HomeMy WebLinkAbout112508 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104
ADA Title 11]
AGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
NOVEMBER 25, 2008 - 7:00 PM
At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 P.M.
Next in Order:
Ordinance: 08-13
Resolution: 08-103
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mike Naggar
Prelude Music: Schuylar Day
Invocation: Pastor Bob Branch of Springs Community Church
Flag Salute: Council Member Roberts
ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Edwards, Roberts, Washington, Naggar
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Council on
items that appear within the Consent Calendar or ones that are not listed on the agenda.
Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council on
an item which is listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a
pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all Public Hearing or Council Business matters on the agenda, a "Request to Speak"
form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Council addressing that item. There is
a five minute (5) time limit for individual speakers
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at
this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these reports
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be
enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members
of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for
separate action
1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the test of all ordinances and resolutions included in
the agenda.
2 List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
3 General Liability Insurance Renewal
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Approve the insurance policy renewal for general and excess liability insurance with
St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines
Insurance Company, in the amount $207,403, for the period of December 1, 2008
through December 1, 2009.
4 Proposed Southern California Edison's Triton Substation (at the request of Council Member
Roberts
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the information presented.
5 Second Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services Between the City of
Temecula and Environmental Science Associates for Preparation of a Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Dealership (PA07-0335)
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Approve the Second Amendment to the Agreement with Environmental Science
Associates in the amount of $14,000 for the completion of the Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Automobile Dealership,
Planning Application Number PA07-0335.
6 Procurement of ShoreTel Phone System - Civic Center
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Approve the purchase of ShoreTel Phone equipment for the total amount of
$128,906, which includes shipping and applicable sales tax;
6.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $12,890, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
7 Approve an Amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission Measure A
Transportation Expenditure Plan (TIP)
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN
8 Southern California Edision and Time Warner Cable Easements within Margarita Park
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Grant an Easement to Southern California Edison for construction, operation, and
maintenance of facilities within Margarita Park;
8.2 Grant an Easement to Time Warner Cable for construction, operation, and
maintenance of facilities within Margarita Park.
9 Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) - Cooperative Work Agreement (CIA)
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA TO
APPROVE THE COOPERATIVE WORK AGREEMENT EXTENSION REQUEST
OF THE LOCAL AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT FOR THE 2006/2007 BICYCLE
TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT PROJECT KNOWN AS THE SANTA
GERTRUDIS CREEK BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT
10 Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman, Inc., for the Santa
Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/ Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect -Project No. PW08-04
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Approve the Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman,
Inc., for an Alignment Study and Design for the Santa Gertrudis Creek
Pedestrian/ Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect, Project No. PW08-04, in the
amount of $246,865;
10.2 Authorize the City Manager to approve Extra Work Authorizations not to exceed the
contingency amount of $24,686.50, which is equal to 10% of the agreement
amount.
11 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 08-12
RECOMMENDATION:
11.l Adopt an Ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 08-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REVISING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO MASSAGE SERVICES, AND
AMENDING TITLE 5 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING
CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of
Directors on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar.
Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the Board of
Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to
Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come
forward and state your name for the record
CSD CONSENT CALENDAR
12 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Approve the minutes of November 18, 2008.
13 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Temecula Community Center
Expansion Grading, Protect No. PW06-05 Phase 1
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Accept the Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading, Project No. PW06-05
as complete;
13.2 Direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond,
and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract
amount;
13.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of
Completion if no liens have been filed.
14 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Roller Hockey Rink Dasher
Board System, Project No. PW07-12
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1 Accept the Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12 as
complete;
14.2 Direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond
and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract
amount;
14.3 Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of
Completion if no liens have been filed.
CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
CSD GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT
CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
CSD ADJOURNMENT
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
RDA PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the
Redevelopment Agency on items that are not listed on the agenda or on the Consent
Calendar. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you decide to speak to the
Board of Directors on an item not on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink
"Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record.
For all other agenda items, a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
Prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit
for individual speakers.
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors should present a completed pink
"Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come
forward and state your name for the record
RDA CONSENT CALENDAR
15 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1 Approve the minutes of November 18, 2008.
RDA DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
16 Redevelopment Department Monthly Report
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Receive and file.
RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT
RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS
RDA ADJOURNMENT
RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or
may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s)
at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or
in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing
17 Proposed Development Code Amendment to define full service hotels, revise the intensity
bonus justification requirements, add new parking standards for full service hotels, and
allow for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full service hotel
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 08-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO
DEFINE FULL SERVICE HOTELS, REVISE THE INTENSITY BONUS
JUSTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHOSE
INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS THE TARGET FLOOR AREA RATIO
ALLOWED IN THE ZONE, ADD NEW PARKING STANDARDS FOR FULL
SERVICE HOTELS, AND ADD PROVISIONS TO ALLOW FOR TANDEM
PARKING SPACES FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHEN VALET SERVICE IS
PROVIDED (LONG RANGE PLANNING APPLICATION NO.
LR08-0045)
18 AB 1600 Financial Reports
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Approve the AB 1600 Financial Reports.
CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS
19 Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain
of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's
Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements - Environmental Mitigation
(Project No. PVV99-11 EM)
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Consider the following Resolution, which is a Resolution of Necessity of the City of
Temecula:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING CERTAIN REAL
PROPERTY INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES AND
AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION THEREOF IN CONNECTION WITH THE
PECHANGA PARKWAY STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - ENVIRONMENTAL
MITIGATION (PROJECT NO. PW99-11 EM)
19.2 Open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Resolution of
Necessity, receive from staff the evidence stated and referred to in this Agenda
Report ("Report"), take testimony from any person wishing to be heard on issues A,
B, C, and D below, and consider all evidence to determine whether to adopt the
proposed Resolution of Necessity.
If the City Council finds, based on the evidence contained and referred to in this
Report, the testimony and comments received at this hearing, and all written
testimony submitted to the City Council, that the evidence warrants the necessary
findings with respect to the proposed Resolution of Necessity, then City staff
recommends, that the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion:
19.3 Adopt proposed Resolution No. 08-_ (which requires a 4/5ths vote of the entire
Council) and authorize the City Attorney's office to file eminent domain proceedings
to acquire the following real property interests from the real property, which is a
vacant lot located along the northern side of Temecula Creek, including a portion of
the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of Temecula, California,
identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-076:
An approximate 74,251 square foot (1.70 acre) permanent conservation
easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached
proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel A Conservation Easement"
and is depicted on Exhibit "B" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled
"Conservation Easement";
An approximate 25,007 (0.58 acre) square foot grading easement, which is
described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution
of Necessity labeled "Parcel B Grading Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit
"C" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Grading Easement";
An approximate 22,648 (0.52 acre) square foot access/water line easement,
which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed
Resolution of Necessity labeled "Parcel C Access and Water Line Easement"
and is depicted on Exhibit "D" to the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Access
and Water Line Easement".
These real property interests are referred to below collectively as "Subject
Property Interests" and are described more particularly in the Exhibits
attached to the Resolution of Necessity. The Resolution of Necessity and its
Exhibits "A", "B", "C" and "D" are attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference;
19.4 Authorize the City Attorney's office and City staff to file and prosecute eminent
domain proceedings and to take all necessary steps to deposit $30,250 with the
Court, the amount of probable compensation, as required by law for issuance of an
Order for Prejudgment Possession;
19.5 Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents.
20 Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent Domain
of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with the City's
Proposed Pechanga Parkway - Dual Turn Lanes From Temecula Parkway (Project No.
PVV06-11)
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Consider the following Resolution, which is a Resolution of Necessity of the City of
Temecula:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING CERTAIN REAL
PROPERTY INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES AND
AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION THEREOF IN CONNECTION WITH THE
PECHANGA PARKWAY - DUAL TURN LANES FROM TEMECULA PARKWAY
(PROJECT NO. PW06-11)
20.2 Open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Resolution of
Necessity, receive from staff the evidence stated and referred to in this Agenda
Report ("Report"), take testimony from any person wishing to be heard on issues A,
B, C, and D below, and consider all evidence to determine whether to adopt the
proposed Resolution of Necessity.
If the City Council finds, based on the evidence contained and referred to in this
Report, the testimony and comments received at this hearing, and all written
testimony submitted to the City Council, that the evidence warrants the necessary
findings with respect to the proposed Resolution of Necessity, then City staff
recommends that the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion:
20.3 Adopt proposed Resolution No. 08-_ (which requires a 4/5ths vote of the entire
Council) and authorize the City Attorney's office to file eminent domain proceedings
to acquire the following real property interests from the real property, which is a
vacant lot located at the southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway and Temecula
Parkway in Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's
Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-073:
An approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street
purposes, which is described on Exhibit "A" to the proposed Resolution of
Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Dedication of Right-Of-Way" and is
depicted on Exhibit "B" labeled "Dedication of Right of Way";
An approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent
public roadway that will revert back to the property owner after construction
of the Project in the manner proposed, which is described on Exhibit "A-1" to
the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Slope
Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "13-1" labeled "Slope Easement";
An approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a
term of eighteen (18) months to facilitate construction of the Project, which is
described on Exhibit "A-2" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled
"Legal Description for Temporary Construction Easement" and depicted on
Exhibit "B-2" labeled "Temporary Construction Easement".
These real property interests are referred to below collectively as "Subject
Property Interests" and are described more particularly in the Exhibits
attached to the Resolution of Necessity. The proposed Resolution of
Necessity and its Exhibits "A", "B", "A-1 "B-1 "A-2" and "B-2" are attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
20.4 Authorize the City Attorney's office and City staff to file and prosecute eminent
domain proceedings and to take all necessary steps to deposit $120,000 with the
Court, the amount of probable compensation, as required by law for issuance of an
Order for Prejudgment Possession;
20.5 Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
21 City Council Travel/Conference Report - October 2008
22 Planning Department Monthly Report
23 Public Works Department Monthly Report
24 Police Department Monthly Report
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: City Council Regular, Tuesday, December 9, 2008, at 5:30 P.M., for a
Closed Session with regular session commencing at 6:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
The entire agenda packet (including staff reports) may be available for viewing at City Hall- 43200 Business Park
Drive, Temecula-and at the Temecula Library- 30600 Pauba Road, Temecula- during normal business hours.
The packet will be available for viewing the Friday before the City Council meeting after 4:00 PM. You may
access the packet on the City's website- cityoftemecula.org- which as well will be available the Friday before the
City Council meeting after 4:00 PM.
10
CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM NO. 1
ITEM NO. 2
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: List of Demands
PREPARED BY: Pascale Brown, Accounting Manager
Jada Yonker, Accounting Specialist
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
BACKGROUND: All claims and demands are reported and summarized for review and
approval by the City Council on a routine basis at each City Council meeting. The attached claims
represent the paid claims and demands since the last City Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT: All claims and demands were paid from appropriated funds or
authorized resources of the City and have been recorded in accordance with the City's policies and
procedures.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution
List of Demands
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on
file in the office of the City Clerk, has been reviewed by the City Manager's Office and
that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $2,056,536.36.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008.
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA }
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
11/13/2008 TOTAL CHECK RUN $ 1,549,727.24
11/13/2008 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 506,809.12
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 11/25/2008 COUNCIL MEETING: $ 2,056,536.36
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND
CHECKS:
001
GENERAL FUND
$ 1,186,587.52
165
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
9,473.30
190
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
212,627.41
192
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
127.51
193
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE
25,469.64
194
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
1,184.55
196
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT.
7,534.27
197
TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND
1,508.45
210
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND
42,160.74
280
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT
5,408.57
300
INSURANCE FUND
12,545.35
310
VEHICLES FUND
4,557.99
320
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
28,196.60
330
SUPPORT SERVICES
3,519.06
340
FACILITIES
8,826.28
001
GENERAL FUND
$ 332,413.64
165
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
8,015.39
190
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
110,020.40
192
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
132.23
193
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL"C" LANDSCAPE/SLOPE
4,881.41
194
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D
1,149.60
196
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT.
1,432.24
197
TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND
722.21
280
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP PROJECT
5,194.26
300
INSURANCE FUND
1,726.62
320
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
28,908.17
330
SUPPORT SERVICES
3,584.48
340
FACILITIES
8,628.47
$ 1,549,727.24
506,809.12
TOTAL BY FUND:
$ 2,056,536.36
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1
1111312008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
1149
11113/2008
000245
PERS - HEALTH INSUR PREMIUM
PERS Health Admin Cost Payment
Blue Shield HMO Payment
1150
11113/2008
000444
INSTATAX (EDD)
State Disability Ins Payment
1151
11113/2008
000283
INSTATAX(IRS)
Federal Income Taxes Payment
1152
11113/2008
000389
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
OBRA- Project Retirement Payment
1153 11113/2008
1154 11113/2008
1155 11113/2008
127788 11113/2008
127789 11113/2008
127790 11113/2008
127791 11113/2008
127792 11113/2008
001065
000246
000642
003552
004973
012245
003951
006915
SOLUTION
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT
SOLUTION
PERS(EMPLOYEES'
RETIREMENT)
TEMECULA CITY FLEXIBLE
AFLAC
ABACHERLI, LINDI
ALEGRIA, GLENDA FAY
ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT
ALLIE'S PARTY EQUIPMENT
Nationwide Retirement Payment
Amount Paid
78,764.62
0.00
24,175.16
95,959.17
3,888.42
22,353.92
PERS ER Paid Member Contr Payment 130,134.32
Child Care Reimbursement Payment
Child Care Reimbursement Payment
AFLAC Cancer Payment
TCSD instructor earnings
Support Payment
Rel Retention w/h PW08-02
Equip Rental:Theater Encore Event
127793 11113/2008 012554 AMERICAN SOCIETY OF HVAC & ASHRAE Handboooks: B&S
127794
11113/2008
000101
APPLE ON E INC
temp help ppe 10125: Ortiz, V
temp help ppe 10111: Ortiz, V
temp help ppe 10118: Ortiz, V
temp help ppe 10125: Wilson, L
127795
11113/2008
011961
AT&T MOBILITY
Oct 4070/3465 cellular usage
127796
11113/2008
002648
AUTO CLUB OF SOUTHERN
Membership: 65120445 DD
CALIF
9,585.35
0.00
3,241.82
920.00
1,091.00
47,204.02
514.71
409.50
597.87
294.84
368.55
1,359.40
361.20
47.00
Check Total
78,764.62
24,175.16
95,959.17
3,888.42
22,353.92
130,134.32
9,585.35
3,241.82
920.00
1,091.00
47,204.02
514.71
409.50
2,620.66
361.20
47.00
Page:1
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 2
11113/2008
3:53:54PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
127797
11113/2008
002541
BECKER CONSTRUCTION SRVS
Vallejo Channel repairs: PW
8,375.00
8,375.00
INC
127798
11113/2008
004040
BIG FOOT GRAPHICS
TCSD instructor earnings
315.00
TCSD instructor earnings
770.00
1,085.00
127799
11113/2008
011230
BONILLA, GERMAN
performance:Hot Summer Ngts
500.00
500.00
127800
11113/2008
010964
C R V P
Data Conversion: Records
2,224.56
2,224.56
127801
11113/2008
003138
CAL MAT
PW patch truck materials
246.66
PW patch truck materials
201.86
PW patch truck materials
331.29
779.81
127802
11113/2008
010349
CALIF DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT
Support Payment Case # 94P6594
159.69
159.69
127803
11113/2008
010349
CALIF DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT
Support Payment Case # Df099118
25.00
25.00
127804
11113/2008
000790
CALIF DEPT OF PESTICIDE
Cert 18713 Renewal: Pesticide DC
60.00
60.00
127805
11113/2008
003775
CHAPARRAL HIGH SCHOOL
08109 Ad CHS Basketball Pgrm
100.00
100.00
127806
11113/2008
004405
COMMUNITY HEALTH CHARITIES
Community Health Charities Payment
136.00
136.00
127807
11113/2008
009524
CREATIVE HANDS ART SCHOOL
TCSD instructor earnings
819.00
TCSD instructor earnings
756.00
1,575.00
127808
11113/2008
003962
DAVID NEAULT ASSOCIATES INC
Oct Idscp insp svcs:Pechanga Ph II
6,080.00
6,080.00
127809
11113/2008
012296
DIRECT ELECTRIC COMPANY
light installation: Loma Linda park
425.00
425.00
127810
11113/2008
002701
DIVERSIFIED RISK/HUB INT'L
Oct'08 special events premiums
11,698.51
11,698.51
Paget
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 3
11113/2008
3:53:54PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
127811
11113/2008 001056
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
mainline repairs:Saddlwood/Pavilion Pt
274.75
mainline repairs: Sad dlwcod/PaviIlion Pt
216.01
mainline valve repair:villages
518.94
irrigation upgrades:crowne hill
351.04
valve repairs:Vail Ranch Pkwy
727.95
backflow repair:Crowne Hill
1,267.01
mainline repairs:Temeku Hills
247.73
mainline repairs:Villages
346.79
backflow repair:Signet Series
890.67
backflow repair:La Mirada
790.69
backflow repair:Ridgeview
960.59
6,592.17
127812
11113/2008 003347
FIRST BANKCARD CENTER
ONTARIO AIRPORT
RR Prkg:SCAG regional mtg
68.00
HILTON
RR HtI:SCAG regional mtg:1011108
121.00
VALET AIR PARK
RR Parking Fee: Metrolink- 10111-16
74.53
COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT
JC Htl:NLCC & Econ Dev Cnf 9124-27
436.43
HERTZ RENT-A-CAR
JC car rental:NLCC cnf 9124-30
409.08
SEAL FURNITURE
HP parts to repair cubicles CSD
215.50
PALUMBOS RISTORANTE
GR refreshments:interview panel
71.74
PAYPAL
GR Payflow Pro Transaction
59.95
BUYONLINENOW.COM
GYname plate- S. Cammarota
103.80
C S M F O
GY recruitment ad/Asst. Fin Director
225.00
GOVERNMENT FINANCE
GY recruitment ad/Asst. Fin Director
150.00
OFFICERS
JOHNSTONE SUPPLY
HP maint supplies:mpsc
96.49
TIGERDIRECT.COM
HP equip maint supplies:theater
140.34
2,171.86
127813
11113/2008 010325
FORT DEARBORN LIFE
Voluntary Supp Life Insurance Payment
912.80
912.80
127814
11113/2008 011145
FOSTER, JILL C.
TCSD instructor earnings
350.00
350.00
127815
11113/2008 011967
FULL VALUE ENTERTAINMENT
sttlmnt: Battle of the Bands
52.50
52.50
127816
11113/2008 004514
G T S I CORP
Panasonic Computer Equip: PD
173.78
Panasonic Toughbook PC: PD
4,384.21
4,557.99
Page3
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 4
11113/2008
3:53:54PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
127817
11113/2008
000177
GLENN IES OFFICE PRODUCTS
Office Supplies: Info Sys
165.69
INC
Office Supplies: Finance
142.65
Office Supplies: PW CIP1Admin
843.63
Office Supplies: Theater
256.53
Office Supplies: City Clerk
177.67
Office Supplies: TV Museum
174.45
Office Supplies: Econ Dev
26.37
Office Supplies: HR
596.53
Office Supplies: Econ Dev
19.38
Office Supplies: Planning
831.97
Office Supplies: B&SlCode Enf
283.37
Office Supplies: MPSC
201.06
Office Supplies: CRC
93.08
3,812.38
127818
11113/2008
004890
GOLDEN STATE FIRE
Fire Sprinkler Insp: TV Museum
500.00
PROTECTION
Fire Sprinkler Insp: City Hall
500.00
Fire Sprinkler Insp: TCC
500.00
Fire Sprinkler Insp: Mpsc
500.00
Fire Sprinkler Insp: Maint Facility
500.00
Fire Sprinkler Insp: Ch Museum
500.00
Fire Sprinkler Insp: CRC
500.00
3,500.00
127819
11113/2008
000186
HANKS HARDWARE INC
Hardware supplies: City Hall
204.05
Hardware supplies: Library
170.40
Hardware supplies: Ch Museum
15.86
Hardware supplies: MPSC
26.46
Hardware supplies: TCC
58.16
Hardware supplies: Theater
111.38
Hardware supplies: TV Museum
3.86
Hardware supplies: B&S
277.95
Hardware supplies: TCSD Parks
640.71
Hardware supplies: Maint Facility
4.31
Hardware supplies: CRC/Skate Pk
271.37
Hardware supplies: Fire
983.16
Hardware supplies: PW Maint
1,015.86
Hardware supplies: PWTraffic
326.45
Hardware supplies: CRC
88.95
4,198.93
127820
11113/2008
003543
HERMAN WEISSKER INC
Oct Const:Old Town Infrastructure
15,151.50
15,151.50
127821
11113/2008
007792
HINTON, BEVERLY L.
TCSD instructor earnings
188.30
188.30
127822
11113/2008
005748
HODSON, CHERYL A.
Support Payment
7.25
7.25
Page-.4
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 5
11113/2008
3:53:54PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
127823
11113/2008
000963
HOGAN, DAVID
Retirement Medical Payment
703.00
703.00
127824
11113/2008
000194
1 C M A RETIREMENT-PLAN
I C M A Retirement Trust 457 Payment
11,082.62
11,082.62
303355
127825
11113/2008
001123
INDUSTRIAL DISTRIBUTION
misc maint supplies: PW Maint
413.89
413.89
GROUP
127826
11113/2008
001186
IRWIN, JOHN
TCSD instructor earnings
78.40
TCSD instructor earnings
68.60
TCSD instructor earnings
196.00
TCSD instructor earnings
333.20
676.20
127827
11113/2008
007671
JONES, MARYLYN
TCSD instructor earnings
604.80
604.80
127828
11113/2008
007188
LAERDAL MEDICAL CORP.
CPR supplies: Fire
220.84
220.84
127829
11113/2008
003782
MAIN STREET SIGNS
Misc. street signs:pw maint div
155.16
155.16
127830
11113/2008
004141
MAINTEX INC
Custodial Supplies:TCC
260.13
Custodial Supplies:Theater
194.10
Custodial Supplies:C. Museum
221.93
Custodial Supplies: Library
295.62
Custodial Supplies:CRC
493.34
Custodial Supplies:MPSC
260.13
Custodial Supplies:T. Museum
260.13
1,985.38
127831
11113/2008
000220
MAURICE PRINTERS INC
2008 cafr report coversAnance
974.06
2008 cafr tab dividersAnance
499.96
1,474.02
127832
1111312008
006571
MELODY'S AD WORKS INC.
reimb expense:O.T. Holiday
1,085.00
1,085.00
127833
11113/2008
003076
MET LIFE INSURANCE COMPAN
Y MetLife Dental Insurance Payment
8,625.42
8,625.42
127834
11113/2008
007210
MIDORI GARDENS
Oct Idscp srvcs: Parks
70,105.00
70,105.00
127835
11113/2008
011440
MILLMORE'S WAX CREW
City vehicle detailing srvcs: PW Depts
100.00
100.00
127836
11113/2008
001384
MINUTEMAN PRESS
10,000 window envelopes:finance
790.94
790.94
127837
11113/2008
001868
MIYAMOTO-JURKOSKY, SUSAN
TCSD Instructor Earnings
415.80
A.
TCSD Instructor Earnings
420.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
453.60
1,289.40
Pagea
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 6
11113/2008
3:53:54PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
127838
11113/2008
008820
NEIGHBORS NEWSPAPER
Nov advertising: ESG/Old Town Holiday
500.00
500.00
127839
11113/2008
000233
NELSON, SHAWN
reimb: Sep/Oct'08 internet services
89.98
89.98
127840
11113/2008
009337
NOLTE ASSOCIATES INC
Engineering Srvcs:Bridge Realign Study
13,976.61
13,976.61
127841
11113/2008
003964
OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS
Misc office supplies:pd mall
99.54
DIV
Misc office supplies:pd mall
21.12
120.66
127842
11113/2008
002105
OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE
City Vehicle Maint Svcs:TCSD
91.27
City Vehicle Maint Svcs: Planning
363.19
City Vehicle Maint Svcs:City Mgr
208.88
663.34
127843
11113/2008
009694
ONSTAGE MUSICALS
"Get Your Kicks" performance 11/9108
7,354.61
7,354.61
127844
11113/2008
012547
PARKS & OBERHANSLEY
filing fees:Tem.Foundation/Higher Educ.
154.69
154.69
127845
11113/2008
001958
PERS LONG TERM CARE
PERS Long Term Care Payment
377.54
377.54
PROGRAM
127846
11113/2008
009796
PERVO PAINT COMPANY
Misc supplies:pw traffic div
1,125.99
1,125.99
127847
11113/2008
000249
PETTY CASH
Petty Cash Reimbursement
621.52
621.52
127848
11113/2008
012251
PORTRAIT PRODUCTIONS
TCSD Instructor Earnings
94.50
94.50
127849
11113/2008
002185
POSTMASTER
11 /08-11109 rental box 892050: Police
374.00
374.00
127850
11113/2008
005820
PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC
PrePaid Legal Services Payment
450.40
450.40
127851
11113/2008
000254
PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPANY
Oct recruitment ads: Human Resources
2,205.82
2,205.82
INC
127852
11113/2008
000262
RANCHO CALIF WATER DISTRIC
T Oct Various Water Meters
975.24
Oct 01-04-47210-OT.E.S. Pool
642.46
Oct Various Water Meters
33,216.07
Oct Various Water Meters
46.17
34,879.94
127853
11113/2008
004584
REGENCY LIGHTING
electrical supplies:mpsc/c.museum
74.99
74.99
Page6
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 7
11113/2008
3:53:54PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
127854
11113/2008
004498
REPUBLIC INTELLIGENT
Conduit repair:mercedes & main
4,564.66
4,564.66
127855
11113/2008
012148
RICHARDSON TECHNOLOGIES
Oct HVAC prev maint:t.c.c.
278.00
INC
Oct HVAC prev maint:fire stn 84
278.00
Oct HVAC prev maint:c. museum
278.00
Oct HVAC prev maint:foc
478.00
Oct HVAC prev maint:west wing
324.00
Oct HVAC prev maint:tcc
185.00
Oct HVAC prev maint:library
934.00
Oct HVAC prevmaint:crc
1,116.00
Oct HVAC prev maint:theater
371.00
new compressor unit #4:crc
2,425.99
Oct HVAC prev maint:fire stn 73
120.00
6,787.99
127856
11113/2008
000411
RIVERSIDE CO FLOOD CONTRO
L permit fees:Murr.CrkTrail pw0l-27
1,568.94
1,568.94
127857
11113/2008
000406
RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS DEPT
0711-16/08 law enforcement
777,397.01
777,397.01
127858
11113/2008
000815
ROWLEY, CATHY
TCSD Instructor Earnings
532.00
TCSD Instructor Earnings
420.00
952.00
127859
11113/2008
002226
RUSSO, MARY ANNE
TCSD Instructor Earnings
875.00
875.00
127860
11113/2008
010518
SAFE KIDS WORLDWIDE
car seat re-cert.: D. Perry T638581
40.00
40.00
127861
11113/2008
007582
SAFEGUARD DENTAL & VISION
SafeGuard Vision Plan Payment
1,056.85
1,056.85
127862
11113/2008
000278
SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE
Oct recruitment ads: Human Resources
1,600.80
1,600.80
127863
11113/2008
006815
SAN DIEGO, COUNTY OF
Support Payment Account # 581095025
12.50
12.50
127864
11113/2008
009980
SANBORN, GWYN
Country @ the Merc 1118108
570.00
570.00
127865
11113/2008
008529
SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL
Support Payment LO File # 08-59437
786.80
786.80
127866
11113/2008
008529
SHERI FPS CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL
Support Payment LO File # 08-59437
357.25
357.25
127867
11113/2008
008529
SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV- CENTRAL
Sup Pmt LO FILE# 2007052618
100.00
100.00
Page:?
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 8
11113/2008
3:53:54PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
127868
11113/2008
008529
SHERIFF'S CIVIL DIV - CENTRAL
Support Payment LO File # 08-59437
100.00
100.00
127869
1111312008
009213
SHERRY BERRY MUSIC
Jazz @ the Merc 1116108
241.50
241.50
127870
11113/2008
000645
SMART & FINAL INC
Misc supplies:childrens museum
63.96
63.96
127871
11113/2008
000537
SO CALIF EDISON
2-29-657-2563 Various TCSD Meters
144.47
Nov 2-30-066-2889 Rancho Vista PED
18.65
Oct 2-20-798-3248 C. Museum
1,020.02
Oct 2-29-479-2981 Temecula Pkwy
107.96
Oct 2-05-791-8807 various mtrs
10,355.42
11,646.52
127872
11113/2008
007762
STANDARD INSURANCE
Mandatory Life Insurance Payment
11,202.32
11,202.32
COMPANY
127873
11113/2008
003000
STATE WATER RESOURCES
10/1108-9130/09 permit:O.T. Infrstr
433.00
433.00
127874
11113/2008
003000
STATE WATER RESOURCES
10/1108-9130109 permit:Murr.Crk Trail
375.00
375.00
127875
11113/2008
003840
STRONGS PAINTING
apply graffiti proof coating: pbsp bldgs
12,900.00
12,900.00
127876
11113/2008
012537
SUN CITY BICYCLES
Police bicycle repair parts
57.09
57.09
127877
1111312008
000305
TARGET BANK BUS CARD SRVCS
Misc Teen Room Supplies
69.98
Misc supplies:teen dance
133.36
203.34
127878
11113/2008
001547
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 911
Union Dues Payment
5,480.00
5,480.00
127879
11113/2008
010046
TEMECULA VALLEY
Sept'08 Bus. Imprv District Asmnts
43,838.79
43,838.79
CONVENTION &
127880
11113/2008
000306
TEMECULA VALLEY PIPE &
irrigation/plumbing supplies: parks
108.13
108.13
SUPPLY
127881
11113/2008
000316
THORNHILL, GARY
Retirement Medical Payment
703.00
703.00
127882
11113/2008
006918
THORSON, TIM
Reimb:MISAC conf 10118-10119108
21.66
21.66
127883
11113/2008
000668
TIMMY D PRODUCTIONS INC
DJ srvcs:fall skate park competition
525.00
525.00
Page:B
apChkLst
Final Check List
Page: 9
11113/2008
3:53:54PM
CITY OF TEMECULA
Bank :
union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA
(Continued)
Check #
Date
Vendor
Description
Amount Paid
Check Total
127884
11113/2008
010276
TW TELECOM
Aug high speed internet City Hall
183.38
183.38
127885
11113/2008
007766
UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT Oct undrgrnd svcs alert tickets:PW
313.50
313.50
127886
11113/2008
004981
UNISOURCE SCREENING &
10/16-31108 bckgmd investigations:hr
10.50
10.50
127887
11113/2008
000199
UNITED STATE TREASURY
Support Payment Case # 614788413
250.00
250.00
127888
11113/2008
000325
UNITED WAY
United Way Charities Payment
63.00
63.00
127889
11113/2008
004794
VALLEY WINDS COMMUNITY
Valley Winds performance 1115108
381.71
381.71
127890
11113/2008
004261
VERIZON
Oct xxx-1540 Old Town Prk Lot
87.94
Oct xxx-6620 general usage
32.87
Oct xxx-5180 79S Irrg Cntr
36.92
Oct xxx-7530 GIS Library
417.62
Oct xxx-8900 GIS Library
843.37
Oct xxx-4200 general usage
866.84
2,285.56
127891
11113/2008
004279
VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC.
Oct access-C. Mus.phone line
591.40
Oct access-CRC phone line
320.00
911.40
127892
11113/2008
008669
VONS
recogn.awards:human resources
584.70
584.70
127893
11113/2008
003730
WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC
Tree trimming srvcs:rncho highland
1,808.00
1,808.00
Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA:
1,549,727.24
Page9
apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10
11113/2008 3:53:54PM CITY OF TEMECULA
113 checks in this report.
Grand Total All Checks:
1,549,727.24
Page:10
ITEM NO. 3
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: General Liability Insurance Renewal
PREPARED BY: Roberto Cardenas, Fiscal Services Manager
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the insurance policy renewal for general
and excess liability insurance with St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess &
Surplus Lines Insurance Company, in the amount $207,403, for the period of December 1, 2008
through December 1, 2009.
BACKGROUND: In preparation for the expiration of the liability insurance policywith St.
Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company on
December 1, 2008, staff requested that the City's insurance broker, Brown & Brown, Inc., market
the City's application for general liability insurance. In response, Brown & Brown, Inc. obtained
proposals from the companies listed below (in the order of responsiveness as determined by the
insurance broker). These premiums were quoted with a minimum self-insured retention (SIR) of
$150,000 and range up to $250,000. In addition, each quote had an Aggregate of $5,000,000 and
an Occurrence of 5,000,000.
GENERAL LIABILITY
Company
Premium
Self-Insured
Retention
St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc.
$159,965
$150,000
Lexington Insurance Company
$187,000
$150,000
Munich American Insurance
$200,000
$150,000
Illinois Union Insurance Company
$219,000
$150,000
Genesis Insurance Company
$300,000
$200,000
Everest National Insurance
$160,000
$250,000
EXCESS LIABILITY
Company
Premium
Princeton Excess & Sur p. Lines Ins. Co.
$47,438
Markel/Evanston Insurance Company
$56,719
New Market Insurance Company
$49,500
St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. has an "A+" rating with a financial size category of "W"
Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company has an "A+" rating, with a financial size
category of "W" The proposal by St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess &
Surplus Lines Insurance Company provides coverage of $10 million per event and $10 million
aggregate, for a premium of $207,403 (general liability of $159,965 and excess liability of $47,438)
with a self-insured retention of $150,000. Considering the City's increasing exposure associated
with growth and increased activities, staff recommends the City accept the proposals of St. Paul
Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company, in the
amounts noted, for coverage from December 1, 2008 through December 1, 2009.
The schedule below reflects general and excess liability insurance premiums for the past seven
years (with $10 million coverage). The liability premium forthis year represents a premium reduction
over the previous years:
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Premium
$268
217
$279
984
$274
063
$278
901
$252
779
$221
445
$207
403
Limits
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
As reflected above, although the City has continued to grow, the premiums have continued to
decrease.
FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds have been budgeted in the fiscal year 2008-2009
insurance fund.
ATTACHMENTS: Proposal from St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. and Princeton
Excess & Surplus Lines Insurance Company.
PROPOSAL FROM
ST. PAUL TRAVELERS
PRINCETON EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY
TERM: December 1, 2008 - December 1, 2009
FORMAT: Event/Occurrence
NAMED INSURED: City of Temecula
Temecula Community Services District
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula
Temecula Public Financing Authority
Industrial Development Authority
SELF-INSURED RETENTION (SIR): $150,000
TOTAL LI MITSICOVE RAGE: $10,000,000 (per occurrence)
ST. PAUL TRAVELERS
PRIMARY COVERAGE AND PREMIUM
$159,965
PUBLIC ENTITY GENERAL LIABILITY
....................INCLUDED
MANAGEMENT LIABILITY
.......................INCLUDED
PUBLIC ENTITY LAW ENFORCEMENT LIABILITY ...........................INCLUDED
PUBLIC ENTITY EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY ................INCLUDED
PUBLIC ENTITY AUTO LIABILITY .....................................................INCLUDED
PUBLIC ENTITY EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN
ADMINISTRATION LIABILITY ............................................................INCLUDED
PUBLIC ENTITY UMBRELLA I EXCESS LIABILITY .........................INCLUDED
TERRORISM RISK INSURANCE ACT LIABILITY ....INCLUDED
$5,000,000 Per Event or Wrongful Act or Combination of Event and Wrongful Act
Excess Over Self-Insured Retention (SIR) Public Entity General (Including Bodily Injury,
Property Damage, Personal Injury, Advertising Injury, Products & Completed Work
Liability), Law Enforcement, Employment Practices, Management, Automobile, and
Umbrella Liability
$1,000,000 Per Wrongful Act Public Entity Employee Benefit Plan Administration Liability
$1,000,000 Per Occurrence Health Care Professional (EMT's, Nurses, Social Services
Professionals)
$5,000,000 Total Limit (Aggregate) Management Liability
$5,000,000 Total Limit (Aggregate) Employment Practices Liability
$3,000,000 Total Limit (Aggregate) Employee Benefit Plan Administration Liability
$5,000,000 Total Limit (Aggregate) General and Law Enforcement
1
PRINCETON EXCESS INSURANCE COMPANY
EXCESS FOLLOWING FORM OVER THE ABOVE
$5,000,000 Occurrence/Aggregate $47,438
TOTAL COMBINED ANNUAL PREMIUM COST .................$207,403
2
ITEM NO. 4
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Proposed Southern California Edison's Triton Substation (at the request of Council
Member Roberts)
PREPARED BY: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the information presented (at the
request of Council Member Roberts).
BACKGROUND: In April 2008, Southern California Edison (SCE) presented to the
community its plans for a new substation project (Triton substation). The project consists of
constructing a new 115/12 kilovolt substation that would serve the cities of Temecula, Murrieta and
unincorporated Riverside County. The purpose of this project is to strengthen SCE's network to
maintain reliability and ensure that the region's electrical demands continue to be met based on
population growth. When first presented to the community, SCE had identified a preferred site
located in Temecula at the southwest corner of Nicolas Road and Los Choras Ranch Road.
Following the presentation, and as a result of changes in the real estate market, SCE was able to
research and identify other available sites that might meet their needs. SCE has now identified a
new preferred site located at the southeast corner of Nicolas Road and Calle Medusa also in the
City of Temecula (exhibit attached).
The project at this new preferred site will require the construction of a new subtransmission line
segment which is approximately 1,300 feet in length. The line will run east along the south side of
Nicolas Road within existing SCE right-of-way. SCE will replace nine wood poles (each 55 feet in
height) with seven engineered tubular steel poles. Each tubular steel pole is approximately 85 feet
in height. The new substation will be an unattended, low profile substation. Landscaping around
the four walls of the substation will be consistent with the surrounding landscaping to the extent
practicable.
As part of the project review and approval process, SCE must submit a Permit to Construct
application to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for approval. In addition, the permit
requires an environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The
CPUC will review the application to ensure the project's compliance with all applicable laws and will
seek public comment on the project. Once the process is complete, the CPUC will approve the
project as presented, approve it with modifications or deny the project.
Staff is currently working with Nicolas Valley residents on the development of a Community Plan for
the Nicolas Valley area to enhance the rural character of the community through development of
community design standards for improvements such as community entry signs, street signage,
fencing, and trails. The proposed substation location raises concerns regarding the potential visual
impact of this facility on the rural character of the area which the residents and City are trying to
maintain.
Staff has met with an Edison representative to discuss screening of the substation and staff is
having on-going discussions regarding how best to landscape the site to provide adequate
screening.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS: Site Plan
Photographs
City Comment Letter dated October 29, 2008
Simulation of view facing south on Nicolas Road and the corner of Calle Medusa towards the proposed site.
Existing view facing south on Nicolas Road and the corner of Calle Medusa towards the proposed site.
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43200 Business Park Drive • Temecula, CA 92590 • Mailing Address: P.0. Box 9033 • Temecula, CA 92589-9033
(951) 694-6400 • FAX (951) 694-6477
October 29, 2008
Mr. Viet Tran
Region Manger
Southern California Edison
26100 Menifee Road
Romoland, CA 92585-9752
Subject: Triton Substation, 115/12KV Distribution Substation
Dear Mr. Tran:
The City of Temecula understands that the Southern California Edison Company has plans to
file an application with the California Public Utilities Commission for authorization to build the
Triton Substation located near the intersection of Calle Medusa and Nicolas Road within the
City of Temecula. We understand that this will be a distribution station that will take a 115 KV
line and step it down to 12KV for distribution to the Cities of Temecula, Murrieta and the
southwest County of Riverside. We further understand that this will bean unmanned facility.
The project site is in a rural area of the City and consequently will be highly visible. Both the
substation proper and the proposed 85 foot high tubular steel suspension poles will create an
aesthetic impact. The City has concerns over the height and color of these poles since they will
be located at the gateway to the Nicolas Valley area which is currently undergoing a community
planning effort to visually enhance the area. The project information for the physical substation
states only that there will be landscaping but there are no existing landscape plans for the City
to review or comment on.
The City is also concerned about the environmental aspects of the proposed substation.
Transformers and certain types of breakers contain oil which is necessary for both insulation
and cooling. Our concern is that the transformers and breakers could contain mineral oil or
worse, Polychlorinated Biphenyls. Further, Sulfur Hexafluoride, a powerful greenhouse gas, is
another possible insulating gas that could be used in this substation. The City has not been in
receipt of any information regarding this aspect of the substation. We would request information
on this matter as well as the proposed containment for these potential contaminants.
We assume that the substation yard will be gravel in order not to compromise the grounding of
equipment. Herbicides will need to be applied in order to prevent the ground grid from being
affected by vegetation. We would request information regarding the schedule and type of
herbicides that will be used for this function.
C:1Program Files (x86)1Neevia.ComlDocument Converterltemp1897844.doc
Lastly, this substation will use transformers, circuit switches, and breakers which all produce
noise. An operating substation produces sounds that can affect the local community from the
constant hum produced by the stepping down of the high voltage electricity from the
transmission line to the distribution level voltage. Noise is also emitted from the transformer
cooling systems. The operation of other kinds of substation equipment produces noise that is
infrequent and lasts only a few seconds. The City is requesting information on what efforts have
been extended to insure noise attenuation and compatibility with the existing and future uses
surrounding the proposed Triton Substation.
The City appreciates the opportunity to comment on your proposed new substation. Please feel
free to contact me at (951) 694-6400 should you have any questions regarding this letter.
Sincerely,
Debbie Ubnoske
Director of Planning
cc City Council
Shawn Nelson, City Manager
Aaron Adams, Assistant City Manager
Grant Yates, Deputy City Manager
CAProgram Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converter\temp\897844.doc
2
ITEM NO. 5
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Second Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services Between the City of
Temecula and Environmental Science Associates for Preparation of a
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Dealership
(PA07-0335)
PREPARED BY: Katie Innes, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approved the Second Amendment to the
Agreement with Environmental Science Associates in the amount of $14,000 for the completion of
the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Automobile Dealership,
Planning Application Number PA07-0335.
BACKGROUND: On January 22, 2008, the City Manager administratively approved a
consultant services agreement with Environmental Science Associates (ESA) in the amount of
$22,500 to start the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the
proposed Mercedes Benz Automobile dealership. An amendment to this agreement was requested
and approved by City Council on February 12, 2008, for an amount of $126,200. The maximum cost
of this contract was $148,700.
Since the approval of this original agreement it was determined that additional funds were required
to bring the Supplemental EIR to completion, as several unanticipated issues were not included in
the original scope of work. The cost of this additional work did not exceed $14,000. The total cost for
the original and amended scope of work totals $162,700.
FISCAL IMPACT: The maximum cost of the second amendment would be $14,000.
Sufficient funds were received by the applicant September 4, 2008.
ATTACHMENTS: Second Contract Amendment
Attachment "A" - Scope of Work/Cost
CC Staff Report dated February 12, 2008 with exhibits
SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF TEMECULA AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES (ESA)
PREPARATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (EIR) FOR MERCEDES BENZ DEALERSHIP
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of November 18, 2008 by
and between the City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation, and ESA ("Consultant"). In
consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as
follows:
1. This Amendment is made with the respect to the following facts and purposes:
a. On January 7, 2008, the City and Consultant entered into that certain
Agreement entitled "City of Temecula Agreement for Consulting Services,
in the amount of $22,500;
b. On February 12, 2008, the Agreement was Amended to increase the
payment in the amount of $126,200;
C. The parties now desire to increase the payment for Consulting Services
in the amount of $14,000 and amend the Agreement as set forth in this
Amendment.
2. Section 5.a. PAYMENT. Section 5a., Payment, of the Agreement is hereby
amended to read as follows:
a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment
rates and schedules and terms set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and
Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though
set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in
Exhibit B other than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and
void. The Second Amendment amount shall not exceed Fourteen Thousand
Dollars and No Cents ($14,000.00) for additional Consulting Services for a total
Agreement amount of One Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand Seven Hundred
Dollars and No Cents ($162,700.00).
3. Exhibit "A" and "B" to the Agreement are hereby amended by adding thereto the
items set forth on Attachment "A" to this Amendment, which is attached hereto
and incorporated herein as though set forth in full.
4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and
conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF TEMECULA Note: Title must be in
bold type
By:
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
Environmental Science Associates
Attn: Eric Ruby, Vice President/Regional Director
9191 Towne Center Drive, Suite 340
San Diego, Ca 92122
Phone: 858-638-0900
Fax: 858-638-0920
BY:
(Signature)
NAME:
(Printed Named)
TITLE:
BY:
(Signature)
NAME:
(Printed Named)
TITLE:
TWO SIGNATURES
REQUIRED FOR CORPORATIONS
2
ATTACHMENT A
Attached hereto and incorporated herein is the additional scope of work and associated cost as
provided by the Consultant.
• The transportation analysis was more complicated than anticipated, which required
meetings with, the City attorneys, City staff, and the transportation sub consultant.
• Overall project delays due to the complexity of the transportation report and coordination
with the City staff and the City attorneys regarding the incorporation of the French Valley
Interchange and eventual connection of Ynez Road to Jackson Ave. to determine
potential future impacts have also required more time to be spent on project
management/coordination.
• A separate Global Warming/Climate Change (Section 3.3) was required by the City and
City attorneys. This separate section was not anticipated in the original scope of work.
• Overall project delays and additional meetings/project management/coordination
resulting from comments received from the City attorneys extended the originally
anticipated administrative DSEIR review and editing phase.
• Additional Spring 2008 bio survey of the Fletcher Jones Mercedes project site to verify
that the site had no significant biological resources and that site vegetation was typical of
disturbed areas and did not have any sensitive plant or animal species.
• Additional unused copies of the DSEIR submittal were produced by the printers prior to
public review of the document. These copies were produced to meet the City's
scheduled deadline, but discontinued and unused as a result of additional comments
received from the City's attorneys.
• Substantial additional alternative scenarios and associated analyses were required by
the City attorneys within Chapter 5 (Alternatives Analysis). These additional alternatives
were not originally anticipated by City staff or ESA.
• Attendance of an additional community meeting with residents of the Harveston Specific
Plan area.
• Numerous revisions and changes to the architecture plans by Gensler, updates to the
landscape architecture plans by David Neault Associates and engineering plans by
Fuscoe required corresponding changes and analyses within the environmental
documents and technical reports.
The following tasks/cost estimate outlines what we will need to complete the CEQA
documentation process for the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Fletcher
Jones Mercedes-Benz Dealership project. The cost for this additional work is not to exceed
$14,000. The total cost for the original and amended scopes of work now totals $162,700.
FLETCHER JONES MERCEDES-BENZ DEALERSHIP SEIR
TASK COST
Project Management Coordination
$1,000
Draft SEIR Preparation
$99,500
Final SEIR/Response to Comments /Mitigation Monitoring Program
$1,500
Total - Contract Amendment Not to Exceed
$94.000
a Document reproduction costs are variable, but can be reduced if copies of all documents are provided
by the applicant's reproduction supplier which eliminates ESA's standard mark up on printing
expenses.
3
Approvals A-Ir
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
DATE: February 12, 2008
SUBJECT: First Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services Between the City of
Temecula and Environmental Science Associates for Preparation of a
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for Planning Application PA07-0335
PREPARED BY: Christine Damko, Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Thatthe City Council approve the First Amendment to theAgreement
with Environmental Science Associates in the amount of $126,200 for the preparation of a
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Mercedes Benz Automobile Dealership,
Planning Application Number PA07-0335.
BACKGROUND: On January 22, 2008, the City Manager administratively approved a
consultant services agreement with Environmental Science Associates in the amount of $22,500 to
start the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed
Mercedes Benz Automobile dealership. An amendment to this agreement is requested to complete
the Supplemental EIR for an amount of $126,200. The total maximum cost of this contract would be
$148,700.
Environmental Science Associate's proposal consists of weekly meetings with staff, attendance of
community meetings and public hearings, the preparation and research of project related studies,
and the preparation of a Supplemental EIR and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program.
FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the original agreement is $22,500. The First
Amendment is for an amount not to exceed $126,200, for a total agreement amount not to exceed
$148,700. Sufficient funds were received by the applicant and were deposited into TrustAccount#
13000 on January 7, 2008.
ATTACHMENTS: First Amendment
Attachment "A" - Description of Schedule/Scope of Work
Attachment "B" - Cost
08-O%
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR
CONSULTANT SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES
("ESA") PREPARATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE MERCEDES
BENZ AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP (PA07-0335)
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of February 12, 2008 by and
between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("Agency") and Environmental Science
Associates ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth
herein, the parties agree as follows:
This Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and purposes:
A. On January 7, 2008 the City and Consultant entered into that certain
agreement entitled Consultant Agreement between the City of Temecula and Consultant for
project management/coordination/preliminary environmental consulting services in the amount
of Twenty Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($22,500.00).
B. The parties now desire to increase the payment for additional consulting
services in the amount of One Hundred Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Dollars and No
Cents ($126,200.00) and amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment.
2. Section 5.a. Payment of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows:
The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment
rates and terms and schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, for services described in
Section B of Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set
forth in full based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit A or B other
than the payment rates and schedule of payment are null and void. The first amendment shall
not exceed One Hundred Twenty Six Thousand Two Hundred Dollars and No Cents
($126,200.00) for additional consulting services for a total agreement amount of One Hundred
Forty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars and No Cents ($148,700.00).
3. "Exhibit "A" and "B" to the Agreement are hereby amended by adding the items
set forth on Attachment "A" to this Amendment, which is attached hereto and incorporated
herein as though set forth in full."
4. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions
of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
1
GAPlanning@007 A07-0335 Mercedes Benz of Temecula CDPA%PIanninGlESA conedVimendmenl Cenlrad.reised.d00
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF TEMECULA
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan WY. J¢nes, MMC, CAy Clerk
Approved As to Form:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
CONSULTANT:
Environmental Science Association
Eric Ruby, Vice President/Regional Director
9191 Towne Center Drive, Suite 340
(858)638-0900
4,6~
Name: ~~1~ J 12t1J3~1
Title:
j.{~
Name: '1, 0A7T EI
Title: I aS I DZ^'
(Two Signatures Required For Corporations)
z
GARannin9VD0APADI-0335 Memedas Benz of Temecula CDPA1PIamiig ESA wn1mcMmendmenl Contact-mvis .dw
ATTACHMENT "A"
DESCRIPTION OF SCHEDULE / SCOPE OF WORK
AMENDMENT TO THE SCOPE OF WORK
Scope of Work will now include:
Task 2 - Draft Supplemental EIR
ESA will prepare an Administrative Draft Supplemental EIR for review by the City of
Temecula and the project team. The Administrative Draft SEIR will be prepared in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 15163 of the CEQA Guidelines. It will
include the above outlined specific CEQA-required sections and will incorporate the
balance of the CEQA sections contained in the original EIR by reference.
Notice of Preparation / Initial Study / Scoping
The City of Temecula will prepare a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study for the
proposed project to solicit input into the content of the SEIR, Based on our preliminary
knowledge of the project the following environmental issues will be identified in the Initial
Study/NOP as being evaluated in the SEIR: aesthetics, air quality, noise traffic and
biological resources. The City of Temecula is responsible for all CEQA and public
hearing noticing and advertising costs.
The following outline summarizes the proposed organization of the Draft SEIR:
Executive Summary: The executive summary is intended to encapsulate the entire
Draft SEIR in order to provide a quick understanding of the project's potential impacts. It
will identify, in an overview fashion, the proposed project under consideration and its
objectives including any design features of the project which will be implemented. The
executive summary will briefly discuss the environmental impacts associated with project
implementation (whether beneficial or adverse, significant as well as insignificant), and
will contain a summary analysis of the alternatives to the proposed project. In addition
the executive summary will provide an overview of the courts action and how each writ
of mandate issues will be addressed in the SEIR.
Section 1.0 - Introduction: The introduction will include the purpose of an SEIR and
procedural information. A detailed discussion of the Writ of Mandate and SEIR structure
will be included in the introduction as well as a summary of the incorporation by
reference process. In addition the introduction will summarize all of the impact analysis
contained in the original Draft EIR.
Section 2.0 -Project Description: The project description will be based on existing
information and include the project location and setting, site characteristics, project
objectives and the characteristics of the project. This section will also include the
requested permits and approvals for the proposed project. In addition, this section will
include a discussion of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects and
activities in the surrounding areas that will serve as the basis for the cumulative impact
analysis.
Section 3.0 - Environmental Impact Analysis: For each potentially significant issue
identified in the NOP/Initial Study, this section of the SEIR will include a discussion of the
environmental setting, project impacts, cumulative impacts, project design features, level
of significance before mitigation, mitigation measures, and the level of significance after
mitigation. The assessment of impacts will be consistent with CEQA requirements and
will utilize defined thresholds of significance to determine the impacts of the proposed
project. ESA will be responsible for the preparation of the technical analysis with regard
to the environmental issues identified in Task 3 below.
Section 4.0 - Alternatives: An alternative site will be evaluated in the draft SEIR.
Alternative site plan design schemes will be developed for the project, and will be
incorporated into the draft SEIR. For the purposes of this proposal, a total of one
alternative site in addition to the mandatory no project alternative will be considered in
this section of the SEIR. For each alternative, a description of the alternative,
consideration of the alternative's feasibility in relation to the basic objectives of the
project (established by the applicant and the City), and a comparative analysis of the
environmental impacts attributable to the alternative versus those associated with the
proposed project for each of the environmental categories discussed above will be
provided. Consideration of any further alternatives which may be required will result in
modifications to the project budget.
Section 5.0 - Long-term Implications of the Proposed Project: ESA will prepare the
following CEQA-required analysis sections: significant irreversible environmental
changes and growth-inducing impacts.
Section 6.0 - Persons and Organizations Consulted/References: ESA will prepare
this section of the SEIR to document all persons and sources that contributed to the
environmental analysis.
ESA will email individual EIR sections to the city as they are completed to expedite
document review. Subsequent to review by City and the project team of the
Screencheck Draft SEIR, ESA will prepare the Draft SEIR which incorporates final
changes. We assume that changes will be minimal due to early consultation with the
City, previous approval of technical reports by City personnel, and submittal of the
Screencheck Draft SEIR. This scope of work assumes two rounds of screen check Draft
SEIR review. Copies of the Draft SEIR, including technical appendices, will be provided
for distribution. ESA will prepare the Notice of Completion prior to public circulation of
the Draft SEIR and will assist the City in transmitting the required copies to the State
Clearinghouse and required agencies.
Task 3 - Final SEIR/Findings/Mitigation Monitoring
At the conclusion of the public review period, ESA will work with City to obtain all
comments received on the Draft SEIR. An Administrative Final SEIR containing
proposed responses to comments and revisions to the Draft SEIR, where required, will
be prepared once all comments are received. It is assumed that if required, the
applicant's technical consultants will provide any and all necessary input to the
responses to comment letters that may be required.
It is difficult to predict public reaction to.the Draft SEIR at this time. For the purposes of
this proposal, it is assumed that public reaction to the document will be limited to a
maximum of 20 comment letters. In the event that the public comments on the Draft
SEIR are greater than expected, ESA will meet with the city to adjust the work
program/budget as necessary. An Administrative Final SEIR will be submitted to the
City for review.
Upon incorporation of comments on -the Administrative Final SEIR, ESA will prepare a
Screencheck Final SEIR for submittal to the City and project team. ESA assumes that
comments on the Screencheck Final SEIR will be minimal, due to early consultation with
the City and the applicant when comments were received. This scope of work assumes
two rounds of screen check Final SEIR review.
Subsequent to City review of the Screencheck Final SEIR, ESA will prepare the Final
SEIR, including findings. It is understood that ESA would only prepare the Statement of
Overriding Considerations, which incorporates final changes, as an optional task. ESA
will assist the City in transmitting the required copies to the State Clearinghouse,
required agencies and commentators.
ESA will prepare a detailed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) in
accordance with Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines in response to any significant
environmental impacts that may be identified to result from the proposed development.
The MMRP will be submitted with the Draft SEIR and will be finalized once the FEIR is
certified.
