impacts associated with implementation of the 1991 Congestion Management Program in Riverside County. Based upon this Assessment, and considering the intent of this Program, it was concluded that n__qo significant environmental impacts would be realized. As a result, the Commission approved a Negative Declaration. Considering the intent of the 2001" Riverside County CMP, and that significant revisions are not incorporated in this CMP update, further environmental analysis or revision to the 1991 Environmental Assessment/Initial Study is not necessary. Prepared for: Riverside County Transportation Commission Prepared by: VRP.4 Technologies ES-5 ITEM 26 APPROVAL C~N EY~,I~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER.~F_~F''~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council Shawn Nelson, City Manager June 25, 2002 CalPERS Contract Amendment Fourth Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the Resolution of Intention to amend the City of Temecula's contract to provide Section 21574 (Fourth Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local miscellaneous members. 1) Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETVVEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TEMECULA 2) Introduce and read by title only: ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETVVEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TEMECULA BACKGROUND: As a part of the adopted Memorandum of Understanding to be effective July 1, 2002 (Article 34 Retirement): the City of Temecula's PERS 1959 Survivor Benefit coverage (Government Code Section 21574) is a cash benefit paid to survivors of an employee who dies prior to retirement. This benefit is to be increased, within the first year of this agreement, from Level 2 to Level 4. This action is consistent with previous City Council direction. The second reading of this ordinance is scheduled for July 23rd with the contract amendment being effective 30 days following the second reading FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of this recommendation will be $7,440 in the first year. These funds are included in the upcoming FY 2002-03 Operating Budget. Attachment: Fourth Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits Resolution Amendment to Contract Exhibit Certification of Governing Body's Action Cerlification of Compliance With Government Code Section 7507 RESOLUTION NO. 02- A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BE'I'~NEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TEMECULA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the Public Employees' Retirement Law permits the participation of public agencies and their employees in the Public Employees' Retirement System by the execution of a contract, and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may elect to subject themselves and their employees to amendments to said Law; and WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its intention to approve an amendment to said contract, which resolution shall contain a summary of the change proposed in said contract; and WHEREAS, the following is a statement of the proposed change: To provide Section 21574 (Fourth Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local miscellaneous members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the governing body of the above agency does hereby give notice of intention to approve an amendment to approve an amendment to the contract between said public agency and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, as an "Exhibit" and by this reference made a part hereof. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THIS 25th day of June 2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, 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. 02- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 25th day of June, 2002, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk CalPERS California Public Employees' Retirement System EXHIBIT AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT Between the Board of Administration California Public Employees' Retirement System and the City Council City of Temecula The Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of the above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective December 1, 1990, and witnessed November 8, 1990, and as amended effective October 25, 1997 which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as follows: Paragraphs 1 through 10 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective October 25, 1997, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 10 inclusive: All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 55 for local miscellaneous members. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after December 1, 1990 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency. PLEASE DO NOT SIGN "EXHIBIT ONLY" Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members). In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: a. SAFETY EMPLOYEES. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 55 Full). Public Agency elected and elects to be subject to the following optional provisions: a. Section 20042 (One-Year Final Compensation). b. Sections 21624 and 21626 (Post-Retirement Survivor Allowance). c. Section 21574 (Fourth Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits). Section 21024 (Military Service Credit as Public Service), Statutes of 1976. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members of said Retirement System. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows: Contributions required per covered member on account of the 1959 Survivor Benefits provided under Section 21574 of said Retirement Law. (Subject to annual change.) In addition, all assets and liabilities of Public Agency and its employees shall be pooled in a single account, based on term insurance rates, for survivors of all local miscellaneous members. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 10. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct payments between the employee and the Board. B. This amendment shall be e~ctive on the __ BOARD OF ADMINISTRATIO~ PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETII~EJVIENT SYSTEM KENNETH W. MARZlON~C-I-IIEF ACTUARIAL & EMPL.O?~R SERVICES DIVISION PUBLIC EMPLOYEES~ETIREMENT SYSTEM day of __, CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TEMECULA ,~ PRESIDING OFFIC Witness Date _ Attest: ~? Clerk ~ AMENDMENT PERS-CON-702A (Rev. 8\96) CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Actuarial and Employer Services Division Public Agency Contract Services P.O. Box 942709 Sacramento, CA 94229-2709 (916) 326-3420 CERTIFICATION OF GOVERNING BODY'S ACTION I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Resolution adopted by the City Council of the (governing body) City of Temecula (public agency) on (date) Clerk/Secretary Title PERS-CON-12 (rev. 1/96) CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Actuarial and Employer Services Division Public Agency Contract Services P.O. Box 942709 Sacramento, CA 94229-2709 (916) 326-3420 CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 7507 I hereby certify that in accordance with Section 7507 of the Government Code the future annual costs as determined by the System Actuary and/or the increase in retirement benefit(s) have been made public at a public meeting of the City Council ofthe (governing body) City of Temecula on (date) Resolution / Ordinance. (public agency) which is at least two weeks prior to the adoption of the Clerk/Secretary Title Date PERS-CON-12A (rev. 1/96) ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF TEMECULA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of Temecula and Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System. SECTION 2. The Mayor of the City Council is hereby authorized, empowered, and directed to execute said amendment for and on behalf of said Agency. SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its adoption, and prior to the expiration of 30 days from the passage thereof shall be published at least once in the Californian, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Temecula and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of ,2002. ATTEST: Ron Roberts, Mayor Susan W. 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, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 02- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 25th day of June, 2002, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 23rd day of July, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, CMC City Clerk DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: DIRECTOR OF FINAN(~~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manage dCi,~/~ncil Debbie Ubnosk[~, Director of Planning June 25, 2002 Monthly Report The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development Department in the month of May 2002. CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES New Cases The Division received__70 new applications for administrative, other minor cases, and home occupations and 1~7 applications for public hearings during the month of May. The new public hearing cases are as follows: Conditional Use Permit Development Plan General Plan Amendment Minor Conditional Use Permit Specific Plan Substantial Conformance Status of Major Proiects Staff is working with project applicants to address any remaining issues and prepare the following cases for public hearing before the Director of Planning or Planning Commission: Roripaugh Ranch Annexation, Specific Plan, Environmental Impact Report and Development Agreement - The EIR 45 day public review period will end on May 17th. Staff is currently reviewing the latest re-draft of the Specific Plan. The DA and CFD meetings are on hold pending submittal of information by the applicant and finalization of the project details. Villages of Old Town - Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment and Environmental Impact Report have been submitted. Staff has reviewed the Specific Plan and provided comments to the applicant. The applicant is in the process of revising the project details. R:\MONTHLY.RPT~2002~vlay 2002 Report.doc Rancho Community Chumh - Application to design, construct and operate a chumh and school campus on a 39-acre site. The overall proposal will include 292,745 square feet of religious and school facilities with two four level (two story) parking structure (162,600 square feet and 380,023 square feet). The site will be developed in a number of phases beginning with a 1,500 seat, 26,927 square foot interim sanctuary with assembly room and a nursery; a two story 226,777 square foot administration building, 17 modular classroom buildings, a 9,695 square foot preschool, a 300 seat, 5,856 square foot chapel, two field house buildings totaling 10,000 square feet and lighted athletic fields. Future phases include permanent first through twelfth grade classroom facilities, a gymnasium, a 3,500 seat, 43,727 square foot worship center and a parking structure. This project is located on the north side of State Highway 79 South east of Jedidiah Smith Road. Staff is completing the Initial Study and reviewing resubmitted draft documents. A community meeting is scheduled for June 20, 2002. Villages of Temecula - Development Plan proposal for a 160 unit multi-family apartment complex with a commercial retail/office center located on the south side of Rancho California Road, west of Cosmic Drive and east of the Moraga Road and Rancho California Road intersection. This project also includes a General Plan Amendment, change of zone (with a PDO) and a parcel map. The State Clearinghouse has circulated the initial study, and no comments were received. A community meeting was held on January 14, 2002. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the project on February 20th. Staff has met with adjacent property owners on two separate occasions and identified their concerns. The project is scheduled to be heard at the June 25, 2002, City Council meeting. · Wolf Creek General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment- This project has been withdrawn by the applicant. Romano's Macaroni Grill - Planning Application to construct a 6,900 square foot freestanding restaurant building within Bel Villaggio Commercial Center. The project site is located at the southwest corner of Margarita Road and North General Kearney Road. Plans were resubmitted on February 21, 2002, and the project was deemed complete on May 6, 2002. Planning Commission approved this project June 5, 2002. Temecula Creek Village - The Planning Commission approved the 32.6-acres mixed-use project on May 1,2002. The project includes 400 multi-family residential units and 123,000 sq. ft. of commercial space. An appeal was filed by "Citizens First of Temecula Valley" on May 9, th 2002 and accepted on May 10 . The appeal is to rescind the adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and cause the developer to prepare an EIR. The appeal is scheduled to go to City Council on June 25th. Mosco Lot 34 - Development plan application to design and construct a 24,850 square foot office/warehouse building on 1.68-acres. The project is located on the south side of Zevo Drive approximately 2,000 feet west of Diaz Road. The project has been continued to the June 26, 2002, Planning Commission meeting to make architectural revisions. T.R. Properties - A Development Plan application to construct, design, and establish a 15,489 sq. ft. multi-tenant industrial building on the southeast corner of Winchester Road and Bostik Court. The project was submitted on April 15, 2002. Revised plans have been submitted to Planning and routed to all internal departments for comments and/or conditions of approval. · The Summit at Crystal Ridge - Development Plan to construct a 36,000 square foot office building on 3.01 -acres, located at Parcel No. 5 of Parcel Map No. 940-310-040, and also known R:~VIONTHLY.RPT~.002'vMay 2002 Report.doc 2 as Assessor's Pamel Number 940-310-040-5; submitted by Lucas Development Company. The application was submitted on January 22, 2002. The applicant resubmitted on April 22, 2002, and is awaiting comments from internal departments. The item is scheduled for the June 26, 2002, Planning Commission meeting. Promenade Outlot Pad Q - Administrative Development Plan 7,600 square foot single story retail building. The project is located on the east side of Ynez Road, south of Winchester Road. The application has been deemed complete. The project was approved administratively on June 10th. The Fountains at Temecula Expansion - Submitted by Fountain Glen Properties; a proposal to design and construct an additional 102 senior apartment units on 3.4-acres. This is an expansion of the existing Fountains at Temecula project located on the adjacent eight-acre lot. The project is located on the northwest corner of Nicholas and Winchester Roads. Staff comments from the DRC meeting were provided to the applicant March 20, 2002. Planning Commission hearing is set for June 26, 2002. Linfield Christian School Master Plan - Submitted by Linfield Christian School; a Conditional Use Permit proposal to expand the existing facility with 154,397 square feet of additional classroom and accessory structures and a proposed 37,500 square feet of housing for a superintendent, caretaker and facility. This project is located on the north side of Pauba Road west of Margarita Road (behind Temecula Valley High School). Staff met with the applicant March 1, 2002, to discuss the need to process a PDO in order to establish development standards and uses desired. Staff is awaiting submittal of material. A community meeting for the project was held April 11,2002. This project is on hold pending the preparation of a Planned Development Overlay application. Commercial Tentative Pamel Map - Application submitted by Lowry and Associates to divide a 13.2-acres parcel into 14 commercial lots. The subject property is located at the southeast and southwest corners of State Highway 79 South and Pala Road. Staff has completed Initial Study and the 30-day public review period will end in mid-June. The project has been scheduled for the June 27th Director's Hearing. Meadowview Golf Course - Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan to design and construct a public golf course and driving range within the Meadowview Community. Staff has reviewed a third draft of Focused Environmental Impact Report. Staff met with project developer on May 8, 2002, and informed them that the document cannot be found adequate for public review. The developer has indicated that a new environmental consultant is being chosen to complete the draft EIR. The new consultant should contact staff within two weeks. Crowne Hill Subdivision - A grading permit has been issued to Pacific Century Homes for grading and improving the remaining 396-acres subdivision located on the southeast corner of Pauba and Butterfield Stage Roads. Upon completion sometime this fall, 803 single-family residential lots will be ready for development. The builders are preparing an application to revise the Design Guidelines and a formal application is expected by the end of June. Hampton Inn Suites - Development Plan application to design and construct a 70 room, four story hotel on a 1.3-acre parcel located at the northeast corner of Jefferson and Winchester. The proposed project was reviewed at the June 5th Planning Commission meeting and was continued for design changes. R:\MONTHLY.RPT~2.002~vlay 2002 Report.doc 3 Temecula Professional Center- Minor Conditional Use Permit for the installation of two wireless telecommunication facilities on the roof of an existing building. The application was submitted on December 13, 2001. The project was scheduled for a DRC meeting on February 14, 2002. Staff is awaiting re-submittal from the applicant. Cingular Wireless Telecommunications & Sign Structure at Chaparral High School - Conditional Use Permit to construct a 26 foot high, 14 foot x14 foot rectangular structure to house six wireless telecommunication antennas and equipment, and structure will include three sides with signage to consist of an 84 square foot non-illuminated sign with green letters and blue background to read "Chaparral High School", a 42 square foot electronic message markee, and a 56 square foot blue and beige colored "C" letter with a black and green puma mascot illustration. Staff evaluated the most recently submitted materials and determined that the application was still incomplete on June 5, 2002. Overland Self Storage Facility - Conditional Use Permit to construct a 124,496 square foot, one story, self-storage mini warehousing facility with beige stucco and beige metal siding exterior walls and olive green color metal roofing on a two lot, 3.65-acres site, located south of Overland Drive and east of Commerce Center Drive. Future phase to include construction of a one-story 3,000 square foot office and caretaker's dwelling unit