The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About121796 CC Agenda In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (909) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title 11] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 43200 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE DECEMBER 17, 1996 7:00 PM 5:30 PM - Closed Session of the City Council/Temecula Redevelopment Agency pursuant to Government Code Sections,. 1. 54945.8, Conference with Real Property Negotiator-, Property: 42136 Avenida Alvardo; Negotiating Parties-. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and Molding International Engineering. Under negotiation: Terms and conditions of an Owner-Participation Agreement. 2. 54956.8, Conference with Real Property Negotiatorl- Property. Approximately 67,000 square feet southwesterly of 1-15/SR79 Interchange-; Negotiating Parties: City of Temecula and Margarita Canyon, L.L.C. Under negotiation-. Price and terms of payment. 3. 954956.9(a), Pratt et al. v. Cit-y of Temecula, et al. At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 1 0:00 PM and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 1 0:00 PM. Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 96-24 Resolution:No. 96-1 52 CALL TO ORDER:Mayor Karel Lindemans presiding Invocation:Pastor Jeff Barnett, Temecula Valley Church of Christ Flag Salute:Councilmember Roberts ROLL CALL:Birdsall, Ford, Roberts, Stone, Lindemans R:\Agenda@l 21 796 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public can 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 before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5)minute time limit for individual speakers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the agenda will be made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (1 0) 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. 1Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1Approve the minutes of November 1 2, 1996. 2.2 Approve the minutes of November 26, 1996. R:\Agenda\l 21 796 2 3Resolution Approvinci List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4Combininci Balance Sheets as of September 30, 1 996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Chancies in Fund Balance, and the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Chancies in Retained Earnings for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1 996 RECOMMENDATION: 4.1Review and file the City's Combining Balance Sheets as of September 30, 1 996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, and the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1 996. 4.2Appropriate $6,500 to the Information Systems Internal Service Fund Consulting Services account. 5Parcel Map No. 2831 7 (Located on the Northerly Side of Winchester Road (Hwy 79 North) at the Intersection of Ynez Road) RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve Parcel Map No. 2831 7, subject to the Conditions of Approval. RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOR TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING, TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT MEETING, OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING R:@Agenda\l 21 796 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance:No. CSD 96-01 Resolution:No. CSD 96-10 CALL TO ORDER: President Ron Roberts ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans, Stone, Roberts PUBLIC COMMENT: A total of 1 5 minutes is provided so members of the public can 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 desire to speak to the Board of Directors on an item not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Board of Directors gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should present a completed pink "Request to Speak" form to the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address for the record. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1Approve the minutes of December 3, 1996. 2Combininci Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1 996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Chancies in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1 996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1 996. R:\Agenda\l 21 796 4 DEPARTMENTAL REPORT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Bradley BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS ADJOURNMENT: Next meeting: January 14, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\l 21 796 5 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance:No. RDA 96-01 Resolution:No. RDA 96-23 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Patricia H. Birdsall presiding ROLL CALL: AGENCY MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall PUBLIC COMMENT: A total of 1 5 minutes is provided so members of the public can 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 desire to speak to the Agency on an item not listed on the agenda or on the Consent Calendar, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Agency gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1Approve the minutes of December 3, 1 996. 2Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1 996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 RECOMMENDATION: 2.1Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1 996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996. R:\Agenda\l 21 796 6 3Contract between ECAP and the Redevelopment Aciency RECOMMENDATION: 3.1Approve a Contract with ECAP not to exceed $1 2,000 to provide quarterly labor reports for the City of Temecula; 3.2Authorize Executive Director and City Attorney to execute the Contract with ECAP. 4Purchase Acireement for a Portion of APN 922-1 00-003 (Located at the Southeast Corner of Pujol Street and First Street) RECOMMENDATION: 4.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PUJOL STREET AND FIRST STREET IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA (PORTION OF APN 922-100-003)." 4.2Authorize the expenditures of up to $6,000 from RDA Capital Improvement Program to cover acquisition, escrow, and closing costs. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: January 14, 1997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\l 21 796 7 OLD TOWN WES SIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY Next in Order: Resolution No.: No. FA 96-14 CALL TO ORDER: President Patricia H. Birdsall ROLL CALL: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 1 5 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council on items that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council about an item 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 and address. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of December 3, 1 996. ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: January 14, 1 997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\l 21 796 8 OLD TOWN WESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY Next in Order: Resolution No.: No. IA 96-03 CALL TO ORDER: President Patricia H. Birdsall ROLL CALL: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 1 5 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council on items that are not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council about an item 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 and address. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of December 3, 1 996. ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: January 14, 1 997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda@l 21 796 9 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondences delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 6Planninci A12plication No. PA96-0333, A Development Acireement between Forest City Development, Inc., LGA07 Inc. and the City of Temecula for a Reciional Mall and Associated Retail Development on 1 79 Acres 6.1Make a Determination of Consistency with a Project for Which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was Previously Certified and Findings that a Subsequent EIR is not required; 6.2Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THAT NEITHER A SUBSEQUENT EIR, A SUPPLEMENTAL EIR NOR FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT WITH RESPECT TO THE APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT INC., AND LGA-7, INC., FOR APPROXIMATELY 179 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0333) 6.3Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 96- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT INC., AND LGA-7, INC., FOR APPROXIMATELY 179 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0333) R:\Age@da\l 21 796 1 0 COUNCIL BUSINESS 7Purchase Agreement for Real Property Required for the Western Bypass Corridor Promect and the 1-1 5 Highway 79S Interchange Improvement Pro@ect RECOMMENDATION: 7.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT" FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES APPROXIMATELY + /- 17,773 SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF FRONT STREET IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 15 AND FRONT STREET, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA WITHIN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-210-047 7.2Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT" FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES APPROXIMATELY + /- 50,793, SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 15, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA WITHIN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-110-005 7.3Authorize an advance of up to $71 8,234 from the General Fund to cover acquisition, escrow, soil testing and closing costs for the Western Bypass Corridor Project. 7.4Authorize an appropriation of up to $258,853 from Development Impact Fees - Public Facilities to cover acquisition, escrow, soil testing, and closing costs for the I- 1 5/Highway 79S interchange improvement project. 7.5Authorize the Mayor to sign the Purchase and Sale Agreements and Escrow Instructions. 8Murrieta Creek Mowinci RECOMMENDATION: 8.1Direct the staff to proceed with the mowing of Murrieta Creek from approximately 1,200 feet south of Rancho California Road to the point of previously (after 1 993 floods) cleared channel, approximately 6,500 feet downstream. R:\Age@da\l 21 796 1 1 DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS CITY MANAGER'S REPORT CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: January 14, 1 997, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. R:\Agenda\l 21 796 1 2 ITEI\4 1 ITEI\4 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD NOVEMBER 12, 1996 EXECUTIVE SESSIObi A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:35 PM. It was duly moved and seconded to adjourn to Executive Session at 6:07 PM, pursuant to Government Code Sections: 1.54956.9(a), Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation City of Temecula vs. K.R. PalmPlaza, 2.54956.9(b), Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation, one matter. The motion was unanimously carried. A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:05 PM at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Lindemans presiding. PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Roberts, Stone, Lindemans ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None Also present were City Manager Ronald Bradley, City Attorney Peter M. Thorson, and City Clerk June S. Greek. PRELUDE MUSIC The prelude music was provided by Katie Jones. INVOCAT ON The invocation was given by Mayor Karel Lindemans. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the flag salute by Councilmember Stone. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIQUE Bishop Doug Carroll of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, presented a copy of the Proclamation on the Family, issued by the Church in September of 1995. He explained this proclamation promotes family values and is in accordance to "National Family Week". Boy Scout Executive David Klein presented the Boy Scout Medal of Honor to Jeremy Jensen. Boy Scout Leader Dennis Gallagher read the award. Minutes\10\1 2\96 -1- 12/12/96 Coty Counc'l Monutes November 12, 1996 City Clerk June Greek read Certificates of Recognition presented by Assemblyman Bruce Thompson and Senator Ray Haynes. Mayor Lindemans presented Jeremy Jenson with the City of Temecula Award of Valor. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT City Attorney Thorson stated that in accordance with the Brown Act, there was nothing to report from Closed Session. PUBLIC COMMENTS Jeffrey Stern, 45835 Jeronimno Street, representing the Wolf Valley Homeowners Association, stated the "Open Air Market" was open for three weekends, and express his opposition to this use. Alan Shawn, 44564 Pala Road, spoke in favor of allowing the "Open Air Market' to operate and stated he has attempted to reach an agreement with surrounding property owners. Clay Phillips, 45439 Master Driver, representing Rainbow Canyon Homeowners Association, stated he did not feel the "Open Air Market' was a proper usage for a residential area. He listed increased traffic and safety of children crossing streets as primary concerns. Wayne Hall, 42134 Agena, speaking on behalf of the American Red Cross, appealed to the community for volunteers. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Stone thanked candidates Sam Pratt and Doug Wolke for their participation in the election as candidates. He also congratulated Steve Ford for his election to City Council. Councilmember Stone reported that through the ERACIT Program, ten drunk drivers were taken off the streets last week. Councilmember Roberts reported he attended a joint meeting of Coachella Valley Association of Governments, the RCTC and WRCOG. He stated that discussion is taking place whether to keep these agencies separate or to go with one larger group. He recommended that if one agencies remains, that WRCOG is his recommendation since everyone, including the cities, have an equal vote. Councilmember Ford encouraged the citizens to get informed and support the Temecula Community Partnership and their contributions to children. He also thanked all the citizens of Temecula who elected him as City Councilmember. Minutes\10\12\96 -2- 12/12/96 City Councol Menutes November 12, 1996 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Lindemans removed Item No. 16 from the Consent Calendar for further comments from City Manager Bradley. He also announced he would abstain on Item 2.2 since he did not attend that meeting. Councilmember Stone requested the removal of Item No. 12 from the Consent Calendar. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Roberts to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-1 1, 13-15 and 17-18, with Mayor Lindemans abstaining on Item 2.2. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Stone, Roberts, Lindemans NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None 1 . Standard Ordinance Adoptoon Procedure - 1.1Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2Minutes 2.1Approve the minutes of October 8, 1996. 2.2 Approve the minutes of October 22, 1996. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Roberts Stone NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans Minutes\l 0\1 2\96 -3- 1 2/1 2/96 Coty Council Minutes November 12. 1996 3Resolution Approyong Lost of Demands 3.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-128 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4.City Treasurer's Report RECOMMENDATION: 4.1Receive and file the City Treasurer's Report as of September 30, 1996. 5Contract for Professional Services with C.M. Gilliss, Consultant RECOMMENDATION: 5.1Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the Professional Services Agreement with C.M. 'Max" Gilliss to act as liaison between the City and governmental agencies and special interest groups for a monthly fee of $1,000. 6Revision to the Schedule of Authorized Positions RECOMMENDATION: 6.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-129 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REVISION THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS 7First Amendment to Agreement for Law Enforcement Between the County of Riverside and the City of Temecula 7.1Approve the First Amendment to the Agreement of Law Enforcement Services between County of Riverside and the City of Temecula and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. Mi nutes\ 1 O\ 1 2\9 6 -4- 12/12/96 Caty Councel Mwnutes November 12, 1996 8Withdrawal from the Riverside City and County Public Library System 8.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-130 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF LIBRARY SERVICES BY THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FREE LIBRARY SYSTEM 9Accel2t Subdivision Monumentat*on On Tract No. 23267-F (Located Southwesterly of Margarita Road at Highway 79(S)) 9.1Accept the Subdivision Monumentation in Tract No. 23267-F; 9.2Authorize release of the Subdivision Monument Bond; 9.3Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Developer and Surety. 10Release Traffic Sianalazatmon Mitioation Bond in Tract No. 23125-2 (Located Northeasterly of intersection of Butterfield Stage Road at De Portola Road) 10.1Authorize the release of traffic signalization mitigation bond in Tract No. 23125- 2; 10.2Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. 1 1Renewal of Annual Rwght-Of-Way Weed Control Pre-Emeraent and Post Emeraent Application. Promect No. PW95-24 11.1Extend the Right-Of-Way (R-O-W) weed control contract with Pestmaster Services of Temecula for a period of one (1) year beginning November 14, 1995 and ending November 14, 1997 in an amount not to exceed $28,331.02. 1 3Completion and Acceptance of the Traffic Signal at Margarita Road and Rustic Glen Drive. Project No. PW96-03 13.1Accept the Traffic Signal at Margarita Road and Rustic Glen Drive, Project No. PW96-03, as complete; 13.2Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one (1) year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract; 13.3Direct the City Clerk to release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. Minutes\l 0\1 2\96 -5- 12/12/96 Coty Council Minutes November 12, 1996 1 4Authorize Temporary Partial Street Closure for Seme-Annual Kawanis Arts and Crafts (Westerly side of Ynez Road Northerly of County Center Drive) 14.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-131 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING PARTIAL STREET CLOSURE FOR KIWANIS CLUB OF TEMECULA VALLEY SEMI-ANNUAL ARTS AND CRAFTS FAIRS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE PERMITS FOR THESE SPECIFIC SPECIAL EVENTS 15.Parcel Map No. 24085-1 Located Northwesterly of the Intersection of Diaz Road and Zeyo Drove (Avenida de Ventas) 15.1Approve Final Parcel Map 24085-1, subject to the Conditions of Approval. 17Median/Traffic Island on Cosmic Drive at Rancho California Road 17.1No longer consider the installation of a median/traffic island at Cosmic Drive and Rancho California Road and direct staff to terminate any additional work. 18Murrieta Creek - Department of Fish and Game Permit for Mowing 18.1Accept the conditions of the Department of Fish and Game, approve the permit, and authorize the City Engineer to sign the permit for the mowing of Murrieta Creek. 12Renewal of Annual Street Stropeno Contract Project No. PW94-17 Councilmember Stone asked if there are any local providers that could perform this service. Public Works Director Joe Kicak stated that an RFP could be done, however he requested extending the contract until this could be accomplished. Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall asked if prevailing wages have gone up for this service and questioned whether going out for an RFP could impact the cost of the contract. It was moved by Councilmember Roberts, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to continue this item to the next City Council meeting to allow staff the opportunity to investigate if there are any local providers of this service, and authorized the extension of the contract with ASAP Services, Inc. Until such time as the council has acted on either awarding or renewing this contract. The motion was unanimously carried. Minutes\10\1 2\96 -6- 12/12/96 C*tv Counc*l Mmnutes November 12, 1996 1 6Professional Services Aareement - City of Temecula and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Mowina of Murrieta Creek City Manager Bradley reported the City is actively pursuing permission from property owners to take action to mow Murrieta Creek. He reported notices have been sent out and every effort is being made to contact these property owners. Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall questioned that since the staff report has been done, have any other property owners come forward. Public Works Director Joe Kicak answered that out of 40 notices sent out, nine have not been returned. Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall suggested doing a press release to notify landowners. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendation with instruction to staff to prepare a press release notifying the public of the project and the need to secure permission of all landowners to proceed with the clearing of the creek. 16.1Approve the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Temecula and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for mowing of the privately owned portions of Murrieta Creek within the City of Temecula. 16.2Appropriate $9,000.00 plus a 10% contingency of $900.00 for a total of $9,900.00 from the unappropriated General Fund Balance. The motion was unanimously carried. RECESS Mayor Lindemans called a recess at 7:52 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the scheduled Community Services District Meeting, Redevelopment Agency Meeting and the Old Town\Westside Financing Authority Meeting, at 8:30 PM. PUBLIC HEARINGS 19Plannona Application No. PA96-0130 (Development Agreement) (Continued from the meeting of 10/8/96) Community Development Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. Mayor Lindemans opened the public hearing at 8:31 PM. Minutes\10\1 2\96 -7- 12/12/96 C*tv Counc*l Minutes November 12, 1996 Bryce Kittle, representing the applicant, stated that the applicant is willing to agree that the amount of application fees would not go below soon to be adopted Development Impact Fees. Mayor Lindemans closed the public hearing at 8:37 PM. Councilmember Stone noted concern about rebating fees, since other projects could come forward requesting the same consideration. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Roberts to deny the request and directed staff to refund the application fees. The motion was unanimously carried. 20Final Draft Riverside Countywide Integrated Waste Manaaement Plan (CIWMP) Mayor Lindemans requested this item be continued to allow time to review the large document which accompanied this report. Councilmember Roberts requested that the City Council be provided with the Executive Summary of this plan. Mayor Lindemans opened the public hearing at 8:45 PM. It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Stone to continue the public hearing to the meeting of November 26, 1996. The motion was unanimously carried. 21Development Code Amendment No. 1 Senior Planner Dave Hogan presented the staff report. Mayor Undemans opened the public hearing at 8:47 PM. Hearing no requests to speak, Mayor Lindemans closed the public hearing at 8:47 PM. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Roberts to approve staff recommendation as follows: 21.1Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 96-19 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE TYPOGRAPHIC AND OTHER MINOR CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE Minutes\10\12\96 -8- 12/12/96 City Councol Minutes November 12, 1996 The motion was unanimously carried. 22Extension of Moratorium on Certain Adult Businesses and Extension of Interim Adult Business Regulat4ons City Attorney Peter Thorson presented the staff report. Mayor Lindemans opened the public hearing at 8:50 PM. Hearing no requests to speak, Mayor Lindemans closed the public hearing at 8:50 PM. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendation 22.2 as follows: 22.2Adopt an urgency ordinance (4/5 vote required) entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 96-20 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA EXTENDING A MORATORIUM ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OR EXPANSION OF ADULT BUSINESSES UNLESS SUCH BUSINESSES COMPLY WITH INTERIM STANDARDS PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION AND LICENSING OF ADULT BUSINESSES AND MAKING FINDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEED FOR SUCH REGULATIONS The motion was unanimously carried. COUNCIL BUSINESS 23Resolution Chanaina Des*anated Location for City Council Meetanas City Clerk June Greek presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to approve staff recommendation as follows: 23.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-132 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CHANGING THE DESIGNATED LOCATION FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS The motion was unanimously carried. Minutes\l 0\1 2\96 -9- 12/12196 Coty Councol Minutes November 12, 1996 24Publoc/Traffic Safety Commission Appointments It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to reappoint Commissioner Charles Coe to serve a full three-year term on the Public/Traffic Safety Commission. The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Councilmember Ford, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to appoint Larry Markham to serve a full three-year term on the Public/Traffic Safety Commission. The motion was unanimously carried. The City Council offered their sincere thanks to Commissioner Steve Sanders for his years of service to the City of Temecula. 25Communot)t Services Commission Appointment It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Stone to reappoint Commissioner Jeff Commerchero to serve a full three-year term on the Community Services Commission. The motion was unanimously carried. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None given. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Thorson reported that with respect to the first Closed Session Item, regarding Potential Litigation, the Council approved the increasing of the deposit in court by amount of final appraisal. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to adjourn at 9:08 PM to a meeting on December 3, 1996, 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk Minutes\10\1 2\96 -10- 12/12/96 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD NOVEMBER 26, 1996 EXECUTIVE SESSION A meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:35 PM. It was duly moved and seconded to adjourn to Executive Session at 5:35 PM, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9: 1.Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation (one case.) 2.Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (two cases) Morger vs. RCHCA and Pratt and Hoxsey vs. City of Temecula. The motion was unanimously carried. A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 7:02 PM at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Lindemans presiding. PRESENT 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Stone, Lindemans ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Roberts Also present were City Manager Ronald Bradley, City Attorney Peter M. Thorson, and City Clerk June S. Greek. INVOCATION The invocation was given by Reverend James Egea, Church of Religious Science of Temecula Valley. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the flag salute by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS A. J. Wilson, representing Western Riverside Council of Governments, gave a presentation regarding the Draft Comprehensive Transportation Plan for Western Riverside County. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT City Attorney Thorson reported the City Council approved the settlement agreement in the matter of Morger vs. Riverside County Habitat Agency and authorized the City Manager to sign the agreement. Minutes\l 1 26\96 -1- 1 2/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1996 PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall stated she has been appointed again to serve on the League of California Cities Community Services Policy Committee, and will be representing the City of Temecula. Mayor Lindemans informed the public that the Tootsie Run, the Tri-City Trolley, serving Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore will have its kick-off on Saturday, December 7th and will run each Saturday through December. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Stone commended staff on Item No. 8, since $50,000 will be spent locally to serve computer needs for the City of Temecula. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-9. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Stone, Lindemans NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Roberts 1 . Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure 1.1Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2Resolution Approvina List of Demands 2.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-133 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Minutes\l 126@96 -2- 12/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1996 3Liability Insurance Renewal 3.1Approve the City of Temecula Liability Insurance Policy Renewal with Insurance Company of the West for the period of December 1, 1996 through December 1, 1 997 in the amount of $98,852. 4Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 24135-1 4.1Accept Public Improvements in Tract No. 24135-1; 4.2Authorize the initiation of the one-year warranty period and reduction of the Faithful Performance Street and drainage, and Water and Sewer Security amounts and release the Subdivision Monumentation and Traffic Signalization Mitigation securities; 4.3Accept substitute securities for Faithful Performance Warranty and Labor and materials; 4.4Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Sureties. 5A-ccept Public Improvements in Tract No. 24135-3 (Located at the Southeasterly corner of Santiago Road at Margarita Road) 5.1Accept the Public Improvements in Tract No. 24135-3; 5.2Authorize the initiation of the one-year warranty period, reduce the Faithful Performance Street, and Water and Sewer Bond amounts, release the subdivision monumentation bond; 5.3Accept substitute bonds; 5.4Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Developer and Surety. 6Acceptance of Public Streets into the Cit)t-Maintained Street S)Istem (Within Tracts No. 24135-1 and 24135-3) Located Easterly of Margarita Road between Pio Pico Road and Santiago Road) 6.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-134 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING CERTAIN PUBLIC STREETS INTO THE CITY- MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM (WITHIN TRACTS NO. 24135-1 AND 24135-3) Minutes\l 1 26\96 -3- 12/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1996 7Accept Public Improvements in Parcel Map No. 23472 (Located at the Northwest corner of Margarita Road at Rancho California Road) 7.1Accept public improvements in Parcel Map No. 23472; 7.2Authorize release of the faithful performance, labor and material, and subdivision monumentation bonds; 7.3Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, the developer and the surety. 8Award of Contract for the Purchase of PC Workstations 8.1Award a contract for P.C. workstations to Valley Micro Computers in the amount of $2,107.78 per unit, including sales tax, for a total purchase amount of $50,586. 8.2Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all necessary agreements. 8.3Appropriate $12,000 to the Depreciation Expense Account in the Information Systems Internal Services Fund. Minutes\l 126\96 -4- 12/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1956 9Second Readina of Ordinance No. 9 -19 9.1Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 96-19 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MAKE TYPOGRAPHIC AND OTHER MINOR CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE RECESS Mayor Lindemans called a recess at 7:55 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the scheduled Community Services District Meeting, Redevelopment Agency Meeting and the Old Town\Westside Financing Authority Meeting, to a Joint Meeting of the Temecula City Council, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency and the Old Town Temecula Westside Community Facilities District Financing Authority at 7:57 PM. JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE OLD TOWN TEMECULA WESTSIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY The joint meeting was called to order at 7:57 P.M. at City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Stone, Lindemans ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Roberts CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 1.Approval of Final Documents for Old Town Public Improvement District Councilmember Stone announced a conflict of interest and stepped down from the dias. City Manager Ronald Bradley presented a brief staff report and introduced Paul Thimmig, Jones, Hall, Hill and White, Bond Counsel for the City and John McAlister, Stone and Youngberg, Investment Banker, to answer any questions of the City Council. Minutes\l 126\96 -5- 12/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26. 1996 It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendation 1.1 as follows: 1.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-135 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING FORMATION OF A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AUTHORITY WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, AND DIRECTING CANCELLATION OF AMENDMENT TO JOINT COMMUNITY FACILITIES AGREEMENT The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Roberts ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone 2.TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUSINMS Bond Counsel Paul Thimmig presented the staff report. It was moved by Agency Member Lindemans, seconded by Agency Member Ford to approve staff recommendation 2.1 as follows: 2.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING FORMATION OF A JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AUTHORITY WITH THE CITY OF TEMECULA The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Roberts ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone Minutes\l 1 26\96 -6- 12/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1996 It was moved by Agency Member Lindemans, seconded by Agency Member Ford to approve staff recommendation 2.2 as follows: 2.2Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPT GUARANTEES FOR THE COMPLETION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE OLD TOWN AREA The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Roberts ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone RECESS Chairperson Birdsall called a recess at 8:03 PM to allow the Mayor and Agency Chairperson to execute the Joint Powers Agreement establishing the Old Town/Westside Improvement Authority. The meeting was reconvened at 8:17 PM. 3.OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY Bond Counsel Paul Thimmig presented the staff report. It was moved by Board Member Lindemans, seconded by Board Member Ford to approve staff recommendation 3.1 as follows: 3.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. FA 96-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OLD TOWN[WESTSIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY APPROVING SALE OF BONDS TO THE OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY, AND APPROVING OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS AND ACTIONS Minutes\l 126\96 -7- 1 2/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1996 The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 BOARD MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Birdsall NOES: 0 BOARD MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 BOARD MEMBERS: Roberts ABSTAIN: 1 BOARD MEMBERS: Stone 3.2Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. FA 96-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY APPROVING CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE AUTHORITY AND FLUOR DANIEL, INC. AND A GUARANTY WITH FLUOR CORPORATION The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 BOARD MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Birdsall NOES: 0 BOARD MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 BOARD MEMBERS: Roberts ABSTAIN: 1 BOARD MEMBERS: Stone 4.OLD TOWNIWESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY 4.1 Election of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson It was moved by Board Member Birdsall, seconded by Board Member Lindemans to elect Board Member Birdsall as Chairperson and Board Member Ford as Vice-Chairperson. The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 BOARD MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Birdsall NOES: 0 BOARD MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 BOARD MEMBERS: Roberts ABSTAIN: 1 BOARD MEMBERS: Stone Minutes\l 1 26\96 -8- 1 2/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1996 It was moved by Board Member Lindemans, seconded by Board Member Ford to approve staff recommendation 4.2 as follows: 4.2Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. IA 96-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OLD TOWN[WESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY REGARDING MEETINGS, ESTABLISHING A SEAL FOR THE AUTHORITY, DIRECTING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF FORMATION WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE, AND ESTABLISHING THE RULES FOR ITS PROCEEDINGS The motion carried as follows: AYES: 3 BOARD MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Birdsall NOES: 0 BOARD MEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 BOARD MEMBERS: Roberts ABSTAIN: 1 BOARD MEMBERS: Stone It was moved by Board Member Lindemans, seconded by Board Member Ford to approve staff recommendation 4.3 as follows: 4.3Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. IA 96-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OLD TOWN[WESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF REVENUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING ACQUISITION OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT BONDS (OLD TOWN AREA), AND APPROVING RELATED AGREEMENTS AND ACTIONS It was moved by Board Member Lindemans, seconded by Board Member Ford to adjourn the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, the Old Town/Westside Community Facilities District Financing Authority and the Old Town/Westside Improvement Authority at 8:25 PM. The motion was unanimously carried with Board Member Stone abstaining. Minutes\l 1 26\96 -9- 12/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1996 Mayor Lindemans reconvened the City Council meeting at 8:26 PM. PUBLIC HEARINGS 10Final Draft Riverside Countywide Intearated Waste Manaaement Plan (CIWMP) Development Services Administrator Phyllis Ruse presented the staff report. Mayor Lindemans announced the public hearing was opened and continued at the meeting of November 12, 1996, and asked for any speakers on this item. Hearing no requests to speak, Mayor Lindemans closed the public hearing at 8:30 PM. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to approve staff recommendation as follows: 10.1Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-136 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE FINAL DRAFT COUNTYWIDE INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN, INCLUDING THE COUNTYWIDE SUMMARY PLAN AND COUNTYWIDE SITING ELEMENT The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Roberts absent. 1 1Special Tax Election - Community Services, Parks, Recreational Facilities and Procirams, Street Liahtina Services and Landscapina Community Services Director Shawn Nelson presented the staff report. Mayor Lindemans opened the public hearing at 8:55 PM. Hearing no requests to speak, Mayor Lindemans closed the public hearing at 8:55 PM. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendation 1 1 . 1 as follows: 11.1Adopt an ordinance by a 4/5 vote entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 96-21 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, LEVYING A SPECIAL TAX TO FINANCE THE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND SERVICING OF PUBLIC PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, RECREATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAMS, MEDIAN LANDSCAPING, ARTERIAL STREET LIGHTS AND TRAFFIC SIGNALS Minutes\l 1 26\96 -10- 12/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26, 1996 The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Roberts absent. It was moved by Councilmennber Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendations 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5 and 11.6 as follows: 11.2Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-137 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ORDERING, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF A MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA ON TUESDAY, MARCH 4,1997, FOR SUBMISSION TO THE VOTERS OF A MEASURE RELATING TO THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX TO FINANCE THE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND SERVICING OF PUBLIC PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, RECREATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAMS, MEDIAN LANDSCAPING, ARTERIAL STREET LIGHTS AND TRAFFIC SIGNALS 11.3Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-138 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REQUESTING THE SERVICES OF THE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO CONDUCT A MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON MARCH 4, 1997\ 11.4Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-139 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING ITS MEMBERS TO FILE A WRITTEN ARGUMENT REGARDING A CITY MEASURE 11.5Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-140 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR A CITY MEASURE SUBMITTED AT MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS 1 1. 6 Appropriate $36,000 from the unappropriated General Fund Balance to Account No. 001-120-999-5225. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Roberts absent. Minutes\l 1 26\96 -11- 1 2/11/96 City Council Minutes November 26. 1996 COUNCIL BUSINESS 12Ordinance Amendinci the Municipal Code Sections Relatina to Purchasina Senior Management Analyst Allie Kuhns presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to approve staff recommendation as follows: 12.1Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 96-22 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING SECTIONS 3.28.245 AND 3.28.305 TO AND AMENDING SECTIONS 3.28.140, 3.28.150, 3.28.290 AND 3.32.050 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE SOLICITATION OF PROPOSALS FOR THE PURCHASE OF SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT AND THE AWARD THEREOF ON THE BASIS OF HIGHEST QUALITY AND COST EFFECTIVENESS, REVISING ADVERTISING REQUIREMENTS, AND ESTABLISHING THE CITY MANAGER'S AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PURCHASE, SERVICE AND CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Roberts absent. 13.Riverside County Intergovernmental Aaencies Discussion (Placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Roberts) It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Ford to continue this item to the meeting of 12/10/96. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Roberts absent. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None given. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT None given. Minutes\l 126\96 -12- 1 2/11/96 City Council Minutes ADJOURNMENT November 26, 1996 It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to adjourn at 9:07 PM to a meeting on December 3, 1996, 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Roberts absent. Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk Minutes\l 1 26\96 -13- 12/11/96 ITEI\4 3 RESOLUTION NO. 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIIL OF THE CITY OF TEMEECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHI]BIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERM@ AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the Office of the City Clerk, have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $1,516,907.09 Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPRED, this 17th day of December, 1996. Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk [SEAL] Resos 123 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CrrY OF TEMECULA) 1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 96- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 17th day of December, 1996 by the following roll call vote: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk Resos 123 2 CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 12/05/96 TOTAL CHECK RUN: $759,421.70 12/17/96 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 757,485.39 TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 12117/96 COUNCIL MEETING: $1,516,907.09 DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 GENERAL $67,695.61 165 RDA-LOW/MOD 44.00 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 41,922.44 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 11,895.22 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 22,500.17 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 20,538.35 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 1,536.00 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ (CIP) 1,178,480.61 280 RDA-CIP 48,692.15 300 INSURANCE 102,589.47 320 INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS 5,726.16 340 FACILITIES 13,072.41 390 TCSO DEBT SERVICE 2,214.50 $1,516,907.09 PREPAR THERESA ALVAREZ, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. TS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE 1, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT. RONALD E. BRADLEY, CITY MANAGER J" VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 6 12/05/96 15:07 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE AMOUNT 001 GENERAL FUND 67,695.61 165 RDA DEV- LOW/MOD SET ASIDE 44.00 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 12,303.36 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 10,969.22 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 22,500.17 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 457.58 195 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL R 1,536.00 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 612,586.44 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 7,075.15 300 INSURANCE FUND 3,737.47 320 INFORMATION SYSTEMS 5,726.16 340 FACILITIES 12,576.04 390 TCSD DEBT SERVICE 2,214.50 TOTAL 759,421.70 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 12/05/96 15:07 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 40620 12/02/96 THE PANTRY BENEFIT FOR PANTRY 12/3 STONE 001-100-999-5260 75.00 75.00 40621 12102/96 001685 TEMECULA VALLEY IN-LINE COMM SRVC FUNDING 96/97 001-100-999-5267 32,500.00 32,500.00 40622 12102/96 002147 COMPLIMENTS, COMPLAINTS SANTA SUIT-BREAKFAST WI SANTA 190-183-999-5370 75.00 40622 12/02/96 002147 COMPLIMENTS, COMPLAINTS TAX 190-183-999-5370 5.81 80.81 40623 12/04/96 001945 E A MENDOZA CONTRACTING PER JOINT CHECK AGREEMENT 210-2038 30,249.32 40623 12/04/96 001945 E A MENDOZA CONTRACTING PER JOINT CHECK AGREEMENT 210-2035 530.05 30,779.37 40624 12/04/96 001945 E A MENDOZA CONTRACTING PER JOINT CHECK AGREEMENT 210-2038 8,487.80 8,487.80 40625 12/04/96 001945 E A MENDOZA CONTRACTING PER JOINT CHECK AGREEMENT 210-2038 1,706.20 1,706.20 40626 12/04/96 4 0 LQ) @ EC-K 40627 12/04/96 001945 E A MENDOZA CONTRACTING PER JOINT CHECK AGREEMENT 210-2035 1,560.00 1,560.00 40630 12/05/96 002348 A-PARK AVENUE BUILDERS POTHOLE REPAIR/RAINBOW CNYN RD 001-164-601-5402 4,500.00 4,500.00 40631 12/05/96 001677 AGRONO-TEC SEED CO. KENT HINTERGARDT PARK 190-180-999-5212 300.00 40631 12/05/96 001677 AGRONO-TEC SEED CO. TAX 190-180-999-5212 23.25 40631 12/05/96 001677 AGRONO-TEC SEED CO. PALOMA DEL SOL PARK/LANDSCAPE 190-180-999-5212 412.00 40631 12/05/96 001677 AGRONO-TEC SEED CO. TAX 190-180-999-5212 31.93 40631 12/05/96 001677 AGRONO-TEC SEED CO. PALA COMMUNITY PARK/LANDSCAPE 190-180-999-5212 412.00 40631 12/05/96 001677 AGRONO-TEC SEED CO. TAX 190-180-999-5212 31.93 1,211.11 40632 12/05/96 002485 ALMOST ANYTHING PROF. 0 TEMPORARY SERVICES FINANCE DEP 001-140-999-5118 114.00 40632 12/05/96 002485 ALMOST ANYTHING PROF. 0 TEMP HELP 001-140-999-5118 229.75 343.75 40633 12/05/96 000102 AMERICAN FENCE CO. OF C SECURITY FENCE PUJOL ST-NOV 165-199-812-5804 44.00 44.00 40634 12/05/96 000122 B S N SPORTS GROUND SLEEVES 190-183-999-5380 410.00 40634 12/05/96 000122 B S N SPORTS FREIGHT 190-183-999-5380 49.20 40634 12/05/96 000122 B S N SPORTS TAX 190-183-999-5380 31.78 490.98 40635 12/05/96 BAKER MOTIVATION, INC REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00 40636 12/05/96 000623 BARB'S BALLOONING AFFAI CITY COMMITTE RECOGNITION RECP 001-100-999-5265 358.00 40636 12/05/96 000623 BARB'S BALLOONING AFFAI TAX 001-100-999-5265 27.75 385.75 40637 12/05/96 002550 BRIZUELA, ROXANNE RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 280-199-807-5804 850.00 850.00 40638 12/05/96 002005 BUILDING ENERGY CONSULT PHASE I PMT-PW95-16 PROJECT 210-165-640-5804 52,012.49 40638 12/05/96 002005 BUILDING ENERGY CONSULT C/O #1 PHASE I-PW95-16 PROJECT 210-165-640-5804 5,191.88 40638 12/05/96 002005 BUILDING ENERGY CONSULT RETENTION W/H PMT #1-PW95-16 210-2035 5,720.43- 51,483.94 40639 12/05/96 001054 CALIFORNIA BUILDING OFF EDUC WK:SMITH,RODRIGUEZ,KEIRSY 001-162-999-5261 175.00 175.00 40640 12/05/96 000152 CALIFORNIA PARKS & RECR MEMBERSHIP DUES:CPRS 190-180-999-5226 130.00 130.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 12/05/96 15:07 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 40641 12/05/96 CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF M MEMBERSHIP:G.ROBERTS:CSMFO1997 001-140-999-5226 100.00 100.00 40642 12/05/96 000131 CARL WARREN & CO., INC. GROVE, BETTE 2/28/96 300-199-999-5205 38.50 38.50 40643 12/05/96 CASHIER, DEPT OF RENEWAL FEE:QUALIFIED APP CERT 190-180-999-5226 30.00 30.00 40644 12/05/96 002037 COM-AID, INC. MISC REPAIR & MAINT OF EQUIP 320-199-999-5215 228.00 40644 12/05/96 002037 COM-AID, INC. COAX CABLE AND MISC MATERIAL 320-199-999-5242 1,022.25 40644 12/05/96 002037 COM-AID, INC. INSTALLATION LABOR 320-199-999-5250 1,781.03 40644 12/05/96 002037 COM-AID, INC. TAX 320-199-999-5242 79.22 40644 12/05/96 002037 COM-AID, INC. MISC REPAIR & MAINT OF EQUIP 320-199-999-5215 114.00 3,224.50 40645 12/05/96 000447 COMTRONIX OF HEMET 1 BATTERY FOR HAND HELD RADIOS 001-164-601-5218 83.34 83.34 40646 12/05/96 002571 CONCHOLA, BARBARA D.J. FOR LINE DANCING T.C.C. 190-183-999-5320 100.00 100.00 40647 12/05/96 002413 DALEY & HEFT AUG 96 LEGAL SERVICES 300-199-999-5246 2,236.83 40647 12/05/96 002413 DALEY & HEFT CREDIT:INCORRECT # HRS BILLED 300-199-999-5246 1,487.50- 749.33 40648 12/05/96 000155 DAVLIN COUNCIL MEETINGS 001-100-999-5250 832.97 832.97 40649 12/05/96 002551 DICKINSON, DIANNE RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 280-199-807-5804 850.00 850.00 40650 12/05/96 DORSO, JANICE REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00 40651 12/05/96 002466 DOVER ELEVATOR COMPANY DEC ELEVATOR MAINT. CITY HALL 340-199-701-5250 195.00 195.00 40652 12/05/96 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 280-199-999-5230 33.75 40652 12/05/96 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-140-999-5230 15.25 40652 12/05/96 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-110-999-5230 14.50 40652 12/05/96 000165 FEDERAL EXPRESS, INC. EXPRESS MAIL SERVICES 001-162-999-5230 61.82 125.32 40653 12/05/96 002340 FIRST TRUST CALIFORNIA SEMI ANNUAL ADMIN FEE TCSD Cop 390-199-999-5227 2,214.50 2,214.50 40654 12/05/96 000170 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY, OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-120-999-5220 29.42 29.42 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 197-5072:GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 1,874.73 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 676-3526 FIRE ALARM 320-199-999-5208 185.02 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 676-6243:GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 27.22 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 693-0956 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 28.79 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 694-4354 PALA COMM PARK 320-199-999-5208 29.52 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 694-4356 KENT HINTERGARDT PARK 320-199-999-5208 29.20 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 694-8927 GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 26.22 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 695-3564 ALARM 320-199-999-5208 52.05 40655 12/05/96 000184 G T E CALIFORNIA - PAYM 909 699-7945:GENERAL USAGE 320-199-999-5208 51.76 2,304.51 40656 12/05/96 GALLAHER, VALERIE REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT/RM REN 190-183-4990 140.00 40656 12/05/96 GALLAHER, VALERIE REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT/RM REN 190-2900 100.00 240.00 40657 12/05/96 002552 GARCIA, ALFONSO & AUDEL RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 280-199-807-5804 850.00 850.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 3 12/05/96 15:07 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 40658 12/05/96 002416 GENESIS CONSTRUCTION PGRS PMT #3 WALCOTT CONST. 210-165-637-5804 548,450.50 40658 12/05/96 002416 GENESIS CONSTRUCTION C/0#2 WALCOTT CONST. 210-165-637-5804 14,477.07 40658 12/05/96 002416 GENESIS CONSTRUCTION RETENTION W/H PMT#3 WALCOTT 210-2035 56,292.76- 506,634.81 40659 12/05/96 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES - TCSD 190-180-999-5220 3.36 40659 12/05/96 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES-TEM. P.D 001-170-999-5220 46.44 40659 12/05/96 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES / FINANCE DEPT 001-140-999-5220 51.69 101.49 40660 12/05/96 000175 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFI APPLICATION FEE 96 CAFR AWARD 001-140-999-5250 415.00 415.00 40661 12/05/96 002553 HESS, HAROLD & GILLAM, RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 280-199-807-5804 850.00 850.00 40662 12/05/96 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES MOTORCYCLE REPAIR TEMECULA PD 001-170-999-5214 177.53 40662 12/05/96 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES MOTORCYCLE REPAIR TEMECULA PD 001-170-999-5214 177.53 40662 12/05/96 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES MOTORCYCLE REPAIR TEMECULA PD 001-170-999-5214 97.32 40662 12/05/96 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES MOTORCYCLE REPAIR TEMECULA PD 001-170-999-5214 176.55 40662 12/05/96 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES MOTORCYCLE REPAIR TEMECULA PD 001-170-999-5214 10.99 40662 12/05/96 002098 HOUSE OF MOTORCYCLES MOTORCYCLE REPAIR TEMECULA PD 001-170-999-5214 24.05 663.97 40663 12/05/96 JOHNSON, PAMELA REFUND:SECURITY DEPOSIT 190-2900 100.00 100.00 40664 12/05/96 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP W/E 11/17 J.EVANS 001-164-604-5118 83.19 40664 12/05/96 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP WIE 11/17 J.EVANS 001-163-999-5118 83.19 40664 12/05/96 001667 KELLY TEMPORARY SERVICE TEMP HELP WIE 11/17 J.EVANS 001-165-999-5118 83.22 249.60 40665 12/05/96 002397 LANDMARK/CALIFORNIA STA REISSUE:PMT#7RET TO ESCROW ACT 210-1035 10,775.32 10,775.32 40666 12/05/96 LANIK BROS REFUND:PERMIT WITHDRAWN 001-162-4285 60.00 60.00 40667 12/05/96 000869 LAWRENCE WELK RESORT TH TCSD EXCURSION CHRISTMAS 96 190-183-999-5350 638.00 40667 12/05/96 000869 LAWRENCE WELK RESORT TH PREPAID-DEPOSIT XMAS EXCURSION 190-183-999-5350 159.50- 478.50 40668 12/05/96 002164 MAHR CONSTRUCTION C/O#l PW96-07CSD PRK RESTROOM 210-190-146-5804 865.00 865.00 40669 12/05/96 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS, INC. 2000 SKATE PARK RESIDENT CARDS 190-183-999-5305 59.00 40669 12/05/96 000220 MAURICE PRINTERS, INC. TAX 190-183-999-5305 4.57 63.57 40670 12/05/96 001384 MINUTEMAN PRESS EMPLOYEE VALUE STATE. PRINTING 001-150-999-5265 317.03 317.03 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY DEBRIS REMOVAL 001-164-601-5402 2,831.00 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY DEBRIS REMOVAL 001-164-601-5402 532.00 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY DEBRIS REMOVAL 001-164-601-5402 805.75 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY CHANNEL CLEANING 001-164-601-5401 1,409.85 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY ROAD GRADING 195-180-999-5402 768.00 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY ROAD GRADING 195-180-999-5402 768.00 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY CHANNEL CLEANING 001-164-601-5401 11,005.00 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY CHANNEL CLEANING 001-164-601-5401 2,500.00 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY CHANNEL CLEANING 001-164-601-5401 3,801.00 40671 12/05/96 000883 MONTELEONE EXCAVATING EMERGENCY CHANNEL CLEANING 001-164-601-5401 1,800.00 26,220.60 40672 12/05/96 001710 NOVELL, INC. SUBSCRIPTION:APPNOTES:T.HAFELI 320-199-999-5228 168.00 168.00 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 4 12/05/96 15:07 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 40673 12/05/96 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE BATTERY 001-164-601-5214 32.27 32.27 40674 12/05/96 001248 PAPER DIRECT MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-140-999-5220 29.44 29.44 40675 12/05/96 002185 POSTMASTER - TEMECULA POSTAGE-MAILING RDA NEWSLETTER 280-199-999-5230 2,791.40 2,791.40 40676 12/05/96 000255 PRO LOCK & KEY LOCKSMITH SERVICES - TCSD 340-199-701-5212 200.00 200.00 40677 12/05/96 002470 PROTECH ENVIRONMENTAL & OCT SRVCS:SIG LAPAZ/79S 210-165-659-5804 174.00 40677 12/05/96 002470 PROTECH ENVIRONMENTAL & OCT PROF SRVCS/SIG MARG & 79S 210-165-645-5804 120.00 294.00 40678 12/05/96 001680 RAY GRAGE AND ASSOCIATE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR 001-162-999-5248 245.70 245.70 40679 12/05/96 002400 REBEL TEMECULA RENTAL TRAILER 001-164-601-5238 70.00 70.00 40680 12/05/96 002412 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERS OCTOBER LEGAL SERVICES 300-199-999-5246 3,536.55 40680 12/05/96 002412 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERS CREDIT:LACK OF DOCUMENTION 300-199-999-5246 586.91- 2,949.64 40681 12/05/96 RVRSD CO CHILD CARE CON MTG:CHILD DEV LEGISLATIVE BRKF 190-180-999-5260 18.00 18.00 40682 12/05/96 002285 SCANTRON CORP 10,000 SCANTRON FORMS 001-163-999-5222 737.20 40682 12/05/96 002285 SCANTRON CORP FREIGHT 001-163-999-5222 26.05 40682 12/05/96 002285 SCANTRON CORP TAX 001-163-999-5222 57.39 820.64 40683 12/05/96 000722 SOUTHERN CALIF ASSOC OF MB/CF: M.SALAZAR & C.KEIRSEY 001-162-999-5226 50.00 40683 12/05/96 000722 SOUTHERN CALIF ASSOC OF MB/CF: M.SALAZAR & C.KEIRSEY 001-162-999-5261 60.00 110.00 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON ELECT METER SENIOR CENTER 190-181-999-5240 614.83 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON VARIOUS ELECT METERS 191-180-999-5319 3,853.90 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON VARIOUS ELECT METERS 190-180-999-5240 7,867.62 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON VARIOUS ELECT METERS 193-180-999-5240 457.58 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 2-02-351-5489 FRONT STREET 001-164-601-5240 100.52 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON OCT-STREET LAMP USAGE 192-180-999-5319 22,440.20 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON OCT-STREET LAMP USAGE 191-180-999-5319 240.79 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON OCT-STREET LAMP USAGE 191-180-999-5319 6,874.53 40684 12/05/96 000537 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON OCT-STREET LAMP USAGE 192-180-999-5319 59.97 42,509.94 40685 12/05/96 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 202-4759-TC-OCT 001-162-999-5208 45.47 40685 12/05/96 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 909 205-7877-E.O.C.-NOV 320-199-999-5208 29.15 74.62 40686 12/05/96 001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P PLUMB SRVCS:NEW CITY HALL BLDG 340-199-701-5250 85.00 40686 12/05/96 001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P PLUMB SRVCS:TEMECULA COMM CTR 190-180-999-5212 55.00 40686 12/05/96 001672 TEMECULA DRAIN SERV & P PLUMB SVCS: BUTTERFD STAGE PRK 190-180-999-5212 57.00 197.00 40687 12/05/96 TEMECULA SOCCER CLUB PMT-HALLOWEEN CARNIVAL BOOTH 190-183-999-5370 70.00 40687 12/05/96 TEMECULA SOCCER CLUB PMT-HALLOWEEN CARNIVAL BOOTH 190-183-999-5370 59.00 40687 12/05/96 TEMECULA SOCCER CLUB PMT-HALLOWEEN CARNIVAL BOOTH 190-183-999-5370 82.20 211.20 40688 12/05/96 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. ROSETTES-ELECTRIC LIGHT PARADE 001-100-999-5265 150.48 40688 12/05/96 000307 TEMECULA TROPHY CO. PAPERWEIGHTS SISTER CITY COMM 001-100-999-5280 107.69 258.17 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 5 12/05/96 15:07 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 40689 12/05/96 002492 U.S. TOY COMPANY, INC. FLOWER LEIS 190-183-999-5370 130.00 40689 12/05/96 002492 U.S. TOY COMPANY, INC. BEACHCOMBERS HAT 190-183-999-5370 24.00 40689 12/05/96 002492 U.S. TOY COMPANY, INC. FREIGHT 190-183-999-5370 107.50 40689 12/05/96 002492 U.S. TOY COMPANY, INC. TAX 190-183-999-5370 11.17 40689 12/05/96 002492 U.S. TOY COMPANY, INC. CREDIT:OVERCHARGE ON FREIGHT 190-183-999-5370 37.50- 235.17 40690 12/05196 002554 VELASQUEZ, M. & GONZALE RELOCATION ASSISTANCE 280-199-807-5804 850.00 850.00 40691 12/05/96 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY, BUILDING MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 340-199-701-5212 128.59 40691 12/05/96 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY, BUILDING MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5212 77.47 40691 12/05/96 001342 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY, BUILDING MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5212 38.74 244.80 40692 12/05/96 001939 WINDSOR PROJECTS, INC. DEC 96 RENT/NOV CAM 340-199-701-5234 11,967.45 11,967.45 40693 12/05/96 000348 ZIGLER, GAIL REIMB:STAFF APPRECIATION DAY 001-150-999-5265 378.27 378.27 TOTAL CHECKS 759,421.70 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 12/05/96 16:00 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS FUND TITLE AMOUNT 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 29,619.08 191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A 926.00 193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C 20,080.77 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ FUND 565,894.17 280 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - CIP 41,617.00 300 INSURANCE FUND 98,852.00 340 FACILITIES 496.37 TOTAL 757,485.39 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1 12/05/96 16:00 VOUCHERICHECK REGISTER FOR ALL PERIODS VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 40696 12/17/96 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, 1997 LIABILITY INSURANCE 300-1655 68,231.00 40696 12/17/96 000128 CAL-SURANCE ASSOCIATES, 1997 LIABILITY INSURANCE 300-1655 30,621.00 98,852.00 40697 12/17/96 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA NOV LDSC MAINT - PARKS 190-180-999-5415 19,651.37 40697 12/17/96 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA NOV LDSC MAINT - SENIOR CTR 190-181-999-5415 245.67 40697 12/17/96 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA NOV LDSC MAINT - CRC 190-182-999-5415 1,692.53 40697 12/17/96 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA NOV LDSC MAINT - CITY HALL 340-199-701-5415 496.37 40697 12/17/96 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA NOV LDSC MAINT - MEDIANS 191-180-999-5415 926.00 40697 12/17/96 000126 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MA NOV LDSC MAINT - COMM CENTER 190-184-999-5415 325.00 23,336.94 40698 12/17/96 001009 D B X, INC. CONST.SIGNAL@MARG./79S PMT#L 210-165-645-5804 127,441.20 40698 12/17/96 001009 D B X, INC. RETENTION W/H PMT#l-MARG./79S 210-2035 12,744.12- 114,697.08 40699 12/17/96 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSC MAINT SLOPES 193-180-999-5415 20,080.77 40699 12/17/96 001056 EXCEL LANDSCAPE NOV LDSC MAINT SPORTS PARK 190-180-999-5415 7,704.51 27,785.28 40700 12/17/96 001550 FIRST PACIFIC NATIONAL RET.TO ESCROW ACCT-GENESIS #1 210-2035 74,694.06 74,694.06 40701 12/17/96 002499 L.D. KING, INC. NOV PROF SRVCS-WINCHESTER/1-15 280-199-602-5801 41,617.00 41,617.00 40702 12/17/96 002469 ROHM CONSTRUCTION, INC. PMT#2 COM SVCS EMERG.GENORATOR 210-190-139-5804 80,597.00 40702 12/17/96 002469 ROHM CONSTRUCTION, INC. RETENTION W/H PMT #2-EMERG GEN 210-2035 8,059.70- 72,537.30 40703 12/17/96 000818 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC PMT#2 CONST.SIGNAL COSMIC/HUMB 210-165-664-5804 29,662.00 40703 12/17/96 000818 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC RETENTION W/H PMT#2-COSMIC/HUM 210-2035 2,966.20- 26,695.80 40704 12/17/96 000314 TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM PMT#2 FOR MUSEUM CONSTRUCTION 210-190-808-5804 70,450.00 40704 12/17/96 000314 TEMECULA VALLEY MUSEUM PMT#L FOR MUSEUM CONSTRUCTION 210-190-808-5804 15,000.00 85,450.00 40705 12/17/96 002350 TOVEY/SHULTZ CONSTRUCTI OCT PRGS PMT#5-CITY HALL MODF 210-199-650-5804 157,374.97 40705 12/17/96 002350 TOVEYISHULTZ CONSTRUCTI C/O #8 OCT-CITY HALL MODIFICAT 210-199-650-5804 5,088.85 40705 12/17/96 002350 TOVEY/SHULTZ CONSTRUCTI C/0#7,9&10 OCT-CITY HALL MODF 210-199-650-5804 13,453.08 40705 12/17/96 002350 TOVEY/SHULTZ CONSTRUCTI RETENTION W/H PMT #5-CITY HALL 210-2035 17,591.69- 158,325.21 40706 12/17/96 000420 TRANS-PACIFIC CONSULTAN NOV PROF SRVCS:PW95-28 210-165-655-5802 5,066.25 40706 12/17/96 000420 TRANS-PACIFIC CONSULTAN OCT PROF SRVCS-WESTERN BYPASS 210-165-612-5802 28,428.47 33,494.72 TOTAL CHECKS 757,485.39 .0 -- ITEI\4 4 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO:City Manager/City Council FROM:Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE:December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Combining Balance Sheets as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, and the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 PREPARED BY: Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director Steve Oakley, Accountant e RECOMMENDATION:That the City Council: 1Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheets as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, and the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996. 2.Appropriate $6,500 to the Information Systems Internal Service Fund Consulting Services account. DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the City for the three months ended September 30, 1996. The adjustment to the Information Systems Internal Service Fund budget is required to cover the unanticipated costs for designing and modifying scantron forms used by Building & Safety, as well as for the associated costs of Sierra System computer program modifications. FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient reserves are available in the Information Internal Service Fund to cover the $6,500 appropriation request. ATTACHMENTS:Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Combining Balance Sheet (Internal Service Funds) as of September 30, 1996 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 CITY OF TEMECULA Combining Balance Sheets as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings For The Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department Cit), of Temecula Combining Balance Sheet As of September 30, 1996 General Gas Tax R.C. Rcimb Dev Impact CDBG A13 2766 Fund Fund District Fund Fund Fund Assets: Cash and investments $ 15,848,800 74,451 272,836 $3,625,909 $185,473 Receivables 3,774,153 73,752 3,859 75,191 $577,042 12,593 Due from other funds 601,493 472,494 Total assets $20,224,446 148,203 $ 276,695- $4,173,594 $ 577,042 $198,066 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds $591,625 Other current liabilities $ 2,588,452 $13,463 $ 111,178 $497,346 Total liabilities 2,588,452 13,463 111,178 497,346 591,625 Fund balances: Reserved 1,760,769 Designated 11,541,277 134,740 165,517 3,676,248 $198,066 Undesignated 4,333,948 (14,583) Total ftind balances 17,635,994 134,740 165,517 3,676@248 (14,583) 198,066 Total liabilities and fund balances $20,224,446 $148,203 $276,695 $4,173,594 $577,042 $198,066 2 City of Temecula Combining Balance Sheet As of September 30, 1996 Marg Rd Deferred Measure "A" CIP Reim Dist Comp Fund Fund Fund Fund Total Assets: Cash and investments $1,578,148 $ 6,414,413 $935,681 $ 28,935,711 Receivables 104,177 540,906 5,161,673 Due from other funds 1,073,987 Total assets $1,682,325 $ 6,955,319 $ 935,681 $35,171,371 Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds $ 302,640 $146,922 $1,041,187 Other current liabilities 1,499,968- 935,681 5,646,088 Total liabilities 1,802,608 146,922 935,681 6,687,275 Fund balances: Reserved 5,081,776 6,842,545 Designated $1,682,325 70,935 17,469,108 Undesignated (146,922) 4,172,443 Total fund balances 1,682,325 5,152,711 (146,922) 28,484,096_ Total liabilities and fund balances $1,682,325 $6,955,319 $ $935,681 $35,171,371 City of Temecula Statement of RexTenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual General Fund For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget Revenues: Sales tax 7,190,000 2,043,693 28% Developmental services: Planning 182,243 73,854 41% Building & safetv 1,291,000 399,098 31% Engineering 508,000 426,913 84% CTrants 30,000 6,168 21% Fire plan check and inspection 75,000 28,329 38% Motor vehicle in lieu 1,459,315 418,949 29% Property tax 1,169,450 70,626 6% Propertv transfer tax 150,000 19,093 13% Franchise fees 920,000 64,820 7% Transient occupancy tax 630,000 192,369 31% Reimbursements 389,628 56,509 15% Reimbursements from TCSD 162,000 40,500 25% Reimbursements from l@A 75,000 18,750 25% Investment interest 600,000 229,532 38% Business licenses 140,000 14,735 11% Vehicle code fines 55,000 5,120 9% Miscellaneous 31,000 6,862 22% Bids & proposals 13,000 2,595 20% Parking citations/impound fees 45,000 20,143 45% Operating transfers in 754,211 Total Revenues 15,869,847 4,138,657 26% City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual General Fund For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual YTD Amended YTD Activitv Percent Budget Activitv Encumbr. + Encumbr of Budget Expenditures: Ci@7 Council 439,716 89,752 1,284 91,036 21% City Manager 519,726 126,872 2,184 129,056 25% Cltv Clerk 484,791 105,864 5,212 111,076 23% Cit,v Attomev 260,000 51,680 51,680 20% Finance 778,298 189,556 56,220 245,776 32% Human Resources 289,295 69,411 3,374 72,785 25% Planning 1,019,872 225,765 16,530 242,295 24% Building 954,743 258,957 107,746 366,703 38% Engineering 843,281 177,567 5,747 183,314 22% Public Works 2,131,592 475,113 139,312 614,425 29% CIP Admin 672,133 178,429 6,433 184,862 28% Police 4,970,187 991,115 4,634 995,749 20% Fire Dept 1,466,968 317,917 25,246 343,163 23% Animal Control 60,000 11,315 11,315 19% Non-departmental 4,162,334 395,334 395,334 9% Total Expenditures 19,052@936 3,664,647 373,922 4,038,569 21% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (3,183,089) 474,010 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 17,161,984 17,161,984 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 13,978,895 17,635,994 Ci@, of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Gas Tax Fund For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activltv of Budget Revenues: Section 2105-2107 739,211 134,077 134,077 18% Investment interest 15,000 663 663 4% Total Revenues 754,211 134,740 134,740 19% Expenditures: Operating transfers out 754,211 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures 134,740 Beginning Fund Balance, JUIV 1, 1996 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $ $134,740 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Rancho California Road Reimbursement District For the 'fliree Months Year Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activitv Encumbr. Activitv of Budget Revenues- Investment interest $3,859 3,859 Total Revenues 3,859 3,859 Expenditures: Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures 3,859 Beginning Fund Balance, Julv 1, 1996 $161,658 161,658 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $161,658 $ 165,517 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Development Impact Fund For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget Activity of Budget Revenues: Public facilities 4,079,316 562,478 14% Parks/habitat 120,000 50,203 42% Public service 96,707 Fire 280,000 36,880 13% Signal mitigation 105,000 50,035 48% Library 70,000 20,300 29% Quimby 30,000 3,496 12% Investment interest 75,191 Total Revenues 4,684,316 895,290 19% Expenditures: Consulting services 39,000 Operating transfers out 8,145,000 2,079@971 26% Total Expenditures 8,184,000 2,078,871 Revenues Oxer/(Under) Expenditures (3,499,684) (1,183,581) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 4,859,829 4,859,829 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 1,360,145 3,676,248 8 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual ConLmunitv Development Block Grant For the Year Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activitv Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Cirant revenue $285,903 $242,000 242,000 85% Total Revenues 285,903 242,000 242,000 85% Expenditures: Other outside services 43,903 Operating transfers out 242,000 242,000 242,000 100% Total Expenditures 285,903 242,000 242,000 85% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 (14,583) (14,583) Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $(14,583) $(14,583) Citv of Temecula Statciyient of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual AB 2766 Fund For the Three Months F-nded September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Acti,,,i@, Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: AB 2766 $ 48,000 $11,495 11,495 24% Tnvestment interest 2,543 21543 Total Revenues -48,000 14,038 14,038 29% Expenditures: Operating transfers out 75,687 Total Expenditures -75,687 Revenues Over/(TJnder) Expenditures (27,687) 14,038 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 184,028 184,028 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $156,341 $198,066 10 Citv of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Measure "A" For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Measure "A" $682,000 223,691 223,691 33% Investment interest 21,113 21-113 Total Revenues 682,000 244,804 244,804 36% Expenditures: Operating transfers out 950,000 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (268,000) 244,804 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 1,437,521 1,437,521 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $1,169,521 $1,682,325 1 1 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Capital Improvement Projects Fund For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Operating transfers in $12,781,557 $2,320,871 $2,320,871 18% @ants 2,777,400 Contributions 110,000 Reimbursements 1,219,000 34,800 34,800 3% Investment interest 92,364 92,364 SB 300 381,130 Article 3 (SB 82 1) 133,517 29,317 29,317 22% 'I'otal Revenues (1) -17,402,604 2,477,352 2,477,352- 14% Expenditures: Rancho Ca. Rd interchange 3,650,000 Winchester Rd interchange 60,000 Western bypass corridor 11,096,287 44,647 166,115 210,762 2% Ynez Rd. between Rancho Ca. Rd. and Santiago Rd 215,000 Pala Rd. bridge 2,109,484 Diaz Rd. extension 955,973 171 171 0% I- 1 5 corridor study 40,400 9,245 29,579 38,824 96% Walcott bypass 2,249,086 193,623 1,739,991 1,933,614 86% Signal interconnect system 516,273 27,053 54,574 81,627 16% Traffic signals - South 79/Margarita 291,522 121 156,348 156,469 54% Traffic signals - Marg/Rustic Glen 60,022 14,899 46,200 61,099 102% Traffic signals - Winchester/Roripaugh 83,000 Traffic signals - Margarita/Solana 50,046 118 1,000 1,118 2% Pavement management 985,683 18,606 27,083 45,689 5% Traffic signals - South 79/Pala 132,162 74,177 6,537 80,714 61% Traffic signals - South 79/La Paz 128,774 196 93,059 93,255 72% Sidewalk project 95 72,823 34,348 34,348 47% I- 1 5 /7 9 S interchange 119,711 28,857 146,395 175,252 146% Winchester Rd./Margarita to N. Willows Ave. 