Environmental Issues
Based on the knowledge of the project, the following specific issues will be evaluated
and addressed in the SEIR:
Landform and Aesthetics
The proposed project includes the construction of a new automobile dealership and may
result in substantial visual changes to the project area.
Tasks
Review the architectural and site plans design prepared for the proposed project.
Analyze the existing visual character of the project site. Compare the height and
massing of the proposed project with surrounding land uses and structures.
Discuss consistency of the proposed project with visual quality and design policies
and guidelines of the City General Plan and Adopted Harveston Specific Plan and
other plans and studies, as appropriate.
Evaluate the project site for potential nighttime light and glare impacts on nearby
uses.
Prepare a visual simulation of the proposed project from adjacent residential areas
Discuss measures included in the proposed project to mitigate potentially significant
visual impacts. As appropriate, identify additional or alternative measures to avoid or
reduce any potentially significant effects to a less-than-significant level.
Determine the significance of potential project impacts on the existing character of
the area.
Air Quality Analysis
Site preparation and construction activities, as well as operational characteristics, could
generate substantial short term temporary and long term operational emissions of
particulates and other criteria air pollutants that may exceed significance thresholds.
Stationary and mobile source emissions associated with the project may result in project
emissions that exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
thresholds of significance. These new emissions, added to existing sources of air
pollution and cumulative development planned for the area, could contribute to the
degraded air quality within the Air Basin.
Tasks
Review the local and regional climate, meteorology, and topography as they affect
the accumulation. or dispersion of pollutants
Identify federal, state, and local regulatory agencies responsible for air quality
management, and briefly summarize pertinent federal, state, and local air quality
policies, regulations and standards as they pertain to the proposed project site.
Summarize current air quality conditions and recent trends (last three years) in the
project area on the basis of the annual air quality monitoring data summaries
published by the Air Resources Board (ARB).
Discuss SCAQMD projections of future air quality trends over the life of the project
as presented in the most recent Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), and the
assumptions upon which the projections are based. Identify any policies or goals
embodied in the AQMP that would apply to the proposed project site.
Identify air pollutant-sensitive land uses or activities in the vicinity of the project site
or along roads providing access to the project site.
Describe the SCAQMD air quality impact significance thresholds for new
developments.
Discuss, at an appropriate level of detail, the potential for short-term emissions of
criteria air pollutants (those for which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has
established ambient air quality standards) generated by construction activities.
Use URBEMIS 2007, version 9.2 air quality model to prepare a daily inventory of
criteria air pollutant and carbon dioxide emissions for the proposed project.
Discuss the potential for air pollutant emissions from development in the project area
to adversely affect sensitive land uses or activities, or to impede attainment of state
or federal air quality goals.
Discuss conformance of the project with the AQMP, and determine whether identified
air quality impacts would meet any SCAQMD thresholds of significance.
Summarize statewide planning efforts relative to climate change and the generation
of greenhouse gas emissions, including Assembly Bill 32, Executive order S-01-07,
and the reporting and recommendations to date of the California EPA Climate Action
Team. Present discussion about how the California Code of Regulations Title 24
requires the construction of new energy efficient buildings that result in less
greenhouse gas emissions.
Identify the greenhouse gas analysis recommendations of the Association of
Environmental Professionals (AEP) as presented in its Alternative Approaches to
Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Climate Change in CEQA
Documents, recently finalized on June 29, 2007. Recommend AEP endorsed
feasible mitigation measures to help the proposed dealership reduce greenhouse
gas without any major project redesigns, such as encouraging recycling, landscaping
recommendations, increased building efficiency, use of energy efficient appliances,
use of highly efficient compact fluorescent lighting, worker carpooling, and pedestrian
friendly design features, to reduce the project's contribution to greenhouse gas
emissions.
Identify cumulative development in the area (i.e., development that has been
approved or is in-process) and discuss the potential for cumulative development to
adversely affect air quality or impede attainment of air quality goals.
Identify practical, feasible and clear measures to mitigate the adverse impacts of the
project on air quality that are identified in the analysis. Mitigation measures will be
developed in consultation with the Authority as appropriate.
Quantify project impacts and evaluate whether mitigation measures would reduce
the impacts below a level of significance. Identify the parties responsible for
implementing each measure. Incorporate standard mitigations provided by the City,
as appropriate. ESA has been listed by the California Climate Registry as a firm
qualified to perform baseline emission inventories for greenhouse gases. ESA has
been implementing greenhouse gas emissions analyses for the past eight months
and has responded to comments from local air districts and the state attorney
general.
Acoustical Analysis
Noise generated by construction activities and operational noise from the completed
project would increase noise levels as a result of an increase in local traffic and
operational activities. This analysis will be based on the traffic report and construction
equipment mix.
Tasks
Briefly describe and discuss existing major noise sources at the project site,
particularly the noise from adjacent roadways. Describe the existing noise
environment on the basis of up to four short-term measurements carried out by ESA
staff.
Briefly summarize state and local noise policies, regulations, and standards as they
pertain to the proposed project.
Identify noise-sensitive land uses or activities in the vicinity of the project site, and
along roads providing access to the project site, that would be affected by
development of the proposed project.
Discuss the potential for on-site construction activities to affect nearby residences
and other sensitive receptors. This discussion will be based upon proposed
construction activities and scheduling information provided by the applicant.
Otherwise, this discussion will be based upon peak noise levels generated by an
assumed standard mix of construction equipment and activities.
Using the Federal Highway Administration's Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model
(FHWA-RD-77-108), ESA will calculate existing, future base case (i.e., without the
project), future project case (i.e., with the project), roadside noise levels along road
segments that would be affected by motor vehicle traffic generated by the project, to
determine whether project vehicular traffic would adversely affect adjacent land uses.
Identify cumulative development in the project area (i.e., development that is under
formal consideration or has been approved, and discuss the potential for cumulative
development to adversely affect noise-sensitive land uses.
Identify practical, feasible and clear measures to mitigate the adverse impacts of the
projecton noise. Mitigation measures will be developed in consultation with the lead
agency and responsible agencies as appropriate.
Develop and discuss measures to mitigate potentially significant noise impacts.
Biological Assessment I MSHCP Conformance Report
ESA will use available information sources,
maps, habitat conversation plans and existing
project region to document existing biological
site. ESA will utilize the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) California
Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society's
Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California to develop a
list of threatened and endangered and other sensitive species with potential to occur
within, or in habitats adjacent to, the project area. ESA will also obtain official special
status species lists for the project area from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
including aerial photographs, topographic
biological and planning documents in the
resources onsite and in the vicinity of the
Tasks
ESA will conduct a field survey to detail vegetation and wildlife habitat in the project area
to identify the potential for special-status species, jurisdictional waters/wetlands and
other sensitive biological resources; including wildlife movement corridors, to be present
onsite. Potential special-status species that may be associated with habitats on, or
adjacent to, the project site include: burrowing owl, California Gnatcatcher, Quino
checker spot butterfly and other riparian bird species. For each special-status species
for which suitable habitat has been identified in the project area, the following specific
information will be collected or estimated:
Distribution and abundance onsite - observed or expected;
Historic and recent status within the area;
Habitat quality;
Ecology, behavior, and habitat requirements; and
Aspects of biology of each species which could be relevant to the proposed uses of
the project site
Once the above biological resources assessment is completed, it will be incorporated
into an MSHCP conformance report / HANS application for submittal to the RCA.
Traffic and Circulation
ESA will coordinate the traffic study to be prepared by DKS and will summarize findings
in the SEIR document. The traffic impact analysis will include an evaluation of
construction related and operational effects.
Tasks
DKS Associates (DKS) will prepare a traffic impact analysis (TIA) of the potential
traffic and circulation impacts related to the development of a new car full-service
dealership (proposed project). Based on a cursory trip generation analysis using trip
rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation, 7"
Edition, the proposed 65,561 square foot Mercedes Benz dealership would generate
approximately 2,186 daily trips, 134 a.m. peak hour trips, and 173 p.m. peak hour
trips on a typical weekday. For a typical Saturday, the proposed project would
generate approximately 1,379 daily trips and 195 peak hour trips.
The TIA will be prepared consistent with the requirements of the City of Temecula's
General Plan Circulation Element and the County of Riverside's current Traffic
Impact Analysis Preparation Guide. DKS will conduct a scoping session with the
City's Traffic Engineer prior to initiating the TIA to ensure that potential on-site
circulation impacts, off-site traffic impacts, and parking impacts are adequately
addressed in the TIA. For purposes of this scope of work, it is assumed that all new
roadway and intersection traffic counts will need to be collected. DKS will contract
with a qualified traffic count firm to collect 24-hour machine counts for up to four (4)
roadway segments; and weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic counts at up to
eight (8) intersections. Due to the upcoming holidays, traffic counts will not be
collected until the second week of January 2008.
The on-site circulation analysis will be based on the City's development standards
and will ensure that vehicles would have adequate and efficient circulation on-site.
The parking analysis will focus on the ability for the proposed project to meet the
parking requirements called for in the City's Municipal Code. For any significant
traffic or parking impacts created by the proposed project, DKS will work with the City
and the project development team to determine appropriate and feasible mitigation
measures. In addition, DKS will attend up to three (3) meetings in support of the TIA.
These meetings may include project team meetings, or public hearings.
Summarize the traffic analysis which is anticipated to include a description of project
area roadways, existing traffic volumes and intersection conditions, applicable plans
and policies, construction and operational impacts, and mitigation measures, if
required.
Cumulative Impacts
Implementation of the proposed project could contribute to cumulative impacts in the
region. 'Cumulative impacts and mitigation measures will be documented and will be
easily differentiated from project specific impacts and mitigation measures.
Tasks
Compile a list of projects in the project vicinity in cooperation with the City and county
and based on information provided in the traffic report.
Address the cumulative impacts of the proposed project in conjunction with other
uses, existing and proposed, in the surrounding area.
Identify measures that would reduce cumulative impacts of the project to the City.
Alternative Site Analysis
Pursuant to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, an alternative site or alternative
location to the currently proposed site/location will be identified, evaluated and compared
and contrasted with the impacts associated with the proposed project site.
Tasks
Clearly identify the process employed for selection of the alternative site and
document impacts associated with the alternative site for each environmental factor
contained in the original Draft EIR.
Document the environmental setting, and impacts associated with implementation of
the project at the alternative site. Identify any required mitigation measures.
Determine if implementation of the project at the alternative site will reduce or
eliminate impacts associated with the proposed project at its currently proposed
location.
If the alternative site does not reduce identified environmental effects and/or is not
feasible, provide the basis for rejection of the alternative.
Schedule
We understand that an aggressive schedule is required for this project and that
certification of the SEIR by the City will be the critical path for project scheduling
purposes. The Administrative Draft SEIR can be completed within two weeks of receipt
of the final land plan and all technical studies, if the applicant and ESA are confident that
no substantial changes to technical studies would occur in response to City comments.
The start to finish CEQA process for the SEIR is approximately 6 months. The following
schedule (Table 1) supports achievement of the major milestones of the project, and the
certification of the environmental documentation.
TABLE 7
SCHEDULE - FLETCHER JONES MERCEDES BENZ DEALERSHIP SEIR
TASK DURATION
Task 2-Draft SEIR Preparation
Prepare Administrative Draft SEIR and Technical Studies
8 weeks'
City/Project Team Review
2 week °
Prepare Screencheck Draft SEIR
2 week
City/Project Team Review
2 week °
Prepare Draft SEIR
1 weeks
Draft SEIR Public Review Period
45 days
Task 3 -Final SEIRIResponse to Comments
Prepare Administrative Final SEIR
3weeks
City/Project Team Review
1 week °
- Prepare Screencheck Final SEIR
0 week
City/Project Team Review
1 week °
Prepare Final SEIR
D week
Submit Final SEIR For Certification
1 day
' This preparation period is dependent on receipt of all documents and electronic information. Preparation of the
document may overlap with other tasks and sections will be submitted prior to completion of entire document,
in order to meet schedule requirements.
° This review period is just an estimate, dependent on City schedule.
` Assumes that technical report authors will provide responses to comments on respective technical issues
within two weeks.
° Initial work on technical reports will begin during the NOP process in order to save time. Technical reports will
be completed within about a week of receipt of traffic report.
ATTACHMENT "B"
COST
Cost Estimate
The following cost estimate (Table 2) has been prepared to outline estimated costs to
complete the above outlined tasks. Reimbursable expenses, including travel/parking,
etc. will be invoiced in accordance with ESA standard rate schedule.
Our services will be billed monthly on a time-and-materials basis. Should the need arise
for additional professional services beyond those set forth in the scope of services due
to revisions to the project, the regulatory environment, requirements exceeding our
specified budget allowances, ESA will only undertake such additional services upon
receipt of authorization by the City of Temecula.
TABLE 2
COST ESTIMATE - FLETCHER JONES MERCEDES BENZ DEALERSHIP SEIR
TASK
COST
Task 2 - Draft SEIR a
$ 37,500
Air Quality Assessment
$ 6,500
Acoustical Assessment
$ 5,500
Biological Assessment/ MSHCP Conformance Report
$ 13,500
Traffic Report
$ 29,200
Visual Simulation
$ 7,500
Task 3 - Final SEIR/Response to Comments / Mitigation Monitoring Program
$ 15,500
Reimbursable Expenses (in-house copying, mileage, postage, etc.) a $ 1,250
Document Reproduction - Assumes 75 Copies of DSEIR & 25 copies of the $ 9,750
Final SEIR & misc. reproduction
Total
$126,200
Cost Estimate assumes that the following will be provided by the city or applicant : topography, aerial imagery,
land plan, market study, grading and earthwork, preliminary hydrology, and Phase 1 Environmental Site
Assessment and hazardous materials assessment. Document reproduction. costs are variable, but can be
reduced if copies of all documents are provided by the. city's reproduction supplier which eliminates ESA's
standard mark up on printing expenses.
ITEM NO. 6
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Tim Thorson, Director of Information Systems
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Procurement of ShoreTel Phone System - Civic Center
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize
1. The purchase of ShoreTel Phone equipment for the total amount of $ 128,906.00, which
includes shipping and applicable sales tax.
2. The City Manager to approve contract change orders not to exceed the contingency amount
of $12,890.00, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
BACKGROUND: The City has been migrating from the existing legacy NEC PBX
telephone system to the ultra modern ShoreTel Voice over Internet Protocol (IP) (VOIP) system.
Remote City facilities, e.g., CRC, History Museum, Senior Center, etc. have already been scheduled
to receive the new phone system through the operating budget process. This purchase completes
the citywide phone upgrade, by procuring the phone system for the new Old Town Civic Center now.
Procuring and installing the phone system upgrade in the current City Hall this fiscal year will allow
the IS department to train staff on the new system well in advance of the move to the new Civic
Center and ensures a smooth transition when relocating City services to the new Civic Center. The
City's primary phone numbers will remain the same and the entire phone system will simply be
relocated to the new Civic Center when the new facility is ready.
ShoreTel VOI P phone equipment is available on the PEPPM Multistate Purchasing Contract. These
competitively, quoted prices are provided by Conduit Networks an authorized PEPPM contractor.
Under this agreement, it would be within the City's discretion to take advantage of the pricing on
another governmental entity contract. The contract is made available for use by State of California
agencies and any city, county or local governmental agency empowered to expend public funds.
Therefore, this purchase would be exempt from competitive bidding requirements. Staff's research
has determined that the PEPPM pricing is the most competitive. Also, it has been determined that
the PEPPM program is consistent with the City's procurement policies and regulations and that it is
used by many cities as an industry standard.
FISCAL IMPACT: This purchase is included in the Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E)
budget for the new Civic Center. The Civic Center project is included in the FY2009-2013 Cl P and
is funded with Capital Project Reserves and Certificates of Participation (COP's). Adequate funds
are available in the project account, No. 210-165-751-5601, for this request.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Quote from the PEPPM Public Sector Schedule
2. Project Location
3. Project Description
City of Temecula Shoretel Professional Services
for City Hall
~M 2,
0Etarn
IWIF", .1 etwo*5
SOLUTIONS FOR BUSINESS
Provided for:
Tim Thorson
City of Temecula Customer Account
Attn: Accounts Payable
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
Guy Reams
Conduit Networks Inc.
27247 Madison Ave, Suite 400
Temecula, CA 92590
www.conduitnetworks.com
main: 951.693.3000
fax: 951.296.0239
EPPH
Technology Bidding and
Purchasing Program
w .pePWn.org
Summary
City of Temecula needs to upgrade current phone system to Shoretel through a
Pre-Bid multistate bidding contract. This quotation is provided under the PEPPM
pre-bid contract for Shoretel Enterprise Phone Systems.
Proposed Objectives for City of Temecula Shoretel System for City
Hall
Obiective 1: Provide ShoreGear Switches
Investment. $17,329.50
Strategies:
■ ShoreGear 24A - 1 U full width, Max Capacities - 24 Analog extensions. No IP Phone or
trunk support. (requires Shore Tel 8 or later)
■ (2) ShoreGear T1 k - I U half width, Max Capacities - 1 T1, 0 IP phones, 0 Analog exts, 0
LS only trunks, 0 Universal ports. Digital trunk support only. Requires one Tray (SKU
10223) for every two units. (requires Shore Tel 8 or later)
■ (3) ShoreGear 90 - 1 U half width, Max Capacities - 90 IP phones, 4 Analog exts, 8 LS
trunks, 0 Universal ports. Not all maximum capacities can be reached at the same time.
Requires one Tray (SKU 10223) for every two units.
■ (3) Kit, rack mounting tray, for ShoreGear Switch 1 U half width, holds two 1 U half width
switches
Measure: Supply ShoreGear Switching Products to accomdate added users, and
analog devices
10/28/08 Breams greams@concluitnetworks.com
Objective 2: Provide ShorePhones
Investment: $44,460.00
Strategies:
■ (5) ShorePhone IP565 - Black (Version 7.5 build 12.13.1328 or later)
■ (12) ShorePhone IP560 - Black
■ (163) ShorePhone IP230 -Black (6.1 or later)
Measure: Supply phones to accomodate added users
Objective 3: Provide Shoretel Licensina
Investment: $39,803.08
Strategies:
■ ShoreWare Remote Web Reporting License (License to enable generation of CDR
reports via the web at remote locations)
■ (180) Extension & Mailbox License
■ (25) Extension-only License (requires Shore Tel 5.2 or higher)
■ Shoretel Warranty and Software Support
Measure: Supply software keys with shipment of product
Total Investment for City of Temecula Shoretel System for City Hall
Total: $109,466.00
(includes all applicable taxes and shipping)
As per PEPPM 2008 - www.peppm.org
Orders can be placed through PEPPM via:
www.epylon.org or FAX to 800-636-3779
Orders should be addressed to:
Archer Technology Group
c/o Conduit Networks Inc.
27247 Madision Ave Suite 400
Temecula, CA 92590
10/28/08 greams greams@conduitnetworks.com
1SPEPPAl'
Technology Bidding and
Purohaaing Program
viw "PPm.org
Summary
City of Temecula requires professional services for implementaiton of the Shoretel
Phone System through a Pre-Bid multistate bidding contract. This quotation is
provided under the PEPPM pre-bid contract for Shoretel Enterprise Phone Systems.
Proposed Objectives for City of Temecula Shoretel Professional
Services for City Hall
Investment. $19,440.00
Strategies:
■ (12) Full Day - PLUS T&E (92010)
Measure: Provide documentation, training, and system that meets IS department
approval upon completion of professional services
Total Investment for City of Temecula Shoretel Professional
Services for City Hall
Total: $19,440.00
(includes all applicable takes and shipping)
10/28/08 greams greams9conduitnetworks.com
ITEM NO. 7
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Aaron Adams, Assistant City Manager
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Approving an Amendment to the Riverside County Transportation Commission
Measure A Transportation Expenditure Plan (TIP)
PREPARED BY: Tamra Middlecamp, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council
1. Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE RIVERSIDE
COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION
EXPENDITURE PLAN
BACKGROUND: The Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation
Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance was approved by 78.9 percent of
voters in Riverside County in November of 1988. The purpose of Measure A is to help relieve traffic
congestion, increase safety, improve air quality, provide funds to match developers' fees and State
and local moneys for transportation and plan adequately for traffic by providing essential countywide
transportation improvements.
The Transportation Expenditure Plan (TIP) identifies State Highway 111 from Ramon Road to Indio
Boulevard as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State highway and
major regional road project funds are to be appropriated and expended. However, since the
passage of Measure A, the designation of Highway 111 has been changed as portions have been
relinquished by the State and are now maintained by local jurisdictions. Additionally, Highway 111
was realigned in the City of Palm Springs. These changes have created the necessity for the
adoption of an amendment to the TI P, as the TI P is no longer current as it applies to Highway 111.
Furthermore, in order for Measure A Highway Funds to be effectively expended to carry out the voter
intent for highway and roadway improvements, an amendment to the TIP is necessary.
The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) recently adopted a resolution initiating an
amendment to the Measure A Transportation Improvement Plan. Following such action, it was
determined that one of the descriptions for the new segments to be included within the Coachella
Valley portion of the TIP was incomplete. Specifically, the description provided in Section 2(A)(1) of
the resolution inadvertently left out the segment of Gene Autry Trail between East Palm Canyon
Drive and Ramon Road. Therefore, a revised resolution was adopted by RCTC on October 8, 2008.
In order for the amendment to the TIP to become effective, the Board of Supervisors of Riverside
County and a majorityof the cities within Riverside County constituting a majority of the incorporated
population must approve the proposed amendment. RCTC has requested that the City of Temecula
approve this amendment.
This amendment will add the segment of Gene Autry Trail to the TIP. It is not approving any
projects.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
ATTACHMENTS: Map.
RESOLUTION NO. -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the Riverside County Transportation Commission Transportation
Expenditure Plan and Retail Transaction and Use Tax Ordinance, Ordinance No. 88-1
("Measure A") was approved by 78.9 percent of the voters in Riverside County in
November of 1988; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of Measure A is to help relieve traffic congestion,
increase safety, improve air quality, provide funds to match developers' fees and State
and local moneys for transportation and plan adequately for traffic by providing essential
countywide transportation improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Transportation Expenditure Plan, also referred to as the
Transportation Improvement Plan ("TIP"), was attached as Exhibit B to Measure A and
was incorporated therein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the TIP identifies State Highway 111 from Ramon Road to Indio
Boulevard as one of the projects in the Coachella Valley for which Measure A State
highway and major regional road project funds are to be appropriated and expended
("Measure A Highway Funds"). A map depicting the then-current Highway 111
designation between Ramon Road to Indio Boulevard (the "Original Alignment") was
part of the TIP; and
WHEREAS, since the passage of Measure A, the designation of Highway 111
has been changed as portions of the Original Alignment have been relinquished by the
State and are now maintained by local jurisdictions. Additionally, Highway 111 was
realigned in the City of Palm Springs and now is located on Vista Chino Drive between
Indian Canyon Drive and Gene Autry Trail, as well as the segment of Gene Autry Trail
from Vista Chino Drive to East Palm Canyon Drive; and
WHEREAS, changes to the alignment of Highway 111 has raised questions
regarding the eligibility of segments relinquished by the State to local agencies for
Measure A Highway Funds. Furthermore, additional segments of Highway 111 not
included in the Original Alignment have been requested to be eligible for receipt of
Measure A Highway Funds; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 240302(d), the
TIP may only be amended by the following process:
(1 } Initiation of amendment by the commission, reciting findings of necessity
for the amendment.
(2) Approval by the Board of Supervisors.
(3) Approval by a majority of the cities constituting a majority of the
incorporated population.
WHEREAS, the changes to the designation of Highway 111 have created the
necessity for the adoption of an amendment to the TIP, as the TIP is no longer current
as it applies to Highway 111. Furthermore, in order for Measure A Highway Funds to be
effectively expended to carry out the voter intent for highway and roadway
improvements, an amendment to the TIP is necessary; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting on October 8, 2008, the Board of Directors of the
Riverside County Transportation Commission ("Commission Board") adopted a
resolution initiating an amendment to the TIP, including the required findings of
necessity for the amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula ("City Council") has
considered the proposed amendment, and approves said amendment to the TIP; and
WHEREAS, the Public Utilities Code section 240302, under which Measure A
and the TIP were adopted, states that generated tax revenues may be expended "for
the planning, environmental reviews, engineering and design costs, and related right-of-
way acquisition;" and
WHEREAS, the TIP states that the "scope of highway and commuter rail projects
to be implemented is to be determined through required environmental analysis and full
consideration of alternatives" including "public participation during the environmental
analysis process;" and
WHEREAS, the amendment to the TIP does not approve construction of any
transportation improvements but amends the TIP to reflect current conditions in the
Coachella Valley; and
WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15378(b)(4),
the amendment of the TIP is not a "project" subject to environmental review under the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because the amendment merely creates
a government funding mechanism and is not a commitment to any specific project; and
WHEREAS, under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15004, the
amendment of the TIP is not subject to CEQA because there is insufficient information
about the transportation improvements to conduct meaningful environmental review at
this time; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the TIP, all appropriate environmental review will be
completed prior to any future approval of a specific transportation improvement; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and
correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by reference as though
fully set forth herein.
Section 2. Approval of Amendment to the TIP. The City Council hereby approves the
following amendment to the TIP, as initiated by the Commission Board:
A. Inclusion of Segments to Coachella Valley Portion of TIP. That portion
of the TIP entitled "Coachella Valley" Section 1, entitled "State
Highways and Major Regional Road Project," of the aforementioned
portion of the TIP, shall be amended to include the segments of
highway, and/or roadway described below and as shown on the map
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference.
The total amount of funding allocated to the Coachella Valley shall not
be changed.
1. In Palm Springs, from the intersection of East Palm
Canyon Drive and Gene Autry Trail, north on Gene
Autry Trail to Vista Chino Drive, thence west on Vista
Chino Drive to North Palm Canyon Drive, thence
northerly on the existing Highway 111 alignment to
Interstate 10;
2. In Indio, from the crossing of Golf Center Parkway over
Indio Boulevard, northerly on Golf Center Parkway to
Interstate 10; and
3. In Indio, from the intersection of Highway 111 and Indio
Boulevard, southeasterly on Indio Boulevard and
Grapefruit Boulevard, the existing and former Highway
111 alignment, through the City of Coachella and
Riverside County to the intersection of State Route 195
(Avenue 66).
B. Revision to Map Included as Part of TIP. The map attached as part of
the TIP shall be amended to include those segments of highway and/or
roadway as shown in the map attached to this Resolution as Exhibit
"A.71
Section 3. Approval of Findings. The City Council hereby approves the findings of
the Commission Board related to adoption of the amendment to the TIP.
Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective on the date of its
adoption. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendment to the TIP set
forth herein shall not be effective unless and until approved by the Board
of Supervisors of Riverside County, and a majority of the cities within
Riverside County.
Section 5. Notice of Exemption. The City Council hereby finds that adoption of this
Resolution is not subject to CEQA and authorizes and directs City staff to
file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk of Riverside County and
the State Clearinghouse within five (5) days following adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008.
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA }
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
Exhibit A
Vlap depicting new segments of highway and/or roadway to be included in the TIP
DESERT HOT
SPRINGS
;et
Dillon Rd
A v 4 4
1 3
~
s
m
1
Ga
CATHEDRAL
- z CITY
a'
Ysta Chino.
E
E
Ramon Rtl
A
8
Geraltl Fortl Dry
a
I '
ei
m
c
PALM SPRINGS
Fr
ank Sinatra Dr
3
8
rv cwhDm PALM
C
& DESERT
'
RANCHO
a
-
MIRAGE
-d .
.d.. D,
I
-IO
INDIAN
"TLLS
m
` Av....5A
3
COACHELLA
Ae.es
LA QIHNTA
Aimort Diva
Mecca
66th Ave
SALTON
SEA
Miles
0 1.5 3 6 9 12
Legend
Original Highway 111
-Alignment - 1988
Highway 111
Ramon Rd to Indio Blvd
Highway 111
1-10 to Ramon Rd
Indio Blvd to 1-10
Highway 111
Indio Blvd to State Highway 195
Highway Routes
Major Roads
N
W +E
S
Map by
Nicholas Peihl,
Coachella Valley
Association of Governments
Disdaimen Maps and data are to be used for reference purposes only. Map features are approximate, and are not necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering standards. CVAG makes no warranty or guarantee as to the content (the source is often third
party), accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any of the data provided, and assumes no legal responsibility for the informafion contained on this map. Any use of this product with respect to accuracy and precision shall be the sole responsibility of the user.
ITEM NO. 8
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Southern California Edision and Time Warner Cable Easements within
Margarita Park
PREPARED BY: Cathy McCarthy, Development Services Administrator
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Grant an Easement to Southern California Edison for construction, operation and
maintenance of facilities within Margarita Park;
2. Grant an Easement to Time Warner Cable for construction, operation and
maintenance of facilities within Margarita Park.
BACKGROUND: The City Council approved a Ground Lease Agreement for the YMCA
of Riverside City and County, Inc. on January 14, 2003. The first amendment to this agreement was
approved January 8, 2008. The Ground Lease Agreement and the First Amendment allows the
YMCA to construct a recreational facility within Margarita Park.
The development plan for the YMCA facility was approved by the Planning Commission on April 4,
2007. Grading began in January. The approval of this easement will allow Southern California
Edison and Time Warner Cable access to construct and maintain service to the YMCA building.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS: Southern California Edison Grant of Easement
Time Warner Cable Grant of Easement
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
SOUnl[RN CALnORMA
EDISON
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY
Corporate Real Estate
14799 Chestnut Street
Westminster, CA 92683-5240
Attn: Distribution/TRES
NON-
EXCLUSIVE
GRANT OF
EASEMENT
ABOVE
DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX$NONE (VALUE
AND CONSIDERATION LESS THAN $100.00)
San Jacinto Valley
6477.2000
8-2247
6777.2590
74526
SCE Company
SIG. OF DECIARANT OR AGENT DETERMINING TA% FIRM. NAME
EIM 490-1725-1
APN : 921-300006
APPROVED:
CORPORATE
REAL ESTATE
SLS/BT
By
10/O6/08
- 77 -
CITY OF TEMECULA, a general law city (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), hereby grants to SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, a corporation, its successors and assigns (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"), a non-
exclusive easement and right of way to construct, use, maintain, operate, alter, add to, repair, replace, reconstruct, inspect and
remove at any time and from time to time underground electrical supply systems and communication systems (hereinafter
referred to as "systems"), consisting of wires, underground conduits, cables, vaults, manholes, handholes, and including above-
ground enclosures, markers and concrete pads and other appurtenant fixtures and equipment necessary or useful for distributing
electrical energy and for transmitting intelligence by electrical means, in, on, over, under, across and along that certain real
property in the County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows:
FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE EXHIBIT "A°ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF.
FOR SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND
MADE A PART HEREOF.
This legal description was prepared pursuant to Sec. 8730(c) of the Business & Professions Code.
Grantor agrees for himself, his heirs and assigns, not to erect, place or maintain, nor to permit the erection, placement or
maintenance of any building, planter boxes, earth fill or other structures except walls and fences on the above described real
property. The Grantee, and its contractors, agents and employees, shall have the right to trim or cut tree roots as may endanger
or interfere with said systems and shall have free access to said systems and every part thereof, at all times, for the purpose of
exercising the rights herein granted; provided, however, that in making any excavation on said property of the Grantor, the
Grantee shall make the same in such a manner as will cause the least injury to the surface of the ground around such excavation,
and shall replace the earth so removed by it and restore the surface of the ground to as near the same condition as it was prior to
such excavation as is practicable.
EXECUTED this day of , 2008.
GRANTOR: CITY OF TEMECULA,
a municipal corporation
Michael S. Naggar
Mayor
Attest:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
Approved As to Form:
Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
October 06, 2008
Sheet I of 1
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
EASEMENTS IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
BEING A CERTAIN PORTION OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF
RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING THE PORTION OF LOT 14 AS SHOWN ON TRACT MAP NO.
3334, FILED IN BOOK 54, PAGES 25 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER, OF SAID COUNTY, INCLUDED WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 12.00 FEET WIDE, 6.00
FEET SOUTHWESTERLY AND 6.00 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF THE REFERENCE LINE WHICH IS
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 14, ALSO BEING A POINT IN THE
SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARGARITA ROAD (88.00 FEET WIDE);
THENCE LEAVING SAID CORNER SOUTH 34054'52" WEST A DISTANCE OF 273.00 FEET TO A POINT IN
THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 14;
THENCE LEAVING SAID POINT SOUTH 55005'08" EAST A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING, HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A";
THENCE SOUTH 55005'08" EAST A DISTANCE OF 16.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINATION.
ALSO A STRIP OF LAND 6.00 FEET WIDE, THE CENTERLINE OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE AFORE DESCRIBED POINT "A";
THENCE NORTH 34°54'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 6.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT;
"THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT SOUTH 55°05'08" EAST 5.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH 34°35'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT;
THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT NORTH 81003'37" EAST A DISTANCE OF 150.53 FEET TO AN
ANGLE POINT;
THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT NORTH 37°43'20" EAST A DISTANCE OF 13.40 FEET TO THE
POINT OF TERMINATION.
THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP ARE TO BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED TO JOIN AT THE ANGLE
POINTS.
CONTAINS: 2,375.58 SQ. FT. 0.055 ACRES, MORE OR LESS
SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.
EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED AND HERETO BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
THIS WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION.
Dated: ne, 2008
Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E,#18619 Exp. 6-30-09
O QQ,OFESS/~~Q
No. G-18616 n
Exp - -6,~
s~gTF C'/ V 1 ~ O
DSE08213353
6477-2000/8-2247
6777-2590/7-2526
SCALE: 1" = 200'
EXHIBIT "B"
Pao aqF <
No, 0-1866119
Exp...--.ua~sfr
\F 0/v OF CF~~\F
. r -
A OARIT AD
C7 A RO
S1 TE
I
VICINITY MAP I
EXISTING
Nor ro / L BUILDING
1
i
DETAIL AREA
SEE SHEET 2 OF 2
/ Iz
i L oIOO
7 LEASE PROPERTY BOUNDARY YMCA p ci
/ PER MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE
111.. RECORDED 07/11/2008 ~If
DOC. #2008-0380475, O.R.
ham/ RIVERSIDE COUNTY
LOT 14
TRACT NO. 3334
M.B. 54 / 25-30
i
/ RIVERSIDE COUNTY
i
i
/ PROPERTY
BOUNDARY
i
N88'23'it"E
LINE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
L1
123.00'
N81-55'10"W
CURVE TABLE
kEji~
LENGTH
RADIUS
DELTA
270.00'
2044.00'
07'34'06"
LEGEND
r-l DENOTES
L~J SCE EASEMENT AREA
APPROX. AREA = 2375.58 SQ. FT.
P.O.C. = POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
T.P.O.B. = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
SHEET 1 OF 2
Dated: ,2008
Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09
\ nB
EXHIBIT n SHEET 2 OF 2
~70G°~~i Cpl ~ ~ ~
SCALE: 1" = 50'
Ll R R 17'
li 0
NW COR. LOT 14
(P.O.C.) .
N37 43 20"E
PROPERTY 13 40':
BOUNDARY 53'
37 __15053~J_- v--'/
//It
00/~ i hs•
,.S\ ry00~ j /
a
4
LOT 14
41 TRACT NO. 3334
h`1' / M.B. 54 / 25-30
a~ RIVERSIDE COUNTY
i i S55'05'08"E
~ss3s \ 4 T.P.O.B.
as 8F S55'05'08"E ~QFCSSjp
16.00'
//POINT "A,
No. 13-18619 ~
/ C LEASE PROPERTY BOUNDARY YMCA E x p ~ -
PER MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE ,e
/ \ \ RECORDED 07/11/2008 J'
\ DOC. #2008-0380475, O.R.
\ \ RIVERSIDE COUNTY ~TF 0 \06~~
\ C Ei~
-EXISTING
BUILDING A
A V Dated: ~ ,2008
III' \
r7 DENOTES
G_J SCE EASEMENT AREA
APPROX. AREA = 2375.58 SQ. FT.
P.O.C. =POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
T.P.O.S. = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
! TIME WARNER CABLE
44 THE POWER OF YOU-
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
TIME WARNER CABLE
Time Warner Cable Business Services
3430. E. Miraloma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92806
IHI1 LlNhtux
GRANT OF EASEMENT
CITY OF TEMECULA, a general law city (hereinafter referred to as Grantor"), hereby grants
to TIME WARNER CABLE Inc., a Corporation, its successors and assigns (hereinafter referred to as
"Grantee"), a non-exclusive easement and right of way to construct, use, maintain, operate, alter, add
to, repair, replace, reconstruct, inspect, and remove at any time and from time to time underground
communication systems (hereinafter referred to as "systems"), consisting of wires, underground
conduits, cables, vaults, manholes, handholes, and including above-ground enclosures, markers and
concrete pads and other appurtenant fixtures and equipment necessary or useful for said
communication systems, in, on, under, across and along that certain real property in the City of
Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows:
SEE LEGAL DESCRIPTION ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT "A" and EXHIBIT "B"
Grantor agrees for himself, his heirs and assigns, not to erect, place or maintain, nor to permit
the erection, placement or maintenance of any building, planter box, earth fill, or other structures
except walls and fences on the above described real property. The Grantee, and its contractors,
agents and employees, shall have the right to trim or cut tree roots as may endanger or interfere with
said systems and shall have free access to said systems and every part thereof, at all times, for the
purpose of exercising the rights herein granted; provided, however, that in making any excavation of
said property of the Grantor, the Grantee shall make the same in such a manner as will cause the least
injury to the surface of the ground around such excavation, and shall replace the earth so removed by
it and restore the surface of the ground to as near the same condition as it was prior to such
excavation as is practicable.
It is understood and agreed that the above description is approximate only, including the intention of
the Grantor(s) to grant an easement for said systems as constructed. The centerline of the easement
shall be coincidental with the centerline of said systems as constructed in, on, over, under, across and
along the Grantor(s) property.
EXECUTED the day of 2008.
GRANTOR: CITY OF TEMECULA,
A municipal corporation
Michael S. Naggar
Mayor
Attest:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
Approved As to Form;
Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
October 06, 2008
Sheet 1 of 1
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
EASEMENTS IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
BEING A CERTAIN PORTION OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF
RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING THE PORTION OF LOT 14 AS SHOWN ON TRACT MAP NO.
3334, FILED IN BOOK 54, PAGES 25 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER, OF SAID COUNTY, INCLUDED WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 12.00 FEET WIDE, 6.00
FEET SOUTHWESTERLY AND 6.00 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF THE REFERENCE LINE WHICH IS
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 14, ALSO BEING A POINT IN THE
SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF MARGARITA ROAD (88.00 FEET WIDE);
THENCE LEAVING SAID CORNER SOUTH 34054'52" WEST A DISTANCE OF 273.00 FEET TO A POINT IN
THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID LOT 14;
THENCE LEAVING SAID POINT SOUTH 55°05'08" EAST A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO THE TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING, HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A";
THENCE SOUTH 55°05'08" EAST A DISTANCE OF 16.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINATION.
ALSO A STRIP OF LAND 6.00 FEET WIDE, THE CENTERLINE OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE AFORE DESCRIBED POINT "A";
THENCE NORTH 34054'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 6.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT;
THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT SOUTH 55°05'08" EAST 5.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH 34035'52" EAST A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT;
THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT NORTH 81003'37" EAST A DISTANCE OF 150.53 FEET TO AN
ANGLE POINT;
THENCE LEAVING SAID ANGLE POINT NORTH 37°43'20" EAST A DISTANCE OF 13.40 FEET TO THE
POINT OF TERMINATION.
THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP ARE TO BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED TO JOIN AT THE ANGLE
POINTS.
CONTAINS: 2,375.58 SQ. FT. 0.055 ACRES, MORE OR LESS
SUBJECT TO ALL COVENANTS, RIGHTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD.
EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED AND HERETO BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
THIS WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION.
Dated: 2008
z
Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09
N M eq~~~~~
2
No. C-18619 m a
* Expfn_ 09
Nq-
\F of
DSE08213353
6477-2000/8-2247
6777-2590/7-2526
mcgN~um
SCALE: 1" = 200'
EXHIBIT "B"
SHEET 1 OF 2
VAOARITA ROAD
I \ 'c"
r L1
~1
SITE I x I
~ I I
EXISTING I t
/ LBUILDING - - J
VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE
I
DETAIL AREA I
5 SEE SHEET 2 OF 2
iZ
°1000
LEASE PROPERTY BOUNDARY YMCA 9 Eli
PER MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE -4N
RECORDED 07/11/2008 1f
DOC. #2008-0380475, O.R. I
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
a ~ 1
LOT 14 i
TRACT NO. 3334
M.B. 54 If 25-30
/ RIVERSIDE COUNTY t
i I
i
/ PROPERTY t
BOUNDARY 1
N88'_23'11"E ---~I
LLL _ - - - 1207.4s;
LINE TABLE
UNE
LENGTH
BEARING
L1
123.00'
N81.55'10"W
CURVE TABLE
CURVE
LENGTH
RADIUS
DELTA ANGLE
C1
270.00'
2044.00'
07'34'06"
I EGEND
DENOTES
® SCE EASEMENT AREA
APPROX. AREA = 2375.58 SO. FT.
P.O.C. = POINT OF COMMENCEMENT
T.P.O.B. = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
Q`<v~Q1 M. No. C-18619 a
* Exp~i7 rt
sT CIV1~-
4F OF CA6\
Dated: 0df i,4.2008
Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09
\ \ EXHIBIT "Bn SHEET 2 OF 2
U Q Lr-t um ` \ \
SCALE: 1 ° = 50'
\ NIARGA~
~ A -
ROAD
> NW CDR. LOT 14
(P.O.C.) -
'
N37'43'20"E
PROPERTY 13 40 >
BOUNDARY N81 03'3-7"E --5 yrJ,
L' y
kY
0~v f>~ ~
^j~// r4> 1' 1
a' LOT 14
,i
TRACT NO. 3334
M.B. 54 / 25-30
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
?boo
o [
p.> S55'OS'OS°E
5.00'
/'Sbs ooh T.P.O.B.
CoD5'08'E oQROFESS/pN9C
~F T 5
16
//POINT °A" M. @ F
No. C-1861
9
LEASE PROPERTY BOUNDARY YMCA Exp PER MEMORANDUM OF GROUND LEASE
RECORDED 07/11/2008 DOC. #2008-0380475, O.R. V 1L RIVERSIDE COUNTY pF CANG ING \ -
\ Dated: 4 ,2008
. \
LEGEND
I?7 DENOTES /
EZ SCE EASEMENT AREA /
APPROX. AREA = 2375.58 SO. FT.
P.O.C. = POINT OF COMMENCEMENT /
T.P.O.B. = TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING / Glenn M. Bakke R.C.E. #18619 Exp. 6-30-09
7"'~
ITEM NO. 9
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) - Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA)
PREPARED BY: Julie Dauer, Sr. CIP Specialist
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council
1. Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA TO APPROVE THE COOPERATIVE WORK
AGREEMENT EXTENSION REQUEST OF THE LOCAL AGENCY-
STATE AGREEMENT FOR THE 2006/2007 BICYCLE
TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT PROJECT KNOWN AS THE
SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND
INTERCONNECT
BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula was approved for 2006/2007 Bicycle
Transportation Account (BTA) funding for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension and
Interconnect project. On September 12, 2006 the City Council adopted a resolution approving the
Local Agency-State Agreement for the 2006/2007 Bicycle Transportation Account for the planning
and preliminary engineering of the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect
project and authorized William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works to execute the agreement. The
original State Agreement required that all work be completed, a final accounting of actual project
costs and a written request for payment be submitted by April 1, 2009. The State shall in turn pay
the local agency the BTA share of the actual costs of the project prior to June 30, 2009, the
expiration date of the BTA funds awarded to this project.
The Department of Public Works is in the process of procuring a consultant agreement for the
planning and preliminary engineering of this project, however it is unlikely that services can be
rendered and completed and actual costs of work performed submitted for reimbursement prior to
the BTA deadlines. Therefore, we are requesting a Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA) to extend
the terms of the original Local Agency-State Agreement for the 2006/2007 Bicycle Transportation
Account, Cycle 6. Government Code Section 16304.3 requires that the extension of budget authority
beyond the normal appropriation period be accomplished through Cooperative Work Agreements
(CWA's) approved by the Department of Finance. The process requires involvement from local
agencies, Department of Finance, State Controller's Office and the California Department of
Transportation (Accounting, Budgets and Local Assistance).
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no change to our original commitment as originally stated in
our approval of the Local Agency-State Agreement for the 2006/2007 Bicycle Transportation
Account project. The City has been awarded a total of $395,000 in BTA funds and has committed a
minimum of $75,000 in local funds for the implementation of project planning and preliminary
engineering for this project. The total estimated project costs remain at $470,000 according to our
Capital Improvement Program for FY2009-2013. If the project costs exceed the original estimate it
will be the responsibility of the city to provide sufficient local funds to finance the excess. In the event
the final costs are less than the estimate the BTA funds will be decreased in relationship to the
percent funded by the BTA program. According to our project application and local agency-state
agreement the project funding percentages are as follows: BTA funds $395,000 (84.04%) and local
funds $75,000 (15.96%).
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2008 -
Cooperative Work Agreement Spreadsheet - Cycle 6
RESOLUTION NO. -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA TO APPROVE THE COOPERATIVE
WORK AGREEMENT EXTENSION REQUEST OF THE
LOCAL AGENCY-STATE AGREEMENT FOR THE
2006/2007 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ACCOUNT
PROJECT KNOWN AS THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK
BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE
AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, under the provisions of Streets and Highways Code Section 2106
(b) and Sections 890 through 894.2, as implemented by regulations in Title 21, Divisions
2, Chapter 10 of the California Administrative Code, funds have been allocated to the
City of Temecula for the project planning and preliminary engineering of a Bicycle
Transportation Account project known as the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail
Extension and Interconnect, and
WHEREAS, under provisions of the California Administrative Code, the State
(Department of Transportation) is required to enter into an agreement with the local
agency (City of Temecula) relative to design standards, the handling and accounting of
funds, time for completion, and all other phases of the project; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 16304.3 requires that the extension of
budget authority beyond the normal appropriation period be accomplished through
Cooperative Work Agreements (CWA's) approved by the Department of Finance (DOF).
This process requires involvement from Local Agencies, DOF, and State Controller's
Office (SCO) and the Department (Accounting, Budgets and Local Assistance).
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula is required to submit a Cooperative Work
Agreement requesting an extension for unspent encumbered budget authority be
completed and submitted to the Department of Transportation by November 17, 2008,
attention District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE).
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula as follows:
Section 1. Approves the Cooperative Work Agreement (CWA) extension
request for the Local Agency-State Agreement Bicycle Transportation Account,
Agreement No. BTA 06/07-08-RIV-04 for the project planning and preliminary
engineering for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect
project.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008.
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA }
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
Local Assistance Projects
Bicycle Transportation Account
CWA Cycle 6
Budget Aullwrlty Lapsing June 30, 2008
(As of July 31, 2008)
Dist 8-Temecula
Y
rA no.
Xst
gency Nate
roton, Ttle
tDex ar
noal Peet Amain
(n FYI -
E.ntnda-
lJmunt
fafl
u4iqudatec
E-b-,
ea'eme
(for FYI
Nit, Balame
ud: be bled
to Caltrm
egi a CvIAI
1s p,olert
annum
w/worw scope
Rv,x of
7
elay
Code
mson for Bela
Identify any
Impe-,us roc
C
v6N Rroyrr
be
Car0cm
Ydthm
Ext"W7
ano of Leal Agency
ProA*nd IMO
daGmul CCmnents
200607
BTA 06107-08-RIV-04
08
City of Temecula
Santa Gertrudis
Preliminary engineering of a Class I
$395,000
$0
$395,000
06130/2010
Yes
Yes
9
The location of our trail project is directly influenced by a new
None anticipated
Yes
William G. Hughes
We have completed an RFP
Creek Bicycle
Trail Extension
Bikeway along Santa Gertrudis
Creek from Diaz Road to Yner
interchange along Interstate 15. The new interchange could have
created significant conflicts and uncertainties relative to the trail
Director of Public
Works
process review and have selected
a consultant for the planning and
and Interconn
Road.
location. The interchange is subject to Federal Highway
preliminary engineering of this
Administration (FHWA) approvals which are out of the City's
project, We are prepared to awardi
control. We have recently resolved the new interchange design
the consultant agreement at our
issues and we anticipate FHWA approval within the next few
regular City Council Meeting of
months which will allow us to complete the trail design. We
November 25, 2008.
therefore request an extension of our agreement so that we may
fulfill our obligation to commit to the planning and preliminary
Our signed CWA will be forwarded
engineering of our Santa Gertrudls Creek Bicycle Trail Extension
to the attention of the DIAE upon
and Interconnect project.
approval from our Council on
November 25, 2008.
TOTAL # OF BTA PROJECrs:
1
TOTALS:
E395 000
D
5395 000
Signature of Approving Agency's Board or Council:
Michael S. Naggar
Print Name: Mayhr
Date: nM.mM.x au,x
Susan W.2ones • MMC, Peter M. Thorson
City Clerk City Attorney
ITEM NO. 1 0
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman, Inc. for the
Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail Extension and Interconnect;
Project No. PW08-04
PREPARED BY: Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works - CIP
Kendra Hannah-Meistrell, Assistant Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Approve the Professional Engineering Services Agreement with Hall & Foreman, Inc.
for an Alignment Study and Design for the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail
Extension and Interconnect, Project No. PW08-04, in the amount of $246,865.00;
2. Authorize the City Manager to approve Extra Work Authorizations not to exceed the
contingency amount of $24,686.50, which is equal to 10% of the agreement amount.
BACKGROUND: In December 2005, the Public Works Department applied for Bicycle
Transportation Account (BTA) grant funds to perform planning and preliminary engineering of the
Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle/Trail Extension and Interconnect Project. On July 31, 2006, the State
funds were approved in the amount of $395,000 with a City contribution of $75,000 (15.96%). On
September 12, 2006, the City Council adopted resolution no. 06-79 entitled, "Resolution of the City
Council of the City of Temecula approving the Local Agency-State Agreement for the 2006/2007
Bicycle Transportation Account project known as the Santa Gertrudis Creek Bicycle Trail Extension
and Interconnect'.
The project will extend the existing Class I Bike Lane/Multipurpose Trail within Santa Gertrudis
Creek from Ynez Road to Diaz Road, thereby closing a 5,500' gap in the City's bike/trail system.
The attached agreement includes preliminary/final engineering and environmental professional
services in accordance with BTA guidelines and the Local Agency-State Agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail Extension and
Interconnect, Project No. PW08-04, is a Capital Improvement Project funded with a Bicycle
Transportation Account (BTA) Grant and Capital Project Reserves. Sufficient funds are available in
the project account (Account No. 210-165-739-5802) for this $271,551.50 request, which includes
the agreement amount of $246,865.00 plus a 10% contingency of $24,686.50.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map
Project Description
Professional Engineer Services Agreement
0
z
a
z
c
Z
w
F-
x
w
J
Q
W
J
U
U
m
Z
Q
N
w
0
w
a
w
w
U
N
D F-
~U
~w
~z
wz
~O
Q~
w
Z
N
NZ
F-
0
L.
CL
o~
a~
c ~
v~
0
a
b
x
Q
O
O
0
0
O
N
N
O
O
O
v
v,
O
U
~
py
O
as
0
c4f)
H
a
to
~
5
.5
4
P
71
~
.
O
N
O
rq
r.l
N
rj
cd
W
ri
~,vj
N
O
rI
N
O
~ ~
~
~
64
64
W
N . ~C
U
~
N
U
.
s
~
rl
U
to
fq
cf)
o
0
4
.
Cos
4
N
U
N
0
Q
~
O
r
c~
A
Cd
W
o
~
c
O
.--a
CA
N
O
O
0
0
O
U
O
O
C
O
O
~
N
~
?
.
N
N
O
O
N
O
C/
~
cd
O
z
O
Ri
'
7
ON
M
C
D-
r-
'
O"
a
N
n5
j
r
V j
~
U
~
as
94
O
+
b9
b9
64
b4
b9
W W
°
F-I
L
~
,
y
~
N
~r
a
p
o
o
o
w
co~
v
H!
o
~
o
~
CL
L6
U
c
D
CL
C
y
m
.
i
~
L
~
~
~
v
~
~
N
O
~
.Ur
U
a3
O
~
a
a
o
o
m
a
Q
N
~
¢
h
a
r
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER SERVICES BETWEEN THE
CITY OF TEMECULA
AND HALL & FOREMAN, INC.
SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND
INTERCONNECT, PW08-04
THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of November 25, 2008, between the
City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation, and Hall & Foreman, Inc. ("Consultant"). In
consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as
follows:
1. TERM. This Agreement shall commence on November 25, 2008, and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later
than December 31, 2009, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this
Agreement.
The City may, upon mutual agreement, extend the Agreement for three (3) year
additional term(s). In no event shall the Agreement be extended beyond three (3) years.
If Agreement is extended beyond the original term, the Agreement price shall be
adjusted at the beginning of each calendar year in accordance with the changes in the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) for all Urban Consumers in the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside
Area, published monthly by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.
2. SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the services and tasks described and set
forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Consultant
shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in
Exhibit A.
3. PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all time faithfully, competently and to the
best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant
shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons
engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its
obligations under this Agreement.
4. PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor
Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per
diem wages, and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft,
classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Agreement from the Director of the
Department of Industrial Relations. Copies may be obtained from the California Department of
Industrial Relations internet website at http://www.dir.ca.gov. Consultant shall provide a copy of
prevailing wage rates to any staff or sub-contractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing
wage rates as a minimum. Consultant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8,
1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of
the Labor Code, Consultant shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of $50.00 for each
calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than
the stipulated prevailing rates for any work done under this Agreement, by him or by any
subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of the Agreement.
5. PAYMENT.
a. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the
payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates
and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in
full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B, other than the
payment rates and schedule of payment, are null and void. This amount shall not exceed Two
Hundred Forty Six Thousand, Eight Hundred Sixty Five Dollars and No Cents
($246,865.00) for the total term of the Agreement, unless additional payment is approved as
provided in this Agreement.
b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in
connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth
herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the
City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and
in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written
authorization is given to Consulant for the performance of said services.
C. The City Manager may approve additional work up to ten percent (10%)
of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall the total sum of the Agreement exceed
thirty thousand dollars and no cents, ($30,000.00), or the amount approved by City Council.
Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council.
d. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.
Invoices shall be submitted between the first and fifteenth business day of each month, for
services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of
receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the City disputes any of Consultant's fees,
it shall give written notice to Consulant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any
disputed fees set forth on the invoice. For all reimbursements authorized by this Agreement,
Consultant shall provide receipts for all reimbursable expenses in excess of fifty dollars ($50) in
such form as approved by the Director of Finance.
6. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE.
a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend
or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant, at least ten
(10) days prior, written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately
cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends
or terminates a portion of this Agreement, such suspension or termination shall not make void or
invalidate the remainder of this Agreement.
b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the
City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination,
provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement
pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City, pursuant to Section 5
above.
DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT.
a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement
shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of
this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for
any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by
written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the
2
performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and
without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default.
b. If the City Manager, or his delegate, determines that the Consultant is in
default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the
Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have ten (10) days after
service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory
performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time,
the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate
this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may
be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement.
8. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to
sales, costs, expenses, receipts, and other such information required by the City that relate to
the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records
of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records
shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be
clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the
representatives of the City, or its designees, at reasonable times, to such books and records,
shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make
transcripts there from as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents,
proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting
documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment.
b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this
Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing
data generated for the work, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of
providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole
property of the City, and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the
permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files containing data generated for the
work, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City,
the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling,
transferring and printing computer files.
C. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall
not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a
location other than that specified in Exhibit A, without the written consent of the Consultant.