located at front of site. Staff held a Development Review Committee meeting on May 8, 2002. As a result, a number of issues have been identified and have been communicated to the owner and applicant. As of June 10, 2002, no plans have been resubmitted for continued review. Rancho Dental - Planning application to construct, operate and establish a 3,719 sq. ft. dental office building on the SW corner of Lyndie Lane and Rancho California Road. The project was submitted on March 21,2002. Staff is working with the applicant on design issues. As of June 10, 2002, no plans have been re-submitted for planning review. Margarita Medical Center, Phase II - is a Development Plan for 14,600 square foot medical office complex with one single story and one two story building capable of being converted to medical office condo units, on Margarita Road just south of the southeast corner of Margarita and North General Kearny Roads on the south end of the existing medical plaza. Plans were distributed for review and comment March 18, 2002, with comments due April 2, 2002. Medical Real Estate Development Company filed this application. Planning Commission hearing is set for June 26th. The Schaeffer Office Building - is a Development Plan request to build an 8,000 square foot professional office building (single story) on .9-acres within the Overland Corporate Center, on the west side of Margarita Road just north of the northwest corner of Margarita Road and Overland Drive. The project is tentatively scheduled for Planning Commission review on June 26th. Linfield Christian School Site Improvements - is a Minor Conditional Use Permit application to make street improvements and the relocation of the school's access on Paula Road and onsite improvements for parking, circulation, and play/ball fields on the north side of Pauba Road west of Margarita Road. This project is located on the north side of Pauba Road west of Margarita Road (behind Temecula Valley High School). This project goes to Director's Hearing June 20, 2002. Antenna Tower at Temecula Creek - is a Conditional Use Permit to construct and operate a 65 foot high cellular antenna, located at 44501 Rainbow Canyon Road (922-220-004); submitted by R:~VlONTHLY,RPT'~2002'Wlay 2002 Report.doc 4 AT&T Wireless. The application was deemed incomplete on April 24, 2002. A DRC meeting was held on May 23, 2002. Staff is awaiting re-submittal by applicant. Affirmed Housing Partners Tentative Tract Map No. 30604 - is a tract map for 17 single family dwelling units on 2.20-acres of land, located on the north and south side of sixth street (922-052- 004, 005,006, and 010); submitted by Affirmed Housing Partners. The application was deemed incomplete on April 27, 2002. Applicant resubmitted on May 17, 2002. Staff reviewed re- submittal and issued comments. Wireless Telecommunication - is a Minor Conditional Use Permit to co-locate three sector antennas on an existing 57 foot high monopine and the installation of four equipment cabinets, located at 41520 Margarita Road (954-020-005); submitted by AT&T Wireless. The project was deemed incomplete on May 7, 2002. A DRC meeting was held on May 23, 2002, and staff is awaiting re-submittal by applicant. Cingular Wireless Antenna Facility - Minor Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate and establish an unmanned telecommunications facility consisting of installing (6) antennas in two 35' high metal poles, replacing the existing poles that ara being utilized to hold up netting, which prevents golf balls from entering into the public street. The project proposed was located on the northeast corner of Rancho California Road and Margarita Road in the Temeku Hills Golf Course. The project was submitted on November 30, 2001. On December 20, 2001, the project was deemed incomplete at which time planning had requested redesign. Finally, on Mamh 12, 2002, the applicant had requested that the project be heard at a Director's Hearing as submitted. The project was heard at the Director's Hearing on May 9, 2002, at which time the homeowners that reside in the Temeku Hills voiced a number of concerns. Consequently, the Hearing Officer continued the project until the May 30, 2002, Director's Hearing in order to address the concerns expressed by the homeowners. On May 30, 2002, the project was heard again, with a number of homeowners in the audience who voiced opposition to the project. The Hearing Officer, after hearing all the facts of the case made a decision to deny the project. An appeal has been filed by the applicant and a Planning Commission hearing is anticipated in July. Wolf Creek Tentative Parcel Map - A pre-application for a Tentative Parcel Map for the southerly half of the Wolf Creek Specific Plan was submitted to Planning on April 9, 2002. A Development Review Committee was held in May 2002. This meeting was very productive and a number of questions were raised and a number of questions were answered. Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints - A pre-application to construct, operate and establish a 24,119 square foot church, located on the north side of Pauba Road approximately 800 feet west of Meadows Parkway (955-050-017) submitted by Cornwall Associates. The pre- application was submitted on April 15, 2002. A Development Review Committee was scheduled on June 13, 2002, and staff is awaiting submittal of a formal application. Muni-Financial Building - A Development Plan Application to construct, operate and establish a 16,197 square foot office building on 1.31-acres, located at 41427 Sanborn Avenue, on the northwest corner of Madison Avenue and Sanborn Avenue (APN # 910-272-001 ) submitted by DAVCON Development, Inc. The project was submitted on Mamh 6, 2002, and deemed incomplete on April 4, 2002. No correspondence had been received from the applicant regarding the corrections until staff was notified in the latter part of April 2002 that the occupant had decided not to proceed with the project. As of June 10, 2002, the applicant has taken no action. Staff anticipates closing out the project by the end of June 2002. R:\MONTHLY.RPT~2002\May 2002 Report,doc 5 Verizon Wireless Antenna Co-location - A Minor Conditional Use Permit was submitted on March 19, 2002, for the co-location of wireless antennas on an existing approved mono-pine (PA01-0196). The project is located east of Interstate 15 and west of Ynez Road on the Rancho Baptist Church property. The project was approved at the June 6, 2002, Director's Hearing. Vail Ranch Center Retail Pads Phase 3-Administrative Development Plan application to design and construct four retail buildings and one child care building around a landscaped pedestrian plaza as Phase 3 of the commercial center development. Staff is currently reviewing the revised site plan and architectural elevation exhibits. Milgard Manufacturing - A Development Plan to design, construct, and operate a 54,000 square foot expansion to the existing Milgard Manufacturing. The subject property is located at 26879 Diaz Road and also known as Assessor's Parcel Number 909-370-031. The Planning Director has approved the project as a Fast Track project. Staff and the applicant have agreed to a Fast Track schedule and the item should be heard at the August 7th Planning Commission meeting. Margarita Village Specific Plan - A General Plan Amendment for Pamel Map 22513, amending the land use from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial on 9.77 acres located at the southeast corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway (954-030-001); Submitted by Venture Point. In addition to the General Plan Amendment the applicant has also submitted a Specific Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit and Development Plan. The applications were submitted on May 23, 2002. Staff is in the process of reviewing these applications and comments are expected to be mailed to the applicant by June 20 2002. Small Business Assistance · House of Jerky: Assisted owner of this Old Town business located in the Welty Building in developing new sign designs. · Mad Madeline's: Advised the owner of this Old Town business regarding their application to the Old Town Local Review Board for the installation of awnings. · RASCAL Process Servers: Staff helped this new Old Town business obtain funding and approval for signs under the Fa(;ade Improvement Program. · Ashcroft Golf Clothing: Provided this potential new business with a City of Temecula business information package and site development statistics. Land and Sea Marine Service: Application by this new business for a wall signs was expedited in order to obtain approval from the Old Town Local Review Board and funding under the Fa(;ade Improvement Program. · US Land Building: Advised new owner of this Old Town building regarding options for new signs and outside paint under the Fa(;ade Improvement Program. Special Event Permits Frontier Days Rodeo: Staff worked with the Temecula Town Association (TTA) regarding its temporary use permit application for this event which is scheduled for May 26 and 27, 2002 at the Northwest Sports Complex. Prepared site plan and will hold a joint organization meeting with the TTA in May. R:~vIONTHLY.RPT~?.002'uMay 2002 Reporl.doc 6 · Tower Plaza Summer Concerts: Staff is assisting the owners of this shopping complex with a temporary use permit to conduct musical events throughout the summer. · September 16th Celebration: Provided Mr. Paul Orozco, who is planning this event for Old Town Temecula, with maps of Old Town and a preliminary site plan. Cinco de Mayo; Helped Ms. Zelda Munoz of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce process a temporary use permit for this event which took place in the Sixth Street parking lot on May 5th. Provided vendor insurance information and a preliminary site plan to applicant. · Promenade Mall Car Sale: Helped local car dealers and mall expedite application for an inaugural used car sale at this location. · Street Painting/Great Race: Worked with the Redevelopment Department to process the application for this event scheduled for June 22nd in Old Town Temecula. Special Proiects & Lon,q Range Planninq Activities The Division also commits work efforts toward larger scale and longer time frame projects for both private and public purposes. These activities can range from a relatively simple ordinance or environmental review to a new specific plan or a general plan amendment. Some of the major special projects and long range planning activities are as follows: Housing Element Update - The City has received the comments of the State Department of Housing and Community Development and has prepared the draft Element for the Planning Commission's consideration. We are currently awaiting comments and feedback from HCD. The remaining issues with HCD are local land costs, unit affordability and their relationship to the allowable densities. · Comprehensive General Plan Update - The CAC has completed its review of the draft goals and policies, and is currently considering alternative land uses. Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance - Final changes are being made prior to scheduling this item for a Planning Commission workshop. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. Surface Mining Ordinance - The staff and City Attorney had been making final changes based upon feedback from the State prior to submitting this item to the Council for their consideration. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. Application Fee Study - Staff has provided information to the consultant and Finance Department about changes to our current fee schedule and is currently awaiting revised information to be returned for the Planning Department's review. · Hillside Development Policy - The policies are being examined for integration into the draft- grading ordinance. This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. Large Family Day Care Home Facility Ordinance - The Planning Commission considered this Ordinance amendment at their February 2, 2000 meeting. This item is being scheduled for City Council review. R:\MONTHLY.RPT~2002'vMay 2002 Report.doc 7 · Southside Specific Plan - This item is on hold pending additional staff resources. · City- Project environmental reviews and permitting: o Interim Southside Fire Station Site o First Street Landscape Improvement Project o Vail Ranch Middle School Basketball Court Lighting General Plan Amendments Villages of Temecula, south of Rancho California Rd., west of Cosmic and east of Moraga intersection. A community meeting was held on January 14, 2002. The project was approved at Planning Commission on February 20, 2002 and will be scheduled for City Council in the near future. Staff has met with adjacent homeowners on two separate occasions and identified a number of concerns. The General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, Development Plan, and Tentative Pamel Map are scheduled to be heard at the June 25, 2002, City Council meeting. · Rancho Highlands Drive was continued by the City Council on September 25, 2001. A request to reduce the size of Via Industrial (Western Bypass Corridor) north of Avenida Alvarado has been submitted and has been on hold pending the approval of a revised Circulation Element. Eli Lilly General Plan Amendment and Zone Change - The applicant's proposal would involve changing the land use designations to Community Commercial. Staff recommends a Professional Office designation on one parcel. A Specific Plan Amendment is required to change the zoning for Planning Area Three of the Regional Center Specific Plan. Geoqraphic Information System (GIS) Activities · The contract for the purchase of the hardware and installation of the equipment on all front line fire emergency response units for the City's GIS based Fire Response Program was awarded. Fire Department and GIS staff once again met with Riverside County GIS and the Riverside County Sheriff's office to discuss countywide coordination of data for public safety applications. It was determined that a committee consisting of representatives of various cities, CDF/County Fire, the County Sheriff's office would be formed and would meeting every other month to discuss the long-term coordination of GIS data including updating and accuracy issues. Staff is awaiting he second deliverable from the Project Design Consultant's contract for the high-resolution digital aerial ortho-photographs of the City and surrounding area. This contract will ultimately include 1 foot per pixel photographs (imagery) and contours at 5 foot intervals for 150 square miles around the City and 6" inch per pixel imagery and contours at 2 foot intervals for the area within the city limits. · Staff continued to work with the Finance Department to provide all maps for the upcoming CIP document. Staff attended training at UCR for the use and maintenance of the ArclMS software program which will ultimately replace the City's Map Objects program currently serving the public on the City's Website. R:\MONTHLY. RPT~.002\May 2002 Report.doc 8 · Staff continues to work with Public Works staff to map storm drain locations with the City's GPS unit. This is an ongoing project, which will take several months to complete. · Recent mapping products and data requests include: Maps and area calculations for landscape maintenance areas around all city interchanges for TCSD Vacant commercial properties map for Economic Development Pala Road soundwall map and owner mailing labels for Public Works Old Town vicinity map for Redevelopment Fire inspection map for the Fire Department Maps and analysis for possible PHS expansion for Economic Development Fire response area study maps for Fire Zoning overlay maps for Old Town area for Planning Maps showing affected areas for the proposed SDG&E power line project for the City Manger's office Updated the point of interest Iocator map for the City Clerks Office Aerial maps showing proposed parks within Crowne Hill for TCSD Site selector map identifying vacant commercial for the City Manager's Office Series of maps showing proposed library site, RTA routes and service area delineations for prospective grant application for TCSD Weed abatement maps and ownership records for Code Enfomement County Zoning map for Planning Vicinity, zoning and land use exhibits prepared for Planning Staff continues with ongoing data layer development and maintenance. R:~vIONTHLY.RPT~.O02~Vlay 2002 Repod.doc 9 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ OU~JZCTOR o~ ~=~,~,~c}z ..-1~'~ CITY MANAOER ~ CiTY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager DATE: June 25, 2002 SUBJECT: Economic Development Monthly Departmental Report Prepared by: Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator The following are the recent highlights for the Economic Development Department for the month of May 2002. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Leads & Inquiries In the month of May, the City followed up on a lead regarding a leading golf and sports apparel manufacturer. They have been looking at Temecula, Ontario and Costa Mesa as possible locations for a new manufacturing facility. The expansion would include a 200,000+ square foot facility, and employ more than 400 workers. They are working with John Bragg of Keamy Real Estate. Staff has provided Mr. Bregg with information about Temecula and our development processing schedules, which he will be giving to them. Staff met with Jim Matee of Krtapy Krerne to discuss a potential Temecula store. Roger Bergstein of Century 21 Wright is working with a client who is interested in purchasing property in Temecula for a latch-key-children's outreach project. Staff provided him with maps and information. In the month of April, the Southwest Riverside County Alliance responded to 6 leads from the Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP) on behalf of the City of Temecula. The Alliance received 6 inquiries fi.om Expansion Management magazine; I lead fi.om the EDC of Southwest Riverside County, and I lead from CTTCA. Attached is a copy of their activity report. Koemont Certificate Each year the Kosmont real estate consulting firm publishes a listing of cities and the cost of doing business. We have been identified as a '%/ery Low Cost of Doing Business" city and have received a certificate. This is in large part due to our lack of a utility user tax and very Iow business license fee. We have noted this in past marketing efforts and will continue to do so. R:\Wolnickg'ff)EPT REPORTS~'Iay 2002 Report.doc Media/Outreach Materials Staff wrote the City article for the Chamber Newsletter titled 'cityoftemecula.org for the Business Community". The article provided an overview of useful information for Temecula's business community including business resources and information, employment, and economic development information. Staff submitted information on Temecula to Rachael Hedgcoth, Associate Editor of Expansion Management, for consideration in their July California State Review issue. Project Dedication City Councilmembers and staff attended the Chaparral High School Pool and Aquatic Center Dedication on May 30~. City speakers included Mayor Pre Tem and TCSD President Jeff Stone and Community Services Commission. Chairman Jack Henz. School District speakers included Barbara Tooker and Principal Tim Ritter. The City worked in cooperation with the Temecula Valley School District. The facility will be open to the public dudng the summer months and used by students dudng the school year. Public swim classes will begin June 17th. Meetings Staff attended the EDC of Southwest Riverside County Business Relations Committee meeting on May 2nd. Company contact reports were given on Rancho Physical Therapy, TK Truck Kovers, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Conforma, Collateral Therapeutics, Destination Temecula, International Rectifier, Ohmdel Engineering, and Ramco Associates. City staff met with Agrispect to address the owner's concerns regarding City permits. A goal progress report was given indicating that there have been 23 site visits and 12 phone interviews for the year. The goal is 27 site visits and 33 phone interviews. Staff attended the Murriete/Temecula Group meeting at Callaway Winery on May 3~. Representatives of Lake EIsinore described local plans and projects for their city. Staff met several times in May with Guidant representatives regarding their expansion plans and Development Agreement. On June 6t', staff met with Alexa Washburn, Planner for Western Riverside Council of Governments, regarding their Jobs/Housing Balance Study. WRCOG has received a grant from the Southern California Association of Governments to conduct a jobs/housing balance study within western Riverside County. WRCOG is conducting interviews with the Economic Development departments and agencies within the sub-region. The document will provide alternative economic strategies/incentives that promote job growth in the sub-region. The program's goal is to promote local land use and balanced transportation policies that can reduce auto travel and support more pedestrian, mixed-use, and transit oriented development. On May 9t~, staff met with Ms. Caraballo of the University of La Veme. The University is looking to establish a presence in this area, and their initial offerings would be in the areas of public administration and organizational management. The courses would be geared toward the working professional. They would start small - probably a couple of classrooms, occupied a couple of times per week. The University of La Verne has 8000 students at their main and satellite campuses. Ms. Caraballo also mentioned that they have partnered with Mt. Jacinto Community College and UCR in the past and would be open to partnering on a higher education facility in Temecula. R:\WolnickgkDEPT REPORTS'tMay 2002 Report.doc Staff attended the EDC of Southwest RiversMe County Board Meeting on May 16~. The EDC considered drafting a letter opposing the SDGE Valley-Rainbow line. The resolution was approved by all present, with 3 abstentions (Susan Norton, Dennis Frank, David Rosenthal). Staff will assist Gary Youmans in the drafting of this letter. Al Sabsevitz of Verizon mentioned that the PUC would be considering area code changes in the first quarter of 2003. Temecula's area code would be one of the areas affected. The two most likely scenarios would be an "overlay" of new area codes, which would allow customers to keep their current phone number, but would require customers to dial 10 digits (1+ area code) for most calls. The other option would be to split the 909 area code. It is likely that our area would be in a new "951" code under this approach. Staff will use caution in ordering signs and stationary as our phone numbers could change in the coming year. On May 16, staff attended the UCR CONNECT Steering Committee Meeting. Program updates were provided on the Directors Luncheon, Springboard and LINKS Schedule of Events, proposed quarterly education sedes, and proposed MIP event. Other issues discussed included the Event Sponsorship Program, UCLA Entrepreneurship Conference, and Orange County CONNECT. Mayor Roberts and staff attended the Southwest Riverside County Manufacturers' Council quarterly luncheon on May 17~ at the California Grill Restaurant. Manufacturers' Council Board Members and Mayor Roberts presented a scholarship award to Chaparral High School student Chris Carey. The guest speakers included Paul O'Neil of O'Neil Associates and Greg MonJson with the Lake Elsinore Water District. They spoke on the topic: "Current and Future Energy Needs." Staff attended the UCR Connect LINKS luncheon on May 31st, at Temecula City Hall. The UCR Connect LINKS Program offers a sedes of outstanding thought leadership presentations by qualified professional speakers that address critical corporate business issues. Guest speaker Craig Nelson, Vice President of Comerica Bank - Technology & Life Sciences Group, spoke on the topic "Find Me the Money" - Obtaining Debt & Equity for Your Business. Mr. Nelson specializes in providing debt and financial services to Start-Up companies through IPO and beyond. Comerica has over 2000 high technology companies served by 19 high tech and life science offices across the U.S. The EDC of Southwest Riverside County held their quarterly luncheon on May 23rd at Guidant. Linda Bradley, R.N., J.D., Chief Operating Officer of Rancho Springs Medical Center spoke on the topic, "Healthcare Report for Southwest Riverside County." Ms. Bradley discussed major issues that affect healthcare both locally and nationally; healthcare workforce issues; future expansions of local hospitals and services; and highlights of Southwest Healthcare System. Staff attended this event. Staff met with John Luttgens, owner of Professional Hospital Supply, on May 15th regarding potential sites for their expansion. Mr. Luttgens is currently using commercial broker Allan Nunez in his site search. Staff will be preparing a map of potential properties and will be identifying earthquake faults, flood hazard areas, and other potential issues. Staff will also be prepared to discuss such factors as the Western bypass and potential connections to Date/Cherry. A follow-up meeting with Mr. Luttgens was held and findings were presented. Our goal is to identify a site or sites in Temecula that will meet his needs. Not only does PHS employ about 650 people, they are one of our very top sales tax producers. Councilmembers Mike Naggar and Sam Pratt toured the new Pechanga Casino and Resort on May 24~. Pechanga personnel provided the tour upon the city's request. R:\Wolnickg'd)EPT REPORTS'aMay 2002 Report.doc Staff attended the Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance meeting on May 29~. Updates were provided on the following: · The Economic Alliance is hosting the first annual Waste of Southwest Riverside County Event" on June 27 - 29. This is a complimentary 'no sale" weekend for business decision makers looking to expand or relocate to Southwest Riverside County. To date, there are 10 confirmed and 5 guests pending for this event. · The Alliance will release a RFP in July for a 1-year contract w/option to renew for providing marketing related services (i.e. website, ad work, branding, etc.) · The Alliance GIS website will be operational at the end of July. · The partners will receive a copy of the Alliance MOU and Marketing Plan by the first part of June. · The Alliance will be participating with California Trade and Commerce at the Bio 2002 Trade Show in Toronto, Canada, June 9 - 12. · The Alliance will be taking a 2 - 3 day tdp in July to the Silicon Valley area to meet with struggling businesses. · The Alliance will focus on the San Diego biotech/biopharmaceutical markets. Staff met with two pdvate investors on May 30~ to discuss a possible ice rink at the old Costco Building. TOURISM Soecial Events Staff worked on the City/Chamber booth for the Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival, which included staffing, signage and backdrop poster displays, set up and tear down. FAMILIARIZATION TOUR The Temecula Chamber FAM Tour was held on Saturday, May 4th. The tour was a tie-in with the popular Temecula Valley Winegrower's Wine Auction. The FAM Tour included Old Town, Farmer's Market, Museum, Temecula Creek Inn, Pechanga, Wine Country, Temeku Hills Golf Club, and the Wine Auction at Thornton Winery. The City participated on the planning committee and provided lodging, gift baskets, and media kits for the travel writers. Eight travel writers and their guests attended. As a result of the FAM Tour, travel writer Madeleine Shaner wrote an article on Temecula in her column for the Beverly Press newspaper (see attached). Media/Outreach Materials KCAL-9 News contacted staff in May regarding information and film footage on Temecula. Staff provided Kathy Young with the information and arranged for footage to be provided to her through Group One Productions. KCAL-9 News may feature Temecula in an upcoming news segment highlighting places to visit. Staff provided Dave Hoekman with an updated tourism press kit, slides and additional tourism information. He plans to write an article about Temecula in Group Tour Magazine. The magazine is distributed to 10,000 group tour planning professionals throughout North America. Staff provided Michaela Edelhaussr, a San Diego freelance travel writer, with a tourism press kit and slides of Temecula. She is conducting some preliminary research on Temecula for a future article. R:\Wolnickg~DEPT REPORTSWIay 2002 Report.doc Sandy Cain, freelance travel writer in Laguna Beach, contacted staff for information on new attractions/events in Temecula. Staff has worked with Ms. Cain previously and provided her with an updated toudsm press kit, slides, and packet on the Children's Museum. Ms. Cain is a contributing writer to Meetings West, Meeting News, and the Orange County Business Journal. She is currently working on an article for Meetings West issue and she will be including Temecula. She expressed great interest in the Children's Museum and hopes to publish an article on the museum in the future. In May, the Ontario Convention & Vlattors Bureau released their Spring/Summer 2002 Vlaitor Guide. They have published 40,000 and will be distributed to the Ontado International ,Airport, California Welcome Centers, California State Tourism Tradeshows, and travel agencies. The guide can also be found in Inland Empire hotel rooms. The City of Ontario Economic Development Office will he distributing this issue in their business recruitment and relocation packages. The City has placed a full-page ad in the Visitor Guide. (see attached) On May 9~, staff met with Mark Fisher, graphic designer, to discuss the concept and layout for the City's Rodeo ad that appeared in the Frontier Days Rodeo program. Staff assisted with the ad design and text. As a sponsor, the City receives a free full-page ad in their event program. Staff met with Gla Danson, President of Vista Pacifica publications, on May 23rd to discuss her upcoming book on Temecula. Ms. Danson will be publishing a hardbound table display book on Temecula this year. Staff provided Ms. Danson with area contacts, slides and information. Staff will continue to provide her with additional information that she requests. Staff provided information and slides to Kathy Strong, a freelance travel writer. Staff also arranged her accommodations and itinerary for her visit to Temecula. Ms. Strong is writing an article on Temecula for an Orange County tourism publication called Preferred Destinations Magazine. The magazine is published quarterly, and has a circulation of 75,000. The publication is complimentary to guests and visitors of 82 premier resorts and hotels in Orange County, and seeks to inform its readers on the very best that Southern California has to offer. Staff has previously worked with Ms. Strong on other articles featuring Temecula. Ms. Strong is very interested in the Temecula Children's Museum and plans to write an article in the future. She was involved with the development of the Children's Museum in San Louis Obispo. Anaheim/Orange County Vlaitor and Convention Bureau published Temecula events in their July - September Calendar of Events, which is sent out to media and bureau members. This is one of the benefits provided to the City as a member. The summer edition of Where - Orange County magazine was published and contained Temecula's co-op ad and listings on Temecula's special events (see attached). MeetinRs On May 10~, staff met with Robert Kellerhouse of Galway Downs. Mr. Kellerhouse would like the City of Temecula to assist in "getting the word out" about Galway Downs. It is a U.S. Olympic Equestrian team training facility, that covers about 250 acres, and much of the property is devoted to jumping and other competitions. They currently draw a few thousand people to their major events, but similar facilities in other parts of the U.S. and in other countries draw in the tens of thousands. The owners, trainers and others that come to Galway Downs stay in local hotels and this runs on the order of $25,000 per year just in hotel rooms. They have a couple of national qualifying events each year, plus an international qualifying event. Staff provided information to Mr. Kellenhouse that could assist in his marketing, including contact information. Staff will include Galway Downs in the City's tourism marketing efforts. R:\WolnickgkDEPT REPORTS'~,Iay 2002 Report.doc On May 16th, City and Chamber staff met with representatives of the Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance and the EDC of Southwest Riverside County and provided them with an update of the City's tourism marketing program/activities and the Chamber's toudsm activities and how both entities work together in this area. ATTACHMENTS Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Activities Report Economic Development Corporation of Southwest Riverside County Activities Report Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance Activities Report - Apdl Inland Empire Economic Partnership Activities Report Temecula Valley Film Council Activities Report (Not submitted.) Advertising/Media Coverage R:\WolnickgkDEPT REPORTS",May 2002 Report.doc TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE June 10, 2002 Sha~vn Nelson, City Manager City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Shawn, Attached please find the Monthly Activity Report provided as per our contract with the City of Temecula. This is the month of May at a glance: Bus ness Inquiry Highlights: In the month of May, 10 businesses requested information on starting or relocating their business in Temecula. They received a btisiness packet, which includes a copy of the City of Temecula demographics, relocation, housing, rentals, maps, organizations, etc. Committee Highlights: Tourism & Visitors Council: The Tourism & Visitors Councils "Escape to Temecula" FAM Tour was a complete success! As a direct result of the lam tour, The Park Labrea/ Beverly Press published an article brimming with enthusiasm and a free lance writer's article ~vill appear in the San Diego Union Tribune. The council provided visitor information in the Temecula Tourism Booth at the Balloon & Wine Festival on June 8 & 9, 2002. Tourism Council members assembled 100 tourism bags with tourism promotional information for "The History Channel's Great Race" participates stopping by Old Tmvn Temecula on Saturday, June 22, 2002. Education Committee: The Youth Job Fair facilitated by the Education Committee ~vas held on May 18, 2002 at the Promenade In Temecula. 34 local businesses and over 460 students attended the job fair. Scholarships were awarded on May 20, 2002 at Chaparral High School to the selected students. The Education Committee recently scored the Student of the Year applications from the local schools and chose one girl and boy student from each school. Thc Student of the Year recipients will be recognized on June 3, 2002 at the Student of the Year hmcheon. 27450 Ynez Road, Suite 124 · Temecula, CA 92591 Phone: (909) 676-5090 1. Fax: (909) 694-020~ www.temecula.org · e-mail: info@temecula.org Ways & Means Committee: The 2nd Annual Talk of the Town event will be held Thursday, June 6, 2002 at 7:30 a.m. at Temecula Creek Inn. The Title Sponsors for this event are Lermar Communities and The Southwest Riverside Association of Realtors. The featured speaker will be Dr. Esmael Adibi, director of the A. Gary Anderson Center for Economic Research and Anderson Professor of Economics at Chapman University. Dr. Adibi will give businesses beneficial information in areas such as: inflation, interest rates, job growth, taxable sales, construction activity, and home prices. Local Business Promotions Committee: The committee held the June Shop Temecula First Kick-Off Party on May 21, 2002. The committee is currently reviewing all aspects possible for a effective mentoring program. The month long campaign will end with the grand prize drawing on July 1, 2002. The Businesses of the Month for June selected by the Government Action Committee are South~vest Riverside County Board of Realtors and Metropolitan Water District. Other campaign winners are Mesa Energy Systems was awarded the Chamber Spotlight, and RSVP Limousine Services is the Mystery Shopper winner for the month of June. Government Action Committee: See Education section. Membership Committee: New member Open House be held on Tuesday, June 18, 2002. It will provide an opportunity for new members to meet Board of Directors, Committee Chairs and others members. The Membership has increased to over 1,300 Members. T¥CC Newly Designed Website: The Chamber has completed the design of the new website. The site has received over 5,000 user hits in the month of May. We have received great reviews from members and the community. The site includes information on Tourism, Business Resource, Community, the Chamber, Directory, etc. Tourism Highlights (Bulk brochure distribution) Activity Report: · 175 Winery Brochures and 50 Visitor Guides to Pechanga RV Resort for distribution to guests. · 150 Winery Brochures and 50 Visitor Guides to TVCC's Weekend Visitor Center for distribution to visitors. · 125 Tour of Temecula Maps, 100 Winery Brochures, and 60 Relocation Packets to Tarbell Relocation for distribution to clients. · 125 Temecula Brochures and 20 Visitor Guides to Woodside Homes for distribution to clients. · 100 Winery Brochures, 50 Visitor Guides and 50 Temecula Brochures to Warner Springs Ranch 'for distribution to guests. · 100 Tour o£Temecula Maps and 150 Visitor Guides to the City of Temecula for distribution in Press Kits and for distribution at thc Lake Elsioore Storm Temecula Day. 2 · 50 Visitor Guides to Temeku Hills for distribution to guests. · 50 Temecula Brochures, 50 Visitor Guides, 50 Winery Brochures and 50 Tour of Temecula Maps to Roadtrek lntemationaI for distribution to motor home rally