Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout022613 CC AgendaIn compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (951) 694-6444. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II] AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET FEBRUARY 26, 2013 — 7:00 PM At approximately 9:45 P.M., the City Council will determine which of the remaining agenda items can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00 P.M. and may continue all other items on which additional time is required until a future meeting. All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 P.M. 5:30 P.M. — The City Council will convene in Closed Session in the Canyons Conference Room on the third floor of the Temecula City Hall concerning the following matters: 1) The City Council will meet in closed session with its designated representatives to discuss labor negotiations pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. The City's designated representatives are: Interim City Manager Aaron Adams; Special Labor Relations Counsel Jeff Freedman; City Attorney Peter Thorson, Director of Public Works Greg Butler, and Sr. Human Resources Analyst Isaac Garibay. The employee organization is the California Teamsters Public, Professional and Medical Employees Union Local 911. 2) The City Council will meet in closed session with the City Attorney pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2) and (4) with respect to a matter of potential litigation and will discuss whether to initiate litigation and intervene in the bankruptcy action involving the YMCA of Riverside City and County, Bankruptcy Petition No. 6:12-bk-38087-MH, Central District of California (Riverside). A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City Attorney, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk. Next in Order: Ordinance: 13-03 Resolution: 13-14 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mike Naggar Prelude Music: Jordan Craite Invocation: Pastor Charles Patmon of Great Oaks Apostolic Church Flag Salute: Council Member Washington 1 ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Edwards, Roberts, Washington, Naggar PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Presentation by CR&R of the 2012 "Recycler of the Year" Certificates of Achievement to Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Boys Tennis Team PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the City Council on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. If the speaker chooses to address the City Council on an item listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a Request to Speak form must be filled out and filed with the City Clerk prior to the City Council addressing Public Comments and the Consent Calendar. Once the speaker is called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Council Business items on the agenda, a Request to Speak form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the City Council addressing that item. Each speaker is limited to five minutes. 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, 10 minutes will be devoted to these reports. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless Members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the action minutes of February 12, 2013. 2 3 List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 4 Property Insurance Renewal RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve the City of Temecula Property Insurance Policy renewal with Travelers Insurance Company and Empire Indemnity Insurance Company for the period of February 26, 2013 through February 26, 2014, in the amount of $380,123. 5 First Amendment to Agreement for Building Plan Review Services for Fiscal Year 2012-13 RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve a First Amendment to Agreement for Building Plan Review Services with Esgil in the amount of $25,000. 6 Roripaugh Ranch Project — Assignment of TUMF Credit Agreement RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the Assignment of and Consent to Assignment of Contracts agreement between Wingsweep Corporation, KB Home Coastal Inc., and the City of Temecula. 7 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for Roripaugh Ranch Street Improvements, Phase I, PW09-02 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Accept the improvements constructed as part of this project as complete; 7.2 Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion, and hold the Performance Bond for a one-year period until September 14, 2013, in lieu of a Maintenance Bond for the project; 7.3 Release the Labor and Materials Bond seven months after recordation of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 3 8 Roripaugh Ranch Street Improvements, Phase II — Funding of City's obligations under Federal and State Law to monitor construction activities in order to protect cultural resources RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Authorize the expenditure of up to $100,000 to compensate the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians for construction monitoring activities as part of the subject project. 9 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Citywide Concrete Repairs for Fiscal Year 2011-12, PW12-07 RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Accept the construction of the Citywide Concrete Repairs for Fiscal Year 2011-12, PW12-07, as complete; 9.2 Direct the City Clerk to file and record the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; 9.3 Release the Labor and Materials Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. 10 Approval of the Plans and Specifications, and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for the Citywide Slurry Seal Project for Fiscal Year 2012-13, PW12-23 RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve the plans and specifications, and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Citywide Slurry Seal Project for Fiscal Year 2012-13, PW12-23. 11 Adoption of Official Map for City Owned Property (located at the northerly end of Diaz Road adjacent to Dendy Parkway) RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING AN OFFICIAL MAP AND SUBDIVIDING A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 ON FILE IN BOOK 6, PAGE 75 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 4 12 Temporary Street Closures for 2013 Springfest Events RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Receive and file the following proposed action by the City Manager: Temporarily close certain streets for the following 2013 Springfest Events: TEMECULA ROD RUN BLUEGRASS FESTIVAL REALITY RALLY TASTE OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES EXPO WESTERN DAYS STREET PAINTING FESTIVAL 13 Substitute Agreements and Bonds for Public Improvements in Tract No. 29661-3 (located southerly of the intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Pourroy Road) RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Accept substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Subdivision Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds as security for improvements and labor and materials for Tract Map 29661-3; 13.2 Accept substitute Subdivision Monument Agreement and Subdivision Monument Bond as security for monumentation for Tract Map 29661-3; 13.3 Authorize the release of the existing Faithful Performance, Labor and Materials, and Monumentation Bonds for Tract Map 29661-3; 13.4 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. 14 Substitute Agreements and Bonds for Public Improvements in Tract No. 29661-4 (located southerly of the intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Pourroy Road) RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Accept substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Subdivision Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds as security for improvements and labor and materials for Tract Map 29661-4; 14.2 Accept substitute Subdivision Monument Agreement and Subdivision Monument Bond as security for monumentation for Tract Map 29661-4; 14.3 Authorize the release of the existing Faithful Performance, Labor and Materials, and Monumentation Bonds for Tract Map 29661-4; 14.4 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. 5 15 Second reading of Ordinance No. 13-02 RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 13-02 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 10.28.010(D) OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREETS ******************** RECESS CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SCHEDULED MEETINGS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT, THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE TEMECULA HOUSING AUTHORITY, AND THE TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY ******************** 6 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. CSD 13-01 Resolution: No. CSD 13-02 CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Comerchero ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington, Comerchero CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 30 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. If the speaker chooses to address the Board of Directors on an item listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a Request to Speak form must be filled out and filed with the City Clerk prior to the Board of Directors addressing Public Comments and the Consent Calendar. Once the speaker is called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or District Business items on the agenda, a Request to Speak form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. Each speaker is limited to five minutes. CSD 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 Temecula Community Services District request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 16 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Approve the action minutes of February 12, 2013. CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT CSD GENERAL MANAGER REPORT CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS CSD ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, March 12, 2013, at 5:30 PM, for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. 7 SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING Next in Order: Ordinance: No. SARDA 13-01 Resolution: No. SARDA 13-02 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mike Naggar ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Edwards, Roberts, Washington, Naggar SARDA PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public may address the Board of Directors on items that appear within the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. If the speaker chooses to address the Board of Directors on an item listed on the Consent Calendar or a matter not listed on the agenda, a Request to Speak form must be filled out and filed with the City Clerk prior to the Board of Directors addressing Public Comments and the Consent Calendar. Once the speaker is called to speak, please come forward and state your name for the record. For all Public Hearing or Agency Business items on the agenda, a Request to Speak form must be filed with the City Clerk prior to the Board of Directors addressing that item. Each speaker is limited to five minutes. SARDA 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 Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 17 Action Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Approve the action minutes of February 12, 2013. 18 Recognized Obligation Payment Schedules for the period of July 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 (ROPS13-14A) RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING A 8 RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2013 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013 PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 34177 AND TAKING CERTAIN ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH SARDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT SARDA BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS SARDA ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, March 12, 2013, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. 9 TEMECULA HOUSING AUTHORITY — no meeting TEMECULA PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY — no meeting 10 RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any of the project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. 19 A General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO -11), a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for a 7.24 acre site, located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road (Planning Application Nos. PA12-0034 and PA12-0033) — Continued from January 22, 2013 RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H); A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -11 (PDO -11); AND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 120 APARTMENT UNITS ON 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (APN 944-060-006) 19.2 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 13 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE PLAN MAP FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H), AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -11 (PDO -11) FOR 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA12-0034) (APN 944-060-006) 11 19.3 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE APARTMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA12-0033) (APN 944-060-006) CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 20 Selection of Alternate to Serve on the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Board RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Appoint a member of the City Council to serve as the alternate to the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency Board; 20.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A REVISED FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION FORM 806 REGARDING THE APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBERS TO COMPENSATED POSITIONS DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS 21 Community Development Department Monthly Report 22 Police Department Monthly Report 23 City Council Travel/Conference Report — January 2013 24 Public Works Department Monthly Reports CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, March 12, 2013, at 5:30 PM, for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. 12 NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC The agenda packet (including staff reports) will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula) after 4:00 PM the Friday before the City Council meeting. At that time, the agenda packet may also be accessed on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public viewing at the respective meeting. Supplemental material received after the posting of the Agenda Any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on the agenda, after the posting of the agenda, will be available for public viewing in the Main Reception area at the Temecula Civic Center (41000 Main Street, Temecula, 8:00 AM — 5:00 PM). In addition, such material will be made available on the City's website — www.cityoftemecula.orq — and will be available for public review at the respective meeting. If you have questions regarding any item on the agenda for this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Department, (951) 694- 6444. 13 PRESENTATIONS The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Hayden Hensley and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Hayden on his accomplishments and efforts with the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We are proud of Hayden' s dedication and talent to the sport of tennis and to his team. We wish him great success in this sport and in his very bright future. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Christian Francisco and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Christian on his accomplishments and efforts with the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We are proud of Christian's dedication and talent to the sport of tennis and to his team. We wish him great success in this sport and in his very bright future. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Patrick Lake and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Patrick on his accomplishments and efforts with the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We are proud of Patrick' s dedication and talent to the sport of tennis and to his team. We wish him great success in this sport and in his very bright future. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Spencer Sherman and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Spencer on his accomplishments and efforts with the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We are proud of Spencer's dedication and talent to the sport of tennis and to his team. We wish him great success in this sport and in his very bright future. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Josh Robbins and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Josh on his accomplishments and efforts with the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We are proud of Josh's dedication and talent to the sport of tennis and to his team. We wish him great success in this sport and in his very bright future. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Eric Kuhlman and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Eric on his accomplishments and efforts with the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We are proud of Eric's dedication and talent to the sport of tennis and to his team. We wish him great success in this sport and in his very bright future. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Kyle Le and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Kyle on his accomplishments and efforts with the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We are proud of Kyle's dedication and talent to the sport of tennis and to his team. We wish him great success in this sport and in his very bright future. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Cody Lusk and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Cody on his accomplishments and efforts with the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We are proud of Cody' s dedication and talent to the sport of tennis and to his team. We wish him great success in this sport and in his very bright future. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Head Coach Hector Arrellano and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Head Coach Hector Arrellano for leading the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We would like to thank Coach Arrellano for his leadership and dedication to these young athletes and appreciate his contributions to their lives and to the City of Temecula. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Assistant Coach Earl Rutz and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Assistant Coach Earl Rutz for leading the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We would like to thank Coach Rutz for his leadership and dedication to these young athletes and appreciate his contributions to their lives and to the City of Temecula. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk The City of Temecula Certificate of Achievement The City Council of the City of Temecula commends the outstanding achievement of Assistant Coach Gary Le and the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Team Tennis Boys Section Championship We join with the citizens of the City of Temecula in congratulating Assistant Coach Gary Le for leading the Linfield ACES USTA Jr. Boys Tennis Team. We also wish to commend him on his efforts to adopt the 411th Engineer Brigade in Bagram Afghanistan, and provide these soldiers with Christmas decorations, stockings, stocking stuffers, and a little piece of home. We would like to thank Coach Le for his leadership and dedication to these young athletes and appreciate his contributions to their lives and to the City of Temecula. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hand and official seal this twenty-sixth day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Susan W. Jones, City Clerk CONSENT CALENDAR Item No. 1 Item No. 2 ACTION MINUTES TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 41000 MAIN STREET FEBRUARY 12, 2013 — 7:00 PM 6:00 P.M. — The City Council convened in Closed Session in the Canyons Conference Room on the third floor of the Temecula City Hall concerning the following matters: 1) The City Council will meet in closed session with its designated representatives to discuss labor negotiations pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6. The City's designated representatives are: Interim City Manager Aaron Adams; Special Labor Relations Counsel Jeff Freedman; City Attorney Peter Thorson, Director of Public Works Greg Butler, and Sr. Human Resources Analyst Isaac Garibay. The employee organization is the California Teamsters Public, Professional and Medical Employees Union Local 911. 2) The City Council will meet in closed session with the City Attorney pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2) and (4) with respect to a matter of potential litigation and will discuss whether to initiate litigation and intervene in the bankruptcy action involving the YMCA of Riverside City and County, Bankruptcy Petition No. 6:12-bk-38087-MH, Central District of California (Riverside). A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the City Attorney, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation involving the City. Public Information concerning existing litigation between the City and various parties may be acquired by reviewing the public documents held by the City Clerk. At 6:00 P.M., Mayor Naggar called the City Council meeting to order and recessed to Closed Session to consider the matters described on the Closed Session agenda. The City Council meeting convened at 7:05 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mike Naggar Prelude Music: Great Oak High School Jazz Combo Invocation: Lead Pastor John Ruhlman of Sandals Church Flag Salute: Council Member Roberts ROLL CALL: Comerchero, Edwards, Roberts, Washington, Naggar PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS Presentation to the City Council by the Great Oak High School Band regarding their recent trip to England Presentation to the City Council of SCE Rebate Check Action Minutes 021213 1 PUBLIC COMMENTS The following individuals addressed the City Council: • Matt Rahn • Edward Day • Ed Elder • Ernie White • Kristina Gara CITY COUNCIL REPORTS CONSENT CALENDAR Ernie White addressed the City Council on Consent Calendar Items 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 16. 1 Standard Ordinance and Resolution Adoption Procedure — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Action Minutes — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1, Council Member Washington abstained) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval with Council Member Washington abstaining. RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve the action minutes of January 22, 2013. 3 List of Demands — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13-07 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Action Minutes 021213 2 4 City Treasurer's Report as of December 31, 2012 — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve and file the City Treasurer's Report as of December 31, 2012. 5 Approval of Fiscal Year 2012-13 Mid -Year Budget Adjustments — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2012-2013 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET 5.2 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF AUTHORIZED POSITIONS 6 Purchase of the annual maintenance/software support with Tyler Technologies for the Eden Systems Suite — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Approve the purchase of the annual maintenance/software support with Tyler Technologies for the Eden Systems Suite in the amount of $38,025.97. 7 Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Temecula and Helixstorm, Inc. for Information Technology Services — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 Approve an Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Temecula and Helixstorm, Inc. for Information Technology Infrastructure Support up to the amount of $100,000. Action Minutes 021213 3 8 Sponsorship Agreement with P&R Foundation for the 2013 Temecula Rod Run on March 8 and 9, 2013 — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0-1, Council Member Edwards abstained) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval with Council Member Edwards abstaining. RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Sponsorship Agreement with P&R Foundation for in-kind City staff support and promotional services in the amount $62,000 for the Temecula Rod Run. 9 Renew the Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program with the County of Riverside — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTHORIZING THE EXTENSION OF THE SERVICE FEE COLLECTED ON BEHALF OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT SERVICE AUTHORITY UNTIL MAY 2024 10 Second Amendment to Agreement for Consulting Services between the City of Temecula and RBF Consulting for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Temecula Creek Inn Specific Plan — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve the Second Amendment to the Agreement for Consultant Services with RBF Consulting for $45,500, plus an additional contingency of $20,000, for a total Amendment of $65,500, and a total Agreement amount of $394,250, for additional consulting services in the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Temecula Creek Inn Specific Plan. 11 Acceptance of all housing assets being transferred from the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency pursuant to ABX1 26 and AB 1484 — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: Action Minutes 021213 4 RESOLUTION NO. 13-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ACCEPTING ALL OF THE HOUSING ASSETS BEING TRANSFERRED FROM THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PURSUANT TO ABX1 26 AND AB 1484 12 Grant of Easement to Southern California Edison within Old Town City -owned Parking Lot (APN 922-046-025) — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA GRANTING AN EASEMENT TO THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN OLD TOWN CITY -OWNED PARKING LOT (APN 922-046-025) 13 Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Traffic Safety and Bridge Light Retrofit Project, PW12-08 — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Accept the construction of the Traffic Safety and Bridge Light Retrofit Project, PW 12-08, as complete; 13.2 Direct the City Clerk to file and record the Notice of Completion. 14 Reject all Construction Bids for the Community Recreation Center Ornamental Picket Fence Replacement, PW12-21 — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Reject all Construction Bids for the Community Recreation Center Ornamental Picket Fence Replacement, PW12-21; 14.2 Authorize the Department of Public Works to re -advertise the Community Recreation Center Ornamental Picket Fence Replacement, PW12-21 for Construction Bids. Action Minutes 021213 5 15 Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for the Pechanqa Parkway Environmental Mitigation Project, PW11-01 — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Pechanga Parkway Environmental Mitigation Project, PW11-01. 16 Roripaugh Ranch Project - Assignment of TUMF Credit Agreement — Approved Staff Recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made by Council Member Comerchero; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Approve the Assignment of and Consent to Assignment of Contracts agreement between Sunwood Roripaugh Ranch, LLC, Roripaugh Temecula 113, and the City of Temecula. RECESS At 8:16 P.M., the City Council recessed and convened as the Temecula Community Services District Meeting and the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency Meeting. At 8:26 P.M., the City Council resumed with regular business. RECONVENE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING 22 Approval for levying an assessment for Fiscal Year 2013-14 in connection with the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District (TVTBID) — Approved staff recommendation (5-0-0) Council Member Washington made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 22.1 Conduct a public hearing to consider protests regarding the levy of an assessment in conjunction with the Temecula Valley Tourism Business Improvement District; 22.2 Instruct the City Clerk to tabulate any written protests which might be received prior to the close of the public hearing regarding the levy of the District; 22.3 If the City Clerk reports that there is not a majority protest received regarding this District, then adopt a resolution entitled: Action Minutes 021213 6 RESOLUTION NO. 13-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA LEVYING AN ASSESSMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-2014 IN CONNECTION WITH THE TEMECULA VALLEY TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (TVTBID) By way of a Power Point presentation, Economic Development Analyst I, Christine Damko presented the staff report as per agenda material. City Clerk Susan Jones confirmed that no formal protests had been received. The public hearing was opened and the following individuals addressed the City Council: • Ernie White • Tom De Mott CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS 23 Ordinance Amending Section 10.28.010(D) of the Temecula Municipal Code Regarding Prima Facie Speed Limits on Certain Streets — Approved Staff Recommendation (4-0- 1, Council Member Edwards abstained) The motion was made by Council Member Roberts; it was seconded by Council Member Comerchero; and electronic vote reflected approval with Council Member Edwards abstaining. RECOMMENDATION: 23.1 Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 13-02 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 10.28.010(D) OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREETS 24 Reinstate Old Town Civic Center Ad Hoc Subcommittee and Appoint Members of the City Council to Serve on the Ad Hoc Subcommittee — Approved staff recommendation to reinstate Council Member Roberts and Comerchero to serve on the Old Town Civic Center Ad Hoc Subcommittee. (5-0-0-) Mayor Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Council Member Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 24.1 Reinstate the Old Town Civic Center Ad Hoc Subcommittee and appoint two members of the City Council to serve on the Ad Hoc Subcommittee. CITY MANAGER REPORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT City Attorney Thorson advised that there were no reportable actions under the Brown Act Action Minutes 021213 7 ADJOURNMENT At 8:49 P.M., the City Council meeting was formally adjourned to Tuesday, February 26, 2013, at 5:30 PM, for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM, City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. *** Adjourned in Memory of Riverside Police Officer Michael Crain and San Bernardino Sheriff Detective Jeremiah MacKay *** Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] Action Minutes 021213 8 Item No. 3 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager M -r• CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Heidi Schrader, Acting Director of Finance DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: List of Demands PREPARED BY: Pascale Brown, Accounting Manager Leah Thomas, Accounting Specialist RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A BACKGROUND: All claims and demands are reported and summarized for review and approval by the City Council on a routine basis at each City Council meeting. The attached claims represent the paid claims and demands since the last City Council meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: All claims and demands were paid from appropriated funds or authorized resources of the City and have been recorded in accordance with the City's policies and procedures. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2. List of Demands RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A, on file in the office of the City Clerk, has been reviewed by the City Manager's Office and that the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $9,107,638.38. Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 13- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26t day of February, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk CITY OF TEMECULA LIST OF DEMANDS 01/31/2013 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 4,120,837.72 02/07/2013 TOTAL CHECK RUN: 4,596,266.23 01/31/2013 TOTAL PAYROLL RUN: 390,534.43 TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 02/26/2013 COUNCIL MEETING: $9,107,638.38 DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND: CHECKS: 001 GENERAL FUND 1,991,507.84 130 RECOVERY ACT JAG FUNDING 567.90 135 BUSINESS INCUBATOR RESOURCE 4,703.09 140 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 137.44 166 SARDA HOUSING 1,054,192.58 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 105,756.45 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 3,162,255.54 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 2,115.01 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 13,165.35 210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FUND 1,265,096.58 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,591.52 310 VEHICLES FUND 42,501.25 320 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 41,614.21 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 5,661.46 340 FACILITIES 31,197.17 380 SARDA DEBT SERVICE FUND 976,361.26 501 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 1 SADDLEWOOD 52.81 502 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 2 WINCHESTER CREEK 82.65 503 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 3 RANCHO HIGHLANDS 84.25 504 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 4 THE VINEYARDS 25.67 505 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 5 SIGNET SERIES 105.53 506 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 6 WOODCREST COUNTRY 26.91 507 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 7 RIDGEVIEW 52.80 508 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 8 VILLAGE GROVE 1,932.25 509 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 9 RANCHO SOLANA 24.30 510 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 10 MARTINIQUE 24.03 511 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 11 MEADOWVIEW 24.48 512 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 12 VINTAGE HILLS 553.82 513 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 13 PRESLEY DEVELOP. 165.88 514 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 14 MORRISON HOMES 72.03 515 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 15 BARCLAY ESTATES 85.41 516 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 16 TRADEWINDS 74.47 517 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 17 MONTE VISTA 23.94 518 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 18 TEMEKU HILLS 157.22 519 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 19 CHANTEMAR 58.97 520 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 20 CROWNE HILL 277.71 521 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 21 VAIL RANCH 14,151.60 522 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 22 SUTTON PLACE 25.52 523 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 23 PHEASENT RUN 23.72 524 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 24 HARVESTON 187.50 525 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 25 SERENA HILLS 10.24 526 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 26 GALLERYTRADITION 44.17 527 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 27 AVONDALE 59.31 528 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 28 WOLF CREEK 250.46 529 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 29 GALLERY PORTRAIT 21.65 8,717,103.95 001 GENERAL FUND 258,532.11 140 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 1,638.43 165 SARDA AFFORDABLE HOUSING 7,087.62 190 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT 84,673.34 192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B 198.96 194 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL D 2,534.58 196 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL "L" LAKE PARK MAINT. 443.20 197 TEMECULA LIBRARY FUND 1,240.08 300 INSURANCE FUND 1,348.98 320 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 17,516.80 330 SUPPORT SERVICES 3,450.49 340 FACILITIES 9,560.28 501 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 1 SADDLEWOOD 84.86 502 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 2 WINCHESTER CREEK 56.88 503 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 3 RANCHO HIGHLANDS 67.77 504 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 4 THE VINEYARDS 12.30 505 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 5 SIGNET SERIES 137.02 506 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 6 WOODCREST COUNTRY 24.79 507 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 7 RIDGEVIEW 35.19 508 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 8 VILLAGE GROVE 232.66 509 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 9 RANCHO SOLANA 2.36 510 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 10 MARTINIQUE 10.50 511 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 11 MEADOWVIEW 7.25 512 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 12 VINTAGE HILLS 155.31 513 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 13 PRESLEY DEVELOP. 33.12 514 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 14 MORRISON HOMES 19.17 515 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 15 BARCLAY ESTATES 16.78 516 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 16 TRADEWINDS 38.63 517 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 17 MONTE VISTA 3.38 518 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 18 TEMEKU HILLS 143.90 519 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 19 CHANTEMAR 77.02 520 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 20 CROWNE HILL 208.72 521 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 21 VAIL RANCH 352.85 522 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 22 SUTTON PLACE 8.48 523 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 23 PHEASENT RUN 9.29 524 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 24 HARVESTON 198.59 525 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 25 SERENA HILLS 63.93 526 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 26 GALLERYTRADITION 2.91 527 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 27 AVONDALE 9.29 528 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 28 WOLF CREEK 292.71 529 SERVICE LEVEL"C"ZONE 29 GALLERY PORTRAIT 3.90 390,534.43 TOTAL BY FUND: $9.107.638.38 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 1 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 2096 01/29/2013 000444 INSTATAX (EDD) 4TH QTR 2012 UI & ETT PAYMENT 3,336.36 3,336.36 2097 01/31/2013 000389 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT OBRA- Project Retirement Payment 2,781.74 2,781.74 SOLUTION 2098 01/31/2013 010349 CALIF DEPT OF CHILD Support Payment 1,741.71 1,741.71 SUPPORT 2099 01/29/2013 005460 U S BANK '06 RDATABs Series A Debt Srvc Pmt 357,818.13 357,818.13 2100 01/29/2013 005460 U S BANK '02 RDA Bonds Debt Srvc Pmt 618,543.13 618,543.13 2101 01/29/2013 005460 U S BANK 11 RDATABs Series A Debt Srvc Pmt 554,046.88 554,046.88 2102 01/29/2013 005460 U S BANK '10 RDATABs Series B Debt Srvc Pmt 491,858.20 491,858.20 2103 01/29/2013 005460 U S BANK '10 RDATABs Series A Debt Srvc Pmt 8,287.50 8,287.50 2104 01/31/2013 003577 CALIF STATE BOARD OF Sales &Use Tax Retum Jan -Dec' 12 9,105.00 9,105.00 156478 01/31/2013 013367 ACTIVE MICRO INC misc tools/equip: pw traffic 742.94 742.94 156479 01/31/2013 008552 ADKINS DESIGN CONSULTING DEC GRAPHIC DESIGN SVCS: 1,093.50 1,093.50 THEATER 156480 01/31/2013 009374 ALLEGRO MUSICAL VENTURES piano tuning/maint: theater 170.00 170.00 156481 01/31/2013 006915 ALLIES PARTY EQUIPMENT RENTAL EQUIP: NEW YEAR'S EVE 1,477.48 1,477.48 Pagel apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor 156482 01/31/2013 012943 ALPHA MECHANICAL SERVICE INC Description Amount Paid Check Total hvac preventative maint: Stn 92 292.00 hvac preventative maint: Stn 73 hvac preventative maint: TCC hvac preventative maint: Harveston HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINT: TVE2 hvac preventative maint: Ch Museum hvac preventative maint: Fld Op Ctr hvac preventative maint: TV Museum hvac preventative maint: CRC HVAC PREVENTATIVE MAINT: TCC SAFE hvac preventative maint: mpsc hvac preventative maint: TV Museum hvac preventative maint: PBSP hvac preventative maint: Theater hvac preventative maint: Library hvac unit repair svcs: crc gym hvac preventative maint: Harveston hvac preventative maint: Stn 84 156483 01/31/2013 004422 AMERICAN BATTERY EMERG LIGHT BATTERIES:MPSC/rV CORPORATION MUSEUM 58.00 120.00 72.00 1,075.00 201.00 283.00 150.00 800.00 97.00 235.00 50.00 133.00 299.50 729.00 1,065.72 191.00 211.00 6,062.22 222.46 222.46 156484 01/31/2013 004240 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES DUI & drug screenings: Police 550.94 (AFN) 156485 01/31/2013 013950 AQUA CHILL OF SAN DIEGO 156486 01/31/2013 011752 ASAN SOCIETY GROUP - 156487 01/31/2013 004205 BALLET FOLKLORICO 156488 01/31/2013 008605 BONTERRA CONSULTING 156489 01/31/2013 015566 BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 156490 01/31/2013 004778 BUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMERICA 156491 01/31/2013 004462 C D W GOVERNMENT INC DUI & drug screenings: Police 678.08 1,229.02 Jan drinking water sys: police 27.00 Jan drinking water sys: civic ctr 149.04 Jan drinking water sys: MPSC 3348 209.52 refund:sec dep:rm rental:CRC 200.00 200.00 TCSD Instructor Eamings TCSD Instructor Eamings 11/10-12/28 ENVIRO CNSLT: MCB/OVLD refund:sec dep:rm rental:TCC Dec plan review svcs: B&S retum: troy micr 401 do printer (7) star tsp100eco printers: library 63.00 63.00 10,055.00 200.00 126.00 10,055.00 200.00 734.16 734.16 -858.33 1,607.59 749.26 Page2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor 156492 01/31/2013 003138 CAL MAT Description Amount Paid Check Total PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS 123.08 487.62 528.60 897.49 826.68 372.44 524.14 903.44 4,663.49 156493 01/31/2013 004248 CALIF DEPT OF DUI & drug screenings: Police 1,855.00 1,855.00 JUSTICE-ACCTING 156494 01/31/2013 000131 CARL WARREN & COMPANY Dec liability claims mgmt: Finance 1,591.52 1,591.52 INC 156495 01/31/2013 014726 CHAPTER 13 STANDING SUPPORT PMT 182.77 182.77 TRUSTEE 156496 01/31/2013 004405 COMMUNITY HEALTH Community Health Charities Payment 20.00 20.00 CHARITIES 156497 01/31/2013 000442 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS alarm maint: temecula marine ctr 80.00 80.00 156498 01/31/2013 002945 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES: THEATER 79.92 DIST. 156499 01/31/2013 001264 COSTCO WHOLESALE 156500 01/31/2013 013379 COUSSOU, CELINE 156501 01/31/2013 010650 CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING & HVAC INC electrical supplies: CRC 135.77 electrical supplies: various parks 19.01 234.70 misc supplies: TCC CERT training 198.70 misc supplies: Theater Hospitality TCSD Instructor Eamings TCSD Instructor Eamings 401.63 600.33 171.50 189.00 360.50 PLUMBING REPAIR: STN 73 264.74 plumbing improvements: Ch Museum baby changing stn install: Ch Museum new toilet installs: Ch Museum baby changing stn install: Ch Museum disposal/water install: Ch Museum plumbing svcs: tve2 156502 01/31/2013 001393 DATA TICKET, INC. Dec parking citation svcs: police 156503 01/31/2013 008943 DEPT OF GENERAL SERVICES ALJ hours: Yang, Shufen (DGS) 3,010.00 2,325.00 14,800.00 2,325.00 1,012.00 269.00 24,005.74 1,034.66 1,034.66 1,978.00 1,978.00 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor 156504 01/31/2013 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS 156505 01/31/2013 004192 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELING INC 156506 01/31/2013 002390 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DIST Description Amount Paid Check Total Feb restroom svc: Riverton Park 52.80 Feb restroom svc: Long Canyon Park Feb restroom svc: Veterans Park Feb restroom svc: Vail Ranch Park 52.80 52.80 52.80 Fuel for City vehicles: tcsd/pw 2,220.02 Fuel for City vehicles: PW Maint Fuel for City vehicles: CC/IT/TCSD Fuel for City vehicles: Police Fuel for City vehicles: Code Enf Fuel for City vehicles: B&S Fuel for City vehicles: PW Traffic Fuel for City vehicles: PW Id/npdes Fuel for City vehicles: PW Id/npdes 1,818.16 118.08 73.75 304.46 409.92 413.38 84.61 137.61 Jan water meter:39656 Diego Dr 60.24 Jan water meter:39569 Seraphina Rd Jan water meter:Murr hot springs rd Jan water meter:Murr hot springs rd 156507 01/31/2013 003053 FAGAN, MATTHEW performance: artist reception 1/11 30.94 39.71 250.71 211.20 5,579.99 381.60 100.00 100.00 156508 01/31/2013 003347 FIRST BANKCARD CENTER 006952 PAYPAL AA Verisign Pay0ow Pro Transaction 243.60 015363 76 TEMECULA FUELS CORP AA fuel: CM vehicle 80.00 000152 CALIF PARKS & RECREATION AA CPRS awards submittal: TCSD 130.00 SOC 015537 CRAIGSLIST.ORG AA recruitment ad: HR 25.00 000154 C S M F 0 AA recruitment ad: HR 275.00 007282 AMAZON.COM, INC AA BOOKS: LIBRARY 465.17 006952 PAYPAL MH Verisign Pay0ow Pro Transaction 59.95 015421 SURVEYMONKEY.COM MH online survey svc: civic ctr 24.00 015560 APPLIAN.COM MH win recorder software: info tech 79.95 013338 APPLE STORE MH mbair laptop c02jvauedrvd: JC 1,835.81 3,218.48 156509 01/31/2013 000172 GASB '13 GARS subscr: Schrader, Heidi 550.00 550.00 156510 01/31/2013 010326 G E MOBILE WATER, INC Jan power washer exchange: Stn 73 63.73 63.73 156511 01/31/2013 001937 GALLS INC uniforms: Police 464.38 464.38 Page4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor 156512 01/31/2013 009608 GOLDEN VALLEY MUSIC SOCIETY 156513 01/31/2013 003792 GRAINGER 156514 01/31/2013 008081 HALL & FOREMAN INC 156515 01/31/2013 004133 HDL SOFTWARE LLC 156516 01/31/2013 012082 HELIX ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING 156517 01/31/2013 013749 HELIXSTORM INC. 156518 01/31/2013 010210 HOME DEPOT SUPPLY INC, TH E 156519 01/31/2013 013695 INLAND EMPIRE SHRED IT 156520 01/31/2013 003266 IRON MOUNTAIN OFFSITE 156521 01/31/2013 001091 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES INC 156522 01/31/2013 009923 L S A ASSOCIATES INC 156523 01/31/2013 013879 LAKESHORE LEARNING MATERIALS 156524 01/31/2013 014817 LAPP, JEREMY SCOTT 156525 01/31/2013 000210 LEAGUE OF CALIF CITIES 156526 01/31/2013 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. 156527 01/31/2013 004905 LIEBERT, CASSIDY& WHITMORE Description Amount Paid Check Total sttlmnt: Classics at the Merc Jan 13 fire extinguisher cabinets: crc Dec cnslt svcs:citywide pave rehab program update:business license Oct bio study:meadowview erosion misc hardware equip: info tech misc hardware equip: info tech misc supplies: harveston park misc supplies: pw maint 1 /7 doc shred svcs: PD mall offc Oct offsite media storage: Records Sept cnslt svcs: local vendor pref Jan cnslt svcs: roripaugh speir misc supplies: tiny tot pgrm sttlmnt: Cabaret at the Merc 1/27 '13 LCC agency mb dues: CM TCSD instructor earnings TCSD instructor earnings TCSD instructor earnings TCSD instructor earnings 1,201.20 1,201.20 166.45 166.45 26,717.70 26,717.70 500.00 500.00 529.65 529.65 1,681.60 1,124.14 2,805.74 180.06 745.10 925.16 15.00 15.00 495.00 495.00 675.00 675.00 3,990.43 3,990.43 35.60 35.60 997.50 997.50 22,172.00 22,172.00 798.00 210.00 136.50 45.50 Dec HR legal svcs for TE060-01 240.00 Dec HR legal svcs for TE060-10 1,190.00 2,580.00 2,820.00 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 156528 01/31/2013 011003 LINE MASTER ENGINEERING misc equip repair parts: pw maint 701.73 701.73 INC 156529 01/31/2013 014228 LSK, LLC Feb lease pmt: harveston center 4,853.88 4,853.88 156530 01/31/2013 003782 MAIN STREET SIGNS misc street signs: pw street maint 1,539.00 1,539.00 156531 01/31/2013 012364 MASTERS, TRACY ee computer loan prgm 1,457.12 1,457.12 156532 01/31/2013 014392 MC COLLOUGH, JILL DENISE Jan interior plants lease:library 200.00 Jan interior plants lease:civic center 525.00 725.00 156533 01/31/2013 015259 MERCURY DISPOSAL Battery recycling pgrm:planning dept 585.96 585.96 SYSTEMS, INC. 156534 01/31/2013 005887 MOFFATT & NICHOL 10/28-12/29 eng/const srvcs:french vly 1,877.50 1,877.50 ENGINEERS 156535 01/31/2013 001986 MUZAK LLC Feb dish network programing:foc 128.31 128.31 156536 01/31/2013 015514 NORTHERN STAR MARKETING, photography services: Theater 1/30 1,000.00 1,000.00 INC 156537 01/31/2013 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Office supplies:TCSD 286.95 DIV Misc office supplies:police mall office 27.49 Misc office supplies:tcc 44.13 Misc office supplies:tcc 46.27 Misc office supplies:tcc 76.74 Misc office supplies:police mall office 115.16 Misc office supplies:old town pd office 13.26 OFFICE SUPPLIES: THEATER 90.08 OFFICE SUPPLIES: THEATER 7.87 Office supplies:TCSD 11.47 Office supplies:TCSD 64.71 Office supplies:TCSD 68.03 Office supplies:TCSD 8.63 Office supplies:TCSD 12.63 873.42 156538 01/31/2013 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE &SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW Street Maint 215.95 215.95 156539 01/31/2013 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Code Enf 212.23 212.23 156540 01/31/2013 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY misc supplies for special events 91.74 INC MISC SUPPLIES:TINY TOT PGRM 38.49 130.23 Pages apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor 156541 01/31/2013 015033 PACIFIC MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS 156542 01/31/2013 015565 PIERCE, KATRINA 156543 01/31/2013 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPANY INC 156544 01/31/2013 003308 R D 0 RENTAL COMPANY 156545 01/31/2013 000262 RANCHO CALIF WATER DISTRICT Description Amount Paid Check Total Dec consulting srvcs:housing element refund:sec dep:rm rental:Harveston Nov advertising: Winterfest in O.T. misc parts & supplies: pw backhoe misc parts & supplies: pw backhoe 2,876.25 2,876.25 200.00 200.00 625.00 625.00 146.88 783.56 930.44 Jan water meter:30875 Rancho vista 16.07 Jan D.C. water meter:Pauba Rd Jan water meter-comm:30600 Pauba rd Jan water meter:30875 Rancho vista Jan var water meters:TCSD svc lev C Jan var water meters: Fire Stns 156546 01/31/2013 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Reproduction services:TCC 16.07 768.42 435.57 1,805.10 134.04 3,175.27 45.68 45.68 156547 01/31/2013 000907 RANCHO TEMECULA CAR Jun -Dec vehicle detailing srvcs: CAP 35.00 WASH Dec City vehicle detailing srvcs:var 52.50 87.50 156548 01/31/2013 014357 REDDIG, DONALD refund:sec dep:ball fields:PHBSP 1,000.00 1,000.00 156549 01/31/2013 015564 RHEW PLUMBING & refund:eng grad dep:LD12-020GR 3,000.00 3,000.00 MECHANICAL INC 156550 01/31/2013 000418 RIVERSIDE CO CLERK & Ntc ofexemption:tcc rehab prjt 64.00 64.00 RECORDER 156551 01/31/2013 010777 RIVERSIDE CO EXECUTIVE DEC -JAN ANIMAL SHELTER PMT 23,200.26 23,200.26 OFFICE 156552 01/31/2013 000406 RIVERSIDE CO SHERIFFS 8/23/12-9/19/12 law enforcement 1,517,144.14 1,517,144.14 DEPT 156553 01/31/2013 000873 ROBERTS, RONALD H. reimb: NLC pin mtg Washington, DC 376.20 376.20 156554 01/31/2013 006063 ROSE INSTITUTE kosmont-rose institute rpt: city council 656.50 656.50 156555 01/31/2013 000278 SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE Oct advertising:Halloween Carnival 210.08 210.08 156556 01/31/2013 000278 SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE pe 12/09 subcr srvcs:mpsc 6.50 pe 12/16 subcr srvcs:mpsc 6.50 13.00 Page:7 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 156557 01/31/2013 009213 SHERRY BERRY MUSIC Jazz © the Merc 1/24 & 1/25 988.40 988.40 156558 01/31/2013 000537 SO CALIF EDISON Jan 2-35-074-2847:27495 Enterprise cirw 76.22 Jan 2-28-904-7706:32329 Overland Td 138.58 Dec 2-28-331-4847:32805 Pauba LS3 105.43 Jan 2-27-371-8494:42189 Winchester 39.15 Jan 2-21-981-4720:30153 Tem pkwy tpp 25.64 Jan 2-29-657-2787:41638 Winchester 26.44 Jan 2-29-223-8607:42035 2nd St PED 658.61 Dec 2-33-357-5785:44747 Redhawk 28.27 Jan 2-35-164-3770:43487 Butterfield 28.85 Jan 2-35-164-3663:42335 Meadows pkwy 26.64 Jan 2-35-164-3242:44270 Meadows pkwy 27.71 Jan 2-35-164-3515:32932 Leena way 26.64 Jan 2-31-282-0665:27407 Diaz rd PED 27.26 Jan 2-31-031-2616:27991 Diaz rd PED 27.26 Jan 2-31-536-3481:41902 Main St 307.70 Jan 2-31-536-3655:41904 Main St 986.17 Jan 2-29-807-1093:28079 Diaz rd PED 26.86 Jan 2-29-807-1226:28077 Diaz rd PED 26.87 Jan 2-34-624-4452:32131 S Loop rd lot 607.19 Jan 2-14-204-1615:30027 Front st rdio 57.46 Jan 2-18-937-3152:28314 Mercedes 79.15 Jan 2-19-171-8568:28300 Mercedes 79.56 Jan 2-29-933-3831:43230 Bus pk dr 1,717.46 Jan 2-02-351-4946:41845 6th St 702.44 Jan 2-29-224-0173:var Fire Stns 1,711.57 7,565.13 156559 01/31/2013 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY Jan 015-575-0195-2:32211 Wolfvly rd 546.29 546.29 156560 01/31/2013 002015 STAR WAY PRODUCTIONS audio rentals:santa's arrival & newyfs 815.00 815.00 156561 01/31/2013 002366 STEAM SUPERIOR CARPET install carpet: children's museum 385.00 385.00 CLEANING 156562 01/31/2013 000168 TEMECULA FLOWER CORRAL wreath:Veteran's event/sunshine fund 513.71 513.71 156563 01/31/2013 010493 TEMECULATOWNE CENTER Feb lease payment: pd mall office 1,458.33 1,458.33 ASSOC LP 156564 01/31/2013 011736 TEMECULA TROPHY INC Recogn awards:'12 Holiday Lights/Sights 195.86 Recogn awards'12 Holiday Parade 746.44 AWARDS & RECOGNITION:CSD PGRMS 105.84 1,048.14 Pages apChkLst 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 9 Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor 156565 01/31/2013 010046 TEMECULA VALLEY CONVENTION & 156566 01/31/2013 007340 TEMECULA VALLEY FIRE 156567 01/31/2013 003067 TEMECULA VALLEY RV SERVICE 156568 01/31/2013 004274 TEMECULA VALLEY SECURITY CENTR 156569 01/31/2013 011090 TEMECULA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION 156570 01/31/2013 008379 THEATER FOUNDATION, THE 156571 01/31/2013 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE 156572 01/31/2013 007433 TOVEY SHULTZ CONSTRUCTION INC 156573 01/31/2013 006192 TRISTAFF GROUP 156574 01/31/2013 007766 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 156575 01/31/2013 002110 UNITED RENTALS NORTH AMERICA 156576 01/31/2013 012663 UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSN 156577 01/31/2013 000325 UNITED WAY 156578 01/31/2013 004261 VERIZON 156579 01/31/2013 004789 VERIZON (Continued) Description Amount Paid Check Total Nov 12 Bus. Impry District Asmnts Fire extinguisher equip: Sta 73 VEH REPAIR & MAINT:POLICE TRAILER VEH REPAIR & MAINT:POLICE TRAILER locksmith srvcs: snack bar/theater locksmith services:Theater Transportation: day camp excursion 8/2 Transportation: day camp excursion 8/9 Readers Theatre in The Merc 1/23 Feb high speed internet:Civic Center Partial retention release:Roripaugh temp help w/e 01/13 Laulu, P. Dec cable/utility locators:pw traffic misc supplies:pw street maint misc supplies:pw street maint 3 year agency membership: sports prgm United Way Charities Payment Jan xxx-8165 gen usage:Enterprise cir w Jan xxx-8625 general usage:Civic Ctr Jan xxx-2886 gen usage:Harveston ctr Jan xxx-5072 general usage Jan Internet svcs:Tem PD DSL Jan Internet svcs:Library 156580 01/31/2013 014146 WAL-MART misc supplies: pw street maint 96,239.24 65.00 110.00 4,409.74 8.64 21.38 2,920.50 2,920.50 301.00 4,174.78 28,890.00 1,104.00 184.50 132.60 41.85 100.00 20.00 94.00 94.00 88.28 1,532.93 49.99 174.99 96,239.24 65.00 4,519.74 30.02 5,841.00 301.00 4,174.78 28,890.00 1,104.00 184.50 174.45 100.00 20.00 1,809.21 224.98 329.76 329.76 Page9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 156581 01/31/2013 010487 WATSON, LUKE reimb:supplies for homeless count 115.51 115.51 156582 01/31/2013 013556 WESTERN AUDIO VISUAL Audio visual srvcs:city facilities 3,494.88 3,494.88 156583 01/31/2013 000621 WESTERN RIVERSIDE Dec '12 TUMF Payment 149,544.00 149,544.00 COUNCIL OF 156584 01/31/2013 008402 WESTERN RIVERSIDE Dec '12 MSHCP payment 29,784.00 29,784.00 COUNTY 156585 01/31/2013 014781 WILLIAMS ARCHITECTS, INC. DESIGN SRVCS: TCC 3,141.60 DESIGN SRVCS: TCC 3,768.90 DESIGN SRVCS: TCC 311.27 DESIGN SRVCS: TCC 3,995.00 DESIGN SRVCS: TCC 17,727.50 28,944.27 999295 01/24/2013 015567 FOSTER, KATHY refund:sec dep:rm rental:Harveston 200.00 200.00 999296 01/24/2013 015568 GONZALEZ, LISA refund:Karate Interm 3610.102 60.00 60.00 999297 01/24/2013 015569 MOUNTAIN VIEW refund:sec dep:rm rental:MPSC 200.00 200.00 999298 01/24/2013 015570 NICHOLS, INGA refund:Nutrition wkshp 1021.101 60.00 60.00 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 4,120,837.72 Pagel 0 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 11 01/31/2013 12:33:33PM CITY OF TEMECULA 121 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks. 4,120,837.72 Pagel 1 apChkLst 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM Final Check List CITY OF TEMECULA Page: 1 Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA Check # Date Vendor Description 156586 02/07/2013 012779 AAA FLAG & BANNER MFG CO, banner: TVE2 gold fever exhibit INC. 156587 02/07/2013 004973 ABACHERLI, LINDI 156588 02/07/2013 008552 ADKINS DESIGN CONSULTING 156589 02/07/2013 004802 ADLERHORST INTERNATIONAL INC 156590 02/07/2013 003859 ALL ABOUT SELF STORAGE 156591 02/07/2013 012943 ALPHA MECHANICAL SERVICE INC 156592 02/07/2013 002187 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS 156593 02/07/2013 001323 ARROWHEAD WATER INC 156594 02/07/2013 015469 ATLAS COPCO USA HOLDINGS, INC. 156595 02/07/2013 015585 BARTZ-WIGGINS, KAREN 156596 02/07/2013 013482 BAS SECURITY 156597 02/07/2013 010328 BEST IMPRESSIONS TCSD instructor earnings JAN GRAPHIC DESIGN SVCS: THEATER Dec training: PD K9s Rudy/Astin Feb '13 storage unit C332: Ch Museum Feb '13 storage unit G702: TCSD hvac repair svcs: MPSC Oct -Nov animal control svcs Bottled wtr svcs: Ch Museum Bottled wtr svcs: TCC Bottled wtr svcs: Council Bottled wtr svcs: CRC Bottled wtr svcs: FId Opt Ctr Bottled wtr svcs: Skate Park Bottled wtr svcs: PBSP Bottled wtr svcs: TES pool Bottled wtr svcs: CHS Bottled wtr svcs: Harveston Ctr Bottled wtr svcs: Library Bottled wtr svcs: TV Museum Bottled wtr svcs: Theater utility compactor/trailer: pw maint refund:Portrait photography 1149.101 Jan security svcs: Harveston Lake calendars/planners: MPSC Amount Paid Check Total 172.62 560.00 162.00 283.34 87.50 100.00 120.00 20,000.00 16.87 20.86 38.83 78.94 95.49 6.45 35.19 6.45 6.45 20.86 64.31 19.03 39.94 42,501.25 112.00 1,496.00 282.09 172.62 560.00 162.00 283.34 187.50 120.00 20,000.00 449.67 42,501.25 112.00 1,496.00 282.09 Pagel apChkLst Final Check List Page: 2 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor 156598 02/07/2013 004262 BIO-TOX LABORATORIES Description DUI & drug screenings: Police DUI & drug screenings: Police DUI & drug screenings: Police Amount Paid Check Total 1,216.00 1,385.50 1,195.26 3,796.76 156599 02/07/2013 012583 BLANCAY PRICE Dec landscape insp: Planning 3,110.00 3,110.00 156600 02/07/2013 015411 BRM CONSTRUCTION 2nd instllmnt: tenant impr Faith Armory 17,805.46 17,805.46 156601 02/07/2013 015526 BUECHI, THOMAS A. performance:art show reception 2/8 100.00 100.00 156602 02/07/2013 004778 BUREAU VERITAS NORTH BILLING ADJ: CORRECTION B12-2435 7.20 7.20 AMERICA FEES 156603 02/07/2013 001035 C R & R INC Jul -Dec '12 trash hauling services 3,161,669.58 3,161,669.58 156604 02/07/2013 012089 CAFE DANIEL INC REFRESHMENTS:LIGHT PARADE VIP 750.00 750.00 TENT 156605 02/07/2013 003138 CAL MAT PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS 746.20 PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS 911.64 PW PATCH TRUCK MATERIALS 123.86 1,781.70 156606 02/07/2013 004241 CALIF DEPT OF ARCHITECT CASp 206 renewal: Clements, Brian 500.00 500.00 156607 02/07/2013 004971 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, FEB COPIER LEASES: CIVIC CTR 3,004.54 3,004.54 INC 156608 02/07/2013 010746 CENTEX HOMES INLAND refund:eng grad dep:LD06-133GR 995.00 995.00 EMPIRE 156609 02/07/2013 015090 CLEARWATER SYSTEMS hvac water syst maint: civic ctr 550.00 550.00 CORP 156610 02/07/2013 015587 COTE, KELLIE refund:sec dep:rm rental:Harveston 200.00 200.00 156611 02/07/2013 010650 CRAFTSMEN PLUMBING & counter improvements: Ch Museum 900.00 900.00 HVAC INC 156612 02/07/2013 012699 CROWNE MEADOWS, LP refund:eng grad dep:LD01-007MP 5,125.00 5,125.00 156613 02/07/2013 015213 CYBER COMPUTERS, INC. (5) hp 8740p notebooks: info tech 4,812.63 4,812.63 156614 02/07/2013 012614 DBX, INC. controller cabinet install:pw traffic 11,880.00 11,880.00 Page:2 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 3 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 156615 02/07/2013 003945 DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL Feb restroom svc: GOHS 52.80 52.80 SRVCS 156616 02/07/2013 012949 DRH, INC., CONTROLLED refund:eng grad dep:LD06-006GR 995.00 995.00 DISB-WEST 156617 02/07/2013 002390 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER Jan water meter:32131 S Loop Rd bldg 150.03 DIST Jan water meter:32131 S Loop rd Idsc 20.67 Jan water meter:32131 S Loop rd dcda 40.50 211.20 156618 02/07/2013 015576 EDUCATIONAL RESOURCE refund:sec dep:rm rental:TCC 200.00 200.00 156619 02/07/2013 004829 ELLISON WILSON ADVOCACY Feb legislative cnslt svcs: CM 3,500.00 3,500.00 LLC 156620 02/07/2013 011202 EMH SPORTS & FITNESS TCSD instructor earnings 434.00 INSTITUTE TCSD instructor earnings 588.00 TCSD instructor earnings 336.00 1,358.00 156621 02/07/2013 011203 ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANING Jan janitorial svcs: park facilities 5,265.00 5,265.00 156622 02/07/2013 000164 ESGIL CORPORATION credit: inv exceeds contract amt -2,079.70 Dec plan ck svcs: B&S 10,565.65 8,485.95 156623 02/07/2013 010804 FEHR & PEERS ASSOCIATES DEC CNSLT SVCS: JEFFERSON 3,530.15 3,530.15 CORRIDOR 156624 02/07/2013 000166 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE building title search: YMCA 157.00 157.00 COMPANY 156625 02/07/2013 014819 FLATIRON WEST, INC. Jan const: french valley pkwy 582,021.96 stop notice: John Deere Landscape -1,087.17 580,934.79 156626 02/07/2013 004074 FRANCHISE MGMT SERVICES misc supplies: high hopes pgrm 103.11 103.11 INC 156627 02/07/2013 004944 FULLCOURT PRESS business license certificates:finance 389.35 389.35 156628 02/07/2013 001937 GALLS INC uniform svcs: Police Volunteers 36.89 36.89 156629 02/07/2013 013076 GAUDET, YVONNE M. TCSD instructor earnings 831.60 831.60 156630 02/07/2013 015577 GERI-FIT COMPANY LLC refund:sec dep:rm rental:MPSC 200.00 200.00 Page:3 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 4 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 156631 02/07/2013 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES: TCSD 2,172.62 2,172.62 INC 156632 02/07/2013 015430 GONZALES, SARAH JO TCSD Instructor earnings: High Hopes 135.00 135.00 156633 02/07/2013 005664 GOSCH TOWING & RECOVERY towing svcs: Police 270.00 270.00 156634 02/07/2013 015451 GREATAMERICA LEASING FEB COPIER LEASES: CIVIC CTR/TVE2 1,341.70 CORP FEB COPIER LEASE: CIVIC CTR 289.44 156635 02/07/2013 005311 H2O CERTIFIED POOL WATER Jan fountain maint: town square 175.00 SPCL. 156636 02/07/2013 000186 HANKS HARDWARE INC Jan maint: CRC/TES pools 900.00 Jan fountain maint: civic ctr Hardware supplies: Theater Hardware supplies: TCC Hardware supplies: CRC Hardware supplies: Ch Museum Hardware supplies: Harveston Hardware supplies: Harveston Hardware supplies: PW Traffic Hardware supplies: PW Maint Hardware supplies: MPSC Hardware supplies: CRC/Rec Hardware supplies: Civic Ctr Hardware supplies: Aquatics Hardware supplies: Parks 156637 02/07/2013 015418 HARLEY EARL, INC. deposit exhibit lease: TM Museum 156638 02/07/2013 002109 HD SUPPLY CONSTR. SUPPLY MISC MAINT SUPPLIES: PW MAINT LTD 156639 02/07/2013 013749 HELIXSTORM INC. network svcs citywide: info tech credit: billing adj inv 2333 billing adj: inv exceeds contract amt 156640 02/07/2013 004406 IGOE & COMPANY INC Jan '13 flex benefit plan pmt 156641 02/07/2013 001186 IRWIN, JOHN TCSD instructor earnings 156642 02/07/2013 013200 JAROTH INC Feb pay phones:duck pond,Library,CRC 156643 02/07/2013 015583 KHESTOO, VENUS refund:sec dep & rental:Harveston 1,631.14 500.00 1,575.00 32.40 30.97 315.75 573.60 84.90 33.67 123.72 530.05 68.76 393.79 293.61 85.52 796.56 3,363.30 2,475.00 2,475.00 79.72 79.72 9,720.00 -720.00 -548.39 210.00 411.60 212.64 684.00 8,451.61 210.00 411.60 212.64 684.00 Page:4 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 5 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 156644 02/07/2013 000209 L & M FERTILIZER INC misc equip parts: pw maint 317.17 317.17 156645 02/07/2013 015582 LANDIN, MARYANN refund:Hawaiian tahitian dance 80.00 80.00 156646 02/07/2013 004412 LEANDER, KERRY D. TCSD instructor earnings 252.00 252.00 156647 02/07/2013 009904 LIVING DESERT, THE excursion: MPSC 2/19 225.00 225.00 156648 02/07/2013 013982 MCI COMM SERVICE Jan xxx-0346 general usage 30.54 Jan xxx-0714 gen usage:PD mall alarrr 31.34 61.88 156649 02/07/2013 015018 MAASBERG, LAURA CITLALI TCSD Instructor Earnings 111.30 111.30 156650 02/07/2013 014365 MAILFINANCE, INC. 11/28-2/27 postage mtr Iease:cntrl srvcs 1,210.68 1,210.68 156651 02/07/2013 014767 MARKETING POWER, INC. lighting retrofit: crc parking lot 11,507.49 11,507.49 156652 02/07/2013 011179 MC MILLIN REDHAWK LLC TCSD Instructor Earnings 364.