9. INDEMNIFICATION.
a. Indemnity for Professional Services. In the connection with its
professional services, Consultant shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify City, District,
and/or Agency, and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants, designated volunteers,
and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City, District, or Agency officials,
(collectively, "Indemnitees"), from any claim, demand, damage, liability, loss, cost or expense
(collectively, "claims"), including but not limited to death or injury to any person and injury to any
property, arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to the negligence, recklessness, or willful
misconduct of Consultant or any of its officers, employees, sub-consultants, or agents in the
performance of its professional services under this Agreement. Consultant shall defend the
Indemnities in any action or actions filed in connection with any such claims with counsel of City,
3
District and/or Agency's choice, and shall pay all costs and expenses, including actual
attorney's fees, incurred in connection with such defense.
b. Other Indemnities. In connection with all claims not covered by
Paragraph A, Consultant shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify the City, District, and/or
Agency, and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants, designated volunteers, and
agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City, District or Agency officials,
(collectively, "Indemnitees"), from any claim, demand, damage, liability, loss, cost or expense
(collectively, "claims"), including but not limited to death or injury to any person and injury to any
property, arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to Consultant's performance of this Agreement.
Consultant shall defend Indemnitees in any action or actions filed in connection with any such
claims with counsel of City, District and/or Agency's choice, and shall pay all costs and
expenses, including actual attorney's fees, incurred in connection with such defense.
10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the
duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to
property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by
the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees.
a. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1) Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability form No.
CG 00 01 11 85 or 88.
2) Insurance Services Office Business Auto Coverage form CA 00
01 06 92 covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). If the
Consultant owns no automobiles, a non-owned auto endorsement
to the General Liability policy described above is acceptable.
3) Workers' Compensation Insurance as required by the State of
California, and Employer's Liability Insurance. If the Consultant
has no employees while performing under this Agreement,
Workers' Compensation Insurance is not required, but Consultant
shall execute a declaration that it has no employees.
4) Professional Liability Insurance shall be written on a policy form
providing professional liability for the Consultant profession.
than:
b. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less
1) General Liability: One million ($1,000,000) per occurrence for
bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial
General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate
limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply
separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit
shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
2) Automobile Liability: One million ($1,000,000) per accident for
bodily injury and property damage.
3) Workers' Compensation as required by the State of California;
Employer's Liability: One million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident
for bodily injury or disease.
4) Professional Liability Coverage: One million ($1,000,000) per
claim and in aggregate.
4
C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured
retentions must be declared to and approved by the City Manager. At the option of the
City Manager, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured
retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the
Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations,
claim administration and defense expenses.
d. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability
policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1) The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities
performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and
completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned,
occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned,
leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall
contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded
to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
2) For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance
coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or
self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials,
employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the
policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage
provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
4) The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect
to the limits of the insurer's liability.
5) Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be
endorsed to state: "Should the policy be canceled before the
expiration date, the issuing insurer will endeavor to mail thirty (30)
days' prior written notice to the City, insurer will provide 10 days
notice for non-payment."
6) If insurance coverage is canceled or reduced in coverage or in
limits, the Consultant shall within two (2) business days of notice
from insurer phone, fax, and/or notify the City, via certified mail,
return receipt requested, of the changes to or cancellation of the
policy.
e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a
current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City. Self
insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance requirements.
f. Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original
endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed
by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to
be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the
City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer
5
may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including
endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications.
11. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly
independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf
of Consultant, shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither
City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct
of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this
Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its
officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City.
Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever
against City, or bind City in any manner.
b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with
the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the
Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for
performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or
indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.
12. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of all
local, State and Federal ordinances, laws and regulations which in any manner affect those
employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement.
The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such ordinances, laws and
regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity
occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section.
13. RELEASE OF INFORMATION.
a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement
shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior
written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not
without written authorization from the City Manager, or unless requested by the City Attorney,
voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to
interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement, or
relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court
order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court
order or subpoena.
b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers,
employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena,
notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other
discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the
work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the City.
City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and/or be present at any
deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to
provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by
Consultant. However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right
by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response.
14. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party
under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii)
6
delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express,
that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States
Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the
party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice.
Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business
day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided
above.
To City: Martina Address.
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 9033
Temecula, California 92589-9033
Attention: City Manager
-or-
Physical Address.
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
Attention: City Manager
To Consultant: Hall & Foreman, Inc.
Three BetterWorld Circle
Temecula, CA 92590
Gavin Powell
15. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of
the City. Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment
for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be
otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant.
16. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have
in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services
described in this Agreement.
17. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the
laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the
parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation
concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court
with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. In the event such litigation is filed by one
party against the other to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the prevailing party, as
determined by the Court's judgment, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and litigation
expenses for the relief granted.
18. PROHIBITED INTEREST. No officer, or employee of the City of Temecula shall
have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, the proceeds thereof, the
Consultant, or Consultant's sub-contractors for this project, during his/her tenure, or for one year
thereafter. The Consultant hereby warrants and represents to the City that no officer or
employee of the City of Temecula has any interest, whether contractual, non-contractual,
financial or otherwise, in this transaction, or in the business of the Consultant or Consultant's
7
sub-contractors on this project. Consultant further agrees to notify the City in the event any
such interest is discovered whether or not such interest is prohibited by law or this Agreement.
19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding
between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All
prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, oral
or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party
is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon
each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.
20. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons
executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has
the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind
Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder.
8
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CITY OF TEMECULA
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
CONSULTANT
Hall & Foreman, Inc.
Three BetterWorld Circle
Temecula, CA 92590
Attention: Gavin Powell
Phone (951) 294-9300
Fax (951) 294-9301
BY:
(Signature)
NAME:
(Printed Named)
TITLE:
BY:
(Signature)
NAME:
(Printed Named)
TITLE:
TWO SIGNATURES
REQUIRED FOR CORPORATIONS
9
EXHIBIT A
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
The specific elements (scope of work) of this service include:
SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND
INTERCONNECT, PROJECT NO. PW08-04
10
EXHIBIT B
PAYMENT RATES AND SCHEDULE
11
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
SECTION 3: SCOPE OF SERVICES
HFI understands the City's desire to connect and extend the Santa Gertrudis Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail
to the existing trails at Ynez Road and Diaz Road. To help the City achieve their goal, HFI's team is
prepared to provide the required technical studies, alignment study and subsequent final design for the
pedestrian/bicycle trail.
The proposed Class I bicycle trail will contribute to making a comprehensive network of trails by joining
the Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/Bicycle Trail at Ynez Road to the Murrieta Creek Multi-Purpose
Trail at Diaz Road. The proposed location will utilize the existing Riverside County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) maintenance access road along the top of Santa Gertrudis
Creek. Access points at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, Diaz Road and possibly Winchester Road make
the trail ideal for those commuting to the surrounding businesses. Likewise, anticipated under crossings
at Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, the I-15 Freeway and possibly Winchester Road will create a safe
environment for users to avoid vehicular traffic. Total length of the project is approximately 5,500 linear
feet.
The location of the project will subject it to approval from a number of permitting agencies and utility
providers. Permitting agencies include the RCFC&WCD, Caltrans, the Regional Water Quality Control
Board, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Utility purveyors include the
Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), the Rancho California Water District (RCWD), Southern
California Edison (SCE) and The Gas Company. Coordination and communication with these entities is
critical for the project to acquire all needed permits, to satisfy the needs of all interested parties, and to
keep the project within budget and schedule.
Because the project is funded primarily through the State of California's Bicycle Transportation Account
(BTA), the project must adhere to all applicable regulations, requirements, and standards of the Local
Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM). HFI understands the BTA funding is set to expire and the City's
February 28th completion date is critical to ensure funding of the project.
HFI recognizes the submittal requirements requested by the City. As such, HFI pledges to make all
requested submittals in the required formats as outlined in the Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 162.
Further, HFI understands that all designs shall conform to the requirements and standards specified
by the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the City of Temecula, the RCFC&WCD, the FHWA and the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Critical to this project is the City's ability to obtain funding from the State of California. Recognizing this,
HFI's approach will emphasize keeping the City's aggressive schedule in mind. Early involvement with
the permitting agencies will be necessary to ensure all concerns are accounted for. In particular, HFI
feels early involvement by Caltrans will be critical, as history has shown us that Caltrans review periods
can be lengthy.
HFI's approach will emphasize open communication with all parties involved with the project. These
parties include the project team, the client, permitting agencies, utility purveyors, and impacted
property owners. HFI will communicate internally and with our sub-consultants to review progress,
discuss project related issues, and ensure team members are well informed of the projects goals,
schedules and expectations.
HFI sees this date as a significant challenge due to processing time with the approving agencies, in
working on other projects that received state funding, the funding was able to be encumbered for the
designs contract effectively extending the expiration date of the funding. This process is recommended
for the project as well.
090085-0000 19
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
HFI believes in Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC). This will be assured by utilizing HFI's
established and proven QA/QC program. Through this program, HFI will ensure all reports, designs and
technical work are reviewed throughout the design process and prior to submittal of any deliverables.
All deliverables will undergo a peer review by a qualified senior staff member. The reviews will
emphasize value engineering and superior design while maintaining clarity, accuracy and completeness.
The reviews will confirm appropriate design standards are used. HFI's QA/QC program also implements
budget and schedule control procedures to ensure the project is run efficiently.
Specific to this project, HFI will approach the project with a three phased approach. The phases would
be Technical Studies, Preliminary Engineering, and Final Engineering. A detailed description of tasks
involved with these phases is included in the following scope of services.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
PHASE A- PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
Task 1- Meetings, Coordination, and Project Management
Upon receiving a notice to proceed, HFI will meet with the City to discuss the parameters and establish
the specific goals of the project. At this meeting, HFI will obtain copies of the City's project records
and establish the project communication guidelines. This task also includes project management
and administration for the life of the project. This includes invoice preparation, coordination with
subconsultants, and City and Agency coordination.
Task 2 - Data Collection and Review
HFI will gather and review all available material relevant to the project. Applicable documents will
be obtained from Caltrans, RCFC&WCD, and the City. These documents may include existing reports
and studies, as-built plans, mapping controls, right-of-way and easement documents, cooperative
agreements and applicable design standards.
Task 3 - Utility Coordination
The City will contact affected utility purveyors to notify them of the project and to obtain record
atlas maps and available cover depths for facilities in the project area. HFI will utilize the information
gathered by the City in our design and will show existing utilities on our base map. HFI will continue to
work with the City and the utility agencies to determine and resolve any conflicts encountered during
design of the project.
Task 4 - Site Assessment
HFI will conduct a thorough site visit to become familiar with the site, evaluate existing conditions, and
identify potential constraints.
Task 5 - Right-of-Way Research /Mapping Control
HFI will conduct the necessary research through City, RCFC&WCD and Caltrans records to determine
existing property limits, public right-of-way and easement boundaries. From the records, HFI will
prepare a boundary showing existing property, right-of-way and easements. Through this research and
development of a preliminary design, HFI will be able to identify right-of-way acquisitions, easement
dedications and cooperative agreements necessary for completion of the project.
Task 6 - Aerial Topography and Field Survey
HFI will set aerial targets and provide aerial topography at two foot {2'} contour intervals one-hundred
feet {1001 beyond the project limits. HFI's survey crew will supplement the aerial survey by conducting
a field survey. The field survey will identify and verify all existing facilities and topographical features
within the project area. Under crossing locations will identify all abutments, pillars, columns, deck
height, flowline and other critical information at the bridges. Cross sections showing the maintenance
090085-0000 20
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
access road, top of channel, bottom of channel and approximately fifty feet (50') within the channel will
be taken at fifty foot (50') intervals where ramps are anticipated. Cross sections will also be taken at
Jefferson Avenue, Ynez Road, Diaz Road and Winchester Road to assist in determining points of access
and to ensure ADA compliance can be provided. Additional sections will be taken along the channel as
necessary to establish line and grade.
HFI will establish temporary benchmarks for use during construction and will tie out all survey
monuments so damaged monuments can be restored after construction. All survey information will
be documented and provided to the City. Electronic files and a plot of all control coordinates will be
provided to the City for use during construction.
Task 7 - Preliminary Hydrology/ Hydraulics Analysis
HFI will perform a hydrology and hydraulics analysis to identify impacts to the Santa Gertrudis Creek
and other impacted drainage facilities. The analysis will be used to determine adequacy of flood
protection levels and existing drainage facilities resulting from the proposed alignments.
Task 8 - Alignment Study
Based on the information gained during the preceding tasks, HFI will develop a minimum of 3
alternative alignments for the proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail. For each alternative, HFI will prepare
a preliminary plan, cost estimate and completion schedule. The preliminary plan will utilize the aerial
topography as a base and show property boundaries and ownership, existing utilities and structures,
proposed right-of-way and easements, and all proposed improvements in concept. Proposed under
crossings and possible pedestrian bicycle bridges will be indicated on the plans. The completion
schedules will include design tasks, environmental clearance and permitting, right-of-way acquisition,
and construction tasks. Cost estimates will include costs for completion of design, environmental
permitting and mitigation, right-of-way acquisition, and construction tasks. The alternatives will be
evaluated and presented in the form of a report comparing each alternative. HFI will provide preferred
alignment recommendations in the report.
In evaluating the alternative alignments, HFI will work with the Chambers Group to identify and
address environmental impacts. The work performed by Chambers Group will be the initial steps of
preparing the environmental document described under Phase C.
PHASE B - FINAL ENGINEERING
After a preferred alternative is determined by the City, HFI will proceed to prepare complete
construction documents, including plans, specifications and cost estimates. Individual tasks under
Phase B will not begin until HFI receives a Notice to Proceed from the City, for each task.
Task 1- Geotechnical Evaluation
HFI will team with Geocon Inland Empire, Inc. to provide geotechnical services for this project. This
proposal includes the following items:
• Review published geologic maps, aerial photographs, and other literature pertaining to the site
to aid in evaluating geologic hazards that may be present.
• Perform laboratory tests on selected soil samples to evaluate soil properties, for example: in
situ density, maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, expansive characteristics,
direct shear, RValue, corrosion, collapse, and consolidation characteristics of the prevailing soil
conditions encountered.
• Mark boring locations at the site 48 hours prior to excavation and notify Underground Service
Alert prior to drilling.
• Excavate approximately 14 exploratory excavations with a drill rig to assess subsurface
090085-0000 21
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
conditions and obtain samples for laboratory testing. The borings will extend to a maximum
depth of 50 feet.
• Submit application package and obtain permits from Caltrans and RCFC&WCD to perform work
within their right-of-way.
• Prepare a written report presenting the findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding
the geotechnical aspects of developing the site with respect to design features including,
but not limited to: structural foundation conditions and recommendations including any
overexcavation and recompaction areas or surcharges, liquefaction analysis, and pavement
design. The reports will include design alternates for various types of access to the under
crossings including, ramps, retaining walls and berms.
Task 2 - Final Hydrology/Hydraulics Report
A final hydrology/hydraulics report will be prepared in accordance with the City, RCFC&WCD, FHWA
and Caltrans standards. The report will be based on the final design of the channel improvements. The
report will include a project summary, methodology, calculations, conclusions and recommendations.
This item includes making revisions resulting from Agency review.
Task 3 - Plats and Legal Descriptions
The selected alignment alternative will determine what easements and right-of-way acquisitions are
necessary for the project. Upon this determination, HFI will prepare the necessary plats and legal
descriptions for the City's use in obtaining the required property. It is anticipated that five (5) easement
documents will be required.
Task 4 - Pedestrian /Bicycle Trail Plan
HFI will prepare pedestrian/bicycle trail plans to join the existing Santa Gertrudis Creek Pedestrian/
Bicycle Trail at Ynez Road and the Murrieta Creek Multi-Purpose Trail at Diaz Road. The plan will include
the following items:
• Plan view of pedestrian/bicycle trail indicating stations, bearings, quantities, finished surface
elevations, horizontal grades, cross slopes and critical locations such as beginning/end of curve,
grade breaks and at points of access.
• Plan and profile at ramps and under crossing locations. Vertical clearances, grades and finished
surface elevations will be shown.
• Grading limits will be shown on the plans. Grading will be minimized as much possible to
minimize construction costs and impacts to surrounding properties. Earthwork quantities will be
shown on the plans.
• Existing and proposed right-of-way, property lines, easements, centerline and existing and
proposed utilities will be shown. Dimensions will be shown for horizontal control and to verify
minimum trail widths.
• Existing utilities will be indicated on the plans showing approximate location, type, size, material
and utility owner.
• Construction items including pavement limits, fencing, drainage structures, water quality
features, proposed utilities, access ramps, channel improvements, pedestrian/bicycle over
crossings, necessary construction details, and all other improvements will be called out on the
plans. Structural calculations for retaining walls will not be included.
Task 5 - Street Improvement Plans
Street improvement plans will be prepared detailing the access points from both sides of the existing
090085-0000 22
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
roadways. This proposal is based on assumed points of access at Ynez Road, Jefferson Avenue, Diaz
Road, and Winchester Road.
Task 6A -Signing and Striping Plans
Signing and striping plans will be prepared in accordance with applicable portions of the Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The plans will include signage and striping of the pedestrian/
bicycle trail to ensure safety to trail users. Not included are signing, signalization and striping to
accommodate at grade crossings of the roadway.
Task 6B - Signing and Striping Plans (Winchester Road)
The anticipated method of crossing Murrieta Creek at Winchester Road is to utilize the existing bridge
and re-stripe the existing roadway to allow for bicycle and pedestrian traffic. If the alignment study
determines that this is the preferred method for crossing Murrieta Creek, HFI will prepare the required
signing and striping plans for Winchester Road. Plans will be prepared in accordance with applicable
portions of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
Task 7 - Erosion Control Plans
Erosion control plans will be prepared to accompany the pedestrian/bicycle trail improvement plans and
will be consistent with the water quality measures outlined in the projects Water Quality Management
Plan (WQMP).
Task 8 - WQMP / Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
HFI will prepare and submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to conduct construction activities for the project as
well as prepare the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for incorporation into the contract
bid documents. The SWPPP will meet the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
requirements and will be submitted to the City for review.
A Water Quality management Plan (WQMP) will be prepared including Best Management Practices
(BMP's) to be implemented and maintained during the post construction life of the project.
First submittal of these documents is anticipated at 90% of PS&E completion.
Task 9 - Final Construction Cost Estimate
Based on the items shown on the construction drawings, HFI will prepare a cost estimate for
construction of the project. Quantity estimate calculations will be detailed and provided as back-up
to the construction cost estimate. Two independent quantity estimate calculations will be performed
to ensure accuracy. Earthwork calculations will be included for excavation, structural backfill and
unclassified excavation.
Task 14 - Special Provisions and Bid Schedule
HFI will prepare the special provisions and bid schedule to be included with the bid package.
Submitted documents will be based on the City's standard documents, edited for application to this
project.
Task 11- Project Coordination and Plan Permit Processing
Because of the number of permitting agencies involved with this project, HFI anticipates a significant
coordination and processing effort in order to get approval from the permitting agencies. This effort
includes coordination of project elements, discussions of project status, meetings with permitting
agencies, and other issues related to obtaining necessary permits. Processing of fact sheets required by
Caltrans is not included with the task.
090085-0000 23
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
Phase G-Technical Studies and Environmental Documents
Individual tasks under Phase C will not begin until HFI receives a Notice to Proceed from the City, for
each task.
Task 1- Preliminary Environmental Study
Chambers Group will prepare a Preliminary Environmental Study (PES) based on the requirements
outlined in the Caltrans General Guidelines for Compliance. This task includes a reconnaissance-level
field visit by an environmental planner.
Three copies of the PES will be submitted to the City for review and signature.
The PES will then be submitted to Caltrans for review. Two sets of revisions to the PES, will be prepared
per the receipt of two sets of integrated comments from the City and Caltrans.
Task 2 - Biological Resources Assessment and Report
After conducting the literature search, a habitat assessment of the biological resources will be
performed during a field visit to the proposed project area. All plant communities on the project site will
be surveyed and mapped. Presence of common and sensitive biological resources on the project site
will be documented. A report will be prepared following the most recent version of a Caltrans Natural
Environmental Survey for a project with Minimal Impacts (i.e. NES MI) report.
The report will evaluate the requirements from the Western Riverside Multi Species Habitat
Conservation Plan. In addition, biologists will assess the project area(s) for potential waters that may
be jurisdictional to the Army Corps of Engineers or other regulatory agency.
For the purpose of identifying potential jurisdictional waterways, Chambers Group will review existing
maps and documents including the U.S.G.S. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle of the site, the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Survey general soils map, previous vegetation maps and
biological surveys prepared for the site, and aerial photographs of the area prior to surveying the site.
A field survey will identify and delineate areas of the project site that fall under the regulatory
jurisdiction of the USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and CDFG jurisdiction
pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code.
The results of the jurisdictional delineation survey will be provided in a Jurisdictional Delineation
Report. The report will include text describing the limits of jurisdiction pursuant to USACE and CDFG
regulations. Following completion of the Jurisdictional Delineation report. Chambers Group will process
the following permits unless it is determined that they are not needed:
• United States Army Corps of Engineers 2007, 404 Nationwide Permit Program
• Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) 401 Permit
• California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) 1602 Streambed Alteration Permit
This proposal does not include the following items. If the preliminary biological study determines that
any of the following may be necessary, Chambers Group can provide the City with a separate scope of
work and cost estimate for these items.
• United States Army Corps of Engineers Informal Section 7 consultation with United States Fish
and Wildlife Service
• United States Army Corps of Engineers 404, Individual Permit
• Focused Biological Surveys
Three copies of the Biological Resources Study will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and
comment.
090085-0000 24
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
Chambers Group will prepare two sets of revisions to the Cultural Resources Study per the receipt of
integrated comments from the City and Caltrans.
Task 3 - Cultural Resources Survey and Report
Chambers Group will contact the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request
a search of their sacred lands files for the proposed project area and request a list of federally and
non-federally recognized Native American groups or representatives, who may have concerns about the
proposed project.
Chambers Group will identify any previously recorded archaeological sites, historic structures, and
properties listed on or determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)
and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) located within one mile of the project area.
Additionally, Chambers Group will determine if any paleontological localities have been recorded within
the study area.
The project area will be closely examined for the presence of archaeological sites or features. Any
newly identified cultural or paleontological resources (including both sites and isolated finds) will be
mapped and recorded in detail according to standards established by the California Office of Historic
Preservation (OHP). Sufficient information will be recorded in the field for each identified site to
complete the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 site forms.
A technical report will be prepared documenting the methods and results of the archaeological records
search and field survey. The report will include a discussion of potential impacts to cultural resources
from the proposed project and will provide recommendations for additional work, as appropriate.
Assumptions and items not included with this task:
• No cultural resources (e.g., archaeological site, historic structure or feature) will be encountered
within the project area.
• Resources encountered in the project area will not require test excavation.
• Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or any Native American groups
or representatives beyond the initial letters of project notification.
• Archival research, test excavation of archaeological sites, or formal evaluation of archaeological
sites or historic resources for eligibility to the CRHR.
Three copies of the Cultural Resources Study will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review and
comment.
Chambers Group will prepare two sets of revisions to the Cultural Resources Study per the receipt of
integrated comments from the City and Caltrans.
Task 4 - Noise Impact Analysis and Report
Chambers Group will prepare a Noise Impact Analysis Letter Report that will describe existing
conditions, identify potential impacts and recommend mitigation measures for both construction and
post construction activities. The report will use the most recent Caltrans Noise Impact Analysis Report
Template and follow the NEPA Delegation format.
In order to prepare the report, Chambers Group will evaluate existing conditions, review applicable
regulations, perform an acoustical analysis for noise impacts, perform a cumulative analysis of noise
impacts and conduct an alternatives analysis for each of the pedestrian/bicycle trail alternatives.
Three copies of the Noise Impact Letter Report will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for review
and comment.
Chambers Group will prepare two sets of revisions to the Noise Impact Letter Report per the receipt of
integrated comments from the City and Caltrans.
090085-0000 25
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
Task 5 - Air Quality Analysis and Report
Chambers Group will prepare an Air Quality Report that will describe existing conditions, identify
potential impacts and recommend mitigation measures to reduce those impacts. The report will use the
most recent Caltrans Air Quality Report Template and follow the NEPA Delegation format.
Preparation of the report will require an evaluation of existing conditions, review of applicable
regulations, calculations for air quality emissions, modeling for air quality dispersion, PM10, PM2.5
emissions analysis, and a cumulative analysis of air quality impacts.
Three copies of the Air Quality Analysis and Letter Report will be submitted to the City and Caltrans for
review and comment.
Chambers Group will prepare two sets of revisions to the Air Quality Analysis and Letter Report per the
receipt of integrated comments from the City and Caltrans.
Task 6 - Preparation of Appropriate CEQA/NEPA Document
Chambers Group will prepare a draft of an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA) and submit
five (5) copies for the City's review.
After comments are received from the City, Chambers Group will revise the document and prepare a
Draft Findings of No Significant Impacts (FONSI). Chambers Group will submit twenty-five copies of the
revised IS/EA and FONSI to the City for distribution to Caltrans and the mailing list. Chambers Group
will work with the City and Caltrans on the mailing list and will distribute the document.
A Notice of Intent will be prepared to adopt a Negative Declaration (ND) or Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) for CEQA and Notice of Availability and a Notice for a Public Hearing. The Notice of
Availability (NOA) will be prepared and distributed with the FONSI. Chambers Group will be responsible
for mailing the notice. It is assumed that the City will pay all fees.
NEPA requires a 30-day review period for a Final EA. After the 30-day review period is completed,
Chambers Group will respond to comments and prepare Final Documents for approval by the City and
Caltrans.
Chambers Group will also prepare a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) for the proposed project and
will submit a Draft MMP to the City and Caltrans for review and comment. After receipt of one set of
integrated comments, Chambers Group will revise the MMP and provide five (5) printed copies of the
MMP to the City.
It is anticipated that 5 copies of the Draft IS/EA will be submitted to the City for review.
Chambers Group will prepare two set of revisions to the IS/EA per the receipt of two sets of integrated
comments from the City and Caltrans.
Up to five meetings are anticipated: one kickoff meeting, one meeting to discuss the Administrative
Draft EA, one Public Meeting during the Public Review Period and two meetings to discuss responses
and comments.
090085-0000 26
CITY OF TEMECULA
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE
SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIANIBICYCLE TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT
TASK ANALYSIS
TASK DESCRIPTION SUBCONSULTANT TOTAL
COSTS AMOUNT
PHASE A - PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
.
PHASE B - FINAL ENGINEERING
.
PHASE C -TECHNICAL STUDIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCS
Reimbursables • •
TOTAL $79,500 $246,865
D9DD85.DDDD
1 ~ N O
O V
O' O'
Q. O N ~
O, O'
a 7, Q'.
O O
O ~ i ~ „ '$3
~ N a
0 Z
U ~ W
0
a ~ ° U
W g Z Z s's 's 's ,s
0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ U
W o H Z Q,
D Q Z
Z 0
N o Z ~ W g s >
H XW
J J o i N JaW
~ ~ ~ ~ o
W JN W ~~U o o
UW °o Wm~ H ~ 0 ~
li a a ~ S ~ o
~~w boa
Vw~ aN o
wW w o ~
v N_
D ~ ~ ~
~ o ~ Z W
C'3 _ _ Q c~ ao ao co rn co ~ rn rn rn rn o rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn __o ~rn _rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z p ~ ~ O N (D ~ N CO ~ CO N ~ ~ C7 ~ N O C7 O O ~ N N aD ~ CO ~ r N CO O ~ N r O O ~ O N ~ CO N Q L ~ RI RI ~ N N N ~ N N ~ N ~ ~ C7 ~ ~ ~ N ~ N ~ N G1 N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ N ~ ~ N N ~ ~ N ~ cn N r r N O r r r r ~ N p N O O 3 O O .a r "O N -O CO "O "O "O O O~ N~ W~ N r r r O r 7 C C O C = O 3 3 L 7 C C~ 'O 'O 'O C y 'O O "O O N N N 'O 'O O O O "O "O "O "O N 'O O
_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ o~~~~~~~ rn rn rn o rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn o rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL CO OD Ln Ln (D (D CO ~ C7 O f~ f~ ~ OD CO O r ~ O ~ r OD N N N N O ~ N O ~ ~ r N N N O ~ r ~ O O ~
~ r N N N N N~ r r r ~ r N r r~ r C7 r r N r N N N N r~~~~ r r N N~ r r N C7 C7 r N 0 ~ ~ r r r r r T r r r N N N N N N •L C'7 In In C4 ~ r r r N 3 3 3 ~ In CO r r 3~~ O O~~ W W ~ r r r r r T •i N O O G1 O~~~ W •i N N 7 7 7 3 7 3 7 7 7 L L L L 7 7 3 3 L 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 ~ G1 'a 'a ~ W ~ ~ 3~~~ W ~ ~ L L L L z L L L L~~~~ L L L L ~ L L L L L L L L
N
H Z N cn cn cn ~ ~ ~ cn cn N cn cn cn cn cn ~ ~ cn cn cn cn N cn cn cn cn ~ ~ ~ cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn cn ~ ~ ~ cn cn W O ~ ~ 'O c~ ~ "O ~ ~ (d ~ "O Y ~ c~ c~ c~ (d (d ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 ~ Y Y c~ ~ c~ ~ (d (d ~ ° a -a r -a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a 3 -a -a -a -a ~ ~ ~ -a -a -a 3 ~ 3 ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ 3 3 -a ~ -a ~ ~ ~
p ~ O ~ r ~ ~ O ~ ~ o r O O N ~ N O N O ~ ~ C7 p Ln O ~ O ~ ~ ~ In ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ Z 7~ r r a1 r r r r r r p r r r r r r IR 0' ~
J a
N U 0
~ O _ Q o w ~ ca > ~ -a ~ m w ~ Z w ~
Z ~ ~ Q ~ o w 3 ~ a z ~ ~ OC ~ 3 ~ a ~ ~ O a~ -a cA 3 U ~ Z W ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ c Z > ~ ~ W a O
w p ~ ~ m ~ w ~ $ a~ a ~ u) cn ~ ~ d ~ W ? ~ ~ a~ ~ C7 ~ ~ w w ° ~ w ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ c[ ~ ~ C7 ~ s W= a~i Z~ g 3 _ro c~ c~ •o o p p ca c ~ w E ~ Z ~ ~
w o ac ~ ~ ~ E w c o ~ ° d ° ~ ro ~ o ~ ~ E d ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ 9 U ~ ~ Q ~ Z ~ c a~i a ~ w ° ~ ~ o ~ o a ro ~ N ~ c ~ ~ a~i ° cn ~ > -a > -a d Z a ro ~ ~ o Z -a ~ O c~ O m O a> g ca o° w o~ 'S a~ a~ c a~ c ~
Q ~ o ~ ~ c ~ a ~ Q a~ > ~ c~ c~ ~ fl- rn ~ ~ J ~ 3 w ~ > ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ c~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ Z_ o c~~ m Z ~ w o a_ a~ _ a~ ~ CC 3 Q o c a~ d CC o~ w Q cn Q m Z~ ~ E 2 O O ~ O~ O d O V ` W O> O ~(Q 6 C W C LLJ O ~ m ~ Q ~ ~ O ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ J ~ U ~ LL ~ W ~ W ~ ~ C C Z ~ ~ ~ CC o ~ w Q c~ ~ W ~ ~ o W C ~ ~ ~
J Q E - O a~ ~ a m c c c ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ 2 •c 0 c~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ - - ~ ~ a ~ m OWC p U U ~ a ~ ~ a>i Z_ ~ ~ _ ~ a~ ~ a~ d a~ ~ Q U w ~ ~ ~ a>i c a m N c ~ ~ ~ U ~ U ~ 9 ~ ~ U ~
O~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L N `J ~ O 'J O 'J O `J O U W ' ~ O N~ O O O u1 O (SS N i H O C C (tl ~ O D U OC U OC ~ W~ U p a, E Q U Y 0~ cA CC Q d Q U m Z C7 ii c~ U~ U rn U r V~~~ U U CC U ii U ~ Z W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ N~~ T m T~ rn o z
~ Q O r N O~ W O Q O r N CO f~ W O r Q r N O~ W O r N N ~ ~2 2 2 ~ a a a
_ _ 0 r N C7 ~ Ln (D f~ N O O r N P7 ~ Ln (D f~ CO O O N ~ In O ~ CO O O N ~ In O ~ OD O O N C'7 ~ In CO ai - r r I r r r r N N N N N `N N N N N C7 C7 C7 P7 P7 P7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~j
ALIGNMENT STUDY AND PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN
SERVICES FOR THE SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE
r TRAIL EXTENSION AND INTERCONNECT PROJECT #PW08--04
SECTION 4: FEE PROPOSAL
OFFICE:
Principal
$195.00/Hour
Project Management (VP/Sr. Proj. Dir./Proj. Dir./Proj. & Survey Mgr)
$165.00/Hour
Senior Engr./Proj. Eng./Proj. Surveyor/Sr. Designer/Principal Planner
$135.00/Hour
Staff Engineer
$115.00/Hour
Designer/Assist. Proj. Mgr/Planner/Survey Analyst
$105.00/Hour
Drafter/CADD Technician/Senior Analyst
$ 95.00/Hour
Project Assistant/Expeditor/Assist. Engineer
$ 80.00/Hour
Administrative
$ 65.00/Hour
Expert Witness/Litigation Consultation
$300.00/Hour
FIELD SURVEY:
3-Person Survey Crew
$245.00/Hour
2-Person Survey Crew
$200.00/Hour
1-Person Survey Crew
$150.00/Hour
2-Person High Definition Survey Crew
$360.00/Hour
CONSTRUCTION:
Resident Engineer $115.00/Hour
Inspector $105.00/Hour
Note 1: Client shall pay the cost, plus 1511/o, for any applicable governmental fees, title company
charges, well monuments, outside vendor reproduction costs, in-house reproduction cost, plotting
costs, and delivery or messenger services incurred on Client's behalf. If requested, HFI will provide a
computer printout, which details these costs. HFI does not typically provide any additional back up for
these generally nominal expenses as part of our fee.
Note 2: In the event Consultant's fee schedule changes due to any increase of costs such as the
granting of wage increases and/or other employee benefits to field or office employees due to the
terms of any labor agreement, or increase in the cost of living, during the lifetime of this agreement, a
percentage increase shall be applied to all remaining fees and charges to reflect the increased costs.
Note 3: The fee stated herein does not include any sales or use tax. In the event that a sales and/
or use tax is imposed by local, state, or federal authority, upon the services rendered hereunder, such
sales and/or use tax shall be in addition to said fee herein, and shall be the full responsibility of the
Client.
090085-0000 29
ITEM NO. 11
ORDINANCE NO. 08-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA REVISING REGULATIONS APPLICABLE
TO MASSAGE SERVICES, AND AMENDING TITLE 5 OF
THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE
A. Recitals.
(i) The City Council finds and declares as follows:
(a) The massage permitting requirements and restrictions adopted
herein are reasonably necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens
of the City of Temecula.
(b) The City of Temecula is authorized under the State Constitution
and California Government Code § 51030, et seq., to regulate massage establishments
by imposing reasonable standards relative to the skill and experience of massage
operators and massage technicians, and reasonable conditions on the operation of the
massage establishments.
(c) There is a significant risk of injury to massage clients by improperly
trained and/or educated massage technicians and this Chapter provides reasonable
safeguards against such injuries and resulting economic loss.
(d) The operation of unregulated massage establishments often results
in increased criminal activities on the premises of such businesses. Such increased
criminal activity presents a risk to the public health, safety and welfare. The
establishment of reasonable standards for issuance of massage related permits and
restrictions on massage operations will serve to reduce the risk of illegal activity.
(e) The restrictions and requirements set forth in this Ordinance will
serve to reduce the burdens on the Police Department and permit the deployment of the
police personnel so as to more effectively provide law enforcement services throughout
the City.
(ii) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council hereby ordains as follows:
SECTION 1: The facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and
correct.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12
SECTION 2: Chapter 5.22 of Title 5 of the Temecula Municipal Code is amended to
read as follows:
Chapter 5.22
MASSAGE AND MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS
Sections:
3.22.010
Definitions.
5.22.020
Massage Establishment permit required.
5.22.030
Application for Massage Establishment permit.
5.22.040
Massage Establishment permit issuance and denial.
3.22.050
Massage Technician permit required.
5.22.060
Application for Massage Technician permit.
5.22.070
Massage Technician permit issuance and denial.
5.22.080
Requirements applicable to the operation of Massage
Establishments.
5.22.090
Requirements applicable to Massage Technicians.
5.22.100
Health certificate.
5.22.110
Transfers and changes of business.
5.22.120
Fees.
5.22.130
Exemptions.
5.22.140
Duration and renewal of permits.
5.22.150
Suspension, revocation, permit denial, and appeal.
5.22.160
Violation and penalty.
5.22.010 Definitions.
Unless the particular provision of the context otherwise requires, the definitions
and provisions contained in this Section shall govern the construction, meaning and
application of words and phrases used in this Chapter.
A. "Chief of Police" shall mean and include the Captain of the Riverside
County Sheriff's Department currently designated by the Sheriff as the command officer
responsible for the City of Temecula, or his or her designated representative.
B. "City Manager" shall mean and include the City Manager of the City of
Temecula or his or her designated representative.
C. "City Council" shall mean and include the City Council of the City of
Temecula.
D. "Conviction" or "Convicted" shall mean and include a conviction following a
plea or verdict of guilty, or plea of nolo contendre.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 2
E. "Days" shall mean and include calendar days, unless otherwise specifically
stated in the text.
F. "Employ" shall mean and include the act of employing employees and/or
contracting with independent contractors.
G. "Employee" shall mean and include every owner, partner, manager,
supervisor, and any other person, whether paid or not, who renders massage services,
or engages in activities that further massage services, of any nature in connection with
the operation of a massage establishment, or upon the premises of a massage
establishment.
H. "Health Department" shall mean and include the Health Services Agency
of the County of Riverside.
1. "Manager" or "On Duty Manager" shall mean and include the person(s)
designated by the operator of the massage establishment, and qualified under
§ 5.22.0306, to act as the representative and agent of the operator in managing day-to-
day operations with the same liabilities and responsibilities. Evidence of management
includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the individual has power to direct or hire and
dismiss employees, control hours of operation, create policy or rules or purchase
supplies. A manager may also be an owner.
J. "Massage" shall mean and include any method of treating the external parts
of the body for remedial, hygienic, relaxation or any other reason or purpose, whether
by means of pressure on, friction against or stroking, kneading, tapping, pounding,
vibrating, rubbing or other manner of touching external parts of the body with the hands
or with the aid of any mechanical or electrical apparatus or appliance with or without
supplementary aids such as rubbing alcohol, liniment, antiseptic, oil, powders, creams,
ointment or other similar preparations commonly used in this practice. Outcall massage
is any massage performed by a massage technician outside of the massage
establishment by which the massage technician is employed.
K. "Massage Establishment" shall mean and include any business conducted
within the City of Temecula at a fixed location where any person, firm, association,
partnership, corporation or combination of the foregoing engages in, conducts, carries
on or permits to be conducted or carried on, for money or any other consideration,
administration to another person of massage, bath or treatment involving massages or
baths. For purposes of this Chapter, "massage establishment" includes "acupressure"
or "day spa" establishments, and any other kind of business where massage is offered.
"Massage establishment" does not include any kind of business exempt under
§5.22.130 or that is otherwise currently licensed, and thereby specifically authorized,
under any provision of state or federal law, to provide massage, so long as such
business conducts massage in strict conformance with, and only to the extent permitted
by, such license. Any such exempt business shall have the burden of establishing its
exemption.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 3
L. "Massage Technician" shall mean and include any individual who
administers massage to another individual in exchange for anything of value.
M. "Operator" shall mean and include any owner or other person who operates
a massage establishment.
N. "Owner" shall mean and include any person having any ownership interest
in a massage establishment, and/or any person whose name appears on the City
business license for a massage establishment.
0. "Person" shall mean and include any individual, or corporation, partnership,
association or other group or combination of individuals acting as an entity.
P. "Police Department" shall mean and include the Riverside County Sheriff's
Department, acting pursuant to its law enforcement contract with the City of Temecula.
Q. "Recognized school of massage" shall mean and include any school or
institution of learning which (i) teaches, through State certified instructors, the theory,
ethics, practice, profession, and work of massage; (ii) has been approved in writing by
the State of California, pursuant to provisions of the California Education Code,
including, but not limited to, Sections 94900 or 94905; and (iii) requires a resident
course of study as a condition to receiving a diploma or other evidence of graduation. A
school offering a correspondence course or courses not requiring attendance shall not
be deemed a recognized school of massage for purposes of this Chapter. The City
shall have the right to confirm that the applicant has actually attended class at a
recognized school of massage.
5.22.020 Massage Establishment permit required.
A. It is unlawful for any person to engage in, operate, conduct or carry on, in
or upon any premises, a massage establishment within the City without first obtaining a
massage establishment permit pursuant to 5.22.030 and 5.22.040 of this Chapter,
securing the necessary business license as required by this code and complying with
Title 5 of this code. A separate permit shall be obtained for each separate massage
establishment operated by such person. A permit to operate a massage establishment
shall be valid for a period of one year, commencing at the date of issuance.
5.22.030 Application for Massage Establishment permit.
A. Any person desiring a permit for a massage establishment shall file a
written application on the required form with the Chief of Police who shall conduct an
investigation. The application, to be signed under penalty of perjury, shall be
accompanied by the appropriate filing fee established by resolution of the City Council.
The application shall be completed and signed by the operator of the proposed
massage establishment, if a sole proprietorship; one general partner, if the operator is a
partnership; one officer or one director, if the operator is a corporation; and one
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 4
participant, if the operator is a joint venture. The application for permit does not
authorize operation of a massage establishment unless and until such permit has been
properly granted. The application shall contain or be accompanied by the following
information:
1. The type of ownership of the business; for example, whether by
individual, partnership, corporation or otherwise. If the applicant is a corporation, the
name of the corporation shall be set forth exactly as shown in its articles of
incorporation or charter, together with the state and date of incorporation and the names
and residence addresses of each of its current officers and directors, and of each
stockholder holding more than 5% of the stock of that corporation. If the applicant is a
partnership, the application shall set forth the name and residence of each of the
partners, including limited partners. If it is a limited partnership, it shall furnish a copy of
its certificate of limited partnership filed with the Secretary of State. If one or more of
the partners is a corporation, the provisions of this subsection pertaining to corporations
shall apply. The applicant corporation or partnership shall designate one of its officers
or general partners to act as its responsible managing officer. Such designated persons
shall complete and sign all application forms required for an individual applicant under
this Chapter, but only one application fee shall be charged;
2. The precise name under which the massage establishment is to be
conducted;
3. The complete address and all telephone numbers of the massage
establishment;
4. A complete current list of the names, residence addresses and
copy of driver's license or other picture identification card issued by a governmental
authority, of all proposed massage technicians, managers, operators, and employees in
the massage establishment;
5. A description of any other business operated on the same premises
or within the City of Temecula or the State of California that is owned or operated by the
applicant;
6. The following personal information concerning the applicant:
a. Full complete name and all aliases used by the applicant,
b. Current address and all previous residential addresses for
eight years immediately preceding the present address of the applicant;
C. Acceptable proof that the applicant is at least 18 years of
age;
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 5
d. Proof of legal residency and/or the ability to legally work in
the United States,
e. Height, weight, color of hair, eyes and gender;
f. Two front faced portrait photographs at least two inches by
two inches in size;
g. The applicant's complete business, occupation and
employment history for eight years preceding the date of application, including, but not
limited to, the massage or similar business history and experience of the applicant;
h. The complete massage permit history of the applicant,
whether such person has ever had any permit or license to conduct a massage
business issued by any governmental authority; the date of issuance of such a permit or
license, whether the permit or license was denied, revoked or suspended; and the
reason therefor;
i. All criminal convictions occurring in any state or country,
including convictions resulting from any plea of nolo contendre, within the last ten years,
including those dismissed or expunged pursuant to Penal Code § 1203.4, but excluding
infraction traffic violations, and the date and place of each such conviction and reason
therefor;
j. A complete set of fingerprints taken by the Police
Department;
7. The name and address of the owner and lessor of the real property
upon or in which the business is to be conducted. In the event the applicant is not the
legal owner of the property, the application must be accompanied by a copy of the lease
and a notarized acknowledgment from the owner of the property that a massage
establishment will be located on the owner's property;
8. Authorization for the City, its agents and employees to verify all
information contained in the application, including, but not limited to, performing a
complete criminal history background check;
9. Such other identification and information as the Chief of Police may
require in order to discover the truth of the matters required to be set forth in the
application;
10. A statement in writing and dated by the applicant that he or she
certifies under penalty of perjury that all information contained in the application is true
and correct;
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 6
11. Statements in writing and dated by the applicant and the applicant's
designated manager(s) certifying under penalty of perjury that they:
a. Have received a copy of this Chapter;
b. Understand its contents; and
c. Understand the duties of a manager.
If, during the term of a permit, the permit holder has any change in information
submitted on the original or renewal application, the permit holder shall notify the Police
Department of such change, within ten (10) business days thereafter, in writing.
12. A floor plan of the proposed massage establishment showing all
interior areas and rooms where massage will be provided, all doors, restrooms,
plumbing, and any other physical features required by the Chief of Police.
B. The applicant, if a corporation or partnership, shall designate one or more
of its officers or partners to act as manager during business hours. If the applicant is an
individual, then that individual, or designee thereof shall act as manager. Any such
designee must comply with the requirements of this subsection B. Each person who
shall serve as manager shall complete and sign all application forms required of an
individual applicant for a massage establishment permit. However, only one application
fee shall be charged. Each manager must, at all times, meet all of the requirements of
this Chapter for massage establishment permit holders or the massage establishment
permit shall be suspended until a manager who meets such requirements is designated.
If no such person is designated within ninety (90) days of permit approval, the massage
establishment permit shall be subject to suspension and revocation. Operation of a
massage establishment without a qualified manager being present is prohibited.
C. Notwithstanding the fact that an application filed under this § 5.22.030 or §
5.22.060 may be a "public record" under Government Code § 6250, et seq., certain
portions of such application contain information vital to the effective administration and
enforcement of the licensing and/or permit scheme established herein which is personal,
private, confidential, or the disclosure of which could expose the applicant to a risk of
harm. Those portions of the application which are not subject to disclosure are: the
applicant's residence address and telephone number, the applicant's date of birth and/or
age, the applicant's driver's permit and/or social security number, and/or personal
financial data. The City Council in adopting the application and licensing and/or permit
system set forth herein has determined in accordance with Government Code Section
6255 that the public interest in disclosure of the information set forth above is outweighed
by the public interest in achieving compliance with this chapter by ensuring that the
applicant's privacy, confidentially or security interests are protected. The city clerk shall
cause to be redacted from any copy of a completed permit application made available to
any member of the public, the information set forth above.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 7
3.22.040 Massage Establishment permit issuance and denial.
A. Upon receipt of a written application for a permit, the Chief of Police shall
conduct an investigation to ascertain whether the applicant satisfies the requirements of
this Chapter. The Chief of Police shall, within sixty (60) days of receipt of an
application, approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. The sixty (60) day
period may be extended for up to sixty (60) additional days, if necessary, to complete
the investigation. The Chief of Police shall issue the permit, unless he or she makes
any of the following findings:
1. The applicant, if an individual, or any of the officers or directors of
the corporation, if the applicant is a corporation; or a partner, if the applicant is a
partnership, or any person directly engaged or employed in the massage establishment,
has, within ten (10) years preceding the date of the application:
a. Any crime involving conduct which requires registration
under any state, federal or territorial law similar to and including California Penal Code
Section 290, or involving conduct which is a violation of the provisions of any state,
federal or territorial law similar to and including California Penal Code Sections 266(h),
266(1), 314, 315, 316, 318, 647 (a), (b) or (d); any crime or violation for which the
prosecutor accepted a plea to violation of California Penal Code Section 415, 602, or
any lesser included or related offense, or any other Penal Code or other criminal
violation in satisfaction or in lieu of, or as a substitute for, any of the foregoing crimes or
Penal Code violations or for any crime involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or moral
turpitude.
In determining if the applicant pled to a lesser included or related offense or any other
offense in lieu of any of the foregoing code sections or crimes, pursuant to any provision
of this Section 5.22.040, the Chief of Police, and any person considering this matter on
appeal, may consider the underlying facts resulting in the arrest regardless of the
charge for which the applicant was convicted.
For the purposes of this chapter, "conviction" means and includes a conviction pursuant
to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere;
b. Been convicted of a violation of Health and Safety Code §
11550 or any offense involving the illegal sale, distribution or possession of a controlled
substance specified in Health and Safety Code 11054, 11055, 11056, 11057 or
11058;
C. Been convicted of any offense in any other state which is the
equivalent of any of the above-mentioned offenses;
d. Engaged in conduct in another jurisdiction which, if it had
occurred within the city, would constitute grounds for denial, suspension or revocation
under this Chapter;
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 8
e. Been subjected to a permanent injunction against the
conducting or maintaining of a nuisance pursuant to California Penal Code 11225
through 11235 or any similar provisions of law in a jurisdiction outside the State of
California;
f. Engaged in conduct in any state or country which would
constitute an offense as described in subsection 1.a, above;
g. Been convicted of an act involving theft, dishonesty, fraud,
deceit or moral turpitude or an act of violence, which act or acts are related to the
qualifications, functions or duties of the operator of a massage establishment, or which
act or acts occurred in connection with the operation of a massage establishment;
h. The applicant has had a massage operator or establishment,
or massage technician permit, or other similar license or permit denied, suspended or
revoked for cause by any governmental authority;
2. The applicant is required to register under Penal Code § 290.
3. The applicant has made a false, misleading or fraudulent statement
or omission of fact to the City in the permit application process;
4. The application does not contain all of the information required by §
5.22.030;
5. The massage establishment, as proposed by the applicant, does
not comply with all applicable laws, including, but not limited to, health, zoning, fire and
safety requirements, regulations and standards;
6. The applicant has not satisfied the requirements of this Chapter in
the time specified,
B. If the application is denied for failure to comply with subsection 3 above,
the applicant may not reapply for a period of one (1) year from the date the application
was denied.
3.22.050 Massage Technician permit required.
No person shall perform or administer a massage, including outcall massage, or
advertise to provide massage services in the City of Temecula, unless such person has
in effect a valid massage technician permit issued pursuant to 5.22.060 and 5.22.070
of this Chapter.
R:/Ords 2008/Ords 08-12 9
3.22.060 Application for Massage Technician permit.
A. Any person desiring a massage technician permit shall file a written
application on the required form with the Police Department. The application shall be
accompanied by the appropriate filing fee established by resolution of the City Council.
The application shall contain the following information:
1. A statement of the exact location(s) where the applicant will be
working as a massage technician, including the full street address, business name, and
all telephone numbers associated with each such location, and the following personal
information concerning the applicant:
a. Full, complete and true name, including all other names ever
used by the applicant, residential address, telephone number, and copy of driver's
license or other picture identification card issued by a governmental authority;
b. All previous residential addresses for eight (8) years
immediately preceding the current address of the applicant;
C. Acceptable written proof that the applicant is at least
eighteen (18) years of age;
d. Proof of legal residency and/or the ability to legally work in
the United States;
e. Height, weight, color of hair and eyes and gender;
f. Two (2) front faced portrait photographs at least two (2)
inches by two (2) inches in size;
g. The business, occupation and employment history of the
applicant for the eight (8) years immediately preceding the date of the application;
h. The complete permit history of the applicant and whether
such person has ever had any license or permit, issued by any agency, board, city or
other jurisdiction, denied, revoked or suspended and the reasons therefor;
2. All criminal convictions occurring in any state or country, including
pleas of nolo contendre, within the last ten (10) years, including those dismissed or
expunged pursuant to Penal Code § 1203.4, but excluding traffic infractions, violations,
and the date and place of each such conviction and reason therefor;
3. A complete set of fingerprints taken by the Police Department;
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 10
4. Such other information and identification as the Chief of Police may
require in order to discover the truth of the matters herein specified and as required to
be set forth in the application;
5. Authorization for the City, its agents and employees to verify all
information contained in the application, including, but not limited to, performing a
complete criminal history background check;
6. A statement in writing and dated by the applicant certifying under
penalty of perjury that all information contained in the application is true and correct;
7. A statement in writing and dated by the applicant certifying under
penalty of perjury that he or she:
a. Has received a copy of this Chapter;
in this Chapter.
b. Understands its contents; and
c. Understands the duties of a massage technician as provided
8. The health certificate required by § 5.22.100;
9. If, during the term of a permit, a permit holder has any change in
information submitted on the original or renewal application, the permit holder shall
notify the Police Department of such change within ten (10) business days thereafter, in
writing.
B. Each applicant must furnish, along with his or her photograph, an original
or certified copy of a diploma or certificate and certified transcript of graduation
evidencing completion of five hundred (500) hours of instruction from an approved or
recognized school of massage, wherein the method, practice, profession, theory, ethics,
anatomical and physiological knowledge and practice of massage is taught by state
certified instructors. The applicant must also supply a course description, an outline of
material covered and a letter to the City from the school administrator verifying
completion.
1. The Chief of Police may consider an applicant's study of massage
completed outside the State of California, at a licensed educational institution if proof of
completion from a formalized course of study in massage practice, anatomy and/or
physiology is provided with the application. Proof of completion shall include dates of
study and the name, address and phone number of the school attended.
2. Any outside course of study submitted for approval shall meet the
State of California's Office of Post-Secondary Education's minimum requirements and
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 11
all requirements set forth in Subchapter 3 of Chapter 21 of Division 1 of Title 5 of the
California Code of Regulations.
C. The applicant must also provide documentary proof of being issued a valid
policy of insurance from a company authorized to do business in the State of California
evidencing that the applicant is insured under a liability insurance policy providing
minimum coverage of $2,000,000 for personal injury or death to one person arising out
of the administration of massage. The policy must remain in full force and effect while
the massage technician license is valid and is subject to inspection and verification by
the Police Department.
D. If required by written order of the Chief of Police issued not less than sixty
(60) days prior to receipt of an application, each applicant for a new permit must pay a
fee and take and receive not less than a seventy percent (70%) score on a written
and/or practical examination conducted by the Police Department or other test
administrator designated by the Police Department. Passage of such test may be
required by the Chief of Police, prior to further processing of any application. The test
administrator shall consist of a member or members appointed by the Police
Department or the County Health Officer. The test administrator shall not be a City
employee, and shall be qualified by reason of education and experience concerning the
methods and procedures used in the practice of massage. The Health Officer and/or
the Police Department shall develop and establish standards and procedures for the
panel governing the administration of examinations for applicants for a massage
technician license in order to determine whether such applicants are competent to
engage in the practice of massage, and the Health Officer and/or the Police Department
shall exercise such supervision as may be necessary to assure compliance therewith.
An unsuccessful applicant shall be entitled to receive a copy of his or her test scores,
but not the examination. Applicants wishing to take the test in a language other than
English, may do so if the test is currently available in their language. If the test is not
available in the applicant's preferred language, the applicant may pay the costs
associated with having both the test and answer sheets translated by a court-certified
translator approved by the Chief of Police. The written examination may be taken as
often as is offered provided, however, that the test fee shall be paid for each test.
E. Excepting only the requirement to file an application and fee, the Chief of
Police may waive any of the permitting requirements of § 5.22.060, including testing, if
he or she finds that the applicant is currently licensed as a massage technician in
another jurisdiction having substantially the same or stricter permitting or licensing
standards as are set forth in this Chapter. Any such waiver shall be effective only while
such massage technician's other license or permit remains current and valid.