guests attending the Balloon & Wine Festival. · 30 Winery Brochures, 20 City Maps and 20 School Brochures to Dutchstone Real Estate for distribution to clients. · 25 Temecula Brochures, 25 Visitor Guides, 25 Winery Brochures and 25 Tour of Temecula Maps to Realty World for distribution to clients. · 25 Winery Brochures and 25 Tour of Temecula Maps to Stephanie Young for distribution to wedding guests. · 25 Winery Brochures and 25 Tour of Temecula Maps to Gwen Patterson for distribution to guests attending a wedding in Temecula. · 15 Temecula Brochures to Prudential California Realty for distribution to clients. · 10 Relocation Packets to Rancon Realty for distribution to clients. · 10 City Maps to the Southwest Riverside County Economic Alliance for distribution to potential business associates. Activity Report: · Tourism calls were 2,139 in May. · Phone calls were 3,719 in May. · Walk-ins were 3,650 in May. · Mailings were up 48.39 percent in May. · E-mail requests were up 39.9I percent in May. · Web Page User Sessions were 5,768 in May. Also, attached are the meeting minutes for the Tourism and Visitors Council, Education, Ways & Means, Membership and Marketing, Local Business Promotions, Government Action Committee's, and a June Temecula Today! If you have any questions regarding this information, please call me at (909) 676-5090. Thank you. Sincerely, President/CEO cc: Mayor Ron Roberts Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Stone Counci hnan Jeff Comerchero Councilman Mike Naggar Councilman Sam Pratt Shawn Nelson, City Manager Jim O'Grady, Assistant City Manager Gary Thornhill, Deputy City Manager Gloria Wolnick, Marketing Coordinator TVCC Board of Directors 3 TEMECULA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT FOR MAY, 2002 PHONE CALLS TOURISM TOURISM REFERRALS Calendar of Events Special Events General Information TOTAL TOURISM CALLS Chamber Vis. Center This Month This Month 386 216 32O 1,217 2,139 RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS CHAMBER MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL PHONE CALLS 153 76 1,083 268 3,719 Total Year-To-Date 1,816 1,026 1,338 5,487 9,667 785 301 5,621 1,096 17,470 WALK-INS TOURISM 314 168 2,424 CALENDAR OF EVENTS 168 3 807 SPECIAL EVENTS 59 0 296 GENERAL INFORMATION 1,169 197 6,125 RELOCATION 209 0 1,077 DEMOGRAPHICS 225 0 527 CHAMBER 861 0 4,391 MISCELLANEOUS 275 2 1,216 TOTAL WALK-INS 3,280 370 16,863 MAILINGS TOURISM RELOCATION DEMOGRAPHICS TOTAL MAILINGS E-MAIL TOURISM RELOCATION MISCELLANEOUS TOTAL E-MAIL WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS G RAN D TOTALS PHONE CALLS WALK-INS MAILINGS E-MAIL WEB PAGE USER SESSIONS 135 128 105 368 74 57 167 298 5,768 THIS MONTH 3,719 3,650 368 241 5,768 579 5O6 452 1,537 426 204 769 1,399 5,768 YEAR-TO-DATE 17,470 16,863 1,537 1,342 5,768 ANNUAL VOLUME COMPARISONS Chamber Chamber May, 2001 May, 2002 Percentage Increase PHONE CALLS TOURISM Tourism Referrals 441 386 -12 Calendar of Events 186 216 16 Special Events 361 320 -11 General Information 1,344 1,217 -9 TOTAL TOU RIS M CALLS 2,332 2,139 -8 RELOCATION 238 153 -36 DEMOGRAPHICS 78 76 -3 CHAMBER 1,347 1,083 -20 MISCELLANEOUS 207 268 29 TOTAL PHONE CALLS 4,202 3,719 -11 WALK-INS TOURISM 374 314 -16 CALENDAR OF EVENTS 177 168 -5 SPECIAL EVENTS 97 59 -39 GENERAL INFORMATION 1,154 1,169 1 RELOCATION 264 209 -21 DEMOGRAPHICS 93 225 142 CHAMBER 998 861 -14 MISCELLANEOUS 216 275 27 VISITOR CENTER WALK-INS 447 370 -17 TOTAL WALK-INS 3,820 3,650 -4 MAILINGS TOURISM 99 135 36.36 RELOCATION 89 128 43.82 DEMOGRAPHICS 60 105 75.00 TOTAL MAILINGS 248 368 48.39 E-MAIL TOURISM 45 74 64.44 RELOCATION 42 57 35.71 MISCELLANEOUS 126 167 32.54 TOTAL E-MAIL 213 298 39.91 * Chamber referrals reflects faxes, walk-ins and phone calls ~-17-202 10:13AH F~OH ~.2 Junc 13, 2002 Jim O'Grady City of Iemecula PO Box 9033 Temeeula, CA 92589-9033 RE: Activity Summary - May 2002 Business Development' Staff received the following business development leads for the month of May: · A phone inquiry from Mark Ruff, owner of Aruba Juice & Java, located in the Lake Elsinore Outlet Center. Mr. Fluff requited financing information for debt consolidation and marketing assistance. Staff referred Mr. Huff to the SBDC and CDC Small Business Finance Corp. to assist with financing needs and to three local marketing finns for his marketing needs. (5/2) · A phone inquiry from Mona iJiffenbacher, who is an instructor at Mt. San Jacinto College. Ms. Diffenbaeher requested a list of local bio-medical and pharmaceutical companies (within a 50-mile radius) that conduct clinical trials and medical research, Staffprovided a list of medical-related companies in the region. (5/6) · A phone inquiry from Joseph Manley of Technical Education Center in Ontario, who requested contact information for the region's high schools' work experience counselors. Staff originally met Mr. Manley at the 2002 SWRC Career Expo in April. Staff provided the contact information and spoke with Mr. Manley about expanding their office into southwest county. The company's owner toured the Workforce Development Center and is negotiating a lease within the center. (5/7) A phone inquiry with Rick Kavenaugh of CB Ellis in Carlsbad, who requested demographic information and local crime statistics for a cl.ient that was described as a fairly large tenant. The client would consider relocation to southwest county, Oceanside or Vista. Staff' referred Mr. Kavenuagh to Stevie Field of SWRC Economic Alliance for further relocation assistance. (S/16) · A phone inquiry from Jim Prani of Barnes Engineering Co., a metal machining firm relocating to Murrieta from Colorado Springs, CO. Mr. Prani requested a list of local electrical contractors to complete their new building. Staff delivered a list of electrical contractors, which were referrals of EDC members in construction and commercial real estate. Staff had assisted Mr. Prani in previous business development needs and has ongoing contact to assist with additional resources. (5/2]) · A phone inquiry from Louis Bolvarides of Lawman Group in Lake Elsinore. The Lawman Group is a private security/patrol company. Mr. Bolvarides purchased the business and financed part of the purchase debt. He requested finance options. Staff provided Mr, Bolvarides with a contact list of EDC members in finance and SBA services. (5/23) Post Offlcc Box 1.'~88 0 27447 £ntcrprksc CR¢IcWcst, Suite ~¢I01 · '£¢m¢cula, CA 92593-1588 Ofttce 909/600,4A')64 · FAX 909/600-6005 · Emall tnfo~cdc.swrc.org · www, cdc.~rc,or8 6-17-202 10:14AH F~OH ~.3 Jim O'Grady City of Tfmecula Activity Summary - May 2002 Page 2 of 3 An inquiry from Kati Biszantz, who requested the latest population numbers for a feasibility study to build a driving range in southwest county. Demographic information was provided for the cities Of Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, Murrieta, Temecula, and unincorporated areas of French Valley, Menifee, Redhawk, Sun City, Wildomar, Wine Country and Winchester. (5/29) Community Outreach Staff attended the following meetings/events to promote or assist economic development: · Professional Womens' Roundtable Meeting (5/2) - Guest speaker Marcia McQuern, president of The Press Enterprise. · Meeting with Diane Burnett of Guldant Corp. (5/6) - Ms. Bumett was seeking venues to make presentations of G-uidant's strategies on employment development and business retention programs. Staff provided contacts for the various Rotary clubs in southwest Riverside County. SWRC Career Expo Meeting (5/7) ~ Post-event meeting to discuss goals, successes and strategies of the Career Expo held on April 20. · Mt. San ,Iacinto College - Workforce Development Summit (5/9) - MSJC held a W°rkforce development workshop that hosted various local comparfies to discuss workforce needs. The purpose of the workshop was to learn about local workforce needs in training and education and tO develop curriculum to address those needs. · Lake Elsinore Valley EDC Luncheon (5/9) - Guest speaker Linda Sanford, KN, MSN, FNP, presented the Healthy Fanfilies program within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District. · Meeting with Merritt Doyle of Marketing IQ (5/10) - MIQ is a marketing company in Escondido that specializes in technology products and companies. Staffand Stevie Field met with Mr. Doyle to talk about local economic development and to discuss ways that he can become more involved in collaborative efforts of the EDC, Alliance, and San Diego companies. Mr. Doyle's company is well positioned with hJgh-tech companies in San Diego. Riverside County Manufacturing Industry Council Partner Meeting (5/14) - A partner meeting to discuss and identify existing initiatives that pertain to the manufacturing industry and "Best Practices". * Meeting with Lois Hall of California State University San Marcos - Staff met with Ms. Hall, who is w/th the university as a hired consultant to identify the higher education needs in local management. * Temecula Tourism Meeting (5/16) - Staffmet with Gloria Wolnick of City of'£emecula and several staff members of Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce to learn more about the .City's and Chamber's marketing efforts to develop greater tourism. 6-17-2~2 10:IDAN FRQN P. 4 Jim O'Grady City of Temecula Activity Summary - May 2002, Page 3 of 3 SWRC Manufacturers' Council Meeting (5/17) - Guest speakers discussed utility needs in the region. · EDC Quarterly Lunch Meeting (5/23) - Guest speaker Linda Bradley, COO of Kancho Spring Medical Center, provided a presentation on healthcare delivery. · Meeting with Pat Partin and Lynn Stuart of North County EDC (5/30) - Staffand Stevie Field met with Ms. Partin and Mr. Stuart, president of North County EDC, to discuss ways to partner and support economic development for southwest Riverside and north San Diego repons. · UCR Connect Links (5/31) - Gue~ Speaker Craig Nelson, V.P. of Comerica Bank presented "Fnd Me the Money" - Obtaining Debt & Equity for Your Business. Business Retention · Business Relations Committee Meeting (5/2) See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. Administration/Organization · EDC Nominating Committee Meeting (5/14) EDC Board of Directors Meeting (5/16) - See attached meeting minutes for discussion topics. · Administration - Staff managed the daily operations of the EDC office; updated the EDC website; coordinated golf tournament and quarterly luncheon action items', coordinated the EDC directors' elections; and prepared and distributed various EDC/community email updates to members/business community, This concludes the activity summary for May 2002. Should you have questions or need further detail, please call me at 600-6064. Respectfully, Diane Sessions Executive Director 6-17-202 10~1~AN FROH p.~ ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSII)E COUNTY BUSINESS RELATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, May 2, 2002 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center, Executive Board Room 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA Committee Members Present: Aaron Adams, City of Temecula Stevie Field, SWKC Economic Alliance Robin Greet, D&D Construction Keith Johnson, Mission Oaks National Bank Michael Lewin, Mirau Edwards Cannon Hamer & Lewin Phil Mulder, CDC Small Business Finance Corp. Rex Oliver, Murrieta Chamber of Commerce Tony Kenz, Diversified The Staffing Solution Oavid Rosenthal, SWRC Manufacturers' Council Oiane Sessions, EDC Alice Sullivan, Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Guests: Ron Nater, SWKC Economic Alliance Liz Yuzer EDC Call To Order Committee Chair Michael Lewin called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. members introduced themselves. He welcomed everyone and Follow=up Actiou Reports Agrispect - Aaron Adams reported that Jim O'Cu'ady had met with Agrispect to address the owner's concerns regarding City permits. Compauv Contact Reports Rancho Physical Therapy - Diane Sessions presented Lori Moss' report on a phone visit with Kimberly Frieze of Rancho Physical Therapy in Murfieta. The company operated 15 locations, with three facilities in Temecula, three in Murrieta, and i~cilities from Ontario to Palm Desert and down to Vista. They anticipated the need fbr a new Murrieta facility and would add a new location soon in Hemet, The Murrieta facility had 40 employees. Primary customers were local residents who visited the location closest to their home or work. Competitors included PKN in Murrieta and Temecula. Ms. Frieze ranked the company as large and indicated that Rancho Physical Therapy was the largest independently-owned physical therapy operation in California. Sales in the past year were up, and they felt the local economy was improving. Their contingency plan for an electrical outage included battery hack-up for their computers and generators. They were happy doing bu.~iness in Southwest Riverside County and would continue to educate the public on physical therapy and how it could reduce Workers Compensation costs. TK Truck Kovers - Rex Oliver reported a visit with Terry Kobylski, owner of TK Truck Kovers in Murrieta. The company produced truck bed covers and liners, and provides costom work for auto dealers. They relocated to a new facility on Jefferson four months ago. Mr. Kobylskl reported tfis concerns about the City's street signage compliance. Mr. Oliver would continue to work with Mr, Kobylski regarding this issue. Arena Pharmaceuticals - Stevie Field and Ron Nater reported a visit with Jack Leaf of Arena Pharmaceuticals in R. ancho Bernardo. The company employed approximately 200 employees. Ms. Field reported the company may look for needed incubator research space in the Temecula area. 6-17-202 1~:16AM FROM P. 6 Buhness Relations Committee Me~ing Minutes-May2, 2002 Page 2 of 3 Conforma, Inc. - Stevie Field and Ron Nater reported a visit with Conforma, Inc., a cancer research firm in Rancho Bemardo. The company started as an incubator business and now employs 50. Their operations were initially funded with venture capital, and they are now looking for second-round financing and a new location. Representatives of Conforma, Inc. would visit Southwest Riverside County in June as part of the Economic Alliance event. Collateral Therapeutics - Stevie Field and Ron Nater reported a visit with Chris Reinhard of Collateral Therapeutics in Rancho Bernardo. They reported that Collateral Therapeutics operated their business in San Diego because of the technology expertise of the workfurce. o Destination Temecnla - Stevie Field reported on a phone visit with Dave Wilson, owner of Destination Temecula. The company coordinates Wine Country tours, tastings, winery dimmers, and lodging and transportation primarily for tourism. In business locally since 1993, the company reported 6 employees. Primary customers live in Southern California, with many that live nationally and internationally. Sales in 2000 were excellent, but decreased slightly in 2001. Mr. Wilson indicated that 2002 was proving to be a ve~' good year, with plans to increase staff as needed. He was happy doing business in Southwest Riverside County. Mr. Wilson had concerns about growth in the community and how current decisions would affect the tourism industry. Alice Sullivan reported that he was Chair of the Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce Tourism Council and was working to implement a Transient Occupancy Tax (TOI) to generate additional marketing dollars. Mr. Wilson would like more infbrmation about the EDC. Action Item: Jim 0 'Grady lo call orr Daw~ F/ilxon to axxi.~'t w~th concerns q/'community growth and touri.~'t~. International Rectifier - Kobin Greet reported a phone interview with Bob Rossen, director of Human Resources for International Rectifier in Temecula. Ms. C~reer reported the company produced semi- conductors for information technology, automobile consumer products and government defense. The company was headquartered in El Segundo, CA, and had been operating since 1947. Temecula's facility began operations 12 years ago and currently employs approximately 600 employees. Seventy-five percent of the workforce live locally and the remaining live in other Riverside County areas. They were pleased with the local business environment and would be willing to be a contact person for other companies that might relocate to the region. No survey completed. * Ohmdel Engineerin~l - Keith Johnson reported on a phone visit 'with Tibor Fait Sr., president of Ohmdel Engineering in Temecula. A small tool and die shop in business for 10 years, the company typically employed seven but had a recent lay-off of four: Primary customers were in the aerospace industpy. Sales decreased this past year due to a struggling aerospace industry, although Mr. Fait felt the local economy was stable. Principal suppliers were non-local ~netal companies. There were no plans to expand the facility or workforce. Comingency plans for an electrical outage included using a small generator. Mr. Fait indicated he was happy doing business in Southwest Riverside County. · Ramco Associates - Keith Johnson reported a phone interview with Russ Howard, presidem of Ramco Associates in Temecula. Mr. Howard was an importer/broker of various products in which he acts as a liaison between manufacturers in the Far East and US manufacturers. The company relocated to Temecula in 1989 from Orange County due to quality of life preferences. Primary customers were manufacturers in the Pacific ~mrthwcst, Florida and Illinois. Sales in the past year were down slightly since the manufacturing sector was slow. There were currently four employees with plans to increase their sales force by two, but no plans to expand their facility. There were no contingency plans for an electrical outage. They were happy doing business in Southwest Riverside County. ~-17-202 10:l~AM F~OM P. 7 Business Relations Committee Meeting Minutes - May 2, 2002 Page 3 of 3 Goal Progress Report * Michael Lewin announced that visits and phone interviews in the tenth month of the fiscal year were as follows: 27 visits ~ 3 points each + 33 phone interviews @ 1 points each = 60 visits/calls @114 points YTD VISIT PHONE POINTS Goal 27 33 114 Actual 23 12 81 Variance -4 -21 - 33 New Committee Assignments · David Rosenthal agreed to call on Solid State Stamping and U.S. Thermoplastics. Aaron Adams would take a binder and Rex OLiver would call on several Murrieta businesses. EDC News and Other Information Economic Alliance Update -Stevie Field reported that the new marketing CD-ROM was available. She also highlighted the Alliance's ~our to be held in conjunction with the EDC golf tournament on June 27. UCR Connect - Rex Oliver reported that the Springboard event would be held May 10 at UC Riverside. City, County & Chamber News v. City of Lake Elslnore - No report available. City ofMurrieta - Rex Oliver reported the City would attend the International Conference of Shopping Centers in Las Vegas: the City would focus on bringing more restaurants to the area by hiring a consultant to conduct a study and compile demographics; Lowes would open in August 2002 and provide 185 jobs; Kohls submitted plans to build a new store in Murrieta; Town Center would house the new 9,000-square-foot senior citizens center; the City submitted a grant application for a new 25,000-square-fbot library at Town Center; Phase III of Town Center would include 160,000 square-feet of shops and retail development. Cffy of Temecula - Aaron Adams reported the City would soon complete their annual and capital improvement budgets; an E- newsletter would be created to allow distribution of various city business reports to thc public; submission of a grant application for a new 33,000-square-foot library was in process. Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce - No report available. Murrieta Chamber of Commerce - Rex OLiver reported that Chamber elections were in process; the Installation Dinner would be held on June 22; the Chamber now had 650 members and their retention rate was 90%. Temecuht Valley Chamber of Cbmmerce - Alice Sullivan reported their membership drive was ongoing and they now had about 1,300 members; the Chamber golf tournament was scheduled on May 3; the youth job fair at The Promenade mall would be held On May 18; Talk of the Town was scheduled on June 6; a new web site had been launched. SWRC Manufacturers' Council - David Rosenthal reported the Council would present a $1,500 scholarship to a senior high school student who would pursue a college education in manut:acturing; a raffle would be held at the EDC golf tournament to increase the Council's scholarship fund; the next quarterly lunch meeting would be held on May 17 at the California Grill in Temecula and would offer discussion topics on utility issues. EDC Board Update - Diane Sessions.reported the next EDC quarterly luncheon would be held at Guidant on May 23 and would focus on the health care industry. Plans were ongoing for the golf tournament to be held on June 27. Adiournment The meeting adjourned at 10: l 0 a.m. DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPNLENT CORPORATION OF SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF DIRECTORS GENERAL MEETING Thursday, May 16, 2002 - 9:00 a.m. Workforce Development Center 27447 Enterprise Circle West, Temecula, CA DRAFT BOARD MEMBERS Marlene Best, City of Lake Elslnore Mike Doblado, The Promenade ln. Temecula Stevie Field, SWRC Economic Alliance Dennis Frank, UCR Extension Darren Gill, D & D Commercial Construction Ted Haring, Eastern Municipal Water District Ron Holliday, City of Murrieta Keith Johnson, Mission Oaks National Bank Susan Norton, Guidant Corporation Jim O'Grady, City of Temecula Rex Oliver, Murrieta Chamber of Commerce David Rosenthal, SWRC Manut:acturers' Council A1 Sabsevitz, Verizon Gary Youmans, Community National Bank EDC STAFF Diane Sessions Liz Yuzer MEMBERS AND GUESTS Ci'ndy Davis~ Riverside Count~ EDA O. B. Johnson, WestMar Commercial Brokerage Ron Nater, SWRC Economic Alliance Ed Sternagle, UCR CONNECT CALL TO ORDER ! Board President Ga~y Youmans called the meeting to order at 9:03 a.m MTNUTES · The Board reviewed the minutes of the April 18, 2002 Board of Directors Meeting. Motion was made by Al Sabsevitz, seconded by Dennis Frank and carried unanimously to approve the minutes of the April 18, 2002 Board of Directors Meeting as presented. FINANCIAL REPORT The Board reviewed the April 30, 2002 Financial Report that showed total monthly revenues of $575 total expenses of $8,313 and total cash-in-bank of $70 656. Motion was made by Ron Holliday, seconded by David Rosenthal and carried unanimously to approve the April 30 2002 Financial Report. NEW BUSINESS · Insurance Proposal: Diane Sessions reported that she requested quotes from six insurance companies and was waiting for a final quote fi'om All State Insurance, which was expected to be lower than the present insurer. Gary Youmans requested that he and Diane Sessions be authorized to approve the lowest bid under $2,600. Motion was made by Dennis Frank, seconded by Ron HoRiday and carded uqanimously to authorize Mr. Youmans and Ms. Sessions to approve the lowest bid under $2,600. (At 10:35 the Board adjourned into closed session to discuss personnel issues and reconvened at 10:45.) · Staffing Service Proposal: See closed session minutes for details. 6-17-282 10:18AH FROH Economic Development Corporation of Somhwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting -- May 16, 2002 Minutes - Page 2 of 3 · FY 2002 Draft Operating Budget: The DraPt Operating Budget for FY 2003 was presented for discussion. Motion was made by Darren Gill, seconded by Rex Oliver and carried unanimously to approve the Operating Budget for FY 2003 with an appropriate adjustment in the Insurance entry once the final bid had been accepted. Nominating Committee Update: Gary Youmans reported that ten positions were open for election plus two vacated seats that would expke in 2003. Ihe slate would be ratified at the Board of Directors meeting in June. · Rainbow Valley Interconnect Power Lines: The Board of Directors discussed the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) hearings regarding the need for and location of power lines in thc area. Rex Oliver reported that a town meeting in Murrieta on the issue had a very large attendance. Gary Youmans suggested that the Economic Development Corporation send a letter to the PUC in opposition to the project. Motion was made by Ron Holliday seconded by Jim O'Grady and carried that Mr. Youmans send a letter opposing the route. Dennis Frank, Susan Norton and David Rosenthal abstained. · Job Czar Program: Gary Youmans reported that Temecula Councilman Mike Naggar requested the opportunity to speak at a Board of Directors meeting regarding his Job Czar program in Temecula. The Board agreed that the concept was facilitated by the Economic Alliance. Jim O'Grady indicated that Mr. Naggar wanted to present ideas that could further economic development in the area. Mr. Youmans suggested that this issue could be covered at a luncheon meeting with a panel discussion involving other area cities. CONTINUING BUSINESS · Temecula General Plan Advisory Committee Update: Gary Youmans reported thc Advisory Committee's review of the land use plan was completed and traffic circulation issues would be discussed at the next meeting. Golf Tournament Update: Gary Youmans reported that major sponsorships were secured and that hole sponsors and additional prizes were being sought. Approximately 75 golfers were registered and a total of 120 were expected. SWRC Economic Alliance Update: Stevie Field introduced Cindy Davis from Kiverside County EDA who would assist with the tour event scheduled for June 27 and 28. Ms, Field provided the tour itinerary and distributed the sponsor brochure. Several participants were already confirmed, Spousors were needed. · Energy & Water Issues Update: No report available. · RCIP Update: No report available. OPEN DISCUSSION 909 Area Code: Al Sabsevitz reported that the PUC had indicated that the 909 area code would nm out of phone numbers in January 2003. Two proposals would go to the commission. One was an overlay that would require all local and long distance calls to be dialed with 10 digits. The other would chm~ge northern Riverside County to a 951 area code, 6-17-202 10:18AN FRO~ P.I~ Economic Development Corporation Of Southwest Riverside County Board of Directors Meeting - May 16, 2002 Minutes - Page 3 of 3 EDC Administrative Update: Diane Sessions reminded the Board of the quarterly luncheon to be held at Guidant on May 23. · SWRC Manufacturers' Council: David Kosenthal announced that a scholarship would be presented to a Chaparral High School senior at the Council's luncheon on May 117. Energy issues would be the topic for discussion at the luncheon. Business Relations Committee: No report available, · City, County and Chamber Updates: City of Lake Elsinore - Marlene Best reported that the skate park was opened and the fire station would be completed by the end of July. She further reported that $65M in building permits were issued in 2001 and $80M were already issued this year. City ofMurrieta - Rex Oliver reported that the annexation of Murrieta Hot Springs on July 1 would bring the city population to 62,325; the Jefferson Avenue upgrade would be completed next week; plans for a 9,000 sq. ft. Senior Citizens Center at Towns Square were approved, and the grant proposal for the new library would be submitted by June 14. City of Temecula .- Jim O'Grady reported that meetings were held with the University of LaVerne to explore options for a local satellite campus; the budget for 2002-2003 included an increase in the Public Works staff; and Pacific Sales, an appliance retailer, would locate to Temecula on Business Park Drive. Lake Elsinore Valley Chamber of Commerce - No report available. Murrieta Chamber of Commerce - Rex Oliver reported that elections to their Board of Directors would take place next week; Murrieta would have a booth at the ICSC conference in Las Vegas; the next mixer would be held June 6, and the golf tournament would be held August 23. Temecula Valley Chamber of Commerce - Mike Doblado reported that 127 golfers participated in their golf tournament and that bids were being accepted for the new Chamber of Commerce building. UCR CONNECT: Ed Sternagle reported that the annual Director's Luncheon would be held June 7 at The Mission Inn. He also announced that UCR CONNECl had been invited to participate in a prestigiot~s entrepreneurial conference. ADJOURNMENT At 10:25 a.m,, motion was made by Mike Doblado, the board meeting. seconded by Rex Oliver and carried unanimously to adjourn Respectively submitted by: Elizabeth Yuzer Phil Oberhansley Recording Secretary Board Secretary 130 Sou[h Main Street Lake Elsinoce, CA 92530 (9~)) 674-3124 Fax ~90~1 674-2392 Qty of I~urri~ ECO~NONtlC ALLIANCE TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Marlene Best Jim O'Gredy Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager City of Lake Elsinore City of Temecula Stevie Field Economic DevelopmentJMarketing Coordinator May 20, 2002 SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY MONTHLY MARKETING UPDATE Lori Moss Assistant City Manager City of Murrieta 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: A total of 14 leads were generated in the month of April. There were six from Expansion Management; six from IEEP leads; one lead from CTTCA and one lead from the EDC. Approximately 60 calls and/or follow-ups were made on both recent and past leads. Consultin,q Ron continues to work on setting up appointments with biotech companies throughout California. To date, we have met with three companies in the San Diego region. Conforma Therapeutics was our last visit. Conforma shared with us that they are looking to possibly relocate within the next year or so. He also stated that they are looking for a location that would decrease their bottom line expenses. Conforma has been invited to our event in June. Trade Shows On behalf of the Alliance, I attended the CoreNetJNacore Symposium in Salt Lake City, UT. with CTTCA. I was able to make some great contacts with professionals in the real estate community. On June 9-13 we will again partner with CTTCA for Bio 2002 in Toronto, Canada. This is the largest show in the field of biotechnology. GIS I spoke with Anatalio on 5/15 and because the County information is not yet available, the completion date has been revised to July. The EDA continues to work with County GIS to obtain this information so that we may go further with this project. Ad agency After discussion at the Alliance meeting, it was determined that rather than releasing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for each project the Alliance is interested in, we would release an RFP for an ad agency to handle all Alliance projects for one year (with option to renew). This RFP is scheduled for release in early June and will come into effect July 1, in conjunction with the MOU between the cities and the County. Sprinqtime event The first round of invitations has gone out, however I continue to work on gathering additional potential guest information. I have attached a copy of the invitation to accompany this update. Cindy Davis, Development Specialist with the EDA, will be assisting me with the sponsorship packages. A brief presentation was given at the EDC meeting on June 16, to explain the sponsorship levels and benefits. There are many components to this event and I will cover them in greater detail at the regular Alliance meeting on May 29. On an ongoing basis, I attend the following meetings: SWRC Manufacturer's Council Temecula/Murrieta Group Business Relations Committee SWRC EDC LE EDC Economic Development meetings concerning the Southwest Riverside County region UCR Connect meetings If you need any additional information or have any questions, please contact me at (909) 600-6066. Sincerely, Stevie Field Marketing/Economic Development Coordinator Copy: Brad Hudson Robin Zimpfer Debi Moore Robert Moran Teresa Gallavan Ron Nater Diane Sessions INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP www. ieep.com REAL ESTATE SUCCESSES (The IEEP reports monthly on significant real estate transactions that occurred with or without the assistance of IEEP, in order to provide leads to our members.) Syphax Engineering, a full service millwright company, announced its plans to relocate its business to the City of Murrieta. Syphax will share approximately 5,000 square feet of 32,000 square feet of existing industrial space with another firm, which is scheduled to complete its move from out of state within the month. The Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP) assisted with the site search and workforce development needs of the company. Syphax was introduced to the region as a direct result of IEEP's booth presence at the April Westcon Trade Show in Los Angeles. Tianz, Inc., a manufacturer of automotive parts and industrial hardware in China, purchased a 426,000 square foot industrial facility located at 1495~1496 E. Francis Street in Ontario for $16 million. The automotive manufacturer is expanding and will use the new facility as a distribution center. Michael Chavez and Bill Helm with Lee & Associates represented the seller, MDC Ontario LLC. Source: Co-Star SoUth Gate Engineering purchased a 55,316 square-foot building located at 13477 Yorba Avenue in Chino for $2.75 million. The facility will be used by South Gate Engineering for the manufacturing of pressurized tanks. Ken Andersen of Collins Commercial represented the seller~ Chino Adams Ltd. Source: Co-Star Masterbrands Cabinets; a national cabinet manufacturer, has expanded its operation, leasing 35,728 square feet of industrial space in the Jersey Business Center at 11201 Jersey Blvd. in Rancho Cucamonga. Total consideration for the 5-year lease is valued at $900,000. Don Kazanjian with Lee & Associates' represented Masterbrands Cabinets. Ron Washle with Grubb & Ellis represented the landlord, Jersey Karubian L.P. Source: Co-Star General Electric Aircraft Engines, a manufacturer of jet engines and gas turbines, plans to build a $20 million hangar for a special 747 jet and bring 53 employees to Southern California Logistics Airport in Victorville. The Cincinnati-based company intends to move its jet engine test plant from Mojave Airport to Victorville Airport and estimates the plant would be in operation in a year. The plant would include office space and storage areas. Source: The Sun USF Bestway, an Arizona based company, which provides trucking services throughout the western United States expanded to a $13 million facility at 10661 Etiwanda Avenue in Fontana. The facility includes 75,000 square feet of dock space and 11,000 square feet of office space. An estimated 200 people work at the new facility, and 20 to 30 more employees could be added by the year's end. Source: The Business Press Lennar Homes, a national residential home developer, will. expand its operation and lease 27,000 square feet of office space at 391 North Main Street in Corona. Approximate consideration for the 5-year lease is valued at $3 million. Jeff Ruscigno with Lee & Associates and Tim Hawke with Grubb & Ellis represented the landlord, Rexco. SourCe: Co-Star CALENDAR ITEMS To register online for SBDC events: ~.iesb~l¢.or9 i June 6, ~13, 20: "Develop Your Plan For Success" with this three-week, comprehensive seminar that is bein9 held from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. at the Inland Empire SBDC, 1157 Spruce St., Riverside. Cost is $40. For more information contact Melanie Cote at 909.781.234§. June ~18: "Get the Tax Facts" in a one-day eye.Jew of federal and state tax i~sues for small businesses. This free IRS workshop will be held from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. in Riverside, and will include topics such as: How To Set Up A New Business, Earned Income Credit, Electronic Federal Tax Payment Systems (EFTPS) filing and much more. For more information contact Melanie Cote at 909.781.2345. June 20.' Want to increase your bottom line? Attend the "Marketing Your Small Business" workshop in Rancho Cucamonga from 9 a.m. to Noon, and learn how to increase sales, profitability, and efficiently manage your marketing dollar. Cost is $20 per person. For more information contact Melanie Cote at 909.781.2345. June 26: Learn how to become a practicing entrepreneur at "The 2~" Entrepreneurs Forum" from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Ontario Convention Center. Cost is $10 per person, students $3. To register call 909.477.2953. July 9, 15, 23: "Develop Your Plan For Success" in a three-week, comprehensive seminar designed to ~rovide a solid basis for creating your business plan. The Inland Empire SBDC will host this seminar from .9 a.m. to Noon. Cost is $40 per person. For more information call 909.781~2345. July 10: What you don't know can hurt you! Attend the "IRS/EDD Payroll Tax Workshop" in Corona from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.