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 224.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 665.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 266.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 392.00 1,911.00 156653 02/07/2013 006571 MELODY'S AD WORKS INC. Feb marketing & promo srvcs: old town 156654 02/07/2013 012962 MILLER, MISTY TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings TCSD Instructor Earnings 1,800.00 1,800.00 126.00 196.00 514.50 836.50 156655 02/07/2013 012580 MINUTEMAN PRESS Commissioner business cards:TCSD 447.80 Business cards: h schrader 53.20 501.00 156656 02/07/2013 009443 MUNYON, DENNIS G. Feb -Apr license fee:theater public prkg 2,375.00 2,375.00 156657 02/07/2013 002925 NAPA AUTO PARTS misc auto parts & supplies:pw st maint 37.13 37.13 156658 02/07/2013 013972 NAT'L PROCUREMENT '13 membership dues: M. Vollmuth 90.00 90.00 156659 02/07/2013 010167 ODYSSEY POWER CORPORATION Equip repair & maint:info tech 1,337.17 Equip repair & maint:info tech 1,321.01 2,658.18 Page:5 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 6 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 156660 02/07/2013 003964 OFFICE DEPOT BUSINESS SVS Misc office supplies:old town pd office DIV Misc office supplies:old town pd office 156661 02/07/2013 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Parks Maint City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Parks Maint City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Parks Maint 156662 02/07/2013 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs:Bldg & Safety Amount Paid Check Total 124.33 21.39 37.41 1,169.03 124.99 252.12 145.72 1,331.43 252.12 156663 02/07/2013 002105 OLD TOWN TIRE & SERVICE City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW Maint 79.55 City Vehicle Maint Svcs:PW Maint 98.93 178.48 156664 02/07/2013 001171 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY Misc. supplies:Children's Museum 189.00 189.00 INC 156665 02/07/2013 000249 PETTY CASH Petty Cash Reimbursement 631.51 631.51 156666 02/07/2013 015578 PHIPPIS, LORIN D. refund:eng grad dep:LD03-002GR 995.00 995.00 156667 02/07/2013 010338 POOL & ELECTRICAL misc supplies & chemicals: var pools 561.84 PRODUCTS INC chemicals & supplies: park fountains 136.09 697.93 156668 02/07/2013 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE DEC ADVERTISING: WINTERFEST'12 625.00 625.00 COMPANY INC 156669 02/07/2013 000947 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS Reproduction srvcs:butterfield rd ext 90.72 90.72 156670 02/07/2013 000271 RBF CONSULTING DEC ENG SRVCS: I-15/SR-79 ULT. 65,995.34 65,995.34 INTRCHG 156671 02/07/2013 015265 RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES refund:eng grad dep:LD10-008GR 5,000.00 5,000.00 156672 02/07/2013 001592 RIVERSIDE CO INFO Dec radio rental:police/prk rngrs 1,127.18 1,127.18 TECHNOLOGY 156673 02/07/2013 001365 RIVERSIDE COUNTY OF renew permit:tcc 578.00 578.00 156674 02/07/2013 012251 ROTH, DONALD J. TCSD Instructor Earnings 630.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 126.00 756.00 156675 02/07/2013 002226 RUSSO, MARY ANNE TCSD Instructor Earnings 203.00 TCSD Instructor Earnings 409.50 612.50 156676 02/07/2013 015586 SAN JOAQUIN refund:sec dep:rm rental:TCC 200.00 200.00 Page:6 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 7 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 156677 02/07/2013 013376 SECURITY SIGNAL DEVICES smoke detector repairs: prkg garage 261.84 261.84 INC 156678 02/07/2013 009213 SHERRY BERRY MUSIC Jazz a@ the Merc 01/31/13 499.10 499.10 156679 02/07/2013 004814 SIMON WONG ENGINEERING Nov -Dec const support srvcs:main st brdg INC 156680 02/07/2013 000645 SMART & FINAL INC Misc supplies:mpsc 156681 02/07/2013 000537 SO CALIF EDISON 156682 02/07/2013 001212 SO CALIF GAS COMPANY Jan 2-29-657-2332:45538 Redwood Jan 2-30-220-8749:45850 N Wolf crk d Jan 2-29-953-8447:31738 Wolf vly rd Jan 2-29-953-8249:46497 Wolf crk dr Jan 2-34-333-3589:41702 Main St Jan 2-29-953-8082:31523 Wolf vly rd Jan 2-31-419-2873:43000 Hwy -395 Jan 2-29-657-2563:42902 Butterfield Jan 2-31-936-3511:46488 Pechanga Jan 2-31-404-6020:28771 OT front st Jan 2-28-629-0507:30600 Pauba Rd Jan 2-02-502-8077:43210 Bus pk dr B Jan 2-32-903-8293:41000 Main St Jan 2-31-912-7494:28690 Mercedes Jan 2-25-393-4681:41951 Moraga rd Jan 2-31-536-3226:28690 Mercedes Jan 2-30-520-4414:32781 Tem pkwy L Jan 2-00-397-5042:43200 Bus pk dr #1 Jan 2-00-397-5067:TCSD svc Iev C Dec 181-383-8881-6:28314 Mercedes Jan 055-461-2483-4:40135 Village rd Dec 196-025-0344-3:C. Museum Dec 117-188-6393-6:32131 S Loop rd Jan 091-085-1632-0:41951 Moraga rd Dec 129-582-9784-3:43230 Bus pk dr Dec 133-040-7373-0:Maint Fac Jan 125-244-2108-3:30600 Pauba rd Dec 101-525-0950-0:28816 Pujol St Dec 021-725-0775-4:41845 6th St Dec 026-671-2909-8:42051 Main St Dec 091-024-9300-5:30875 Rancho vi Dec 129-535-4236-7:41000 Main St Jan 028-025-1468-3:41375 McCabe ct 156683 02/07/2013 014783 SOFTRESOURCES, LLC Jan consultant srvcs:new permit sys 5,597.20 5,597.20 191.57 191.57 26.22 586.07 26.09 25.98 131.81 26.80 26.18 202.93 50.94 1,725.15 5,317.99 421.26 10,708.39 1,392.85 310.55 1,817.51 1,032.63 2,314.59 2,110.75 324.57 211.51 316.06 193.49 1,461.87 365.58 30.95 1,271.53 292.14 453.64 794.20 5,072.39 3,333.51 45.88 28,254.69 14,167.32 5,993.75 5,993.75 Page:7 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 8 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description 156684 02/07/2013 012422 SOUTHERN CALIF LIGHTING BAL DUE/HOLIDAY LIGHTING:OLD INC TOWN 2012 156685 02/07/2013 005786 SPRINT Dec 26 -Jan 25 cellular usage/equip Amount Paid Check Total 12,750.00 12,750.00 4,784.83 4,784.83 156686 02/07/2013 003599 T Y LIN INTERNATIONAL DEC CONSULTING SRVCS:F.VLY 290,656.76 PKWY/I-15 DEC CONSULTING SRVCS:WNCHSI 158,822.02 449,478.78 156687 02/07/2013 000305 TARGET BANK BUS CARD MISC SUPPLIES:MPSC/HIGH HOPES 261.63 SRVCS Misc supplies:high hopes pgrm 49.25 MISC SUPPLIES:CHILDREN'S MUSE 58.10 368.98 156688 02/07/2013 011736 TEMECULA TROPHY INC Nametag: TCSD Commissioner 8.59 8.59 156689 02/07/2013 009194 TEMECULA VALLEY NEWS Jan advertising: Theater 286.40 286.40 156690 02/07/2013 015584 THOMAS, SAMUEL partial refund:Bear club univ 4010.102 156.80 156.80 156691 02/07/2013 003862 THYSSENKRUPP Jan -Mar elevator maint srvcs:var 4,200.00 4,200.00 ELEVATOR.BRNCH 37 156692 02/07/2013 010276 TIME WARNER CABLE Feb high speed internet:Library 501.97 Feb high speed internet:40135 Village 235.47 Feb high speed internet:42081 Main St 61.39 798.83 156693 02/07/2013 002110 UNITED RENTALS NORTH misc supplies:pw street maint 20.73 AMERICA misc supplies:pw street maint 27.50 misc supplies:pw street maint 29.49 77.72 156694 02/07/2013 014486 VERIZON WIRELESS 1/16-2/15 Broadband usage:City 332.88 332.88 156695 02/07/2013 006248 WALKER, JESSICA TCSD Instructor Earnings 280.00 280.00 156696 02/07/2013 015581 WAL-MART refund:eng grad dep:LD07-124GR 5,014.28 5,014.28 156697 02/07/2013 015588 WEE SPARKLE! HOME partial refund:sec dep:rental:Harveston 169.00 169.00 PRESCHOOL 156698 02/07/2013 003730 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC tree trim & removal: villages slope 1,330.00 tree trim & removal: vail ranch slope 13,931.00 15,261.00 156699 02/07/2013 012343 WEST COAST PERFORMING Ticket sales for Swing Dolls 2/1/13 7,047.99 7,047.99 Page:8 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 9 02/07/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA Bank : union UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Check # Date Vendor Description Amount Paid Check Total 156700 02/07/2013 000341 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES INC DEC ENGINEERING SRVCS:PW 2,309.14 TRAFFIC DEC ENGINEERING SRVCS:PW TRA 2,140.00 156701 02/07/2013 015579 WOLF CREEK PA17 refund:eng grad dep:LD05-211GR 995.00 156702 02/07/2013 009512 WURMS JANITORIAL SERVICES, INC Feb janitorial srvcs:pd civic center 242.25 Feb janitorial srvcs: var city Feb janitorial services: tve2 999299 01/31/2013 015573 SEARS, JR., OLIVER W. refund:sec dep:rm rental:TCC 18, 999.51 781.71 4,449.14 995.00 20,023.47 200.00 200.00 Grand total for UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA: 4,596,266.23 Page:9 apChkLst Final Check List Page: 10 02107/2013 9:39:29AM CITY OF TEMECULA 118 checks in this report. Grand Total All Checks: 4,596,266.23 Pagel 0 Item No. 4 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager Sze -r - CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Heidi Schrader, Acting Director of Finance DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Property Insurance Renewal PREPARED BY: Roberto Cardenas, Fiscal Services Manager RECOMMENDATION: Approve the City of Temecula Property Insurance Policy renewal with Travelers Insurance Company and Empire Indemnity Insurance Company for the period of February 26, 2013 through February 26, 2014, in the amount of $380,123. BACKGROUND: The City's property insurance policy with Travelers Insurance Company and Empire Indemnity Insurance Company expires on February 26, 2013. In an effort to preserve a competitive rate, staff directed the City's property insurance broker, Brown & Brown, Inc., to market the City's property insurance policy. Together with Brown & Brown, Inc., staff validated the inventory of all City buildings and property requiring coverage. In response to the solicitation for Basic Property Insurance, the City received five qualified proposals from interested insurance carriers - nine additional insurance carriers either declined to submit, were not able to compete with expiring terms, or were not a market for municipalities. In response to the solicitation for Earthquake & Flood Insurance, the City received four qualified proposals from a combination of five qualified carriers — thirteen additional insurance carriers either declined to submit or could not provide the level of insurance requested. BASIC PROPERTY INSURANCE CARRIER PREMIUM* Travelers Insurance Company $121,306 Fireman's Fund Insurance Company $97,617** Hanover Insurance Company $140,000** Allied Insurance $160,000** Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company $160,000** *Deductible Range - $1,000 to $10,000 **Unable to write Automobile Physical Damage EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD INSURANCE CARRIER PREMIUM* Empire Indemnity Insurance Co. $243,971 Arch Insurance Company/Mt. Hawley Insurance Company/Endurance Insurance Company $299,280 Arch Insurance Company/Landmark American Insurance Company/Mt. Hawley Insurance Company/Endurance Insurance Company $340,560 Landmark American Insurance Company/Mt. Hawley Insurance Company/Endurance Insurance Company $381,840 *Deductible Range - 5% to 10%; premium includes taxes and fees Based on the responses, staff recommends that the City accept the proposals from the following carriers: INSURANCE CARRIER LINE PREMIUM* Travelers Insurance Company Basic Property $121,306 Travelers Insurance Company Automobile Physical Damage $ 10,845 Travelers Insurance Company Crime $ 4,001 Empire Indemnity Insurance Company Earthquake & Flood $243,971 *Includes fees and taxes TOTAL $380,123 The total premium of $380,123 is an increase of $1,295 over last year's premium of $378,828. The increase is primarily due to an increase in property values over the values insured last year. The City's property is valued at approximately $143.5 million — a 1.3% increase over last year. To ensure each carrier had sufficient financial capacity to provide the necessary policy limits to insure the City's risks, Brown & Brown, Inc. utilized the services of A.M. Best to assess the financial strength and creditworthiness of each carrier that submitted a proposal. A.M. Best assigned a Financial Strength Rating (FSR) of "A+" (Superior) to Travelers based on their ability to meet their ongoing insurance policy and contractual obligations (after a comprehensive evaluation of their balance sheet strength, operating performance, and business profile). In addition, A.M. Best assigned Travelers a Financial Size Category (FSC) of "XV' ($2 billion or greater) based on their policyholder's adjusted surplus. Travelers Insurance Company is an admitted carrier in the State of California. A.M. Best assigned Empire Indemnity Insurance Company an FSR of "A+" (Excellent) with an FSC of "XV' ($2 billion or greater). Through Travelers Insurance Company, the City will maintain Basic Property coverage with a deductible that ranges from $1,000 to $10,000 (depending on the category of property involved). Through Empire Indemnity Insurance Company, the City will maintain Earthquake and Flood coverage of to $35 million with a 5% deductible. Since total loss is not likely to occur in the event of an earthquake or flood, this coverage amount is considered sufficient and in accordance with the industry standards and practices. The attached proposal summarizes the premium and coverage provided by both Travelers insurance Company and Empire Indemnity Insurance Company. FISCAL IMPACT: Sufficient funds for the property insurance premium are available for the remaining four months of fiscal year 2012-13. The Annual Operating Budget for fiscal year 2013-14 will establish funding for the remaining eight months of the total annual premium. ATTACHMENTS: Proposal from Travelers insurance Company and Empire Indemnity Insurance Company. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kateila., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Insurance Proposal Submitted For: City of Temecula Town & Town IINSURANCE® PROPERTY, EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD/ DIFFERENCE IN CONDITIONS, AUTOMOBILE PHYSICAL DAMAGE AND CRIME INSURANCE PROPOSAL Policy Term: 02/26/2013 - 02/26/2014 Submitted by: Mike Bush Senior Vice President This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cannot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %own IOWn INSURANCE. Thank you for inviting us to develop and present a Risk Solution Program to you. We welcome the opportunity to become involved with your company. We have worked to identify your needs and concerns, and to develop a program for your insurance. Brown & Brown, Inc. is the seventh largest independent agency organization nationally.' The company provides a variety of insurance products and services to corporate, institutional, professional and individual clients. Headquartered in Daytona Beach and Tampa, Florida, Brown & Brown is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange (BRO) and has been included in Forbes' list of the "200 Best Small Companies in America". The company handles clients' premiums in excess of $10 Billion annually and has approximately 5,600 employees. While size is not the sole criteria for choosing an insurance agent, it does enable us to offer our clients clout in the marketplace and unmatched service capability. Please feel free to visit our website at www.bbinsurance.com. This brief description of insurance coverage is being provided as an accommodation only and is not intended to cover or describe all policy terms. For more complete information on the scope and limits of coverage please refer to the policy document. Specimen policy form(s) are available upon request. As listed in Business Insurance magazine, July 18, 2011 edition This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccnot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %OW11 �T Town INSURANCE. Account Executive Mike Bush (714)221-1853 phone (714) 221-4143 fax mbush@bbsocal.com email Mike Bush is responsible for overseeing all aspects of your program. Peggy L. Coleman Account Manager (714)221-1883 phone (714) 221-4143 fax pcoleman@bbsocal.com Peggy L Coleman will assist with the daily servicing of your account, including endorsements, certificate requests, client services, program design, accounting, quality assurance and market relationships. Judith Villalobos (Backup) Account Manager (714)221-1828 phone (714) 221-4128 fax jvillalobos@bbsocal.com Feel free to contact anyone on this list if you have questions or concerns regarding your insurance policy. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cannot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %own TO T1 INSURANCE IMPORTANT NOTICE DISCLAIMER Disclaimer: This proposal/policy presented is based upon the exposures to loss made known to the agency. Any changes in these exposures (Le. new operations, new products, additional state of hire, etc.) need to be promptly reported to our agency in order that proper coverage(s) may be put in place. The proposal contains only a general description of the coverage(s) and does not constitute a policy / contract. The proposal includes, but is not limited to, the terms, exclusions and conditions listed. For complete policy information, including exclusions, limitations and conditions, refer to the policy document. Specimen policy forms and endorsements are available upon request. ❑ Non -Admitted Carrier Taxes: $Per Section Fees: $Per Section Minimum Earned Premium: Per % Section Higher Limits may be available upon request V Premiums may be subject to audit Premiums exclude Terrorism Coverage Policy Type Property, APHD, Crime Carrier Travelers Insurance Companies Rating A+XV; (Admitted) Earthquake & Flood/Difference in Conditions See Earthquake Section for Carriers Ratings and Taxes/Fees Please read your policy for specific details. The information obtained from A.M. Best's Rating is not in any way a warranty or guaranty by Brown & Brown, Inc. of the financial stability of the insurer and this information is current only as of the date of publication. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cqpnot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 QST Town INSURANCE A.M. Best Rating of Proposed Carriers General Rating: These rating classifications reflect BEST's opinion of the relative position of each company in comparison with others, based upon averages within the Property -Casualty insurance industry. They are reflective of overall company services and standing within the industry. A++, A+ Superior B++ Very Good C++, C+ Fair A, A- Excellent B, B- Good C, C- Marginal Financial Size Category: The financial Size Category is an indication of the size of an Insurer and is based on reported Policyholders' surplus plus conditional or Technical Reserve Funds, such as mandatory securities valuation reserve, other investment and operating contingency funds and/or miscellaneous voluntary reserves in liabilities. Financial Size Category (in Thousands) Class I Up to $1,000 Class II $1,000 to $2,000 Class III $2,000 to $5,000 Class IV $5,000 to $10,000 Class V $10,000 to $25,000 Class VI $25,000 to $50,000 Class VII $50,000 to $100,000 Class VIII $100,000 to $250,000 Class IX $250,000 to $500,000 Class X $500,000 to $750,000 Class XI $750,000 to $1,000,000 Class XII $1,000,000 to $1,250,000 Class XIII $1,250,000 to $1,500,000 Class XIV $1,500,000 to $1,750,000 Class XV $1,750,000 to $2,000,000 This information has been provided to you so that consideration is given to the financial condition of our proposed carriers. The financial information disclosed is the most recent available to Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. Brown & Brown does not guarantee financial condition of the insurers listed above. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cannot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Viown & I O w I1 INSURANCE. Claims Reporting Guidelines Make Brown & Brown, Inc. aware of any and all incidents immediately after they occur, whether it be an auto accident, a theft, slip & fall, even a minor incident that appears will have no future activity. Do not wait for a police report. Gather as much concrete information as possible. For example, police reports, company incident reports, conversation Togs, medicals and pictures - anything that may assist in the handling of your claim. Send this information either by mail, e-mail or fax to: Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 (714) 221-4196 fax If you have any questions or incur any problems, please call our office and we will be glad to assist in any way we can. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccnot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 I own & row 11 INSURANCE What is an Audit? Policies which use fluctuating values as the exposure basis, i.e.: payroll or sales are subject to an audit. The company may visit your business to examine your records or ask you to complete a voluntary "mail in" audit. If at the time of the audit your exposures are different from what you estimated at the time your policy was written, you will receive a return premium credit or an additional premium billing. If you subcontract any work, it is essential that the subcontractor provide you with a Certificate of Insurance indicating that insurance coverage is in place for General Liability, Workers Compensation, and Automobile Liability. If at the time of audit you do not have evidence of insurance from your subcontractors, you will be charged an additional premium for the payroll of the subcontractor on your policies. We recommend you require subcontractors to carry insurance via a contract. Audits that generate an additional premium are due upon receipt. It is important that you review audits as soon as you receive them and advise us of any discrepancies in the exposures immediately so that we may inform the insurance carrier. If payment of the audit is not received by the insurance company on a timely basis, your coverage may be canceled and could adversely affect the future placement of insurance coverage. We recommend that you review the actual exposures as compared to your estimated exposures quarterly and advise us of any significant variance. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccinot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 rown. & row n INSURANCE Named Insureds The following are named insureds on your policies: City of Temecula Temecula Community Services District Oversight Board and The Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula Temecula Public Financing Authority Temecula Housing Authority Please verify the accuracy of each name on this list and update if needed. Location Schedule: This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cqpnot be considered bound until a binder has been received. City of Temecula Schedule of Locations 1 1 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA Civic Center 2 1 43200 Business Park Dr Temecula, CA 92590 (Old)City Hall 3 1 30875 Rancho Vista Rd Temecula, CA 92590 & 42659 Margarita Rd. Temecula, CA 92590 Ronald Regan Sports Park; Community Recreation Center Offices (CRC); Meeting Rooms 3 2 Gym 3 3 Auditorium, Classrooms, Kitchen 3 4 Pool / Pool Bldg. 3 5 Skateboard Park, 3 6 Roller Hockey Park, 3 7 Restrooms/Playground Equipment Rental Facility 4 1 28816 Puljo Street, Temecula, CA Temecula Community Center 4 2 Caboose 5 1 41845 6th Street Temecula, CA 92590 Mary Phillips Senior Center 6 1 28314 Mercedes Temecula, CA 92590 Museum 7 1 28300 Mercedes Temecula, CA 92590 Wedding Chapel (Chapel of Memories) 8 1 42081 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Children's Museum Gift Shop Single Occupant 9 1 42051 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Old Town Temecula Community Theater 9 2 42049 Main Street Mercantile Building 10 1 43210 Business Park Dr Temecula, CA 92590 West Wing Maintenance Facility / Office 11 1,2,3 43230 Business Park, Temecula, CA 92591 Field Operation Center 12 1 30600 Pauba Rd Temecula CA 92591 Temecula Public Library 13 1 28690 Mercedes Street Temecula, CA 92590 Parking Structure/Office - Retail 14 1 28816 Pujol Street Temecula, CA 92590 TCC Safe House 15 Bahia Vista Park 41566 Avenida De La Reina, Temcula, CA Park, Basketball 16 1 Buterfield Stage Park 33654 De Portola Road Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment & Restroom 17 Calle Aragon Park 41621 Calle Aragon Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 18 1 Crowne Hill Park 33203 Old Oak Rd Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment & Restroom 19 1,2,3 Harveston Community Park 28582 Harveston Dr. Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restroom, Snack bar 20 1, 2 Harveston Lake Park 29005 Lake House Road Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms, Lake, Gazebo, Boat House 21 John Magee Park 44576 Corte Veranos, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment, 22 1 Kent Hintergardt Park 31465 Via Cordoba, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms, Snack bar 23 Loma Linda Park 30877 Loma Linda Road, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 24 Long Canyon Creek Park 40356 N. General Keamy Rd, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 25 1, 2 Margarita Community Park 29119 Margarita Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Pork, Roller Hockey, Ball Fields, Tennis 26 1, 2 Meadows Park 43110 Meadows Parkway Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restroom 27 Nakayama Park 30952 Nicolas Rd, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 28 Nicholas Road Park 39955 Nicholas Road Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment, 29 Pablo Apis Park 33005 Regina Dr, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 30 1 Pala Community Park 44900 Temecula Lane Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms,Snack bar, Ball Fields, Tennis 31 1 Paloma Del Sol Park 32099 De Portola, Temecula, CA Park, Restrooms, Ball Fields, Snack bar 32 Paseo Gallante Park 32455 Camino San Dimas, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 33 1, 2, 3, 4 Patrice H. Birdsall Sports Park 32380 Dean Hollow Way Temecula, CA Park, Snack bar, Playground Equipment, Restrooms, Ball Fields, Courts, Maintenance Building 34 1, 2 Pauba Ridge Park 33405 Pauba Road Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms 35 1, 2 Redhawk Park F (Redhawk Community Park} 44715 Redhawk Parkway Temecula, CA Park, Turf Area, Shelter/Picnic Tables, Dog Park, Restrooms, Basketball-Half Court 36 Riverton Park 30950 Riverton Ln, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 37 Rotary Park 28816 Pujol Street Temecula, CA Park; Picnic Tables 38 1 Sam Hicks Park 41970 Moreno Dr Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms 39 Serena Hills Park 40747 Walcott Lane Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 40 Stephen Linen Jr. Memorial Park 44935 Nighthawk Pass, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 41 Sunset Park 32155 Camino San Jose, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 42 1, 2 Temecula Duck Pond 28250 Ynez Rd & Rancho California Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Pump House, Restroom, Shade Facilities and Veterans Memorial 43 Temecula Creek Trail Park 33662 Channel Street, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 44 1, 2 Temeku Hill Park 31367 La Serena Way Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, 2 Restrooms, Snack bar, Ball Fields 45 Vail Ranch Park 32965 Harmony Lane, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 46 Veteran's Park 30965 La Serena Way, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 47 Voorburg Park 39960 Nicolas Rd, Temecula, CA Park 48 1 Winchester Creek Park 39950 Margarita Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms, Basketball 49 1 Wolf Creek Trail Park 45454 Wolf Creek Rd, Temecula, CA Park, Trail with Par Course 50 Wolf Creek Park 45850 Wolf Creek Dr N., Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment, Restroom, Gazebo 51 1 30650 Pauba Rd. Temecula, CA 92590 Fire Station #84 52 28330 Mercedes Temecula, CA Fire Station #12 53 27415 Enterprise Cr. West Temecula, CA Fire Station #73 54 37500 Sky Canyon Dr Temecula, CA Fire Station #83 55 1 32221 Wolf Valley Road Temecula, CA 92592 Fire Station #92 56 1 32131 South Loop Rd. Temecula, CA 92591 Fire Station to be occupied upon dispute settlement 57 1 32364 Overland Trail Temecula, CA 92592 Temecula Citizens Corp & Paramedics 58 1 41951 Moraga Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Temecula Elementary School, Restrooms 2 Pool / Pool Bldg. 59 42075 Meadows Parkway Temecula, CA Temecula Middle School 60 1 30027 Front Street Temecula, CA 92590 Prefab Radio Bldg. 61 1,2,3 28870 Pujol St. Temecula, CA 92589 Pantry Storage Escalar House & Barne 62 1 6th & Front Streets Temecula, CA 92590 Restrooms & Light Standards, Parking Lot 63 Towne Square Park 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Turf & Benches 64 Harveston House 40135 Village Road, Temecula, CA (Lease) Multi -Purpose Facility 65 1 27495 Enterprise Circle West Temecula, CA 92590 LIABILITY ONLY 66 1 27498 Enterprise Circle West Temecula, CA 92590 LIABILITY ONLY 67 1 41735 McCabe Court Temecula, CA 92590 LIABILITY ONLY 68 1,2 Old Town Temecula Temecula, CA 92590 2 Arches 69 "Basket Foundation" Town Square Park 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA Fountain — Sculpture 70 "Singing in the Rain" 28250 Ynez Road Temecula, CA 92590 Public Art — Sculpture 71 Overland Bridge Artwork between 27624 Jefferson & 26531 Ynez Road Temecula, CA 92590 Public Art 72 Civic Center Mural on Parking Garage 28690 Mercedes St. Temecula, CA 92590 Public Art 73 "Immigrant Trail" Civic Center Mural 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Public Art 74 Temecula Duck Pond 28250 Ynez Rd. & Rancho California Rd. Temecula, Ca 92590 Veteran's Memorial CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference in Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26-13 CO 2-26.14 D1C Loc.6 Bldg.6 Address Occupancy Budding BPP •Plimanumil B1 EE Na dal& Papers EDP Hardware ED SoftwareLOP ES Year Soft Construction Stories C7 (agse l X 1 1 11000 Mono SL '0em00as,CMC CA Center 34.926,892 3,539,800 0 1.000 50,000 2.000,000 5.000.000 Included 500,000 2010 * 3 4 96795 X 2 1 43200 Business Park Dr Temecula. CA 92590 (Old) City Hap 9,000,000 1200,000 0 0 0 0 250000 IndWod 25,000 1993 Spnnklered JiMasonry 2 4 30,157 X 3 1 30875 Randa Volo Rd Tenacula. CA 92590 0 42659 Margarita Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Ronald Rogan Sporn Perk Commun0y Recreation Cooler Offices (CRC); Mooting Room 1.200,000 215,000 150.000 0 50,000 100.000 100,000 Included 10.000 1994 Sprinklarod Concrete Block 1 4 8.000 X 3 2 Gym 3,400.000 60.000 0 0 Included 0 0 0 0 1994 spnkbred Concrete Block 1 4 10,000 X 3 3 Auditorium, Classrooms, Kitchen 2.500,000 115.000 0 0 Included 0 15,000 Included 10000 1994 Spink ersd Concrete Block 1 4 10,000 X 3 4 Pooh Peal Bidp/Sbile 250.000 0 130.000 0 Inducted 0 0 0 0 1994 Concrete Block 1 4 1.000 X 3 5 Skateboard Park RoOar Hockey Perk 250.000 200.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 tntrud04 Included 0 0 5,000 Included Included Included 0 0 1694 Spattered Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 X 3 6 X 3 7 Redman's, Sneckbore,Playground Equipment Rental Fardtr 500,000 35.000 100,000 0 Included 0 0 0 0 1990 .9 6asonry 1 4 3,000 X 4 1 28816 Pu5o Street To,n c ta, CA Tomscda Commwnty Center 1,100,000 250.000 0 0 50,000 0 15000 Included 0 1985 Wood Frame 1 4 5,900 4 2 Caboose 250,000 35,000 0 0 0 0 0 1985 Steel 1 4 600 X 5 1 41845 6th Street Temecula, CA 92590 Mary Philos Senior Condor 2,000.000 375,000 0 0 50.000 0 15,000 Included 0 1085 Sp nklmW Wood Frame 1 4 8,000 X 6 1 26314 Mercedes Temecula, CA 92590 Museum 1,800.000 50,000 0 0 0 3,000.000 15,000 Included 0 1998 Spnklorod Frame 2 4 7200 X 7 1 28300 Mercedes Ton»cu1a, CA 92590 Wedding Chapel (Chapel of ktomoMsl 250000 100,000 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 1998 NO3-Sprink Frame 1 4 1,509 X 8 1 42081 Msn Street Temeada. CA 92590 Claldron's Museum Gdt Shop Seigle Occupard 2250.000 1,500,000 0 0 0 0 25,000 Included 0 Fantod. Sennbend. Aurrnttrie a 5eeary) 4 X 9 1 42051 Mast Street Temecula, CA 92590 42049 Mast Street Oto Town Temecula Community Theater 9000.000 1,090,000 0 300.000 0 0 650,000 lnd51404 75000 2005 Sprinklers, Steel. Wood 3 4 20,000 X 9 2 kMcerdlo Budding 1,500,000 50.000 0 0 0 0 15,000 Included 10,000 2003 Frame 6 Bnck 1 4 2.164 X 10 1 43210 eu3.ass Park Dr Temecula. CA 92590 Wert Wmg Mmdanvwo Fixity 1081ee 3,300,000 400.000 0 0 0 0 75.000 Included 10,000 1997 Spattered Masonry 2 4 13.500 X 11 12.3 43230 Bui ass Park TemeMa, CA 92591 Field Operates) Condor 6600000 550000 0 0 50.000 0 150,000 Included 100,000 2007 SproUdered Stool Fran Composite Membrane and Metal Root 2 17,600 X 12 1 30600 Pauba Rd Temecula CA 92591 Temecula Pubic library 10.000,000 550000 0 0 200000 2.000.000 950.000 Included 150,000 2006 Spmtderod Stool 1 34,000 X 13 26693 Mercedes St Temecula. CA 52590 Perking StructurorONico• Retail RE: EDP Hardware Location Locked wet card access & eocurdy amara) 16,700,000 0 0 0 0 0 650.000 Included 0 2010 Reinforced 8 paabosaod aged in pace concroto9Wct ural steel frame 1 below 8 3 above 4 179.4101 8555 X 14 28816 Pujol Street Tenacula, CA 92590 TCC SAFE House 1242.053 0 0 0 50,000 0 175000 Included 0 2009 Spmklored frame win metal roof 1 4 3,800 15 Bares Visa Park 41566 Avenida De La Rena, Tornado. CA Park Besketb0p 0 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 1 Substeld Sage Park 3355413e Portoa Road Temecula CA 92590 Park Playground Equipment 0 25.000 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 Concrete Stock 1 4 1,000 17 Cala Aragon Park 41621 Cane Aragon Temecula, CA Park 916ygroun0 Esstament 37500 0 0 D 0 0 0 19 1 Crowns H2O Pads 33203 Old Oak Rd Temecula CA 92590 Park Playground Equipment 8 Restroom 170200 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 Comxeto Block 1 4 1,000 mb201302pc- Temecula SOV 2-21-13 (2) CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference In Conditions, Earthquako Flood Statement of Values 2-26.13 to 2-26-14 OMC Loc.8 Bido.9 Address Occupancy Building DPP Cordwood Epidd 18 EB Valuable Payers EDP►taldrrare FDP 13oMrare EDP EE Year Dal Coed No. of Storles Prot h Am matt X 19 12 3 Hamesan Comenun3y Park 28582 Hamadan Dr. Temecula, CA 92590 P*r, Paypround Equipment. Restroom, Snsckbar 503.000 15.000 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 Concrete Bleck 14 3,000 Community Room 800.000 Ind*dW0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 Concur* Mock 1,900 20 1, 2 Haivaston Lake Park 29005 Lake House Road Tenacula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment Rostroams, Loko. Gazebo. Boat House 500.000 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 Conasa Black 5 Wood 1 4 3.000 21 John Magee Park 44576 Con* Volans, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 0 0 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 1 Kele Hodugardt Park 31455 Vic* Cordoba, Temeada. CA Park, Playground automat meat Resbooms. SnnctDv 500.000 35,000 82.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1991 Conroe Back 1 4 3,000 23 Loma Linda Park 308T7 Lana Lida Road. Tamsada, CA Park. Playground Ertuqu red 0 0 187,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 Long Canyon Creek Park 40356 N. General Kearny Rd. Temeada, CA Petr PtmgroundErpromord. Shads Caen 25.000 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 1, 2 Maiparlir Commuray Park 29119 Margar*a Rd Tomcod*, CA 92590 Peak, Rollo Hackle, Bab Fiofd$, Tarsals, Snack Bardieetroom 500,0000 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.000 28 1, 2 Moadowa Park 43110 Msadaws Parkway Tomcod° CA 92590 Park, Playground Emeprnoot. Restroom 170,200 0 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 Comet Badk 1 4 1.000 27 Nakayama Park 30952 Nicolas Rd, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 Nicholas Road Park 39955 Nicholas Road Tomeada, CA Park, Playground Equtpmrnt 0 0 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 Pablo APO Park 33005 Rsgna Dr. Terteada, CA Park, Playground EOkepmsnt. Strada Covers 75.000 0 100.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 1 Pala Community Park 44900 Temec to lane Temeada, CA Pet Playground Eple mod . Rexrooms. Snackbar, Bag Fgkls. Tonna 500.000 35.000 100.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 Comma Block 1 4 3.000 31 1 Poama ON Sol Park 32099 Do Panora. Temecula. CA Park. Res:rooms.8a0 Fields. Srrcdear 500,000 35,000 40.000 1.000 6.900 0 15.000 Inckidsd10.000 1991 J4aasarvy 1 1 3.000 32 Paseo PsaOarde Pork 32455 Camino San Dana. Temeada, CA Part Playground Equupnenl 0 0 82.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 1, 2,1.4 PO= H. Birdsall Sports ParkPork, 32380 Daan Hollow Way Temecula, CA Snackbar, Playground Equipment. Rsetrooms, Bag Fbdn. Courts. Mainanenco Balding 2240.000 100.000 112.500 0 0 0 100.000 mended 50,000 2000 Concrete Black 1 7,189 34 1, 2 Psuba Ridge Park 33405 Pauba Road Tomocufa, CA 92590 Pork, Playground Equipment. Reetroome, Sheds Cores 170200 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 Concrete Block 14 1,000 35 1, 2 Reekawk Perk F (Radhawk Communsy Park) 44715 Rednrwh Parkway Temeada. CA Pet Turf Area, Shaker/Plane Tabled. Dog Park. Restrooms, Basketball Half -Court 250.000 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 D 0 m0201302pc- Temeada SOV 2-26-13(2) 2 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference in Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26-13 re 2-26-14 DSC toe • Bidp a Address Occupancy Br1Shcap BPP llicepoundEmacesant 61 EE Valuable Pipets EDP Hardware EDP Slat.", EDP EE YaarBull Coe ueeon & Ma Prot et Arse 18 1 36 Riverton Park 30950 Rh -orlon Le. Temecula. CA Put Playground Egdpment Shade Coven 25.000 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 Rotary Park 28818 Pujol Street Temecula, CA Park; Plane Tebbe, Shade Covers 12.500 0 82.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 1 Gam Hicks Park 41970 Moreno 0r Temecula Ce 92590 Park. Playground Equipment Restroomr. Shade Covers 225.000 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 39 Serena Mb Park 40747 Walcott Lime Temecula. CA Park. Playground Equlpmenl Shade Covers 25.000 0 125,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 Stephan Link Jr. Memorial Park 44935 Npht rev k Pass, Temecula, CA Pule Ptsywound Equgrent Shade Coven 25.000 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 Sumo Park 32155 Carreto San Jose, Temeada. CA Perk, Pleyp o and Equipment 0 12,500 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 1.2 Temecula Duck Paled 28250 Ynez Rd 6 Rancho Calm* Rd Temecula. CA 92590 Pork, Pump Howe, Restroom. Shade FacLUrs 200,000 0 25.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 43 Temecula Gook Tse Prink 33662 Channel Street Temecula. CA Park, Playground Eoatpmenl 0 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 1, 2 Temeku Hal Park 31367 La Serena Way Temecula. CA 92590 Pork, Playground Equipment. 2 Rostrooms. Seckonr, Ball Fields 500,000 35,000 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 D 2000 Concrete Block 1 4 3,000 45 VW Randle Park 32965 Harmony Lane, Temecula. CA Park, Playground Equfpmekd 0 0 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 Veteran's Park 30965 La Serena Way. Tereada, CA Park, Playground Emeanant 0 0 125,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 'Voabkay Peak 39960 Nmolas Rd. Tomcods, CA Park 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 1 Windxs:er Greek Perk 39930 Margarita Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Pent overwound Eeramvi coscoo+e. 6earunu , Shwa emus 195200 0 100.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 JMasoruy 1 4 1.000 49 1 Wolf Creek Tref Park 45454 Wolf Geek Rd. Temecula, CA Pork. Tear nth Par Course, Shade Covets 25,000 0 150.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 Wolf Creek Park 45050 Woo Creek Or N., Temecula. CA Pak, Playground Equipment. Restroom, Ouebo 195200 0 150.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 Concrete Block 1 4 1900 % 51 1 30850 Pauba Rd. Temecula, CA 92590 Ftro SLOon 154 3,000900 120,000 0 0 0 0 15.000 Included 5,000 1957 Sprblklered Masonry 2 4 10,000 52 28330 Mercedes Temecula, CA Fne Staten 112 Insured by CAL FIRE 0 0 0 0 0 15.000 Included 5,000 % 53 27415 Enterprise G. Wort Temecula. CA Fre Metal 173 1.600.000 95,000 0 0 0 0 15,000 Included 5,000 1988 Type V Wood Frame Stucco 1 4 8.000 mb201302pc- Temecula SOV 2,26,13 (2) 3 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference In Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26-13 to 2-26-14 CMC Loc.1 Bldg.1 Address Occupancy Building BPP Eqpt BI EE Valuable Papers ECP Hardware DP Software ECP EE Year Butts Constrrretkn Storks C1 l8gFt.j 54 37500 Sky Canyon Or Temecula, CA Fire Station 183 Insured by County of Riverside 0 0' 0 0 0 15,000 Included 0 X 55 1 32221 Wall Valley Road Temecula, CA 92592 Fire Staten 992 2.118.800 95,000 0 0 0 0 15.000 Included 0 2007 Sprinklored Steel Stucco & Rock 1 4 9,082 X 56 1 32131 South Loop Rd. Temecula, CA 92591 Fire Stetson to be occupied upon dispute setltement 2.709.000 95,000 0 0 0 0 15.000 Included 0 2008 SConed cret Concrete ete 1 4 9,030 57 1 32364 Overland 'red Temecula. CA 92592 Temecula Citizens Corp & Paramedics 60,000 30.000 0 0 0 0 10,000 Included 0 2002 Weed Frame Wood Siding 1 2.000 58 1 41951 Morelia Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Temecula Qlcmcnlary School. Restroom, 140,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 Sprinklored Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 58 2 Pool l P001 Bldg. 140.400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 59 42075 Meadows Parkway Temecula, CA Temecula ldiddlo School 0 25,000 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 60 1 30027 Front Street Temecula, CA 92590 Prefab Rado Bldg. 8,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 Steel 1 4 48 81 1 Escalar House & Barn 26870 Nei St. Temecula, CA 92599 Pantry Storage 720,000 0 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 1928 Wood Stucco 1 4 1,500 62 1 6th 8 Front Streets Temecula, CA 92590 Resbooms & Light Standards, Parking Lot 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 Frame 1 4 700 Unscheduled, Electronic Data Processing Hardware, Software and Erna Fxpenso at Non•OMned Localbns 0 0 0 0 0 0 290,000 Included Included 63 Town Square Park 41000 Maar Street, Temecula, CA 92590 Turf d Benches 0 0 50.000 0 0 0 0 0 D 64 Harveaton House 40135 Village Road, Temeccula,CA (Leased) Multi -Purpose Facd ty 1,000.000 0 0 56.568 Included 0 15.000 tncludsd 10,000 201)4 Wood Frame. Sprinkbred, Alarmed 1 4 3,493 65 1 27495 Enterprise Circle West Temecula, CA 92590 Liability Only 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 66 1 27498 Enterprise Circle West Temecula, CA 92590 Uabtlity Only 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 1 41735 McCabe Court Temecula, CA 92590 Liability Only 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insured Values -Special Form 5129,344,595 510,797,300 $3,370,000 1358,588 1508,900 57,100,000 $8,825,000 Included 1975,000 X D1C, EO a Flood Coverage Totals: 5118,898,545 510,429,800 NIA 1301,000 5500.000 57,109,000 8,185,000 Included 1900,000 10,797,300 3,370,000 358,588 506,900 7,100.000 8,925,000 0- X 68 1, 2 Old Town Temecula Temecula, CA 92590 2 Arches 1§ 9175,000 each 350.000 50,009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 Steel Reirdarced Concrete - Flagstone Face PobsMd Braes mb201302pc- Temecula SOV 2-28-13 () 4 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference In Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26-13 to 2-26-14 IBC Loc.6 Bldg, 6 Address Occupancy Building BPP tOf1 d E4r+iP +t B] EE Vatuabte Papers EDP Hardware EDP Software EDP EE Year Built Construct/on Ho -of Stories Prot Cl Ams 184.Ft.) 69 'Basket Fountain' Town Square Park. 41000 Main Street, Tarwcuta, CA Fountain Sculpture 400,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 70 -Singing in the Rain- 29250 Ynez Road, Temecula. CA 92590 Public Art Sculpture 130,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 71 Owrtand Bridge Artwork between 27624 Jefferson & 26531 Ynez Road. Temecuia, CA 92590 Public Art 60,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 mb201302pc- Temecula SOV 2-26-13 (23 5 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference in Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26-13 to 2-26-14 D1C Loe.t Bldg. / Address Occupancy Buedkrg 8PP •Pla_ Equipment rourtif 01 00 Valuable Papers EDPHazdwana 8LW n EDP EE Ywt8u0 ConstructionPla.d Stories Prot Ct Arne CMC Cellar Mural on Parking Damao 26690 Mercedes St Temecula, CA 92590 'knndgrantheir Pull0c Art 250,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (Stift)72 73 CMC Cantel Mwel 41000 Main Shed Temecula. CA 92500 Pubac Art 45,000 D D 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 X 74 1 Teme.uta Dude Pont! Yncz Rd d Rancho CahlorNa Rd Temecula. CA 92590 Veteran's Memorial 550.000 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 2004 Deo Reinforced CoRRMMerw Preened Giants Face AuUwraed Signalers Title mh201302po•Te111egda SOV 2.26.13 (2) 'Playground Equipment (Includes Shelters & Picak Tables/B80; Slides etc) 6 PROPERTY 2-26-13 To 2-26-14 Per Schedule of Locations / Statement of Values attached Subjects of Insurance Limits of Insurance Building & Personal Property — Blanket excluding Playground Equipment $140,141,895 Playground Equipment $3,370,000 Location #74 - Veterans Memorial $550,000 Location #68 - 2 Arches $400,000 Contractor's & Mobile Equipment, Per Schedule Attached $555,609 Business Income Including Extra Expense - Blanket $910,000 Fine Arts (Loc. #6) (Loc. #12) (Loc. #6 & #12) (Loc. #69 - #73) $250,000 Owned $35,000 Owned $250,000 Property of Others (5 location Total)$885,000 Fine Arts at Any Other Location (AOL) $100,000 Fine Arts in Transit (Owned & Others) $100,000 Valuable Papers — Blanket $7,100,000 EDP Property — Blanket (Hardware & Software) $8,625,000 EDP Extra Expense $975,000 Newly Acquired Buildings $2,000,000 Newly Acquired Equipment $1,000,000 EQSL Sublimit with $50,000 Deductible $2,000,000 Machinery & Equipment Breakdown Included Miscellaneous Unscheduled Equipment Including Mobile & Voice Communication Equipment (See Representative Sampling) $150,000 Personal Property in Transit $100,000 Deductibles: Coinsurance: Agreed Value: Endorsements: $10,000 Building/Personal Property $5,000 Valuable Papers/EDP/Fine Arts and (AOL, Transit) Contractor's Equipment/ Personal Property at Unnamed Locations/ Personal Property in Transit $1,000 Miscellaneous Unscheduled Equipment & Mobile Communication Property 24 hour waiting period for Business Income and Extra Expense (with EDP BI/EE) & Machinery & Equipment Breakdown Business Income Nil Yes, subject to receipt of current signed statement of values and Business Income worksheet. • Date Recognition Exdusion • State Amendatory (where applicable) • All expiring endorsements unless otherwise noted or previously disclosed CONTRACTORS & MOBILE EQUIPMENT 2-26-13 TO 2-26-14 No. Description Limit 1. 1992 Massey Ferguson Tractor with Loader and Scraper SIN: LF31180U397524U $31,500 2. Speed Limit Sign 10,000 3. 1995 John Deere 310D Backhoes S/N: T0310DG813754 64,760 4 1997 Eagle Police Command Trailer S/N: 1UPT10P20V1016022 (Licensed) 45,000 5. 2 Cairnsiris Helmets - $25,350 each 50,700 6. High Density Mobile Storage System** 18,750 7. Traffic Signal Modification 14,590 8. 1998 Essick Walk Behind Patch Truck Roller SIN: 1D631029 11,167 9. Mobile Traffic Monitor 12,700 10. Scrubber, Floor 17,633 11. Equipment, Defibrillators 35,000 12. 2000 CMPLA Ditchwitch S/N: 1A9AF1826YF495820 48,000 13. 2007 Kawasaki Mule SIN: 1 JK1 AFCJ137B510945 7,000 14. Cushman Truckster S/N: 1CUNH22274PL000708 10,000 15. New Holland Tractor SIN: NH33660 20,000 16. 2006 Westcoaster Motor Boat & Trailer S/N: HULJ1112G506 5,600 17. Genie Lift 7,500 18. 2007 Kawasaki Mule S/N: JK1AFCJ127B510676 7,000 19. 2012 John Deere Backhoe 1T03105JLBD211149 113,709 20. 2011 Scissor Lift #200204597 25,000 TOTAL: $555,609 *Including Voice Communication Equipment **Miscellaneous Equipment Contained Inside Covered Under Unscheduled Equipment Mb201302pc — Temecula Property & IM values MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT BREAKDOWN 2-26-13 TO 2-26-14 Coverage Limit Deductible Direct Damage Included $10,000 Business Interruption Included 24 Hours Extra Expense Included 24 Hours Consequential / Spoilage Included $10,000 Expediting Expenses Included $10,000 Spoilage Included $10,000 Ammonia Contamination Excluded $10,000 Off -Premises Power Interruption Included $10,000 Mb201302pc — Temecula Property & IM values MISCELLANEOUS UNSCHEDULED EQUIPMENT INCLUDING MOBILE 8t VOICE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT (IN TRANSIT OR AT OTHER LOCATIONS) 2-26-13 TO 2-26-14 REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLING (Below and Per Attached List of Furnishings, Tools & Equipment): 1. Arial Equipment $21,662 2. Compressor Equipment $3,105 3. Traffic Counter $1,629 4. Fence $2,126 5. Break Jar Mod Drill $5,162 6. Pump System Stencil Truck $2,800 7. Security System $1,130 8. Solar Arrowboard $4,262 9. Gymnastics Equipment $7,394 10. Sound System $141,908 11. Defibrillator $5,199 12. Helmet, Cairns Iris $25,350 13. Bicycle $1,291 14. Radar Equipment $2,172 15. Traffic Signal Modification $14,590 16. Digital Dimmer Component $26,782 17. Play Equipment $15,494 18. Recycling Equipment $5,487 19. Shampooer $2,100 (Limit of Insurance: $150,000) Deductible: $1,000 Mb201302pc — Temecula Property 6 IM values faMsIAoI master Fixed Asset Report Paso: 1 12117/2012 9:29:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Assoc Numter 020003 - LAND, IMPROVEMENTS, HANDICAP ACCESS Assoc Status ACTIVE Asset Plass. Land • LAND Progeny Type FIXED ASSET Asset Type: land Assol Ccndtion convert ACt^^!r Property Grcup Mosta' Asset a Assoc Size. 0.00 4teasuo Und Post to Balance Snort Y Tog IMnocr. 