5.22.070 Massage Technician permit issuance and denial.
A. Upon receipt of a written application for a permit, the Chief of Police shall
conduct an investigation in such manner as he or she deems appropriate in order to
ascertain whether the applicant satisfies the requirements of this Chapter. The Chief of
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 12
Police shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the application within sixty (60) days
of the filing of an application. The sixty (60) day period may be continued for an
additional thirty (30) days if necessary to complete the investigation. The Chief of
Police shall issue such permit as requested, unless he or she makes any of the
following findings:
1. The applicant has, within ten (10) years preceding the date of the
application, been convicted of any of the following:
a. Any crime involving conduct which requires registration
under any state, federal or territorial law similar to and including California Penal Code
Section 290, or involving conduct which is a violation of the provisions of any state,
federal or territorial law similar to and including California Penal Code Sections 266(h),
266(1), 314, 315, 316, 318, 647 (a), (b) or (d); any crime or violation for which the
prosecutor accepted a plea to violation of California Penal Code Section 415, 602, or
any lesser included or related offense, or any other Penal Code or other criminal
violation in satisfaction or in lieu of, or as a substitute for, any of the foregoing crimes or
Penal Code violations or for any crime involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or moral
turpitude.
In determining if the applicant pled to a lesser included or related offense or any other
offense in lieu of any of the foregoing code sections or crimes, pursuant to any provision
of this Section 5.22.070, the Chief of Police, and any person considering this matter on
appeal, may consider the underlying facts resulting in the arrest regardless of the
charge for which the applicant was convicted.
For the purposes of this chapter, "conviction" means and includes a conviction pursuant
to a plea of guilty or nolo contendere;
b. A violation of Health and Safety Code § 11550 or any
offense involving the illegal sale, distribution or possession of a controlled substance
specified in Health and Safety Code 11054, 11055, 11056, 11057 or 11058; or
c. Any offense in any other state which is the equivalent of any
of the above-mentioned offenses;
2. The applicant is required to register under Penal Code § 290, or
has engaged in conduct which would constitute an offense as described in subsection
1.a., above;
3. The applicant has committed an act, which, if committed in this
state would have been a violation of law and which, if done by a permit holder under this
Chapter, would be grounds for denial, suspension or revocation of the permit;
4. The applicant has been convicted of an act involving theft,
dishonesty, fraud, deceit or moral turpitude or an act of violence, which act or acts are
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 13
substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a massage technician, or
which act or acts occurred in connection with the provision of massage or the operation
of a massage establishment;
5. The applicant has had a massage establishment permit or
massage technician's permit or other similar license or permit denied, suspended or
revoked for cause by a licensing authority or by any city, county or state within ten (10)
years prior to the date of the application;
6. The applicant has knowingly made a false, misleading or fraudulent
statement or omission of fact to the City in the permit application process;
7. The application does not contain the information required by §
5.22.060;
8. The applicant failed to pass any written or practical examination
required by this Chapter.
9. The applicant has not satisfied the requirements of this Chapter in
the time specified;
10. The applicant has a communicable disease that presents an
unreasonable risk of harm to the applicant or the public;
11. If the application is denied for failure to comply with subsections 6
or 7, above, the applicant may not reapply for a period of six (6) months from the date
the application was denied.
5.22.088 Requirements applicable to the operation of Massage Establishments.
A. Facilities.
1. Structure. Massage establishments shall be located in a zoning
district which permits such use. When a new massage establishment is proposed to be
constructed, a set of plans shall be submitted to the City of Temecula for approval and
shall be accompanied by the appropriate application and plan check fee.
2. Signs; display of permits. Each operator shall post and maintain, in
compliance with all state and City laws, a readable sign identifying the premises as a
massage establishment. Neither signs or the front of the business shall be illuminated
by strobe or flashing lights. Each operator and/or on-duty manager shall display the
massage establishment permit in a conspicuous public place in the lobby of the
massage establishment. In addition, each operator and/or on-duty manager shall
ensure the massage technician permit for each massage technician employed at the
establishment (whether on-duty or not) is conspicuously displayed in a public place in
the lobby, or is contained within a clearly marked binder at the front desk or counter,
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 14
and that each massage technician is wearing or has in his/her possession the
identification card required by § 5.22.090A.3. at all times when in the massage
establishment. Massage technician permits shall be available for inspection only to City
or Police Department representatives while performing official duties. The operator
and/or on-duty manager must also post, on a daily basis in a conspicuous public place
in the lobby, the name of the operator and on-duty manager, as well as all on-duty
massage technicians.
3. Services list. Each operator shall post and maintain a list of
services available and the cost of such services, in a conspicuous public place within
the premises. No operator or on duty manager shall permit, and no massage technician
shall offer or perform, any service other than those posted.
4. Lighting. Each operator shall illuminate each room where massage
is given with light equivalent to a 40-watt incandescent light bulb, and shall provide
sufficient ventilation. Such lighting and ventilation shall otherwise comply with the
current Mechanical and Building Code of the City. The lighting in each massage room
shall be activated at all times while the patron is in such room or enclosure.
5. Bath facilities. A minimum of one toilet and one separate wash
basin shall be provided for patrons in each massage establishment. Each wash basin
shall be equipped with soap or detergent and hot running water at all times and shall be
located in close proximity to the area devoted to the performing of massage services. A
permanently installed soap dispenser, filled with soap, and a single service towel
dispenser shall be provided at the restroom hand wash sink. Bar soap may not be
used. A trash receptacle shall be provided in each toilet room. Showers may be
provided at the operator's option.
6. Separate rooms. If male and female patrons are to be treated
simultaneously at the same massage establishment, separate massage rooms shall be
provided for male and female patrons provided, however, that massage establishments
having separate massage rooms for male and female patrons may provide "couples
massage" in a single room, subject to the requirements of this subsection 6. Couples
massage, i.e., concurrent massage of two persons, is permitted within one room
provided all other requirements of this Chapter are satisfied including, but not limited to,
provision of a separate massage table and massage technician for each customer. Any
room to be used for couples massage shall be sufficiently sized so as to comply with
any and all applicable Building and Fire Codes and to permit free passage and
movement of the massage technicians.
7. Maintenance. All facilities of the massage establishment must be in
good repair and shall be thoroughly cleaned and sanitized each day the business is in
operation. All walls, floors and ceilings of each restroom and shower area shall be
made smooth and easily cleanable. No carpeting shall be installed in any of these
areas.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 15
8. Massage table. A massage table shall be provided in each
massage room and the massage shall be performed on this massage table. The tables
shall have a minimum height of 28 inches. Two inch thick foam pads with maximum
width of four feet may be used on a massage table and must be covered with durable,
washable plastic or other waterproof material. Beds, floor mattresses and waterbeds
are not permitted on the premises.
B. Operations.
1. Equipment. Each operator and/or on duty manager shall provide
and maintain on the premises adequate equipment for disinfecting and sterilizing
instruments used in massage.
2. Inspections.
a. By accepting a massage establishment permit, each
massage establishment permit holder consents to the routine inspection of the massage
establishment, without prior notice, by the City's Building and Safety Department, Fire
Department, Police Department and the Health Department for the purpose of
determining that the provisions of this Chapter, state law or other applicable laws or
regulations are met. Routine inspections shall not occur more than twice a year, unless
violations are found or complaints are received. Criminal investigations may be
conducted at any time permitted by law. The Police Department may inspect the
occupied massage rooms for the purpose of determining that the provisions of this
Chapter are met upon occurrence of any of the conditions referenced in § 5.22.0806.25
which would require the posting of the Notice To All Patrons. During an inspection, the
Police Department may verify the identity of all on-duty employees.
b. Inspections of the massage establishment shall be
conducted during business hours.
C. No operator or manager, or his or her agent or employee,
shall refuse to permit an inspection of the massage establishment pursuant to this
subsection by a representative of the Police Department anytime it is occupied or open
for business.
3. Linen. Common use of towels or linen shall not be permitted.
Towels and linen shall be laundered or changed promptly after each use. Separate
cabinets or containers shall be provided for the storage of clean and soiled linen, and
such cabinets or containers shall be plainly marked: "clean linen" and "soiled linen".
4. Sterilizing equipment. Each massage technician shall provide and
maintain at the location where the massage is performed adequate equipment for
disinfecting and sterilizing instruments used in massage.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 16
5. Living prohibited. No person or persons shall be allowed to live
inside the massage establishment at any time. All living quarters shall be separate from
the massage establishment. No food of any kind shall be prepared for sale or sold in
the establishment unless permitted by the Temecula Municipal Code, and an
appropriate food vending permit is granted by the City or County of Riverside.
6. Alcoholic beverages/drugs; Prohibited materials. No person shall
enter, be in or remain in any part of a massage establishment licensed under this
Chapter while in possession of, consuming, using or under the influence of any
alcoholic beverage or controlled substance. The owner, operator and on-duty manager
shall be responsible to ensure that no such person shall enter or remain upon the
massage establishment. Service of alcoholic beverages shall not be permitted. No
contraception devices; i.e. condoms or other prophylactics, shall be allowed on the
premises or possessed by any employee while on the premises.
7. Recordings. No electrical, mechanical or artificial device shall be
used by the operator or any employee of the massage establishment for audio and/or
video recording or for monitoring the performance of a massage or the conversation or
other sounds in the massage rooms without the written consent of the patron.
8. Roster of employees. The owner, operator and/or manager of the
massage establishment shall maintain a roster of all employees, including operators,
managers and massage technicians, showing each name, nick-name and alias, home
address, age, birth date, gender, height, weight, color of hair and eyes, phone number,
social security number, date of employment, and duties of each employee. The
foregoing roster and all information therein shall be maintained on the premises for a
period of two (2) years following the termination of each employee. The operator or
manager on duty shall make the roster immediately available for inspection upon
demand by a City or Police Department representative performing official duties, during
all hours the massage establishment is open for business. Information in the roster
shall be available for inspection only to City or Police Department representatives while
performing official duties.
9. Coverings. The massage technician shall provide to each patron
clean, sanitary and opaque coverings capable of covering areas of the patron identified
as prohibited massage areas in § 5.22.090A.1, including the genital area, anus and
female breast(s). No common use of such coverings is permitted, and re-use is
prohibited unless adequately cleaned and sanitized.
10. Records. Every person operating a massage establishment shall
keep a record of the dates and hours of each treatment or service, the name and
address of the patron, the name of technician administering such service and a
description of the treatment or service rendered. A short medical history form shall be
completed by the operator to determine if the patron has any communicable diseases,
areas of pain, high blood pressure or any physical condition which may be adversely
affected by massage. These records shall be prepared prior to administering any
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 17
massage or treatment and shall be retained on the premises for a period of 24 months
after such treatment or service. These records shall be open to inspection upon demand
only by officials charged with enforcement of this Chapter and for no other purpose.
The Police Department shall periodically inspect the records to ensure compliance with
this Section. The information furnished or secured as a result of any such records shall
be used only to ensure and enforce compliance with this Chapter or any other
applicable state or federal laws and shall remain confidential. Any unauthorized
disclosure or use of such information by any person, including any officer or employee
of the City, shall constitute a misdemeanor.
11. Hours of operation. The owner must advise the City, in writing, at
the time of application for a permit of the business hours, and any change in hours
occurring thereafter. No person shall operate a massage establishment or administer a
massage in any massage establishment or at an outcall location booked by that
massage establishment pursuant to § 5.22.080C between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m. A massage begun any time before 9:00 p.m. must nevertheless terminate at
9:00 p.m. All customers, patrons and visitors shall be excluded from the massage
establishment during these hours and be advised of these hours. The hours of
operation must be displayed in a conspicuous public place in the lobby within the
massage establishment and in the front window clearly visible from the outside.
12. Advertising. No permitted massage establishment shall place,
publish or distribute, or cause to be placed, published or distributed, in any publication
or any website, any advertising matter that depicts any portion of the human body that
would reasonably suggest to prospective patrons that any service is available other than
those services authorized in this Chapter. No massage establishment shall employ
language in the text of such advertising that would reasonably suggest to a prospective
patron that any service is available other than those services authorized by this
Chapter.
13. Insurance. No person shall engage in, conduct or carry on the
business of a massage establishment unless there is on file with the Police Department,
in full force and effect at all times, documents issued by an insurance company
authorized to do business in the State of California evidencing that the permit holder is
insured under a liability insurance policy providing minimum coverage of $2,000,000 for
personal injury or death to one person arising out of the operation of the massage
establishment and/or the administration of any massage. Evidence of the required
insurance shall be provided to the Chief of Police at the time an initial application, or
renewal application, is filed.
14. Compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act and related
laws. All massage establishments must comply with all state and federal laws and
regulations providing for access to and receipt of services by disabled persons.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 18
15. Municipal Code compliance. Proof of compliance with all
applicable provisions of the Temecula Municipal Code shall be provided upon request
by the Police Department.
16. Doors. All front, reception, hallway or front exterior doors (except
back or exterior doors used solely for employee entrance to and exit from the massage
establishment) shall be unlocked during business hours, except as may be permitted by
applicable law (such as the Temecula Fire Code) which allow for safety doors that may
be opened from the inside when locked. No massage may be given within any cubicle,
room, booth or any other area within a massage establishment that is fitted with a lock
of any kind (such as a locking door knob, padlock, dead bolt, sliding bar or similar
device), unless the door is an exterior door.
17. Access. No customer shall be permitted to be within a massage
establishment except within the lobby/reception area, or area where such customer is
receiving massage services, during hours of operation. No entry doors to any room
shall be obstructed by any means.
18. Discrimination. No massage establishment may discriminate or
exclude patrons on the basis of their race, sex, religion, age, disability or any other
classification protected under federal or state laws, rules or regulations.
19. Prohibited massage areas. No massage technician or other person
shall massage the genitals or anal area of any patron or the breasts of any female
patron, nor shall any owner, operator or manager allow or permit such massage. No
operator, manager or employee while performing any task or service associated with
the massage business, shall be present in any room with another person unless the
person's genitals, gluteal crease, anus and, in the case of a female, her breasts, are
fully covered.
20. Clothing. All persons employed in a massage establishment shall
be fully clothed at all times while acting on behalf of the business or performing under
the massage establishment permit. Clothing shall be of a fully opaque, non-transparent
material and shall provide complete covering of the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, anal
area and chest area.
21. Names. No person granted a permit pursuant to this Chapter shall
use any name or conduct business under any designation not specified in his or her
permit.
22. Display of identification cards. The operator and on duty manager
shall ensure that, at all times while in the massage establishment, while open for
business, or otherwise while massage is being performed, each massage technician
wears or has in his/her possession the identification card required by § 5.22.090A.3.
Such identification shall be provided to City or Police Department representatives upon
demand.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 19
23. Responsibility for conduct of massage establishment. The owner,
operator and on duty manager shall be jointly responsible for the conduct of all
employees while the employees are on the premises of the massage establishment.
Any act or omission of an employee constituting a violation of any provision of this
Chapter shall be deemed to be an act or omission of the owner, operator and on duty
manager for purposes of determining whether the massage establishment permit should
be suspended or revoked, or an application for such permit or renewal thereof, denied.
24. Licensed Massage Technicians. No owner or operator shall
employ any person as a massage technician who does not have a valid massage
technician permit issued pursuant to this Chapter. Every operator shall report to the
Chief of Police any change of employees, whether by new or renewed employment,
discharge or termination, on the form and in the manner required by the Chief of Police.
The report shall contain the name of the employee and the date of hire or termination.
The report shall be made within five (5) business days of the date of hire or termination.
25. Notices. In the event that any employee of the massage
establishment or any person who has been aided and abetted by an employee of the
massage establishment has been found, after full hearing by administrative proceeding
or state court, to have violated any of the offenses listed in 5.22.040A.1 or
5.22.070A.1, then the Chief of Police may require posting of the following notice:
NOTICE TO ALL PATRONS - THIS MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT AND THE
MASSAGE ROOMS DO NOT PROVIDE COMPLETE PRIVACY AND ARE SUBJECT
TO INSPECTION BY THE TEMECULA POLICE DEPARTMENT WITHOUT PRIOR
NOTICE.
a. The notice set forth above shall be prepared and issued by
the Chief of Police.
b. The notice shall be conspicuously posted in locations within
the massage establishment that are easily visible to any person entering the premises
and in each massage room. The notice shall be posted for twelve (12) months following
the date of the offense.
C. The requirement for posting the notice described in this
Section is cumulative and in addition to all other remedies for violations, and penalties,
set forth in this Chapter or otherwise in the ordinances, laws, rules or regulations of the
City of Temecula, County of Riverside and the State of California.
26. Licensed massage technician on premises. No massage
establishment permitted hereunder shall be open for business without having at least
one massage technician holding a current valid permit for the specific establishment on
the premises and on duty at all times when the establishment is open.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 20
27. Display of permits and identification cards. The operator and/or
designated manager(s) shall ensure that the massage technician permit for each
massage technician employed at the establishment (whether on-duty or not) is
displayed or retained as required by § 5.22.080A.2, and that each massage technician
is wearing or has in his/her possession the identification required by § 5.22.090A.3. at
all times when in the massage establishment. Such identification shall be provided to
City or Police Department representatives upon demand.
28. Compliance with all laws. Each owner, operator and on-duty
manager shall at all times comply with all provisions of this Chapter and all other
applicable provisions of the Temecula Municipal Code, all conditions of any required
zoning approvals, conditions imposed by the Chief of Police, and all state and federal
laws, statutes and regulations.
3.22.090 Requirements applicable to Massage Technicians.
A. All massage technicians shall comply with the following requirements and
any other conditions imposed by the Chief of Police on issuance of the massage
technician's permit.
1. Prohibited massage areas. No massage technician or other person
shall massage the genitals or anal area of any patron or the breast(s) of any female
patron. No massage technician or other person, while performing any task or service
associated with the massage business, shall be present in any room with another
person unless the person's genitals, gluteal crease, anus or, in the case of a female, her
breasts, are fully covered.
2. Coverings. The massage technician shall provide to each patron
clean, sanitary and opaque coverings capable of covering areas of the patron identified
as prohibited massage areas in § 5.22.090A.1, including the genital area, anus and
female breasts. No common use of such coverings is permitted, and re-use is
prohibited unless adequately cleaned and sanitized. No massage technician shall
massage any patron unless the person's genitals, gluteal crease, anus and, in the case
of a female, her breasts, are fully covered at all times while the technician or other
employee is present in the same room as the patron.
3. Identification cards. The massage technician shall wear or have in
his/her possession a photo identification card prepared and issued by the Police
Department at all times when present in the massage establishment. Such
identification shall be provided to City regulatory officials upon demand. When worn,
the identification card shall be worn on outer clothing with the photo side facing out. If a
massage technician changes his or her business address, he or she shall, prior to such
change, obtain from the Chief of Police a new photo identification card and advise the
Police Department, in writing, of the new business address.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 21
4. Massage locations. Massage technicians shall not perform any
massage at any location other than the massage establishment specified on the permit,
or at an authorized outcall location booked by that massage establishment pursuant to §
5.22.080C.
5. Names. While on duty, the massage technician shall not use any
name other than that specified on his or her photo identification card.
6. Clothing. Massage technicians and all massage establishment
employees shall be fully clothed at all times while within a massage establishment or
performing services under a massage establishment permit. Clothing shall be of a fully
opaque, non-transparent material and provide complete covering of the genitals, pubic
area, buttocks, anal area and chest area.
7. Inspections. By accepting a massage technician permit, each
massage technician consents to the inspection of the massage establishment by the
City's Building and Safety, Fire Department, Police Department, Code Enforcement and
the Health Department for the purpose of determining that the provisions of this Chapter
or other applicable laws or regulations are met. The massage technician further
consents to the inspection of the occupied massage rooms by the Police Department for
the purpose of determining that the provisions of this Chapter are met upon occurrence
of any of the conditions referenced in § 5.22.080.6.25 which would require the posting
of the Notice to All Patrons.
8. Every massage technician licensed under this Chapter shall
annually complete at least twelve (12) hours of continuing education courses in
massage from a recognized school of massage or equivalent organization as approved
by the Chief of Police. Failure to complete such hours and submit proof of such
completion in a form satisfactory to the Chief of Police at the time of permit renewal
shall be grounds for denial of permit renewal. The minimum requirement of twelve (12)
hours of continuing education courses to renew a permit is based on a five-hundred-
hour education recommendation for membership in the American Massage Therapists
Association (AMTA). If recommended hours of education for membership in the AMTA
increase, the number of continuing education hours for renewal of permits under this
Section shall increase by two (2) hours for each additional one-hundred (100) education
hours required for membership in the AMTA.
6.22.100 Health certificate.
A. Before issuing or renewing a massage technician permit, the Chief of
Police shall submit the name and address of the applicant to the County Health Officer
and shall advise the applicant that he or she must report for examination or,
alternatively, the applicant may report to a private medical doctor duly licensed to
practice medicine in the State of California for examination. The Chief of Police shall
not issue the permit until advised that the applicant has been examined by the County
R:/Ords 2008/Ords 08-12 22
Health Officer or his or her private physician and has been found to be free of any
contagious or communicable disease as defined in this Chapter.
B. In addition to the above requirements, upon submission of an initial
application for a massage technician permit or upon annual renewal thereafter, the
applicant shall submit to the Chief of Police a certificate from a medical doctor stating
that the applicant has, within fifteen (15) days immediately prior thereto, been examined
and found to be free of any contagious or communicable disease as defined in this
Chapter; and if said applicant is not so found free of any contagious or communicable
disease, his or her permit shall be denied or revoked by the Chief of Police. Failure to
provide such health certificate shall result in revocation of the massage technician
permit.
C. For purposes of this Chapter, contagious and communicable diseases
shall include tuberculosis and hepatitis A, B and C.
D. Notwithstanding the above, if a person with a communicable disease
wishes to be considered for licensing by the City, such individual may provide a report
from an appropriate medical specialist concluding that, based upon a recent physical
and review of medical records, allowing such individual to practice massage therapy
would not interfere with the individual's treatment or health and that the individual's
practice of massage therapy would not create a risk to patients, including patients with
compromised immune systems. The report shall include any precautions
recommended by the medical specialist. The Chief of Police shall consider the report
and shall issue the permit within fifteen (15) days unless he or she finds that the risk of
harm to the applicant or to massage customers if the permit is granted would be
significant.
E. The report or certification of an appropriate medical specialist must
provide a description of his/her specialty and practice and include a detailed description
of the physical and medical history he/she conducted, including the results of any tests
for such individual. Any and all records provided by an applicant pursuant to this
section shall be maintained as confidential medical records.
5.22.110 Transfers and changes of business.
A. Every owner and operator shall report immediately to the Police
Department any and all changes of ownership or management of the massage
establishment or business, including, but not limited to, changes of manager or other
person principally in charge, stockholders holding more than 5% of the stock of the
corporation, officers, directors and partners, and any and all changes of name, style or
designation under which the business is to be conducted and all changes of address or
telephone numbers of the massage business. A change of location of any of the
premises may be approved by the Chief of Police provided there is compliance with all
applicable regulations of the City of Temecula.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 23
B. No massage establishment permit may be sold, transferred or assigned by
a permit holder, or by operation of law, to any other person or persons. Any such sale,
transfer or assignment, or attempted sale, transfer or assignment, shall be deemed to
constitute a voluntary surrender of such permit and such permit shall thereafter be null
and void; provided and excepting, however, that if the permit holder is a partnership and
one or more of the partners should die, one or more of the surviving partners may
acquire, by purchase or otherwise, the interest of the deceased partner or partners
without effecting a surrender or termination of such permit, and in such case, the permit,
upon notification to the Chief of Police, shall be placed in the name of the surviving
partners. No massage technician permit may be sold, transferred or assigned by a
permit holder or any operation of law to any other person or persons.
3.22.120 Fees.
The City Council shall establish by resolution, and from time to time may amend,
the fees for the administration of this Chapter, including required testing. Fees required
by this Chapter shall be in addition to any required under any other chapter of this code.
3.22.130 Exemptions.
A. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to the following classes of
individuals or businesses while engaged in the performance of the duties of their
respective professions:
1. Physicians, surgeons, chiropractors, osteopaths, acupuncturists
and physical therapists who are duly licensed to practice their respective professions in
the State of California, provided such professionals are performing massage, as defined
in this Chapter, at a licensed business as part of and to the extent permitted by their
respective professions, and further provided massage is not being performed at any
time by massage technicians or other persons who are required to obtain a massage
technician permit pursuant to this Chapter;
2. Registered and licensed vocational nurses working on the premises
of, and under the direct supervision of, a State licensed physician, surgeon, chiropractor
or osteopath. Practical nurses or other persons that do not meet the requisite
qualifications to obtain a massage technician permit under this Chapter, or any other
person otherwise licensed by the State of California, whether or not employed by a
physician, surgeon, chiropractor or osteopath, may not provide massage services or act
as a massage technician;
3. Barbers and cosmetologists, licensed by the State of California,
and persons licensed by the State of California to provide skin care {estheticians} or nail
care (manicurists), as defined and to the extent provided in Business and Professions
Code Section 7316, or any successor provision thereto, as follows:
a. Barbers may massage the face and scalp;
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 24
b. Cosmetologists may massage the scalp, face, neck,
arms, hands, feet below the calf, and the body extending from the
clavicles upward;
C. Estheticians may massage the face, neck, arms and
the body extending from the clavicles upward;
d. Manicurists may massage the hands, and feet below
the calf.
State licensed barbers, cosmetologists, estheticians and manicurists are
subject to the exemption provided by this subsection 3 only while providing other
barbering, cosmetology, skin care or nail care services in a facility licensed by the City
of Temecula to provide such services. The provisions of this subsection 3 apply to
apprentices of any of the foregoing who are licensed by the State of California, but only
while performing barbering, cosmetology, skin care or nail care services under the direct
supervision of a barber, cosmetologist, esthetician or manicurist who is subject to the
exemption provided by this subsection.
4. Hospitals, nursing homes, sanitariums, or other health care facilities
duly licensed by the State of California;
5. Fully accredited high schools, junior colleges, and colleges or
universities whose athletic coaches and trainers are acting within the scope of their
employment;
6. Trainers of amateur, semiprofessional or professional
athletes or athletic teams;
7. Massage conducted in the course of education at any recognized
school of massage, as defined herein.
8. "Chair massage", i.e., massage of the body from the waist up, to a
person seated in a chair, provided by a City-permitted massage technician, provided
the customer and massage technician are fully clothed and the massage is provided in
full compliance with §5.22.090A.1 (no massage of prohibited massage areas.)
9. Persons and businesses exempt from the permitting requirements
of this Chapter, pursuant to any State or Federal law that expressly preempts the permit
requirements set forth in this Chapter, but only to the extent of such preemption. Any
business or person claiming to be exempt pursuant to this subsection 9 shall have the
burden of establishing the applicability of such exemption.
R:/Ords 2008/Ords 08-12 25
B. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to massage services
provided by the City of Temecula or by any City-authorized person, group, entity,
business or organization as part of an official City program or function approved in
writing by the City Manager.
5.22.140 Duration and renewal of permits.
A. Permits for massage establishments and technicians may be renewed on
a year-to-year basis provided the permit holder continues to meet the requirements of
this Chapter.
B. Applications for the permit renewal shall be filed with the Chief of Police at
least sixty (60) days prior to expiration of the existing permit, otherwise the permit will
lapse. At the discretion of the Chief of Police, a conditional permit pending satisfactory
completion of the renewal application process may be issued to renewal applicants who
have no permit revocation or suspension proceedings pending at the time of filing of the
renewal application.
C. Renewal applications shall set forth such information as may be required
by the Chief of Police to update and verify the information contained in the original
permit application. The applicant shall pay a new application fee when applying for
renewal.
5.22.150 Suspension, revocation, permit denial, and appeal.
A. Violation and noncompliance. The Chief of Police may refuse to renew a
permit or may revoke or suspend an existing permit on the grounds that the applicant or
permit holder has failed to comply with the permit conditions or other requirements of
this Chapter. If a suspended permit lapses during the suspension period, a new
application must be made at the end of the suspension period. In any such case, the
applicant or permit holder shall have the right to appeal in the time and manner set forth
in this Section.
permit.
B. Revocation, suspension, and denial of renewal of massage establishment
1. The Chief of Police may revoke or refuse to renew a massage
establishment permit if he or she finds that any owner or operator: (i) no longer
satisfies the requirements of § 5.22.040A, or (ii) has engaged in or permitted conduct
that would be grounds for denial of a permit under § 5.22.040A., or (iii) has engaged in
or permitted conduct that would be a violation of § 5.22.0806.19, B.20, B.24 or §
5.22.090 A.1, A.2 or A.6, as applies to massage technicians performing outcall
massage; or (iv) has violated any provision of this Chapter within one year following
suspension under subsection 2 below; or (v) has demonstrated an inability to operate or
manage the massage establishment in a law abiding manner, thus necessitating one or
more criminal investigations of the establishment by law enforcement officers.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 26
2. The Chief of Police may suspend a massage establishment permit
for a period of thirty (30) days for violation of any subsection of § 5.22.080 not listed in
subsection 1. above.
permit.
C. Revocation, suspension, and denial of renewal of massage technician
1. The Chief of Police may revoke or refuse to renew a massage
technician permit if he or she finds that the technician: (i) no longer satisfies the
requirements of § 5.22.070, or (ii) has engaged in conduct that would be grounds for
denial of a permit under § 5.22.070A, or (iii) has engaged in conduct that would be a
violation of § 5.22.090A.1, A.2 or A.6, or (iv) has violated any provision of this Chapter
within one (1) year following suspension under subsection 2 below.
2. The Chief of Police may suspend a massage technician permit for a
period of 30 days for any violation of any section or subsection of this Chapter not listed
in subsection 1, above.
D. Notice. When the Chief of Police concludes that grounds for denial of a
new permit or permit renewal, or permit suspension or revocation exist, the Chief of
Police shall serve the applicant or permit holder, either personally or by certified mail
addressed to the business or residence address of applicant or permit holder, with a
Notice of Denial of Permit, or Notice of Intent to Suspend, Revoke or Deny Renewal.
This Notice shall state the reasons for the decision, the effective date of the decision,
the right of the applicant or permit holder to appeal the decision to a Hearing Officer,
and that the decision will be final if no written appeal is filed within the time permitted.
E. Appeal.
1. The right to file a written appeal shall terminate upon the expiration
of fifteen (15) days of the date of mailing by the Chief of Police of the Notice specified in
subsection D, above. The written appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk of the City of
Temecula and shall be accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount as set by City
Council resolution, and the City Clerk shall promptly forward a copy of the appeal to the
Chief of Police.
2. In the event an appeal is timely filed, the denial of renewal,
suspension or revocation shall not be effective until a final decision has been rendered
by the Hearing Officer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Chief of Police finds and
determines that permitting a massage establishment to continue to operate, or a
massage technician to continue to provide massage, pending the appeal hearing, would
present an unreasonable and immediate risk to the public health and safety, the denial
of renewal, suspension or revocation may take effect immediately. If no timely appeal is
filed, the denial of renewal, suspension or revocation shall become effective upon
expiration of the period for filing appeals.
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 27
3. Upon receipt of a timely appeal, the City Clerk shall make
arrangements for the selection of a Hearing Officer to conduct the Appeal Hearing. Not
less than fifteen (15) days prior to the Appeal Hearing, the City Clerk shall notify the
Chief of Police and the Appellant of the names of three qualified attorneys or retired
Superior Court or Appellate Court judges submitted to the City Clerk by a reputable firm
providing mediators and arbitrators to serve as a panel from which the Hearing Officer
will be selected. Within five (5) days of the date of mailing the notice of the available
panel, the Chief of Police and the Appellant may notify the City Clerk in writing that he
or she elects to remove one of the three potential Hearing Officers. The City Clerk shall
then request the mediation and arbitration firm to select one of the remaining names on
the list as the designated Hearing Officer for the Appeal Hearing. The Hearing Officer
shall be fair and impartial and shall have no bias for or against the Chief of Police or the
Appellant.
4. At the Appeal Hearing, the Hearing Officer shall receive oral and
written evidence from the Chief of Police and the Appellant. The Hearing Officer shall
have authority to administer oaths to those persons who will provide oral testimony.
The evidence presented need not comply with the strict rules of evidence set forth in the
California Evidence Code but shall be the type of evidence upon which reasonable and
prudent people rely upon in the conduct of serious affairs. The Hearing Officer shall
have broad authority to control the proceedings and to provide for cross examination of
witness in a fair and impartial manner. The Chief of Police shall have the burden of
proof to establish by clear and convincing evidence the facts upon which his decision is
based. The Appeal Hearing shall be recorded by audio recording. Any party may, at its
sole cost and expense, utilize the services of a certified court reporter to prepare the
verbatim record of the hearing. If a court reporter is used, the transcript prepared shall
be made available for purchase to both parties. The Hearing Officer may continue the
Appeal Hearing from time to time, but only upon written motion of a party showing good
cause for the continuance.
5. The Hearing Officer may uphold, modify or reverse the decision of
the Chief of Police. Within ten (10) days of the conclusion of the Appeal Hearing, the
Hearing Officer shall render his or her decision and make written findings supporting the
decision. He or she shall send the decision to the City Clerk. Upon receipt of the
Hearing Officer's Decision, the City Clerk shall send a copy of it to the Chief of Police
and the Appellant, along with a proof of mailing.
6. Within ten (10) days from date of the City Clerk's mailing of the
Decision, either party may appeal the Decision to the City Manager. The appeal shall
be in writing and filed with the City Clerk, and shall state the grounds of the appeal and
specify the errors in the Hearing Officer's decision. Upon receipt of the Appeal, the City
Clerk shall schedule the Appeal for review by the City Manager to occur within thirty
(30) days.
7. The City Manager's review of the Appeal shall be limited to
determining whether the evidence received at the Appeal Hearing supports the findings
R:/Ords 2008/Ords 08-12 28
and decision of the Hearing Officer. The City Manager shall be limited to considering
the evidence presented at the Appeal Hearing. No public hearing shall be required and
no new evidence shall be taken by the City Manager. The City Manager's decision on
the Appeal shall be set forth in a written opinion. The City Clerk shall mail a copy of the
City Manager's opinion to the Chief of Police and the Appellant along with a proof of
service. Any legal action challenging the City Manager's decision shall be filed within
ninety (90) days of the date of the proof of service of mailing of the City Manager's
opinion, pursuant to § 1094.5, et seq. of the California Code of Civil Procedure. The
City Manager's decision shall be final and effective upon mailing of the opinion. If the
Appellant prevails following a final decision, the appeal fee shall be returned.
5.22.160 Violation and penalty.
A. Violation of any provision of this Chapter is a misdemeanor and is subject
to enforcement pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 1.20, 1.21 and/or 1.24 of Title 1
of this code. The provisions of this Chapter may be enforced by members of the
Riverside County Sheriffs Department, persons employed by the City whose job
descriptions require the person to enforce the provisions of this Code, including but not
limited to code enforcement officers, and such other Enforcement Officials as described
in Section 1. 16.020 of this Code or its successor sections.
B. Any massage establishment operated, conducted or maintained contrary
to the provisions of this Chapter shall be, and the same is declared to be, unlawful and
a public nuisance, and the City may, in addition to or in lieu of prosecuting a criminal or
administrative action hereunder, commence an action or actions, proceeding or
proceedings for the abatement, removal and enjoinment thereof, in the manner provided
by law, and shall take such other steps and shall apply to such court or courts as may
have jurisdiction to grant such relief as will abate or remove such massage
establishment businesses and restrain and enjoin any person from operating,
conducting or maintaining a massage establishment or contrary to the provisions of this
Chapter."
SECTION 3: Time for Compliance. Commencing on the effective date of this
Ordinance and Chapter hereby adopted, all permits are to be issued in accordance with
the provisions of said Chapter.
Existing massage practitioners' and/or technicians' permits that are valid and in
good standing as of the effective date of this Ordinance, shall continue in effect until
expiration, provided the affiliated massage establishment permit remains valid. All
existing and validly permitted massage practitioner or technician permit holders shall
have an additional three (3) years from the effective date of this Ordinance to meet and
comply with the 500-hour training and testing requirement (if testing is required.)
provided, however, that the 500-hour training and testing requirement of this Ordinance
shall not apply if during this period the Massage Therapy Organization of the State of
California established pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 384 of the Statues of 2008,
Chapter 10.5 of the Business and Professions Code, commencing at Section 4600 ("SB
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 29
731 has implemented its certification program pursuant to SB 731 and such massage
practitioner or massage technician is certified by the Massage Therapy Organization.
Each massage establishment permit holder legally doing business as of the
effective date of this Ordinance shall apply for a new permit not later than one-hundred
twenty (120) days from said date, and shall comply with all new permit holder
requirements for issuance of a permit before such a new permit may be issued.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in order to avoid a lapse of permit, owners and operators
having massage establishment permits that will expire within said 120 day period must
apply for a new permit within such time as is provided for a new permit application to be
processed in accordance with this Ordinance. If a permit is denied for any such
business, the business shall cease operation upon issuance of the decision of the Chief
of Police, unless a timely appeal is filed in accordance with the Chapter adopted hereby.
In such case, the business shall cease operation if and when there is a final decision
upholding the decision of the Chief of Police.
SECTION 4: Severability. The City Council declares that, should any article, provision,
section, paragraph, sentence or word of this Ordinance or the Chapter hereby adopted
be or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by
reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs,
sentences and words of the Chapter hereby adopted shall remain in full force and
effect.
SECTION 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008.
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 30
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 08-12 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading
at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 18th day of November,
2008, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the following
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
RJOrds 2008/Ords 08-12 31
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
ITEM NO. 12
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF
THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
NOVEMBER 18, 2008
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order at
7:40 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Edwards, Naggar, Washington,
Comerchero
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Roberts
Also present were City Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No reports at this time.
CSD CONSENT CALENDAR
18 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Approve the minutes of October 28, 2008.
19 Award the Construction Contract for the Temecula Community Center Expansion, Project
No. PW06-05
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Award a construction contract for the Temecula Community Center Expansion,
Project No. PW06-05 to Erickson Hall Construction Company in the amount of
$1,184,000;
19.2 Authorize the General Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $118,400, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount;
19.3 Make a finding that the Temecula Community Center Expansion project is exempt
from Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) fees.
MOTION: Director Edwards moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Director Naggar
seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected approval with the exception of Director
Roberts who was absent.
RAMinutes\111808
CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
No report at this time.
CSD GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT
No report at this time.
CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
No additional comments.
CSD ADJOURNMENT
At 7:41 p.m., the Temecula Community Services District meeting was formally adjourned to
Tuesday, November 25, 2008, at 5:30 p.m. for a Closed Session with regular session
commencing at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California.
Jeff Comerchero. President
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk/District Secretary
[SEAL]
RAMinutes\111808 2
ITEM NO. 13
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO: General Manager/Board of Directors
FROM: Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Temecula
Community Center Expansion Grading Project No. PW06-05 Phase 1
PREPARED BY: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works
Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works
Bill McAteer, Construction Manager
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors:
1. Accept the Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading, Project No. PW06-05 as
complete; and
2. Direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond and
accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; and
3. Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion
if no liens have been filed.
BACKGROUND: The Community Services District Board of Directors awarded a design
contract to Meyer and Associates for the preparation of the master plan and construction documents
for an expansion at the Temecula Community Center (TCC). During the development of the master
plan, it was determined that two historically significant structures, (the Escallier House and Barn),
that occupied the future Old Town Civic Center site could be relocated to the southern-most part of
the TCC site. To expedite this relocation, a grading contract was awarded separately to prepare the
site.
On April 8, 2008, the Board of Directors awarded a contract to Addison Equipment Rental for the
grading of the TCC Expansion in the amount of $49,995.00 and authorized a contingency in the
amount of $4,999.50, 10% of the contract amount for a total authorization of $54,994.50.
On June 24, 2008, the Board of Directors authorized additional funds in the amount of $1,980.33 to
stabilize unsuitable soil for a final contract amount of $56,974.83.
The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications to
the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. All work will be warranted for a period of one (1)
year from the date of acceptance by the Board of Directors. The City had beneficial use of this
project site on May 20, 2008. The retention for this project was released pursuant to the provisions
of Public Contract Code Section 7107.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Temecula Community Center Expansion project is a Capital
Improvement Program and is funded through a Community Development Block Grant, Development
Impact Fees and Quimby. The total construction cost is $56,974.83, which is comprised of the
original contract amount of $49,995.00 and the authorized contingency of $6,979.83.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion
2. Maintenance Bond
3. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release
AND RETURN TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF TEMECULA
P.O. Box 9033
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described.
2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California
92590.
3. The Nature of Interest is a Contract which was awarded by the City of Temecula to
Addison Equipment Rental, 10206 Elm Ave., Fontana, CA 92335 to perform the following work of
improvement:
Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading
Project No. PW06-05 Phase 1
4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the
satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the
City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on November 25, 2008. That upon said
contract the Suretec Insurance Companywas surety for the bond given by the said company as required by
law.
5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula,
County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows:
Temecula Community Center Expansion Grading, Project No. PW06-05 Phase 1
6. The location of said property is: 28816 Pujol St, Temecula, CA
Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of November, 2008
City of Temecula
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk
I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of
perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF
COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of
Riverside by said City Council.
Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of November, 2008.
City of Temecula
Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk
CAProgram Files (x88)1Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp1897839.doc Form
May 12 08 01:24p Addison Equipment Rental 9098226898
Bond Number 4360206
CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
MAINTENANCE BOND
PROJECT NO PWO6.05 PHASE 9
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION GRADING
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT:
Addison Equipment Rental, 10206 Elm Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335
NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTORS
Corporation
a - hereinafter called Principal, and
Lhll;n wl~oUxrra CwporarkY, PnsbsasMp br'!ndwldun9
SUreTec Insurance Company, 3033 51h Avenue, Suite 300, San Diego CA 92103
NAME AND ADDRESS OF'SURETy
hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF
hereinafter Called OWNER, in tho penal sum of Fifty Six Thousand F
DOLLARS and 83/100
CENTS 56,474.53 1 in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than
ten (10%) of the Contract value payable by the said Cky of Temecula under the terms of the
Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and
severally, firmly by these presents.
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION Is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a
certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the 8th day of Aril 20 08 ' a op
of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PWOg
06 PHASE I, TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION GRADING.
WHEREAS, Said Contract provides that the principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee
for the period of one (f) year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER,
against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period;
and
WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and the final estimate was approved on Mav
2 , 20 08.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if wilhin one yper
from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done
under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work,
and the carrying out of the terns of said Contract. or it shall appear that defective materials were
furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this
instrument shall be void.
As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the fact) amount speed, costs and
reasonable expenses and fees shalt be included, including reasonable attomeys' fees incurred by
WNrEMNCE BOND M4 0.YY•MRO1E4tBF+a usr,.trum,,,...y~rp( py~gp",yx.
May 14 08 02:40p Rddison Equipment Rental 9098226898 p.2
the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and
included in any judgment rendered.
The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition
to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications
accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby
waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the
Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications.
14th
Signed and sealed this
(Seal)
SURETY
fay;
Kevin P. Reed
(Name) Attorney-in-Fact
(Title)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
day of May
PRINCIPAL.
By
20 os
Robert W. Dye Jr.
(Name)
Vice President
(Title)
By,
(Name)
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
(Title)
MAINTCNANCEGON0 M-2 pv;ir,~i~odr.C~3NVramwo Usionscui~ccM,u,nirCenserera~r<roo.wana:;.i~
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE
CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California
County of ORANGE
On _ 4 9 2cL)~ before ntc, Brandon K. Grindel, Notary Public
(love lasers * and aids of dw mTmm)
personally appeared 9~-L~
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persanW whose subscn-bed to
the within instrument and fledged to me that j'sbmWmy executed the same in ' authorized
capecity(ies), and that b ' ' signattx*pf on the instrument the person(p, or the entity upon behalf of
which the person , executed the instrurent.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
W ESS [try hand arrd ofiCiel Seal. BRANDON K. GRINDEEL
~n Comm. # 1662838 rn
UI NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA N
ORANGE COUNTY
My COMM. EXP. MAY 1, 2OtU
Of Navy Pk"k (Notary 3ertl ......~..........W.~
ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL. MNI+'ORMATION
DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOC'U'MENT
fri*ordacnptinno(mVmd ddae wo)
(Tick or dekwiytim ofatttmb d doe mm" eo otinmd)
Numba of Psps Dootmtant D*W `r ! A A_
~y ~.IAdoklwol infavtaatias)
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER
0 Individtat (s)
O Corporate Of kvr
(rmg)
Partner(s)
Attorney-ia-l=tect
0 Trustee(s)
0 Odd
Kt
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLEIINO TMS FORM
Av empta" At C&%%*ro awr esrwar wslMlke Co y, as
V,V atow is dhr navy stcOm or w arraraw aabmwkwtowvvv fo w curt M
! 1 caw~ oars a+s u*pd to 40 aberrant. The etr+v)r0 4 (~a
vbrywsrr 1r M k ntaolad masi* of Ca4tnda bt sack tlatmmew mW dkvmww
I 4pm - *nhiW m mV be plwsd at swk o iarmww so Axv m dw
t bhp Aw aw raynlrr air rtvwry to Aa ma mUW"m dkprJb• a nerory to
• ft m and Coaaay iaYmnmmt mm be the Soto and Cotrny wbate ft doe+ar m
ms(s) p"WaMy aFr+ellew before the notary p"C tot a edp 0&
• ltwe of as kstim awat be die data that do si~s) Vataarity 4" mao4 %4"
a m dm M dw mos 4Me Lire aduowletipta[ it ootapieled.
• The awtsy pbrlt swat /virt his or her tttavt as it appaats •ri0vin bit a tar
cawvlilmYsn lorbatved by a oottttta avd the* yrtur tfda (vtapey Oak)
+ Perim On cacao(s) of doarma si "90 who posonaNy appear at rho Neat of
mworrimm"
"mduciW
rooeai if a
-0 ankh the v4pwre an 1140 Vnei die ofe or
ro"M by oar iMM.04 forma (i.er
no fang Favlwe to oenoetly trtdiCSla dot
Groan n
NA oaatd help to mma drt
2UU4VWWMt;APA V17-JQ.Vr W"73•9N5 wr1W14ovyC1MmCurn
Smwdy attneh Ohm dne owet to v!e sipW domme It
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE
CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California
County of ORANGE
Uri - /A / t ko0 before me, Brandon K. Grindel, Notary Public
()sere iwrnt arwe aAd toga of air o(ftas)
personally appeared ~ohQ27 l~ t~ -
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the pefsoi o whose na ngg& sasu mcrbed to
the within instrument and =knowledged to me that*ydw hvy executed the same in authorized
capaciity(ias) and that by r si&u" on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of
which the person(A) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregping paragraph
is true and corrmt.
_ BRANDON K. GRINDEL
'fNESS my Mind and official seal. 77nn COMMA 1662838 rr~~
( V, = ~ 140TARYPU9LIC•CAIIFORMA 41
~•^i ORANGE CGUMt1.
ASI COl!f.1. EXP. }AY 1. 2010 ~6
[""^•~7 3ew+o..-/~'TSV[••R•T?VM'T17~•VV9Y•Oq~'T1
Riptaare eFNatary Public
ADDMONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION
DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT
(Ti* or dacrpdw of asacfbd deco)
- (Tick or *bMiptIm of oUsdW docwlraK caatimcd) ~vi
Number of Pil~e3 . _ DoeutYWM I~rie~ I o_..
(Add4hoW tnfm w6m)
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY 'THE SIGNER
Q individwl (1)
Caponte.Uft~r
D Paatner(s)
❑ Ana may-in-!:tact
❑ Tnnt
INM K: i IONS FOR C OMPL"No Ims
aay driwewfwilprtwr cottpkrrr err C.A7'rWn ~ eavok we
'%y - , abate In A hr wowry srraios or a ar'rtr se uchm rkAm
• &W and Cotray ofo 000 mart be the l%w wd Cotmy where Ale 4WANAt
A*"Ks) pefsaa * oPpt+r, Vetere die Mwy public for adutowledpateAt
• thm of woosrbw*m aaaat be Ow date Art the sip ws) Pasotrtty oppomw v hkh
amd o%dwstaaterateAteakawMedgwat isemo kud.
• The nowy pwk wait pest ho or ter rears sa it appoats 04i0riw We a ha
aswsadn faifeai' br s assets awd dM yww tft (nwwy pWWk)
• Pfim 00 hMnt(s) of doottttteat sipuer(s) who pasmNey appear at the time of
notan "
• fA&CW Ate tvttect SWCAar or pkwd fomK by acaft off woortc, lotm (i.e
iad *AVjyr s Asti )err cftb p the MOM form F46n a eormcdy l III, aas tarp
in bnow m mAy iatd w rr , * g - cf drottwieat rooo *ft
• TW INOWY real k0marira torch be der and 0woVz$u ally reprodsciblc.
f posion ftw no MW oast a 1wa. if rat wp maioa UWAkm ft?meal if a
JW06 wr era Pstw ft MbWwiro aow0ft a difrOOM sclowwWwwo fenw
• ~
the Y tlik W" w 8kh dw stptsetre an Me wO doe office of
cowlyde&
♦ Addkim d afrmom is m r pWW bra cotdd bap to omtni OW
8dI3I&0 rdprrrt is NO s boW s wAdrod to a dif wo daeurwtrl.
bdioase Barre w"0f4INh Ralf dtretattetr4 at w*& of papas aad date.
i MOM rite ap t"y ciw"d by dw S "W, if the der 00 rapaeitr it s
atporsse O iew, adicare dw We (i.a UK). (!FO, %"guy).
• Saw* a nch do 4mumtt to doe sipred decumertt
awe .entma nna rtz tv.v~ sN sra•YSes WWWX4U41yLVAV .eom
POA 510049
SureTec Insurance Company
(LIMITED POWER OF ATTORNEY
Know All Men by 21ese Presents, That SURETEC INSURANCE COMPANY (the "Company"), a corporation duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Texas, and having its principal office in Houston, Harris County, Texas, does by these presents
make, constitute and appoint
Kevin P. Reed
of Santa Ana, CA its true and lawful Attorney(s)-in-fact, with full power and authority hereby conferred in its name, place and stead, to
execute, acknowledge and deliver any and all bonds, recognizances, undertakings or other instruments or contracts of suretyship to
include waivers to the conditions of contracts and consents of surety, providing the bond penalty does not exceed
Five Million Dollars and no/100 ($5,000,000.00)
and to bind the Company thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such bonds were signed by the President, sealed with the corporate
seal of the Company and duly attested by its Secretary, hereby ratifying and confirming all that the said Attorney(s)-in-Fact may do in the
premises. Said appointment shall continue in force until _ 10131/09 and is made under and by authority of the following
resolutions of the Board of Directors of the SureTec Insurance Company:
Be it Resolved, that the President, any Vice-President, any Assistant Vice-President, any Secretary or any Assistant Secretary shall be and is
hereby vested with full power and authority to appoint any one or more suitable persons as Attorney(s)-in-Fact to represent and act for and on
behalf of the Company subject to the following provisions:
Attorney-in-Fact may be given full power and authority for and in the name of and of behalf of the Company, to execute, acknowledge and
deliver, any and all bonds, recognizances, contracts, agreements or indemnity and other conditional or obligatory undertakings and any and all
notices and documents canceling or terminating the Company's liability thereunder, and any such instruments so executed by any such
Attorney-in-Fact shall be binding upon the Company as if signed by the President and sealed and effected by the Corporate Secretary.
Be it Resolved, that the signature of any authorized officer and seal of the Company heretofore or hereafter affixed to any power of attorney or
any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, and any power of attorney or certificate bearing facsimile signature or facsimile seal shalt be valid
and binding upon the Company with respect to any bond or undertaking to which it is attached. (Adopted at a meeting held on 20'" of April,
1999.)
In Witness Whereof, SURETEC INSURANCE COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed by its President, and its corporate seal
to be hereto affixed this 20th day of June, A.D. 2005.
~~RAy~ TEC URANCE COMPANY
By:_
State of Texas ss:' `2,.t T;ECURANCE COMPANY
tw 1T B.J.Ki g, reside t
County of Harris'
On this 20th day of June, A.D. 2005 before me personally came B.J. King, to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say, that he
resides in Houston, Texas, that he is President of SURETEC INSURANCE COMPANY, the company described in and which executed the above
instrument; that he knows the seal of said Company; that the seal affixed to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the
Board of Directors of said Company; and that he signed his name thereto by like order.
MichelleDyenny
Fct ~tQ(y/r ~,LWI~
&ate of TOM$
W Cow EMTM Michelle Denny, Notary P lic
August 27, 2€ 08 My commission expires August 27, 2008
I, M. Brent Beaty, Assistant Secretary of SURETEC INSURANCE, COMPANY, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy
of a Power of Attorney, executed by said Company, which is still in full force and effect; and furthermore, the resolutions of the Board of Directors, set
out in the Power of Attorney are in full force and effect.
Given under any hand and the seal of said Company at Houston, Texas this ~11 day ~~l ( 20 A.D.
Any instrument issued in excess of the penalty stated above is totally void and without any validity.
For verification of the authority of this power you may call (713) 812-0800 any business day between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm CST.
CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OCT ZUUB
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE
PROJECT NO. PW06-05 PHASE 1
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION GRADING
This is to certify that '(hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR")
declares to the City of Temecula, unde,/loath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all
materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by
the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or
subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of
Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain
work of improvement known as PROJECT NO. PW06-05 PHASE 1, TEMECULA
COMMUNITY CENTER EXPANSION GRADING, situated in the City of Temecula, State
of California, more particularly described as follows:
INSERT ADDRESS OR DESCRIBE LOCATION OF WORK HERE
The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising
out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop
Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR.
Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR
hereby disputes the following amounts:
Description Dollar Amount to Dispute
Pursuant to Public Contract Code §7100, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release
and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of
them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might
exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of
any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above.
CONTRACTOR
Dated: 1 C% l By: ,t< L Cam.
Signature
Print Name and Title
ITEM NO. 14
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
General Manager/Board of Directors
FROM:
Herman D. Parker, Director of Community Services
DATE:
November 25, 2008
SUBJECT:
Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Roller Hockey
Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12
PREPARED BY: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works
Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works
Bill McAteer, Construction Manager
RECOMMEN
DATION: That the Board of Directors:
1. Accept the Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12 as complete;
and
2. Direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond and
accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; and
3. Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of
Completion if no liens have been filed.
BACKGROUND: This project included the demolition and removal of the existing roller
hockey rink dasher board system components and the procurement and installation of an entirely
new aluminum frame and composite dasher board system including: penalty, player and scorer
boxes, benches, professional goals and protective netting. On April 8, 2008, the Board of Directors
awarded a contract to YAKKAR for this work in the amount of $178,350.00 and authorized a
contingency in the amount of $17,835.00, 10% of the contract amount for a total authorization of
$196,185.00.
The project had $16,952.65 in change orders bringing the total cost of construction to $195,302.65.
With regard to the changes over the original contract amount, these expenses related to a complete
resurfacing and striping of the rink and for additional anchorage of the dasher board system to
enhance safety.
The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications
and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. All work will be warranted for a period of one
(1) year from the date the District obtained "beneficial use" (i.e., August 8, 2008) of the project
improvements. The retention for this project was released pursuant to the provisions of Public
Contract Code Section 7107.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board Replacement Project is a
Capital Improvement Project and is funded by Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fees, as
noted above, the total cost to complete this project was $195,302.65.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion
2. Maintenance Bond
3. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release
AND RETURN TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF TEMECULA
P.O. Box 9033
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92589-9033
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described.
2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California
92590.
3. The Nature of Interest is a Contract which was awarded by the City of Temecula to
YAKKAR, 1440 Hunters Trail, Glendora, CA 91740 to perform the following work of improvement:
Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System
Project No. PW07-12
4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the
satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the
City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on November 25, 2008. That upon said
contract the Western Surety Company was surety for the bond given by the said company as required by
law.
5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula,
County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows:
Roller Hockey Rink Dasher Board System, Project No. PW07-12
6. The location of said property is: 30875 Rancho Vista Rd., Temecula, CA
Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of November, 2008
City of Temecula
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk
I, Susan W. Jones CMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of
perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF
COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of
Riverside by said City Council.
Dated at Temecula, California, this 25th day of November, 2008.