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 100% Traffic signal Rancho Ca./Cosmic 117,083 2,616 94,945 97,561 83% I- 1 5 corridor traffic study 20,500 I- 15/79S interchange (ultimate) 200,000 Pala Road improvements 150,000 Pavement management system update 45,000 1,666 1,666 4% Traffic signals Vincent Moraga/Rancho Ca. Road 30,000 Traffic signals Rancho Ca. Rd.Nia Las Colinas 125@000 Flashing signals school 60,000 Traffic signals Winchester/F-nterprise 125,000 Traffic signals Margarita Rd./Santiago 120,000 Traffic signals 79S/Bedford Court 120,000 Traffic signals 79S/Butterfield 125,000 104,095 104,095 83% Cltv sidewalk project (various) 132,000 (continued) 12 City of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Capital Improvement Projects Fund For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activit-,, of Budget Margarita community park 1,556,966 5,735 5,735 0% Sports park improvements 137,384 36,460 22,493 58,953 43% Parkview site project 228,007 104,835 29,762 134,597 59% Emergency generator 195,594 2,512 120,815 123,327 63% Duck pond park 208,577 18,338 10,723 29,061 14% Maintenance yard 964,902 5,210 902,425 907,635 94% Rancho California sports park (ADA) 66,500 Rancho California sports park- restrooms 61,306 360 29,229 29,589 48% Various park improvements (ADA) 64,951 1,250 7,650 8,900 14% Winchester creek park 612,988 6,140 29,430 35,570 6% Margarita sidewalk project 110,000 Temecula Community Center 267,000 250,286 5,033 255,319 96% Community Recreation Center improvements 150,000 6,090 6,090 4% Fire station 1,835,187 403,978 1,089,118 1,493,096 81% Museum 395,964 20,000 20,000 5% City Hall 1,956,207 1,588,066 261,447 1,849,513 95% Total Expenditures -34,197,262 4,191,873 5,081,776 9,273,649- 27% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (16,794,658) (1,714,521) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 6,867,232 6,867,232 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 (9,927,426) 5,152,711 (1)Budgeted revenue does not include the amount possibly to be funded by CFD No. I for the Western Bypass Corridor project. 1 3 Internal Service Funds Combining Balance Sheet As of September 30, 1996 Info Support Insurance Vehicles Systems Services Facilities Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total Assets: Cash and investments 1,286,666 $176,241 14,624 98,363 82,635 1,658,529 Receivables 50,892 2,361 340 1,096 733 55,422 Propertv, plant and equipment (net of accumulated depreciation) 72,355 490,917 42,326 605,598 Total assets 1,337,558 250,957 $505,881 141,785 83,368 2,319,549 Liabilities and fund equity: Current liabilities 173,492 51,465 $2,819 15,781 243,557 Fund equity: Contributed capital 500,000 $214,539 246,628 94,177 1,055,344 Retained earnings 664,066 36,418 207,788 44,789 67,587 1,020,648 Total fund equit-,, 1,164,066 250,957 454,416 138,966 67,587 2,075@992 Total liabilities and ftind equity 1,337@558 $250,957 505,881 141,785 $83,368 2,319,549 14 Cltv of Temecula Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings Internal Service Funds For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Self Information Support Insurance Vehicles Svstems SerAiees Facilities Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total Revenues: Charces for services 83,948 11,175 93,825 41,004 $ 89,638 $319,590 t, Investment interest 14,971 2,361 340 1,096 733 19,501 Miscellaneous 74 74 Operating transfers in 200,000 200,000 Total Revenues 298,919 13,536 94,239 42,100 90,371 539,165 Expenses: Salaries & wages 6,273 31,354 8,319 23,664 69,610 Operating expenses 95,873 47,257 18,825 66,332 228,287 Depreciation 13,050 63,250 6,250 82,550 Total Expenses 102,146 13,050 141,861 33,394 89,996 380,447 Net Income (Loss) 196,773 486 (47,622) 8,706 375 158,718 Retained Earnings, Julv 1, 1996 467,293 35,932 255,410 36,083 67,212 861,930 Retained Earnings, September 30, 1996 664,066 $36,418 $207,788 $44,789 $67,587 $1,020,648 15/FINAL ITEI\4 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR Y MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: December 1 7, 1996 SUBJECT:Parcel Map No. 28317, Located on the Northerly Side of Winchester Road (Hwy79 North) at the Intersection of Ynez Road PREPARED BY: Ronald J. Parks, Principal Engineer - Land Development John Pourkazemi, Associate Engineer - Land Development RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Parcel Map No. 28317 subject to the Conditions of Approval. BACKGROUND: Tentative Parcel Map No. 28317, was approved by the City of Temecula Planning Manager, Debbie Ubnoske, on April 11, 1996. The Developer, Temecula Medical Park Development, Phase 11, has met all of the Conditions of Approval. Parcel Map No. 28317 is one (1) lot commercial subdivision, for condominium purposes, of 1. 1 2 acres located on the northerly side of Winchester Road (Hwy 79 North) at the intersection of Ynez Road. The site is currently vacant. The existing drainage facilities at the intersection of Winchester Road (Highway 79 North) and Ynez Road were reviewed and found to be inadequate to support additional development. The existing drainage facilities will need to be up sized as additional development occurs along the north side of Winchester Road. An Agreement for Payment of Drainage Improvement Fees will be recorded concurrently with Parcel Map No. 2831 7 and similar agreements will be required for each contributing property as they are developed. The following fees have been paid for Parcel Map No. 28317: Stephen's K-Rat Fee $780.50 Area Drainage Plan Fee $1,839.24 The following fees have been deferred for Parcel Map No. 28317: Public Facilities Deposit$10,000.00 Due Prior to issuance of building permit Signal Mitigation Fee $2,800.00 Due Prior to issuance of building permit r:Nagdrpt\96\1 217\PM28317.agn/AJP The Agreement for Payment of Drainage Improvement Fees will be recorded concurrently with Parcel Map No. 28317 and a bond of $20,000 will be posted for this developer's fair share of drainage improvements. FISCAL IMPACT: None Attachm@: 1 . Development Fee Checklist 2.Project Location Map 3.Parcel Map No. 28317 4.Fees & Securities Report 5. Agreement for Payment of Drainage Improvement Fee r:\agdrpt\96\1 217\PM28317.agn/AJP CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST CASE NO.: Parcel Map No. 28317 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. FEE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Flood Control (ADP) Paid prior to issuance of grading permit (Condition no. 42) Public Facility To be paid prior to issuance of building permit (Condition no. 48) Traffic Signal Mitigation To be paid prior to issuance of building permit (Condition no. 35) r:\agdrpt\96\1 217 \PM28317.agn/AJP lovis In# n 7- LJ I >- u C4 0 i i z c3c I= i i z Lii c- u C= D 52 a- =0 0 > F- u Li F7 CY n ES NIINI ST. lwt 0 CD tn Net rz3 QL t @j 40 ZLL E- low d" I C3 Z-t T-1 E- z U) -3 LI de et& ooext 'ON l@ (Ivoa Z:GNA CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT PARCEL MAP NO. 28317 DATE: December 10, 1996 IMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE MATERIAL & LABOR SECURITY* SECURITY* Street and Drainage 0.00 $ 0.00 Water 0.00 0.00 ewer 0.00 0.00 TOTAL $ O.Oo s o.ool, Maintenance Retention $0.00 Monument Security $0.00 Note:The Agreement for Payment of Drainage Improvement Fees will be recorded concurrently with Parcel Map No. 28317 and a bond of $20,000 will be posted for this developer's fair share of drainage improvements. DEVELOPMENT FEES City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs $0.00 RCFCD Drainage Fee Paid $1,839.24 Fire Mitigation Fee $ N/A Signal Mitigation Fee - Deferred to Bldg Permit $2,800.00 Road and Bridge Benefit Fee $ N/A Other Development Fees $ 10,000.00 SERVICE FEES Planning Fee $55.00 Comprehensive Transportation Plan $4.00 Plan Check Fee $7,750.00 Inspection Fee $0.00 Monument Inspection Fee $0.00 Letter of Map Revision (LOMAR Review) $0.00 Fees Paid to Date $829.00 Balance of Fees Due $0.00 ,:\agdrpt\98\1 21 O%PM28317.agn/ga Recording requested by, and When recorded mail to@ CITY OF TEMLECULA 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Attn: City Clerk AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT FEE This Agreement is made this 6h day of November , 1996, by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("City") and Wade Faerber, M.D., an individual, Thomas LoBue, M.D., an individual, John Ellis, M.D., an individual, and David Robinson, an individual, collectively, (the "Doctors")- RECITALS A.The Doctors are the owners of the following real property (the "Property") in the City of Temecula: Parcel 3 & a portion of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map'-13335. The legal description of the Property is described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. B. The Doctors propose to develop the Property pursuant to Tentative Tract Map No. 283 17 Amendment No. 1, approved on March II, 1993 by the City of Temecula (the "Project"). C. City has determined that the Project will impact drainage facilities within the City as identified in the Condition No, 26b for the Project. These impacts must be mitigated by payment of a fee as a condition of development, or participation in an assessment district for additional drainage facility construction, which fee or assessment district shall be identified as the "Drainage Improvement Fee." D. Subject to compliance with all public hearing procedures and applicable law, the City proposes to impose the Drainage Improvement Fee upon new developments within Parcels I through 5 of Parcel Map 2')335, and Parcels I through 5 of Parcel Map 26852 in the City of Temecula, as shown on Exhibit "C" attached hereto, in order to construct additional drainage facility improvements (the "Improvements") to serve and benefit those new developments, including the Project, E. The City has determined the estimated costs of additional drainage facility improvements as shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto. The costs have been distributed on a pro-rata basis according to the acreage of the benefited lots to determine the estimated Drainage Improvement Fee for the Project. F- In order for the Doctors to proceed with the Project without full payment of the Drainage Improvement Fee in a timely manner, the City and the Doctors have determined to enter into this Agreement. G@ The term "drainage facility" shall refer to public drainage and flood control facilities, and similar public infrastructure. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows@ I Drainage Improvement Fee (a) The City Council will establish the amount of the Drainage Improvement Fee in the future. The Fee will be based upon the acreage of each development against the total acreage of all available lots benefited by the Improvements. The Drainage Improvement Fee shall also establish the specific drainage facility to be constructed and their cost, the benefit assessment area and the method by which the fair share, pro-rata obligations of each property are to be established based on the demand for the Improvements. In no event, however, shall the Drainage Improvement Fee for the Pr 'ect exceed one hundred twenty-five percent (1250/'O) of Oi the estimated Drainage Improvement Fee established in Exhibit "B" to this Agreement. (b) In lieu of inunediate payment of the estimated Drainage Improvement Fee the Doctors 'de security for the estimated Drainage Improvement Fee pursuant to Section 2 of this Agreement. may provi Upon five days written demand from the City, which may be made at any time, the Doctors shall pay the City the estimated Drainage Improvement Fee or any portion thereof, in order to pay for the formation of the financing mechanism of the Drainage Improvement Fee and the design and construction of the Improvements. (c) When the Drainage Improvement Fee is established, the Doctors shall pay the City the Fee within five days of receiving written notice fi-om the City. Any estimated Drainage Improvement Fee previously paid shall be a credit against the Drainage Improvement Fee. (d) When the Drainage Improvement Fee is established by the City Council, the Doctors will be reimbursed for any difference between the estimated Drainage Improvement Fee previously paid and the Drainage Improvement Fee if the estimated Drainage Improvement Fee exceeds the Drainage Improvement Fee. (e)The City shall record a release of this Agreement upon payment of any Drainage Improvement Fee owing andshall provide Doctors with a copy of such release. (f)As part of paying the Drainage Improvement Fee, Doctors may be required to participate in an assessment district, drainage district, or other financing mechanism based upon their fair share apportionment. 2.Security for the Drainape Improvement Fee (a) Concurrent with the execution of this Agreement, Doctors shall provide an irrevocable letter of credit or other form of bond approved by the City, in a form approved by the City Attorney, in an amount equal to the estimated Drainage Improvement Fee for the Pr 'ect, plus twenty five percent (25%) Oi of the estimated amount. (b) As an alternative to collecting the fee from the letter of credit or bond, if the Doctors fall to pay the Drainage Improvement Fee within thirty (30) days of the date the demand is made, the City may assess a penalty of ten percent (10%) of the amount owing and make said Fee, inclusive of penalty, a lien upon the described real property by recording a notice that said Fee is due under the terms of this Agreement with the County Recorder of Riverside County. The notice shall state the fact that it is unpaid and draws interest on the Fee and penalty at the rate set forth at California Revenue & Taxation Section 19269 until paid. (c) The City may as an alternative to the lien procedure set forth above, bring legal action to collect the Drainage Improvement Fee due. The Doctors agree that if legal action by the City I is necessary to collect the Fee, the Doctors shall pay the Cltv a reasonable sum as attor-ney's fees and court costs, together with penalty and interest determined according to paragraph 4(b) of this Agreement, 3. Agreement Runs With Land This Agreement pertains to and runs with the Property. This Agreement binds the successors in interest of each of the parties. 4. Binding Agreement This Agreement shall be binding upon Doctors, Doctors' successors and assigns. 5. AmendmentiNo Continuing Waiver This Agreement may be modified or amended only in writing, signed by both parties. This Agreement contains the full and complete understanding of the parties and supersedes any and all prior oral or written agreements or representations. A waiver of any term or condition of this Agreement by either party shall not be deemed a continuing waiver thereof 6. Attorney's Fees Should either party deterrrdne that it is necessary to file a legal action to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in that litigation shall be entitled to its reasonable costs, including but not limited to attorney's fees. 7. Notice Notice shall be deemed given under this Agreement when in writing and deposited in the United States mail, first-class, postage prepaid, addressed as follows@ CITY: DOCTORS-. City of Temecula Temecula Medical Park Dev., G.P., Phase 11 43200 Business Park Drive c/o Edward Anderson Temecula, CA 92590 P.O. Box 891269 Temecula, CA 92589 8.Miscellaneous Provisions A. If any provision of this Agreement is adjudged invalid, the remaining provisions shall not be affected. B. If there is more than one (I) signer of this Agreement as Doctors, their obligations are Joint and several. IN WITNESS WTIEREOF, the parties or their duly authorized representatives have executed this Agreement as of the date set out above. CITY OF TENIECULA DOCTORS By-. Byi M/9 tioseph Kical,;,Director Thomas LoBue, M.D. Public WorksiCity Engineer ATTEST-. Bv, John Elli By@ June S. Greek B City Clerk B Wade Faerb STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ss. COUNTY OF Riverside On beforeme, -@Akibi t4,6L/C- personally appeared Thomas LoBue, M.D -------- ------ - ---------------------- personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature (on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNE8S my hand Sign @ture 7t- SANDI WINGER COM?-4. #10r,6098 < NOTARY PUBLIC - CAUFORNLA RIVERSIDE COUNTY MY COMM Expires AUG. 7, 1 999 onessomensomens Manassas STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ss. COUNTY OF Riverside On t I I ) i 9 (, before me,,-SAA4bi LU@/M (JEC', IJOTA eL) ISLI C- personally appeared John Ellis, M.D --- - - - ------ ----- personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature (on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. I se SANDI WINGER COMM. #1066098 > LU (P C/) NOTARY PUBUC - CAUFORNIA rn < RRVERSIDE COUNTY 0 u My Comm. Sxpires ALr, - 7,1999 a STATE OF CALIFORNIA Ss. COUNTY On personally appeared David Robinson, I ------ - ---------------- - ------- personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature (on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, I se@ SANDI WINGER Comm. #I ONoge > NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNLA RFVERSIDE COUNTY My Comm. Exp@es AUG. 7,1999 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COU'@7-Y OF Riverside On before me,,EAI O/ personally appeared Wade Faerber, M.D ---------- - --------- - ------ - ------- personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature (on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, nt. and al seal a SANDI WINGER ui COk@@i@.ti. #1066098 > TIOTAIIY PUBLR- - CALIFORNIA RIVERIICX- ROUNTY a My Comm Expires ALG. 7,1999 nanon3L ,nsuRi,,,c2 American Motorists Insurance Company comfantes FIRST TERM PREMIUM FULLY EARNED Bond Number: 3SM 889 906 00 Premium (Two Years) 600.00 SUBDIVISION BOND FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE-PUBLIC WOIM KNOW ALL \4EN BY THESE PRESENTS: as Priicipal, and the AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSL4UNCE CO.N4PANY, a corporation or-anizec.' and existino wider the laws of the State of Illinois and authorized to transact surety business in the Sta-c of California as Surety, are held and fir@y bound unto City of Temecula, as Oblieec. in the sum of Twenty Thou-cand & NO/100ths DOLLARS ($20,000.W,@, for which the payment whereof, well and truly to be made, said Pr"4ncipal and Surety bind themselves, their heir-,, administrators, @, ccessots, and assigns, :o;lntly and sevemfly, firm@, bv these presents, THE Condition of the foregoing obligation is such that, whereas tile above bounden Principal has entered into a contrac,@agrecinent, dated 11-6-96, with the Obligee to do and perform the following work; to wit: Drainap,e improvement fee for Parcel 3 & a portion of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 23335. NOW, THEREFORE, if the above bounden Principal shall well ,4nd truly perform the work contracted to be performed under said contract, then this obligation shall be void: otherwise to remain in full force and effect. SIGNED, SEALED, DATED: Novmber 12, 1996 Temecula Medical Park D@@ent Phase 11, G.P. American Motorists Insur@ Company lprincipal) (Surety) By: By: @ichiel Attoi-nev In Fact That, Temecula Medical Park Development Phase 11, G.P DIRECT CORRESPONDENCE TO: LOU JONES & ASSOCIATES, PO BOX 41375, 7470 N. FIGUEROA ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90041 PHONE (213) 257-8291 - FAX (213) 256-7218 Subdivision Performance Bond -2-12-96.dot CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of Orange On NOV before me, Kim Nguyen, Notary Public NAME,'UITLE OF OFFICER personally appeared Michael E. Cundiff NAME OF SIGNER Personally known tome - OR - r7 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) istare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/ they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/heritheir signatures on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of N - - I' which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. 42 E FORNIA'. c; WITNESS my hand and official seal. (SIG A@TURE OF NOTARY) OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT INDIVIDUAL CORPORATE OFFICER BONDS TITLE(S) TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT PARTNER(S) LIMITED GENERAL NUMBER OF PAGES Z ATTORNEY-IN-FACT TRUSTEE(S) GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR OTHER: DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) American Motorists Insurance Company None SIGNER OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE 6TmnaL InSURan American Motorists Insurance Companycompanie!s Bond Number : 3SM 889 906 00 SUBDIVISION BOND LABOR & MATERIAL/PAYMENT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we. Temecula Medical Park Development Phase 11, G.P. as Principal, and AMERICAN MOTORI@STS INStfRANCE COMPKNY, as Sure@,, are held and flr!nly bound arito City of Temecula as Oblipee, in the sum of Twentv Thousand & NO/100ths DOLLARS (,$2(1,000.00) lawful money of the linited States of America, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, We L)ind ourselves jointly and severally, firmly by. these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SU-CI4, That., 'Wlcreas, said Principal has entered iito a Subdivision Agreement with the Obligee, dated 11-0-96 , in which said Principal a-re,-s i,,) construct designated public improvements, as follows: Drainar,e lmprovment fee for Parcel 3 & a po_rtion of Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 23335 and, as a condition of approving said Subdivis@oti, the Principal is requ;:red to !zive Labor and Material Payi-nent Bond as herein provided. NOW, THEREFORE, if said Principal and/or contractor or subcontractor fails to pay for anv materials, provisions, or rented equipment used in, upon, or for or about the construction of the public improvements for performance of the work to be done, or any work or labor done of any kind, in or on such improvements, said surety will pay the same in an amount not exceedin- the sum set forth above. This bond sliall insure to the benefit of the contractor, his subcontractors, and to persons r-,3iting equipment or furnishing labor and materials to them for the improvements. SIGNED, SEALED, DATED: November 12,1996 Temecula Medical Park D cnt Phase 11, G.P@ Anerican cc Company (Principal) (Silretv) By: By: /@/ @' IVM@ael iff, Atto,7ney In Fact DIRECT CORRESPONDENCE TO: LOU JONES & ASSOCIATES, PO BOX 41375, 7470 N. FIGUEROA ST., LOS ANGELES, CA 90041 In PHONE (213) 257-8291 9 FAX (213) 256-7218 7ubdivision Paynient Bond -2-12-96.dot CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of Orange On Holy, 1 z 100Q-C) before me, Kim Nguyen, Notary Public Nz%j'*IE. I'I'I'LE OF OFFICER personally appeared Michael E. Cundiff NANIE OF SIGNER Z Personally known tome -OR- proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that heishel they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by hisiheritheir signature(s) on the 264@ instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of ALIFORN@\ which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. C', COLJNTY WITNESS my hand and official sea]. (SI R OF NOTARY) OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required bv law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT INDIVIDUAL CORPORATE OFFICER BONDS TITLE(S) TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT PARTNER(S) LIMITED -------- --- GENERAL NUMBER OF PAGES Z ATTORNEY-FN-FACT TRUSTEE(S) GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR OTHIER: DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) American Motorists insurance Company None SIGNER OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE American Motorists Insurance Company nmvnal FISIJ Home Office: Long Grove, IL 60049 Carlos POWER OF ATTORNEY Know All Men By These Presents: That the American Motorists Insurance Company, (hereinafter called the "Company") a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Itinois, and having its principal office in Long Grove, Illinois, does hereby appoint Michael E. Cundiff of Orange, California its true and lawful agent(s) and attorney(s)-in-fact, to make, execute, seal, and deliver during the period beginning with the date of issuance of this power and ending on the date specified below, unless sooner revoked for and on its behalf as surety, and as its act and deed: Any and all bonds and undertakings provided the amount of no one bond or undertaking exceeds ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) EXCEPTION:NO AUTHORITY is granted to make, execute, seal and deliver any bond or undertaking which guarantees the payment or collection of any promissory note, check, draft or letter of credit. This authority does not permit the same obligation to be split into two or more bonds in order to bhng each such bond within the dollar limit of authority as set forth herein. This appointment may be revoked at any time by the Company. The execution of such bonds and undertakings in pursuance of these presents shall be as binding upon the said Company as fully and amply to all intents and purposes, as if the same had been duly executed and acknowledged by its regularly elected officers at its principal office in Long Grove, Illinois. THIS APPOINTMENT SHALL CEASE AND TERMINATE WITHOUT NOTICE AS OF December 31,1997 This Power of Attorney is executed by authority of a resolution adopted by the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company on February 23, 1988 at Chicago, Illinois, a true and accurate copy of which are hereinafter set forth and is hereby certified to by the undersigned Secretary as being in full force and effect: "VOTED, That the Chairman of the Board, the President, or any Vice President, or their appointees designated in writing and filed with the Secretary, or the Secretary shall have the power and authority to appoint agents and attorneys-in-fact, and to authorize them to execute on behalf of the Company, and attach the seal of the Company thereto, t>onds and undertakings, recognizances, contracts of indemnity and other writings, obligatory in the nature thereof, and any such officers of the Company may appoint agents for acceptance of process." This Power of Attorney is signed, sealed and certified by facsimile under and by authority of the following resolution adopted by the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company at a meeting duly called and held on the 23rd day of February, 1988: "VOTED, That the signature of the Chairman of the Board, the President, any Vice President, or their appointees designated in writing and filed with the Secretary, and the signature of the Secretary, the seal of the Company, and certifications by the Secretary, may be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney or bond executed pursuant to resolution adopted by the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors on February 23, 1988 and any such power so executed, sealed and certified with respect to any bond or undertaking to which it is attached, shall continue to be valid and binding upon the Company." in Testimony Whereof, the Company has caused this instrument to be signed and its corporate seal to be affixed by its authorized officers, this January 1, 1994. Aftested and Certified: American Motorists Insurance Company Robert P. Hames, Secretary by J. S. Kemper, 111, Exec.Vice President STATE OF ILLINOIS Ss COUNTY OF LAKE 1, Irene Kiewer, a Notary Public, do hereby certify that J. S. Kemper, III and Robert P. Hames personally known to me to be the same persons whose names are respectively as Exec. Vice President and Secretary of the American Motorists Insurance Company, a Corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, subscribed to the foregoing instrument, appeared before me this day in person and severally acknowledged that they being thereunto duly authorized signed, sealed with the corporate seal and delivered the said instrument as the free and voluntary act of said corporation and as their own free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes therein set forth. SEAL' K13wer 4NW" Publit, @ of U"s lo 4imm P. My commission expires 1-28-98 vvvlwvlwvvvvvvv Irene Klewer, Notary Public TENAECULA COIMIMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ITEI\4 I MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996 A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 5:07 P.M. at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. Vice President Jeff Stone presiding. ROLL CALL PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None Also present were General Manager Ronald E. Bradley, District Counsel Peter Thorson and District Secretary June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. DISTRICT BUSINESS 1Election of Officers for 1997 It was moved by Director Ford, seconded by Director Lindemans to elect Jeff Stone as President to preside until the end of calendar year 1 997. The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Stone to elect Steve Ford to service as Vice president who will assume the duties of the President in his absence and will hold this office until the end of calendar year 1 997. The motion was unanimously carried. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT None given. GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT None given. BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS None given. r:\minutes.csd\l 20396 -1- ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Director Stone, seconded by Director Ford to adjourn at 5:09 PM to a meeting on December 10, 1 996, 7:00 PM, Temecula City Hall, City Council Chamber, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried. Ron Roberts, President ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk/ District Secretary r:\minutes.csd\l 20396 -2- ITEI\4 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY LA DIR. OF FINAN@ CITY MANAGER TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGENDA REPORT TO:General Manager/Board of Directors FROM:Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE:December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 PREPARED BY:Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director@ Steve Oakley, Accountant@ RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996. DISCUSSION:The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the Community ServicesDistrict for the three months ended September 30, 1996. FISCAL IMPACT:None. ATTACHMENTS:Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department 1 Temecula Community Services District Combining Balance Sheet As of September 30, 1996 TCSD Service Service Service Fund Level A Level B Level C Assets and other debits: Cash and investments $636,429 $ 13,984 $229,256 Receivables 134,984 615 4,141 Due from other funds 16,723 Total assets $788,136 $ $14,599 233,397 Liabilities and fund balances: Due to other funds $ 16,723 Other current liabilities $185,432 14,658 $22,830 45,275 185,432 31,381 22,830 45,275- Fund balances: Reserved 318,433 21,459 181,243 Designated 284,271 6,879 Undesignated (52,840) (8 Total fund balances 602,704 (31,381) (8,231) 188,122 Total liabilities and fund balances 788,136 $ $ 14,599 $233,397 Temecula Community Services Combining Balance Sheet As of September 30, 1996 Service Service CIP - Conim Debt Level D Level R Rec Center Service Total Assets and other debits: Cash and investments $181,903 3,650 $292,833 855,023 $2,213,078 Receivables 1,979 39 4,142 145,900 Due from other funds 16,723 Total assets $183,882 $3,689 $296,975 855,023 2,375,701 Liabilities and fund balances: Due to other funds 16,723 Other current liabilities $ 1,892 270,087 1,892 286,810 Fund balances: Reserved $502,690 1,023,825 Designated $ 181,990 $3,689 $296,975 352,333 1,126,137 Undesignated (61,071) Total fund balances 181,990 3,689 296,975 855,023 2,088,891 Total liabilities and fund balances $183,882 $3,689 296,975 $855,023 $2,375,701 Temecula Community Services District Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Citywide assessments $2,717,562 269 269 0% TCSD admin fee credlU"RF-ST" 299,524 179,024 179,024 59% Recreation 365,425 157,584 157,584 43% Investment interest 20,000 12,684 12,684 63% Operating transfer in 12,500 Miscellaneous 24,617 623 623 3% Total Revenues 3,439,628 349,184 349,184 10% Expenditures: Citywide parks and recreation 2,642,125 857,415 $283,628 1,141,043 43% Seniors 93,329 15,555 5,713 21,268 23% Community Recreation Center (CRC) 255,691 61,301 20,990 82,291 32% Recreation 408,498 118,429 5,319 123,748 30% Temecula Community Center 137,524 12@786 2,783 15,569 11% Total Expenditures 3,537,167 1,065,486 318,433 1,383,919 39% Revenues Over/(tJnder) Expenditures (97,539) (716,302) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 1,319,006 1,319,006 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $1,221,467 $602,704 Temecula Community Services District Service Level A Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activit@, Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Assessments 204,092 Investment interest 1,800 Miscellaneous 1,803 734 $ 734 41% Total Revenues 207,695 734 734 0% Expenditures: Salaries and wages 2,695 684 684 25% Street lighting 165,000 43,936 43,936 27% Landscape maintenance/rehab. 28,000 2,778 21,459 24,237 87% Operating expenditures 12,000 1,332 1,332 11% Total Expenditures 207,695 48,730 21,459 70,189 34% Revenues Over/(LJnder) Expenditures (47,996) Beginning Fund Balance, Julv 1, 1996 16,615 16,615 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 16,615 $(31,381 5 Temecula Conmiunity Services District Service Level B Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Assessments $252,948 InN,cstment interest 2,500 $ 615 615 25% Miscellaneous 13,000 3,339 3,339 26% Total Revenues 268,448 3,954 3@954 1% Expenditures: Salaries and wages 6,923 1,742 1,742 25% Street lightinc, 266,900 89,100 89,100 33% Miscellaneous 4@615 779 779 17% Total Expenditures 278,338 91,621 91,621 33% Revenues O,,,er/(Under) Expenditures (9,890) (87,667) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 79,436 79,436 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $ 69,546 $8,231) Temecula Communltv Services District Service Level C Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activitv Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Assessments $508,482 Investment interest 8,000 $4,141 $ 4,141 52% Miscellaneous 5,000 281 281 6% Total Revenues 521,482 4,422 4,422 1% Expenditures: Salaries and wages 111,479 27,834 27,834 25% Landscape maintenance 272,972 59,167 180,829 239,996 98% Utilities 103,575 41,718 41,718 40% Other expenditures 65,553 4,843 414 5,257 8% Total Expenditures 553,579 133,562 181,243 314,805 57% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (32,097) (129,140) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 317,262 317,262 Ending Fund Balance, September 3 0, 1996 285,165 $188,122 Temecula Community Services District Service Level D Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activitv of Budget Revenues: Assessments 1,826,717 "@ST" 17,310 17,310 17,310 100% AB 939 2,000 9,191 9,191 460% Investment interest 8,000 1,979 1,979 25% Miscellaneous 506 506 Total Revenues 1,854,027 28,986 28,480 2% Expenditures: Salaries and wages 44,775 11,117 11,117 25% Refuse hauling 1,826,717 Other expenditures 8,095 1,199 1,199 15% Total Expenditures 1,879,587 12,316 12,316 1% Revenues Over/(tJnder) Expenditures (25,560) 16,670 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 165,320 165,320 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 139,760 181,990 Temecula Community Services District Service Level R Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Three Months Ended September 3 0, 19 96 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. -Activitv of Budget Revenues: Assessments 19,276 Investment interest 39 39 Total Revenues 19,276 39 39 Expenditures: Emergency street maintenance 19,201 Other expenditures 75 Total Expenditures 19,276 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures 39 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 3,650 3,650 Ending Fund Balance, September 3 0, 1996 $ 3,650 $ 3,689 Temecula Conununity Services District Capital Project Fund-Comrnunity Recreation Center Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Total Percent Budget Activitv Encumbr. Acti,,,,itv of Budget Revenues: Investment interest 4,142 4,142 Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures 4,142 Beginning Fund Balance, Julv 1, 1996 $292,833 292,933 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $292,833 296,975 10 Temecula Community Services District Debt Service Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended Total Percent Budget Aetivitv of Budget Revenues: Operating transfers in 501,600 324,220 65% Investment interest 34,000 8,888 26% Total Revenues 535,600 333,108 62% Expenditures: Debt service - principal 170,000 Debt scr-Nice - interest 325,600 Trustee admin fees 6,000 1,934 32% Total Expenditures 501,600 1,934 0% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures 34,000 331,174 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 523,849 523,849 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 557,849 855,023 1 1 /FINAL DEPARTI\4ENTAL REPORT APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTO@@, CITY MANAGER6@ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ronald E. Bradley, General Manager DATE: December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Departmental Report PREPARED BY:Gail L. Zigler, Administrative Secretaryi Construction of the Parkview Fire Station began on January 3, 1996. The exterior stucco is scheduled to be completed by the end of December. The parking lot and sidewalks should be complete prior to the end of the year. This project is scheduled to be completed February, 1997. The Rancho California Creek Restoration Project completed construction on September 25, 1996 and is currently in the 90 day maintenance period. The maintenance period is scheduled for completion in early January, 1997. Sam Hicks Monument Park Improvement Project is complete and has begun the 90 day maintenance period. The maintenance period is scheduled to be complete February 17, 1997. A contract was awarded to Skytec, Inc., for the construction of the City of Temecula Maintenance Yard facility. Construction began on September 3, 1996. The perimeter masonry walls are complete. Currently the contractor is laying masonry block at the second story level of the facility. Installation of the concrete parking lot will begin the first of January, 1997. Installation of the rough plumbing and electrical is scheduled for mid- December. This project is scheduled to be completed by Spring of 1997. The Alhambra Group has completed the construction documents for second submittal for Margarita Community Park. It is anticipated this project will go out to bid in March, 1997. The Master Plan includes parking, lighting, tot lots, picnic facilities, landscaping, irrigation, and pedestrian walkways. The bid will also include additive alternates for a roller hockey rink, tennis courts, and improvements to the adjacent school district baseball fields. The 6th Street Parking and Restroom Project is currently in the masonry construction phase of the restroom facility and block wall along Front Street. This project will be the first built as part of the Old Town demonstration block. Amenities include a restroom facility, public lockers and eighty (80) parking stalls. Additionally, the Temecula Stage Stop transportation center will begin construction and is located on this site. It is anticipated this project will be completed in April 1997. R:\A\AGENDAS\DEPT'037 @to,im REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEI\4 I MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996 A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 5:09 P.M. at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. Chairperson Patricia H. Birdsall presiding. PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, Agency General Counsel Peter Thorson and Agency Secretary June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. AGENCY BUSINESS 1Election of Officers for 1 997 It was moved by Agency Member Lindemans, seconded by Agency Member Roberts to elect Steve Ford to serve as Chairperson to preside until the end of calendar year 1 997. The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Agency Member Roberts, seconded by Agency Member Stone to elect Karel Lindemans as Vice Chairperson who will assume the duties of the Chairperson in his absence and hold this office until the end of calendar year 1997. The motion was unanimously carried. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT None given. AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS None given. Minutes.rdal 20396 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Lindemans to adjourn at 5:1 5 PM to a meeting on December 10, 1 996, 7:00 P.M., Temecula City Hall, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was unanimously carried. Patricia H. Birdsall, Chairperson ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC, City Clerk/ Agency Secretary Minutes.rdal 20396 -2- ITEI\4 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIR. OF FINAN,@@ CITY MANAGER TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO:Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members FROM:Genie Roberts, Director of Finance DATE:December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 PREPARED BY:Tim McDermott, Assistant Finance Director Steve Oakley, Accountant@ RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30,1996. DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited activity of the Redevelopment Agency for the three months ended September 30, 1996. FISCAL IMPACT: None. ATTACHMENTS:Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Combining Balance Sheet as of September 30, 1996 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance For The Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 (Unaudited) Prepared by the Finance Department 1 Temecula Redevelopment Agency Combining Balance Sheet As of September 30, 1996 Assets and other debits: Cash and investments Receivables Land held for resale Total assets Liabilities and fund balances: Liabilities: Due to other funds Other current liabilities Total liabilities l,'und balances: Reserved Designated Total fund balances Total liabilities and ftind balances Low/Mod CIP Fund Fund $3,466,717 $12,422,968 49,230 982,772 2,103,053 $3,515,947 $15,508,793 $ 32,800 $17,853 623,686 17,853 656,486 28,115 2,519,454 3,469,979 12,332,853 3,498,094 14,852,307 $3,515,947 $15,508,793 2 Debt Service Total $3,824,063 $ 19@713,748 33,724 1,065,726 2,103,053 $3,857,787 $22,882,527 $32,800 641,539 674,339 $1,448,920 3,996,489 2,408,867 18,211,699 3,857,787 22,208,188 $3,857,787 $22,882,527 City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Agency Low/Moderate Income Housing For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YID Total Percent Budget tivity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Property tax increment $1,150,648 Investment interest 150,000 $ 49,231 $49,231 33% Mscellancous 6,000 Total Revenues 1,306,648 49,231 49,231 4% Expenditures: Salaries and wages 70,534 16,674 16,674 24% Operating expenditures 107,500 12,621 $6,600 19,221 18% First time homebuyer program 250,000 Affordable housing - substantial rehab. 200,000 18,245 18,245 9% Affordable housing - rental units 1,130,000 12,296 3,270 15,566 1% Total Expenditures 1,758,034 41,591 28,115 69,706 4% Revenues Over/(Under) Expenditures (451,386) 7,640 Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 3,490,454 3,490,454 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $ 3,039,068 S 3,498,094 3 City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Agency-CIIP For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YID Total Percent Budget Activity Encumbr. Activity of Budget Revenues: Investment interest $375,000 105,263 $105,263 28% Rental income 102,000 27,750 27,750 27% Loan fees 500 350 350 70% Loan interest 15,000 9,388 9,388 63% Total Revenues 492,500 142,751 142,751 29% Expenditures : Winchester Road interchange 2,852,420 514,660 1,771,470 2,286,130 80% Sam lecks monument park 241,219 124,088 70,607 194,695 81% First street bridge 3,981,076 72,584 64,788 137,372 3% Sixth street parking 734,083 72,330 595,001 667,331 91% Old Town demo block 2,495,000 Old Town building facades 150,034 2,705 2,705 2% Old Town gateway 83,500 Old Town storm drain 420,000 Old Town sewer lines 474,200 Old Town water lines 437,000 Salaries and wages 128,793 28,445 28,445 22% City adniin charges 75,000 18,750 18,750 25% Fee reimbursement 30,000 Economic development 150,900 66,299 4,500 70,799 47% Consulting services 172,950 10,689 300 10,989 6% Legal services 70,000 7,753 7,753 11% Owner participation agreements 238,000 City promotional program 117,523 46,352 3,951 50,303 43% Old Town plan implementation 62,500 Auto dealer assn. loan credit 140,000 Operating transfers out 258,870 Operating expenses 71,670 17,875 8,837 26,712 37% Total Expenditures 13,384,738 982,530 2,519,454 3,501,984 26% Revenues Over/(TJnder) Expenditures (12,892,238) (839,779) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 15,692,086 15,692,086 EndingFundBalance,September3O,l996 2,799,848 S -14,852,307 City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual Redevelopment Agency - Debt Service For the Three Months Ended September 30, 1996 Annual Amended YTD Percent Budget tivity of Budget Revenues: Property tax increment $ 4,602,592 $ 10,381 0% Investment interest 125,000 43,115 34% Deferred passthrough 810,017 Total Revenues 5,537,609 53,496 1% Expenditures: Passthrough agreements 3,547,741 Property tax adniin fees 95,000 Debt service - principal 590,000 Debt service - interest 858,670 429,335 50% Trustee admin fees 6,000 Total Expenditures 5,097,411 429,335 8% Revenues Over/(LJnder) Expenditures 440,198 (375,839) Beginning Fund Balance, July 1, 1996 4,233,626 4,233,626 Ending Fund Balance, September 30, 1996 $4,673,824 $3,857,787 5/FINAL ITEI\4 3 APPROVAL CITY ATTOR FINANCE DIF CITY MANA( TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members FROM: Mary Jane McLarney, Assistant City Manager DATE: December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Contract Between ECAP and the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members: 1)Approve a Contract with ECAP not to exceed $12,000 to provide quarterly labor reports for the City of Temecula; 2)Authorize Executive Director and City Attorney to execute the Contract with ECAP. BACKGROUND: On October 8, 1996, the City Council adopted the Economic Development Strategic Plan which is based on an assessment of the Temecula economy. The key component of this assessment is current and accurate labor information. Therefore, staff is requesting a contract with ECAP to provide quarterly labor reports similar to our sales tax and property tax reports. The reports will provide information on our existing businesses including numbers of employees, salaries, as well as comparative data. We will also be able to independently verify employment information provided by those companies who have Owner Participation Agreements and property tax reimbursements contingent upon minimum employment levels. The cost of this service is $1,000 per month. John Husing, Ph.D. of ECAP, is the only provider of this data at this point, because the legislature only recently adopted legislation to allow cities access to Employment Development Department records. Dr. Husing's resume and client list is included as Attachment B. In addition to providing the labor data, ECAP will also provide a demographic profile. A sample (City of Corona) is included in Attachment A. Currently, staff compiles a report in-house, but does not have access to the same number of data resources. Another important component of labor data is a report on the local workforce. A separate study was prepared in 1994 and is in need of an update. Current information is available from other sources and will be brought forward at a later date. FISCAL IMPACT: This contract will be funded out of Redevelopment Agency Consulting. ATTACHMENTS:A - City of Corona Demographic Profile B - Resume/Client List Contract ATTACHMENT A CITY OF CORONA DEMOGRAPHIC, ECONOMIC, QUALITY OF LIFE DATA INDEX - - - - -------------------- a.=arn== CITY OF CORONA SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION As the City of Corona approaches the 21st Century, a combination of location, timing and attitude are turning it into one of the Southern Califomia's true success stories: Location because the city sits at the mouth of the Santa Ana Canyon, making it the first Inland Empire city to receive growth impulses from the outward movement of people and firms from traditionally prosperous Orange County. Timing because Corona was inevitably slated to be at the dynamic edge of Southern Califomia's growth, that day just happens to be now. Attitude because Corona's lead- ership is approaching this period of intense prosperity in a manner that will create a livable envi- ronment and solid economic base well into the future. These statements are not just hyperbola. They are supported by a wide range of solid data about the city. These data are presented below. 2. Demo-graphics For generations, Southern California has grown outward along its transportation corridors. Dur- ing each decade, the current outer ring of development has eventually become saturated. This has driven up its cost of living and level of congestion, pushing people and firms still farther out. At different times this "spill over" process has made the San Fernando Valley and Orange County metaphors for Southern California energy and growth. Today, that mantle is falling on the Inland Empire, with the City of Corona one of the prime beneficiaries. Thus, the city's demographic profile now shows a fast growing, ethnically diverse place, where relatively young, well educated families are raising children, and succeeding eco- nomically. Since 1990, Corona has added more people than any other Inland Empire community and has had the highest growth rate for area cities with over 80,000 residents. Its 1990 mean age was signifi- cantly younger than that of Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles or Orange Counties. Like most Southern California places, Corona is ethnically diverse though it has a larger proportion of Hspanics and Asians but a smaller percentage of Black population. Corona is a place for young families. Thus, the Census showed that the city's largest population group was 30-39 year old baby boomers; its second largest was their 0-9 year old children. Far exceeding Southern California averages, two of three Corona adults are living with their spouses, with 60% of these couples living with children under 18. Corona's fa@lies benefit from above average income and education. Thus, the city's 1996 me- dian income of $53,000 is well above that for Riverside, San Bernardino, or Los Angeles Coun- ties, and nearly equal to Orange County. The largest percentage of its families make $45,00- $74,999. Over half of Corona's residents have attended some college, with over a quarter receiv- ing bachelors or graduate degrees. 3. Home Markets Corona's housing stock is feeling the influence of its position at the leading edge of Southern Califomia's fastest growing region. Since 1980, the number of dwelling units has increased over 2.5 times, with the vast majority being single family detached homes. Today, sales of existing and new home are at their highest levels since 1990. They have trended upward since 1992 and 1993 respectively, despite near dormant conditions in most Southland residential markets. Meanwhile, new home prices have risen for three consecutive quarters and existing home prices are stable. Families moving to Corona find home prices averaging $70,000-$80,000 below those in Orange or Los Angeles Counties. In the investment grade multi-family housing market, one in ten Inland Empire units is found in Corona. This market's strength echoes that in the city's detached residential markets. Thus, nineteen of twenty units are occupied, with average rental rates ranked second highest in the re- gion. Looking ahead, Corona has been the only Inland Empire community to see several consecutive years of continuous and accelerating growth in single family residential building permits. Last year, its total residential and non-residential permits were nearly 2.5 times those in the nearest other Riverside County community. With the recession ending, Corona's housing markets will now benefit from interest rates that are over 2% below historic averages, and the lowest average monthly payments for new and existing homes in a decade. In addition, Southern California job markets are finally strengthening, giving consumers the confidence they have been lacking for some time. 4. Employment (To be written) 5. Taxable Retail Trade With Southern Califomia's recession over, Corona's taxable retail sales are again setting records. Last year, they were just under the $ 1. 0 billion dollar level, up nearly IO%. Consistent with the city's leading edge position in the Inland Empire, its sales growth has exceeded that of Riverside County for nine of ten years. Though Corona has just under 100,000 people, its retail activity is above that in three of the six Inland Empire cities with populations above that level. Given the importance of the retail sales tax to municipal finance, taxable sales per capita are a fair index of a city's ability to provide services to its population. Corona is thus fortunate to find its retail trade per capita back above the $10,000 level, and second only to Ontario among Inland Empire major cities. It per capita sales are one-third higher than the Riverside County average and have grown at three times the county level for the past three years. Interestingly, in the past decade, Corona's sales tax growth has been largely driven by retail sales by non-retail outlets. This includes retail sales by professional & service firms, construction con- tractors, and manufacturing & distribution firms. Dufing this period, the group accounted for one-third of the city's sales gain, and is now responsible for three of every ten dollars in total sales. It is now Corona's largest retail sector, well ahead of the slower growing automotive group. Corona's retail sales performance is benefiting outlets located in the community. In eight out of twelve retail sectors, their average sales are above Inland Empire averages. Over all, city outlets average $765,000 a year in sales, thirty percent above Riverside County. The city's strongest re- tail performance is by building material outlets. Their average sales exceed either Riverside or San Bernardino levels by $1 million per year. Looking ahead, Corona's retail sales jumped II. 8% in the first quarter of 1996 indicating that its retail strength continues to build. Riverside County sales surged 11.9% indicating that the posi- tive envirom-nent affecting the city is now spreading to the region. 6. Industrial Real Estate Since Jan-94, Corona's location advantages and aggressive marketing efforts have lured 38 me- dium sized firms to the city. Not counting secondary impacts, these companies will eventually add 2,300 jobs to its economic base. Most are manufacturers, a few are distributors, a small number are firms providing services to clients throughout California. The majority of these operations are migrating to Corona from either LA or Orange County. They are coming because the city offers reasonable lease rates and competitive labor costs while providing uncongested access to logistics centers such as Ontario International Airport, Consoli- dated Freight's regional hub in Mra Loma, and BN-Santa Fe's Intermodal Rail Yard in San Ber- nardino. In addition, the city is located at the Route 91 & I- 1 5 junction, close to Orange County. Along with these location factors, firms find that the Corona city government has created policies and procedures designed to increase the efficiency with which business interacts with the munici- pal government. The success of these was seen in the recent set of decisions by Fender Guitar to first stay in the city; then to expand; and later to expand a third time, plus assist in the develop- ment of a guitar museum and perforating arts center. Today, Corona has nearly 14 million square feet of manufactufing and distribution space, fifth among Inland Empire cities. In a five year period, the rush of firms to the city has caused its in- dustfial vacancy rate to fall from over 24% to very low levels: 1.34% according to Lee & Asso- ciates- 9.4% according to Grubb & Ellis. In any case, the market is now tight and new space is under development. Industrial firms migrating to Corona vall find that its average lease rate is equal to the lowest in any non-Inland Empire market. 7. Community Characteristics Corona expanding economy has given it the wherewithal to devote an increasing amount of com- munity resources to education, parks and law enforcement. The results have been significant. The community's students are performing well, its citizens enjoy a substantial number and variety of parks, and the city's crime rate has fallen dramatically. Corona's young people attend classes in the Corona-Norco Unified School District, the third largest in Riverside County. Students in this district have a graduation rate over 86%, higher than either the county or California averages. They are enrolling in college preparatory classes at the same rate as Riverside County, and a higher rate than the state average. In an era when many parents want their children prepared for the work place, the district is second among Riverside County's ten largest districts in technical class enrollment, ahead of either the county or state av- erages. On an achievement basis, Corona-Norco consistently ranks above the average for River- side County on SAT & ACT scores, and advanced placement testing. Within a half-hour drive of Corona, are 12 private and public colleges & universities with a com- bined enrollment of over 1 12,000 students. Included are nationally known private schools like the Claremont Colleges, the University of Redlands; and Loma Linda Medical School. There are two State University campuses, one specializing in engineering; the University of California at River- side; and four Community Colleges including a campus of Riverside Community College in adja- cent Norco. Meanwhile, Corona residents looking to enjoy their leisure time now find that the city has 29 parks covering 210.5 acres, plus a variety of neighborhood and community parks that bring the total acreage to 269.5. There is one acre of city park land for each 369 residents. Finally, people are safer in Corona thanks to a crime rate that has decreased by 22% since 1992. The city's property crime rate per I 00,000 people is down 28.6%- and violent crime is off 2. 1 %. Summary Eventually, the City of Corona was going to be one of Southern Califomia's hot spots. That time is now. As a result, the city finds its population rapidly becoming larger, better educated and more prosperous, with an increasing proportion of younger fa@ies with children. Reflecting these trends, the city's residential real estate sales are the strongest in the Inland Empire with sin- gle family detached homes representing the vast bulk of activity, and prices beginning to recover. Consistent with this environment, Corona's retail sales are surging, with per capita sales the sec- ond highest among major Inland Empire cities and city outlets generally exceeding sales averages for the region. Meanwhile, a combination of strong cost and locational advantages, plus shrewd governmental policies have lured several new firms to Corona, broadening its long term economic base. an @ Kw mirm Corona residents are fortunate to have a school system with graduation rates, college prep atten- dance and technical education attendance that are generally above county & state averages, and high school student achievement above county averages. City residents have access to a very well developed park system, and live in a city where the crime rate has fallen substantially in the past four years. When a Southland city is hit by the outward moving wave of prosperity now affecting Corona, city leaders have the opportunity to shape its long term character. Corona appears to be develop- ing as a prosperous family community, with a solid financial base from the retail sales, a sound economic base built around manufactufing, with good schools, numerous parks, and a falling crime rate. CITY OF CORONA SECTION 2 DEMOGRAPHICS As Corona is the closest Inland Empire city to Orange County, and sits at the junction of Route 91& Interstate 15, it has been one of the main beneficiaries of the growth that has spilled into the Riverside-San Bernardino County area from Southern Califomia's congested coastal counties. Thus, during the past 6-years, Corona has added more people (23,557) than any other inland area community (Exhibit 1), and has had the highest percentage growth rate (31.0%) for cities over 80,000 people (Exhibit 2). Its annual growth rate fell from a torrid 6.8% to 2.4% during the re- cession. It returned to a very rapid 4.3% pace last year (Exhibit 3). Since 1987, the city has consistently grown faster than either Riverside or San Bernardino County (Exhibit 4). Corona is succeeding, in part, because young families are n-tigrating inland in search of affordable housing and an uncongested environment. As a result, in 1990, the city's largest population group was its 30-39 year old baby boomers. Interestingly, its second largest group was their chil- dren, in the 0-9 year age range (Exhibit 5). With a mean age of 29.1 years, the community's population is significantly younger than that of Riverside or the adjacent counties (Exhibit 6). Corona is becoming an upper middle class community. In 1990, its $43,55 median income was substantially above that for Riverside, San Bernardino, or Los Angeles (L.A.) Counties, and al- most up to the Orange County's level (Exhibit 8). In 1996, the city's median income is estimated to have reached $52,895, compared to $40,176 for Riverside County (Exhibit 7). Today, the largest percentage of Corona families are thought to be in the $45,00-$74,999 bracket- the county's largest group are estimated in the $O-$29,999 group (Exhibit 9-10). Corona is doing well economically for three reasons: 1.New home sales have been strong, bringing the city a continuing flow of working families. 2.Thecity'seconomycontinuestoproduceastreamofgoodqualityjobs. 3.The commute to Orange County is relatively short. m vtw Also, Corona benefits from having a well educated population. In 1990, 52.6% of the city's resi- dents had at least attended college (Exhibit 12). That is a larger share of the adult population than for Riverside, San Bernardino or L.A. Counties, though it was less than in prosperous Or- ange County. 27% have either a bachelor degree or advanced degree (Exhibit 11). Like most Southern California cities, Corona is an ethnically diverse community. According to the 1990 census, 29.9% of city residents classified themselves culturally as Mspanic. That was a higher percentage than for the adjacent counties except L.A.(Exhibit 13-14). Among the ethnic groups, each of which contains IFEspanics, three of four people were V;Mte. Blacks were a rela- tively low 2.7%. Asian were a disproportionately high 7. 1 %. Other races and American Indians made up the remaining 13.4%. Corona's relative youth shows up in the martial status of its households. During 1990, 66.9% contained a married couple living together (Exhibit 15-16). That is 6% to 16% higher than in the adjacent and surrounding counties. In addition, 59.4% of those families had children under 18. That is 4% to II% more than in those counties. Clearly, a significant number of young families are either moving to or remaining in Corona and raising their children. Looking at individuals, 59.4% are living with a spouse, again a higher percentage than for Southern California as a whole (Exhibit 17-18). To summarize, demographically Corona emerges as a very fast growing, ethnically diverse city, where relatively young and well educated fan-tilies are raising children, and doing well econon-fi- cally. Note: The 1990 Census has served as the basis for parts of this section. Since 1990, the baby boomers have aged six years. California has had a severe recession. I-Espanic families have had more than the average number of children. Asian families have become a somewhat stronger in- fluence in Southern Califon-tia. And, Corona's new home market has slowed but done better than surrounding areas. As a result, the Corona of today is undoubtedly an older, somewhat better educated, slightly more diverse city, with a larger share of married couples with children. The natural forces affecting the city's resident population have provided the extra age and diversity. The continuing influx of new home owners to the community has likely moderated its diversity while adding families with better education and income. The latter is the case as many of the new arrivals have needed above aver- age incomes to qualify for home loans. City 1990 1996 Change % Change 1 Corona 75,943 99,500 23,557 31.0% 2 Victorville 40,674 60,000 19,326 47.5% 3 San Bdno 164,676 181,700 17,024 10.3% 4 Riverside 226,546 243,400 16,854 7.4% 5 Hemet 36,094 52,600 16,506 45.7% 6 Fontana 87,535 103,300 15,765 18.0% 7 Temecula 27,099 41,B50 14,751 54.4% 8 Moreno Valley 1 1 B,779 133,400 14,621 12.3% 9 R. Cucamonga 101,409 115,900 14,491 14.3% 10 Palm Desert 23,252 33,450 10,198 43.9% 11 Blythe 8,448 18,350 9,902 117.2% 12 Ontario 133,179 142,400 9,221 6.9% 13 Penis 21,500 30,500 9,000 41.9% 14 Hesperia 50,418 59,400 8,982 17.8% 15 Rialto 72,395 80,300 7,905 10.9% 16 San Jacinto 16,210 23,900 7,690 47.4% 17 Lake Elsinore 18,316 25,600 7,284 39.8% 18 La Quinta 11,215 1 B,050 6,835 60.9% 19 Apple Valley 46,079 52,800 6,721 14.6% 20 Adelanto 6,791 13,350 6,559 96.6% Source:CA Department of Finance, E-5 Reports, 1990-1996 Population Growth... January 1990-1996 0In the 1990s, Corona has been the Inland Empire's fastest growing city adding 23,557 people. That was 4,321 more than Victorville. 0Among cities with over 80,000 people, Corona had by far the fastest growth rate, up 3 I.%. The next city was Fontana at 18%. .... ............. 3tO% ... .. .... ...... ..... . ................ .... .... ........ .... .. ............ .... ... ..... ... . .... . . . .............. t2.$% 10.9% io.@% t--- ---- 7 4% 6.1% Corona Fontana RanchoCuca. MomnoVal. Mano San Bdno Mverside Onlano Isource:r-ADepartmentofFinance,E-5R ------------------------------- -------------- -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - 6.9% ----------- -------------- --------------- - ------------- -------------- --------- --- ------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - ------------- -------------- 4.1% ------------- - -------- ---- 2.9% - - - - - - - - - - 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Isource: CA Depa@ent of Finance,E-5 Reportsi Population Growth ... Corona's population growth rate slowed from over 6.8% to 2.4% in the early 1990s. It accelerated back to 4.3% from 1994-1996 in response to Califomia's economic recovery. In the immediate future, Corona's rapid growth NOII continue as the city is the nearest Inland Empire city to Orange County, and sits at the Route 60-115 junction.. From 1993-2005, the Inland Empire will add 928,000 people, Number #1 among 172 U.S. Metropolitan Areas! -U.S. Depar-tment of Commerce- Since 1988, Corona has grown faster than either Riverside or San Bernardino County. In 1997, Corona will be the sixth Inland Empire city to reach 100,000 people. imumm Mr, nrlg ME Year Corona Riverside County San Bomardino County 1986 45,002 840,451 1,110,442 1987 47,467 5.5% 893,403 6.3% 1,174,243 5.7% 1988 52,684 11.0% 953,807 6.8% 1,250,896 6.5% 1989 61,631 17.0% 1,024,604 7.4% 1,335,649 6.8% 1990 75,943 23.2% 1,170,413 14.2% 1,418,380 6.2% 1991 81,100 6.8% 1,223,200 4.5% 1,464,700 3.3% 1992 86,400 6.5% 1,268,800 3.7% 1,508,700 3.0% 1993 90,500 4.7% 1,304,400 2.8% 1,538,600 2.0% 1994 92,700 2.4% 1,332,000 2.1% 1,559,100 1.3% 1995 95,400 2.9% 1,355,600 1.8% 1,572,700 0.9% 1996 99,500 4.3% 1 11381,879 1.9% 1 1,589,470 1.1% Note:1990 growth includes adjustments for underestimates during prior decade. Source: CA Department of Finance, E-5 Reports 0 WIN Age Group City of Riverside San Bernardino LA. Orange Corona County County County County 0-9 19.8% 17.3% 18.7% 15.5% 14.4% 10-19 14.3% 13.9% 15.2% 13.8% 13.1% 20-29 1 B.8% 15.7% 17.2% 19.0% 19.5% 30-39 20.4% 17.3% 18.0% 18.0% -18.2% 40-49 12.1% 11.2% 11.6% 12.3% 13.5% 50-59 6.3% 7.5% 7.2% 8.1% 8.8% 60-69 4.6% 8.4% 6.3% 6.8% 6.7% 70-79 2.7% 6.1% 4.0% 4.3% 3.9% 80 &Up 1.0% 2.6% 1.7% 2.1% 2.0%1 Population 76,095 1,170,413 1,418,380 8,863,184 2,410,5561 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 Age Distribution, 1990 ... 