1209130429 From CtP N Manldsquor AIM& Pares' Disposal N Model a Disposal Rostnaon Serial a Reetnu.on post Document Sourcos Aleut. -ops Depremaeon Transfer In may. P cpnatary Ploprtetary. Governmental. ecttlandg Qeverrvnmlat doplandgo Communal transfer CIP Disposal Proceeds Propnalary. Propdotary. Proprietary, Govermentd: Gcvcrmwntal disposal Govemmorue! Purchase Ac4ute Molhod convert Pueuso Duo 6/3011995 Fong Scum AmcuN 30.581.90 PO; PO Date trodut 0 Inco Dam veudtcr a Voucher Dato Cheat/ Chock Date Deed a Dood Data' Ura Type AcecureNumber Ruchaso Dlslrleutlon Fund 030/1995 0 020.1920 520 Loudon Rasoonstle Dear in Use Person Rospcns, !0 Perm AN; Percent Araotaei 100.00 30,501.90 Valuation Dato Transaction Trans Type Fund Typo LAo UnsIs Lde Salvage Amount 03011093 Acqulsltton Cost 020 G 30.901.40 Total 30,501.90 Firs description Asset Num0er. 000004 • LAND IMPROVEMENTS. SAM HICKS PARK Asset Status. ACTIVE Aust Class: land - LAND Propeoy Typo FIXED ASSET Asset Typo: land Asset Cameron' convert Acl!'Atr. Property Group Master Assail 8 Asset Size: 'LBO Medusa Urst 1.8 Post to Balanco Shoot Y Tag Number 1209130427 From PP 14 4tareat~srer 41970 MORENO ROAD Pamal D.spetai N Modelo Cispis.7 Restnolcn Saul a Restriction Dose Dacuatenf Soarcoa Acq%ls lion Depredation Transfer In Prcpriotary. Proprietary Propnotary Gorasmonlrt ocglandg Gavemmcrtd deplandgo Governments transfor CPP Crsposvt Prececas Prcpnetary. Governments: Pr retary Govern -now disposal Propctemry Governmm at P090.1 (aMstAst feaster Flied Asset Rotten Page: 2 1211712012 9:28:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Pw chaao Atgmro Method. convert Purchase Date 6130/1095 Fund rip SCOW Amount 409,826.44 PO a PO Date Invace a Invoice Dale Voucher d Wither Onto- Check a Chedt Dale Ikeda Dead Data o typo Account Nuateer Purchase Distnbuunn Find 6130/1995 0 820.1900 820 LoCatfon Respororoto Dept to Use Person Respanubee Person- APN Poroarn Amc a t 100.00 409,026.44 Valuation Data Transaelxcn Trans Type Fund Typo Lao Units Leo Salvage Amount 6130119115 Acquisition Coat 620 G 409,026.44 Total 409,026.44 Full doscdpUon Assot Hunter. 000005 • LAND IMPROVEMENTS, ADA PARK IMPROVEMENTS Asset Status ACTIVE Asset Class: Land • LAND Property Type FIXED ASSET Asset Typo: land Aunt Condntan eonvart may' Proparty Group MosterAsset a Asset Seto 0.00 Mansura Unit Post to oohnco Sheet: Y Tog Kumbcr. 1209130435 From CIP. N Manufacturer Attow Partial Disposes• N Model a Ciipasat Rostne en: Serials Restncecn MSC* DctuettaISources Acquisieon Coprea son Transfer In Prepnoury Prnp etary Propnetary. Geventstentat acgtand9 Garrrenntat doplandgo Gamma= transfer OP Damsel Proceeds ProCnoary- Proprietary Ptcisnetary Gevearessuat Go.muucntat disposal Govcnanental Purchase Amuse Method convert Purchase Date 6/3011995 Ftnor.g Sturm Amount 261,771.18 POR PO Dato Imo= 9 Invoke Date. Watcher d Voucher Dale ChecIt d Chad/ Data: Mod 0 Dood Data: Purchase Distribution Oato typo AacuMNurntror Fund 6130/1990 B 820.1900 020 Location Rosponsitta Dopt In Uso Posen Respensfito Person APN Percent Amount 100.00 261,771.18 Valuation Cato Tramatxn Trans Typo Fund Type We Urns Lto Savage Amours 6/2011899 Acquisition Cost 820 G 261,771.18 Total 261,771.18 Faadoicstpdon Asset Number: 000006 - LAND, 6TH PARKING LOT Asset Ctosa: land • LAND Assoc Typo: land Asset Status ACTIVE Prcp my Typc FIXED ASSET Asset Cenddion convort Pa90: 2 raMstAst &taster Fired Asset Deport P48e: 3 1211712012 9:28:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Activity: &taster Asset a Asset Size: 0.00 Tog Number. 1209130436 Manufacturer: Modal 0 Swain Measure Unit Prcpudy Group Pestle (tatenco Sheet: Y From CIP N Aersv Partial Disposal' N Disposal Restriction Rosurumrt Des` Oatume l Sources Acruistcn Depralaicn Transfer In Proprietary: Governmental: acglandg CIP Proprietary. Prepnetary; Governmental: deptandgo Govcmmental: transfer Disposal Proceeds Proprietary: Prapnetary Proprietary: Gjo nt* Governmental. disposal Goverment*: purchase ACAtaro Meltct convert Purchase Date 613011985 Ratan; Sanoo: Amount 631,897.58 PO 0 PO Date invoice 0 Invoice Dale VOudser a Voucher Dato Chock a Check Dato Deed a Oecd Dalo b to Type Acoounl Number Purchase Distribution Fund 013011898 B 820.1900 820 Loeadon Respcnsroto Dept In trso Person Rosponstle Person API/ Percent Amount 100.00 631.897.58 Vakratbn Dote Troroadion Trans Typo Fund Type Life Unts Leo Salvage Mount 613011998 Acquisition Cost 820 G 831,897.58 819/2004 Valuation Cost 820 G 127,984.00 Total 759,461.58 Fal *sedation Asset Manner: 000010 • LAND, 28040 PUJOL STREET Asset Status: ACTIVE Asset Class land • LAND Property Type: FIXED ASSET Asset Type: land Asset Condition* coned Activity: Properly Group: 185-199 Masts: Asset a Asset Size: 0.88 Mea3uro (trot Post Is Balance Sheet Y TogNum9cr. Prom CM' N Marntacttaer. Attew Partial Disposal N Model a D:spcsel Restnc cis- Send a Restrct0en Dem: DoeumcnlSaunas. AaquistSaa Depreciation Transfer In Proprietary: Proprietary. Proprietary: Govommentat: aeglandg Gavemmenlar, daprandgo GevmmenlaL transfer CIP Disposal Proceeds Ptcpnotary: Proprietary Proprietary Covmuiertal: Governmental disposal Governmental. Parehsse /Supra Method: convert Purcnaso Dato 12/20/1999 Ftrort0 mya: LOWIMOD Amount 15000.00 PO a PO Date Invoice a fnvorce Date Voucher Voucher Date Ctieoe 0 Chock Date Deed a Deed Date Data Type AccosmtNumter Purchase Distribution 12/2011999 B 820.1900 Fuld Percent Amount 820 100.00 154,500.00 Page 3 faMstAst &tutor Flute Asset Report Pape: 4 1211712012 9:28:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Loudon Responsrae Dept 165.199 Rosponf0lo Person John Mayor In use Person APN 922.053.0201021 Wfoadan Oa:o Transuan Trans Type Fun: Typo Lite Unts 140 Swage Amman 1212011999 Acquisition Cost 020 O 154,500.00 Total 154,500.00 Fah doscdptA n Asset Mentor 000012 • LAND, BEG BAL FROM COUNTY Asset Status ACTIVE Asset Class. land LAND PrapenyTypo FIXED ASSET AssalTypo. land Assist Donation' convert Actively: Property Group MasterAtlet 0 Asset S12a: 0.00 Measure Unit Post to Balance Shoo: Y Tog Mater 12091 0308 From CIF'. N Uoratcamar. Maw Paniat Disposal N Nadel 0 Disposal Restriction Senal o Rotucthcn Desc DaeamentSources Acqusun Depreciation Transfer to Proprtolvy. Prepnetary Gavenrnentat outland° Governmental dopland8o CIP Disposal Propnetary. Prepn¢;ary Goven eentot. Governmental disposal Purchase Aware/8090d Convotl Purchase Doe: 121111989 Fudnq Source Amount 7,298,800.00 PO 0 PO Date Imroica a Invoice Data Vbu9ser 0 Voudser Date Chock a Check Delo Decd a Deed Dae Purdtasn Distribution PrePnelary Oovemmental: transfer Pmcoo:s Prr"notary Governmental typo AccountNum0at Fuel 121111989 B 820.1900 820 Location Rerpatstlo Dept In Use Person Respaea0te Person' APN: !Percent Amount 100.00 7.298,800.00 Wanton Data Trorooction Truro Typo Fuld Typo Lrlo Unts Lire Salvfga Amour 12/111089 Acquisition Cost 820 G 7.296,000.00 Tavel 7,256,800.00 FhNdescrlpdon Asset Number. 00001 - LAND, PALA COMMUNITY PARK Asset Status ACTIVE Atsel Class: land • LAND Property Typo FIXED ASSET Main Typo. land AssetConmbon convert Amity. Property Group Master Asset a Page 4 faMstAst Rester Fixed Assort Report Piga: 5 12/1712012 9:20:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Asset Silo 10.00 Tag Macaw 1209120397 Manda,slser 44900 TEMECULA LANE Madel a Santa Measure UM Post lo Dance Sheet. Y From CIP N Mae Partial Oirposal: N Disposal Reiarcaan Rostnctcn 0e1c Docama t Sources Moisten Doprerrascn Transfer In Proprietary Proprietary. Covsnrnanit acglandg Govemm o*a1 doplandgo CIP Gopma/ Proprietary. Go mvsenwt Pwarm MAW 0 Methee: convert Fundng Sosrco POa tremors 8 bbrrrner 0 Cnoek a Deed a Propnolay Gevrrrmertta disposal PurehoseDate 10!15!1991 Amount 1,571,184.81 PO Dano Invoice Doto Voucher Data Check Data Deed Dato Purchase Distribution Proprietary Governmental transfor Proceeds Proprietary: Govcmmereot Data typo Acaos:nt Number slaty 1051511001 B 820.1900 020 LosoUaa Respanb a Dept in Use Pcrocn Responstolo Pawn. AM! Fertern oar7.2111 100.00 1,671.104.51 Vatuadan Data Transaction Trans Typo Rad Typo Life Urns Leo Salvage Amount 10115/1991 Acquisition Cost 020 G 1.571.184.61 Total 1,571,184.51 Full deserteden Assaf Wheat 000014 • LAND, RONALD REAGAN SPORTS PARK Asset Status ACTIVE Asset Class land • LAND Prapedy Typo FIXED ASSET AseelType land Asset Cenerben convert fit" t7 Property Grp MasterAssela Assort Size 63.00 Measure Un4 Pest to Balance Sheet Y Tao Nlor cr 1209130398 From GP N Manufacturer. 42859 MARGARITA ROAD Arrow Partial Orsposat N Nodcl A Disposal Restrict= Sens) a Rest:taco Dose: DeoumartSources Armasiten Coprlaas:n Transfer In Propri¢fmy: Governmental acelandg OP Propnetary. Gruornmensat Parehtso Aalite Mcleod. convert Funding Scarce P00 Invoice a Voucher Cheri a Decd a bele lypo Arcata Nmeer PraFneta'Y Coveniental doplandgo Psopdactry Govcrnmental. transfer Dispcsat Proceeds Prcpriotary Governmental disposal Purchase Data. 10515/1991 Amount 1,810,000.00 PO Oato InyrtcO Data. Voucher Dam: Cheek 0a:e Deed Ora Purchase Distribution Proprietary. Governmental Fund 10116/1991 B 020.1900 820 Loeaildn Rasport2ie Dept in Use Parson Rosponsade Person APN. Percent Amount 100.00 1,818.000.00 Page 5 faMatAst Rask, Fised Asci Rapers Pope: 0 12/17/2012 9:28:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL lhhradon Oats Transaction Trans Typo Fund Typo Lde Unts Life Salvage Amount 10/1611991 Acquisition Cost 820 0 1.818.000.00 Total 1,818,000.00 Feardescripiion Asset ranter. 000015 -LAND, .51 ACRES PARK SITE 1 Asset Status ACTIVE Asset Class land • LAND Property Type FIXED ASSET Asset Typo: land AssetCcndticn convert AC:stilt Property Group Mauer Asset a Asset Stzo: 0.61 Measure Une: Post to Balance Shoot Y Tag Nurnoet 1209130399 From CIP N rdatsutaetrger. Max Partial C sposC N MedolO Disposal Restriction Serial n Roatncbon Dere • Decummr Sources AequiCCon Deprouatdn Traeger In Proprietary Proprietary Prbpnetary Govensaere:al aegiandg Grommer..n deplandgo GovernmentX transfer CIP piaposel Proceeds Proprfe�ry Proprietary Prepeeury GOcCfnntildal Gaanrnenmt disposal Govarretetaal Purchase Aupato Method convert Purchase Dalo 1 011 511 091 Fund ng Source Amount 126,000.00 PO a PO Date lamina St Invoice Date - Vomer a Voucher Date. Cheat a Check Date Deed 0 Omni Date: Purchaso Distribution Data Typo Arasu Monter Fuca 10!1511991 B 020.1900 a20 Location Respcnsts4 Dept m Use Person. Responstlo PersonAPN. Fotccni Amount 100.00 126,000.00 Valuation Dato Transactor Trans Typo Fund Typo Ute Unts Life Salvapo Amoum 1011611991 Acquisition Cost 920 13 128,000.00 Total 126,000.00 Fufl daselfptlon Asset fAacber 000015 • LAND, BAHIA VISTA PARK Asset Status. ACTIVE Asset CUSS: Lind • LAND Property Typo FIXED ASSET Asset Type: Wrtd Asset Cendscn convert AraNar Property Group Masser Asset a Page 0 laMslAsl Master Fixed Asset Report Page: 7 12/1712012 9:26:14AM CITY OF TE11ECULA PAYROLL Asset Sim 0.46 Tag Mender. 1209130400 Manufacturer: 41566 AVENIDA DE LA REINA Model 0 Shat d Mur Uret Pest m Balance Meet Y FmmCIP N Allay Partial Disposal N Cupola, Restriction Rettncton Dose ooeumont Sources Aeon:tun Deere:avvn Transfer In Prcpnelary Governmental acglandg CtP Prcpnotary . Prcpncurry. Gcventmentat doplandgo GPra'rxnm:01 transfer Qrspam Proceeds Prep:unary lmprotary Proprietary Governmental' Governmental disposal Gwatvnentd Perched Aquae Monad convert Pentose Date: 10115/1991 Ftatdtng Source; Amman: 115,000.00 POO PO Qea: lnvo, o 0 trireme Orae Voucher 0 Voudter Data: Crack 0 Check Date: Good d Deed Due Purchaser oistnbtaion Oslo Type Accosad Mentor Fund Yercem Arrqunt 10115/1991 8 820.1900 020 100.00 115,000.00 Locadcn Rosparutle Dept to Use Person Respcnsitlo Person: APN- Vatuallar Data Transaction Trans Typo Fund Typo Lilo Units oto Salvage Amount 10/1511991 Acqutsf Ion Coal 020 G 115.000.00 Total 116,000.00 Fu0 deserfpllon Asset laantser. 000017 . LAND. RIVERTON PARK Asset Status ACTIVE Asset Class. land - LAND Pavony Typo: FIXED ASSET Asset Typo land AssetCondron convert Activity-. Prcpeny Group Master Asset 0 Asset Site: 4.94 Measure Unit. Post to 0alanco Sheet Y Tag Nun0cc 1209130401 From CIP N Martulsc wsr. 30950 RIVERTON LANE Allay Parva! D4posat N Modal 0 Disposal Restate= Sella, 0 Resutcucn Dosc Document Sources Acquisition Dcprociucn Transfer In Prconetary: Governmental: acgtandg CEP PrepncLary A-oRruder1l Gavcmmontal doplandgo Governmental Iranslor Qepasel Proceeds Prepndtiry: Propratary PropSCIWy Governmental . Govenvncni6i disposal Governmental Prrahaso Acquire Malted. convert Recluse Data: 10/16/1691 FundrgSetateAmcum 545,755.50 PO 0 PO Date. Invoice 0 Invc.co Oats Vadter d VasCtcr Date' Cnedc r Check Dale Deed 0 Deed Darr Data Type Account *mot Pwdwso OIstrtoutlen Ftrtd Portent AmaW 1011611091 B 820.1900 820 100.00 545,795.50 LoeaUon Rospensbte Dept to Use Person' Responsible Person APAL Paco 7 faMstAst Master Flood Asset Report Paso: 8 1271712012 9:28:14AM CITY OF TEMECUTA PAYROLL Wharton Dxe Trmacuon Trans Type Fund Type tifeUnts Uta Salvage Amcunt 1011511991 Acquisition Cost 820 G 845,765.50 Total 645,755.50 Frdf description Asset hunter 000019 - LAND IMPROVEMENTS. LIGHTING PH II DESIGN Asset Status. ACTIVE Assaf Crass* land • LAND Property Typo: FIXED ASSET Asset Typo: land Asset Condemn convert Actnry Property Group. Mau Asset 9 AssocSae. 0.00 Stemma Um Post w Baonce Steel Y Tog t9arocr 1209130403 From GP N Yarortacutcr Mow Partial Drsposat. N Model a Disposal Rostncben Sonal d Roslnetasn Oesc: DawatomSomas Ace ssnon Dewar -lawn Transfer In Prernetary Prpwtary Propne a y Govemmerssat acglandg Govertmentar doptandgo Gwerrcnent r transfor CP Disposal Procoads Prcpdotary: Propdotary: Proprietary: Governmerum: Gorvmncntat disposal Goeammesuat. Poreheso Acestre Method eanvert Pwthaso Date, 112811992 Futdas Source Amount 11,970.00 PO a PO Dato Imam a invoice alto Voucher a Youehar Dato Check a Cheek Dato. Deed d Dead Date Purchase Distribution Ys type AO:cunt thimble urn] Percent Amount 112971992 13 820.1900 020 100.00 11,970.00 1.atatlen Respau4le Dept 111 Use Person ResponcMe Parson APN VaRndon Delo Tram:mon Tram Typo Fund TWO Lao Unts Life Samoa Arnie' 112911892 Acquisition Cost 820 G 11.970.00 Total 11,970.00 Fut description Asset Number 000020 - LAND IMPROVEMENTS, ELECT ENG PHASE II Asset Status ACTIVE Assaf Class land • LAND Rropony Typo- FIXED ASSET Assc1 Typo land Asset Condlion convert Aetm►y. Property Group MadetAsoe 0 Page:8 faMstAs1 Mash Fled Auot Report Page: 9 1211712012 0:26:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Auer Siza. 0.90 Maasuro Unit Post to Botance Sheer. Y Tag timber 1209130404 From CIP N Marofacuxer Anew Pandit Cnpesrx N Model a D;spcsaI Restnccon Senor a RestuCran Desc Document Sources Acquisition Depreer ton Transco/ In Pro eLvy. Prepnetary Prop.•eeary. Gamma= acgtandg Goemmcnt1 deplandgo Gmemmevat transfer CIP OtspOsoi Proceeds Propneary Ga+amneroat Pascbaso Acnsro Method Fusdng Sane POa Imam Vo larD Check a Deed convert Date Typo Account ranter PropnoIary Gevetr r.entat disposal Purc iase Dalo 711/1991 Amtran 415,366.76 PO Data rrnam Data VODUtOr Date Chock Date Deed Date Purchase Distraction Ptopnetary. Covemmeazt 71111991 B 020.1900 Fina Percent Arnota11 920 Location Respaueto Dept In Use Penton Rasponside Person APN: 100.00 415,380.70 Maadbn Date Transaction Trans Typo Fund Typo Leo Ikitts Leo Salvage Amount 7/1/1991 Acquisition Cost 020 G 418,368.78 Total 415,366.76 Fhadsscsfpslett Asset I.Vmoor. 000022 • LAND, COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECT Asset Status: ACTIVE Asset Gess: land • LAND Property Typo: FIXED ASSET Asset Type: land Assa,Candaian convert Acontr P openy Gres* Mostar Asset Asset Size: 0.00 tdeasuro Umt Post to Balance Sheet Y Tag Number. 1209130406 Fr¢n CtP N MamQagvar. Attar Parcel Disposal N Model a Disposal Restriction: Scoot a Restrict= 0etc Doeaaaenz Sources Aa, baton Depreciation Transfer In Propnetay Gmenctiental- acglandg CI? Pro;nctary Proonetary. Geer nenta1 doplandgo Goverrmenial transfer Disposal Proceeds Frcpnetary' Prep -Wary Prcpntiacy. Gcvanmanat Gareaane t i disposal Goren /n=0 Prtrcfnite •AcgtrroMethod: commit PurchaseDa•.o 412811092 Fulda° Sou= Amount 136,008.69 PO 2 PO Data tMeee a Invo=ee Data Vurchcra Varuscr Dats. Caeca a G+ock Dale Cees A Does Date bate Type Aocctao Number tAvpuso Dlatrtbutton Fund 4!2611992 8 820.1900 820 Location Resporomlo Dept to Use Person Responsdo Palen: APN: Percent AmOW:t 100.00 138,000.59 Page 0 taMstAst Nosier Mod Asset Report 12/17/2012 9:28:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Van:aeon Date Transaction Trans Typo Fund Typo Lire Units life Salvage Amoutt 4/2811092 Acquisition Cost 820 G 135,008.59 Totat 135,008.58 Faildaacrtpt/on Pace: 10 Asset lumber 000023 • LAND. PRINTING COST, FEES. CRC Asset States ACTIVE Asset Class land. LAND Prpcny Type FIXED ASSET Asset Type land Asset Ccndscn convert ACmty Property Grflc;P Vaster Asset a Asset Size 0.00 Mauro Una Pest to Qatar= Sheet Y Tag Iturnber 1209130407 From CtP N Wind =I t Atex Partial Qsposm N Model a D,sposal Restncucn Sene1 a neszcion Dere Ooamrent Sources Actaistaon Doprocutpn Transfer In Prcpnewy Governmental acglandg CIP Proprietary Governmental dopland0o C.spossl Proprietary. Govemmcred transfer Proceeds Pmpnetary. PropnotarY Proprietary. Governmentaa Governmental disposal Goventnen:I Pintas* Actium Method. Purthaso Data 613011892 Funding Sousa: Amavtt 4,901.08 PO 0 PO Dam ins 11 invoice Oato VoucherVout3Wr Date Chock a Chock Oxo Deed u Dcod Date. Dara Typo Account Number Purchase Olsulbuaen 817011092 B 820.1900 uttd Percent Amcunt 820 Location Responslbto Dept. In Use Person: RaspansiNo Person' APN, 100.00 4,981.08 Windom Date Transaction Trans Typo Fund Typo Lite Units Life Salvage Amount 813011082 Acquisition Cost 820 G 4,981.00 Total 4,881.06 Felt desertpCwr Asset Nurrber 000025 • LAND, RECLASS CRC PROJECT Asset 5tatrs ACTIVE Asset pass: land -LAND Prcperry Type FIXED ASSET Asset Type land Asset Condition convert ACBMy: Prcpany Group Mager Asset a Paco 10 1071330 1211712012 9:26320AM You.b.Ct10 Do mlatton Radon C11YOP TEM ECUTAPAYROLL Immo Pond 14atRum Tess 2013 Pape. 1 Ap61 MOSSO' OnestotIon Acquire Ode Polar Wu Cvnan* Yeas Cunene War Oepsod Bon 0oplode3en Ad(wenroib Doak Ytlw Asia Foxe mew Ospanoant 620 Aetk4ty U do6ned 002074 002076 002016 002077 002078 002070 002060 002081 002602 002091 007054 002055 002086 002087 002080 002089 000000 002191 002491 002093 602664 002085 002096 003134 004091 AIN. type: ewMO% D IP$d1I ent 120 MOW: 077018837701 00071 D apal0aont:140 Adh ly: UndoOnod 000707 D adanenent 141 AaEvhy:Undo(nod 000707 Oepoelmdlt 110 000787 0epdnamet 410 A001: Undefined 000765 000186 000767 000708 000789 000771 000772 000771 000774 000778 000770 000770 004781 000702 000763 000784 EMPIRE CREEK 0 OEL RIO RD BRIDGE 07/3011009 EMPIRE CREEK 0 PROW ST BRIDGE 0030/1000 MARGARITA CREEK 0 VIA NORTE BRIDGE 0800/1669 MUARIETACREEK 0 MARY ST BRUME 050011680 MURRIETACREEK O RANCHO CARD BR100E 00,30/1900 MURRIETACREEK 0 WONCNESTBR 110 BRIDGE 06001080 PECWINGACREEK ® RAINBOW CANYON RD esa01 0672421680 RANCHO CARD cHARNE 6) BUSINESS PARK DR 001381100 SANTA GERTRUDISCREEK 0YNEZRDBRIDGE 0013011989 EMPIRE CREEK o NUMBER 0R BRIDGE 02130/1000 EMPIRE CREEK 0 MARGARITA RD BRIDGE 08,301090 EMPIRE CREEK O MORAGARD BRIDGE 06/30/000 EMPIRE CREEK Oyon. RD BRIOGB 061301090 EMPIRE CRExC0YUKON RDBRIDGE 00/3011000 SANTA GERTRUDISCREEK fpJEFFERSONAIE BR 001301000 PALARDCIIAMIEL0WWI VALLEY RDBRIDGE 069011001 REGIAVMC PKWY CHANNEL 0 OVERLAND TRAIL BF 0613011091 SANTA MUMS CREEKO N. GENERAL KBARN 001301091 VVAO0ELLW1.01®0016NERCE MIER OR BRIDE 09/301991 BANTAGERTR*iD6 CREEK MARGARITA RD BRI 00401093 LIEFER RO BRIDGE 101001996 TEMECWICREEK OPALARDBROW 06304000 PALARD BRIDGE 09/302003 ROLA ROAD BRIDGE PHASE • 2 00/302007 PEOESTRINOIRCYC LE BRIDGE OVER SAIDA GER 061441013 Adetly: NadeRn 0 TOTAL Okpart:neak 620 TOTAL Mut TypK.64011377 TOTAL 01Y HALL I1PRpVEMEN1S Ae6Mry UaddLad10TAl Oepaiment 120 TOTAL 00130119088 CITY 06,3811998 Activity: Undafinod TOTAL OtpsAnuM:140TOTAL OTY HALL IMPROVEMENTS Ad1r1Iy: Unde6eod TOTAL popuknet t 161 TOTAL 061361990 OW HALL IMPROVEMENTS 0913411098 Adtetten IndsRaodTOTAL 0epsekneat:160 TOTAL IMAGINATgNWORKSHOPCHI,ORERS MUSEUM 11001314 VILLAGE APARTMENTS 011/NALLa OVE/1E14TS 24616 FRONT STREET TEMECU1.A VALLEY HISTORY UUSEUM BUILO=NO CITY I104.L BLUING MNNTENANCE FAC0.17Y =LONG MISSION VILLAGE APARTMENTS MISSIONVILLAGEAPARTMENTS MISSION VILLAGE APARTMENTS MISSION VILLAGE APARTMENTS MAINTENANCE FACIUTY IMPROVEMENTS TOC BUILDING CRC GYM IMPROVEMENTS RONALD REAGAN SPORTS PK SNACKBAR BLDG CRC BU91.09NG 341,77000 107,134.11 300.60900 07,020.81 16882100 62.921.73 712.0000 22249922 8.391.266.38 1350.41111 3.652,840 00 1.146048.42 414,30000 121839.57 21630700 80.021.70 1.371361.00 4300.3.89 33223500 101.57098 909,007.00 02.78635 203,501.00 84004.14 412385.000 121063.17 30167400 0198702 1371.72000 301,70906 163,62900 62,611.79 141.74100 40,888.78 1,00832300 311.68316 313.07.00 69,44844 3,81347000 941168.0 4411000 94027.68 6.416.10600 904,06362 4401 40 5325.18 147/7.98 1.23040 1351.063.00 3.761.96 0.00 000 000 000 0.00 0.00 000 000 000 009 000 000 0170 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 00o 000 000 000 000 000 000 0.00 0.00 0.00 009 000 000 0.00 000 0.00 *CO 000 0.00 066 060 000 000 000 *CO 600 0.00 234.63580 212,48830 11560427 489.46978 280283827 2307.70358 204,430.43 140.07530 041,59111 23471104 315,30085 20440886 2466123 210.70893 0910/094 130667.21 101,11721 77465481 223.647.51 2.673.413.41 343,18212 4,511,051.38 40.75822 11347.58 1.241101.04 31.025678.70 7.264901.06 040 0.00 23,64807146 31626.1478 7.384604.40 0.00 400 3365497415 31.69467470 73126010 10.177.90 366174 100 0.60 400 230417116 0.00 8.50616 *0.177.60 3.410.74 16.17720 3,868.74 22.002.30 635534 0.00 100 000 400 5.60!*6 400 0.03 4408.18 1444806 79.10200 436734 0.0 0.00 14.64496 22.602.30 4118.34 4.403.00 1.73023 400 000 100 0.00 14.04861 3369.77 1000.00 1,730.23 0.00 0.00 460000 133021 7317.00 2837.38 100 0.00 000 100 7.31740 2037.30 0.40 0.00 3,060..77 301477 40982 467613 7.31740 3637.38 06402001 3.46269046 015,009 61 03/3111007 125484068 462.00522 09301098 14616068 40.14395 07120/1008 347.187.18 121.51552 060011099 2432.049.29 0223.02948 06/36/968 3.277341.27 1.318.084.37 0613011000 1.314.011.80 534711072 00151665 6439024 35.121 28 0016/1005 10111420 140946 06/201006 74000.00 28345.35 06/2611096 104,640.80 42,202 44 06402001 126133.06 3151902 064811007 2.730.128.87 426.0405 1N15/1903 3347A20.441 1.522.33132 01124/1991 135641.30 63,550.70 0710111902 2.470300.47 1330.54522 090 000 000 093 000 000 0.00 000 000 000 0.00 0.00 000 000 0.00 000 0.00 400 000 0.00 000 000 0.00 000 000 000 090 000 000 0.00 040 0.00 0.00 000 44140 3.087.68084 774,454.38 108.11671 22561166 2609.116.81 1350.256.30 785.89006 511006 64.75..72 41.753135 62,18808 01.41434 2.308.24422 1.725.02.14 6499051 1131646.25 Pape 1 Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %own rown INSURANCE An Explanation of PROPERTY BUILDINGS: (Real Property) Buildings or structures including extensions, fixtures, machinery and equipment constituting a permanent part of the building, building service equipment and supplies. CONTENTS: (Personal Property) All business property including stock, fixtures, equipment while in the building or in the open within 100 feet of the premises. IMPROVEMENTS & BETTERMENTS: Alterations or additions to any building not owned by insured. BUSINESS INCOME: Reimburses insured for loss of income resulting directly from interruption of business caused by damage to or destruction of real or personal property, by perils insured against. The company is liable for the actual loss of net income that would have been earned or incurred and continuing normal operating expenses including payroll. This form of insurance provides "disability Income" for your business and the function of it is to replace the operating income of your business during the period when damage to the premises or other property prevents this from being earned. It is from your operating income that your business meets expenses of payroll, Tight, heat, advertising, telephone, etc., and from which is derived your profit. This form is subject to coinsurance of either 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100% or 125%. MAXIMUM PERIOD OF INDEMNITY: Provides loss of income the same as business income except that coverage is limited to 120 days and is not subject to coinsurance. MONTHLY LIMIT OF INDEMNITY: Provides Toss of income based on insured's highest monthly loss times length of maximum down time. Not subject to coinsurance. EXTRA EXPENSE: If your building was rendered untenantable by fire or by any other insured peril, it would probably be deemed necessary to secure other quarters to continue operations. However, the use of such buildings would undoubtedly involve many extra expenses such as rents, installation of telephones, etc. Extra Expense Coverage would provide the necessary money for such expenditures. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 IiiI' O WIl & l oWI7 INSURANCE CONTINGENT BUSINESS INTERRUPTION: Indemnifies the insured for Toss of gross earnings and continuing charges and expenses resulting directly from necessary interruption of his business due to damage to or destruction of (a) Contributing properties which are firms supplying raw materials or parts to the insured and (2) Recipient properties which are firms to which products of the insured are furnished. AGREED VALUE ENDORSEMENT: An agreement made by the insured company that they will waive the coinsurance clause on specified property if a loss caused by an insured peril occurs after the date of the endorsement and prior to the expiration of the policy. If this endorsement is not extended by endorsement beyond the expiration date the Coinsurance Clause is automatically reinstated. VALUE REPORTING FORM: If your stock values fluctuate from month to month, this is the most feasible plan you can have as you report exact amount of exposure present. This policy is written subject to the 100% Coinsurance Clause and the values are adjusted at the end of each year. You will either receive a return premium or an additional premium, depending upon the average value reported. The deposit premium is based on 75% of the face amount of insurance shown. PLATE GLASS: "All Risk" of direct physical Toss. Includes the expenses of repairing frames, installing temporary plates, or boarding up opening. Coverage is for Full Replacement Cost, Tess deductible. EMPLOYMENT DISHONESTY: This covers loss of money, securities or property belonging to the insured or for which the insured is legally liable due to employee dishonesty. Burden of proof rests with the insured. Policy does not cover inventory losses based on an inventory computation or a profit and loss computation, unless the insured can prove through evidence wholly apart from such computation that the loss was sustained through dishonest acts of employees. Under Blanket Position Bond each employee is bonded for policy limit, while under Commercial Blanket Bond the policy limit applies regardless of the number of employees involved. MONEY & SECURITIES BROAD FORM: The company pays for loss of money and securities by the actual destruction, disappearance or wrongful abstraction of same from within the premises or while being conveyed by a messenger outside the premises. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE: "All Risk" protection is provided which includes the following perils: fire, lightning, windstorm, hail, riot, civil commotion, strikes, explosion, aircraft, vehicle damage, collapse of building by weight of ice, snow or sleet, vandalism and malicious mischief, burglary and theft and other perils not excluded by the policy. The intent of this insurance, if any of the above losses occur, is to provide coverage for the following: This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage capot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %rown . & rown INSURANCE CONTINGENT BUSINESS INTERRUPTION: Indemnifies the insured for Toss of gross earnings and continuing charges and expenses resulting directly from necessary interruption of his business due to damage to or destruction of (a) Contributing properties which are firms supplying raw materials or parts to the insured and (2) Recipient properties which are firms to which products of the insured are furnished. AGREED VALUE ENDORSEMENT: An agreement made by the insured company that they will waive the coinsurance clause on specified property if a loss caused by an insured peril occurs after the date of the endorsement and prior to the expiration of the policy. If this endorsement is not extended by endorsement beyond the expiration date the Coinsurance Clause is automatically reinstated. VALUE REPORTING FORM: If your stock values fluctuate from month to month, this is the most feasible plan you can have as you report exact amount of exposure present. This policy is written subject to the 100% Coinsurance Clause and the values are adjusted at the end of each year. You will either receive a return premium or an additional premium, depending upon the average value reported. The deposit premium is based on 75% of the face amount of insurance shown. PLATE GLASS: "All Risk" of direct physical loss. Includes the expenses of repairing frames, installing temporary plates, or boarding up opening. Coverage is for Full Replacement Cost, less deductible. EMPLOYMENT DISHONESTY: This covers loss of money, securities or property belonging to the insured or for which the insured is legally liable due to employee dishonesty. Burden of proof rests with the insured. Policy does not cover inventory losses based on an inventory computation or a profit and Toss computation, unless the insured can prove through evidence wholly apart from such computation that the loss was sustained through dishonest acts of employees. Under Blanket Position Bond each employee is bonded for policy limit, while under Commercial Blanket Bond the policy limit applies regardless of the number of employees involved. MONEY & SECURITIES BROAD FORM: The company pays for loss of money and securities by the actual destruction, disappearance or wrongful abstraction of same from within the premises or while being conveyed by a messenger outside the premises. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE: "All Risk" protection is provided which includes the following perils: fire, lightning, windstorm, hail, riot, civil commotion, strikes, explosion, aircraft, vehicle damage, collapse of building by weight of ice, snow or sleet, vandalism and malicious mischief, burglary and theft and other perils not excluded by the policy. The intent of this insurance, if any of the above losses occur, is to provide coverage for the following: This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cafrot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katelia., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 L OW�fl & 1'O W 11 INSURANCEe • All sums due you from customers, provided you are unable to effect collection thereof as a direct loss or damage to records of accounts receivable. • Interest charges on any loan to offset impaired collections pending repayment of such sums made collectable by such loss or damage. • Collection expense in excess of normal collection cost made necessary because of such Toss or damage. • Other expense, when reasonably incurred by you in re-establishing records of accounts receivable following loss or damage. INSTALLATION FLOATER: Covers materials and supplies destined to be installed or erected while in transit or at a job site. Tools and equipment of the insured and property at owned or rented premises is excluded. NEON SIGN COVERAGE: Policies are written on "All Risk" basis, subject to the following exclusions: • Wear and tear and gradual deterioration • Loss caused by installation • Mechanical breakdown • Loss caused by dampness of atmosphere • Loss caused by war • Loss caused by nuclear reaction VALUABLE PAPERS: Valuable papers means written, printed, or otherwise inscribed documents and records, including books, maps, films, drawings, abstracts, deeds, mortgages and manuscripts. Valuable papers would cover the cost of research to reconstruct damaged records, as well as the cost of new paper and transcription. It is an "All Risk" form. This endorsement does not apply to the following: • Fraudulent or dishonest acts by the insured • Loss resulting directly from errors or omissions in processing or copying the valuable paper • Wear, tear, gradual deterioration, vermin, or inherent vice • Loss due to electrical or magnetic injury, or erasure of electronic recordings except by lightning • Loss due to nuclear reaction • Loss caused by warlike action • Loss of property held as samples or for sale or for delivery after sale. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccyot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 l Owll & town INSURANCE CONTRACTORS TOOLS & EQUIPMENT: A floater used to cover a wide variety of movable equipment. Coverage can include small items such cis hand tools, i.e., hammers, circular saw, jig -saw, pumps, etc. EQUIPMENT FLOATER: A floater used to cover a wide variety of owned and rented equipment. Coverage can also include equipment rented to others. See your specific form for details. COMPUTER: MEDIA - magnetic tapes, discs, drums, or other materials on which data are recorded. EQUIPMENT - machinery used to read and produce information kept on the media. LOSS OF INCOME - when normal operations are curtailed because of damage to or destruction of the equipment or the media. EXTRA EXPENSE - additional cost incurred by an insured in its attempt to conduct business on a normal basis after damage or destruction of its processing system. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 1[0Wfl 1 O W I`1 INSURANCE® An Explanation of SPECIAL FORM COVERS ALL DIRECT CAUSES OF LOSS, SUBJECT TO, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE FOLLOWING EXCLUSIONS: > Explosion of steam boilers > Voluntary parting via trick or device > Mysterious disappearance or inventory shortage > Wear and tear ➢ Loss caused by birds, insects, rodents or other animals > Mechanical breakdown > Artificially generated electrical currents > Continuous or repeated seepage or leakage of water over a period of 14 days or more > Smog > Dishonest act or omission by an insured, employee, volunteer or authorized representative > Rust, corrosion, fungus, decay, deterioration or latent defect ➢ Earth movement > Dampness or dryness of atmosphere, extremes of temperature > Water leakage from failure to protect from freezing > Flood - surface waters or water which backs up through sewers or drains. Water below the surface of the ground, including that which exerts pressure or flows, seeps or leaks through sidewalks, driveways, foundations, walls, basement or other floors, or through any opening. > Governmental Action > Nuclear Hazard > War > Power Failure > Building Ordinance > Rain, snow, ice or sleet to personal property in the open > Release of contaminants > Setting or cracking > Marring or scratching This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccppot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 I O wll. & row n INSURANCE ➢ Smoke, vapor or gas from agricultural smudging or industrial operations > Collapse except as provided by additional coverage > Failure to act, inadequate planning, or defective design, materials, or maintenance A SPECIAL FORM provides much broader coverage than a BASIC or BROAD PERILS policy in lieu of a limited number of perils insured against under the BASIC or BROAD PERILS policy. The SPECIAL FORM places the burden on the insurance company to pay any loss that is not specifically excluded in the policy contract. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katefa., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 rows. & 1 o w IZ INSURANCE What is Co -Insurance? The co-insurance clause is found in almost every property policy. It states that the insurance company agrees to give you a lower rate per $100 of coverage, if you agree to carry the specified percent of insurance to the value of the property. Examples of Co-insurance at 80%: Building Value $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Insurance Carried $100,000 $80,000 $70,000 Loss $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 Insurance Pays $60,000 $60,000 $52,500* Have (70,000) Should have (80,000) x Loss = % Paid Ordinance or Law Coverage: Coverage is provided when the insured is required by enforcement of building, zoning or land use ordinance or law to repair, replace or demolish a covered building property. Description of Coverage: Coverage A. Loss to the undamaged portion of the building allows a partially damaged building to be valued as a total loss Limits of Coverage B. Demolition Cost C. Increased Cost of Construction OR: Blanket Limits Coverage B and C. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccyot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %own & row 11 INSURANCE Machinery Breakdown Building & Business Personal Property Business Income w/Extra Expense EDP Property on Prem Fine Arts - AOL Fine Arts in Transit Fine Arts on Premises Personal Property Personal Property - AOL Scheduled Personal Property Valuable Papers on Premises Total Property: PREMIUM SUMMARY PROPERTY (EXCLUDING EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD) 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 $6,217 $8,218 $10,214 Included Included Included $72,493 $65,391 $72,105 $91,271 $110,708* $123,999* Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included Included $78,710 $73,609 $82,319 $91,271 $110,708 $123,999 NOTES: a) COMBINED SCHEDULED BUILDING & PERSONAL PROPERTY VALUES 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 $52,565,750 $68,915,750 $80,801,938. $80,590,138 $100,548,991 .1248 .1109 .0974 .0913 .0819 2011 2012 2013 $139,147,695 142,437,895 143,511,895 .0656 .0777 .0871* 2012 Value Increase: 1.3% (*Includes Playground Equipment Increase) b) Rate Increase: 10.6% (Travelers) c) Premium Increase: 12.0% (Travelers) Includes: 1.3% Value increase & 10.6% rate increase for Travelers (1.013 x 1.106 = 1.120) Travelers *Terrorism included at $3,566 (Travelers) This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cannot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 10W11. & Y OPV I1 INSURANCE PREMIUM PAYMENT OPTIONS 1. Payment in Full 2. 4 Payments — 25% due at inception, 25% due at 4th, 7th, & 10th month This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccyiot be considered bound until a binder hos been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 24W E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 1' ()W TowIZ INSURANCEa MARKETING RESULTS PROPERTY (EXCLUDING EARTHQUAKE, FLOOD & AUTOMOBILE PHYSICAL DAMAGE) Travelers Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A+: XV; Admitted Philadelphia Indemnity Ins. Co. 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A+: XIV; Admitted Fireman's Fund Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV; Admitted Chubb(Federal Insurance Company) 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A++: XV; Admitted Chartis Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV; Admitted Hartford Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV; Admitted Allied Insurance 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV; Admitted Crum & Forster Insurance Comapny 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII; Admitted $123,999 $160,000 + (No Auto APHD) $97,617 (No Auto APHD) Unable to compete with Incumbent Pricing Unable to Compete with Incumbent Pricing Not a Market for Municipalities $160,000 to $170,000(No APHD) No California Business This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 town & row IZ INSURANCE Golden Eagle Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV; Admitted Hanover Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIV; Admitted ACE 2013 A.M. Best Rating: Landmark American Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: Axis Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: Scottsdale Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: Not a Market for Municipalities Premium: $140,000+ Declined: Not a Market for Municipalities Declined Cannot Compete Cannot Compete This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 town. & lowf INSURANCE DIC (Including Earthquake & Flood) ♦ Statement of Values ♦ Premium Summary This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AuloPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 1�Own & 1-O W 11 INSURANCE Coverage: Interests Covered: Limits: Sublimits: Deductible: Conditions: Subject to: Premium: DIFFERENCE IN CONDITIONS DIC, including Earthquake (Not Including Earth movement), Flood & Earthquake Sprinkler Leakage Buildings, Business Income, Contents, Electronic Data Processing, Extra Expense, Improvements & Betterments, Stock, Valuable Papers $35,000,000 Per Occurrence & in Annual Aggregate separately as (last year: respects Earthquake & Flood. Earthquake Sprinkler 35,000,000) Leakage subject to Earthquake Aggregate. 5,000,000 Building Ordinance, Increased Cost of Construction & Demolition $500,000 Property of Others $500,000 Owned Property at Other Locations $50,000 Per Occurrence, all perils except 5.0% *Per Unit of Insurance for Earthquake & Earthquake Sprinkler Leakage, subject to a $50,000 minimum per Occurrence $100,000 Per Occurrence for Flood. TERM: 12 Months EFFECTIVE DATE: 2-26-13 VALUATION: Replacement Cost except Actual Loss Sustained on Time Element COINS: Nil VALUES: $147,241,345(Lost Year $147,242,345) WARRANT: All Risk Underlyer • Debris Removal Clause • Receipt of Terrorism Disclosure Notices, prior to binding. • Locations marked "X", per DIC Schedule attached • Loss Control Survey $236,206.00 $7.764.99 Surplus Lines Tax/Fee & Policy and Intermed. Fees $243,970.99 Total (See Alternate Limits Quote) Rates: Various Cancellation: 30 days Notice of Cancellation except 10 days for non-payment of premium. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysOmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ca -mot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Viown & TOWTl INSURANCE *Unit of Insurance Valuation: Terrorism/TRIA: Optional Increase in Occurrence & Annual Aggregate Limit a) Each separate Building or Structure b) Contents in each separate Building or Structure c) Property in Yard d) Business Income/Extra Expense Replacement Cost: Property Damage & Stock Valuation; Actual Loss Sustained: Time Element including Extra Expense TRIA (Terrorism Risk Insurance Act) Act of 2002, Empire Indemnity Co. is offering coverage for annual additional premium of $118,103 + $3779.30 taxes/fees. Must have declination/ acceptance of offer at time of binding. a) 10,000,000 Excess over $35,000,000. Premium: $14,000 + .032 Taxes and Fees Participating Company Participation Layer Premium Taxes & Fees Empire Indemnity Ins. Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A+: XV; Non -Admitted 100% $35,000,000 $236,206 $7,764.99 Note: 35% MINIMUM EARNED PREMIUM Major Terms & Conditions: Quote expires 30 days from quote date. Full premiums and fees are due and payable 20 days from inception. • 100% MINIMUM EARNED ON FEES Form: Company Form Major Exclusions Terrorism -Not to Include the US Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (company form)(If declined) Pollution (Company Form) Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, Seepage Asbestos/Contamination (Company Form) War Mold (Company Form) Theft This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Viown & 10wn INSURANCE Flood -Locations located in 100 year flood plain and shaded X flood zone. Boiler & Machinery Electronic Data & Computer Systems (company form) All Risk Perils (including windstorm) Ensuing Loss Building Ordinance, Increased Cost of Construction (Except above the $5,000,000 limit provided) Further Subject To: Signed Terrorism Notice Signed D-1 Form Additional Comments: THE EXCLUSION FOR FLOOD ZONE A, V & SHADED X DOES NOT APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS, OR ANY OTHER LOCATIONS ON THE EXISTING SCHEDULE, SHOULD THEY BE REASSIGNED BY FEMA TO FLOOD ZONE A, V OR SHADED X. 1. 43200 Business Park Dr., Temecula, CA 2. 43210 Business Park Dr., Temecula, CA 3. 43230 Business Park Dr., Temecula, CA 4. 42081 Main Street, Temecula, CA 5. 42049-51 Main St., Temecula, CA 6. 28300 Mercedes, Temecula, CA 7. Old Town Temecula, Temecula, CA (Flood Deductible for Flood Zones A, V, & Shaded X is 2% per location with a 500,000 minimum per occurrence.) This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katelia., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %own rO\V I1 INSURANCEw DIC PREMIUM SUMMARY EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD Annual Premium Annual Premium 201212013 Insurance Company 201312014 $236,206.00 Empire Indemnity Company $236,206.00 13,500.57 plus Taxes/Fees 7,764.99 $249,706.57 $5,735.58 Savings $243,970.99 Premium Decrease: Value Decrease: (Total Insured Values) Rate Decrease: 2007 Total DIC 2008 Total DIC 2009 Total DIC 2010 Total DIC 2011 Total DIC 2012 Total DIC 2013 Total DIC NOTE: a) b) 243,970.99 = 2.3% (Decrease) 249,760.57 147,241,345 = 0.0% (Decrease) 147,242,345 12.5% (Decrease) Limit $15M Ded. 10% Limit $25M Ded. 7.5% Limit $25M Ded. 5% Limit $25M Ded. 5% Limit $35M Ded. 5% Limit $35M Ded. 5% Limit $35M Ded. 5% Values: 69,830,088 Values: 82,224,088 Values: 82,493,816 Values: 106,565,469 Values: 147,004,595 Values: 147,242,345 Values: 147,241,345 Premium: 209,137.50 Premium: 145,467.48 Premium: 158,992.34 Premium: 179,818.50 Premium: 238,138.50 Premium: 249,706.57 Premium: 243,970.99 Terrorism not included above, see options Premium decrease of 2.3% (comprised of a value decrease of .0% and a rate decrease of 2.3%) This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 town. & rown INSURANCE PREMIUM PAYMENT OPTIONS 1. Payment in Full 2. Premium Finance: 25% down payment and 9 monthly installments This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 24W E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 IDWfl & I'own INSURANCE OTHER MARKETING RESULTS (Plus Taxes & Fees, where applicable) Insurance Company of the West 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A-: IX Lloyds of London (Vikco) 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII Limit Premium Declined: Flood Exposure Declined: Underwriting Reasons Landmark American Insurance Company $5,000,000 $250,000 @ 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII ICAT Specialty Insurance Company(Lloyds Syndicate) 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII (Primary) 10% Ded. Declined: Due to TIV's too high Aspen Insurance Declined 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV Arch Insurance Company Indicated $170,000; No 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A+: XV $5,000,000 Zones A & V Align General Company Declined: Rockhill Insurance Company Flood 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XI Exposure Plaza Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XI Colony Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XII Commonwealth Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A-: VI Declined: Excess Only Cannot Compete This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 I,0 W 1-1 & rown INSURANCE, Mt. Hawley Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A+: XI Western Re Axis Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV London Syndicates 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII Seneca Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: VIII Alterra E & S Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: TBD Endurance Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV QBE Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV $10,000,000 xs $10,000,000 Declined: cannot compete Declined: Municipality Declined: Due to High PML Indication: 10,000,000 xs 10,000,000 Declined: Flood Zone A $50,000 $50,000 This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cagot be considered bound until a binder has been received. CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form. Difference in Conditions. Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2.26.13 to 2-26-14 DIC Loc. a Bldg. P Address Occupancy Billdklg BPP ound Bt EE Valuable Papers EDP hardware EDP : EDP EE Year Bull CoConstruct.-.Sofh of No'a ot C 4 Arse (�F 95.795 X 1 1 41000 Mob SL Temecula. Chic Canter. 34.928.892 3.539,500 0 4273.152 50.000 2.000.000 5,030.000 wed 500,000 2010 * 3 X 2 1 43200 Buslnoas Pork Dr Temecula. CA 92590 (Old) City Hall 9.000.000 1200.000 0 0 0 0 250,000 Included 25.000 1993 Sprb1US d ,M„taaonry 2 4 30.147 X 3 1 30475 Rsneho Vol* Rd Tomsculs. CA 92590 3 42659 Margarita Rd Temecula. CA 92590 Ronald Regan Sporn Perk Community Recroa0on Cen.Of6oea (CRC). Meetng Rooms _ 1200.000 215,000 150.000 0 50,000 100,000 ‘.- 100,000 Included 10.000 1994 Sprink5arod Concrete B1odk 1 4 6,000 X 3 2 Gym 3.400.000 60,000 0 0 1ncl+dsd .X 0 0 0 0 1994 Sprinktered Concrete Block, 1 1 4 4 16.000 10,000 X 3 3 Audllanurn. Classrooms, Kitchen 2,500,000 115,000 0 0 Included 0 15,000 Included 10,000 1994 Sprinklered Conant. Block X 3 4 Pool1 Pool Bldg/Slde 250.000 0 130.000 0 tndudod 0 0 0 0 1994 Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 X 3 5 Skateboard Park. Roam Hockey Park. 250.000 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 trrduded Included 0 0 5,000 Included Mahn od tadud.d 0 0 1994 SyskUdored Coocroto Block 1 4 1.000 X 3 8 X 3 7 Reshoomn. SnpdtareoPlefleound Equipment Rental Facilely 500.000 35.000 100.000 0 Included 0 0 0 0 1990 JAAasonry 1 4 3,000 X 4 1 24416 Pugo Street, Temecula. CA Temoada Colteraudy Getter 1,100,000 250,000 0 0 50,000 0 15,000 Ind uded 0 1985 Wood Frame 1 4 5,930 4 2 Cabooeo 250,000 35,000 0-__ 0 0 0 0 1985 S1.ot 1 4 403 X 5 1 41845 SOb Sheet Temecula, CA 92590 Mary Phillips Senor CortesWood 2.000,000 375,000 0 0 50.000 0 15.000 Inc ed 0 1985 em 1 4 6,000 X 6 1 25314 Monocles Tomscata_CA 92590 Museum 1,600,030 50.000 0 0 0 3.000.00D 15.000 Inc..0 1904 Sprimuaied Remo 2 r 4 7200 X 7 1 25300 Mercedes Ton eta. CA 92590 Woad, Chapel (Chapin of Menun r4) 250.030 100.000 0 0 0 00 ,Frame 0 0 0 1998 14onSp:ink 1 4 1.509 X 5 1 42081 Main Shoot Tenacula, CA 92590Sapp Ch6ldrent MemnonGM2250.030 Single OccuPact 1.500,000 0 0 300,000 0 0 0 0 25.000 850.000 haw. 50c6 ad 0 75.000 2005 Framaq Spw*k.0 Ssn AsfrmtFn Sea, Sprerktend, ' Steel. Wood 3 4 4 20,000 X 9 1 42051 Main Stool Tomscua. CA 92590 42049 Main Shoat Old Town Temecula Community Theater _ 9,000,000 1,000,000 0 X 9 2 Mercarrl:lo Bu ++g 1,500,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 15,000 included 10,000 2003 Frame 8 Brill[ 1 4 2 154 X ID 1 43210 Business Pork Dr Temecula, CA 92590 West WIng Maintenance Faci3y 1 Dike 3,300,000 400.000 0 0 0 0 75.000 lnduded 10,000 1997 Sp:1.cred "Wow 2 4 13,501 X 11 12,3 43230 Bowvw13 Park, Temecula. CA 92591 Field Operate n Genion 6.600.000 550.000 0 0 50,000 0 150,000 Included 100.000 2007 SprInklered Steel Frame Membrane and Metal Root 2 17.600 X 12 1 30600 Peuba Rd Tomos. CA 92591 Temocuie Pub4c LArery 10.000.000 550.000 0 0 200,000 2.000.000 950.000 Insludad 150.000 - 2008 Sprhgmed Stool 1 34.000 X 13 28690 Mercedes St Tanrouta. CA 92590 Parking Structure/0f5c*- R. (RE EDP Marernue Locution Locked wth card 16,730,000 0 0 0 0 0 650400 Mauled 0 2010 Reint010od it pre-4hoLsod casted M place commie/an. unit atoll ham. 1 bolo. 3.3 above 4 179,4101 8555 access 3 Socurllr camera) X 14 28418 Pup1 Street. Temecula, CA 92590 TCC SAFE Imola 1242.053 0 0 0 50000 0 175,000 lnduded 0 2009 Sprinklored hamo with metal root 1 4 3.400 15 r Berm Yate Parr 41566 Avenida De Le Rena, Temcula, CA Pork, Basketball 0 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 1 Buter6efd Stage Park 33654 De Portola Road Temecula CA 02590 Par, Playground Eglapmeod 0 - 25.000 62,500 0 0 Ov 0 0 0 1996 Concrete Block 1 4 1,003 17 Calla Aragon Park 41821 Calle Aragon Temecula, CA Par, Playground Egopmora 37.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 1 Crowne Fat] Part 33203 Old Oak Rd Temecula CA 92590 Par, PUMP..PUMP..170200 Egan:men15 Restroom 0 125.000 0 _ 0 O _ r 0 _ O 0 2003 Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 rnb201302pa Temecula DIG SOV 2-26.13(2) CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference In Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26-93 to 2-26.14 D IC Los. • B Vag. / Address Occupancy Betiding BPP Timprou d Equipmant& @@ Valuable Papers EDP !Mishears EDP Sotevraro EDP EE Year Bull Construction No, or Stalls Prot C1 Area FLS X 19 1.2 3 Hafveatan Cormnwndy Perk 20592 Hmvesbn Dr. Temecula, CA 92590 Part, Playground Equipmo d. Restroom. Snackbar 500,000 35.000 125,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 Concrete Block 1 4 3,000 Conunirroy Room 600,000 Included 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 2004 Concrete Block 1,900 20 1.2 Harveston Lake Park 29005 Lake House Road Temecula. CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment. Rostroom$. Lake. Gazebo. Boat House 500,000 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 Concrete Block 9 Wood 1 4 3,000 21 John Magee Park 44576 Cate Venoms. Temecula, CA Park. Playground Egupmakt 0 0 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 1 Korn H7nterpanil Part 31495 Vla Cordoba. Temocu4, CA Park, Playground Equipment Restrooms, Snackbar 500,000 35.000 02.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1991 Concrete Block 1 4 3,000 23 Loma Linda Park 30877 Loma Lyda Road, Temeaia, CA Pok, Playground Egi4makt 0 0 107,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 Lore Canyon Creek Perk 40356 N. General Kearny Rd, Temecula, CA Parc P10 WoundEqupmont Shade Corers 250000 02.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 1, 2 Margarita Community Park 29119 Margortla Rd Temecula. CA 92590 Park, Roller Hockey, Ball Fields, Tennis, Snack Oar/Restroom 500,0000 02.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,000 20 1, 2 Meadows Part 43110 taoa4owa Partway Temecula CA 92590 Par, Pro ground EgktymeM, Resta=m 170200 0 100.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 Comet Brock 1 1 1.000 27 Nakayama Park 30052 Nicolas Rd, Temecula. CA Park, Playground Equipment 0 0 5.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 Nk1loW Road Park 39955 Nzlmlss Road Tarnow* CA Pak Playground EgxOrnerr 0 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 Pablo APS Perk 33005 Rogba Dr. Temecula. CA Park Playground Emolument, Shade Comm 75.000 0 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 1 Pala Commwloy Park 44900 Temeada Lend Temaarla. CA Park. Playground EmApmsnl. Reatrooms. Snockbar, 940 Fefds. Tents 500,000 35,000 100.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 Concrete Block 1 4 3000 31 1 Paloma Der Sol Pads 32099 Do Portal, Temecula, CA Pok, Rostroernl, Beg leas, Snackbar 500000 35,000 40,000 1,000 0,900 0 15.000 l npua>b 10,000 1991 JaAmoruy 1 4 3,000 32 Paseo Gallante Park 32455 Camino Son Dimas, Temecula, CA Perk. Playa:oued Equtpmem 0 0 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 1, 2, 3.4 Pahlea H. Birdsall Spat Part 32360 Dean Hollow Way Tenwala, CA Par►. Sna*mar, Playground Eau:pinta Rofbonnn, Bao Fields. Court. Mainlerronoo Baldry 2240,000 100,000 112,500 0 0 0 100.000 Included 50,000 2006 Conareb Block 1 7,169 34 1.2 Paubo Rides Pork 33405 Paula Road Temscula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equlpmant, Resbooms. Shade Covers 170200 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 Conaoto Block 14 1,000 35 1.2 Radium* Park F (Rodhawt Community Park) 44715 Redhawk Parkway Temecula, CA Park, Turf Area, ShaDorMa/a Tables. Dog Park, Rosbooms, Basketball Hatt -Coot 250,000 0 62500 0 0 0 0 0 0 rnb201302po Temecula DSC SOV 2.2613 (2) 2 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference in Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26.13 to 2-26.14 WC Loc., 8300.1 Address Occupancy BuSrbp BPPalergrosaid Em 13 EE Va1Oa5M Pipers Software EDP 88 Yea: Bala Conshudlonlia illariea PM/ CI Area Mtn) EDP Hardman 36 Riverton Park 30950 Riverton Ln. Temecula. CA Park, Playground Equipment Shade Coven 25.000 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 Rotary Perk 26810 POjol Stent Terneapa. CA Park: Picnic Tables. Shade Covers 12.500 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 1 Sem Hicks Park 41970 Moreno Dr Temecula Ca 912580 Pork, Playground Equyment Ro4rooms. Shade Comm 225600 0 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 39 Serena Hits Part 40747 Woleoa Lane Temecula, CA Park. Playground Equipment 6hoda Covens 25.000 0 125,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 Stephen Linen .5. Memorial Park 44935 nighthawk Paso. Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment. Shade Coven 25.000 0 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 Sunsel Port 32155 Camino San Jose, Temecula, CA Park, PI/wound Egrtprnont 0 12.500 62,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 1.2 Temecula Duds Pond 28250 Ynoz Rd 8 Rancho Ca5lario Rd Tetnec4a, CA 92590 Perk, Pump Hoene, ReWoom, Shade Foe/Ekes 200.000 0 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1995 Comets Block 1 4 1,000 43 Temecula Creek Trail Pork 33662 Channel 5treet, Temecula. CA Park, Playground Equipment 0 0 02,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 1, 2 Temeku Ha Park 31367 La Saone Way Temecula, CA 92590 Pam. Playground Equpmod. 