City of Temecula
Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk
CAProgram Files (x88)1Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp1898187.doc Form
' CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
MAINTENANCE BOND
EXECUTED IN DUPLICATE BOND NUMBER 70494212
PROJECT NO. PW07-12 PREMIUM INCLUDED IN PERFORMANCE BOND
ROLLER HOCKEY RINK DASHER BOARD SYSTEM
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT:
' YAKAR, 1440 HUNTERS TRAIL, GLANDORA CA 91740
NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S
' a , hereinafter called Principal, and
((11 in whether a Corporation, Partnership or indviduaq
WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, 101 S. PHILLIPS SIOUX FALLS SD 57117
NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY
hereinafter called SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto CITY OF TEMECULA,
hereinafter called OWNER, in the penal sum of SEVENTEEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED
THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS and 00
CENTS 00 ) in lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than
ten (10%) of the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the
' Contract, for the payment of which, we bind ourselves, successors, and assigns, jointly and
severally, firmly by these presents.
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas, the Principal entered into a
certain Contract with the OWNER, dated the 4th day of APRIL , 20 08, a copy
of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of PROJECT NO. PW07-
12, ROLLER HOCKEY RINK DASHER BOARD SYSTEM.
WHEREAS, said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee
for the period of one (1) year after approval of the final estimate on said job, by the OWNER,
against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period;
and
WHEREAS, the said Contract has been completed, and the final estimate was approved on
AUGUST 8 20 08
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if within one year
from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done
under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work,
and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract, or it shall appear that defective materials were
furnished thereunder, then this obligation shall remain in full force and virtue, otherwise this
instrument shall be void.
As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified, costs and
reasonable expenses and fees shall be included, including reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by
MAINTENANCE BOND M-1 RACIPIPROIECT51PW071PW07-12 Roller Hockey RinkIPW07-12 Bid Doc.doc
the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing this obligation, all to be taxed as costs and
included in any judgment rendered.
The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition
to the terms of the Contract, or to the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications
accompanying the same, shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby
waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the
Contract, or to the work, or to the Specifications.
Signed and sealed this 13th day of OCTOBER 20 08
(Seal)
SURETY WESTERN SURETY COMPANY PRINCIP xAR
By' By:
SHAWN BILUME
CI ICq ylq~ rn~,~
(Nzme; (Na[~qJe) '
A7: TORVEY-liv-^ACT f Y`2 S, e N K
(i itie) (Title)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney
(Name)
(Title)
IAe11.RCNAmr[ PMIII ALA M4rIP%PPr16r.TC1P61 APWR7.19 PMH 14,*w RInkY3"7_19 AW IW dm
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE
CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California
County of RIVERSIDE
On O before me, R. CISNEROS "NOTARY PUBLIC"
(Here insert tanno and tide of the officer)
personally appeared SHAWN BLUME
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personA whose nameoYiskve-subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/helf4heir authorized
capacityfies), and that by his/heF#heirsignatureo) on the instrument the person(p7 or the entity upon behalf of
which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal. N Comm #1796916
NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA m
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
(Notary Sean My Comm. Expires June 7, 2012 J
Signature of Notary Public
ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION
DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT
(Title or description of attached document)
(Tide or description of attached document continued)
Number of Pages _ Document Date
(Additional information)
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER
❑
Individual (s)
❑
Corporate Officer
(Title)
❑
Partner(s)
❑
Auomey-in-Fact
❑
Trustee(s)
❑
Other
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM
Any acbmrhrdgmnu contained in Callibrttn must comam verbiage exactor as
appears above in the notary section or a separate acknowbedgmeni form guar be
property completed and marched to shat document. The ony mcepaw u if a
document is ro be recorded outside of California. In such innamex any alrernatrre
acknariedgmenr verbiage m may be printed an saeh a document so long as the
verbiage does not require the notary m do something that is illegal far a votary in
California (i. e. cenifytng the authorized capadty of the signer). Please cluck rite
document carefullyforproper notarial wording and mach this farm grmquired.
• Stare and County information must be the State and County where the document
signer(s) personally appeared before the notary public for acknowledgment
• Owe of nouriawion must be the date that the signer(s) personally appeared which
must also be the same date the acknowledgment is completed.
• The notary public must prim his or her name a it appears within his or her
commission followed by a comma and then your tide (notary public).
• Print the name(s) of document signer(s) who personally appear at the time of
notarization.
• Indicate the correct singular or plural forms by creasing off incorrect forms (i.c.
hdshe/dey; is /are) or circling the correct forms. Failure to correctly indicate this
information may lad to rejection of document according,
• The notary seal impression must be clear and photographically reproducible.
Impression must not cover text or lines. If Seel impression smudges, re-seal if a
sufficient area permits, otherwise complete a different acknowledgment forth.
• Signature of the notary public must match the signature on file with the office of
the county clerk.
4 Additional information is not required but could help to ensure this
acknowledgment is net misused or attached to a different document.
O Indicate die or type of attached document, number of poges and data.
d Indicate the capacity claimed by the sib. If the claimed capacity is a
corporate officer, mdicwc the tide (i.e. CEO, CFO, Secretary).
• Securely omen this docunent to the signed document
200SVemion CAPAVI2.10.07800-873.9865 www.NaaryC7ossts.cam
Western Surety Company
POWER OF ATTORNEY APPOINTING INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
Know All Men By These Presents, That WESTERN SURETY COMPANY, a South Dakota corporation, is a duly organized and existing corporation
having its principal office in the City of Sioux Falls, and State of South Dakota, and that it does by virtue of the signature and seal herein affixed hereby
make, constitute and appoint
Michael D Stong, Rosemary Cisneros, Shawn Blume, Jeremy Pendergast, Individually
of Riverside, CA, its true and lawful Attomey(s)-in-Fact with full power and authority hereby conferred to sign, seal and execute for and on its behalf bonds,
undertakings and other obligatory instruments of similar nature
- In Unlimited Amounts -
and to bind it thereby as fully and to the same extent as if such instruments were signed by a duly authorized officer of the corporation and all the acts of said
Attorney, pursuant to the authority hereby given, are hereby ratified and confirmed.
This Power of Attorney is made and executed pursuant to and by authority of the By-Law printed on the reverse hereof, duly adopted, as indicated, by
the shareholders of the corporation.
In Witness Whereof, WESTERN SURETY COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed by its Senior Vice President and its corporate seal to
be hereto affixed on this 19th day of October, 2007.
Op WESTERN SURETY COMPANY Paul . Bruflat, Senior Vice President
State of South Dakota 1
Jj ss
County of Minnehaha
On this 19th day of October, 2007, before me personally came Paul T. Bru lat, to me known, who, being by me duly swom, did depose and say: that
he resides in the City of Sioux Falls, State of South Dakota; that he is the Senior Vice President of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY described in and
which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to the said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was
so affixed pursuant to authority given by the Board of Directors of said corporation and that he signed his time thereto pursuant to like authority, and
acknowledges same to be the act and deed of said corporation.
My commission expires +
D. KRELL
November 30, 2012 ~HO
+ x
orri
• SOUTH UTH DmAKOfAY /J•
♦ti......ti......~.titir..+~.ti~...~.titi....
D. Krell, NoTliry Public
CERTIFICATE
1, L. Nelson, Assistant Secretary of WESTERN SURETY COMPANY do hereby certify that the Power of Attorney hereinabove set forth is still in
force, and further certify that the By-Law of the corporation printed on the reverse, hereof is still in force. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed
my name and affixed the seal of the said corporation this I ~f t I day of(,'~i.('j , ;XX V .
+/s„ItETyc WESTERN SURETY COMPANY
4'M
L. Nelson, Assistant Secretary
Form F4280-09-06
CITYOF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE
PROJECT NO PM7-12
ROLLER HOCKEYMNK DASHER BOARD SYSTEM
This is to certify that 1" Y'* (tom the 'CONTRACTORI declares
to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor,
services, toils, equipment, and aii other bid conhaded for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of
the CONTRACTORS agents, employees or -subcontractors used or in contribution to the
execution of We contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the buil' g, erection,
construction, or repair of that certain work of Improvement known as PROJECT NO. M0742,
ROLLER HOCKEY RINK DASHER BOARD SYSTEM, situated in the City of Temecula, State of
California, more particularly described as follows:
KA
The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said
Contract which would Mute grounds for any third party to daim a Stop Notice against of any
..unpaid suns owing to the CONTRACTOR.
Further, in connectiom with the final payment of the Cordrad, the CONTRACTOR hereby
disputes the following amounts:
Description Dollar Amount to Dispute
Pursuers to Public Conrad Code §710D, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and
acquit the city of TemecrrM and all agents and employees of the City. and each of them, from arty
and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the
CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the
CONTRACTOR has not disputed above.
CONTRACTOR
Dated: < < , ty (fib 9y
Signature
M akxtw Am,,-, f a:,
PM Narne and TO&
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
ITEM NO. 15
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF
THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
NOVEMBER 18, 2008
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 7:41
p.m., in the City Council Chambers, at 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Comerchero, Edwards, Naggar,
Washington
ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Roberts
Also present were City Manager Nelson, City Attorney Thorson, and City Clerk Jones.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No comments at this time.
RDA CONSENT CALENDAR
20 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Approve the minutes of October 28, 2008.
21 Professional Services Agreement between Agency and Fehr & Peers
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1 That the Agency Members approve a Professional Services Agreement between the
Agency and Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants for the Old Town Parking
Management Plan, in the amount of $53,510;
21.2 Approve a 10% contingency for an amount of $5,351.
22 Old Town Parking License Agreement - Munson
RECOMMENDATION:
22.1 That the Agency Members extend the Old Town License Agreement between the
Temecula Redevelopment Agency and Dennis Munyon for an annual amount of
$9,500.
RAMinutes1111808
MOTION: Agency Member Comerchero moved to approve the Consent Calendar. Agency
Member Washington seconded the motion and electronic vote reflected approval with the
exception of Agency Member Roberts who was absent.
RDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS REPORT
No reports at this time.
RDA AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS
No reports at this time.
RDA ADJOURNMENT
At 7:42 p.m., the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to
Tuesday, November 25, 2008, at 5:30 p.m. for a Closed Session with regular session
commencing at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California
Ron Roberts, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
RAMinutes1111808 2
RDA DEPARTMENTAL
REPORT
ITEM NO. 1 6
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
Executive Director/Agency Members
FROM:
John Meyer, Redevelopment Director
DATE:
November 25, 2008
SUBJECT:
Redevelopment Departmental Monthly Report
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
REDEVELOPMENT
Town Square Market Place
As part of the Civic Center Master Plan, the City has created a development opportunity for
approximately 52,000 square feet of commercial and office development surrounding the Town
Square along the reconfigured Main Street. The Agency has issued a Request for Interest to select
a preferred development partner. Initially six firms were interviewed and a second round of
interviews took place in early April. Council and Staff have heard presentations from the two
finalists. A site visit was also conducted. On August 26, 2008, the City Council entered into an
Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Pelican Properties to develop the project.
Facade Improvement Program
The Facade Improvement Program provides funding assistance to Old Town business and property
owners to provide exterior improvements to their buildings and property. Funding in the amount of
$80,000 is available during FY 2008-09.
The following facade improvements are in process or recently completed:
Palomar Hotel
- Paint Exterior, New Windows and Doors
La Menagerie
- Design and Install Sand Blasted Wood Signs
The Bank of Mexican Food
- Paint Exterior Door & Window Frames
Butterfield Square
- Paint Exterior
European Living
- New Signs
The Public House Restaurant
- Paint Exterior
- New Awnings
HOUSING
Housina Element Ur)date
The Agency is preparing the Housing Element Update. A second draft of the Housing Element was
submitted to the state Department of Housing and Community Development {HCD} for a 60 -day
review and comment period on July 2, 2008. HCD comments were received on September 8,
2008. Staff met with HCD on October 17, 2008 to review proposed amendments based on HCD's
comments. A final draft will be submitted to HCD for review in November 2008. A revised timeline
has been prepared that anticipates a Planning Commission hearing in January 2009 and a City
Council hearing in February 2009. Upon adoption by the City Council, the Housing Element will be
submitted a final time to HCD for a 90-day Certification review.
Diaz Road Exclusive Negotiation Agreement
The Agency issued a Request for Interestto select a preferred development partner for the 30 acre
site located on Diaz Road. Seven firms have responded. On September 9, 2008, the City Council
entered into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with RC Hobbs Companyto develop the project.
The Warehouse at Creekside
On August 12, 2008, the City Council approved an Owner Participation Agreementwith Warehouse
at Creekside for an Affordable Housing Mixed Use Project. The Agency is currently working with Bill
Dalton on a new development on 3rd Street in Old Town. The proposed development includes 32
units of affordable housing and 3500 square foot ground floor of commercial. The project includes 1
dedicated parking space for each residential unit.
First Time Homebuyers Program
On July 22, 2008, the City Council approved an amendment to increase the loan amount for down
payment assistance from $24,000 to $65,000. This down payment assistance will allow qualifying
households to purchase homes in the $250,000 - $300,000 price range. Payments and interest are
deferred for the first 5 years and then fully amortized in years 6 through 30. The Agency conducted
a workshop for approved lenders on November 20, 2008 to explain and promote the program.
Residential Improvement Programs
The program budget for FY 08-09 is $200,000.00, with $36,605 funded to date. The amount
available to each participant is $7,500.
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM NO. 17
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Proposed Development Code Amendment to define full service hotels, revise the
intensity bonus justification requirements, add new parking standards forfull service
hotels, and allow for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full
service hotel
PREPARED BY: Katie Innes, Case Planner
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Introduce and read by title only an Ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 08-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE FULL SERVICE
HOTELS, REVISE THE INTENSITY BONUS JUSTIFICATION
REQUIREMENTS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHOSE
INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS THE TARGET FLOOR
AREA RATIO ALLOWED IN THE ZONE, ADD NEW PARKING
STANDARDS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS, AND ADD
PROVISIONS TO ALLOW FOR TANDEM PARKING SPACES FOR
FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHEN VALET SERVICE IS PROVIDED
(LONG RANGE PLANNING APPLICATION NO. LR08-0045)
BACKGROUND: In 1995, the City Council adopted the Development Code forthe City
of Temecula. Since its adoption, the City Council periodically amends the Development Code to
improve its clarity and make corrections and amendments as necessary. This Development Code
amendment consists of four parts and proposes to add new policies, and clarify a number of
provisions within the Code, which are described in detail within the attached November 5, 2008
Planning Commission Staff Report (and redlined attachments), and summarized below:
1. Define full service hotels as follows: Hotels which provide lodging facilities, full service on-
site restaurant facilities, and meeting space, such as a ballroom; along with additional ancillary
services within the facility, which may include health club/spa services, concierge services, room
service, valet service, or similar hospitality related amenities, as determined by the Director of
Planning. The purpose of adding a definition for full service hotels to the Code is to clarify the
difference between typical hotel/motels and full service hotels.
2. Amend the intensity bonus justification requirements for full service hotels whose intensity of
development exceeds the target Floor Area Ratio (FAR) allowed in the zone. This Amendment
proposes to slightly relax the justification requirements for "full service hotels" in order to promote
this type of development within the City.
3. Add a new parking ratio standard for full service hotels to require that one parking space be
provided on-site for each guest room/suite, and require additional parking for the ancillary meeting
space within the hotel facility.
4. Add a provision to the Development Code which allows for tandem parking spaces when
valet service is provided at a full service hotel. Tandem spaces shall be permitted to be counted
toward meeting the off-street parking requirements for the use.
The Planning Commission considered the draft Ordinance on November 5, 2008. At this meeting
the Planning Commission recommended that the Ordinance be revised to add a provision which
requires parking spaces to be provided for the ancillary meeting space (ballrooms, conference
rooms, meeting rooms) within a full service hotel. The Commission adopted Resolution No. 08-48
recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance No. 08-_, with the requested
addition, with a vote of 5-0.
ENVIRONMENTAL: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the
proposed project has been deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review,
and a Notice of Exemption will be filed in compliance with CEQA Section 15061(b)(3).
It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to Title 17 of
the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant effect on the environment. Staff concluded that
there is no possibility that the Code amendments will have a significant effect on the environment
because the proposed Development Code Amendments are minor policychanges and clarifications
to Title 17 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Staff has reviewed the proposed changes to the
Development Code in context to their environmental impacts and determined that there is no
potential for an adverse impact on the environment. The proposed amendments do not allow for
additional development to occur or allow for significant adverse changes to the physical
environment. The proposed Amendment will strengthen the City's ability to conduct a CEQA review
for the future development of full service hotels since the Development Code amendment requires
the preparation of a traffic study. As a result, a site-specific CEQA review will occur for every
development application for full service hotels. These proposed amendments are minor
clarifications of the Code and will ensure compliance with CEQA. As such, there is no possibility
that the proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant
effect on the environment. As a result, staff has concluded that the project is exempt from further
environmental review pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3), as it has been determined, with
certainty, that there is no possibilitythat the Development Code amendments will have a significant
effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT: Encouraging projects which meet the definition of a "full service hotel,"
by slightly relaxing the FAR justification requirements for such development projects, would provide
a direct economic benefit to the City. These benefits include employment opportunities, the
expansion of the City of Temecula's tourism industry, as well as providing a fiscal benefit to the City
through the generation of transient occupancy tax.
ATTACHMENTS: City Council Ordinance 08-_
Redlined/Strikeout Changes to the Development Code
November 5, 2008 Planning Commission Staff Report
EXHIBIT A
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO. -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE FULL
SERVICE HOTELS, REVISE THE INTENSITY BONUS
JUSTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR FULL SERVICE
HOTELS WHOSE INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT
EXCEEDS THE TARGET FLOOR AREA RATIO
ALLOWED IN THE ZONE, ADD NEW PARKING
STANDARDS FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS, AND ADD
PROVISIONS TO ALLOW FOR TANDEM PARKING
SPACES FOR FULL SERVICE HOTELS WHEN VALET
SERVICE IS PROVIDED (LONG RANGE PLANNING
APPLICATION NO. LR08-0043)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. The proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code
were processed and an environmental review was conducted as required by the
California Environmental Quality Act.
B. The Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed
public hearing on November 5, 2008, to consider the proposed Amendments at which
time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to, and did testify either in
support or opposition to the matter.
C. Following consideration of the entire record of information received at the
public hearing and due consideration of the proposed amendments, the Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 08-48, recommending that the City Council
approve the proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code.
D. On November 25, 2008, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a
duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Amendments at which time all persons
interested in the proposed Amendments had the opportunity and did address the City
Council on these matters, and following receipt of all public testimony closed the
hearing.
Section 2. Further Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula, in
approving the proposed Municipal Code Amendments in Long Range Planning
Application No. LR08-0045 hereby makes the following additional findings as required
by section 17.01.040 ("Relationship to the General Plan") of the Temecula Municipal
Code:
A. The proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code
are allowed in the land use designations in which the uses are located, as shown on the
land use map, or are described in the text of the General Plan.
B. The proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code
are in conformance with the goals, policies, programs and guidelines of the elements of
the General Plan.
C. The proposed Amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code
are consistent with the General Plan and all applicable provisions contained therein.
Section 3. Environmental Findings. Environmental Compliance. In accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed City Council Ordinance No.
08- is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
("CEQA") pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Section
15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the
Ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment. There is no possibility that
the Code amendments will have a significant effect on the environment because the
proposed Development Code Amendments are minor policy changes and clarifications
to Title 17 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code. Staff has reviewed the proposed
changes to the Development Code in context to their environmental impacts and
determined that there is no potential for an adverse impact on the environment. The
proposed amendments do not allow for additional development to occur or allow for
significant adverse changes to the physical environment. The proposed amendment
will strengthen the City's ability to conduct CEQA review for the future development of
full service hotels within the City since the Development Code Amendment requires the
preparation of a traffic study for projects which exceed the target intensity (Floor Area
Ratio). As a result, site-specific CEQA review will occur for every development
application for full service hotels. The proposed amendments are minor clarifications of
the Code and will ensure compliance with CEQA. As such, there is no possibility that
the proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a
significant effect on the environment. As a result, staff has concluded that the project is
exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Section 15061 (b) (3), as it
has been determined, with certainty, that there is no possibility that the Development
Code Amendments will have a significant effect on the environment.
Section 4. That the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby amends
subsection 17.08.050 (A) of the Temecula Municipal Code by replacing it in its entirety
to read as follows:
A. Commercial/Office/Industrial Incentives - Increases in the Floor Area
Ratio. As part of the process of reviewing and approving an application for a
Development Plan or Conditional Use Permit, the approval authority may consider an
increase in the maximum allowable intensity as indicated in Tablel 7.08.040A. The
amount of the increased intensity shall not exceed the maximum of the density range or
floor area ratio stated for the specific land use designation. The requested increase
may not be approved if the City's traffic engineer determines that the increased intensity
would create an unmitigatable impact upon traffic circulation or would overburden any
utilities serving the area. To be eligible for an increase in the floor area ratio, the
applicant must meet the following:
1. A traffic impact analysis shall be prepared for the project as determined by
the City's traffic engineer.
2. All projects, {with the exception of "full service hotels", for which separate
justification requirements are provided below in Section 17.08.050 {3}} shall
provide for FAR increase justifications from Table 17.08.050A as follows:
a. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.01 to 0.10 shall
incorporate two justifications from Category I, one justification from
Category III, and one justification from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A.
b. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.11 to 0.20 shall
incorporate two justifications from Category I, one justification from
Category II, one justification from Category III, and one justification from
Category IV of Table 17.08.050A.
C. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.21 to 0.30 shall
incorporate two justifications from Category I, two justifications from
Category II, two justifications from Category III, and two justifications from
Category IV of Table 17.08.050A.
d. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.31 or more shall
incorporate two justifications from Category I, three justifications from
Category II, three justifications from Category III, and three justifications
from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A.
3. Full service hotel projects, must provide FAR increase justifications from
Table 17.08.050 A as follows:
a. Full service hotel projects proposing an FAR increase above the
target FAR allowed for the zone shall incorporate one justification from
Category I, one justification from Category II, one justification from
Category III and one justification from Category IV, of Table 17.08.050A.
Table 17.08.050A
Justifications for an FAR Increase
Category I
Category II
Category III
Category IV
Amenities
Landscape & Art
Community Benefit
Conservation
Uses which generate
Utilize LEED
Provide
Provide trees at
significant sales tax, or
(Leadership in Energy
bicycle
40% 36" box,
uses that generate
and Environmental
lockers or
40% 24" box, and
transient occupancy tax
Design) eligible recycled
lockable
20% 15-gallon
building materials (such
indoor
sizes with all
as exterior siding,
storage,
street and parking
roofing
changing
lot tree sizes at a
materials, and carpet -
rooms, and
minimum 24-inch
20% minimum recycle
showers
box size at the
content)
time of planting
The project generate
Utilize LEED eligible
Provide a
Increase
a significant number of
energy efficient
location for
landscaped open
higher paying jobs
materials and design to
an on-site
space area
(higher paying jobs are
include: roofing,
daycare
(increase must be
considered skilled and
insulation, exterior
facility or
equal to or
professional jobs that
siding, shading from
provide a
greater than 2%
provide
awnings and deep
location for a
of the site area
incomes of at least one-
recessed windows,
daycare
for each 0.05
half the median
automated sensors and
provider
increase in FAR)
household income for the
controls for lighting,
city of Temecula)
heating, and air
conditioning, waterless
urinals, low-flow toilets
and faucets, and
aerators and timers on
faucets
Provide enhanced public
Provide for on-site
Provide
Increase
facilities that are needed
renewable energy
parking
landscaped
by the city beyond
(minimum of 10% of the
designated
setback (at least
required
facilities energy needs)
as a park
two feet
mitigation impact
and ride
additional for
measures. Examples
facility
each 0.05
include: the
increase in FAR)
provision of community
meeting centers,
enhanced transportation
improvements, police or
fire stations, and
public recreation facilities
Table 17.08.050A
Justifications for an FAR Increase
Category I
Category II
Category III
Category IV
Amenities
Landscape & Art
Community Benefit
Conservation
Utilize "green roof'
Provide a
Provide an on-
technology
landscaped
site public art
courtyard
feature of equal
open to a
or greater value
public street
than required by
(minimum
the city's public
area equal
art
to 10% of
ordinance and in
the ground
compliance with
floor area)
the city's public
art
ordinance
Provide water quality
mitigation in excess of
minimum NPDES
requirements
Provide all air
conditioning equipment
at a SEER rating that
exceeds the minimum
California Building Code
requirement
Section 5. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby amends
subsection 17.24.020 to add a new section 17.24.020 (F) to follow Section E, to read as
follows:
F. Tandem Parking/Valet Parking. Tandem parking for commercial uses may be
approved provided that the tandem parking is limited to the following purposes:
1. Valet parking areas associated with a full service hotel. Tandem parking
spaces associated with valet service may be counted toward meeting the
minimum parking requirements for the use.
2. Valet service shall be provided to and from the main entrance of the hotel.
A passenger loading and unloading zone, as approved by the city's traffic
engineer shall be provided near the main entrance.
3. Availability of valet service shall be conspicuously posted inside and
outside the establishment near the main entrance.
4. All designated valet parking area in which the automobiles are to be
parked shall not be farther than 800 feet from the main entrance.
Section 6. The City Council of the City of Temecula amends table 17.24.040
"Parking Spaces Required" to add a new row for "full service hotels" under the
"Commercial Uses- Retail and Service" column, and by adding 1 space/guest room or
suite (ancillary conference rooms, meeting rooms and ballrooms within the hotel shall
be parked at 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area," under the corresponding row
under the "Required Number of Spaces" column, as follows:
Commercial Uses-Retail and Service
Furniture stores, bulk goods, floor covering,
1 space/500 SF of GFA
home improvement
General retail with less than 25,000 SF-GFA
1 space/300 SF-GFA
General retail with 25,000 SF or greater
See shopping center
Hotels and motels
1 space/guest room plus 1 space/10 rooms for
guests and 2 spaces for resident manager
Full Service Hotel
1 space/guest room or suite (ancillary
conference rooms, meeting rooms and
ballrooms within the hotel shall be parked
separately at 1 s ace/300 SF GFA
Laundromat
1 space/3 washing machines
Plant nurseries
1 space/500 SF indoor GFA, plus 1
space/1,000 SF gross outdoor retail area
Outdoor sales, including lumberyards, car
1 space/1,000 SF gross outdoor sales area,
sales, salvage yards
plus 1 space/300 SF of indoor sales area
Restaurants
Dine-in
1 space/100 SF-GFA, with a minimum of 10
spaces in all cases
Fast food
1 space/75 SF-GFA, with a minimum of 10
spaces in all cases
Shopping center (25,000 SF-GFA or
1 space/300 SF-GFA with the following
greater)
additions:
Cinemas in shopping centers
1 space/5 seats
Restaurant areas occupying greater than
1 space/100 GFA
15 percent of total shopping area GFA
Section 7. The City Council of the City of Temecula adds to Section 17.34.010
"Definitions and Illustrations of Terms," a new definition for full service hotels under
subsection "F" Definitions and Illustrations, to read as follows:
"Full Service Hotel" means a hotel which provides lodging facilities and full service on-
site restaurant facilities and meeting space, such as a ballroom; along with additional
ancillary services within the facility, which may include health club/spa services,
concierge services, room service, valet service, or similar hospitality related amenities,
as determined by the Director of Planning.
Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph,
sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or
circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or
unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections,
subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this
Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of
the City of Temecula hereby declares that it would have adopted each section,
subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of
the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs,
sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable.
Section 9. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula shall
certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same or a
summary thereof to be published and posted in the manner required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008.
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA }
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 08- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading
at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 25th day of November,
2008, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City
of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of by the following
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
Proposed text looks like this.
Deleted text 199kS lmkp thic
Development Code Section - 17.08.050 Special Use Regulations and Standards
A. Commercial/Office/Industrial Incentives-Increases in the Floor Area Ratio. As part of
the process of reviewing and approving an application for a development plan or conditional
use permit, the approval authority may consider an increase in the maximum allowable
intensity as indicated in Tables 17.08.040A. The amount of the increased intensity shall not
exceed the maximum of the density range or floor area ratio stated for the specific land use
designation. The requested increase may not be approved if the City's traffic engineer
determines that the increased intensity would create an unmitigatable impact upon traffic
circulation or would overburden any utilities serving the area. To be eligible for an increase
in the floor area ratio, the applicant must meet the following:
1. A traffic impact analysis shall be prepared for the project as determined by the
city's traffic engineer.
2. All nroiects. (with the exception of "full service hotels". for which
separate justification requirements are provided below in Section
17.08.050(3), shall 4P provide fEw FAR increase justifications from Table
17.08.050A as follows:
a. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.01 to 0.10 shall incorporate
two justifications from Category I, one justification from Category III,
and one justification from Category IV of Table 17.08.050A.
b. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.11 to 0.20 shall incorporate
two justifications from Category I, one justification from Category II,
one justification from Category III, and one justification from
Category IV of Table 17.08.050A.
c. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.21 to 0.30 shall incorporate
two justifications from Category I, two justifications from Category II,
two justifications from Category III, and two justifications from
Category IV of Table 17.08.050A.
d. Projects proposing an FAR increase of 0.31 or more shall incorporate
two justifications from Category I, three justifications from Category
II, three justifications from Category III, and three justifications from
Category IV of Table 17.08.050A.
3. Full service hotel projects, must provide FAR increase justifications from
Table 17.08.050 A as follows:
a. Full service hotel projects proposing an FAR increase above the
target FAR allowed for the zone shall incorporate one
justification from Cate6ory I, one iustification from Cate2ory II,
one iustification from Cate2ory III and one iustification from
Cate2ory IV, of Table 17.08.050A.
CAProgram Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp\898195.doc
Proposed text looks like this.
Deleted text 199kS lmkp Fhic
Table 17.08.050A
Justifications for an FAR Increase
Category I
Category II
Category
Category IV
III
Landscape &
Community Benefit
Conservation
Amenities
Art
Uses which generate
Utilize LEED
Provide
Provide trees at
significant sales tax, or
(Leadership in Energy
bicycle
40% 36" box,
uses that generate
and Environmental
lockers or
40% 24" box, and
transient occupancy tax
Design) eligible recycled
lockable
20% 15-gallon
building materials (such
indoor
sizes with all
as exterior siding,
storage,
street and parking
roofing
changing
lot tree sizes at a
materials, and carpet -
rooms, and
minimum 24-inch
20% minimum recycle
showers
box size at the
content)
time of planting
The project generate
Utilize LEED eligible
Provide a
Increase
a significant number of
energy efficient
location for
landscaped open
higher paying jobs
materials and design to
an on-site
space area
(higher paying jobs are
include: roofing,
daycare
(increase must be
considered skilled and
insulation, exterior
facility or
equal to or greater
professional jobs that
siding, shading from
provide a
than 2% of the
provide
awnings and deep
location for
site area for each
incomes of at least one-
recessed windows,
a daycare
0.05 increase in
half the median
automated sensors and
provider
FAR)
household income for the
controls for lighting,
city of Temecula)
heating, and air
conditioning, waterless
urinals, low-flow toilets
and faucets, and
aerators and timers on
faucets
Provide enhanced public
Provide for on-site
Provide
Increase
facilities that are needed
renewable energy
parking
landscaped
by the city beyond
(minimum of 10% of the
designated
setback (at least
required
facilities energy needs)
as a park and
two feet
mitigation impact
ride facility
additional for
measures. Examples
each 0.05 increase
include: the
in FAR)
provision of community
meeting centers,
enhanced transportation
improvements, police or
fire stations, and
public recreation facilities
CAProgram Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp\898195.doc
Proposed text looks like this.
Deleted text 199kS lmkp Fhic
Table 17.08.050A
Justifications for an FAR Increase
Category I
Category II
Category
Category IV
III
Landscape &
Community Benefit
Conservation
Amenities
Art
Utilize "green roof'
Provide a
Provide an on-site
technology
landscaped
public art feature
courtyard
of equal or greater
open to a
value than
public street
required by the
(minimum
city's public art
area equal to
ordinance and in
10% of the
compliance with
ground floor
the city's public
area)
art
ordinance
Provide water quality
mitigation in excess of
minimum NPDES
requirements
Provide all air
conditioning equipment
at a SEER rating that
exceeds the minimum
California Building
Code
requirement
CAProgram Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converterltemp\898195.doc
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE OF MEETING: November 5, 2008
PREPARED BY: Katie Innes, Case Planner
APPLICANT NAME: City of Temecula
PROJECT Long Range Planning Application No. LR08-0045, a Development
SUMMARY: Code Amendment to define full service hotels, revise the intensity
bonus justification requirements for full service hotels whose
intensity of development exceeds the target Floor Area Ratio
allowed in the zone, add new parking standards for full service
hotels, and add a provision to allow for tandem parking spaces
when valet service is provided at a full service hotel
CEQA:
Categorically Exempt
Section 15061 (b) (3)
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend the City Council adopt an Ordinance
BACKGROUND SUMMARY
In 1995, the City Council adopted the Development Code for the City of Temecula. Since its
adoption, the City Council periodically amends the Development Code to improve its clarity and
make corrections and amendments as necessary. This Development Code Amendment
consists of four parts and proposes to: 1) Define full service hotels to clarify the difference
between typical hotels/motels and full service hotels; 2) Amend the intensity bonus justification
requirements for full service hotels whose intensity exceeds the target Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
allowed in the zone; 3) Add new parking standards for full service hotels; and 4) Add a provision
to the Development Code which allows for tandem parking spaces when valet service is
provided at a full service hotel.
At the August 15, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission recommended
clarification and expansion of the requirements for allowing an FAR increase beyond the
General Plan and Development Code Targets. The Commission directed staff to draft an
Ordinance which would require measurable and quantifiable justifications to be met to allow for
an increase in the target FAR. Specifically, the new requirements were to avoid granting FAR
increases based upon subjective criteria such as "exceptional" architecture and landscaping.
On October 23, 2007, the City Council adopted an Ordinance which requires measurable and
quantifiable justification criteria for projects requesting a FAR increase above the target. The
current Ordinance requires that all projects proposing an increase in the FAR beyond the target
shall comply with the quantifiable justification criteria. The current criteria also requires that a
traffic impact analysis be prepared for the project, as determined by the City's Traffic Engineer,
and that the project provide FAR justifications from each of the four categories which include:
community benefit, conservation, amenities and landscaping. The current Ordinance structure
also requires an increase in the number of justification criteria required to be met, as the
proposed FAR increases incrementally.
ANALYSIS
Since the adoption of this Ordinance staff has found that certain uses, such as hotels, have
difficulty in meeting the current FAR justification criteria. Considering the nature of hotels and
their need to have multiple stories and larger building square footages as compared to, for
example a typical office building, it is challenging for large scale hotels to meet the target FAR.
Considering this, many of the hotels have Floor Area Ratios that are often above the allowable
target allowed by the Development Code and General Plan. Below are the Floor Area Ratios for
a number of hotels that have recently been constructed, or are currently being constructed, in
the City:
Marriott Fairfield
Hampton Inn
Springhill Suites
Target FAR: 0.30
Approved FAR: 0.65
Target FAR: 0.30
Approved FAR: 0.53
Target FAR: 0.30
Approved FAR: 0.51
All of the approved Floor Area Ratios for the hotels listed above exceed the allowable FAR
target; however they do not exceed the maximum FAR allowed by the Development Code and
General Plan. Although many of the hotels constructed in the City exceed the target FAR, it is
important to acknowledge that hotels provide important benefits to the community. These
benefits include employment opportunities, the expansion of the City of Temecula's tourism
industry, as well as providing a fiscal benefit to the City through the generation of transient
occupancy tax. Encouraging projects which meet the definition of a "full service hotel," by
slightly relaxing the FAR justification requirements for such development projects, would provide
a direct economic benefit to the City. According to the Temecula Valley Convention and Visitors
Bureau, the lodging industry generated over $49.5 million dollars in hotel room revenue and
occupancy rates in Temecula. Additionally, according to the same source, 457,000 visitors
stayed in Temecula hotels in 2007, averaging 38,000 visitors per month.
Staff is recommending that the current FAR criteria be amended to provide separate FAR
requirements for "full service hotels." The proposed FAR intensity bonus justification
requirements for "full service hotels" would still require that a traffic impact analysis be prepared
for the project, as determined by the City's Traffic Engineer, in order to ensure that the increase
in FAR above the target would not create an unmitigable traffic impact. Additionally, the new
criteria would still require justifications to be based upon community benefit, conservation,
amenities and landscaping; however "full service hotel" projects would be required to provide
only one justification from each category, as opposed to being required to provide additional
justifications as the FAR increases incrementally.
In addition to amending the FAR justifications for "full service hotels," the second part of this
Development Code Amendment provides a definition for full service hotels. The definition will
differentiate between standard hotels/motels and full service hotels. For the purposes of this
Development Code Amendment, full service hotels are defined as: hotels which provide lodging
facilities and full service on-site restaurant facilities and meeting space, such as a ballroom;
along with additional ancillary services within the facility, which may include health club/spa
services, concierge services, room service, valet service, or similar hospitality related amenities,
as determined by the Director of Planning.
The objective of the proposed Development Code Amendment is to encourage the development
of full service hotels in the City, while still requiring intensity bonus justifications as a trade-off to
be permitted to construct a hotel that exceeds the target FAR for the zone. However, as
indicated above, the separate FAR justification requirements for full service hotels will not be as
restrictive as the current Ordinance. The reason for requiring fewer justifications for "full service
hotels," as opposed to other types of uses, is that "full service hotels" will provide a number of
services and benefits that will further promote tourism and economic growth for the community.
According to the Economic Development Element of the City of Temecula General Plan, the
City is to encourage the development of lodging along the freeway to enhance the tourism
industry and enhance fiscal viability. Staff feels that the Development Code Amendment is
consistent with the General Plan's goals related to tourism. Relaxing the FAR requirements for
"full service hotels" will assist in continuing to promote Temecula as a destination resort area by
encouraging development that will make the City a paint-of-interest for visitors and residents
alike.
Parking Requirement
In addition to defining full service hotels, and revising the FAR justification requirements for full
service hotels, this Development Code Amendment also includes provisions to add new parking
standards to the off-street parking section of the code for full service hotels, and to allow for
tandem parking when valet service is provided. Currently the Development Code requires that
regular hotels/motels provide one parking space per guest room, one parking space for every
ten guest rooms plus two additional spaces for the resident manager. The proposed
Development Code Amendment includes a new parking standard for full service hotels which
requires onr parking space for every guest room or suite. Staff has conducted a review of other
parking requirements for other municipalities in the area and determined that the parking
standard of onr space per guest room or suite is typical for a hotel use. A comparison of the
parking standards are outlined below:
City of Riverside:
1 parking space/guest room
City of Corona:
1 parking space/bedroom + 2 spaces for the resident manager
City of Ontario:
1 parking space/room or suite
City of Carlsbad:
1.2 parking spaces/ unit
City of San Diego:
1 parking space/room
City of Escondido:
1 parking space/ per sleeping unit; 1 for resident manager and 1 loading
space
It is anticipated that many full service hotels will provide valet services. Often when valet
service is provided, the cars are parked in a tandem fashion in order to efficiently accommodate
the number of cars in the lot. Currently our Development Code is silent on the requirements
and provisions relating to tandem parking and valet parking. The proposed Development Code
Amendment will allow for tandem parking spaces when valet service is provided at a full service
hotel. The tandem/valet parking spaces will be permitted to be counted toward the minimum
parking requirements for the use. This will encourage full service hotels to provide valet
services and ensure that adequate parking accommodations are being provided for hotel
guests. No change to the hotel/motel parking standards is proposed at this time due to the fact
that a typical hotel/motel is less likely to provide valet parking or require the need for tandem
parking spaces.
LEGAL NOTICING REQUIREMENTS
Notice of the public hearing was published in the Californian on October 25, 2008.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project has been
deemed to be categorically exempt from further environmental review, and a Notice of
Exemption will be filed in compliance with CEQA Section 15061 (b)(3).
If can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments to Title
17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant effect on the environment. Staff
concluded that there is no passibility that the Development Cade Amendments will have a
significant effect on the environment because the proposed Development Code Amendments
are minor policy changes and clarifications to Title 17 of the City of Temecula Municipal Code.
Staff has reviewed the proposed changes to the Development Code in context to their
environmental impacts and determined that there is no potential for an adverse impact on the
environment. The proposed amendments do not allow for additional development to occur or
allow for significant adverse changes to the physical environment. The proposed amendment
will strengthen the City's ability to conduct a CEQA review for the future development of full
service hotels since the Development Code Amendment requires the preparation of a traffic
study. As a result, a site-specific CEQA review will occur for every development application for
full service hotels. These proposed amendments are minor clarifications of the Code and will
ensure compliance with CEQA. As such, there is no possibility that the proposed amendments
to Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code will have a significant effect on the environment. As
a result, staff has concluded that the project is exempt from further environmental review
pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3), as it has been determined, with certainty, that there is
no possibility that the Development Code Amendments will have a significant effect on the
environment.
ATTACHM ENTS
PC Resolution
Exhibit A - Draft CC Ordinance
Redline/strikeout changes to the Development Code
Exhibit 1 - Section 17.08.050 Special Use Regulations and Standards
Exhibit 2 - Section 17.24.020 General Provisions
Exhibit 3 - Table 17.24.040 Parking Spaces Required
Exhibit 4 - Section 17.34.010 Definition of Terms
Notice of Public Hearing
ITEM NO. 18
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Genie Roberts, Director of Finance
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: AB 1600 Financial Reports
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the AB 1600 Financial Reports
BACKGROUND: Government Code Sections 66006 requires that an accounting of the
developer impact fees be made public and the information reviewed in a regularly scheduled public
hearing. The Legislature finds and declares that the timely and proper allocation of development
fees promotes economic growth and is, therefore, a matter of statewide interest and concern.
Annually, the City Finance Department staff compiles a report of expenditures made with the
developer impact fees collected and interest accrued during the year. Staff has compiled the AB
1600 Report for this purpose and recommends acceptance and approval of the report of
expenditures made with the developer impact fees after hearing public testimony.
This report covers activity for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2008.
FISCAL IMPACT: Monies must be used within five years for specified purposes or
returned to the developer. All funds are all programmed to be spent in accordance with the 2009-
2013 Capital Improvement Program adopted June 10, 2008, by the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS: AB 1600 Reports
City of Temecula
Open Space
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 1
Fees are collected for open space land acquisitions. The impact fees for open space land are based
on the cost of land needed to maintain the City's existing ratio of open space acreage to population.
Because these fees are population-driven, they apply only to residential development. The fee
is $576.88 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex) and $805.22
per residential detached unit (single family), payable at the time of issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
$ 84,527
Interest income
$ 50,028
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 134,555
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 375,000
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 375,000
Total Available
$ 922,011
$ (240,445)
$ 681,566
evenue
ng First In First Out Method
(Unspent Funds Represent Endina Fund Balance I June 30. 2008 1
US rears Kevenues
N/A
ues Collected from FY2004/05
$
-
ues Collected from FY2005/06
$
283,849
ues Collected from FY2006/07
$
263,162
ues Collected from FY2007/08
$
134,555
Ending Fund Balance
$
681,566
Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001.
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
Capital Improvement Projects
FY 2007-08
% Complete
% Funded With Fee
210.190.142. MULTI TRAILS SYSTEM CITYWIDE
$ 375,000
35.27%
39.40%
Total
$ 375,000
City of Temecula
Public Facilities & Road Benefit
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 2
Fee is collected to provide street system, park and recreation, corporate, fire protection, and library
facilities in an amount sufficient to meet the estimated demand created by residential and non-residential
developments constructed in the City through build out. The fee varied depending on development type and
was collected for each building payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
Interest income
$ 14,010
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 14,010
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 473,011
Transfers out
$ (395,840)
Total Uses
$ 77,171
Total Available
$ 63,161
$ (63,161
$ -
Using First In First Out Method
Unspent Funds Represent Ending Fund Balance June 30, 2008
Previous Years Revenues $ -
Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 $ -
Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 $ -
Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 $ -
Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ -
Total Ending Fund Balance $ -
Result : Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001.
(Capital Improvement Projects I FY 2007-08 1 % Complete I % Funded With Fee
210.165.726.5800 French Valley 1-15 Overcrossina $
3/31/08 Transfer Fire Stations Wolf Creek/Library 1 $
(395, 840)
473,011
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
ITotal I $ 77.171 1
City of Temecula
Public Services
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 3
Fee is collected to provide future space for police facilities and equipment. The fee is $350.25 per
residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $197.97 per detached unit
(single family), and $.05-$.20 per square foot of floor area for commercial developments. Fees is payable
upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the
building permit is issued for commercial developments.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
Interest income
$ -
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ -
Expenditures tip Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ -
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ -
Total Available
$ -
$ -
$ -
Using First In First Out Method
IUnsoent Funds Represent Endina Fund Balance I June 30. 2008 1
rrevious Years Kevenues
Z~ -
Revenues
Collected from
FY2004/05
$ -
Revenues
Collected from
FY2005/06
$ -
Revenues
Collected from
FY2006/07
$ -
Revenues
Collected from
FY2007/08
$ -
Result : Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001.
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
Capital Improvement Projects
FY 2007-08
% Complete
% Funded With Fee
n/a
$ -
Total
$ -
City of Temecula
Fire Protection
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 4
Fee is collected to provide fire protection facilities in an amount sufficient to meet the estimated demand
created by residential and non-residential development constructed in the City through build out. The fee
varied depending on development type and was collected for each building payable upon the issuance of
the certificate of occupancy.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
Interest income
$ 343
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 343
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 11,595
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 11,595
Total Available
$ 11,252
$ (11,252)
$ -
evenue
ng First In First Out Method
IUnsoent Funds Represent Ending Fund Balance June 30. 2008 1
us Years Revenues
$
ues Collected from FY2004/05
$
ues Collected from FY2005/06
$
ues Collected from FY2006/07
$
Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001.
pital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
3/31/08 Transfer Fire Stations Wolf Creek/Library $ 11,595 100.00%
47.50%
11
City of Temecula
Street Improvements
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 5
Fee is collected based on the total cost of such improvements and number of peak hour vehicle trips
generated by future development. The fee is $1,171.69 per residential attached unit (condominium,
apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $1,673.85 per residential detached unit (single family),
and $2.30-6.40 per square foot of floor area for commercial development. Fee is payable upon the
issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building
permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include
the Builders Cost Index factor for increases.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
$ 902,542
Interest income
$ 54,806
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 957,348
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 4,369,037
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 4,369,037
Total Available
$ 4,588,456
$ 1,176,767
Five Year Revenue Test
Using First In First Out Method
Unspent Funds Represent Ending Fund Balance June 30, 2008
Previous Years Revenues N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 $ 219,419
Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 957,348
Total Ending Fund Balance $ 1,176,767
Result : Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001.
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
ICapital Improvement Proiects I FY 2007-08 I% Complete 1% Funded With Feel
210.165.622.5800 Medians
$ 1,137
100.00%
29.20%
210.165.624.5800 Rancho Cal Wide Old Town
$ 1,903,060
100.00%
86.00%
210.165.632.5800 Diaz Rd Realignment
$ 1,780,000
100.00%
74.60%
210.165.638.5800 Winchester Rd./79 North
$ 260,000
8.90%
37.04%
210.165.668.5800 Pechanga
$ 29,000
56.40%
7.40%
210.165.726.5800 French Vallev 1-15 Overcrossin
$ 395.840
59.74%
9.20%
City of Temecula
Traffic Signals and Traffic Control Systems
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 6
Fee is collected based on the total cost of such improvements and number of peak hour vehicle trips
generated by future development. The fee is $165.86 per residential attached unit (condominium,
apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $236.94 per residential detached unit (single family),
and $.33-$.90 per square foot of floor area for commercial development. Fee is payable upon the
issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building
permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include
the Builders Cost Index factor for increases.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
$ 176,559
Interest income
$ 50,483
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 227,042
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 120,000
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 120,000
Total Available
$ 881,765
$ 107,042
$ 988,807
Five Year Revenue Test
Using First In First Out Method
Revenues Collected from FY2004/05 N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2005/06 $ 452,121
Revenues Collected from FY2006/07 $ 309,644
Revenues Collected from FY2007/08 $ 227,042
Total Endinq Fund Balance $ 988,807
Result : Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001.
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
210.165.673.5800 Sign als-Rancho@Bus.Park $ 120,000 100.00% 100.00%
City of Temecula
Park&Recreation Improvements
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 7
Fee is collected for park improvements based on the cost of improvements needed to maintain the City's
existing ratio of improved park acreage to population. The fee for recreation facilities is based on the
existing ratio of facility replacement cost to population. Because these fees are population-driven, they
apply only to residential developments. The fee is $1,979.17 per residential attached unit (condominium,
apartment, townhouse, and duplex) and $2,762.58 per residential detached unit (single family). Fee is
payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year
to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
$ 201,997
Interest income
$ 13,068
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 215,065
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 357,809
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 357,809
Total Available
$ 240,162
$ (142,744)
$ 97,418
Five Year Revenue Test
Using First In First Out Method
Previous Years Revenues
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2004/05
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2005/06
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2006/07
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2007/08
$ 97,418
Total Ending Fund Balance
$ 97,418
Result : Five year spent test met in accordan
ce with Government Code 66001.
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
210.190.137.5800 Roller Hockey Rink
$ 30,000
13.30%
100.00%
210.190.173.5800 Sports Complex Patricia B.
$ 241,731
100.00%
30.02%
210.190.179.5800 Play Structure
$ 4,078
100.00%
100.00%
210.190.190.5800 Dog Parks
$ 60,000
100.00%
100.00%
210.190.675.5800 Temecula Children's Museum
$ 22,000
17.00%
100.00%
ITotal 1 $ 357,809 1
City of Temecula
Corporate Facilities
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 8
Fee is collected for City administrative and maintenance facilities. The need for future City Hall space is
due to the demand for services housed in City Hall. The need for maintenance facilities is due to increase
in street and park maintenance. The fee is $243.50 per residential attached unit (condominium, apartment
townhouse, and duplex), $454.13 per residential detached unit (single family), and $.16-$.44 per square
foot of floor area for commercial developments. Fee is payable upon the issuance of the certificate of
occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the building permits is issued for
commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include the Builders Cost
Index factor for increases.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
$ 176,969
Interest income
$ 2,867
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 179,836
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 80,000
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 80,000
Total Available
$ 377
$ 99,836
$ 100,213
Five Year Revenue Test
Using First In First Out Method
Previous Years Revenues
NIA
Revenues Collected from FY2004/05
NIA
Revenues Collected from FY2005/06
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2006/07
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2007/08
$ 100,213
Total Ending Fund Balance
$ 100,213
Result : Five year spent test met in accordan
ce with Government Code 66001.
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
Capital Improvement Projects
FY 2007-08
% Complete
% Funded With Fee
Maintenance Facility 210-165-742
80,000
100.00%
30.01%
Total
$ 80,000
City of Temecula
Fire Protection Facilities
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 9
Fee is collected to provide future fire protection facilities and apparatus. The fee is $266.59 per
residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $574.49 per residential
detached unit (single family), and $.11 - $.16 per square foot of floor area for commercial developments,
payable upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the
time the building permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal
year to include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
i
Developer fees
$ 77,252
Interest income
$ 4,132
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
$ 251,789
Total Sources
$ 333,173
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 298,789
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 298,789
Total Available
$ 460
$ 34,384
$ 34,844
First In First Out Method
is Years Revenues
ues Collected from FY2004/05
ues Collected from FY2005/06
ues Collected from FY2006/07
Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001.
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
Capital Improvement Projects
FY 2007-08
% Complete
% Funded With Fee
210.165.733 WOLF CREEK FIRE STATION
$ 298,789
100.00%
47.50%
Total
$ 298,789
City of Temecula
Library
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 10
Fee is collected to provide future library facilities and materials. Because these fees are population-driven,
they apply only to residential developments. The fee is $527.15 per residential attached unit (condominium,
apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $735.81 per residential detached unit (single family). Fee is payable
upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to include
the Builders Cost Index factor for increases.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
$ 136,721
Interest income
$ 3,775
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
$ 232,817
Total Sources
$ 373,313
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 373,429
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 373,429
Total Available
$ 116
$ (116)
$ -
First In First Out Method
Previous Years Revenues
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2004/05
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2005/06
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2006/07
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2007/08
$ -
Total Endina Fund Balance
$ -
Five year spent test met in accordance with Government Code 66001.
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
Capital Improvement Projects
FY 2007-08
% Complete
% Funded With Fee
Library 280-199-129
$ 373,429
100.00%
3.01%
Total
$ 373,429
City of Temecula
Public Art
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 11
Fees are collected to enhance the quality of life for city residents, workers and visitors by providing for
the acquisition, placement and maintenance of public artwork. The fee is equal to 10% of 1 % of the building
value in excess of $100,000 payable upon the issuance of each building permit.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
$ 34,103
Interest income
$ 3,378
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 37,481
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 190,000
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 190,000
Total Available
$ 181,654
$ (152,519)
$ 29,135
nue
Using First In First Out Method
Revenues Collected from FY2004/05
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2005/06
NIA
Revenues Collected from FY2006/07
NIA
Revenues Collected from FY2007/08
$ 29,135
Total Ending Fund Balance
$ 29,135
Capital Improvement Facilities Expenditures
(Capital Improvement Proiects I FY 2007-08 1 % Complete I % Funded With Fee I
210.165.674.5800 Bridge fencing
$ 190,000
1
City of Temecula
Police Facilities
Government Code 66000 Calculation
FY 2007-08
Attachment No. 12
Fee is collected to provide future space for police facilities and equipment. The fee is $427.96 per
residential attached unit (condominium, apartment, townhouse, and duplex), $241.90 per detached unit
(single family), and $.06-$.24 per square foot of floor area for commercial developments. Fees is payable
upon the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for residential developments and payable at the time the
building permit is issued for commercial developments. The fee is adjusted at July 1, each fiscal year to
include the Builders Cost Index factor for increases.
The fee is based upon the attached formula and data sheet and varies from project to project.
Beginning
Ending
Account Description
Fund Balance
FY 2007-08
Fund Balance
Revenues & Other Sources:
Developer fees
$ 55,214
Interest income
$ 8,331
Contributions from property owners
Transfers in
Total Sources
$ 63,545
Expenditures & Other Uses:
Capital Projects
$ 135,000
Transfers out
Total Uses
$ 135,000
Total Available
$ 208,768
$ (71,455)
$ 137,313
Five Year Revenue Test
Using First In First Out Method
Revenues Collected from FY2004/05
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2005/06
N/A
Revenues Collected from FY2006/07
$
73,768
Revenues Collected from FY2007/08
$
63,545
Total Ending Fund Balance
$
137,313
Result : Five year spent test met in accordan
ce with Government Code 66001.
Improvement Facilities Expenditures
210.165.644.5800 Old Town Parking, Office & Reta $ 135,000
COUNCIL BUSINESS
ITEM NO. 19
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent
Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with
the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements -
Environmental Mitigation (Project PW99-11 EM)
PREPARED BY: Paula Gutierrez-Baeza, City Attorney's Office
Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works - CIP
Monica Adamee, Real Property Agent
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Consider the following Resolution, which is a Resolution of Necessity of the City of
Temecula:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION
THEREOF IN CONNECTION WITH THE PECHANGA PARKWAY
STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - ENVIRONMENTAL
MITIGATION (PROJECT NO. PW99-11 EM)
2. Open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Resolution of Necessity,
receive from staff the evidence stated and referred to in this Agenda Report ("Report"), take
testimony from any person wishing to be heard on issues A, B, C, and D below, and
consider all evidence to determine whether to adopt the proposed Resolution of Necessity.
If the City Council finds, based on the evidence contained and referred to in this Report, the
testimony and comments received at this hearing, and all written testimony submitted to the City
Council, that the evidence warrants the necessary findings with respect to the proposed Resolution
of Necessity, then City staff recommends, that the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion:
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 1
Adopt proposed Resolution No. 08-_ (which requires a 4/5ths vote of the entire Council)
and authorize the City Attorney's office to file eminent domain proceedings to acquire the
following real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located along the
northern side of Temecula Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith
Road in the City of Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's
Parcel Number 961-010-076:
An approximate 74,251 square foot (1.70 acre) permanent conservation easement,
which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of
Necessity labeled "Parcel A Conservation Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" to
the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Conservation Easement";
An approximate 25,007 (0.58 acre) square foot grading easement, which is described on
the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled
"Parcel B Grading Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "C" to the Resolution of
Necessity labeled "Grading Easement"; and
An approximate 22,648 (0.52 acre) square foot access/water line easement, which is
described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity
labeled "Parcel C Access and Water Line Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "D" to
the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Access and Water Line Easement".