0In 1990, the largest share of Corona's population, 20.4%, was in the 30-39 year old age baby boomer group. 0The children of this group are the city's second largest population group, ages 0-9. Corona Is Young: 1990 Mean Age Was 29.1! Riverside County (33.8), San Bernardino County (30.9) Los Angeles (32.8), Orange County (33.2) -U.S. Census Bureau- 0In 1990, only 8.3% of Cororia's population was over 60, versus 17.1% for Riverside County. 0 Recent rapid population growth, adding young new home owners, should keep the average age low. .. ....... . ... - - - ------- - 20.4%; 19.8% ..... . . ... .......... . - ------- 17.3% 17.3% ..... ..... . ------- ... ...... ... 15.7% + C)Drona 12.1 W. 0 Rrverside Co. ..... ........ 8.4% .7@5% 4.6 2.7 .2.6% D-9 1D- 19 20-29 30-39 4G-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80 & Up Source:U.S. Census, 1990 Income Range Corona Riverside County F@es % Dist FaniLiBes % Dist $ 0,000-$14,999 2,973 9.5% 77,880 16.4% $15,000-$29,999 4,330 13.8% 96,046 20.2% $30,000-$44,999 5,245 16.8% 90,257 19.0% $45,000-$59,999 5,519 17.6% 72,065 15.2% $60,000-$74,999 4,889 15.6% 51,943 10.9% $43.555 $75,000-$99,999 4,541 14.5% 44,454 9.4% $1 00,000 and Up 3,800 12.1% 42,474 8.9% $33io8l $33443 Median household income $52,895 $40,176 Total Income (000) $1,838,080 $23,941,665 Average Household Income $58,731 $50,391 Per Capita Income $18,473 $17,326 IE@ates allow for changes in CPI and population. 2 Assumes stable relative income levels & no purchasing power change. @8 LA Ccunty Omnge RKe@de San Bemerlino Source: U.S. Census, 1990, and ECAP estimates for 1996. [source: u.s. sus, iggo INCOME, 1990 & 1996 ... 059.9% of Corona's households have incomes over $45,000 versus 44.4% for Riverside County. 0Corona's 1996 estimated median income of $52,895 is substantially above that of Riverside County ($40,176). 0In 1990, Corona's median income ($43,555) was just below that of Orange Countv ($45,922) and well above that of Riverside, L.A. and San Bernardino Counties ($33,000-$35, 000). 0In 1990, the largest share of Corona's households were in the $45,000-$74,999 income group (33.391o), for Riverside County it was the O-$29,999 group (36 691o). (8 9%) six Om UP (12 1%) s,co,ooo &UP (14 5%) $75 000 S99. 15 M) $30.OW$44 Ng (33 3%) $45 M@$74,gN is-@. U.S.C..-,ECAPI US C,,,- ECAP lughest Education lxvel Corona Riverside San Bernardino Los Angeles Orange Less 9 Years 10.4% 10.2% 8.8% 15.6% 9.0% 9 to 12 Years Non-graduate 13.5% 15.7% 15.8% 14.4% 9.8% High School Diploma/GED 23.5% 26.4% 27.0% 20.7% 20.1% Some College 25.6% 25.6% 25.0% 19.7% 24.5% Associated Arts 9.1% 7.5% 8.5% 7.4% 8.9% Bachelor Degree 13.7% 9.6% 9.8% 14.5% 18.7% Graduate Degree 4.2% 4.9% 5.2% 7.8% 9.1% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: U.S. Census, 1990 Educational Levels, 1990 ... 0Corona has a relatively well educated population with only 23.9% of residents 25 & up not having graduated from high school in 1990. 052.6% of Corona's adults had attended some college. This was above Riverside, San Bernardino and L.A. Counties (47-4901o). It was below Orange County (6]Yo) 027% of Corona's adults in 1990 had a Bachelor's Degree or higher. This was more than Riverside (22yo) and San Bernardino County (24?lo), though less than L.A. (30"o and Orange County (3791o). .................................. . ... .. .. ....... .... .. .... . 52@B% 49.b% ........................ 4 B..i. 4 % ............. ù......... ...... ù......... Corona Riverside San Bernardino LA County Orange AA, BA, MA, PH.D. orno degree I Source: U.S. Census, 1990 ti IEW-41 Ethnic Group Corona Riverside San Bernardino LA County Ora White 76.0% 76.5% 73.1% 56.9% 7E - Black 2.7% 5.4% 8.1% 11.2% 1.7% Asian/Pacific Islander 7.1% 3.6% 4.1% 10.8% 10.4% Other Race 13.4% 13.5% 13.7% 20.6% 8.7% American Indian 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 0.5% 0. TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% luspanics (1) 29.9% 25.8% 26.3% 37.3% 23.1% Note:Hisp@cs are included in all other ethnic groups Source: Bureau of the Census, 1990 ETHNICITY, 1990 ... 0Corona's population was 29.9% lbspanics of all races in 1990. That was more than Riverside (26@o San Bernardino (26?lo) or Orange Counties (2301o), but much less than L.A. County (3701o). 0Corona's population was 2.7% Black. That was less than Riverside (5Yo), San Bernardino (8@o or L.A. Coun- ties (II Olo), but more than Orange County (2"o . 07. 1% of Corona population was Asians or Pacific Islanders. This was nearly double Riverside (401o) and San Bernardino (491o) Counties, but less than L.A. County (I 191o) and more than Orange County (10%). 0Other Races and American Indians made up 14.2% of Corona's population. That was about equal to Riverside (1591o) and San Bernardino (15Yo) Counties, less than L.A. Countv (21"o and more than Orange County (9%). MR m III E a:UTlm DIM N (0.8%) Arne@can Indian (13.4%) Other Race (7.1%) Asian/Pacific @nd (2.7%) Black Vkh te Isource: U.S. Censu WIN (39.7%) Married CoupL-, Alone (27.2%) Married Couple & Children PV(l 8%)Non-FaMly (4.2%) Male Householder (9.2%) Female Householder lsource: U.S. Cens Types Of Households, 1990 ... 0Corona households are more likely to be composed of married couples than those in adjacent counties. And, the city's married couples are more likely to have children under 18 years old. 0This is a reflection of Corona's status as a fast growing, younger suburban connnunity. It is also impacted by the significant percentage of city families that are Mspanic. 0In 1990, 66.9% of Corona households were married couples. This is more than Riverside (6191o), San Ber- nardino (6091o), Los Angeles (5OYo) or Orange (58YIo) Counties. 0At 59.4%, Corona's larger proportion of married couples are also more likely to have minor children at home than Riverside (4991o), San Bernardino (55"o , Los Angeles (5]Olo) or Orange (4801o) Counties. Household Type Corona Riverside San Bernardino lAs Angeles Orat Married Couple, children under 18 39.7% 29.8% 33.0% 25.5% 2-.9u/o Married Couple, alone 27.2% 31.0% 27.0% 24.2% 29.7% Male, children under 18 1.8% 1.9% 2.5% 2.2% 1.7% Male, no children home 2.3% 2.0% 2.1% 3.2% 2.7% Female, children under 18 5.6% 5.7% 7.5% 6.8% 4.7% Female, no children home 3.5% 3.8% 4.2% 6.0% 4.6% Non-farriily Group 19.8% 25.8% 23.6% 32.0% 28.8% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% I Population/Households 3.19 2.91 3.04 2.96 2.91 Source:U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Ulm= a a 63 ttv%lm Corona Riverside San Bernardino @s Angeles Orar Never Married 24.8% 22.9% 25.2% 33.8% 29.2% Married, Together 59.5% 56.5% 54.8% 44.8% 51.2% Separated 2.0% 2.3% 2.9% 3.0% 2.0% Living Apart 2.5% 2.9% 2.5% 3.7% 3.4% Widowed 3.5% 6.4% 5.4% 5.9% 5 Divorced 7.7% 8.9% 9.3% 8.7% 9.0% TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Marital Status, 1990 ... 059.5% of Corona citizens 15 and over are married and still living together. That is a larger percentage than in Riverside (57'lo), San Bernardino (5591o), Los Angeles (45"o or Orange Counties (51"0 . 0Meanwhile, at 7.7%, Corona residents are less likely to be divorced than each of the adjacent counties where the percentage is 9%. 0Reflecting Corona's younger population, only 3.5% of residents are widowed. The proportion is 5. 1% to 6.4% in the adjacent counties. Never Married (59.5%) Married,Together Divorced owed d [source: u.s. Census, EcApi w am CITY OF CORONA SECTION 3 HOUSING As Corona enters the last few years of the 20th Century, the city's housing stock is feeling the influence of its position at the leading edge of Southern Califomia's fastest growing region. New and existing home sales are at their highest levels since 1990. New home prices are rising, exist- ing home prices appear ready to do so. The vacancy rate in multi-family units is low, and rents are strong. Meanwhile, developers are showing considerable optimism about Corona's future. Looking forward, Corona's location advantages will allow the community to benefit from the best set of housing conditions to exist in many years. Interest rates are 2.0%-2.5% below their averages of the past 30-years. The low home price-interest rate combination has made monthly payments the best that Southern Californians have seen in a decade (without adjustingfor infla- tion). Job markets are clearly strengthening, giving consumers the confldent and security they have recently been missing. In Corona's new home market, sales have been trending upward since 1993 and are now nearing 1990 levels (Exhibit 19-22). The city's past performance has been in contrast to the generally dormant state of the Southland's new home sales. Now, however, every county is having a strong 1996. Similar, though somewhat more moderate growth has occurred in Corona's existing home mar- ket (Exhibit 23-26). Here, sales have climbing since 1992, with one off year. In 1996, they are up at a double digit rate and are also approaching 1990 levels. The feeling that Southern Cali- fornia is entering a long term upswing in housing is reinforced by the strong 1996 existing home sales being posted in every county. The long term decline in Southern California housing prices has been a main culprit in holding down sales. Here too the news is improving. In Corona, new home prices are definitely rising, with year-over-year percentage increases registered for three consecutive quarters (Exhibit 2 7- 29). Riverside and L.A. Counties have had similar experiences; San Bernardino and Orange County have not. Existing home prices have been more stubborn, with those in Corona at a floor for the past four quarters (Exhibit 31-33). However, a general increase should be experienced in @$n@ff @MMEOTEM,T(INMI the coming months given the strengthening of new and resale home markets, and new home prices. ThishasbeguninRiversideCountyasawhole,whereexistinghomepricesareup2.1% in 1996. Of considerable importance to Corona's long term health is the amount by which the city's new and existing home prices are less expensive than those in Orange and L.A. Counties. In 1996, fa@lies will find that they can save $75,000-$80,000 on the average new home, and $70,000- $80,000 on the average existing home by buying in Corona (Exhibit 30 & 34). That is more money than they were able to save in the late 1980s when the region's perceived affordability lured so many new families to the Inland Empire. Turning to multi-family housing, Corona's rapid population growth and nearness to Orange County have strengthened the market. The occupancy rate for investment grade projects is a re- spectable 94.7%, and the $713 average rental rate is the second highest in the Inland Empire (Exhibit 35-36). The city's 5,339 multifamily units represent 10% of the regional total. When Corona's housing data are viewed from an historical perspective, they show why it is one of California's fastest growing the cities. In the 16 years from 1980-1996, the number of dwell- ing units increased from 12,530 to 32,897, over 2.5 times. In this period, the character of the city was established by the fact that the overwhelming majority of these units were single family detached homes (Exhibit 37-39). Looking to the future, the development community firn-dy believes that Corona will be one of Southern California's best market places. This is revealed by the continuous and accelerating growth in the number of city single family residential building permits. It is also seen by the $273 million in 1995 total building permit valuation, an amount nearly 2.5 times the nearest other Riv- ersi 'de County community (Exhibit 37-39). 800 .. ............. ................... ............ t 600 400 ........... ................................. ......................... 200 ............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o 1 st-88 lst-89 1 St-90 1 St-91 lst-92 1 st-93 I st-94 lst-95 lst-96 ISource TRWREDIPropertyData,E-CAPSeaso@nalfty New Home Sales ... 0Since the beginning of 1993, Corona's new home sales have been moving upward. As a result, 1996 has been the best year since 1990. aThe 357 new homes sold in 2nd Quarter 1996 were the highest number in Corona since the 2nd Quarter of 1990. -vim Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. Ist-88 360 lst-92 106 5.0% 2nd-88 585 2nd-92 152 -15.1% 3rd-88 608 3rd-92 118 -29.8% 4th-88 632 4th-92 213 43.9% lst-89 421 16.9% Ist-93 98 -7.5% 2nd-89 450 -23.1% 2nd-93 144 -5.3% 3rd-89 478 -21.4% 3rd-93 204 72.9% 4th-89 649 2.7% 4th-93 163 -23.5% lst-90 327 -22.3% Ist-94 169 72.4% 2nd-90 422 -6.2% 2nd-94 231 60.4% 3rd-90 314 -34.3% 3rd-94 281 37.7% 4th-90 228 -64.9% 4th-94 296 81.6% Ist-91 101 -69.1% lst-95 230 36.1% 2nd-91 179 -57.6% 2nd-95 270 16.9% 3rd-91 168 -46.5% 3rd-95 262 -6.8% 4th-91 148 -35.1% 4th-95 321 8.4% lst-96 270 17.4% 2nd-96 357 32.2% Source:TRW REDI Property Data ON-Mok, MIMM "MM, nm@ Year Corona @ide San Bernardino Los Angeles Orange 1988 1989 -8.6% 37.3% -10.1% -27.8% -29.3% 1990 -35.4% -30.4% -22.6% -19.8% -9.3% 1991 -53.8% -39.0% -16.1% -11.8% -12.1% 1992 -1.2% -12.1% -13.8% -22.0% -13.8% 1993 3.4% -0.6% -4.3% -8.8% 0.4% 1994 60.4% 4.5% -0.6% -13.0% 32.7%11 1995 10.8% -20.2% -26.7% -7.0% -13.7% 1996 YTD 25.4% 1 17.5% 16.1%, 3.0% 8.8%11 Source: TRW REDI Property Data New Home Sales ... 0For the first six months of 1996, Corona's new home sales are up 25.4%. Sales in the adjacent and surround- ing counties are also growing though at slower rates: Riverside (17.591o), San Bernardino (16.]Olo), L.A. (3.091o), and Orange County (8.891o). Corona's New Home sales have done well as the city's homes are affordable and offer families good access to Orange & L.A. Counties, without their congested life style! 0From 1993-1995, Corona new home sales also trended upward with rates of 3.4%, 60.4% and 10.8%. In this period, the city also outperformed the region as San Bernardino and Los Angeles County sales were falling; those in Riverside and Orange County were inconsistent. 0With Southern Califon-tia employment rising, consumer confidence increasing, and six years of pent-up de- mand available, the Inland Empire and Corona home markets appear to be starting a very long upward trend. . . . ......... 60.4% . . . . ........... .......... ù. . . . ............. ù......... ù. ......... T . ... . .................... . . 10.8% ù. ......... ù. . ......... ù. . . . .......... ------------ t ------ . . . . ........ . . . . .............. . ... . ........ 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 YTD isource:TRWRM Property Data, ECAP SeasonalKyl 600 - - -------- - - -------- t 500 ... . ... . ......... . . ........ . ........... 400 . . . . ........ . ............ 3C ....... . ........ . . ........ 200 --- - -------- . ........ ..... 100 1 st-88 1 St-89 lst-90 lst-91 lst-92 1 st-93 lst-94 1 st-95 1 st-96 ISo.rce TRWREDPropertyData,BCAPSeasoralftyl Existing Home Sales ... 0The 386 existing homes sold in Corona during 2nd Quarter 1996 was that market's best performance since the 3rd quarter of 1990. The 1996 sales increase follows 1993 when existing home sales rose sharply, and 1994-1995 when they cycled in a narrow range. 0The upward trend of the past three quarters, has allowed seasonally adjusted Corona existing home sales to reach their highest level since 1990. li[l]ILI%Bklllllil I=. in@ in Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. lst-88 264 Ist-92 196 32.40@A 2nd-88 465 2nd-92 267 -1.5% 3rd-88 467 3rd-92 226 -5.4% 4th-88 467 4th-92 199 -4.8% Ist-89 402 52.3% lst-93 161 -17.9% 2nd-89 479 3.0% 2nd-93 228 -1466% 3rd-89 546 16.9% 3rd-93 279 23.5% 4th-89 506 8.4% 4th-93 282 41.7% Ist-90 379 -5.7% lst-94 284 76.4% 2nd-90 444 -7.3% 2nd-94 312 36.8% 3rd-90 396 -27.5% 3rd-94 303 8.6% 4th-90 277 -45.3% 4th-94 299 6.0% lst-91 148 -60.9% Ist-95 275 -3.2% 2nd-91 271 -39.0% 2nd-95 317 1.6% r - 1 239 -39.6% 3rd-95 294 -3.0% 4th-91 209 -24.5% 4th-95 267 -10.7% lst-96 272 -1.1%11 2nd-96 386 @80/.1 Source:TRW REDI Property Data Year Corona Riverside San Bernardino L4)s Angeles Orange 1988 1989 16.2% 13.5% 11.0% -14.1% -22.4% 1990 -22.6% -9.8% -7.6% -16.0% -2.9% 1991 -42.0% -26.0% -27.9% -28.0% -24.4% 1992 2.4% -12.2% -10.8% -12.6% -12.9% 1993 7.0% -0.9% -6.1% -1.7% 1.2% 1994 26.1% 18.5% 12.2% 15.9% 1. 1995 -3.8% -5.1% -3.9% -8.7% -20.5% 1996 YTD 11.1% 18.9% 15.3% 12.6% 31.3%, Source: TRW REDI Prope@ Data Existing Home Sales ... *Corona's existing home sales have grown more consistently than those in the adjacent and surrounding counties. Thus, from 1992-1995 the city posted sales gains in three of four years. The exception was a 3.8% decline in 1995. *A general Southern California real estate recovery appears to be occurring in 1996. Double digit sales in- creases have occurred in every county: Fiverside (18.901o), San Bernardino (l5.3Yo), Los Angeles (12.6yo), Orange (31.3"o . *As Corona is starting from a higher level, its 1996 existing home sales gain of 1 1. 1% was somewhat slower than the rates for Southern California generally. - - - -- - ------------------------------------ - --- ------ ------------ ----- - - ----- ------------- -- -- - ------- -................. .. 2.4% - - - - ---- ---- ---- --- ----------- - -- - --------------- - ------------------ 4210% 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1 1996 YTD Isource:TRWREDIPropertyData, ECAPSeasonalkyl 240,000 ------------- --------- -------------- ------------ 220,DOO .......... -------- ............ 200,000 ............ 180,000 160,000 --------------------------- 140,000 1 st-88 lst-89 lst-90 lst-91 lst-92 Ist-93 lst-94 lst-95 lst-96 Isource:TRWREDIPrope"Data,ECAP Seasonally] New Home Prices ... 0Prices for Corona's new homes set a clear bottom in late 1994 and early 1995. With strengthening real estate markets, they are now trending upward. 0At $168,302, Corona's new home prices averaged 1.1% more in 2nd quarter 1996 than in 2nd quarter 1995. This marks the third consecutive quarter during which year-over-year prices have been up. 0 1 Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. Qua er Recordings 1-Year Chg. I st-88 $146,064 Ist-92 $189,143 -9.6% 2nd-88 $147,085 2nd-92 $183,738 -8.5% 3rd-88 $149,422 3rd-92 $188,074 -6.5% 4th-88 $160,624 4th-92 $179,370 1.8% 1 st-89 $166,616 14.1% Ist-93 $181,307 -4.1% 2nd-89 $180,919 23.0% 2nd-93 $176,531 -3.9% 3rd-89 $190,978 27.8% 3rd-93 $175,022 -6.9% 4th-89 $213,189 32.7% 4th-93 $183,535 2.3% 1 St-90 $205,747 23.5% Ist-94 $181,231 -0.0% 2nd-90 $193,294 6.8% 2nd-94 $180,505 2.3% 3rd-90 $209,499 9.7% 3rd-94 $168,873 -3.5% 4th-90 $216,705 1.6% 4th-94 $159,793 -12.9% Ist-91 $209,198 1.7% Ist-95 $161,004 -11.2% 2nd-91 $200,821 3.9% 2nd-95 $166,469 -7.8% 3rd-91 $201,136 4.0% 3rd-95 $159,736 -5.4% 4th-91 $176,183 -18.7% 4th-95 $160,815 0.6% 1 st-96 $165,980 .1% 2nd-96 $168,302 1.1% Source:'IRW REDI Property Data ttelt 0, RMU&41jaorzw im LIM @%,W.Tl I= a @ Kg Year Corona Riverside San Bernardino Us Angeles Orange 1988 1989 26.0% 17.0% 18.0% 10.4% 18.3% 1990 7.2% 12.1% 10.7% 11.4% -0.0% 1991 -3.9% 0.6% 3.0% 3.9% 0.5% 1992 -6.4% -5.1% -7.0% -7.8% -2.5% 1993 -2.9% -4.3% -7.5% -2.5% -4.9% 1994 -4.3% 1.0% -0.9% 4.9% 4.8% 1995 -5.3% -0.6% 2.8% 4.4% -3.1% 1996 YM 3.3% 4.8% -2.7% 10.5% -0.6% Source: TRW REDI Property Data New Home Prices ... 0In 1996, Corona's new home prices are running 3.3% ahead of the average for 1995. This is a turnaround from their trend during the recession. 0The 1996 new home price gain in Corona is consistent with gains in Riverside (4.8@o and L.A. Counties (IO. 5"o . San Bernardino (-2.7@o and Orange Counties (-O. 6Yo) prices were down. Corona's competitive New Home prices create an advantage for high tech firms in the city. They can hire nationally with- out asking workers to sacrifice their living of standard. 0Looking forward, 1996 Corona new home buyers are saving from $75,000-$80,000 over what they would be paying in L.A. & Orange Counties. This gap is much wider than during the boom years of the 1980s. $100,000 M Lo, A@, 0 0 $90,000 - - --- - ---- $80,000 . ..... . ... . .... .............. $70,000 ............. ... .. . ..... .... $60,000 $50,000 ...... $40,000 ..... . ...... ........... $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 - - 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 YTD Isource:TRWRE[)L Property Data, ECAP Seasonalftyl a 180,000 160,000 140,000 1 St-88 1 St-89 lst-90 1 St-91 lst-92 1 st-93 1 st-94 1 st-95 1 St-96 lsource: TRVV REDI Property Data, ECAP Seasonalftyl Existing Home Prices ... a Corona's existing home prices appear to be setting a floor at an average of $148,000. 0With all home sales rising, and new home prices going up, exiting home prices should soon begin increasing. Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. Quarter Recordings 1-Year Chg. Ist-88 $122,761 Ist-92 $166,553 -0.9% 2nd-88 $125,458 2nd-92 $161,673 -2.2% 3rd-88 $134,753 3rd-92 $168,345 -2.1% 4th-88 $139,026 4th-92 $166,004 0.3% lst-89 $151,052 23.0% lst-93 $161,256 -3.2% 2nd-89 $159,608 27.2% 2nd-93 $161,712 0.0% 3rd-89 $161,652 20.0% 3rd-93 $162,374 -3.5% 4th-89 $160,667 15.6% 4th-93 $152,806 -8.0% Ist-90 $156,150 3.4% Ist-94 $154,787 -4.0% 2nd-90 $172,929 8.3% 2nd-94 $156,850 -3.0% 3rd-90 $165,576 2.4% 3rd-94 $159,365 -1.9% 4th-90 $169,675 5.6% 4th-94 $156,265 2.3% Ist-91 $168,127 7.7% Ist-95 $156,326 1.0% 2nd-91 $165,323 -4.4% 2nd-95 $157,054 0.1% 3rd-91 $171,992 3.9% 3rd-95 $148,312 -6.9% 4th-91 $165,562 -2.4% 4th-95 $150,420 -3.7% lst_96 $147,123 -5.9% 2nd-96 $148,877 -5.2% Source:TRW REDI Property Data Year Corona Riverside San Bernardino @s Angeles Orange 1988 1989 20.7% 12.3% 15.4% 11.5% 16.5% 1990 4.7% 7.0% 3.6% 2.9% 0.3% 1991 0.9% 10.4% 4.4% 7.7% 3.2% 1992 -1.4% 2.0% 0.2% -2.2% -1.7% 1993 -3.8% -5.6% -1.6% -4.3% -1.6% -1.5% -1.2% -2.3% -1.9% -0.9% 1995 -2.4% -4.3% -5.1% -5.3% -2.% 1996 YTD -3.2% 2.1% -0.8% -0.9% -1.1% Source: TRW REDI Prope@ Data Existing Home Prices ... 0After a rapid increase in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Corona's existing home price have been trending downward. In 1996, existing home prices are averaging 3.2% below 1995. People wishing to avoid L.A. & Orange County's congested life style can save $70,000 to $80,000 by purchasing an existing home in Corona, while remaining close to those areas. 0Corona's existing home prices will soon be rising as evidenced by the 2. 1 % increase in Riverside County prices and the smaller decreases now occurring in other counties. $100,000 ... . ... $90,000 e@ C3 Orange $80,000 . ......... $70,000 $60,000 $50,000 ..... $40,000 ...... $30,000 $20,000 .... $10,000 $0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 YTD Isource:TRWREEN Property Data, ECAP Seasonal@yl ILII-i,lui 96% E %nt -0 acupancy ... . ....... 95% . ....... ...... 94% $602 ... 93% $6P4 $598 . ...... 92% ---- - - --- 91% ... . ... - 90% ... . ... - 89% ... . . .... 88% . ..... 87% 86% Jun-95 Sep-95 DLc-95 Nbr-96 Jun-96 Isource: RealFacts(415)884-2480,CalculationsByECAPI Multi-Family Housing ... 0Corona has 5,339 investment grade A, multi-fan-dly housing units in 18 complexes, averaging 297 units. 0These multi-family units rent for an average of $713 per month, second highest in the Inland Empire. This is consistent with Corona's position as the region's fastest growing city and nearest point to Orange County. 0Occupancy in Corona's multi-family grade A units is above average for the Inland Empire at 94.7%. 0Inland Empire occupancy levels have recently been trending slowly downward. Average area rents have fallen from $632 to $598. City Complexes Units Units/Complcx Occupancy Avg. Rent Chino Hills 6 1,423 237 96.1% $791 Corona 18 5,339 297 94.7% $713 R. Cucamonga 23 6,402 278 95.0% $707 Ontario 8 1,987 248 94.6% $689 Chino 7 1,178 168 92.6% $647 Temecula 9 2,043 227 96.4% $629 Redlands 8 2,194 274 94.7% $627 Loma Linda 5 1,006 201 96.3% $627 Upland 10 2,105 211 94.6% $626 Mw-rieta 4 1,260 315 97.6% $597 Riverside 24 5,008 209 92.2% $557 Moreno Valley 9 1,902 211 95.2% $54 Lake Elsinore 3 534 178 1 85.0% 1 $53 Inland Empire 181 43,807 242 93.4% $62 Source:RealFacts (415)894-2480 Si.91. F..ity =3 Multi-F.mily 1980 1985 1990 1995 1994 igge CA D.p.,t@..t.fFi...... E- 6@. Year Total Single Family Multi-Family Mobile Rome Occupied Vacant Pers/HH 1980 12,530 9,515 2,427 588 11,964 4.5% 3.13 1985 15,150 11,165 2,950 1,035 14,056 7.2% 3.23 1990 25,891 17,678 6,935 1,278 23,061 10.9% 3.16 l,lO5 19,711 10,110 1,284 28,526 8.3% 3.30 1994 31,813 20,367 10,162 1,284 29,301 7.9% 3.33 1996 32,978 21,456 10,238 1,284 29,725 9.9% 3.33 Source: CA Dep@ent of Finance, E-5 Reports Dwelling Units ... 0From 1980 to 1990, the number of dwelling units in Corona doubled. It increased another 7,000 units from 1990-1996. The current vacancy rate is 9.9%. It has risen due to a recent spurt in new home construction. 0Most of the growth in units has occurred in single f@ly dwellings. The number has gone from 9,515 to 21,238 in 16 years. This large increase is why Corona is one of Califomia's fastest growing conununities. 0Since 1980, the number of persons per household has climbed steadily from 3.13 to 3.33. 0In January 1996, most Corona families live in detached single family homes (19,820) followed by multi- family apartment units (8,744). Single Famty Detache 1 19,820 1 Single Famly Attached 1,636 Mult@Family (2-4 units) Muft@Family (5+ unb) 8,714 Mobile Home 1,2i4 isou,ce:CADepanmentofFin&Lce, E-5 Report ........... @.@@@4 ............ I... I ........... ............ .......... 83,5 46 7 1988 1989 i990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Poum.:ConstructionindustryResearchBoard,ComnaBuiidingDepartmenti Year Corona Growth Riverside Growth San Bdno Growth 1988 3,394 29,689 14,514 1989 1,785 -47.4% 22,010 -25.9% 16,251 12.0% 1990 380 -78.7% 12,171 -44.7% 11,013 -32.2% 1991 142 -62.6% 6,976 -42.7% 5,969 -45.8% 1992 373 162.7% 7,607 9.0% 5,882 -1.5% 1993 467 25.2% 7,012 -7.8% 5,354 -9.0% 1994 835 78.8% 7,690 9.7% 4,585 -1. 1995 1,339 60.4% 6,803 -11.5% 3,852 -16.0% YTD 1996 561 1 59.8% 4,591 17.2% 2,832 34.5% Note: 1995 YTD 351 3,918 2,106 Source: Co@ction Industry Research Board, Corona Building Dep@ent Building Permits ... aThe pace of growth for Corona's single family residential pe@ts has been rapidly rising since 1991 and has far exceeded that of either Riverside or San Bernardino Counties. The building industry clearly sees Corona as the regional leader in new home sales during the coming months. aTotal building permit valuation in Corona, at $273 million in 1995, was two and half times that of Riverside County's second fastest expanding city. 27 3,36 4.9 9 3 .......... . ... . ....... .. . .... 115,341,7 96 115,257,873 108,74 2,703 98,299,745 Co,.n. Temecula Murr Riverside Palm Desert ilding Departments, PressEnterprise CITY OF CORONA SECTION 4 EMPLOYMENT Section Will Be Complete When EDD Data Arrives. It will run to pa2e 36 Fem..:Johnlkmheg To: @Jww I Ill&W @, l@:30 ftW I of4 ECAP ecommic wW political an@s 3142 Cactus Cimle Highlmd, CA 92346-1739 (909)4254M2 Phone & Fox john-husing@.org TO:Mary Jane McLamey, Assistant City Manager FROM:John Husing SUBJECT:Tables for ihe Employment Section DATE: November 15, 1996 @ six tables below form the basis for the data in ihe employment section. 'Me data becomes available about three months after the city applies to EDD. stry Ontario % Distrib. lni2nd Empire ONV]E truction 3,144 4.8% 42,767 7.4% if -Bl,* & Fumi@ 2,293 3.5% 17,100 13.4% 1 Sales-Biding NUtetials 312 0.5% 5,833 5.3% Im@ & Real 899 1.4% 15,300 5.9% Building & Housing 6,648 10.1% 81,000 8.2% Fabricated Metal & MacIL 2,140 3.3% 17,100 12.5% Other Non-DOD Durable @uf. 2,724 4.1% 24,200 11.3% Non-Durable @ufacturing 6,004 9.1% 32,433 18.5% Non-DOD Manufacturing 10,868 16.6% 73,733 14.7% Agriculture 1,255 1.90/0 29,500 4.3% D@bution & Transportation 13,779 21.0% 64,067 21.5% Health Service 1,167 1.8% 60,567 1.9% Business Services 4,825 7.4% 36,667 13.2% Hotel & Anumernent 1,290 2.0% 28,000 4.6% EngLn@ & Management 880 1.3% 12,167 7.2% Export Service 21,941 33.4% 201,467 10.90A missiles & space 2,510 3.8% 4,033 62.2% D@ent of Def@ 0 0.0% 6,400 0.0% Defense 2,510 3.8% 10,433 24.1% Education 4,310 6.6% 98,967 4.4% Retail Trade (non-buil@ 11,428 17.4% 162,567 7.0% Other Services 2,473 3.8% 56,567 4.4% Utilities 1,359 2.1% 12,833 10.6% IF@al Institutions (depository) 662 1.0% 13,900 4.8% 10ov (incl. @ & fe@) 2,188 3.3% 66.133 3.3% Locally B@ Sectors 22,420 3 4. r/o 410,967 5.5% Wage & Salary Survey Local Fmplayment 65,642 1 00.00/0 807,100 8.1% Civlian L@ Force 1,281,133 0.0% E-plo@ 1,172,933 0.0% Unernployrn-t 108,200 0.0% lunemployrn@ Rate 8.4% SOLTRCF: CA Emplo@t DevWopment t From: John HLobig To: R" J@ a: I IliSM Tbm: l@:32 Page 2 of 4 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 94-95 Chg. 1,255 1,183 1,261 1,86.4 1,951 6.1% 3,144 2,794 2,594 2,713 2,934 12.5% 9 13,161 10,593 11,147 10,2()9 10,115 24.2% @bution & Transpodation 13,779 10,771 9,757 7,443 6,174 27.9% Health Services 1,167 1,168 1,140 999 864 -0.1% Business Services 2,391 2,381 1,980 1,550 1,790 0.4% Employment & Help Supply Agencies 2,434 1,226 814 747 632 98.5% Engine@ & 880 984 1,160 1,128 1,()44 -10.6% Hotel & Amusemerit 1,290 1,233 1,106 1,439 1,234 4.6% Other Services 2,473 2,612 2,423 2,229 1,830 -5.3% Retail Truk 11,740 10,765 11,707 12,181 11,491 9.1% F@ cc, ReW E@ 1,561 1,634 1,501 1,264 1,245 -4.5% Utilities 1,359 831 843 955 831 63.5% Education 4,310 4,170 4,090 4,049 4,097 3.4% it missiles & space 2,510 2,598 2,791 3,074 3,077 -3@4% Govenunent 2,188 2,231 2,195 2,162 2,201 -1.9% ST kL 65,r>42 57,174 56,509 54,006 51,510 1 4. Se/a NOTE: 1,625 Lockheed workers added to prior yeam. They were not reported in Ontario in yeam. SOURCE:CA Employment Development Departinent Industry 1995 1994 1993 im 1991 94-94 cbzj Agriculture $5,700,680 $5,557,797 $6,179,683 $9,490,855 $9,861,389 2.6% Com@on 22,579,@ 19,039,963 18,152,596 19,915@ 20,060,924 18.60/- M-ufactu-g 95,450,138 70,987,860 70,176,437 69,142,066 66,559,625 34.5% Distribution & Tmmportation 95,881,206 73,562,097 62,179,696 51,190,482 42,112,816 30.3% Health Services 9,510,361 9,055,129 7,628,185 5,890,217 4,481,828 5.0-/. Business Services 12,700,636 12,396,486 9,613,356 7,767,371 8,422,636 2.5% Ernpl & Help Supply @encies 5,654,026 4,348,990 1,903,720 1,813,101 1,376,416 30.0% Engin & ent 8,524,567 8,890,830 10,280,645 9,726,665 8,119,742 4.1% Hotel & Amusement 4,108,226 3,934,272 3,609,853 5,363,138 3,554,525 4.4% Other Smices 12,823,610 13,775,476 12,454,252 11,581,842 9,724,137 -6.9% Retail Tm& 60,322,186 53,614,493 58,609,103 56,413,790 50,006,480 12.5% F Im Real Estate 12,877,801 13,238,297 11,526,330 9,505,462 8,934,345 -2.7% Utilities 14,765,226 7,348,728 7,602,018 7,617,365 6,559,764 100.9% E uca 34,702,490 33,042,224 32,022,704 31,8?-?,214 30,952,976 5.0-/. missiles & 27,245,402 28,161,317 30,055,155 30,994,486 31,960,535 -3.3% Gov 21,590,935 21,208,915 20,651,641 19,138,683 18,490,258 1.8% TOTAL $444,437,399 S378,161,874 S362,645,374 S347,353,036 S321,178,396 17.5% SOLTRCE:CA Employment Development NOTE: $18.8millioninLockheedpayrolladdedintoprioryears. ItwasnotreportedinOntarioindxneyeam. From: John Hu"M To: Nimry J@ McLwrmy Dam I IlISM r@: 12:26:37 Page 3 af 4 1"5 19% 1"3 1992 1"1 @95 Ck& $18,169 $18,792 $19,602 $20,367 $20,218 -3.3% 28,728 27,257 27,992 29,363 27,350 5.4% 29,010 26,806 25,182 27,091 26,321 8.2% @bution & Tmwportation 27,834 27,319 25,491 27,505 27,284 1.9% .earth SeMces 32,598 31,011 26,766 23,544 20,749 5.1% .nusiness Services 21,247 20,826 19,421 20,045 18,822 2.0% Employment & Help Supply Agencies 9,292 14,189 9,355 9,709 8,711 -34.5% EngLneering & ent 38,748 36,142 35,451 34,492 31,110 7.2% Hotel & Amusement 12,739 12,763 13,056 14,908 11,522 -0.2% Other Services 20,742 21,096 20,560 20,784 21,255 -1.7% Retail Tmde 20,553 19,922 20,025 18,525 17,407 3.2% F@ Insurance, Real 32,999 32,407 30,716 30,081 28,705 1.8% utilities 43,459 35,373 36,071 31,905 31,575 22.9% Education 32,206 31,695 31,318 31,437 30,220 1.6% Aircmft, missiles & 43,419 43,358 43,074 40,331 41,548 0.1% ,Govemment 39,472 38,026 37,634 35,409 33,603 3.8% trOTAL $77,083 $26,457 $25,670 $25,727 $24,941 2.4% SOURCE:CA Employment Development Ind-try 1995 19% 1993 IM 1991 %-95 Chg. Agriculture 10 9 9 13 13 6.1% on 12 12 10 10 10 -1.611/a Manufactunng 32 32 32 31 30 0.3% D@@on & TmWortation 27 23 21 19 16 17.1% Health Services 14 15 14 13 11 -10.5% Business Services 10 11 9 8 9 -10.0% Employment & Help Supply Agencies 128 94 74 53 42 35.8% Engin@ & @ement 12 15 15 17 16 -20.5% Hotel & Amusement 29 28 24 28 26 2.3% Other Services 8 9 8 8 7 -8.5% Retail Trade 26 26 27 29 27 1.6% F Im Real Estate 9 12 10 11 11 -20.1% Utilities 54 59 70 80 69 -8.4% Education 254 298 215 253 273 -14.90/a missiles & spaoc 157 75 69 81 104 109.6% Governnient 1,094 1,116 1,098 1,081 1,101 -1.90/6 TOTAL AVERAGE WORKERS PER FI[ETM 35 30 32 30 28 15.6% SOLTRCE: CA Employinent Developinent t From: John @ To: Nlmry Jam II/ISM Tom: 12:27:32 @4a(4 Ind@ Firms Workers Largest La@etal Agriculttire 128 1,255 64 5.1% C on 271 3,144 181 5.8% M- 410 13,161 798 6.1% Dighbution & T tion 508 13,779 2,169 15.70/o Health Services 86 1,167 187 16.001a Business Services 240 2,391 414 17.3% @loyment & Help Supply Agmcies 19 2,434 605 24.90/o B & ert 72 890 205 23.3% Hotel & Amusement 45 1,290 304 23.6% @ Services 295 2,473 131 5.3% Retail Trade 453 11,740 1,029 8.8% F@ce, cc, Real Estate 165 1,561 III 7.1% LTtilities 25 1,359 563 41.4% Educgition 17 4,310 2,283 53.00/o Aircraft, missiles & space 16 2,510 1,625 64.70/o 3ovmment-City of Ontmio 1 2,188 2,188 100.00/0 ,-OTAL AVERGE WO PERFIRM 2,751 65,642 SOLTRCE:CA Employment Development D@ent a r6 CITY OF CORONA SECTION 5 TAXABLE RETAIL TRADE With Southern Califomia's recession over, Corona's taxable retail sales are again setting records. In 1995, they finished just under the $1.0 billion dollar level at $990 million (Exhibit 65). Growth was strong, up 9.6%, and exceeded that of Riverside County for the ninth time in ten years (Exhibit 66). Though the city has just under 100,000 people, its 1995 sales were above those for three of the six Inland Empire cities whose populations exceed that level (Exhibit 67). Given the importance of the retail sales tax to California municipalities, taxable retail sales per capita is a good barometer of a community's ability to provide services to its population. Co- rona fares well by this standard. In 1995, its per capita sales exceeded $10,000. This was sec- ond only to Ontario among the Inland Empire's major cities. It was more than one-third higher than Riverside County's average (Exhibit 69-70). Since 1993, city sales per capita have risen by almost $1,500; the county average has risen $500 (Exhibit 68). In the past 10 years, Corona's retail trade has more than doubled, rising by 132% or $562 million (Exhibit 72). The largest share of this gain came from retail sales by non-retail outlets (Exhibit 71). This group includes professional & service firms, construction contractors, and manufactur- ing & distribution firms selling directly to the public. This group accounted for almost exactly one-third of the city's 10-year retail sales increase. Other sectors that did well in this period were general merchandise stores, specialty shops and firms selling retail building materials. By 1995, these trends have caused some reordering of the importance of Corona's various retail sectors. Thus, the non-retail outlet group has become the city's most important sector, account- ing for 29% of sales (Exhibit 73-74). By contrast, new & used automobile dealers and auto parts supply stores fell from first to second position, with their share of sales dropping from 29% to 15%. Other fast growing sectors each absorbed larger shares of Corona's 1995 market with 30% now in the combined general merchandise (II%); specialty shops & other miscellaneous stores (9.5%) and retail building material suppliers (9.0%). Retail outlets in Corona generally outperform those in other Inland Empire areas. Thus, the city's average retail store had sales of $765,000, 30% more than for Riverside County (Exhibit 76).In eight out of twelve sectors, city outlets did better than the region, with the strongest per store performance in the retail building material field (Exhibit 75). There, sales per outlet aver- aged better than $1 million higher than in either Riverside or San Bernardino County. Looking ahead, Corona's retail sales jumped 11.8% in the first quarter of 1996, indicating that the city's retail strength continues to build. At the same time, Riverside County sales surged 11.9% indicating that the positive environment that has been affecting the city the past few years is spreading throughout the region. Taking a longer perspective, the most important development in 1996, for Corona's retail trade, may well be the rebound in Inland Empire housing markets. Directly, increased housing sales will lead to sales of building materials (e.g., fences, sprinklers) and household durable goods (e.g., washers, sofas). Directly, they will also lead to population growth and higher levels of re- tail demand. Indirectly, increasing home sales will ultimately impact home prices, home equity levels and consumer feelings about their "wealth". It was this latter element, as much as fraying job markets, that restrained retail spending in the early 1990s. It should have the opposite impact in the late 1990s. . . . . . 9 9 0 U 5 3 ..... 903PSO . . . . . . . . . . 8 0-0 '17 0 2 6 9 7 iS 12 ........ ............. . . ........ .. ............. . ....... .. ....... 4 2 7 6 6 F MIN 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 IS o u,. e, C A B a a rd o f Eq u liz.ti.. Total Taxable Retail Sales ... 0In 1995, Corona's taxable retail sales surged to $990 million, an all time record. 0In the past three years, Corona's retail sales have increased 5.6%, 11.5% and 9.6% respectively. *Corona's retail sales have substantially outperformed those of Riverside County for nine of the past 10 years. Thus, the city's 1995 growth rate of 9.6% was well above the county's 5.2%. C)orona C3 Riverside Couryty -- - --------------- - - - - - ---------- ------------- -- -- - - - ------------- - - - ------------------- - ----------------------------- - - -- 16.5% ......... ......... ........ . ................... -- - ------------------------- --------- - --------- 120% 1 1 5%: 9.6%: - - - - --------- --------- --- - - ----------- - - - ------------- - 5.t% Fbc 5.21/. 1.9%; 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Isource CABoardofEqualizationi $2,140,450 $1,74F.049 $1,731,528 $99CI 353 $760 6 $721. 401 $591,067 Riverside San Bernardino Ontario Corona R. Cucamonga Fontana Moreno Valiey isource: CA Board of Equalization; CA DepartmentofFinancel Retail Sales Compared ... 0Corona (99,400) will be the Inland Empire's next 100,000 person city. Already, its retail sales are greater than those in three of the six cities in that category: Rancho Cucamonga, Fontana and Moreno Valley. 0From 1993-1995, Corona's taxable sales increased from $8,876 to $10,381 per person, up $1,482. In that period, Riverside County's sales rose $503. 0 Corona's 1995 per capital retail sales of $10,381 was $2,768 higher the county's $7,613 (364Yo). $12,000 4;a Corona Riverside Count, ------ ------ $11,ooo - - - - - - ----------------- ............... . - - ----------- sio,ooo ----------------- - -- --------------; $9.000 $8,000 $7,000 ---------- -- sr,,ooo 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Isourre:CA BoardofEguaiizationi ---mgdmFm zwr TIMI au lmwim Year Corona Riverside Moreno Val. San Bdno. Ontario P- Cucamonga Fontana 1990 $10,440 $9,Bl9 $3,423 $11,626 $ 9,497 $4,700 $6,885 1991 $ 9,283 $8,824 $3,427 $10,650 $ 9,972 $5,061 $6,730 1992 $ 8,876 $8,646 $3,868 $ 9,966 $10,848 $5,279 $6,766 1993 $ 8,948 $8,505 $4,226 $ 9,327 $10,773 $5,668 $6,461 1994 $ 9,744 $8,866 $4,363 $ 9,562 $12,112 $6,089 $6,641 1995 $10,381 $8,878 $4,504 $ 9,668 $12,271 $6,716 $7, P-p 95,400 241,100 131,900 180,700 141,600 114,600 102,200 Source: CA Board of Equalization; CA Department of Finance Taxable Retail Sales Per Capita ... 0Given the importance of retail sales to city finances, sales per capita are a key measure of a municipality's ability to provide services to its population. 0Corona 1995 per capita retail sales of $10,381 ranked second only to the $12,271 in Ontario, among Inland Empire cities with 100,000 or more people. ------ ---------------------------------------- --- - - - - - - - ---------------- - - - - 2@71 ................ ------------------- ----- $8,078 . .. . .................. - ---------- --- - ------------ $7,069 $6,VI6 --------- ---------- ----- -- $4,fG4 Corona Riverside Wreno Valiey San Bernardino Ontario P, Oicarrr)riga Fontana Isource:CA Board ofequalization, CA Depa@ntofFinancel Sector 1986 1997 1988 1989 1990 I"l 1"2 1"3 1"4 1"5 Apparel 6,442 6,935 7,536 9,904 14,399 18,790 20,505 19,818 21,076 22,365 General Merchandise 39,598 43,024 50,167 91,380 97,160 94,634 86,854 96,115 108,013 111,231 Drug Stores 7,606 7,818 12,358 15,076 16,995 17,455 19,912 15,814 13,893 13,616 Food Stores 26,877 29,914 33,931 39,657 47,220 52,996 56,701 47,917 47,854 48,503 Liquor Stores 2,640 2,642 2,986 3,302 2,691 2,947 3,578 4,755 2,818 2,548 Eating & g 36,674 40,406 46,531 52,849 57,660 62,452 67,036 70,394 72,759 75,882 Fumiture /Appliances 6,742 7,197 9,941 20,090 28,407 24,537 24,036 21,826 24,913 24,891 Blding Materials/Farm 32,504 32,593 41,490 58,323 92,390 76,975 81,507 88,679 90,085 95,419 Auto Dealers /Suppliers 123,653 123,999 119,361 122,242 126,060 103,066 110,071 117,962 132,018 151,972 Service Stations 31,149 38,684 45,392 52,223 68,791 66,201 69,932 70,732 75,694 80,635 Other Retail 27,220 27,826 35,899 48,648 62,643 69,412 62,657 65,481 83,715 90,671 Total RetaU 341,106 361,038 405,692 513,694 614,416 589,466 602,789 619,493 672,838 717,733 Al] Other 86,561 117,018 149,478 184,118 178,404 163,392 164,105 190,269 230,412 272,620 ,itotal AU Outlets 427,666 478,056 566,070 697,812 792,820 762,867 766,894 809,762 903,250 990,363 Source:CABoardofEqualization Retail Sales By Sector ... 0In the period 1986-1995, Corona's retail sales grew by $562 million (132Vo), from $427 million to a record $990 million. 0One third of Corona's retail growth ($186 million) occurred in non-retail outlets. These include retail sales by professionals & service firms, construction contractors, and industrial & distribution firms selling directly to the public. The group now ranks #1 in city retail sales ($273 million). 0Three segments of Corona's 1995 retail community have each accounted for $60-$75 million of its sales growth since 1986: general merchandise stores, other retail operations (mostly specialty goods shops) and retail building supply firms. .. . ....... -- --------- - --------------- . ...... Comna's Taxable Sales grew by $562 million between 1986-1995, up 131.6% - -- - ---------- - -------- --- ---------- - ----- "1,451 $62,915 $15,023 ($.2@ N-R.t.M G-. W-h. Oth, R.I.0 Bldg. Mi." S-. St.11.@ EMIDW* AA. SM../Pn F..d St- F-.IAppB-. APP.M Dv Sl- Uq- Sl- iso.me:CABoardofEq.akz.tioni u Oil (1.5%)Appami (9.3%) Gan oral Mem h andise (20.2%) AllOth.r (1.8%) D. g Store. (8.3%)FoodSt.10. (0.6%) Liqu.,Sto@s (6 4%)Oth.,R.tail (8.6%)E.ti.g & Drinking (7.3%)S.,ice Stations I'@@4 (1.6%)F.@itur.&Applicance. 0%)BuildingMat.,i.is&Fam (28.9%)AutoD..I.@&S.ppli.s is.u@.: CAB..rdofEqu.liz.ti.ni Share of Retail Sales ... Then (1 986) & Now (1 995) 0The rapid growth of sales in Corona's non-retail outlets moved the sector group from 20% of sales in 1986 to 27.5% in 1995, now #1 in the city. 0In 1986, new & used automobile dealers and automotive parts accounted for 28.9% of Corona sales By 1995, the group had fallen to #2 and 15.3% of sales. In the interim, the sector accounted for only $22 million of the city's retail sales increase (3.901o). 0Strong sales by Corona specialty shops increased their share of city sales from 6.4% in 1986 to 9.2% in 1995 (#5). A strong new home market pushed retail building materials from 7.6% to 9.6% of city sales (#4). And, general merchandise stores increased their share from 9.3% to 11.2% (#3). (2.3%)Appami (27.5%)AIlOth., %)Dmg Store. (4.9%)Food Stores (0.3%) L iqu or Store 6 .......... .......... (7.7%)Eating & Drinking (2.5%)Fu,.iture & Appli... (9.2%)OtherR.t. %)Buildi.g Materials & Fam (15.3%)Auto Dealers & Suppli*. IS.u@. CA Board DfEqu.liz.tion @q CITY OF CORONA SECTION 6 INDUSTRIAL REAL ESTATE Since Jan-94, Corona's location advantages have caused 38 medium sized firms to move to the city. Not counting secondary impacts, these companies will eventually add 2,300 jobs to the community's economic base (Exhibit 85-88). Most are manufacturers, a few are distributors, a small number are firms providing services to clients throughout California. The majority of these operations are migrating to Corona from either Los Angeles or Orange County. They are coming because the city offers reasonable lease rates, competitive labor costs and uncongested access to logistics centers such as Ontario International Airport, Consolidated Freight's regional hub in Mra Loma, and BN-Santa Fe's Intermodal Rail Yard in San Ber- nardino. In addition, the city is located at the Route 91 & I- 1 5 junction, close to Orange County. Along with these location factors, firms find that the City of Corona has created policies and procedures designed to increase the efficiency with which business interacts with the municipal government. The success of these was seen in the recent set of decisions by Fender Guitar to first stay in the city, then to expand, and later to expand again, plus assist in the development of a guitar museum and performing arts center. In 1996, Grubb & Ellis estimated that Corona has 13.8 million square feet of manufacturing & distribution space, representing 8.8% of the Inland Empire inventory (Exhibit 77-78). Its supply ranks 5th in the region behind Ontario/Mra Loma, Rancho Cucamonga, Chino and Riverside. Lee & Associates found that by August 1996, Corona's industrial space vacancy rate was 1.34%, with space available in only one site over 100,000 square feet (Exhibit 79-80). Using a different method of calculation, Grubb & Ellis estimated that the rush of firms into the Inland Empire re- duced Corona's industrial space vacancy rate from 24.4% to 9.4% from 1991-1996. The city's vacancy rate thus mirrors the tightness in other major Inland Empire markets (Exhibit 81-82). Several new industrial projects are construction in Corona as a result. Corona's industrial space is currently leasing for an average of $0.31 a square foot. This is at the lowest end of prices being charged by Southern California locations outside of the Inland Empire (Exhibit 83-84). Owing to the city's ideal location, it is somewhat above the $0.28 average within the region. anom Lt @, minim , @am, ouM 13,790.470 ................................................................................................. I 13,643,524 13,477,343 13,477,343 . ......... I I 13,301,953 ............ I r .............. 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Note:SpeculativeSpace0ver5,OOOFeet. NoBuildToSuttorownerBui Source Grubb& Ellis Total Industrial Space Available ... 0In 1996, Grubb & Ellis estimated that Corona had 13,790,470 feet of manufacturing & distribution space. This includes sites over 5,000 square feet, but does not include either build-to-suits or owner-built facilities. 0Corona's speculative industrial space increased by 488,5 17 square feet since 199 1. 0 Corona ranks 5th in Inland Empire speculative industrial space with 8.8% of the market. OntariotMira Lorria 53,833,333 R. Cucarnong a 18,639,985 Chin 1Y@,817,862 0 Riversid 16,13T,glg Corona 13,790,470i. (8.8%) Fontan 12,033,658 San Bernardino i,774,383 Rialto pland Moreno Valley 2,995,876 Cofton 2,511,260 Montclair 1,894,763 Redlands 1,143,009 ISource Grubb & Eitisi =Ks LI T Size Range Sites Sites Vacant Available Space Vacant Space 5,000-9,999 222 3 13 1.3% 10000-14,999 110 1 9 0.8% 15,000-24,999 102 3 7 3.6% 25,000-49,999 86 1 7 1.5% 50,000-99,999 60 1 3 1.5% 100,000 Plus 27 0 1 Sites 607 9 40 1.3% Source: Lee & Associates Industrial Space Available ... 0Corona's location at the intersection of Route 91 & 1-15, and its nearness to Orange County, have made it a hot spot for distribution & manufacturing firms migrating to the Inland Empire. 0In 1996, Lee & Assoicates estimated that the vacancy rate in Corona was down to 1.34%. Grubb & Ellis es- timated the rate at 9.4%, low by their methodology. 0In 1996, Lee & Associates estimated that Corona had vacant space available in only one of its 27 sites with over I 00,000 square feet. 0Corona's tight industrial space market has made it profitable for developers to erect additional speculative industrial space. Several projects are currently under construction. 3@6% - -- ------- -- - --------- ---- ... . .. . ............. . ............. ----- --- - ---------- -------------------------- - - ---------- - -- ---------------- 1.3% 0.0% 5,000-9,999 10000-14,999 15,000-24,999 25,000-49,999 50,000-99,999 1 00. 000 RLr. sites isource:Lee&Associatesi 30% -e Corona 4 25 % 20% 15% -- ------------ -- ------ - ----- - ------- - - -------- ------ 10% ------------- 5 % 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Note:Using anuncomp a rab lemethodLee&Associales estimatesCorona1996vac ancy at1.3% 1 Source: Gnibb &Ellis Industrial Vacancy Rate ... 0The accelerating migration of manufacturing & distribution firms to the Inland Empire has caused the area's industrial space vacancy rates to plunge. As a result, Grubb & Ellis estimates that Corona's industrial space vacancy rate dropped from 24.4% to 9.4% from 1990-1996. Using a different method, Lee & Associates puts the 1996 figure at 1.3%. 0Grubb & Ellis estimates that all Inland Empire industrial markets have tightened, with the area's vacancy rate falling from 21.6% to 8.0%. In their calculations, Corona's vacancy rate reflects the tightness found in other major Inland Empire markets. Cofton 26.6% Fontana P.4% Corona @.4% Riverside R. Oicarmnga San Bernardino 8. 6* Redlands 7@6% C)ntario/Mra Lo 7.5% Wreno Valley 6.3% Chirio 6@1% kbntclair 3.1% Uplarid )% Riato Note:UsinganuncomparablerriethodLee&AssociatesestimatesCoronal996vacancyatl.3% Source Grubb&Blis Market Colton/Rialto Redlands/San Bdno. Moreno Valley/P@s Riverside Rancho Cucamonga Ontaiio/Mira Loma Central L.A. Corona Chino Fontana South Bay Buena Pk-Cerritos Area San Gabriel Valley Orange County San Fernando Valley Ventura San Diego Source: @bb &Ellis Industrial Lease Rates (NNN) ... ennnTUTMEWPI (NNN, Month) $0.26 $0.26 $0.27 $0.28 $0.29 $0.30 $0.31 $0.31 $0.31 $0.31 $0.31 $0.36 $0.37 $0.44 $0.45 $0.48 0Corona's industrial space leasing rates averages $0.31 a month (NAW). 0Corona's industrial space costs are low by Southern California standards as it is an Inland Empire city. 0Corona's $0.31 average industrial space cost is at the top of the Inland Empire market as the city is located at the Route 91 & 1-15 junction, near Orange County, Ontario International Airport, and the Consolidated Freight hub, NNith uncongested access to the BN-Santa Fe Interrnodal Yard in San Bernardino. ........................ ........................... . ................... ................... ............ ................. $ O,.,4 4 .... . .................. . ................... $Oim ............ $0131 so;:31 $0131 . ...... ........... ...... ...... ....... ........... Irdand Emple Corona SOLAH Bay Buena Park San Gabriel Omnge Co. San Fwmrido VentLta Isource:Grubb& Bis San Dego Number of Firms Employment In Firms Manufacturing 27 71.1% Manufacturing 1,949 84.8% Distribution 9 23.7% Distribution 291 12.7% Service 2 5.3% Service 59 2.5% Government 0 0.0% Government 0 0.0% 100.0% TOTAL 100.0% TOTAL 0 Source of Firms Workers Per Firm Migrate from LA/OR 17 44.7% Manufacturing 72.2 New Growth 9 23.7% Distribution 32.3 New To Ini. Empire 26 68.4% Service 29.3 Expand Locally 12 31.6% vemment 0.0 TOTAL 100.0% TOTAL Source: CB Conunercial, Grubb & Ellis, Cushman Wakefield, Lee & Associa@, Collim Fuller Firms Migrating ... 0From Jan-94 to Jul-96, 26 firms have migrated to Corona from outside the Inland Empire. Another 12 have expanded within the city or moved from elsewhere inside the region. These companies are taking advantage of the area's available space, lower lease and labor costs, and excellent logistics infrastructure. 0These 38 firms will eventually create 2,298 new manufacturing (84.891o), distribution (12.7"o or "export" service (2.591o) jobs within Corona, an average of 60.5 per firm. 0Since Jan-94, 289 manufacturing, distribution and "exporc' service firms have announced they will move to or expand within the Inland Empire. They will directly hire 19,102 workers, 12% in Corona. ---- - - - - - -------------- - - - -- ---------------------- -- - -- - ----- - - -- ------------- ------------ - ------------ ------------ ------ - ------- --- --- ---------------------------------------------------------------- 12.0% ù. ............................................... . . .. . . . ... . ................................. . . 2,298 Inland Erripire Corona Percent isource CBCo"mrcial,Grubb&Blis,CushrrianWakefield,Lee&Associates,CollinsF.I@r F,M ri m I-ALI Lim I I N 'LI a I Ltilki I m 17.1 I Itein n I astries San Diego Aug-94 20,000 21 @grate Machinery & Equip -dical X-Ray 15 Expand May-95 11,000 Medical .bber Co. El Monte Jan-95 18,570 19 Migrate Rubber Amerifex Anaheim Aug-94 30,000 45 Migrate Metal Fabricate Avalon Manufacturing Santa Fe Springs May-94 19,277 10 Migrate Machinery & Equip Boone international Orange County Mar-95 54,490 200 Nfigrate Office Equipment Cantar/Polyair Jan-96 78,200 90 Migrate Plastic Club Car, Inc. Anaheim Jul-95 17,340 15 Migrate Sport DDC Investments May-95 34,870 21 Expand Food Fender Musical Instrument Dec-94 70,000 500 Expand Musical Instruments Fender Musical Instrument Jul-96 200,000 200 Expand Musical Instruments Homexx Orange County Jul-94 44,522 40 Migrate Metal Fabricate Hood Precision Machine Mar-96 21,000 30 Expand Auto Parts Hytech Spas Jan-95 39,630 50 New Plastic Kuchar Limited Liability Van Nuys Jul-96 25,080 15 Migrate Plastic Lucas Oil Jan-95 17,480 18 Expand Petroleum Merrick Engineering Jun-96 87,000 45 Expand Plastic Miracle Surfaces Orange County Nov-94 51,360 50 Migrate Sport National Industrial Tire Sep-94 43,000 45 New Auto Parts Preproduction Plastics Los Alamitos Jun-94 43,043 70 Nfigrate Plastic Reese Products L A County Jul-95 27,078 10 Nfigrate Auto Parts Sammons Equipment Industry May-95 30,700 20 Migrate Metal Fabricate Sunrich Fresh Processors Fullerton Jan-95 14,380 15 Migrate Food Syroco of Calif Jan-84 242,000 200 New Furniture Thermal Structures Jun-96 16,300 20 Expand Machinery & Equip TNU Products Hawthorne Aug-94 40,000 35 Nfigrate Auto Parts Watson Pharmaceutical Aug-94 I 150,000 150 Ext)and Pharmaceutical Core Mark Aug-94 70,000 50 Expand Distribution Doorway Sales Inc San Diego Jan-94 57,152 50 Migrate Distribution Ewing Irrigation Apr-96 23,000 20 New Distribution Fender Musical histniments Brea Jun-94 103,000 100 Migrate Distribution Giant Inland Empire RV Mar-96 14,000 5 Expand Distribution Hino Motors International Apr-95 60,200 11 New Distribution hmovative Packaging Mar-95 11,450 25 Expand Distribution National Distribution Ctrs. Dec-95 145,000 20 New Distribution Rehaulnc Jun-95 1 22@070 i 10 I New Distribution Special Operations Group Aug-94 13,000 45 1 New Business Service Centex Homes Riverside May-94 10,000 14 Exl2and HO Construction Source: CB Commercial, Grubb & Ellis, Cushman Wakefield, Lee & Associates, Collins Fuller Firms Migrating Or Expanding ... 93mm*.. tor Workers Firms Workers Per Firm sical Instnirnents 700 1 700.0 stic Injection 270 5 53.9 -nitue 200 1 200.0 Office Equipment 200 1 200.0 Pharmaceutical 150 1 150.0 Auto Parts 120 4 29.9 Metal Fabricating 105 3 35.0 Sport 65 2 32.5 Machinery & Equip 50 3 16.8 Food 36 2 18.2 Rubber 19 1 19.3 Petroleum 18 1 18.2 Medical 15 1 15.0 Manufacturing 1,949 27 72.2 Distribution 291 9 32.3 Service 59 2 29.3 GRAND TOTAL 2,298 38 60.5 Source:CB Commercial, Grubb & Ellis, Cuslunan Wakefield, Lee & Associates, Collins Fuller CITY OF CORONA SECTION 7 COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS As a rapidly growing community, Corona has devoted an increasing amount of community re- sources to education, parks and law enforcement. The results have been significant. The com- munity's students are perforating well, its citizens now enjoy a substantial number and variety of parks, and the city's crime rate has fallen significantly. Education Corona's young people attend classes in the Corona-Norco Unified School District. By 1995, thisdistrict had become Riverside County's third largest with over 28,000 pupils (Exhibit 89- 91).Significantly, its students are achieving a high school graduation rate of over 86%, higher thaneither the county or California averages (Exhibit 92). Corona-Norco District students are enrolling in college preparatory classes at the same rate as Riverside County, and higher than the state average (Exhibit 96). In an era when many parents want their children prepared for the work place, the district ranks second among Riverside County's ten largest districts in technical class enrollment, ahead of either the county or state av- erages (Exhibit 95). Of those ten districts, the system ranks 7th in the percent of minority stu- dents (Exhibit 93). On an achievement basis, the Corona-Norco District consistently ranked above the average for Riverside County on SAT & ACT scores, and advanced placement testing (Exhibit 97-100). Within a half-hour drive of Corona, residents and business leaders have access to large array of private and public colleges & universities (Exhibit 101-102). Altogether, there are 12 campuses with a combined enrollment of over 112,000 students. The list includes nationally known pri- vate, liberal arts schools like the Claremont Colleges and the University of Redlands. Impressive scientific work is being conducted at Harvey Mudd College, California State Polytechnic Uni- versity at Pomona, and the University of California, Riverside. Loma Linda University boosts one of the top medical schools in the world. California State University San Bernardino has an excellent School of Business. And, there are four nearby Conununity Colleges including a cam- pus of Riverside Community College in adjacent Norco. Recreation The City of Corona has one acre of park land for each 369 residents. These are located within 29 parks covering 210.5 acres, and a variety of neighborhood and community parks that bring the total acreage to 269.5 (Exhibit 103). Crime Rates Corona's crime rate decreased 21.9% from 1992-1995, according to the Department of Justice (Exhibit 104-107). In this period, the number of crimes decreased by 13.8% even though the city's population grew by 10.4%. According to the Justice Department, the city's property crime rate per I 00,000 people was down 28.6%; its violent crime was off 2. 1 %. Corona's improving public safety is reflected in regional trends. Three of the six Inland Empire city's with over I 00, 000 people had higher crime rates, three were lower (Exhibit 108-109). Like Corona, these six cities saw their combine crime rates drop 8. 1 % between 1994-1995. "I'lllffl MMMM*., District Enrollment Teachers Student/Teacher Riverside Unified 35,055 1,403 25.0 Moreno Valley Unified 31,503 1,268 24.8 Corona-Norco Unified 28,014 1,081 25.9 Desert Sands Unified 19,662 747 26.3 Palrn Springs Unified 17,589 682 25.8 Jurupa Unified 17,305 668 25.9 Alvord Unified 16,356 621 26.3 Hemet Unified 14,910 589 25.3 Lake Elsinore Unified 14,133 527 26.8 Temecula Valley Unified 12,295 488 25.2 Coachella Valley Unified 10,659 403 26.4 Murrieta Valley Unified 8,399 324 25.9 Val Verde Urified 8,134 301 27.1 Perris Union High 4,794 156 30.9 Banning Unified 4,671 195 24.0 San Jacinto Unified 4,623 177 26.1 Menifee Union Elementary 4,025 156 25.8 Perris Elementary 4,011 149 27.0 Palo Verde Unified 3,949 159 24.9 Beaumont Unified 3,510 136 25.8 Nuview Union Elementary 1,312 47 27.9 Romoland Elementary 1,011 38 26.7 Desert Center Unified 67 5 13.4 . iverside County 265,987 10,318 25.8 California 5,467,224 226,796 24.1 Source: CA Department of Education School Districts ... 0In 1995, the Corona-Norco Unified School District was the third largest of Riverside County's 24 districts with 28,014 students. 0The Corona-Norco District had 1,081 teachers, giving it a 1995 student/teacher ratio of 25.9. 0As a fast growing area, Corona-Norco's 25.9 student/teacher ratio was just above Riverside County's average of 25.8 and above the @ifo@a State Average of 24. 1. 35.0 5 5 .......... 3 1,5 a 3 - - - -------- - - ----------- - - --------- -- - - - -------- - -- ---------- - ------- 19.6 62 ,5 eT ---------- - ----------------- ........ ----------------- 16.3 5 6 U.9 10 95 1, P I. IS.u..,CA - -- ---------------- - - ------------------- ------------------- - ------------ ------ - - - - ----------- 26.8 26.3 26.3 25.9 25.9 25.8 25.3 25.2 25.0 24@8 24.1 Elvin.. @.,d D..t Sa.di C.@ns-Nw. JU.P. P.b. S pkg. H.met Teme"iR @..id. Wmno CALF. @ource CA@a@taf@ucation High School Completion Rate... 0The Corona-Norco Unified School District's student/teacher ratio of 25.9 will fall in 1996, as the state budget makes possible the hiring of more teachers and the reduction of class sizes. * 86.1% of 1995 Corona-Norco high school students are expected to graduate. 0The Corona-Norco high school completion rate is higher than Riverside County's average of 85.2% and Cali- fomia's average of 8 1. I%. - -------- - - -------------- 910% 90.8% A&6?/ 86.1% 85.2% .. . . ............ . .. . 8 t I,/. 79.2% 73.9% W... T.m.c.k @..id. @.,d P.k.Sptg. L.E3.i... Co.n.-No @@ C.. CALF. B...t J..P. DitSand. Isource:CA Department of Education -TR M Tt'o n I --------- ------------------- ------------------- - - - - - -- - --------------- ------------------- - ----------- 63.2% ----------- -------------------- ------------------- ---------- 54.1% 49.8% ------------------- - - - ---------- ---------------------- 34.1% 32.3% --- ---- 77 7-A ----------- DI, S ..d. P. k. S pdg. M.@.. Ak,.,d J..P. Ri,..id@ C.... -N. L. Fhi... H...t T...,.]. CA Dep artment of Ed ... ti.. Student Ethnicity ... 0In 1995, 49.8% of Corona-Norco students were Mspanic, Asian, Black or American Indian, 7th among the 10 largest districts in Riverside County. College Entrance ... 036.5% of Corona-Norco 1994 class of seniors entered a California 4-year or community college in the fall, well above the 24.4% average for Riverside County but below the 49.4% for California. California college entrance by Corona-Norco seniors ranked 3rd among the large Riverside County districts for whom data was available. 49.4% ....................... ------- - ------------- ----------------- - ---------------- 40.4% ... . . .................- - ----- - -- ------------------------ 36.5% 32.8% 29.8% --- 25.1% 24.4% 18.7% ............. - ------- na na CALIF. Ril@.id. T..,.uh C.@..-N.. Ju.p. Ak,.,d M.... Ri,. C.. L. Ebi... H..@t P.h.Sp-g. D.nS..d. is.u@. CA D.p.,t..@t.fEdu..ti.. I - --------- - ------- - ------ - - ------- - ------- - ------ - - - ------- - ------ - -------- - ------ -- - -------- - - -------- - ------ - - --------- - - - ------- - -------- ........ .... -- --- ---------- - ------------ - --------- - -------- - - ------- - ------- . ..... ---------- -- ------ - - ------- ..... - - - ------ - -------------- - - --------- - - ------ - - ------ - - -- - ------- . ..... . . ....... .. .... ---- --------- - -------- - --------- ... .......... . ... - - ------ - - ------- - - ------- - ------- - - ------ - - ------ - - -------- l@A it rA ID.7% -- 10.0% ------ 9.2% ------- 9.2% 8,9% "% 7.9% ------ -7@ @ ------ -7.0@ ---- - ------ - 5.6% Terrecula Corona-ttco Jurupa Alvord CAUF. PaimSprings He"t Co. Kbrano Dsrt Sands L. Ssinore Rwerside [source: CA Depanmnt of Education Technical Skill & University Eligible Enrollment... aReflecting the new emphasis on preparing students for the job market, 11.1% of 1995 Corona-Norco high school enrollment was in technically oriented classes, 2nd among Riverside County's ten largest districts. This exceeded the enrollment rates of both Riverside County (8.401o) and California (9.291o). 53.1 % of 1995 Corona-Norco high school enrollment was in classes that are accepted for admission to the Universitv of California. This was about equal to the Riverside County rate of 53.3% and above the California rate of 52.8%. - --------- ------------ - --------------------- -- - - --- --------------------- - - ----------- 65.0% 57 4.% 567% --- - --- @74% - ----------------------- 53.6% 53.3% 53.2% 5 3. r/. 52.8% 49.9-A 48.5% ...... . ..... ----------- 45.6% L. E3.m.. M..Ct @..id. Wmn. T...@.k C.. @.,d C....-N.. CALF. Palm Spfg. J.-P. Dft San& Isource:CA @art@lof Educabon I ------------- - ------------------- - - - ------------------- ------------------- ------------------- - ----------- 19.8% 19.5% .... ------------------- ------- ------------------- 19.0% --- -------------------- - - - - ------------------- ------ - - - - - ------------ 15.7% 15.1% 15.1% --- 14 3% 12.8% 8.3% ---------- @enid. CALF. Temecuk L.13xulom DffrtSands Hemet Comna-No Wn. Co, Alvord PaimSpbg. Jumps lsource:cApepa@tofEducatoni Test Scores ... 0In 1995, 14.2% of Corona-Norco seniors scored 900 or above on the Scholastic Assessment Test or 21 and above on the American College Testing. That was more than the 12.8% for Riverside County as a whole, but below the 19.5% for Califonl-ia. 08.6% of Corona-Norco juriiors/seniors passed very difficult Advanced Placement or International Baccalaure- ate examinations in 1995. The district ranked 4th among Riverside County's ten largest districts. Corona- Norco seniors were above the county average of 8.4%, and below the California average of 11.3%. ... ............ . . - - -- - - --------------------- - 16.0% . . . ................ - - ----------------------------- - - - -------------- 13.6% 12.4% ......... . . lt3% 10.4% ---------- - - ---------------------- - - - ------------------- 8.6% 8.4% 7.0% - - - - ------------ - --------------- -------- - - ----- ----------- 3.2% 3.2% @.nid. Hemet T...@uia CALF. L.Elinon C.m..-N.. @.C.. P@spfg. fi&.,d W..o Dit Sands J..P. lsource:CAI)epar"enlofEducationj --------------- - - - - -------------------- - ------------- ------ ------------------- - - ----------- ------------------- ------------------- ------------------- - ----------- .......... . ..... - ------------------------ - - ---------------- - - - --------------------- - - - - ----------- 424 419 419 4f7 412 404 401 399 397 394 391 ---- Temecuia Rwemide L. Ekiin.. CALF. DoTtSands Pab7nSpring. H.mot Riv, Co. Com.&-Nrc. W..o A),.rd Jumpa Isource: CA Depa@t of Educauon Scholastic Aptitude Test. . . 0In 1995, Corona-Norco seniors averaged a score of 397 on the verbal portion of the Scholastic Assessment Test. That was about equal to the 399 for Riverside County as a whole, but below the 417 for California. 0Corona-Norco seniors averaged a score of 447 on the math portion of the Scholastic Assessment Test. Again, that was about equal to the 450 for Riverside County, but below the 485 for California. lm:m,n--$Hg ..... . ...................... . ---- - - --- - --------------------- - ----------- - -- - - -------------------- - - - --------------------- - - - - - ----------- ... . ........... . . - --- - -------------------------------- - -- - - --------------------- - - - - - ----------- 2 --------- 4.7.a ------ - ---------- - - - -I,------- - - - ------- ------- - - ---------- 450 448 447 443 443 440 418 ...... .... .......... . . CALF. Rie.id. T. me c uh H,..t PahnSpmgs Riv. Co. @.,d Comna-Nmo L.E3.in.. Dart Sands Nbn. J.mp. isource:CA D"art@t ofeducation Campus California Baptist College Califo@a State Polytechnic Univ. California State University, SB Chaffey Community College Claremont Colleges La Sierra University Loma Linda Universitv Mt. San Jacinto Comm, College Riverside Comm. College RCC - Norco Camps San Bernardino Valley College University of California, Riverside University of Redlands Total E@Rment Source:Each Campus Address city Year Specialty Main Degrees 8432 Magnolia Riverside 1950 Liberal Arts BA MA 3801 W. Temple Pomona 1838 Engineering BS MA 5500 University Pkwy San Bdno 1960 Comprehensive BA MA 12,000 5585 Haven Ave. R Cucamonga 1883 Community College A-A- 17,000 160 E. Tenth Claremont 1925 Science, Lib. Arts BA MA 1,855 4700 Pierce Riverside 1922 Liberal Arts BA MA Ph.D. 1,500 11234 Anderson St. Loma Linda 1905 Medical, Dental B.A. M.D. DDS 3,200 14990 N. State St San Jacinto 1963 Community College A-A- 10,500 4800 Magnolia Riverside 1916 Community College A.A- 20,500 2001 Third Street Norco 1991 701 S. Mt. Vernon San Bdno 1926 Community College 17,000 900 University Ave. Riverside 1954 Comprehensive BA MA Ph.D. 8,900 1200 E. Colton Redlands 1907 Liberal Arts BA MA Ph.D. 1,450 2,15-5 College and University Enrollment ... 0Within close proximity to Corona are 12 public & private colleges with a combined enrollment of 112,155. 65,000 students (58Yo) are at four comprehensive community college, including the Norco campus of Riverside Conununity College located adjacent to the city. 029,000 students (25.9Yo) attend two comprehensive California State University campus. One of these, Cal Poly, Pomona, has a long tradition as a state leader in preparing engineers and other scientific technicians. 012, 1 00 students (I 1. 8%) attend the undergraduate and graduate classes at the University of California, River- side or undergraduate, medical and dental school classes at world famous Loma Linda University. 06,055 students (5.4%) attend several prestigious, private liberal arts colleges in the area including the Clare- mont Colleges and the University of Redlands. (5.4%) P@te Colleges 25.9%) State University Campuse (58.0%)CommunityColloges (10.8%)UCR&LomaLind&Universgy isource: Each Cam@us Park Name Address Acreage Border Park 2400 Border Ave. 2.5 Border Tennis Courts 2485 Border- Ave. 0.0 Brentwood Park 1646 Dawnridge 13.0 Butterfield Park 1886 Butterfield Stage Dr.. 64.0 City Park 930 East Sixth St. 17.0 Civic Center 815 W. Sixth St. 6.0 Contreras Park Buena Vista & Rail Road 0.3 Cresta Verde Park 1640 E. Collete 5.0 Fairview Park 1604 Fairview 5.0 Garretson Tennis Courts Gar-retson & Ontario 0.0 Griffin Park 13.0 Husted Park 1200 Merrill 3.3 Joy Park Joy & Grand 0.3 Kellogg Park 1635 Kellogg 3.5 Lincoln Park Lincoln & Citron 5.0 Mangular Park 2208 Mangular Ave. 4.0 Merrill Park I Oth & W. Grand 0.3 Mountain Gate Park 3 1 00 S. Main St. 21.0 Neighborhood Center 304 S. Vicentia 0.5 Ontano Park Ontario & Via Pacifica 5.0 Parkview Park 2084 Parkview Dr. 6.3 Ridgeline Park 2850 Ridgeline 5.0 River Road Park I 100 W. River Road 5.0 Rock Vista Park 2481 Steven Dr. 9.0 Senior Center 921 S. Belle 2.0 Serfas Club Park 2575 Green River Rd. 5.0 Tehachapi 4.0 Sheridan Park 300 S. Sheridan 3.0 Victoria Park 312 Ninth St. 2.5 Total Developed Parks 210.5 Neighborhood Parks 58.9 Commurnty Parks 39.0 Total City Parks 269.4 Population 99,400 People per Park Acre 369 Source: Corona Parks & Recreation Park & Recreation Facilities ... ùCorona has an extensive number of developed parks, 29 in all, totaling 210.5 acres. ùCoronahasanadditional58.9acresinNeighborhoodParksand39acresinCommunityParks. ùWith a 1996 population of 99,400, Corona has a 369 people per acre of park land. w III ........................................ 6. 1 . ........ ............. . ........ 7,839 ............. 7,202 . ........ ............. ............. .......... 1992 19 9 3 1994 1995 te:Population Revised by CA Deparbmnt OfFinance, 19961 rosource: U.S. Departrrient ofjustice, Untorm@n* Report I Failing Crime Rate ... 