2 Resbooms. Snackbar, Boll Fiords 500,000 35,000 82,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 Conaete Bock 1 4 3,000 45 Val Ranch Park 32965 Harmwq Lane. Temecula. CA Pork. Playground Easement 0 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 Veleronb Park 30965 La Serena Way. Temecula. CA Pork, Playground Equipment 0 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 Voaburg Park 39960 Weotas Rd, Temecula. CA Pork 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 1 Winchester Creek Park 39950 Margarita Rd Temeaaa. CA 92590 Perk Puyg.Ound E4upnwnt Rec ocnu. 0matto . Stade Comm 195200 0 100.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 19Aasenry 1 4 1,000 49 1 Woo Creek Teal Park 45454 Wolf Creak Rd, Temecula. CA Pork, Troll web Par Course. Shade Coven 25,000 0 150,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 — 50 Wan Crook Pork 45850 Wolf Creek Dr H . Temecula. CA Park, Playground Enuannent Reohoom, Gazebo 195200 0 150.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2008 Concrete Block 1 4 1,000 X 51 1 30650 Peuba Rd. Temecula. CA 92590 Fire Stollen 084 3,000,000 120,000 0 0 0 0 15.000 Included 5,000 1997 Spdnklered Ma9or+ry 2 4 10,000 52 28330 Mercedes Temecula. CA Fn Stilton 112 Insured by CAL FIRE 0 0 0 0 0 15.000 Nqudod 5,000 X 53 27415 Enterprise Cr. West Temecula, CA Fire Station 173 1,800600 95.000 0 0 0 0 15.000 Included 5.000 1988 Type V Wood Frame Stucco 1 4 8600 mb20130295. Temecula OIC SOV 228-13 (2) 3 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Fonn, Difference In Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26-13 to 2-26-14 DIC Loc.11 La Blds.9 Address Occapency Bding al BPP 'Playground EqugureniBI EE Valuable Papers ware EDP Hard EDP Software EDP EE Year Dull Construction S o Me Pmt Ama sU 54 37500 Sky Canyon Dr Temecula, CA Fire Station 183 Insured by County o1 Riverside 0 0 0 0 0 15.000 Included 0 X 55 1 32221 Wed Valley Road Temecula. CA 92592 Fie Swan /82 2719000 95.000 0 0 0 0 15400 included 0 2007 Spelt -lend Steel Stucco & Rod 1 4 9,062 X 56 1 32131 South Loop Rd. Temecula, CA92591 Foo Station to bo occupied upon dilpldo ootlornant 2.709,000 95.000 0 0 0 0 15.000 Included 0 2006 Spinkbred Concrete 1 4 9030 57 1 32354 Overland Tired Temecula. CA 92592 Tomeada Calms Corp 6 Paramedics 60,000 30,000 0 0 0 0 10,000 Included 0 2002 Woad Frame Wood Siding 1 2,000 58 1 41951 Morena Rd Terracotta. CA 92590 Temecula Elementary School. Reatroonn 140.400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1994 Spieler ed Concrete Bbd 1 4 1000 58 2 Pool r Pool Wd9. 140,400 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 1994 Concrete Block 1 4 1.009 59 42075 Meadows Parkway Temecula. CA Temecula MOO) Sdrool 0 25000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 1 30027 Front Street Temecula, CA 92590 Prolal Rada Bldg. 8,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1996 Stool 1 4 46 61 1 Es8arat Mouse & Born 28870 Pujol Si TemeaAa, CA 92589 Partly Storage 720,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1928 Wood Sb cco 1 4 1,500 62 1 904 6 Front Streets Temecula, CA 92590 Restrooms 6 Light Standard*, Parkbq Lot 500,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1997 Frame 1 4 700 Unscheduled. Electronic Data Prom Hardware. Soften, and Elena Esme d Non -Owned taca5ma 0 0 0 0 0 0 290,000 mduded Included 83 Town Square Perk 41000 Main Street Temecula. CA 92590 Tud 6 Bond,os 0 0 50.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 ManKion Norse 40135 Village Road. Temoa8a4A (leased) M013.Purposo Featly 1,000,000 0 0 56,568 Included 0 15.000 tnduW O 10000 2004 Wood Frame, Sprinkbred, Alarmed 1 4 3,493 65 1 27495 Enterprise Circle West Temecula. CA 92590 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Liabildty Only 66 1 27498 Enterprise Ckcb West Temecula, CA 92590 Liability Only 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 1 41735 McCabe Cool Temecula, CA 92590 Liability Only 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insured Values -Special Fars 1129,344,595 510,797,300 83,370,100 841830,720 8505,900 97,100,000 18,805,000 Included 5978,000 X DMC. EQ & Flood Coming* Totals: 3116,665,045 110,421,900 NIA 94,673,152 1500000 17,100,000 6,185,000 included 3100,000 13130,0001040 Option 11, 11& 170 X 89 1.2 Ok1 Tom Temecula Temecula, CA 92690 2 Arches 0 9175,000 each 350,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 Ste RaMerad Conan • FatploM Face Peened BM* mb20t3O2pc- Temecula DIC SOV 246.13(2) 4 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Forth, Difference in Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-26-13 to 2-26-14 DlC Loe.t BIOp.P Address Occupied,nsOQlnm BPP l31 EE Valuat*Po es EDPIYMware EDP 8o es EDP EE Ww7BuR Coostructlon Std ories Area (WO 69 'Basket Founlon• Town Square Park. 41000 latae Street. Temecula, CA Fountain Sculpture 400.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 70 'Seism in M Ran' 29250 Ynoz Road. Temecula. CA 92590 Pubic Art Sculpture 130,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 Overland Sege Artwork between 27624 Jefferson 6 26531 Ynoz Road. Temecula, CA 92590 Pupae M 60000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m0201302pc• Temecula C9C SOV 2.26-13 (2) 5 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form. Difference in Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 2-24.13 to 2-26-14 MC Linc, 9 Mdp. 9 Address Occupancy 13v1SdYrg BPP vianstimsis EquIpiradStogies EE Valuable Paper EDP Ilea/ware EDP. EDP EE You Balt Construction N.' of Prot Cl Area eat72 Chet Center Mural on Parking GruaGruaPublic 28680 Mercedes St. Temseols, CA 02590 Art 250,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 73 •uomigrsot 1 raI Cine Corder 'Anal 41000 Mak Street, TemectM. CA 02500 Parc Art 45,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 X 74 1 Temecula Durk Pond 28250 Ynoz Rd 8 Rancho [sharia Rd Tomocu 9, CA 92590 Veteran's Msmonsl 550,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2004 SIMI Renbrcsd Concrete • PoesAW Grente Fete X Total Insured Valves (OIC): Brxldang- Pool Loc 83 Pool Loc 1158 BPP: B1 EE VP: EDP(H)- EDP(S): EDP (EE)' Arches (Loc. 868): Veteran 14em- (LocJ74: Total: (This Year) (Oplwn 11 5118.896.545 NIA NIA 10,429,800 300.000 500.000 7.100.000 8.165.000 Included 8900,000 400,000 550,000 814T,241.345 (Lost Year) 5118.896.545 NIA NIA 10.429.800 301,000 500,000 7.100.000 8.185,000 Inducted 8900.000 400,000 550,000 8147.242.345 AuCuonled Spnatwe Sprmklered Fully -Construction Type Loci': Structural Steel Braced Frame with Reinforced Comite Shear Walls. Structure 1t05 Iwo roofing components over metal decking with concrole (1) built up clay ale and (2) Thermoplastic (TPO) membmo roofing, Stucco Exterior with Metal Studs X Total Insured Values (OIC): Budding: 5118.896,545 (Option l) Pool Loc 83 5750,000 Poo.I Loc 858 5459.600 BPP: 10,429,600 111 300.000 EE: 500,000 VP: 7.100.000 EDP(H): 8.165.000 EDP(S): tndvded EDP (EE): 8900.000 ArchO$ (Loc. 868) 400,000 X Veteran Mem. (Loc. 874): Total: 550.000 148.450,945 Total Insured Velars (atC): Building: 8118.899,545 (Option 10) Pool Loc *3 5750.000 Poo.I Loc 858 5459.600 BPP: 10.429.800 BI. 4.573,152 •' EE: 500.000 VP: 7.100,000 EDP(H): 8.165,000 EDP(S): tnrduded EDP (EE): 5900,000 Archos (Loc 868) 400,000 Veteran Man. (Loc. 874): Total: 550.000 152,724,097 •Playground Equipment (Iodides Shapaa 5 Picnic Tables/11130; Sodas etc) Hato mb201392sc• TornoWla DIC SOV 248.13(2) B Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 town rown INSURANCEa AUTOMOBILE PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGE This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccmot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 IOWi. & I owii INSURANCE CITY OF TEMECULA AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE SCHEDULE Vehicle Description / ID No. Cost New Comp Ded CoII Ded USE • 1992 GMC MAC III Top Kick w/Breathing Support #1 GDP7H1.1502955 $208,259 2,000 2,000 Fire Truck 2. 1995 Sentry Pumper #4ENRAAA8651004369 $206,005 2,000 2,000 Fire Truck 3. 2002 Ford F550 (Medic Squad 73) #1 FDAX56F92EB25749 $94,422 2,000 2,000 Medic Squad 4. 2001 Ford 550 Super Duty Truck with #1FDAF56581EA24722 Hydraulic Boom Hoist 4722 $80,097 2,000 2,000 Boom - Hoist Trk 5. 2002 Ford Truck #1 FDAF56F91 EB60874 $54,825 2,000 2,000 FRMT 6. 2003 Ford F550 Truck #1 FDAF56F23EA94199 $46,122 2,000 2,000 Stencil Truck 7. 2002 Ford F550 7.3L Diesel #1 FDAX56F03EB25804 $108,906 2,000 2,000 FRMT 8. 2004 KME Fire Aerial FT #1 K9AF42884N058774 $724,000 2,000 2,000 Fire/ Aerial Truck 9. 2004 Int'I Multi Purpose Utility Truck #1 HTWNADT64J093129 $142,000 2,000 2,000 Utility Truck 10. 2006 Freightliner Truck #1 FVACWCS86HW91952 $85,000 2,000 2,000 Freightli ner Truck 2007 GMC Aerial Truck #1 GDG5C1 G97F405242 $127,466 2,000 2,000 Aerial Boom Truck This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %own & row n INSURANCE Vehicle Description / ID No. Cost New Comp Ded CoII Ded USE 12. 2005 Smeal Fire Engine #4S7CT2D956C054456 $341,382 2,000 2,000 Fire Engine 13. 2004 Charmac Trailer #4RYC322094T110951 $50,000 2,000 2,000 Trailer (Are) 14. 2006 Eldorado Bus #1GBA5V1E75F513455 $82,524 3,000 3,000 Bus 15. 2009 Ford F250 Pickup #1 FTSX20Y59EA01537 (Scales) Enforcement Vehicle $51,645 2,000 2,000 Vehicle 16. 2009 International Spaulding #1 HTWCAAR29J 197473 $144,234 2,000 2,000 Patch Truck 17. 2012 Haulmark Trailer Incl Equipment -Kodiak Cargo #16HPB 1427CA041497 $15,244 2,000 2,000 Trailer 18. 2012 Haulmark Trailer Incl Equipment -Kodiak Cargo #16HPB 1426CA041491 $15,244 2,000 2,000 Trailer 19. 2013 Chevrolet Van Tru Express# 1 GCEGTCG5D1133947 $ 25,000 2,000 2,000 Van Total Values $2,602,375 FRMT = Fire Rescue Medical Truck (No Transport) Renewal Quote: Travelers Insurance Company Premium for Automobile Physical Damage Coverage = 13,170* (.5061) Current Annual Premium is 14,252* (.5596) *Includes Terrorism This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ckot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 r OWII. & row n INSURANCE CRIME INSURANCE This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage caiot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 r OWIl. & l0Wfl INSURANCE CRIME COVERAGES Current Carrier (Travelers Insurance Company) Limit Employee Theft -Per Loss 500,000 (With Faithful Performance) Forgery or Alteration 500,000 5,000 DEDUCTIBLE 5,000 Theft of Money & Securities (Inside) and Robbery Not Covered & Safe Burglary -Other Property (Inside) In Transit (Outside) Not Covered Money Orders & Counterfeit Currency Not Covered Computer Fraud 500,000 Credit, Debit or Charge Card Forgery Funds Transfer Fraud Claim Expense 5,000 500,000 5,000 500,000 $5,000 5,000 0 Premium: $4,001 Includes: 1. Bonded Treasurer or Tax Collectors Exclusion Deleted Excess over any Public Official Bond. 2. Bonded Employees Exclusion Deleted Excess over any Public Official Bond. 3. Fidelity Research & Investigative Settlement Clause 10,000 Limit/5,000 Deductible Requires: 1. No Requirements This FORM lS FOR ISSUSTRATION Purposes only. Read your policy for specific defaih This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage caiot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 IiirOW11. & lO\V11 INSURANCE PREMIUM SUMMARY City of Temecula Temecula Community Services District Oversight Board and The Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula Temecula Public Financing Authority Temecula Housing Authority Crime Coverage: $4,001 (Travelers Insurance Company) Last Year $4,007 (Travelers Insurance Company) Premiums include Terrorism PREMIUM PAYMENT OPTION Payment up front This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 IOwn & rowri INSURANCES Important Information Compensation: In addition to the commissions or fees received by us for assistance with the placement, servicing, claims handling, or renewal of your insurance coverages, other parties, such as excess and surplus lines brokers, wholesale brokers, reinsurance intermediaries, underwriting managers and similar parties, some of which may be owned in whole or in part by Brown & Brown, Inc., may also receive compensation for their role in providing insurance products or services to you pursuant to their separate contracts with insurance or reinsurance carriers. That compensation is derived from your premium payments. Additionally, it is possible that we, or our corporate parents or affiliates, may receive contingent payments or allowances from insurers based on factors which are not client -specific, such as the performance and/or size of an overall book of business produced with an insurer. We generally do not know if such a contingent payment will be made by a particular insurer, or the amount of any such contingent payments, until the underwriting year is closed. That compensation is partially derived from your premium dollars, after being combined (or "pooled") with the premium dollars of other insureds that have purchased similar types of coverage. We may also receive invitations to programs sponsored and paid for by insurance carriers to inform brokers regarding their products and services, including possible participation in company -sponsored events such as trips, seminars, and advisory council meetings, based upon the total volume of business placed with the carrier you select. We may, on occasion, receive loans or credit from insurance companies. Additionally, in the ordinary course of our business, we may receive and retain interest on premiums you pay from the date we receive them until the date the premiums are remitted to the insurance company or intermediary. In the event that we assist with placement and other details of arranging for the financing of your insurance premium, we may also receive a fee from the premium finance company. Questions and Information Requests: Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact this office at 1-800-228-7975 or, if you prefer, submit your question or request online at www.bbsocal.com This proposal contains only a general description of the coverage(s) and does not constitute a policy/ contract. For complete policy information, including exclusions, limitations, and conditions, refer to the policy document. This proposal is based upon the exposures to Toss made known to the Agency. Any changes in these exposures (i.e., new operations, new products, additional states of hire, etc.) need to be promptly reported to us in order that proper coverage(s) may be put into place. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage caot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 IOWl. & rown INSURANCE Wholesale Broker/Managing General Agent: Swett & Crawford This intermediary ❑ is ® is not owned in whole or part by Brown & Brown, Inc., the parent company of Brown & Brown Insurance Services of California, Inc. Brown & Brown entities operate independently and are not required to utilize other companies owned by Brown & Brown, Inc., but routinely do so. In addition to providing access to the insurance company, the Wholesale Insurance Broker/Managing General Agent may provide additional services including, but not limited to: underwriting, loss control, risk placement, coverage review, claims coordination with insurance company; and policy issuance. Compensation paid for those services may be up to 15% of the premium you pay for coverage, and any compensation paid for those services is derived from your premium payment. The Fee, if any, for the Wholesale Insurance Broker's/Managing General Agent's services above is $0.00. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cccot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Supplemental Material for Item No. 4 Property Insurance Renewal Updated Proposal Commercial Ins urance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katetla., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Insurance Proposal Submitted For: City of Temecula I o\vn. ro\vn [INSURANCE PROPERTY, EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD/ DIFFERENCE IN CONDITIONS, AUTOMOBILE PHYSICAL DAMAGE AND CRIME INSURANCE PROPOSAL Policy Term: 02/26/2013 - 02/26/2014 Submitted by: Mike Bush Senior Vice President This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhys0mg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccyinot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kateila., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 I'C)wll ro w 1-1 INSURANCE. Thank you for inviting us to develop and present a Risk Solution Program to you. We welcome the opportunity to become involved with your company. We have worked to identify your needs and concerns, and to develop a program for your insurance. Brown & Brown, Inc is the seventh largest independent agency organization nationally.' The company provides a variety of insurance products and services to corporate, institutional, professional and individual clients. Headquartered in Daytona Beach and Tampa, Florida, Brown & Brown is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange (BRO) and has been included in Forbes' list of the "200 Best Small Companies in America". The company handles clients' premiums in excess of $10 Billion annually and has approximately 5,600 employees. While size is not the sole criteria for choosing an insurance agent, it does enable us to offer our clients clout in the marketplace and unmatched service capability. Please feel free to visit our website at www.bbinsurance.com. This brief description of insurance coverage is being provided as an accommodation only and is not intended to cover or describe all policy terms. For more complete information on the scope and limits of coverage please refer to the policy document. Specimen policy form(s) are available upon request. ' As listed in jiusjness InsuigmQ magazine, July 18, 2011 edition This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for octuol terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-Itvi-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage co1not be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kateila., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 INSURANCE. i I ,f rOwl 1 -own Account Executive Mike Bush (714)221-1853 phone (714) 221-4143 fax mbush@bbsocal.com email Mike Bush is responsible for overseeing all aspects of your program. Peggy L. Coleman Account Manager (714)221-1883 phone (714) 221-4143 fax pcoleman@bbsocal.com Peggy L Coleman will assist with the daily servicing of your account, including endorsements, certificate requests, client services, program design, accounting, quality assurance and market relationships. Judith Villalobos (Backup) Account Manager (714)221-1828 phone (714) 221-4128 fax jvillalobos@bbsocal.com Feel free to contact anyone on this list if you have questions or concerns regarding your insurance policy. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutaPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccinot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 iiii INSURANCE IMPORTANT NOTICE DISCLAIMER Disclaimer: This proposal/policy presented is based upon the exposures to Toss mode known to the agency. Any changes in these exposures (Le. new operations, new products, additional state of hire, etc.) need to be promptly reported to our agency in order that proper coverage(s) may be put in place. The proposal contains only a general description of the coverages) and does not constitute a policy / contract. The proposal includes, but is not limited to, the terms, exclusions and conditions listed. For complete policy information, including exclusions, limitations and conditions, refer to the policy document. Spedmen policy forms and endorsements are available upon request. ❑ Non -Admitted Carrier Taxes: $Per Section Fees: $Per Section Minimum Earned Premium: Per % Section Higher Limits may be available upon request V Premiums may be subject to audit Premiums exclude Terrorism Coverage Policy Type Carrier Rating Property, APHD, Crime Travelers Insurance Companies Admitted) Admitted) Earthquake & Flood/Difference in Conditions See Earthquake Section for Carriers Ratings and Taxes/Fees Please read your policy for specific details. The information obtained from A.M. Best's Rating is not in any way a warranty or guaranty by Brown & Brown, Inc. of the financial stability of the insurer and this information is current only as of the date of publication. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cginot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA. Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 INSURANCE A.M. Best Rating of Proposed Carriers General Rating: These rating classifications reflect BEST'S opinion of the relative position of each company in comparison with others, based upon averages within the Property -Casualty insurance industry. They are reflective of overall company services and standing within the industry. A++, A+ Superior B++ Very Good C++, C+ Fair A, A- Excellent B, B- Good C, C- Marginal Financial Size Category: The financial Size Category is an indication of the size of an Insurer and is based on reported Policyholders' surplus plus conditional or Technical Reserve Funds, such as mandatory securities valuation reserve, other investment and operating contingency funds and/or miscellaneous voluntary reserves in liabilities. Financial Size Category (in Thousands) Class l Up to $1,000 Class II $1,000 to $2,000 Class III $2,000 to $5,000 Class IV $5,000 to $10,000 Class V $10,000 to $25,000 Class VI $25,000 to $50,000 Class Vil $50,000 to $100,000 Class VIII $100,000 to $250,000 Class IX $250,000 to $500,000 Class X $500,000 to $750,000 Class XI $750,000 to $1,000,000 Class XII $1,000,000 to $1,250,000 Class XIII $1,250,000 to $1,500,000 Class XIV $1,500,000 to $1,750,000 Class XV $1,750,000 to $2,000,000 This information has been provided to you so that consideration is given to the financial condition of our proposed carriers. The financial information disclosed is the most recent available to Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. Brown & Brown does not guarantee financial condition of the insurers listed above. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AufoPhysOmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ca snot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katela., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 INSURANCE Claims Reporting Guidelines Make Brown & Brown, Inc. aware of any and all incidents immediately after they occur, whether it be an auto accident, a theft, slip & fall, even a minor incident that appears will have no future activity. Do not wait for a police report. Gather as much concrete information as possible. For example, police reports, company incidentreports, conversation Togs, medicois and pictures - anything that may assist in the handling ofyour claim. Send this information either by mail, e-mail or fax to: Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. 2401 E. Katelia., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 (714) 221-4196. fax If you haveany questions or incur any problems, please call our office and we will be glad to assist in any way we can. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cg9not be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katela., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 lirowll. ro`,`,,f INSURANCE What is an Audit? Policies which use fluctuating values as the exposure basis, i.e.: payroll or sales are subject to an audit. The company may visit your business to examine your records or ask you to complete a voluntary "mail in" audit. If at the time of the audit your exposures are different from what you estimated at the time your policy was written, you will receive a return premium credit or an additional premium billing. If you subcontract any work, it is essential that the subcontractor provide you with a Certificate of Insurance indicating that insurance coverage is In place for General Liability, Workers Compensation, and Automobile Liability. If at the time of audit you do not have evidence of insurance from your subcontractors, you will be charged an additional premium for the payroll of the subcontractor on your policies. We recommend you require subcontractors to carry insurance via a contract. Audits that generate on additional premium are due upon receipt. It is important that you review audits cis soon as you receive them and advise us of any discrepancies in the exposures immediately so that we may inform the insurance carrier. If payment of the audit is not received by the insurance company on a timely basis, your coverage may be canceled and could adversely affect the future placement of insurance coverage. We recommend that you review the actual exposures as compared to your estimated exposures quarterly and advise us of any significant variance. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. • mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysomg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cannot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella.; Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 928041 row n Y0 \-V Il INSURANCE Named Insureds The following are named insureds on your policies: City of Temecula Temecula Community Services District Oversight Board and The Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula Temecula Public Financing Authority Temecula Housing Authority Please verify the accuracy of each name on this list and update if needed. Location Schedule: Address Description Alt City Operations This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccpnot be considered bound until'o binder has been received. City of Temecula Schedule of Locations 1 1 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA Civic Center 2 1 43200 Business Park Dr Temecula, CA 92590 (01d)City Hall 3 1 30875 Rancho Vista Rd Temecula, CA 92590 & 42659 Margarita Rd. Temecula, CA 92590 Ronald Regan Sports Pork; Community Recreation Center Offices (CRC); Meeting Rooms 3 2 Gym 3 3 Auditorium, Classrooms, Kitchen 3 4 Pool / Pool Bldg. 3 5 Skateboard Pork, 3 6 Roller Hockeeark, Restrooms/Playground Equipment Rental Facility 3 7 4 1 28816 Puljo Street, Temecula, CA Temecula Community Center 9 2. Caboose 5 1 41845 6th Street Temecula, CA 92590 Mary Phillips Senior Center 6 1 28314 Mercedes Temecula, CA 92590 Museum 7 1 28300 Mercedes Temecula, CA 92590 Wedding Chapel (Chapel of Memories) 8 1 42081 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Children's Museum Gift Shop Single Occupant 9 i 42051 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Old Town Temecula Community Theater 9 2 4204.9 Main Street Mercantile Building West Wing Maintenance Facility / Office 10 1 43210 Business Park Dr Temecula CA 92590 11 1,2,3 43230 Business Park, Temecula, CA 92591 Field Operation Center 12 1 30600 Pauba Rd Temecula CA 92591 Temecula Public Library 13 1 28690 Mercedes Street Temecula, CA 92590 Parking Structure/Office - Retail 14 1 28816 Pujol Street Temecula, CA 92590 TCC Safe House 15 Bahia Vista Park 41566 Avenida De La Reino, Temcula, CA Pork, Basketball 16 1 Buterfield Stage Park 33654 De Portola Road Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment & Restroom 17 Calle Aragon Park 41621 Calle Aragon Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 18 1 Crowne Hill Park 33203 Old Oak Rd. Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment & Restroom 19 1,2,3 Harveston Community Pork 28582 Harveston Dr. Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restroom, Snack bar 20 1,.2 Harveston Lake Pork 29005 Lake House Road Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Rostra ms, Lake, Gazebo, Boat House 21 John Magee Park 44576 Corte Veranos, Temecuta,'CA Park, Playground Equipment, 22 1 Kent Hintergordt Park 31465 Via Cordoba, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms, Snack bar 23 Loma Linda Park 30877 Loma Linda Rood, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 24 Long Canyon Creek Park 40356 N. General Kearny Rd, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 25 1, 2 Margarita Community Park 29119 Margarita Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Roller Hockey, Bali Fields, Tennis 26 1, 2 ' Meadows Park 43110 Meadows Parkway Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restroom 27 Nakayama Park 30952 Nicolas Rd, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 28 Nicholas Road Park 39955 Nicholas Road Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment, 29 Pablo Apis Park 33005 Regina Dr, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 30 1 Pala Community Park 44900 Temecula Lane Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment,. Restrooms,Snack bar, Ball Fields, Tennis 31 1 Poloma Del Sol Pork 32099 De Portota, Temecula, CA Park, Restrooms, Ball Fields, Snack bar 32 Paseo Galtante Park 32455 Camino San Dimas, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 33 1, 2, 3, 4 Patrice H. Birdsall Sports Park 32380 Dean Hollow Way Temecula, CA Park, Snack bar, Playground Equipment, Restrooms, Ball Fields, Courts, Maintenance Building 34 1, 2 Pouba Ridge Park 33405 Pouba Rood Temecula, CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms 35 1, 2 Redhawk Park F (Redhawk Community Park} 44715 Redhawk Parkway Temecula, CA Park, Turf Area, Shelter/Picnic Tables, Dog Pork, Restrooms, Basketball-Half Court 36 Riverton Pork 30950 Riverton Ln, , Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 37 Rotary Park 28816 Pujol Street Temecula, CA Pork; Picnic Tables 38 1 Sam Hicks Park 41970 Moreno Dr Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms 39 Sereno Hills Park 40747 Walcott Lane Temecula CA Pork, Playground Equipment 40 Stephen Linen Jr. Memorial Park 44935 Nighthawk Pass, Temecula CA Park, Playground Equipment 41 Sunset Park 32155 Camino San Jose, Temecula CA Park, Playground Equipment 1, 2 Temecula Duck Pond 28250 Ynez Rd & Rancho California Rd Temecula CA 92590 Park, Pump House, Restroom, Shade Facilities and Veterans Memorial 43 Temecula Creek Trail Park 33662 Channel Street, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment 44 1, 2 Temeku Hill Park 31367 La Serena Way Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, 2 Restrooms, Snack bar, Ball Fields Vail Ranch Park 32965 Harmony Lane, Temecula CA Park, Playground Equipment Veteran's Park 30965 La Serena Way, Temecula, CA Park, Playground Equipment Voorburg Park 39.960 Nicolas Rd, Temecula, CA Park Winchester Creek Park Margarita Rd Temecula CA 92590 Park, Playground Equipment, Restrooms, Basketball N39950 Wolf Creek Trail Park 45454 Woif Creek Rd, Temecula CA Park, Trail with Par Course 50 III Wolf Creek Park 45850 Wolf Creek Dr N., Temecula CA Park, Playground Equipment, Restroom, Gazebo 51 1 30650 Pouba Rd. Temecula CA 92590 Fire Station #84 52 28330 Mercedes Temecula, CA Fire Station #12 53 27415 Enterprise Cr. West Temecula, CA Fire Station #73 54 37500 Sky Canyon Dr Temecula CA Fire Station #83 55 1 32221 Wolf Valley Road Temecula CA 92592 Fire Station #92 56 1 32131 South Loop Rd. Temecula CA 92591 Fire Station to be occupied upon dispute settlement 57 32364 Overland Trail Temecula, CA 92592 Temecula Citizens Corp & Paramedics 58 41951 Moraga Rd Temecula, CA 92590 Temecula Elementary School, Restrooms Pool / Pool Bldg. 59 42075 Meadows Parkway Temecula, CA Temecula Middle School 60 1 30027 Front Street Temecula, CA 92590 Prefab Radio Bldg. 61 1,2,3 28870 Pujol St. Temecula, CA 92589 Pontry Storage tscalar House & Barre 62 1 6th & Front Streets Temecula, CA 92590 Restroom: & Light Standards, Parking Lot 63 Towne Square Park 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Turf 8, Benches 64 Harveston House 40135 Village Road, Temecula, CA (Lease) Multi -Purpose Facility 6.5 1 27495 Enterprise Circle West Temecula, CA 92590 LIABILITY ONLY 66 1 27498 Enterprise Circle West Temecula, CA 92590 LIABILITY ONLY 67 1 41735 McCabe Court Temecula, CA 92590 LIABILITY ONLY 68 1,2 Old Town Temecula Temecula, CA 92590 2 Arches. 69 "Basket Foundation" Town Square Park 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA Fountain — Sculpture 70 "Singing in the Rain" 28250 Ynez Road Temecula, CA 92590 Public Art — Sculpture 71 Overland Bridge Artwork between 27624 Jefferson & 26531 Ynez Road Temecula, CA 92590 Public Art 72 Civic Center Mural on Parking Garage 28690 Mercedes St. Temecula, CA 92590 Public Art 73 "immigrant Trail" Civic Center Mural 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Public Art 74 Temecula Duck Pond 28250 Ynez Rd. & Rancho California Rd. Temecula, Ca 92590 Veteran's Memorial CRY OF TEMECU A Special Form, Difference In Condttiono, Earthqueko Flood Statement of Values 2-26-13 co 2.26-14 000 161.6 0100.9 Addicts Ocaupia 0 13 190 OPP61 `1100rograd 0910219.1 68 Vatmb0Papas EDP Mardian EDP 00319100 CONTE. Y 'her Coa m 9611a0 Ra.ol Marin P1el et AMA X t 1 4100 94a:11 S( Tarnea6e, CA Dec Cont 34.926692 3,530.600 0 1000 50.000 2000000 0.000000 U1Mdoa 500000 2010 * 3 4 (8014 0679 X 2 t 43200 Butner. Perk Dr Tomcats. CA 92500 (010 Coy Nag 9.500.060 1200990 0 0 - 0 0 210.000 10006 06 25,900 1093 Sam ad +ul 2 4 30.551 X 3 d 10075 Rearm Vats Rd ng Tac4a, CA 925906 42650 1600450 Rd Temoade. CA_02590 Ron021 Ragan Sparta Park; Cataxture0Reaaallan Contr 015609 (gift: 006000 Rooms 129600 755,00 150.000 0 50.000 100.000 100,000 1060054 50,000 1904 SPOdbrod CDna.%Bloch 1 4 0.000 X 3 2 Ora 3600,00 9000 0 0 tndudad 0 0 0 0. 1090 BPtndiaad 1 4 10.000 X 3 3 Au19990m. S1491a0903, kart'ore 2.100000 115,000 0 0 17610136 0 15,00 690000 1000 '1004 0040914 Bleck 00150.161.4 Cameo Wadi 1 4 10,000 X 3 4 PPW/Poo3600/560o 750.600 0 130.00 0 octudad 0 0 0 0 1904 Gonad* Wadi 1 4 1,000 X 3 5 06/060000 Part Raw 1.164:197 Pmt 200.06 700.000 0 0 0 0 0 6 O640390 hoops 0 0 5000 3n0bdod 0ic4Aaa 1961000 0 0 1904 Bwaltterad eruct 656ct 1 4 1,00 X 3 0 X 0 7 128016Pu:0a R. booms. 6 54tDort➢laigroww Equt.nem R09e10.0617 500.000 73.000 100.000 0 tuladod 0 0 0 0 1990 JA!pav7 1 4 3.00 X 4 1 Mast TorMM6. CA Tomaaca Commardy Centor 1;100.50 250,000 0 0 50.00 0 13.00 It.45.049 0 1065 Woo:Frem. 1 4 5 , 4 2 Caboose 250000 31,000 0 0 0 0 0 1960 00.., 1 4 900 X 5 1 41645 60 61491 Tanwb c, CA 02590 Mary Pnriq ' 6.1wr 0. 0 1,00,004 175.000 0 0 -50.00 0 15,00 1600 001 0 1065 Spmt1lrid Wood From 1 4 0,000 X 6 1 20304 M5reedo5 ma Tewd. CA 92590 - Museum 1600,000 $0,00 0 0 0 3620.000 15,00 ttcludod 0 1905 Sp1n10ea.d 0x9.1. 2 4 7200 X 7 1 26300 16w95290 T91. a,CA 17590 W004+W 0001:., (01.400101 Momonwl 25000 100.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1016 Hon.2pri'56 Prime 1 4 1.500 X 0 1 42061105460546 1a90.06. CA 92190 070010001.0.090m Oda 5009 040 Oaalpart 2.250.00 1,500.00 0 0 0 0 25,000 /6616004 0 Know( 50.0000 40615150.0 5e40511 4 1. 0 1 42051 lam 96..1 Taeerc109. CA 92590 12049 Maim Sam 010 Town Temecula u00r Ttmr C666615665ab 9,000.000 1.000.000 0 300000 0 0 050.002 1.96005 35,000 2003 00111110.0. 0700. 3 4 20.000 X 9 2 1101cu01e 1365500 1,50,000 50.000 0 0 0 0 15.000 1004160 10,00 2003 W090 0600.6 8664 1 4 2.1 X 10 1 43219&cnos9 Pat 01 Taaracasa,CA 97550 West *W501ts696u.mo Fit 101109 3,30.000 400.000 0 0 0 0 - 73.000 lndud.d 10,000 1997 8pre.15rod 2 4 13.500 X 11 12.3 43239 laminas Put TO6rc0As, CA 92591 Fold Oplaten CarAcs 0600.00 530,000 0 0 50,00 0 150.00 tM1W4d 10.00 2007 Sp... ffia., Fra. MenYXmm and Mali Roca 2 17000 X /2 1 70600 Paub1 Rd Tom.wla CA 02591 Temecula Palace Mow 10.00,00 • 150.000 0 0 20.00 2.00.000 950.000 1050 6.0 150.00 206 n1f 600mad Sioq 1 34.000 6 53 20653 Mm000s5 St Tomecuq, CA 02590 Pealing 01nuc0 ror015 o. ROUX (RE: EDP *400war0 (669509(04.00 wet Card =cm 60aankcamoro) 1670,000 0 0 0 0 0 650.000 l,cru00d 0 2010 .. Readot00d 6' 9.4060104 0000hp16W conaoMMv6t ura1Va0100ma 1 Defaw .61 1.0050 4 179.4100' 6355 X 14 nolo P in Stint 7am604.. CA 92$90 TCC BAFE11am 1142„0553 0 0 0 50.00 5 075.00 tnctudori 0 2009 8prng5rod 01.990+0. 99630 rood 1 6 3,...,. 15 6561 Vista Port 41566 As.rlido 0a Ll Rats. TamAca. CA Part, 000.0360 0 - 15006 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 1 B+76r5.d Slogs Port 33654 Oe P011ffi6 Rod 11096156 CA 92590 park Ammo* E4uipnlad 0 25.000 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 5000 Crlae%0bea 1 4 1,000 17 - P-.,bOtag.l Pmt 41621 Ca0o NaDu1 701M0016, CA Park Playgmlm0 0900mrl 37600 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 1 Carom 110 Part 33203 010 Oat Rd Tomcods CA9250 Pa*t0105660d E44xnm i 6 R6*Oaom 170,200 0 *25.00 0 0 0 0 0 6 203 Canaemaba 1 4 1.00 5102013020c-Trtr0904601/ 2-20.13 Q3 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference In Condttions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values . 2-26.63 to 2.26-t4 Mt 100.0 Blep.9 Aden„ APPEtairased AB EE Vat0o35o Pepsi* 911pttaV+we tt ID/' EDP EB Year Out Cola Werra CIt0 R 19 1,2. s Hmsmlmn Commuter Park 29592 Horatian Or. Torleet44. CA 92590. Part Pttesuam0 Egu31nart Roe40091, 0000956/ 909900 35,000 125,000 0 0 -0 0 0 0 2004 WndetO Week 1 4 .3.000 CO1^soot9R°0m BOD90 _ Irnea+de4 0 p - 0 0 0 0 0 2004 Cannot* Brea - 1900 20 1.2 Harr aaon tote Park 29050.44 Nous* Rood Tomacuta, CA 02590 Pant P4ypround Equ1pmorLR,W0aro, take Gazebo, Boat Nouse 500.000 0 125,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 .2004 Centro* Blot* S Wood 1 4 3.000 21 John tstoee Pork 44570 Corn V491999. Tareap. CA Pari Plartraud (493100)01 0 0 02,500 0 0 0 0 6 0 22 1 Rem Haduper5IPerk 31485 Via Gasless, Tena , CA Port Pray3eaud 09140060t Reyraolm, 8nea0;a 0=980 35,00 02,580 0 0 0 0 0 0 1091 Ca0p0t06105 1 4 3,009 23 Loma tette Park Man lama i da Rase. • Te nodi. CA Dart P197190.0d (91430614 0 0 107,50 0 0 0 0 9 0 24 Leap Cameo Creel Park 40350 N. General Roane Rd Toneda4,CA Pan. Ptsysumnagpsterest Shads Coma 25,00 0 62.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 1.2 180 20 Communy Pah 29119 Mortar&Rd Pam. R95s Hodary, Bea Hadi. Taws, 8n.01, eauRodtarun 500.000 0 82,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.000 Tommas. CA 00:590 20 1.2 Masbate Park 43110 aleasarre Portray Tareaaa CA 02590 pork, Playground Lgnym0nt. Redrawn 170200 9 10.00 0 0 6 0 0 6 20) Contra Block 1 4 1900 27 _ Nakepmn Pak 30952 Hi003d 110, Tonw614., CA Pork Playgpuna 90914/9014 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Mcrae'Road Pmt 1090 39955,0161 Road Temecula, CA Parma 0 .0 82,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 Pablo Arlo Pmt 33005 Retie Or, terteaee, CA. Part Playground E4opnaii Motto Corers 75,00 0 100900 0 0 -0 0 0 0 30 1 Pala Comms437 Part 44903 Tem cod& tare - Temaa4e. CA Part, PtaHllwad EavOmetd. Re:t 50900 35.000 100.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 1992 Canelo 87ed 1 4 3.000 ams Soee>Qar, e00 Felt., Teets 31 1 Prima 0016c4 Park 32099 Om Paters. Tensa&,CA - 4a2*, 040200109.890 Fiat., enaamar 300,000 11.000 40900 . 1030 9000 0 15.000 -549.0400 10.00 1901 J•30rswmy 1 4 3.003 32 Prate Gaga& Park 32453 Carreto San Canal. Tomo -4s, CA Pak. Pl0A9e97d Eaupmad 0 0 02.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 1.2,3,4 Paws N. Birdsall Spat Psh 33390 Darn Hales Way lemmas, CA 4023. 0040,340. P4Rmwd etpon.OL Ree94ame, Bao Rohs. Clop, klakkaonce 8leaup 2240.00 10.00 112.500 0 0 0 10.03 t tu&0 50.000 208 Concrete Brock 1 7.109 24 1, 2 Pouts Rippe PAR 33401 paha Roar T4pea4*, CA 02590 Pat Plalpramd Eg+opnont Ra3odm. Shads Cordo 110,200 0 125.00 - 0 0 a 0 0 0 2007 Canada Blodt 1 4 1,00 35 1.2 Roamed Pert (946na9 Co anent, Pup 447150,935.9 Pehrsy Temente CA POM. Tur1Arra. SMEm.910Na Tablet, Ow Par; Roseman, amts a ti rp0.Caal 230.00. _ .. 9 _ .. 82,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 mb201302pe' Ttlmada SOV 226.3 Q) 2 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, Difference In Conditions, Earthquake Rood Statement of Values 2.26-13 to 2.26-94 030 Lts.4 03ttp.6 MOM Oosapsoq 13000630 OPPlaustroosal a ® 0L! V•6gbls Pipets 0135.14a3 Bol se EDP ea YeuOai Coemtstloo BdY C tBAo�it.1. 38 Rosetta Pah 30950 Ruston La, Temeado. CA PM. PROwaad EOu4u+mmi 81104 Coves 26,000 0 330.500 0 0 0- 0 0 0 37 Rotary Park 36630 P10318lreet Temaada, CA tiara; ParaTobIo4, Shoo Cesare 12600 6 02500 0 0 0 0 0 30 1 841411403 Rat 41070 Gw.ra 0, 7anrahCoWOO Pmt Playpto ,0 FqupmcnL Redrawn, SAW* Cowan .225.000 0 00.500 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 1006 Cossets Work 1 4 3900 38 - Urns NW Park 40747 Wakes laws Tomcods CA Pm Pia , add Ealasso t -Shads Craw* 25.000 0 120000 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 40 41 b Macaw Liam M4n1r0 Pah 44935 330:310 Pau, T4maada. CA Pak Pardpsod Egaprnoot Shads Cava 25.000 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 a 41 S1om Pah 32315 Camas San Joao. Tdnoad4.CA Pak Pkorpas ,0 Evaim•na 9 12400 02.500 0 0 0 4 0 0 42 1, 2 da TuresOut! Pard 21000 Mu RO 6 Rands Cotdonm Rd Temearta. CA 82550 Pork. 1taa Rottman. SAW* Fa1r1`a* 200.000 0 - 23.000 0 0 0 0 0 1001 Canasta Bloat 1 4 1,000' 43 Tamotsu Carat Trap Pan 33862 Charmed Stoat TM3ade. CA Pak Playyadl0 EmOtword 0 0 - 62,100 0 0 0 0 0 44 1, 2 Tanrsu Ha Pah 533673.6 Somas Way Tamwt., CA 02390 Perk P30ypr0Wd equipment. 2 Maroons. Smckt s. 0o0 Folds 300,000 35.000 62500 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 2093 Canasta Block 3 4 3,000 45 Va! Ranch Port 3296514rmorry Low T4mcoO3. CA Pork Ramsay!0 Eglpmer0 0 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 40 V4twan's Pe,k 30865 Lt Swam W07. T�mawroada, CA Park Playstaad Emapnar0 0 0 325.000 0 0 0- 0 0 0. 47 'VOre9 Part 10060 0t las RO. Tarnecula. CA Pail 0 0 5.000 0 00 0t 0 44 1 Wortant s Creel Pat 300300a party Rd Twroada. CA 112590 Ppm Mamma!,Egoan+4 185200 0 100.000 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 1908 J64E7ory 1 4 1.000 aeaus.s Oaamdmik 3,14.4 Caw 40 1 Wad Crest Tad Part 45454 Wes Croat Rd. TertrruL. CA Pork Tram sea Pm Cam. 65044 Corsa 25.000 0 150.000 0 6 '. 0 0 0 30 Wed Creak Pork 43630 0000 Croat Dr R:, T4mopda, CA Port. Fla prommd Equ0 mors. Restroom. Ousts 305.205 0 150.000 0 9 0 0 0 0 2009 Corsets Woe* 1 4 3,000 X 31 1 30650 Paubo Rd. 00 T4ra 13. CA 04590 Fas SLyya 034 3.000.000 320000 0 0 0 0 15000 NOMod - 5.000 1097 Sp643orad 4S43amy 2 4 10,000 52 26330 !Amato* to* Twnbad4, CA Fra Staaon 612 413t1t441b9 CAL FORE 0 0 . 0 0 35.000 Included 5.000 X 53 27415 Er0np . Ca. wag T4m¢adp CA _ Fra Watts 673 *602000 .000 0 . 0 0 0 15.000 0100 4 5.000 1066 Typo V Woad Fates 23tue*O 3 4 .6.000 mb2013020s. Tamco 4a SOV 240..13 OD 3 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form. Difference In Conditions. Earthquake Ftood Statement of Values 2.26.13 to 2-26-14 05 toc.* 111.19.11 nu 040416661et0tdm0 BAP mmalSDPNuMs. 546914461 0 6a Popes EDP EDP FE Year 114110 Colaltd16n 710. 01 01504.5 Ct Ana "tofu_ 54 37500 SAy Cany00 Or 00m9546. CA Flte Salm 43 0.e07/e by Ca tal41 RAcntle 0 0 0 0 0 15,000 1100.004 0 X 35 1 32321 Me Vaeoy Road rdraada. CA 9292592- Ma 5roao1192 2,110,000 05.Ow 0 0 0 0 15.000 5004444 0 2007 OpAntim.d Mel Samoa 6Rock i 1 tool X 56• 1 52131 64.41. Loop Ra Tomcods. CA 92591 Foe 01a5on to bo occ0pm5 upon Caputo s00 mon1 2.09.0060 00.000 0 0 0 0 15.000 Inducted 0 2000 sp11U 41d Comets 1 4 9.030 57 5 32364 0110504 Traa Tamxv4a, CA 92502 Temacufa 8911/n4 -81p 8' Pascua:a3 ' • 0000 311.040 0 0 6 0 10.000 800505ed 0 2462 Wood Frame. Mad 6850 1 2,000 - 55 1 110511barepa Rd Temaoda. CA 82500 Tomxul0 Eamacctrc Sanaa R/W0Oam 140.406 0 0 4l 0 0 0 0 0 1994 119516101416 Concrete OI000 1 4 1.000 38 2 Pod/POd Ba.0. 540.490 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 NOW Calaot/&5* i 4 5,000 39 A2076 a4w4owe Paawey Tomoa4o. CA Tam8414810 lO 5d1041 0 25.040 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 30017 Front Strews - 7o01e1848, CA, 82080 Pmtab Radkr814. 0,157 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 11190 Stool 1 4 40 91 1 Eawkf Na4,06 cam 20070 Ps401 Si Temecula. CA 92569 Pantry Stonpo 120,006 0 0 W 0 5 0 0 0 5620 W004 Slum 1 4 5.500 62 1 6016Frad555414 Tem,ade, CA 92590 R/aba0ap6 LOO 6aMad.ParW641Loa V30.000 0 6 0 0 0 0 IS 0 1997 Fmfm 1 4 700 UrraOedfded.EadneicDam P0Ooeasarp slara.0re, bote.sr00n0 Bra Everao e1148mew ed 10003arn 0 0 0 0 0 d 290,000 ad141041 100••4.4 63 Tam Squaw Pae - 41000 7.4.5. arm* Tem5o40. CA 02696 Tuff 60an0ma 0 0 '50.000 -0 0 9 0 0 0 • 04 Ilslvoaton Noudo 103$55000�0 Road,Too,.oda,CA (101444) .... F •• 1,060.000 0 0 00.100 smear 0 10.000 148091 10.006 2004 Woad From*. 6r<8No,ed• Atarmod 1 4 3,493 65 1 11499 &Umtatie Cade Walt enrsoda.CA 92590 14911114 Oats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 60 1 27480 PA rAarma MOW W4A 700e1:444, CA92390 Wt41tp ONy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 1 4173514Cobo Cowl .- TonAade, CA 02190 W106913401 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 !muted V4.wa•9590411F0a0* 1129.346895 110,787,300 03.,310.900 8159505 155.409 07,500.000 98.119,000 bmbcte4 897665 X DC, EQ a 9850Cevareg► T4.0: 8110.090.846 910421600 509 1101.000 050u.009 376100.006 8,118,006 55444464 3160.063 .10.707,300 3,370,05 350,308 506,006 7.100.000 6,118,000 0 X 08 1.2 1193Tmen Temecula Temsade.CA 92390 2/u9noa13.1171,05 wade 350.05 50.900 0 0 17 - 0 0 0 0 1999 Sd.IRantmnd Comm. • n.gs➢tneFAN 94188406,448 .rd0013937m•TemecW SOV 230-13 CA CITY OF'TEMECULA Special Form, Difference In Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Wires 2-26-13 to 2-26- t4 0C toes Bldg. a Addnroa Occupancy luaaxma 8PP m 68 M0akY0apan EDP lta daato EIW,s tIlP10 Y«MAOrIcaatosoot Moffat CI 101 i e9 'Baokot Fwtquin' Toon Soon Peak: 41000 Mai, Oboe. Tsvwaaa CA FouWnn SadpM* 400000 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 70 135,05,0InUwRae 26250 You Road. TomsMa. CA 02390 Milk MSoappa0 I KM 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 Owda Wags Artwork maroon 27024 Jataraon a 20331 Ma Rind, lmneadi. CA 02500 Pp01bM 00.002 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m1201392po• Tomoada6OV 22043 (!1 CITY OF 7EMECULA Special Form, Difference In conditions, Earthquake flood. Statement of Vatnee 2-26-13 to 2.26.14 MC tos.1 8140.1 A44ens eesspsary 8404849 8PP 0443334ai 01 E0 Wat®ali papers EDYstudence EDP Yew 81111CamYtutkn OD 01 PM Ana 5, 72 CMk Can* Mom on Putt/ 860013 2008914er % SI. Teagadt, CA 82540 Pa&Ac .230.000 .s, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 7 2 r4 Tor CMC Cama M441 41000RtrhhBtreat Tomaa4i. CA 87500 P Ad - 49,000 0 0 0 0 - - - 0 - 0 0 0 2010 X 74 1 Tsmsca0ls 0* Pend 28390 YaszR46 Rancho Cs45o10 a R4 742301310. CA• 82580 Yetarnab Usmo01 550,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 2001 13.401h 4140•4 PeaYhmafiransa 4614 AOLmW683piMa 12b 42261292a4.Temeato 60122043 t2) 'Paye owt d 1000rtrici 14clud/es ObtOns 13 Pio* Tablealeap; 01004 ate) e PROPERTY 2-26-13 To 2-26-14 Per Schedule of Locations / Statement of Values attached Subjects of Insurance Limits of Insurance Building & Personal Property — Blanket excluding Playground Equipment $140,141,895 Playground Equipment $3,370,000 Location #74 - Veterans Memorial $550,000 Location #68 - 2 Arches $400,000 Contractor's & Mobile Equipment, Per Schedule Attached $555,609 Business Income Including Extra Expense - Blanket $910,000 Fine Arts (Loc. #6) (Loc. #12) (Loc. #6 & #12) (Loc. #69 - #73) $250,000 Owned $35,000 Owned $250,000 Property of Others (5 location Total)$885,000 Fine Arts at Any Other Location (AOL) $100,000 Fine Arts in Transit (Owned & Others) $100,000 Valuable Papers — Blanket $7,100,000 EDP Property — Blanket (Hardware & Software) $8,625,000 EDP Extra Expense $975,000 Newly Acquired Buildings $2,000,000 Newly Acquired. Equipment $1,000,000 EQSL Sublimit with $50,000 Deductible $2,000,000 Machinery & Equipment Breakdown Included Miscellaneous Unscheduled Equipment Including Mobile & Voice Communication Equipment (See Representative Sampling) $150,000 Personal Property in Transit $100,000 Deductibles: Coinsurance: Agreed Value: Endorsements: $10,000 Building/Personal Property $5,000 Valuable Papers/EDP/Fine Arts and (AOL, Transit) Contractor's Equipment/ Personal Property at Unnamed Locations/ Personal Property in Transit $1,000 Miscellaneous Unscheduled Equipment & Mobile Communication Property 24 hour wafting period for Business Income and Extra Expense (with EDP BI/EE) & Machinery & Equipment Breakdown Business Income Nil Yes, subject to receipt of current signed statement of values and Business Income worksheet. • Date Recognition Exclusion • State Amendatory (where applicable) • All expiring endorsements unless otherwise noted or previously disclosed CONTRACTORS & MOBILE EQUIPMENT 2-26-13 To 2-26-14 No. Description Limit 1. 1992 Massey Ferguson Tractor with Loader and Scraper S/N: LF31180U397524U $31,500 2. Speed Limit Sign 10,000 3. 1995 John Deere 310D Backhoes S/N: T0310DG813754 64,760 4 1997 Eagle Police Command Trailer S/N: 1UPT10P20V1016022 (Licensed) 45,000 5. 2 Caimsiris Helmets - $25,350 each 50,700 6. High Density Mobile Storage System** 18 750 7. Traffic Signal Modification 14,590 8. 1998 Essick Walk Behind Patch Truck Roller S/N: 10631029 11,167 9. Mobile Traffic Monitor 12,700 10. Scrubber, Floor 17,633 11. Equipment, Defibrillators 35,000 12. 2000 CMPLA Ditchwitch S/N: 1A9AF1826YF495820 48,000 13. 2007 Kawasaki Mule SIN: 1JK1AFCJ137B510945 7 000 14. Cushman Truckster S/N: 1CUNH22274PL000708 10,000 15. New Holland Tractor S/N: NH33660 20,000 16. 2006 Westcoaster Motor Boat & Trailer S/N: HULJ1112G506 5,600 17. Genie Lift 7,500 18. 2007 Kawasaki Mule SIN: JKIAFCJ127B510676 7,000 19. 2012 John Deere Backhoe 1T03105JLBD211149 113 709 20. 2011 Scissor Lift #200204597 25,000 TOTAL: $555,609 *Including Voice Communication Equipment **Miscellaneous Equipment Contained Inside Covered Under Unscheduled Equipment 493201302K— Temeade Property & IM velum MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT BREAKDOWN 2-26-13 To 2-26-14 Coverage Limit Deductible Direct Damage Included $10,000 Business Interruption Included 24 Hours Extra Expense Included 24 Hours Consequential / Spoilage Included $10,000 Expediting Expenses Included $10,000 Spoilage Included $10,000 Ammonia Contamination Excluded $10,000 Off -Premises Power Interruption Included $10,000 Mb2Ot3O2pc — Temecula Property B IM vatues MISCELLANEOUS UNSCHEDULED EQUIPMENT INCLUDING MOBILE & VOICE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT (IN TRANSIT OR AT OTHER LOCATIONS) 2-26-13 To 2-26-14 REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLING (Below and Per Attached List of Furnishings, Tools & Equipment): 1. Arial Equipment $21,662 2. Compressor Equipment $3,105 3. Traffic Counter $1,629 4. Fence $2,126 5. Break Jar Mod Drill $5,162 6. Pump System Stencil Truck $2,800 7. Security System $1,130 8. Solar Arrowboard $4,262 9. Gymnastics Equipment $7,394 10. Sound System $141,908 11. Defibrillator $5,199 12. Helmet, Cairns Iris $25,350 13. Bicycle $1,291 14. Radar Equipment $2,172 15. Traffic Signal Modification $14,590 16. Digital Dimmer Component $26,782 17. Play Equipment 815,494 18. Recycling Equipment $5,487 19. Shampooer $2,100 (Limit of Insurance: $150,000) Deductible: $1,000 14)201302pa - Temecula Prapaty & IM vatue3 LsMsIAst manor Mod Asses Repan 1V1712012 0 28:14AM CITY OF tEMECULA PAYROLL Ono: 1 Astec Muter 000003 • LAND, IMPROVEMENTS, NARCICAP ACCESS Asset Staoa ACTIVE Asset Class: hind. AND ProtenyTypo FIXED ASSET As4atTypo: Sand AssafCCnatun comma Acera7 Property Croup Motu Asset 0 Alin Sign 0.00 Mamas thss Post to 9armrco Shoat Y Tag Mona= 12 091 3042 8 F om CtP N Yantdaduron Mon Parts, Onpasat N Meld 47 Daposat Rasulmnr SOrtIJ 4 Ractncdort Ounc OaaanentSamos lavasurt Da Taman In PrKalxsat• Prephoure Peigratary. Goocrencrata nustands Oerarmc oal dopland80 Govern nfol !senator C1P DuposeS Petunias Plbpdutoey. GOuvnnentd: Pushup urn Proprietary. Gaammntat disposal Azure Maui convert PrawtcOsio 8730/1995 Roane Scum Arrtunl 30,581.90 PO a PO Duo terata D moues Dam Vestrig s Va a 00 Dano Cnetlrq Mack Dam [7asd v Dano Oal Pwunsnc Clntnunlon Uma Type Aamwtl - Fuad votuwd 6/3011995 0 820.1900 820 Laudon R41ponspe Date rn use Pusan Rosocttt aP4741 t. APU Peepntuary. Govemoterael 100.00 30381.90 Qua Trort$OWen Tram Type Funs Typo Ld0 Urn$ Lao Swog0 AnsCwa 8A00995 Aequtsttran 00471 820 G 30,801.00 TON/ 30,501.90 FaAdasodidon Asset Raymer. 00410047 .LAND IMPROVEMENTS, SAM HICKS PARK _ Asset Status. ACTIVE asset Claw land - LAND - PropmgTfpo FIXED ASSET" Asset Typo: Lind Mat Canadair C07V07t ACI Mfr Protons Drove Mosta Asset Ill Aunt Slut 1.60 Bonsai sant 1.8 Post eBatatra Snaat Y Tap Number. 1209120/27 Fran CtP N Uartlarvar 41910 MORENO ROAD :.C:s PD.'.,al 0itParai ti 1400!10 Ortt:ay Res01II+Crt Stento Ranncaan Dose Dowmanateettas AmMsant Prcprialmr Cortmmordr3 acgtandg OP Gore+n.M.rtJ 0alueUstion 7toturor In Prcprataa Pmmpnatary GOvemzaasu dontandto Covenuncns transfer Da ase Pnrcatas Pre;rrlary GOeeentruu disposal Pn:prresy Genanmc=J PM. 1 taMstAst Munn Filed Asps Repan' 12/1712012 9:28:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL PorWta Amato Ura convwl Pe111L110 Date 813011995 Cum asSavor ARauni 409,820.44 P09 PO Dato Inwood Invoice Daus Vasdta O Voua et Onus Chace O Creta Qam' Diode Dead Oro. Purchase Oran soon lice AOCOuraKumasi Fntd Precast Amami 8170/1995 0 820.1900 020 Lo90009 Rowed/Ka OM Use Person' RofPero+t o Ponos APN Paco: 2 100.00 409,029.41 tadualhn Data Trarnemto Mrs Troy Fled TTpo tris Unts t+0 Savage Amoutc 0150/1995 Acquldllan Coat 020 0 409,028,44 Total 409,826.44 Fwa Anatolian Aism Nuatter, 500005 • LAND tMPROYEMENTS, ADA PARK IMPROVEMENTS Aims Sms' ACTIVE ActotDoss: land •LAND Property Type. FIXED ASSET Asad Type: fend Asses Canaan' convort Miner Proem!! (gaup' Koster Alva Ass/1158o 0.00 Massaro tetra. Post to Bohm Sneer Y fop Ntr 1209130435 Ftcm CID. N 110otdaaurrr. Anon Pseud Diapoi 0 N Wad onpota/Tasma n SKIS Rostnctcn Doc 0mwaleat30*Mds #400411ten CeprecOlon hooter In Prepoctlry Prtxnctawy Pnwn6lrry. Carcmatenf l acgtand0 Gaerr9nat doplandgo Daimonsum transfer OP otsecsd Ptectr00s PYeprtpary. Presnetyy - _ P1eritusts Gmvomtdd5: Grnmraa,ut disposal GorensnenLsl Pannasa Ager: Manx cannel Purdtaso Oo o 613001990 Futdng ScuroO' Amount 281,771.18 POO PO Dat: /swim 0 Inv:to Date: Vaahn 0 yo jd er Oats' GNdt a Mack Data: Deed 0 Good Oats: Peduoo Olstdaudnn IAlfa lige Mews Num= Fund Pelona Ans 8130/1990 S 820.1900 820 10080 261,771./0 Leadon RosC0mAt0 Dept In Use Person Respetn,Lo Pena% ARP!, WWI= 0210 tramaeaos Tram Typo Furs Two Leo Urns Leo Ser ogo moon 0/2911009 Acaulslttan Coot 820 D RID deev./Man 281,771.18 Total 261,771.18 Ands wow 000006'• LAND, BTN PARKING LOT As101 Chaser. Land • LAND Aso)! Two land Ass at Status ACTIVE P*O9arry Typo, FIXED ASSET Asset Cantata++ consort Page: 2 I3MSIAI I .8ester Thad AscotRapon PiOa: 3 12/17/2012 9:78:1/ANI CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Mid' Prepmty Croup' Muter Asses 0 AssafSoe: 0.00 keesuroWO Post to0.uanc,Sheet. Y Tag Monter. 1209130136 From OP N liallatfiCluret Attar Partial Wposd' N Noma a DasCesel Reaa+aian Sawa Penni:um Dose Document Somas Aapautn Copto iatan Transfm M Roadway: Proprietary. ProPetaty: Oovoriiadat acgbndg Oovanmanlat deptandfo Ga+rormoraa1: It afar' CIP Crspasal Procecdi Prapiattuy: Propaebry. Cason:serttal. Gavcn omni, disposal AVM, Nairn consort Poro aio 0M. 8/3011905 Fvturg Scum: Amon 631,89738 P01 PO Oro Invoke a mutts Oslo Wagnera VWdwrCato Chun 0' Chacis 0ato Coedit Mod Data Date Type Aomd rlumaa Pure Otatrtrunte8 Ptapdat ry: Government.* 0/3011098 8 620.1000 tawYon Rasp:mato Coat Rmpantte Persms 820 to use Person APt! Mart 100.00 631.087.58 Oaro TYareadlit Trans Typo Fsasa Typo tire Gras tat Satvege Oxcart 8/7011998 AmpasIdan Cost 820 G 61042004 Valuation Cost 820 0 F'rt0desesp9on Total 631,007.58 127,884.00 759.461,58 Assd hunter 000010 - LAND, 08040 PUJOLSTREET ASSN Sums ACTIVE Awns ICans land •LAND PropenyType:. FIXED ASSET Asaol Typo; land Aust Conmticn• convert"tr Properly Group: 165-159 ActiMosta:Assset 0 Anal Sita 0.80 tleosru0 Um Post to balance Succi Y TogNwr2cr Fran COP* N Wrsaacater. Auras Paroo Cams N Model O 0aacsv Resta:tam Serra a Resircuua t Casc: PosumaciSoutsms AtNiadon Dopreciaso+ Trunks In PaspOstary. Proprietary, Piapeletas. Gasoomsaroaa: oegtand8 Cov *suss ejS doptandgo Gavcrtntaeeat tranator CIP OOpoSO1 Premeds PrcPnoLuK Pro{arcury. Proprietary Gasanmeraat Gwacseontat disposal 0,,cmrnas4t, PtaehNo ...CRUM Marocc canyon Ptecnu00am 124011999 FLeona Scam LOW21CD Amount 184,500.60 PO 7 PO Gate Inraia0 a tnuoad Date VIAJC ra VoucharData Omara Chad: Cam De*O8 Deal Cate Purahaso DtaanWtI0n Drs Type Arcocnt aarmba ram Vsrraltl 1242011999 8 620.1906 020 100.00 151.50030 Page 3 faMstAst &tutorMae AsaotReport Pow 4 12117/2012 9:20: 41161 CITY OF TEMECUtA PAYROLL Locidan Raspwnmco Daps 165.199 as use Pews Rospons:No Parson ,lotto Mayor APf1 922 053.0201021 Vend= Coco Transxioe Turps Type Fora Typo Lae Unts LAD Satvous Lomas 121301/490 Acqutsalon Cool 020 0 154,500.00 Tout 164,500.00 Fandosarlptbn Asset tomato' 000012 . LAND; BEG DAL FROM COUNTY Asset Stows ACTIVE Asset Class: bed • LAND P,Opany Type FIXED ASSET ANN Type Land AscotCondaar convert Actirsy. PrCpony Gross LtasterAtual a Aa00t Site: 060 Metawm IdtiY Post 10 Cola= Shoot: Y Tagtterenee 1209130396 Facto CIP' N U0ea6adtaor. Am. Format D+tposm N used o QsFosy Rasataa:n Sonata Resin' =disc OaemetaSaunas Amtso a Ommmtn Transfer to Poopmtmy ProNetey Ptapeeury Cenotr stress acglaadp Govonna mm dapbedgo Oosemmentat transtot CIP - Disposal P omens Pla omary. Ffirer! Gova+mnovel. • Go.cnmaCar &sposot AtiOnso AcQdm ueOtod utmost Pusdraso Oise: 1211/1999 Fid Sour= Amor 7,228,900.00 PO PO Due ntvoim a Invoice Dam *emu 1/13135%41 ilato: Check a Crock Date • Coeds Deco Dee PWdimte pstrenelen ilam Iypo Account Humber Pipe- - sworn* • cnagy Govcnreolal 1211/1909 8 820.2000 820 100.00 7,29000.00 toasObn nateasstbCern .teUse Person Raman:Ma Pessary. APN Vsleathm Data Trasnn9on Trans Two Fund Typo. tdo Unu talo Salvage Arro19e 12/111689 Amyl/Nem Cost 020 G iLOdosafgars 7.266,80000 Total 7.266,80000 Asset INmaer 600013- LAND, PALA COMMUNITY PARK Asset Slane AcmWE Anal ixasa tied • LAND Propcdy Typo. FIXED ASSET Assaf Typo. bad AssetCamt:an convert Amity. Poverty Group Master Assets Paha 4 taltslAst 127/7/2012 9:29:14A01 AstatS,m• 10A0 Tao threw 1209120197 Mandacttser. 