These real property interests are referred to below collectively as "Subject Property
Interests" and are described more particularly in the Exhibits attached to the Resolution of
Necessity. The Resolution of Necessity and its Exhibits "A", "B", "C" and "D" are attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Authorize the City Attorney's office and City staff to file and prosecute eminent domain
proceedings and to take all necessary steps to deposit, $30,250 with the Court, the
amount of probable compensation, as required by law for issuance of an Order for
Prejudgment Possession.
Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents.
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY:
Description of Project:
The City Council has before it a proposed Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition by
eminent domain of certain real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located
along the northern side of Temecula Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah
Smith Road in the City of Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's
Parcel Number 961-010-076 ("larger parcel"), in connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga
Parkway Storm Drain Improvements - Environmental Mitigation (Project PW99-11 EM) (referred to
below as the "proposed Project"). The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a
public purpose, namely for conservation easement purposes to mitigate storm drainage facilities
constructed as part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project (PW99-11)
(referred to below as "Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements") as required by the California
Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Specifically, the proposed Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square
foot) permanent conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14 acres of
riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. As part of the proposed Project, the City would
landscape the area and provide irrigation to the conservation easement area for a period of
approximately 5 112 years. Accordingly, the City would need to acquire an approximate 22,648
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 2
square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line easement. The City
would also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easementto connectthe conservation
easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the proposed Project, the City
would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period
of 5112 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5
112 years. At that time, the City would offer to re-convey the permanent grading and access/water
line easement back to the property owner if the owner wished to retain these areas.
As indicated above, the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public
purpose, namelyfor conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto
for the proposed Project to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed by the City as part of the
previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements as required by the California Department of
Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The City seeks to acquire the
Subject Property Interests for a public use pursuant to the authority conferred upon the City to
acquire real property by eminent domain by Section 19 of Article 1 of the California Constitution,
California Government Code Sections 37350, 37350.5, 37351, 40401 and 40404, California Civil
Code Section 815 et seq., California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010 et seq. (Eminent
Domain Law), including but not limited to Sections 1240.010, 1240.020, 1240.110, 1240.120,
1240.510, 1240.610, 1240.650, and by other provisions of law. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 815,
the State Legislature has declared that the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space
condition is among the most important environmental assets of California.
The City was required to provide 1.7-acres of replacement mitigation for temporary and
permanent impacts to riparian and wetland habitat located within the Wolf Valley Creek Channel
resulting from the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City's construction of the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements was for a public purpose, namely for public street and
drainage purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to alleviate traffic congestion and
improve traffic circulation and drainage in the area of the improvements. Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1240.120 authorizes a public entity to acquire property necessary to carry out and make
effective the principal purposes involved including but not limited to property to be used for the
protection or preservation of the attractiveness, safety and usefulness of the project. Here, the
acquisition of the Subject Property Interests is for conservation easement purposes to mitigate the
impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements.
The Pechanga Parkway Phase 11 Improvements widened and improved Pechanga Parkway
from Temecula Parkway (formerly State Route 79 South) to Via Gilberto into a six-lane urban arterial
highway to its full-width of 134 feet. It also improved and widened Pechanga Parkway from Via
Gilberto to Pechanga Road into a four-lane arterial highwaywith a rig ht-of-way width of 110 feet. In
addition, the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements constructed curbs, gutters, pavement
delineation and signage, islands, sidewalks, landscaping, irrigation, streetlights, driveway
approaches, traffic signal interconnect system, retaining wall improvements, and storm drain
improvements. Further, the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements also included improvements
to Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The storm drain improvements in connection with Wolf Valley Creek
Channel included the under-grounding of a portion of the concrete lined Wolf Valley Creek Channel
from Loma Linda Road to approximately 900 linear feet downstream of Muirfield Drive
(approximately 1,900 total linear feet). Later improvements included the reconstruction of a portion
of the existing rip rap/concrete-lined trapezoidal Wolf Valley Creek Channel from approximately 900
linear feet north of Muirfield Road downstream to the Temecula Creek confluence (approximately
1,100 total linear feet).
The Pechanga Parkway Phase 11 Improvements resulted in permanent impacts to 0.10-acre
and temporary impacts to 0.26-acre to wetland waters of the United States, regulated bythe United
States Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. It also resulted in
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 3
permanent impacts to an approximate 0.85-acre of riparian habitat regulated by the California
Department of Fish and Game contained within a 960 linear foot portion of the Wolf Valley Creek
Channel. The City was required to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements by creating a 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area, which comprises a
portion of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel. The
proposed Project would be constructed pursuant to the requirements of the United States Army
Corps of Engineers in Nationwide Permit NW43 No. 200500150-SMJ, the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board in Water Quality Certification and Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements
for Discharge of Dredge and/or Fill Materials No. 04C-107, and the California Department of Fish
and Game in Agreement Regarding Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration (Notification No. 6-2003-
069).
Approximately 48 percent of the proposed 1.70-acre permanent conservation easement on
the larger parcel is located within the lower Temecula Creek floodway, 47 percent of this
conservation easement is located in the lower Temecula Creek floodplain and the remaining 5
percent of the conservation easement area is located outside of the floodway or floodplain. The
larger parcel is currently encumbered with an approximate 9.40-acre conservation easement and an
approximate 16.50-acre conservation easement. The approximate 25,007 square foot permanent
grading easement the City seeks to acquire is located completely in the lower Temecula Creek
floodway and completely overlaps the existing conservation easements on the larger parcel. The
approximate 22,648 square foot permanent access and water line easement the City seeks to
acquire is located completely in the lower Temecula Creek Floodway. An approximate 15,948
square foot portion of this access and water line easement overlaps the existing conservation
easements on the larger parcel and the remaining approximate 6,700 square foot area is located
outside of the existing conservation easement areas.
The mitigation comprising the proposed Project would take place within the 1.7-acre
permanent conservation easement area. The mitigation includes an approximate 1.14 acres of
riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The mitigation would be completed consistent with the
Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements
Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, which is
incorporated in this Report by this reference. The purpose of the mitigation is to compensate for the
loss of wetland and riparian habitat associated with the Wolf Valley Creek Channel improvement
portion of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The proposed Project would enhance the
overall functions and values of the subject portion of Temecula Creek watershed that currently
provides limited biological and hydrological function to this area of the City. The proposed Project
would require site preparation and amendments to the topography of the land to provide the area
with adequate hydrology and would include a restoration effort consisting of a combination of
seeding and planting to encourage establishment of riparian and wetland habitat.
The regulatory agencies referenced above and the City expect that the proposed Project
would successfully implement the mitigation effort based on the following factors:
As a result of the mitigation effort, the mitigation site would support a physical
environment that promotes the long-term sustainability and function of the proposed
habitat to be created.
The mitigation effort would include an appropriate site preparation phase to implement
necessary amendments to the physical condition of the site priorto installation, including
appropriate grading and excavation. This would be done in an effort to establish
adequate natural hydrology to the site and promote the establishment of proposed
seeding and planting.
The mitigation effort would include a restoration plan and seeding and container plant
palette that mimics the existing natural conditions, and consists of site-appropriate native
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 4
species, including dominant and common species found within the existing natural area.
The seeding plant palette would include both long-lived dominant perennial grasses and
short-lived, aggressive "weed beater" species.
Planting would take place during the appropriate climatic seasons and supplemental
irrigation measures are included to assist in establishing native species in case of
extended drought conditions during the establishment period.
Fencing would be constructed to prohibit intrusion, site disturbance and signage would
be provided to properly identify the restoration area.
Required Findings for Acquisition of Subject Property Interests by Eminent
Domain
In order to adopt the Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition by eminent domain of the
Subject Property Interests, the City Council must find and determine with respect to the proposed
acquisition of the Subject Property Interests that:
A. The public interest and necessity require the proposed Project;
B. The proposed Project is planned and located in the manner that will be most compatible with
the greatest public good and the least private injury;
C. The Subject Property Interests described in the Resolution of Necessity are necessary for
the proposed Project;
D. The City has made an offer as required by Government Code Section 7267.2 to the owner of
record of the real property it seeks to acquire.
The amount of just compensation is not an issue before the City Council at this hearing. The
hearing relates to issues A, B, C, and D above. The amount of just compensation would be
determined in the eminent domain proceeding that would be filed if the City Council, in its sole
discretion, adopts the proposed Resolution of Necessity.
Environmental Analysis
As mentioned above, the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests to mitigate
storm drainage facilities and other improvements constructed as part of the Pechanga Parkway
Phase II Improvements, which mitigation was required by the California Department of Fish and
Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Accordingly, the environmental effects of
the proposed Project were studied and analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., the CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code
Regs. § 15000 etseq. ("CEQA Guidelines") and the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA") in
connection with the Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City Council on February 13,
2001, several initial studies pursuant to the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and a
Categorical Exclusion ("CE") pursuant to NEPA prepared for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements (Project No. PW99-11). The acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests were
studied as an integral part of the Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, EIRs and the CE prepared in
connection with the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City is the lead agency for
approval under CEQA and FHWA is the lead agency for approval under NEPA in connection with
the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements.
On April 11, 2006 the City prepared a Notice of Determination for the Pechanga Parkway
Phase II Improvements, which was dulyfiled on April 20, 2006with the County Clerk and Recorder's
Office in accordance with CEQA. The Notice of Determination noted that the City approved the
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 5
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements on March 14, 2006. The City made the following
determinations in approving the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements:
(1) The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements will not have a significant effect on
the environment.
(2) A Negative Declaration was previously prepared and adopted for the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements pursuant to CEQA. The following environmental
determinations have been made in the past which have evaluated the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements, or interim improvements to Pechanga Parkway:
• Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City of Temecula City Council on
February 13, 2001.
• City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR, certified by the
Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005.
• EA 71, a Notice of Exemption adopted by the City of Temecula on August 11,
2000 for interim road widening on Pechanga Parkway.
• EA 74, a Negative Declaration adopted by the City of Temecula on October 4,
2000 for the widening of a portion of Pechanga Parkway to four lanes.
• EA89 a Negative Declaration adopted bythe City Council on January 8, 2002 for
interim widening improvements and the construction of a sound wall along the
west side of Pechanga Parkway.
(3) Mitigation measures were not made a condition of the approval of the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements.
(4) A Statement of Overriding Consideration was not adopted forthe Pechanga Parkway
Phase II Improvements.
(5) Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
Concurrently, with the Notice of Determination, the City prepared on April 11, 2006 a
Certificate of Fee Exemption (De Minimus Impact Finding) for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements. Pursuant to the Certificate of Fee Exemption, the City made the following findings of
exemption:
(1) The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements consists of the completion of
widening improvements to Pechanga Parkwayto its ultimate configuration as defined
in the City of Temecula General Plan Circulation Element.
(2) Several Initial Studies were previously prepared that evaluated the potential for
adverse environmental impacts associated that could result from the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements.
(3) These previous Initial Studies and prior Negative Declarations and Environmental
Impact Reports indicated that no impacts would occur to fish and wildlife resources
as a result of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements and the City of
Temecula recommended that a Notice of Determination be prepared forthis project
exempting the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements from further
environmental review pursuant to Section 15161 of the CEQA Guidelines. The City
found that Section 15161 applied here because a previous Environmental Impact
Report or Negative Declaration has been prepared and it can be determined thatthe
impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements have been fullydisclosed
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 6
and analyzed by the previous environmental determinations. (No wildlife related
mitigation measures were required for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements).
(4) The City of Temecula previously adopted a Negative Declaration or has evaluated
the environmental impacts of widening Pechanga Parkway in an EIR for earlier
related Projects. The following environmental determinations have been made in the
past that have evaluated the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements or interim
improvements to Pechanga Parkway:
• Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City of Temecula City Council on
February 13, 2001.
• City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR, certified by the
Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005.
• EA 71, a Notice of Exemption adopted by the City of Temecula on August 11,
2000 for interim road widening on Pechanga Parkway.
• EA 74, a Negative Declaration adopted by the City of Temecula on October 4,
2000 for the widening of a portion of Pechanga Parkway to four lanes.
• EA89 a Negative Declaration adopted bythe City Council on January 8, 2002 for
interim widening improvements and the construction of a sound wall along the
west side of Pechanga Parkway.
(5) The City of Temecula believes that the ultimate improvements to Pechanga Parkway
were addressed in the previous environmental determinations made for the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements and that there will be no impacts
resulting from said Project that have not been addressed and analyzed in these
previous reports.
In accordance with the requirements of NEPA, Caltrans and FHWA approved a Categorical
Exclusion ("CE") for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The Caltrans Environmental
Chief Officer and the Caltrans Project Manager/DLA Engineer approved the CE on March 29, 2007
and on April 3, 2007, respectively. FHWA approved the CE on April 19, 2007. In approving the CE,
Caltrans determined that a CE was proper because the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements
would not individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental effect and that said Project
was excluded from the requirements to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) or
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The CE, Caltrans' findings in the CE, and the stipulations
and/or directions set forth in the Continuation Sheet of the CE are incorporated herein by this
reference.
The proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests were studied as an integral part
of the environmental documents discussed above. The proposed Project is a mitigation requirement
for the City's construction of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The above
environmental findings are the appropriate findings for the proposed acquisitions of the Subject
Property Interests.
In connection with the proposed Resolutions of Necessity, City staff on November-, 2008,
reviewed all of the environmental documentation prepared in connection with the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements, including the Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified bythe City of
Temecula City Council on February 13, 2001; the City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan
Update EIR, certified bythe Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005; EA 71, a Notice of Exemption
adopted by the City of Temecula on August 11, 2000 for interim road widening on Pechanga
Parkway; EA 74, a Negative Declaration adopted bythe City of Temecula on October 4, 2000 for the
widening of a portion of Pechanga Parkway to four lanes; EA 89, a Negative Declaration adopted by
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 7
the City Council on January 8, 2002 for interim widening improvements and the construction of a
sound wall along the west side of Pechanga Parkway, the Traffic Studies prepared in connection
with said EIRs, the Noise Study Report for Pechanga Parkway Phase II Street Improvements
revised March 12, 2007 and all other technical studies prepared in connection with said documents,
the Notice of Determination (EA-126) filed with the County Clerk on April 20, 2006, the CE (PLHL-
54591014) dated April 19, 2007 by FHWA and its Continuation Sheet approved by Caltrans and
FHWA pursuant to NEPA, and the Agenda Reports prepared in connection with these
environmental documents. Pursuant to the criteria of Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and
Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code, City staff concluded that no substantial changes have
occurred in the proposed Project that the City has obtained no new information of substantial
importance that would require further environmental analysis. These environmental findings are the
appropriate findings with respect to the proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests.
City's Actions Pursuant to Government Code Section 7260 et seq.
As more fully described below, the City of Temecula, pursuant to California Government
Code Section 7260 etseq., obtained a fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests,
set just compensation in accordance with the appraised fair market value, and extended a written
offer on June 4, 2008 to the owner of record, Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited
partnership. The City's offer letter included copies of the legal description of the Subject Property
Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel, a drawing depicting these property
interests and the comparable sales data relied on by the appraiser.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025, the City also offered to pay the
reasonable costs, up to $5,000.00 (Five Thousand Dollars), for an independent appraisal of these
real property interests. The offer letter informed the property owner that by law, an appraiser
licensed by the Office of Real Estate Appraisers must prepare the independent appraisal. The
property owner was asked to let the City know by July 17, 2008 whether the owner wished to have
the City issue this money to the owner for this purpose. It requested the property owner to either
forward to the City an invoice from the appraiser identifying the property that is the subject of the
appraisal and the fee charged for the appraisal. Alternatively, the property owner was allowed to
submit a declaration under penalty of perjury providing the relevant information regarding the
appraisal costs and identification of the property that is the subject of the appraisal. The property
owners have not submitted either a declaration or invoice as of November 12, 2008.
City staff has negotiated with the property owner on behalf of the City. As of November 12,
2008, the parties have not reached an agreement regarding the City's proposed acquisition of the
Subject Property Interests.
Based on the timeline of the proposed Project, it is necessaryfor the City Council to consider
the adoption of the proposed Resolution of Necessity at this time. As discussed above, this hearing
relates to issues A, B, C and D below.
City's Actions Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235
Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235, the City sent a letter and
notice by first-class mail on November 5, 2008 to the record owner Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a
California limited partnership, advising the owner of the City's intent to consider the adoption of a
resolution of necessity forthe acquisition of the Subject Property Interests byeminent domain atthe
City Council's meeting of November 25, 2008. The notice advised the property owner of its right to
appear and object to the proposed adoption of the resolution of necessity if the property owner filed
a written request with the City to appear within fifteen (15) days of the date the notice was mailed.
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 8
A. The Public Interest and Necessity Require the Proposed Project
As shown above, the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public use,
namely for conservation easement purposes to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed as part
of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project as required by the California
Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. As planned and
designed, and as approved by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States
Army Corps of Engineers, the proposed Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251
square foot) permanent conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14
acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 815, the State
Legislature has declared that the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space condition
is among the most important environmental assets of California.
The City was required to provide 1.7-acres of replacement mitigation for temporary and
permanent impacts to riparian and wetland habitat located within the Wolf Valley Creek Channel
resulting from the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements widened and improved Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway (formerly State
Route 79 South) to Via Gilberto into a six-lane urban arterial highway to its full-width of 134 feet. It
also improved and widened Pechanga Parkwayfrom Via Gilberto to Pechanga Road into a four-lane
arterial highway with a right-of-way width of 110 feet. In addition, the Pechanga Parkway Phase I I
Improvements constructed curbs, gutters, pavement delineation and signage, islands, sidewalks,
landscaping, irrigation, streetlights, driveway approaches, traffic signal interconnect system,
retaining wall improvements, and storm drain improvements. Further, the Pechanga Parkway Phase
II Improvements also included improvements to Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The storm drain
improvements in connection with Wolf Valley Creek Channel included the under-grounding of a
portion of the concrete lined Wolf Valley Creek Channel from Loma Linda Road to approximately
900 linear feet downstream of Muirfield Drive (approximately 1,900 total linear feet). Later
improvements included the reconstruction of a portion of the existing rip rap/concrete-lined
trapezoidal Wolf Valley Creek Channel from approximately 900 linear feet north of Muirfield Road
downstream to the Temecula Creek confluence (approximately 1,100 total linear feet). The City's
construction of the various components comprising the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements
was for a public use, namely for public street and drainage purposes and all uses necessary or
convenient thereto to alleviate traffic congestion and improve traffic circulation and drainage in the
area of the project. The acquisition of the Subject Property Interests for conservation easement
purposes to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements is also for a
public use for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto and is
in the public interest and necessity.
The Pechanga Parkway Phase 11 Improvements resulted in permanent impacts to 0.10-acre
and temporary impacts to 0.26-acre to wetland waters of the United States, regulated bythe United
States Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. It also resulted in
permanent impacts to an approximate 0.85-acre of riparian habitat regulated by the California
Department of Fish and Game contained within a 960 linear foot portion of the Wolf Valley Creek
Channel. The City was required to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements by creating a 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area, which comprises a
portion of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel. The
proposed Project would be constructed pursuant to the requirements of the United States Army
Corps of Engineers in Nationwide Permit NW43 No. 200500150-SMJ, the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board in Water Quality Certification and Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements
for Discharge of Dredge and/or Fill Materials No. 04C-107, and the California Department of Fish
and Game in Agreement Regarding Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration (Notification No. 6-2003-
069).
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 9
As planned and designed, the City would landscape the conservation easement area and
provide irrigation to this area for a period of approximately 5 112 years. The City would use an
approximate 22,648 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line
easement to provide access to and irrigation to the conservation easement area. The City would
also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easement to connect the conservation
easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the proposed Project, the City
would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period
of 51 /2 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5
1/2 years. At that time, the City would offer to re-convey the permanent grading and access/water
line easement back to the property owner if the owner wished to retain these areas.
The mitigation would be completed consistent with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and
prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The
purpose of the mitigation is to compensate for the loss of wetland and riparian habitat associated
with the Wolf Valley Creek Channel improvement portion of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements. The proposed Project would enhance the overall functions and values of the subject
portion of Temecula Creek watershed that currently provides limited biological and hydrological
function to this area of the City. The proposed Project would require site preparation and
amendments to the topography of the land to provide the area with adequate hydrology and would
include a restoration effort consisting of a combination of seeding and planting to encourage
establishment of riparian and wetland habitat. Further, the proposed Project is in the public interest
and necessity because it would further Goal 3 of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the
City's General Plan, which seeks the conservation of important biological habitats and protection of
plan an animal species of concern, wildlife movement corridors and general biodiversity.
B. The Project is Planned and Located in the Mannerthat Will be Most Compatible
with the Greatest Public Good and the Least Private Injury
As discussed above, the proposed Project, as planned and designed, and as approved by
the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the
proposed Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square foot) permanent
conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14 acres of riparian habitat
and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The City seeks to acquire the approximate 1.70-acre conservation
easement for a public use, namely for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or
convenient thereto to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed as part of the previous Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements Project as required bythe California Department of Fish and Game
and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 815, the State
Legislature has declared that the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space condition
is among the most important environmental assets of California.
As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape the area and provide irrigation to
the conservation easement area for a period of approximately 5 1 /2 years. The City would use an
approximate 22,648 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line
easement to provide access to and irrigation to the conservation easement area. The City would
also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easement to connect the conservation
easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the proposed Project, the City
would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period
of 51 /2 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5
1/2 years.
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 10
The proposed Project, as planned and designed, is located near the vicinity of the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements. The larger parcel is zoned OS-C (Conservation District) by the
City. The General Plan Designation is OS (Open Space). The OS-C zone is intended for those
lands that should remain in a natural state as much as feasible without intrusion from active
recreational uses. The construction of buildings and other structures generally is not permitted in
the OS-C zone, with few exceptions by a conditional use permit. Approximately 48 percent of the
proposed 1.70-acre permanent conservation easement on the larger parcel is located within the
lower Temecula Creek floodway, 47 percent of this conservation easement is located in the lower
Temecula Creek floodplain and the remaining 5 percent of the conservation easement area is
located outside of the floodway or floodplain. The larger parcel is currently encumbered with an
approximate 9.40-acre conservation easement and an approximate 16.50-acre conservation
easement. The approximate 25,007 square foot permanent grading easement the City seeks to
acquire is located completely in the lower Temecula Creek floodway and completely overlaps the
existing conservation easements on the larger parcel. The approximate 22,648 square foot
permanent access and water line easement the City seeks to acquire is located completely in the
lower Temecula Creek Floodway. An approximate 15,948 square foot portion of this access and
water line easement overlaps the existing conservation easements on the larger parcel and the
remaining approximate 6,700 square foot area is located outside of the existing conservation
easement areas.
As planned and designed, the mitigation would take place within the 1.7-acre permanent
conservation easement area. The mitigation includes an approximate 1.14 acres of riparian habitat
and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The mitigation would be done consistent with the Habitat Mitigation and
Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23,
2008 and prepared by Michael Brandman Associates, which is incorporated in this Report by this
reference. The purpose of the mitigation is to compensate for the loss of wetland and riparian
habitat associated with the Wolf Valley Creek Channel improvement portion of the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements. The proposed Project would enhance the overall functions and
values of the subject portion of Temecula Creek watershed that currently provides limited biological
and hydrological function to this area of the City. The proposed Project would require site
preparation and amendments to the topography of the land to provide the area with adequate
hydrology and would include a restoration effort consisting of a combination of seeding and planting
to encourage establishment of riparian and wetland habitat. The proposed Projectfurthers Goal 3 of
the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City's General Plan, which is the conservation of
important biological habitats and protection of plan an animal species of concern, wildlife movement
corridors and general biodiversity.
The proposed Project is planned and designed to allow the property ownerto have the rights
to the permanent grading and access/water line easement after the 51/2 year period discussed
above if the owner wishes the Cityto re-conveythese interests, thereby minimizing the impact to the
larger parcel over the long term.
C. The Subject Property Interests Described in The Resolution of Necessity Are
Necessary for the Proposed Project
As described above, as planned and designed, and as approved by the California
Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the proposed
Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square foot) permanent conservation
easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14 acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres
of wetlands. The City seeks to acquire the approximate 1.70-acre conservation easement for a
public use, namely for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient
thereto to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed on as part of the previous Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements Project as required bythe California Department of Fish and Game
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 11
and the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
As part of the proposed Project, the City would landscape the area and provide irrigation to
the conservation easement area for a period of approximately 5 112 years. The City would use an
approximate 22,648 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent access/water line
easement to provide access to and irrigation to the conservation easement area. The City would
also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading easement to connect the conservation
easement area and the access/water line easement area. As part of the proposed Project, the City
would landscape and irrigate the conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period
of 51 /2 years. The City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5
1/2 years. At that time, the City would offer to re-convey the permanent grading and access/water
line easement back to the property owner if the owner wished to retain these areas.
The proposed Project cannot be constructed without the acquisition of the following Subject
Property Interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located along the northern side of
Temecula Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of
Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number 961-010-076:
An approximate 74,251 square foot (1.70 acre) permanent conservation easement,
which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of
Necessity labeled "Parcel A Conservation Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" to
the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Conservation Easement";
An approximate 25,007 (0.58 acre) square foot grading easement, which is described on
the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled
"Parcel B Grading Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "C" to the Resolution of
Necessity labeled "Grading Easement"; and
An approximate 22,648 (0.52 acre) square foot access/water line easement, which is
described on the portion of Exhibit "A" to the attached proposed Resolution of Necessity
labeled "Parcel C Access and Water Line Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "D" to
the Resolution of Necessity labeled "Access and Water Line Easement".
D. The City has Made the Offer Required by Section 7260 et seq. of the
Government Code to the Owner of Record of the Real Property Interests the
City Seeks to Acquire
As explained more fully above, the City pursuant to Government Code Section 7260 etseq.
obtained a fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in
accordance with the appraised fair market value, and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008
pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2 to Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited
partnership, the record owner of the Subject Property Interests:
The following documents on file in the City Clerk's Office, the Planning Department and/or
the Public Works Department, which are referenced in this report, are incorporated in this report by
this reference:
• Resolution of Necessity and Exhibits "A" through "D" to Resolution, attached hereto
• City of Temecula General Plan (updated 2005)
• Offer Letter from the City of Temecula to the Record Owner of the Subject Property
Interests
• Notice Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 from City of Temecula
to Record Owner of the Subject Property Interests
• Street Improvement Plans for Proposed Project
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 12
Environmental Documents Relating to Proposed Project and Pechanga Parkway
Phase II Improvements, including Notice of Determination and Categorical Exclusion
and all documents referenced above in connection with CEQA and NEPA analyses.
Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain
Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael
Brandman Associates
FISCAL IMPACT: The Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements-Environmental
Mitigation, Project No. PW99-11 EM, is part of the overall Pechanga Parkway Street Improvements,
Phase II Project. It is a Capital Improvement Program project approved bythe City Council as part of
Fiscal Year 2008/ 2009 budget. Sufficient funds are available in Account No. 210-165-668-6700 to
cover the $30,250.00 deposit.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution of Necessity and Exhibits "A" through "D" to Resolution,
attached hereto
R:/Agenda Reports/Storm Drain Agenda Report 11 25 08 13
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DECLARING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS
NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES AND
AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION THEREOF IN
CONNECTION WITH THE PECHANGA PARKWAY
STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - ENVIRONMENTAL
MITIGATION (PROJECT NO. PW99-11EM)
THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, FIND, DETERMINE,
AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Temecula is a municipal corporation, in the County of
Riverside, State of California.
Section 2. The real property interests described in Section 3 of this Resolution
are to be taken for a public use, namely for conservation easement purposes and all
uses necessary or convenient thereto for the Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain
Improvements - Environmental Mitigation (Project No. PW99-11 EM) ("Project") to
mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed by the City as part of the previous
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project (PW99-11). The City seeks to
acquire the real property interests described in Section 3 for a public use pursuant to
the authority conferred upon the City of Temecula to acquire property by eminent
domain by Section 19 of Article 1 of the California Constitution, California Government
Code Sections 37350, 37350.5, 37351, 40401 and 40404, California Civil Code Section
815 et seq., and California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010 et seq. (Eminent
Domain Law), including, but not limited to Sections 1240.010, 1240.020, 1240.110,
1240.120, 1240.510, 1240.610, 1240.650 and other provisions of law. Pursuant to Civil
Code Section 815, the State Legislature has declared that the preservation of land in its
natural, scenic or open-space condition is among the most important environmental
assets of California.
Section 3. The City seeks to acquire the following real property interests from
the real property, which is a vacant lot located along the northern side of Temecula
Creek, including a portion of the floodway, east of Jedediah Smith Road in the City of
Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Number
961-010-076 in connection with the Project:
• An approximate 74,251 square foot (1.70 acre) permanent conservation
easement, which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" hereto labeled "Parcel
A Conservation Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" hereto labeled
"Conservation Easement";
• An approximate 25,007 (0.58 acre) square foot grading easement, which is
described on the portion of Exhibit "A" hereto labeled "Parcel B Grading
11 086\01 58\1 099931 v.1
Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "C" hereto labeled "Grading Easement";
and
• An approximate 22,648 (0.52 acre) square foot access/water line easement,
which is described on the portion of Exhibit "A" hereto labeled "Parcel C Access
and Water Line Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "D" hereto labeled "Access
and Water Line Easement".
Exhibits "A", "B", "C" and "D" to this Resolution of Necessity are incorporated
herein by this reference. The Subject Property Interests are required for conservation
easement purposes for the Project to mitigate the impacts of the City's construction of
the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project (Project No. PW99-11).
Section 4. The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public
purpose, namely for conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or
convenient thereto for the Project to mitigate storm drainage facilities constructed as
part of the previous Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements Project as required by
the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of
Engineers. The Project would require an approximate 1.70-acre (74,251 square foot)
permanent conservation easement that would be used to create approximately 1.14
acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. As planned and designed, the City
would landscape the conservation easement area and provide irrigation to the area for a
period of approximately 5 1 /2 years. Accordingly, the City would need to acquire an
approximate 22,648 square foot area of an existing dirt road as a permanent
access/water line easement to provide access to and irrigation to the conservation
easement area. The City would also need an approximate 25,007 square foot grading
easement to connect the conservation easement area and the access/water line
easement area. As part of the Project, the City would landscape and irrigate the
conservation easement and grading easement areas for a period of 5 1/2 years. The
City expects that the conservation easement area would be self-sufficient after 5 1 /2
years. At that time, the City would offer to re-convey the permanent grading and
access/water line easement back to the property owner if the owner wished to retain
these areas.
The City was required to provide 1.7-acres of replacement mitigation for
temporary and permanent impacts to riparian and wetland habitat located within the
Wolf Valley Creek Channel resulting from the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements. The City's construction of the various components comprising the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements was for a public purpose, namely for public
street and drainage purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to alleviate
traffic congestion and improve traffic circulation and drainage in the area of the
improvements. The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements widened and improved
Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway (formerly State Route 79 South) to Via
Gilberto into a six-lane urban arterial highway to its full-width of 134 feet. It also
improved and widened Pechanga Parkway from Via Gilberto to Pechanga Road into a
four-lane arterial highway with a right-of-way width of 110 feet. In addition, the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements constructed curbs, gutters, pavement
delineation and signage, islands, sidewalks, landscaping, irrigation, streetlights,
z
driveway approaches, traffic signal interconnect system, retaining wall improvements,
and storm drain improvements. Further, the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements
also included improvements to Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The storm drain
improvements in connection with Wolf Valley Creek Channel included the under-
grounding of a portion of the concrete lined Wolf Valley Creek Channel from Loma
Linda Road to approximately 900 linear feet downstream of Muirfield Drive
(approximately 1,900 total linear feet). Later improvements included the reconstruction
of a portion of the existing rip rap/concrete-lined trapezoidal Wolf Valley Creek Channel
from approximately 900 linear feet north of Muirfield Road downstream to the Temecula
Creek confluence (approximately 1,100 total linear feet).
The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements resulted in permanent impacts to
0.10-acre and temporary impacts to 0.26-acre to wetland waters of the United States,
regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water
Quality Control Board. It also resulted in permanent impacts to an approximate 0.85-
acre of riparian habitat regulated b the California Department of Fish and Game
contained within a 960 linear foot portion of the Wolf Valley Creek Channel. The City
was required to mitigate the impacts of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements
by creating a 1.7-acre permanent conservation easement area, which comprises a
portion of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire from the larger parcel.
The Project would be constructed pursuant to the requirements of the United States
Army Corps of Engineers in Nationwide Permit NW43 No. 200500150-SMJ, the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board in Water Quality Certification and
Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharge of Dredge and/or Fill Materials
No. 04C-107, and the California Department of Fish and Game in Agreement Regarding
Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration (Notification No. 6-2003-069).
The mitigation comprising the Project would take place within the 1.7-acre
permanent conservation easement area. The mitigation includes an approximate 1.14
acres of riparian habitat and 0.56 acres of wetlands. The mitigation would be completed
consistent with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga Parkway
Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared by Michael
Brandman Associates, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The purpose of
the mitigation is to compensate for the loss of wetland and riparian habitat associated
with the Wolf Valley Creek Channel improvement portion of the Pechanga Parkway
Phase II Improvements. The Project would enhance the overall functions and values of
the subject portion of Temecula Creek watershed that currently provides limited
biological and hydrological function to this area of the City. The Project would require
site preparation and amendments to the topography of the land to provide the area with
adequate hydrology and would include a restoration effort consisting of a combination of
seeding and planting to encourage establishment of riparian and wetland habitat.
Further, the Project is in the public interest and necessity because it would
further Goal 3 of the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City's General Plan,
which seeks the conservation of important biological habitats and protection of plan an
animal species of concern, wildlife movement corridors and general biodiversity.
Moreover, the State Legislature has declared pursuant to Civil Code Section 815 that
3
the preservation of land in its natural, scenic or open-space condition is among the most
important environmental assets of California.
Section 5. The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for
conservation easement purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto to
mitigate storm drainage facilities and other improvements constructed as part of the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, which mitigation was required by the
California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Army Corps of
Engineers. Accordingly, the environmental effects of the Project were studied and
analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public
Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., the CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs. §
15000 et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines") and the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA")
in connection with the Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City Council on
February 13, 2001, several initial studies pursuant to the requirements of CEQA and the
CEQA Guidelines and a Categorical Exclusion ("CE") pursuant to NEPA prepared for
the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements (Project No. PW99-11). The
acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests were studied as an integral part of the
Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, EIRs and the CE prepared in connection with the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City is the lead agency for approval
under CEQA and FHWA is the lead agency for approval under NEPA in connection with
the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements.
On April 11, 2006 the City prepared a Notice of Determination for the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements, which was duly filed on April 20, 2006 with the County
Clerk and Recorder's Office in accordance with CEQA. The Notice of Determination
noted that the City approved the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements on March
14, 2006. The City made the following determinations in approving the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements:
(a) The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements will not have a significant
effect on the environment.
(b) A Negative Declaration was previously prepared and adopted for the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements pursuant to CEQA. The following
environmental determinations have been made in the past which have
evaluated the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, or interim
improvements to Pechanga Parkway:
■ Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City of Temecula City
Council on February 13, 2001.
■ City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR, certified
by the Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005.
■ EA 71, a Notice of Exemption adopted by the City of Temecula on
August 11, 2000 for interim road widening on Pechanga Parkway.
■ EA 74, a Negative Declaration adopted by the City of Temecula on
October 4, 2000 for the widening of a portion of Pechanga Parkway to
four lanes.
a
■ EA89 a Negative Declaration adopted by the City Council on January
8, 2002 for interim widening improvements and the construction of a
sound wall along the west side of Pechanga Parkway.
(c) Mitigation measures were not made a condition of the approval of the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements.
(d) A Statement of Overriding Consideration was not adopted for the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements.
(e) Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
Concurrently, with the Notice of Determination, the City prepared on April 11,
2006 a Certificate of Fee Exemption (De Minimus Impact Finding) for the Pechanga
Parkway Phase II Improvements. Pursuant to the Certificate of Fee Exemption, the City
made the following findings of exemption:
(a) The Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements consists of the completion of
widening improvements to Pechanga Parkway to its ultimate configuration as
defined in the City of Temecula General Plan Circulation Element.
(b) Several Initial Studies were previously prepared that evaluated the potential
for adverse environmental impacts associated that could result from the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements.
(c) These previous Initial Studies and prior Negative Declarations and
Environmental Impact Reports indicated that no impacts would occur to fish
and wildlife resources as a result of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements and the City of Temecula recommended that a Notice of
Determination be prepared for this project exempting the Pechanga Parkway
Phase II Improvements from further environmental review pursuant to Section
15161 of the CEQA Guidelines. The City found that Section 15161 applied
here because a previous Environmental Impact Report or Negative
Declaration has been prepared and it can be determined that the impacts of
the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements have been fully disclosed and
analyzed by the previous environmental determinations. (No wildlife related
mitigation measures were required for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements).
(d) The City of Temecula previously adopted a Negative Declaration or has
evaluated the environmental impacts of widening Pechanga Parkway in an
EIR for earlier related Projects. The following environmental determinations
have been made in the past that have evaluated the Pechanga Parkway
Phase II Improvements or interim improvements to Pechanga Parkway:
• Wolf Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City of Temecula City
Council on February 13, 2001.
5
■ City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR, certified
by the Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005.
■ EA 71, a Notice of Exemption adopted by the City of Temecula on
August 11, 2000 for interim road widening on Pechanga Parkway.
■ EA 74, a Negative Declaration adopted by the City of Temecula on
October 4, 2000 for the widening of a portion of Pechanga Parkway to
four lanes.
■ EA89 a Negative Declaration adopted by the City Council on January
8, 2002 for interim widening improvements and the construction of a
sound wall along the west side of Pechanga Parkway.
(e) The City of Temecula believes that the ultimate improvements to Pechanga
Parkway were addressed in the previous environmental determinations made
for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements and that there will be no
impacts resulting from said Project that have not been addressed and
analyzed in these previous reports.
In accordance with the requirements of NEPA, Caltrans and FHWA approved a
Categorical Exclusion ("CE") for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The
Caltrans Environmental Chief Officer and the Caltrans Project Manager/DLA Engineer
approved the CE on March 29, 2007 and on April 3, 2007, respectively. FHWA
approved the CE on April 19, 2007. In approving the CE, Caltrans determined that a
CE was proper because the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements would not
individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental effect and that said Project
was excluded from the requirements to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) or
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The CE, Caltrans' findings in the CE, and the
stipulations and/or directions set forth in the Continuation Sheet of the CE are
incorporated herein by this reference.
The proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests were studied as an
integral part of the environmental documents discussed above. The Project is a
mitigation requirement for the City's construction of the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements. The above environmental findings are the appropriate findings for the
proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests.
In connection with the proposed Resolutions of Necessity, City staff on
November , 2008, reviewed all of the environmental documentation prepared in
connection with the Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements, including the Wolf
Creek Specific Plan EIR, certified by the City of Temecula City Council on February 13,
2001; the City of Temecula Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR, certified by the
Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005; EA 71, a Notice of Exemption adopted by the
City of Temecula on August 11, 2000 for interim road widening on Pechanga Parkway;
EA 74, a Negative Declaration adopted by the City of Temecula on October 4, 2000 for
the widening of a portion of Pechanga Parkway to four lanes; EA 89, a Negative
Declaration adopted by the City Council on January 8, 2002 for interim widening
improvements and the construction of a sound wall along the west side of Pechanga
Parkway, the Traffic Studies prepared in connection with said EIRs, the Noise Study
s
Report for Pechanga Parkway Phase II Street Improvements revised March 12, 2007
and all other technical studies prepared in connection with said documents, the Notice
of Determination (EA-126) filed with the County Clerk on April 20, 2006, the CE (PLHL-
54591014) dated April 19, 2007 by FHWA and its Continuation Sheet approved by
Caltrans and FHWA pursuant to NEPA, and the Agenda Reports prepared in
connection with these environmental documents. Pursuant to the criteria of Section
15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code, City
staff concluded that no substantial changes have occurred in the Project that the City
has obtained no new information of substantial importance that would require further
environmental analysis. These environmental findings are the appropriate findings with
respect to the proposed acquisitions of the Subject Property Interests.
Section 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2, the City obtained a
fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in
accordance with the fair market value and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008 to
the record owner. The City's offer letter also offered to pay to the property owner the
reasonable costs, up to $5,000.00 (Five Thousand Dollars) for an independent appraisal
of the Subject Property Interests pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025.
Section 7. The City provided notice to the record owner pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 of its decision to consider the adoption of a
Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition by eminent domain of the Subject Property
Interests.
Section 8. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing regarding the
Project, including the Agenda Report and documents referenced therein, the City
Council hereby finds and determines that:
A. The public interest and necessity require the Project;
B. The Project is planned and located in the manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury;
C. The Subject Property Interests described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on
Exhibits "B", "C" and "D" hereto are necessary for the Project; and
D. The City has made the offer required by Government Code Section
7267.2 to the owner of record of the Subject Property Interests it seeks to
acquire.
Section 9. The findings and declarations contained in this Resolution are
based upon the record before the City Council, including the Agenda Report and all
documents referenced therein, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference,
and any testimony and/or comments submitted to the City by the record owner and or
its representative(s). These documents include, but are not limited to, the City's
General Plan, its Circulation Element, the plans for the Pechanga Parkway Phase II
Improvements, the environmental documents referenced above and in the Agenda
Report, including the Notice of Determination and Categorical Exclusion approved by
7
the Federal Highway Administration and the California Department of Transportation
pursuant to NEPA, the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Pechanga
Parkway Storm Drain Improvements Project dated September 23, 2008 and prepared
by Michael Brandman Associates, the offer letter sent to the property owner pursuant to
Code of Civil Procedure Section 7267.2, the notice to the record owner pursuant to
Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 of the City's intent to consider the adoption of
the Resolution of Necessity.
Section 10. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby authorizes and
directs the City Attorney's office to take all steps necessary to commence and prosecute
legal proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction to acquire by eminent domain the
real property interests described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibits "B", "C" and "D"
attached hereto and to take all steps necessary to deposit with the Court the amount of
probable compensation required by law for the issuance of an Order for Prejudgment
Possession.
Section 11. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby authorizes the City
Manager to execute all necessary documents in connection with the eminent domain
proceeding.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008.
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
a
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 08-_ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
9
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PECHANGA PARKWAY STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION EASEMENTS
THAT PORTION OF THE REMAINDER PARCEL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY A MAP
ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL "A"
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL "B" OF THE "WETLAND CREATION
AREA" AS DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED NOVEMBER 14,
2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 561440 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO
BEING ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT" AS
DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT NO. 366277, RECORED OCTOBER 8, 1997 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
SAID COUNTY;
THENCE NORTH 60°30'00" WEST, 63.17 FEET (NORTH 60°31'05" WEST, 63.17 AS RECORDED IN
SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 561440) ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL "B", "WETLAND
CREATION AREA" TO THE BEGINNING OF.A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS OF 190.00 FEET;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B",
"WETLAND CREATION AREA" THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°12'50", AN ARC LENGTH OF
110.14 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 86°17'10" WEST, 131.69 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL"B",
"WETLAND CREATION AREA" TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 190.00 FEET;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B",
"WETLAND CREATION AREA" THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°10'07", AN ARC LENGTH OF
100.04 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 63°32'43" WEST, 23.37 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE.OF PARCEL "B",
"WETLAND CREATION AREA" TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FEET;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B"
"WETLAND CREATION AREA" THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°59'49", AN ARC LENGTH OF
226.87 FEET;
THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL "B", "WETLAND CREATION AREA" SOUTH
86°54'37" EAST, 548.70 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 82°38'40" EAST, 224.77 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89°34'27" EAST, 489.39 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID
"WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT";
Page 1 of 7
Created on 6/21/2007 2:10 PM
BY: R.C.O.
CK'D BY: B. Fox
F:107012001Legals\SD MITIGATION ESMTS.doc
THENCE SOUTH 55°52'16" WEST, 64.65 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT";
THENCE SOUTH 72°53'44" WEST, 201.78 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT";
THENCE NORTH 85°45'31" WEST, 386.01 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT" TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 74,251 SQUARE FEET OR 1.70 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B" AND THEREBY BEING
MADE A PART HEREOF.
PARCEL "B"
GRADING EASEMENT
COMMENCING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL "B" OF THE "WETLAND CREATION
AREA" AS DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED NOVEMBER 14,
2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 561440 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO
BEING ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT" AS
DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT NO. 366277, RECORED OCTOBER 8, 1997 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
SAID COUNTY;
THENCE SOUTH 85°45'31" EAST, 386.01 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT";
THENCE NORTH 72°53'44" EAST, 61.78 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT" TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH 72°53'44" EAST, 140.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT";
THENCE LEAVING THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID "WILDLIFE CONSERVATION EASEMENT"
SOUTH 46°41'42" EAST, 287.02 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 76°24'18" WEST, 65.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 58°32'48" WEST, 327.64 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
CONTAINING 25,007 SQUARE FEET OR 0.57 ACRE MORE OR LESS.
THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "C" AND THEREBY BEING
MADE A PART HEREOF.
Page 2 of 7
Created on 6/21/2007 2:10 PM
BY: R.C.O.
CK'D BY: B. Fox
F:\0701200\Legals\SD MITIGATION ESMTS.doc
PARCEL "C"
ACCESS AND WATER LINE EASEMENT
A STRIP OF LAND 20 FEET WIDE, THE CENTERLINE OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT "A" OF PARCEL MAP NO. 29132 AS
SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 199, PAGES 78 THROUGH 80 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE NORTH 16°36'44" WEST, 10.23 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "A" TO
THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE SOUTH 61 °16'24" WEST, 90.52 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 90.00 FEET;.
THENCE WESTERLY AND NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 86°44'18", AN ARC LENGTH OF 136.25 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID
POINT BEARS NORTH 58°00'42" EAST;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY AND WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 93°58'32", AN ARC LENGTH OF 82.01 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 54°02'10" WEST, 55.07 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°28'54", AN
ARC LENGTH OF 43.57 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 41 °33'15" WEST, 77.05 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38°38'27", AN
ARC LENGTH OF 67.44 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 80°11'42" WEST, 121.08 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°16'21", AN
ARC LENGTH OF 68.54 FEET TO. THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE
NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT
BEARS SOUTH 49°04'40" EAST;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 54°02'36", AN ARC
LENGTH OF 94.32 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 85°02'04" WEST, 31.87 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE
CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°08'48", AN ARC
LENGTH OF 31.93 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 85°49'08" WEST, 232.74 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF
PARCEL "B", "GRADING EASEMENT" AS DESCRIBED ABOVE.
Page 3 of 7
Created on.6/21/2007 2:10 PM
BY: R.C.O.
CK'D BY: B. Fox
F:\0701200\Legals\SD MITIGATION ESMTS.doc
THE SIDELINES OF SAID 20 FOOT EASEMENT SHALL BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED AS TO
BEGIN AT THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "A" AND TO TERMINATE ON THE NORTHEASTERLY
LINE OF SAID PARCEL "B".
CONTAINING 22,648 SQUARE FEET OR 0.52 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "D" AND THEREBY BEING
MADE A PART HEREOF.
PREPARED UNDER MY SUPERVISION:
KEVIN B. COZAD
REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 26159
EXPIRES: 3-31-2008
~0•
r N0.28159
Exp 3/31/E1r3
iVr~
Page 4 of 7
Created on 6/2112007 2:10 PM
BY: R.C.O.
CK'D BY: B. Fox
F:\0701200\Legals\SD MITIGATION ESMTS.do<
EXHIBIT "B"
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
Q
O
Go
V
r
z
m
v
1.m--
r,-,
w
Fi
~
r
m
N
z
~
00 O
f~
~
Oo
N
W
W
O)
W
2
O
V
O
co
V
to
N
(n
(n
Z
(n
C):
c0~
N
pOj
Co.,
i
OM
G'1
,
C4
,
,
A'
Olt
N
_
O
V
O
CA
W
rn
rn
rn
0
r
r
r
p
c
p
o
z
M
r
rn
7
o
•
_
OOD
S
T,
C
N
co
a
n
c
w
/
v ~ n1 ~ I
Nv
o
o ~ I
~
m
w
I
rZTI
/
I N
CD
I I
I y ~
I
►
I m
j~
~
I :n
I
ti
y
I y o
I
I
5
Z
w y
1,
p a
I
I tiR
I ~v ~ O I vy
v
rc-p
I
~j
SCALE: 1"=200' I \
I. \
I \
I \
\
I \
PREPARED FOR: CFESSf~
CITY OF TEMECULA /Q C
43200 BUSINESS PARK DR.
TEMECULA, CA 92590
(951) 694-6411
rc NO. 2169
RECORD OWNER: EV1
BORCHARD-TEMECULA, L.P., r
A CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP~r.
n
NZZ..-i c /
W v zn
1
I o
I w
I
I c1~
I `T'
I QlA
n I
I
o~~l
nyal
mZ^I
~~al
ti ~I
I
I
I
I
i
/
SHEET 5 OF 7
CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS / PLANNERS
Air SURVEYORS / GPS
151 South Girard Street Hemet, Ca 92544
TEL (951) 652-4454 • FAX (951) 766-8942
E-MAIL kbcozadOkbcozod.com
I EXHIBIT "C" I
GRADING EASEMENT
Q
kp~
V
rn
w
-v
m
C
Z
irn
m
C
N
0)
ONO
01
Ell
rT1
V
cn
V
O
S
O
i-
O
O
O
N
O
O
v
00
r
a
c
V)
v
v
Z
OD
c;
O-
N
N
f.7
N
N3
pz
?
W
W
Olt
Olt
ll~
L*'
::9
m
m
rn
/ I I
/ F 1
I tiro
co
I ~ m I ~c I o
I ~ I oo \ W
I 'Oa'r c~ I \
v
Z-A
I r \
Z \
► 1 /
SCALE: 1"=200'
1 1
/
/
/
/
I
I
I
►
I
N ,W
I
I O O•~
I
I ~
I
I C31
I ~
I
~I
i
~~\SHEET 6 OF 7
I
~
1
\
PREPARED FOR:
CITY OF TEMECULA
~OS~
~
O• C
43200 BUSINESS PARK DR.
TEMECULA, CA 92590
(951) 694-6411
f40.26159
RECORD OWNER:
EXP, 3ri.1
BORCHARD-TEMECULA, L.P.,
A CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP
/ W 1
CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS / PLANNERS
SURVEYORS./ GPS
151 South Girard Street Hemet, Ca 92544
TEL (951) 652-4454 • FAX (951) 766-8942
E-MAIL kbcozodOkbcozod.com
EXHIBIT "D"
ACCESS AND WATER LINE EASEMENT
I I %
I 11 ~ ~ ; I
I
ti 1 I
va~j III r- 1 \
~1 1 a aka I. \
~m~~ I I n\ \
(n R
0
1 c m C)
p \ rn rn ym~ \ y
0 1 ~ ~ Vic, gym \
1z) lh
>0 ~R i
'W 1 ' Z
r
O>
r
CT
r
A
r
L4
r
N
r
Z
rn
r
Z
z
_j
Ln
co
rn
~0
-4
crl
(D
co
O
O
O
CT
D
co
?
V
CA
CT
V
N
r
rn
a)
w
z
N
(n
N
N
co
co
co
~
CA
M
z
v2
g
q
1
oC)
(A
C)
(
N
W
N
41
O
O
?
N
co
-0.
N
cn
O
~
73
W ~ \ 11 ~ ~ ~ m ~ I yo N w
; Niz:~ o all
~ w tea-, \ I ~ ClJ
\ 1 ~ p ~ ys~ N ~ m \II C31
p N ` ( j l CI1
i
PREPARED FOR:
CITY OF TEMECULA
43200 BUSINESS PARK DR.
TEMECULA, CA 92590
(951) 694-6411
RECORD OWNER:.
BORCHARD-TEMECULA, L.P.,
A CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP
C-)
c
C...)
rn
V
M
Cn
~
w
N
j
m
n
w
co
rn
Cn
4~.
co
w
z
c
G9
V
w
N
01
to
w
U1
-r-.
Ln
O
1.1
2
rCTI
L4.
N
?
A
V
CT
W
r
o
o
o
o
o
cn
co
Cl
g
m
0
0
0
Co
0
0
o
c
0
0
0
0
6
0
6
(n
O
O'
C7
O
O
O
C)
.
cq
I
?
w
(D
w
co
~
N
co
w
Oa
(72
~
O
O
w
N.
LA
~
r
01
1
N
CA
(3
j
00
N
00
cn
01
CA
4Z
D
Oo
i
CA
i
i
V
i
~
i
N
i
Oa
i
\
Q\~oFE , \\60
\r\
\o \ ~ Zg~6 y, QIN ~d
Z
rn
No 26159 4~
~jVItv.
\~F!Attr~~~ w V.- SHEET 7 OF 7
CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
Z SUNRVICIPAL EYORS ~NGPUSLTANTS /PLANNERS
Y 151 South Girard Street Hemet, Co 92544
TEL (951) 652-4454 • FAX (951) 766-8942
E-MAIL kbcozadOkticozod.com
SCALE: 1"=200'
ITEM NO. 20
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by Eminent
Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in Connection with
the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway - Dual Turn Lanes From Temecula
Parkway (Project No. PW 06-11)
PREPARED BY: Paula Gutierrez-Baeza, City Attorney's Office
Greg Butler, Deputy Director of Public Works - CIP
Monica Adamee, Real Property Agent
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
Consider the following Resolution, which is a Resolution of Necessity of the City of
Temecula:
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS NECESSARY FOR
PUBLIC PURPOSES AND AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION
THEREOF IN CONNECTION WITH THE PECHANGA PARKWAY-
DUAL TURN LANES FROM TEMECULA PARKWAY (PROJECT
NO. PW06-11)
2. Open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the proposed Resolution of Necessity,
receive from staff the evidence stated and referred to in this Agenda Report ("Report"), take
testimony from any person wishing to be heard on issues A, B, C, and D below, and
consider all evidence to determine whether to adopt the proposed Resolution of Necessity.
If the City Council finds, based on the evidence contained and referred to in this Report, the
testimony and comments received at this hearing, and all written testimony submitted to the City
Council, that the evidence warrants the necessary findings with respect to the proposed Resolution
of Necessity, then City staff recommends that the City Council, in the exercise of its discretion:
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 1
Adopt proposed Resolution No. 08-_ (which requires a 4/5ths vote of the entire Council)
and authorize the City Attorney's office to file eminent domain proceedings to acquire the
following real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located at the
southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California,
identified as Riverside County Tax Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-
073:
➢ An approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street purposes,
which is described on Exhibit "A" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal
Description for Dedication of Right-Of-Way' and is depicted on Exhibit "B" labeled
"Dedication of Right of Way";
➢ An approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent public
roadwaythat will revert back to the property owner after construction of the Project in the
manner proposed, which is described on Exhibit "A-1" to the proposed Resolution of
Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Slope Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B-
1" labeled "Slope Easement"; and
➢ An approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a term of
eighteen (18) months to facilitate construction of the Project, which is described on
Exhibit "A-2" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for
Temporary Construction Easement" and depicted on Exhibit "B-2" labeled "Temporary
Construction Easement".
These real property interests are referred to below collectively as "Subject Property
Interests" and are described more particularly in the Exhibits attached to the Resolution of
Necessity. The proposed Resolution of Necessity and its Exhibits "A", "B", "A-1 "B-1 "A-2"
and "B-2" are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Authorize the City Attorney's office and City staff to file and prosecute eminent domain
proceedings and to take all necessary steps to deposit $120,000 with the Court, the amount
of probable compensation, as required by law for issuance of an Order for Prejudgment
Possession.
Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents.