-to gain crucial information on Federal and State payroll requirements. Free of charge. For more information call 909.781.2345. WELCOME 19EW MEMBERS Comercia Bank-California, a Business Bank; provides a range of financial products and services to businesses. Curt L. McCombs, Senior.Vice President, can be reached at 909.944.8402. Encore Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Pharmaceutical Company, provideS laboratory research and pharmaceutical consulting. Dietma Baur, Manager of Business Operations, can be reached at 909.275.5890. Integrated Warehouse Solutions designs and installs warehouse systems such as: Pallet racks, shelving, conveyers, and mezzanines. Terry Labanies, President; can be reached at 909.941.2540. Sprint, a Telecommunications and E-Business Provider, ~ocuses on maximizing communication services to help clients achieve a technological advantage in the way they do business. Terrance Simmon, Regional Director, can be reached at 909.484.8012. CHECK US OUT !!! IEEP ACTIVITY REPORT FOR MAY- Business DeVelopment. noted 26 inquiries and one lead for a total of 27 leads year to date. The Inland Empire Film Commission (IEFC). registered 142 total days of film activity and 373 requests for locations, with eight permits issued in San Bemardino County, four issued in Riverside County, and 1 5permits issued for the Bureau of' Land Management for. an economic impact of $4,560;000. Small Business 'Development Center (SBDC) - counseled !621 clients for 825 client hours, and conducted 16 training events with 212 attendees. IEEP MEMBERSHIP LUNCHEON Join the IEEP Membership Luncheon on July 24 at the Ontario Airport Marriot, 2200 Holt Blvd., Ontario from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Dr. Herbert Fischer, San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools and Dr. David Long, Riverside County Superintendent of Schools will speak on The State of K thru !2: Education in the Inland Empire. R.S.V.P. to Margie Oswald at 909.890.1090 ext. 222. RIVERSIDE COUIgTY INTEGRATED PLAN [RCIP] The most important long term land use, endangered species habitat, and transportation planning exercise is currently underway and accepting public comments. If you live or work in Riverside County the RCIP will shape the future, get involved. Public hearings will be held at the following locations: Wednesday, June 19: Riverside County Planning Commission, General Plan Public Hearing will be held at the Riverside Convention Center, Ben H. Lewis Hall - North, 3443 Orange St. Downtown Riverside, from 8:30 a.m.to 8 p.m. Thursday, ,June 20: RCIP EIR Public Scoping Meeting will be held at the Lake Perris Fairgrounds - Harrison Hall, 18700 Lake Perris Dr., Perris, at 5:30 p.m. For more information visit: www. rcip.org or call 877-375-RCIP LOCAL INTERESTS UIglTE TO PROTECT ESSENTIAL SERVICES The Leave Our Community Assets Local (LOCAL) Coalition is a growing statewide coalition of local leaders that have united in an effort to protect local services by preventing further cuts to local revenues. The coalition represents a broad range of stakeholders ranging from local police, fire chiefs, sheriffs, city council members, mayors, county supervisors, special districts, chamber of commerce, and many others who have an interest in protecting local services from being cut to balance the state's budget. The LOCAL Coalition will be actively involved in this year's budget process, both in Sacramento and in communities throughout, the state, to ensure funding for local services is preserved. The coalition has offered state lawmakers a series of proposed solutions to the state budget crisis that will not erode funding for local services. To learn more about how you can get involved and help protect local services, visit the LOCAL website at www. calocal.org. 119LAND EMPIRE TOURISM COUNCIL The Inland Empire Tourism Council (IETC) is currently working with the California Restaurant Association to provide essenti~al information on numerous programs available through the State of California's Travel & Tourism Commission. Currently a Bed & Breakfast FAM (familiarization) tour is being planned for September 2002. This FAM tour will be built around the communities of Wrightwood, Crestline, Lake Arrowhead, Big Bearl Idyllwild and Temecula. Several countywide FAM tours are also in the planning stages. The IETC wi!l begin a membership drive in July 2002. All of the cities in the Inland Empire are encouraged to join with the IETC in marketing to the tourism industry. There will I:Je many opportunities fOr participating in co-op advertising, travel show Co-ops, FAM tours and membership luncheons with ~(eynote speakers. Participation in the various programs of the IETC will only be available to members. For more information, please contact Sheri Davis at 909-890-1090, ext. 231. The 2002 IETC Visitors guide is available in both terminals of Ontario International Airport, as well as numerous visitor centers' and tourist.destinations. It is now being, delivered to all of the Chamber of Commerce in the Inland Empire. I~ you would like a copy of this guide~ please forward your name and address to the IETC, sdavis@ieeD.com, and a guide will be sent to you. INLANI] EMPIRE FILM COMMISSION ']'he Inland Empire Film Commission (IEFC) recently represented the region at the 2002 ShowBiz Expo. Sharing a booth with the California Film Commission enabled the film commission to use their marketing funds to assist location managers and scouts with more in-depth scouting in the two-county San Bemardino County's inland Empire No~th enjoyed a two month stay from Universal Pictures' "Hulk". UniYersal's construction crews re-created an ice cream store, drive in, and 9as station in the small community of Yermo. The community was invited to visit durin9 the construction period, and then to apply durin9 the extras castin9 time for the film. A student from Anthony Rile¥'$ Academy for the Performing Arts' was selected to work on the set as an extra. The IEFC is currently in negotiations with the Palm Springs Buieau of Tourism to increase awareness of the city to the production community. Palm Springs enjoyed "Oceans 11" and the numerous co-star visits to the many restaurants and stores throughout the city. The IEFC plans to work closely with AmeriDream, a $200 million dollar project. AmeriDream is in the planning stages of a major production facility and theme park for the Coachella Valley area. There are also plans for production of a feature film in the near future. The IEFC is providing crew and service information to the company at this time. Location requests are up considerably over last year during this same period. There are five major feature films in various stages of negotiations for locations. 2002 should be a very strong year for production throughout the Inland Empire. Please send materials for conaideration to Diane Evans. Submissions can be sent by e-mai/to devans@ieep.com, or by fax to (909) 890-1088. All materials should be received by the last Friday of each month. · · . INLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP 301 East Vanderbilt Way, Suite 100 San Bernardino, CA 92408 (909) 890-1090 Fax (909) 890-1088 tooms@ieep.com - www.ieep.com Gloda Wolnick City of Temecula P.O. 8ox 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 OntariO' OltANGE* COUNTY when the air currents gte i? har- monlc convergence wi{h the fi}st pot of black coffee avail- able at your hotel, of which there are approximately a cou- ple of dozen,, including a i'ea- sonably priced Comfort Inn ' (909)699-5888 and some ele- . gant and inexpensive Bed & Breakfasts; We stayed at the Embassy Suites Hotel, a spa- cious, well-kept, full service hotel, just minutes from the freeway and from Old To.wn Temecula. (800) EMBASSY. The name Temecula. comes · fi'om an Indian word which means. "Where'the sun breaks through the mist." And for about 11 months of the year, the sun does break through the mist. It is the only city on California to retain its odginal Indian name. The Luisefio Indians inh~bited Temecula in the 180Os, when the first Spanish padres vis!ted. Ranch Temecula was a land grant made to Felix Valdez in 184-5, followed by the romantic era of rancheros and vaqueros, [elebrated annually at the Ramona Pageant in Hemet. a - stone's throw from Temecula. Indian wars and massacres, des- peradoes and outlaws, stage- coach hold-ups, apost office and new settlers, and some migiants from the Civil War in the 1860;3, set the flavor of Temecula. There are still traces of all these eras in Old Town Temecula. With civilization ' came a dam -- Vail Lake -- and as the two-legged species encroached, the wildlife -- griz- zlies, mountain lions and coy- otes.- began to mireat, leaving Madmusings From page 6 the Temeculans were running out of things to do, include: an Arts and Croft Fair in April, · Temecula Val!ey Winegrowers Grope Days, Golf Seminal' and Trade Show, Temecula Gold Annual Bluegrass F~st[val, Hot Su.mmer Nights, Halloween Spook Nighi; and 01d . Fashioned Christmas. Temecula's a grea{ place to visit; you might even want to live there. With a cufi'jmt year-. round population of about .82 000, the city is spumous, new, and conven'enfi . ', Winemakers' Dinne~', Western Construction is as rampant as. Days in Old Temecula, w n~ries, but still under control, Champagne Jazz at Thornton policing is good hnd reliable, Winery, the 2002 Taste of the World at Tower Plaza, Temecula Valley Museum Family Day Programs, Annual Old Town, Dixieland Jazz Festival, Annual Frontier Days Ro0eo; Temecula Valley Balloon & Wine Festival Temecula Street Painting Festival, The Great Race 2002 20th Anniversary, the Annual and commufiity above all is [he watchword for the growing city. And did i mention the ~viner- ies? At 1,500 feet above, sea level, the T6mecula Valley off-ers an ideal location for growing premium wine grapes -. the perfect balance of geogra- phy, microclimate and well- drained s0il. At first count there Rod Run, Annfial Arts in the. are upwards of 15,'count 'em · Coun[ry Festival, the Mayor's: ' i 5! m~j0r Wineries, including Ball for the Airs, Valentine[s '. Callaway, Falkner, Hart, Stuart Love Song Concerts, spring and :' Cellars, Thornton and Wilson fall Concerts on the Green, a '" '' Creek. Events sponsored bY the Summer Youth Arts Institute, : Winegrowers' Association · Annual Temecula Valley ·include winter Barrel Tasting in International Film Festival, February, Summer Passport: Tasting and Wine Trail in June, Harvest Wine Celebration in November, and Wine. Auction · Weekend in May.' Thornton Winery hosted the Fifth Annual Wine Auction to which we were . invited. Lordy; all those great. wines to taste and all that gourmet food to sav6r! For wine. information (800)801-WINE. I can even provide you with a · recipe foi' elderberry mousse cake, pistachio encrusted pork loin with dried fruit compote and sweet potato at/gratin.or: in a pinch,lmini crepes with fresh ' peach and ginger mascarpone crearp and spiced deep choco- late torte with sweet pear eom: pote, from a selection of the gourmet Temecula restaurants that provided the food tasting that went with the wi~e-sipping. It was a tough job, but some, body had t6 do it. · For information about any of ~ese marvelous activities or for questions about othei' facilities, call Temecula Valley Chamber of Commeme (909)676-5090 or check out www. temecula.org. ' TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CiTY ATTORNEY ~'~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCF_.~,~k'~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Howard Windsor, City Fire Chief "~ June 10, 2002 Monthly Departmental Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Fire Department's Monthly Activity Report for the months of January 2002 through April 2002. Month: January Year: 2002 Structure Fires Vehicle Fires Vegetation Fires Other Fires Medical Aids rraftic Collisions False Alarms Fire Menace Standbys Public Service Assists Assists and Covers Total Medic Resp + 10min Medic Resp + lOmi~ 63 63 2 2 School Pro~rams Fairs and Displays Company Inspections LE-38 Dooryard Inspections 0 43 1 39 0 0 5 5 0 0 1 1 0 0 82 82 0 0 0 0 Burning Permits Issued Pre Plans 33 0 0 0 3 36 36 0 0 6 6 total 78 49 0 3 130 130 Month: January Year: 2002 Medical Aids 0 2oo 200 200 rraffic Collisions 0 41 41 41 Public Service Assists 0 4 4 4 Fire Menace Standby's 0 0 0 0 Structure Fires 0 5 5 5 Ringing Alarm 0 20 20 20 Vegetation Fire 0 1 I ! Vehicle Fire 0 I I 1 Fire-Other 0 I 1 1 Hazmat o o o o Total 0 273 273 273 Average Response Time 5.6 5.6 5.6 Longest Response Time 0 13 N/A N/A Medic Squad Cancelled Prior to Patient Contact 0 39 39 39 Average Wait Time for AMR 4.58 4.58 4.58 Medic Squad on Scene prior to AMR- Medical Aids and Traffic Collisions 0 ! 27 127 127 Performed *ALS prior to AMR's Arrival 0 65 65 65 *ALS - Advanced Life Support Month: January Year: 2002 Building TI 28 28 NCOM Buildin~ 7 7 UG Water 14 14 Over/Under Ground Tanks 0 0 NCOM Sprinkler 13 13 Sprinkler TI 9 9 Hood Duct 6 6 Spray Booths 0 0 Special Suppression Systems 0 0 Alarms 19 19 Planning Cases 19 19 Special Code Permits 0 0 Miscellaneous 11 11 Total 126 126 Fire C of O 27 27 Shell Final 18 18 , UG Hydro 8 8 Thrust Blocks 4 4 Over Head Hydro 27 27 Fire Flow 0 0 Flush 32 32 Sprinkler Final 9 9 Weld Inspection 5 5 Hood Duct Final 0 0 Alarm Pre-wire 4 4 Alarm Final 25 25 Spray Booth Final 1 1 Fire Safety Inspection 9 9 State Mandated Inspection 1 1 Special Events Inspection 0 0 Piping Hydro 1 1 Shear Valves 0 0 Over/Under Tank Final 2 2 Special Suppression System 0 0 Special Project Investigation 0 0 Ensine Company Follow-up 0 0 Miscellaneous 4 4 Total 177 177 Month: February Year: 2002 Structure Fires Vehicle Fires Vegetation Fires Other Fires Medical Aids Traffic Collisions False Alarms Fire Menace Standbys Public Service Assists Assists and Covers Total Medic Resp + 10min i Medic Resp + 10min ~ 6O 25 School Programs Fairs and Displays Company Inspections LE-38 Dooryard Inspections Burning Permits Issued Pre Plans 0 0 51 0 2 17 0 I0 68 11 150 0 25 0 5 10 1 41 77 0 5 0 0 0 5 Il Total 76 24 6 17 3 126 256 Month: February Year: 2002 Medical Aids 0 195 195 395 Traffic Collisions 0 45 45 86 Public Service Assists 0 2 2 6 Fire Menace Standby's 0 0 0 0 Structure Fires 0 7 7 12 Ringing Alarm 0 14 14 34 'Vegetation Fire 0 0 0 1 Vehicle Fire 0 0 0 1 Refuse Fire 0 0 0 1 Hazmat 0 0 0 0 Total 0 263 263 536 Average Response Time 5.41 5.41 5.51 Longest Response Time 0 14 N/A N/A Medic Squad Cancelled Prior to Patient Contact 0 62 62 101 Average Wait Time for AMR 4.38 4.38 4.48 Medic Squad on Scene prior to AMR- Medical Aids and traffic Collisions o 117 1 ! 7 244 Performed *ALS prior to AMR's Arrival 0 61 61 126 *ALS - Advanced Life Support Month: February Year: 2002 Building TI 27 55 NCOM Building 13 20 UG Water 7 21 Over/Under Ground Tanks 0 0 NCOM Sprinkler 6 19 Sprinkler TI 6 15 Hood Duct 1 7 Spray Booths 0 0 Special Suppression Systems 1 1 Alarms 18 37 Planning Cases 14 33 Special Code Permits 0 0 Miscellaneous 10 21 Total 103 229 Fire C of O 30 57 Shell Final 26 44 UG Hydro 9 17 Thrust Blocks 11 15 Over Head Hydro 14 41 Fire Flow 0 0 Flush 3 35 Sprinkler Final 9 18 Weld Inspection 1 6 Hood Duct Final 3 3 Alarm Pre-wire 11 15 Alarm Final 22 47 Spray Booth Final 1 2 Fire Safety Inspection 10 19 State Mandated Inspection 1 2 Special Events Inspection 0 0 Piping Hydro 1 2 Shear Valves 1 1 Over/Under Tank Final 0 2 Special Suppression System 0 0 Special Project Investigation 1 1 Engine Company Follow-up 2 2 Miscellaneous 2 6 Total 158 335 Month: March Year: 2002 Structure Fires Vehicle Fires Vegetation Fires Other Fires Medical Aids Traffic Collisions False Alarms Fire Menace Standbys Public Service Assists Assists and Covers Total Medic Resp + 10min ir Medic Resp + lOmin ~ 42 165 35 62 School Programs Fairs and Displays Company Inspections LE-38 Dooryard Inspections 4 0 0 0 0 4 11 0 I 0 0 0 ! 12 44 22 0 0 20 86 236 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Burning Permits Issued 19 0 I 0 I 21 98 Pre Plans 0 3 0 0 2 5 16 Total 67 26 1 0 23 117 373 Month: March Year: 2002 Medical Aids 0 206 206 60 ! Traffic Collisions 0 60 60 146 Public Service Assists 0 4 4 10 Fire Menace Standby's 0 I 1 1 Strucmre Fires 0 11 11 23 Ringing Alarm 0 2 2 36 Vegetation Fire 0 1 I 2 Vehicle Fire 0 0 0 1 Refuse Fire 0 I I 2 Hazmat 0 0 0 0 Total 0 286 286 822 Average Response Time 5.61 5.61 5.56 Longest Response Time 0 1 ! N/A N/A Medic Squad Cancelled Prior to Patient Contact 0 51 51 152 Average Wait Time for AMR 4.11 4.11 4.30 Medic Squad on Scene prior to AMR- Medical Aids and Traffic Collisions 0 124 124 368 Performed *ALS prior to AMR's Arrival 0 50 50 176 *ALS- Advanced Li~ Support Month: March Year: 2002 Building TI 37 92 NCOM Building 12 32 UG Water 38 59 Over/Under Ground Tanks 0 0 NCOM Sprinkler 11 30 Sprinkler TI 9 24 Hood Duct 1 8 ~Spray Booths 1 1 Special Suppression Systems 2 3 Alarms 6 43 Planning Cases 28 61 Special Code Permits 0 0 Miscellaneous 24 45 Total 169 398 Fire C of O 40 97 Shell Final 24 68 UG Hydro 12 29 Thrust Blocks 6 21 Over Head Hydro 21 62 Fire Flow 0 0 Flush 3 38 Sprinkler Final 17 35 Weld Inspection 4 10 Hood Duct Final 3 6 Alarm Pre-wire 5 20 Alarm Final 36 83 Spray Booth Final 0 2 Fire Safety Inspection 10 29 State Mandated Inspection 4 6 Special Events Inspection 3 3 Piping Hydro 0 2 Shear Valves 1 2 Over/Under Tank Final 0 2 Special Suppression System 0 0 Special Project Investigation 0 1 Engine Company Follow-up 0 2 Miscellaneous 2 8 Total 191 526 Month: April Year: 2002 Structure Fires Vehicle Fires Vegetation Fires Other Fires Medical Aids Traffic Collisions False Alarms Fire Menace Standbys Public Service Assists Assists and Covers Total Medic Resp + 10min in ( Medic Resp + 10min out 198 45 107 School Pro,rams 0 0 0 13 Fairs and Displays Company Inspections 3 0 0 15 19 0 10 337 LE-38 Dooryard Inspections 0 0 Burning Permits Issued 21 0 Pre Plans 0 2 Total 95 24 0 0 0 0 1 121 0 2 20 1 0 13 133 506 Month: April Year: 2002 Medical Aids 0 ! 97 197 798 Traffic Collisions 0 43 43 189 Public Service Assists 0 5 5 15 Fire Menace Standby's 0 0 0 1 Structure Fires 0 5 5 28 Ringing Alarm 0 3 3 39 Vegetation Fire 0 I I 3 Vehicle Fire 0 0 0 Refuse Fire 0 I I 3 Hazmat 0 1 I 1 Total 0 256 256 1078 Average Response Time 5.673 5.673 5.62 Longest Response Time 0 12 N/A N/A Medic Squad Cancelled Prior to Patient Contact 0 64 64 216 Average Wait Time for AMR 4.42 4.42 4.36 Medic Squad on Scene prior to AMR- Medical Aids and rraffic Collisions 0 124 124 492 Performed *ALS prior to AMR's Arrival 0 56 56 232 *ALS - Advanced Life Support Month: April Year: 2002 Building TI 28 120 NCOM Building 10 42 UG Water 9 68 Over/Under Ground Tanks 0 0 NCOM Sprinkler 9 39 Sprinkler TI 7 31 Hood Duct 1 9 Spray Booths 1 2 Special Suppression Systems 0 3 Alarms 7 50 Planning Cases 4 65 Special Code Permits 0 0 Miscellaneous 18 63 Total 94 492 Fire C of O 45 142 Shell Final 13 81 UG Hydro 14 43 Thrust Blocks 14 35 Over Head Hydro 15 77 Fire Flow 1 1 Flush 7 45 Sprinkler Final 7 42 Weld Inspection 3 13 Hood Duct Final 4 10 Alarm Pre-wire 7 27 Alarm Final 12 95 Spray Booth Final 3 5 Fire Safet7 Inspection 10 39 State Mandated Inspection 4 10 Special Events Inspection 0 3 Piping Hydro 0 2 Shear Valves 0 2 Over/Under Tank Final 0 2 Special Suppression System I 1 Special Project Investigation 3 4 Engine Company Follow-up 0 2 Miscellaneous 3 11 Total 166 692 APPROVAL CITY ATTORN EYe/ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council/City Manager Anthony J. Elmo, Director of Building & Safety~ June 25, 2002 Departmental Report May 2002 PREPARED BY:Carol Brockmeier, Administrative Secretary TOTAL NUMBER OF PERMITS ISSUED ............................ 287 NSFR .................................................................................................................. 65 NCOM ................................................................................................................... 