44900 TEMECULA LANE Medal Sontag DoesonaalSawsar • Accadsnen MOattae Una . WOW Riad AsW1 Rcpw1 CRY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Pon to paance Sheat. Y Francs' N Moo PO 03I0apossl. N 1%1005al NOSIDC On Rotmaal Oou Depteuaun Pmpdetary Proptetery, Corcrtsaaits =panda GovorretkM r dopiand0o C0' WOAD Psoo, 5 Danger to Ptapddary• Goontuntr.s9 tronsfor Proeoaas Pte. PropttaND ; Propiatm: Comments Gcro uttertt:r disposal Gar nn:weed PmWse AesteroMCIR07. canvort AaGioseOatar 1W150991 Ftssdno Sassed - Arresir4 1,571,184.61 PO a PO Cac tritons a Irtra_o Data tbtsAer a Vprtl1at Data Crack a Cate* Duo ONO o Oeed Data Caw 790 A0X300 Nt::naar Patithaso Dlsutstition 1011511091 9 420.1800 Lociden . RespanCa ail in Use Posen Reo io No Perim APtt arta C&CCM Jett aatl 820 100.00 1.671.184:61 Delo Tratnadim Tran Typo Fora Typo Lea URN Lee Salop 10115/1991 Acpulaillon Cost 920 G Total sae desettolo, 1,6/1,154.61 1.571.194.61 Assaf Nt mass 000014� •• LAND. RONALD REAGAN SPORTS PARK ANN Oats ALAND ND T190. land ACnry MosterAstaia Asset $bn 81.00 Deaturo U04 Tao tiseroar 1209110296 Manufacturer. 42859 MARGARITA ROAD Model Soya a Qacwaortr Samna Ase+ Coins A1101 $149i* ACTIVE Properly Typo FIXED ASSET Asset Cones= i convert Prcponf Groep Post to80Isne0Sheet Y frnn OP N ANON Partial Orpasal N DisposalRosmani% Retln0.en Cain. Traenfe In Poop 1clo y; Ptopcetary Pr try. Goscntmeum =Undo Gatersrte:d duptartdoo Goretrmend. Uonafor OP O:spesd Promeds Precnotent. Preplan Petpnetay. Geotrnrserso Goverment: disposal Gernormremst Palt40ta Arpure Mc1940 corrvort Pwdwse Dom. 10110/1001 Funding Sumo Arrawd• 1,818,000.00 POD POOtate mveice a rnrav9O 0aro. Voucher a Vouarer Data Cho* a Coes Oxe Dao a Dora Caw bra typo Um= Monter DurOmsa O strlbudan FVnd 10115/1091 8 020.1900 820 Leeattari '. RmpaaCm Dep rn Uso Parton Rospauda0 Person .41N PCKan4 ArriVN 100.00 1,018.00000 Palo 5 IaAfatAal 12/1T/2012 9:28:14AM www Fixed Asset Reryswt Paso: 8 CITY OF TEAIECULA PAYROLL tra uaaon Dam Trmnadan bans Typo FW Type Lds Urvis td0 Smr200 Aircuni 10116/1091 Acquisition Coat 820 0 1818,000.00 To WI 1.818,000.00 Fattdaaufp1 +n Anal marten, 0000t5• LAND, .81 ACRES PARK SITE I Aal0l Wan ACTIVE Anal Our laid • LAND Pcapcwty Typa FIXED ASSET A2241 Typo. Land AaootCenddan convMA ACn0y Propctry G m.D Massa Asset 2 Ataat Sao: 0.61 Meatwe Unit Past to Balmrop 6tteor Y Tan Number. 1209130399 Fran CVP N taanutmArcr. Area Panel D:aaass N Modal 0U srdRoamcuon Sadatd Rows: on Oast DeamaaatSnmros Ad an Deyeamiat trarbtartn PreFnalmy PM:notary PrapnaLary Ga.arscaaut atglandg Gorenmerz dapland0o Gordnttmts transfer CIP Gamma Nomads PrapAeary, Prepnctsty Pinot:My Co.trratonto. Gcw memWt disposal Garoarunetnia PatMtw ActusoMe9at convert PwanatoDeur 10118/1991 Rang Swam Amman 128.000.00 PO2 PO Dye nwoito a Imdur Date Varner 0 Yammer Oats. Client a Medi Date • Deeda Oo900os 12172 Typo Amari Uurnaer Owosso DIsUdaunon 1811811991 B 820.1900 Local/an RespensoaaCopt tn use Pasdr Ralponlmlo Parson' APE: Fur.o 820 Farasd Atacama 100.00 1200080 Vaaaniaa Duro hamact ort Trans Type Fain Type 140 Urns 140 Satrap Amours 10116/1991 AcqutswUon Cast 820 0 128400.00 Total 126,000.00 RA daterfplten Ana* ttrs►2cr 000018 • LAND. BANIA VISTA PARK Assaf Stairs ACTIVE mut Class: land • LAND Prowl/ Typo. FIXED ASSET And T090. land Asset Candsav canven aNtar. Peepony Group AtaumAssat a Pio 8 LIMMLAti Master Fixed Asset Repass Papa: 7 12/1712012 916:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Aiwa Sete. 0.48 Tap Ittstoson 0.1280130400 Ltmarbtaeor. 41680 AVENIDA DE LA REINA Mo001 a Scnst Doeatem Sources Accusa,an Preanseny Caarnnierettt at glandg CtP sternum the Pest b 8atsnrA Srteet Y Frain GP. N /l1toaPaNaIOispatm N Disposal Roatoico t Resorteus Dale Deprerasisrn Translerrn Propnorary Garemmenrat dopland0o Dnpesee Ganarrncnts transfer Prcpmtary - PrtP^otni ProFnotury Gcnernattsuat Caemmexts disposal Crvn'r items PmeMa Acourro UMW caovart Ponchos°Dtrto: 101t$11081 Furatag¢o otoca Amu* 116,000.0 P00 PO Dano: Ow*, 0 *maw Date %Ababa 0 Voucher Date: Chock a Chetlt Date: Rood a Doad Casa. Wp Type Acz tau fA.sSR Pwshaso C V iI an FW 10116/1991 8 820.1900 820 Rosporut0a Dept MUNI Person Rosponst io Faison- APN. ',wawa ARIOemt 10040. 116,00640 Dole Transaction Tram Typo Fund Typo Lao taros Oto Sal„sgo 1101611991 AcqubJUon Cost 020 0 fall description Amount 115.00040 Total 116,00040 Acct Wawa 000017 • LANO, MERTON PARK Asset Slates ACTIVE allot Cress. land ;LAND Property Typo: FIXED ASSET .stat Typo: tend Astat Cdndton• COMM, Activity Property Group Moller Assaf a MINN Sae: 4.84 Maeat ri tbfL Post to 03$w co Mat Y Tap Nurser 1209130401 From 0P N Ms saataaa . 30050 RLVERTou LANE AWro Paean Meow N Ltadol a Rsp*sat Rosartuan Servat 0 Rotintota Doss DaeLman1Saattai' Aceparben Damnociecn . Trans* In Pregnatary. rhapaertry Pte, .0ov mxtss: aegbndp Gowcmmont doptaedpo Oo atanta nm 4anstor l7P DRAW Prosaods Rotary. Pmpeotsy Proprietary. Gae:mavtar dbpasal (Se er:nues Pushes* AtokastoaeaI. cermet Pter e*so08V~ra: 1011611991 Roam Source Atrstan 645,26540 F0 * PO trace, labia: 0 tnwit* Data Vouchera Voucheroa:o Creta s Glee* ,a' Lazo* 1 Dew (Sze 12ata Typo Acmes *sem PuM,ssa Distribution Fond 10;1601091 8 620,1980 9M R?swons44 Dept re Use Petscn Resparaaw Person Apsy PO nl Pascua 100.00 545,755.60 Pay* 7 1aH61Aet Mosler Read Mull Report 1271712013 9:28:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Matto Dry Trarnatoar Trans Type Fund Typo tda Units Ido SarnOo MOM 10,1511991 Acqulshlon Cost 820 0 646,76SS0 Total 549.7S390 larddescdpdon Pa00: 8 ALM Hurter 090019-LANDIMPROVEMENTS, UGHTING PH II DESIGN Assaf Status ACTIVE Assdcross• land - LAND Properly Typo: FIXED ASSET AssolTypo: land Assa,Coddtan comma ACM), Property Group Mauer Asset d AssatSao 0.09 'Moab+0 Ufu 000 la goons Shad Y fog Mortar 1209130403 Fran OP N Itm atachry A O* Paula Daposv. N MMU S omosat RDf not an SaWId RoantlanDese: Don:emSoweas AOpaaradn Deprodemr transfer to Proprietary Prrsmt uy Proprietary Gormnmaraal mallards Go+anndmv doptandgo Gaemneraa. transfer CtP Deposal Proceeds Proximal: Pmpnotdry: Proprietary: Gc.anmmtm: Goremmentaf disposal Gororrm enmi Pereiaao Amour* uotr o0 canyon Puswso Dxd, 112011092 Runup Scram An ,nI 11,97000 PO d PO Data tn,oco a tmaice Oate 1kudletd VAuatar COM auk 0 Crack Data' ODed 0 Deed Data rize Iype Aceansttutr er Roams* OrslnarJon 1,011 Pencil MOUnl 112811992 8 030.1900 - 020 100.00 11,97010 Lowlkn Respona ie Dept In Use Penal RosporlsDte Penton APN Va&tMen Or.. Tromps= Trims Typo Fuld Typo loo thus tate Saha,-12 An+os-r 1176!1092 AcgokBlon Cost 820 G 1191090 Total 11,910.030 FoOdascdptdae Asset number 000020 • LAND IMPROVEMENTS, ELECT ENG PHASE R Asad Sta04 ACTIVE Aunt Clan land • LAND Pmpony Tyco. FIXED ASSET Asses Typo Land Asset Ca1ffi!on convert Arm-+ty: . Property Group. Mailer Asset d Paso: 0 faMatAal Rasta Rad Asia Rapm1 Page: 9 12/1712012 0:20:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL AsaatSuo• 0.60 Tag Nurhtr 1209120404 Model Sona 0 maxima Um Pest a Renee Shot Y From CIP N man Pal601 Oppose: N Dispose, Resutaon Ra rade Dee DocumentSamon AKvysrtiort Oprossasen Nester Pagratary. Prepnasary Prete try. Gammen= acgland0 Genoeseeo nopfoodg0 GerenvP.uad transfer OP DRIPS Ptocamts Prontredry. Pro=rraey PrepneIryr. Gonernentima Geverr erect dlaposal GOraranersen Paden Amato Metre convert PufW to Dro 7/1/1991 knell Sauce Andre 419,266.76 PO 0 PO Oslo masa 0 trox a0 Cato Warne0 Mae Otto Cele 0 tract 1200 Ooed 0 'Dee Dow base Typo Arman I00T0 Pwhaae C otnLution wra Famed Atnprd 7/111991 8 820.1940 020 100.00 415,360.76 Loathe Rs=potscre Ocpt to Ute Pepin Resp reatoPawl APN: Date Tra saaivr Taro Typo Fund flea Loo Ursa loo Cottage Amman 7/1/1991 Acquisition Cost 820 0 416,268.78 Total 41508836 Rama:at mt Ault Alanaer. 000022 • LAND, COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECT Asset Mete ACTIVE Aust Crest land • LAND Property Typo: FIXED ASSET Asset Tip*. landAssaf Candraen 6000011 Amor Prosody Grafi 6131667A03610 Asset Site: 0.00 Mental unt Post to Ba PO Wet. Y Tap Number. 1279120406 From OP N Ydrndomer. Aeon Paint Dyed N Road o Doren Reale-ter Stam 0 Relates Dec Doevatent Scores Aces en 0cprec.ot en Taro*, M Propnetay Proarets y PmPneenry. Gorerr0eedal. PIMP') GemTmentat doplandgo GormrousturJ transfer CtP Day Proceeds Frcpsavy f'reCatW Pro:Wart. Cc-nro ental Gorareaeum dtaposal Gorerrmtoov Pure* %Wpm Mooed: cormatt Purseso Day 42811892 Fuses &sem Arra-tae 130,000.69 PO 0 PO De ease 0 1nvGte 0aa you tier 0 Veutrur Oso Cott o Cuts 0. Caro 0 Dow 000 baa Typo metro Narita Ptvhaso 06100 0 N2111092 8 020.1900 t=tnd 820 Respmncte Opt to Up Porten Respo0GioPesars APN: FOtatnt ArtAta:i 100.00 135,006.59 Paso 0 taMstAat Nada Rand And Ragan Pa0o: 10 12117/2012 8:20:14AM CITY OF TEMECULA PAYROLL Dam Transaeaan Tann Typo Fano Typo We LIMM lad SalO110 Amaro 412811992 Adgtdsltlon Cost 870 G 135,008.59 Total 125.008.99 FuMdosafpr/aa Aunt f.•an for 000023 • LAND. PRINTING COST. FEES. CRC Asset Sim ACTIVE Auer Can land • LAND Prpcnt Toa FIXED ASSET AUe1 Toe land Asset Conde= convert ACn`t, PrcFerty Gram doom Asses Asad San 0.00 NoaLtro Unt Pca to Oaanco Sneer Y raga:U er 1209130407 FIUICIP N 1landatnttr ArrrPat= Onposaa N 0...odel o ptposalRei cn Send n Resmr-ion0ow OoamrmfSetaces Aa1daabn AaCaauen Transfer In Prcptalary Pocandary Propadarp Gorernmentd. acgtandp Ga,amn atuaf daptandpo Gortmmoml Iransfor CP Dngaay Piareeda Rowan Progdatm7. Govanmand Govarmentm. d1pasal Ganant+ertd Pta5Aaao Aqua. Metno0. Purchase Duo 0130/1092 FuWarg Scum Amoutt 4,901.08 PO 0 PO 0am tnnice d amdeO Dila *um: a Vtuarar Qet0 Otea: a CnarA Ora Deed a Dead Dam. Ham Type Ammo tamai Puauso Olstrlednan Fund 61201109? 8 820.1000 - 820 [antral Raffia CA% 14 lino Person: RalacnaeaPeraam APN. Percent AmCeld 100.00 408108 wwadori Dab Trinuakn Trans Too FIAlti TTpo Ute [ben Ufa Sem* Ancrod 830/1992 Acquls8Ian Cost 820 G 4,981.08 Tidal 08138 AueiNurtar 000025. LAND. RECLASS CRC PROJECT Asset Stu ACTIVE ANN Cass: land • LAND Prc cry Type FIXED ASSET Anal Toe land AssctCanduon eonvott At9ay. Prowl/ Grew Nara, Asset a Pap, 10 1070009 1711712012 922028026 You to•Ono 0ona=Io l Rapo0 COY 017 TEMECUlAPATROLL Tamp Pin= N a11,40 You 203 Pm: 1 ANO AVON 071/!07000 050101 TOO PdaYaer Otto Can 04produton Cur=You DANNYore 07pese8066 6611 ANN for tifdps 04 01117 010 020 002074 032070 CO2020 022177 002070 002020 002080 002081 002082 003033 Mao64 000085 02600 022007 022226 002039 022600 092091 012022 03200 002994 007005 07007 037134 004001 A4w 1}000040000 04p91/0106 t2 00767 0upotraant t40 ANMIr. va00RAN 000767 3apuleaot 141 000322 Deportment «o ANdq: YaSi4Ae0 000767 Wpu.uant 2.m ANN*: thoNtro0 016605 000788 00707 080700 000789 001771 000173 000773 001714 000776 000776 000779 000791 000702 000703 000761 ENPIRE CREEK ® 0E1100 RD BRIDQE 03730/1089 EXAM CREPx FRON7 BT BUGS 00001688 M*RGAR666$03EK0DW1MOMS BRIOO 031308289 6SIJWOETACRE1316 WORSTBWOGE COMM 501RR2ETAG EEK07R IO00CARDBRmOS 03/30/1083 MURRIBTA CREEK YNKCI4ESTSR 00 870008 089011008 PEOWIOACREEK ® RANMOOW CANYON RD ORO 037301003 RANCROCARD C AIM 42 MADAMPATO(DR 081911969 SU4TA (ffiRTRUOS CREEK 43 MHZ RD 810008 04091580 EMPIRE CREEK ® MINCER OR 80100.E EOM CREEK ®AMARYGRRITARD 8RIDGE DARE CREEK O 140RAOA RD BRt00E E119007 CRP.O(QYTIEZRO Bftr011E 6119 W H CREpt O YUKON R0 07000E SANTA G00T1ntSEnos ,EFFERSONAXE BR 0812914490 MLA ROOK W1EL ®7401P W LLOY R0 001008 06908901 RECHOOltROAM Goma OVERLAND TRAM 09 06908991 SANTA 000TR130601EEKIIN. GUM. WARM 081911991 MP100ELS.66111602io18o03HERDR en= 06921001 SAMAGE RTI07 CREEK 4$ 114103021177.1213 001 00011950 LE7i0 RD 81600E TBMECt1L1CRBFJ(@ R1tAR0 820008 PA5ARDOXCOE PA(AROAD OMAN PWASE.2 0915000? BRIDGE 0VER BANTA GER 06/2212012 Await WON= TOLL Oeyattemat 607 TOTAL 341.77000 107.134.11 300.60900 0722001 16/070.00 5252123 710530 CO 27S67222 6391.26630 126441011 355244000 1.140.01042 41120000 128009.67 21400700 64001.70 137195700 43028308 09008000 366,21500 101.62008 08968800 300467.00 0176632 WW1= 200}21222 61094.10 069021090 422.06640 124663.7 Olt MOW 30107400 6336702 1271.7200 38170906 183220.00 60041.79 141.76000 400820 12062906 111.06119 313297.0 6144944 351357000 94026860 064308606 44011080 04027.68 012012000 6.H8.10603 00106302 07130090 41601.48 Mae 16.777.06 123a49 1351.607.00 2.761.08 Asod Too 046004 TONI C11Y NW. WPt0N6i18H1s Ae0d1I1110343=0 113161. 0ep41ta%e11t 120 10 211 06908966 art HAu.repttim60006 009011903 moot: 0042614ro1 TOTAL 0epatmxsH: 240 WOOL OTYNALL00PROYEMENTO 06W1= AWdyr,Uelmefo dTBTA1 02pilm42d 191 TOTAL CIN HALL atPRai EMENRa 080011998 Ad7e01%MO10aNTOTAL 0v80/904nt 160 TOTAL 1102001.023201/43111431033, MUM/DM MUSEUM M79510N101UAO4APRRTUENTS COT NALLOYAROVEMIDOS ?6442 702'.117 STREET 7U08CU1A VALLEY DOWRY NUSEUM 6660003 CITY HALL 24.10 12103 MAIRBHANCE FAOUfY 0 110 0 110 0 16188100490.1=36 APARTM ENI B 10.1408APRRR: viTS HISSIONALAGS 192:2014111224138 APARTNENT8 NIYNTERAOCE FAOUTY IIIPROVEMENTS ICC 9102010 CRC OM 0/EMENT3 R0 41-.0 REAGAN 690108 PK S14A01f*11 01.00 CRC (0000.3 0.09 ata 21/83500 000 000 2/208830 000 a00 101904.22 000 000 489.46976 0.00 0.03 650463777 0.00 000 2.607.79266 000 0.03 24423043 000 OM 94097330 040 003 941.69111 000 00 27471404 000 900 22830066 000 000 20440700 000 003 3060123 000 000 21070603 000 Oto 622.01094 000 000 /305672/ 000 003 101.11724 008 000 77456901 000 000 223.041.50 000 00 247342041 000 000 34316242 000 000 4.51156136 000 00 4475827 000 1100 18,54700 0.00 000 1244101.01 312360/870 7215.60460 000 800 219/37410 31323,17870 126460103 000 000 13.830.37416 312124673.10 7212.60124 1017720 *007290 10177.00 22.906.30 57.00170 000 000 276953.57419 3600.71 0.00 a0 650016 366.71 000 000 060141 7260.74 0.00 8255 31 17353±4. 2;967.30 4.6DI00 420090 420103 7,31700 7.217.00 721780 03463+4 1.73020 0.00 0.01.10 000 0.00 1080096 000 000 44441011 000 060 1404040 0OD 093 3089.1 1.73033 13021 223728 3137.29 2..3739 08103001 3.98258043 815.009 81 00124!1007 125004068 402.10522 COMM* 10326068 AIN 95 COMM $47.107.18 231.61662 001208999 2.87284820 023.92048 033911098 3177241.27 1.318.084.57 03008021 1314211 08 5707/182 0411911408 6838024 3712128 07611446 109.11420 44,23866 06/291996 70.04300 2834333 069811496 104393.60 42283 44 05937001 120233.08 3161902 0013011887 273222687 42068486 1111911420 3.347,42048 157253832 01/448421 13554130 0766070 0718111408 2.4702400 123784622 000 000 3,06377 000 am 3.04417 0.00 .300 407000 0.90 0.99 447802 000 COO 47342 000 000 3.087.68084 000 0.00 77145139 000 000 108.11011 003 000 22551166 00 000 2.609.11081 000 000 1551226.90 000 000 768;04000 000 000 6116800 000 000 6420472 0.00 000 4120303 0.00 000 0720805 000 080 01.41434 000 000 2.10S2M.12 000 000 1.72400214 000 003 8.09361 0.00 000 123864626 Poor 1 Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kotella., Suite 550, Anaheim. CA 92806 row 11 I'O \-V 11 INSURANCE An Explanation of PROPERTY BUILDINGS: (Real Property) Buildings or structures including extensions, fixtures, machinery and equipment constituting a permanent part of the building, building service equipment and supplies. CONTENTS: (Personal Property) All business property including stock, fixtures, equipment while in the building or in the open within 100 feet of the premises. IMPROVEMENTS & BETTERMENTS: Alterations or additions to any building not owned by insured. BUSINESS INCOME: Reimburses insured for loss of income resulting directly from interruption of business caused by damage to or destruction of real or personal property, by perils insured against. The company Is liable for the actual Toss of net income that would have been earned or incurred and continuing normal operating expenses including payroll. This form of insurance provides "disability Income" for your business and the function of it is to replace the operating income of your business during the period when damage to the premises or other property prevents this from being earned. It is from your operating income that your business meets expenses of payroll, light, heat, advertising, telephone, etc., and from which is derived your profit. This form is subject to coinsurance of either 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100% or 125%. MAXIMUM PERIOD OF INDEMNITY: Provides loss of income the same as business income except that coverage is limited to 120 days and is not subject to coinsurance. MONTHLY LIMIT OF INDEMNITY: Provides loss of income based on insured's highest monthly loss times length of maximum down time. Not subject to coinsurance. EXTRA EXPENSE: If your building was rendered untenantable by fire or by any other insured peril, it would probably be deemed necessary to secure other quarters to continue operations. However, the use of such buildings would undoubtedly involve many extra expenses such as rents, installation of telephones, etc. Extra Expense Coverage would provide the necessary money for such expenditures. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Iiirown & ro NV n INSURANCE CONTINGENT BUSINESS INTERRUPTION: Indemnifies the insured for loss of gross earnings and continuing charges and expenses resulting directly from necessary interruption of his business due to damage to or destruction of (a) Contributing properties which are firms supplying raw materials or parts to the insured and (2) Recipient properties which are firms to which products of the insured are furnished. AGREED VALUE ENDORSEMENT: An agreement made by the insured company that they will waive the coinsurance clause on specified property if a loss caused by an insured peril occurs after the date of the endorsement and prior to the expiration of the policy. If this endorsement is not extended by endorsement beyond the expiration date the Coinsurance Clause is automatically reinstated. VALUE REPORTING FORM: If your stock values fluctuate from month to month, this is the most feasible plan you can have as you report exact amount of exposure present. This policy is written subject to the 100% Coinsurance Clause and the values are adjusted at the end of each year. You will either receive a return premium or an additional premium, depending upon the average value reported. The deposit premium is based on 75% of the face amount of insurance shown. PLATE GLASS: "All Risk" of direct physical loss. Includes the expenses of repairing frames, installing temporary plates, or boarding up opening. Coverage is for Full Replacement Cost, less deductible. EMPLOYMENT DISHONESTY: This covers loss of money, securities or property belonging to the insured or for which the insured is legally liable due to employee dishonesty. Burden of proof rests with the insured. Policy does not cover inventory losses based on an inventory computation or a profit and loss computation, unless the insured can prove through evidence wholly apart from such computation that the loss was sustained through dishonest acts of employees. Under Blanket Position Bond each employee is bonded for policy limit, while under Commercial Blanket Bond the policy limit applies regardless of the number of employees involved. MONEY & SECURITIES BROAD FORM: The company pays for loss of money and securities by the actual destruction, disappearance or wrongful abstraction of same from within the premises or while being conveyed by a messenger outside the premises. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE: "All Risk" protection is provided which includes the following perils: fire, lightning, windstorm, hail, riot, civil commotion, strikes, explosion, aircraft, vehicle damage, collapse of building by weight of ice, snow or sleet, vandalism and malicious mischief, burglary and theft and other perils not excluded by the policy. The intent of this insurance, if any of the above losses occur, is to provide coverage for the following: This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage carrot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E, Katetla., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Iii1"0\Vll. L TO'vV n IIII INSURANCE CONTINGENT BUSINESS INTERRUPTION; a Indemnifies the insured for Toss of gross earnings and continuing charges and expenses resulting directly from necessary interruption of his business due to damage to or destruction of (a) Contributing properties which are firms supplying raw materials or parts to the insured and (2) Recipient properties which are firms to which products of the insured are furnished. AGREED VALUE ENDORSEMENT: An agreement made by the insured company that they will waive the coinsurance clause on specified property if a loss caused by an insured peril occurs after the date of the endorsement and prior to the expiration of the policy. If this endorsement is not extended by endorsement beyond the expiration date the Coinsurance Clause is automatically reinstated. VALUE REPORTING FORM: If your stock values fluctuate from month to month, this is the most feasible plan you can have as you report exact amount of exposure present. This policy is written sub(ect to the 100% Coinsurance Clouse and the values are adjusted at the end of each year. You will either receive a return premium or an additional premium, depending upon the average value reported. The deposit premium is based on 75% of the face amount of insurance shown. PLATE GLASS: "All Risk" of direct physical loss. Includes the expenses of repairing frames, installing temporary plates, or boarding up opening. Coverage is for Full Replacement Cost, Tess deductible. EMPLOYMENT DISHONESTY: This covers Toss of money, securities or property belonging to the insured or for which the insured is legally liable due to employee dishonesty. Burden of proof rests with the insured. Policy does not cover inventory losses based on an inventory computation or a profit and loss computation, unless the insured can prove through evidence wholly apart from such computation that the loss was sustained through dishonest acts of employees. Under Blanket Position Bond each employee is bonded for policy limit, while under Commercial Blanket Bond the policy limit applies regardless of the number of employees involved. MONEY & SECURITIES BROAD FORM: The company pays for loss of money and l securities by the actual destruction, disappearance or wrongful abstraction of same from within the premises or while being conveyed by a messenger outside the premises. ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE: "All Risk" protection is provided which includes the following perils: fire, lightning, windstorm, hail, riot, civil commotion, strikes, explosion, aircraft, vehicle damage, collapse of building by weight of ice, snow or sleet, vandalism and malicious mischief, burglary and theft and. other perils not excluded by the policy. The intent of this insurance, if any of the above losses occur, is to provide coverage for the followings This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb2013O2Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage carrot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. KateHa., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 town. &rU w ll INSURANCEe All sums due you from customers, provided you are unable to effect collection thereof as a direct Toss or damage to records of accounts receivable. • Interest charges on any loan to offset impaired collections pending repayment of such sums made collectable by such Toss or damage. • Collection expense in excess of normal collection cost made necessary because of such Toss or damage. • Other expense, when reasonably incurred by you in re-establishing records of accounts receivable following loss or damage. INSTALLATION FLOATER: Covers materials and supplies destined to be installed or erected while in transit or at a job site. Tools and equipment of the insured and property at owned or rented premises. is excluded. NEON SIGN COVERAGE: Policies are written on "All Risk" basis, subject to the following exclusions: • Wear and tear and gradual deterioration • Loss caused by installation • Mechanical breakdown • Loss caused by dampness of atmosphere • Loss caused by war • Loss caused by nuclear reaction VALUABLE PAPERS: Valuable papers means written, printed, or otherwise inscribed documents and records, including books, maps, films, drawings, abstracts, deeds, mortgages and manuscripts. Valuable papers would cover the cost of research to reconstruct damaged records, as well as the cost of new paper and transcription. It is an "All Risk" form. This endorsement does not apply to the following: • Fraudulent or dishonest acts by the insured • Loss resulting directly from errors or omissions in processing or copying the valuable paper • Wear, tear, gradual deterioration, vermin, or inherent vice • loss due to electrical or magnetic injury, or erasure of electronic recordings except by lightning • Loss due to nuclear reaction • Loss caused by warlike action • Loss of property held as samples or for sale or for delivery after sale. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coyot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 to will & row 11 INSURANCE CONTRACTORS TOOLS & EQUIPMENT: A floater used to cover o wide variety of movable equipment. Coverage can include small items such as hand tools, i.e., hammers, circular saw, jig -saw, pumps, etc. EQUIPMENT FLOATER: A floater used to cover a wide variety of owned and rented equipment, Coverage can also include equipment rented to others. See your specific form for details. COMPUTER: MEDIA - magnetic tapes,discs, drums, or other materials on which data are recorded. EQUIPMENT - machinery used to read and produce information .kept on the media. LOSS OF INCOME - when normal operations ore curtailed because of damage to or destruction of the equipment or the media. EXTRA EXPENSE - additional cost incurred by an insured in its attempt to conduct business on a normal basis after damage or destruction of its processing system. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysOmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 iovll & 1o\vf INSURANCE An Explanation of SPECIAL FORM COVERS ALL DIRECT CAUSES OF LOSS, SUBJECT TO, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE FOLLOWING EXCLUSIONS: > Explosion of steam boilers > Voluntary parting via trick or device ➢ Mysterious disappearance or inventory shortage > Wear and tear D Loss caused by birds, insects, rodents or other animals ➢ Mechanical breakdown > Artificially generated electrical currents > Continuous or repeated seepage or leakage of water over a period of 14 days or more > Smog ➢ Dishonest act or omission by an insured, employee, volunteer or authorized representative > Rust, corrosion, fungus, decay, deterioration or latent defect ➢ Earth movement D Dampness or dryness of atmosphere, extremes of temperature Water leakage from failure to protect from freezing D Flood - surface waters or water which backs up through sewers or drains. Water below the surface of the ground, including that which exerts pressure or flows, seeps or leaks through sidewalks, driveways, foundations, walls, basement or other floors, or through any opening. D Governmental Action > Nuclear Hazard > War > Power Failure > Building Ordinance > Rain, snow, ice or sleet to personal property in the open > Release of contaminants > Setting or cracking ➢ Marring or scratching This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage copilot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kotella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 %own. & row n INSURANC16 E > Smoke, vapor or gas from agricultural smudging or industrial operations • Collapse except as provided by additional coverage > Failure to act, inadequate planning, or defective design, materials, or maintenance A SPECIAL FORM provides much broader coverage than a BASIC or BROAD PERILS policy in lieu of a limited number of perils insured against under the BASIC or BROAD PERILS policy. The SPECIAL FORM places the burden on the insurance company to pay any loss that is not specifically excluded in the policy contract. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kate tla„ Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 1 o wn, & row n INSURANCE. What is Co -Insurance? The co-insurance clause is found in almost every property policy. It states that the insurance company agrees to give you a lower rate per $100 of coverage, if you agree to carry the specified percent of insurance to the value of the property. Examples of Co-insurance at 80%: Building Value $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 Insurance Carried $100,000 $80,000 $70,000 Loss $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 Insurance Pays $60,000 $60,000 $52,500* Have (70,000) Should have (80,000) x loss = Paid Ordinance or Law Coverage: Coverage is provided when the insured is required by enforcement of building, zoning or land use ordinance or law to repair, replace or demolish a covered building property. Description of Coverage: Coverage A. Loss to the undamaged portion of the building allows a partially damaged building to be valued as a total loss ;Limits of1Coverage B. Demolition Cost C. increased Cost of Construction OR: Blanket Limits Coverage B and C. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysOmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cctot be considered bound until a binder has been received. BroWn'& Bi-own'InsurOnte.SerVides Of CA, Inc. !•2401" E...Katella.;.SOite. 550, Ahaheint CA.92806 PREMIUM SUMMARY PROPERTY -: (EKLOD1Np. FIRHIQYAKT:8(..fippp) 2008/2009 .2009/2010 2010/2011 .:2011 /201.2 ,2011/201.3: .201312014, Miiehin"erY'Bieokdi5,1vii $6;217 $8.,21:8 $10i214. Included (kkided ' Included Building,•AUSinest $72,493 $65,391 $72,105 :$9.1i271 •-$110;708*'' -$1.11„-306'!'" Personal •Property' Business Income w/Extra• 'included inciUded. included Included Iritluded inclUded Expense ED? ProPerii on Prem Included Included Included Included inCluded Included ..-. ..„ Fine/kits .-•,;.t.),OL included Included Included. Included - InCioded: Included Fine.ocsrts•iri'TranSitIfiCluded Included InClUded Included . friCILicled • Included FineArtt-...pii Premises inClui3.ed included Ineltided. IriClUded Irk-IUde& IhEliidetl. "Ppyp'nal .P-rorieny• liletucf01 included Ikluded InCluded Included, Included Personal Prapert4e•••••_,01. Included fridliclo'd Included InClUded, Included InClUdecl. Scheduled Personal .;nclOdeci lnc/uCled Included included Included Included' Property Valuable Papers On included included! Included included Included. included • Pi-emisei „ ..„. Total Pe.pgorlSil. $78,71,0 -$71,609. ,82-,319 '$911,271 $1.10708. -$1,21,;306 NOTES:, a) ComBiN.ED.50-1EbUi.ED BUILDING:& PERSONAL PROPERTY VALUES 2006 2007 2008 2009 ... .. 2010 .$.5250•,75:1 .1248. . $68,91,750 :1109 $80801 938 :071 .s80,59,9,13 :0.913 . .j00,548.;991 :08:1-0' .. 20.11 2012 .2013- $139,14.17695, . .0656. •1:42437895' . ,O/J. 1-43,511f,395 , .687i 2013 Value increase: 1.3% (*Includes Playground Equipment InCrecise) b) Rate Increase: 8.2% (Travelers). c) Premium Increase:9.6%. (Travelers) Iricludes 1.3% Value increase & 8.2% rate increase for Travelers (1.013 x i .082 = L096)Travelers. *TerForis'm indu0ed.:Oi.$3;539 (TraVelerS) This proposal is for illUStration purposes only. Please refer t� the lidliOy for actual terfriVadnaitions. mb20 I 302ferti Prop IM AutoPhysDmg Cnme DIC Proposal Coverage carrot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Film inn/ '59 9fl1 Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 1"Own. &row I1 INSURANCE 11) PREMIUM PAYMENT OPTIONS 1. Payment in Full 2. 4 Payments.— 25% due at inception, 25% due at 4th, 7th, & 10th month This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-1M-AuloPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Brown & Brawn,Insurance SerN-/iceS of CA, Inc:: ! :2401 E.Katelld., 5pite-5$0, heirn CA 9230.6 INSURANCE WARKETINQ'REWLTS PROPERT'e (EkCLubiKG EARTHO6AKE, FLOOD & AUTOMOB'ILE:PHYSICAL DAMAGE) Travelers Insurance ", Rcojetoi Admitted Philndetpiiin Indemnity: Ins. CO. 201:3 A.M. Best Rating: A+t.Xl.V; .Admitted Fireman's FundlInt.urante.:Conripany 20.13 A.M. Best Rating: A: XVi: Admitted Chubb(Federal Insurance Company) 2013 A.M. Best Rating A++: XV, Admitted .Chprtis' tos--,.o.rorico :ccppetry. xv;..Admiffed Hartford Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV; Admitted Allied Insurance 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV; Admitted ,Crum & .Forster Insurance Comapny 20,13 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII; Admitted .$121,306 $1•60,000 (No Auto APHD) $97,617 (No Auto APHID) Unable; to compete with Incumbent Pricing Unablet� CoMp.ete. with joo,ittiii)qt.n pricifj.§ Not:a Market for. Mvnicipcilities $160,000 to $170,600(No APHD) No California Business 4 -MVP This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the pOlicy fOr actual terms/conditions. mb261.302Tern Prop-IM-AutoPhysbrng-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cc -of be considered bound until a binder has been received. Fc•hi I Inn.? 0.2 9111-:1 Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 FO\V 11 INSURANCE Golden Eagle Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV; Admitted Hanover Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIV; Admitted ACE 2013 A.M. Best Rating: Landmark American Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: Axis Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: Scottsdale Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: Not a Market for Municipalities Premium: $140,000+ Declined: Not a Market for Municipalities Declined Cannot Compete Cannot Compete This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysOmg-Crime-OIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 240) E. Katetlo., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 IOW11. &TO TOW 11 illi io INSURANCEe DIC (Including Earthquake & Flood) • Statement of Values • Premium Summary This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katelia., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 [own & row 11 INSURANCE0 DIFFERENCE IN CONDITIONS Coverage: Interests Covered: DIC, including Earthquake (Not Including Earth movement), Flood & Earthquake Sprinkler Leakage Buildings, Business Income, Contents, Electronic Data Processing, Extra Expense, Improvements & Betterments, Stock, Valuable Papers Limits: $35,000,000 Per Occurrence & in Annual Aggregate separately as (last year: respects Earthquake & Flood. Earthquake Sprinkler 35,000,000) Leakage subject to Earthquake Aggregate. Sublimits: 5,000,000 Building Ordinance, Increased Cost of Construction & Demolition $500,000 Property of Others $500,000 Owned Property at Other Locations Dedudibte: $50,000 Per Occurrence, all perils except 5.0% Per Unit of Insurance for Earthquake & Earthquake Sprinkler Leakage, subject to a $50,000 minimum per Occurrence $100,000 Per Occurrence for Flood. Conditions: TERM: 12 Months EFFECTIVE DATE 2-26-13 VALUATION: • Replacement Cost except Actual Loss Sustained on Time Element COINS: Nil VALUES: $147,24),345(Lost Year $147,242,345) WARRANT: All Risk Underlyer Subject to: • Debris Removal Clause • Receipt of Terrorism Disclosure Notices, prior to binding. • Locations marked "X", per DIC Schedule attached Premium: • Loss Control Survey $ 236,206.00 $7.764.99 Surplus Lines Tax/Fee & Policy and Intermed. Fees $243,970.99 Total (See Altemote Limits Quote) Rates: Various Cancellation: 30 days Notice of Cancellation except 10 days for non-payment of premium. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kateila., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 IiifOW7 row 1 1 INSURANCE *Unit of Insurance Valuation: Tarrorism/TRIA: Optional Increase in Occurrence & Annual Aggregate Limit a) Each separate Building or Structure b) Contents in each separate Building or Structure c) Property In Yard d) Business Income/Extra Expense Replacement Cost: Property Damage & Stock Valuation; Actual Loss Sustained: Time. Element including Extra Expense TWA (Terrorism Risk Insurance Act) Act of 2002, Empire Indemnity Co. is offering coverage for annual additional premium of $118,103 + $3,779.30 taxes/fees. Must hove declination/ acceptance of offer at time of binding. a) 10,000,000 Excess over $35,000,000. Premium: $14,000 + .032 Taxes and Fees Participating Company Participation Layer Premium Taxes & Fees Empire Indemnity Ins. Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A+: XV; Non -Admitted 100% $35,000,000 $236,206 $7,764.99 Note: 35% MINIMUM EARNED PREMIUM Major Terms & Conditions: Quote expires 30 days from quote date. Full premiums and fees are due and payable 20 days from inception. 1 0O% MINIMUM EARNED ON FEES Form: Company Form Major Exclusions Terrorism -Not to Include the US Terrorism Risk insurance Act of 2002 (company form)(If declined) Pollution (Company Form) Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, Seepage Asbestos/Contamination (Company Form) War Mold,(Company Form) Theft This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysOmg-Crime•OIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katela., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 I own ro \'V n INSURANCE Flood -Locations located in 100 year flood plain and shaded X flood zone. Boiler & Machinery Electronic Data & Computer Systems (company form) All Risk Perils (including windstorm) Ensuing Loss Building Ordinance, Increased Cost of Construction (Except above the $5,000,000 limit provided) Further Subject To; Signed Terrorism Notice Signed D-1 Form Additional Comments: THE EXCLUSION FOR FLOOD ZONE A, V & SHADED X DOES NOT APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS, OR ANY OTHER LOCATIONS ON THE EXISTING SCHEDULE, SHOULD THEY BE REASSIGNED BY FEMA TO FLOOD ZONE A, V OR SHADED X. 1. 43200 Business Park Dr., Temecula, CA 2. 43210 Business Park Dr., Temecula, CA 3. 43230 Business Pork Dr., Temecula, CA. 4. 42081 Main Street, Temecula, CA 5. 42049-51 Main St., Temecula, CA 6. 28300 Mercedes, Temecula, CA 7. Old Town Temecula, Temecula, CA (Flood 'Deductible for Flood Zones A, V, & Shaded X is 2% per location with a 500,000 minimum per occurrence.) This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-1M-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder hos been received. Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katefla., Suite 550. Anaheim, CA 92806 ron & row 11 INSURANCE, DIC PREMIUM SUMMARY EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD Annual Premium Annual Premium 201212013 Insurance Company 201312014 $236,206.00 Empire Indemnity Company $236,206.00 13,500.57 plus Taxes/Fees 7,764.99 $249,706.57 $5,735.58 Savings $243,970.99 Premium Decrease: Value Decrease: (Total Insured Values) Rate Decrease: 2007 Total DIC 2008 Total DIC 2009 Total DIC 2010 Total DIC 2011 Total DtC 2012 Total DtC 2013 Total DIC NOTE: 243,970.99 = 2.3% (Decrease) 249,760.57 147,241,345 = 0.0% (Decrease) 147,242,345 12.5% (Decrease) Limit $15M Ded. 10% Limit $25M Ded. 7.5% Limit $25M Ded. 5% Limit $25M Ded. 5% Limit $35M Ded. 5% Limit $35M Ded. 5% Limit $35M Ded. 5% Values: Values: Values: Values: Values: Values: Values: 69,830,088 82,224,088 82,493,816 106,565,469 147,004,595 147,242,345 147,241,345 Premium: 209,137.50 Premium: 145,467.48 Premium: 158,992.34 Premium: 179,818.50 Premium: 238,138.50 Premium: 249,706.57 Premium: 243,970.99 • a) Terrorism not included above, see options b) Premium decrease of 2.3% (comprised of a value decrease of .0% and a rate decrease of 2.3%) This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cazrot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 rUwn. & ID \\7 [1 INSURANCEe PREMIUM PAYMENT OPTIONS 1. Payment in Ful 2. Premium Finance: 25% down payment and 9 monthly installments This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysbrng-Crime-OIC Proposal Coverage camot be considered bound until a binder hos been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katelia., Suite 550. Anaheim, CA 92806 li3r O W I1 WWII INSURANCE OTHER MARKETING. RESULTS (Plus Taxes & Fees, where applicable) Insurance. Company of the West 20.13 A.M. Best Rating: A-: IX Lloyds of London (Vikco) 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII Limit Ptemiu !a Declined: Flood Exposure Declined: Underwriting Reasons Landmark American Insurance Company $5,000,000 $250,000 @ 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII (Primary) 10% Ded. ICAT Specialty Insurance Company(Lloyds Syndicate) 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII Declined: Due to TIV's too high Aspen Insurance Declined 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV Arch Insurance Company Indicated $170,000; No 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A+: XV $5,000,000 Zones A & V Align General Company Declined: Rockhill Insurance Company Flood 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XI Exposure Plaza Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XI Colony Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XII Commonwealth Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A-: VI Declined: Excess Only Cannot Compete This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysOmg-Crime-OMC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder hos been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katelia., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Ifoirown 1"O\JVf INSURANCE*, Mt. Hawley Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A+: XI Western Re Axis Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV London Syndicates 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XIII Seneca Insurance Company 2013• A.M. Best Rating: A: VIII Altems E 8 S Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: TBD Endurance Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV QBE Insurance Company 2013 A.M. Best Rating: A: XV $10,000,000 $50,000 xs $10,000,000 Declined: cannot compete Declined: Municipality Declined: Due to High PML Indication: $50,000 10,000,000 xs 10,000,000 Declined: Flood Zone A This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder hos been received. CITY OF TEMECULA - SpeWlii Form. Difference in Conditions, Earthquake Flood SmtemeM of Values 2.26-13 to 2.26-34 OX Loc.11 0220:10 Adams* (51d 0 DPPIrtmgrouncl Stpdpmed_ 03 EE Vato6ta Papers OSP Halm* EDP 8 n EDP QE You 8 d* Cw stroldlo0 ti" 02aItP, Won Cl Ma t8gfki % 1 1 �IarOre2n+;4G Coit Cooks 31.928,892 3.539,000 0 4273,152 50,000 2,02,20 $,000.000 Includad 500.02 2010 * .3 4 98.795 X 2 1 43200002051 Pmt Co ms TaAOb: CA 62590 (O93CO3 Hag 0000.000 1.200.000 0 0 0 0 - 250.02 tsotWed 23,000 1913 80003472 .1113r9on77 2 4 '30,107 % 3 1 30S75RaK.M Vats Rd 79m449ls. CA .925900 42859 Maw* RO Tama 8, CA 91590 Ronal Rapao Sports Pork; CamnwnMy RaaosSon Cantor 0199.* (CRC). Woke Roams 1260.000 215.20 150.000 0 50.000 100,000 100,000 bcbd4d 10.000 1994 Sprin*taod Comm*eke* 1 4. 8,000 X 3 2 01111 00.000 - . 0 0 bwaeed 0 0 9 0 1904 BDraat,*.d .1 • 4 10,000 X 3 3 I Pos a urn. Ct*llropnl, 1ltallmr 2300,000 - /15.000 0 0 tridu4pa 0 130 2 9 ductal 10,000 1904 Caataia * $011k2mM d Canaan QOM 1 4 ' 10.000 X 3 - 4 Pool /Pool B819/S34e 220.000 0 130,000' 0 twcbdod 0 0 0 5 1994 Coma* Mogi 1- 4 1,0001 X 3 5 S14355omd Port. Rollor HxkOy Part 250,000 200.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 tnc*dad 249344 - 0 0 3.000 Irxhded tncaded 2:0140 0 0 1994 39440440 Caneioto Boca 1 4 1,006 X 3 8 % 3 7 R02340r2. Es:0~ntRont41 Fant0y 390,000 33,000 100.000 0 tctudod 0 0 0 0 1900 ,3%b1c.o7 t 1 '3,000 X 4 1 20018 Pulp Oo80 lamactm. CA Tomoado Cronmats Careen 1,1.000 2 250,000 0 0 50000 0 13.000 OfC40o0 0 1903 Wood Hayes - 1 4 " 3,900 4 2 Cabo* 250.000 33,E 0 0 d 0 0 1983 Stool 1. 4 000 X 5 1 418431101800a1 Tarwswb, CA 97590 WANT pla00/0. form Corby 2.000,000 373.20" 0. 0 50.000 - 0 10,000 9404391 0 1906 Spmuarod Wood Frorna 1 ' 4 0,02 X 8 1 25314I1.rcn4t0 74m4.44 cA 02550 I6no*on 1,800.050 50,000 0 0 0 5.02.006 15,0007 Mt:M4 0 1000 65551 ra4 . Z 4 7200 X 1 1' 2830044.., Tromoo a CA 92590 VOsednp Coopol (Ctap*1at lao.00mp 230.02 100.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999 N0a3194,9 Foorna - 1 4 1,500 X 0 1 12031Ma*Street Tamsw:a. CA 02590 COOdr4ab Stumm 042 Soap 94,0 s Ocsup-R 2260,034 1300,000 0 0 0 0 25,000 OOtd.4 0 - draaMSPnan*0 Amn(dreII Saea*p 4 X 0 1 4205110M $Oast Tamew'A. CA 92390 42049 Mao $pop Old Tara Tammepdo Cementums 104.4 0,00020 1,02.000 - 0 32.02 0 - - 0 - - 6502 kaade8 75.02 200$ SpatYrad. Staa>,iNfiad. 3 4 2002 R 0 2 MacOMO 3000,0 1.52,20 50,000 0 0 0 0 '15,000 tncadad 10,000 2003 Frearo 8 Brkk1 4 2,304 X ID 1 43210 Dulb *Port Dr TomCA 02300 mrb W4o1NNp Maun.anmo. a Foa9Ta aro/M»onn 3,32,000 42,000 0 0 0 0 75.20 lneiadad 10.000 1997 Spl,h2cgd 2 4 13,900 X 11 12.1 4.3233130mass Peak, Yamada, CA 02591 210S0pero0on Cantor 8,000.09) 550,000 0 0 50000 0 130,000 20000.0 100,000 2007 Bp*dforod SIF„so• Conpoato Mem3rm 8 0nd Instal Rost 2 *7,000 X 12 1 30000 Pomo Rd Topmost* CA 92991Stool Tama<ICa Pub* Lam( 10000.20 530,20 0 0200.000 2.1X0000 050.000 24:0040 150.000 2008 BpehW,40 1 34.000 X 13 2882MNcadoo SL 244440,6. Pagino 6034940101104. Rots! (RE' EDP Hardware' tneaOon Looked7c0o cord setosto311550 aaat40mouttycornos0 18.700300 0 0 0 0 0 2002 Manton 0 2010 Rern*arood Q cnlb4tipsp rnratstra ct tool 31001$umo 1 bolo.. 39 Own: 4 /79410! DSS. CA 90590 X 14 .29019 P90360393 Tamewt0, CA 92530 TCC £.0.E 10to4 1242.033 0 0,(73:3 0 175.22 ta0:G:0 0 2000 774640.10441 $anis weft metal 00' 4 3300 IS Bates llba Peak 4/580Ata0433 Da La Rohs. Tanmw6,CA Peat 8404402 0 /3.000 0 0 P 0 0 ' 0 16 1 Bust` r**4 Sudo Pak . )3854 Do Porto* Road Tamoa4.CA62590 PM. Ptssproon4 F419211100 0 2392 82,5M 0 0 0 0 0 0 1986 Comp* atop, 1 4 7.000 17 C49• AMP. Part T 41821 Cato Ar4pon Tanmafa, CA Pat PUy9.Owd Soupnrnd '37,52 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 G4me142 Park 35203 00 20511:11 Tomeouts CA 82590 Pa51py07a04 Eoaonlanl 8 RoRtomn . 170200 0 125,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2003 ' 00090a301=0 1 4 1.000 .020130244 Tampada DX UP/ 2.2041300 CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form, DlffotonceIn Conditions% Earthquako Flood Statement of Values 2-2643 to 2.26t4 033 toe.0 1304.0 Adawu. O Buillalp OPP 01 ell VOt/1 * Papers E�0PHantaan gown EDP Von Bull Cotubuckon Marks14"1 Poet Cl Ane Mat) X 10 /2 3 205, Ron cetlLtartd7 Pat 2'0302 Kmrmon m. Tonaada: CA 02103 F4ti PPhokaound ost. &maim, 440.400 31.000 123000 0 0 a 0' 0 0 2404 ''Coomoo alai 1 4 3.000 Comnw*L7 Rain 040.000 mAuOad 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2001 Coaaota moot 20 1.2 Heratkon late Port 25005 Uro Haus. Road T.moprU. CA 02590 Part Piaypround Egaprnw4,Rodlom s, Lott. Combo. Boat Hann 50000a 0 125.000 0 0 0 -.0 0 0 2004 Canal* M Mott d Wood 5 4 1.900 3,000 21 Al Worm Pea 44570 Corti Vt1Vna, Ttmeoala, CA Pat Pta prouM Egtipmtlt 0 0 02.309 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 I 3onl ata aastll alt Y.mowb. CA Pat Pim rowel Eq , nsnt'Retbuom5. Smelter 500000 .000 02,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 1991 CanbWPM 06 K 1 4 3,000 23 Lone Undo Pmt 10077 Loma Lada Rood. T.m.dita. CA Pork Playground 0li l ont 0 0 107.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 Lap Canyon Creat Port 4030050.000.5.5 eomn7 Rd. tatn.W1.. CA Park PtaygroundEmarnont Shads Covers 21,000 0 02.000 0 0 •0 0 0 0 25 1.2 Magotte Communtly Part 29119 Mar9ato Rd T.nwauL, CA 92390 Park Rata Hockey. SO Fbq., T.tudl, &lett aarRenOom 300000 62.500 0 0 0 0 0 6 1.000 20 1,2 hloadva I Port • 43119 Meadows Pittway T.nowb CA 02590 Pmt Ptatgon and EgJpmat Rama m 170200 0 100,000 0 00 0 0 0 2003 Canard 0144 t 4 1,000 27 Nakayama Pmt 30032 Nakao Rd, Taauwta CA Pork Ptemo ind Ea mown! 1 0 0 5.000 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 20 18444042 Road Pat 19963 Nadmin ROW Itaractdo. G Pert, Ptenrdend Warlowd 0 0 02,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 Poko Ace Pat 33005 Racks d. Tanoab. CA Pmt. PYtgroand Egs4rsont. Shot' COMM 75.000 0 100000 0 0 0 0 0 0 3D 1 Palo Conmmn37 Pat 44000 Tamacuta lane Yamada, CA Park P5. z0wC Equtpr+ard. Rrseooml. Sneaky, Oaf Forts. Tomas 100.000 35.000 100.000 0 0 0 .0 0 0 1902 Canasta Beet 1 4 4,000 31 1 \Paseo Palma Dal Sal Put 32009 Do Pots., Tanawls, CA POR. Ra oma. Bat rots. Onaaoa 100000 $5.000 40,000 1000 0.900 0 -- 15.000 1nta..d 10,000 5991 attn'a.y 5 4 5.000 32 0.l1MSPark 32453 Canna San Maas. T.soa41, CA Pmt. P1a70rawsd Egrtprram 0 0 02,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 1.2.3,4 Placa H. Sankt SPmb Put 32300 Oran thaw Way T.mea,5., CA Pat Sumas.Pttytpaod Edt4Prora, R.4soawa. Baa Roth. Caab. MMakla4ra,00 2240.000 '100,000 112.500 - 0 0 0 100000 eta 50000 2000 Canso) slam 1 -7,109 34. 5, 2 Pomo Rata Pmt 33405 Pomo Road Tenaada, CA 02590 - Put Playpmurd Equbmad.R11301X,773. Wads Cocas 170209 350.000 0 0 121.000 02.503 0 0 0 0 0 0 - -0 0 0 0 0 0 .2003 Cattalo abet 5 4 1.000 33 5, 2 Rodhe0R Put r (Ro63eot Comtrton*y Pert) 44711 Rednewt Portray lamoada, CA Put Tatarse. 53140wrItato Tobias.Dop Part. Rosb0em3. .9.44.1606 M.$Caud • 77620131323 .7.1000.00 I C 00V 2.2843 03 2 CITY OF TEMECULA SpeNal Form. OMferenbo in Conditions; EarthquakeFlood Statement of Values 2-2613 to 2.2644 DC Lcd 610. / AdNMa Ockupency 0411dinp OPP 91000010 T 81 E VNnata POpce EDP 1 s 0 i, Doll WP E8 Yaa7OolO Cool ton�/ An. 3G Rvoton Park 30080 Overton IA. Temecula. CA Pclk,, Pfaypsavl Equipment 81•040 Cows 25000 • 6 125000 0 0 0 0 0 0 I7 Rainy Park 26010 Pupa Guam Temagaa, CA Pen: Penn Takb6. 8lm1e COMM 17.500 0 82.500 0 0 0 0 0 -0 36 1 Sem Fete Park 4197014osno or Iceman& Ca 02500 Perk, PlMpnend Evitenenl. Ramvoml, Shad* Comm 225.000 0 02,300 0 0 0 0 0 1000 Concrepaklck 1 4 1600 09 Serena Mkt Pang 40747 We1ca0 L.os Tegracute, CA Part„ Pleysteund £g140 4. Shaft CORNS 25000' 0 - 125000 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 40 Stepan ILe00 Jr. Memo al Park 44935 Ng atunkt Pwa, Tmnrevta. CA Put, PlgOralnd Ecnionent 6000 Cowan 25.000 0 08,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 Same Pan 12157Como BaaAge. Tn00W14, CA Peck Platpsan0 EgWmmt 0 12100 82.300 0 0 0 .0 0 0 - 42 1, 2 Temecula Duck Pond 20350 'Inez Rd 0 Rancho C43lanie Rd Temeaua, CA 02500 Pack. P010p Hoax, Reeaoom, Annie Fa35oa 200.000 0 25.000 0 0 0 0 0 1903 Concrete Owl 1 4 100 41 Toneata Creek Tel Perk 33802 Channel Skeet, Terncada, G Pott, Playground 01Anneeal 0 0 02500 0 0 0 0 0 44 1, 2 Tcntu HO Peak 31387 Le Soon Way Tanca'o. CA 02500 Pct, Pltrygtauw E00q 0utd 2 IlbrAceens. Ana 04040. MU nods 50000 33.000 02.500 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 Contras 110x1 1 4 3.000 45 Val Ranch Park 72965 Hamner, Lane, Twooula, CA Pae. Pla7gtea06 EgvpnaM 0 0 02,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 Vet4ra0h Pack 309651.. Boon Wry, To CA Pat, Plelgtaw0 000440401 0 125.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 tetula. 47 Vcortneg Perk 30060120W Rd. Tmgab. CA Pak 0 0 5.000 0 9 0 0 0 0 48. 1 Waalhooror Crook Perk 30050 lAaripinIa Rd Tanpda. CA 02500 Park Pg9goc.o0EP o... Amoomm. 8omman. Sala Cason 105200 - 0 100.000 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 *999 AlAarray 1 4 1,000 49 1 Wat1 Crock TtaFP409 43454 Woe Covet R0, Tmnculo, CA - Pali Trod AO Ceune, Skwe Cowes 23,000 0 150,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 '• 30 War CAA* Par. 45830 Wolf Gook Or H , Temacaa. CA Pant Ptolgsw0d Eme4.w0. Rae5eoc, WOW 100.200 0 150.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 COncrmb 01oc4, 1 4 1.000 X 51 1 10650 Pine= R0: Ten.000la, CA 92590&fluenc Fko Sk10a1 /64 3,000,000 120.000 0 0 0 0 15.000 Mauled 5,000 1997 SpobAtorw 7 2 4 10.000 02 287:0 a4rwdee Tatn&oata. CA Fee GWon012 www byC 0. Al1E o 0 0 r 0 *0.000 0.4w4o0 3,000 X 53 27413 Entm4be Co. Wool Temoc en CA Fin 6tana1073 - 1000.000 93.000 0 0 0 15.000 tncktdad - 5.000 1985 Type V Waal Trane Stumm 1 4 0000 n01013020. Temea5a OC 84V 2.29.13 0 CITY OF TEMECULA Spacial Form. Difioreneo 171 Conditions, Earthquake Flood Statement of Valuer) 2.26.13 to 2.26-14 OIC Loc., 134305 Admess Osueuray 117796100 1590 '91m EE VOW* Paws ESP 10040/619 EDA Bnlllraf0 EDP EE T. 8910 Cr41750149 Mo. o1 Eimba Prot b Amo 5i 37500014C47110901 TrmSclIs CA Ftro St6600 083 171/979719 iramed400wdto1 0 - 0 0. 0 0 15000 04006!9 0 , X 55 1 5. 17406 V991 Road TeOeade,CA 92592 Fie 90000 4512 2,714800 95100 0 0 00 15.000 790091.4 0 2007 so9tdo00 sem 801700 4 Rota 7 4 0.002 X ' 50 1 22131134M Loop Rd. 709700.00, CA02591 For 540004 b 89 4134940 5000d73540330001000:91 2.709,000 45.0900 0 0 0 15.000 to 4.4' 0 2006 910040001- C044407 t 4 9,070 57 i 323040.. A 9259 7097094, CA 92592 Trneo0eCAtan4 00159 90,090 PerutSod+te 30,000' 0 - 0 0 0 10,000 0 2002 Woad50450 i 2,000 58 1 41951144ga Rd 14094449. CA 82590 aaar 944740911.4 140,400 730710990tu 80041. Roo5oorre 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 1994 10001.74101 0097000 69100 1 4 0,000 38 2 Pool IPo406.0. 740,400 00 Q D 0 O 0 0 1044 09+01090810011 1 4 1,090 59 41'0 75 890 64975 Patera/ Trmoa0. CA Trnea00690470 539701 0 25.000 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 60 1 30027 FroN 00901 Tamo4110. CA 02530 Pr0ta0 Rade 1342. 0750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1086 Steel 1 4 46 91 1 E90341 140140 8 Bom 26070 Padal6l 1c0.4ada. CA 42569 P0097 Stmcjla 720,000 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 1026 W0036.6.000 1 4 1.500 82 1 96+8 front 500091 4400404, CA 92590 1706400110081874 500.4000 S4nda.d4. Parlfip 196 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 11797 y Fmmr t 4 700 408904 4d. E4t0094 Date 090090009 4439447.0. 5404700 m0. Ems Eappm 74 104420041 teta6ale 0 0 0 0 0 0 290,000 lnt4ltl04 0.0391.4 63 Tu.m 9.4 044 Pmt 41000 Man Scoot lemmata. CA 92590 7.018 Bora = 0 0 50.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 401e445091100e43 40135 V010093000. trmoaa9.CA Ee7e001450$v0:Pr0. 1,000 F0m 57ad, 00 56.566 1.5440002 0 15.000 068494 70.000 2901 Wood four*. 8♦ • 1 4 5.443 85 1 2749$ Warta* 00414 W09 T9044.4e. CA 02500 1390307 00hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 1 27499 E x44410 C.0010 woe Temowla, CA 90590 1262437 Oaf 0 0 D 0 0 0 Q- 0 0 0 57 1 417331404000079 T090a.4. CA 92590 1494007 013/ 00 0 0 r 0 0 D 0 0 043444 2441e949447 fpm 5124346.590 010.7/7.300 93.370,004 94.530.720 9500.909 $7.100.000 58.026.000 1.900.4 5974000 X MC. ERE Fond Cmrrapr Totals: 514896143 910,429.580 700 MAM169 9500000 57.100.000 8.199,000 006364 5900.900 __ 11300.000(0= Option q ODE p0 X 66 1:2 013 790.374200293 Twnew4, CA 02590 2 Anton 52 S175.00004t4 550,080 50,000 D 0 0 0 ( 0 I 0 ( 0 1 t. 1899 ssto laa5b ad `° Fate 00504041 4704 T I 44201102pr, To ecW 010 SOV 24641 W 4 CITYOF TEMECULA Special Forth, Difference to Conditions. Earthquake Flood Statement of Vatuea 2.26-13 to,246"14 OX t.0..s a Adarsas Oaf ash (IPP E4,44...4 E$ Valuable Valra0bpapas SDPllatdsass ..+ ®PEE Yon WI Ca2L1Rtlon et.itit M . l 6S •ea.tol Fountain' Town SOuma Pmk. 41000 Wm 80061. Twr610. CA Foun1200 Satiate 400.000 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 1010 70 'Snym0 in M Ram" 'i0250 Yn0[ Rab& Tomauta. CA 82590 Natant Art Putt M 0Ct4pty o 130,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 Putts M 00.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U . ort OObe0wt 27004 Jetoo,wn 6 2033t Yo02 Road, Twwmub,CA 02.00 mtoots92oF anima.OaC SOV 2-260 a) J s CITY OF TEMECULA Special Form. Difference In Condiflone, Earthquake Flood Statement of Values 24643 to 2-2644 570 toes Bides 044445 7 0404519 OOP EE 14Mu/1ePepin EDP iWdwan 6otlwue F.DP 18 Yew 6419 Comsvtdoa Metes Prot 01 014021 TZ Clae Center Awl on PSMp0. o 26620ksoreedee St T4ntacul . CA 02500 Paas Art 250,000 0 '0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 ri 0mr.Orws tar - Oirs Centel Moat 41000 Main Own. Temee1,41.0A 02500 PeNx Art 45,000 0 0- 0 0 0 0. 0 0 2010 X 74 1 TcroswteWR Pore 24250 Yew Rd 5 Reneno CO2t774ap4 las92 Temse. CA 922'80 V4Laeaa 14mown 550.004 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 2004 Wee Ree41•e c`.eew• Pewee0 ntsat Fes X Total Wowed Values (014): 01/4*71(0. • Poo, Gee 03 Po0,11.oc 838 BPP: SI: EE: vP: EDPoir EOM): EDP (EE)', Mchos (Loc.. 488); V0toran atom. 0.00174: Toed. (TRW Yaw) (Opton I) 0119808.646 WA r8A 10.420,600 300,000 300.000 7,100,000 8,166,000 Included 5900,000 400.000 550,000 5147,241.345 (Last Year) 5516.608.545 HFA WA 10.428.800 301,000 300,000 7.100,000 6.165,000 Included 1000.000 400.000 330,000 1147443.345 'Ptrowee 10 Equtpinem (axardes 8660x5 6 Picnic 'rat4tY990: Sides dc) Aellanted 8aputae Delo SPmri.4ro0 Fudy'Consiutton Type Local: 51nrctu04 Stell &4004 frome one Rainfcroed Concrete Mess Wafts. Seruetw'a Das 440 roofing cmnoorums ova ended docket.; with comets (1) 40744 up cloy M0 000 (2) Tho m0747501 (TPO) marn0m0 400719. Stucco Estenet with Metal Slab )( two towed Yawn (0101: &Meg: 5116,896',.45 (0414600 (1) Pool Lot 63 0750.000 P o.I.ocC30 - $459000 SPP: 10.426.800 51: 300.000 1E: 300.000 VP: 7.100.000 EOP(4): 6.165,000' EDP(S): 54Cuded EDP (EE): 0000.000 Andes (Loc. 006)' 400.000 Votmeit Mem, (.00.174): Tank 660.000 148.450.043 X tato tames views (Dlel: Butdulp: 1116.600.6as (Option (5) Pool Lac 73 8750,000 Poo.4 Lac 158. 5059.660 SPP. 10.420.600 Eft ; 4.573.152 e• EE: 600.000 VP: 7.100.000' EOPOq. 