BACKGROUND:
Description of Project:
The City Council has before it a proposed Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition by
eminent domain of certain real property interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located
at the southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California,
identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-073 ("larger parcel").
Specifically, the Subject Property Interests consist of an approximate 2,978 square foot permanent
easement for public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto in connection with
the Proposed Pechanga Parkway- Dual Turn Lanes from Temecula Parkway (Project No. PW06-
11) (referred to below as "proposed Project"), an approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to
support the adjacent public roadway that will revert back to the underlying fee owner after
construction of the proposed Project, and an approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction
easement with a term of eighteen (18) months to facilitate the construction of the proposed Project.
The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests to construct the proposed Project.
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 2
The proposed Project would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound
Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway consistent with the City's General Plan and
would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks. Temecula Parkway is designated as a
principal arterial in the City's General Plan and is currently configured with three eastbound and
three westbound traffic lanes in the vicinity of the larger parcel. There are also two westbound left
turn lanes, one eastbound left turn lane and one eastbound right turn lane at the signalized
intersection with Pechanga Parkway. The construction of the proposed Project in the manner
proposed would not change the westbound configuration of Temecula Parkway. The proposed
Project would change the eastbound configuration of Temecula Parkway to realign the existing
single right turn lane to accommodate two right turn lanes. The proposed Project would not change
the grade of the larger parcel from which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests.
The grade of Temecula Parkway would change as it approaches the intersection at Pechanga
Parkway.
The City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests for a public use, namely public
street purposes, and all uses necessary or convenient thereto in connection with the proposed
Project pursuant to the authority conferred upon the Cityto acquire real property by eminent domain
by Section 19 of Article 1 of the California Constitution, Government Code Sections 37350, 37350.5,
37351, 40401 and 40404, California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010 et seq. (Eminent
Domain Law), including but not limited to Sections 1240.010, 1240.020, 1240.110, 1240.120,
1240.510, 1240.610, 1240.650, and by other provisions of law.
As mentioned above, the proposed Project would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on
eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway and would also construct new
curbs, gutters and sidewalks consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The Final
Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003061041) for the 2005 City of Temecula General Plan
Update ("2005 General Plan EIR"), which was certified by the City Council on April 12, 2005,
contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary lanes at principal intersections would remove
through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. The Circulation Element of the General
Plan indicates that the failure of key intersections to perform at adopted performance standards
significantly impairs the overall effectiveness of the transportation network. The proposed Project is
consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the 2005 General Plan
EIR. For example, the Circulation Element indicates that Principal Arterials, such as Temecula
Parkway, have six lanes of through travel with additional turn lanes at specific locations. The
proposed Project would construct the two dedicated right turn lanes that are needed at the
intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to improve traffic circulation at this
intersection.
The proposed Project is needed to improve traffic circulation in this area of the City.
Increased development in this area of the City and an increase in patrons of the Pechanga Casino
have resulted in traffic congestion and have impacted traffic circulation on Pechanga Parkway. The
proposed Project's construction of two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway
to southbound Pechanga Parkway would improve traffic conditions at the intersection of Temecula
Parkway and Pechanga Parkway. Level of Service ("LOS") describes the efficiency and quality of
traffic operations. LOS is ranked on a scale of LOS A to LOS F, with LOS A representing excellent
efficiency or free-flow traffic and LOS F representing extreme congestion or a forced or breakdown
flow. At LOS F, traffic volumes exceed capacity, resulting in jammed intersections. This can result
in delays greater than 80 seconds at intersections and/or two-cycle signal waits. The proposed
Project would improve the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkwayfrom LOS F to
LOS E, which is still below the LOS D goal established by the Circulation Element of the General
Plan. Goal 1 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan is to "strive to maintain a LOS D or
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 3
better at all intersections within the City during peak hours and LOS C or better during non-peak
hours." The construction of the proposed improvements would bring the intersection of Temecula
Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to a level of service closer to the LOS D goal set forth in the
Circulation Element of the General Plan.
By improving the efficiency of traffic circulation as set forth above, the proposed Project
would also help to meet Goal 3 of the Circulation Element, which is to provide an efficient City
circulation system through the use of transportation system management and travel demand
management strategies. The proposed Project adds turn lanes to implement this Goal. The
proposed Project will also complywith policy3.2, which is to discourage on-street (curbside) parking
along principal arterial roadways to minimize traffic conflicts and increase carrying capacity. The
impacted portions of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway will continue to prohibit curbside
parking.
As indicated above, increased development in this area of the City and an increase in
patrons of the Pechanga Casino have resulted in additional traffic congestion on Pechanga Parkway
and have impacted traffic circulation efficiency on Pechanga Parkway. This traffic congestion may
increase the risk of traffic accidents. The proposed Project is in the public interest and necessity
and is needed to improve traffic circulation and safety in this area of the City. The proposed Project
would improve traffic circulation and efficiency at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and
Pechanga Parkway, benefiting the residents of this area of the City and the community as a whole.
As indicated above, the proposed Project is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General
Plan. By making right turn movements from Temecula Parkway to Pechanga Parkway more
efficient, the proposed Projectwould improve traffic circulation and efficiencyatthis intersection and
on Pechanga Parkway during peak hour traffic. This may also consequently have a beneficial effect
on the access and response times of emergency vehicles vital to the public health and safety, and
thus, benefit the community as a whole.
For the reasons set forth above and discussed more fully below, the construction of the
proposed Project is needed to ensure that adequate traffic circulation is maintained at the
intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway.
Required Findings for Acquisition of Subject Property Interests by Eminent Domain
In orderto adoptthe proposed Resolution of Necessityforthe acquisition byeminent domain
of the Subject Property Interests, the City Council must find and determine that:
A. The public interest and necessity require the proposed Project;
B. The proposed Project is planned and located in the manner that will be most compatible
with the greatest public good and the least private injury;
C. The Subject Property Interests described in the Resolution of Necessity are necessary
for the proposed Project;
D. The City has made an offer as required by Government Code Section 7267.2 to the
owner of record of the real property it seeks to acquire.
The amount of just compensation is not an issue before the City Council at this hearing. The
hearing relates to issues A, B, C, and D above. The amount of just compensation would be
determined in the eminent domain proceeding that would be filed if the City Council, in its sole
discretion, adopts the proposed Resolution of Necessity.
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 4
Environmental Analysis
The environmental effects of the proposed Project were studied and analyzed pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.
and the CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines"). On
September 24, 2008, the City filed a Notice of Exemption for the proposed Project pursuant to
Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. In adopting a Notice of Exemption, the City determined that
the environmental effects of the proposed Project were studied by the City Council on April 12,
2005, when the City Council certified the 2005 General Plan EIR (SCH #2003061041). Specifically,
the Circulation Element of the 2005 General Plan discussed the need for and includes provisions to
add auxiliary turn lanes at principal intersections in the City. The City has identified the intersection
of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway as one of the intersections that need these auxiliary
turn lanes. The 2005 General Plan EIR contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary turn
lanes at principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic
flow. The Notice of Exemption found that the proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan
Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the City found the
proposed Project is exempt from further review under CEQA pursuant to Section 15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines.
The Notice of Exemption, 2005 General Plan EIR, Notice of Preparation of a Draft
Environmental Impact Report dated June 4, 2003, the Environmental Checklist prepared bythe City
in connection with the 2005 General Plan EIR and agenda reports prepared in connection with these
environmental documents are incorporated herein by this reference.
In connection with the proposed Resolution of Necessity, City staff on November-, 2008,
reviewed all of the environmental documentation prepared in connection with the proposed Project,
including the Notice of Exemption dated September 24, 2008, the 2005 General Plan EIR certified
bythe Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005 by City Council Resolution No. . Pursuantto
the criteria of Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and Section 21166 of the Public Resources
Code, City staff concluded that no substantial changes have occurred in the proposed Project that
the City has obtained no new information of substantial importance that would require further
environmental analysis. These environmental findings are the appropriate findings with respect to
the proposed acquisition of the Subject Property Interests.
City's Actions Pursuant to Government Code Section 7260 et seq.
The City of Temecula, pursuant to California Government Code Section 7260 et seq.,
obtained a fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in
accordance with the appraised fair market value, and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008, to
the owner of record, Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership. The City's offer letter
included copies of the legal description of the Subject Property Interests the City seeks to acquire
from the larger parcel, a drawing depicting these property interests and the comparable sales data
relied on by the appraiser.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025, the City also offered to pay to the
record owner the reasonable costs, up to $5,000.00 (Five Thousand Dollars), for an independent
appraisal of these real property interests. The offer letter informed the property owner that by law,
an appraiser licensed by the Office of Real Estate Appraisers must prepare the independent
appraisal. The property owner was asked to let the City know by June 30, 2008 whether the owner
wished to have the City issue this money to the owner for this purpose. It requested the property
owner to either forward to the City an invoice from the appraiser identifying the property that is the
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 5
subject of the appraisal and the fee charged for the appraisal. Alternatively, the property owner was
allowed to submit a declaration under penalty of perjury providing the relevant information regarding
the appraisal costs and identification of the property that is the subject of the appraisal. The City did
not receive an invoice or declaration regarding any appraisal costs.
City staff has negotiated with the property owner on behalf of the City. The owner indicated
to City staff that it would accept the City's offer. On July 31, 2008, the City sent a letter to the
property owner confirming the owner's acceptance of the City's offer together with a Purchase and
Sale Agreement. City staff and the property owner have had further discussions regarding the City's
proposed acquisition of the Subject Property Interests since July 31, 2008. As of November 12,
2008, however, the property owner has not executed the proposed Purchase and Sale Agreement.
Based on the timeline of the proposed Project, it is necessaryfor the City Council to consider
the adoption of the proposed Resolutions of Necessity at this time. As discussed above, this
hearing relates to issues A, B, C and D below.
City's Actions Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235
Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235, the City sent a letter and
notice by first-class mail on November 5, 2008 to the record owner Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a
California limited partnership, advising the owner of the City's intent to consider the adoption of a
resolution of necessity forthe acquisition of the Subject Property Interests byeminent domain atthe
City Council's meeting of November 25, 2008. The notice advised the property owner of the owner's
right to appear and object to the proposed adoption of the resolution of necessity if the property
owner filed a written request with the City to appear within fifteen (15) days of the date the notice
was mailed.
A. The Public Interest and Necessity Require the Proposed Project
The proposed Project is necessaryto ensure thattraffic circulation and efficiency is improved
at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkwayand to ensure thatthe goals of the
Circulation Element are met. As planned and designed, the proposed Project, would construct two
dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkwayto southbound Pechanga Parkwayand
would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks consistentwith the Circulation Element of the
General Plan. The 2005 General Plan EIR, which was certified by the City Council on April 12,
2005, contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary lanes at principal intersections would
remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. The proposed Project would
construct necessary auxiliary lanes. The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan
Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the 2005 General Plan EIR.
The proposed Project is in the public interest and necessity because it is needed to improve
traffic circulation in this area of the City. Increased development in this area of the City and an
increase in patrons of the Pechanga Casino have resulted in traffic congestion and have impacted
traffic circulation on Pechanga Parkway. As planned and designed, the proposed Project's
construction of two dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound
Pechanga Parkway would improve traffic conditions at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and
Pechanga Parkway. The proposed Project would improve the intersection of Temecula Parkway
and Pechanga Parkway from LOS F to LOS E, which is still below the LOS D goal established by
the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan
is to "strive to maintain a LOS D or better at all intersections within the City during peak hours and
LOS C or better during non-peak hours." The construction of the proposed improvements would
bring the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to a level of service closer to
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 6
the LOS D goal set forth in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The addition of the dual
right turn lanes, as planned and designed, would allow for increased capacity for right turn
movements onto Pechanga Parkway from Temecula Parkway.
The increase in traffic congestion in the location of the proposed Project may increase the
risk of traffic accidents. The proposed Project is in the public interest and necessity and is needed
to improve safety for both pedestrians and vehicles in this area of the City. The proposed Project
would improve traffic circulation and efficiency at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and
Pechanga Parkway, benefiting the residents of this area of the City and the community as a whole.
As indicated above, the proposed Project is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General
Plan. By making the right turn from Temecula Parkway to Pechanga Parkway more efficient, the
proposed Project would improve traffic circulation and efficiency at this intersection and on
Pechanga Parkway during peak hour traffic. This may also consequently have a beneficial effect on
the access and response times of emergency vehicles vital to the public health and safety, and thus,
benefit the community as a whole.
The proposed Project may require the relocation of several utilities to the proposed new
right-of-way area. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests,
namely public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto, is a more necessary
public use than the uses to which the public utility easement holders have appropriated those utility
easements, which are located in the Subject Property Interests and are affected by the proposed
Project.
B. The Project is Planned and Located in the Mannerthat Will be Most Compatible
with the Greatest Public Good and the Least Private Injury
As discussed above, the proposed Project, as planned and designed, would construct two
dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkwayto southbound Pechanga Parkwayand
would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks consistentwith the Circulation Element of the
General Plan. The 2005 General Plan EIR, which was certified by the City Council on April 12,
2005, contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary lanes at principal intersections would
remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic flow. As planned and designed, the
proposed Project would construct necessary auxiliary lanes. The proposed Project is consistent
with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the 2005 General Plan EIR.
The proposed Project is planned and located in the manner that would ensure that traffic
circulation and efficiency is improved at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga
Parkway benefiting the residents of this area of the City and the community as a whole. As
discussed above, increased development in this area of the City and an increase in patrons of the
Pechanga Casino have resulted in traffic congestion and have impacted traffic circulation at several
intersections along Pechanga Parkway, including the intersection of Temecula Parkway and
Pechanga Parkway. The proposed Project would improve the intersection of Temecula Parkway
and Pechanga Parkway from LOS F to LOS E, which is still below the LOS D goal established by
the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Goal 1 of the Circulation Element of the General Plan
is to "strive to maintain a LOS D or better at all intersections within the City during peak hours and
LOS C or better during non-peak hours." The construction of the proposed improvements would
bring the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to a level of service closer to
the LOS D goal set forth in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The proposed Project is
planned and located to alleviate the growing traffic congestion at the intersection of Temecula
Parkway and Pechanga Parkway, to serve the needs of the community, and has been planned and
located to minimize the impact to the larger parcel. The improvement of traffic circulation and
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 7
reduction of traffic congestion at this intersection during peak hour traffic may also consequently
have a beneficial effect on the access and response times of emergency vehicles vital to the public
health and safety, and thus, benefit the community as a whole.
The proposed Project may require the relocation of several utilities to the proposed new
right-of-way area. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests,
namely public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto, is a more necessary
public use than the uses to which the public utility easement holders have appropriated those utility
easements, which are located in the Subject Property Interests and are affected by the proposed
Project.
C. The Subject Property Interests Described in the Resolution of Necessity Are
Necessary for the Proposed Project
As described above, the proposed Project, as planned and designed, would construct two
dedicated right-turn lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkwayto southbound Pechanga Parkwayand
would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks consistentwith the Circulation Element of the
General Plan. The proposed Project requires the acquisition of the following Subject Property
Interests from the real property, which is a vacant lot located at the southwest corner of Pechanga
Parkway and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax
Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-073:
➢ An approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street purposes,
which is described on Exhibit "A" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal
Description for Dedication of Right-Of-Way" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" labeled
"Dedication of Right of Way";
➢ An approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent public
roadway that will revert back to the property owner after construction of the Project in the
manner proposed, which is described on Exhibit "A-1" to the proposed Resolution of
Necessity labeled "Legal Description for Slope Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B-
1" labeled "Slope Easement"; and
➢ An approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a term of
eighteen (18) months to facilitate construction of the Project, which is described on
Exhibit "A-2" to the proposed Resolution of Necessity labeled "Legal Description for
Temporary Construction Easement" and is depicted on Exhibit "B-2" labeled "Temporary
Construction Easement".
The City's construction of the proposed Project requires the acquisition of the above Subject
Property Interests.
The proposed Project may require the relocation of several utilities to the proposed new
right-of-way area. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property Interests,
namely public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto, is a more necessary
public use within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1240.650 than the uses to which
public utility easement holders have appropriated those utility easements, which are located in the
Subject Property Interests and are affected by the proposed Project.
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 8
D. The City has Made the Offer Required by Section 7260 et seq. of the
Government Code to the Owner of Record of the Real Property Interests the
City Seeks to Acquire
As explained more fully above, the City, pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2
obtained fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in
accordance with the appraised fair market value, and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008 to
Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership, the record fee owner of the Subject
Property Interests.
The following documents on file in the City Clerk's Office, the City's Planning Department and/orthe
City's Public Works Department, which are referenced in this report, are incorporated in this report
by this reference:
• City of Temecula General Plan (Update 2005)
• Offer Letter from the City of Temecula to Borchard-Temecula, L.P., the record owner
of the Subject Property Interests
• Notice Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 from City of Temecula
to record owner of the Subject Property Interests
• Street Improvement Plans for Proposed Project
• Environmental Documents Relating to Proposed Project, including Notice of
Exemption and the 2005 General Plan EIR
FISCAL IMPACT: The Pechanga Parkway- Dual Right Turn Lanes from Temecula Parkway,
Project No. PW06-11, is a Capital Improvement Program project approved by the City Council as
part of Fiscal Year 2008/ 2009 budget. Sufficient funds are available in Account No. 210-165-637-
5700 to cover the $120,000 deposit.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution of Necessity and Exhibits "A", "A-1", "A-2", "B", "B-1" and "B-2"
to Resolution attached hereto
R:/Agenda Reports/Pechanga Pkwy Dual Turn Lanes 11 25 08 9
RESOLUTION NO. 08-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DECLARING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS
NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES AND
AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION THEREOF IN
CONNECTION WITH THE PECHANGA PARKWAY -
DUAL TURN LANES FROM TEMECULA PARKWAY
(PROJECT NO. PW06-11)
THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, FIND, DETERMINE,
AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Temecula is a municipal corporation, in the County of
Riverside, State of California.
Section 2. The real property interests described in Section 3 of this Resolution
are to be taken for a public use, namely for public street purposes and all uses
necessary or convenient thereto in connection with the Pechanga Parkway - Dual Turn
Lanes From Temecula Parkway (Project No. PW 06-11) ("Project"), pursuant to the
authority conferred upon the City of Temecula to acquire property by eminent domain by
California Constitution Article 1, Section 19, California Government Code Sections
37350, 37350.5, 37351, 40401 and 40404 and California Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1230.010 et seq. (Eminent Domain Law), including, but not limited to Sections
1240.010, 1240.020, 1240.110, 1240.120, 1240.510, 1240.610, 1240.650 and other
provisions of law.
Section 3. The City seeks to acquire the following real property interests
(which are referred to below collectively as "Subject Property Interests") from the real
property, which is a vacant lot located at the southwest corner of Pechanga Parkway
and Temecula Parkway in Temecula, California, identified as Riverside County Tax
Assessor's Parcel Numbers 961-010-072 and 961-010-073 ("larger parcel"), for public
street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient thereto:
• An approximate 2,978 square foot permanent easement for public street
purposes, which is described on Exhibit "A" hereto labeled "Legal Description
for Dedication of Right-Of-Way" and is depicted on Exhibit "B" labeled
"Dedication of Right of Way";
• An approximate 2,774 square foot slope easement to support the adjacent
public roadway that will revert back to the property owner after construction of
the Project in the manner proposed, which is described on Exhibit "A-1"
hereto labeled "Legal Description for Slope Easement" and is depicted on
Exhibit "B-1" labeled "Slope Easement"; and
• An approximate 3,004 square foot temporary construction easement with a
term of eighteen (18) months to facilitate construction of the Project, which is
described on Exhibit "A-2"hereto labeled "Legal Description for Temporary
Construction Easement" and depicted on Exhibit "B-2" labeled "Temporary
Construction Easement".
The Subject Property Interests described on Exhibits "A", "A-1" and "A-2" and
depicted, respectively, on Exhibits "B" "B-1" and "B-2" hereto are incorporated herein by
this reference. The Subject Property Interests are required for the construction of the
Project, which a public use.
Section 4. The Project would construct two dedicated right-turn lanes on
eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway consistent with the
City's General Plan and would also construct new curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
Temecula Parkway is designated as a principal arterial in the City's General Plan and is
currently configured with three eastbound and three westbound traffic lanes in the
vicinity of the larger parcel. There are also two westbound left turn lanes, one
eastbound left turn lane and one eastbound right turn lane at the signalized intersection
with Pechanga Parkway. The construction of the Project in the manner proposed would
not change the westbound configuration of Temecula Parkway. The Project would
change the eastbound configuration of Temecula Parkway to realign the existing single
right turn lane to accommodate two right turn lanes. The Project would not change the
grade of the larger parcel from which the City seeks to acquire the Subject Property
Interests. The grade of Temecula Parkway would change as it approaches the
intersection at Pechanga Parkway.
The Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2003061041) for the 2005 City of
Temecula General Plan Update ("2005 General Plan EIR"), which was certified by the
City Council on April 12, 2005, contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary
lanes at principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and
improve traffic flow. The Circulation Element of the General Plan indicates that the
failure of key intersections to perform at adopted performance standards significantly
impairs the overall effectiveness of the transportation network. The Project is consistent
with the General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the 2005 General
Plan EIR. For example, the Circulation Element indicates that principal arterials, such
as Temecula Parkway, have six lanes of through travel with additional turn lanes at
specific locations. The Project would construct the two dedicated right turn lanes that
are needed at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to improve
traffic circulation at this intersection.
The Project is needed to improve traffic circulation in this area of the City.
Increased development in this area of the City and an increase in patrons of the
Pechanga Casino have resulted in traffic congestion and have impacted traffic
circulation on Pechanga Parkway. The Project's construction of two dedicated right-turn
lanes on eastbound Temecula Parkway to southbound Pechanga Parkway would
improve traffic conditions at the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga
Parkway. Level of Service ("LOS") describes the efficiency and quality of traffic
operations. LOS is ranked on a scale of LOS A to LOS F, with LOS A representing
excellent efficiency or free-flow traffic and LOS F representing extreme congestion or a
forced or breakdown flow. At LOS F, traffic volumes exceed capacity, resulting in
z
jammed intersections. This can result in delays greater than 80 seconds at
intersections and/or two-cycle signal waits. The Project would improve the intersection
of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway from LOS F to LOS E, which is still below
the LOS D goal established by the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Goal 1 of
the Circulation Element of the General Plan is to "strive to maintain a LOS D or better at
all intersections within the City during peak hours and LOS C or better during non-peak
hours." The construction of the proposed improvements would bring the intersection of
Temecula Parkway and Pechanga Parkway to a level of service closer to the LOS D
goal set forth in the Circulation Element of the General Plan.
By improving the efficiency of traffic circulation as set forth above, the Project
would also help to meet Goal 3 of the Circulation Element, which is to provide an
efficient City circulation system through the use of transportation system management
and travel demand management strategies. The proposed Project adds turn lanes to
implement this Goal. The proposed Project will also comply with policy 3.2, which is to
discourage on-street (curbside) parking along principal arterial roadways to minimize
traffic conflicts and increase carrying capacity. The impacted portions of Temecula
Parkway and Pechanga Parkway will continue to prohibit curbside parking.
By making right turn movements from Temecula Parkway to Pechanga Parkway
more efficient, the proposed Project would improve traffic circulation and efficiency at
this intersection and on Pechanga Parkway during peak hour traffic. This may also
consequently have a beneficial effect on the access and response times of emergency
vehicles vital to the public health and safety, and thus, benefit the community as a
whole.
Section 5. The environmental effects of the Project were studied and analyzed
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code
Section 21000 et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq.
("CEQA Guidelines"). On September 24, 2008, the City filed a Notice of Exemption for
the proposed Project pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. In adopting a
Notice of Exemption, the City determined that the environmental effects of the Project
were studied by the City Council on April 12, 2005, when the City Council certified the
2005 General Plan EIR (SCH #2003061041) pursuant to City Council Resolution No.
Specifically, the Circulation Element of the 2005 General Plan discussed the
need for and includes provisions to add auxiliary turn lanes at principal intersections in
the City. The City has identified the intersection of Temecula Parkway and Pechanga
Parkway as one of the intersections that need these auxiliary turn lanes. The 2005
General Plan EIR contains a traffic study that concluded that auxiliary turn lanes at
principal intersections would remove through-movement bottlenecks and improve traffic
flow. The Notice of Exemption found that the proposed Project is consistent with the
General Plan Circulation Element, which was analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Therefore, the City found the proposed Project is exempt from further review under
CEQA pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Notice of Exemption,
2005 General Plan EIR, Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report
3
dated June 4, 2003, the Environmental Checklist prepared by the City in connection
with the 2005 General Plan EIR and agenda reports prepared in connection with these
environmental documents are incorporated herein by this reference.
In connection with the proposed Resolution of Necessity, City staff on November
2008, reviewed all of the environmental documentation prepared in connection
with the Project, including the Notice of Exemption dated September 24, 2008, the 2005
General Plan EIR certified by the Temecula City Council on April 12, 2005 by City
Council Resolution No. . Pursuant to the criteria of Section 15162 of the CEQA
Guidelines and Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code, City staff concluded that
no substantial changes have occurred in the proposed Project that the City has
obtained no new information of substantial importance that would require further
environmental analysis. These environmental findings are the appropriate findings with
respect to the proposed acquisition of the Subject Property Interests.
Section 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2, the City obtained a
fair market value appraisal of the Subject Property Interests, set just compensation in
accordance with the fair market value and extended a written offer on June 4, 2008 to
the record owner. The City's offer letter also offered to pay to the property owner the
reasonable costs, up to $5,000.00 (Five Thousand Dollars) for an independent appraisal
of the Subject Property Interests pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.025.
Section 7. The City provided notice to the record owner pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 of its decision to consider the adoption of a
Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition of the Subject Property Interests by eminent
domain.
Section 8. The public use for which the City seeks to acquire the Subject
Property Interests, namely public street purposes and all uses necessary or convenient
thereto, is a more necessary public use within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure
Section 1240.650 than the uses to which public utility easement holders have
appropriated those utility easements, which are located in the Subject Property Interests
and are affected by the Project.
Section 9. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing regarding the
Project, including the Agenda Report and documents referenced therein, the City
Council hereby finds and determines that:
A. The public interest and necessity require the Project;
B. The Project is planned and located in the manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury;
C. The Subject Property Interests described in Exhibits "A", "A-1" and "A-2"
and depicted, respectively, on Exhibits "B" "B-1" and "B-2" hereto are
necessary for the Project; and
a
D. The City has made the offer required by Government Code Section
7267.2 to the owner of record of the Subject Property Interests it seeks to
acquire.
Section 10. The findings and declarations contained in this Resolution are
based upon the record before the City Council, including the Agenda Report and all
documents referenced therein, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference,
and any testimony and/or comments submitted to the City by the record owner and or
its representative(s). These documents include, but are not limited to, the 2005 General
Plan; the Circulation Element, the street plans for the Project, the environmental
documents referenced above and in the Agenda Report, including the Notice of
Exemption, the 2005 General Plan EIR, the offer letter sent to the property owner
pursuant to Government Code Section 7267.2, and the notice to the record owner
pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.235 of the City's intent to consider the
adoption of the Resolution of Necessity.
Section 11. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby authorizes and
directs the City Attorney's office to take all steps necessary to commence and prosecute
legal proceedings in a court of competent jurisdiction to acquire by eminent domain the
property described in Exhibits "A", "A-1" and "A-2" and depicted, respectively, on
Exhibits "B" "B-1" and "B-2" attached hereto.
Section 12. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby authorizes the City
Manager to execute all necessary documents in connection with the eminent domain
proceeding.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula this 25th day of November, 2008.
Michael S. Naggar, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
[SEAL]
5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Resolution No. 08- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 25th day of November, 2008, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Susan W. Jones, MMC
City Clerk
s
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
A DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56
THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP,
SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-VVAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79
AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP, SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING A CURVE CONCAVE
NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,571.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID
POINT BEARS SOUTH 101 14' 05" WEST;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 060 58'22", AN ARC LENGTH OF 191.19 FEET TO THE BEGINNING
OF A CORNER CUT BACK AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP;
THENCE SOUTH 540 18'48- EAST, 31.29 FEET ALONG SAID CORNER CUT BACK TO THE
BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF
1,588.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 020 18' 32" WEST,
SAID CURVE ALSO BEING CONCENTRIC TO AND 88.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE
CENTER LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
050 04'21". AN ARC DISTANCE OF 140.59 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180
37' 15", AN ARC LENGTH OF 43.55 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 630 59' 51" WEST, 37.37 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 2,978 SQUARE FEET OR 0.07 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
GRANTOR HEREBY RELEASES AND RELINQUISHES TO THE GRANTEE ANY AND ALL
ABUTTER'S RIGHTS OF ACCESS BETWEEN THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND
AND THE GRANTOR'S REMAINING PROPERTY LYING SOUTHERLY THEREOF.
EXCEPTING AND RESERVING THERETO THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED ACCESS
OPENING:
A 30-FOOT WIDE PUBLIC ACCESS OPENING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED
PARCEL 14;
Page 1 of 2
THENCE SOUTH 630 59'51- EAST, 17.07 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF
SAID THIRTY FOOT WIDE ACCESS OPENING;
THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 630 59'51- EAST, 20.30 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A
TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 040 45'08",
AN ARC LENGTH OF 11.11 FEET TO THE END OF SAID 30-FOOT WIDE PUBLIC ACCESS
OPENING.
THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "W,
AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF:
PREPARED Y ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION:
oQpOFESS/pl
/KEVIN B. COZAD
PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 26159
REGISTRATION EXPIRES 3131108 NO. 26159
t,r E KP 3/31A6
IV%
Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT "B"
DEDICATION OF RIGHT OF WAY
A DEDICATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF
PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH
61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
CR- 0051 pp'
L=896.
P.O. B. o'er
Jl-E\ C1
PARCEL 1
"
C2 17.00'
C3
Lo
D
\ _
_ /N
C4
I
C
y CORNER CUTBACK
CA
Ni
SEE DETAIL BELOW
°
PARCEL MAP 30180
P.M. 208/56-61
v
TRACT 20319
M.B. 181/54-58
( A=02'42'25".
R=1067.00'
L=50.41')
D G)
"E o
(P1 053 ACRES) 1) 83, (N69%Rl \ \
(Np1 ` 7~
SR 79 cR) _
r R=1500.00
3 6=04'42'30" i
I . 3 L=123.26')
71.oo•'t M
rl col.. y oCf
M ~ ~ ~OS
~5w
PARCEL 13
so'
I •LE 1"=60'
SCALE: 1 "=60'
P. 0. B. 30' ACCESS
OPENING
is 46
526'00' 09"W
(R) DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
( ) INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PM 208/56-61
No. 26159
`Q, EV. S/S1/08
L
INE TABLE
CURVE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
CURVE
LENGTH
RADIUS
TANGENT
DELTA
L1
37.37
W63-59'51 -W
Cl
191.19
1571.00
95.71
6'58'22"
L2
31.
N54'18'48"W
C2
43.55
134.00
21.97
18'37'16"
L3
113.60
N54'18'44W
C3
140.59
1588.00
70.34
5'04'21"
L4
36.34
N08'45'19"E
C4
11.11
134.00
70.34
4'45'08"
17.07
S6359'51"E
L6
20.30
563'59'51"E
EXHIBIT "A -1"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR SLOPE EASEMENT
A SLOPE EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP
NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61
INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS. RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP,
SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79
AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP, SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING A CURVE CONCAVE
NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,571.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID
POINT BEARS SOUTH 10° 14'05" WEST;
THENCE SOUTH 630 59'51" EAST, 37.37 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE
BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 134.00 FEET, A
RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 260 00'09" WEST;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180 37'16",
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 43.55 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,588.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH
SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 070 22'53" WEST;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05° 04' 21
AN ARC DISTANCE OF 140.59 FEET, TO THE BEGINNING OF A CORNER CUT BACK AS
SHOWN ON SAID MAP A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 02018'32"
WEST, ALSO BEING CONCENTRIC TO AND 88.00 FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTER
LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP;
THENCE SOUTH 54° 18' 44" EAST ALONG SAID CORNER CUT BACK, 21.63 FEET TO
THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A
RADIUS OF 1,600.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 0.1 °
39' 44" WEST;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°
43' 09", AN ARC LENGTH OF 159.71 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 146.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH
SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 070 22'53" WEST;
THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18°
37'16", AN ARC LENGTH OF 47.45 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS
SOUTH 26° 00' 09" WEST;
THENCE NORTH 630 59' 51" WEST, 33.65 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 080 45'19" EAST, 12.56 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 2,774 SQUARE FEET OR 0.06 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
Page 1 of 2
Created on 9f2WM 3:52 PM
BY: JS.W.
CK'DBY:K.COZAD
F: \07009D0\0fficeT BgaW-wW1 _Slope doc
THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B",
AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF:
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION:
EVIN B. COZAD
PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 26159
REGISTRATION EXPIRES 3/31/08
Page 2 of 2
Created on 912612007 3:52 PM
BY: J.S.W.
CWD BY: K. COZAD
F:\07009001office\Lega(\Ease01_Slope.doc
EXHIBIT "B -1"
SLOPE EASEMENT
SLOPE EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL
MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208, PAGES 56
THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Co
u* f
DO'
L'42'30V~
19'~ 'J(i*1 „Q fr ~i
PARCEL MAP 30180
P.M. 208/56-61
PARCEL14
r
ACRES)
PARCEL13
*d0
TRACT 20319 M.B.
181/54-58
SCALE: i"=60'
INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PM 208/56-61
v
LINE TABLE CURVE TABLE
UNE LENGTH BEARING CURVE DELTA LENGTH RADIUS TANG
L1 37.37" S 63'59'51" E Cl 18'37'16" 43.55 134.00' 21.97-
L2 21.63' S 54-18'44" E C2 5*04'2r 140.59' 1588.00' 70.34'
EXHIBIT "A - 2"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF
PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 208,
PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF PARCEL 14 OF SAID MAP,
SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79
AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP, SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY BEING A CURVE CONCAVE
NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,571.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID
POINT BEARS SOUTH 100 14'05" WEST;
THENCE SOUTH 080 45'19" WEST, 12.56 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE SOUTH 630 59' 51" EAST, 33.65 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT
CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 146.00 FEET;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18037'
16", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 47,45 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE
CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,600.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH
SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 070 22'53" WEST;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALSO BEING CONCENTRIC TO AND 100.00
FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID
MAP, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05° 43' 09", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 159.71 FEET,
TO A POINT ON THE CORNER CUT BACK AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP, A RADIAL LINE
THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 01 ° 39'44" WEST;
THENCE SOUTH 540 18' 44" EAST ALONG SAID CORNER CUT BACK, 21.27 FEET TO
THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A
RADIUS OF 1,612.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 01°
02'08" WEST;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALSO BEING CONCENTRIC TO AND 112.00
FEET SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTER LINE OF STATE HIGHWAY 79 AS SHOWN BY SAID
MAP, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06° 20'45", AN ARC LENGTH OF 178.54 FEET TO
THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS
OF 158.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 07° 22'53" WEST;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 180 37'
16", AN ARC LENGTH OF 51.35 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 63°59'51 " WEST, 29.92 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 080 45'19" EAST, 12.56 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Page 1 of 2
Created on 10/812007 11:12 AM
BY: J.S.W.
CIC D BY., K COZAD
F1070090"icelegaWmeC2_TempComLdoc
CONTAINING 3,004 SQUARE FEET OR 0.069 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
THIS DESCRIPTION ALSO BEING SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B",
AND THEREBY BEING MADE A PART HEREOF:
PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION:
"KEVIN B. COZAD PROFESSIONAL CIVIL (rev;
ENGINEER NO.26159 REGISTRATION EXPIRES 3/31/08 Page 2 of 2
Created on 106200711:12 AM
BY:J.S.W.
IXCD BY: K COZAD
F:\070MOUCtkeLLegaNFase02_TemRomstdoc
EXHIBIT "B - 2"
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OVER AND ACROSS A PORTION OF
PARCEL 14 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 30180 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN
BOOK 208, PAGES 56 THROUGH 61 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS
OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
T
71'
P.O.
B.
12'
SR 79
~R=~500ri23.267
'1
10G '
tj CORNER CUTBACK PARCEL 1 %k .
C (A=D2*42'25-
R=1067.00*
PARCEL MAP 30180 L=5D.41')
1 P. 61
PARCEL14
(1.053 ACRES)
PARCEL 13
TRACT 20319
M.B. 181/54-58
LEGEND
V111A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PM 208/56-61
LINE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
Li
12.56'
S 08'45'19" W
L2
33.65'
S F
L3
21.27'
54' 18*44" F
L4
29.92'
N r W
L5
12.56'
N 06'45'19" E
CURVE TABLE
CURVE
DELTA
LENGTH
RADIUS
TANGENT
G1
18'37'16"
4715'
146.00'
23.94'
G2
.5'43'09"
159.71'
1600.00*
79.92"
C3
6'20'45"
178.54'
1612.00'
89.36'
C4
18.3716"
51.35'
158.00'
25.90'
DEPARTMENTAL
REPORTS
ITEM NO. 21
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Shawn D. Nelson, City Manager
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: City Council Travel/Conference Report - October 2008
PREPARED BY: Sue Steffen, Executive Assistant
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file
On October 1, 2008 Council Member Ron Roberts traveled to Los Angeles to attend the Southern
California Association of Governments Administration, Transportation & Communications
Committee, and Regional Council Meetings.
On October 11, 2008 Council Member Ron Roberts traveled to Seoul, South Korea in connection
with his duties as Chairman of the Metrolink Board. The purpose of the trip was to meet with top
management of Hyundai-Rotem (the company building over 100 Metrolink passenger cars) as well
as inspect and approve a rail car prototype. Expenses for this trip will be paid for by Metrolink.
Attachments: Meeting Agendas
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION of
GOVERNMENTS
Main Office
818 West Seventh Street
12th Floor
Los Angeles, California
90017.3435
t (213) 236-1800
((213)236-1825
www.xag.ra.gov
Officers
President
Richard Dixon, Lake Forest
FlrstVice President
Harry8aidwin, Son Gabriel
Second Vice President
!on Edney, EI Centro
Immediate Post President
Gary Ovitt, San Bernardino County
Policy Committee Chairs
Executive/Administration
Richard Dlxon,.Lake Forest
Community, Economic and
Human Development
Larry McCailon, Highland
Energy & Environment
Keith Hanks, Azusa
Transportation
Mike-Ten, South Pasadena
MEETING OF THE
Thursday, October 2, 2008
9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.
SCAG Offices
818 West 7t" Street, 12th Floor
San Bernardino Conference Rm A & B
Los Angeles, CA 90017
213.236.1800
If members of the public wish to review the attachments or
have any questions on any of the agenda items, please
contact Carmen Summers at 213.236.1984 or
summerstcDscag.ca.oov
Agendas and Minutes for the Executive/Administration
Committee are also available at:
www.scag.c gov/commiftees/eac.htm
SCAG, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), will
accommodate persons who require a modification of accommodation in order to
participate in this meeting. If you require such assistance, please contact SCAG
at (213) 236-1868 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting to enable SCAG to
make reasonable arrangements. To request documents related to this document
in an alternative format, please contact (213) 236-1868.
The Regional Council Is comprised of 83 elected officials representing 168 cities, six counties, five County Transportation Commissions,
Imperial Valley Association of Governments and a Tribal Government representative within Southern California.
09.0608
EXECUTIVE/ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
AGENDA
OCTOBER 29 2008
The Administration Committee may consider and act upon any of the items listed
on the agenda regardless of whether they are listed as information or action items.
1.0 CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
(Hon. Richard Dixon, Chair) .
2.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - Members of the public desiring to speak on items
on the agenda, or items not on the agenda, but within the purview of the Executive/
Administration Committee, must fill out and present a speaker's card to the Assistant
prior to speaking. Comments will be limited to three minutes. The chair may limit the
total time for all comments to twenty minutes.
3.0 REVIEW and PRIORITIZE AGENDA ITEMS
4.0 CONSENT CALENDAR
4.1 Approval Items
4.1.1 Minutes of Sentemher 4.2008 Meetine
4.1.2 Contracts Over $250,000
4.2 Receive & File
4.2.1 Contracts/Purchase Orders
Between $.5,000 - $250,000
5.0 ACTION ITEMS
5.1 Update to the SCAG Investment Policy
(Wayne Moore, CFO)
Recommended Action: Recommend that the RC
amend Article X of the RC Policy Manual replacing
the Statement of Investment Policy with the 2008
SCAG Investment Policy.
6.0 STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE
(Jon Edney, 2nd Vice President)
i
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
Attachment
1
b
12
5 minutes 13
10 minutes
EAC - OCT 2008
Doc#147986
Salcido-924/20084:44:35 PM
TIME PG#
~04 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS
9
KECUTIVE/ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
AGENDA
OCTOBER 29 2008
TIME
5 minutes
Lantz, Chair)
8,1 Federal Legislative Reauthorization 10 minutes
(Councilmember Glen Becerra)
8.2 SB 395 ((Stembergg~~ 10 minutes
(Sharo Director of Legislation)
9.0 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
PG#
10.0 CFO MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Attachment 5 minutes 24
11.0 CLOSED SESSION
A closed session will be held only if necessary to
report significant development or to take required action.
11.1 Conference with Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation
3 cases (Government Code Section §54596.9)
a) NRDC v: EPA
b) City of Irvine vs. SCAG, Court of Appeal,
4`h District, No. G040513
c) City of La Mirada, City of Palmdale vs.
SCAG, Court of Appeal, 2nd District,
No. B206528
11.2 Public E=Ioyee Performance Evaluation
(Government Code Section _ 5~ 4957) Title:
Executive Director
EAC-C#
Dort! 14
Salcido-9/25/2008-9:11:11
ti
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS
TIME PG#
12.0 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Any Committee member or staff desiring to place items on a
future agenda may make such request.
13.0 ANNOUNCEMENTS
14.0 ADJOURNMENT
The next meeting of the Executive/Administration Committee will be held on
Thursday, November 6, 2008 at the SLAG offices in downtown Los Angeles.
EAC - OCT 2008
Doc#147986
Salcido-9/242008-0:44:35 PM
III
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of
GOVERNMENTS
Main n
818 West Seventh th Street Thursday, October 2, 2008
12th Floor 10:00 a.m. -11:00 a.m.
Los Angeles, California
90017-3435 SCAG Offices
f(213)236-1800 818 West 7th Street, 12th Floor
San Bernardino Conference Rm A & B
www.scag.ca.gov Los Angeles, CA 90017 -
Officers (213) 236-1800
President
Richard Dixon, Lake Forest
FirstVice President If members of the public wish to review the attachments or
Harry Baldwin, San Gabriel have any questions on any of the agenda items, please
Second Vice President contact Mariana Pulido at 213.236.1881 or
Jon Edney, El Centro oulido Q scaa.ca.oov
Immediate Past President
Gary ovitt, San Bernardino County Agendas and minutes for the Transportation
Policy Committee Chairs Committee are also available at:
Execumve,Administation www.scaa.ca.gov/committees/tc.htm
Richard Dixon, Lake Forest
Community, Economic and - SCAG, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), will
Human Development accommodate persons who require a modification of accommodation in order to
Larry Mccallon, Highland participate in this meeting. If you require such assistance, please contact SCAG
Energy a Environment - at (213) 236-1868 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting to enable SCAG to
Keith Hanks, Azusa make reasonable arrangements. To request documents related to this document
in an alternative format, please contact (213) 236-1868.
Transportation
Mike Ten, South Pasadena
The Regional Council is comprised of 83 elected officials representing 168 cities, sixcounres,five OmmyTansponationCommissions,
Imperial Valley Association of Governments and a Tribal Government representative within Southern Caldomia.
a9.aaae
MEETING OF THE
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
AGENDA
OCTOBER 29 2008
The Transportation Committee may consider and act upon any of the items listed
on the agenda regardless of whether they are listed as information or action, items.
1.0 CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
(Hon. Mike Ten, Chair)
2.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - Members of the public desiring to speak on
items on the agenda, or items not on the agenda, but within the purview of the
Transportation and Communications Committee, must fill out and present a
speaker's card to the Assistant prior to speaking. Comments will be limited
to three minutes. The Chairman may limit the total time for all comments to
twenty minutes.
3.0 REVIEW and PRIORTIZE AGENDA ITEMS
4.0 CONSENT CALENDAR
4.1 Aimroval Items
4.1.1 Minutes of September 4, 2008 Meeting
5.0 REPORTS/ACTION ITEMS
5.1 Draft 2008 RTP Amendment #1 and the
associated Draft 2008 RTIP Amendment #08-01
(Ryan Ku o, SCAG Stafn
(Draft RTPAmendment #1 will be mailed under
Separate cover)
Staff will present a brief report on the Draft 2008 RTP
Amendment #I and Draft Consistency Amendment to
the 2008 RTIP for public review and comment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Release the Draft 2008 RTP Amendment #1 and the
Associated Draft 2008 RTIP Amendment #08-01 for a
30-day public review and comment.
Attachment
TIME PG#
Attachment 10 min
SOUTHERN OOf CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS rc - OCT 2008
Doc#147979
Salcido-9/25/2008-3:58:38 PM
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
AGENDA
OCTOBER 29 2008
6.0 INFORMATION ITEMS TIME PG#
6.1 Inland Port Feasibility Study Attachment 15 min 10
(Dan Smith, The Tioga Group)
A presentation will be made of the results of a
SCAG study on the feasibility of the development
of an inland port facility for the region.
6.2 AB 32 Attachment 10 min 20
(Jacob Lieb, SCAG and Lynn Terry, California
Air Resources Board)
Staff will summarize the concepts to develop comments
on the Draft Scoping Plan, in addition to receiving a
briefing from ARB staff on the Scoping Plan.
6.3 Compass Blueprint Update Attachment 10 min 2?
(Jennifer Sarnecki, SCAG)
Staff will provide an update on the program focus
for FY2008-2009.
7.0 AVIATION TASK FORCE REPORT
(Hon. Paul Glaab, Chair)
8.0 MAGLEV TASK FORCE REPORT
(Hon. Lou Bone, Chair)
9.0 CHAIR'S REPORT
Attachment
5 min
10.0 STAFF REPORT
(Naresh Amatya, SCAG)
11.0 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
ii
TC - OCT 2008
Doe4147979
Salcido-9/25/2008-3:56:11 PM-
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
AGENDA
OCTOBER 29 2008
TIME PG#
12.0 ANNOUNCEMENTS
13.0 ADJOURNMENT
The next meeting of the Transportation Committee will be held on November 6, 2008
at the SCAG office in downtown Los Angeles.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS
TC - OCT 2008
Doc#147979
Salcido-925/2008-2:50:05 PM
Ill
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of
GOVERNMENTS
Main Office
NO. 502
MEETING OF THE
818 West Seventh Street
12th Floor
Los Angeles, California Thursday, October 2, 2008 .
-
90017.3435 12:15 p.m. - 2.00 p.m. -
t(213)236-1800
f(213)236-1825. SCAG Offices
wwwscag.ca.go~ 818.West 7th Street, 12th Floor
San Bernardino Conference Rm A & B
Officers ..Los Angeles, CA 90017.
President (213) 236-1800
Richard Dixon, Lake Forest -
FirstvlcePresident
Harry Baldwin, San Gabriel
Second Vice President
Jon Edney, E7 Centro . If members of the public wish to review the attachments
Jon
Immediate Past President or have any questions on any of the agenda items,
Gary ovltt San Bernardino County please contact Shelia Stewart at 213.236.1868 or
Policy Committee Chairs Stewart scagca.gov
Executive/Administration
Richard Dixon, Lake Forest - Agendas and Minutes for the Regional Council are also
Community, Economic and available at:
Human Development
Larry McCallon,Highland _ www.scaci.ca.ooylcommiftees/rc.htm
Energy & Environment
Keith Hanks, Azusa
SCAG, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), will
Transportadon accommodate persons who require a modification of accommodation in
Mlkeren, South Pasadena order to participate in this meeting. If you require such assistance, please
contact SCAG at (213) 236-1868 at least 72 hours in advance of the
meeting to enable SCAG to make reasonable arrangements. To request
documents related to this document in an alternative format, please
contact (213) 236-1868.
The Regional Councll Is comprised of 83 elected officials representing 168 cities, six counties, five CountyTransportation Conwnlmlons,
Impedal Valley Association of Governments and a Tribal Government representative within Southern California.
WACO
REGIONAL COUNCIL
AGENDA
OCTOBER 2, 2008
PG#
The Regional Council may consider and act upon any of the items listed on the agenda
regardless if they are listed as information or action items.
1.0 CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
(Hon. Richard Dixon, President)
2.0 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD -Members of the public desiring to speak on items on the agenda,
or items not on the agenda, but within the purview of the Council, must fill out and present a
speaker's card to the Assistant prior to speaking. The Regional Council may consider and act
upon any of the items listed. on the agenda. Comments will be limited to three minutes.
The President may limit the total time for all comments to twenty minutes.
3.0 CONSENT CALENDAR
3.1 Approval Items
3.1.1 Minutes.of September 4, 2008 Meetine
3.1.2 Contracts over $250.000
Attachment
Attachment
1
7
3.2 Receive & File .
3.2.1 Contracts/Purchase Orders between
$5,000 -$250,000
Attachment
13
3.2.2 CFO Monthly Financial Report
4.0 PRESIDENT'S REPORT
4.1 Committee Appointments
5.0 COMMITTEE REPORTS/ACTION ITEMS
5.1 Executive/Administration Committee (EAC)
Report
5.1.1 Update to the Investment Policy
(President Dixon, Chair)
' Recommended Action: Approve
1
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION Of GOVERNMENTS
Attachment
Attachment
17
24
REGIONAL COUNCIL
AGENDA
OCTOBER 2, 2008
PG#
5.2 Transportation Committee (TC) Report
5.3 Community, Economic & Human Development
(GEED) Report
5.3.1 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) Attachment 32
Recommended Action: Approve Resolution
#08-502-1 adopting the 2008 RCP.
5.4 Enemy & Environment Committee Report (EEC)
Report
5.4.1 Report on AB32 Attachment 42
Recommended Action: Authorize staff to
submit comments on the AB32 Draft Scoping
Plan, based on the concepts described in the
report. I
5.5 L_eaislative/Communication and Membership
Subcommittee Report
5.5.1 Federal Legislative Reauthorization
(Hon. Glen Becerra, Chair)
5.5.2 SB 375 (Steinberg,)
(Sharon Neeley, Director, Legislation)
6.0 INFORMATION
6.2 Update .on Strategic Plan
(Hon. Jon Edney)
7.0 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
(Hasan Ikhrata)
9.0 ADJOURNMENT
The next meeting of the Regional Council will be held on November 6, 2008 at SCAG
Offices in downtown Los Angeles.
ii
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
z
E
E
H
W
O
H
O
O
M
0
F
P4
C4
F
0
H
o
(
~
l
'
y
I ~
t
!
i
l
i ~
I
I
I
i
i s
~
;
[
~
I F I
I i
1 1
j
~ I
i
1
~
C
y
1
~ i I~
i t
f
g,~
b
=
'
~ E
I
'S~'
p
~
i p c
C]
_I(7
a
i
i
i
i
is
1
~
~
c
2
y
i
Y I
3
i
C2
T
p5 Ld
e
Z
Z W R I
Z G R
d o
d i
3
E N E
r
2
= S
S
d
c
Cf !
c"
a
s J
:3
Y O.:
C6
i
a
2
rZ Z
r2 `
1
! 4 3
! 1
~
°
!
d
a'i
v
L
'
1 [ O
O
i a °1 i! I I
Qc
C
L
4 cf '
1
[
4
0 ~I
2
L
._..1
Y
e Oi
0
~
$
c
L
555ppp
C
lO
~
I
2.
AAA
lil
~ l~ ll
3
f
T
LL I
I_°
c
E
l c i
y
y i ~
C7 :
d L
c u
~
Q
E ~C ~ L
i
L O. E
J
C E
I
C 1,
p
O
~ J
t i O
E
J C ~r
.r
t
LL
c~~l i
li E
3
mi
Iw
yi
CO)
i
Si ~ j
UI
~
~
d
~='Ep
,
C
L7
PP
Q
O[OiO R
RI RfC:~r
0~0~01
R M M
0
M
OI
Rl
OI 01
M `:O
^J
OI
ppI
M.
ME
M
OI
R
O OI
M~RE
.
.
00
O
.
r
C,
W
r
I
OIT
O
r
47t
W I
AI
M
:
f
~
I
T ~
~
E
r=
'
{
l
i
~
[
III
~
~
I
III
t
I
.
I
_
I
~
~ 0
~
I
~
~ m co
l
p~
O
~ .T-I~I~
O
O
N
M
tc) tD
W
~
N
v 01
.M co
i
r
7.
m
O
O
;
r
I
NC
G
r
~
T
ITEM NO. 22
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Monthly Report
The following are the recent highlights for the Planning Division of the Community Development
Department for the month of October 2008.
CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITIES
New Cases
The Division received 47 new applications for administrative, other minor cases, and home
occupations including 8 applications for public hearings during the month of October. The new
public hearing cases are as follows:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 6
DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1
MINOR MODIFICATION 1
SPECIAL PROJECTS & LONG RANGE PLANNING ACTIVITIES
The Long Range Planning Division commits work efforts toward larger scale and longer time frame
projects for both private and public purposes. These activities can range from a relatively simple
ordinance or environmental review to a new specific plan or a general plan amendment. Some of
the major special projects and long range planning activities currently in progress are described in
the paragraphs below:
Temecula Regional Hospital - This project was approved bythe City Council on January 22,
2008. The CEQA challenge period for the Supplemental EIR expired on February 28, 2008.
No legal challenges were filed regarding the SEIR. The CEQA challenge period for the
second reading of the Zone Change expired on March 14, 2008. The City Attorney filed a
Return to the Writ of Mandate for the project with the Riverside County Superior Court on
March 20, 2008. A ruling from the Court regarding compliance with the Court's order was
expected by the end of May 2008 and staff is awaiting this ruling. (FISK)
General Plan Housing Element Update - State law requires the City to adopt an update to
the Housing Element by June 30, 2008 and it must be certified by the State Department of
Housing and Community Development (HCD) by December 31, 2008. A draft version of the
Housing Element was sent to HCD on February 12, 2008 to begin its 60-day review and
comment period. Staff received comments on the draft Housing Element from the California
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on April 13, 2008. Based on
these comments, staff prepared a revised draft and submitted to HCD for a second 60 -day
review on July 2, 2008. Preliminary HCD comments were received on September 8, 2008.