0 Corona's crime rate per 100,000 residents fell 21.9% between 1992-1995. The decline occuff ed because Corona had 1,097 fewer crimes reported (-13.8%) even though its population increased by 9,000 people (+ 10. 4%). %I] lill lmffl ;Ili%.= Kill Crime 1992 1993 1994 1995 Murder 7 2 5 4 Forcible Rape 21 28 21 24 Robbery 222 244 237 214 Aggravated Assault 1,763 2,017 1,795 1,933 Burglary 1,663 1,600 1,517 1,252 Larceny Theft 3,141 3,101 2,605 2,327 Motor Vehicle Theft 1,121 1,334 1,074 1,099 Arson 30 23 13 18 Total Crimes 7,968 8,349 7,267 6,871 Population 86,400 90,500 92,700 95,400 Crimes per 100,000 people 9,222 9,225 7,839 7,202 Change 0.0% -15.0% -8.1% Note:Decline in crime rate, 1992-1995 = -21.9% Note:AJI Population Revised by CA Department of Finance, 1996 Source: U.S. Department of Justice, Uniform Crime Report .......... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ........... . .......... .. .............. 2,330 2,220 2,280 . ........ ............. 19 9 2 19 9 3 19 94 199 5 rot: Population Revised by CADepartment Of Finance, 1996 S urce U.S.DepartmenlofJustice.UnfformCAmeReport Violent & Property Crime Rates ... ùThere was a 28.6% decline in Corona's property crime rate between 1992-1995. ùInthatfouryearperiod,Corona'sviolentcrimeratefeII2.1%. 6,892 .................................................................... .6;604 . ........ 5.,.Slg 4,922 ............. . ........ ............. . ........ ............. 19 9 2 19 9 3 1994 1995 te: Population Revised by CA Departrrent Of Finance,@96 rosource U.S.DepartffentofJu@e,UnfformCri"*Report I'll, ...................... . ........ ............. . ........ 7,202 6,993 ...... 6,166 .... ......... r 4,244 ........ .......... . ........ ............. San Bemardino Riverside Ontario Corona P&m no VaBey Fontana R.Cucamonga te:Popuiation Reviwd by CADepaftmnt OfFinance, 1996 rosource: U.S. I)epadmnt ofju@e, Un ",nC6"e Report Crime Rates Compared ... ùCorona's crime rate stands in the middle of the six Inland Empire cities with 100,000 or more people. ùIn the past year, these six cities saw their combined crime rate decrease 8.1%- Corona's de- cline was also 8. 1%. riswilff gill kill Itilrklm III"IItoo ;IIIIII I kfck OM tilixiiiii Forcible Major Larceny Vehicle Per city Murder Rape Robbery Assault Burglary Theft Theft Arson Total Pop. 100,000 San Bernardino 67 101 1,442 2,320 3,991 7,897 3,503 188 19,509 190,700 10,796 Riverside 34 117 1,010 2,648 4,232 8,545 3,097 244 19,927 241,100 8,265 Ontano 21 70 550 905 1,856 4,830 2,151 68 10,451 141,600 7,381 Corona 4 24 214 1,933 1,252 2,327 1,099 18 6,871 95,400 7,202 Moreno Valley 16 44 390 852 2,200 4,566 1,119 37 9,224 131,900 6,993 Fontana 13 66 470 978 1,372 1,788 1,589 26 6,302 102,200 6,166 R. Cucamonga 7 22 179 158 998 2,498 981 21 i 4,864 114,600 4,244 Source:U.S. Justice Department, Uniform Crime Report CA Department of Finance, Revised Population Estimates, 1996 LMKW 1=4 MamiTolimic From: John Musing To: Mary Jww Mc Date: 12110/N T@: 09:26:09 Page I of4 ATTACHMENT B ECAP economic and political an@s 3142 Cactus Circle Highland, CA 9234@1739 (M)425-M2 Phone & Fax john-husinglasee.org R-ESUMF, John E. Hus@, PILD. Economic Analyst for IECAP EDUCATION B.S. @ laud* Saint @s College of Califomia C@ics & Cs 1962 M-A., Ph-D. Cl School Economics 1965,1971 Dis ion: Economic Impact of Defense Cl@ on the InloW Empire SANWLES OF RECENT APPLUED RESEARCH 1. Supply & Demand For Regional Center Retail Space in @ East @ Bernardino Valley Market 1"6 Arigorouse@tionofthesuppiyanddern@forregionalcenUw"m. Takesmtosocountsub-regionaldifferenoesm population gro@ per capita income and income dwtnbutlon. SpendLng pa by chfferent mwm @s were cormid- cred, as was -to-znarket weightm& Allowance was made for tn shopping and regional maU market p iorl Sales perfoot factors were used to @late dollar d into @ demand. 2.Eagle Mountain landr&U & Recycling Center-, Economic Lupact on the Inland Empire, Riverside County & the Coachella Valley, 1996. An input-ou@ model of the Inland E-mpim was used to determuie the economic, employment and tax revenue impact of the of a SouLhem Calif@a land fill at @ former E44e Mowi@ open pit mine. 3.impact oir Southern California Outward Expansion on the Economic Condition or the City or Corona & City of On- tario areas, 1996. Reports are in a con quarterly series tacking the way in which the Inland Empire's competitive ad@es are un- pactingthe@iesoftheCitiesofOnterio&Corona. Series@suchveriablesascitypopulation,@isates,hoine prices & sal@ @sed valuatiom new firm locations and employment. It @@ why the variables are mo@ as they are, 4.Helped C@inate Successful Effort to Stop Closure of Nsival Warfibre Assessment DM*Ion, 1"5 Modeled cumulative employment and dollar impact of adding NWAD to the No@ @e, & Mwch AFB closwes and/or downsizing. Documented weaknessm m Navy's @ for clos@ NWAD. Helped coordinated local lobbp% efforts. Tes- tified before BRAC 1995 & 1993. Wrote @ons of Governor Wilsoris BRAC @ony both years. 1,500 direct jobs saved at NWAD. 5.linland Empire Marketing Program, 1994-5 Created @d Empire Marketing ProFm concept @ convmced 25 cities and both @ties to fund ttus $275,000 c-oop- emuvc effort managed by MEP. The pr is des@ to market the sU@ of the @d Empire to fums @ are considering leaving California, avoiding Califomia or locating so else in Calif@n. I of 4 From: John Huning To: Mmy Jww Mc Date: 12110/N T@: 09.27:11 Ps" 2 of4 6.Heritage Tourism @rkofing PrograM City of Riverside, 1"3 Des@ed @ mar@ pr for the downtown @ of the City of Riverside @ch included a @ed @e of the very @ful Orwige Blossom Festival. 7.Economk Development Strategies: Cities or San Bernardino & Riverside, 19@5 Separate analyses of each cities! economy. Detailed di@sion of appropriate @ic s@es for the 1990s. Specific @ed policy recommendations and action items. Rtvcmide completed wW adop@ San dmo in process. S.Effk:acy of Continuing to Permit Warehousing Development in Ontario, 1995. Study of the efft@ of continuing to allow @ co ion of law warehousing in Ontario. Work fo@ on @ cycle of development and the later adaptability of this @tecwm to manufacturing and office 9.Defense Finance & Accounting Center (DFAS), 1993 R@chedtheeconomicimpactofDFASonthetaxreve.nuesofCalifomizandthe@dEmpire. Helpeddesign&n@ tiate al incentives to the t of Defense- Wrote the executive @ary and financial @ions of the pro- p@. @arately briefed Commerce S@tary Ron Brown @ Senator Diane FeinsteirL ]LO. Moody's, Fitch's and Standard & Poor Bond Ratings, 1"3-1996 RedtheunpactoftheCalif@recessiorA/recoveryonthenear&longtermhealthoftheIrJandEmpire. @re- pe@ tiom to the FitcWs, Moody's and Standard & Poor bond rating @ies on behalf of Wand Empire clients- Feawm @er Bond Buyer conference on Califonua municipal securities. 11.Wand Empire Quarterly Economic Report, 1965.-1969; 1988-1996 of the res@ Inland Empire Q@ a publication now in its sev@ year dukt is @tributed to 12,000 business governmental leadm. The QER gives hard data on the Inland Empire economy, the impacts of economic trends and govenmental policies. 12. Budget Forecasts For Inland Empire Cities & Counties, 1"1-1"6 Track the impact of the @ic activity on the cities and counties of the @ Empire. Advised @es (eg. City of San Bemardino, County Rivermde) on appropriate economic policies. 13.Inland Empire Data Base Maintam extensive database of Riverside & Swi B o Cowity s cal indicators. So@ include: TRW REDI property data; CB =ial-, Grubb & Ellis-, US. Cm"-, US. Bureau of Economic Analysis; Bureau of Labor S@ tics; CA Employment Development Dept; CA Dept. of Finance; CA Board of Equalization; The Meyer's Group; MMer- liter & DeLlaxnas; The Re@e Group; nw Findley Rep@; Construction R Board-, Real Estate Research ii. 14.Economic Impact of dw California Speedway on the Inland Empire, 19% R@ched the economic @ of the proposed NASCAR and DMY Car rac@y @ developed on the land of the old @er Steel Nfill. Work used in the EIR process and the @vat process. 15.Economic Impact of Santa Fe Intermodal Rail Yards on San Bernardino, 1"5 R@ched the job wW economic impact of developing a 500,000 lift c@ty rail yard in the City of San Ber- nardino. Work explained the location advantage of intennodat rail for warehousing & m@ firms in an era ofjugt- in-time inventory control. 2 of 4 From: John Musing To: Mary Jww Mc Date: i2liQI96 T@: 09:28:44 3 of 4 16.Comparative Advantages of the ]Inland Empire versus L.A- & Orange Coun@ 1995. R@hed the reawm why the @and Empire economy has been adding jobs fww @ the l@ adj counties aM whytlustrendwillcontmuemtotheforeseeablefutme. WorkarguesmfavoroftheuwtallattonoffiberopticcVabilitym @ region before some older but slower evolving areas. POSMONS HELD Economist ECAP economic & political analysis ics & F 1981-96 Editor/Writer @d Empire Quarterly Economic Report Economic Research 1988-96 Ex@ve Cormnittee Inland Empire Economic PwMendiip ic Development 1996 interim President Inland Empire FA=ornic Partnership ic Development 1994 Economist @d Empire B@ess Center, CSU San Bdno Economic Research 1990-92 LBO AniLlyst WinzarFinancial Financial Analyst 1986-88 C,meral White Pine Company Hotel, Casino 1985-86 Lecturer Califomia State University San Bdrto mica 19176-93 Founding Board Upland National Bank Finance 1982-83 Senior Wm Califorrua State Assexnbly Analyst 198"4 Amociate Profea@ San Bmwdino Valley College Economics 1964-81 mmw American River Touring Assmiation River Rafting 1973 Division Chairman San Bemardmo Valley College Bus@ & Economics 1966-68 GS OUOTED BY (sample) New York Times San Bemardino Sun Los Angeles Times Riverside Press Enterprise Christian Science Mamtor Inland Valley Duity Bulletin Inland Empire Business Victor Valley Daily Press KNBC-TV KCBS-TV L.A Business Joumal @e County Busmess Joumal CL HAVE INCLUDED Cities of Ontario, Riverside, San Bemardino, Chino, R@o Cucam@ @rm, Norco. County of San dino U.S. Dept. of Justice, Anti-Trust Division Telephone Pomona Fust FederalRediands Fedeml Bank Riverside County T an ission San Bcmar&w @ciated @verriments Ryland OToup MJ. Brock) Citizens Business Bank Inland Empire Economic P@@p RAMOM OTFYF-R PROFF-SSIONAL EXPERYENCES Intemational County of Riverside Califorrua Speedway Fe Railroad Redlands Centezwual Bank San Bdno Co C@ Cr@t Umon Inland Valley Development Agency Iffland Center Mail Numerous Law Firm * Consultant, U S. Information Agency, latvian @ition to CapitalisM 1992 a Represented Califomia bly EnerU Comnuttee, Liquefied Na@ Gas discussions: @ Alpda; Sw@ 1977 0 Sw&ed impact of the end of colonialization on Africa economies: Zambia, Mala@ Zimbabwe, Kenya, U@ T a, car @ 77wsis area) 1967, 1979 3 of4 From: John Husing To: taory Jww Mc@ DM*@: I?JIGM TIFDO: 09:20:iO 4 of4 National 0 @wi@,BaseReuse&CI@Cornrni@on,1995,1993 a Briefed S=etary of Conun@ U.S. Senator, cumulative impact of defense cl@ on the Empire, 1993 & ional Candidate, 1968 State * Smor Comultant, Cahforrua Assembly Rules Conmu@ 1982-1984 *@or Adminis"five Aic* 4 Califomia Assembi 1974-1982 *Cwnpaign mmW, 5 Califomia Assemblymem 1974-1984 Local * Expert Wttness: Logt Real Egtate & Business Loss Valug6on, 1967-1996 0 Campaign , numerous city, cotmty, judicial school board offici@ 1968-1995 0TV Host and/or Guest Analyst, local @ic & political specials, KVCR & cable stations, 1964-1996 AD S 0 First Ccyn@ a clan of the Kombey Tribe, Irian Jaya, New Rain Fore@ 1996 & Climbed into the Lost World of hft. Ronma m Venezuela, 1987. 0Climbed to Mt. Everest base cwnp (I 8,600), NepaL 1984. 0 C@bed Mt Yilirnaniaro (I 9,342), T a,1967,1979. a Jogged 8 1/2 miles through the heaviest concen"fion of lion in the Serangeti National P@ T 1979. a Crossed Alakili Swamp, 1978 0 White W@ @de, W American Rivem 1972-1973 0Extensive Travel: 41 @tries, every continent 0 04th Generauon Catifoniiwi * Competitive s Swirnming 0Mwned, two grown children 4 of 4 CrrY OF TEMECULA AGREEMIENT TIUS AG is made and effective as of 1996, between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation ("Agency") and ECAP, ("Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. TFRM. This Agreement shall commence on 1996, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than , 1997, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 2. SERVICM. Consultant shall perform the 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. PFRFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his or her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of Consultant hereunder in meeting its obligations under this Agreement. 4.PAYWNI. a. The City agrees to pay Consultant $1,000 a month commencing January 1, 1997. This amount shall not exceed Twelve Tbousand Dollars and -0- Cents ($12,000.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. b. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement 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 Agency's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of the Agreement, but in no event shall such sum exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by the City Council. C. Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all nondisputed fees. If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant within 30 days of receipt of a invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. -1- r: \agmto m\95master.agr/ajp - rev@ 9/19/95 5.SUSPENSION OR TFRMMATION OF AGRERMF-NT WITHOUT CAIT,SF,. a. The City may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this Agreement, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the consultant at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the City suspends or terminates a portion of this Agreement such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement. b. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this Section, the City shall pay to Consultant the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the City. Upon termination of the Agreement pursuant to this Section, the Consultant will submit an invoice to the City pursuant to Section 3. 6.DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT. a. The Consultant's failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. If such failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out of causes beyond the Consultant's control, and without fault or negligence of the Consultant, it shall not be considered a default. b. If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall have (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement. 7.OWNERSHIEP OF DOCUMENTS. a. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities -2- r:\agmts@tcrs\95miLster.agr/ajp - revised 9119/95 related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment. b. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant. With respect to computer files, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files. C. With respect to the design of public improvements, the Consultant shall not be liable for any injuries or property damage resulting from the reuse of the design at a location other than that specified in Exhibit A without the written consent of the Consultant. 8. CATION. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense costs or expenses, or liability of any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent or wrongful acts or omissions in performing or failing to perform under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole negligence of the City. 9. INSURANCERMIJIR . Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees. a.Minimum Scol& of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: (1)Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). (2)Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). (3)Worker's Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. (4)Errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to the consultant's profession. b.Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: -3- r:\agmto\msatcrs\95master.agr/ajp - revised 9119/95 (1)General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (2)Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. (3)Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. (4)Errors and omissions liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. C. Deductibles and Self-Insured 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 Insumce Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: (1)The City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. (2)For any claims related to this project, the Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. (3)Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. -4- r:\agmto\nwstcrs\95master.agrtajp - mv@ 9/19195 (4)The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. (5)Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. e. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VH, unless other-wise acceptable to the City. f.Verification of Coverage. Consultant shall furnish the City with original endorsements effectingcoverage required by this clause. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized bythat insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the City. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. As an alternative to the City's forms, the Consultant's insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. 10. INDECONTRACTOR. a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder. 11. 1,FC-AT, RESPONSEBILITTF-S. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply with this section. r:\agmta@ters\95master.agr/ajp - revised 9/19/95 12.RF@1,F@A',RF, OF 1[NFORMATION. a. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization. Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena. b. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City retains the 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. 13. NOTICES. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (I) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by Notice: To City:Attention: Executive Director Temecula Redevelopment Agency 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92589-9033 To Consultant:ECAP 3142 Cactus Circle Highland, CA 92346-1739 -6- r:\agmts\masters\95master.agr/ajp - rev@ 9/19/95 14. ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, only Brett Barnett shall perform the services described in this Agreement. Brett Barnett may use assistants, under their direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Brett Barnett from Consultant's employ. Should he or she leave Consultant's employ, the city shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon tennmation of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Council and the Consultant. 15. LICENSES. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this Agreement. 16. C.'OVFRNINC, LAN. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the City of Temecula. 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this Agreement based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material. 18. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant and has the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. -7- r:@ta@ters\95master.agr/itjp - revised 9/19/95 IN S F, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY By Patricia H. Birdsall Chairperson Attest: June S. Greek, Agency Secretary Approved As to Form: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT By By: -8- r:\agmts\masters\95master.agr/ajp - revised 9119195 EXHIBIT A SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED 1Assist the City in qualifying to obtain historical EDD employment and wage & salary data by firm under the terms of new state legislation. 2.Provide the City with spreadsheets to easily use EDD's data, including listings of firms that can be easily sorted or combined using any of several characteristics: firm name, size of payroll, number of employees average pay per worker, SIC code, Zip Code, or street name. In addition, ECAP will supply tables showing how each sector of the Temecula economy is evolving in terms of wages & salaries, number of workers, average worker earnings, and number of firms. At the City's request, sectors can be aggregated or disaggregated down to the 4-digit SIC code level. 3.Provide the City with specialized information from the EDD database. 4.Create an Annual Report on City demographic, economic & life style data. 0Demographics (city & regional population trends; income, age and ethnic distribution; educational levels; family sizes and types) 0Housing (city & regional single family home volumes, prices, permits, and monthly mortgage payment levels; multi-tenant occupancy & rental levels) 0Employment (city & regional trends by detailed sector including: number of workers, wage & salary earnings, average size of payroll, largest employers) 0Retail Sales (city & regional trends in total & sector taxable sales, per capita sales, per outlet sales) 0industrial Real Estate (city & regional trends in industrial space availability, vacancy rates, absorption, prices, specific firms migrating) 0Community Characteristics (city & Regional educational achievement, park land, and crime statistics) 5.Provide a detailed analysis of the EDD employment data on Temecula. 6.Initial Report on the general state of the Inland Empire Economy, with emphasis on the City of Temecula. 7.Make four quarterly oral presentations on the Temecula economy. 8.Assist City in selecting economic data for promotional materials. 9.Attend meetings, where a knowledge of the economic environment might contribute to better decision making. 4 -- ITEI\4 4 APPR CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF Fl CITY MANAGER TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO:Redevelopment Agency Members FROM:Ronald E. Bradley, Executive Director DATE:December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Purchase Agreement for a portion of APN 922-100-003. Located at the southeast corner of Pujol Street and First Street. Prepared By: John Meyer, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: 1.Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AFFROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED " AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PUJOL STREET AND FIRST STREET IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA (PORTION OF APN 922-100-003). 2.That the Agency authorize the expenditures of up to $6,000 from RDA Capital Improvement Program to cover acquisition, escrow, and closing costs BACKGROUND: In an effort to implement the Old Town Specific Plan and the Capital Improvement Program staff has pursued the acquisition of real property for the First Street Bridge and Extension Project. Based on fair market appraisals, staff has negotiated the following purchase prices for the subject properties. Temecula Town Association (Portion of APN 922-100-003) Frontage along First Street $ 4,563 The purchase is an all cash transaction with the Agency paying all closing costs. Additional fund authorization in the amount of $1,437 is requested to cover escrow fees and closing costs, bringing the total fund authorization request to $6,000. FISCAL IMPACTS R:\HOUSING\TTAPURCH.CC 12/9196jrm The $6,000 acquisition cost will be funded by the RDA CIP First Street Bridge and Road Extension Project which includes $3,500,000 for acquisition and construction (Line Item 280- 199-807-5804). Attachments: 1. Resolution No. RDA 96- - Page 3 2.Agreement for Acquisition - Page 6 R:\HOUSING\TTAPURCH.CC 12/9/96jnn 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96- R:\HOUSING\TTAPURCH.CC 12/9196jfm 3 RESOLUTION NO. RDA 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OFTEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENTENTITLED "AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITIONOF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PUJOL STREET AND FIRST STREET IN THE CITY OF TEM[ECULA (PORTION OF APN 922-100-003)." THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Redevelopment Agency does hereby find, determine and declare that: a. The Agency is currently implementing the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1--1988, originally approved by the Board of Supervisors on July 12, 1988 prior to the incorporation of the City and subsequently approved and transferred to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula on April 9, 1991 (the "Plan"). b. The Agency is currently implementing the Old Town Specific Plan and the Capital Improvement Program First Street Bridge and Road Extension Project ("Project"). C. The Agency proposes to purchase the properties described in the attached "Agreement for Acquisition of Certain Real Properties" ("Property") for the purposes of implementing the Capital Improvement Program First Street Bridge and Extension Program. d.The Project has been the subject of extensive prior environmental review as part of the OldTown Redevelopment Project EIR certified by the City Council and Agency on June 13, 1995. Thisportion of the Project is exempt from further environmental review as stated in the findings and as set forth in California Public Resources Code Section and 16 California Code Regulation 15160. Section 2. The Board of Directors of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula hereby approves that certain agreement entitled "Agreement for Acquisition of Certain Real Property located at the southeast corner of Pujol Street and First Street in the City of Temecula ( Portion of APN 922-100-003)" and authorizes the Chairperson to execute the Agreement in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 3. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. R:\HOUSING\TTAPURCH.CC 12/9/96jrm 4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPRED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula on December 17, 1996. Patricia H. Birdsall, Chairperson ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Ss CITY OF TEMECULA 1, June S. Greek, City Clerk/Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the Resolution No. RDA 96- was duly and regularly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on December 17, 1996 by the following vote, to wit: AYES:AGENCY MEMBERS: NOES:AGENCY MEMBERS: ABSENT:AGENCY MEMBERS: ABSTAIN:AGENCY MEMBERS: June S. Greek, CMC City Clerk/Agency Secretary R:\HOUSING\rrAPURCH.CC 12/9/96jrm 5 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION R:\HOUSING\TTAPURCH.CC 12/9/96jrm 6 PURCHASE AND SALE AGRF.IF@MIFNT AND ESCROW INSTRIJCTIONI,; THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ("Agreement") is dated and entered into as of September 26, 1996 by and between TEMECULA TOWN ASSOCIATION, a California non-profit corporation ("Seller"), and THE CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ("Buyer"), and constitutes both an agreement to purchase and sell real property between the parties and the parties' escrow instructions directed to First American Title Insurance Company ("Escrow Holder"). RECITALS A. On May 14, 1996 the Buyer delivered Seller an offer (the "Offer") to purchase the real property interests described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property") pursuant to Title 1, Division 7, Chapter I of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.). B.Buyer intends to use the Property for public purposes. C. Seller desires to sell and Buyer desires to buy, the Property on the terms and conditions set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises operative provisions and the Recitals which are incorporated herein by this reference, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1.Purchase and Sale. On the Close of Escrow (as herein defined), Seller agrees to sell the Propertyto Buyer, and Buyer agrees to buy the Property from Seller, on the terms and conditions hereinafterset forth. 2.Purchase @. The total purchase price for the Property to be paid by Buyer is the sum of Four Thousand Five Hundred Sixty Three Dollars ($4,563.00) (the "Purchase Price"), which sum shall be paid in full in cash on the Close of Escrow. The Purchase Price consists of two components: The first is the compensation for Parcels A and B (as defined in Exhibit A) in the sum of One Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety Three Dollars ($1,793.00); and the second is the compensation for a temporary construction and slope easement for Parcel C (as defined in Exhibit C) in the sum of Two Thousand Seven Hundred Seventy Dollars (2,770.00). 3. Title and Title Insurance. Upon the Opening of Escrow, Escrow Holder shall order from First American Title Company ("Title Company") a title commitment for the Property. Escrow Holder shall also request two copies each of all instruments identified as exceptions on said title commitment. Upon receipt of the foregoing, Escrow Holder shall deliver these instruments and the title commitment to Buyer and Seller. Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be insured at the Close of Escrow by a CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of the Purchase Price (the "Policy"). The Policy of title insurance provided for pursuant to this Section shall insure R:\HOUSING\BUYROW.TTA 10/l/96 klb Buyer's fee interest in the Property free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, restrictions, and rights-of- way of record, subject only to the following permitted conditions of title ("Permitted Title Exceptions"): (a) The applicable zoning, building and development regulations of any municipality, county, state or federal jurisdiction affecting the Property; and (b) Those non-monetary exceptions approved by Buyer within fifteen (15) business days after the date Buyer receives the title commitment and legible copies of all instruments noted as exceptions therein. If Buyer unconditionally disapproves any such exceptions, Escrow shall thereupon terminate, all funds deposited therein shall be refunded to Buyer (less Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), and this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. If Buyer conditionally disapproves any such exceptions, then Seller shall use Seller's best efforts to cause such exceptions to be removed by the Close of Escrow. If such conditionally disapproved non-monetary exceptions are not removed by the Close of Escrow, Buyer may, at Buyer's option, either accept the Property subject to such encumbrances, or terminate the Escrow and receive a refund of all funds deposited into Escrow Oess Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), if any, and this Agreement shall thereupon be of no further force or effect. At the Close of Escrow, Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be free and clear of all monetary encumbrances. 4.Grant Deed. Seller covenants and agrees to deposit with Escrow Holder prior to the Close of Escrowa Grant Deed duly executed and acknowledged by Seller, granting and conveying to Buyer the Property.The Grant Deed shall be in a form satisfactory to Buyer and Buyer's counsel and shall be accepted by Buyer prior to recording. 5. Tempor= Co@ction and Slope easement. Seller covenants and agrees to deposit with Escrow Holder prior to the close of escrow temporary construction and slope easements for property described as Parcel C as described in Exhibit C in a form satisfactory to Buyer and Buyer's Counsel which easements shall be accepted by Buyer and recorded at close of escrow. 6. Authorization to Record Documents and Disburse F'unds. Escrow Holder is hereby authorized to record the documents and disburse the funds and documents called for hereunder upon the Close of Escrow, provided each of the following conditions has then been fulfilled: (a)Title Company can issue in favor of Buyer the Policy, showing the Property vested in Buyer subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. Escrow Holder shall use the proceeds of the Purchase Price to obtain partial reconveyance, if necessary, of any monetary liens encumbering the Property, so that the Property shall be free and clear of monetary liens and encumbrances at the Close of Escrow. (b) Escrow Holder shall have received Buyer's notice of approval or satisfaction or waiver of all of the contingencies to Buyer's obligations hereunder, as provided for in Section I 1; and(c) Seller shall have deposited in Escrow the Grant Deed required by Section 4. Unless otherwise instructed in writing, Escrow Holder is authorized to record at the Close of Escrow any instrument delivered through this Escrow if necessary or proper for issuance of the Policy, including the Grant Deed. R:\HOUSrNG\BUYROW.TTA 10/l/96 klb 7. Escrow. The parties hereby establish an escrow ("Escrow") to accommodate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Opening of Escrow shall mean the date on which Escrow Holder shall have received a fully executed original of this Agreement from Buyer and Seller. Close of Escrow shall be the date upon which the Grant Deed to Buyer is delivered and recorded in the Official Records of the County of Riverside. The Close of Escrow shall be on the date which is not later than the first business day occurring sixty (60) days after the date of this Agreement. Before the Close of Escrow, all risk of loss and damage to the Property from any source whatsoevershall be solely that of Seller. Buyer shall pay all escrow costs. 8. Escrow Charges and Prorations. Buyer shall pay for the cost of the CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance, the Escrow fees and Escrow Holder's customary out-of-pocket expenses for messenger services, long distance telephone, etc. Buyer shall pay for recording the Grant Deed and any documentary or other local transfer taxes, and any other recording fees. If the Escrow shall fail to close through no fault of either party, Buyer shau pay all Escrow cancellation charges. 9. License to @. Seller hereby grants to Buyer and Buyer's authorized agents, contractors, consultants,.assigns, attorneys, accountants and other representatives an irrevocable license to enter upon the Property for the purpose of making inspections and other examinations of the Property, including, but not limited to, the right to perform soil and geological tests of the Property and wi environmental site assessment thereof. Buyer shall give Seller reasonable notice before going on the Property. Buyer does hereby indemnify and forever save Seller, Seller's heirs, successors and assigns, and the Property, free and harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, damages and costs and expenses, demands, causes of action, claims or judgments, whether or not arising from or occurring out of any damage to the Property as a result of any accident or other occurrence at the Property which is in any way connected with Buyer's inspections or non-permanent improvements involving entrance onto the Property pursuant to this Section. If Buyer fails to acquire the Property due to Buyer's default, this license shall terminate upon the termination of Buyer's right to purchase the Property. In such event, Buyer shall remove or cause to be removed all Buyer's personal property, facilities, tools and equipment from the Property. 10. Warrantieg and Representations of Seller. Seller hereby represents and warrants to Buyer the following, it being expressly understood and agreed that all such representations and warranties are to be true and correct as of the Close of Escrow and shall survive the Close of Escrow: (a) That (1) on the Close of Escrow the Property shall be free and clear of any and all hazardous or toxic substances, materials, and waste, including, but not limited to, asbestos; (ii) the Property is in compliance with all applicable statutes and regulations, including environmental, health and safety requirements; (iii) all businesses on the Property have disposed of their waste in accordance with all applicable statutes, ordinances, and regulations; and (iv) Seller has no notice of any pending or threatened action or proceeding arising out of the condition of the Property or alleged violation of environmental, health or safety statutes, ordinance or regulations To this end, it is agreed that notwithstanding the conveyance of the Property to Buyer, Seller shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless Buyer from and against any and all claims, liabilities, suits, losses, costs, expenses and damages, including but not limited to attorneys' fees and costs, arising out of any claim for loss or damage to any property, including the Property, injuries to or death of persons, or for the cost of cleaning up the Property and removing hazardous or toxic substances, materials and waste therefrom, by reason of contamination or adverse effects on the environment, or by reason of any statutes, ordinances, orders, rules or regulations of any govemmenw entity or agency requiring the clmn-up of R:\HOUSING\BUYROW.TTA 10/i/96 klb the Property, caused by or resulting from any hazardous material, substance or waste existing on, under or about the Property on the Close of Escrow. (b) That Seller is the sole owner of the Property free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances, easements, encroachments from adjacent properties, encroachments by improvements or vegetation on the Property onto adjacent property, or rights of way of any nature, other than those that may appear on the title commitment. Seller shall not further encumber the Property or allow the Property or to be further encumbered prior to the Close of Escrow. (c) Neither this Agreement nor anything provided to be done hereunder including the @sfer of the Property to Buyer, violates or shall violate any contract, agreement or instrument to which Seller is a party, or which affects the Property, and the sale of the Property herein contemplated does not require the consent of any party not a signatory hereto. (d) There are no mechanics', materialmen's or similar claims or liens presently claimed or which will be claimed against the Property for work performed or commenced prior to the date of this Agreement. Seller agrees to hold Buyer harmless from all costs, expenses, liabilities, losses, charges, fees, including attorney fees, arising from or relating to any such lien or any similar lien claimed against the Property and arising from work performed or commenced prior to the Close of Escrow. (e) There are no written or oral leases or contractual right or option to lease, purchase, or otherwise enjoy possession, rights or interest of any nature in and to the Property or any part thereof, and no persons have any right of possession to the Property or any part thereof. (f) Seller has no knowledge of any pending, @tened or potential litigation, action or proceeding against Seller or any other ?arty before any court or administrative tribunal which is in any way related to the Property. 11. FULL PAYMENT OF ATI, OBIIGATIONS OF CM. it is and agreed between Seller and Buyer that the payments made to Seller as set forth in this Agreement represent an all inclusive settlement and is full and complete payment for just compensation for the acquisition of all property interests pe@g to the Property and includes and satisfies any and all other payments, if any, which may be required by law to be paid to Seller arising out of the acquisition and displacement of the Seller and persons residing on the Property, and specifically includes, but is not limited to, claims for severance and other damages, attomey's fees, interest, expenses of litigation, expert's fees, precondemnation damages, inverse condemnation, owner participation rights under the Redevelopment Plan, relocation assistance and/or benefits under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.), if applicable, or under Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 1 of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.), and loss of business goodwill under the Eminent Domain Law, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.5 10, and all costs and expenses whatever in connection therewith. Seller hereby acknowledges that Buyer has advised Seller of the possible availability of such relocation assistance rights to Seller and that the waiver of all rights by Seller herein set forth as free and voluntary. 12. Buyer's Contoncrencies. For the benefit of Buyer, the Closing of Escrow and the Buyer's obligation to consummate the purchase of the Property shall be contingent upon and subject to the occurrence of all of the following (or Buyer's written waiver thereof, it being agreed that Buyer can waive any or all such contingencies) on or before the Close of Escrow: R.\HOUSING\BUYROW.TTA 10/l/96 klb (a) That as of the Close of Escrow the representations and warranties of Seller contained in this Agreement are all true and correct. (b)The delivery of all documents pursuant to Section 4 hereol (c) Title Company's commitment to issue in favor of Buyer of a CLTA Standard Coverage Owner's Policy of Title Insurance with liability equal to the Purchase Price showing Buyer's fee interest in the Property subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. (d) Buyer's approval prior to the Close of Escrow of any environmental site assessment, soils or geological reports, or other physical inspections of the Property or the underlying real property that Buyer might perform prior to the Close of Escrow. 13. Certification of Non-Foreign Status. Seller covenants to deliver to Escrow a certification of Non-Foreign Status in accordance with I.R.C. Section 1445, and a similar notice pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 18805 and 26131, prior to the Close of Escrow. 14. Default. In the event of a breach or default under this Agreement by either Buyer or Seller, the non-defaulting party shall have, in addition to all rights available at law or equity, the right to terminate this Agreement and the Escrow for the purchase and sale of the Property, by delivering written notice thereof to the defaulting party and to Escrow Holder, and if Buyer is the non-defaulting party, Buyer shall thereupon promptly receive a refund of all prior deposits, if any. Such termination of the Escrow by a non-defaulting party shall be without prejudice to the non-defaulting party's rights and remedies at law or equity. 15.Notices. All notices and demands shall be given in writing by certified mail, postage prepaid, andreturn receipt requested, or by personal delivery. Notices shall be considered given upon the earlierof (a) personal delivery, (b) two (2) business days following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified or registered, return receipt requested, or'O one (1) business day following deposit with an overnight carrier service. A copy of all notices shall be sent to Escrow Holder. Notices shall be addressed as provided below for the respective party; provided that if any party gives notice in writing of a change of name or address, notices to such party shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice: BUYER:City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, California 92590 Attn:City Manager COPY TO:Richards, Watson & Gershon 333 So. Hope St., 38th Fl. Los Angeles, California 90071 Attn:Peter M. Thorson, Esq. SELLER:Temecula Town Association Post Office Box No. 435 Temecula, California 92589-0435 R:\HOUSING\BUYROW.TTA 10/l/96 klb ESCROWFirst American Title Company HOLDER3625 Fourteenth Street Riverside, CA 92502 16. Broker's Commossion--;. Seller shall pay all claims of brokers, agents or finders, licensed or unlicensed, and all claims of real estate or other consultants which exist or may arise as a result of Seller's actions with respect to the Property. Buyer shall not be liable for any such fees or claims and Seller shall indemnify Buyer, its officers, employees and agents, from any and all costs, liabilities or judgments, including attorneys' fees, incurred in defending or paying any such claims. 17. Further @ctions. Each party agrees to execute such other and @er escrow instructions as may be necessary or proper in order to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 18. Amendments. Any amendments to this Agreement shall be effective only when duly executed by Buyer and Seller and deposited with Escrow Holder. 19.MisceflaneouS (a) AiDpticable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted under, and governed and enforced according to the laws of the State of California. (b) Entire A@ment. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement, oral or written, and together with the Exhibits hereto and any agreements delivered pursuant hereto, contains the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller on the subject matter hereol No subsequent agreement, representation or promise made by either party hereto, or by or to any employee, officer, agent or representative of either party, shall be of any effect unless it is in writing and executed by the party to be bound thereby. No person is authorized to make, and by execution hereof Seller and Buyer acknowledge that no person has made, any representation, warranty, guaranty or promise except as set forth herein; and no agreement, statement, representation or promise made by any such person which is not contained herein shall be valid or binding on Seller or Buyer. (c) Successors and Assi=. This Agreement @ be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. (d) Thne of F-csence. The parties acknowledge that time is of the essence in this Agreement, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Escrow company's general Escrow instructions. (e) Remedies Not Exclusive and Waivers. No remedy confeffed by any of the specific provisions of this Agreement is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy and each and every remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of the right to pursue other available remedies. (f)InteWretation and Construction. The parties agree that each party has reviewed and revised thisAgreement and have had the opportunity to have their counsel and real estate advisors review and revisethis agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved againstthe drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. In this Agreement the neuter gender includes the femi@e and R:\HOUSING\BUYROW.TTA 10/l/96 klb masculine, and singular number includes the plural, and the words "person" and "party" include corporation, partnership, firm, trust, or association where ever the context so requires. The recitals and captions of the sections and subsections of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only, and the words contained therein shall in no way be held to explain, modify, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of theprovisions of this Agreement. (g) City Manager Autho@ The City Manager is hereby directed and authorized to execute such other documents, including without limitation, escrow instructions and amendments thereto, certificates of acceptance, agreements for payments of lost rent, or certifications, as may be necessary or convenient to implement the terms of this Agreement. 20. Attorneys' Fm. If either party hereto incurs attorneys' fees in order to enforce, defend or interpret any of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement or because of a breach of this Agreement by the other party, the prevailing party, whether by suit, negotiation, arbitration or settlement shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees from the other party. 21. Assignment. Buyer may assign its rights under this Agreement or may designate a nominee to acquire title to the Property, provided, however, that any such assignment or designation shall not relieve Buyer of any of its obligations under this Agreement. 22. Escrow Holder Need Not Be Concerned. Escrow Holder is not to be concerned with Section 8, 9, 10, and 15 hereof, and Buyer and Seller release Escrow Holder from liability or obligation as to Section 8, 9, 10, and 15 hereof. R:\HOUSING\BUYROW.TTA 10/l/96 kib EXHI]BIT "A" Legal Description of the Property EXHIBIT A Page 1 of 2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Right of Way easement PARCELA IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CITY OF TEMECULA, THAT PORTION OF LOT A, AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP 8248, FILED IN BOOK 32, PAGES 16 THROUGH 18 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT A, AS SHOWN BY SAID PARCEL MAP 8248, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST, AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1617.02 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 69'55'56" EAST-, THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A, 6.44 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF O'l 3'42" TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 7039.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 45101'41 " EAST-, THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE, SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID NON-TANGENT CURVE 33.17 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF Oll 6'1 2" TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1587.02 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 70'40'05" EAST-, THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE AND SAID NON-TANGENT CURVE 6.09 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF O'l 3'12" TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE NORTH 44'30'26" EAST 33.27 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 189 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS PARCEL B IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CITY OF TEMECULA, THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 2 AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP 8248, FILED IN BOOK 32, PAGES 16 THROUGH 18 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS-. BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1687.02 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 68'48'26" EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, AND THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2,6.64 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF O'l 3'32"; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE AND TRAVERSING THE INTERIOR OF SAID PARCEL 2 THE FOLLOWING TWO COURSES: SOUTH 44'30'26" WEST 20.08 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 7039.00 FEET-, EXEMIT A Page 2 of 2 THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 57.09 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0'27'53" TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1617.02 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 70'09'39" EAST; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE AND SAID NON-TANGENT CURVE 6.44 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE 01 1 3'42" TO THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE NORTH 44'30'26" EAST 77.14 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 463 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS Basis of bearings-. Field survey based on First Street west of Front Street bearing North 44030'26" East per PM 7674 (86/50-51). A MAP ENTITLED "EXHIBIT B" IS ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF BY THIS REFERENCE. Jack P. Norris, PE. C15446 NORRIS-REPKE, INC. 33055 Vino Way Temecula, CA 92591 February 12, 1996 Temecula Town Association APN 922-100-003 Order # 2034431 wp6\9203-431 -Igi EXHIBIT -fBv P.M. 8248, 32/16-18 30, PARCEL 1 LOT D 19' LC LOT C FIRST STREET /V '9 11 I @@o.@- nn IS 4,V30'26" W Pcl A 44!30'1 4!' W n POB Pcl B C, C2 ry V) I 0 CL 'LOT A PARCEL Jo @o AREAS: PCL A = 189 S.F. ñ (0.004 Ac) GRAPHIC SCALE PCL 8 = 463 S.F. ñ (0. 0 1 1 Ac) 130, 0 S'O 100 Record bearing per Parcel Map 8248 II eprepared by IN FEET M2NORRtS-RE KE:.INC. C-@, @ @l.= -. -. @- COURSE TABLES %ANO WAY MMECU@ CA 92591 Tel @O9@ 676-5816 Fox W 676-0016 LINE DIRECTION DISTANCE J.t4 92_03 Ll N 4,V 3 0'2 6" E 33.27' L2 S 44!30'26" W 20.08' r L-,3 N 4 4! 3 0'215' E 77.14' CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA c 1 1 61 7.0 2' 6.44' 00, 1 3142!' C2 7039.00' 33.17' OOl 6'1:Z' C3 1587.02' 6.09' OOl 3'1 2" C4 1687-02' 6.64' OOl 3'32" C5 7039.00' 57.09' 00'27'53" O@VNER:TEMECULA TOWN ASSOCIATION DRAWN RCM POR. LOT A & PCL. 2 IDATE 4-18-96 APPR. JPN PARCEL MAP 8248, 32/16-18 SCALE I' = 50 ORDER 2034431 RIVERSID@ CALIFORNIA 1BY NORRIS-REPKE INC. A.P.N. 922-100-003 CITY OF TEMECULA DWG Di\P\9203\DWG\L.DS.DWG SEP---5-,?f-, LJED I-- :17 t4OPF-I!3-REF,KE.- It-4i@. 1 4 1 EXHIBIT C T.T.A Property Page 1 of I TEMPORARY SLOPEICONSTRUCTION EASEMENT PARCEL C A STRIP OF LAND, APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET WIDE, IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CITY OF TEMECULA, BEINR, THOSE PORTIONS OF LOT A AND PARCEL 2, AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP 8248, FILED IN BOOK 32, PAGE3 16 THROUGH 18 OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE NORTHEASI ERLY 46.05 FLEI'OF SAID LOT A AND SAID PARCEL 2. EXCEPTING PARCELS A AND B AS DESCRIBED IN'EXHIBIT A'. CONTAINING.- 4,473SQUAPEFEE-r,0.1027ACR@S,MOREORLESS Basis of bearings: Field survey based on First Street west of Front Street bearing North 44'30'26" East per PM 7674 (86/50-51). A MAP ENTITLED "EXHIBIT D" IS ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PAR,R HEREOF BY 1-HIS REFERENCE N@. Norris, PE. C 1 5446 ENFW NORRIS-REPKE,-N@C. 33055 Vino Way Temecula, CA 92591 September 25, 1996 Temecula Town Association APN 922-100-003 Order # 2034431 920'31431 tmp IVI E Fl 5 6 L-1 P I S - F-,'F@- P K E , 1 t4 1 4 9 3 F' L7, FXHIBIT "Do 30' 824-8, PAP,CEI-. I..O'F D LOT E S 44#30'26" W 0 FIRST STREET PCL. Al PARCEL GRAP141C SCALE AREA: PC.L A 4,473 S.F. (0,1027 Ac) IN Prep(ired by NORRIS-REPKE,INC C---Ulo Cl-I 4@d Ldne .3-305r) 'ANO WAY No. C15446 TEMECULA. fA 02591 T41 @909) 676-5816 Fax qOg) 876-0010 J.N 92--03 OWNER; TEMF.CUI-A TOWN ASSOCIATION DPAWN PCM P(IR, LOT A PCL, 2 DATE 9/27/96 APPR. JPN PARCEL MAP 8248, 32/16-18 SE.ALE 11 = 50 ORDER 2034431 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA BY NLIRRIS-RE K N 922-100-003 CITY OF TEMECULA LDWG D,\P\9L'03\DWG\LDS.DWG OLD TOWN WESTSIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY ITEI\4 I MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCING AUTHORITY HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996 A regular meeting of the was called to order at 5:1 1 P.M. at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. Chairperson Patricia H. Birdsall presiding. PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, Authority General Counsel Peter Thorson and Authority Secretary June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. AUTHORITY BUSINESS 1 .Election of Officers for 1 997 It was moved by Board Member Roberts, seconded by Board Member Stone to elect Karel Lindemans as Chairperson to preside over the Financing Authority until the end of calendar year 1 997. The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Board Member Stone, seconded by Board Member Lindemans to elect Steve Ford as Vice Chairperson who will assume the duties of the Chairperson in his absence, and will hold this office until the end of calendar year 1 997. The motion was unanimously carried. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Board Member Stone, seconded by Board Member Lindemans to adjourn at 5:1 2 PM to a meeting on December 10, 1 996, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Patricia H. Birdsall, Chairperson ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC City Clerk/Authority Secretary Minutes.fal 20396 OLD TOWN WESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY ITEI\4 I MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE OLD TOWN/WESTSIDE IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996 A regular meeting of the was called to order at 5:1 3 P.M. at the Community Recreation Center, 30875 Rancho Vista Road, Temecula, California. Chairperson Patricia H. Birdsall presiding. PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Ford, Lindemans, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None Also present were Executive Director Ronald E. Bradley, Authority General Counsel Peter Thorson and Authority Secretary June S. Greek. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. AUTHORITY BUSINESS 1 .Election of Officers for 1997 It was moved by Board Member Ford, seconded by Board Member Stone to elect Karel Lindemans as Chairperson to preside over the Improvement Authority until the end of calendar year 1 997. The motion was unanimously carried. It was moved by Board Member Lindemans, seconded by Board Member Stone to elect Steve Ford as Vice Chairperson who will assume the duties of the Chairperson in his absence, and will hold this office until the end of calendar year 1 997. The motion was unanimously carried. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Board Member Stone, seconded by Board Member Lindemans to adjourn at 5:14 PM to a meeting on December 10, 1996, 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Patricia H. Birdsall, Chairperson ATTEST: June S. Greek, CMC City Clerk/Authority Secretary Minutes.ial 20396 rrEI\4 6 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTOR OF FINAN CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM:Gary Thornhill, Community Development Directori6@ DATE:December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Planning Application No. PA96-0333: A Development Agreement between Forest City Development, Inc., LGA-7 Inc. and the City of Temecula for a Regional Mall and Associated Retail Development on 1 79 Acres Prepared By: Matthew Fagan, Associate Planner RECOMMENDATION:The Planning Commission recommends the City Council: 1 .Make a Determination of Consistency With a Project for Which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was Previously Certified and Findings that a Subsequent EIR is not required; and 2.Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96-_ AN RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA FINDING THAT NEITHER A SUBSEQUENT EIR, A SUPPLEMENTAL EIR NOR FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT WITH RESPECT TO THE APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT INC., AND LGA-7, INC., FOR APPROXIMATELY 179 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0333) 3.Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 96-_ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT INC., AND LGA-7, INC., FOR APPROXIMATELY 179 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0333) R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb BACKGROUND The Development Agreement for a regional mail on 1 79 acres was submitted to the Planning Department on November 26, 1996. Since the Planning Commission had not made a recommendation to the City Council as of the writing of this report, Staff will update the Council on the night of the hearing regarding the Commission's decision. ANALYSIS The Development Agreement (Agreement) has been drafted by the City Attorney and reviewed by the other parties. Staff has reviewed the provisions contained within the Agreement for consistency with the General Plan and Specific Plan No. 263. Two particular Sections of the Agreement, Section 6 (Development Standards for the property; Applicable Rules) and Section 7 (Regional Public Improvements) are discussed below. Section 6. Development Standards for the Property: Applicable Rules This Section discusses the applicable development standards and restrictions governing the use and development of the project. Applicable ordinances and regulations include: 0The City's General Plan (as it exists on the Effective Date of the Agreement); *Specific Plan No. 263 (Regional Center Specific Plan); *The Mitigation Monitoring Program for Environmental Impact Report No. 340; *The City's Development Code (as it exists on the Effective Date of the Agreement); *Portions of Ordinance No. 348 (Zoning), not superseded by the Development Code; 0Ordinance No. 460 (Subdivision Ordinance); 0Uniform Building Code Parking, lighting, payment of Development Mitigation Fees ($2.00/sq. ft. of gross leasable building area -except the department store anchors), plan check and inspection fees are also discussed in this Section. This Section also contains provisions entitling the developer to install the major site identity sign for the property along the freeway as described in the Specific Plan allowing a sign up to a maximum ninety-four (94) feet in height, and five hundred (500) square feet of sign area.The sign shall not contain changeable messages. The location, size and design of the signshall be subject to Development Plan approval and all applicable governmental permitrequirements. Section 7. ReaionalPublic Improvements This Section of the Agreement discusses the nature of the proposed Regional Public Improvements (Improvements) , identification of the parties responsible for designing, constructing, installing and maintaining the Improvements and timing for the completion of the Improvements. R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 2 According to this Section of the Agreement, the City shall design, construct, install and maintain at no cost or expense to the Developer the following improvements: Perimeter Road improvements to include: Winchester Road improvements. Ynez Road improvements. Margarita Road improvements - Winchester to Solana. Overland Drive connection between Ynez Road and Margarita Road. @onstruct new or remodel existing traffic signals. Underground overhead power and communications lines on the south side of Winchester Road from Ynez Road to Margarita Road. Construct regional storm drainage facilities. The certificate of occupancy for 750,000 sq. ft. of mall space will trigger the sale of the second series of bonds in CFD 88-1 2, thus providing for the construction of the Overland from Ynez Road to Jefferson Avenue over-crossing. Timing for completion of the improvements is listed below: *The City shall award contracts for the improvements (other than the Overland Overpass) prior to the final approval of the Development Plan for the Mall Site of the property. &The City shall have approved plans and specifications and shall have advertised the Notice Inviting Bids for the construction of the improvements (other than the Overland Overpass) prior to the commencement of the major grading of the property. *The City shall begin and diligently pursue to completion the improvements (other than the Overland Overpass) prior to the opening of the Mall portion of the project. 9The City shall use its reasonable best efforts to cause the commencement of construction of the Overland Overpass within thirty-six (36) months following the opening of the Mall. The majority of the improvements have been identified though the City of Temecula Capital Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 1997-2001). Other improvements have been identified and will be funded through Development Impact Fees that will be collected as new development occurs. FISCAL IMPACT The majority of the regional infrastructure improvements have been identified in the City's Capital Improvement Program (Fiscal Years 1997-2001) and will be funded by the General Fund in the amount of $3,862,736 and Development Impact Fees in the amount of $3,163,409. This proposed development will generate additional Development Impact Fee revenues, as well as significant sales tax revenues. The proposed mall would also generate significant future tax increment because of its location in a redevelopment project area. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb Attachments: 1 Resolution No. 96- - Page 5 A.Conditions of Approval - Page 1 1 2. Ordinance No. 96- - Page 13 3.Initial Environmental Study - Page 1 8 4.Proposed Development Agreement - Page 39 5.Exhibits - Blue Page 40 A.Vicinity Map B.General Plan Map C. Zoning Map R:\STAFFRn\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb ATTACHMENT NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96- R:\STAFF@\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 5 RESOLUTION NO. 96-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA FINDING THAT NEITHER A SUBSEQUENT EIR, A SUPPLEMENTAL EIR NOR FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT WITH RESPECT TO THE APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMIECULA, FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT INC., AND LGA-7, INC., FOR APPROXIMATELY 179 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0333) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby finds determines, and declares as follows: a. In accordance with the procedure specified in Section 65864 @ aN. of the Government Code of the State of California and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52, Forest City Development, Inc. ("Developer") and LGA-7, Inc. ("Owner") have jointly filed with the City of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement ("Development Agreement") for approximately 179 acres located at the southwest corner of Winchester Road and Ynez Road ("Property") for a regional mall and retail commercial uses, which application has been reviewed and accepted for filing by the Community Development Director ("Project"); b. Notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of the Development Agreement and to consider the findings under the California Environmental Quality Act that an EIR, supplemental EIR or subsequent EIR is not required has been duly given in the form and manner require by law for both the public hearing before the Planning Commission and public hearing before the City Council; (1) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the public hearings, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearings to the project applicants and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the Property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 6 (2) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and notice of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; C. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Development Agreement on December 16, 1996 at which time the Planning Commission heard and considered all of the written material and oral comments presented to it on the environmental findings and the proposed Development Agreement; d. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Development Agreement on December 17, 1996 at which time the City Council heard and considered all of the written material and oral comments presented to it on the environmental findings and the proposed Development Agreement; Section 2. The City Council hereby further finds and determines that the Project has been the subject of extensive prior environmental review: a.On July 13, 1993, following a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted Resolution No. 93-57 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 340 WITH ADDENDUM, ADOPTION OF THE STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF YNEZ AND WINCHESTER ROADS AND KNOVIN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO(S) 910-130-046, 047; 921-090-001, 002, 003, 004, 005, AND 006, " certifying the Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan No. 263 and Zone Change 5589 for the Property. b. Additionally, on October 11, 1994, following a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted Resolution No. 94-100 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING THE ADDENDUM TO THE FEIR NO. 340; TO ADOPT AN ADDENDUM TO FEIR NO. 349 INCLUDING A NEW MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND DETERMINING NO ADDITIONAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THE CIRCULATION MITIGATION MEASURES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF YNEZ ROAD AND WINCHESTER ROAD. " The Council found at this time that the proposed specific plan and zone change did not change any of the impacts identified in FEIR No. 340, none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA guidelines calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR had occurred, only minor technical changes or additions were necessary to make FEIR No. 340 adequate under CEQA, and the changes to the EIR by the Addendum do not raise important new issues about the significant effects on the environment. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CC1 12/12196 klb 7 C. The Staff of the Planning Department has prepared an Initial Study of Environmental Impact, dated December 6, 1996 analyzing the proposed Development Agreement and the prior environmental actions on the Project, which Initial Study is incorporated herein by this reference. d. The Development Agreement currently before the Council incorporates the provisions of the City's General Plan, Specific Plan 253, the current zoning regulations for the Property, the Mitigation Plan of Environmental Impact Report No. 340 and such other ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies governing permitted uses, density, design, improvement, development fees, and construction standards applicable to the Property on the effective date of the Development Agreement. The Development Agreement makes minor adjustments to the procedures for Planning Commission determination of adequate parking spaces, minor adjustments in the procedures for approval by the Director of lighting for the Project, allows for a freeway identification sign for the Project, all as provided for by the Specific Plan, and provides for allocation between the City and Developer of responsibility for construction of the off-site improvements required for the Project, which are required for the Project. All of the provisions of the proposed Development Agreement which might affect the environment were discussed and analyzed in FEIR 340. e. Therefore, no further environmental review is required for the Amendment unless required by 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15161 or 15163. Section 3. Based on the evidence in the record before it, and after careful consideration of the evidence, the City Council hereby finds and determines that neither a Subsequent EIR a Supplemental EIR, nor further environmental review is required for the Development Agreement pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166, 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15162 or 15163, based on the following findings of the City Council: a. The elements of the Project as described in the Development Agreement were contemplated and fully and properly analyzed in the EIR certified and approved by the City Council on July 13, 1993 and the Addendum thereto approved on October 11, 1994 for the approval of Specific Plan 263 and Zone Change 5589; b.There have been no subsequent changes to the Project since October 11, 1994 which wouldrequire major revisions of the previous FEIR and Addendum due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. C. Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous FEIR and Addendum due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. R:\STAFF@333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 8 d. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR and Addendum which would show or tend to show that the Project might have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous FEIR and Addendum. e. There is no new information since the certification of the previous FEIR and Addendum which would show or tend to show that significant effects previously examined might be substantially more severe than shown in the FEIR and Addendum. f. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and Addendum which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternative previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project. 9. There is no new information since the certification of the FEIR and Addendum which would show or tend to show that mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous FEIR and Addendum would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment. Section 4. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 199-. Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] R:NSTAFF@\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) BY CERT]IFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of @ 199_ by the following vote of the Council: AYES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT:CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12112/96 klb 10 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb it EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No. PA96-0333 (Development Agreement) Project Description: A Development Agreement between Forest City Development, Inc., LGA-7 Inc. 179 acres Approval Date: Expiration Date: PLANNING DEPARTMENT WithinForty-Eight (48) Hours of the Approval of this Project 1 .The applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashier's check or money order made payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Seventy-Eight Dollars ($78.