0.163.000 EOP(8): Included EOP (EE): 5900.000 Ara** (toe 088) 400,000 Vetaml Mem. (Loo. 074); Tosat 550.000 900015132ac Tsmsaaa 010 SSV 2.28.13(8 162.724,007 Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katelia., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 row TOW 1Z INSURANCE AUTOMOBILE PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGE This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 I own L ]"O INSURANCE0 CITY OF TEMECULA AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE SCHEDULE Vehicle Description / ID No. Cost Comp Coil New Ded Ded USE 1. 1992 GMC MAC III Top Kick w/Breathing Support #1 GDP7H 1 J502955 $208,259 2,000 2,000 Fire Truck 2. 1.995 Sentry Pumper #4ENRAAA8651004369 $206,005 2,000. 2,000 Fire Truck 3. 2002 Ford F550 (Medic Squad 73) #1 FDAX56F92EB25749 $94,422 2,000 2,000 Medic Squad 4. 2001 Ford 550 Super Duty Truck with #1 FDAF56581EA24722 Hydraulic Boom Hoist 4722 $80,097 2,000 2,000 Boom - Hoist Irk 5. 2002 Ford Truck #1 FDAF56F91 EB60874 $54,825 2,000 2,000 FRMT 6. 2003 Ford F550 Truck #1FDAF56F23EA94199 $46,122 2,00.0 2,000 Stencil Truck 7. 2002 Ford F550 7.3L Diesel #1 FDAX56F03EB25804 $108,906 2,000 2,000 FRMT 8. 2004 KME Fire Aerial FT #1 K9AF42884N058774 $724,000 2,000 2,000 Fire/ Aerial Truck 9. 2004 Int'I Multi Purpose Utility Truck #1 HTWNADT64J093129 $142,000 2,000 2,000 Utility Truck 10. 2006 Freightliner Truck #1 FVACWCS86HW91952 $85,000 2,000 2,000 Freight!! ner Truth 2007 GMC Aerial Truck #1 GDG5C1 G97F405242 $127,466 2,000 2,000 Aerial Boom Truck This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Brown & Brown InsUrah6e.SeNiCei of CA, InC, 2401. .„lcatello.-, Spite 550i.noineirn,..c-k92806 INSURANCE, Iggt, 10.1.Kn This proposal is fOr illustration purposes Only: Please refer to the paticy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tertf PrOP*-1M-AtitoPhysDmg,Crime-DIC PropOkil Coverage caspbt be.considered bound until 6 binder has been received. Fphri On/ 99 Vehicle.DegOiiptiOn / ID No. Cott New COMP Ded CoII Ded USE 12; 2005.'5i -ilea) Fire Engine #4S7c72122525445.6 $341,382 2,000 ;2,000 Fke Engine 13: . 2004 Chcirrii91.e-61iI01- #410/c2.21:2921T110951 $50,0O.:0 •2;0Q0 2,0.00 Trailer (Fiee) 14.. 2006. Eldorado .Bus #1 pBASyl E7SF51345.5 $$2,524 .3,006 .3,000 Rus: 16: 2OG9 Ecied''F250 RiCkaja #1.FISX20Y59EA0137 (Scales) Enforcement Vehicle:. S1,6215 .:2,000 .. ,2,000 Vehicle -1,6,, 2009: International Spaulding #1 tiTVVCAA1229:1197473 $144,234 !Zoo() ',,c)oo Patch 'Truck 17, 2012..May1RK:irk:Trailer Inel Equipment -Kodiak Caito :#16HPB1427CA04.1.497: $15;244 2,000 2,000 Trailer la 2012 'FIciultrfark.'Triailer Ind Equipment -Kodiak Cargo .#16HPE$1.420CA04.1491 -$1.5j244 . 2,000 2;000 Trailer 19.: 201 3 Chevrolet Van Tru • E?rpres4#1GCEGT.00501119:47; $25-,000 2,000 2;000 Van TOM Values.' $2402,375 FRMT--:-. Fiie Resaie Medical Truck;(No Transport) Renewal. quoto: Travelers Insurance Company Premium for Automobile Physical Damage Coverage = 10,8454' (.4167) Curren!. Annual Premium is 14;252?t' (.5594) *Includes Terrorism Iggt, 10.1.Kn This proposal is fOr illustration purposes Only: Please refer to the paticy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tertf PrOP*-1M-AtitoPhysDmg,Crime-DIC PropOkil Coverage caspbt be.considered bound until 6 binder has been received. Fphri On/ 99 Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katello., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 t ownn. 1-o `,V 11 INSURANCE0 CRIME INSURANCE This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage coot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 roW]]. - I'OWll ,INSURANCE6 CRIME COVERAGES Current Carrier (Travelers Insurance Company) Limit DE4ucnat.4 Employee Theft -Per Loss 500,000 5,000 (With Faithful Performance) Forgery or Alteration 500,000 5,000 Theft of Money & Securities (Inside) and Robbery & Safe Burglary -Other Property (Inside) Not Covered In Transit (Outside) Not Covered Money Orders & Counterfeit Currency Not Covered Computer Fraud 500,000 5,000 Credit, Debit or Charge Card Forgery 500,000 5,000 Funds Transfer Fraud 500,000 5,000 Claim Expense $5,000 0 Premium: $4,001 Includes: 1. Bonded Treasurer or Tax Collectors Exclusion Deleted Excess over any Public Official Bond. 2. Bonded Employees Exclusion Deleted Excess over any Public Official Bond. 3. Fidelity Research & Investigative Settlement Clause 10,000 Limit/5,000 Deductible Requires: 1. No Requirements This FORM IS FOR tSSUSiRArroN Pu,poses only. Rawl your policy tor spew detcils This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-OIC Proposal Coverage casTot be considered bound until a binder has been received. CommercialInsurance Proposal Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kotelia., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 Virowri roW l; t :INSURANCE! PREMIUM SUMMARY City of Temecula Temecula Community Services District Oversight Board and The Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula Temecula Public Financing Authority Temecula Housing Authority Crime Coverage: $4,001 (Travelers Insurance Company) Premiums include Terrorism Last Year $4,007 (Travelers Insurance Company) PREMIUM PAYMENT OPTION Payment up front This proposal is for illustration purposes cniy. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions_ rib201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crirne-DIC Proposal Coverage ccp,o. be considered bound until a binder has been received. Commercial Insurance Proposal: Brown & Brown insurance Services of CA, Inc. • 2401 E. Kate!la.. Suite 550. Anaheim, CA 92806 • row rown ■ .INSURANCE:, Important Information . Compensation: In addition to the commissions or fees received by us for assistance with the plccement, servicing, claims handling, or renewal of your insurance coverages, other parties, such as excess and surplus lines brokers, wholesale brokers, reinsurance intermediaries, underwriting managers and similar parties, some of which may be owned in whole or in part by Brown & Brown, Inc., may also receive compensation for their role in providing Insurance products or services to you pursuant to their separate contracts with insurance or reinsurance carriers. That compensation is derived from your premium payments. Additionally, it is possible that we, or our corporate parents or affiliates, may receive contingent payments or allowances from insurers based on factors which are not client -specific, such as the performance and/or size of on overall book of business produced with on insurer. We generally do not know if such a contingent payment will be made by a particular insurer, or the amount of any such contingent payments, until the underwriting yeor is dosed. That compensation is partially derived From your premium dollars, after being combined (or "pooled") with the premium dollars of other insureds that have purchased similar types of. coverage. We may also receive invitations to programs sponsored and paid for by insurance carriers to inform brokers regarding their products and services, including possible participation in company -sponsored events such as trips, seminars, and advisory council meetings, based upon the total volume of business placed with the carrier you select. We may, on occasion, receive loons or credit from insurance companies. Additionally, in the ordinary course of our business, we may receive and retain interest on premiums you pay from the date we receive them until the date the premiums are remitted to the insurance company or intermediary. In the event that we assist with placement and other details of arranging for the financing of your insurance premium, we may also receive a fee from the premium finance company. Questions and Information Requests: Should you hove any questions, or require additional information, please contact this office at 1-800-228.7975 or, if you prefer, submit your question or request online at www.bbsocal cam This proposal contains only a general description of the coverage(s) and does not constitute a policy/ contract. For complete policy information, including exclusions, limitations, and conditions, refer to the policy document. This proposal is based upon the exposures to loss made known to the Agency. Any changes in these exposures (i.e., new operations, new products, additional states of. hire, etc.) need to be promptly reported to us in order that proper coverage(s) may be put into place. This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please reser to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-!M-AutophysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage cctot be considered bound unlit a binder has been received. Brown & Brown Insurance Services of CA. Inc. • 2401 E. Katella., Suite 550, Anaheim, CA 92806 1 INSURANCE' Wholesale Broker/Managing General Agent: Swett & Crawford This intermediary ❑ is 0 is not owned in whole or part by Brown & Brown, Inc., the parent company of Brown & Brown Insurance Services of California, Inc. Brown & Brown entities operate independently and are not required to utilize other companies owned by Brown & Brown, Inc., but routinely do so. In addition to providing access to the insurance company, the Wholesale Insurance Broker/Managing General Agent may provide additional services including, but not limited to: underwriting, loss control, risk placement, coverage review, claims coordination with insurance company; and policy issuance. Compensation paid for those services may he up to 15% of the premium you pay for coverage, and any compensation paid for those services is derived from your premium payment. The Fee, if any, for the Wholesale Insurance Broker's/Managing General Agent's services above is $0.00. - This proposal is for illustration purposes only. Please refer to the policy for actual terms/conditions. mb201302Tem Prop-IM-AutoPhysDmg-Crime-DIC Proposal Coverage ccr,ot be considered bound until a binder has been received. Item No. 5 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Patrick Richardson, Director of Community Development DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: First Amendment to Agreement for Building Plan Review Services for Fiscal Year 2012-13 PREPARED BY: Rich Johnston, Building Official Theresa Harris, Development Processing Coordinator RECOMMENDATION: Approve a First Amendment to Agreement for Building Plan Review Services with Esgil in the amount of $25,000. BACKGROUND: The City of Temecula Building and Safety Division has utilized outside plan review consulting services since inception to assist with the high volume of plan review services required. Plan review services include accurate code interpretation, review of construction plans for all applicable code disciplines, and identification of areas of noncompliance. On July 1, 2012, the City entered into an agreement titled "Plan Review Services" in the amount of $50,000. This City now desires to increase that amount by $25,000 for additional Plan Review Services for a total Agreement amount of $75,000 due to the increased volume of plan review submittals. FISCAL IMPACT: The $25,000 has been budgeted in the Building and Safety's Fiscal Year 2012-13 Budget Line Item 001.162.999.5248, Consulting Services. ATTACHMENTS: First Amendment FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF TEMECULA AND ESGIL PLAN REVIEW SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into as of February 26, 2013 by and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and Esgil, a Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. This Amendment is made with the respect to the following facts and purposes: a. On July 1, 2012, the City and Consultant entered into that certain Agreement entitled "Agreement for Plan Review Services", in the amount of $50,000. b. The parties now desire to increase the payment in the amount of $25,000, and to amend the Agreement as set forth in this Amendment. 2. Section 4 of the Agreement entitled "PAYMENT" at paragraph "a" is hereby amended to read as follows: The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and schedules and terms set forth in Exhibit B, Payment Rates and Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. Any terms in Exhibit B, other than the payment rates and schedule of payment, are null and void. The FIRST Amendment amount shall not exceed Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000) for additional Plan Review Services for a total Agreement amount of Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 3. Except for the changes specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF TEMECULA Esgil (Two Signatures of corporate officers required unless corporate documents authorize only one person to sign the agreement on behalf of the corporation.) By: By: Michael S. Naggar, Mayor Kurt Culver, President ATTEST: By: By: Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney CONSULTANT Chuck Mendenhall, Vice President Esgil Kurt Culver 9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 San Diego, CA 92123 858-560-1468 Phone 858-560-1576 Fax 2 PM Initials:l'1 R Date: // y Item No. 6 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Roripaugh Ranch Project — Assignment of TUMF Credit Agreement RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Assignment of and Consent to Assignment of Contracts agreement between Wingsweep Corporation, KB Home Coastal Inc., and the City of Temecula. BACKGROUND: The City and other parties entered into (i) the Roripaugh Ranch Project Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Improvement and Credit Agreement dated February 28, 2006, and (ii) the Reimbursement Agreement Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program dated March 23, 2006 ("collectively, the "TUMF Contracts"). The TUMF Contracts provide that the TUMF Improvements would be constructed in accordance with the "Acquisition Agreement by and between the Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC," dated February 18, 2006, ("Acquisition Agreement"). The Acquisition Agreement was amended by that certain agreement entitled "Amended and Restated Acquisition Agreement by and between the Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby, USA, LLC" dated July 21, 2009. The TUMF Contracts relate to the development and/or operation of a real estate development located in the City of Temecula, Riverside County known as "Roripaugh Ranch," envisioned as an approximately 800 -acre master -planned community. Wingsweep Corporation acquired Roripaugh Ranch Planning Area 4B, Lot 1 of Tract 29353-1 ("Lot 1 Tract 29353-1"), a portion of the Roripaugh Ranch from Unicom Global, Inc., the successor in interest to the rights of Ashby USA, LLC. Wingsweep has sold its interest in Lot 1 Tract 29353-1 to KB Home Coastal Inc. as of October 31, 2012 and in connection therewith wishes to assign its interest in the TUMF Contracts to KB Home Coastal Inc. The terms of the TUMF Contracts require that the City provide consent to the assignment of the TUMF Contracts to an Assignee. The subject Agreement is the legal mechanism that provides the City's consent and documents the assignment. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. TUMF Credit Agreement 2. Agreement Exhibit "A" Partial Reconveyance 3. Agreement Exhibit "B" Grant Deed ASSIGNMENT OF AND CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACTS This ASSIGNMENT OF AND CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACTS ("Assignment") dated as of February 26, 2013, is entered into by and between WINGSWEEP CORPORATION, a California corporation ("Assignor"), KB HOME COASTAL INC., a California corporation ("Assignee"), and the CITY OF TEMECULA, a municipal corporation ("City"), with respect to the following facts that are acknowledged as true and correct by the parties: RECITALS WHEREAS, the City and other parties entered into (i) that certain Roripaugh Ranch Project Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Improvement and Credit Agreement dated as of February 28, 2006 and (ii) that certain Reimbursement Agreement Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program dated as of March 23, 2006 ("collectively, the "TUMF Contracts"); and WHERAS, the TUMF Contracts provide that the TUMF Improvements would be constructed in accordance with that certain agreement entitled "Acquisition Agreement by and between the Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC," dated as of February 18, 2006, as such agreement existed as of the date of the Agreement, February 18, 2006 ("Acquisition Agreement"), or as may hereafter be amended by the applicable parties; and WHEREAS, the Acquisition Agreement was amended by that certain agreement entitled "Amended and Restated Acquisition Agreement by and between the Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby, USA, LLC" dated as of July 21, 2009; and WHEREAS, the TUMF Contracts relate to the development and/or operation of a real estate development located in the City of Temecula, Riverside County known as "Roripaugh Ranch," envisioned as an approximately 800 -acre master -planned community= and WHEREAS, Assignor warrants and represents to the City that Unicorn Global, Inc. is the successor in interest to the rights of Ashby USA, LLC, (one of the original parties to the TUMF Contracts) under the TUMF Contracts with respect to Roripaugh Ranch Planning Area 4B, Lot 1 of Tract 29353-1 ("Lot 1 Tract 29353-1"); and WHEREAS, Assignor warrants and represents to the City that Assignor acquired Lot 1 Tract 29353-1 and all right, title, and interest of Unicom Global, Inc. therein, as evidenced by the Partial Reconveyance recorded November 8, 2012 as Document No. 2012-0541341, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A hereto and that Assignor has the legal capacity to enter into this Agreement; and, WHEREAS, Assignee warrants and represents to the City that Assignee acquired Lot 1 Tract 29353-1 and all right, title, and interest, as evidenced by the Grant Deed recorded November 8, 2012 as Document No. 2012-0541340, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B hereto and that Assignee owns fee title to the Property and has the legal capacity to enter into this Agreement; and, 1 WHEREAS, Assignor, as prior owner of Lot 1 Tract 29353-1, has sold Lot 1 Tract 29353-1 to Assignee and in connection therewith wishes to assign its interest in the TUMF Contracts to Assignee; and, WHEREAS, the terms of the TUMF Contracts require that the City provide consent to the assignment of the TUMF Contracts to Assignee. NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Assignor and Assignee hereby agree as follows: 1. Assignment of Contract. Assignor hereby sells, assigns, grants, transfers and conveys to Assignee all of Assignor's rights, title, and interest of Assignor under the TUMF Contracts with respect to Lot 1 Tract 29353-1. This assignment is a present, complete and absolute assignment and is not intended as security of any kind. 2. Acceptance of Assignment and Promise to Perform. Assignee hereby accepts the foregoing grant and assignment from Assignor and agrees to perform all of Assignor's obligations under the TUMF Contracts that arise or accrue from and after the date of this Assignment. 3. Consent to Assignment. The City of Temecula hereby consents to the foregoing grant and assignment from Assignor to Assignee, insofar as such consent may be required under the TUMF Contracts. 4. Effective Date. This Assignment will be effective as of the date that (i) a grant deed conveying title to Lot 1 Tract 29353-1 to Assignee has been recorded in the Official Records of the Riverside County Recorder and (ii) the City has executed this Agreement. 5. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the assignment of the TUMF Contracts with respect to Lot 1 Tract 29353-1. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, concerning the assignment of the TUMF Contracts with respect to Lot 1 Tract 29353-1 are merged into this Agreement and shall be of no further force and effect except for those agreements concerning the Roripaugh Ranch Projects described in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and the "Fifth Operating Memorandum to the Recorded Development Agreement between City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC" dated as of October 26, 2010 and the "Sixth Operating Memorandum to the Recorded Development Agreement between City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC", dated as of January 25, 2011. 6. Authority to Enter into Agreement. Assignor and Assignee each individually warrant and represent to the City that all persons, including without limitation, lenders, who may have some interest with respect to or in Lot 1 Tract 29353-lhave approved this Agreement as may be required by applicable law or agreements, and that by entering into this Agreement neither Assignor nor Assignee is in violation of or breach of any other agreement to which such Assignor or Assignee may be a party. 2 7. Signature Authority. Each person signing on behalf of a party to this Agreement warrants and represents to the other parties that he or she has the legal power, right and authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the party and to bind said party. 8. Counterparts. This Assignment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together will constitute one instrument. 9. Governing Law. This Assignment shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Consent as of the date first stated above. [SIGNATURE PAGES FOLLOW] 3 ASSIGNOR: Wingsweep Corporation a California corporation By: Wingsweep Corporation a California Corporation, Its: Manager By: Its: Executive Vice President By: Its: Executive Vice President ASSIGNEE: KB Horne Coastal Inc. a California corporation By: KB Home Coastal Inc. a California corporation Its: Managing Member By: Its: 4 CITY OF TEMECULA A municipal corporation Michael S. Naggar Mayor Attest: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Approved as to form: Peter M. Thorson City Attorney DB EXHIBIT A PARTIAL RECONVEYANCE EXHIBIT B GRANT DEED EXHIBIT C AGREEMENTS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH 5 Contracts/Agreements List Contracts with City of Temecula 1. Development Agreement between City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of December 17, 2002. 2. First Operating Memorandum to the Recorded Development Agreement between City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC (Roripaugh Ranch Project), dated as of October 21, 2004. 3. First Amendment to Development Agreement between City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC (Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan), dated as of February 14, 2006. 4. Second Operating Memorandum to the Recorded Development Agreement between City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC (Roripaugh Ranch Project), dated as of March 21, 2006. 5. Third Operating Memorandum to the Recorded Development Agreement between City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC (Roripaugh Ranch Project), dated as of August 31, 2006. 6. Fourth Operating Memorandum to the Recorded Development Agreement between City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC (Roripaugh Ranch Project), dated as of March 6, 2007. 7. Agreement to Defer Completions of Conditions of Approval Until After Recordation Final Map for Tract 29353-2 Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan between the City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of September 23, 2003. 8. First Amendment to Agreement to Defer Completion of Conditions of Approval Until After Recordation of Final Map for Tract 29353-2 (Roripaugh Ranch Specific Plan), dated as of June 28, 2005. 9. Joint Community Facilities Agreement (Flood Control Improvements) by and among Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, County of Riverside, City of Temecula, Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of November 1, 2004. 10. Joint Community Facilities Agreement (Street Improvements) by and among County of Riverside and City of Temecula and Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of November 1, 2004. 11. Joint Community Facilities Agreement by and among the Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC and Eastern Municipal Water District, dated as of January 1, 2005. 12. Joint Community Facilities Agreement City Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 03-02 (Roripaugh Ranch), dated as of January 1, 2005. 13. Joint Community Facilities Agreement City, Amended and Restated 14. Agreement between the City of Temecula and Ashby USA LLC for the Acquisition of Certain Property for Public Rights of Way in connection with the Roripaugh Ranch Project, dated as of August 23, 2005. 15. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Recorded Instrument No. 2003-779101). 16. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Recorded Instrument No. 2003-779102). 17. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Recorded Instrument No. 2003-779103). 18. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (Recorded Instrument No. 2006-322168). 19. Subdivision Monument Agreement (Recorded Instrument No. 2003-779104). 20. Subdivision Monument Agreement (Recorded Instrument No. 2006-322167). 21. License Agreement Between the City of Temecula and Ashby USA, LLC for Access to Fire Station Property, dated as of December 29, 2004. 22. Amended and Restated Deposit/Reimbursement Agreement by and among the City of Temecula, the Temecula Public Financing Authority for itself and on `behalf of the proposed TPFA Community Facilities District No. 03-02 (Roripaugh Ranch), Ashby USA, LLC, and Calloway 220, LLC, dated as of March 29, 2004. 23. Roripaugh Ranch Project Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Improvement and Credit Agreement by and between the City of Temecula, Ashby USA, LLC, Davidson Roripaugh Ranch 122, LLC, Tanamera/Roripaugh, LLC, Tanamera/Roripaugh II, LLC, Traditions at Roripaugh and Western Riverside County Council of Governments, dated as of February 28, 2006. 24. TUMF Reimbursement Agreement, dated as of March 23, 2006. Contracts with Temecula Public Financing Authority 1. Joint Community Facilities Agreement (Flood Control Improvements) by and among Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, County of Riverside, City of Temecula, Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of November 1, 2004. 2. Joint Community Facilities Agreement (Street Improvements) by and among County of Riverside and City of Temecula and Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of November 1, 2004. 3. Joint Community Facilities Agreement by and among the Temecula Public 4. Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC and Eastern Municipal Water District, dated as of January 1, 2005. 5. Joint Community Facilities Agreement City Temecula Public Financing 6. Authority Community Facilities District No. 03-02 (Roripaugh Ranch), dated as of January 1, 2005. 7. Joint Community Facilities Agreement City, Amended and Restated 8. Joint Community Facilities Agreement TCSD Temecula Public Financing 9. Authority Community Facilities District No. 03-02 (Roripaugh Ranch), dated as of January 1, 2005. 10. Amended and Restated Acquisition Agreement by and between the Temecula 11. Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of July 21, 2009. 12. Fiscal Agent Agreement by and between Temecula Public Financing Authority and U.S. Bank National Association, dated as of March 1, 2006. 13. Fiscal Agent Agreement Supplemental Agreement #1 14. Continuing Disclosure Agreement by and between Temecula Public Financing 15. Authority and U.S. Bank National Association, as disseminating agent, dated as of March 1, 2006. 16. Amended and Restated Deposit/Reimbursement Agreement by and among the 17. City of Temecula, the Temecula Public Financing Authority for itself and on behalf of the proposed TPFA Community Facilities District No. 03-02 (Roripaugh Ranch), Ashby USA, LLC, and Calloway 220, LLC, dated as of March 29, 2004. 18. Assessment Lien Discharge Escrow Agreement by and between Temecula Public 19. Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of March 23, 2006. Contracts with Temecula Community Services District 1. Joint Community Facilities Agreement TCSD Temecula Public Financing Authority Community Facilities District No. 03-02 (Roripaugh Ranch), dated as of January 1, 2005. Contracts with Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 1. Joint Community Facilities Agreement (Flood Control Improvements) by and among Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, County of Riverside, City of Temecula, Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of November 1, 2004. Contracts with County of Riverside 1. Joint Community Facilities Agreement (Flood Control Improvements) by and among Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, County of Riverside, City of Temecula, Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of November 1, 2004. 2. Joint Community Facilities Agreement (Street Improvements) by and among County of Riverside and City of Temecula and Temecula Public Financing Authority and Ashby USA, LLC, dated as of November 1, 2004. RECORDING REOWEST!D EY! FIRST, AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY NATIONALHOMEBUIIDER SERVICES SUBDIVISION DEPARTMENT RECORDING REQUESTED BY First American Title Company NHS AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL DOCUMENT TO: Wingsweep Corporation 15535 San Fernarndo Mission Blvd., ste 310 Mission Hills, Ca. 91345 A.P.N.: 957-340-048-8 Space Above This Line for Recorder's Use Only T.R.A. No.013-117 PARTIAL RECONVEYANCE File No.: OSA-3729309 (jg) Unicom Global, Inc., Trustee under that Deed of Trust dated February 19, 2008, executed by Wingsweep Corporation, Trustor and recorded on April 25, 2008, in Book NA, as Page(s) NA, as Instrument No. 2008- 0209911 of Official Records, in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside, California, having been requested in writing, by holder of the obligations secured by said Deed of Trust, to reconvey a portion of the estate granted to Trustee under said Deed of Trust, DOES HEREBY RECONVEY TO THE PERSON OR PERSONS LEGALLY ENTITLED THERETO, WITHOUT WARRANTY, ALL THE ESTATE, TITLE, AND INTEREST acquired by Trustee under said Deed of Trust, in and to the portion of the property described as follows: LOT 1 OF TRACT NO. 29353-1, IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 334 PAGE 21 THROUGH 24, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. The remaining property described in said Deed of Trust shall continue to be held by said Trustee under the terms thereof. As provided in said Deed of Trust this Partial Reconveyance is made without affecting the personal liability of any person or the corporate liability of any corporation for the payment of the indebtedness mentioned as secured thereby or the unpaid portion thereof, nor shall it affect any rights or obligations of any of the parties of said Deed of Trust. Dated: October 31, 2012 Unicom Global, Inc. By: Authorized Signer orry /719N01- A.P.N.: 957-340-048-8 Partial Reconveyance - continued File No.: OSA-3729309 (jg) Date: October 31, 2012 � • t Cal STATE OF �C.1 f ONvui 9 )SS COUNTY OF Lis AriA984g ) On 10 - 3 ( 2-.0 (-2 - before me, ktcthN/ Si 1121 , Notary Public, personally appeared C-0 12.LI 4-4 o proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(e) whose name(b) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/ hey executed the same in his/her heir authorized capacityand that by his/ter/th°" signature$) on the instrument the persons$ or the entity upon behalf of which the person(5)acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature My Commission Expires: 23,a-oC Notary Name: ti0)L?tET S!{ Notary Registration Number: KANWAL JEET SINGH Commission # 1950286 Notary Public - California D 2 Los Angeles County Aly Comm. Expires Aug 29.2015 This area for official notarial seal Notary Phone: RIB -- 366" 02 County of Principal Place of Business: L.4. Page 2 of 2 record rlg Requested By First American Title NHS RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO, AND MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO: KB Home Coastal Inc. 36310 Inland Valley Drive Wildomar, California 92595 Attn: Steve Ruffner & Mike Freeman ,SJ -3y© -C48 Y (Above Space for Recorder's Use Only) 77?/f D/3-//7 The undersigned grantor declares: Documentary Transfer Tax not shown pursuant to Section 11932 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code GRANT DEED City of Temecula FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is acknowledged, WINGSWEEP CORPORATION, a California corporation, GRANTS to KB HOME Coastal Inc., a Califomia corporation, the following described real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California: See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. TOGETHER with: 1. All tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances, including easements and water rights, if any, thereto belonging or appertaining, and any reversions, remainders, rents, issues or profits thereof; and 2. All rights, title, and interests of Grantor in and under all covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, easements, and other matters of record, including, without limitation, all rights as "Declarant" under any Declarations of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of record. -e%1 tq"t `3 / , 2012 DATED: WINGSWEEP CORPORATION, a Califomia corporation By: —��— Name: _„,5,e/2-2( Title: By: Name: Title: CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT 3C.�S(.n �3r�S.saC.'f mCcv- »L.ntr :f..air S1.). •••• a -as Se vim. an14..9.. ata ACS g*•. - C164.. • voaa`vrH. State of California County of Los Angeles on IO -31'2012 - Date personally appeared before me, C °wy 1 Kanwal Jeet Singh Notary Public Here Insert Name and Tile of the Officer �VV• s) of Signers) KANWAL JEET SINGH Commission # 1950286 t4otafy Public - California Los Angeles County g rrmm. Expires Aug 29.2019 y z z Place Notary Seal Above who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s`jwhose namo() istairraibsciibed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sheAhey-executed the same in hislhes,.4iieir authorized capacity(ie$ and that by his/herltheir signature(e)-on the instrument the person(* or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)-acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature OPTIONAL Signature of Notary Public Though the information below is not required by taw, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document '1,61/14- DeeS1 Title or Type of Document: Document Date: 10 - 31 -" 24*-) Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner — 0 Limited D General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: RIGHTTHUMBPRINT. OF SIGNER :- Top of thumb here Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer—Title(s): ❑ Partner —❑ Limited 0 General ❑ Attorney in Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: RIGHTTHUMBPRINT OP SIGNER - Top of thumb here: z• --c^K=w - -c.�k, �,e�.c�•--r2-' .n -a.0 c' a`-u..X, -curt=6c-=<',EX., X-5, ^she--cs.< u; ^r4•u:+%' .-(�--.` n • 02007 National Notary Assooafion• 9350 De Soto Ave., PO.Box 2402•Chatsworih, CA 91313-2402• wwnNalionalNotaryorg Item 05997 Reorder. Cap Tot -Free 1-850-876-8827 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: LOT 1 OF TRACT NO. 29353-1, IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 334, PAGES 21 THROUGH 24, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. APN: 957-340-048-8 Item No. 7 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager OcL CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for Roripaugh Ranch Street Improvements, Phase I, PW09-02 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer David McBride, Senior Engineer RECOMMENDATION: 1. Accept the improvements constructed as part of this project as complete; 2. Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion, and hold the Performance Bond for a one-year period until September 14, 2013, in lieu of a Maintenance Bond for the project; 3. Release the Labor and Materials Bond seven months after recordation of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On October 11, 2011, the City Council awarded this project to Hillcrest Contracting in the amount of $5,659,299.96, inclusive of $220,400 of improvements for and funded by the Rancho California Water District (RCWD). The work involved: (1) final paving and landscaping improvements on Murrieta Hot Springs Road (MHSR) from City limits to Butterfield Stage Road (BSR); (2) completion of the improvements on Butterfield Stage Road from MHSR to a point just south of Calle Chapos, which includes storm drains, wet and dry utilities, street lights, raised medians, and provisions for future traffic signals and median landscaping; (3) completion of street improvements on Calle Chapos (BSR to Walcott Lane), and a portion of South Loop Road (including access to the fire station); and, (4) improvement of various RCWD facilities within and adjacent to the project that were most appropriately constructed as part of this project. Hillcrest has completed the work in accordance with the plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. All improvements are warrantied under the maintenance bond (i.e., Performance Bond) until September 14, 2013, which is one year from the date the City received beneficial use of the project improvements. The retention was released pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 7107. The Roripaugh Ranch Street Improvements Phase I project is included in the City's Fiscal Year 2012-16 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget as the first phase of Butterfield State Road Extension. It is funded with Community Facilities District (CFD) for Roripaugh Ranch, Reimbursement/Other from Shea Homes, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) funds. The original construction contract amount was $5,659,299.96. Multiple change orders, totaling $100,333 were issued with $33,072.43 of that amount being attributable to RCWD for a total construction contract amount of $5,759,632.96. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of the acceptance of the project and filing the Notice of Completion. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92589-9033 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. 2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. 3. The Nature of Interest is a Contract which was awarded by the City of Temecula to Hillcrest Contracting, 1467 Circle City Drive, Corona, CA 92879 to perform the following work of improvement: RORIPAUGH RANCH STREET IMPROVEMENTS PHASE ONE, PROJECT NO. PW09-02 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on February 26. 2013. That upon said contract the Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland CIO Zurich, 1400 American Lane, Schaumburg, IL 60196 was surety for the bond given by said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: RORIPAUGH RANCH STREET IMPROVEMENTS PHASE ONE, PROJECT NO. PW09-02 6. The location of said property is: Murrieta Hot Springs Road from Pourroy Road to Butterfield Stage Road and Butterfield Stage Road from Murrieta Hot Springs Road to Calle Chapos / South Loop Road, Temecula, California. Dated at Temecula, California, this 26th day of February 2013. City of Temecula Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. Dated at Temecula, California, this 26th day of February 2013. City of Temecula Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk CITY OF TEMECULA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE RORIPAUGH RANCH STREET IMPROVEMENTS — PHASE 1 PROJECT NO. PW09-02 This is to certify that thilereAf efi atYadi (hereinafter the °CONTRACTOR") declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/its paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor, services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of it's contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction, or repair of that certain work of improvement known as RORIPAUGH RANCH STREEET IMPROVEMENTS — PHASE I PROJECT NO. PW09-02 situated in the City of Temecula, State of California, more particularly described as follows: eonpuu�h e j CLL P1100-ta INSER DDRESS OR DESCRIBE LOCATION OF WORK The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further, in connection with the final payment of the Contract, the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts: Description Dollar Amount to Dispute IJ/A k Pursuant to Public Contract Code §7100, the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands, or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above. CONTRACTOR Dated: IJa6 113 By: n Signature atYltli'Lia CrpyviloatA Print Name and Title . &V 0-tvaaA4minivitzty0.-- RELEASE R-1 PW09-02Spec.docx Item No. 8 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager OcL CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Roripaugh Ranch Street Improvements, Phase II — Funding of City's obligations under Federal and State Law to monitor construction activities in order to protect cultural resources PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer David McBride, Senior Engineer RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the expenditure of up to $100,000 to compensate the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians for construction monitoring activities as part of the subject project. BACKGROUND: In accordance with Federal and State law, the approved environmental document for Phase II of the Roripaugh Ranch Street Improvements project requires that ground disturbing construction activities (i.e., earth moving) be monitored by the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians in order to protect any cultural resources that might be found. State and Federal law impose very specific requirements on the City for monitoring earth moving activities and protecting cultural resources that might be discovered during such construction activities. We recommend an allowance of up to $100,000 for the monitoring required based on the scope and duration of the earth moving work in the project. FISCAL IMPACT: The Roripaugh Ranch Street Improvements Phase II project, PW09-02, is included in the City's Fiscal Year 2013-17 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget as the second phase of Butterfield State Road Extension. It is funded with Community Facilities District (CFD) for Roripaugh Ranch, Reimbursement/Other from Shea Homes, and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) funds. There are sufficient funds in account 210.165.723.5804 to address the recommended action. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Project Location 2. Project Description BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD EXTENSION Circulation Project Location f ziu Y W U 117171 Z Ce aY J W UCe U P'rniOS RO CAMINO CIELO L1EFER RQ o SOUTH LOOP RD CALLE GIRASOL' CALLE CHAPOS ENF�F�O <N VISTA DEL MOt' y- \QUE Aerial Data - March 2010 512.5 1,025 Feet 2,050 46 CITY OF TEMECULA Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2013-17 BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD EXTENSION Project Description: This project includes the complete design and construction of four lanes on Butterfield Stage Road (from Rancho California Road to Murrieta Hot Springs Road), four lanes on Murrieta Hot Springs Road (from Butterfield Stage Road to the City limits), and two lanes on Calle Chapos (from Butterfield Stage Road to Walcott Road), totaling approximately 3.2 miles of road. Benefit / Core Value: This project improves traffic circulation by providing a crucial north and south arterial road on the eastern side of the City. In addition, this project satisfies the City's Core Values of Transportation Mobility and Connectivity. Proiect Status: Phase I of this project is under construction. It is anticipated that Phase II of this project will begin construction during fiscal year 2012-13. Department: Public Works—Account No. 210.165.723 Level: I Project Cost: Actua Is to Date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Future Total Project Years Cost Administration $ 585,319 $ 807,141 $ 100,000 $ 1,492,460 Acquisition $15,006,728 $ 2,051,352 $1,166,991 $ 17,058,080 Construction* $ 504,761 $22,153,126 $1,066,991 $ 23,724,878 Construction $ 173,808 $ 173,808 Engineering $ 21,480 $ 338,520 $ 360,000 Design $ 572,852 $ 87,052 $1,166,991 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 659,904 Environmental $ 240,000 $ 240,000 Tata Is $16,691,140 $25,677,191 $1,166,991 $ - $ - $ - $ - $43,535,322 Actual s Source of Funds: to Date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Future Total Project Years Cost CFD (Roripaugh Ranch) $15,253,140 $25,503,383 $1,166,991 $ 41,923,514 Reimbursement/ Other (Shea Homes) $ 173,808 $ 173,808 TUMF $ 1,438,000 $ 1,438,000 Total Funding: $16,691,140 $25,677,191 $1,166,991 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 43,535,322 Future Operation & Maintenance Costs: 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 $ 18,360 2015-16 $ 18,727 2016-17 $ 19,102 $ 19,484 *Construction funding is for Phase I in fiscal year 2011-12 and Phase II in fiscal year 2012-13. Note: Assumes that only minor right-of-way acquisitions would be necessary and that all major right-of-way dedications are voluntary. 47 Item No. 9 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Improvements and Notice of Completion for the Citywide Concrete Repairs for Fiscal Year 2011-12, PW12-07 PREPARED BY: Amer Attar, Principal Engineer Chris White, Assistant Engineer - CIP RECOMMENDATION: 1. Accept the construction of the Citywide Concrete Repairs for Fiscal Year 2011- 12, PW12-07, as complete; 2. Direct the City Clerk to file and record the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and accept a one-year Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract amount; 3. Release the Labor and Materials Bond seven months after filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed. BACKGROUND: On June 12, 2012, the City Council awarded a construction contract to Above All Names Construction Services, Inc., in the amount of $127,777.77 to complete the Citywide Concrete Repairs for fiscal year 2011-12, PW 12-07. The project included removal and replacement of damaged curb & gutter, sidewalk, driveway approaches, under sidewalk drains, cross gutters, ADA ramps and spandrels, at various locations throughout the City. The Contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. All work will be warranted for a period of one year from December 12, 2012, the date the City obtained "beneficial use" of the project improvements. The retention for this project will be released pursuant to the provisions of Public Contract Code Section 7107. The Citywide Concrete Repairs for fiscal year 2011-12 project is funded with fiscal year 2012-13 Public Works Maintenance budget for routine street maintenance. The original construction contract amount was $127,777.77. Multiple contract change orders totaling $22,923.56 were issued for a total construction contract amount of $150,701.33. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact as a result of the acceptance of the project and filing the Notice of Completion. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Notice of Completion 2. Maintenance Bond 3. Contractor's Affidavit and Final Release RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF TEMECULA 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92589-9033 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described. 2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California, 92589. 3. The Nature of Interest is a Contract which was awarded by the City of Temecula to Above All Names Construction Services, Inc., 1648 W. Persimmon Street, Rialto, CA 92377 to perform the following work of improvement: CITYWIDE CONCRETE REPAIRS FISCAL YEAR 2011-12, PROJECT NO. PW 12-07 4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on February 26, 2013. That upon said contract the American Contractors Indemnity Company, 601 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 1600, Los Angeles, CA 90017 was surety for the bond given by said company as required by law. 5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: CITYWIDE CONCRETE REPAIRS FISCAL YEAR 2011-12, PROJECT NO. PW 12-07 6. The location of said property is: Various locations throughout the City of Temecula. Dated at Temecula, California, this 26th day of February 2013. City of Temecula Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF TEMECULA ) ) ss ) I, Susan W. Jones MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside by said City Council. Dated at Temecula, California, this 26th day of February 2013. City of Temecula Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk EXECUTED IN DUPLICATE CITY OF TEMECULA. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS BOND NO. 197197 MAINTENANCE BOND FOR CITYWIDE CONCRETE REPAIRS - FY 2011-12 PROJECT NO. PW12-07 KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT THAT: 1648 W. Persimmon St. Above All NamesConstruction Services, Inc. Rialto, Ca. _92377_ NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACTOR'S a California Corporation p,d ,n wrnrner .j C:.rprudrron f'artnersiv or,rchvx'wro1 hereinafter called Principal, and 601 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1600 American Contractors Indemnit1 Company_ Los Angeles, Ca. 90017 NAME AND ADDRESS OF SURETY hereinafter called SURETY. are held and firmly oound unto CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called OWNER. in the penal sum of FIFTEEN THOUSAND SEVENTY*********** DOLLARS and ***00*** CENTS ($ 15,070.00******) lawful money of the United States, said sum being not less than ten percent of the Contract value payable by the said City of Temecula under the terms of the Contract. for the payment of wnich we bind ourselves. successors and assigns. jointly ano severally. firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION is such that whereas. the Principal entered into a certain Contract with the OWNER dated the 1st day of July 2012 a copy of wnich is hereto attached and made a part hereof for the construction of CITYWIDE CONCRETE REPAIRS - FY 2011-12, PROJECT NO. PW12-07. WHEREAS said Contract provides that the Principal will furnish a bond conditioned to guarantee for the period of one year after approval of the final estimate on said job. by the OWNER, against all defects in workmanship and materials which may become apparent during said period; and WHEREAS. the said Contract nas been completed. and was the final estimate approved on December 12 2012 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH. that if within one year from the date of approval of the final estimate on said job pursuant to the Contract, the work done under the terms of said Contract shall disclose poor workmanship in the execution of said work and the carrying out of the terms of said Contract. or it shall appear that defective materials were furnished thereunder. then this obligation shall remain 1r full force and virtue. otherwise this instrument shall be void. VA,NTENAACE BCNC As a part of the obligation sec:,red hereby and in addition tc the face amount specified costs and reasonable expenses and fees shall De included. including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the City of Temecula in successfully enforcing tnis obligation all to be taxed as costs and included In any judgment rendered Tie Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time. alteration. or addition to the terms of the Contract. or tc the work to be performed thereunder, or to the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect Its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such changeextension of time. alteration or addition to the terms of the Contract or to the work or to the Specifications Signed ano sealed this 23rd day of January 2013 ;Seal) SURETY American Contractors Indemnity Company PRINCIPAL By V By Ryan S. Mantle Name) Attorney—in—Fact Above All Names Construction ‘Services, lnc. ,idbn C. Pedregon (Name) President Jim)) Tale i APPROVED AS TO FORM: Peter M Thcrson City Attcrney By (Name) 1TIk; Attach Notarial Acknowledgement or Jurat for both the Surety and Principal Signatures CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT 4���'�':��.Y'�'4'7'S�'�'4P.�.t^l`vL^c�"�'•C�CS�S'.c`�',S,r,�!'cY)cY`G�'.CY�•L f7Ll•,.tKfL�[`2!rrr.�r�L`Gt7�.�ti^��'4"Gc�'��S•�'���'k'�'-4� State of California County of Orange On % - Z 1 201 3 before me, Dale personally appeared 1 Mary Martignoni - Notary Public Hae kKO,t Name and Rile d ere °Muer Ryan Mantle Namels, of SOnerlsl MARY MARTIGNONI COMM. # 1947853 2 NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA; ORANGE COUNTY Comm. Expires Sept. 9.20151 Place Notary Seal Above who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name] is/zsubscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/3:0003w executed the same in his authorized capacitytira and that by hisW/Ded signatureK on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person fA acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signatu(e OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law. it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: _ Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: Ryan Mantle Individual Corporate Officer — Title(s): Partner — Limited - General X. Attorney in Fact Trustee Guardian or Conservator Other: Signer Is Representing: American Contractors _Indemnity Gcmipany RIGHT THUMBPRINT OF SIGNER Top o, •t Number of Pages: Signer's Name: Individual Corporate Otficer — Title(s): 0 Partner — - Limited L General ID Attorney in Fact o Trustee O Guardian or Conservator C Other: Signer Is Representing: RIGHT THt,•.IFPnINT •At,r,r Si Ra etc v.:4e4N 47oCCA .; ,^ske, s w,s�cs v�t�cvc s vvn�c w• z C 2Jll; Natda' Notary AsanoaNm • 9350 De Soto Ave . PO Oco 24 .CJtbwnn. CA 91313.24C2• w. wNefpWNoraryO,g Item e5907 Reorder Cal Tat- Free 1.9006766827 w ✓ ✓ oe ✓ Y ✓ or, ✓ ✓ ✓- ✓ M ✓ - ✓ ✓ POWER OF ATTORNEY AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY UNITED STATES SURETY COMPANY U.S. SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That American Contractors Indemnity Company. a California corporation, United States Surety Company, a Maryland corporation and U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, a Texas corporation (collectively, the "Companies"), do by these presents make, constitute and appoint: Les M. Mantle or Ryan Mantle of Fullerton, California its true and laaN ful Attorneys) -in -fact, each in their separate capacity if more than one is named above. with full power and authority hereby conferred in its name, place and stead. to execute. acknowledge and deliver any and all bonds, recognizances, undertakings or other instruments or contracts of suretyship to include riders, amendments. and consents of surety, providing the bond penalty does not exceed Three Million Dollars (S '•3,000,000.00•• ). This Power of Attorney shall expire without further action on March 18, 2015. This Power of Attorney is granted under and by authority of the following resolutions adopted by the Boards of Directors of the Companies: Re it Resolved. that the President. any Vice -President. any Assistant Vice -President. any Secretary or any Assistant Secretary shall be and is hereby vested with full power and authority to appoint any one or more suitable persons as Attorney(s)-in-Fact to represent and act for and on behalf of the Company subject to the following pnwisions: Attorney -in -Fact may be given full power and authority for and in the name of and on behalf of the Company. to execute. acknowledge and deliver. any and all bonds, recognisances. contracts, agreements or indemnity and other conditional or obligatory undertakings, including any and all consents for the release of retained percentages and/or final estimates on engineering and construction contracts, and any and all notices and documents canceling or terminating the Company's liability thereunder, and any such instruments so executed by any such Attorney -in -Fact stall be binding upon the Company as if signed by the President and sealed and effected by the Corporate Secretary. Re it Resolved, that the signature of any authorized officer and seal of the Company heretofore or hereafter affixed to any power of attorney or any certificate relating thereto by facsimile. and any power of attorney or certificate bearing facsimile signature or facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon the Company with respect to any bond or undeAaking to which it is attached. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The Companies have caused this instrument to be signed and their corporate seals to be hereto affixed. this 3"I day of October, 201 I. AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COA1PANY UNITED STATES SURETY COMPANY U.S. SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY Corporate Seals +�Ta�o,� a NICNIVILITO timams :1 State of California Daniel P. Aguilar, \ice Presiders County of Los Angeles SS: On this 3"' day of October, 2011, before me, Deborah Reese, a notary public, personally appeared Daniel P. Aguilar, Vice President of American Contractors Indemnity Company, United States Surety Company and U.S. Specialty Insurance Company who proved 10 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(s). or the entity upon beim' f of which the person(s) acted. executed the instrument. 