Redevelopment Agency staff is working with HCD staff to review areas of concern prior to
submitting for a formal final review. A revised timeline has been prepared that anticipates a
Planning Commission hearing in January 2009 and a City Council hearing in February
2009. Upon adoption bythe City Council, the Housing Element will be submitted a final time
to HCD for a 90-day Certification review. (PAPP)
Nicolas Valley Rural Preservation Area - Staff has prepared a conceptual land use plan and
conceptual financing options to pay for needed road improvements. A third workshop was
held on November 29, 2007 where information on infrastructure options and recommended
density was provided to residents and interested parties. The results of a survey conducted
that evening indicated that a majority of property owners favor the formation of an
Assessment District and favor increased density. Staff held a briefing meeting with the
Nicolas Valley City Council Subcommittee on January 31, 2008 to discuss findings and to
seek further direction. Staff met with the City Manager in March to discuss scope of work,
timing and budget. A community meeting was held on June 17, 2008 to provide an update
on the process. Approximately 20 residents attended. Staff indicated to the residents that it
is the City's intent to run parallel processes for the Assessment District/Leifer Road
Improvement Plans and the General Plan/Zone Changes to increase the density, and that
we anticipated the process to take between 18 to 24 months. Staff agreed to provide
website and email updates on a quarterly basis to the residents on the project progress. An
internal staff meeting (Planning, Public Works, TCSD, and Finance) was held on August 6to
discuss timelines, budget, work tasks, and priorities. Staff is working on constraints/lotting
analyses to develop firm numbers for assessment district fiscal analysis. In addition, staff
has hired Bob LaCoss (PDS) to prepare Design Guidelines and will be hiring a consultantto
prepare an EIR. A community meeting to discuss community character and design was held
on October 21't. Approximately 40-50 people attended the meeting. Planning staff briefly
brought everyone up to speed on the process and where we are and then introduced Bob
LaCoss who is the consultant hired to prepare the Design Guidelines. It was the consensus
of the attendees that they wanted Guidelines which would protect the rural nature of Nicolas
Valley. They also mentioned that farming, equestrian uses, vineyard themes, Palomar
Mountain and the Santa Gertrudis creek were things that they associated with Nicolas
Valley. It is anticipated that staff will be meeting again with the community in December to
present some early concepts based on the information they provided. Staff anticipates
completing the GPIZC process by July 2009. (PETERSIKITZEROW)
Transit Center and Transportation Planning - Staff has received the letter from ACOE
confirming the conceptual location of the transit center within the Murrieta Creek Recreation
Basin. This letter is needed in order for RTA to move forward with the transit center design,
and supplemental EIS. Staff will continue working with agency staff to update transit center
timelines, provide input into the RTA route restructuring, and work with agency staff to
establish a Transportation NOW chapter for southwest Riverside County. Staff met with
RTA staff to discuss potential bus stop locations within the City of Temecula for a new
commuter link route that will connect Riverside County residents from Hemet to the
Escondido Transit Center. Two stops are being considered forthe northern area of the City
along Winchester Road and one stop at the southern end of the City near Temecula
Parkway. Staff also discussed two options for the Harveston Shuttle routes. The options
being considered would connect the Harveston communityto the Mall area andlorOld Town
Temecula. (WESTISCHUMA)
Heritage Tree Ordinance - Staff has prepared a Heritage Tree Ordinance which will protect
certain tree species and other large trees throughoutthe City. The item was reviewed bythe
Planning Commission on April 16, 2008 and the Planning Commission continued the item
for 45 days to allow staff the necessary time to amend the draft Ordinance. Staff has revised
the Ordinance based largely on the City of Thousand Oaks tree preservation ordinances
which were originally adopted in the 1970's and revised overtime. The draft Ordinance has
been reviewed by the City Attorney and staff is preparing a standard contract for review bya
Consulting Arborist. The draft Ordinance is tentatively scheduled for review bythe Planning
Commission in December 2008 and is tentatively scheduled for City Council in January
2009. (PAPP)
Massage Ordinance - Staff is working with the Temecula Police Department to develop a
new massage ordinance that is more restrictive than the existing ordinance and will be
implemented and monitored directly by the Police Department. The proposed ordinance will
require each employee to undergo several hundred hours of training, to wear identification at
all times and includes more severe penalties for violators and business owners. The City
Attorney has been making revisions to the draft Ordinance based on comments received
from PD and local business owners working in conjunction with PD. Temecula PD will be
scheduling briefing meetings with members of the City Council when the final draft
Ordinance is completed. (FISK)
Procedures to Implement CEQA - The Planning Department has hired Environmental
Science Associates to prepare a policy document that will identify thresholds of significance
to provide direction to staff regarding the level of environmental analysis required for new
projects. This project will also include local guidelines and a procedure manual for
processing CEQA documents, including the adoption of local exemptions, significance
thresholds, and procedures for the City to contract for the preparation of Environmental
Impact Reports. This effort has been expanded to include internal procedures for
coordinating the environmental review of Capital Improvement Projects. ESA has prepared
a draft procedure handbook that is currently being reviewed. Staff's goal is to present this
handbook to the Council for review and approval in November. The CEQA thresholds
portion of this work effort is currently on-hold pending the update to the Circulation Element.
(KITZEROWISCHUMAIWEST)
Sustainability Program - Several staff level working groups (with outside agency
representatives) have been developing measurable goals for the major categories of the
Sustainability Plan - Energy, Green Buildings, Water, Air Quality, Waste Reduction,
Transportation and Community Design, and Open Space. The working groups are near
completion with the goal setting process and are prepared to meet with the Council
Subcommittee. The City Council Subcommittee meeting originally scheduled for November
5, 2008 was cancelled, but will be rescheduled. On October 14, 2008, the City Council
adopted a resolution authorizing staff to proceed with the development of a Green House
Gas Emissions Inventory and Climate Action Plan, which when completed will be
incorporated into the Sustainability Plan. Staff is also developing a program to assist
existing residents and businesses with making energy efficiency improvements to their
properties. Staff will present the draft program structure to the Sustainability Subcommittee
for direction prior to taking it forward to the City Council. (WESTILECOMTE)
■ Santa Margarita Area Annexation - The revised EIR dated September 22, 2008 was
distributed for public review from September 22, 2008 through November 5, 2008. A public
hearing is scheduled for the Planning Commission on November 19, 2008. A public hearing
is anticipated for City Council on December 9, 2008. (BROWNILOWREY/
WEST/LECOMTE)
Development Code Update - Staff is preparing an update of the Development Code that
proposes to remove the distinction that exists between zoning standards for kindergarten
through grade twelve (K-12) public schools (including charter schools) and zoning standards
for K-12 private schools. The amendment proposes all schools, including colleges and
universities, proposed within all commercial zoning districts shall be subject to City review of
a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) [except Temecula Valley Unified School District, State and
Community Colleges may be exempt pursuant to State law] so thatthe placement of schools
and their relationship to surrounding uses, as well as CEQA impacts, can be analyzed on a
case by case basis with each Conditional Use Permit. The amendment to the Development
Code ensures that vocational and trade schools, such as cosmetology schools, and other
specialized vocations, would not be subject to the same process as K-12 schools and
colleges and universities since they are viewed more as a business than a conventional
school. (LOWREY)
Old Town Specific Plan Update - Staff is working in conjunction with consulting firms Inland
Planning+Design and Fehr and Peers (parking and circulation) to prepare an update to the
Old Town Specific Plan that addresses the ten goals and recommendations for Old Town
presented to City Council on March 25, 2008. On August 11, 2008, the Old Town Local
Review Board formed a steering committer for the Specific Plan Update consisting of Board
Members Blair and Harker, with the purpose of this committee being to provide the Old Town
Local Review Board with additional opportunities to review and comment on concepts and
preliminary plans as the Specific Plan update progresses and for the committee to report
back to the other Board members on the progress of the update. Staff intends to complete
the analysis/research phase of this update in October 2008, to complete the first draft of the
Specific Plan update in February 2009, to present the draft update to the public in March
2009, and to bring the updated plan to the Old Town Local Review Board for review in April
2009, to the Planning Commission for review in May 2009, and to City Council for review in
June 2009. (FISK)
Planning Agenda Report
10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008
1. Recently Approved
APN #
• PA08-0122 CUP - Fresh and Easy in PDO#5 944290012 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS
A Conditional Use Permit application to allow a grocery store larger than 10,000 square feet with alcohol sales, ABC
License Type 20 for beer and wine, in Sub Area B of the Temecula Village Planned Development Overlay (PDO) #5
(APN 944-370-005, 006, and 007).
Submitted Date Approved Date
5/30/2008 Oct 15 2008
APN #
• PA08-0123 FIE Major Mod PDO#5 944290012 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS
A Major Modification to the approved Development Plan at Temecula Village, PDO#5, to allow a 13,969 square foot
Fresh and Easy Market, and a 5,800 square foot Pad C (APN 944-370-005, 006, and 007).
Submitted Date Approved Date
5/30/2008 Oct 15 2008
APN #
• PA08-0197 NORRIS RANCH PUMPKIN PATCH 959070012 KNUTE NOLAND
A Major Temporary Use Permit for a Pumpkin Patch to be located at 31300 Rancho Community Way (APN: 959-
070-012).
Submitted Date Approved Date
9/9/2008 Oct 9 2008
APN #
• PA08.0208 2008 FALL ROD RUN 922026008 CHRISTINE DAMKC
A Major Temporary Use Permit for the Fall Rod Run event in Old Town on October 10th from 1:00pm to 8:00pm and
October 11th from 5:00am to 4:00pm.
Submitted Date Approved Date
9/16/2008 Oct 9 2008
APN #
PA08-0212 FROSTY'S FOREST PUMPKIN 910420005 KNUTE NOLAND
PATCH
A Major Temporary Use Permit for Frosty's Forest Pumpkin Patch to be operated at 40820 Winchester Road from
October 9, 2008 to October 31, 2008.
Submitted Date Approved Date
9/18/2008 Oct 8 2008
APN #
• PA08-0215 RANCHO CHRISTMAS TREES 959070012 KNUTE NOLAND
A Major Temporary Use Permit for a Christmas tree lot to be operated at the south west corner of Temecula
Parkway and Rancho Community Way, 31300 Rancho Community Way, from November 28, 2008 to December 24,
2008, 9:00 am to 9:00 pm daily.
Submitted Date Approved Date
9/19/2008 Oct 28 2008
APN #
1 of 7
Planning Agenda Report
10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008
• PA08-0227 FAMILY FALL FESTIVAL 920090005 KNUTE NOLAND
A Major Temporary Use Permit for a Family Fall Festival (Business Expo) to be held at Chaparral High School,
27515 Nicolas Road, on October 18, 2008 from 10:00 am to 5:00 pm.
Submitted Date Approved Date
9/30/2008 Oct 16 2008
2 of7
Planning Agenda Report
10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008
2.
APN #
• PA08-0125 Temecula Village PDO-5 Amendl 944290012 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS
A Zoning Amendment to modify PDO-5 (Temecula Village) to permit Grocery Stores up to 15,000 square feet with a
Conditional Use Permit (currently allowed up to 10,000 SF w/CUP). Other changes include reducing landscape
buffer/setback along Rancho California Road from 25 to 20 feet and miscellaneous clean-up/references to previous
approvals. Temecula Village is located along the south side of Rancho California Road, east of Moraga Road.
(Associate projects PA08-0122 and PA08-0123 - Fresh and Easy DP/CUP)
Submitted Date
DRC Meeting Date
City Council
6/4/2008
6/26/2008
Nov 18 2008
APN #
• PA08-0153 Grace Presbyterian Major Mod 957140010 BETSY LOWREY
A Major Modification Application to modify an existing Fellowship Hall/Worship Center originally entitled as a one-
story 2,600 square foot expansion to be a two-story 6,532 square foot expansion (a total increase of 3,932 square
feet) for Grace Presbyterian Church, generally located at the southwest corner of Nicolas and Calle Medusa at
31143 Nicolas Road [APN 957-140-010]. This project is related to previously approved Development Plan Planning
Application PA02-0257.
Submitted Date
DRC Meeting Date
Planning Commision
7/7/2008
8/5/2008
Nov 5 2008
APN #
• PA08-0154 Iron Wok Minor CUP 910320039 ERIC JONES
A Minor Conditional Use Permit for the Iron Wok to conduct live entertainment with a band or Disc Jockey. A dance
area will also be provided. Located at 26520 Ynez Road.
Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
7/8/2008 I TBD
APN #
Scheduled for Hearing
• PA08-0179 Pujol Street Apartments 922260001 DANASCHUMA
A Tentative Residential Parcel Map (TPM 36119) to create one parcel for the Pujol Street Apartment complex
located at 28801 Pujol Street. (Related project: PA07-0229)
Submitted Date
DRC Meeting Date
Directors Hearing
8/20/2008
9/18/2008
Oct 30 2008
APN #
PA08-0183 EONS Gaming 921830015 DANA SCHUMA
A Minor Conditional Use Permit to authorize EONS Gaming to have an indoor video gaming facility located within a
3,866 square foot unit at 41533 Margarita Road, Suite M101 in the Bel Villaggio shopping center. The gaming facility
proposes to have 30 gaming stations available from 12 p.m. to 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 10 a.m. to 12
a.m. Fridays and Saturdays.
Submitted Date
DRC Meeting Date
Planning Commision
8/25/2008
9/18/2008
Nov 19 2008
APN #
• PA08.0196 Starbuzz Hookah Minor CUP 960020057 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS
A Minor Conditional Use Permit application for a Starbuzz Hookah Lounge in suites 108 and 109 of shopping center
at 32483 Temecula Parkway.
3 of7
Planning Agenda Report
10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008
Submitted Date
DRC Meeting Date
Directors Hearing
9/9/2008
10/2/2008
Nov 20 2008
APN #
• PA08.0206 Public House MCUP alcohollent 922044024 CHERYL KITZEROW/MATT PETERS
A Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow for live entertainment and a Type 47 (On-Sale General) Alcohol Beverage
Control license to allow the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits at the Public House restaurant located at 41971
Main Street in Old Town.
Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date Directors Hearing
911512008 Nov 20 2008
AYN #
• PA08-0224 Martial Arts Studio CUP 954030001 ERIC JONES
A Minor Conditional Use Permit for a Martial Arts studio located in suite 8700 totaling 4,996 square feet within the
Meadows Village Shopping Center.
Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
9/30/2008 TBD
APN #
• PA08.0225 Fit Wize for Kids Minor CUP 954030001 ERIC JONES
A Minor Conditional Use Permit for a Fitwize for Kids facility located in suite B400 totaling 3,023 square feet within
the Meadows Village Shopping Center.
Submitted Date DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
9/30/2008 TBD
4 of7
Planning Agenda Report
10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008
3.
APN #
• PA07.0309 PDO-6 Zoning Amendment 959060007 ERIC JONES
A Zoning Amendment application to amend the Rancho Pueblo Planned Development Overlay (PDO-6). The site is
generally located on Temecula Parkway approximately 325 feet east of Jedediah Smith Road.
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
11/1/2007 TBD
APN #
• PA08.0165 AT&T Wireless 954020005 DANA SCHUMA
A Conditional Use Permit/Antenna Facility Application for ATT Wireless to install two slimline poles and an
equipment structure on Rancho California Water District property located at 41520 Margarita Road.
Submitted Date
Anticipated DRC Meeting Date
No Hearing Planned
7/31/2008
8/28/2008
TBD
APN #
• PA08-0189 Penske Truck Leasing DP 909370013 KATIE LECOMTE
A Development Plan application to construct a 13,248 square foot industrial building for Penske Truck Leasing
located at 42006 Remington Avenue (APN: 909-370-0013). Please note: This application is associated with
Conditional Use Permit application PA08-0190.
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
8/28/2008 TBD
APN #
• PA08-0190 Penske Truck Leasing CUP 909370013 KATIE LECOMTE
A Conditional Use Permit (with related Development Plan PA08-0189) to authorize truck leasing and rental, light
duty truck maintenance and truck washing bays, at the proposed 13,248 square foot Penske Truck Leasing facility
located at 42006 Remington Avenue (APN: 909-370-013).
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
8/28/2008 TBD
APN #
• PA08-0220 The Painted Garden PCN 922045025 KATIE LECOMTE
A Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity to authorize a Type-42 (beer and wine - public premises) to allow for
wine tasting at The Painted Garden located at 28657 Old Town Front Street (APN: 922-045-025).
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
9/24/2008 TBD
APN #
New Submittals Pending DRC Meeting
• PA08-0143 BAILY'S RESTAURANT BANQUET 922046018
TUP CHRISTINE DAMKO
A Major Temporary Use Permit to allow Bally's Restaurant to conduct banquets/events throughout the year within a
tent approximately 2,000 sqaure feet on restaurant property. Live entertainment is also part of this application.
Bally's Restaurant is located at the north west corner of Front Street and Second Street within the Old Town Specific
Plan.
Submitted Date
Anticipated DRC Meeting Date
No Hearing Planned
6/25/2008
TBD
5 of7
Planning Agenda Report
10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008
APN #
• PA08-0228 Crowne Plaza Type 70 License 921060055 KATIE LECOMTE
A Conditional Use Permit to authorize a Type-70 (On-Sale General - Restrictive Serrvice) ABC license, for Crowne
Plaza Hotel, proposed to be located east of Jefferson and approximately 500 feet north of Rancho California Road.
This license would allow for the sale or furnishing of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption on the premises
to the establishment's overnight transient occupancy guests.
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
10/1/2008 TB D
APN #
• PA08.0231 CHRIST THE VINE WIRELESS 921830035 KNUTE NOLAND
A Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate and maintain a wireless facility of six (6) panel antennas mounted
inside of an existing bell tower that is connected to the main building at Christ the Vine Lutheran Church, 29581 N.
General Kearny Road. An eight (8) foot CMU wall matching the church building will be constructed to house (4)
BTS radio equipment cabinets that are included with this installation.
Submitted Date
Anticipated DRC Meeting Date
No Hearing Planned
10/6/2008
11 /6/2008
TB D
APN #
• PA08.0232 TEMECULA CREEK INN WIRELESS 922220003 KNUTE NOLAND
A Conditional Use Permit for the construction, operation and maintenance of a wireless antenna facility consisting of
six (6) panel antennas, four (4) BTS radio equipment cabinets and one microwave dish to be located at the
Temecula Creek Inn Golf Course, 44501 Rainbow Canyon Road. The antennas are to be attached to a new ninety
three (93) foot monopine and the equipment cabinets are to be housed in a new eight (8) foot CMU wall and chain
link fencing.
Submitted Date
Anticipated DRC Meeting Date
No Hearing Planned
10/6/2008
1116/2008
TB D
APN #
• PA08-0233 RANCHO BAPTIST CHURCH 922130017
WIRELESS KNUTE NOLAND
W
A Conditional Use Permit to construct, operate and maintain a wireless facility consisting of six (6) panel antennas,
four (4) BTS radio equipment cabinets and one microwave dish at Rancho Baptist Church, 29775 Santiago Road.
The antennas are attached to a new 77'- 4" monopine and the equipment cabinets are located inside a new T- 9"
wrought iron fence.
Submitted Date
Anticipated DRC Meeting Date
No Hearing Planned
10/6/2008
11/13/2008
TB D
APN #
• PA08-0241 Islamic Center DP 957140007 ERIC JONES
A Commercial Development Plan for a two story 24,943 square foot Islamic Center located at APN 957-140-007 &
957-140-011, both parcels total 4.12 acres. The project will constructed in two phases. (Related: Planning
Application PA08-0242, Conditional Use Permit)
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
10/14/2008 TBD
APN #
• PA08.0242 Islamic Center CUP 957140007 ERIC JONES
6 of7
Planning Agenda Report
10-01-2008 through 10-31-2008
A Conditional Use Permit to allow a 24,943 square foot Islamic Center to operate within a VL zone located on
parcels 957-140-007 & 957-140-011. (Related Planning Application PA08-0241, Development Plan)
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
10/14/2008 TED
APN #
• PA08-0244 Arco Car Wash CUP/DP 950100011 BETSY LOWREY
A Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit Application to construct a 946 square foot self-serve drive-through
car wash at an existing Arco Gas Station located on the northwest corner of Temecula Parkway and Margarita Road
at 44239 Margarita Road [APN 959-080-017]
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
10/21/2008 TBD
APN #
• PA08-0250 FROSTY'S FOREST CHRISTMAS 910420005
KNUTE NOLAND
TREE
A Major Temporary Use Permit for a Christmas Tree Lot to be operated at the Promenade Mall, 40820 Winchester
Road, from November 28, 2008 to December 23, 2008, 9:00 am to 9:00 pm.
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date Administrators Hearing
10/29/2008 Nov 30 2008
APN #
• PA08-0253 The Edge Restaurant CUP 922033009 ERIC JONES
A Minor Conditional Use Permit to allow the Edge Restaurant & Lounge to pursue a Type 47 ABC license. Related
application PA08-0254, Minor Mod Planning Review Only
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
11/3/2008 TBD
APN #
• PA08.0256 Crowne Plaza Hotel PCN 921060055 KATIE LECOMTE
A Finding of Public Convenience or Necessity to authorize a Type-70 ABC license for the proposed Crowne Plaza
Hotel located east of Jefferson Avenue, west of Interstate 15 and approximately 500 feet north of Ranchol California
Road (APN: 921-060-055).
Submitted Date Anticipated DRC Meeting Date No Hearing Planned
11/5/2008 TBD
7 of7
SPft1NGS O i
f~{ a yy~ ~`yy ~`'7`
~uRR1~7R tlOT SptyNGS ~O
yr
i /
FAD C"?
1 ~ ~ ~ ++t = 1,. I N~GO S
PA08-0153
9 1 s PA08-0241•P 08-0242 1
lur rlr
PA08-0227 ~57~~-~~y r. r
Y
i
i• , T I
,i
J
l
i PA08-0212 PA08-0231 1
O (JPA08 0250 1
l
P PA08-0154 PA08-0223 {)PA08-018 U4R~Y~o
_i
PA08-0190 OPA08-0189
/ i PA08-0125 v A) PA08 0122oPA08 0123
08 0165
!.D~ rG ~ G~,O ~11Sf H RD N _ ~~.1u"/ Cicas
A PA A228
9q ~PA08=0256
~y
P...000208'-`
PIM
LFB FM gym ( i
O gP
y ~
PA08-0233
J
P.A08-0179 U ~
pOR~O~~p
~~.08-0196
PA08-0244
PA08 0215
P.A 0.197 PA07-0309 197 i
sue'` ` ~ ••,i
r
Legend r _
PA08-0232
Planning Status - October 2008
0 1. Recently Approved
0 2. Scheduled for Hearing ~r`~,
• 3. New Submittals Pending DRC Meeting
CIS" /F V 4 J f /
~1 y,U 4 \ / ~ J
ITEM NO. 23
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: William G. Hughes, Director of Public Works
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Public Works Department Monthly Report
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file the attached Department of Public Works Monthly
Activity Reports for the month of October, 2008.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Hughes, Director of Public Works
FROM: bq6 Brad Baron, Maintenance Superintendent
DATE: November 6, 2008
SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - October, 2008
The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in-house personnel
for the month of October, 2008:
1. SIGNS
A. Total signs replaced 85
B. Total signs installed 1
C. Total signs repaired 81
if. TREES
A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns
M. ASPHALT REPAIRS
A. Total square feet of A. C. repairs
B. Total Tons
IV. CATCH BASINS
A. Total catch basins cleaned
V. RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT
A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement
VI. GRAFFITI REMOVAL
A. Total locations
B. Total S.F.
VII. STENCILING
A. 176 New and repainted legends
B. 800 L.F. of new and repainted red curb and striping
20
5,346
59
613
0
37
3,100
R:V AINTAINWOACTRRT
Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 47 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trirmning,
sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 61 service order requests
for the month of September, 2008.
The Maintenance Crew has also put in 225 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and
response to street emergencies.
The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of October, 2008 was $63,994.00
compared to $34,885.00 for the month of September, 2008.
Account No. 5402
Account No. 5401
Account No. 999-5402
$ 29,069.00
$ 34,925.00
$ -0-
cc; Dan York, Deputy Director of Public Works/Land Development
Ali Moghadam, Principal Engineer - Traffic
Amer Attar, Principal Engineer - Capital Improvements
Jerry Alegria, Senior Engineer - Land Development
R:\MAINTMI OACTRR
mo
N
d O
L O)
d x v
O
z m m
H m
F Q
0
M W
Q
J J. J
74o
0.~ N
~ LL
M
N
OD
Cf
fp
- C
w
O O
0 0
O O
N i9
f0
W
in
O
fp
~
v
Oi
ep
w
O
O
N
N ID
OD
in
O r
O O
O N
O r N 1
i0 W
Mr
w w
O ep
'O c
C6 CO
O W
M r
N" r
N~
ra en
W M
A O~
V C'
WN" O
N
a O!
en
OD
O
t0
c
b
d!
N
tG
O
0
Oi
i0
w
N
M
V
O
M
~
M
r
N
v
p"
m~
~
U
Q
0
~i
Z
Q
.Q
N
F
W
i0
O O
O O
Of
O
O
O
OM
O r
O N
O i0
O
t0 O
r
r
N
O
O
y
a
o
Q.: H.
-
C!
OJ
C N
b
tp
C In
O N
A h
tV
O
G
E -
co
2
Y
V
tD
f9 fp
A
OD
M
M
T
N m
M t0
N R
b M
lD N
A Of
M
Oi
N
N
W
N
N
A
O
a N V
F
J J
OD
C"!
W
OD Oi
i919.
OD V
M
"
p
O d
y '
. 0 Q
Q
i0
N
t'1
-
t9
M M
w
N
A
m
a n
O
F. U.
i
W
en
.
~
ui
w
ui ui
vi
M
ui
m
p
t
y
o
'a
y
Q m
LL -
U
M
0
0
W
YWc
K
w
3m
O~
U
K
00
.
U.
~ 0
0
0
OZ
U
O
x
y W
'
R
IL
Z N
U
3m,0
W
z
m >
> Z O
U
7 F F o
'
N
> Z
LL
C
N
m
of o,~
o o
a
m
o
' o
o m
o,
o o
o o
o
n o
¢
m
~o
m
m
_
U. F a~
ow
r
W
O
N C'
N N
` N
N
O
~tNO'.
Q
b'
l l
C)
(O
M
'
V' N
Hl (A
tb V
t0
?
ro
ffl
-
O'
N
J W J
U
e'
a r»
W
wQ
Oo
.
~x
o
U)
z
Q O y LL
(QO
O O
N
fnO
0
O
M V
N.
,p
N
O
C
W
C'!
N
(O
N
W
Y W m
O
N
C
77
M
Q
K
m
0
320
0
U
G
Q
01
M N
F
4' 3 '
w m
$ m
'S
a c
m
J
,
J
O
R
li
CtiU
E
2
LL
m
`
W:U
z a
f!1
N
W U
z
c
W e
W
-
F
W
CO)
y
W
p,
U
W
t/1
-
I
3
F
0
N
.
Z
LL
7
0
W
j
y
o
O
W
W
O
LL
0
W
L
u
J
W
06
x
z
0
O
z
~
m
Q
Q
IL
m
¢
W
<
w
w
w
v
~
W
z
c
i
x
c
H
¢
U
a
-
U
n
w
Y
W
W
O
J
Q
Z
W
y
CO)
z
0
W
y
W
O
S
W
3
1
z
z
Z
0
3
J
p
K
2
-
Q
>
w
-
F
Q
fA
N
?
N
y
C7
~
?
y
Q
~
0
W
J-
N
D
O
W
~
p
R
W
m
W
i ? °
Y
a
J ~
O m m
Q
y
o~
J
h
N
O
F
LL
mm
Q
=
L
m n a
N
(p ~ ~
T
❑ y a
O o
moot o
0
O OOI M OOI O
co
~ tV Q V Q C) V
7.-Mn N N (O
~
r IV
W
O
O
O
~
~
F
J
a
rc
Q
no O ON
0 O
O
M
7 M r N N
Z
CO
rl'OD
w
w
m
w
U
W
O
w OOOO
W O
OOO
o
OO
OD~o
O O
N OO) (O OIt
n O)ina n-co
V)Q
m 6
M
ci
V3
06
o
C=;
A
M M R
W
m F
O J
ap fL
CL
w
V N O N
m V G O~ 0 0
O O O
O O O
O O
~ N~ M O N~ M
a N U) N N
O
O
O
N to
U. 0 w M: (n0
m
O
N7
fR
fA
w
z U J Q
wz<
a V O O O O 0 0 0 N O O O
H Z o n
(q
LL
Y
~
o
~
Q r
a Z
J
m
~
dLL ~
z LL
a(D
O
c
i
q
N m c N
y O~ a)
N
LL
a
z
z
m a N
J
ca
F a) rnN
H
m
E o
o
0
nU)
~
a~0
o
a)
. .V
i
~
a
mc
N M
0' 0 g
V
£
H d'
R
Dc Cla-
m
Z OCH
W
N m
~
A
~
m m
w..:..
QO02
0
0A
~
HI-
rn n M n o n m v n
O M W M W
T N to
V O
3
N
LL
O U m N N
N z m ao ~
J 3
z z
Q N s a 0 N
Q N z a Uaa 4%-~
W U ¢ dym ~°~❑O
m H U
F } C C U ~
O p F rnrnm dO aZi
H 0 (A (A 0 IL K z,Q(4
STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS
The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of October, 2008
DATE
DESCRIPTION
TOTAL COST
ACCOUNT
STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE
OF WORK
SIZE
CONTRACTOR. `
MQNTELEONE EX*CAYATING
Date: 10/03/08
CITYWIDE
CITYWIDE NPDES PLACEMENT IN R.O.W.s
# 5402
TOTAL COST
$ 9,500.00
Date: 10/30/08
DENDY PARKWAY &
REPLACE DAMAGED P.C.C.
MARGARITA N/O MORAGA
# 5402
TOTAL COST
$ 2,600.00
Date: 10/30/08
DEL RIO BRIDGE OUTLET WASH-OUT
BACKFILL, COMPACT, PLACE RIP-RAP AND
SLURRY
# 5401
TOTAL COST
$ 6,500.00
CONTRACTOR:
BECKER ENGINEERING
Date: 10/08/08
BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD
REMOVE SILT & DEBRIS; INSTALL NPDES
MEASURES
# 5402
TOTAL COST
$ 4,525.00
Date: 10/08/08
VALLEJO CHANNEL
REMOVE SILT & DEBRIS FROM CHANNEL
# 5401
TOTAL COST
$13,865.00
Date: 10/15/OS
SANTIAGO AT YNEZ
CONSTRUCT DESILTING POND FOR NPDES
MEASURES
# 5401
TOTAL COST
$ 6,185.00
Date: 19/29/08
VALLEJO CHANNEL
PLACE 25 YDS. SLURRY IN CHANNEL TO
PROTECT RIP-RAP AND EROSION
# 5401
TOTAL COST
$ 8,375.00
CONTRACTOR:
REAIS COMMERCLIL MANAGEMENT , .
Date: 10/08
CITYWIDE
TRASH, WEEDS, DEBRIS AND V-DITCH
CLEANING IN R.O.W.s
# 5402
TOTAL COST
$ 12,444.00
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5401 $ 34,925.00
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #5402 $ 29,069.00
TOTAL COST ACCOUNT #99-5402 - 0 -
RAMAINTMMMOACTRn
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
ASPHALT (POTHOLES) REPAIRS
MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008
10/06/08
SANTIAGO AT BRIDGE DECK
OVERLAY A.C.
383
3.5
10/07/08
SANTIAGO AT BRIDGE DECK
OVERLAY A.C.
108
2.5
10/08/08
OLD TOWN AREA
OVERLAY A.C.
350
3.5
10/09/08
OLD TOWN AREA
OVERLAY A.C.
79
2
10/13/08
CITYWIDE
POTHOLE REPAIRS
155
3
10/14/08
MEADOWVIEW AREA
REPAIR OVER-SIDE DRAINS
376
3
10/15/08
CITYWIDE
A.C. OVERLAYS
490
4
10/16/08
CITYWIDE
A.C. OVERLAYS
499
3.5
10/20/08
VIA LA VIDA
R & R A.C.
285
5.5
10/21/08
MARGARITA AT PIO PICO
R & R A.C.
285
8
10/22/08
42762 AGENA STREET
R & R A.C.
266
7
10/23/08
PAUBA AT LA PRIMAVERA
A.C. OVERLAYS
352
5
10/27/08
CITYWIDE
POTHOLE REPAIRS
637
3
10/28/08
ENTERPRISE CIRCLE
R & R A.C.
78
2
10/29/08
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT CITY LIMITS
A.C. OVERLAYS
1,003
3.5
TOTAL S.F. OF REPAIRS 5,346
TOTAL TONS 59
R:WMNTAINIWKCM LTMASPHALTRPR
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE
MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008
DATE
I OCA®O
$ RK COMPL°ETTD
10/01/08
AREA #3
CLEANED & CHECKED
13 CATCH BASINS
10/01/08
AREA #1
CLEANED & CHECKED
56 CATCH BASINS
10/01/08
AREA #2
CLEANED & CHECKED
13 CATCH BASINS
10/02/08
AREAS #1 & #2
CLEANED & CHECKED
106 CATCH BASINS
10/02/08
AREA #2
CLEANED & CHECKED
12 CATCH BASINS
10/06/08
CITYWIDE
CLEANED & CHECKED
24 CATCH BASINS
10/07/08
AREA #2
CLEANED & CHECKED
20 CATCH BASINS
10/08/08
AREA #2
CLEANED & CHECKED
19 CATCH BASINS
10/09/08
AREA #2'
CLEANED & CHECKED
7 CATCH BASINS
10/13/08
CITYWIDE
CLEANED & CHECKED
14 CATCH BASINS
10/15/08
AREA #3
CLEANED & CHECKED
21 CATCH BASINS
10/16/08
AREA #2
CLEANED & CHECKED
9 CATCH BASINS
10/20/08
AREA #3 -
CLEANED & CHECKED
23 CATCH BASINS
10/20/08
CITYWIDE
CLEANED & CHECKED
17 CATCH BASINS
10/21/08
AREA #4
CLEANED & CHECKED
26 CATCH BASINS
10/21/08
CITYWIDE
CLEANED & CHECKED
18 CATCH BASINS
10/21/08
AREA #3 -
CLEANED & CHECKED
20 CATCH BASINS
10/22/08
AREA #4
CLEANED & CHECKED
13 CATCH BASINS
10122/08
AREA #2
CLEANED & CHECKED
22 CATCH BASINS
10/22/08
AREA #3
CLEANED & CHECKED
23 CATCH BASINS
10/23/08
AREA #4
CLEANED & CHECKED
33 CATCH BASINS
10/27/08
CITYWIDE
CLEANED & CHECKED
28 CATCH BASINS
10/28/08
AREA #3
CLEANED & CHECKED
29 CATCH BASINS
10/28/08
AREA #5
CLEANED & CHECKED
19 CATCH BASINS
10/28/08
AREA #5
CLEANED & CHECKED
19 CATCH BASINS
10/30/08
AREAS #1 & #2
CLEANED & CHECKED
9 CATCH BASINS
TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED & CHECKED 613
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
GRAFFITI REMOVAL
MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008
LOCAL
WORXOMPLEIEb
10/01/08
PASEO GALLANTE
REMOVED
3 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/02/08
REDHAWK
REMOVED
8 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10103/08
JUNE COURT
REMOVED
6 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/03/08
HOPACTONG
REMOVED
36 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/03108
LAHONTAN STREET
REMOVED
. 50 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/06/08
FELIX VALDEZ
REMOVED
24 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/06/08
PECHANGA BRIDGE
REMOVED
74 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/06/08
WOLF CREEK /REDHAWK
REMOVED
37 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/06/08
BUTTERFIELD BRIDGE
REMOVED
148 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/06/08
LOMA LINDA
REMOVED
21 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/06/08
EMPIRE CREEK INLET
REMOVED
22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/06/08
.27531 YNEZ -
REMOVED
11 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/06/08
WINCHESTER BRIDGE
REMOVED
1,103 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/10/08
28535 FRONT STREET
REMOVED
10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/10/08
TOWER PLAZA
REMOVED
37 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/13/08
MEADOWS PARKWAY AT CORTE FLORECITA
REMOVED
63 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/13/08
SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK
REMOVED
151 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/14/08
MEADOWS PARKWAY AT CORTE FLORECITA
REMOVED
47 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/14/08
ROMANCE AT TOY COURT
REMOVED
25 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/15/08
27133 JEFFERSON
REMOVED
46 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/16/08
SANTA GERTRUDIS
REMOVED
97 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/20/08
DEER HOLLOW
REMOVED
166 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/20/08
DEER MEADOWS
REMOVED
20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/20/08
SANTA GERTRUDIS. CREEK
REMOVED
210 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/21/08
WOLF VALLEY
REMOVED
22 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10121/08
MARGARITA ROAD AT RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD
REMOVED
20 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/22/08
COUNTY CENTER
REMOVED
27 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
RAMAINTAIMWKCWLTD\GRA 0TI\
10/27/08
AVENIDA DE MISSIONS
REMOVED
86 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/27/08
SANTA GERTRUDIS CREEK
REMOVED
114 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/28/08
WELTON
REMOVED
19 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/28/08
VAIL RANCH
REMOVED
38 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/29/08
CORTE RODRIGUEZ
REMOVED
10 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/30/08
WABASH LANE
REMOVED
160 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/30/08
BEDFORD COURT
REMOVED
35 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
10/30/08
MARGARITA ROAD
REMOVED
108 S.F. OF GRAFFITI
TOTAL S.F. GRAFFITI REMOVED 3,100
TOTAL LOCATIONS 37
R:\ MNTMMW CMPLM\GRA HTI\
a
oa
W ~ W
I~1
oz~
V
h~l
Q~ N
PLO
W
A
~o~cvcnrv~oor
GY d' V1 ~ V M V M ~ M.
a
a
U
a
OzQ
U
W
O
O
Z
F
U
O
F
a
w
m
cs
a
r
J
W
Z
7
Q
J_
I
IL
a
a
m
w
ZLL
Q
F
LL
Q
cn
7
N
Cad W
M
7
N
oo
w4'
A
c
o
O
~
o
H z
w
rn
U
oMO
O
N Obi W ti prp
_ . . _
h
V.
O
0
H
y
~ ,
ti
w
~a ti Q
V)
0 '
z
q -
.
x
V
3
00000oooooaooaooooo0000000
00000000oooooaooooo0000000
oooooaooooo000000000000000
+-rnn~Mrrnnu~Mrrnn~nM+-rnnu>Mrrnn l1YMr
~f1cY'ct ad'~MMMMM NNNNNrrr
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
SERVICE ORDER REQUEST LOG
MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008
DATE '
REC'D
LOCATION"
REQUEST
DATE WORK'
COMPLETED
10/03/08
42568 CONDIDA DRIVE
TREE REMOVAL
10/03/08
10/05/08
CROWNE HILL ROAD
POTHOLE
10/05/08
10/06/08
MARGARITA ROAD
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/06/08
10106/08
32918 BONITA MESA
TREE CONCERN
10/06/08
10/06/08
MORAGA ROAD
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/06/08
10/06/08
GREEN TREE ROAD
SAND IN PIPES
10/06/08
10/06/08
VIA PUESTA DEL SOL
V-DITCH CLEANING
10/06/08
10/06/08
MORAGA ROAD -
CHANNEL CLEANING
10/06/08
10/07/08
LEIGH LANE
TRASH CLEAN-UP
10/07/08
10/07/08
LA SERENA
TRANSMISSION FLUID IN STREET
10/07/08
10/07/08
TEMECULA PARKWAY
STICKER ON SIGN
10/07/08
10/08/08
ANACONDA COURT
S.N.S. MISSING
10/08/08
10/09/08
REDHAWK PARKWAY
TREE LIMB
10/09/08
10/10/08
BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD
TREE TRIMMING
10/10/08
10/13/08
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AT MARGARITA
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/13/08.
10/13/08
YNEZ N/B
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/13/08
10/13/08
45680 COUTE LOBOS
ROOT PRUNING
10/13/08
10/13/08
WAGASA PLACE
STORM DRAIN CLEANING
10/13/08
10/14/08
CHANDLER
WEED ABATEMENT
10/14/08
10/14/08
CHANDLER
TRASH PICK-UP
10/14/08
10/16/08
NICOLAS AT VIA LOBO
TRASH PICK-UP
10/16/08
10116/08
JEFFERSON N/O SANBORN
RAISED SIDEWALK
10/16/08
10/21/08
CALABRIA DRIVE
FADED STOP SIGN
10/21/08
10/21/08
42070 TEATREE COURT
ROOT PRUNING
10/21/08
10/22/08
31842 COUTE MONTECITO
TREE TRIMMING
10/22/08
10/22/08
MORAGA
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/22/08
10/22/08
SOMERSET
SIGN DOWN
10/22/08
RANWWMN\WR COWLTMSORS\
DATE
REC'D
LOCATION
REQUEST
10/22/08
TEMECULA PARKWAY
A.C. REPAIRS
n10/22/08
10/22/08
31400 VIA EDUARDO
TREE REMOVAL
10/23/08
GOLDEN ROD
OIL SPILL
10/23/08
10/24/08
CORTE BENAVENTE
S.N.S. MISSING
10/24/08
10/27/08
42070 TEATREE COURT
ROOT PRUNING
10/27/08
10/27/08
29910 VIA PUESTA DEL SOL
STORM DRAIN PLUGGED
10/27/08
10/27/08
40555 NEW TOWN DRIVE
STORM DRAIN PLUGGED
10/27/08
10/27108
MORAGA
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/27/08
10/27/08
ORCHARD CHURCH
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/27/08
10/27/08
MORAGA AT CHANNEL
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/27/08
10/28/08
LASERENA
DEBRIS PICK-UP-_
10/28/08
10/28/08
MORAGA
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/28/08
10/28/-08
42797 TWILIGHT COURT
TREE TRIMMING
10/28/08
10/28/08
31955 LODGE HOUSE COURT
DEAD TREE
10/28/08
10/28/08
45964 PARSIPPANY COURT
DEAD TREE
10/28/08
10/29/08
HOPE WAY
DEBRIS PICK-UP
10/29/08
10/30/08
BUTTERFIIELD STAGE ROAD
STORM DRAIN CLOGGED
10/30/08
10/30/08
LOMA LINDA ROAD
CELL IN DRAIN
10/30/08
10/30/08
45492 TOURNAMENT LANE
TREE TRIMMING.
10/30/08
10/30/08
FLORES AT YNEZ
STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE
10/30/08
TOTAL SERVICE ORDER REQUESTS 47
R:\MAINTAIM W RKCOM?=\SORS\
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
RIGHT-OF-WAY TREE TRIMMING
MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008
10/01/08
WINDSOR ROAD -
TRIMMED
4 R.O.W. TREES
10/02/08
CITYWIDE SIGN MAINTENANCE -
TRIMMED
7 R.O.W.TREES
10/06/08
MORENO
TRIMMED
6 R.O.W. TREES
10/09/08
MAIN STREET
TRIMMED
3 R.O.W. TREES
TOTAL R.O.W. TREES TRIMMED 20
RAMAINTAIMWRKCOMPLTMTREES
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
SIGNS
MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008
,DAAZ
LOGATIOL~T
RfiORK COMPLETED;. `
10/01/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
4
REPAIRED
5
10/02/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
10
REPAIRED
5
10/07/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
21
REPAIRED
2
10/08/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
2
10/09/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
2
REPAIRED
6
10/09/08
4141 CHEMIN C
OUTET
INSTALLED
N-T4-1
10/14/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
8
REPAIRED
1
10/15/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
6
REPAIRED
2
10/16/08
WINCHESTER
REPLACED
1
INSTALLED
3
10/20/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
4
REPAIRED
2
10/21/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
3
REPAIRED
2
10/22/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
12
REPAIRED
7
10/23/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
2
REPAIRED 38
10/27/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
7
REPAIRED
4
10/31/08
CITYWIDE
REPLACED
7
REPAIRED
4
TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED
TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED
TOTAL SIGNS REPAIRED
85
1
81
R:WAINTAIMW KCMPLTDl lGNS\
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ROADS DIVISION
STENCILS / STRIPING
MONTH OF OCTOBER, 2008
~ LOO Cr~TION '
;WORK COMPY;ETED . <
10/01/08
AREA #3
REPAINTED
73 LEGENDS
10/02/08
AREAS # 3 & #4
REPAINTED
20 LEGENDS
10/07/08
AREA #5
REPAINTED
40 LEGENDS
10/09/08
AREA #4
REPAINTED
18 LEGENDS
10/09/08
AREA #2
REPAINTED
800 L.F. RED CURB
10/29/08
AREA #2
REPAINTED
12 LEGENDS
10/30/08
AREAS #2 & #4
REPAINTED
13 LEGENDS
TOTAL NEW & REPAINTED LEGENDS 176
NEW & REPAINTED RED CURB & STRIPING L.F. 800
RM AINTAIN\WRKCOMPLTO\STRIPING
ITEM NO. 24
Approvals
City Attorney
Director of Finance
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Manager/City Council
FROM: Jerry Williams, Chief of Police
DATE: November 25, 2008
SUBJECT: Police Department Monthly Report
The following report reflects the activity of the Temecula Police Department for the month of October
2008.
PATROL SERVICES
Overall calls for police service
8350
"Priority One" calls for service
50
Average response time for "Priority One" calls
.................................7 Minutes
VOLUNTEERS
Volunteer administration hours
391
Special Events
445
Community Action Patrol (CAP) hours
1407
Reserve officer hours (patrol)
8
Training hours
332
Total Volunteer hours
2172
CRIME PREVENTION/GRAFFITI
Crime prevention workshops conducted
10
Residential/business security surveys conducted
2
Businesses visited
20
Businesses visited for past crime follow-up
20
Crime prevention articles
1
Total square footage of graffiti removed
3,100
Number of Graffiti Locations
37
OLD TOWN STOREFRONT
Total customers served 396
Sets of fingerprints taken 83
Police reports filed 11
Citations signed off 02
Total receipts $6,069.00
SPECIAL ENFORCEMENT TEAM (SET TEAM)
On sight felony arrests
On sight misdemeanor arrests
Felony arrest warrants served
Misdemeanor arrest warrants served
Follow-up investigations
Parole Searches
Gang Members Contacted
TRAFFIC
Citations issued for hazardous violations
1345
D.U.I. checkpoints conducted
0
D.U.I. Arrest
...........................27
Non-hazardous citations
605
Stop Light Abuse/Intersection Program (S.L.A.P.)citations
319
Neighborhood Enforcement Team (N.E.T.) citations
134
Parking citations
560
Seatbelts
..........................46
School Zones
..........................55
Cell Phone Cites
...............................155
Injury collisions
18
Presentations
............................0
INVESTIGATIONS
Beginning Caseload 175
Total Cases Assigned 56
Total Cases Closed ....................................................................................39
Number of community seminars/presentations conducted 1
PROMENADE MALL TEAM
Calls for service
295
Felony arrest/filings
11
Misdemeanor arrest/filings
28
Vehicle burglaries
0
Vehicle thefts
2
Total receipts
$6,304.00
SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS
Felony arrests
4
Misdemeanor arrests
16
Citations
50
Youth counseled
205
Presentations
21
YOUTH ACCOUNTABILITY TEAM
School visits
69
Home visits
35
Presentations
.......................................................3
Truancy Sweep
.......................................................1
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED
FOR THE RECORD
M /oo�-/0
PARKS & OBERHANSLEY
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
27250 VIA INDUSTRIA, SUITE B
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590
MAIN TELEPHONE: (951) 699-4200
FACSIMILE: (951) 699-1200
Offices in San Diego and Temecula, California
November 25, 2008
PHILIP D. OBERHANSLEY
phil@potemecula.com
(951) 699-4200
9736.000
Hand -Delivered
Mayor Michael S. Naggar and
Members of the Temecula City Council
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
RE: Temecula City Council Meeting, November 25, 2008, Agenda Item No. 19
Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by
Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in
Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain
Improvements — Environmental Mitigation (Project No. PW99-11EM)
Dear Mayor Naggar and Councilmembers:
This firm represents Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership
(`Borchard") in connection with the above -referenced matter. Borchard owns the real property
in question. We hereby request this letter be made a part of the public record for Agenda Item
No. 19 of the Temecula City Council Meeting for Tuesday, November 25, 2008.
Borchard hereby objects to the proposed adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the
Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in
Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway Storm Drain Improvements —
Environmental Mitigation (Project No. PW99-11EM) (the "Proposed Project"). Borchard
objects to the Proposed Project on the grounds that: (1) the public interest and necessity do not
require the Proposed Project; (2) the Proposed Project is not planned and located in the manner
that will be most compatible with the least private injury; and (3) the monetary compensation
offer made by the City to acquire the real property interests required for the Proposed Project
was insufficient to satisfy the requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2.
PARKS & OBERHANSLE Y
A Professional Law Corporation
Mayor Naggar and
Temecula City Councilmembers
November 25, 2008
Page 2
1. The Public Interest and Necessity Do Not Require the Proposed Project.
The City unilaterally identified the subject real property interests out of literally
hundreds, if not thousands, of eligible acres that could satisfy the need generated by the
Pechanga Parkway Phase II Improvements. The City then unilaterally subjected these real
property interests to the permitting processes of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board and the California Department of Fish and
Game, in hopes of utilizing them for a conservation easement. Again, there is nothing of a
particular public interest or necessity pertaining to the subject property interests in and of
themselves. Rather, the City is attempting to create such public interest and necessity by means
of the entitlements the City obtained therefor through the permitting agencies without input or
consultation whatsoever with Borchard. This does not rise to the level of public interest and
necessity required by California Law and, therefore, the City should not adopt the Resolution of
Necessity for the Proposed Project.
2. The Proposed Project is not Planned and Located in the Manner that will be
most Compatible with the Least Private Injury.
As indicated above, the City never consulted with Borchard regarding the subject
real property interests in any of the planning or location for such interests. Consequently, the
Proposed Project is not most compatible with the least private injury. Indeed, of Borchard's
approximately 54 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, wetlands creation and/or other Temecula
Creek undeveloped land (collectively, the "Borchard Wetlands Acreage"), the approximate 1.70 -
acre portion identified by the City is highly injurious to Borchard's future plans for this property.
Borchard has been exploring with the City's planning staff for over two years the possibility of
developing this property for a seniors housing project (albeit any such future development would
be subject to additional governmental approvals). Even though such future development may be
uncertain, the City's acquisition of the subject real property interests would make any such future
development plans impossible. The City did not even meet with, or seek the input of, Borchard
regarding which portion of the Borchard Wetland Acreage to consider for the Proposed Project.
How can the City be sure the Proposed Project is planned and located in the manner that will be
compatible with the least private injury when the City hasn't even conferred with the property
owner in question (especially when almost any other portion of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage
could have been utilized for the Proposed Project with far less private injury to the Borchard
Wetlands Acreage)?
1W
PARKS & OBERHANSLE Y
A Professional Law Corporation
Mayor Naggar and
Temecula City Councilmembers
November 25, 2008
Page 3
3. The Monetary Compensation Offer made by the City to Acquire the Real
Property Interests Required for the Proposed Project was Insufficient to Satisfy
the Requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2.
The monetary compensation offer made by the City to acquire the real property
interests required for the Proposed Project was woefully insufficient. Other similar mitigation
property in the area has sold between $75,000 and $150,000 per acre and yet the City has offered
only $18,000 per acre. Borchard has not previously raised this issue, or requested its own
appraisal at City cost and expense, because the location of the 1.70 acres desired by the City is so
detrimental to any other use by Borchard of the remainder of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage.
Indeed, the City's appraisal fails to take into account the detriment this taking would have on the
balance of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage.
Based on the foregoing, Borchard just recently has engaged City staff in
discussion regarding the City's potential acquisition of the entirety of the Borchard Wetlands
Acreage. This would be extremely beneficial to the City in that the City would have the ability
to mitigate for future projects through its own land bank without the need to engage in future
condemnation proceedings to acquire suitable mitigation property. However, the present attempt
by the City to acquire the subject real property interests by way of condemnation at such a
disparate reduced price from perceived current market value may irreparably endanger any future
negotiations between Borchard and the City for the entirety of the Borchard Wetlands Acreage.
Please be advised, if formal condemnation proceedings are instigated by the City,
Borchard will object to the City's proposed deposit of $30,250 (Agenda Item 19.4) in order to
obtain immediate possession of the subject real property interests because such sum is below the
minimum good faith cash fair market value under California Law.
For the reasons set forth above, Borchard objects to the Proposed Project, and will
exercise all rights and legal processes available to it in the future to oppose it.
Sincerely,
Ag�6Z lYil
Aftiltip D. berhansley, of
PARKS & OBERHANSLEY
A Professional Law Corporation
PDO:sr
cc: Borchard Temecula, L.P.
100,2-1,)
PARKS & OBERHANSLEY
A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
27250 VIA INDUSTRIA, SUITE B
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590
MAIN TELEPHONE: (951) 699-4200
FACSIMILE: (951) 699-1200
Offices in San Diego and Temecula, California
November 25, 2008
PHILIP D. OBERHANSLEY
phil@potemecula.com
(951)6994200
9736.000
Hand -Delivered
Mayor Michael S. Naggar and
Members of the Temecula City Council
City of Temecula
43200 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
RE: Temecula City Council Meeting, November 25, 2008, Agenda Item No. 20
Consideration of Adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the Acquisition by
Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in
Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway — Dual Turn Lanes
From Temecula Parkway (Project No. PW06-11)
Dear Mayor Naggar and Councilmembers:
This firm represents Borchard-Temecula, L.P., a California limited partnership
(`Borchard") in connection with the above -referenced matter. Borchard owns the property in
question. We hereby request this letter be made a part of the public record for Agenda Item No.
20 of the Temecula City Council Meeting for Tuesday, November 25, 2008.
Borchard hereby objects to the proposed adoption of Resolution of Necessity for the
Acquisition by Eminent Domain of Certain Real Property Interests for Public Purposes in
Connection with the City's Proposed Pechanga Parkway — Dual Turn Lanes From Temecula
Parkway (Project No. PW06-11) (the "Proposed Project"). Borchard objects to the Proposed
Project on the grounds that: (1) the Proposed Project is not planned and located in the manner
that will be most compatible with the least private injury; and (2) the monetary compensation
offer made by the City to acquire the real property interests required for the Proposed Project
was insufficient to satisfy the requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2.
PARKS & OBERHANSLEY
A Professional Law Corporation
Mayor Naggar and
Temecula City Councilmembers
November 25, 2008
Page 2
1. The Proposed Project is not Planned and Located in the Manner that will be
most Compatible with the Least Private Injury.
When the City first approached Borchard regarding the Proposed Project,
Borchard cooperated in every way possible. In connection with such cooperation, and the due
diligence associated therewith, Borchard discovered, for the first time, the existence of an AT&T
fiber-optic line that runs right through the middle of its property. The location of such line may
well reduce the value of the Borchard property by 35 percent, or more, because it prevents
commercial improvements from being constructed over the top of it. There is no recorded
easement or agreement of any kind pertaining to this fiber-optic line — rather it remains in place
from what used to be the old alignment of Pala Road (and which was conveyed by the City to
Borchard's predecessor -in -interest by way of Grant Deed without reservation of any kind for the
fiber-optic line). Apparently, the City never vacated the old Pala Road right-of-way and failed to
include AT&T in the condemnation action related to its conveyance of the property to
Borchard's predecessor -in -interest. I
Given the foregoing circumstances, the relocation of the AT&T fiber-optic line
should be included within the scope of the Proposed Project in order to avoid further, significant
private injury to Borchard and its real property interests.
2. The Monetary Compensation Offer made by the City to Acquire the Real
Property Interests Required for the Proposed Project was Insufficient to Satisfy
the Requirements of Government Code Section 7267.2.
The monetary compensation offer made by the City to acquire the real property
interest required for the Proposed Project was insufficient to satisfy the requirements of
Government Code Section 7267.2. Other similarly zoned property just 500 feet away from the
property in question sold recently for $50 per square foot and yet the City has offered only
$30.87 per square foot. Such a significant difference in price might be resolved through
negotiations with the City if it were not for the dramatic, detrimental financial impact the City's
past actions or inactions regarding AT&T's fiber-optic line have already had on the subject real
property interests. If the City is willing to participate in resolving the relocation of AT&T's
fiber-optic line in connection with the proposed condemnation acquisition contemplated by the
Proposed Project, Borchard is willing to negotiate in good faith a total resolution of these issues.
1 Under California law, had the City taken either course of action, AT&T would have been required at
such time to relocate the fiber-optic line at its sole cost and expense. However, in light of present
circumstances, AT&T refuses to relocate its fiber-optic line unless Borchard agrees to pay such relocation
expenses — estimated at approximately $250,000.
4r
PARKS & OBERHANSLEY
A Professional Law Corporation
Mayor Naggar and
Temecula City Councilmembers
November 25, 2008
Page 3
If formal condemnation proceedings are commenced through the courts by the
City, Borchard will object to the City's proposed deposit of $120,000 (Agenda Item 20.4) in
order to obtain immediate possession of the subject real property interests because such sum is
below the minimum good faith cash fair market value sum required under California Law.
For the reasons set forth above, Borchard objects to the Proposed Project, and will
exercise all rights and legal processes available to it in the future to oppose it.
PDO:sr
cc: Borchard-Temecula, L.P.
Sincerely,
p & a)bi4�tl'l
Philip D. Oberhansley, of
PARKS & OBERHANSLEY
A Professional Law Corporation