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Exemption required under Public Resources Code Section 21108(b) and California Code of Regulations Section 1 5062. If within said forty-eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void by reason of failure of condition. GeneralRequirements 2.The developer/applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City and any agency or instrumentality thereof, and/or any of its officers, employees and agents from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees and agents, to attack, set aside, void, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting from an approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning Planning Application No. PA96-0130 (Development Agreement) which action is brought within the appropriate statute of limitations period and Public Resources Code, Division 1 3, Chapter 4 (Section 21 000 el=., including but not by the way of limitations Section 21 1 52 and 21167). City shall promptly notify the developer/applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding brought within this time period. City shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. Should the City fail to either promptly notify or cooperate fully, developer/applicant shall not, thereafter be responsible to indemnify, defend, protect, or hold harmless the City, any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its officers, employees, or agents. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 12 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 96- R:%STAFF@333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 13 ORDINANCE NO. 96-_ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT INC., AND LGA-7, INC., FOR APPROXIMATELY 179 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND YNEZ ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA96-0333) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMIECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby finds determines, and declares as follows: a. Section 65864 @ @. of the Government Code of the State of California and Temecula City Resolution No. 91-52 authorize the execution of development agreements establishing and maintaining requirements applicable to the development of real property; b. In accordance with the procedure specified in said statutes and Resolution, Forest City Development, Inc. ("Developer") and LGA-7, Inc. ("Owner") have jointly filed with the City of Temecula an application for a Development Agreement ("Development Agreement") for approximately 179 acres located at the southeast corner of Winchester Road and Ynez Road ("Property") for a regional mall and retail commercial uses consistent with Specific Plan No. 263, which application has been reviewed and accepted for filing by the Community Development Director; C. Notice of the City's intention to consider adoption of the Development Agreement and to consider the findings under the California Environmental Quality Act that a Supplemental EIR or Subsequent EIR is not required has been duly given in the form and manner require by law for both the public hearing before the Planning Commission and the public hearing before the City Council; (1) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council was published in a newspaper of general circulation at least ten (10) days before the public hearings, and mailed or delivered at least ten (10) days prior to the hearings to the project applicants and to each agency expected to provide water, sewer, schools, police protection, and fire protection, and to all property owners within six hundred feet (600') of the Property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 14 (2) Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council included the date, time, and place of the public hearing, the identity of the hearing body, a general explanation of the matter to be considered, a general description in text or diagram of the location of the real property that is the subject of the hearing, and notice of the need to exhaust administrative remedies; d. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Development Agreement on December 16, 1996 at which time the Planning Commission heard and considered all of the written material and oral comments presented to it on the proposed environmental findings and the proposed Development Agreement; e. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the Development Agreement on December 17, 1996 at which time the City Council heard and considered all of the written material and oral comments presented to it on the proposed environmental findings and the proposed Development Agreement; Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula further finds, determines and declares that: a. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the City of Temecula's General Plan in that: (1) The Development Agreement makes reasonable provision for the use of the Property for commercial development consistent with the General Plan's land use designation of Community Commercial, Professional Office and Public/Institutional Facilities for the Property which provide for commercial development; (2) The Development Agreement and development on the Property will provide for the creation of jobs within the City, enhance the balance of housing and jobs within the City as provided in the Growth Management/Public Facility, Land Use, and Economic Development Elements of the General Plan; b.The Development Agreement is consistent with Specific Plan 263 in which the Property is locatedin that: (1) The Development Agreement provides for commercial development pursuant to and in conformance with the terms of Specific Plan 263; (2) The specific land uses proposed for the Project as set forth in the Development Agreement are specifically allowed by Specific Plan No. 263; (3) The Development Agreement provides for the actual construction of the regional public improvements by the City as described in Specific Plan 263; R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 15 (4) The Applicable Rules set forth in the Development Agreement do not change the provisions of the Specific Plan, but clarifies the uses to be allowed and standards to be imposed where the Specific Plan provides for alternatives; C. The Development Agreement is in conformity with the public convenience, general welfare, and good land use practice because it makes reasonable provision for a balance of land uses compatible with the remainder of the City; d. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to, and in fact enhances, the health, safety, or general welfare because it provides adequate assurances for the protection thereof through the implementation of the Applicable Rules; e. The City Council's approval of the Development Agreement by this Ordinance is based upon evidence and findings of the Planning Commission and the evidence presented at the hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council on the Development Agreement; f. The following benefits, among others, will accrue to the people of the City of Temecula from the Development Agreement: (1)Generation of municipal revenue; (2)Construction of needed public infrastructure facilities; (3) Acceleration of both the timely development of subject property as well as the payment of municipal revenue; (4) Enhancement of quality of life for surrounding residents with the timely development through the elimination of dust and nuisance of partially improved lots and providing retail development necessary to serve the community; and (5)Payment of Public Facility Fees. 9- By separate resolution adopted prior to this Ordinance, the City Council has determined that environmental impacts for the commercial development described in the Development Agreement were contemplated and fully and properly analyzed in Environmental Impact Report No. 340, approved July 13, 1993, and the Addendum thereto approved October 11, 1994 and that none of the findings described in Public Resources Code Section 21166, 14 Cal. Admin. Code Sections 15162 or 15163 requiring a subsequent environmental impact report for the Development Agreement exist. Section 3. The Development Agreement is hereby approved in substantially the form attached and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit A. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to evidence such approval by executing this Agreement for, and in the name of, the City of Temecula and the City Clerk is directed to attest thereto. R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 16 Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law. Section 5. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 199-. Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS CITY OF TEMECULA) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of 1 199_ by the following vote of the Council: AYES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT:CITY COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk R:\STAFFM\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 17 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY R:\STAFF@%333PA96.CC1 12/12196 kib 18 CITY OF TEMECULA Environmental Checklist 1. Project Title: Planning Application No. PA96-0333 (Development Agreement) 2.Lead AgencyName and Address: City of Temecula, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Matthew Fagan, Associate Planner (909) 694-6400 4.P 'ect Location: East of Ynez Road, south of Winchester Road, west of Margarita Road and north roi of the proposed Overland Road extension 5 . Pr 'ect Sponsor's Name and Address: Forest City Development, Inc. Oi 949 S. Hope Street, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 92504 LGA-7, Inc. 9601 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 6. General Plan Designation: CC (Community Conunercial), P (Public/Institutional Facilities) and 0 (Professional Office) 7.Zoning: SP (Specific Plan - Regional Center) 8.Description of Project: A Development Agreement betnveen Forest City Development, Inc., LGA-7 Inc. and the City of Temecula for a Regional Mall and Associated Retail Development on approximately 179 Acres. The approximately 179 acre site which the Development Agreement will cover constitutes portions of Planning Area No. 1 and Planning Area No. 2 of the Regional Center Specific Plan. The Specific Plan was adopted in October, 1994. Under the Plan, Planning Areas No. I and 2 are designated for up to 1,673,000 square feet of retail floor space. The entire Specific Plan contains three (3) Planning Areas on 201.3 acres. The Specific Plan would permit retail, commercial, office, institutional, residential and hotel uses on the property. The proposed Development Agreement provides for future development 'in accordance with the Applicable Rules which include the General Plan, Specific Plan No. 263, existing zoning ordinance and minor procedural clarifications. Development would be required to comply with the existing binding regulations at the time of development. Currently, the City does not have an adopted development impact fee. The Development Agreementwouldsetthefecat$2.00persquarefootofgrossleasablebuildingarea. TheDevclopment Agreement allocates responsibility for construction of regional public improvements between the City and the Developer. The term of the Development Agreement would be ten (I 0) years from its effective date. The EIR for the Specific Plan was certified in July, 1993. An Addendum to the EIR was adopted in October, 1994. The 1993 EIR indicated that even after implementing the proposed mitigations, several significant impacts wall remain. The remaining significant impacts will be to Noise, Climate and Air Quality, and Agriculture. Several other cumulatively significant impacts will occur if the other proposed Specific Plans for the re 'on, Specific Plan No. I (Campos Verdes) and Specific Plan No. 25 5 91 R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 19 (Winchester Mlis), are developed. These additional areas of significant impact will be Seismic Safety, Flooding, Wildlife and Vegetation, Circulation and Traffic, Fire Services, Sheriff Services, Schools, Utilities and Libraries. As part of the certification of the EIR in 1993, the City Council had to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations detailing -,vby the project was approved in light of the unavoidable environmental effects. The 1994 EIR Addendum incorporated technical analysis (in the Areas of traffic/circulation and dra'mage/flooding) into the Final EIR and integrated additional/revised nutigation measures into the Mitigation Monitoring Program. Under California Public Resources Code Section 21166 and Section 15162 if the California Envirom-nental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, no additional EIR is required unless additional impacts not previously considered, or substantial increases in the severity of impacts, may result from: substantial changes in the circumstances under which the pr 'ect is undertaken, or new information that Oi could not have been knoNNn at the time the EIR was prepared. This Initial Envirom-nental Study is tiered from the 1993 EIR and the 1994 EIR Addendum for the Specific Plan and examines the question of whether any impacts beyond those analyzed in the 1993 EIR and 1994 EIR Addendum, would result from the proposed Development Agreement, changes in circumstances, or new information. 9.Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Vacant to the south and cast Palm Plaza (Commercial Center) and ACS (manufacturing and office) to the west Doctor's Medical Plaza (medical offices), Costco Center (Commercial Center) and vacant to the north. 10.Other public agencies whose approval is required: None. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 20 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Hazards Population and Housing Noise Geologic Problems Public Services Water Utilities and Service Systems Air Quality Aesthetics Transportation/Circulation Cultural Resources Biological Resources Recreation Energy and Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance [XI None DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: Ifindthattheproposedp 'ectCOULDNOThaveasignificantontheenvironment,thatnoneoftheconditions roi described in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred; therefore, the previous analysis performed under EIR No. 340 (certified July, 1993) and the EIR Addendum (adopted October, 1994) adequately addresses all impacts from this project. Staff is recommending the Planning Commission and the City Council Make a Determination of Consistency With a Project for Which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was Previously Certified and Findings that a Subsequent EIR is not required. Signature Date Printed Name R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 2 1 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1.LAND USE AN][) PLANNING. Would the proposal: a. Conflietwithgeneralplandesignationorzoning? 11 [XI b.Conflict with applicable envirom-nental plans or policies adoptedbyagencieswithjurisdictionoverthepr 'ect? I I [XI Oi c. Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? I I [XI d.Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or fan-nlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? I I I I [XI e.Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including low-income or minority conununity)? I I [XI 2.POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would be proposal: a.Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projects? b.Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through project in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? [XI c. Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? I I I I I I [XI 3.GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving? a. Fault rupture? I I [XI b. Seismic ground shaking? I I I I [XI c.Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d.Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e. Landslides or mudflows? f Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? g. Subsidence ofthe land? I I I I I I [XI h. Expansive soils? I I I I I I [XI 1. Unique geologic or physical features? I I I I I I [XI R:\STAFFRff\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 22 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 4.WATER. Would the proposal result in: a.Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and mount of sufface nmoff? I I b Exposure ofpeople or property to water related hazards such as flooding? I I I [XI c.Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? [ I [XI d.Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? I I [XI e.Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? I I I [XI f Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? I I g. Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? I I h. Impacts to groundwater quality? I I i.Substantial reduction in the amount of groundnvater otherwise available for public water supplies? 5.AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a.Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? I [XI b. Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? I c.Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in climate? [ I I [XI d. Create objectionable odors? I I I [XI 6.TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a. Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion? [ I [XI h.Hazardstosafetyfromdesignfeatures(e.g.sharpcurves or dangerous intersection or incompatible uses)? I I I I [ I [XI c. Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? I I R:\STAFFRYr\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 23 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Uss Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES impact Incorporated Impact Impact d. Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? [XI e. Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? [XI f Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? I I [XI g. Rail, waterbome or air traffic impacts? [XI 7.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a.Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals and birds)? I [XI b. Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? I I I I [XI c.Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? I I I I I I [XI d. Welland habitat (e.g. marsh, rip ari an and vernal pool)? I I I I I I [XI e. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? I I I I I I I)q 8.ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a.Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b.Use non-renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? c.Result in the loss of availability of a kno@vn mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? 9.HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a.A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemical or radiation)? b.Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? I I [XI c.The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? [XI R:\STAFF@\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 24 ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d.Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? I I [XI e.Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? I I [XI 10.NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a.Increase in existing noise levels? b.Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 11.PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? [ I [XI b. Police protection? I I [XI c. Schools? I I I I I I [XI d. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? I I I I I I [XI e. Other governmental services? I I I I I I I)q 12.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? I I [XI b. Communications systems? I I [XI c.Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? I I [XI d. Sewer or septic tanks? I I [XI e. Storm water drainage? I I [XI f. Solid waste disposal? I I [XI g. Local or regional water supplies? I I I I [XI 13.AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? I I [XI b. Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? I I I I [XI R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 25 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ISSUES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c. Create light or glare? I I [XI 14.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a. Disturb paleontological resources? I I I I [XI b. Disturb archaeological resources? I I N c. Affect historical resources? I I [XI d.Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e.Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 15.RECREATION. Would the proposal: a.Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? I I [XI b. Affect existing recreational opportunities? I I [XI 16.MANDATORYFINDINGSOFSIGNIFICANCE. a.Does the pr 'ect have the potential to degrade the quality Oi of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b.Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? [XI c.Does the project have impacts that area individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively consi 'derable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects). [XI d.Does the project have envirom-nental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? I I [XI R:\STAFF@\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 26 17. EARLIER ANALYSES. a.Earlieranalysesused:lhsUfialEnvironmentalStudyistieredfromtheEIRfortheRegionalCenterSpeciflcPlan (EIR No. 340) certified in 1993 and the EIR Addendum adopted in 1994. R:\STAFFRn%333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 27 EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST JUDGEMENTS The following checklist judgements list the level of impact anticipated from the proposed project. These judgements are made against the baseline of the adopted Specific Plan with its required mitigation. The checklist judgements address the question of whether the proposed project would result in additional impacts, not previously addressed in the 1 993 EIR and the 1994 EIR Addendum. 1. Land Use Planning The 1993 EIR identified the loss of agricultural lands as an unavoidable significant adverse impact by the adoption of the Specific Plan. Implementation of the Specific Plan will remove existing dry farmed cropland from production. It will also result in the loss of future agricultural lands designated as "Local Important Farmland" and "Prime Farmland" as indicated in the City's Draft General Plan, agricultural resources. Development of the property could theoretically hasten the conversion of other agricultural areas to urban uses by creating economic pressures and increasing land value for development. However, from a practical standpoint, this project is surrounded by urbanizing or planned urban development and farming operations have not been present on the property for several years. There are no practical mitigations for this impact, with the exception of no development, even though the impact is considered a significant impact. The City Council addressed this unavoidable impact in the Findings of Overriding Consideration associated with the certification of the EIR. a)No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with the City's General Plan designation or zoning. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning for the proposed project which was adopted with approval of the Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan and is therefore consistent with adopted regional plans. c)No Impact. The proposed project will not be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity. Buffering was considered on the eastern portion of the site, adjacent to residential development. No buffering is required to the west, north and south. d)No Impact. The proposal will not affect agricultural resources or operations. The site is currently vacant and is not being used for agricultural purposes. e)No Impact. The proposal will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted Specific Plan and will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the community in an manner that is different than contemplated in the Specific Plan. R:\STAFFRP'f\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 28 2. Population and Housing The 1 993 EIR did not identify any significant population and housing impacts. a)No Impact. The proposal will not cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projects. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted Specific Plan and the City's General Plan. It is therefore consistent with official regional and local projections. b)No Impact. The proposal will not induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly beyond that previously analyzed in the 1993 EIR for the Specific Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not displace existing housing, especially affordable housing. The proposed project site is currently vacant. 3. Geologic Problems The 1993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Geologic Problems ( Soils, Ground Rupture, Ground Surface Cracking, Liquefaction, Seismically Induced Flooding, Topography, Groundwater, Slope Stability and Wind Erosion) have been reduced to an insignificant level (Pages V-1 7, V-24 and V-25). a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts from fault rupture beyond those impacts described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impact from seismic ground shaking beyond those impacts described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts from seismic ground failure or liquefaction beyond those impacts described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts from a seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard beyond those impacts described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. e)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts from landslides or mudflows beyond those impacts described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. In additional, no additional significant geotechnical information regarding the project has been developed since certification of the 1993 EIR. R:\STAFF@%333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 29 f)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts from erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill beyond those impacts described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. No additional significant geotechnical information regarding the project site, erosion, soil or grading related impacts have been developed since certification of the 1993 EIR. g)No Impact. The proposal will not result in an impact due to subsidence of the land. The proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. No additional significant geotechnical information regarding the project has been developed since certification of the 1993 EIR. Therefore, no additional impacts beyond those described in the 1993 are anticipated. h)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts from expansive soils beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. No additional significant geotechnical information regarding the project has been developed since certification of the 1993 EIR. i)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to unique geologic or physical features beyond those impacts described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 4. Water The 1 993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Water (Water Quality and Flooding) have been reduced to an insignificant level (Pages V-30, and V-58). The 1 994 EIR Addendum further elaborated upon the impacts from the project and additional/revised Mitigation Measures required. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff beyond those impacts described in the 1993 EIR and the 1994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1 994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality beyond that described in the 1993 EIR and the 1994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR, the 1 994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional changes in the amount of surface water in any water body beyond that described in the 1993 EIR and the 1994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 30 e)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR, the 1 994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. f)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional change in the quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability beyond that described in the 1993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. g)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional alteration to the direction or rate of flow of groundwater beyond that described in the 1993 EIR and the 1994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1 994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. h)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to groundwater quality beyond that described in the 1993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. i)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional substantial reductions in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 5.Air Quality The1993 EIR identified Air Quality as impacted in an unavoidable significant adverse way by thecertification of the EIR and the adoption of the Specific Plan. Although impacts to air quality will occur during the grading and construction phase of the project, the major impact to air quality will come from vehicle exhaust after build out of the project. Mitigation measures have been added to the project to lessen the impacts to the air quality. While measures provide feasible mitigations for the increased traffic, the impact to air quality will still be significant. The total number of vehicle trips generated from the project and surrounding projects cannot be reduced sufficiently to enable the impact to be considered insignificant. The City Council addressed these unavoidable impacts in the Findings of Overriding Consideration associated with the certification of the EIR. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional potential to violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional exposure of sensitive receptors to pollutant beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. R:\STAFFRP'n333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 kib 31 c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in climate beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in the creation of any additional objectional odors beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 6. Transportation/Circulation The 1993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Circulation and Traffic have been reduced to an insignificant level (Page V-1 17). This project impacts both on and off-site roadways. The size of the project generates sufficient traffic to require the project to comply with the State Congestion Management Program. The circulation pattern connects with proposed roadways that run through the City of Murrieta and the County of Riverside. The Traffic Study included in the technical appendix of the EIR details the impacts to the circulation system of all three jurisdictions. The analysis contains mitigation measures and timing requirements for the completion of the improvements. These mitigations have been included in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and the Conditions of Approval for the project. Cumulative unavoidable significant impacts were identified from the development of Specific Plan No. 255 and Specific Plan No. 1 concurrently with Specific Plan No. 263. The impacts will be lessened by adherence to the Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures. The City Council addressed this unavoidable impact in the Findings of Overriding Consideration associated with the certification of the EIR. The 1994 EIR Addendum further elaborated upon the impacts from the project and additional/revised Mitigation Measures required. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional increase in vehicle trips or traffic congestion beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional hazards to safety from design features beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1 994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional inadequacies for emergency access or access to nearby uses beyond those described in the 1993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1 994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional insufficiencies to parking capacity on-site or off-site beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR, the 1 994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. e)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 32 f)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. g)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional conflicts with rail, waterborne or air traffic beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR and the 1 994 EIR Addendum. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR, the 1994 EIR Addendum and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 7. Biological Resources The 1 993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Wildlife/Vegetation have been reduced to an insignificant level (Page V-83). Although the site is not habitat for any rare or endangered species, the loss of the habitat will add to the cumulative loss of wildlife habitat in the area. This cumulative loss is considered significant even though the individual project impact is not considered significant. The City Council addressed this unavoidable cumulative impact in the Findings of Overriding Consideration associated with the certification of the EIR. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to locally designated species beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to locally designated natural communities beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to wetiand habitat beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. e)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 8. Energy and Mineral Resources The 1 993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Energy and Mineral Resources have been reduced to an insignificant level (Page V-85). R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CCI 12112/96 klb 33 a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional conflicts with adopted energy conservation plans beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts from the use of non- renewal resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to which would result in the loss of availability of a known resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the state beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 9. Hazards The 1 993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Hazards (Toxic Substances, Page V-62 and Disaster Preparation, Page V-151) have been reduced to an insignificant level (Page V-85). a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to a risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemical or radiation) beyond those described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to or in a possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to expose people to existing sources of potential health hazards beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. e)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or increases to fire hazards in areas of flammable brush, grass, or trees beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 34 10. Noise The 1993 EIR identified Noise as a significant adverse impact. Noise impacts will occur during grading and construction of the project, although the major impact to noise will be from the cumulative effect of increased traffic on the roadways from this project and additional development in the area. Impacts during construction will be lessened by controlling the time construction activities are allowed to take place. Even after implementation of feasible mitigation measures, the cumulative noise impact cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. The City Council addressed this unavoidable cumulative impact in the Findings of Overriding Consideration associated with the certification of the EIR. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional increase in existing noise levels beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional exposure of people to severe noise levels beyond those described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 11. Public Services The 1993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Public Services (Fire Service, Page V-125; Police Protection - Page V-126; Schools, Page V-130 and Libraries, Page V -145) have been reduced to an insignificant level. Cumulative unavoidable significant impacts were identified from the development of Specific Plan No. 255 and Specific Plan No. 1 concurrently with Specific Plan No. 263, in the areas of Public Services (Fire Protection Services, Police Protection Services, Schools, and Libraries). The City Council addressed this unavoidable cumulative impact in the Findings of Overriding Consideration associated with the certification of the EIR. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new or altered fire protection services beyond those described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new or altered police protection services beyond those described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new or altered schools beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new or altered maintenance of public facilities, including roads beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. e)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for other new or altered governmental services beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This R:\STAFFM\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 35 is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 12. Utilities and Service Systems The 1993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Utilities and Service Systems (Water and Sewer, Page V-122; Utilities, Page V-137; and Solid Waste, Page V-143) have been reduced to an insignificant level. Cumulative unavoidable significant impacts were identified from the development of Specific Plan No. 255 and Specific Plan No. 1 concurrently with Specific Plan No. 263, in the areas of Public Services (Water and Sewer and Utilities). The City Council addressed this unavoidable cumulative impact in the Findings of Overriding Consideration associated with the certification of the EIR. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to power or natural gas beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to communication systems beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to sewer or septic systems beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. e)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to storm water drainage beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. f)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to slid waste disposal beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. g)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional water supplies beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CC1 12/12/96 klb 36 13. Aesthetics The 1993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Aesthetics (Scenic Highways, Page V-88 and Light and Glare, Page V-149) have been reduced to an insignificant level. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional increase or affect to a scenic vista or scenic highway beyond that described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional demonstrable negative aesthetic effect beyond those described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts from light and glare beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. 14.Cultural Resources The 1993 EIR indicated no cultural resources are anticipated to occur on the site (EIR No. 340, Appendix D, Technical Appendices). Adherence to the paleontologists mitigation program and the conditions of approval will reduce the potential impact to a level of non-significance (Cultural and Scientific Resources, Page V-92). Cumulative unavoidable significant impacts were identified from the development of Specific Plan No. 255 and Specific Plan No. 1 concurrently with Specific Plan No. 263, in the areas of Public Services (Water and Sewer and Utilities). The City Council addressed this unavoidable cumulative impact in the Findings of Overriding Consideration associated with the certification of the EIR. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to paleontological resources beyond those described in the 1993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to archaeological resources beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. c)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to historical resources beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. d)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. e)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts which would restrict existing religious or scared uses within the potential impact area beyond that described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1 993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 37 15. Recreation The 1993 EIR indicated that based upon the mitigation measures proposed for the project, the level of impacts related to Recreation (Open Space and Conversation, Page V-69 and Parks and Recreation, Page V-132) have been reduced to an insignificant level. a)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts or an increase in the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. b)No Impact. The proposal will not result in any additional impacts affecting existing recreational opportunities beyond those described in the 1 993 EIR. This is because the proposed project is within the scope of the 1993 EIR and is consistent with the approved Specific Plan. R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 kib 38 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. PA96-0333 SUBMITTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CCI 12/12/96 klb 39 ATTACHMENT NO. 5 EXHIBITS CITY OF TEMECULA CASE NO. PA96-0333 EXHIBIT - A VICINITY MAP CITY COUNCIL DATE - DECEMBER 17, 1996 R:\STAFFRP'r\333PA96.CC1 12/11/96 klb CITY OF TEMECULA Os r- p 13P v4TC c VL BP ITE BP BP LM p LM p ep LM f7 0 CASE NO. PA96-0333 EXHIBIT - B GENERAL PLAN MAP CITY COUNCIL DATE - DECEMBER 17, 1996 R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CC1 12/10196 klb CITY OF TEMECULA SP p SP s P CASE NO. PA96-0333 EXHIBIT - C ZONING MAP CITY COUNCIL DATE - DECEMBER 17, 1996 R:\STAFFRPT\333PA96.CCI 12110/96 kib EXEMEPT FROM RECORDER'S FEES Pursuant to Govermnent Code 6103, 27383 Recording Requested By and When Recorded Return to: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT CALIFORNIA, INC., A CALIEFORNIA CORPORATION, AND LGA-7, INC., AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION Development Agreement No. DV96- THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITHIN TEN DAYS OF EXECUTION BY ALL PARTIES HERETO PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CODE 65868.5 Final: De-cember 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 p:\agreemen\1480121.mal TABLE OF CONTENTS AGREEMENT 1. Recitals 1 2. Definitions 3 3. Interests of Owner and Developer 4 4. Binding Effect 4 5. Negation of Agency 4 6.Development Standards for the Property; Applicable Rules 5 7. Regional Public Improvements 7 8.Acknowledgments, Agreements and Assurances on the Part of the Developer 12 9.Acknowledgments, Agreements and Assurances on the Part of the City 13 10. Cooperation and Implementation 15 11. Compliance; Termination; Modifications And Amendments. 17 12. Proceedings Upon Termination 18 13. Modification, Amendment or Cancellation 18 14. Operation Agreements 18 15. Term of Agreement 19 16. Legal Action 19 17.Administration of Agreement and Resolution of Disputes 20 18.Transfers and Assignments to Parties Other Than Owner 20 19. Mortgage Protection 21 20. Notices 22 21. Severability and Termination 23 22. Time of Essence 23 23. Force Majeure 23 24. Waiver 24 25. Constructive Notice and Acceptance 24 26. No Third Party Beneficiaries 24 27. Attomey's Fees 24 28. Incorporation of Exhibits 24 29. Entire Agreement; Conflicts 25 F@: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 p:\agreemen\1480121.mal EXHI]BITS EXHEBIT A LEGAL DESCRIMON Exhibit A-1 Property Exhibit A-2Developer's Parcels--Mall Parcel Exhibit A-3Developer's Parcels--Power Center Parcel Exhibit A-4Property EXHIBIT BCITY OF TEMECULA FURNISHED STRUCTURE Exhibit B- IStreet Improvements Exhibit B-2Traffic Signals Exhibit B-3Underground Power Lines Exhibit B-4Storm Drain Improvements Final: December 12, 1996 11096-00006 pt 1480121.3 p:kagrecmen%1480121.mal DEVELOPMENT AGREEMIENT This Development Agreement ("Agreement") is made this 17th day of December, 1996, by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA, a general law city in the State of California (the "City"), FOREST CITY DEVELOPMENT CALIFORNIA, INC., a California corporation (the "Developer"), and LGA-7, INC., an Illinois Corporation (the "Owner"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Recitals. This Agreement is made with respect to the following facts and for the following purposes, each of which is acknowledged as true and correct by the parties: a. The City is authorized pursuant to Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5 (the "Development Agreement Statute") to enter into binding agreements with persons or entities having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to establish certainty in the development process. b. The property which is the subject of this Development Agreement (the "Property") consists of approximately 179 acres. Developer is contractually entitled to acquire from the Owner approximately 120 acres of the Property, which shall be known as the "Developer's Parcels." The remaining approximately 59 acres will remain owned by the Owner and shall be known as the " Owner's Parcel." The Property is legally described on Exhibit A-1, the Developer's Parcels are legally described on Exhibits A-2 and A-3, and the Owner's Parcel is legally described on Exhibit A-4. All such exhibits are attached to this Agreement. In the event the Developer does not purchase the Developer's Parcels from Owner and Developer's rights to purchase the Developer's Parcels expires or are terminated, Section 3 of this Agreement provides that the Owner may elect to terminate this Agreement or to assume all rights and obligations of the Developer. C. The parties desire to enter into this Agreement in conformance with the Development Agreement Statutes and Resolution 91-52 of the City of Temecula in order to achieve the development of the "Temecula Regional Center" ("Regional Center") on Developer's Parcels in order to achieve the retail development of an as yet unidentified project on the Owner's Parcel. As of the date of this Agreement, no specific project is planned for the Owner's Parcel. The parties likewise desire to provide land uses on the Property consistent with Specific Plan 263 and provide public services and urban infrastructure, all in the promotion of the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the City of Temecula. Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -I- p:\agreemenkl480121.m&l d. The development of the of the Regional Center on Developer's Parcels includes a regional shopping mall (anchored by department stores and containing retail shops, and other commercial uses and a separate power center), all in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement and with Specific Plan 263 (together "Developer's Project"). Owner's Parcel shall be allowed to develop in accordance with the Applicable Rules described in Section 6 of this Agreement. The Developer's Project and the terms of this Agreement are consistent with the land uses and amenities described in Specific Plan 263. The Developer's Project will be the largest commercial development within the City of Temecula and requires the assurances set forth in this Development Agreement with respect to the identification of specific development standards and requirements in order to accommodate the development of the Developer's Parcels and the development on the Owner's Parcel. e. On December 16, 1996, the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Developer's and Owner's application for the Development Agreement (Planning Application No. PA96-00333) and by Resolution No. recommended to the City Council approval of this Agreement. f. On December 17, 1996, the City Council of the City of Temecula held a duly noticed public hearing on the Developer's and Owner's application for the Development Agreement (Planning Application No. PA96-00333) and on @ 1996 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. approving this Agreement. 9. An environmental review has been conducted and approved for this Agreement in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. h. The City desires to obtain the binding agreement of the Developer and Owner for the development of the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. i. The Developer desires to obtain the binding agreement of the City to permit the Developer to develop the Developer's Project on the Developer's Parcels in accordance with the "Applicable Rules" (as hereinafter defined) and this Agreement. j. The Owner desires to obtain the binding agreement of the City to permit the Owner to develop the Owner's Parcel in accordance with the "Applicable Rules" (as hereinafter defined) and this Agreement. k. Developer and Owner have applied to the City in accordance with applicable procedures for approval of this mutually binding Agreement. The Planning Commission and City Council of the City have given notice of intention to consider the Final: December 12, 1996 11096-00006 pt 1480121.3 -2- p:\agreemenNI480121.mal Agreement, have conducted public hearings thereon pursuant to the Government Code, and have found that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the Specific Plan 263 and the City's General Plan. 1. This Agreement is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare needs of the residents of the City and the surrounding region. The City has specifically considered and approved the impact and benefits of the development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement upon the welfare of the region. M. This Agreement will bind the City to the terms and obligations specified in this Agreement and will limit, to the degree specified in the Agreement and under State law, the future exercise of the City's ability to delay, postpone, preclude or regulate development on the Property, except as provided for herein. n. In accordance with the Development Agreement Statutes, this Agreement eliminates uncertainty in the planning process and provides for the orderly development of the Property. Further, this Agreement eliminates uncertainty about the validity of exactions imposed by the City, allows installation of necessary improvements, provides for public services necessary for the region with incidental benefits for the Property, and generally serves the public interest within the City of Temecula and the surrounding region. 2.Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires: a."Applicable Rules" means the development standards and restrictions set forth in Section 6 of this Agreement which shall govern the use and development of the Property and shall amend and supersede any conflicting or inconsistent provisions of zoning ordinances, regulations or other City requirements relating to development of property within the City. b. "Discretionary Actions; Discretionary Approvals" are actions which require the exercise of judgement or a discretionary decision, and which contemplate and authorize the imposition of revisions or additional conditions, by the City, including any board, commission, or department of the City and any officer or employee of the City; as opposed to actions in the process of approving or disapproving a permit or other entitlement merely requires the City, including any board, commission, or department of the City and any officer or employee of the City, to determine whether there has been compliance with applicable statutes, ordinances, regulations, or conditions of approval. C. "Effective Date" is the date the ordinance approving this Agreement becomes effective. Final: December 12, 1996 1108 pt 1480121.3 -3- p:\agreemen\1480121.mal d. "Future Approvals" means any action in implementation of development of the Property which requires Discretionary Approvals pursuant to the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, parcel maps, tentative subdivision maps, development plans, and conditional use permits. Upon approval of any of the Future Approvals, as they may be amended from time to time, they shall become part of the Applicable Rules, and Developer or Owner, as the case may be, shall have a "vested right," as that term is defined under California law, in and to such Future Approvals by virtue of this Agreement. 3.Interests of Owner and DevelQper. a. The Owner represents to the City that, as of the Effective Date, it is the owner of the entire Property, subject to encumbrances, easements, covenants, conditions, restrictions, and other matters of record. Owner and Developer represent to the City that as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Developer is contractually entitled to acquire the Developer's Parcels. b. In the event the Developer does not purchase the either or both Developer's Parcels from Owner and Developer's rights to purchase either or both the Developer's Parcels expires or terminate, Owner may, as to the property not purchased by Developer, elect, in its discretion, to terminate this Agreement or to assume all rights of the Developer pursuant to this Agreement for the benefit of the Owner and to assume all obligations of the Developer under this Agreement. Such an election shall be effective upon written notice from the Owner to the City and Developer, in which event Developer shall no longer be a party to this Agreement nor have any rights, duties or obligations hereunder. The notice shall contain a representation of the Owner to the City, that Developer has not purchased the applicable Developer's Parcels, Developer is no longer entitled to purchase the applicable Developer's Parcels, and that Owner elects to either terminate the Agreement as to such parcels or to assume and be bound by of all the benefits and obligations of Developer as to such parcels as set forth in the Agreement. If Owner elects to assume and be bound by all of the benefits and obligations of Developer, then at such time all references in this Agreement to Developer shall mean and include only Owner. 4. Binding Eff=. This Agreement, and all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, shall run with the land comprising the Property and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective assigns, heirs, or other successors in interest. 5. Negation of Agency. The parties acknowledge that, in entering into and performing under this Agreement, each is acting as an independent entity and not as an agent of the other in any respect. Nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City, Developer, and Owner joint Final: December 12, 1996 11096-00006 pt 1480121.3 -4- p:\agreemen\1480121.nml venturers, partners, agents of the other, or employer/employee. Developer is not the agent of the Owner. Except as otherwise set forth in Section 3.b. above, neither Owner nor Developer shall be entitled to bind the other nor to modify this Agreement without the express written consent of the other and nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as allowing Developer or Owner to bind the other or to modify this Agreement without the express written consent of the other. Developer and Owner each acknowledge that this consent requirement may cause delays in modifying or amending this Agreement and implementing the development proposed thereby. 6. Development Standards for the Prop@e AWlicable Rules, The following development standards and restrictions set forth in this Section shall govern the use and development of the Project and the Developer's Project, Developer's Parcels, and the Owner's Parcel and shall constitute the Applicable Rules, except as otherwise provided herein, and shall amend and supersede any conflicting or inconsistent provisions of existing zoning ordinances, regulations or other City requirements relating to development of Property and any subsequent changes to the applicable Rules as specifically described in Section 9.b.: a.The following ordinances and regulations shall be part of the Applicable Rules: (1)The City's General Plan as it exists on the Effective Date; (2)Specific Plan No. 263, as it exists on the Effective Date; (3) The Mitigation Plan of Environmental Impact Report No. 340, as it exists on the Effective Date; (4) The City's Development Code, which is set forth in Title 17 of the Temecula Municipal Code, as it exists on the Effective Date; (5)Those portions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, Zoning, adopted bythe City by City Ordinance No. 90-04, which have not been supersededby the City's Development Code; (6)Those portions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, Subdivisions, adopted by the City by City Ordinance No. 90-04, which have not been superseded by the City's Development Code or other City Ordinances; (7) The Uniform Building Code as adopted by the City of Temecula and are applicable generally to structures within the City, which are in effect on the date of issuance of building permits for structures on the Property and as may be in effect on the date of issuance of building permits for subsequent modifications of those structures; Final: @ember 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -5- p:\agreemen\1480121.mat (8) Such other ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property, density, design, improvement, development fees, and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property in force at the time of the Effective Date, which are not in conflict with the development standards set forth in this Section; (9) The land uses permitted on the Developer's Parcels and the Owner's Parcel include all of the allowable land uses permitted in Specific Plan No. 263 or those permitted by the Planning Director (Director of Community Development) pursuant to Paragraph a. at page 111-56, Vol. 1 of Specific Plan No. 263. The parties acknowledge and are aware of that the Planning Commission in approving a development on the Property will apply the standards set forth in Specific Plan 263 and are also aware of the language set forth in Paragraph c. 1) at page 111-42, Vol. 1 of Specific Plan 263 which provides: "It is important to note that not all uses allowed in Planning Area 1 are necessarily expected to occur. For this reason, some of the above design features may not be appropriate nor economically feasible. For this reason, only the concept of a 'Main Street' is discussed in depth above. Additional options for possible development in Planning Area 1 are discussed in Section IV, Design Guidelines, in this Specific Plan." b. The following development standards and procedures shall also govem the development of the Property and shall be part of the Applicable Rules: (1) The number of parking spaces required by the Development Code may be reduced by the Planning Commission upon a finding that a lesser number of parldng spaces would be adequate for the Property based on the results of a parldng study utilizing generally accepted methodologies for shared parking studies and conducted by a qualified consultant; (2) The Director of Community Development may approve alternatives to the lighting requirements of the Development Code, if requested by the Developer, so long as the Director finds that the alternatives will mitigate the light pollution to the same extent as the Development Code requirements and the proposed lighting program is consistent with Palomar Lighting District requirements; (3) Developer and Owner shall pay a maximum Development Mitigation Fee in the amount of two dollars ($2.00) per square foot of gross leasable building area in lieu of all other City development fees for structures on Final: Decemimr 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -6- p:\ag@\1480121.rrud the Property or any other City fees or charges related to development, except as otherwise provided herein in accordance with the following provisions; i. The Development Mitigation Fee shall be applicable to all areas of the Property, including retail space, except for the department store anchors for the Mall on the Developer's Parcels, to which no City development fees shall apply; ii. The Development Mitigation Fee shall be in effect for the duration of this Agreement; iii. The Development Mitigation Fee shall be paid at the time of issuance of a building permit for the structure; and iv. Developer and Owner shall pay the Development fee only for their respective parcels and neither Developer nor Owner shall be responsible for the payment of the fee for the other party's parcel(s). (4) Developer and Owner shall pay all building plan check and building inspection fees for work on their respective parcels on the Property in effect at the time an application for a grading permit or building permit is applied for; (5) The public works plan check fee and public works inspection fee for public improvements constructed and installed by the Developer shall be the actual costs to the City to conduct the plan check and inspections plus ten percent (10%) of those actual costs for administrative overhead; (6) The Developer shall be entitled to install a major site identity sign identifying the Project in accordance with the following regulations; i. The sign shall be located on property with a perpetual easement in favor of Developer and shall be located within 50 feet of the right of way for the 1-15 Freeway and within an area of 2500 feet north or south of the right of way for Winchester Road or such other location permitted by the City and accepted by the Developer; ii. Upon the acquisition of the sign property by Developer, Developer shall notify the City Manager and the City Manager is hereby authorized to and shall enter in to an amendment to this Development Agreement adding the sign property to the legal description of the Developer's Parcels and causing the sign property to be subject to the terms of this Agreement; Final: Drcember 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -7- p:\agreemen\1480121.nul iii. The sign shall not exceed ninety four (94) feet in height. The minimum area of the sign shall be five hundred (500) square feet of sign area, subject to future approval of additional sign area by the Director of Community Development; iv. The design of the sign shall be of high architectural quality, compatible with the area surrounding it, and shall be consistent with the sign program for the Property adopted by the Planning Commission; V. The sign shall be an identification sign for the Developer's Project which shall contain only the names of the anchor tenants and project name and shall not contain changeable messages; vi. The location, size and design of the sign shall be subject to Development Plan approval and all applicable governmental permit requirements and City shall be the lead agency in obtaining all required permits and approvals for the sign, including, without limitation, environmental review, permits from CalTrans and all other governmental agencies, and a building permit for construction of the sign; (7) Developer and Owner, as to their respective Parcels, shall construct and install all public improvements set forth in Specific Plan 263 and in the Conditions of Approval of Specific Plan 263 as applicable to the development it actually undertakes except for those Regional Public Improvements being constructed and installed by the City pursuant to Section 7 of this Agreement; and (8) Subsequent development plans submitted for individual users that are substantially in conformance with the Specific Plan 263 may be approved by the Director of Community Development. C. Prior to the Effective Date, City and Developer shall use reasonable efforts to identify, assemble and copy three identical sets of the Applicable Rules, for the City, Developer, and Owner so that if it becomes necessary in the future to refer to any of the Applicable Rules, there will be a common set of the Applicable Rules available to all parties. 7. Regional Public Impmements. In accordance with the schedule of completion described in Section 7.c., City agrees to and shall, at its own cost and expense, except as otherwise provided herein, design, construct, install and finally complete, in a Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -8- p:\agreemcn\1480121.mal diligent, timely and workmanlike manner, and in conformance with the Applicable Rules, the following regional public infrastructure improvements ("Regional Public Improvements"): a. Oblillation to Construct, The City shall construct, install, finally complete and thereafter maintain all perimeter road improvements for the Property in accordance with all requirements of Specific Plan 263, the Applicable Rules and as shown in Exhibit B-1, and as described in further detail as follows: (1) Construct, install and finally complete all Winchester Road improvements, including, but not limited to, adding and upgrading street lighting, transit facilities and turn outs if required, all required signalization or signal upgrades, landscaping, permanent irrigation systems between street curb and sidewalks, Class 11 bike lanes, signs, striping, turning lanes, driveway approaches, and sidewalks on the south side of the roadway from Ynez Road to Margarita Road. (2) Construct, install and finally complete all Ynez Road improvements, including, but not limited to, adding and upgrading street lighting, landscaping, permanent irrigation systems in medians if required, transit facilities and turn outs if required, all required signalization or signal upgrades, signs, turning lanes, Class II bike lanes, driveway approaches, and sidewalks on the east side of the roadway from Overland Drive to Winchester Road. (3) Construct, install, and finally complete full width Margarita Road from Winchester Road to Solana Way improvements in a manner consistent with and pursuant to existing Margarita Road improvement plans including, but not limited to, landscaped medians and irrigation systems, slopes, driveway approaches, transit facilities and turn outs if required, all required signalization or signal upgrades, storm drainage facilities, Class 11 bike lanes, and sidewalk and street lights on the west side of the roadway from Winchester Road to Overland Drive. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Specific Plan 263, neither Developer nor Owner shall be required to issue, provide or post any bond, collateral or other security for the work of improvement contemplated by this Section 7. a. (3) nor for any of the other Regional Public Improvements. (4) Construct, install, and finally complete full width Overland Drive road improvements, including, but not limited to, driveway approaches, transit facilities and turn outs if required, all required signalization or signal upgrades, storm drainage facilities, Class 11 bike lanes, and a sidewalk and street light on the north side of the roadway from Margafita Road to Ynez Road. F@: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -9- p:Niigreemen\1480121.mal (5) Cause the completion of the overcrossing of the 1-15 Freeway from Ynez to Jefferson at Overland Road ("Overland Overpass") in accordance with existing Community Facilities District 88-12 ("CFD 88-12") plans and subject to the funding of the land acquisition and construction costs of the Overland Overpass by CFD 88-12; the parties acknowledge and agree that City shall have no obligation to fund the Overland Overpass through its General Fund, development impact fees it may have collected for traffic improvements or other funds it may control; (6) Construct, install and finally complete new, or upgrade or remodel existing, traffic signals and all necessary or associated street improvements as may be required at the intersections of Solana Way and Margarita Road, all traffic signals to be used in conjunction with the Overland Drive freeway overpass, as well as the traffic signals at the other locations illustrated in Exhibit B-2. (7) Underground the overhead power and communications lines on the south side of Winchester Road from Ynez to Margarita Roads as illustrated in Exhibit B-3. (8) Construct, install and finally complete regional storm drainage systems and courses through the Property as illustrated in Exhibit B-4 and which are further described as: A.Two (2) main underground storm drains equivalent to a forty eight(48) inch pipe or greater, running through the Property and dischargingat the box culvert in Ynez Road. B.A detention basin on the east side of Margarita Road. C. An underground storm drain on the east side of Margarita Road. D. Box culverts and associated approaches and outlet structures for the open channel crossing at Margarita Road and Overland Drive including any remedial grading to the interim open channel between the two streets. b. Permits and A1212rovals; Release of Owner and Develo]2er, Prior to commencement of construction of any portion or segment of the Regional Public Improvements the City shall, at its own costs and expense, obtain all grading permits, building permits, construction permits, development permits and other licenses, permits, approvals, or consents which are required, either by or from the City or any Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -1@ p:\agreemen\1480121.mal department thereof, or by or from CalTrans, Riverside County or the San Diego County Regional Water Quality Control Board, or by or from the Sate of California Department of Fish and Game, the State of California Water Resources Control Board, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System or any other governmental or quasi- governmental agency asserting jurisdiction over the Property. If, and to the extent, that the City's obligation pursuant to this Agreement to construct the Regional Public Improvements conflicts with the obligation of the "Developer" or "Applicant" pursuant to Specific Plan 263 to construct the same items, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail. C. City's Time to Coml2le@ The City shall finally complete all of the Regional Public Improvements, at its own cost and expense, pursuant to the following schedule: (1) The City shall award design contracts for the Regional Public Improvements (excluding the Overland Overpass) promptly following the Effective Date. (2) On condition that the Developer delivers written notice to the City at least thirty (30) days prior to commencement of any major grading by Developer on any portion of Developer's Parcels, the City shall, prior to actual commencement of major grading by Developer: (A) Take all actions, adopt all resolutions, make all findings and adopt all ordinances as are necessary or required to approve the final plans and specifications for the construction and installation of all Regional Public Improvements (excluding the Overland Overpass); and (B) complete advertising all required Notices Inviting Bids for the construction of the Regional Public Improvements (excluding the Overland Overpass). Developer shall diligently pursue major grading once it has commenced. (3) The City shall construct and finally complete installation of all Regional Public Improvements (except the Overland Overpass) prior to the date the Developer opens the Regional Center for business, provided, however, the City shall not be required to commence construction of said Regional Public Improvements until such time as the Developer commences construction of the Regional Center. Developer shall notify City of the completion of all contingencies to its financing of the construction of the Mall Portion of the Developer's Parcels, that financing is ready to close, and the date construction of the Regional Center is expected to commence within five (5) working days of the completion of the final contingency for financing of the Regional Center. Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -II- p:\agreemen\1480121.mal (4) City shall use its reasonable best efforts to cause the commencement of construction of the Overland Overpass within thirty six (36) months following opening of the Regional Center, subject to the funding of the Overland Overpass through CFD 88-12 and the conditions of approval for Specific Plan 263. Provided, however, all traffic signals which are intended to operate in conjunction with the Overland Overpass shall be constructed and installed by the City pursuant to Section 7.a.(4) above, at the time required by Section 7. c. (3) above. d. Coo=ation, City and the Developer recognize that the design and construction of all Regional Public Improvements (including the Overland Overpass), the Regional Center, and (when finally approved) the project on the Owner's Parcel, will require close coordination between all of the parties. Each of the parties agrees to coordinate the design and construction of their respective projects and improvements with each other, to the extent reasonably practicable, in order to facilitate the orderly development of the Property and to avoid conflicts in design and construction. In this regard: (i) the City, Developer, and Owner shall use their respective best efforts to create working procedures whereby each gives notice to the other in a timely manner of their respective activities that impact on the other, and (ii) Developer and Owner shall have the opportunity to review and comment upon the design and construction contracts for all Regional Public Improvements, but shall do so in an expeditious manner so as not to impede the City's design and construction schedule for the Regional Public Improvements. Developer and Owner acknowledge that City will bid the Regional Public Improvements in accordance with the bidding requirements of the Public Contract Code and will require payment of prevailing wages for the construction of the Regional Public Improvements pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1770, et seq. e. City's Failure to Complete Regional Public ImprovementL The City's failure to timely complete construction and installation of the Regional Public Improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. In said event, Developer and Owner shall have all of the rights and remedies granted to them in this Agreement. In addition, in such an event, Developer and Owner shall have the right to require the City, at no cost or expense to the Developer or Owner, to amend the Applicable Rules (including, but not limited to, this Agreement and Specific Plan 263), in accordance with law, to provide that Developer and Owner may proceed with the development, construction, and installation of their respective projects on the Property, without any requirement that the unfinished Regional Public Improvements be completed. f. Coordination and Relocation of Utility Systems; Dedication of Land, The City agrees to coordinate installation of all utility delivery systems required by the Regional Public Improvements with the installation of Planned utility delivery systems in the Property, as well as coordinate the required relocation of any existing utility Fing: Decembff 12, 19% 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -12- p:Xagreemen\1480121.mal delivery systems and that construction delays may occur as a consequence thereof. Developer, Owner, and the City Agree in good faith to mutually determine which portions of the Property are required for construction and installation of the Regional Public Improvements (except for the Overland Overpass which is to be constructed on land not owned by the Developer or Owner). In this regard, all parties agree to use their best efforts to have the planned utility delivery systems to be installed within the dedicated roads. When mutually determined as aforesaid, Developer and Owner, as appropriate, shall dedicate the land required for the Regional Public Improvements to the City, and City agrees to accept and thereafter operate and maintain said land at no cost to the Developer or Owner. Provided, however, if the portion(s) of the Property to be dedicated are encumbered with liens securing repayment of any Mello-Roos Community Facilities District bonds or any City of Temecula, County of Riverside, or State of California real property taxes, special taxes or assessments, then Developer and Owner, as appropriate, shall (1) cause the liens to be reallocated to the remaining portions of the Property or the remaining portions of the applicable community facilities district or assessment district or (2) in the event the liens cannot be so reallocated, be obligated to pay the taxes or assessments on the portion of the Property dedicated to the City. Developer and Owner shall not be required to pay such liens and shall not be required to secure a lien-free release from the Agency or entity holding the referenced liens. City shall be entitled to take the dedicated property either free and clear of all encumbrances, assessments or liens, or, in the event the Developer or Owner, as appropriate, cannot so deliver the dedicated land, the City shall take the land subject only to the lien or assessment of the governmental entity and Developer or Owner, as appropriate, shall continue to pay the taxes or assessment on the dedicated land. 9. Agreement Re Owner's Parcel, In recognition of certain regional benefits associated with the storm drain planned to carry storm runoff across the Owner's property from Margarita Road to the southwesterly side of Overland Drive, City and Owner agree that at the time a master plan is submitted by Owner for the full Owner's Parcel, the City agrees to negotiate in good faith with the Owner in an attempt to fund a portion of the costs of said storm drain based on the potential tax benefits to be realized by the City from the proposed project on the Owner's Parcel. 8. Acknowledgments, Agreements and Assurances on the Part of the Developer. a. Develo='s Faithful Performance, The parties acknowledge and agree that Developer's faithful performance in developing the Developer's Project on the Developer's Parcels and in constructing and installing certain public improvements and complying with the Applicable Rules and Owner's development of a project on the Owner's Parcel in accordance with the Applicable Rules will fulfill substantial public needs. The City acknowledges and agrees that there is good and valuable consideration Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -13- p:%agrccmen\1480121.mal to the City resulting from Developer's and Owner's assurances and faithful performance thereof and that same is in balance with the benefits conferred by the City on the Developer's Project. The parties further acknowledge and agree that the exchanged consideration hereunder is fair, just and reasonable. Developer and Owner each acknowledge that the consideration is reasonably related to the type and extent of the impacts of their respective projects on the community and the Property, and further acknowledge that the consideration is necessary to mitigate the direct and indirect impacts caused by the development on the Property. The parties further acknowledge that development of the Owner's Parcel alone without the development of the Regional Center on the Developer's Parcels will not provide the benefits to the City described above and would not in and of themselves justify the commitments of the City pursuant to this Agreement. b. DevelQ='s Agreement to DevelQp. In consideration of the foregoing and the City's assurance set out in Section 9 below, Developer hereby agrees to use its reasonable best efforts, in accordance with its own reasonable business judgement, taking into consideration market conditions, financing and other economic factors, to develop the Mall Parcel and, if acquired, the Power Center Parcel in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Applicable Rules. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, Owner shall have the right, but shall not be obligated to construct a project on the Owner's Parcel during the term of this Agreement. C. Obligations to be Non-Recourse, As a material element of this Agreement, and as an inducement to Owner and Developer to enter into this Agreement, each of the parties understands and agrees that the City's remedies for breach of the obligations of Developer and Owner under this Agreement shall be limited as described in Section 15, below. 9. Acknowledgements, Agreements and Assurances on the Part of the City. In order to effectuate the provisions of this Agreement, and in consideration for the Developer and Owner to obligate themselves to carry out the covenants and conditions set forth in the preceding Section 8 of this Agreement, the City hereby agrees and assures Developer that Developer will be permitted to carry out and complete the development of the Developer's Project on the Developer's Parcels, and agrees and assures Owner that Owner will be permitted to develop a project on the Owner's Parcel, each in accordance with the Applicable Rules, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Applicable Rules. Therefore, the City hereby agrees and acknowledges that: a. Entitlement to DevelQp. The Developer is hereby granted the vested right to develop the Developer's Project on the Developer's Parcels to the extent and in the manner provided in this Agreement, subject to the Applicable Rules and the Future Approvals. Owner is hereby granted the vested right to develop a project on the Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -14- p:\agreemen\1480121.nial Owner's Parcel in accordance with the Applicable Rules and the Future Approvals, provided, however, that said rights of Owner shall not vest until such time as the Developer has commenced construction of the Regional Center on the Developer's Parcels. b. Conflicting Enactments. Any change in the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, any change in any applicable general area or specific plan, zoning, subdivision or building regulation, adopted or becoming effective after the Effective Date, including, without limitation, any such change by means of a Future Approval, an ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order or moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever and adopted by the Council, the Planning Commission or any other board, commission or department of City, or any officer or employee thereof, or by the electorate, as the case may be, which would, absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Property and which would conflict in any way with or be more restrictive than the Applicable Rules ("Subsequent Rules"), shall not be applied by City to any part of the Property. Developer or Owner may give City written notice of its election to have any Subsequent Rule applied to such portion of the Property as it may own, in which case such Subsequent Rule shall be deemed to be an Applicable Rule insofar as that portion of the Property is concerned. C. Permitted Conditions. Provided Developer's or Owner's applications for any Future Approvals are consistent with this Agreement and the Applicable Rules, City shall grant the Future Approvals in accordance with the Applicable Rules and authorize development of the Property for the uses and to the density and regulations as described herein. City shall have the right to impose reasonable conditions in connection with Future Approvals and, in approving tentative subdivision maps, impose dedications for rights of way or easements for public access, utilities, water, sewers, and drainage necessary for the Project or other developments on the Property; provided, however, such conditions and dedications shall not be inconsistent with the Applicable Rules in effect prior to implementation nor inconsistent with the development of the Project as contemplated by this Agreement; and, provided further, such conditions and dedication shall not impose additional infrastructure or public improvement obligations in excess of those identified in this Agreement. If the Future approval is not necessary for the development to occur and operate consistent with Applicable Rules, the party applying for the Future Approval may elect to reject the benefits and burdens of this Agreement. The party applying for a Future Approval may protest any conditions, dedications or fees while confinuing to develop the Property; such a protest by the party applying shall not delay or stop the issuance of building permits or certificates of occupancy. d. Term of Mal2s and Other Prq.ject Apl2rovals. Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 66452.6(l) and 65863.9, the term of any subdivision or parcel map that may be processed on all or any portion of the Property and the term of Final: Decrmber 12, 1996 1108 pt 1480121.3 -15- p:%agreemen\1480121.mal each of the Project Approvals, including the tentative map and any Future Approvals shall be extended for a period of time through the scheduled termination date of this Agreement as set forth in Section 15 below. e.Timin,g of DevelQpment. Because the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Con v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), that failure of the parties to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over the parties' agreement, it is the intent of the Developer, Owner, and the City to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that Developer or Owner shall have the right (without the obligation) to develop the their respective portions of the Property in such order and at such rate and at such time as each deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgement, subject to the terms of this Agreement. f. Moratorium. No City-imposed moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing or sequencing of the development or construction of all or any part of the Property, whether imposed by ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order or otherwise, and whether enacted by the Council, an agency of City, the electorate, or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use or service (including, without limitation, water and sewer, should the City ever provide such services) approved, issued or granted within City, or portions of City, shall apply to the Property to the extent such moratorium or other limitation is in conflict with this Agreement; provided, however, the provisions of this Section shall not affect City's compliance with moratoria or other limitation mandated by other governmental agencies or court-imposed moratoria or other limitation. 9. Permitted Fees and Exactions. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, City shall only charge and impose those fees and exactions, including, without limitation, dedications and any other fees or taxes (including excise, construction or any other taxes) relating to development or the privilege of developing the Property, as are set forth in the Applicable Rules described Section 6 of this Agreement. This Section shall not be applicable the following fees and taxes and shall not be construed to limit the authority of City to: (1)Charge application, processing, and permit fees for land use approvals, building permits, and other similar permits and entitlements, which fees are designed to reimburse City's expenses attributable to such application, provided, however, said application, processing and permitting fees shall not exceed the fees that are charged by the City generally to applicants, on a non-discriminatory basis for similar approvals, permits, or entitlements are granted by City; Final: December 12, 1996 1108 pt 1480121.3 -1& p:\agreemen\1480121.mal (2)Impose or levy general or special taxes, including but not limited to, property taxes, sales taxes, parcel taxes, transient occupancy taxes, business taxes, which may be applied to the Property or to businesses occupying the Property, provided, however, that the tax is of general applicability citywide and does not burden the Property disproportionately to other retail development within the City; or (3)Collect such fees or exactions as are imposed and set by governmental entities not controlled by City but which are required to be collected by City. 10. C on and Implementation. The City agrees that it will cooperate with Developer and Owner to the fullest extent reasonable and feasible to implement this Agreement. Upon satisfactory performance by Developer of all required preliminary conditions, actions and payments, the City will commence and in a timely manner proceed to complete all steps necessary for the implementation of this Agreement and the development of the Developer's Project on the Developer's Parcels or a project on the Owner's Parcel in accordance with the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, City acknowledges and agrees that nothing herein shall obligate Owner to construct a project on Owner's Parcel. Developer and Owner shall, in a timely manner, provide the City with all documents, plans, and other information necessary for the City to carry out its obligations. Additionally: a. Further Assurancess Covenant to Sign Documents. Each party shall take all actions and do all things, and execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit, if required, any and all documents and writings, that may be necessary or proper to achieve the purposes and objectives of this Agreement. b. Reimbursement and A12pQrtionmmi. Nothing in this Agreement precludes City, Developer or Owner from entering into any reimbursement agreements for the portion (if any) of the cost of any dedications, public facilities and/or infrastructure that City, pursuant to this Agreement, may require as conditions of the Future Approvals, to the extent that they are in excess of those reasonably necessary to mitigate the impacts of the Project or development on the Property. C. Processing. Upon satisfactory completion by Developer of all required preliminary actions and payments of appropriate processing fees, if any, City shall, subject to all legal requirements, promptly initiate, diligently process, and complete at the earliest possible time all required steps, and expeditiously act upon any approvals and permits necessary for the development by Developer or Owner of the Property in accordance with this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the following: Final: December 12, 1996 11OW00006 pt 1490121.3 -17- p:\agreemen\1480121.miLl (1) the processing of applications for and issuing of all discretionary approvals requiring the exercise of judgement and deliberation by City, including without limitation, the Future Approvals; (2)the holding of any required public hearings; (3) the processing of applications for and issuing of all ministerial approvals requiring the determination of conformance with the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, site plans, grading plans, improvement plans, building plans and specifications, and ministerial issuance of one or more final maps, zoning clearances, grading permits, improvement permits, wall permits, building permits, lot line adjustments, encroachment permits, temporary use permits, certificates of use and occupancy and approvals and entitlements and related matters as necessary for the completion of the development of the Property ("Ministerial Approvals"). d. Processing During Third Party Litigation. The filing of any third party lawsuit(s) against City, Developer, or Owner relating to this Agreement or to other development issues affecting the Property shall not delay or stop the development, processing or construction of the Developer's Parcel, approval of the Future Approvals, or issuance of Ministerial Approvals, unless the third party obtains a court order preventing the activity. City shall not stipulate to the issuance of any such order. e. State, Federal or Case Taw. Where any state, federal or case law allows City to exercise any discretion or take any act with respect to that law, City shall, in an expeditious and timely manner, at the earliest possible time, (i) exercise its discretion in sucha way as to be consistent with, and carry out the terms of, this Agreement and (ii)take such other actions as may be necessary to carry out in good faith the terms of thisAgreement. Defense of Agreement. City agrees to and shall timely take all actions which are necessary or required to uphold the validity and enforceability of this Agreement, subject to the indemnification provisions of this Section. If this Agreement is adjudicated or determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the City agrees, subject to all legal requirements, to consider and implement all modifications to this Agreement which are necessary or required to render it valid and enforceable to the extent permitted by applicable law; provided, however, City shall not be required to construct or install any additional public improvements beyond those described in this Agreement as of the Effective Date nor expend funds for items not described in this Agreement as of the Effective Date. Developer and Owner jointly and severally agree to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless the City and its agencies, instrumentalities and their respective officers, employees and agents (collectively, "Indemnified Parties") from any and all claims, actions, or proceedings ("Claims") brought against any of the Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -18- p:\agreemen\1480121.mAl indemnified Parties by any third party or entity not a signatory to this Agreement, which Claims seek to attack, set aside, void, or annul or seek monetary damages as a result of, the City's approval of this Agreement or any amendment thereto and which Claims are not caused by the gross negligence or wilful misconduct of any of the Indemnified Parties. Each Indemnified Party agrees to and shall promptly notify the Developer and Owner in writing of any Claims within ten (10) calendar days from their receipt of any Claim. Each Indemnified Party shall cooperate fully with Owner and Developer in the defense of all Claims. Developer and Owner shall be entitled to select legal counsel of their choice (which counsel is/are reasonably acceptable to City) to conduct such defense and which legal counsel shall represent the City in the defense of such Claim. Notwithstanding the foregoing: (1) Upon written notice to the City, Developer and/or Owner shall have the right in their sole discretion to elect not to defend the City or elect not to defend the validity of this Agreement. In said event, the electing party shall be deemed to have consented to the termination of this Agreement as to said party and City shall take all required actions as my be required by law or by this Agreement to (A) settle the Claim and (B) terminate this Agreement as to the electing party. (2) Should any Indemnified Party fail to notify Owner and Developer of the existence of any Claims or fail to fully cooperate with Owner and Developer in the defense of any Claims, then Owner and Developer, as appropriate, may elect to terminate their indemnification obligations under this Section 10.f and if such an election is made in writing to the parties to this Agreement, the this Agreement shall terminate, expire and have no further force or effect. (3) The Indemnified Parties shall not reject any reasonable settlement, including, without limitation, the option of not proceeding with any project. Should any Indemnified Party reject a settlement which is reasonably acceptable to Developer or Owner or their successors or assign, Owner and Developer may elect to terminate their indemnification obligations under this Section 10.f by written notice to all parties. If such an election is made, said obligations shall, insofar as the rejecting Indemnified Party is concerned, immediately terminate, expire and have no further force or effect and the rejecting Indemnified Party shall thereafter be obligated to defend itself against said Claims at its own cost and expense. (4) If Owner or Developer are at any time required by this Agreement to indemnify, defend, protect or hold any Indemnified Party harmless from any Claims, then said Owner or Developer shall have the right but not the obligation to terminate and cancel this Agreement as it affects the Final: December 12, 1996 11086 pt 1480121.3 -19- p:\agromen\1480121.mal portion of the Property owned by said terminating party. If Owner or Developer elect to terminate this Agreement pursuant to this Section 10.L(4), it shall do so by written notice to the City and the other party hereto, in which event this Agreement shall as to the terminating party terminate, expire and have no further force or effect. Thereafter, the terminating party's indemnity and defense obligations pursuant to this Agreement shall, as to acts or omissions occurring after the effective date of said termination, have no further force or effect. 11.Compliance; Termination; Modifications And Amendments. a. Review Of Comi2liance.. The Director of Community Development of the City ("Director") shall review this Development Agreement once each year, on or before each anniversary of the Effective Date ("Periodic Review"), in accordance with this Section 1 1, the Applicable Rules and Resolution 90-52 of the City of Temecula ("Resolution 90-52") in order to determine whether or not Developer and Owner are out-of-compliance with any specific term or provision of this Agreement. At commencement of each Periodic Review, the Director shall notify Developer and Owner in writing that said Periodic Review is or has been commenced. (1)Prima Facie Compliance. During each Periodic Review, the Director shallrequest, in writing, that Developer and Owner each demonstrate that they haveduring the preceding twelve (12) month period, been in prima facie compliance with this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, the phrase "prima facie compliance" shall mean that Developer and/or Owner have demonstrated that it has acted in a commercially reasonable manner (taking into account the circumstances which then exist) and in good faith in attempting to adhere to the substance of this Agreement. Precise or technical adherence to each term or provision of this Agreement shall not be required in order for a party to be in prima facie compliance; and the failure of any party to agree with the City in connection with the determination or implementation of any Discretionary Approval, Future Approval or Ministerial Approval shall not demonstrate a lack of prima facie compliance. (2) Notice Of Non-Compliance; Cure Rights. If during any Periodic Review, the Director reasonably concludes that (A) either Developer or Owner has not demonstrated that it is in prima facie compliance with this Agreement, AND (B) that said party is out of compliance with a specific, substantive term or provision of this Agreement, then the Director may issue and deliver to that party a written "Notice of Non-compliance" detailing the specific reasons for non-compliance (including references to sections and provisions of this Agreement and Applicable Rules which allegedly have been breached) with a complete statement of all facts demonstrating such non-compliance. That party Final: December 12, 1996 11096 pt 1480121.3 -2@ p:\agreemenNI48012I.mal shall then have thirty (30) calendar days following their receipt of the Notice of Non-compliance to cure said failure(s), provided, however, if any one or more of the item(s) of non-compliance set forth in the Notice of Non-compliance cannot reasonably be cured within said thirty(30) calendar day period, then that party shall not be in breach of this Agreement if it commences to cure said item(s) within said thirty (30) day period and diligently prosecutes said cure to completion. Upon completion of each Periodic Review, the Director shall submit a report to the City Council setting forth the Director's determination of whether or not each Owner and Developer have satisfactorily demonstrated prima facie compliance with this Development Agreement, and if not, what steps have been taken by the Director or what steps he/she recommends that the City subsequently take. A breach or default by one party shall not constitute a breach or default by the other party. b. Termination of Develol2ment Agreement As To Breaching Party, If either Owner or Developer fails to timely cure any item(s) of non-compliance set forth in a Notice of Non-compliance, then the City shall have the right but not the obligation to initiate proceedings for the purpose to terminating this Agreement as against that party or the legal remedies described in Paragraph 15 of this Agreement; however, termination of this Agreement as to one party shall not terminate this Agreement as to any nonbreaching party. If the City determines to terminate this Agreement as to any party, it shall give written notice thereof to both Developer and Owner, which notice shall specify the precise grounds for termination and shall set a date, time and place for a public hearing on the issue, all in compliance with the Development Agreement Statutes. At the noticed public hearing, the breaching party and/or its designated representative, as well as the non-breaching party and/or its designated representatives, as well as the non-breaching party, shall be given an opportunity to make a full and public presentation to the City. If, following the taking of evidence and hearing of testimony at said public hearing, the City finds, based upon substantial evidence, that the breaching party has not demonstrated prima facie compliance with this Agreement, and that the breaching party is out of compliance with a specific, substantive term or provision of this Agreement, then the City may (unless the parties otherwise agree in writing) terminate this Agreement as to that breaching party. C. Modification or Amendment, of Develol2ment Agreement, Subject to the notice and hearing requirements of the applicable Development Agreement Statutes, this Agreement may be modified or amended from time to time only with the written consent of the Owner, Developer and the City or their successors and assigns in accordance with the provisions of the Temecula Municipal Code and Section 65868 of the Government Code. The parties contemplate amending this Agreement to refine the legal descriptions of the Developer's Parcels and Owner's Parcel once a parcel map has been approved for the Property. Such an amendment being contemplated by this Agreement may be approved by the City Manager on behalf Final: Decemb,-r 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -21- p:\agreemen\1490121.mia of the City without notice and hearing pursuant to Government Code Section 65867. Any changes to the legal description of the Property will require compliance with Government Code Section 65867. 12. Qperating Memoranda.. The provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between City, Developer and Owner. The anticipated refinements to the Developer's Project and other development activity at the Property may demonstrate that clarifications to this Agreement and the Applicable Rules are appropriate with respect to the details of performance of City, Developer, and Owner. If and when, from time to time, during the term of this Agreement, City, Developer and Owner agree that such clarifications are necessary or appropriate, they shall effectuate such clarifications through operating memoranda approved in writing by the City, Developer and Owner, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto and become a part of this Agreement and the same may be further clarified from time to time as necessary with future written approval by City, Developer and Owner. Operating memoranda are not intended to constitute an amendment to this Agreement but mere ministerial clarifications, therefore public notices and hearings shall not be required. The City Attorney shall be authorized, upon consultation with, and approval of, Developer and Owner, to determine whether a requested clarification may be effectuated pursuant to this Section or whether the requested clarification is of such a character to constitute an amendment hereof which requires compliance with the provisions of Section 12.c., above. The authority to enter into such operating memoranda is hereby delegated to the City Manager and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any operating memoranda hereunder without further Council action. 13. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall become operative and commence upon the Effective Date. It shall remain in effect until ten (10) years from the Effective Date unless this Agreement is terminated, modified, or extended upon mutual written consent of the parties hereto or as otherwise provided in this Agreement. Following the expiration or termination of the term, hereof, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect; provided, such expiration or termination shall not automatically affect any right of the City, Developer or Owner arising from City approvals on the Property prior to the expiration or termination of the term and arising from the duties of the parties as prescribed in this Agreement. 14. Tax Reimbursements, The Property lies within an area defined as Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 88-12 ("CFD 88-12"). Pursuant to CFD 88-12, under certain conditions, the City has the right, but not the obligation, to reimburse property owners within CFD 88-12 for annual special taxes previously paid by that property owner. The City agrees to implement any existing reimbursement agreements which may be applicable to the Property and to Developer and Owner by virtue of their acquiring portions of the Property- 15.Administration of Agreement and Resolution of Disl2utes. Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -22- p:\agreemen\1480121.nial a.Administration of Disputes, All disputes involving the enforcement, interpretationor administration of this Agreement (including, but not limited to decisions by the City staffconcerning this Agreement and any of the projects or other matters concerning this Agreement which are the subject hereof) shall first be subject to good faith negotiations between the parties to resolve the dispute. In the event the dispute is not resolved by negotiations, the dispute shall then be heard and decided by the Planning Commission. Then, decisions of the Planning Commission which remain in dispute shall be appealed to the City Council in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Applicable Rules. Then, decisions of the City Council which remain in dispute shall be appealable to, heard by, and resolved pursuant to the Mandatory Alternative Dispute Resolution procedures set forth in Section 15.b hereinbelow. b. Mandat= Alternative Dispute Resolution, After the provisions of Section 15.a above have been complied with, and pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 638. et seq., all disputes regarding the enforcement, interpretation of administration of this Agreement (including, but not limited to, appeals from decisions of the City Council, all matters involving Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5, all Ministerial Approvals, Discretionary Approvals Future Approvals and the application of Applicable Rules) shall be heard and resolved pursuant to the alternative dispute resolution procedure set forth in this Section 15.b. All matters to be heard and resolved pursuant to this Section 15.b shall be heard and resolved by a single appointed referee who shall be a retired judge from either the California Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal, the California Supreme Court, The United States District Court or the United States Court of Appeals, provided that the appointed referee shall have significant and recent experience in resolving land use and real property disputes. The parties to this Agreement who are involved in the dispute shall agree and appoint a single referee who shall then try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report in writing to the parties to the disputes all findings of facts and issues and decisions of law and the final judgments made thereon, in sufficient detail to inform each party as the basis of the referee's decision. The referee shall try all issues as if he/she were a California Superior Court judge, sitting without a jury, and shall (unless otherwise limited by any term or provision of this Agreement) have all legal and equitable powers granted a California Superior Court judge. Prior to the hearing, the parties shall have full discovery rights as provided by the California Code of Civil Procedure. At the hearing, the parties shall have the right to present evidence, examine and cross-examine lay and expert witnesses, submit briefs and have arguments of counsel heard, all in accordance with a briefing and hearing schedule reasonably established by the referee. The referee shall be required to follow and adhere to all laws, rules an regulations of the State of California in the hearing of testimony, admission of evidence, conduct of discovery, issuance of a judgment and fashioning of remedy, subject to such restriction on remedies as set forth in this Agreement. If the parties involved in the dispute are unable to agree on a referee, any party to the dispute may seek to have a single referee appointed by a California Superior Court and the hearing shall be held in Riverside County pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of any proceeding held pursuant to this Section 15.b shall initially be bome equally by the parties involved in the dispute, and each party shall bear its own attomey's fees. Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -23- p:\agreemen\1480121.nul Any referee selected pursuant to this Section shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. If any party to the dispute fails to timely pay its fees or costs, or fails to cooperate in the administration of the hearing and decision process as determined by the referee, the referee shall upon the written request of any party to the dispute be required to issue a written notice of breach to the defaulting party and, if the defaulting party fails to timely respond or cooperate with the period of time set forth in the notice of default (which in any event may not exceed thirty (30) calendar days), then the referee shall upon the request of any non-defaulting party render a default judgement against the defaulting party. At the end of the hearing, the referee shall issue a written judgement (which may include an award of reasonable attorneys' fees and costs as elsewhere provided in this Agreement), which judgment shall be final and binding between the parties and may be entered as a final judgment in a California Superior Court. The referee shall use his/her best efforts of finally resolve the dispute and issue a final judgment within sixty (60) calendar days from his/her appointment. (1) Any party to the dispute may, in addition to any other rights or remedies provided to it by this Agreement, seek, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof, or enforce by specific performance the obligations and rights of the parties hereto, except as otherwise provided herein. (2) The parties hereto agree that (A) the City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable for general, special or compensatory damages for any default under or with respect to this Agreement or the application thereof, and (B) Owner and Developer have adequate remedies, other than general, special or compensatory damages, to secure City's compliance with it's obligations under this Agreement. Therefore, the undersigned agree that the City, and its officers, employees and agents, shall not be liable for general, special or compensatory damages to the Owner and Developer or to any successor or assignee or transferee of the Owner or Developer, for the City's breach or default under or with respect to this Agreement; and the Owner and Developer covenant not to sue the City for, or claim against the City, any right to receive general, special or compensatory damages for default of this Agreement by City. Notwithstanding the provisions of this subsection (2), City agrees that Developer and Owner shall have the right to seek a refund or return of a deposit made with the City or fee paid to the City in accordance with the provisions of the Applicable Rules. (3) Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Section to the contrary, City agrees that its only recourse in the event the Developer does not proceed with construction of the Regional Center as provided in Section 8., shall be the termination of this Development Agreement and City shall not have any right to damages or specific enforcement of the Developer's obligation to complete the Regional Center as provided in Section 8. FhW: December 12, 1996 1108 pt 1480121.3 -24- p:%agreemen\1480121.mAl 16.Transfers and Assignments a. Right to As@ Developer or Owner shall have the right to sell, assign or transfer all or portions of the Property and the rights under this Agreement which they may own to any person at any time during the term of this Agreement without approval of the City provided Developer has provided to Owner and to the City Manager thirty (30) days prior written notice of the proposed transfer and Developer provides to Owner and City with notice of the name and address of the assignee within ten (10) days of the effective date of the transfer. Should the Owner acquire the rights of the Developer (as elsewhere provided in this Agreement), the Owner shall have the right to sell, assign or transfer the rights under this Agreement without the approval of the City provided the Owner has provided to the City Manager thirty (30) days prior written notice of the proposed transfer and the name and address of the assignee within ten (10) days after the effective date of the transfer. b. Liabilities @n Trans@ Upon the delegation of all duties and obligations and the sale, transfer or assignment of all or any portion of the Property, Developer or Owner, as the case may be, shall be released from its obligations under this Agreement with respect to the Property, or portion thereof, so transferred arising subsequent to the effective date of such transfer if (1) Developer has provided to Owner and City thirty (30) days' prior written notice of such transfer (2) the transferee has agreed in writing to be subject to all of the provisions hereof applicable to the portion of the Property so transferred. Upon any transfer of any portion of the Property and the express assumption of Developer's or Owner's obligations under this Agreement by such transferee, City agrees to look solely to the transferee for compliance by such transferee with the provisions of this Agreement as such provisions relate to the portion of the Property acquired by such transferee. A default by any transferee shall only affect that portion of the Property owned by such transferee and shall not cancel or diminish in any way Developer's or Owner's rights hereunder with respect to any portion of the Property not owned by such transferee. The transferee shall be responsible for the reporting and annual review requirements relating to the portion of the Property owned by such transferee, and any amendment to this Agreement between City and a transferee shall only affect the portion of the Property owned by such transferee. C. Owner's Right-,- In the event Developer does not purchase the Developer's Parcels and it right to do so expires or terminates, the Owner's rights with respect to the Developer's Parcels are set forth at Section 3 of this Agreement. 17. Mortgage Protection. The parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer or Owner, in any manner, at Developer's or Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Final: Decernber 12, 1996 11OW00006 pt 1480121.3 -25- p: \agreemen\1480121.nmd Property. City acknowledges that the lender(s) providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with Developer or Owner and representatives of such lender(s) to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Any mortgagee of a mortgage or a beneficiary of a deed of trust ("Mortgagee") on the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: a. Mortgage Not Rendered Invalid, Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust on the Property made in good faith and for value. b. B=uest for Notice to Mortgagee, The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, who has submitted a request in writing to City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by Developer or Owner in the performance of Developer's or Owner's obligations under this Agreement. C. Mortgagee's Time to C@ If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to Developer under the terms of this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten days of sending the notice of default to Developer or Owner. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. d. P=erty Taken SuWect to Obligations, Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or deed in lieu of foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement; provided, however, in no event shall such Mortgagee be liable for any defaults or monetary obligations of Developer arising prior to acquisition of title to the Property by such Mortgagee, except that any such Mortgagee or its successors or assigns shall not be entitled to a building permit or occupancy certificate until all delinquent and current fees and other monetary obligations due under this Agreement for the Property, or portion thereof acquired by such Mortgagee, have been paid to City. 18. Notices. All notices under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed delivered when personally received by the addressee, or within three (3) calendar days after deposit in the United States mail by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the following parties and their counsel at the addresses indicated below, provided, however, if any party to this Agreement delivers a notice or causes a notice Final: De-cember 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -26- p:\ag@\1480121.mal to be delivered to any other party to this Agreement, a duplicate of that Notice shall be concurrently delivered to each other party and their respective counsel. To City:City of Temecula Attention: City Manager 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590-3606 With a Copy to:Peter M. Thorson, Esq. Richards, Watson & Gershon 333 South Hope Street, 38th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 To Developer:Forest City Development Inc. 949 South Hope Street, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90015 Attn:Brian M. Jones With a Copy to: Forest City Enterprises, Inc. 10800 Brookpark Rd. Cleveland, Ohio 44130 Attention:General Counsel To Owner:LGA-7, INC. c/o Kemper Insurance Companies One Kemper Drive Corporate Legal Department, C-3 Long Grove, Illinois, 60049-0001 Attn: Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel With a Copy to:Myron Meyers, Esq. Keith D. Elkins, Esq. Jeffers, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro, LLP 2121 Avenue of the Stars, 10th Floor Los Angeles, California 90067 Notice given in any other manner shall be effective when received by the addressee. The addresses for notices may be changed by notice given in accordance with this provision. Fkg: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -27- p:\agreemen\1480121.mal 19. Severability and Termin@. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, or if any provision of this Agreement is superseded or rendered unenforceable according to any law which becomes effective after the Effective Date, the remainder of this Agreement shall be effective to the extent the remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform, taldng into consideration the purposes of this Agreement. 20. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 21. Force Maje=. Changed conditions, changes in local, state or federal laws or regulations, floods, earthquakes, delays due to strikes or other labor problems, moratoria enacted by City or by any other governmental entity or agency, injunctions issued by any court of competent jurisdiction, the inability to obtain materials, civil commotion, fire, intragalatic invasion, acts of God, or other circumstances which substantially interferes with the development or construction of the Developer's Parcels or the development of the Owner's Parcel, or which substantially interferes with the ability of any of the parties to perform its obligations under this Agreement shall collectively be referred to as "Events of Force Majeure. " If any party to this Agreement is prevented by an Event or Events of Force Majeure from performing its obligation under this Agreement, then on condition that the party claiming the benefit of said Event(s) of Force Majeure (a) did not cause said Event(s) and (b) said Event(s) was beyond said party's reasonable control, the time for performance by said party of its obligations under this Agreement shall be extended by a number of days equal to the number of days that said Event(s) of Force Majeure continued in effect, or by the number of days it takes to repair or restore the damage caused by said Event(s) to the condition which existed prior to the occupance of said Event(s), which ever is longer; provided, however, that the termination date of this Agreement as set forth in Section 13 of this Agreement shall not be extended by this provision. 22. Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. 23. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the Developer, Owner, the City of Temecula and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 24. Attorneys' @. If any party commences any action for the interpretation, enforcement, termination, cancellation or rescission of this Agreement, or for specific performance for the breach hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees, litigation expenses and costs. Attorneys' fees under this Section Final: December 12, 1996 11086 pt 1480121.3 -28- p:\agreemen\1480121.mAl shall include attorneys' fees on any appeal as well as any attorneys' fees incurred in any post-judgment proceedings to collect or enforce the judgment. 25. Inco=ration of Exhibits. The following exhibits which are part of this Agreement are attached hereto and each of which is incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full: EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRUTION Exhibit A- 1 Property Exhibit A-2 Developer's Parcels--Mall Parcel Exhibit A-3 Developer's Parcels--Power Center Parcel Exhibit A-4 Owner's Parcel EXHIBIT B CITY OF TEM[ECULA FURNISHED STRUCTURE Exhibit B- I Street Improvements Exhibit B-2 Traffic Signals Exhibit B-3 Underground Power Lines Exhibit B-4 Storm Drain Improvements 26. Authority to Execute; Binding Effect, Owner and Developer each represent and warrant that they have the power and authority to execute this Agreement and, once executed, this Agreement shall be final and binding on said parties. The City represents and warrants to Owner and Developer as follows: (a) all public notices have been given and published, all public hearings have been held, all applicable laws, rules, ordinances and regulations have been issued as are necessary or required for the approval of this Agreement; (b) this Agreement is consistent with Specific Plan 263; (c) this Agreement once executed by the City, shall be final and binding on the City; and (d) this Agreement may not be amended, modified, changed or terminated in the future by the City except in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth herein. 27. Entire Agreement; Conflicts. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto, and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements between the parties or their predecessors in interest with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. Should any or all of the provisions of this Agreement be found to be in conflict with any other provision or provisions found in the Applicable Rules, or Subsequent Applicable Rules, then the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail. FixW: December 12, 19% 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -29- p:\agrecmen\1480121.mal IN WITNESS "EREOF, the Parties have each executed this Agreement of the date first written above. CITY OF TEMIECULA By: KAREL LINDEMANS Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek City Clerk APPROVED AS -TO FORM: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney FOREST CITY DEVELOPM[ENT, INC., a California Corporation By: President By: FirW: December 12, 19% 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -3@ p:\agreemen\1480121.mal LGA-7, INC., an @ois Corporation By: President By: FirW: @ember 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -31- p:\agreemen\1480121.nud ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of On 1996, before me, personally appeared personally known to me -OR- proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. SIGNATURE OF NOTARY CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER INDIVIDUAL(S) OFFICER(S) (TITLE[S]): PARTNER(S) A-fTORNEY-IN-FACT TRUSTEE(S) SUBSCRIBING WITNESS GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR CHAIRPERSON/MAYOR OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: Final: December 12, 1996 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -32- p:\agreemen\1480121.mal ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of On 1996, before me, personally appeared personally known to me -OR- proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. SIGNATURE OF NOTARY CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER INDIVIDUAL(S) OFFICER(S) (TITLE[S]): PARTNER(S) ATTORNEY-IN-FACT TRUSTEE(S) SUBSCRIBING WITNESS GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR CHAIRPERSON/MAYOR OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: FitW:Dezemberl2,19% 1108&00006ptl48Ol2l.3 -33- p:\agrecmen\1480121.mal ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of On 1996, before me, personally appeared personally known to me -OR- proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. SIGNATURE OF NOTARY CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER INDIVIDUAL(S) OFFICER(S) (TrrLE[S]): PARTNER(S) ATRORNEY-IN-FACT TRUSTEE(S) SUBSCRIBING WITNESS GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR CHAIRPERSON/MAYOR OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: Final: Decem@ 12, 19% 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -34- p:\agreemen\1480121.mal ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of Califomia County of on 1996, before me, personally appeared personally known to me -OR- proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. SIGNATURE OF NOTARY CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER INDIVIDUAL(S) OFFICER(S) (TITLE[S]): PARTNER(S) ATTORNEY-IN-FACT TRUSTEE(S) SUBSCRIBING WITNESS GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR CHAIRPERSON/MAYOR OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: FinM: Dmember 12, 19% 11086-00006 pt 1480121.3 -35- p:\agreemcn\1480121.mal Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 December 3, 1996 JN 401027-M5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Page 1 of 1 MALL SITE OVERALL OWNERSHIP That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 115, 117, 140 and 141, Jackson Avenue, Lincoln Avenue and Monroe Avenue (vacated by Resolution of the Board of Supervisors recorded December 19, 1951 in Book 1328, Page 67 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County) and Apricot Street as shown on a Map of the Temecula Land and Water Company filed in Book 8, Page 359 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California, together with those portions of Lots 4 through 7 of Tract No. 3334 filed in Book 54, Pages 25 through 30 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, included within Parcels A, B, C, F, G and H of Lot Line Adjustment No. PA95-01 11 recorded December 15, 1995 as Instrument No. 416771 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder. CONTAINING: 189.17 Acres Gross, more or less. SUBJECT TO all covenants, rights, rights-of-way and easements of record. Lawrence L. Bacon, PLS 3527 EXHIBIT A-1 LL1 Z x C) w > -J < I = < w m > F- 0 Cl) m EXHIBIT A-1 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 Revised December 3, 1996 November 5, 1996 JN 401027-M3 Page 1 of 4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION TEMECULA TOWN CENTER WESTERLY PORTION - REGIONAL MALL That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 115, 117, and 140, Jackson Avenue and Monroe Avenue (vacated by Resolution of the Board of Supervisors recorded December 19, 1951 in Book 1328, Page 67 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County) and Apricot Street as shown on a map of the Temecula Land and Water Company filed in Book 8, Page 359 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California, together with those portions of Lots 4, 5 and 6 of Tract No. 3334 filed in Book 54, Pages 25 through 30 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder (being also shown as portions of Parcels A, B, F, G and H of Lot Line Adjustment No. PA95-0111 recorded December 15, 1995 as Instrument No. 416771 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, described as a whole as follows: COMMENCING at the intersection of the centerline of Margarita Road (110.00 feet wide) as described in Parcel 1 of an easement deed recorded August 18, 1992 as Instrument No. 305607 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder with the southeasterly line of Winchester Road (60.00 feet wide) as described in a deed recorded April 8, 1930 in Book 722, Page 512 of Deeds in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder; thence along said centerline of Margarita Road through the following courses: South 43'54'46" East 54.68 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve in said centerline concave southwesterly and having a radius of 2000.00 feet; thence along said curve southeasterly 931.03 feet through a central angle of 2604011911 to the southerly terminus thereof; thence leaving said centerline, radially from said curve South 72'45'33" West 55.00 feet; thence South 53'33'19" West 844.53 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXHIBIT A-2 Revised December 3, 1996 Robert Bein William Frost & Associates November 5, 1996 Temecula Town Center JN 401027-M3 Regional Mall - Westerly Portion Page 2 of 4 thence South 41'46'24" East 486.00 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southwesterly and having a radius of 350.00 feet; thence along said curve southeasterly 231.36 feet through a central angle of 37'52'29"; thence tangent from said curve South 03'53'55" East 180.01 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 350.00 feet; thence along said curve southwesterly 318.42 feet through a central angle of 52'07'31"; thence tangent from said curve South 48'13'36" West 1072.28 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 394.00 feet; thence along said curve southwesterly 171.91 feet through a central angle of 25'00'00"; thence tangent from said curve South 73'13'36" West 138.88 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northerly and having a radius of 394.00 feet; thence along said curve westerly 309.45 feet through a central angle of 45'00'00"; thence tangent from said curve North 61'46'24" West 136.59 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southerly and having a radius of 35.00 feet; thence along said curve westerly 54.98 feet through a central angle of 90'00'00"; thence tangent from said curve South 28'13'36" West 42.03 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 281.00 feet; thence along said curve southwesterly 166.90 feet through a central angle of 34'01'48"; thence tangent from said curve South 62015'241, West 112.31 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southeasterly and having a radius of 35.00 feet; thence along said curve southwesterly 41.72 feet through a central angle of 68018'02" to the non-tangent intersection with a curve concave southwesterly and having a radius of 1267.00 feet in the northeasterly line of Ynez Road as described in a document recorded August 28, 1991 as Instrument No. 297822 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 64'10'44" West; Revised December 3, 1996 Robert Bein William Frost & Associates November 5, 1996 Temecula Town Center JN 401027-M3 Regional Mall - Westerly Portion Page 3 of 4 thence non-tangent from said curve South 64'14'07" West 15.06 feet to the non-tangent intersection with a curve concave southwesterly and having a radius of 1044.00 feet in the northeasterly line of Ynez Road (88.00 feet wide) as described in a deed recorded July 12, 1973 as Instrument No. 90991 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 64'14'07" West; thence along said northeasterly line through the following courses: along said curve northwesterly 295.80 feet through a central angle of 16'14'02"; thence tangent from said curve North 41'59'55" West 1143.31 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave easterly and having a radius of 50.00 feet; thence along said curve northerly 78.65 feet through a central angle of 90'07'3 1" to the point of tangency with said southeasterly line of Winchester Road (60.00 feet wide) as described in said deed recorded April 8, 1930 in Book 722, Page 512 of Deeds; thence leaving said northeasterly line, along said southeasterly line of Winchester Road North 48'07'36" East 2409.53 feet; thence South 41'52'24" East 50.16 feet to a non-tangent intersection with a curve in the southeasterly line of Winchester Road concave southeasterly and having a radius of 1933.00 feet, said point being the beginning of a non-tangent curve concave easterly and having a radius of 35.00 feet, a radial line of last said curve from said point bears South 83'42'51" East; thence along said curve southerly 29.36 feet through a central angle of 48'03'33"-, thence tangent from said curve South 41'46'24" East 66.99 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave westerly and having a radius of 260.00 feet; thence along said curve southerly 174.08 feet through a central angle of 38'21'42"; thence tangent from said curve South 03'24'42" East 111.87 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northeasterly and having a radius of 35.00 feet; thence along said curve southerly 48.73 feet through a central angle of 79'46'18" to a point of reverse curvature with a curve concave southerly and having a radius of 500.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 06'49'00" West; Revised December 3, 1996 Robert Bein William Frost & Associates November 5, 1996 Temecula Town Center JN 401027-M3 Regional Mall - Westerly Portion Page 4 of 4 thence along said curve easterly 361.37 feet through a central angle of 41'24'36"-, thence tangent from said curve South 41'46'24" East 205.91 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING:102.20 Acres Gross, more or less. 99.36 Acres Net, more or less. SUBJECT TO all covenants, rights, rights-of-way and easements of record. Lawrence L. Bacon, PLS 3527 z 2 0 x LLJ a_ w w cr W w Z> 3: cn EXHIBIT A-2 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 Revised December 3, 1996 November 5, 1996 JN 401027-M2 Page 1 of 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION TEMECULA TOWN CENTER REGIONAL MALL - POWER CENTER That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 140 and 141 and Lincoln Avenue (vacated by Resolution of the Board of Supervisors recorded December 19, 1951 in Book 1328, Page 67 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County) as shown on a map of the Temecula Land and Water Company filed in Book 8, Page 359 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California (being also shown as Portions of Parcels B and C of Lot Line Adjustment No. PA95-0111 recorded December 15, 1995 as Instrument No. 416771 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder) described as a whole as follows: BEGINNING at the intersection of the centerline of Margarita Road (110.00 feet wide) as described in Parcel 1 of an easement deed recorded August 18, 1992 as Instrument No. 305607 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder with the southeasterly line of Winchester Road (60.00 feet wide) as described in a deed recorded April 8, 1930 in Book 722, Page 512 of Deeds in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder; thence along said centerline of Margarita Road through the following courses: South 43'54'46" East 54.68 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve in said centerline concave southwesterly and having a radius of 2000.00 feet; thence along said curve southeasterly 931.03 feet through a central angle of 26'40'19" to the southerly terminus thereof; thence leaving said centerline, radially from said curve South 72'45'33" West 55.00 feet; thence South 53'33'19" West 844.53 feet; thence North 41'46'24" West 205.91 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southwesterly and having a radius of 500.00 feet; EXHIBIT A-3 Revised December 3, 1996 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates November 5, 1996 Temecula Town Center Regional Mall JN 401027-M2 Power Center Page 2 of 3 thence along said curve northwesterly 361.37 feet through a central angle of 41'24'36" to a point of reverse curvature with a curve concave northeasterly and having a radius of 35.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears North 06'49'00" East; thence along said curve northwesterly 48.73 feet through a central angle of 79'46'18"; thence tangent from said curve North 03'24'42" West I 1 1.87 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave westerly and having a radius of 260.00 feet; thence along said curve northerly 174.08 feet through a central angle of 38'21'42"; thence tangent from said curve North 41'46'24" West 66.99 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave easterly and having a radius of 35.00 feet; thence along said curve northerly 29.36 feet through a central angle of 48'03'33" to the non- tangent intersection with a curve concave southeasterly and having a radius of 1933.00 feet in the southeasterly line of Winchester Road as described in a document recorded April 23, 1991 as Instrument No. 132834 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 35'11'03" East; thence non-tangent from said curve North 41'52'24" West 50.16 feet to said southeasterly line of Winchester Road (60.00 feet wide); thence along said southeasterly line through the following courses: North 48'07'36" East 3.29 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve therein concave southeasterly and having a radius of 925.37 feet; thence along said curve northeasterly 233.45 feet through a central angle of 14'27'16"; thence tangent from said curve North 62'34'52" East 269.57 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 985.37 feet; thence along said curve northeasterly 283.66 feet through a central angle of 16'29'3S"; Revised December 3, 1996 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates November 5, 1996 Temecula Town Center Regional Mall JN 401027-M2 Power Center Page 3 of 3 thence tangent from said curve North 46'05'14" East 280.78 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING:22.81 Acres Gross, more or less. 20.64 Acres Net, more or less. SUBJECT TO all covenants, rights, rights-of-way and easements of record. Lawrence L. Bacon, PLS 3527 w X Z LLi w u ILI CO tr > w 0 CL I C,4 Cl) LLJ EXHIBIT A-3 Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 27555 Ynez Road, Suite 400 Temecula, CA 92591 December 3, 1996 JN 401027-M4 Page 1 of 4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION TEMECULA TOWN CENTER LUMBERMAN PARCEL That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 115, 117, 140, 141, Lincoln Avenue and Monroe Avenue (vacated by Resolution of the Board of Supervisors recorded December 19, 1951 in Book 1328, Page 67 of Official Records in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County) and Apricot Street as shown on a Map of the Temecula Land and Water Company filed in Book 8, Page 359 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California, together with those portions of Lots 4, 5 and 6 of Tract No. 3334 filed in Book 54, Pages 25 through 30 of Maps in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder (being also shown as portions of Parcels A, B, C, F, G and H of Lot Line Adjustment No. PA95-0111 recorded December 15, 1995 as Instrument No. 416771 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, described as a whole as follows: COMMENCING at the intersection of the centerline of Margarita Road (110.00 feet wide) as described in Parcel 1 of an easement deed recorded August 18, 1992 as Instrument No. 305607 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder with the southeasterly line of Winchester Road (60.00 feet wide) as described in a deed recorded April 8, 1930 in Book 722, Page 512 of Deeds in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder; thence along said centerline of Margarita Road through the following courses: South 43'54'46" East 54.68 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve in said centerline concave southwesterly and having a radius of 2000.00 feet; thence along said curve southeasterly 931.03 feet through a central angle of 26'40'19" to the southerly terminus thereof and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence leaving said centerline, radially from said curve South 72'45'33" West 55.00 feet; thence South 53'33'19" West 844.53 feet; thence South 41'46'24" East 486.00 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southwesterly and having a radius of 350.00 feet; EXHIBIT A-4 Robert Bein William Frost & Associates December 3, 1996 Temecula Town Center Regional Mall JN 401027-M4 Lumberman Parcel Page 2 of 4 thence along said curve southeasterly 231.36 feet through a central angle of 37'52'29"; thence tangent from said curve South 03'53'55" East 180.01 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 350.00 feet; thence along said curve southwesterly 318.42 feet through a central angle of 52'07'31"; thence tangent from said curve South 48'13'36" West 1072.28 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 394.00 feet; thence along said curve southwesterly 171.91 feet through a central angle of 25'00'00"; thence tangent from said curve South 73'13'36" West 138.88 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northerly and having a radius of 394.00 feet; thence along said curve westerly 309.45 feet through a central angle of 45'00'00"; thence tangent from said curve North 61'46'24" West 136.59 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southerly and having a radius of 35.00 feet; thence along said curve westerly 54.98 feet through a central angle of 90'00'00"; thence tangent from said curve South 28'13'36" West 42.03 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northwesterly and having a radius of 281.00 feet; thence along said curve southwesterly 166.90 feet through a central angle of 34'01'48"; thence tangent from said curve South 62'15'24" West 112.31 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southeasterly and having a radius of 35.00 feet; thence along said curve southwesterly 41.72 feet through a central angle of 68'18'02" to the non-tangent intersection with a curve concave southwesterly and having a radius of 1267.00 feet in the northeasterly line of Ynez Road as described in a document recorded August 28, 1991 as Instrument No. 297822 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 64'10'44" West; thence non-tangent from said curve South 64'14'07" West 15.06 feet to the non-tangent intersection with a curve concave southwesterly and having a radius of 1044.00 feet in the northeasterly line of Ynez Road (88.00 feet wide) as described in a deed recorded July 12, 1973 as Instrument No. 90991 of Official Records in said Office of the Riverside County Recorder, Robert Bein William Frost & Associates December 3, 1996 Temecula Town Center Regional Mall JN 401027-M4 Lumberman Parcel Page 3 of 4 a radial line of said curve from said point bears South 64'14'07" West; thence along said northeasterly line and curve southeasterly 283.28 feet through a central angle of 15'32'48"; thence South 10'13'05" East 15.06 feet to the northwesterly line of said Tract No. 3334; thence along said northwesterly line South 44054'58" West 53.63 feet to the centerline of Ynez Road as shown on said map of Tract No. 3334; thence along said centerline South 10'13'05" East 265.57 feet to the centerline of Proposed Overland Drive as shown on said Lot Line Adjustment No. 95-0111; thence along said centerline through the following courses: North 79'46'55" East 90.00 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave southerly and having a radius of 1000.00 feet; 10011. thence along said curve easterly 261.80 feet through a central angle of 15'00 thence tangent from said curve South 85'13'05" East 683.49 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave northerly and having a radius of 1000.00 feet; thence along said curve easterly 117.80 feet through a central angle of 06'44'57"; thence tangent from said curve North 88'01'58" East 546.33 feet to said centerline of Margarita Road; thence leaving said centerline of Overland Drive, along said centerline of Margarita Road through the following courses: North 01'58'41" West 9.71 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave easterly and having a radius of 2000.00 feet; thence along said curve northerly 986.99 feet through a central angle of 28'16'31" thence tangent from said curve North 26'17'50" East 479.08 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave westerly and having a radius of 2000.00 feet; Robert Bein William Frost & Associates December 3, 1996 Temecula Town Center Regional Mall JN 401027-M4 Lumberman Parcel Page 4 of 4 thence along said curve northerly 1519.75 feet through a central angle of 43'32'17"; thence tangent from said curve North 17'14'27" West 293.55 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING:64.19 Acres Gross, more or less. 59.48 Acres Net, more or less. SUBJECT TO all covenants, rights, rights-of-way and easements of record. Lawrence L. Bacon, PLS 3527 LLI Ca x LLI LLJ ZUJ > w EXHIBIT A-4 < < z 0 cn 0 co < E LU a) 2 ui cn r- Cn U- co C.) QO co 0 0OU C@ll CL im - _ID 7n (1) < _ u 0 Co 0 avo?j Z3Nk (OPIS Ise3) MlemOPIS PULI SIL4f)l'l laajls lielsul -saq3eoiddV f-,BMGA,ja t4iim aue-I uoileialaoaCl/uolloialoooV lonjisuoo sueld lUaWOAOjdLul Z L-80 (i=lo jgd 6UISSOJOJOAO OAijaPUelJaAo 13nilsuoo EXHIBIT B-1 Ca r Cf) L) w Ca co F- LU LLJ LL co CD cn ix E 0 co cn Fn Fn Fn 0 z CD EXHIBIT B-2 z o (D LLJ < i :D LLJ :E LLJ .E CL) LL r 0 0 avou Z3NA z EXHIBIT B-3 (L) U) < CD < E z o > 0 0 E ui m o cn < j r- E uj (D r_ cu 2 c CD ui C4 U- 0 co Cf) % E %% co 0 cc > CZ GVO?I Z3NA, co C, z c,li Mh. co, El EXHIBIT B-4 ITEI\4 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO:City Council FROM:Ronald E. Bradley, City Manager DATE:December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Purchase Agreement for Real Property Required for the Western Bypass Corridor Project and the 1-1 5/Highway 79S Interchange Improvement Project Prepared by: Marilyn Whisenand, Redevelopment Director RECOMMENDATION: 1.Adopt resolutions entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 96- "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT' FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES APPROXIMATELY +/- 17,773 SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF FRONT STREET IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 15 AND FRONT STREET, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA WITHIN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-210- 047; AND RESOLUTION NO. 96- "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT" FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES APPROXIMATELY +/- 50,793 SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 15, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA WITHIN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-110-005. 