1 certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OESORAI4 REESE Ca/mows 11421044 Signature Ai/41444z_ /tCs'S-e- (Seal) Notify P.V0C Antess alcor., E.wr.. w.,,e. 2tt5I I, Jeannie Lee, Assistant Secretary of American Contractors Indemnity Company, United States Surety Company and U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Power of Attorney, executed by said Companies, which is still in full force and effect; furthermore, the resolutions of the Boards of Directors, set out in the Power of Attorney are in full force and effect. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seals of said Companies at Los Angeles, Calitbrnia this 23rd day of January ,2013. Corporate Seals Bond No. 197197 Agency No. 8227 JeannisLee!csistant Secretary ry CITY OF TEMECULA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT AND FINAL RELEASE CITYWIDE CONCRETE REPAIRS — FY 2011-12 PROJECT NO. PW12-07 Aeoom I Names aAsT This is to certify that 2A) r i , (hereinafter the "CONTRACTOR') declares to the City of Temecula, under oath, that he/she/it has paid in full for all materials, supplies, labor. services, tools, equipment, and all other bills contracted for by the CONTRACTOR or by any of the CONTRACTOR's agents, employees or subcontractors used or in contribution to the execution of its contract with the City of Temecula, with regard to the building, erection, construction. or repair of that certain work of improvement known as CITYWIDE CONCRETE REPAIRS — FY 2011-12, PROJECT NO. PW12-07, situated in the City of Temecula. State of California, more particularly described as follows: V G4ui',v 5 LL<< -f ii &A!5 / -1-"heCI�L F TNi,reec !,'c, INSERT ADDRESS OR DESCRIBE LOCATION OF WORK The CONTRACTOR declares that it knows of no unpaid debts or claims arising out of said Contract which would constitute grounds for any third party to claim a Stop Notice against of any unpaid sums owing to the CONTRACTOR. Further. in connection with the final payment of the Contract. the CONTRACTOR hereby disputes the following amounts. Description Dollar Amount to Dispute /if Pursuant to Public Contract Code §7100. the CONTRACTOR does hereby fully release and acquit the City of Temecula and all agents and employees of the City, and each of them, from any and all claims, debts, demands. or cause of action which exist or might exist in favor of the CONTRACTOR by reason of payment by the City of Temecula of any contract amount which the CONTRACTOR has not disputed above Dated:) i 14, (2013 ' E_EAi:E CONTRACTOR By: I� nature O [.fief C -&D/ZCh&J Pv1T Print Name and Title RI Item No. 10 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CYL CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Approval of the Plans and Specifications, and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for the Citywide Slurry Seal Project for Fiscal Year 2012-13, PW 12-23 PREPARED BY: Avlin Odviar, Senior Engineer- CIP Kendra Hannah-Meistrell, Associate Engineer - CIP RECOMMENDATION: Approve the plans and specifications, and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Citywide Slurry Seal Project for Fiscal Year 2012-13, PW12-23. BACKGROUND: The Citywide Slurry Seal Project for Fiscal Year 2012-13, is an annual project that will utilize a slurry to seal the project roadways against water intrusion and deterioration of asphalt concrete pavement wearing surface. Ideally slurry seal is applied every five to seven years as it prolongs pavement life thereby delaying more costly rehabilitation measures such as asphalt concrete overlays or removal and reconstruction. Slurry sealing involves cleaning and crack sealing the existing roadway surface, applying the slurry and restoring pavement delineation. Staff has identified the street locations based on a previously completed Pavement Management System (PMS) study, current pavement conditions, time elapsed since the last preventative maintenance measure and geographical proximity. The streets to be sealed this year are portions of Los Ranchitos, Santiago Ranchos, Santiago Estates, Country Manor Estates, Windsor Crest, and Promenade at Temecula. This project is exempt from the CEQA requirements pursuant to Article 19, Categorical Exemption, Section 15301, Existing Facilities, of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15301 states that the repair and maintenance of existing highways and streets are Class 1 activities, which is exempt from CEQA. Project specifications are complete and the project is ready to be advertised for construction bids. The contract documents are available for review in the office of the Director of Public Works. The engineer's Construction Estimate for the project is $590,500. FISCAL IMPACT: Adequate funds are available in the Fiscal Year 2012-13 Measure A Fund Operating Budget. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Slurry Seal Street List 2. Location Maps CITYWIDE SLURRY SEAL FISCAL YEAR 2012-13, PW12-23 AREA 1 TYPE I SLURRY SEAL WITH CRACK SEAL STREET NAME LENGTH (LF) WIDTH (LF) PAVED AREA (SF) CRESTA VERDE CT 744.28 40 29,771.20 BEL MONTE CT 404.03 40 16,161.20 JOHN WARNER RD 3,517.53 50 175,876.50 LA PRESA LOOP 351.70 50 17,585.00 COLVER CT 184.45 50 9,222.50 LOLITA RD 1,300.27 50 65,013.50 PAULITA RD 738.91 50 36,945.50 BEDFORD CT 272.08 44 11,971.52 LA PAZ ST 593.25 40 23,730.00 TOTAL TYPE II SLURRY SEAL WITHOUT CRACK SEAL 386,276.92 STREET NAME LENGTH (LF) WIDTH (LF)I PAVED AREA (SF) SANTIAGO RD 2,726.54 46 125,420.84 CAJON DR 360.98 50 18,049.00 YORBA AV 2,142.81 50 107,140.50 VALLEJO AVE E 1,600.72 50 80,036.00 VALLEJO AV 7,487.30 50 374,365.00 LA PAZ ST 1,521.88 68 103,487.84 PALMA DR 365.00 50 18,250.00 CABO ST 385.00 50 19,250.00 FLORES DR 988.85 50 49,442.50 CORONADO DR 770.00 50 38,500.00 VERDE DR 411.48 50 20,574.00 VILLA DEL SUR DR 558.00 50 27,900.00 PIO PICO RD 2,109.16 70 147,641.20 RENDOVA PL 583.00 50 29,150.00 JEDEDIAH SMITH RD 4,960.15 44 218,246.60 PIASANO PL 913.25 50 45,662.50 PESCADO DR 2,073.27 50 103,663.50 EL LUCERO PL 562.50 50 28,125.00 EL FARO PL 445.00 50 22,250.00 CALLE DE VELARDO 3,109.20 50 155,460.00 MANZANO DR 2,146.29 50 107,314.50 MARIPOSA PL 414.00 50 20,700.00 SANTIAGO RD 3,530.87 46 162,420.02 SAN FERMIN PL 1,154.13 50 57,706.50 TOTAL 2,080,755.50 CITYWIDE SLURRY SEAL FISCAL YEAR 2012-13, PW12-23 AREA 2 TYPE I SLURRY SEAL WITH CRACK SEAL STREET NAME LENGTH (LF) WIDTH (LF) PAVED AREA (SF) CALLE HALCON 1,862.01 40 74,480.40 CAMPO VERDE 414.87 40 16,594.80 CAMPO ROJO 188.78 40 7,551.20 CIELO MESA 176.18 40 7,047.20 VILLA ALTURAS DR 265.74 40 10,629.60 CIELO DE AZUL 118.68 40 4,747.20 ELINDA RD 1,242.48 40 49,699.20 VIA CANADA 430.01 40 17,200.40 VIA BRISA 577.00 40 23,080.00 LA PRIMAVERA ST 173.99 40 6,959.60 COLI NA VERDE 2,246.93 40 89,877.20 VISTA DEL RANCHO 818.63 40 32,745.20 CORTE VILLA 368.75 40 14,750.00 ESTERO ST 444.41 40 17,776.40 TOTAL AREA 3 373,138.40 TYPE I SLURRY SEAL WITH CRACK SEAL STREET NAME LENGTH (LF) WIDTH (LF)I PAVED AREA (SF) GEORGETOWN LN 771.28 40 30,851.20 BRANDEIS CIR 241.61 40 9,664.40 CARLETON WY 1,169.32 40 46,772.80 WINDWOOD CIR 881.90 40 35,276.00 GILWOOD CT 180.93 40 7,237.20 TOTAL 129,801.60 5 JSP CIA 5' Type I Slurry Seal (With Crack Seal) Type II Slurry Seal (Without Crack Seal) 1- city 1,250 625 0 1.250 Feet February 12, 2013 GpMl 4O p lP I -A PRIMAVERA sr lj CIH Type I Slurry Seal (With Crack Seal) 404 Centerline aoo 200 0 400 Feet rlg,larcmnp propct4J2k tral.4lurryt lanCn l.rtud February 12, 2013 / \'Y Area 2 NOR GENERAL KEARNY NICOLE LN City Type 1 Slurry Seal (With Crack Seal) Centerline 400 200 0 400 Feet rlgielmep ptcocb'pibk rralulflurryl kends kb.m.d February 12. 2013 en; 0 O O W U U O �� I NIGH1ylEW o CIR 0 VAIL BROOK DR n WAYNEWOOD DR N 0 O NIGHTCREST CIR -4 U cr MARHILL CIR :AWNCREST CIR SOLANA WY r 1 uJ Tq Area 3 F,( DEL REY RD �O�SE r JSP O r N Item No. 11 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City ManagerOft Pro-r- /-A,P CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Adoption of Official Map for City Owned Property (located at the northerly end of Diaz Road adjacent to Dendy Parkway) PREPARED BY: Mayra De La Torre, Senior Engineer John Pourkazemi, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING AN OFFICIAL MAP AND SUBDIVIDING A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 ON FILE IN BOOK 6, PAGE 75 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA BACKGROUND: The City owns the property at the northerly end of Diaz Road, between Dendy Parkway and the northerly City Limit (officially: a portion of Parcel 1 as shown on Parcel Map No. 4646). The City is in negotiations with Wild Rivers Temecula, LLC for the purchase of a portion of the City owned property for development and operation of a water park. The Official Map will subdivide the existing City owned property into three legal parcels owned by the City of Temecula in fee. Wild Rivers Temecula will acquire Parcel 1, the western most parcel, with the City retaining fee title ownership of Parcels 2 and 3. Refer to the attached Official Map. In addition to the three numbered parcels, the Official Map reaffirms the previously dedicated rights-of-way for Lot A (extension of Diaz Road), Lot B (future Cherry Street), and Lot C (northerly half of Dendy Parkway) for public street and utility purposes. As a condition of the previously dedicated rights-of-way, the owners of Parcels 1 and 2 will have no rights of access except the general easements of travel and the access openings, as shown on the Official Map. FISCAL IMPACT: Other than minor recordation fees, there is no fiscal impact associated with the approval of the Official Map. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Official Map for the Diaz Road Property 2. Resolution 13- NUMBER OF PARCELS = 3 NUMBER OF LETTERED LOTS = 3 GROSS AREA = 40.001 AC. NET AREA = 34.332 AC. PROJECT LOCATION DVLS 2196047.398 6317223.991 JOINED PIPES W/STD. SURVEY SCREW IN TOP N71'22'18" 356.61' (356.576' GRID VICINITY & HORIZONTAL SURVEY CONTROL MAP NOT TO SCALE SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT ILL 2154994.777 6313564.389 JOINED PIPES W/STD. SURVEY SCREW IN TOP I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS OFFICIAL MAP HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND IS BASED UPON A FIELD SURVEY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCES AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY ENGINEER IN MAY 2012, THAT IT COMPLIES WITH SECTION 66499.52 AND DIVISION 3 OF TITLE 7 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, OFFICIAL MAPS PROVISION OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, AND THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF APPLICABLE STATE LAW AND CITY REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH. DATED: , 2013. WILLIAM L. GREEN, L.S. 4547 EXPIRES: 9-30-14 CITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT I HEREBY STATE THAT THIS MAP WAS PREPARED AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND THAT IT COMPLIES WITH DIVISION 3, OFFICIAL MAPS, OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF APPLICABLE STATE LAW AND CITY REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH, AND THAT I AM SATISIFIED THIS MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT. DATED: 2013. KRIS R. WINCHAK, LS 6240 EXP. 3/31/14 FOR GREG BUTLER, CITY ENGINEER (AS DELEGATED) CITY OF TEMECULA SIGNATURE OMISSIONS NOTE: SEE SHEET NO. 2 FOR SIGNATURE OMISSIONS NOTE. H. \PDATA\15102484\CA00\MAPPING\OFFICIAL MAP \24840M001.DWG TVERLOOP 2/12/13 8:17 am IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA OFFICIAL NJ AP BcING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 ON FILE IN OK 6, PAGE 75 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. ■ ■ ■ CONSULTING MAY, 2012 RESOLUTION NO. 13-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING AN OFFICIAL MAP AND SUBDIVIDING A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 ON FILE IN BOOK 6, PAGE 75 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND DETERMINE AND DECLARE THAT: A. DIVISION 3 OF TITLE 7 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE AUTHORIZES THE CITY COUNCIL TO DIRECT THE CITY ENGINEER TO CAUSE TO HAVE AN OFFICIAL MAP PREPARED OF PORTIONS OF THE CITY; B. THE CITY ENGINEER HAS BEEN DIRECTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL TO HAVE AN OFFICIAL MAP PREPARED PURSUANT TO SAID DIVISION 3 OF TITLE 7 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE; C. UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY ENGINEER, A FIELD SURVEY WAS DONE AND AN OFFICIAL MAP PREPARED BY WILLIAM L. GREEN, A LICENSED SURVEYOR, NUMBER L.S. 4547; D. THE CITY OF TEMECULA OWNS A PORTION OF LAND IN FEE IN PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 ON FILE IN BOOK 6, PAGE 75 OF PARCEL MAPS RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; E. SAID OFFICIAL MAP SUBDIVIDES ONE PARCEL OF LAND INTO THREE (3) PARCELS OF LAND OWNED BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA IN FEE; SECTION 2. APPROVAL OF OFFICIAL MAP. THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY APPROVES, ADOPTS AND CERTIFIES THE MAP CONSISTING OF THREE (3) SHEETS ATTACHED HERETO AS THE OFFICIAL MAP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 3 OF TITLE 7 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES THEREIN NAMED. SECTION 3. PEDICATION TO PUBLIC. THE CITY OF TEMECULA HEREBY DEDICATES TO THE PUBLIC FOR STREET AND PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES, LOT A (DIAZ ROAD), LOT B (CHERRY STREET) AND LOT C (DENDY PARKWAY) AS SHOWN ON THIS MAP THAT IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED AS AN OFFICIAL MAP. ALSO AS A CONDITION OF DEDICATION OF LOTS "A", "B" AND "C" THE OWNERS OF PARCELS 1 AND 2 WILL HAVE NO RIGHTS OF ACCESS EXCEPT THE GENERAL EASEMENTS OF TRAVEL, ALSO EXCEPTING THE ACCESS OPENINGS AS SHOWN ON THE OFFICIAL MAP. ANY CHANGE OF ALIGNMENT OR WIDTH THAT RESULTS IN THE VACATION THEREOF SHALL TERMINATE THIS CONDITION OF ACCESS RIGHTS AS TO THE PART VACATED. SECTION 4. CERTIFICATION. THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO CERTIFY TO THE ADOPTION OF THIS RESOLUTION ATTESTED BY THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA THIS 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013. ATTEST: SUSAN W. JONES MMC CITY CLERK [SEAL] MICHAEL S. NAGGAR, MAYOR SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETS RECORDER'S STATEMENT FILED THIS DAY OF 2013. AT M IN BOOK OF OFFICIAL MAPS, AT PAGE , AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY CLERK, CITY OF TEMECULA NO FEE LARRY W. WARD, COUNTY ASSESSOR - CLERK -RECORDER BY: , DEPUTY SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE BY: FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, SUSAN W. JONES, MMC, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION NO. 13-_ WAS DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED AND IS SIGNED BY A MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND THE MAYOR AS PRESIDING OFFICER OF SAID BODY AT A MEETING THEREOF HELD ON THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: _ COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: _ COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: _ COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: _ COUNCIL MEMBERS: SUSAN JONES, MMC CITY CLERK ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT NOTE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTAINT SHEET AFFECTING THIS MAP IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER. CITY OF TEMECULA. IN E.C.S. BOOK T, PAGES 379. THIS AFFECTS ALL LOTS. EASEMENT NOTES ( AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE FOR RIVER CHANNEL, BANK PROTECTIONS WORK AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, REC. 9/13/39 IN BK 434, PG 108, O.R. 02 THE EFFECT OF A DECLARATION OF DEDICATION, PURPORTING TO IRREVOCABLE DEDICATE IN PERPETUITY FOR PUBUC ROAD, PUBUC UTILITY AND PUBLIC SERVICE PURPOSES, THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED THEREIN, REC. 11/16/72 AS INST. NO. 152905, O.R. THE EFFECT OF A RESOLUTION BY THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACCEPTING SAID OFFER OF DEDICATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF VESTING TITLE IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ON BEHALF OF THE PUBUC, BUT NOT AS PART OF THE COUNTY -MAINTAINED ROAD SYSTEM. REC. 9/2/82 AS INST. NO. 153178, O.R. AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY FOR PUBUC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, REC. 1/9/73 AS INST. NO. 3490, O.R. AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF KACOR REALTY INC. FOR PUBUC UTILITIES, DRAINAGE, CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF SLOPES AND ROAD EASEMENTS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, REC. 5/31/73 AS INST. NO. 70688, O.R. AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT FOR PIPELINES AND APPURTENANCES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, REC. 11/14/90 AS INST. NO. 415924, O.R. AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF RANCON BUSINESS CENTER/RANCHO CALIFORNIA FOR ROADWAY, UTILITY LINES AND CONDUITS, REC. 10/04/89 AS INST. NO. 344254, O.R. AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT FOR SEWER TRANSMISSION AND COLLECTION FACILRIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, REC. 01/26/2007 AS INST. NO. 2007-0063024, O.R. IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEETS OFFICIAL NJ AP BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 ON BOOK 6, PAGE 75 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. .... CONSULTING MAY, 2012 SIGNATURE OMISSION NOTE PURSUANT TO SECTION 66436 OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, THE SIGNATURES OF THE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS HAVE BEEN OMITTED: COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR RIVER CHANNEL, BANK PROTECTIONS WORK AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES. RECORDED SEPTEMBER 13. 1939 IN BOOK 434, PAGES 108 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED JANUARY 9, 1973 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 3490 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. KACOR REALTY INC. HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR PUBUC UTILITIES, DRAINAGE, CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF SLOPES AND ROAD EASEMENTS AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED MAY 31, 1973 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 70688, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, HOLDER OF EASEMENTS FOR PIPELINES AND APPURTENANCES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES RECORDED NOVEMBER 14, 1990 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 415924 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND FOR SEWER TRANSMISSION AND COLLECTION FACILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED JANUARY 26, 2007 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2007-0063024 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. RANCON BUSINESS CENTER, HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR ROADWAY, UTILITY UNES AND CONDUITS, RECORDED OCTOBER 4, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 344254 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. PROCEDURES OF SURVEY PARCEL MAP NO. 24991 P.M.B. 165/96-103 PCL. 6 MURRIETA CITY LIMITS C/L CHERRY STREET N48°09'33"E 5747.99' [5747.69' CALC. ] <N 48°09'38"E 5748.30' CALC.> N48°09'33"E 1680.60' 1680.60' [[N48°08'43"E .6 x --) e ObCP riOyaltj�'.4,4.1 Mti ti At 5747.78']] 2707.88' [[2707.42']] TRACT MAP NO. 35181 1 tn FILE IN C/L ADAMS AVENUE 1359.51' (1360.00') <1360.00'> [1359.75'] rw -04§ (o 0 • co o ▪ 0 0 Z M u 1s ° z PARCEL 1 ESTABLISHED AS SW'Y LINE OF PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN A DEED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECORDED 4-23-92 AS INST. NO. 146241.0.R. BY HOLDING RECORD CURVE DATA ON DENDY PARKWAY AND RECORD DISTANCE ALONG NWLY LINE OF PROPERTY. TEMECULA CITY LIMITS PARCEL 2 SEE DETAIL "A" HEREON N20°07'36"W //- (R) 1387 N43059'42"E 1387.82 (N43"59'1387.89 ))\89 ) ((N43°58146"59E C/L DENDY PARKWAY PARCEL "B" LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. PA 99-0351 1 INST. NO. 557083, O.R. 0 n REC. 12-27-99 PCL. 130044 PARCEL MAP NO. P.M.B. 200/9;10 PCL . 2 DATA TABLE BEARING/DELTA RADIUS LENGTH 1 N48°18'41"W (N48°18'54"W <N48°18'52"W 2 04°25'58" 3 N37°15'21"E (N37°15'08"E 4 N41°41'19"E 5 (02°18'23" 6 (27°22'36" 7 N71°22'18"E (N71°22'05"E [[N71°21'44"E 8 ((25°52'42" 9 N37°15'21"E 10 N46°01'12"W 11 06°43'27" (06°43'27" 12 01°29'54" [[01°29'54" 13 N46°01'12"W (N46°01'25"W 14 N48°18'41"W (N48°18'54"W <N48°18'52"W © N37_15' 21"E (R) 4000.00' (R) (R) 1250.50' 1250.50') 1249.15'> 309.47' 144.82' 144.82') 100.89' MONUMENT NOTES SET 1" IP & TAG "LS 4547" IN GROUND OR LEAD AND TAG "LS 4547" IN CONCRETE OR SPIKE & WASHER STAMPED "LS 4547" IN ASPHALT HAVING A THICKNESS OF 2" OR MORE AT ALL PARCEL CORNERS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. O INDICATES SEARCHED, FOUND NOTHING, SET 1" IP & TAG "LS 4547" IN GROUND OR LEAD AND TAG "LS 4547" IN CONCRETE OR SPIKE & WASHER STAMPED "LS 4547" IN ASPHALT HAVING A THICKNESS OF 2" OR MORE. ALL MONUMENTS SHOWN AS SET SHALL BE SET IN ACCORDANCE WITH RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE 461.9 AND THE MONUMENTATION AGREEMENT FOR THIS MAP. • INDICATES FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED AND REFERENCED HEREON. FD 1" IP W/TAG "LS 7161" PER PM NO. 28657-1, PMB 193/64-67, FLUSH. FD 1" IP, NO TAG, NO REF, DN 0.7'. NOT ACCEPTED AS CORNER. 2000.00' 80.51')& MEAS 850.00' 406.14')& MEAS -- 356.61' -- 356.61') 356.62']] 850.00' 383.91'))& MEAS (R) 280.00' -- 613.10' 4280.00' 502.31' 4280.00' 502.30') 850.00' 22.23' 850.00' 22.23']] -- 607.42' 607.49') 767.91' 767.97') 767.14'> N43°59'42"E 954.03 FD 1-1/4" IP, NO TAG, UP 0.4'; ACCEPTED AS POINT ON CENTERLINE OF CHERRY STREET PER PM NO. 24991, PMB 165/96-103; SET "LS 4547" TAG IN PIPE. FD 2" IP W/TAG "RCE 26283",IN LIEU OF 1" IP W/TAG "RCE 26283" PER PM NO. 29895, PMB 198/15-16, FLUSH; ACC AS C/L EC. FD 2" IP W/TAG "RCE 26283", IN LIEU OF 1" IP W/TAG "RCE 26283" PER PM NO. 29895, PMB 196/15-16, FLUSH; ACC AS C/L BC. FD "C" NAIL, NO REF; ACCEPTED AS C/L EC PER PM NO. 28657-1, PMB 193/64-67, FLUSH. SET 1" IP W/TAG "LS 4547". FD 1" IP W/TAG "RCE 26406" PER PM NO. 24085-3, PMB 190/95-97, FLUSH. FD WELL MON W/BRASS CAP "RCE 26406" PER PM NO. 24085-3, PMB 190/95-97, DN 1.0' 5.68' C/L REMINGTON AVENUE DETAIL "A" NOT TO SCALE SEARCHED FOUND NOTHING SET NOTHING SURVEYOR'S NOTES THIS OFFICIAL MAP CONTAINS 40.008 ACRES, GROSS. 2. THIS OFFICIAL MAP CONTAINS 3 NUMBERED PARCELS AND 3 LETTERED LOTS. 3. ( ) INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PARCEL MAP NO. 28657-1, PMB 193/64-67, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4. < > INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PARCEL MAP NO. 4646, PMB 6/75. 5. [ ] INDICATES RECORD DATA PER PARCEL MAP NO. 24991, PMB 165/96-103. 6. (( )) INDICATES RECORD DATA PER GRANT DEED TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECORDED APRIL 23, 1992 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 146241,0.R. 7. [[ 1] INDICATES RECORD DATA PER TRACT MAP NO. 35181, M.B. 430/66-72. 111111 INDICATES RESTRICTED ACCESS RIGHTS. BASIS OF BEARINGS NOTE THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM, ZONE VI, NAD83 (EPOCH 2007.0) AS DETERMINED LOCALLY BY A LINE BETWEEN CONTINUOUS OPERATING REFERENCE STATIONS (CORS) BILL AND DVLS BEING NORTH 05°05'38.83" EAST AS DERIVED FROM GEODETIC VALUES PUBLISHED BY THE CALIFORNIA SPATIAL REFERENCE CENTER (CSRC) AND/OR NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY (NGS), RESPECTIVELY. ALL DISTANCES SHOWN ARE GROUND DISTANCES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. GRID DISTANCES MAY BE OBTAINED BY MULTIPLYING GROUND DISTANCES BY 0.99991389. H: \PDATA\15102484\CADD\MAPPING\OFFICIAL MAP\24840M002.DWC TVERLOOP 2/12/13 8:21 am 100 50 0 100 200 300 SCALE: 1"=100' 50.00' 'Pi j_ to Ed OD A • Z V Oc cc Co O Il) 7/ \ 1 1 1 1 1 1.0� 1 1 1 1 1 5500 50. 1 1 N i C/L 42' ACCESS OPENING rn 77 i IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA OFFICIAL V AP BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 ON FILE IN BOOK 6, PAGE 75 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL MAP NO. 24991 P.M.B. 165/96-103 PCL. 6 C/L CHERRY STREET LOT B 1400.60 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 /111 1 1 1 i 77 i 7 PARCEL 1 19.273 ACRES 1 1 1[ 1 1 35858 859.08.1 N48609'33"E `C/L 26' ACCESS OPENING N48609'33"E 1680.60' 11111111111 1377.78' / / / ■ ■ ■ CONSULTING MAY, 2012 L1 11 1'1,1111111111111111 C/L 26' ACCESS OPENING 51870 LN 3 0 PARCEL 2 10.910 ACRES m t C/L 26' ACCESS OPENING ?>•18'43� " L'318.35' r� �e ,R_aoo. D0. t, L=381351 1c' N T - - PCL. 1 /PCL . 27-- 1 PARCEL MAPS 004 0 I 4 P.M.B. I 1 .00 L=383.91 2 5. 127.1 _ _ N43"59 42"E 645.03 -- 54. 3' -�-r-- c 1 /L DENDY PARKWAY N29609'516E (R) -1 0 111 � �r. 25.42' N47"33'17" (R) 0 C/L 60' ACCESS OPENING 8 I' I� 20 00 50. 1 c.00 SEARCHED, NOTHING FOUND, NOTHING SET i el 4 • p 399.6572.49' -�-� - 1 2 N43659'426E 1387.82' 1 PARCEL "8" LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NPA O. R 99-0351 INST. NO. 1999-557083 6 SEE DETAIL "B" HEREON II II II I II 1 180.00 0 39' 150' o' IROS 00 20' 15' 0 / 111 I I I 1 I 1 I1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I II I I I I' SEARCHED, NOTHING FOUND, NOTHING SET I I I I I I I I I I II II II I I I I II II I I II O PARCEL 3 4.150 ACRES 0 20' 02 II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II ', II II II II II II II II II 50' SEARCHED, NOTHING FOUND, NOTHING SET m 15' ._ 0 II II II II II II II II II II II II II 11 0 12' • SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS DATA TABLE ® 1 BEARING/DELTA RADIUS I LENGTH 1 N41 42 20 W 2 N41.42'20"W 3 N41"42'20'1 (N41"42'33"W <N41'42'22"1 4 N85654'48"W 5 N41641'19"E 6 02618'23" 7 N46.01.12"W 8 NO2"32'44"W 9 N41"41'19"E 10 02.18'23" 11 01629'54" 12 00.44'23' 13 N41642'20"W 14 N43659'42"E 15 N46601'12"W 16 N46.01.12'W 17 13608'02" 18 N32'53'10"W 19 13.08'02" 20 N43'59'426E 21 20643'35" 22 N64'43'17"E 23 20.43'35" 24 N43'59'42"E 25 20.43'35" 26 N23'16'07"E 27 20.43'35" 28 02.04'37" 29 02626'06" 30 N48609'33"E (N48'09'37"E <N48'09'38"E 31 N43'59'42"E *143"58'46"E 2000.00' 1950.00- ' 850.00' 4280.00' 188.00' 212.00- ' 50.00' 50.00- ' 50.00- ' 50.00- ' 800.00' 800.00' 19.16 18.73' 18.62' 19.75') 18.55'> 33.07' 100.89' 80.51' 5.68' 31.65' 17.05' 78.50' 22.23' 55.26' 18.50' 114.00' 75.24' 613.10' 43.10' 15.56' 48.60' 159.00' 18.09' 15.62' 18.09' 50.00' 18.09' 15.62' 18.09' 29.00' 34.00' 230.00' 230.00') 230.00'> 252.50' 252.50'> SEARCHED, NOTHING FOUND, NOTHING SET DETAIL "B" NOT TO SCALE SEE SHEET 2 FOR SURVEYOR'S NOTES, MONUMENT NOTES, EASEMENT NOTES AND BASIS OF BEARINGS NOTE. \PDATA\15102484\CADD\MAPPING\OFFICIAL MAP \24840M003.DWG TVERLOOP 2/12/13 8:24 am RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING AN OFFICIAL MAP AND SUBDIVIDING A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 4646 ON FILE IN BOOK 6, PAGE 75 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. FINDINGS. The City Council does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. Division 3 of Title 7 of the California Government Code authorizes the City Council to direct the City Engineer to cause to have an Official Map prepared of portions of the City; B. The City Engineer has been directed by the City Council to have an Official Map prepared pursuant to said Division 3 of Title 7 of the California Government Code; C. Under the direction of the City Engineer, a field survey was done and an Official Map prepared by William L. Green, a licensed surveyor, number LS 4547; D The City of Temecula owns a portion of land in fee in Parcel 1 as shown on Parcel Map No. 4646 on file in Book 6, Page 75 of Parcel Maps Records of Riverside County, California; E. Said Official Map subdivides one parcel of land into three parcels of land owned by the City of Temecula in fee; Section 2. APPROVAL OF OFFICIAL MAP. The City Council hereby approves, adopts and certifies the map consisting of three sheets attached hereto as the Official Map in accordance with the provisions of Division 3 of Title 7 of the California Government Code for the uses and purposes therein named. Section 3. DEDICATION TO PUBLIC. The City of Temecula hereby dedicates to the public for street and public utility purposes, Lot A (Diaz Road), Lot B (Cherry Street) and Lot C (Dendy Parkway) as shown on this map that is approved and adopted as an Official Map. Also, as a condition of dedication of Lots A, B and C, the owners of Parcels 1 and 2 will have no rights of access except the general easements of travel, also excepting the access openings as shown on the Official Map. Any change of alignment or width that results in the vacation thereof shall terminate this condition of access rights as to the part vacated. Section 4. CERTIFICATION. The City Clerk of the City of Temecula is hereby directed to certify to the adoption of this Resolution attested by the official seal of the City of Temecula. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 13- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26th day of February, 2013 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Item No. 12 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager Ro-r- eaL CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Temporary Street Closures for 2013 Springfest Events PREPARED BY: Mayra De La Torre, Senior Engineer Steve Charette, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file the following proposed action by the City Manager: Temporarily close certain streets for the following 2013 Springfest Events: TEMECULA ROD RUN BLUEGRASS FESTIVAL REALITY RALLY TASTE OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES EXPO WESTERN DAYS STREET PAINTING FESTIVAL BACKGROUND: Seven special events scheduled from March through June 2013 necessitate the physical closure of all or portions of certain streets within the Old Town area. The closures are necessary to facilitate the events and to protect participants and viewers. Public Works CIP staff has coordinated the start of the Main Street Bridge Replacement project, which will entail closing Main Street at the creek crossing, with the first two Springfest events. The bridge replacement project will not start until after the Bluegrass Festival taking place March 15th — 17`h. Once the bridge replacement project starts, detours will be in place directing traffic to the First Street Bridge to gain access across Murrieta Creek. Any detour impacted by any of the closures noted below will be temporarily adjusted to accommodate the special event. The seven events and the associated street closures are as follows: 1) TEMECULA ROD RUN - March 8th and 9th The annual Spring Rod Run will be held in Old Town on Friday March 8, 2013 from 1:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., and Saturday March 9, 2013 from 5:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. This year's Temecula Spring Rod Run Event sponsors propose street closures as follows: A. Old Town Front Street - Moreno Road (5) to Second Street. B. Sixth, Fifth, Fourth, Main, & Third Streets - Mercedes Street to Murrieta Creek. North -south traffic will be detoured around the event via Mercedes Street. Access is provided to handicap parking lots located at Sixth Street and Mercedes Street, and First Street at Old Town Front Street. Show car parking will be at designated parking lots and along both sides of Old Town Front Street as shown on the attached Rod Run Location Map. The Old Town Parking Garage will be open with ample free parking available to the public. The entire length of Mercedes Street will open for the duration of the event starting Friday, March 8th at 4:00 p.m. Access to the parking garage during the Rod Run from the north will be via Moreno Road to Mercedes Street and from the south via Old Town Front Street to Second Street to Mercedes Street. The event will require the closure of Main Street between Old Town Front Street and the Main Street Bridge. Provisions have been included to ensure public access and public parking at the Children's Museum during the road closure. 2) BLUEGRASS FESTIVAL - March 15th -17th The annual Bluegrass Festival will be held at the Town Square with the street closures scheduled as follows: A. Main Street — the easterly driveway edge of 28636 Old Town Front Street (Rosa's Cantina) to Mercedes Street - 8:00 a.m. Friday, March 15th to 7:00 p.m.Sunday, March 17th B. Mercedes Street — Fourth Street to Third Street - 6:00 a.m. Saturday, March 16 to 7:00 p.m. Sunday, March 17th 3) REALITY RALLY - April 5th and 6th The Reality Rally event will be held at the Town Square with the street closures scheduled as follows: A. Main Street — the easterly driveway edge of 28636 Old Town Front Street (Rosa's Cantina) to Mercedes Street - 4:00 p.m. Friday, April 5th to 7:00 p.m. Saturday, April 6th B. Mercedes Street — Fourth Street to Third Street - 5:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Saturday, April 6th 4) COMMUNITY SERVICES EXPO - April 19th _ 20th The Community Services Expo street closures for both Main Street and Mercedes Street are scheduled from 10:00 a.m. Friday, April 19th to 7:00 p.m. Saturday, April 20th as follows: A. Main Street — the easterly driveway edge of 28636 Old Town Front Street (Rosa's Cantina) to Mercedes Street. B. Mercedes Street — Fourth Street to Third Street. 5) TASTE OF TEMECULA - April 26th -28th The Taste of Temecula street closures for both Main Street and Mercedes Street are scheduled from 5:00 p.m. Friday, April 26th to 5:00 a.m. Sunday, April 28th as follows: A. Main Street — the easterly driveway edge of 28636 Old Town Front Street (Rosa's Cantina) to Mercedes Street B. Mercedes Street — Fourth Street to Third Street 6) WESTERN DAYS - May 19th The annual Western Days event street closures for both Main Street and Mercedes Street are scheduled from 5:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Sunday, May 19th as follows: A. Main Street — the easterly driveway edge of 28636 Old Town Front Street (Rosa's Cantina) to Mercedes Street. B. Mercedes Street — Fourth Street to Third Street. 7) STREET PAINTING FESTIVAL - June 21st — 23rd The Street Painting Festival street closures for both Main Street and Mercedes Street are scheduled from 7:00 a.m. Friday, June 21st to 7:00 p.m. Sunday, June 23rd as follows: A. Main Street — the easterly driveway edge of 28636 Old Town Front Street (Rosa's Cantina) to Mercedes Street. B. Mercedes Street — Fourth Street to Third Street. Street closures for the above six events (2 through 7) are pursuant to the attached Exhibit 'A.' Mercedes Street traffic for the above six events will be detoured around the event via Third and Fourth Streets. The Old Town Parking Garage will be open with ample free parking available to the public during all 2013 Springfest events. Street closures are allowed by the California Vehicle Code upon approval by the local governing body for certain conditions. Under Vehicle Code Section 21101, "Regulation of Highways", local authorities, for those highways under their jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution for, among other instances, "temporary closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes, when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing." Chapter 12.12 of the Temecula Municipal Code, Parades and Special Events, provides standards and procedures for special events on public streets, highways, sidewalks, or public right of way and authorizes the City Council or City Manager to temporarily close streets, or portions of streets, for these special events. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs of police services, as well as services provided by the City Public Works Maintenance Division (for provision, placement and retrieval of necessary warning and advisory devices), are included in budgetary items. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map — Temecula Rod Run 2. Springfest Street Closures — 2013 - Exhibit 'A' 2013 TEMECULA ROD RUN Site Plan March 8, 2013 (1:00 PM – 8-00 PM) March 9, 2013 (5:00 AM – 4:00 PM) Merchant Parking Lots End of L-12 30 Lot L-14 26 End of L-1 55 Lot L-16 13 Public Parking Structure 480 Handicap Parking: Sixth Street First Street Mercedes Street Open to Public Civic Center Parking Structure Open to Public Additional motorcycle parking at L-13 Friday evening (until 6:00 PM) Third Street closure will move up to Kid's World parking area to allow for child pickup Old Town Front Street Closes at 1:30 pm on Friday Trash Bins • Portable Toilets (ADA Accessible) rimisi Road Closure 1._ i Public Parking I_ 1 Parcels - Event Headquarters J Incident Command Post (ICP) I Show Car Parting E2 Handicap Parking - Private Lot (for Stampede Employees) a Service by Appointment Only (Customer Parking) _ I Merchant Parking Motorcycle Parking 0 95 190 4711 380 570 780 Feet Emergency Response Area at Fire Station 12 Old Town Tna mrp wat tn.w W •1.Oro a TWINY. O.oa.pbc .l010Mm,>ty.Nrn The mp60.AW 40011..4 oats 0.00.teO by PS pwsc0:,anr/A,u»Or. W Dsnnent not OM Tgvp04.00r1 ard 1.10 N0q..tmr Ag..c, ol0wrrupr CW14 fro Ctyof lbn.0W .,tonsno *fro., oru0Mr.pp0bbty br n.Wi000* 9nbn0 W O.,ti. ft* DNA .1.5hMnYcnrll++rw4OTFi. me, an vtjot1%A.M.ard MOdkl0.n TN 0.09.ysc WmrN00 e/MA.*M NM. MAR..A.oAo to P.nM Iw OM ma ow ratioatolon T Hs M..N 0t/ WN/W Wow. Mppnp4W FMuuMy 11.2040 r a,w<wma.pjr.lva._Mardrao p nu0 BALDARAY CIR SIXTH ST 1 — - L-12 L-11 SIXTH ST$— It I� o I L-9 AO FIFTH ST [Ili 4 _I'.---. .L 1'._ . I 1 _I 1 FOt1RTH ST I I14 I I t _- 4-11111 _J.] Eve ntiHcadugrs ` I �' Town I MAIN ST Square -- , / J Handicap 'whin FORST ST L-1 I11.:116 1'- 11-1A L-5 L.I THIRD ST I` -.L _JI 1 C I-1 SECOND Cfvic� Center Partin ?q Structure 1_IaJi Public Parkl iq $orv(C,od b)'Coy Sco ( \Handicap Pa'tkl on Street/ LOCATION MAP SPRINGFEST STREET CLOSURES - 2013 (MAIN STREET AND MERCEDES STREET) * BLUEGRASS FES TI VAL - MARCH 15 - 17 * REALITY RALLY - APRIL 5 8 6 * TASTE OF TEMECULA - APRIL 26 - 28 * COMMUNITY SERVICES EXPO - APRIL 19 8 20 * WESTERN DAYS - MAY 19 * STREET PAINTING FESTIVAL - JUNE 21 - 23 LEGEND STREET CLOSURE ` BARRICADE EXHIBIT 'A' Item No. 13 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Substitute Agreements and Bonds for Public Improvements in Tract No. 29661- 3 (located southerly of the intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Pourroy Road) PREPARED BY: Mayra De La Torre, Senior Engineer Steve Charette, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Accept substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Subdivision Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds as security for improvements and labor and materials for Tract Map 29661-3; 2. Accept substitute Subdivision Monument Agreement and Subdivision Monument Bond as security for monumentation for Tract Map 29661-3; 3. Authorize the release of the existing Faithful Performance, Labor and Materials, and Monumentation Bonds for Tract Map 29661-3; 4. Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. BACKGROUND: On February 10, 2004, the City Council approved Tract Map No. 29661-3 and entered into Subdivision Improvement Agreements with Shea Homes Limited Partnership. The original subdivider has recently sold the project to Standard Pacific Corporation. Standard Pacific has submitted substitute bonds and agreements. The following lists existing securities and agreements secured by Shea Homes Limited Partnership and posted by the Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland to be released: 1) Faithful Performance Bond No. 08606078 in the amount of $842,500 2) Labor and Materials Bond No. 08606078 in the amount of $421,250 3) Monumentation Bond No. 08606077 in the amount of $12,960 Original Bond Company: Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland 2677 N. Main Street #300 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Accompanying the agreements submitted by the new owner, Standard Pacific Corporation, are the following substitute bonds posted by International Fidelity Insurance Company (note the dollar amounts have been adjusted to reflect the new CPI): 1) Faithful Performance Bond No. 0585130 in the amount of $1,894,000 2) Labor and Materials Bond No. 0585130 in the amount of $947,000 3) Monumentation Bond No. 0585131 in the amount of $19,800 The original agreements (Subdivision Improvement Agreement and the Subdivision Monument Agreement) and bonds (Faithful Performance, Labor and Material and the Monument Bonds) for TM29661-3 are available for review in the office of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit - Index Map for Tract Map Nos. 29661-3 SO i 0 300 600 900 Scale 1" 300' BRASS 7777 888777 7.7.5. R.LN., I/4 5181517 7474. 4404 TAO. FLOAT PER Me .974/21-740 6-34 & Rs 74/46-50 Ill 2.I. 4745 661 06G Aunt R(0 0747 25610-1 IY 777/41-74 Met NO. 75004.7. AO 247%th37 ND Rt 76/4040• .4(12070 AS we 8748680 074760 M 71(108 70. OCSWOW77 06MMi C04581W7.0A; I • IY. 7A5 5190 MO IO 677 SST PER IRAN 29367-4 170 334/21-24 IN THE CITY OF TE.1MECULA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TRACT NO. 29661-3 BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 4 AND 5 OF TRACT NO. 29353-1, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON f7LE IN BOOK 334 OF MAPS, PACES 21 THROUGH 24, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA adkan CAoilACCRR RIVERSIDC, C4 TRACT NO. 25619- M110. 211/6,7-74 LOT 19 0149C47044 OF/4479719747 1701 MAWS 4010 ROT 47 OgMMCYPPDRWO et RA a *2 24752-1. 8a 2•4/22-81 _ J - 154 cowry won aM2_. _ , A.„ ` 73-1" -IaJ II�L_}/' ti lQ .. �jbp� : . tatillaPjii NM olio L7El Q4 'vSHEET 4 :1r 4�7u w 3D�-{{ n© Rimitipop. 8 :' •f ' '--' (V L I t 6 P Ery .41-1,21.7.917 x T J2 1NO 9353-/ s6�- --C=-7= r ,0 1 77077=% - • (Mo J4J814 327!4727) 4 I I I' RVR. 2 36'48Y 5750.71 3 'fh11 67, s ,I1 1 fit; (+AW 26/34-35 i - RM 9/80_66) `n 047!8115/59-60, RA1B 76/.71-JS1 PON. 34 `lg8n'�-tp 4 67704. Y 1 MO 7/64-60 1r; P40 26/34-35' OCTOBER 2002 BOUNDARY CONTROL TERRITOPY OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRACT NO. 29353-1 MB, 234 / 21-24 (1449475 '0%1 ID .• d' ADI IS 1617 (4777 007098187008 e.AM1 I• IP 871,5!, 77910 /AG 177 P� , PM 1/4-19 &MPT(D'As K6.1 1 077E CON OF 774r 7.80718151 7/4 or 513. 20. BASIS OF BEARINGS 2 1 Jr s'., 1/44-46`4 81490400 510140 HEREON ARE 84570 ow at Stunt IAC D• 58811 77, 7. 777, R. 2 7, 5877 PER 7(ICI 25619-1 AS ROD 01 9897 224 LAWS 6J 77870709 74 RMO5WW RECORDS OF WNW( COMM 7701888 4900 t 081701• w. SURVEYORS NOTES 845,507 0(49055 (525(50' ADI MR 711/63.44) (N4nYoJt49 «223)077) • 4 CITY 1001 UNE (17250.477) 7 OF S SHUTS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT NOTE.' TRAINT SHUT AMMO MI5 IS ON 1115CON5IN 7573 ORICEE OF INE CITY ENCOIE08 Orr Of MAMMA, w C.C.S. 8007 1. RACE 213 71115 AFFEC75 ALL C075. x•00 36i 070 977 61/70-41 113 l/0 2 17.- 0/477 3437 110 00 72: 069 RS 67/70 -II par) M 2' 10.• 7 5 3/93 !75 ...plat 6: PER SSI/10-11 7 %4rI g55## kill re A/ i 1 1 . 4 1 YpPlitt- 41.1 �E /��� •� &(0141 4,73, 71ti) I 1 I TRACT NO. 29353- 70.8 1334 / 21-24 777 -"`__1_�- . -- --- fn11/P W. Ma f..4NG $17 �_ .P I • A 4' POGO PoSS SW P: WOO* 474 el/a) 177(0.09' R /v 7/47-147.1 e I `J. S aR RAI 1/44-4R KCYPIID AS ((er6'a9"Nh) .3477 r I INE E 4/14 Or W NW Nf I/4 ..-307.-47.-.7_."-UX _'d� -II.0L-..r. =''R'W1,-_-.70:-...r....-_,.'," //�N.u7 or see 20. r s 5.790 TAG 70 Of sr/ 777 1 I/f• 4r _!0. I• rf 1 i i i �•7••i � - PER 4 79.04-4. MD .(774/71_74 87//77y,4 4134. Wi ; 7/4771 17(14 7177 1 7 3 / O /IU9( PER R5 01/40 FLUS, NR /• 1 PIA 17197 P119/106/24 4 i i � /7/1 1 1 4 MONUMENT NOTES 7- - 70 13049 /7 1770 975/J5 MI 10838 ,6//' 2 ' 7711/44-46 0T IR. 1•4.. 7/R6z 12116 IAA RUSH 0.16' 53045207 Off UR: PER RS 67/70-11. -.-.I , 855/d2...!lIYYY /.1 Oj RI2•D.WAS 248787.. EN„OH Jr. P1RR281/10-11. .s AZ_ _.;-•--. 44 Oj 103/4•77, 80368 UP 6:LDIr es2' wrier); NO RIM.. 077 IDT AL'W7 O 00 1 • I? WAS 1667 870 7477. MAK PER RS 61/10-11. O ID 1.W. 7A5 5607 478 84 /Vet PER R5 61/40-14. 27: '-g RR ID 1. 87 INN IS 2482 077 11[0I' SYR 447137 73619-7. MS 7711/6) 74, 4£100/1747 440 RS. 61 r0-41. OF (70swam 30 A 706757 Cg 714.00 I OE 781(7 MOANS 25.801 A005 (650055) 77 '401414747 3867 (Ob75 94487 et am 071 or wows .NO 016110.004 J517 We Cr Dud 0R 141SLW IlOWAIOl7. M I10A Al 114) 8 FC) ON A IOW+ON b Nd4F9Y 10[ R.Y. CO. 5107 4. AU AFAR 101 00817348 AND A40E P0441T Mt 0770(00470 67. 1. 4794 NP[ 85470 LS 5390 5LT PLU5N AIM 501(877 M(55 07.79185E 8570 77w. M. sill A7 5 0 080475 517 I • 1810 P877 77106 won Ls 5390. 788E55 014[34853 80770. 8 • ROOMS (OMD 1 • (P. 188 t5 538, 71494 PER MIC7 NO 29153-7, 444 334/27-28. 40.4150 0718578.5C I07477 7. ( ) AAVL55 07980llAliAAF AND OMA Ave IRK( NO 25919-1. NO 221/63-74. 8 ( f 061/27(5 RECORD ARO uFAS4RED OM PER RS 61/10-14 890E55 070885E 0070 9 (3 )) Navas AMMO NO OVA P171 17437 Na 29.55E-4 N8 334/21-24. ANUS'S ATOMS( MOMS 70 074 004947785 9409 M 7777. 9781 08 5E7N 470.708860 PIM 776 40744 414774 .50770(78 7.07 'IAS 1NA. MESS 0020W0E WED. II, Au 4W4Y'Nrs SWIM AS i5r 987 08 517 00 47801884E RUN !4704977( 4'01977 0041PWT 4575 4 i 1 J CURIE TABLE IM . A- 0.' a: CI 77476 5090 Ie48)1 4*7 01'9539- 9600,00 35.0.712. al 01877- 23859 ,151.0.2)2, 30.00 203)1 CA I. 9 UNE TABLE M7447710M7CINN 05fter C. (14128217077 41.47L 77 f(N9873050)' 567023 4.1((8}755 (2340' ((70T3W2.7 4088 067) ,)1 (7 RN69'55.431 29.05) 40 •7»2'7 45962 077171 '4 LIS') 1 .1' _z 439. ' 9 (..Y 4 ., 1 -• I JI.j.400)t1/. 447 ({007(0 7O�A/j/i}" 75>.Nr 7»i{7l '77877) 417 )4 131 N ,_ :j114 /mugs 44 &ST•53/( r r! r7 b 9.047; 61! [ I7D, 101. ) 717 170 LIP (Mr48DJT Ie.4P J0 A» 109,357) f(M!_NA .7'JJ 4 9) : 127 A8V7<41 .1,;,:d. 1,. p._ LN - 79!E.7i J2.. ffNRr32»lf 773 (4707.87794---.112'.5P7511 EASEMENT NOTES.: AN 4SCIANI 71 7.0.49 Of R0CIANNO AASAAC04 67047 7 (NR't1•M dM IW70 8(5. 07C, AND A9(81 WA uC FOR SEWN TAM 7704017 8'770101 0(1540(8 17. 2001 As 85744071 770. 01-61701, CVIICaL ATOMS OF 07.78/700E alum 447177000. © N, (45(47178 IN 74477 ? Or 0(050077 AMMAN TORS 01 CAL0O0NIA REONMIf 7.(5. AOC.. 4700 859477 fist 716 (6d vorm7R 4740 UADSPMn40 RE(OROEO 017748E0 (2, 2004 45 01779450(717 700. 01-647414 0117701 RECORDS Or 037995106 /7770(0173 8 . 4412•040 44 AN FASEMEN1 04 FARM OF 04500940 80774 OF 4'000400 newton 160 MC., AIN 479.7' MSL 113 FOR 517177 AND 474477590E 70 O(0(U3 1106(RIY 0840.40(0 0(47 004 72. 2007 As 645998671 NO 07-677484 0477487 17(60705 OF 84345003 (04372•, 40641674 4 A P(ARTUAL NR OR WOW 747944707 504 371675 REFERRED 10 AS ANOA6O'1 ROOS 01 AND 70 INC NR SPACE AVOW 7.05( 004147'945 0r PAR7731747 PLANES OR wilceNAR7 $0809335 DNI OKRU( 5R0 LAND AND 07.7P CMN. AS PAJAMA 9 AN 0057717747307 1!VOWED APAR 2a 8KR9Of COUNTY, 2003 AS 445 70 78677 7 N0. 200.3-299715. ORV AL RECORDS OF .7 A 847007 (47570101 N (47707 0' 5974 410475 LWOW PARTNIRSTIP. A 4474704441087(47 MR/A7R907! 4740 AS4*Y Ost (tC MR 441455 (ASIANS AO 37*007 «3070(0 LOY 2a 2001.48ea171P777 eV 20577-3483445 04773441 80C9005 OF 86(4507 304*15 08704677 NCINm 144 oeN Item No. 14 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Greg Butler, Director of Public Works/City Engineer DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Substitute Agreements and Bonds for Public Improvements in Tract No. 29661- 4 (located southerly of the intersection of Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Pourroy Road) PREPARED BY: Mayra De La Torre, Senior Engineer Steve Charette, Associate Engineer RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council: 1. Accept substitute Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Subdivision Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds as security for improvements and labor and materials for Tract Map 29661-4; 2. Accept substitute Subdivision Monument Agreement and Subdivision Monument Bond as security for monumentation for Tract Map 29661-4; 3. Authorize the release of the existing Faithful Performance, Labor and Materials, and Monumentation Bonds for Tract Map 29661-4; 4. Direct the City Clerk to so advise the developer and surety. BACKGROUND: On February 10, 2004, the City Council approved Tract Map No. 29661-4 and entered into Subdivision Improvement Agreements with Griffin Communities. The original subdivider has recently sold the project to Standard Pacific Corporation. Standard Pacific has submitted substitute bonds and agreements. The following lists existing securities and agreements secured by Griffin Communities and posted by the Developers Surety & Indemnity Company to be released: 1) Faithful Performance Bond No. 828665S in the amount of $856,500 2) Labor and Materials Bond No. 828665S in the amount of $428,250 3) Monumentation Bond No. 828355S in the amount of $12,960 Original Bond Company: Developers Surety & Indemnity Company P.O. Box 19725 Irvine, CA 92623 Attn: Janet Pimental Accompanying the agreements, submitted by the new owner, Standard Pacific Corporation, are the following substitute bonds posted by International Fidelity Insurance Company (note the dollar amounts have been adjusted to reflect the new CPI): 1) Faithful Performance Bond No. 0585128 in the amount of $2,014,500 2) Labor and Materials Bond No. 0585128 in the amount of $1,007,250 3) Monumentation Bond No. 0585129 in the amount of $19,800 The original agreements (Subdivision Improvement Agreement and the Subdivision Monument Agreement) and bonds (Faithful Performance, Labor and Material and the Monument Bonds) for TM29661-4 are available for review in the office of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit - Index Map for Tract Map No. 29661-4 )\; 500 0 Scale 1 " - 300 ' 900 OD 8)7050 OAP IMS9 If 94/0.6 4454 700 011194 PER Me 31W36-29 94 RS 74/46-50 t 068 334/2,24 10 re. IMIS WV 151111,1 Mt 71� -74 MAC+ 400MOM 402560/-/ .033194 COMM OX sremin-JS 60 COMO CRpfLLOlyd�46.30 . �ENro00 q.6 CPS 5390 101I' 98 MKT n . t • 89 334/77 (74430' IA7 701 PIR AS 71 46-50 _U691(3!' O 1D. I. IP /1.6 X696. /MTA / PER RS 24/46-50.1; 101.W/71�39�� Ili 5•, tr4K • IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CAUFORN/A TRACT NO. 29661-4 BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 6 OF TRACT NO. 29353-1. AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 334 OF MAPS, PAGES 21 THROUGH 24, INCLUSIVE, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. adkan ENOINEER9 RIVERSTO0. CA BOUNDARY CONTROL TRACT N0. 15619-1 M B. 721/63-74 LOT 19 OCTOBER 2002 0909:4DON Or 1900(10 NOT 5001005 8010 (LOT A') UNINCORPORATED , TERRITORY OF RI'ERSIOE COUNTY BY 1R6(7 NO. 18753-7. MB 374/72-61. 0 /kS22:0,E7.(A3 8195 Or BEARMCS .• 1 � \ (y2049,31 R 1LB. 213Y0g 11 (A•KJ777710 [(62 0371 CRY LAO! LRE � 0(0250.9)%) 5M14 2 Of 4 541(15 ENWRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT NOTE ENNRm9ENME CON 004711 500(1 AITEC7716 RIS AMP 6 011 140E 40 DE 077107 Of INC CITY 111000(7; 0n Of TEMfC01A 01 E.C.S. BOOK T, PACE 274. FIRS AFFECTS ALL 0095. LC' OR KePOPRS 61,10. II / I- r0 12; PER 10, PAS 0104-77 R✓ ON Ir, PER 40.5 a/+o-II (14.007 /R r LP_ RA/45 3961 190 .bA.6;MR 56/1x11 fl TRACT N0. 29353-1 M.8. 334/21-24 996y1-�7 tt \054 •8 7D r P ANN LS 5497 744 OR 4; 40 6E'r: N 11(j1 Or - I. (P. I1/14CE 11114 MA Pt* 7 PAL C 1/44:41XCCm7E0.AS11-9766 SEC COR 07 NE 711F17M(54 I/4 Or SEC 20. as- _ w _ _ fliitstO-Pc_ r_ -ray " ((l1fe�J6:f0M 3320.9)')) SIJ POR 2 . (OM6'J6'461Y SMILE 4 by me 0'6/34-35 Pm.' l/u- Pull 26/14- J5 i t PDR. 2 P1161 44POR . 46 I3l 9500 26/34-J5 C31R4v CP(N 9,..Q ARE. 1*907 Na *157- , RI .434/7I-24 POR J / POR, J 2 PM 6791 31 Bads OF BEARINGS i 0 1/44 46'• 8(744090 9001114 140101148 995E0 ON OK SOON IRE 0< SWOON 17. 0 7 0. R. 2 R. 5611, PER MC/ 25619-1 09 0909 N 0307 221. PAGES 63 77(009894 r4, 0047,67114 0T40085 0' 0647600 00140D; 07180589 6(946 9 0r)703r R. SURVEYOR'S NOTES 7. DIS MLC' MIMS 1E425 ACRES (4055). 2. ~WE 0(50007215 509410 K 9591 TREE 9' MAWS Ale 08577480506 J RI Noir tor [OWNS ARE 09415451718 0' A IOW PUO t 1AC155390 SET (/09 O' 170 aY /IK PROIQN117 (' 40. 540tAM 41 0345 t EC'S ON A IM0 RAMI M P IA'C ( i7 4 Au MAR 101 (6110(65 NO ANGEL' PON7S AM LIMNY11710 er A 1' ION off 140000 45 5.700 SET 71050MN 1*01010 90.1105 017404.8 14)1(0. (00 CO 570. T7 6 0 '984750 511 1' 110v APC. 011614 MIN LS 5390. 701455 011.1015E 10000. 0.. • ROOMS 1000 07 IP. ION 45 578)1 MAO( POP MACE 140 29353-7, MB 34/71-24. WOOS 00889150 Aorta Mats ACCORD AIR 19091110 OVA PR MCT Na 25619-L 116 227/03-74, 104055 071461150 140100. 601036 MEMO AAO R EANN(0 9474 PER RS 61/10.11. MESS 01,70661 Iola 44304110 MCAD 000 4849840 OL19 Ma 1/90110. 29353-1, RB 3!4/21-24 MISS 00(9941 N0l(0. la (( ))60Ramo M0/�1(A9Nt0 ORA 9MGT 01 NO 29664-5MUSS I• y_ 9 l� 11 ALL 06(64015 Po9M 45 357' 54111 M SET M 000000740( MN Oe MLWIN1MANON 000(0905 108 On 19414 MESS 00610745E I0700 12 AIL WANARO15 9001 A5 Vt. 944 Of srr .IOLORCANGY Y,9( 4001950( COW, 00(084 IBIS. IJ. Zi/_44 90944405 0(5,0(710 0010(55' 7. ( ) 6 ( 1 9. (( 11 4 LINE TABLE tri s A.CORM Mimi rte. (( 0>o0.1.1 tra q. limirmigiol [FI•TR •t�.�ta%rSS�0 ,,,j YT A -'g7, rem AI res•MI(, 1. 4734.40 3 3 193- : m -756-6? 11401 0- C Ir.I J6 01210111 rt r-. -- NDslss ,- „(N0ro961 0041 Jr 97 r(I (' 20'. 61'4 �[(( 110 )I [001 ainG. !9005')•11 ® 45..00 I [®l r. • Egon IMMO f(rC alarm [IJii)11 ur71( -. 4y0 rano 30000,4) ----T ^ YID GA (N JO PER 14561/10-11 _------ ; �i 11 -_- . JO fa J/4'.? NO GA IN 8; 8040 151' N1818031'. M AEF- LID MDI 001(017 /O la I' P, R/15 5697 0,90 140. '111947 PER RS 81/10-11. O ID I' i. 7/05 5697 MRO. 4010 RfpN. PEN R5 81/10-10. dr RR R,S f1 - 0.160911 NM or TRACT N0. 29353-1 MB. 334/21-24 I 7 1110 L J $ 17�. SII=54'1 •[¢i ye _(610.37 ACCESS ANO 0IIUIY EASEMENTe0,1)1L PE65.t;l1MSIRIIENE 1296- r0. 0 I/1 ITP ra 1• V PM .4-161 8 r I r. 1E7yJJ' w/L.S 0736 LAC 000010 73178 TAC r 17 J U, i i 0 547.577 /Fv94 904)10 49/.2 7 47'99 j i _ PM 17197, 1043/706/94 1 1 T I/ MONUM 'NT NOTES r 2 r • ' MP 71049 , 1"M8 9,/35 PM 10638 ,17/7 7 „' PIM 1/4,1-46 O ID I' P, 94/ROr 12776 100 400711 0.18' 55045'309 On L4[ PER RS 61/10-11 I . PMB 55/1290" O 2 TO 2' P, ► S WU . . .A; AA TO r' 8' 80IN 12 3465 IAC. /44584 PER 14001.25610-7, MQ 721/67-71, RS 006/57.57 A50 RS 41/70_11, 00000790 AS 11)7 001118457 (OW* (Y' SEC7*4 10 19 1 1/4' m NO IAA SET N 4' x 4' 7000 0057,, IAP 8: PQ PAL 1/48-46 ACCEPTE0 AS OE E 1/16 COR. OF 796E NE 1/4 00 SEC 20, L.S. 6390 TAO 10 fit SET PER 040107 10363-1, Mg 3.74/21-21 CURVE TABLE ( s A.CORM (( 0>o0.1.1 .. W �). C('..T. I •7). (Irl •1 66003- 3003 0/ 1. 4734.40 3 3 193- : m -756-6? 11401 0- C Ir.I J6 1r� 4305' 07 10500 2.759,49.:7!74) 100000 0041 Jr 97 ty II (' 20'. 61'4 015 «03!519- 1600.00 JASj EASEMENT NOTES: AN EA50RENr N FAVOR 0E NONCOM AMRNOW ROANS OF 01040040Oµ MOHAIR( RES, INC., ANO 49OY 064 (0c TOR sorra fACIonES/ACREEOENT M0000E0 505010F9 12. 2000 45 155181e8091 NO 01-617467, 0008940 0!000)15 OF 100240510E COIRRt 047706744 4 AR EASONOV' N !NOR Of NOON:WO 074940001 11908' 07 )1010%40( Meow *7 IES MC.. Ale 05880 0507 110 TOR 4001AARN75 ANO 4AN05(40940 RECORDED 905090E8 72. 2007 AS 07594031947 00 01-017483. 00770441 RECORDS OF 409414050E Mary. (1700014 ® All GISEMOIT N FAWN Or 94094740940 AgIES Of (4165RRM 0001497 /3"5 RM N0.45.131Y 054 uC fm 598(1 ANO ACRE114N7 10 0(08011 00099677 9(7000(0 0(0010708 72, 2001 .45 0051402447 940. 01-617484, 0714041 4(00105 OF '040950( COUNTY. 0004-001494 .. A 9(RMIMI AM OR 91CNI (45011NT SCAK71005 40(71409410 10 AS 47141094 ROM *NW 40 or 403 9105E 4004► NOSE Amon's 0( AMMAN, RAAM(S OR 0MOY(NPY 994!79.(5 MAI OMEME SRO IN0 AMO OROS. (Ma Af PR034000 M Al 847117A4071 0r0440r0 ARRA 26 360; 145 74519409(11 Na 7003-2)7195 071700140100035 Of &RO9/X Mart04 X00.174 5. A WARTY (45061147 IN IRMOR Or 40(030(94 RANCH 700. CP„ A 04,128047 MINTED 45606IP5494. AIN ASHY 054 IAC TOt ACCESS (A5EREN1 AOt(ELK 01 40(0001(0 9947 27, 1003 AS 94.,579414740 090. 206E-300398 69+13P.L 874505 OF 19070549' 0(718)45) (11100114 VICINITY MIP Item No. 15 • • ORDINANCE NO. 13-02 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING SECTION 10.28.010(D) OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS ON CERTAIN STREETS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 10.28.010(D) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows to modify the declared prima facie speed limits only on the following streets: Name of Street And Portion Affected Declared Prima Facie Speed Limit Miles Per Hour Anza Road Peppercorn Drive to Drymen Avenue 40 Business Park Drive Diaz Road to Rancho California Road 35 Date Street Ynez Road to Lakeview Road 50 Date Street Lakeview Road to East City Limits 45 De Portola Road Jedediah Smith Road to East City Limits 45 Deer Hollow Way Pechanga Parkway to Peppercorn Drive 45 Margarita Road North City Limits to De Portola Road 45 Margarita Road De Portola Road to Temecula Parkway 35 Nicolas Road Winchester Road to Calle Girasol 45 Ords 13-02 1 Old Town Front Street Santiago Road to Temecula Parkway 40 Overland Drive Commerce Center Drive to Jefferson Avenue 35 Overland Drive Jefferson Avenue to Margarita Road 40 Pauba Road Ynez Road to La Primavera Street 40 Pauba Road La Primavera Street to Via Rami 45 Pauba Road Via Rami to Butterfield Stage Road 50 Rainbow Canyon Road Pechanga Parkway to South City Limits 40 Wolf Valley Road Pechanga Parkway to Redhawk Parkway 45 Section 2. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance. Section 3. The City Council shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] Ords 13-02 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 13-02 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the 12th day of February, 2013, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26th day of February, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Ords 13-02 3 TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT Item No. 16 ACTION MINUTES of February 12, 2013 City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING The Temecula Community Services District Meeting convened at 8:16 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: President Jeff Comerchero ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Edwards, Naggar, Roberts, Washington, Comerchero CSD PUBLIC COMMENTS None. CSD CONSENT CALENDAR Ernie White addressed the Temecula Community Services District on Consent Calendar Item No. 18. 