6 TOTAL VALUATION ..................................................................................... $17,002.544 TOTAL NUMBER OF INSPECTIONS PERFORMED .............................................. 4,094 APPROVAL ~ CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN_C,E,~ CITY MANAGER ~,,) TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OFTEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council Domenoe, Chief of Polic~ Jim June 25, 2002 Monthly Departmental Report The following report reflects special teams, traffic enforcement and miscellaneous activity occurring during May of 2002. The Police Department responded to 54 "priority one" calls for service during the month of May, with an average response time of approximately 6.9 minutes. A total of 3,894 calls for police service were generated in the City of Temecula during the month. During the month of May, the Temecula Police Department's Town Center Storefront served a total of 196 customers. Thirty-seven sets of fingerprints were taken, 29 people flied police reports and 10 people had citations signed off. Crime Prevention Officer Lynn Fanene participated in a number of special events, neighborhood watch and community-oriented programs during the month. He also coordinated requests for patrol ride-alongs. Additionally, he continued to provide residential and business security surveys/visits and past crime follow-up. Officer Fanene also continued to process City Planning Department submissions of site plans/conditions. The POP Teams continued to work on the "Crime Free Multi-Housing" project, re-certifying five apartment complexes during the month of May. The teams continued their Warrant Apprehension Program during the month, which resulted in two felony arrests and five misdemeanor arrests. The POP Teams continued with their proactive patrol efforts and made four additional felony arrests and 11 misdemeanor arrests during the month of May. Additionally, the POP Teams continued working a special massage parlor/prostitution program, ensuring that the businesses were complying with all laws. The massage parlor/prostitution program will be ongoing, with the goal of keeping prostitution out of the city. POP Teams also conducted their on-going homeless persons program, with the goal of assisting homeless in finding services and aid to help them. POP Teams were instrumental in helping another homeless person find these services during the month of May. The Old Town Storefront serves as an office tor the POP teams and a location to assist the public with police services. This has greatly increased their accessibility and their ability to serve the Old Town area. During May, the Old Town Storefront served 189 customers. Twenty-eight sets of fingerprints were taken, 28 reports were written, and 16 citations were signed off. Monthly Departmental Report Page 2 The traffic team reported that during the month of May there were 832 citations issued for hazardous violations, 110 citations were issued for non-hazardous violations and 86 parking citations were issued. During the month there were just six .injury traffic collisions, 67 non-injury collisions were reported and 13 drivers were arrested for DUI. The Neighborhood Enforcement Team (NET) program resulted in 133 citations being issued. This program addresses traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods with a dedicated motor officer. The SLAP program (Stop Light Abuse Program) resulted in 71 citations being issued, with 141 additional SLAP citations issued on overtime. The total number of SLAP citations issued during the month of May was 212. During the month of May, the POP officers assigned to the Promenade Mall handled a total of 206 calls for service. The majority of these calls were for shoplifting investigations. During the month, calls and on-sight activity resulted in the criminal arrest and filings on 20 misdemeanors and one felony case for various offenses. Officers McEIvain and Rupe continued to provide training to security staff during the month. The mall officers continued to work on vehicle theft and burglary programs. Two vehicle burglaries and'no vehicle thefts occurred during the month of May. Four school resource officers continued to remain active during May. They conducted a total of three school presentations. The topics of these presentations ranged from "Inhalants" to "Rave Drugs." The school resource officers also conducted many counseling sessions with students. Ten misdemeanor arrests were made during May. These arrests ranged from trespassing, truancy and possession of alcohol and marijuana to battery and theft. The school resource officers also made five felony arrests during May. These arrests were for felony vandalism, sales of marijuana and the possession of a knife on school campus. A total of 54 investigations/reports were conducted/written by the school resource officers during May. The JOLT program (Juvenile Offender Law Enforcement Program) continues to be a success in part through its Youth Court program. Officer Michelle Medeiros conducted the 87~ Youth Court session. The JOLT officer assisted at other schools wh sn needed and conducted follow-ups with parents of juveniles in the JOLT program. Officer Medeires worked with "at risk" juveniles throughout the month and also conducted counseling sessions with their parents. She also assisted the District Attorney's Office and the Probation Department by providing training during home visits with incorrigible/at risk juveniles during th& month of May. During the month of May, the Special Enfomement Team (SET Team) of Officers John Wade and John Morin handled a total of ten cases. These cases resulted in 13 misdemeanor and six felony arrests, primarily for narcotics violations. This team continues to work street level narcotics and specialty patrol within the city on a proactive basis. During this month, the team served two search warrants for narcotics violations, and recovered quantities of methamphetamine, cocaine and marijuana plants and dried marijuana. Volunteers from the community continue to be an integral part of the Temecula Police Department's staff. Under the guidance of volunteer coordinator Officer Bob Ridley and assistant coordinator Gayle Gerrish, the Police Department's volunteer staff contributed 305 hours of service in May. Volunteer assignments include computer data input, logistics support, special event assistance and telephone answering duties. Community Action Patrol (CAP) Program volunteers have begun their activities, patrolling the city for graffiti, conducting vacation residential checks and assisting patrol with special logistical needs and special events. Other duties these volunteers will attend to are business checks and abandoned vehicles and traffic control. The goal of the program is high visibility, which prevents crime from Monthly Departmental Report Page 3 occurring. CAP Team members contributed 184 hours of service to the community during the month of May. 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, crime prevention, off road vehicle enforcement and a variety of special functions. Reserve police officers worked a total of 174 hours specifically on patrol in Temecula during the month of May. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City ManagedCity Council APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAj~C_E_~ CITY MANAGER William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer June 25, 2002 Department of Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Repods for the month of May, 2002. MOACTRPT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report May / June 2002 Prepared By: Amer Attar Submitted by: William G. Hughes Date: June 25, 2002 PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1. Margarita Road Widening, Phase I (Interim), Pauba Road to Plo Pico This project will widen Margarita Road on an interim bases between Pauba Road and Plo Pico. As a result, Margarita Road will have four lanes throughout City limits. The contractor, R.J. Noble, has completed the work. The final quantities will be calculated and the contract close out information will be forwarded to City Council for the Notice of Completion. 2. Chaparral High School Swimming Pool A 25-yard x 25-meter pool will be built 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 as an element in the base construction bid. The project is complete with the exception of several minor punch list items. The final quantities will be calculated and the contract close out information will be forwarded to City Council for the Notice of Completion. A grand opening ceremony was held on 5/30/2002. The pool is now open to the public. 3. Pala Road Improvements, Phase I - (Widening to accommodate four lanes from Pala Road Bridge to Wolf Valley) and Traffic Signals Modifications at Loma Linda, and at Wolf Valley Pala Road Improvements, Phase I, will give Pala Road two lanes in each direction (58 feet in width) from the Pala Road Bridge to the Pechanga Casino. It includes re-striping the entire length. Pala Road Phase I. In addition, the two traffic signals at Loma Linda and at Wolf Valley will be modified to accommodate the road interim widening. This project is complete except for minor punch list items. Traffic was allowed in the new widened portion of Pala Road on May 17. 4. Slurry Seal Program - FY2001-02 This project will slurry seal and protect various streets throughout the city. Bids were opened on May 20. The lowest bidder is American Asphalt with a bid of $343,269.12. Contract awarded by City council at 5/28/02 meeting. Contractor is finalizing contract documents. Pre-construction meeting is set for 6-24-02. 5. First Street Extension - Environmental Mitigation This project will create approximately 1.49 acres of wetlands along Murrieta Creek at First Street. It includes construction of landscaping and irrigation improvements, and maintenance of said improvements for a period of five (5) years in accordance with California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit requirements. Bids were opened June 6, 2002. Award is on hold pending RCFC/ACOE coordination with Murrieta Creek Improvement project. R:\M onthlyActivityRepor t\C IPL2002XMay.d~c 6. Pavement Rehabilitation Program - FY 2001/2002 This project will rehabilitate and reconstruct portions of Rancho California Road between Hope Way and Cosmic Way. Bids were opened on June 18. The lowest bidder is R.J. Noble Company with a bid of $593,194.85. Council is to award the construction contract on 6-25-02. PROJECTS BEING ADVERTISED FOR BIDS None PROJECTS IN DESIGN 1. 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 read. Plan check comments (70% Submittal) were returned to the consultant. RCFC & WCD approved the Wolf Creek Drainage Basin Hydrology Study that was prepared by Lohr Associates, Inc. (with respect to hydrology only). Work is now proceeding with the remainder of the design. Michael Brandman Associates submitted the initial study/environmental assessment to the City for review. 2. Rancho California Road Bridge Widening Over Murrieta Creek This project will widen Rancho California Bridge over Murrieta Creek to provide four additional traffic lanes. The consultant is currently revising drawings for 100% drawing submittal by June20. Processing for right of way and environmental requirements are schedule for completion by August 2002. 3. 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. A separate parcel has been created for the library for bond purposes. The application to the State was submitted on 6/13/02. Utility services construction will be coordinated with Pauba Road, Phase II Street Improvements. 4. 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. 100% design plans and specs were submitted to the City for review. Plans were sent to all utilities on 3/18/02 and all utility issues are being addressed. Work is being coordinated with the library project. 5. John Warner/Santiago Road Assessment District - Hydrology Study Under this project a drainage study will be done to compliment the improvement plans being done by the property owners. Eventually the city will be the oversight agency for a property owners sponsored assessment district. The City received five proposals from consultants to do the hydrology study. The City Council approved a Professional Services Agreement with Engineering 2 R:~Vl onthlyAcfivi~yRepor~Cll~2002kMay.doc Resources of Southern California, Inc. at the June 11, 2002 meeting. A kick-off meeting will be scheduled and work will begin within the next few weeks. 6. Landscaping and Sidewalk On 79 South (Front Street to Pala Road) The project consists of the design and construction of new sidewalk, landscaping, and irrigation along State Route 79 South between Pala Road and Old Town Front Street. Review of the first plan submittal is complete. Review comments returned to consultant. The City will finalize and send out Caltrans Encroachment Permit during the week of 6-17-02. 7. Temecula Sports Complex A new 40+ Acres sports complex will be built on Pala Road at Wolf Valley. The new sports complex location will be at the corner of Pala Road and Deer Hollow Way. Preliminary design is underway, with approval for the site layout pending. 8. Bridge Barrier Rail Upgrade, Rainbow Canyon Road over Pechanga Creek/Del Rio Road over Empire Creek This project will replace the existing barrier rails of the Rainbow Canyon Bridge over Pechanga Creek and the Del Rio Road Bridge over Empire Creek. Simon Wong Engineering (SWE) developed "as-builts" for the existing bridges and prepared the Barrier Concepts Report. SWE revised the General Plans, per the City's comments, and prepared the Design Exception Forms, which the City Engineer has approved. SWE has begun the Final Design and submitted the 70% documents on 5/31/02. The City is in the process of reviewing these documents. 9. Fire Station - Wolf Creek Site A fire station will be built at the Wolf Creek Site. Complete set of plan-check comments were returned to the designer mid May. The re-submittal is expected by the end of June. 10. Community Theatre This project will create a community theatre at the old Mercantile building in downtown Temecula. The Contractor Pre-Qualification process for the Mercantile Seismic Retrofit Project is complete. Acceptance of the qualified contractors and approval for Advertisement to Bid the project was done at the March 26, 2002 Council meeting. Staff is compiling final specifications and anticipates sending bid packages to pre-qualified contractors by end of June. 11. Pavement Management System Update The project will establish a pavement management program that will provide an ongoing schedule of needed repairs and provide data that will be used to prepare budget estimates required to complete the scheduled work. GIS links, AutoCAD review, and updates to MicroPAVER are included in the total program. Approximately 60% of the City has been surveyed. 12. Children's Museum This project will construct a 7,500 square foot children's museum. The consultant submitted revised plans on June 12, 2002. Staff will review the second submittal and forward any comments to the consultant. Plans, specifications and estimates were approved by City Council on March 26, 2002, however the architect has not submitted the final bidding package to Public Works. 3 R:~VlondalyActivityRepor t~ClP~2002~Vlay.doc 13. Vail Ranch Park (Near Pauba Valley School) - Add Amenities This project will add amenities, including play equipment to the recently annexed Vail Ranch Park. The Community Services Commission approved the Vail Ranch Park Site "C" Master Plan on February 11,2002. The Master Plan was approved by City Council at the March 26, 2002 meeting. RHA Landscape Architects/Planners Inc. is the design firm and the first submittal was made on May 3rd. The City reviewed these documents and returned them to the contractor for revisions. 14. 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. City staff is currently designing the project. Anticipated street and landscaping design completion is scheduled for June 2002. Right of Way processing is anticipated to be completed by July of 2002. 15. Rancho California Road Median Modifications at Town Center The project will include the closing of the two median openings on Rancho California Road in front of the Town Center, while lengthening the left turn lanes at Ynez Road, Town Center Drive, and Via Los Colinas to improve traffic circulation. The design is 95% complete. Additional rehabilitation work for a poor pavement area east of Ynez Road is currently being added to the plans. Bidding is scheduled for July 2002. 16. Rancho California Road Widening at Ynez Road (Add right turn lane to westbound lanes) This project will add a right turn lane on westbound Rancho California Road at Ynez Road. Right of way acquisition at the northeast corner of Rancho California and Ynez is in process with Claim Jumper Restaurant signing the acquisition agreement. In-house design is 90% complete. 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. Gathered additional survey information. Project layout was plotted and discussed with Traffic and Director of Public Works. In-house design continues. 18. Citywide A.C. Repairs - FY2001-02 This project will repair various road sections throughout the City. The project specifications are being finalized (2nd Draft) along with the engineer's estimate. Specs is to be completed during the week of 6-17-02. 19. Rancho California Sports park ADA Access and Shade Structure Design and construct concrete ADA walkways to the remaining ball fields 3,4,5,7,8. Install two shade picnic/seating areas adjacent to the snack bar building. Design and construct concrete ADA walkways to the remaining ball fields 3,4,5,7,8. Install two shade picnic/seating areas adjacent to the snack bar building. Design work will start during week of 6-17-02 and is anticipated to be completed by late June 2002. 4 R :~v~ont~lyActivityRepor~C lP~2002~lay.doc PROJECTS IN THE PLANNING STAGE 1. 1-15! SR 79 Interchange - Project Study Report (PSR) This project will modify the I-15/SR 79 South Interchange to accommodate projected future traffic. The City received the final Value Engineering Analysis Report from Caltrans on May 8, 2002. All proposed alignments presented by the value analysis team were rejected. Staff is currently waiting for Caltrans to conditionally approve the Project Study Report. 2. French Valley Parkway Interchange - Project Study Report (PSR) This project will construct an interchange between Winchester Road Interchange and the I-15/I-215 split. Project Study Report (PSR) has been approved. Project will be constructed in different phases. City started the acquisition process for one parcel. An appraisal report for an additional parcel was done and received by the City. A protection acquisition request was submitted to Caltrans for this parcel. Four additional Proposed Protection Acquisition requests have been sent to Caltrans. Staff is working with Caltrans to advertise for Consultants to do the PR and the PS&E. 3. Murrieta Creek Bridge - Overland Drive Extension to Diaz This project will entail alignment studies and the design of an extension of Overland Drive, westerly to Diaz Road, which includes a new bridge over Murrieta Creek. 