2.Authorize an advance of up to $718,234 from the General Fund to cover acquisition, escrow, soil testing, and closing costs for the Western Bypass Corridor Project. r:\bradley\agenda\047&005.pur 3.Authorize an appropriation of up to $258,853 from Development Impact Fees - Public Facilities to cover acquisition, escrow, soil testing, and closing costs for the I- 1 5/Highway 79S interchange improvement project. 4.Authorize the Mayor to sign the Purchase and Sale Agreements and Escrow Instructions. BACKGROUND: In order to implement the Old Town Specific Plan and the City of Temecula's Capital Improvement Program, staff has pursued the acquisition of real property for the Western Bypass Corridor and the 1-1 5/Highway 79S interchange improvement project. Based on fair market appraisals, staff has negotiated the following purchase prices for the subject properties. +/- 17,773 s.f. within APN 922-210-047 $248,853 + /- 50,793 s.f. within APN 922-110-005 $688,234 Total $937,087 Both purchases are all cash transactions with the City paying all closing costs. Additional fund authorization in the amount of $40,000 is required to cover escrow, closing costs, and soils testing fees, bringing the total fund authorization request to $977,087. FISCAL IMPACT The $718,234 total acquisition cost for the Western Bypass Corridor Project will be advanced by the General Fund subject to reimbursement from Redevelopment Agency and/or Community Facilities District Funds. The $258,853 for the 1-1 5/Highway 79S Interchange Improvement Project will require an appropriation from Development Impact Fees (Public Facilities) fund to the Capital Improvement Project fund. Adequate funds are available in both funds for these acquisitions. Attachments: 1 . Resolution No. 96- 2.Resolution No. 96- 3.Purchase Agreement APN 922-210-047 4. Purchase Agreement APN 922-110-005 r:\bradicy\agenda\047&005.pur RESOLUTION NO. 96- "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT" FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES APPROXIMATELY +/- 17,773 SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF FRONT STREET IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 15 AND FRONT STREET, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA WITHIN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-210- 047; AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: a. The City is currently implementing the Capital Improvement Program for fiscal years 1997-2001 adopted by the City Council on June 25, 1996. b. The City is currently implementing the Old Town Specific Plan and the Capital Improvement Program 1-1 5/Highway 79S Interchange Project and the Western Bypass Corridor Phase I Project. C. The City proposes to purchase the properties described in the attached Purchase and Sales Agreement ("Agreement") for the purposes of implementing the Project. d. The Project has been the subject of extensive prior environmental review as part of the Old Town Redevelopment Project EIR certified by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency on June 1 3, 1995. This portion of the Project is exempt from further environmental review as stated in the findings and as set forth in California Public Resources Code Section and 16 California Code Regulation 15160. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves that certain agreement entitled "Purchase and Sale Agreement" for property located on the west side of Front Street immediately west of the intersection of Interstate 1 5 and Front Street, Temecula, California within Assessor's Parcel Number 922-210-047 and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Agreement in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 17th day of December, 1996. Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor r: \bradley\agenda\047&005.pur ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk r: \bradley\agenda\047&005.pur STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Ss CITY OF TEMECULA 1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 96- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 17th day of December, 1996, by the following roll call vote: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS June S. Greek, City Clerk r: \bradley\agrndaNO47&005.pur RESOLUTION NO. 96- "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING THAT CERTAIN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT" FOR ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES APPROXIMATELY +/- 50,793 SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF INTERSTATE 15, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA WITHIN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-110-005. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: a. The City is currently implementing the Capital Improvement Program for fiscal years 1997-2001 adopted by the City Council on June 25, 1996. b. The City is currently implementing the Old Town Specific Plan and the Capital Improvement Program 1-1 5/Highway 79S Interchange Project and the Western Bypass Corridor Phase I Project. C. The City proposes to purchase the properties described in the attached Purchase and Sales Agreement ("Agreement") for the purposes of implementing the Project. d. The Project has been the subject of extensive prior environmental review as part of the Old Town Redevelopment Project EIR certified by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency on June 13, 1 995. This portion of the Project is exempt from further environmental review as stated in the findings and as set forth in California Public Resources Code Section and 16 California Code Regulation 15160. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby approves that certain agreement entitled "Purchase and Sale Agreement" for property located on the west side of Interstate 15, Temecula, California within Assessor's Parcel Number 922-110-005. Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting held on the 17th day of December, 1996. Karel F. Lindemans, Mayor r:\bradley\agenda\047&005.pur ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk r:\bradley\agenda\047&005.pur STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Ss CITY OF TEMECULA 1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 96- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 17th day of December, 1996, by the following roll call vote: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS June S. Greek, City Clerk r: \bradley\agenda\047&005.pur PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEM@ AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ("Agreement") is dated and entered into as of December 10, 1996 by and between Margarita Canyon, LLC ("Seller"), and THE CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ("Buyer"), and constitutes both an agreement to purchase and sell real property between the parties and the parties' escrow instructions directed to First American Title Insurance Company ("Escrow Holder"). RECITALS A. On November 5, 1996 the Buyer delivered Seller an offer (the "Offer") to purchase the real property interests described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property") pursuant to Title 1, Division 7, Chapter I of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.). B.Buyer intends to use the Property for public purposes. C. Seller desires to sell and Buyer desires to buy, the Property on the terms and conditions set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises operative provisions and the Recitals which are incorporated herein by this reference, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1 . Purchase and Sale. On the Close of Escrow (as herein defined), Seller agrees to sell the Property to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to buy the Property from Seller, on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 2. Purcbase-@. The total purchase price for the Property to be paid by Buyer is the sum of Two Hundred Forty-Eight Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty-Three Dollars ($248,853.00) (the "Purchase Price"), which sum shall be paid in full in cash on the Close of Escrow. 3. T*tle and Title Insurance. Upon the Opening of Escrow, Escrow Holder shall order from First American Title Company ("Title Company") a title commitment for the Property. Escrow Holder shall also request two copies each of all instruments identified as exceptions on said title commitment. Upon receipt of the foregoing, Escrow Holder shall deliver these instruments and the title commitment to Buyer and Seller. Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be insured at the Close of Escrow by a CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of the Purchase Price (the "Policy"). The Policy of title insurance provided for pursuant to this Section shall insure Buyer's fee interest in the Property free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, restrictions, and rights-of-way of record, subject only to the following permitted conditions of title ("Permitted Title Exceptions"): (a) The applicable zoning, building and. development regulations of any municipality, county, state or federal jurisdiction affecting the Property; and (b)Those non-monetary exceptions approved by Buyer within fifteen (15) business days after the date Buyer receives the title commitment and legible copies of all instruments noted as exceptions therein. If Buyer unconditionally disapproves any such exceptions, Escrow shall thereupon terminate, all funds deposited therein shall be refunded to Buyer (less Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), and this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. If Buyer conditionally disapproves any such exceptions, then Seller shall use Seller's best efforts to cause such exceptions to be removed by the Close of Escrow. If such conditionally disapproved non-monetary exceptions are not removed by the Close of Escrow, Buyer may, at Buyer's option, either accept the Property subject to such encumbrances, or terminate the Escrow and receive a refund of all funds deposited into Escrow (less Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), if any, and this Agreement shall thereupon be of no further force or effect. At the Close of Escrow, Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be free and clear of all monetary encumbrances. 4. Grant Deed. Seller covenants and agrees to deposit with Escrow Holder prior to the Close of Escrow a Grant Deed duly executed and acknowledged by Seller, granting and conveying to Buyer the Property. The Grant Deed shall be in a form satisfactory to Buyer and Buyer's counsel and shall be accepted by Buyer prior to recording. 5. Authorization to R!Qcord Documents and Disburse Funds. Escrow Holder is hereby authorized to record the documents and disburse the funds and documents called for hereunder upon the Close of Escrow, provided each of the following conditions has then been fulfilled: (a) Title Company can issue in favor of Buyer the Policy, showing the Property vested in Buyer subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. Escrow Holder shall use the proceeds of the Purchase Price to obtain partial reconveyance, if necessary, of any monetary liens encumbering the Property, so that the Property shall be free and clear of monetary liens and encumbrances at the Close of Escrow. (b) Escrow Holder shall have received Buyer's notice of approval or satisfaction or waiver of all of the contingencies to Buyer's obligations hereunder, as provided for in Section I 1; and f:\whiscm@96\purchase.047 - 2 - (Margarita Canyon LLC 922-210-047) (c) Seller shall have deposited in Escrow the Grant Deed required by Section 4. Unless otherwise instructed in writing, Escrow Holder is authorized to record at the Close of Escrow any instrument delivered through this Escrow if necessary or proper for issuance of the Policy, including the Grant Deed. 6. Escrow. The parties hereby establish an escrow ("Escrow") to accommodate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Opening of Escrow shall mean the date on which Escrow Holder shall have received a fully executed original of this Agreement from Buyer and Seller. Close of Escrow shall be the date upon which the Grant Deed to Buyer is delivered and recorded in the Official Records of the County of Riverside. The Close of Escrow shall be on the date which is not later than the first business day occurring sixty (60) days after the date of this Agreement. Before the Close of Escrow, all risk of loss and damage to the Property from any source what- soever shall be solely that of Seller. Buyer shall pay all escrow costs. 7. Escrow Charges and Prorations. Buyer shall pay for the cost of the CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance, the Escrow fees and Escrow Holder's customary out-of-pocket expenses for messenger services, long distance telephone, etc. Buyer shall pay for recording the Grant Deed and any documentary or other local transfer taxes, and any other recording fees. If the Escrow shall fail to close through no fault of either party, Buyer shall pay all Escrow cancellation charges. 8. License to Enter. Seller hereby grants to Buyer and Buyer's authorized agents, contractors, consultants, assigns, attorneys, accountants and other representatives an irrevocable license to enter upon the Property for the purpose of making inspections and other examinations of the Property, including, but not limited to, the right to perform soil and geo- logical tests of the Property and an environmental site assessment thereof. Buyer shall give Seller reasonable notice before going on the Property. Buyer does hereby indemnify and forever save Seller, Seller's heirs, successors and assigns, and the Property, free and harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, damages and costs and expenses, demands, causes of action, claims or judgments, whether or not arising from or occurring out of any damage to the Property as a result of any accident or other occurrence at the Property which is in any way connected with Buyer's inspections or non-permanent improvements involving entrance onto the Property pursuant to this Section. If Buyer fails to acquire the Property due to Buyer's default, this license shall terminate upon the termination of Buyer's right to purchase the Property. In such event, Buyer shall remove or cause to be removed all Buyer's personal property, facilities, tools and equipment from the Property. 9. Temporary Construction Easements. Seller hereby agrees to cooperate with the City of Temecula in the construction of the Western Bypass Corridor and the 1-15/Highway 79S interchange improvements ("Improvements") by providing without r:\whiscm\96\purchase.047 - 3 - (Margarita Canyon LLC 922-210-047) compensation, such temporary construction easements as may be required on property owned by Seller to facilitate the completion of Improvements. 10. Warranties and Representations of Seller. Seller hereby represents and warrants to Buyer the following, it being expressly understood and agreed that all such representations and warranties are to be true and correct as of the Close of Escrow and shall survive the Close of Escrow: (a) That (i) on the Close of Escrow the Property shall be free and clear of any and all hazardous or toxic substances, materials, and waste, including, but not limited to, asbestos; (ii) the Property is in compliance with all applicable statutes and regulations, including environmental, health and safety requirements; (iii) all businesses on the Property have disposed of their waste in accordance with all applicable statutes, ordinances, and regulations; and (iv) Seller has no notice of any pending or threatened action or proceeding arising out of the condition of the Property or alleged violation of environmental, health or safety statutes, ordinance or regulations To this end, it is agreed that notwithstanding the conveyance of the Property to Buyer, Seller shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless Buyer from and against any and all claims, liabilities, suits, losses, costs, expenses and damages, including but not limited to attorneys' fees and costs, arising out of any claim for loss or damage to any property, including the Property, injuries to or death of persons, or for the cost of cleaning up the Property and removing hazardous or toxic substances, materials and waste therefrom, by reason of contamination or adverse effects on the environment, or by reason of any statutes, ordinances, orders, rules or regulations of any governmental entity or agency requiring the clean-up of the Property, caused by or resulting from any hazardous material, substance or waste existing on, under or about the Property on the Close of Escrow. (b) That Seller is the sole owner of the Property free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances, easements, encroachments from adjacent properties, encroachments by improvements or vegetation on the Property onto adjacent property, or rights of way of any nature, other than those that may appear on the title commitment. Seller shall not further encumber the Property or allow the Property or to be further encumbered prior to the Close of Escrow. (c) Neither this Agreement nor anything provided to be done hereunder including the transfer of the Property to Buyer, violates or shall violate any contract, agreement or instrument to which Seller is a party, or which affects the Property, and the sale of the Property herein contemplated does not require the consent of any party not a signatory hereto. (d) There are no mechanics', materialmen's or similar claims or liens presently claimed or which will be claimed against the Property for work performed or commenced prior to the date of this Agreement. Seller agrees to hold Buyer harmless from all costs, expenses, liabilities, losses, charges, fees, including attorney fees, arising from or relat- r:\wWwm\96\pumhase.047 - 4 - (Maig@ta Canyon LLC 922-21@7) ing to any such lien or any similar lien claimed against the Property and arising from work performed or commenced prior to the Close of Escrow. (e) There are no written or oral leases or contractual right or option to lease, purchase, or otherwise enjoy possession, rights or interest of any nature in and to the Property or any part thereof, and no persons have any right of possession to the Property or any part thereof. (f) Seller has no knowledge of any pending, threatened or potential litigation, action or proceeding against Seller or any other Party before any court or administrative tribunal which is in any way related to the Property. 11. Full Payment of All Obligations OLUX. It is understood and agreed between Seller and Buyer that the payments made to Seller as set forth in this Agreement represent an all inclusive settlement and is full and complete payment for just compensation for the acquisition of all property interests pertaining to the Property and includes and satisfies any and all other payments, if any, which may be required by law to be paid to Seller arising out of the acquisition and displacement of the Seller and persons residing on the Property, and specifically includes, but is not limited to, claims for severance and other damages, attomey's fees, interest, expenses of litigation, exper-t's fees, precondemnation damages, inverse condemnation, owner participation rights under the Redevelopment Plan, relocation assistance and/or benefits under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.), if applicable, or under Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 1 of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.), and loss of business goodwill under the Eminent Domain Law, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.510, and all costs and expenses whatever in connection therewith. Seller hereby acknowledges that Buyer has advised Seller of the possible availability of such relocation assistance rights to Seller and that the waiver of all rights by Seller herein set forth as free and voluntary. 12. Seller's Contingencies. For the benefit of Seller, the Closing of Escrow and the Seller's obligation to consummate the purchase of the Property shall be contingent upon and subject to the occurrence of all of the following (or Seller's written waiver thereof, it being agreed that Seller can waive any or all such contingencies) on or before the Close of Escrow. (a) That the Close of Escrow shall be contingent on the concurrent Close of Escrow for property which is the subject of the Purchase & Sale Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit 'B" and made a part hereof. 13. Buyer's Contingencies. For the benefit of Buyer, the Closing of Escrow and the Buyer's obligation to consummate the purchase of the Property shall be contingent upon and subject to the occurrence of all of the following (or Buyer's written r: \whisem\96\purchAw.047 - 5 - @rgarila Canyon LLC 922-210-W7) waiver thereof, it being agreed that Buyer can waive any or all such contingencies) on or before the Close of Escrow: (a) That as of the Close of Escrow the representations and warranties of Seller contained in this Agreement are all true and correct. (b)The delivery of all documents pursuant to Section 4 hereof. (c) Title Company's commitment to issue in favor of Buyer of a CLTA Standard Coverage Owner's Policy of Title Insurance with liability equal to the Purchase Price showing Buyer's fee interest in the Property subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. (d) Buyer's approval prior to the Close of Escrow of any environmental site assessment, soils or geological reports, or other physical inspections of the Property or the underlying real property that Buyer might perform prior to the Close of Escrow. 14. Certirication of Noia-Foreign Status. Seller covenants to deliver to Escrow a certification of Non-Foreign Status in accordance with I.R.C. Section 1445, and a similar notice pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 18805 and 26131, prior to the Close of Escrow. 15. Default. In the event of a breach or default under this Agreement by either Buyer or Seller, the non-defaulting party shall have, in addition to all rights available at law or equity, the right to terminate this Agreement and the Escrow for the purchase and sale of the Property, by delivering written notice thereof to the defaulting party and to Escrow Holder, and if Buyer is the non-defaulting party, Buyer shall thereupon promptly receive a refund of all prior deposits, if any. Such termination of the Escrow by a non-defaulting party shall be without prejudice to the non-defaulting party's rights and remedies at law or equity. 16. Notices. All notices and demands shall be given in writing by certified mail, postage prepaid, and return receipt requested, or by personal delivery. Notices shall be considered given upon the earlier of (a) personal delivery, (b) two (2) business days following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified or registered, return receipt requested, or (c) one (1) business day following deposit with an overnight carrier service. A copy of all notices shall be sent to Escrow Holder. Notices shall be addressed as provided below for the respective party; provided that if any party gives notice in writing of a change of name or address, notices to such party shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice: r:\whiscm\96\purchisc.047 - 6 - (Margarita Canyon LLC 922-210-047) BUYER:City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P. 0. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attn:City Manager COPY TO:Richards, Watson & Gershon 333 So. Hope St., 38th Fl. Los Angeles, California 90071 Attn:Peter M. Thorson, Esq. SELLER:Margarita Canyon, LLC c/o Fred D. Grimes, Co-Manager and Jim Roberts, Co-Manager 27740 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 100 Temecula, CA 92590 ESCROW First American Title Company HOLDER:3625 Fourteenth Street Riverside, CA 92502 17. Broker's C... . Seller shall pay all claims of brokers, agents or finders, licensed or unlicensed, and all claims of real estate or other consultants which exist or may arise as a result of Seller's actions with respect to the Property. Buyer shall not be liable for any such fees or claims and Seller shall indemnify Buyer, its officers, employees and agents, from any and all costs, liabilities or judgments, including attorneys' fees, incurred in defending or paying any such claims. 18. Further Instructions. Each party agrees to execute such other and further escrow instructions as may be necessary or proper in order to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 19. Amendments. Any amendments to this Agreement shall be effective only when duly executed by Buyer and Seller and deposited with Escrow Holder. 20.Miscellaneo s (a) Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted under, and governed and enforced according to the laws of the State of California. (b) Entire Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement, oral or written, and together with the Exhibits hereto and any agreements delivered pursuant hereto, contains the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller on the subject matter r: \whis=\96\purchaw.047 - 7 - (M@ta Canyon LLC 922-210-047) hereof. No subsequent agreement, representation or promise made by either party hereto, or by or to any employee, officer, agent or representative of either party, shall be of any effect unless it is in writing and executed by the party to be bound thereby. No person is authorized to make, and by execution hereof Seller and Buyer acknowledge that no person has made, any representation, warranty, guaranty or promise except as set forth herein; and no agreement, statement, representation or promise made by any such person which is not contained herein shall be valid or binding on Seller or Buyer. (c) Successors and Assilins. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. (d) Time of Essence. The parties acknowledge that time is of the essence in this Agreement, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Escrow company's general Escrow instructions. (e) Remedies Not Exclus*ve and Waivers. No remedy conferred by any of the specific provisions of this Agreement is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy and each and every remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of the right to pursue other available remedies. (d) Interpretation and Construction. The parties agree that each party has reviewed and revised this Agreement and have had the opportunity to have their counsel and real estate advisors review and revise this agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. In this Agreement the neuter gender includes the feminine and masculine, and singular number includes the plural, and the words "person" and "party" include corporation, partnership, firm, trust, or association where ever the context so requires. The recitals and captions of the sections and subsections of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only, and the words contained therein shall in no way be held to explain, modify, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement. (e) City Manager Authori@ The City Manager is hereby directed and authorized to execute such other documents, including without limitation, escrow instructions and amendments thereto, certificates of acceptance, agreements for payments of lost rent, or certifications, as may be necessary or convenient to implement the terms of this Agreement. 21. Attorneys' Fees. If either party hereto incurs attorneys' fees in order to enforce, defend or interpret any of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement or r:%whisem\96\purchage.047 - 8 - (Marg@ts Canyon LLC 922-210-047) because of a breach of this Agreement by the other party, the prevailing party, whether by suit, negotiation, arbitration or settlement shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees from the other party. 22. Agsii!ment. Buyer may assign its rights under this Agreement or may designate a nominee to acquire title to the Property, provided, however, that any such assignment or designation shall not relieve Buyer of any of its obligations under this Agreement. 23. Escrow Holder Need Not Be Concerned. Escrow Holder is not to be concerned with Section 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 hereof, and Buyer and Seller release Escrow Holder from liability or obligation as to Section 8, 9, 10, and 15, and 17 hereof. r:\wWsem\96\purchase.047 - 9 - MMarita Canyon LLC 922-210-047) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. SELLER MARGARITA CANYON, LLC Fred D. Grimes, Co-Manager Jim Roberts, iCo-Manager -s -Daniel L. Step@en -or(, Co-Manager BUYER CITY OF TEMECLTLA, a municipal corporation: Karel Lindemans, Mayor ATTEST: By June S. Greek, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Peter M. Thorson City Attorney r:kwhisem\96\purrhase.047 - 10 - (MargrAta Canyon LLC 922-210-047) EY@ii6lT ",A" PARCEL "A" BEING A PORTION OF LOT A OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 3057 IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT NO. 90541, RECORDED MARCH 19, 1991 IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 11 IN BLOCK 32 OF THE TOWN OF TEMECULA, AS FILED IN BOOK 3-@, PAGE 726 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 11 NORTH 15042f2'@"' WEST, 128.78 FEET (WORTH 15-39'27" WEST 128.78 FEET, RECORD PER SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 3057) TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID LOT A; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE AND ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A NORTH 59036'06- EAST, 9.68 FEET (NORTH 59('39'01" EAST, RECORD PER LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 3057) TO A POINT ON A 756.00 FOOT RADIUS NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 7039'42" EASTF SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12"@-4'52", A DISTANCE OF 163.80 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE NORTH 32040'16" WEST, 175.17 FEET (NORTH 3-038'01" WEST, RECORD PER SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 3057) TO THE BEGINNING OF A 1030.00 FOOT RADIUS NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 48"46'53-" WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF LOT A THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11039'00", A DISTANCE OF @-09.43 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT A; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A SOUTH 15042'22" EAST, 278.30 FEET (SOUTH 150394@7" EAST '@78.34 FEET, RECORD PER SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 1,10. 3057) TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAID WESTERLY LINE; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A @OUTH 59036'06" WEST, Z"1.33 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS THIS PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS ("Agreement") is dated and entered into as of December 10, 1996 by and between Margarita Canyon, LLC ("Seller"), and THE CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ("Buyer"), and constitutes both an agreement to purchase and sell real property between the parties and the parties' escrow instructions directed to First American Title Insurance Company ("Escrow Holder"). RECITALS A. On November 5, 1996 the Buyer delivered Seller an offer (the "Offer") to purchase the real property interests described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property") pursuant to Title 1, Division 7, Chapter I of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.). B.Buyer intends to use the Property for public purposes. C. Seller desires to sell and Buyer desires to buy, the Property on the terms and conditions set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises operative provisions and the Recitals which are incorporated herein by this reference, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1 . Purchase and Sale. On the Close of Escrow (as herein defined), Seller agrees to sell the Property to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to buy the Property from Seller, on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. 2. Purchase Price. The total purchase price for the Property to be paid by Buyer is the sum of Six Hundred Eighty-Eight Thousand Two Hundred Thirty-Four Dollars ($688,234.00) (the "Purchase Price"), which sum shall be paid in full in cash on the Close of Escrow. 3. Title and Title Insurance. Upon the Opening of Escrow, Escrow Holder shall order from First American Title Company ("Title Company") a title commitment for the Property. Escrow Holder shall also request two copies each of all instruments identified as exceptions on said title commitment. Upon receipt of the foregoing, Escrow Holder shall deliver these instruments and the title commitment to Buyer and Seller. Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be insured at the Close of Escrow by a CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of the Purchase Price (the "Policy"). The Policy of title insurance provided for pursuant to this Section shall insure Buyer's fee interest in the Property free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, restrictions, and rights-of-way of record, subject only to the following permitted conditions of title ("Permitted Title Exceptions"): (a) The applicable zoning, building and development regulations of any municipality, county, state or federal jurisdiction affecting the Property; and (b)Those non-monetary exceptions approved by Buyer within fifteen (15) business days after the date Buyer receives the title commitment and legible copies of all instruments noted as exceptions therein. If Buyer unconditionally disapproves any such exceptions, Escrow shall thereupon terminate, all funds deposited therein shall be refunded to Buyer (less Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), and this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. If Buyer conditionally disapproves any such exceptions, then Seller shall use Seller's best efforts to cause such exceptions to be removed by the Close of Escrow. If such conditionally disapproved non-monetary exceptions are not removed by the Close of Escrow, Buyer may, at Buyer's option, either accept the Property subject to such encumbrances, or terminate the Escrow and receive a refund of all funds deposited into Escrow (less Buyer's share of escrow cancellation charges), if any, and this Agreement shall thereupon be of no further force or effect. At the Close of Escrow, Buyer's fee title to the Property shall be free and clear of all monetary encumbrances. 4. Grant Deed. Seller covenants and agrees to deposit with Escrow Holder prior to the Close of Escrow a Grant Deed duly executed and acknowledged by Seller, granting and conveying to Buyer the Property. The Grant Deed shall be in a form satisfactory to Buyer and Buyer's counsel and shall be accepted by Buyer prior to recording. 5. Authorization to Record Documents and Disburse Funds. Escrow Holder is hereby authorized to record the documents and disburse the funds and documents called for hereunder upon the Close of Escrow, provided each of the following conditions has then been fulfilled: (a) Title Company can issue in favor of Buyer the Policy, showing the Property vested in Buyer subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. Escrow Holder shall use the proceeds of the Purchase Price to obtain partial reconveyance, if necessary, of any monetary liens encumbering the Property, so that the Property shall be free and clear of monetary liens and encumbrances at the Close of Escrow. (b) Escrow Holder shall have received Buyer's notice of approval or satisfaction or waiver of all of the contingencies to Buyer's obligations hereunder, as provided for in Section 1 1; and r.\whiscm\96\puFcham.005 - 2 - (MargrAta Canyon LLC 922-110-005) (c) Seller shall have deposited in Escrow the Grant Deed required by Section 4. Unless otherwise instructed in writing, Escrow Holder is authorized to record at the Close of Escrow any instrument delivered through this Escrow if necessary or proper for issuance of the Policy, including the Grant Deed. 6. Escrow. The parties hereby establish an escrow ("Escrow") to accommodate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, Opening of Escrow shall mean the date on which Escrow Holder shall have received a fully executed original of this Agreement from Buyer and Seller. Close of Escrow shall be the date upon which the Grant Deed to Buyer is delivered and recorded in the Official Records of the County of Riverside. The Close of Escrow shall be on the date which is not later than the first business day occurring sixty (60) days after the date of this Agreement. Before the Close of Escrow, all risk of loss and damage to the Property from any source what- soever shall be solely that of Seller. Buyer shall pay all escrow costs. 7. Escrow Charges and Prorations. Buyer shall pay for the cost of the CLTA Owner's Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance, the Escrow fees and Escrow Holder's customary out-of-pocket expenses for messenger services, long distance telephone, etc. Buyer shall pay for recording the Grant Deed and any documentary or other local transfer taxes, and any other recording fees. If the Escrow shall fail to close through no fault of either party, Buyer shall pay all Escrow cancellation charges. 8. License to Enter. Seller hereby grants to Buyer and Buyer's authorized agents, contractors, consultants, assigns, attorneys, accountants and other representatives an irrevocable license to enter upon the Property for the purpose of making inspections and other examinations of the Property, including, but not limited to, the right to perform soil and geo- logical tests of the Property and an environmental site assessment thereof. Buyer shall give Seller reasonable notice before going on the Property. Buyer does hereby indemnify and forever save Seller, Seller's heirs, successors and assigns, and the Property, free and harmless from and against any and all liability, loss, damages and costs and expenses, demands, causes of action, claims or judgments, whether or not arising from or occurring out of any damage to the Property as a result of any accident or other occurrence at the Property which is in any way connected with Buyer's inspections or non-permanent improvements involving entrance onto the Property pursuant to this Section. If Buyer fails to acquire the Property due to Buyer's default, this license shall terminate upon the termination of Buyer's right to purchase the Property. In such event, Buyer shall remove or cause to be removed all Buyer's personal property, facilities, tools and equipment from the Property. 9. Ternt2orary Construction Easements. Seller hereby agrees to cooperate with the City of Temecula in the construction of the Western Bypass Corridor and the 1-15/Highway 79S interchange improvements ("Improvements") by providing without r:\whisem\96\purc@.005 - 3 - (Margarita Canyon LLC 922-110-005) compensation such temporary construction easements as may be required on property owned by Seller to facilitate the completion of Improvements. 10. Warranties and Representations of Seller. Seller hereby represents and warrants to Buyer the following, it being expressly understood and agreed that all such representations and warranties are to be true and correct as of the Close of Escrow and shall survive the Close of Escrow: (a) That (i) on the Close of Escrow the Property shall be free and clear of any and all hazardous or toxic substances, materials, and waste, including, but not limited to, asbestos; (ii) the Property is in compliance with all applicable statutes and regulations, including environmental, health and safety requirements; (iii) all businesses on the Property have disposed of their waste in accordance with all applicable statutes, ordinances, and regulations; and (iv) Seller has no notice of any pending or threatened action or proceeding arising out of the condition of the Property or alleged violation of environmental, health or safety statutes, ordinance or regulations To this end, it is agreed that notwithstanding the conveyance of the Property to Buyer, Seller shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless Buyer from and against any and all claims, liabilities, suits, losses, costs, expenses and damages, including but not limited to attorneys' fees and costs, arising out of any claim for loss or damage to any property, including the Property, injuries to or death of persons, or for the cost of cleaning up the Property and removing hazardous or toxic substances, materials and waste therefrom, by reason of contamination or adverse effects on the environment, or by reason of any statutes, ordinances, orders, rules or regulations of any governmental entity or agency requiring the clean-up of the Property, caused by or resulting from any hazardous material, substance or waste existing on, under or about the Property on the Close of Escrow. (b) That Seller is the sole owner of the Property free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances, easements, encroachments from adjacent properties, encroachments by improvements or vegetation on the Property onto adjacent property, or rights of way of any nature, other than those that may appear on the title commitment. Seller shall not further encumber the Property or allow the Property or to be further encumbered prior to the Close of Escrow. (c) Neither this Agreement nor anything provided to be done hereunder including the transfer of the Property to Buyer, violates or shall violate any contract, agreement or instrument to which Seller is a party, or which affects the Property, and the sale of the Property herein contemplated does not require the consent of any party not a signatory hereto. (d) There are no mechanics', materialmen's or similar claims or liens presently claimed or which will be claimed against the Property for work performed or commenced prior to the date of this Agreement. Seller agrees to hold Buyer harmless from all costs, expenses, liabilities, losses, charges, fees, including attorney fees, arising from or relat- r:\whiwm\%\purchase.005 - 4 - (MargsAta Canyon LLC 922-110-005) ing to any such lien or any similar lien claimed against the Property and arising from work performed or commenced prior to the Close of Escrow. (e) There are no written or oral leases or contractual right or option to lease, purchase, or otherwise enjoy possession, rights or interest of any nature in and to the Property or any part thereof, and no persons have any right of possession to the Property or any part thereof. (f) Seller has no knowledge of any pending, threatened or potential litigation, action or proceeding against Seller or any other Party before any court or administrative tribunal which is in any way related to the Property. It. Full Payment of All Obligations of City. It is understood and agreed between Seller and Buyer that the payments made to Seller as set forth in this Agreement represent an all inclusive settlement and is full and complete payment for just compensation for the acquisition of all property interests pertaining to the Property and includes and satisfies any and all other payments, if any, which may be required by law to be paid to Seller arising out of the acquisition and displacement of the Seller and persons residing on the Property, and specifically includes, but is not limited to, claims for severance and other damages, attomey's fees, interest, expenses of litigation, expert's fees, precondemnation damages, inverse condemnation, owner participation rights under the Redevelopment Plan, relocation assistance and/or benefits under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.), if applicable, or under Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 1 of the Government Code of the State of California (Section 7260, et seq.), and loss of business goodwill under the Eminent Domain Law, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1263.510, and all costs and expenses whatever in connection therewith. Seller hereby acknowledges that Buyer has advised Seller of the possible availability of such relocation assistance rights to Seller and that the waiver of all rights by Seller herein set forth as free and voluntary. 12. Seller's Contingencies. For the benefit of Seller, the Closing of Escrow and the Seller's obligation to consummate the purchase of the Property shall be contingent upon and subject to the occurrence of all of the following (or Seller's written waiver thereof, it being agreed that Seller can waive any or all such contingencies) on or before the Close of Escrow. (a) That the Close of Escrow shall be contingent on the concurrent Close of Escrow for property which is the subject of the Purchase & Sale Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit 'B" and made a part hereof. 13. Buyer's Contingencies. For the benefit of Buyer, the Closing of Escrow and the Buyer's obligation to consummate the purchase of the Property shall be contingent upon and subject to the occurrence of all of the following (or Buyer's written r:\whiscmk96\purchAw.005 - 5 - @rg@ta Canyon LLC 922-1 1 0-005) waiver thereof, it being agreed that Buyer can waive any or all such contingencies) on or before the Close of Escrow: (a) That as of the Close of Escrow the representations and warranties of Seller contained in this Agreement are all true and correct. (b)The delivery of all documents pursuant to Section 4 hereof. (c) Title Company's commitment to issue in favor of Buyer of a CLTA Standard Coverage Owner's Policy of Title Insurance with liability equal to the Purchase Price showing Buyer's fee interest in the Property subject only to the Permitted Title Exceptions. (d) Buyer's approval prior to the Close of Escrow of any environmental site assessment, soils or geological reports, or other physical inspections of the Property or the underlying real property that Buyer might perform prior to the Close of Escrow. 14. Certification of Non-Foreign Status. Seller covenants to deliver to Escrow a certification of Non-Foreign Status in accordance with I.R.C. Section 1445, and a similar notice pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 18805 and 26131, prior to the Close of Escrow. 15. Default. In the event of a breach or default under this Agreement by either Buyer or Seller, the non-defaulting party shall have, in addition to all rights available at law or equity, the right to terminate this Agreement and the Escrow for the purchase and sale of the Property, by delivering written notice thereof to the defaulting party and to Escrow Holder, and if Buyer is the non-defaulting party, Buyer shall thereupon promptly receive a refund of all prior deposits, if any. Such termination of the Escrow by a non-defaulting party shall be without prejudice to the non-defaulting party's rights and remedies at law or equity. 16. Not*ces. All notices and demands shall be given in writing by certified mail, postage prepaid, and return receipt requested, or by personal delivery. Notices shall be considered given upon the earlier of (a) personal delivery, (b) two (2) business days following deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified or registered, return receipt requested, or (c) one (1) business day following deposit with an overnight carrier service. A copy of all notices shall be sent to Escrow Holder. Notices shall be addressed as provided below for the respective party; provided that if any party gives notice in writing of a change of name or address, notices to such party shall thereafter be given as demanded in that notice: r: \whiscrn\96\purchasc.005 - 6 - (Margarita Canyon LLC 922-110-005) BUYER:City of Temecula 43200 Business Park Drive P. 0. Box 9033 Temecula, California 92589-9033 Attn:City Manager COPY TO:Richards, Watson & Gershon 333 So. Hope St., 38th Fl. Los Angeles, California 90071 Attn:Peter M. Thorson, Esq. SELLER:Margarita Canyon, LLC c/o Fred D. Grimes, Co-Manager and Jim Roberts, Co-Manager 27740 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 100 Temecula, CA 92590 ESCROW First American Title Company HOLDER:3625 Fourteenth Street Riverside, CA 92502 17. Broker's C... . Seller shall pay all claims of brokers, agents or finders, licensed or unlicensed, and all claims of real estate or other consultants which exist or may arise as a result of Seller's actions with respect to the Property. Buyer shall not be liable for any such fees or claims and Seller shall indemnify Buyer, its officers, employees and agents, ftom any and all costs, liabilities or judgments, including attorneys' fees, incurred in defending or paying any such claims. 18. Further Instructions. Each party agrees to execute such other and further escrow instructions as may be necessary or proper in order to consummate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. 19. Amendments. Any amendments to this Agreement shall be effective only when duly executed by Buyer and Seller and deposited with Escrow Holder. 20.Miscellaneous (a) Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted under, and governed and enforced according to the laws of the State of California. (b) Entire Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any prior agreement, oral or written, and together with the Exhibits hereto and any agreements delivered pursuant hereto, contains the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller on the subject matter r:Nwhisem\96NpurcMw.005 - 7 - (Margarita Canyon LLC 922-1 l@5) hereof. No subsequent agreement, representation or promise made by either party hereto, or by or to any employee, officer, agent or representative of either party, shall be of any effect unless it is in writing and executed by the party to be bound thereby. No person is authorized to make, and by execution hereof Seller and Buyer acknowledge that no person has made, any representation, warranty, guaranty or promise except as set forth herein; and no agreement, statement, representation or promise made by any such person which is not contained herein shall be valid or binding on Seller or Buyer. (c) Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. (d) Tiune of Essence. The parties acknowledge that time is of the essence in this Agreement, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Escrow company's general Escrow instructions. (e) Remedies Not Exclusive and Waivers. No remedy conferred by any of the specific provisions of this Agreement is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy and each and every remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute or otherwise. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of the right to pursue other available remedies. (d) Interpretation and Construction. The parties agree that each party has reviewed and revised this Agreement and have had the opportunity to have their counsel and real estate advisors review and revise this agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement or any amendments or exhibits thereto. In this Agreement the neuter gender includes the feminine and masculine, and singular number includes the plural, and the words "person" and "party" include corporation, partnership, firm, trust, or association where ever the context so requires. The recitals and captions of the sections and subsections of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only, and the words contained therein shall in no way be held to explain, modify, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement. (e) City Manager Authorily, The City Manager is hereby directed and authorized to execute such other documents, including without limitation, escrow instructions and amendments thereto, certificates of acceptance, agreements for payments of lost rent, or certifications, as may be necessary or convenient to implement the terms of this Agreement. 21. Attorneys' Fees. If either party hereto incurs attorneys' fees in order to enforce, defend or interpret any of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement or r:\wbtiscm\96\purchase.005 8 - (Margarita Canyon LLC 922-11@5) because of a breach of this Agreement by the other party, the prevailing party, whether by suit, negotiation, arbitration or settlement shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees from the other party. 22. Assignmenl. Buyer may assign its rights under this Agreement or may designate a nominee to acquire title to the Property, provided, however, that any such assignment or designation shall not relieve Buyer of any of its obligations under this Agreement. 23. Escrow Holder Need Not Be Concerned. Escrow Holder is not to be concerned with Section 8, 9, 10, 15, and 17 hereof, and Buyer and Seller release Escrow Holder from liability or obligation as to Section 8, 9, 10, 15, and hereof. r: \whisem\96\purchase. 005 - 9 - (MaFgarita Canyon LLC 922-1 10-005) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above. SELLER MARGARITA CANYON, LLC @ ti Fred D. Grimes, Co-Manager k "IIM Kot)eds, Co-Manager Daniel L. Stephenson,'Co-Manager BUYER CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation: Karel Lindemans, Mayor ATTEST: Bv June S. Greek, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Peter M. Thorson City Attorney r:\whisem\96\purchase.005 - 10 - (Margarita Canyon LLC 922-1 10-005) EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEING A PORTION OF LOT 11 IN BLOCK 32 OF THE TOWN OF TEMECULA, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,, AS FILED IN BOOK 32, PAGE 726 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 11; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 11 NORTH 15'042'22" WEST, 288.50 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 11, SAID POINT BEING ALSO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 11 SOUTH 74017'38" WEST, 588.03 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 11, SAID POINT BEING ALSO ON A 3739.84 FOOT RADIUS NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 69'/'-7'19" WEST; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 11 AND SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00*44'28", A DISTANCE OF 48.37 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE AND SAID CURVE NORTH 82*41'51" EAST, 377.69 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 756.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14011' "j6", A DISTANCE OF 187.28 FEET TO SAID EASTERLY LINE OF LOT 11; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH WEST, 153-29 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING c)0,793.34 SQUARE FEET OR 1.17 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. J:\KRD-CPLW.DOC KRDC, INC. 1. Iz@ I i I / APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTO CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Murrieta Creek Mowing RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council direct the staff to proceed with the mowing of Murrieta Creek from approximately 1200 feet south of Rancho California Road to the point of previously (after 1993 floods) cleared channel, approximately 6,500 feet downstream. BACKGROUND: During the winter of 1993, heavy rains, resulting run-off, sedimentation and vegetation in Murrieta Creek caused the channel to overflow causing large amounts of damage in the City of Temecula. Since that time, the City and Riverside County Flood Control have been working together to obtain a long term permit to clear the vegetation from the channel to provide for the conveyance, to the maximum extent possible, of the tributary flows. In the past year, Riverside County Flood Control District purchased rubber tracked vehicles with front mower attachments capable of clearing the vegetation by mowing it as low as 12" above the ground without disturbing the root system of the existing vegetation or disturbing the soil during operation. On June 24, 1996, the City of Temecula and Riverside County Flood Control District requested permission of the Department of the Army, Los Angeles District, Corps of Engineers to utilize this piece of equipment in Murrieta Creek. On July 30, 1996, we received a response from the Corps of Engineers stating that demonstration of the performance would be required prior to determining if this equipment could be utilized for this purpose. On August 7, 1996, representatives from the Corps of Engineers, Riverside County Flood Control and City of Temecula witnessed the demonstration in a small portion of Murrieta Creek above Cherry Street. Based on that demonstration, the Corps of Engineers determined that the proposal to mow Murrieta Creek with this piece of equipment would not require Section 404 authorization 33 CFT Part 323.2 (d)(2)(ii); and therefore permitted the mowing of vegetation subject to approvals by other regulatory agencies. Subsequently, we contacted the Regional Water Quality Control Board staff regarding the 401 permit. We were advised that no permit would be required, however, in the conversation they requested that any material cut in the channel area falling within the running stream be moved to dry areas of the channel bottom. Verbal assurance to comply were adequate and such were granted by the City. r:\agdrpt\96\1 217Vnurrieta.mow/ajp After requesting the permit from the Department of Fish and Game, we received on October 7, 1996, a draft of an Agreement for the work in the area described, limiting the mowing to a 50 foot wide strip. Our negotiations continued with the Department requesting that the full bottom width previously cleared be included in the permit for mowing. On October 30, 1996, we received from the Department of Fish and Game a modified agreement allowing the City to mow the whole bottom of the channel. They advised the City that they consider this a natural channel, 'not a designed flood control facility', requesting that CEQA documents be provided with the standard review and comment period. Since this portion of the channel was included as part of the 1993 clearing and plans were prepared for such clearing, and the 1994 Riverside County Flood Control plans that included this portion of the channel, were approved by both the cities of Temecula and Murrieta, we filed a Categorical Exemption, which is a document identical to the one submitted by Riverside County Flood Control District for this portion of the channel. On November 12, 1996, the City Council accepted the Department of Fish and Game's conditions, approved the permit and authorized the City Engineer to sign the permit. On November 25, 1996, we received a letter from the Department of Fish and Game, after several telephone conversations and review of the facts, stating that Categorical Exemption was not applicable, and asked why an EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration was not deemed appropriate. On December 10, 1996, representatives of various agencies including Riverside County Flood Control District, the Army Corps of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife and Department of Fish and Game attended the Temecula/Murrieta advisory meeting in Temecula. Once again we reiterated to the Department of Fish and Game that this portion of the channel was no different than that which was recently cleared by the Riverside County Flood Control District with respect to plans or the channel or previous maintenance effort. This channel had been cleared previously after the 1993 floods and a 404 permit was issued by the Army Corps of Engineers. Attached is a letter addressed to you from Senator Raymond N. Haynes, pledging support in our efforts to clear the channel. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated cost for clearing of $15,000.00 to $20,000.00, previously authorized by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: 1 . Letter dated December 13, 1996, from Senator Raymond N. Haynes 2.Section 404 permit issued in 1993, including this section of Murrieta Creek 3.Letter - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers dated August 1 5, 1996 4.Letter - Department of Fish and Game dated October 7, 1996 5.Agreement - Department of Fish and Game, providing clearing 50 foot wide strip 6.Letter - Department of Fish and Game dated October 30, 1996 7.Minute Action - Letter of Transmittal and Agreement for full bottom width mowing of the channel 8. Letter - Department of Fish and Game dated November 25, 1996 r:\agdrpt\96\1 217VnLKrieta.mow/ajp 5ACRAMENTO OFFICE COMMIT-TEES STATE CAPITOL VICE CHAIRMAN OF: ROOM 4082 EC)UCATION SACRAME14TO CA 95814 CE CHAIRMAN OF 6) 445-9781 (IT HEALVT'H & HUMAN SERVICES X rgl F@91 45@447-9008 @atiforni *fate lenzit-c jj[)ICIARY DIST PICT OFFICES PIJBLIC MPLOYTIENT & SE^'4ATC,R REETIREMERIT 6840 IND@ANA AVENUE SU TE 275 RAYMOND N. HAYNES SELECT COMMITTEE ON RIVERSIDE, CA 92506 ALIFORNIA BUS4('AESS @-LIMATE (909) 782-411 1 TF-.iRTY-SIXTH SF.@,AT\-)RIAL DISTRICT SELECT COMMITTEE ON FAX @909) 276-4,183 C)EFEt-4SE EASE CL SURE .13180 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE STATE CHAIRMAN AMERICAN SUITE A-101 LEGISLATIVE EXCHA(,JGE --OU@JCIL TEMECUL-A CA 92590 1909@ 693-0266 FAX 909@ C,93-0466 December 13, 1996 Honorable Board Members City of Temecula P. 0. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 It has been brought to my attention that the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) is currently prohibiting the mowing of vegetation in Murrieta Creek. As your elected state senate representative, and because CDFG is a state agency, I feel compelled once again, to address this most important issue. I want to start by making three points very clear regarding the urgency surrounding the proper flood control maintenance of Murrieta Creek. They are as follows: 1.The Citv of Temecula, working in conjunction with the County of Riverside Flood Control and Water Conservation District has an obligation to protect life and property from imminent flooding. 2.Time is of the essence. The rainy season is upon us. History has proven that if vegetation, debris and sediment are @ maintained through the Old Town portion of Murrieta Creek, and when rainfall is heavy, flooding is imminent. 3.CDFG prohibiting the mowing of vegetation in Murrieta Creek does not have precedence over the obligation to protect life and property from historical fact: flooding. I have made it a point to research the facts surrounding the perceived inability to mow the vegetation in Murrieta Creek through the "Old Town" section of Temecula. The Department of Fish and Game, as documented in their letter dated October 30, 1996, is refusing to validate Streambed Alteration Agreement No. 5-366-96 unless the City of Temecula submits the appropriate environmental documents for this section of Murrieta December 13,1996 Page Two Creek. This request by CDFG is based on the premise that Murrieta Creek has never been cleared through Old Town Temecula. However, in January of 1993, after severe flooding the County of Riverside Flood Control and Water Conservation District constructed and cleared Murrieta Creek through Old Town Temecula in accordance with an emergency 404 permit issued by the Army Corps of Engineers. According to CDFG policy this would allow the City of Temecula to file a notice of maintenance exemption for an existing facility and mow the vegetation in the creek. I want to pledge my support to the Citv Council in taking whatever steps are necessary in expediting this project and will sustain that decision on behalf of the people of your city. I believe the most important resources we can protect are our constituent's life and property. Very truly yo ES LOS ANGELES DISTRICT U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT Parmittes: Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Permit Number: 93-291-RS Issuing Office: :Angeles District lote: The term "You" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means -he pernittee or any future transferee. The term "this office" refers to -he appropriate district or division office of the Corps of Engineers taving jurisdiction over the permitted activity or the appropriate )fficial acting under the authority of the commanding officer. I ou are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and Conditions specified below. roject Description: To perform emergency flood protection works along urrieta Creek between the vicinity of Kalmia Street in Murrieta to the .S.G.S. stream flow gage at Temecula. This work includes removing agetation and accumulated sediment from the channel which was dug in 980, restoring the damaged and washed out levees along the creek; emoving downed trees, brush and other debris, and cleaning sediment a;-,.I abris from side-channel inlets to the creek, within Reaches I thru 7 as iown on the attached drawings. .0ject Location: In Murrieta Creek in the Cities of Temecula and irrieta in Riverside County, CA. Permit Conditions ,eneral Conditions: I. The time limit for completing the authorized activity ends on April 30, 1993. If you find that you need more time to complete the authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension to this office for consideration at least one month before the above date is reached. 2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in conformance with the terms and conditions of this permit. You are not relieved of this requirement if you abandon the permitted activity, although you may make a good faith transfer to a third party in compliance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to maintain the authorized activity or should you desire to abandon it without a good faith transfer, you must obtain a modification from this permit from this office, which may require restoration of the area. 3. If you discover any previously unknown historic or archeological remains while accomplishing the activity authorized by this permit, you must immediately notify this office of what you have found. We will initiate the Federal and state coordination required to determine if the remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. . If you sell the property associated with this permit, you must obtain _ne signature of the new owner in the space provided and forward a copy of the permit to this office to validate the transfer of this authorization. 5. A conditioned water quality certification may be issued for your project, you must comply with the conditions specified in the certification as special conditions to this permit. 6. You must allow representatives from this office to inspect the authorized activity at any time deemed necessary to ensure that it is being or has been accomplished with the terms and conditions of your permit. Special Conditions: A)The permittee shall mitigate for impacts to 106 acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on a 1:1 basis of like habitat, to be implemented within two years of issuance of this permit. The permittee shall develop a mitigation plan (other than that proposed for the long-term plan) within 6---Mont-ha which is acceptable to the Corps and resource agencies. Approval of the permitteals proposed long-term flood control project and associated mitigation measures within this two-year period would supersede this special condition. F--thermore, any mitigation measures carried out in accordr 1-t-@ i-Ilis condition shall be credited to any long-term flood control Projects which encompass the area subject to this permit. Successful mitigation for the emergency permit can be credited towards off-setting the impacts of the long-term flood control plan if mitigation will not be impacted by the long term project overlays with the area of impact from the emergency permit. 