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. PDC has completed the alignment study and staff has reviewed copies of the preliminary plans. Staff has received comments regarding revisions to the negative declaration. Staff have reviewed design costs for next years' fiscal funding. 4. Alignment Study for Murrieta Creek Bridge Between Winchester Road and Temecula's City Limits and Diaz Road Extension This study will determine the alignment and location of the Murrieta Creek crossing between Winchester Road to the northern City Limits. In addition, the study will be combined with the Diaz Road Extension alignment study and design. Coordination with the City of Murrieta, Flood Control and Army Corps of Engineers is necessary. The Consultant and Staff met with Riverside County Flood Control to discuss possible alignments. The consultant is currently awaiting data from Riverside County Flood Control in order to complete the work on the first draft of the alignment study. Staff was informed this data could take up to a year to receive. 5. Pedestrian Crossing- SR 79 North at Nicolas Road City met with Caltrans and sent a letter at their request to initiate this project. Caltrens responded in a letter that the bridge does not meet their warrents and that they will not support and allow its construction. A consultant, Imbsen & Associates, was hired to do a feasibility study. The draft feasibility study was submitted for City review. Comments will be made and sent to consultant to finalize the report. 6. Murrieta Creek Multi Purpose Trail This project will build portions of the equestrian and bike trails along Murrieta Creek within City limits. The City has received a federal grant of $1,214,000. An "Authorization to Proceed with Preliminary Engineering" package has been submitted to Caltrans for approval. We can begin the 5 R:XMonthlyAcfivityRepor t\CIPX2002Wlay.doc RFP process to hire a consultant as soon as an authorization letter is received from Caltrans. A field meeting will be conducted on June 25, 2002. PROJECTS THAT ARE SUSPENDED OR ON-HOLD 1. Santa Gertrudis 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 1-15 southbound exit-ramp at the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bridge to provide an additional lane on the exit ramp just north of Winchester Road. Staff is revisiting the merits of this project in light of the proposed Project Study Report for Cherry Street Intemhange. The study shows that this bridge may have to be removed in the future to accommodate the Cherry Street Interchange. This project is suspended indefinitely. 2. Margarita Road/Winchester Road Intersection Improvements Project is on hold. Under this project, an additional left turn from eastbound Winchester to northbound Margarita will be added in order to accommodate increasing traffic volumes. Design is 50% complete. A developer may do this project. 3. Pujol Street Sidewalk Improvements - Phase I! Project is on hold. This project will complete the knuckle at the intersection of Sixth Street and Felix Valdez. The developer of a nearby properbj may be designing and constructing this project. 4. School Site ADA Improvements Project is on-hold. Design and construct ADA concrete walkways and hand railing to athletic facilities at Temecula Middle School, James L. Day Middle School and Margarita Middle School. TCSD re-allocated the funds. 5. City Hall Parking Lot Modifications Project is on-hold. Under this project, a security fence will be installed between the existing maintenance facility and the western side of City Hall to secure the parking lot west of the main building. The design of a security fence between the existing maintenance facility and the western side of City Hall will be performed in-house. The design of a security fence between the existing maintenance facility and the western side of City Hall is being performed in-house. A scoping meeting was held on 11/12/01. Research on existing base maps for the proposed area and as- builts for the existing security fence near the maintenance facility is complete. Design and review of the proposed layout is complete. The project is currently on hold waiting for further direction 6 R:',MonthlyActi vityRepor~CIl~2002'~v/ay.doc I,- Z IL/ 1,1.1 > TO: FROM: MEMORANDUM Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works/City Engineer ~ ,~ Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent DATE: June 3, 2002 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - May, 2002 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel for the month of May, 2002: I. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 204 B. Total signs installed ? C. Total signs repaired 22 II. TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 10 II1. ASPHALT REPAIRS A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs B. Total Tons 3~464 56 IV. VI. VII. CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned 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. 27 New and repainted legends B. 64~222 L,F. of new and repainted red curb and stdping 84 62 972 Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 38 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 42 service order requests for the month of April~ 2002. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 192 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 May, 2002 was ~ 23~097.00 compared to ~ 18,402.00 for the month of ApHI~ 2002. Account No. 5402 $ 4,147.00 Account No. 5401 $18,950.00 Account No. 999-5402 $ - 0 - Ron Parks, Deputy Director of Public Works Ali Moghadam, Senior Engineer - (ClP/Traffic) Greg Butler, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) Amer Attar, Senior Engineer (Capital Improvements) JerryAlegria, Senior Engineer - (Land Development) STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of May, 2002 DATE DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST ACCOUNT STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE OF WORK SIZE CONTRACTOR: MONTELEONE EXCAVATING Date: 05/09/02 VIA LOBO CHANNEL REMOVAL OF SILT & DEBRIS FROM CHANNEL # 5401 TOTAL COST $ 4,500.00 Date: 05/22~02 SANTIAGO CHANNEL REMOVAL OF SILT & DEBRIS FROM CHANNEL # 5401 TOTAL COST $ 4,500.00 CONTRACTOR: BECKER ENGINEERING Date: 05/09/02 DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF RIO NEDO REMOVE & REPLACE CATCH BASIN TRAN- SITIONS AND CONSTRUCT NEW LID # 5402 TOTAL COST $ 4,147.00 CONTRACTOR: RENE'S COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT Date: 05/02 CITYWIDE CHANNELS REMOVAL OF ALL DEBRIS AND BRUSH WITH POST EMERGENT, HERBICIDE APPLI- # 5401 CATIONS & MECHANICAL WEED ABATEMENT TOTAL COST $ 9,950.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401 $18,950.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 $ 4,147.00 TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #99-5402 -0- CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DMSION SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG MONTH OF MAY, 2002 DATE LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK RECEIVED COMPLETED 05/01/02 30165 CORTE CARRIZO DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/01/02 05/01/02 30530 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD STREET NAME SIGN iVI~SSING 05/01/02 05/01/02 45910 HOPACTONG STREET S.N.S. QUESTION 05/01/02 05/01/02 30145 CORTE PlakTA SINKHOLE 05/01/02 05/02/02 45546 CLUBHOUSE TREE TRIMMING 05/02/02 05/02/02 30737 CALLE PI~IA COLADA DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/02/02 05/03/02 43573 MODENA DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/03/02 05/06/02 29899 VIA PUESTA DEL SOL ASPHALT REPAIR 05/06/02 05/07/02 43272 BROOKWAY DRIVE DRAINAGE CONCERN 05/07/02 05/07/02 TEMECULA H~GH SCHOOL STORM DRAIN QUESTION 05/07/02 05/07/02 32106 CORTE SOLEDAD OIL SPILL 05/07/02 05/07/02 39624 LONG RIDGE DRIVE DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/07/02 05/08/02 31849 CAMINO MAREA S.N.S. MISSING 05/08/02 05/08/02 CAMINO PIEDRA ROJO AND WELLINGTON R-I DAMAGED 05/08/092 05/08L02 43180 CORTE ALMERIA S.N.S. MISSING 05/08/02 05/09/02 41825 CALLE CABRILLO DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/09/02 05/10/02 43255 BROOKWAY DRIVE DRAINAGE CONCERN 05/10/02 05/10/02 40200 STARLING COURT DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/10/02 05/10/02 AVENIDA SONOMA DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/10/02 05/13/02 43015 SHOWALTER ROAD S.N.S. MISSING 05/13/02 05/13/02 MEADOWS PARKWAY DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/13/02 05/14/02 27080 FALLING CREEK COURT RAISED SIDEWALK 05/14/02 05/14K)2 AVENIDA ESTRADA DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/14~02 05/16/02 WINCHESTER AT REMINGTON SIGN REPAIR 05/16/02 DATE LOCATION REQUEST DATE WORK RECEIVED COMPLETED 05/16/02 30816 MADERA WAY P.C.C. REPAIR 05/16/02 05/17/02 42146 ROANOAKE STREET DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/17/02 05/17/02 42146 ROANOAKE STREET DEBRIS PCK-UP 05/17/02 05/20/02 31815 CAMINO ROADES DRIVEWAY CONCERN 05/20/02 05/20/02 29922 AVENIDA CIMA DEL SOL OIL SPILL 05/20/02 05/20/02 41237 COG HILL DRIVE DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/20~)2 05/20/02 32785 PATERNO TREE CONCERN 05/20/02 05/21/02 PALA ROAD DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/21/02 05/22/02 41588 BIG SAGE COURT RAISED SIDEWALK 05/22/02 05/23/02 31551 SANDHILL LANE STANDING WATER 05/23/02 05/28/02 41739 ASTEROID DEAD TREE 05/28/02 05/29/02 CUPEI:qO LANE RED CURB QUESTIONS 05/29/02 05/29/02 31000 CAMINO DEL ESTE DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/29K)2 05/29/02 WILLOW RUN AT LA SERENA DEBRIS PICK-UP 05/29/02 TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DMSION STENCILS / STRIPING MONTH OF MAY, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 04/29/02 AREA I REPA1NT 3,606 Iff OF RED CURB 05/01/02 AREA I REPAINT 8,000 Iff OF RED CURB 05/02/02 AREAl REPAINT 9,100 LF OF RED CURB 05/06/02 AREA I REPAINT 5,090 LF OF RED CURB 05/07/02 AREA I REPAINT 3,000 LF OF RED CURB 05/08/02 AREA I REPAINT 3,800 LF OF RED CURB 05/08/02 NICHOLAS AT NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY REPAINTED 10 LEGENDS 05/13/02 MEADOWS PARKWAY REPAINTED 4 LEGENDS 05/13/02 AREA #1 REPA/NTED 1,800 LF OF RED CURB 05/15,'02 AREA #2 REPARqTED 5,201 LF OF RED CURB 05/16/02 AREA #2 REPAINTED 5,400 Iff OF RED CURB 05/20/02 RANCHO VISTA ROAD REPAINTED 4,358 LF OF RED CURB 05/21/02 RANCHO VISTA ROAD AT IVI]RA LOMA REP/LIiNTED 4,774 IF' OF RED CURB 05/22/02 AREAS #1 AND 84 REPAINTED 2,297 LF OF RED CURB 05/28/02 AREA #1 REPAINTED 3,676 LF OF RED CURB 05/29/02 PALOMA DEL SOL AREA REPAINTED 4,120 LF OF RED CURB 05/30/02 YNEZ ROAD REPAINTED 13 LEGENDS TOTAL NEW & REPAINIED LEGENDS 27 NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F. 64.222 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS MONTH OF, 2002 DATE LOCATION SCOPE OF WORK S.F. TOTAL TONS R&RAC 322 05/01/02 26090 YENZ ROAD AC CAP 169 10 05/02/02 JEFFERSON FILL POTHOLES 26 TEIVIP AC 05/02/02 STONEWOOD FILL POTHOLES 8 TEMP AC 05/02/02 MARGARITA NORTH OF STONEWOOD FILL POTHOLES 25 TEMP AC 05/02/02 26040 YNEZ ROAD R & R AC 125 4 05/06/02 26040 YNEZ ROAD R & R AC 135 4.5 R&RAC 42 S.F. 05/07/02 40543 CALLE MEDUSA OVERLAY A.C. 240 S.F. 282 4.5 05/08/02 RIVERTON AT BRIXTON COVE R & R A.C. 166 4 05/13/02 31136 WELLINGTON A.C. OVERLAY 1010 5 05/14/02 30894 WELLINGTON A.C. OVERLAY 552 3.5 05/15/02 40515 CALLE MEDUSA A.C. OVERLAY 156 2.5 05/16/02 RIVERTON AT CALLE MEDUSA R & R A.C. 100 3 05/20/02 44886 CORTE SIERRA & RAINBOW CANYON ROAD A.C. OVERLAY 104 2 05/28/02 44861 CORTE CASA & SURROUNDING AREA A.C. OVERLAY 84 2.5 05/29/02 31260 CALLE FELICIDAD R&R A.C. 160 4.5 05/30/02 YNEZ AT SOLANA R & R A.C. 40 2 TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 3.464 TOTAL TONS 56 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING MONTH OF MAY, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/02/02 MARGARITA SOUTH OF MORAGA TRIMMED 3 R.O.W. TREES 05/03/02 45546 CLUBHOUSE TRIMMED 1 R.O.W. TREES 05/20/02 WARBLER AT NICHOLAS TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 05/22/02 WELTON AT BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES 05/29/02 LONG VALLEY AT HUMBER TRIMMED 2 R.O.W. TREES TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 10 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE MONTH OF MAY, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/01/02 AREA 3 CLEANED & CHECKED 23 CATCH BASINS 05/02~2 AREA 3 CLEANED & CHECKED 19 CATCH BASINS 05/07~32 AREAS 3 & 5 CLEANED & CHECKED 6 CATCH BASINS 05/08/02 NICHOLAS & WINCHESTER CLEANED & CHECKED 6 CATCH BASINS 05/14~D2 TEMEKU HILLS CLEANED & CHECKED 9 CATCH BASINS 05/15/02 TEMEKU HILLS CLEANED & CHECKED 21 CATCH BASINS TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 84 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DMSION GRAFFITI REMOVAL MONTH OF MAY, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/01/02 33065 TURI~Y RANCH ROAD REMOVED 70 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/01/02 YNEZ 200' NORTH OF COUNTY CENTER DRIVE REMOVED 6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/02/02 YNEZ AT EMPIRE CREEK REMOVED 49 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/06/02 41910 SANTIAGO (3 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 168 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/08/02 42041 PINE NEEDLE REMOVED 2 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/0802 MARGARITA AT AVENIDA BARCA REMOVED 20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/08/02 42180 MARGARITA (11 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 173 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/08/02 MORAGA AT MARGARITA REMOVED 8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/08/02 AVENIDA DEL SOL AT MARGARITA REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI , 05/10/02 CAMi'NO MAREA AT CALLE JABILI (6 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/20/02 I-15 FWY AT OVERLAND (5 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 131 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/20/02 26455 YNEZ AT 1-15 FWY (3 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 29 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/20/02 MARGARITA PARK (3 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 21 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/22/02 DE PORTOLA AT BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD REMOVED 12 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/23/02 JEH:~RSON AT WINCHESTER (3 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 16 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/24/02 28903 FRONT STREET REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/28/02 SOLANA AT MARGARITA (5 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/28/02 COURTNEY AT MARGARITA REMOVED 3 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/28/02 STONEWOOD AT MARGARITA REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/28/02 MARGARITA PARK REMOVED 4 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/29/02 EMPIRE CREEK (5 LOCATIONS) REMOVED 116 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/29/02 27520 YNEZ RF_2V[OVED 38 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/29/02 27555 YNEZ REMOVED 3 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/29/02 27171 YNEZ REMOVED 25 S.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/29/02 YNEZ AT TOWER PLAZA REMOVED 14 S.K OF GRAFFITI DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/29/02 39662 RORIPAUGH REMOVED 2 $.F. OF GRAFFITI 05/30/02 MEADOWS AT VIA POLA REMOVED 18 S.F. OF GRAFFITI TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 972 TOTAL LOCATIONS 62 CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DMSION SIGNS MONTH OF MAY, 2002 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/01/02 CALLE MATARO AT VIA CESARIO INSTALL SNS 2 05/01/02 AREA #1 REPLACE SNS 14 05/01/02 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD EAST OF MORAGA REMOVE ADOPT A STREET SIGN 1 05/02/02 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD ~ VIA LAS COLINAS REMOVE STICKER FROM R-7 1 05/02/02 SOLANA AT MOTOR CAR PARKWAY INSTALL K MARKER 1 05/02/02 SOLANA AT MOTOR CAR PARKWAY INSTALL R-7 1 05/02/02 MARGARITA AT MORAGA REMOVE STICKER FROM R-26 1 05/02/02 YNEZ ROAD REMOVE STICKER FROM SIGNS 6 05/02/02 SOLANA AT MOTOR CAR PARKWAY REPLACE R- 1 1 05/06/02 MEADOWS AT McCABE REPLACE W-17, R-l, R-lA 05/06/02 MUIRF1ELD AT GREENSBORO REPLACE R-1 05/06/02 AREA #1 REPLACE 16 S~N.S. 05/06/02 TEMECULA LANE AT CANTERFIELD REPAIRED 3 SIGNS 05/07/02 AREA #1 REPLACED 16 S.N.S. 05/07/02 MARGARITA AT AVENIDA BARCA INSTALL R26 05/07/02 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD AT CITY LllvffTS INSTALLED P-,20B 05/07/02 RAINBOW CANYON ROAD AT CITY LIMITS REPLACED SISTER CITY SIGN 05/08/02 VAIL RANCH ROAD REPLACED R- 1 05/11/02 AREA #1 REPLACED 12 S.N.S. 05/14/02 CORTE CAROLINA AT VIA CORDOVA REPLACED S.N.S. 05/15/02 AREA #1 REPLACED 26 S.N.S. 05/15/02 GENERAL KEARIqEY AT CROSS CREEK REPLACED R-1 05/15/02 GENERAL KEARNEY AT NICHOLAS REPLACED R-4 05/16/02 WINCHESTER AT REMINGTON REPLACED W-3 05/16/02 MEADOWS AT SPYGLASS HILL REPLACED R-10 DATE LOCATION WORK COMPLETED 05/16/02 AREA t43 REPAIRED R41, R3 - 35, R-1 05/20/02 AREA #4 REPLACED 19 S.N.S. 05/20/02 WARBLER AT JON CHRISTIAN REPLACED 3 R-1 05/20/02 RORIPAUGH AT STARLING REPLACED R- 1 05/21/02 AREA #4 REPLACED 22 S.N.S. 05/21/02 RORIPAUGH AT STARLING REPLACED R-1 05/21/02 RORIPAUGH AT JIMSON REPLACED R-1 05/21/02 RORIPAUGH AT MIMULUS REPLACED R- 1 05/21/02 DE PORTOLA AT ALCOBA REPI~.CED 2 R-7 05/22/02 BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD AT DE PORTOLA REPLACED CARSONITE 05/22/02 PAUBA AT BUTTERFIELD STAGE REPLACED R-1 05/23/02 RANCHO CALIF. ROAD AT BUSINESS PARK DRIVE REPLACED R- I 05/23/02 LA SERENA AT MEADOWS REPLACED 5 DELINEATORS 05/23/02 MARGARITA AT RUSTIC GLEN REPLACED 6 DELINEATORS 05/23/02 MARGARITA AT WINCHESTER REPAIRED 8 SIGNS "STICKERS" 05/24/02 SHOWALTER AT PAUBA REPLACED R-I & S.N.S. 05/24/02 PAUBA AT YNEZ REPLACED TYPE N 05/28/02 NICHOLAS AT WARBLER REPLACED R-1 05/28/02 RORIPAUGH AT SWALLOW REPLACED 2 R-1 05/28/02 RORIPAUGH AT SANDERL1NG REPLACED R- 1 05/28/02 AREA#4 REPLACED 26 S.N.S. 05/29/02 HUMBER AT LONG VALLEY REPLACED R-1 05/29/02 27163 GREENSTONE INSTALLED T-59 05/29/02 AREA #1 REPLACED 6 S.N.S. 05/30/02 27470 JEFFERSON REPLACED W-41 05/30/02 RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA REPLACED 2 TYPE N & R- 10 TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 204 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALl Jl:~) 7 TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED 22