5)The permittee shall implement standard control measures to prevent the intrusion of non-native invasive vegetation, such as Giant Reed (Arundo donax) or Pampas grass (Cortaderia atacamensis), in the reaches of the Murrieta Creek subject to this permit. These control measures shall continue for two years unless superseded by special- conditions contained in a permit for any long-term proposal for Murrieta Creek. C)All non-earthen debris removed from Murrieta Creek in accordance with this permit shall be removed to an upland disposal site. No such material shall be placed in such a way that it may reenter any waters of the United States. D)Earthen material not removed to an upland disposal site may only be utilized for backfilling eroded channel banks and reconstructing existing levees along Murrieta Creek. No dredged material shall be placed on non-eroded banks in such a way that burial of woody vegetation would occur. E)This permit does not authorize future channel maintenance activities along Murrieta Creek subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act which are not otherwise covered by the terms and conditions of this permit. F)That the permittee shall, concurrent with construction, obtain a 401 water quality certification or waiver from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Further Information: 1. Congressional Authorities: You have been authorized to undertake the activity described above pursuant to: ( ) Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403). (x)Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Section 103 of tw,e Marine Protection, Research and sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1413). 3 -tts is authorization. a. This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations required by law. b. This permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges. c. This permit does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others. d. This permit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project. 3. Limits of Federal Liability. in issuing this permit, the Federal Government does not assume any liability for the following: a. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or unpermitted activities or from natural causes. b. Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities undertaken by or on behalf of the United States in the public interest. c. Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or unpermitted activities or structures caused by the activity authorized by this permit. d. Design or construction deficiencies associated with the permitted work. e. Damage claims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this permit. 4. Reliance on Applicant's Data: The determination of this office that issuance of this permit is not contrary to the public interest was made in reliance on the information you provided. 5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this permit at any tine the circumstances warrant. Circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following; a. You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit. @. The information provided by you in support of your permit Application proves to have been false, incomplete, or inaccurate (See i above). Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the original public interest decision. 4 Such a reevaluation may result in a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension, modification, and revocation procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326-5. The referenced enforcement procedures provide for the issuance of an administrative order requiring you to comply with the terms and conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You will be required to pay for any corrective measure ordered by this off 4& , and if you fail to comply with such directive, this office may in certain situations (such as those specified in 33 CFR 209.170) accomplish the corrective measures by contract or otherwise and bill you for the cost. 6 . Extensions. General condition 1 establishes a time limit for the completion of the activity autl-. -ized by this permit. Unless there are circumstances requiring eithe-- .)rompt completion of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of public interest decision, the Corps will normally give you favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time limit. Your signature below, as perm' indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms and cions of this permit. (PERMITTEE) (DATE) This permit becomes effective when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of the Army, has signed below. R. L. VANANTWERP (DATE) COL, EN Commanding When the structures or :horized by this permit are still in existence at the time tiie @ -eerty is transferred, the terms and conditions of this permit will continue to be binding on the nsw owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below. (TRANSFEREE) (DATE) VI' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E FFE 1:1 F -IL@TOF"i" @,3K_SePte ber 11, 1996 5:18am '@,S 00: 57AN DEPARTMENT OF TliE ARMY LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CONPS OF ENGINEERS @@4ka@ 911 WI@URE E30ULEVARD LOS ANGELES, CALIFOANIA DW17-3401 REPLY TO August 15, 1996 ATM@ 4Y: Office of the @ef Regulatory Branch AUG -"'ZIDE COURTYFLCOO C.O.,gT, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Co@ervation District Attn: Dave Zappe/Zoolie Smith 1995 Market Street Fdverside, CalffO@a 9@1-171,0 -@ar Ms. S@th: This letter is in response to your request, dated June 24,1996, for a jurisdictional determination for your proposal to mow Nfu-rr]-eta Creek using a rubber-tracked vencle. In ou-r letter dated July 30, 1996, we deferred making a final detem-tination on this acfivitv pending a demonstration of the equipment. On August 7,1996 Eric Stein of my staff attended a demonstration of the ASV Posi-Track NM 70 rubber-trac--ked ve@cle equipped with a front-mounted rotary mowing attachment. L Based on the Au@t 7 demonstration, we have det that your proposal to mow Murrieta Creek with the equipment described above would not require a Section 404 authorization 33 CFR Fart 323.'-'(d)(2)(ii) states that Section 404 authorization is not required for activities that involve only the cutting or removing of vegetation above the ground (e. mowing, rotary cutfin@ and chainsawing) where the activity neither substantially disturbs the root system nor involves mechanized pushing, draggin& or other similar activities that redeposit excavated soil material. Some minor redistribution of substrate wa3 observed when t-l-te rubber-txacked vehicle turned @ saadv, unvegetated portions of the Creek. However, the tLLrning area of the vehicje represents a minor portion of the total area to be mowed and the nu@er of @ns would be @@zed. We have determined that the redistribution in the turrling area would have a de rninimis effect on the aquatic functions of Nlurrieta Cr@. Pursuant to 33 CFR Part 32-3.2(d)(3) Section 404 authorization is not required for the I . rw-idental addition, including redeposits of dredged rn2terial as@ated with anv ac-Livity that does not have or would not have the effect of destroying or degrading an area of waters of the LTnited States- The Corps' determination under -@ction 4@4 of the Clem Water Act does not release vou from the requirements or' ad other applicable Federal, State, and l@] regulations, such as tYLe Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treatv Act, and National f-listoric Presp=ation Act. In addition, the redeposit of t-no@ved vegetation and debris could be considered a Waste ch@ar.ge regulated under Secbori 40z' oi the Clean 1,Vater Act. We recommend that you contact the U.,Ij. Environmental PriDtectiort Ag@,ncy or Pegional Water QuaLitv Control Board regarding ti-tis issue. Wednesday September 11, 1996 5:18am -- Page 4 P. 414 This non-jurisdictional determination only applies 50 long as all vegetation CuWmg occurs above ground and root z;ysten-Ls are not Substantially disturbed. Removal of @Ment or any activity which involves pushing, raking, windrowing, stockpiling, or other actions which would disturb the substrate of the creek or cause discharge or redepoe;it of d@ged material would require a @ion 104 authorization. In addition, @ determination is only valid when using the identical type oi equipment cle@ibed above in a sandy-bottom -Ystem. If you @sh to use different equipment or work in a system with a different substrate-type (e.g. organic substrate, substrate with high percent of fines or clays), you mLLst contact the Corps for another jurisdictional detonation. We have requested that the Corps South Pacific Division review our dete tion and they would ret@ the d@etion to reverse our determination. However, until further int)fice, a @ction 404 authorization is not required for the activity described above. If you have any questions, please contact Eric Stein of my staff at (213) 452-3415. Please refer to this letter and 93-00291-ES in your reply. Sincerely, c@ .P\ichard J. S(--hubel Acting C:hief, Regulatory cf:CESPD; At@ Ted Durst USEPA; Attit: Jeff P,@blum US@VS; A@: Jack Fancher CDFG; At7tn-. C@ Tauche-r (--SWRCB; Attru Wait Petit City c)i Tem@iL Attn: Joe Yacak CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ENVIRONMENTAL SIERVICES P.O. Box 517 JAMUL, CA @91935 Phono and FAX (619) 468-9231 DATE: TO: FROM: COMMENTS: .0 Numb&r of pages in4Vudi@header--...., For your Information At your request AB discussed For review & comment p le"o call Znviro tal services Division P. 0. BOX 317 Jamul, CJL 91935 (619) 466-9231 natel October 71 Z996 Too Mt. LT*spoh Kicak, Director @ lie Works Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 L)ear Mr. Kicak: Bnclouod ar6 two Copies Of Strea@d Alteration Agreement No. 5-366-9-6 lil. you agree with the conditions/measurse set forth in the agra@nt, please sign both copies and return both to me for signature at tho @e address. written notice of your intent to commence project activities needs to provided to the Department at least five days in advance of commencing project activities. The reach of murrieta Creek you plan on mowing is not a designed flood control facility and is what the Department considers a natural channel. AB such is Department policy to require mitigation for any temporary and/or permanent imp*cta to fish and wildlife habitat. Should you need to mow additional art& or plan on any future vegetation modifications within thin reach, the Department &hall require replacement mitigation at a 4;1 ratio. The California Fish and Game Code requires that you notify the Department in writing within 14 days of receipt of this Proposal an to its acceptability, except that this time may be extended by mutual agreement. If you do not respond within this time period you may lose your -right to request binding arbitration. For minor changes we suggest you contact the person responsible for writing your agreement, Dee Sudduth, prior to sending the written response. If you have any questions regarding the proposed conditions plans* contact me at (619) 468-9231, or Environmental services supervisor Bruce Kinney at (619) 872-1129. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. sincere Dee Sudduth Environmental Services Specialist Region S OF FISH AND CJLLTI'OPNTJL R)BPAR 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50 Long Reach, California goao2 Notification NO, 5-3g(;-qr 4 @Z RA IX(; PITOPOORD 9 OR @TMTZON THIS AORS , entered into between the State of California, Department of Fish and Game, hereinafter called the Department, and name: Joseph Kicak, titls: Director of Public works, representing; City of Temecula, address: 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA $2590, phone: (909) 694-6411, County of Riv*raide, State of hereinafter called the operator, in as follown- purs @ t to Section 1601 of California Fish and Came Code, the Operator, an the 23rd day of September, 1996, notified the Department that they intend to divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or change the bad, channel, or bank of, or use material from the streambed(s) of, the following wat:ar(a) : Murrieta Creek of Riverside County, tributary to Santa Margarita River, located West of Front Street from approximately 1220 feet mouth of Rancho California Road to approximately 6500 fast downstream. Section TownshipRange USCS Map Temecula. WHE@, the Department has determined that such operations may substantially adversely affect existing fish and wildlife resources includiniz: those songbirds, raptorn, other birds, --mle, reptiles. ampl&LbiatLa, plants, and all other aquatic resources and wildlife in the stre @ ad/lake and amaoclat*d area affected by the proposed project in this agremmnt. FORIN, the Department hereby proposes measures to protect fish and wildlife resources during the Operator's work. The Operator hereby agrees to accept the following measures/conditions as part of "a proposed work. If the operators work changes from that stated in the notification specified above, this agreement is no longer valid and A new notification shall be submitted to the Department of Fish and Game. Failure to comply with the provisions of this agreement and with other pertinent code sections, including but not limited to Fish and Game Code Sections 5650, 5652, 5937, and 5946, may result in prosecution. Nothing in this agreement authorizes the Operator to trespass on any land or property, nor does it relieve the Operator of responsibility for compliance with applicable federal, state, or local laws or ordinances. A cons@ted agreement does not constitute Department of Fish and Game endorsement of the proposed operation, or assure the Departmentla concurrence with permits required from other agencies. THIS AGREBECOMES EFETCTIVE ON DATE OF DEPAR IS SIGNATURE AN13 TERMINATZSOctober 7, 1997, for the ]proposed project only. The Operator may request anextension of the agreement annually for a 12-month period if additionalconstruction time is necessary. The extension shall be requested prior to the termination date of the agreement. This agreement shall remain in affect for that time necessary to satisfy the terms/cQndltions of this agreement. pa$;e 2 of 4 (5-366-96) STREAMBBD ALTMTATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTT.FIC;LTION BRi 5-366-2G 1. The following provisions constitute the limit of activities agreed to and resolved by this agreement. The signing of thin agreement does not imply that the operator in precluded from doing other activities at the site. However, activities not specifically agreed to and resolved by this agreement, *hall be subject to separate notification pursuant to Fish and Game Code 1600 at seq.. 2. The Operator proposes to alter the following strea@d: Mgrrieta Crank, to perform the following work: one- time mowing of vegetation within the bottom of the channel, the mowing shall be confined to a 50 foot width, an described in the a tted application. 3. =* agreed work includes activities associated with No. 2 @ys. The project area in located in the following streambed Murrieta cree--k, Riverside County, located approximately an follows: from approximately 1200 feet mouth of Rancho California Road to approximately 6500 feet downstream. Section Township Range , USGS Map Temecula. sp@ac iia work areas and mitigation measures are described on/in the plans and documents submitted by the operator and shall be implemented as proposed, unlean directed differently by this agreement. 4. The Operator certifies by signing thin agreement that the project sit* ham been surveyed and shall not @&ct any rare, threatened or endangered species; or the Opbwator c*rtifiem that such a survey is not required for the proposed pwoj*ct. if raw*, threatened or endangered species occur within the propomed work area. or could be impacted by the work proposed, this agre@t shall not be valid and the operator shall not proceed with the project until the operator consults with the Depar@nt and obtains any required state and/or Federal perilits- S.Mowing within the channel bottom shall be confined to a 50 foot width. 6.This shall be a one time alteration to the channel. Any additional temporary or permanent habitat alterations shall be mitigated at a 4:1 ratio. 7. In those project areas where nesting birds may occur, the Operator either shall not remove potential nesting riparian vegetation from March 15 through July 30, or shall survey all potential nenting riparian vegetation within the project site for active bird nestm. If an active bird neat is located the next site shall be flagged or staked a minimum of 5 yards in all directions, and thin flagged zone shall not be disturbed until the nest becomes inactive, unless otherwise directed by the Department (ref. ; Fish and Game Codes 3503, 3503. 5) . S.The removal or disturbance of soil, vegetation and vegetative debris from the streambed or bank shall not exceed the limits approved by the Depart or as described in the submitted application. 9. vehicle* xhall not be driven or equipment operated in water covered portions of a stream or lake or in wetted areas, or where wetland vegetation, riparian vegetation, or aquatic organisms may be destroyed, except as otherwise provided for in the agreement and an necessary to complete authorized work. 10. Xt a stream channel has been altered during project operations, its low flow channel shall be returned as nearly as possible to pre-projact conditions without creating a possible future streambed or bank erosion problem, or a flat wide channel or sluice-like area. The disturbed portions of any stream c el within the high water mark of the stream shall be restored to as near original co @ tion an possible, except an other-wise indicated in the submitted application or as directed by the Department. 11. Vegetation removed from the site shall not be stockpiled in the streambed/creek or on its bank. The sites selected on which to push this material out of the stream should be selected in compliance with the other provisions of this agreement. Where possible, suitable brush pilea may be left to provide wildlife habitat. PR= I mf 4 (9-194-96) 12.This agreement does not authorize the construction of any ' mporary or te Permanent dam, structure, flow restriction or fill, except as described in the Operator's notification. Any temporary dam, artificial obstruction, or other flow diversion *hall be constructed from materials, such am clean gravel or sandbags, which will cause little or no siltation. If necessary, flow diversions shall be done in a manner that shall prevent pollution, minimi:xo siltation and which shall provide flows to downstream reaches. Flown to downstream roaches shall be provided during all times that the natural flow would have supported a@tic life. said flown shall he of sufficient quality and quantity to support *xisting a@tic life both above and below the diversion. Normal flows shall be restored to the stream immediately upon completion of work at that location. 13. Precautions to minimize turbidity/ailtation shall be taken into account during project planning and implementation. This may require that the work site .be isolated and /or the construction of ailt catchment basins, so that silt, or other deleterimm materials are not allowed to pass to downstream reaches. The placement of any structure or materials in the stream for this purpose, not included in the original project description, shall be coordinated with the Department. Coordination shall include the negotiation of additional agreement provisions. 14. Upon Department determination that turbidity/siltation levels resulting from project related activities constitute a threat to aquatic life, activities associated with the turbidity/ailtation, shall be halted until effective Department approved control devices are installed, or abatement procedures are initiated. 15. Spoil sites shall not be located within a stroam/lake, where spoil can be washed back into a atream/laLke, or where it will cover a@tic or riparian vegetation. The operator may remove all human generated debris, such aL& 14LWn and farm cutting&, garbage and trash. 26. Structures and associated materials, including debris, not designed to withstand high seasonal flows shall be removed to areas above the high water mark before such flown occur. 17. No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any stream channel or lalke margin where petroleum product& or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these &ream under a" flow. 18. The operator shall comply with all litter and pollution laws. All contractors, subcontractors and employees shall also obey these laws and it shall be the responsibility of the operator to ensure compliance. 19. The clean-up of all pollution spills shall begin immediately, The Operator shall notify the Department immediately of any spills and shall consult with the Department regarding clean-up procedures and requirements. 20. All debris, bark, slash, sawdust, rubbish, silt, cement or concrete or waahingo thereof, asphalt, paint or other coating material, oil or other petroleum products, or any other substances resulting from project related activities which could be hazardous to a @ tic life or waters of the state, shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or @ttrizg the waters of the state. None of these materials shall be allowed to enter into or be placed within or where they may enter or be washed by rainfall or runoff into waters of the state. When operations are completed, any excess materials or debris shall be removed from the work area. No rubbish shall be deposited within 1SO feet of the- high water mark of any stream or lake. 21. All provisions of this agreement remain in force throughout the term of the agreement. Any provisions of the agreement may be amended or the agreement may be terminated at any time provided such amendment and/or te @ nation in agreed to in writing by both parties. Mutually approved amendments become part of the original agreement and are subject to all previously negotiated provisions. 22.If the Operator or any of the individuals mentioned above, violate any of the term or conditions of this agreement, all work *hall terminate immediately and shall not proceed until the Department has taken all of its legal actions. Page 4 of 4 (S-366-919@ 23. The Department reserves the Tight to enter the project site at any time to ensure compliance with terma/conditions of this agreement. 24. The Operator shall provide a copy of this agre@t to all contractors, subcontractors, and the operators project supez-vinozo, Copies of the agreement shall be readily available at work siten at all times during periods of active work and must he presented to any Department personnel, or personnel from another agency upon demand. 25. The orator shall notify the Department, in writing, at least five (3) days prior to aitiation of construction (project) activities, and at least five (5) days prior to completion of construction (project) activities. Notificatickn 97nall be sent to the Department at 330 ' Golden Shore, Suite 50, Long Beach, CA 90802, Attnt Environmental Services. 29. The Department reserves the right to suspend and/or revoke this agrea@t if the Department determines that the circumstances warrant. The circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following: a.Failure to comply with the ter,,u3/c!onditiona of this agreement. b.The information provided by the operator in support of the Notification/Agreement is determined by the Department to he incomplete, or inaccurate. c.When new information becomes available to the Department representatives) that wan not known when preparing the original tax-ma/conditions of this agreement. d.The project an described in the Notification/Agreement has changed, or conditions affecting fish and wildlife resources change, City of TwwulaCalifornia Department of Fish &ad Oman Joseph Kit-mk Doe auddlatl (signat te (signature) (date) Rirpnt-nv- of D"hlic Workig En-vironmental 42aciallat rTT (title) (title) STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME Environmental Services Division P. 0. BOX 517 Jamul, CA 91935 (619) 468-9231 EnT WILSON, vernor NOV 7 1996 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: October 30, 1996 To:Mr. Joseph Kicak, Director Public Works Department 43174 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 Dear Mr. Kicak: Enclosed are two copies of streambed Alteration Agreement No. 5-366-96 have made the changes that you have requested to allow additional mowing width within the creek bottom. The reach of Murrieta Creek you plan on mowing is not a designed flood control facility and is what the Department considers a natural channel. As such it is Department policy to require mitigation for any temporary and/or permanent impacts to fish and wildlife habitat. Should you or the property owners plan on any future vegetation modifications within this reach, the Department shall hold the City of Temecula responsible for replacement mitigation at a 3:1 ratio. The Department will also require a current CEQA document with the standard review and comment period for your project. The agreement will not be valid until the CEQA document is received- Please forward your certified document with your returned signed agreement. If you agree with the conditions/measures set forth in the agreement, please sign both copies and return both to me for signature, at the above address. Written notice of your intent to commence project activities needs to be provided to the Department at least five days in advance of commencing project activities. The California Fish and Game Code requires that you notify the Department in writing within 14 days of receipt of this Proposal as to its acceptability, except that this time may be extended by mutual agreement. If you do not respond within this time period you may lose your right to request binding arbitration. For minor changes we suggest you contact the person responsible for writing your agreement, Dee Sudduth, prior to sending the written response. If you have any questions regarding the proposed conditions please contact me at (619) 468-9231, or Environmental Services Supervisor Bruce Kinney at (619) 872-1129. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Dee Sudduth Environmental Services Specialist Region 5 MMTE ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA DATE: November 2'-', 1996 TO: Joe Kicak, Director of Public Works MEETING OF: November 12, 1996 AGENDAITEM No.: Item 18 SUBJECT: Murrieta Creek - Department of Fish and Game Permit for Mowing The motion was made by Councilmember Stone, secotided by Councilmember Roberts to approve staff recommendations. 18.1Accept the conditions of the Department of Fish and Game, approve the permit, and authorize the City Engineer to sign the permit for the mowing of Murrieta Creek. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Ford, Roberts, Stone, Lindemans NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) 1, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY, under penalty of perjury, the foregoing to be the official action taken by the City Council at the above meeting. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this '@'2nd day of November, 1996. rk, CMt Citv of Temecula 432()O Busine,,,, Park, E)rA/e a Femecula, C@ 9@@590 NbijingAddre,-,: P 0 Box "/033 Temecula, CA 9-Z'589-9c)33 (909@ 94@,444-F,-ix(QO91694-1@90 November 18, 1996 State of California - The Resources Agency Department of Fish and Game Environmental Services Division P.O. Box 517 Jamul, CA 91935 Attn: Ms. Dee Sudduth, Environmental Services Specialist Dear Mrs. Sudduth: Enclosed you will find two original notifications No. 5-366-96, Agreement Regarding Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration. This is in conjunction with the mowing of Murrieta Creek from 1,200 feet south of Rancho California Road to approximately 6500 feet southerly. Also enclosed is a copy of the Notice of Exemption for the above project. Please return an executed copy of the agreement to our office. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call me at (909) 694-641 1. Sincerely, Joseph Kicak Director of Public Works/City Engineer Enclosure i,@, I @' R-\muRRciLK@GMnTTLF&G CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50 Long Beach, California 90802 Notification No. 5-366-96 -Page I of 4 AGREEMENT REG-KRDING PROPOSED STREAM OR LAKE ALTERATION THIS AGREEMENT, entered into between the State of California, Department of Fish and Game, hereinafter called the Department, and name: Joseph Kicak, title: Director of Public works, representing: City of Temecula, address: 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, CA 92590, phone: (909) 694-6411, County of Riverside, State of California, hereinafter called the Operator, is as follows: WHEREAS,pursuanL to Section 1601 of California Fish and Game Code, the Operator, on the 23rd day of September, l@96, notified the Department that they intend to divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or change the bed, channel, or bank of, or use material from the streambed(s) of, the following water(s) : murrieta Creek of Riverside County, tributary to Santa Margarita River, located West of Front Street from approximately 1220 feet south of Rancho California Road to approximately 65bO feet downstream. Section Township I Range _, USGS Map Temecula. WHEREAS, the Department has determined that such operations may substantially adversely affect existing fish and wildlife resources including: those songbirds, raptors, other birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, plants, and all other aquatic resources and wildlife in the streambed/lake and associated area affected by the proposed project in this agreement. THEREFORE, the Department hereby proposes measures to protect fish and wildlife resources during the Operator's work. The Operator hereby agrees to accept the following measures/conditions as part of the proposed work. If the Operator's work changes from that stated in the notification specified above, this agreement is no longer valid and a new notification shall be submitted to the Department of Fish and Game. Failure to comply with the provisions of this agreement and with other pertinent code sections, including but not limited to Fish and Game Code Sections 5650, 5652, 5937, and 5948, mav result in prosecution. Nothing in this agreement authorizes the Operator to trespass on any land or property, nor does it relieve the Ooerator of responsibility for compliance with applicable federal, state, or local laws or ordinances. A consummated agreement does not constitute Department of Fish and Game endorsement of -he proposed operation, or assure the Department's concurrence with permits required from other agencies. THIS AGREEMENT BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON DATE OF DEPARTMENT'S SIGNATURE A-ND TERMINATES October 7, 1997, for the proposed project only. The Operator may request an extension of the agreement annually for a 12-month period if additional construction time is necessary. The extension shall be requested prior to the termination date of the agreement. This agreement shall remain in effect for that time necessary to satisfy the terms/conditions of this agreement. Page 2 of 4 (5-366-96) STREAMBED ALTERATION CONDITIONS FOR NOTIFICATION UMBER: 5-366-96 1. The following provisions constitute the limit of activities agreed to and resolved by this agreement. The signing of this agreement does not imply that the Operator is precluded from doing other activities at the site. However, activities not-specifically agreed to and resolved by this agreement, shall be subject to separate notification pursuant to Fish and Game Code 1600 et seq.. I The Operator proposes to alter the following streambed: Murrieta Creek, to perform the following work: one-time mowing of vegetation within the bottom of the channel, the mowing shall be confined to the bottom of the channel, as described in the submitted application. 3. The agreed work includes activities associated with No. 2 above. The project area is located in the following streambed murrieta Creek, Riverside County, located approximately as follows: from approximately i2OO feet south of Rancho California Road to approximately 6500 feet downstream, Section Township Specific work areas and mitigation measures are described on/in the plans and documents submitted by the Operator and shall be implemented as proposed, unless directed differently by this agreement. 4. The Operator certifies by signing this agreement that the project site has been surveyed and shall not impact any rare, threatened or endangered species; or the Operator certifies that such a survey is not required for the proposed project. If rare, threatened or endangered species occur within the proposed work area, or could be impacted by the work proposed, this agreement shall not be valid and the operator shall not proceed with the project until the Operator consults with the Department and obtains any required State and/or Federal permits. 5. Mowing within the channel bottom shall be confined to the bottom of the channel only. No native trees with a diameter of 4 inches or greater at breast height shall be removed. 6. This shall be a one-time alteration to the channel. Any future, additional temporary or permanent habitat alterations shall be mitigated for by the City of Temecula at a 3:1 ratio. The mitigation shall be identified and installed prior to anv further disturbance to this reach of Murrieta Creek. 7. in those project areas where nesting birds mav occur, the Operator either shall not remove potential nesting riparian vegetation from March 15 through July 30, or shall survey all potential nesting riparian vegetation within the project site for active bird nests. If an active bird nest is located the nest site shall be flagged or staked a minimum of 5 yards in all directions, and this flagged zone shall not be disturbed until the nest becomes inactive, unless otherwise directed by the Department (ref.: Fish and Game Codes 3503, 3503.5). 8. The removal or disturbance of soil, vegetation and vegetative debris from the streambed or bank shall not exceed the limits approved by the Department, or as described in the submitted application. 9. Vehicles shall not be driven or equipment operated in water covered portions of a stream or lake or in wetted areas, or where wetland vegetation, riparian vegetation, or aquatic organisms may be destroyed, except as otherwise provided for in the agreement and as necessary to complete authorized work. 10. If a stream channel has been altered during project operat - ons, its low flow channel shall be returned as nearly as possible to pre-project conditions without creating a possible future streambed or bank erosion problem, or a flat wide channel or sluice-like area. The disturbed portions of any stream channel within the high water mark of the stream shall be restored to as near original condition as possible, except as otherwise indicated in the submitted application or as directed by the Department. 11. Vegetation removed from the site shall not be stockpiled in the streambed/creek or on its bank. The sites selected on which to push this I Range I USGS Map Temecula. Page 3 of 4 (5-3 6-96) material out of the stream should be selected in compliance with the other provisions of this agreement. where possible, suitable brush piles may be left to provide wildlife habitat. 12. This agreement does not authorize the construction of any temporary or permanent dam, structure, flow restriction or fill, except as described in the Operator's notification. Any temporary dam, artificial obstruction, or other flow diversion shall be constructed from materials, such as clean gravel or sandbags, which will cause little or no siltation. If necessary, flow diversions shall be done in a manner that shall prevent pollution, minimize siltation and which shall provide flows to downstream reaches- Flows to downstream reaches shall be provided during all times that the natural flow would have supported aquatic life. Said flows shall be of sufficient quality and quantity to support existing aquatic life both above and below the diversion. Normal flows shall be restored to the stream immediately upon completion of work at that location. 13. Precautions to minimize turbidity/siltation shall be taken into account during project planning and implementation. This may require that the work site be isolated and /or the construction of silt catchment basins, so that silt, or other deleterious materials are not allowed to pass to downstream reaches. The placement of any structure or materials in the stream for this purpose, not included in the original project description, shall be coordinated with the Department. coordination shall include the negotiation of additional agreement provisions. 14. Upon Department determination that turbidity/siltation levels resulting from project related activities constitute a threat to aquatic life, activities associated with the turbidity/siltation, shall be halted until effective Department approved control devices are installed, or abatement procedures are initiated. 15. Spoil sites shall not be located within a stream/lake, where spoil can be washed back into a stream/lake, or where it will cover aquatic or riparian vegetation. The Operator may remove all human generated debris, such as lawn and farm cuttings, garbage and trash. 16. Structures and associated materials, including debris, not designed to withstand high seasonal flows shall be removed to areas above the high water mark before such flows occur. 17. No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any stream channel or lake margin where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areas under any flow. 18. The Operator shall comply with all litter and pollution laws. All contractors, subcontractors and employees shall also obey these laws and it shall be the responsibility of the operator to ensure compliance. 19. The clean-up of all pollution spills shall begin immediately. The Operator shall notify the Department immediately of any spills and shall consult with the Department regarding clean-up procedures and requirements. lo@ All debris, bark, slash, sawdust, rubbish, silt, cement or concrete or washings thereof, asphalt, paint or other coating material, oil or other petroleum products, or any other substances resulting from project related activities which could be hazardous to aquatic life or waters of the state, shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering the waters of the state. None of these materials shall be allowed to enter into or be placed within or where they may enter or be washed by rainfall or runoff into waters of the state. When operations are completed, any excess materials or debris shall be removed from the work area. No rubbish shall be deposited within 150 feet of the high water mark of any stream or lake. 21. All provisions of this agreement remain in force throughout the term of the agreement. Any provisions of the agreement mav be amended or the agreement mav he terminated at any time provided such amendment and/or termination is agreed to in writing by both parties. Mutually approved amendments become part of the original agreement and are subject to all previously negotiated provisions. Page 4 -4 (5-366-96) 2If the Operator or any of the individuals mentioned above, -violate any of theterms or conditions of this agreement, all work shall terminate immediately andshall not proceed until the Department has taken all of its legal actions. 23.The Department reserves the right to enter the project site at any time to ensure compliance with terms/conditions of this agreement. 24. The Operator shall provide a copy of this agreement to all contractors, subcontractors, and the Operator's project supervisors. Copies of the agreement shall be readily available at work sites at all times during periods of active work and must be presented to any Department personnel, or personnel from another agency upon demand. 25. The Operator shall notify the Department, in writing, at least five (5) days prior to initiation of construction (project) activities, and at least five (5) days prior to completion of construction (project) activities. Notification shall be sent to the Department at 330 Golden Shore, Suite 50, Long Beach, CA 90802, Attn: Environmental services. 26. The Department reserves the right to suspend and/or revoke this agreement if the Department determines that the circumstances warrant. The circumstances that could require a reevaluation include, but are not limited to, the following: a.Failure to comply with the terms/conditions of this agreement. b.The information provided by the operator in support of the Notification/Agreement is determined by the Department to be incomplete, or inaccurate. C.When new information becomes available to the Department representatives) that was not known when preparing the original terms/conditions of this agreement. d.The project as described in the tiotification/Agreement has changed, or conditions affecting fish and wildlife resources change. CONCURRENCE: City of Temecula California Department of Fish and Game Joseph Kicak Dee Sudduth 14-1 1/@ (s gnature) (d (signature) (date) @irector of Public works Environmental Specialist III (title) (title) XTA'M OF TN@ CM A mm liEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME P. 0. Box 317 Jamul, CA 9193S November 2s, i996 Mr. Joseph Kincak, Director Public Works Dept. City of Temecula Dear Mr. Kiscak:' The Department has previously expressed and continues to express concerns that the Categorical Exiamption claimed by your lead agency for the described work within murrista Creek is not applicable to this project'. Based on the Depart @ t's limited review of the Categorical Exemptions to CBQA it in our belief that the Statement of Reasons .supporting the Finding in not appropriate. This is the last remining natural portion of ieta Creek and has not been designed by Riverside County Flood Control District for a specific capacity as development occurred. Secondly it in the first time the entire channel has been cleared so this would not be considered a routine maintenance. since you continue to refer to this as a flood control channel please define to the Department the specific design capacity of this portion of Murrieta Crook as intended by Riv*roide County Flood Control District after clearing, as compared to the present capacity of the c el under existing natural conditions. The Department feeli3 that the work described in your arlication will essentially result in substantial loss of habitat for fsh, wildlife and planter including wetland and riparian species for which the Department has a policy of "no net loss". This project, in addition to the maintenance projects currently being conducted upstream, represents a significant cumulative impact and may have significant impacts on downstream resources through increased flow and velocity, The Depart t an a Trustee agency therefore requests further clarification as to why an SIR, or at a minimum a Mitigated Negative Declaration, has not been deemed appropriate for this project by the lead agency. Sincerely, Dee Sudduth Environmental Specialist Region 5 (619) 468-9231 RECI=IVPD DEC 0 2 199 6 CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING I)EPARTMENI DEPARTI\4ENTAL REPORTS APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY R OF FINANCE CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO:City Manager/City Co4ncil FROM:Debbie Ubnoske@lanning Manager DATE:December 1 7, 1996 SUBJECT:Monthly Report RECOMMENDATION:Receive and File Discussion:The following is a summary of the Community Development Department's Planning Division caseload and project activity for the month of November 1996: Caseload Activit)t: The Department received 13 applications for administrative cases and 5 applications for public hearing cases for the month of November. The following are the public hearing cases: Conditional Use Permit 1 Minor Conditional Use Permit 2 Development Agreement 1 Development Plan (subject to CEQA) 1 Total 5 OnaoinaProiects: Old Town Streetscape Improvement Proiect: The development of the Sixth Street Parking Lot is under construction. Staff is preparing to send out a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for development of the construction plans for the Streetscape and storm drain improvements in mid December. Murdy Ranch Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report: Staff is reviewing the draft Specific Plan and EIR. Staff will review and determine if the screen check draft EIR can be circulated and Specific Plan can be set for Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting. R:\MONTHLY.RPT\1996\DEC.WPD 12/10/96 klb Rorioauah Ranch Specific Plan: The Planning Commission held a public workshop on September 11, 1995 and directed the applicant to reduce the density and the total number of units as well as to be more sensitive to the surrounding land use by increasing the buffer area and providing a transition of lot sizes. No future hearing date has been established. Temecula Shuttle: Temecula Shuttle will begin the construction of their facility after a building pad is provided by the City. The anticipated ground breaking is set for January 1, 1 997. Sian Ordinance: After the Planning Commission hearing, staff started a series of meetings with the comment group which was assembled at the Planning Commission. This group has recommended a number of changes to the proposed ordinance which will be presented to the Planning Commission in January 1 997. N-ew Proiects Trend: The Department is currently processing or in preliminary discussions with eight to ten different applicants for new industrial and warehouse facilities within the city. New applications include a 300 unit apartment complex, Golden Corral Restaurant and Peony Restaurant. Desian Guidelines: The Planning Commission will conclude their review at the December 16th Planning Commission meeting. When completed, this will be forwarded to the City Council. R:\MONTHLY.RPT\1996\DEC.WPD 12/10196 klb 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 REVENUE STATUS REPORT R:\MONTHLY.RPT\1996\DEC.WPD 12110/96 lclb 3 REVPRIN2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 1 12/05/96 13:26:19 REVENUE STATUS REPORT NOVEMBER 1996 001 GENERAL FUND 161 PLANNING ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION ADJUSTED NOVEMBER 1996-97 BALANCE % COL ESTIMATE REVENUE REVENUE 4101 AMENDED FINAL MAP 4102 APPEALS 4103 CERT. OF LAND DIV. COMPLIANCE 4104EXTENSION OF TIME 4105SINGLE FAMILY TRACTS 4106MULTI-FAMILY TRACTS 4107PARCEL MAPS 4108LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 4109MINOR CHANGE 4110PARCEL MERGER (2-4 LOTS) 4111RECORDABLE SUBDIVISION MAPS 4112REVERSION TO ACREAGE (5+LOTS) 4113SPECIAL SERVICE LETTER 4114SECOND UNIT PERMITS 4115CHANGE OF ZONE 4116CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 4117CONSISTENCY CHECKS 4118GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4119PLOT PLAN 4120PUBLIC USE PERMIT 4121REVISED PERMIT 4122SETBACK ADJUSTMENT 4123SPECIFIC PLAN 4124SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE 4125TEMORARY OUTDOOR EVENT 4126TEMPORARY USE PERMIT 4127VARIANCE 4128ZONING INFORMATION LETTER 4129CEQA (INITIAL STUDIES) 4130CEQA ENVIROMENT IMPACT REPORT 4131DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 4132GEOLOGY CEQA 4133GEOLOGY ORD. 547 APZ 4134LAFCO 4135PARCEL MAP/WAIVER 4136MERGER 4137AMENDED FINAL TRACT/PAR. MAP 4138CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION 4139CONDO TRACT MAP 4140REVERSION TO ACREAGE 4141LOT REVISION AFTER CHECK 4142LOT LINE ADJUST. PLAN CHECK 4143CERT. OF CORRECT. PLAN CHECK 4144CERT. OF COMPLIANCE PLAN CHECK 4145COND. CERT. OF COMPL. PLN. CK. 4146CERT. OF PAR. MERGER PLAN CK .00 .00 .00 .00 702.00 .00 .30 701.70 0.0 3,348.00 .00 .00 3,348.00 0.0 6,750.00 268.00- 84.00 6,666.00 1.2 9,396.00 .00 12,970.00 3,574.00- 138.0 6,590.00 .00 .00 6,590.00 0.0 7,173.00 .00 5,528.20 1,644.80 77.1 2,300.00 460.00 1,840.00 460.00 80.0 470.00 .00 459.00 11.00 97.7 1,000.00 .00 .00 1,000.00 0.0 .00 .00 .00 .00 392.00 .00 .00 392.00 0.0 .00 .00 .00 .00 1,483.00 .00 .00 1,483.00 0.0 10,984.00 .00 .00 10,984.00 0.0 15,108.00 4,841.00 15,188.00 80.00- 100.5 5,735.00 .00 .00 5,735.00 0.0 8,256.00 .00 .00 8,256.00 0.0 19,075.00 2,011.00 43,053.85 23,978.85- 225.7 .00 .00 295.00- 295.00 *** 11,261.00 .00 .00 11,261.00 0.0 528.00 .00 .00 528.00 0.0 9,254.00 .00 .00 9,254.00 0.0 880.00 370.00 3,885.00 3,005.00- 441.5 .00 352.00 2,056.00 2,056.00- **- 2,640.00 .00 .00 2,640.00 0.0 2,952.00 .00 .00 2,952.00 0.0 .00 .00 .00 .00 15,904.00 1,150.90 10,677.40 5,226.60 67.1 6,202.00 .00 .00 6,202.00 0.0 16,000.00 4,000.00- 4,000.00- 20,000.00 25.0- .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 1,000.00 1,000.00- .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 REVPRIN2 CITY OF TEMECULA PAGE 2 12/05/96 13:26:19 REVENUE STATUS REPORT NOVEMBER 1996 001 GENERAL FUND 161 PLANNING ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION ADJUSTED NOVEMBER 1996-97 BALANCE % COL ESTIMATE REVENUE REVENUE 4147 VACATIONS PLAN CK .00 .00 .00 .00 4148 DOCUMENT PROCESSING .00 .00 .00 .00 4149 CONDEMNATION PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00 4150 REVERSION TO ACRE. PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00 4151 PARCEL MAP PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00 4152 TRACT MAP PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00 4153 AMENDED MAP PLAN CHECK .00 .00 .00 .00 4154 4TH & SUBS. SUBMITTALS .00 .00 .00 .00 4155 FEMA STUDY REVIEW .00 .00 .00 .00 4156 LOMA REVIEW .00 .00 .00 .00 4157 DRAINAGE STUDY REVIEW .00 .00 .00 .00 4169 IMPROVE INSPECTION ON-SITE .00 .00 .00 .00 4170 K-RAT STUDY FEES 1,480.00 .00 .00 1,480.00 0.0 4175 FAST TRACK PLANNING .00 .00 .00 .00 4180 FORMA FAST TRACK .00 .00 .00 .00 4200 IN HOUSE PLAN CHECKS .00 760.00 5,030.00 5,030.00-... 4206 ANNEXATION FEES 710.00 .00 .00 710.00 0.0 4226 TEMPORARY USE PERMIT .00 .00 .00 .00 4260 ACCESSORY WIND ENERGY .00 .00 .00 .00 4261 LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE .00 .00 .00 .00 4262 HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY .00 .00 .00 .00 4369 LAND DIV UNIT MAP 374.00 .00 187.00 187.00 50.0 4370 LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK 15,296.00 4,537.00 23,777.00 8,481.00- 155.4 REVENUE TO DATE 182,243.00 10,213.90 121,440.75 60,802.25 66.6 GENERAL FUND 182,243.00 10,213.90 121,440.75 60,802.25 66.6 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE DIRECTOR CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Council/City Manager FROM: Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: December 17, 1996 SUBJECT:Public Works Monthly Activity Report RECOMMENDATION: Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Department of Public Works' Monthly Activity Reports for November, 1996. r:\agdrpt\moactrpt/ajp CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Monthly Activity Report DECEMBER, 1996 Submitted by: Joseph Kicak Prepared by: Don Spagnolo on Date:December 9, 1996 1. WORK UNDER CONSTRUCTION: 1. 1-15/Winchester Road Interchange Modifications,-, The contractor has paved the new northbound exit ramp and auxiliary lane which is open to traffic. Construction of the framework for the new Winchester Road Bridge is completed. Placement of steel reinforcement for Winchester Road Bridge will continue until complete. The contractor is currently grading and installing storm drain systems. 2. Fire Station #84: Interior walls have been painted and the hanging of the doors is nearly complete. The large roll- up doors will be installed by the 18th of December, followed shortly by the placement of the apparatus room concrete slab. Exterior stucco for the building will be applied the fourth week of December. The on-site parldng lot slab will be placed by December 13. Pauba Road sidewalks will be installed the 3rd week of December followed by the asphalt overlaying and striping of Pauba Road. 3. Walcott Corridor: The contractor has completed most of the mass grading and the water main installation in Calle Girasol and Calle Chapos. The contractor will continue to work on the storm drain systems. The utility companies are in the process of installing the first phase of the dry utilities and expect to be completed by mid-January. The contractor expects to complete the entire project in June, 1997. 4. Sam Hicks Montiment Park bnprovement PrQject: The majority of the improvements have been completed and therefore the 90-day maintenance period was s@ November 13. Installation of the lighting system and bare root roses will not occur until late December due to the long lead time for delivery of these items. The maintenance period will end February 17, 1997. 5. Trafric Signal at Route 79S and Margarita Road/Redhawk Parkway: The traffic signal has been installed and is currently operating on flashing red, since the existing striping does not align with the signal heads. Upon completion of the assessment district's road work and re-striping of the intersection, the traffic signal will be functioning as intended. 6. Interim Trafric Signal at Route 79S and Pala Road: The addition of left-tum phasing and relocation of poles has been completed and this signal is currently fully operational. 7. Interim Trafric Signal at Route 79S and La Paz Street: Installation of the traffic signal has been completed and the signal is fully operational. City and Caltrans staff will monitor the signal and modify the signal timing as necessary. ,:\moactrpt\cip\88\dec.mar Monthly Activity Report December 12, 1996 Page 2 8. North/South Restroom Fac@ The contractor has completed the entire project and the project acceptance will be on the January 14, 1997 City Council meeting. 9. Sports Park Creek Restoration: The improvements were completed by the contractor on September 25 and the project is presently in the 90-day maintenance period. The maintenance period is scheduled for completion January 2, 1997. The project consisted of the construction of gabion channel bank protection, landscaping, irrigation, subdrain lines, and walkway paving along the channel south of the Sports Park. 10, Emeri!ency Generator: The 25OKW generator and 1,000 gallon fuel tank were delivered and installed inside the constructed block wall enclosure on November 25. The contractor has also completed the installation of surface drainage and landscape improvements. Installation of the electric-powered winches for the gym backboards occurred the first week of December. A final inspection will be scheduled the third week of December with the generator operational by the end of the month. The project includes installing an emergency generator at the Community Recreation Center to provide power for emergency operations. 11, City-Wide Trafric Control Device Inventory AR data has been collected and been inputted into the computer. The consultant demonstrated the system on December 5 and is currently making the @ adjustments to the system. The complete system will be in operation by the end of December. 12, Trafric Signal at Rancho Califomia and Cosmic Drive: All the signal equipment has been installed. S.C.E. is scheduled to install the meters on December 9 and the signal should be in operation on December 12. 13, City Maintenance Facility: Masonry work on the building and perimeter walls is nearly complete. Framing of the interior rooms and building roofing system is presently underway. Placement of the parking lot slab is anticipated in mid-December. Installation of the rough plumbing and electrical is scheduled the third week of December followed by the installation of the windows. This project is scheduled for completion in mid-February. 14, City Wide Intel]iLyent Traffic Mana!Lyement System (1@): Plans and specifications for Phase II of this project have been completed and this project will be advertised for bid in January, 1997. Upon completion of Phase II, all traffic signals on the city's major arterials can be monitored and signal timing coordinated from the city hall. r:\moactrpt\cip\96\dec.mar Monthly Activity Report December 12, 1996 Page 3 ]El. B]II) 1. Acoustic Panels at the CRC G=: On November 13 an informal construction bid opening was held. All bids were opened and all costs came in over the allowable amount for the informal bidding process. Staff will recommend a formal solicitation of bids at the January 14, 1997 City Council meeting. This project will install acoustical panels on the walls and on the ceiling in the basketball gym at the Community Recreation Center. Also, additional protection pads will be placed at both ends of the basketball court to provide a cushion for the ball players. HI. WORK IN DESIGN: 1. 1-15/Rancho California Road Interchange Modifications* Roadway plans will be resubmitted to Caltrans (District 8) on Friday, December 9 for final approval. The structural plans have already been approved and signed by Caltrans Division of Structures. The Construction Cooperative Agreement has been approved by the City Council. 2. 1-15/Overland Drive Overcrossing Improvementse The structural plans were approved and signed by Caltrans Division of Structures. Roadway plan comments were received by the consultant on September 10 and the roadway plans will be resubmitted to Caltrans (District 8) on Friday, November 22 for final approval. The Construction Cooperative Agreement has been approved by the City Council. 3. Margarita Community Park* The architect completed the revisions for the first plan check November 20 and plan review is presently underway by the Public Works Department and the Community Service District. Bidding the project is anticipated to occur in February, 1997. The project includes picnic areas, a tot play area, restroom facilities, and open turf areas. The development of two ball fields on school district property, two lighted tennis courts, and one lighted hockey facility will be as add- alternates. 4. Trafric Signal at SR-79S and Redford C@ Plans and specifications have be revised per Caltrans requirements and have been resubmitted to Calwms for approval. This project will be advertised for bids when the encroachment permit is issued. 5.Traffic Signal at Margarita Road & Solana Way The prehmmary design has been competed and staff will the plans this month. This traffic signal will be constructed using the existing equipment that are stored in the city yard. r:\Fnoactrptkcip\96\dac.mar Monthly Activity Report December 12, 1996 Page 4 6. FY95-96 Pavement Management Systm The consultant has returned the second plan check back to the City for review which will be completed by the week of December 9. This project includes removing and reconstructing the a.c. pavement and providing only an overlay in some areas on Rancho Vista Road, Solana Way, and La Serena Way. 7. FY96-97 Pavement Management Syst= Proposals have been received from the prospective consultants. Reviewing of the proposals will be completed by the end of December. A consultant agreement to provide the design services will be presented to the City Council at the next earliest meeting. 8. Pavement manaffmnt System @Date Staff has received four pavement management consultant proposals and are in the process of reviewing them to determined the best qualified consultant to perform this work. r:Nmoactrpt\cipN96\dec.mar LAND DEVELOPMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT SPECIAL PROJECTS NOVEMBER 1996 Submitted by: Joseph Kicak Prepared by: Ronald J. Pa rks Date: December 9, 199 6 1. PW95-07 - Phase I Western Bypass Corrodorm The bridge engineers have completed the "unchecked" bridge plans of the Western Bypass Corridor Bridge over Murrieta Creek. The "unchecked" means that these plans are the first submittals and upon completion of the reviews, the final drawings will be prepared. The review process of the bridge plans has not began. The design of the improvements associated with the portion of Western Bypass Corridor from Vincent Moraga Drive to Rancho California Road have also been submitted for preliminary review. We are waiting for a response from Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District on our second plan check submittal of the storm drain plans. 2.PW95-08 - Forst Street Extens*ons Theunchecked bridge plans were submitted to the bridge plan checkers for review. Thedesign of the improvements associated with the First Street Extension is ongoing at similar stage and schedule to the Western Bypass Corridor design. 3. PW95-26 - 6th Street Parking Projects Construction is ongoing. There were unknown underground utilities that had to be removed. Therefore construction of improvements along Front Street is delayed however, the completion date of the project is on schedule. 4.PW96-05 - Pro-ject Study Report (PSR) And Pro-oect Rel2ort (PR) For Ultemate Interchange Improvements at Interstate 15/State Route 79 South (1-1 5/SR7@- The preparation of the PSR, Project Study Report, will be completed next month based on the alternatives agreed upon by Caltrans and the impacted property owners. The PSR will then be presented to Caltrans for review. R.\MOACTRP'nDEV\96\NOVEMBER.WPD to (D (D z LLI EL CD LLi EL Lu Lu t)0 Z LLI00 le ce to 0 co U) 4T- C4 0 0 le z 6 ci C4 E z LU CD C4 0 co 0 LU -i co 0 W) .0 co co CDC4 c:r C4 to co CD r: LU C.) CL (i) 4.t LU F- M (L 0 < 6 (3 0: w r_ 0 w CD 6 9 -t q z -e cn 0 0 co tu V- cl in C4 -i le %- co >. U. cn Co, W) t- 0 cr 0La CD cn V- co w w U- 0 co ai wi ii 0 M r4 P. m le C4 w F- ri (k co CD co C* CA 0 C4 (D > CD CD > a C4 t- co 0 Ci a! IR Ci LO 0 co CD t- w ui lu z EL- 0 Lg) co &a a > 0 ui lx 0 CD (4 ri Ci > 0 0: CD 0 CD C4 v- C* W) o (.) IL CD C4 C4 W) UJ 0. M r4 w z F- z 0 LU Z to z 0 Cl) 0 le C-4 = Lu F- 0 0 LL 5 (i U) CO I- LU Cl) C,4 V- to U) 0 W CL Cl) ce co 00 C,4 W) z LU LU 0 Cl) W) ci CD co 93 > z W) w co Cl) Cl) ix o 0 Cl) 'k ri 0 t- C,4 C,4 1- U) 0 a) co co EL to co Uj IL W) U) ui V) Cl) LU LL cm an co C4 T- C.) z qt -e 0 0 40 CD 0 0 CD UJ 0 In Om 0 co C4 F- Z U) Cl) C4 a) 0 C4 W 0 W) > PZ I& C.) ea cn C,4 Cl) > L) to CO C* a. z LL z 0 0 Z CN z C4 Li Li Li Li LU z LU L) IL LLI ui C.) 0 el) 0 0 0 0 w W CL LLI z 2 0 m 0. 0 w 0 0 IL ui C3 z = 9 w i- > 0 0 z z 0 i- 4 0 F- LU > LLI w U) U) o x CL > z EL ce LU IL > 4 'K LLI w iL LU 4) z W z z U. 4) -i 0) w LLJ E (3 0.1 a Lu< LL a- Z (L a v- C4 cn le MEMORANDUM TO:Joseph Kicak, Director of Public Works/City Engineer FROM:Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent DATE:December 2, 1996 SUBJECT: Monthly Activity Report - November, 1996 The following activities were performed by Public Works Department, Street Maintenance Division in- house personnel for the month of November, 1996: 1. SIGNS A. Total signs replaced 35 B. Total signs installed 5 C. Total signs repaired 2 TREES A. Total trees trimmed for sight distance and street sweeping concerns 113 Ill. POTHOLES A. Total square feet of potholes repaired 127 IV.CATCH BASINS A. Total catch basins cleaned 113 V.RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT A. Total square footage for right-of-way abatement 31,275 VI.GRAFFITI REMOVAL A. Total locations 7 B. Total S.F. 783 VII.STENCILING A.2 new and repainted legends B. 10 L.F. of red curb new and repainted 1 R:\ROADS@CTRPT\96\1 L.NOV rh MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT - November, 1996 Also, City Maintenance staff responded to 24 service order requests ranging from weed abatement, tree trimming, sign repair, A.C. failures, litter removal, and catch basin cleanings. This is compared to 27 service order requests for the month of October, 1996. The Maintenance Crew has also put in 92 hours of overtime which includes standby time, special events and response to street emergencies. I.P.S. STRIPING AND STENCILING COMPANY has completed the following 0L.F. of new and repainted striping 0 L.F. of sand blasting The total cost for I.P.S. striping services was $0.00 compared to $0.00 for October, 1996. PESTMASTER SERVICES has completed the following 0 - 0 - S.F. of right-of-way weed control, total cost $0.00 compared to $0.00 for October, 1996. The total cost for Street Maintenance performed by Contractors for the month of November, 1996 was $34,020.60 compared to $204,859.64.00 for the month of October, 1996. Account No. 5402 $11,968.75 Account No. 5401 20,515.85 Account No. 999-5402 1,536.00 cc: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects 2 R:\ROADS\.ACTRPT\96\1 L.NOV rh STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACTORS The following contractors have performed the following projects for the month of November, 1996. DATE STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDGE 12ESCRIPTION OF WORK TOTAL COSI ACCOUNT . .. ..... .. . RK]@@AYE.N@UE:@@BUILDERS:. .. ........ . ........... ..... .. .. . 11/18/96 Avenida Del Reposo Installed 492 LF of 6" A.C. Berm 5402 Total A.C. - 18 tons 18 Tons Total L.F. 492 TOTAL COST $3,300.00 .. .. ..... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .]FtAINBOW@@@CANYON@@R . .. .. ..... 11/13/96 From Temecula Creek Inn to the City Repair Potholes Limits 5402 Total A.C. 13 Tons Total S.F. 1,020 TOTAL COST $4,500.00 .......... 11/22/96 Rancho California Road in Front of Emergency Street Debris Removal Due to through AMSCAN Heavy Rains on 1 1 /21/96 11/25/96 Pauba and Margarita Road 5402 Margarita and Solana Way Old Town, Clean Intersections Cabrillo and John Warner Old Town "C" Street and Santiago Cabrillo and East Vallejo Cabrillo and Jedediah Smith Jedediah Smith & Calle Velardo De Portola, Various Locations TOTAL COST $4,168.75] TOTAL AMOUNT ACCT $11,968.7511 #5402 3 R:\ROADS\ACTRPT\98\1 L.NOV rh DATE ST REETICHANNEL/BRIDGE DESCRIPTIO ACCOUNT . .. .. .. ..... ..... ..... .. .. @@@@@]@@]@]@]@]MONTEL:EONE@@@@EXCA 11/22/96 Channel at Margarita Road Emergency Channel Cleaning Due to Heavy through Rains of 11/21/96 11/27/96 John Warner and Santiago 5401 Santiago and "C" Street 'C" Street and Channel Jedediah and Margarita Channel Pauba Road Desilting Pond Channel at Via Lobo Channel at De Portola and Pio Pico TOTAL COST $20,515.85 TOTAL AMOUNT ACCT $20,515. #5401 DATE STREET/CHANNEL/BRIDr2E- DESCRIPTION OF WM TOTAL COST ACCOUNT ON ELEONE@@@EXCAVATING 11/22/96 Santiago Road Emergency Dirt Road Grading 999-5402 John Warner Road Lolita Road Paulita Road Ormsby Road Liefer Road Greenwood Road Gatlin Road Pala Vista Road I TOTAL COST $i,536.001 TOTAL AMOUNT ACCT $1,536.00 999-5401 . ........ .. . . . .. .............. . 4 R:\ROADS\ACTRPT\96kl I.NOV rh (O C,4 r- tf) 0) 0) 10 CD 0 co Ul) 0 CD a w r- m r- r_ w m r- w r_ 0) N 00 v 0 v- 0 0 r- W M @ W) M 0 v- N od ci C4 6 6 W) C) r- cl 4 (N Cl) ce) 0) CD to (6 (6 co z ce) 0 C) co lw csi 0 PZ CV) C6 LL co 6% Le) N 40 co E ID UJ C/) 0 (D cu co (L m C) CD 0 a 10 0 40 CD 0 CD a 0 (N N N C) F- CD a) LO V ce) CD C3) 00 CN C,4 lw CD Ul) CD ci CD co 40 r_ 44 C4 a) C) CD CD to CD 0 CD a CD a CD CD CD c:o m CD CD CD CD cn C,4 w N m w I- 0 Q N IR IR W LU CD CD CR F- ce) (14 LU LQ (q IL 0 ootnoo 0 C5 a a C> CD CD a CD N(OMOWNW-W@ co CD C) 0 CD a cq as C4 w; Lq C-4 cn CD cn 60 (D C%i 0 ta 61 LU LU >- co co CD CD 0 C) 40 CD CD CD CD CD CD a CD LO M m v m r- m m m C> r- C) CD CD CD W W W Q M W u) cl) to Ln C) Z cl) C,4 LLI I- z w U- E U- r_r w - L ua, 0 z 4) 4) 4) .0 (D U- 4) Co _j le r- z a) co = Co co w >1 U) w 0 0 0 41 -0 CL (a co c E rrc tm E C) 72 E a-CO E E CD CL z -o -9 i- C/3 o ',w-o E C) , a,) @ co 0 co w 0 0 < tm L) F- M F- (D to 0 w cn U) Co w m 4) CL 0. co 0 " 0) -0 co -0 -0 0 co 0 4) 'co C/) O- i- F- F- F- IL F- F- C/) CD LC) 0 a Lf) 0 LC) C,4 0 R q R (p R @ Ci Ci < Z < r_ co CD 4D tc) 40 Cl) 40 0) co Cl) C,i 0 0 t* ui v LO 00 U) 0) 0) Cl) LC) 0) ri: u % >- Clt IQ CR -i -i r- 0) co r- (14 C) C,4 C4 (0 r- (3) r- - f- cn co .0 40 64 fA 44 44 G4 m (L w 0 co < 0 Of tm CD 0 CD CD C4 CD to CD C4 co w CD CD 0 C4 CD Cl) 40 0) 0 0) CD CD P- C,4 o UJ r- to r- 0 0) LD r- 44 (D CY) C4 &4 co co co m E 'a m u >. to 0) Cl) Cl) lw CD C4 co Ln -0 'a -i -i L6 Cs @ -7 V7 @ -7 -7 U-i = b (D lr < C4 - 40 44 65 G4 46 64 - o to to Cl) E 0 U. CL r.o 5 LU LL. M to w 0 u w ui Lu I- co Of LLI -i n LLI 0 LLI . ............... .......... ..... ..... ........... ..... A ........ ......... ..... Of . . . . . . . . . ........... :." , .. - . . . ............. 0 w . .... ........ . ......... . ....... w z ..... ... ..... ..................... ................ .. . .......... ..... LLI .... ..... IL > Z LL v 0 C) (D o u 20) it at R CR Lq (D CD co CD (1) co U') co ID C,4 CD Cl) < 0 w to to LC) Lf) co Cl) C,4 to - co z LL. m - U') I- Lr) co 0 0 (14 LU LL. 0 csi cli cq csi 0 i- 0 u CN Z u 0 0 cn EL LU 0) Cl) 40 0 Cl) CD C,4 CD (14 r- 0) (14 Iq cn Ln lw cn C4 co 0 CID Cl) w m co co -i 0 0 CL 0 0 0 L) ta c L16 LU co w 8 z en U- U. LL. < z ui IL LU -i LL) U) Z m LU M (D 0 L) LU Lu w LU m 0 s I- cr U) cr 11 a 0 LU CO) i LLi U. w all U- -i o CC Ck: z z LU LU w z n. 7 u w ui LLI LLI z 0 z ;R 5 w C,4 U -i IL CL cc :2 ui to LU LLI 0 0 w LU U) LU (D co LU x U) 19 z t= < U U. m x o U) U. z 0 LLI CL z z F- LU LL 0 IC C4@ @oo 0 0 w r- CN m m to 0 kc C4 %o x m tn ID C\ r- kn @ M - @ r- W) C4 - r- r- C,4 C,4 C4 rA o m LLI C:> CL LLI cn LL. 00 woo mom C> - LLI LL. c:l C,4 C,4 v ON 00 a\ kn 00 00 t- cn C4 W) cn C,4 0 0 0 U U DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION NOVEMBER, 1996 GRAFFITI REMOVAL DATE.@ @.:.LOCATION@@ @WORK COMPLETED 11-01-96 N. General Kearney Removed 20 S.F. of Graffiti 11-01-96 Temecula Community Center (Pujol) Removed 10 S.F. of Grattiti 11-01-96 Agena @ M.W.D. Easement Removed 50 S.F. of Grattiti 11-04-96 Boys and Girls Club Removed 6 S. F. of Graffiti 11-04-96 30030 Villa Alturas Removed 2 S.F. of Graffiti 11-05-96 La Primavera Foot Bridge Removed 500 S. F. of Graffiti 11-05-96 Santa Gertrudes Creek @ 1-15 Removed 215 S. F. of Graffiti TOTAL 7 LOCATIONS TOTAL S.F. 783 REMOVED PW3kROADS\\VKCMPLTD\96\1 I.GRAF 12M% CITY OF TEMECULA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION NOVEMBER, 1996 REPAINTING LEGENDS iiA E:: @ILO TION @WORK@.COM ED. 11-18-96 Front Street @ First Street repainted 2 Legends 11-18-96 Mira Loma Drive Dainted 1 O' of Red Curb TOTAL LEGENDS IEPAINTED 2 ROTAL L.F. RED --URB fiEPAINTED 10 PIWO3@ROAOSkWKCMPLTD%96\1 L.REPAINT LEGENDS/120296 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION NOVEMBER, 1996 SIGNS WORK Coi D ATE@@ 11-12--96 Corte Almonte N/0 Calle Veronica Installed W-53 11-12-96 Corte Almonte @ Santiago Replaced R-1 "Damaged" 11-12-96 First Street @ end of Cul-de-sac Replaced 2 Carsonites 3 Type "N" W-31 11-15-96 Rancho Caiifornia Road E/O Margarita Replaced 1 Delineator 11-18-96 Rancho Vista W/O Margarita Installed R-81 11-18-96 "C" Street @ Santiago Road Installed 3 Type "N" & W-31 11-21-96 28146 Front Street Replaced W-41 "Faded" 11-22-96 La Colina @ Calle Madero Installed W-53 11-25-96 Ynez Road S/0 K-Mart Replaced R-7 & R-7A "T.C." 11-27-96 Area's 1 & 2 Replaced 22 R-260 & 2 W-1 7 (See Daily's for Locations) TOTAL SIGNS REPLACED 35 TOTAL SIGNS INSTALLED 5 P%VO3kROADS\WKCMPLTD\96\1 I.SGN 120296 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION NOVEMBER, 1996 R.O.W. TREE TRIMMING @L@O ION. COMP 11-06-96 41848, 41755 Asteroid Trimmed 3 Trees 11-12-96 Rancho Vista @ Meadows Parkway Trimmed 1 Tree 11-12-96 Main Street @ Pujol Trimmed 1 Tree 11-13-96 Ynez Road @ Preece Trimmed 15 Trees 11-14-96 "C" Street @ Santiago Trimmed 30 Trees 11-18-96 'C" Street @ Santiago Trimmed 40 Trees 11-19-96 Front Street @ Del Rio Trimmed 3 Trees 11-20-96 Front Street N/0 Del Rio Trimmed 4 Trees 11-21-96 Front Street N/0 Del Rio Trimmed 15 Trees 11-27-96 45587 Classic Way Trimmed 1 Tree TOTAL TREES TRIMMED 113 F'WO3\ROADS\WKCMPLT'D\96\- I iTrR 12m% DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION NOVEMBER, 1996 RIGHT-OF-WAY WEED ABATEMENT :c @::],:WORK: OM ETED LOCATION 11-04-96 Area #4 Abated 17,500 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds 11-05-96 Area #4 Abated 450 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds 11-06-96 Area #4 Abated 600 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds 11-07-96 Area #4 Abated 2,105 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds 11-08-96 Margarita @ Moraga Road Abated 2,900 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds 11-12-96 First Street Abated 3,000 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds (End of Cul-de-sac) 11-13-96 Sixth Street @ Felix Valdez Abated 500 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds 11-13-96 Santiago @ Front Street Abated 1,200 S.F. R.O.W. Weeds 11-13-ar, Vallejo @ Flores Drive Abated 2,750 S. F. R.O.W. Weeds 11-18-96 "C" Street @ Santiago Abated 270 S. F. R.O.W. Weeds TOTAL S.F. 31,275 R.O.W. WEED ABATEMENT PW3\ROAI)S\%WCMPLTF)\%NlIROWEED l@ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DIVISION NOVEMBER, 1996 CATCH BASIN MAINTENANCE ..WORK COMPLETED@.", DATE @,@@:@@@@.@@LOCATION 11-06-96 Area #1 Cleaned 4 Catch Basins 11-07-96 Area #1 Cleaned 6 Catch Basins 11-12-96 Area #1 Cleaned 1 Catch Basin 11-13-96 Ar . ea #1 Cleaned 16 Catch Basinsi 11-15-96 City Wide Cleaned 8 Catch Basins 11-21-96 City Wide "Rain" Cleaned 48 Catch Basins 11-22-96 City Wide "Rain" Cleaned 30 Catch Basins TOTAL CATCH BASINS CLEANED 113 pwO3\road\wkempltd\96\11.CB 120296