17 Action Minutes — Approved staff recommendation (4-0-1, Director Washington • abstained) Director Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Director Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval, with Director Washington abstaining. • RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Approve the action minutes of January 22, 2013. 18 Approval of Fiscal Year 2012-13 Mid -Year Budget Adjustments — Approved staff recommendation (5-0-0) Director Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Director Edwards; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. CSD 13-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2012-13 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGETS CSD Action Minutes 021213 1 19 Approval of Plans and Specification and Authorization to Solicit Construction Bids for the Great Oak High School Tennis Court Lighting Project, PW12-03 — Approved staff recommendation (4-0-1, Director Naggar abstained) Director Naggar made the motion; it was seconded by Director Edwards; and electronic vote reflected approval with Director Naggar abstaining. RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Approve the plans and specifications and authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit construction bids for the Great Oak High School Tennis Court Lighting Project, PW12-03. CSD DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT CSD GENERAL MANAGER REPORT CSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS CSD ADJOURNMENT At 8:21 P.M., the Community Services District was formally adjourned to Tuesday, February 26, 2013, at 5:30 PM, for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. Jeff Comerchero, President ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/District Secretary [SEAL] CSD Action Minutes 021213 1 SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Item No. 17 ACTION MINUTES of February 12, 2012 City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING The Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency convened at 8:22 P.M. CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Mike Naggar ROLL CALL: DIRECTORS: Comerchero, Edwards, Roberts, Washington, Naggar SARDA PUBLIC COMMENTS None. SARDA CONSENT CALENDAR Ernie White addressed the Board on Consent Calendar Item No. 21. 20 Action Minutes — Approved staff recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made Director Washington; it was seconded by Director Roberts; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Approve the action minutes of December 11, 2012. 21 Transfer of all housing assets from the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency to the City of Temecula as Successor Housing Agency pursuant to ABX1 26 and AB 1484 — Approved staff recommendation (5-0-0) The motion was made Director Washington; it was seconded by Director Roberts; and electronic vote reflected unanimous approval. 21.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 13-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TRANSFERRING ALL HOUSING ASSETS LISTED ON THE HOUSING ASSET LIST TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA AS HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY PURSUANT TO ABX1 26 AND AB 1484 1 SARDAAction Minutes 021213 SARDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT SARDA BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS SARDA ADJOURNMENT At 8:26 P.M., the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency meeting was formally adjourned to February 26, 2013, at 5:30 P.M., for a Closed Session, with regular session commencing at 7:00 PM., City Council Chambers, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California. ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/Board Secretary [SEAL] 2 SARDAAction Minutes 021213 Chuck Washington, Chairperson Item No. 18 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City Manager GioL THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA REPORT TO: Executive Director/Board of Directors FROM: Patrick Richardson, Director of Community Development DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: Recognized Obligation Payment Schedules for the period of July 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 (ROPS13-14A) PREPARED BY: Luke Watson, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING A RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2013 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013 PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 34177 AND TAKING CERTAIN ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34177(1)(2)(B), successor agencies are required to prepare in advance a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) that is forward looking for six months and covering the periods of July 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. The ROPS lists all of the Successor Agency's financial obligations. The Successor Agency is required to submit this ROPS to the State Department of Finance and the County Auditor Controller no later than March 3, 2013. Preparation of a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule is in furtherance of allowing the Successor Agency to pay enforceable obligations of the former Redevelopment Agency. FISCAL IMPACT: Adoption of the proposed resolution will enable the Successor Agency to fulfill its enforceable obligations. In accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 34173(e), the liability of the Successor Agency, acting pursuant to the powers granted under Part 1.85, shall be limited to the extent of, and payable solely from, the total sum of property tax revenues it receives pursuant to Part 1.85 and the value of assets transferred to it as a successor agency for a dissolved redevelopment agency. The debts, assets, liabilities, and obligations of the Successor Agency shall be solely the debts, assets, liabilities, and obligations of the Successor Agency and not of the City. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. SARDA 13- 2. Exhibit A - Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule for the periods of July 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 (ROPS 13-14A) RESOLUTION NO. SARDA 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING A RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 2013 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013 PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 34177 AND TAKING CERTAIN ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. The Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula was a redevelopment agency in the City of Temecula, duly created pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law, Part 1, commencing with Section 33000, of Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code (hereafter the "Temecula Redevelopment Agency"). On June 12, 1988, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside adopted Ordinance No. 658 adopting and approving the "Redevelopment Plan for Riverside County Redevelopment Project No. 1988-1." On December 1, 1989, the City of Temecula was incorporated. The boundaries of the Project Area described in the Plan are entirely within the boundaries of the City of Temecula. On April 9, 1991, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted Ordinances Nos. 91-08, 91-11, 91-14, and 91- 15 establishing the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula and transferring jurisdiction over the Plan from the County to the City. Pursuant to Ordinance Nos. 91- 11 and 91-15, the City of Temecula and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula assumed jurisdiction over the Plan as of July 1, 1991. The Plan has been amended by Ordinance Nos. 94-33, 06-11 and 07-20 adopted by the City Council. The Agency duly adopted its Implementation Plan for 2010-2014 on December 8, 2009 in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33490. B. The City Council of the City of Temecula adopted Resolution No. 12-02 January 10, 2012, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34173 and applicable law electing for the City to serve as the Successor Agency for the Temecula Redevelopment Agency upon the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula. The City Council of the City of Temecula, Acting as the Governing Body for the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, adopted Resolution No. 12-01 on February 28, 2012 declaring the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency duly constituted pursuant to law and establishing rules and regulations for the operation of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency"). C. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34175(b) and the California Supreme Court's decision in California Redevelopment Association, et al. v. Ana Matosantos, et al. (53 Ca1.4th 231(2011)), on February 1, 2012, all assets, properties, contracts, leases, books and records, buildings, and equipment of the former Temecula Redevelopment Agency transferred to the control of the Successor Agency by operation of law. D. The City Council of the City of Temecula (the "City") adopted Resolution No. 12-02 January 10, 2012, pursuant to Part 1.85 electing for the City to serve as the successor agency for the Temecula Redevelopment Agency upon the Agency's dissolution. E. The City Council of the City of Temecula, Acting as the Governing Body for the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency adopted Resolution No. 12-01 on February 28, 2012 declaring the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency duly constituted pursuant to law and establishing rules and regulations for the operation of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency"). F. Health and Safety Code Section 34177(1), as modified by the California Supreme Court, provides that by March 1, 2012, the Successor Agency must prepare a draft initial Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the enforceable obligations of the former Redevelopment Agency, in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (1). The draft schedule must be reviewed and certified, as to its accuracy, by an external auditor designated at the county auditor -controller's direction pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34182. The certified Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule must be submitted to and approved by the oversight board. Finally, after approval by the oversight board, a copy of the approved Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule must be submitted to the county auditor -controller, the State Controller and the State Department of Finance ("DOF"), and be posted on the Successor Agency's web site. G. Accordingly, the Board desires to adopt this Resolution approving the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the periods of July 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 in accordance with Part 1.85. Section 2. This Resolution is adopted pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34177. Section 3. The Board hereby approves the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the periods of July 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 substantially in the form attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution and incorporated herein by reference (the "ROPS"). The Executive Director of the Successor Agency, in consultation with the Successor Agency's legal counsel, may modify the ROPS as the Executive Director or the Successor Agency's legal counsel deems necessary or advisable. Section 4. The Board hereby designates the Chief Financial Officer as the official to whom the DOF may make requests for review in connection with the ROPS and who shall provide the DOF with the telephone number and e-mail contact information for the purpose of communicating with the DOF. Section 5. Staff is hereby authorized and directed to post a copy of the Oversight Board -approved ROPS 13-14A on the Successor Agency's Internet Website (being a page on the Internet website of the City of Temecula). Section 6. The officers and staff of the Successor Agency are hereby authorized and directed, jointly and severally, to do any and all things which they may deem necessary or advisable to effectuate this Resolution, including submitting the certified Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule to the oversight board for approval and requesting additional review by the DOF and an opportunity to meet and confer on any disputed items, and any such actions previously taken by such officers are hereby ratified and confirmed. Section 7. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency this 26th day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Chairperson ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/Board Secretary [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk/Board Secretary of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. SARDA 13- was duly and regularly adopted by the Board Members of the Successor Agency to the Temecula Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26th day of February, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: BOARD MEMBERS: NOES: BOARD MEMBERS: ABSENT: BOARD MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: BOARD MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk/Board Secretary SUMMARY OF RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE Filed for the July 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013 Period Name of Successor Agency: TEMECULA (RIVERSIDE) Outstanding Debt or Obligation Total Total Outstanding Debt or Obligation $186,493,164 Current Period Outstanding Debt or Obligation Six -Month Total A Available Revenues Other Than Anticipated RPTTF Funding B Enforceable Obligations Funded with RPTTF C Administrative Allowance Funded with RPTTF D Total RPTTF Funded (B + C = D) E Total Current Period Outstanding Debt or Obligation (A + B + C = E) Should be same amount as ROPS form six-month total F Enter Total Six -Month Anticipated RPTTF Funding G Variance (F - D = G) Maximum RPTTF Allowable should not exceed Total Anticipated RPTTF Funding Prior Period (July 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012) Estimated vs. Actual Payments (as required in HSC section 34186 (a)) $680,000 $4,080,357 $125,000 $4,205,357 $4,885,357 $4,205,357 ($0) H Enter Estimated Obligations Funded by RPTTF (lesser of Finance's approved RPTTF amount including admin allowance or the actual amount distributed) I Enter Actual Obligations Paid with RPTTF J Enter Actual Administrative Expenses Paid with RPTTF K Adjustment to Redevelopment Obligation Retirement Fund (H - (I +J) = K) L Adjustment to RPTTF (D - K = L) Certification of Oversight Board Chairman: $3,920,383 $4,580,486 $125,000 so $4,205,357 Pursuant to Section 34177(m) of the Health and Safety code, Name Title I hereby certify that the above is a true and accurate Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule for the above named agency. /s/ Signature Date Oversight Board Approval Date: TEMECULA (RIVERSIDE) RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE (ROPS 13-14A) July 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 Item 8 Project Name / Debt Obligation Contract/Agreement Execution Date Contract/Agreement Termination Date Payee Description/Project Scope Project Area Total Outstanding Debt or Obligation Total Due During Fiscal Year 2013-14 Funding Source Bond Proceeds Reserve Balance Admin Allowance RPTTF Other Six -Month Total 5186,493,164 $9,246,210 50 5680,000 $125,000 $4,080,357 50 $4,885,357 1 Trustee Admin Fees 4/24/2002 6/30/2013 US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Trustee Fees for TAB Bond Issues No 1-1988 16,000 16,000 0 0 0 8,000 0 8,000 2 Abbott OPA 2/12/2002 2/12/2021 Abbott Vascular Property Tax Reimbursment No 1-1988 1,517,518 128,503 0 0 0 128,503 0 128,503 3 Abbott OPA 2/12/2002 2/12/2021 Abbott Vascular Reimbursement for Development Improvements No 1-1988 750,000 750,000 0 0 0 173,148 0 173,148 4 SERAF Payment Reimbursment 5/10/2011 Low -Mod Housing Fund Loan of Low Mod to Redeye. Fund for SERAF No 1-1988 5,250,954 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Temecula Gardens L.P Loan Agreement 7/1/1998 7/1/2027 Temecula Gardens LP. Loan for Affordable Housing No 1-1988 4,575,000 305,000 0 0 0 305,000 0 305,000 6 2002 TAB FY 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) 4/24/2002 7/28/2005 US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Redevelopment Activities No 1-1988 42,194,237 1,770,097 0 500,000 0 663,543 0 1,163,543 7 2006 TAB Series A FY 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) 12/1/2006 7/30/2005 US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Redevelopment Activities No 1-1988 29,229,221 994,936 0 180,000 0 462,818 0 642,818 8 2006 TAB Series B FY 2012/13 Debt Service 12/1/2006 7/30/2005 US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Redevelopment Activities No 1-1988 5,114,879 199,963 0 0 0 130,619 0 130,619 9 2007 TAB FY 2012/13 Debt Service 10/17/2007 7/30/2005 US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Redevelopment Activities No 1-1988 28,104,360 1,092,056 0 0 0 694,432 0 694,432 10 2010 Housing TAB Series A & 8 FY 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) 2/24/2010 7/31/2005 US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Affordable Housing No 1-1988 30,524,776 1,256,595 0 0 0 760,247 0 760,247 11 2011 Housing TAB Fiscal Year 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) 3/1/2011 7/31/2005 US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Affordable Housing No 1-1988 37,788,253 1,305,094 0 0 0 754,047 0 754,047 12 AMCAL Pujol Fund L.P. OPA 2/22/2011 2/23/2066 AMCAL Pujol Fund, LP. Grant for construction of Affordable Housing No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 Old Town Infrastructure Projects 7/29/2005 RBF / Pardell / LH Engineering / Edge Old Town Infrastructure Improvements No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 Promenade Parking Garage OPA 7/24/2007 7/29/2005 Forrest City Loan for Public Parking Garage No 1-1989 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Professional Services Agreement 3/22/2011 6/30/2013 Environmental Science Associates Jefferson Corridor Specific Plan EIR No 1-1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 Professional Services Agreement 3/22/2011 6/30/2013 Inland Planning & Design Jefferson Corridor Specific Plan No 1-1992 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 CSUSM Campus Funding Agreement 11/24/2009 11/24/2019 Cal State San Marcos Satellite Campus Development No 1-1994 97,704 97,704 0 0 0 0 0 18 Summerhouse Housing Associates, L.P., OPA 9/22/2009 9/22/2064 Summerhouse Housing Associates, L.P. Loan for Affordable Housing No 1-1995 1,080,262 1,080,262 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 3rd and Front OPA 2/22/2011 2/22/2066 Front Street Plaza Partners LLC Loan for Affordable Housing No 1-1996 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 20 Agency Administration 7/1/2012 6/30/2013 Multiple Payees Agency Staff Compensation / Agency Admin No 1-1997 250,000 250,000 0 0 125,000 0 0 125,000 0 0 0 0 TEMECULA (RIVERSIDE) Pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 34186 (a) PRIOR PERIOD ESTIMATED OBLIGATIONS vs. ACTUAL PAYMENTS RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE CROPS II) July 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012 Item 8 Project Name / Debt Obligation Payee Description/Project Scope Project Area IMIHF Bond Proceeds Reserve Balance Admin Allowance RPTTF Other Estimate Actual Estimate Actual Estimate Actual Estimate Actual Estimate Actual Estimate Actual 51,323,910 514,503 52,632,319 50 5471.624 5136,960 5125,000 5125,000 $7,376,363 $4,580,486 $0 50 1 Trustee Admin Fees US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Trustee Fees for TAB Bond Issues No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18,078 10,860 0 0 2 Abbott OPA Abbott Vascular Property Tax Reimbursment No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 162,737 159,716 0 0 3 Abbott OPA Abbott Vascular Reimbursement for Development Improvements No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 750,000 0 0 0 4 SERAF Payment Reimbursment Low -Mod Housing Fund Loan of Low Mod to Redeye. Fund for SERAF No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Temecula Gardens L.P Loan Agreement Temecula Gardens L.P. Loan for Affordable Housing No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 305,000 305.000 0 0 6 2002 TAB FY 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Redevelopment Activities No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,773,899 1,150,356 0 0 7 2006 TAB Series A FY 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Redevelopment Activities No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 996,137 638,318 0 0 8 2006 TAB Series B FY 2012/13 Debt Service US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Redevelopment Activities No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 126,754 126,754 0 0 9 2007 TAB FY 2012/13 Debt Service US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Redevelopment Activities No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 680,668 680,688 0 0 10 2010 Housing TAB Series A & B FY 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Affordable Housing No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,258,046 757,797 0 0 11 2011 Housing TAB Fiscal Year 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) US Bank as Trustee for Bondholders Bonds Issues to Fund Affordable Housing No 1-1988 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,305,044 750,997 0 0 12 AMCAL Pujol Fund L.P. OPA AMCAL Pujol Fund, L.P. Grant for construction of Affordable Housing No 1-1988 0 0 2,430,099 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 Old Town Infrastructure Projects RBF / Pardell / LH Engineering / Edge Old Town Infrastructure Improvements No 1-1988 0 0 182,220 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 Promenade Parking Garage OPA Forrest City Loan for Public Parking Garage No 1-1989 0 0 20,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Professional Services Agreement Environmental Science Associates Jefferson Corridor Specific Plan EIR No 1-1991 189,222 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 Professional Services Agreement Inland Planning & Design Jefferson Corridor Specific Plan No 1-1992 54,426 14,503 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 CSUSM Campus Funding Agreement Cal State San Marcos Satellite Campus Development No 1-1994 0 0 0 0 471,624 136,960 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 Summerhouse Housing Associates, L.P., OPA Summerhouse Housing Associates, L.P. Loan for Affordable Housing No 1-1995 1,080,262 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 3rd and Front OPA FYont-Street.Phu*Pe-rtnersOEC • Loan for Affordable Housing No 1-1996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 Agency Administration Multiple Payees Agency Staff Compensation / Agency Admin No 1-1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 125,000 125,000 0 0 0 0 TEMECULA (RIVERSIDE) RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE (ROPS 13-14A) -- Notes (Optional) July 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 Item # Project Name / Debt Obligation Notes/Comments 1 Trustee Admin Fees 2 Abbott OPA 3 Abbott OPA 4 SERAF Payment Reimbursment 5 Temecula Gardens L.P Loan Agreement 6 2002 TAB FY 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) 7 8 2006 TAB Series A FY 2012/13 Debt Service l(aa) 2006 TAB Series B FY 2012/13 Debt Service ` 9 2007 TAB FY 2012/13 Debt Service 10 (Debt 2010 Housing TAB Series A & B FY 2012/13 Service (aa) f 11 12 2011 Housing TAB Fiscal Year 2012/13 Debt Service (aa) AMCAL Pujol Fund L.P. OPA 13 Old Town Infrastructure Projects 14 Promenade Parking Garage OPA 15 Professional Services Agreement 16 Professional Services Agreement 17 CSUSM Campus Funding Agreement 18 Summerhouse Housing Associates, L.P., OPA 19 3rd and Front OPA 20 Agency Administration PUBLIC HEARING Item No. 19 Approvals City Attorney Director of Finance City ManagerOct CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager/City Council FROM: Patrick Richardson, Director of Community Development DATE: February 26, 2013 SUBJECT: A General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO -11), a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration for a 7.24 acre site, located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road (Planning Application Nos. PA12-0034 and PA12-0033) PREPARED BY: Stuart Fisk, Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H); A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -11 (PDO -11); AND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 120 APARTMENT UNITS ON 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (APN 944-060-006) 2. Introduce and read by title only an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 13 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE PLAN MAP FROM 1 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H) AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -11 (PDO -11) FOR 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA12-0034) (APN 944-060-006) 3. Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE APARTMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA12-0033) (APN 944-060-006) SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE: The proposed ordinance will amend the existing Official General Plan map on file with the City of Temecula City Clerk's office by changing the General Plan designation of the property located on 7.24 acres at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road in the City of Temecula (APN 944-060-006) from Medium Density Residential (M) to High Density Residential (H) and amends Section 17.22.220 thru 17.22.234, "Rancho Vista Village Planned Development Overlay District (PDO -11)", of the Temecula Municipal Code to amend the zoning and development standards for the property. BACKGROUND: On April 4, 2007, the City Council approved a Zone Change for the project site from Medium Density Residential (M) to Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO -11). The approved PDO -11 allows for 62 single-family residential units on condominium lots with a density of 8.4 units per acre. The proposed amendment to PDO -11 would allow for 120 multi -family apartment units on the 7.24 acre site with a density of 16.6 units per acre, and would also provide for development standards for the site that are specific to multi -family apartment units. The proposed Planned Development Overlay also requires approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan designation from Medium Density Residential (M) to High Density Residential (H), which is consistent with existing multi -family developments located directly north and west of the project site. Other General Plan designations adjoining the site include Public Institutional (PI; Vail Elementary School) and Residential Low -Medium (LM) to the east and to the south. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended 4-0 (Guerriero absent) that the City Council approve the project. At the Planning Commission hearing, Mr. Wayne Hall stated concerns regarding trash and standing water on the adjacent property to the east of the project site. Understanding that the trash and standing water issues are not linked to this project, Mr. Hall stated support for the project. A Code Enforcement case was opened to seek resolution to Mr. Hall's concerns with the adjacent property. The Code Enforcement Officer did not find trash on the property, but did contact the Vector Control division of the Riverside County Health Department. Vector Control tested the area for mosquitos and did not find evidence of them at the time of testing, but Vector Control has created a Vector Site number for the area, which places the property on rotation for future mosquito testing. 2 The City Council reviewed the proposed project at public hearing on November 13, 2012. After hearing public testimony on the project, City Council directed the applicant to redesign the site plan to include the provision of a public pedestrian/bicycle trail along the eastern edge of the property from Mira Loma Drive to Rancho Vista Road and directed staff to provide additional information in the environmental Initial Study and to recirculate the Initial Study. The City Council continued the Project to the January 22, 2013 City Council meeting. The applicant has revised the site plan to include a public pedestrian/bicycle trail along the eastern edge of the property from Mira Loma Drive to Rancho Vista Road (see attachment 10) and information has been added to the Initial Study from the Air Quality Study, MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment, Cultural Resources Report, Water Quality Management Plan, and Traffic Study prepared for the project and the Initial Study was recirculated for review from December 12, 2012 thru January 11, 2013. All of the information added to the Initial Study was derived from the existing studies for the project, with the exception of language added to the traffic section, which came from the December 6, 2012 meeting of the Pubic/Traffic Safety Commission. The Public/Traffic Safety Commission discussed school area traffic circulation at Vail Elementary School and the Commission agreed with the traffic analysis prepared for the project and did riot perceive any additional impacts to Mira Loma Drive or Vail Elementary School as a result of the project. Additionally, Jason Osborn, Director of Transportation for Temecula Valley Unified School District, concurred with the findings of the analysis and indicated that due to the close proximity of the school, children from the proposed apartments are more likely to walk to school based on existing pedestrian travel patterns for the surrounding neighborhood. On January 11, 2013, staff received a comment letter on the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project from Robert Oder's attorney, Tamar Stein of Cox, Castle, and Nicholson LLP. Ms. Stein's comment letter asserts that preparation of an EIR is mandatory for the project, that the project description in the Mitigated Negative Declaration is inadequate because it does riot include the public multi-purpose trail, that the project may cause significant hydrology and water quality impacts, that there are possible significant safety impacts to Vail Elementary School students and to vehicles and pedestrians on Mira Loma Drive, that the Land Use and Planning section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is legally inadequate, that the noise analysis of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is legally inadequate, and that the biological resources section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is legally inadequate because it does riot assess the potential impacts of the public multi-purpose trail. On January 22, 2013, the applicant requested that the item be continued to provide time to respond to comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project. The City Council continued the Project to the February 26, 2013 City Council meeting. Staff worked with the consultant team for the project, including the applicant's engineers and the consultants hired by the City to prepare the environmental studies for traffic and biology. The City also contracted with RK Engineering to prepare a noise study for use in responding to Ms. Stien's comment letter. The City Attorney's office reviewed staff's response letter to Ms. Stein and the letter was both e-mailed and mailed to Ms. Stein, Robert Oder, and their consultants on February 14, 2013. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution (Mitigated Negative Declaration) 2. Ordinance (General Plan AmendmentiZone Change) Exhibit A — Planned Development Overlay 3 3. Resolution (Development Plan) Exhibit A — Draft Conditions of Approval 4. Initial Study 5. Mitigation Monitoring Program 6. Mitigation Negative Declaration Comment Letter 7. Response to Mitigated Negative Declaration Comment Letter 8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-21 (General Plan Amendment/Zone Change) 9. Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-22 (Development Plan) 10. Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-23 (Mitigated Negative Declaration) 11. Staff Report for the October 17, 2012 Planning Commission Hearing 12. Trail Exhibit RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H); A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -11 (PDO -11); AND A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT 120 APARTMENT UNITS ON 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (APN 944-060 -006) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033, Development Plan, and PA12-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay - 11 (PDO -11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033, Development Plan, and PA12-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO - 11). C. The Project was processed, including but not limited to all public notices, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code § 21000, et seq. and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, 14. Cal. Code Regs. § 15000 et seq. (collectively referred to as "CEQA") D. Pursuant to CEQA, the City is the lead agency for the Project because it is the public agency with the authority and principal responsibility for approving the Project. E. The Planning Commission, at a regular meeting, considered the Application and environmental review on October 17, 2012, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, at which time the City staff and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. F. The Planning Commission reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the October 17, 2012 public hearing and, based on the whole record before it, found that: (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. G. The City Council reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the November 13, 2012 public hearing. The City Council, at this hearing, directed the applicant to add pubic amenities in the form of a public pedestrian/bicycle trail along the eastern edge of the property and directed staff to make additions to the environmental Initial Study and to recirculate the Initial Study. The City Council continued the Project to the January 22, 2013 City Council meeting. H. A revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA") and circulated for public review from December 12, 2012, through January 11, 2013, for a 30 -day public review. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Development Services, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. I. On January 22, 2013, the applicant requested that the item be continued to provide time to respond to comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project. The City Council continued the Project to the February 26, 2013 City Council meeting. J. The City Council reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the February 26, 2013 public hearing, and makes these findings based on the whole record before it. Section 2. CEQA Findings. The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares that: A. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA), City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the approval of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Development Plan Applications, as described in the Initial Study ("the Project"). Based upon the findings contained in that study, City staff determined that there was no substantial evidence that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. B. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as required by law. The public comment period commenced on September 14, 2012, and expired on December 12, 2012. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Development Services, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. C. A revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA") and circulated for public review from December 12, 2012, through January 11, 2013, fora 30 -day public review. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Development Services, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. D. One written comment letter was received prior to the February 26, 2013 public hearing and a response to all the comments made therein was prepared, submitted to the City Council and incorporated into the administrative record of the proceedings. Section 3 Approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. A. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the February 26, 2013 public hearing, and based on the whole record before it finds that: (1) the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; (2) there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment; and (3) Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. B. The documents and analysis on which this determination is based are and have been on file in the Office of the Planning Department of the City of Temecula located at 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. C. Based on the findings set forth in the Resolution, the City Council hereby approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for this Project. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 13- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26t day of February, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 13 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE PLAN MAP FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (M) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (H), AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO REVISE THE TEXT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY -11 (PDO -11) FOR 7.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA12-0034) (APN 944- 060-006) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033, Development Plan, and PA12-0034, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay - 11 (PDO -11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033, Development Plan, and PA12-0034, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO - 11). C. The Project was processed including, but not limited to, a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. D. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA") and circulated for public review from September 14, 2012, through October 14, 2012, for a 30 -day public review. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Development Services, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. E. On October 17, 2012, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, the Planning Commission considered the Project and any comments received prior to or at the public hearing on October 17, 2012, at which time the City staff presented its report, and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration. F. Following consideration of the entire record before it at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project. G. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the entire record before the Planning Commission hearing, and after due consideration of the testimony regarding the proposed Project, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Project including Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033, Development Plan, and PA12-0034, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO -11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. H. On November 13, 2012, the City Council of the City of Temecula considered the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, at a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. The Council considered all the testimony and any comments received regarding the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the public hearing. The City Council, at this hearing, directed the applicant to add pubic amenities in the form of a public pedestrian/bicycle trail along the eastern edge of the property and directed staff to make additions to the environmental Initial Study and to recirculate the Initial Study. The City Council continued the Project to the January 22, 2013 City Council meeting. I. A revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA") and circulated for public review from December 12, 2012, through January 11, 2013, for a 30 -day public review. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Development Services, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. J. On January 22, 2013, the applicant requested that the item be continued to provide time to respond to comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project. The City Council continued the Project to the February 26, 2013 City Council meeting. K. On February 26, 2013, the City Council of the City of Temecula considered the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, at a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. The Council considered all the testimony and any comments received regarding the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the public hearing. L. Following the public hearing, the Council adopted Resolution No. 13 - adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. M. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council, in approving the Project hereby finds, determines and declares that: General Plan A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the direction, goals and policies of the adopted General Plan; This application is accompanied by a Development Plan for an apartment complex and a Zone Change to amend the existing PDO -11. The General Plan Amendment and PDO -11 Amendment establish the density and design framework for the proposed apartment complex development. The proposed design provides for a higher density, lower cost multi -family residential alternative that assists in providing for a variety of densities to accommodate existing and future housing needs in the City while enhancing the neighborhood through quality project design and appropriate scale, massing, amenities, roofline variation, and high quality and varied materials to integrate the project in to the neighborhood, thereby promoting the goals of the General Plan to provide for a diversity of housing opportunities that satisfy the physical, social, and economic needs of existing and future residents of Temecula (Housing Goal 1; Housing Policy 1.1 and 1.2), to provide a land use pattern that protects and enhances residential neighborhoods (Land Use Goal 5; Policy 5.1), and to preserve and enhance the positive qualities of individual neighborhoods (Community Design Goal 3; Policy 3.1 and 3.2). The project design is consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. B. The proposed amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area; The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have an impact on the character of the surrounding area because it has been designed to better integrate with the surrounding area, which includes High Density Residential (H) development to the north and to the west, than the previously approved design. The proposed design achieves better integration with the surrounding area through the elimination of the extensive use of retaining walls required for the single-family project and the provision of more open areas between buildings, resulting in a development that is more aesthetically compatible with its surroundings and that better integrates into the surrounding community, and through quality project design and appropriate scale, massing, amenities, roofline variation, and high quality and varied materials to integrate the project in to the neighborhood. Zone Change C. The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the land use designation in which the use is located, as shown on the Land Use Map, General Plan and Development Code. The proposed Planned Development Overlay Amendment is consistent with the proposed land use designation for the property. The proposed General Plan Amendment and PDO -11 Amendment establish the density and design framework for the proposed apartment complex development. As proposed and conditioned, the project design will be consistent with the General Plan and all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City. Section 3. The City Council hereby amends the existing General Plan on file with the City of Temecula City Clerk's office and approves the proposed amendment to Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO -11) and adopts Sections 17.22.220 through 17.22.234 including the PDO -11 Text and Development Standards in the form attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit A. Section 4. Severability. If any portion, provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance is rendered or declared to be invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining portions, provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect and shall be interpreted by the court so as to give effect to such remaining portions of the Ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. Section 6. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause it to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this day of , 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 13- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Temecula on the day of , 2013, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the day of , , the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk Rancho Vista Village City of Temecula PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY INLANE COMMLJrJm 5 CORP DEVELOPER: INLAND COMMUNITIES CORPORATION ARCHITECT: HANNOUCHE ARCHITECTS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: DAVID NEAULT & ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENGINEER: VSL ENGINEERING PR11-0023 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY TABLE OF CONTENTS 17.22.220 TITLE 3 17.22.222 PURPOSE 3 17.22.224 RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND CITYWIDE DESIGN STANDARDS 3 17.22.226 USE REGULATIONS .3 17.22.228 SUPPLEMENTAL DESIGN AND SETBACK STANDARDS 4 17.22.230 PROJECT SETTING 4 A. Setting and Location 4 B. Existing Site Conditions .4 C. Surrounding Land Uses and Development 5 17.22.232 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES 6 A. Design Style 6 B. Articulation of Design Facades 6 C. Streetscape 9 D. Massing and Scale 9 E. Roof Planes ..9 F. Walls and Fences .9 G. Lighting 11 H. Parking 12 I. Trash Enclosures 12 17.22.234 LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS 13 A. Landscape Elements 13 B. Entry Monument 15 C. Private Recreation Facility 16 12/18/2012 Page 2 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 17.22.220 TITLE Section 17.22.220 through 17.22.234 shall be known as "PDO - 11" (Rancho Vista Village Planned Development Overlay District) 17.22.222 PURPOSE The Rancho Vista Village Planned Development Overlay District (PDO -11) is intended to meet the high density Multi -Family Residential criteria contained in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Typical housing types may include townhouses, stacked dwellings and apartments with a density range of 13 — 20 du per acre. 17.22.224 RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND CITYWIDE DESIGN STANDARDS A) The permitted uses for the Rancho Vista Village Planned Development Overlay District are described in Section 17.22.226. B) Except as modified by the provisions of Section 17.22.228 the following rules and regulations shall apply to all planning applications in this area. 1. The Citywide Design Guidelines that are in effect at the time of application is deemed complete. 2. The approval requirements contained in the Development Code that are in effect at the time the application is deemed complete. 3. Any other relevant rule, regulation or standard that is in effect at the time an application is deemed complete. 17.22.226 USE REGULATIONS The Rancho Vista Village Planned Development Overlay district (PDO -11) located along Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road is intended to provide for the Multi - Family Apartment Development of 120 Units on 7.24 gross acres with a density of 16.6 du/ac. The proposed project is comprised entirely of private residential land uses designed to enhance housing opportunities, consider natural features, incorporate private and common space, private recreation and develop a common community theme. The project will provide housing opportunities consistent with the City's General Plan Policies in response to the local market demands and will 12/18/2012 Page 3 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY provide for a visually pleasing environment through adoption of supplemental performance standards that have been provided to ensure compatibility with the adjacent neighborhoods. 17.22.228 SUPPLEMENTAL DESIGN AND SETBACK STANDARDS The Multi Family component shall comply with the development standards set fourth in Table 17.22.228. Table 17.22.228 Rancho Vista Village Planned Development Overlay District Residential Development Standards PDO -11 AREA Site Acreage 7.24 gross / 6.27 net Maximum number of dwelling units per acre 20 Units per acre target 16.6 du/acre net BUILDING SETBACKS Minimum building separation 16 ft. at first floor. 18 ft. at second and third floors Minimum Front setback 20 ft. Minimum Rear setback 20 ft. Minimum Side setback 15 ft. OTHER REQUIREMENTS Maximum height 45 ft. Minimum Open space Required 25% Private open space per unit 50 sq.ft. Minimum 17.22.230 PROJECT SETTING A. Setting and Location The Rancho Vista Village Project is comprised of 7.24 gross acres located on Mira Loma Drive on the north side of Rancho Vista Road. A conservation channel runs adjacent to the eastern boundary of the project site. Mira Loma Drive is a loop road, which borders the project from the northern boundary and continues on the west. 12/18/2012 Page 4 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY B. Existing Site Conditions The property consists of vacant land with and an existing small asphalt parking lot. The elevation of the property is lower than the surrounding Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Drive. C. Surrounding Land Uses and Development A conservation channel runs along the eastern edge of the project. Vail Elementary School is located along the southeast portion of the channel. The northeast edge is bordered by single-family housing (Low -Medium Density). Located on the north and west of the project site are apartment dwellings (High Density). 12/18/2012 Page 5 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 17.22.232 ARCHITECTURAL GUIDE LINES A. Design Style The design of the project site shall comply with the City's Municipal Code Requirements (Residential performance standards — Section 17.06.070(A, C & D) and Citywide Design Guidelines). The purpose of residential architectural guidelines is to provide guidance for the development of the Rancho Vista Village Project Site. 1. Site plan elements that shall be considered to produce a great neighborhood include. a. Street Trees b. Pedestrian Connectivity c. Building Placement d. Recreation Amenities e. Open space preservation 2. Architectural elements / concepts that shall be considered to create a quality neighborhood include. a. Articulation of building forms in a horizontal and vertical plane b. Using Design elements to balance the overall building scale c. Varied roof forms and elements d. The use of various color palettes and building materials e. Building materials/design to reflect architectural styles B. Articulation of Design Facades 1. The building design shall incorporate 360 -degree architecture. The use of elements such as overhangs, trellises, and secondary building materials will be used to lend character to the building. 2. Architectural elements that add interest and character, such as arches, alcoves, balconies, and recessed windows shall be provided. 3. High quality material shall be used to create a look of permanence within the project. Variations in color and material will be used in order to create interest and reduce a monotonous appearance. 12/18/2012 Page 6 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY B. Articulation of Design Facades (cont.) 4. Color palettes will be selected per design style. Colors chosen for trim, windows, doors and architectural elements shall complement the exterior finish material. 5. Fixtures and finishes will be selected for their contribution to the overall theme of the development. 6. The selected architectural styles for this project have been determined to be: Spanish Colonial and Tuscan. SPANISH COLONIAL 'L': �'�r L'C' ` ''e'• yµ�l�ila: �EI��±A�►�,�,�Yg4:ts. i1 111WMIC4 inn — — Ittati■ ■■I ■rn� u.r 143�!I !ilk «til 1 •-sq�I4� V. STYLE ELEMENTS: • Simple stucco plaster finish with arched design elements • Balconies with metal railings • Decorative iron details on exterior elevations • Simulated wood header and corbel detailing • Wood shutters • Predominantly hip roofs with Concrete 'S' Tile Roofs • 18" Eaves • Garage door patterns to compliment the style 12/18/2012 Page 7 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY TUSCAN STYLE ELEMENTS: • Simple stucco and manufactured stone exterior finish • Balconies with metal railings • Stucco covered window plant shelves • Wood shutters • Predominately hip forms with gables at projecting elements. • 18" Eaves • 12" Rakes • Garage door pattern to complement the style. 12/18/2012 Page 8 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY C. Streetscape and Street Design The streetscape shall be designed in a manner to create a visually interesting community. Landscaping, setbacks, building orientation, recreation features with Spanish Colonial and Tuscan type building designs shall be used to avoid a monotonous appearance. Also see page 18 of this P.D.O. for street cross sections. 1. The interior street has a minimum width of 24'-0" with a clear travel width of 24'-0". This street provides circulation for the residents, emergency services and trash collection. Residents also have access to their garages and entries from the street. The design shall incorporate adequate radii and clearance for emergency vehicle access. D. Massing and Scale The use of a variety of shapes and forms including architectural projections, such as roof overhangs or stepped facades which provide contrast with vertical walls, and chimneys shall be used to avoid box -like design. Excessive mass and bulk of the roof area shall be broken up into smaller areas that reduce the apparent scale of the house and provide visual interest. This shall be accomplished by varying the height portions of the roof, varying the orientation of the roof, and by using gables, and hip roofs. E. Roof Planes Varying roof forms/changes in roof plane shall be used to minimize a flat, repetitious plane. Multiple rooflines can be used to create a visually appealing silhouette and will be considered when the building elevations are visible from a public street. F. Walls and Fences Decorative walls, yard walls, and fencing should be designed to integrate with the architectural style of the buildings as well as the landscape design. Materials and finishes will complement the project's overall theme. 1. Perimeter fencing to be vinyl post and rail type. 2. Pool fencing to be 5'-0" high tubular steel type. 12/18/2012 Page 9 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY F. Walls and Fences (cont.) Ol SPLILFACE BLOCK PILASTER ® MAIN CORNERS, COLOR TO BE TAN' O TUBULAR STEEL POST 0 8'-0" O.C. MAX. 0 TUBULAR STEEL PICKETS Q4 P.I.P. CONCRETE PILASTER CAP p5 FINISH GRADE 5' TUBULAR STEEL POOL FENCE SCALE: 2' = 1'-0" O VINYL POST Q VINYL RAILING 0 FINISH GRADE 3 RAIL VINYL FENCE SCALE: ' = l'-0" 12/18/2012 Page 10 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY G. Lighting 1. Lighting shall be consistent with the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The lighting should not be so intense that it calls attention to the project site. Timers and sensors shall be used to avoid unnecessary lighting. 2. Lighting should be low -voltage / high efficiency when possible. 3. Flashing, moving, high intensity or exposed light source type luminaries are not permitted. 4. Exterior lighting design shall address the issue of security. Parking areas, walkways and building entrances should be well lit for security and safety. 5. Exterior lighting should have a variation of fixtures and illumination levels to define the organization of streets, walkways and community facilities. 6. Neon and similar types of lighting are prohibited per Mount Palomar 7 Maximum 26 watt fluorescent lighting to be used. Minka Group 8212 -61 -PL (Garage) Minka Group 8217 -61 -PL (Entry) 12/18/2012 Page 11 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY Kim Lighting — Era Bell (Pedestrian & Parking Area) H. Parking Kim Lighting — Low Level Luminaire Parking requirements for the project site shall comply with the following: 1. Covered Parking: 1 Covered parking space for each 1 Bedroom (or less) Units and 1 Covered parking space for each 2 Bedroom Units. 2. Uncovered Parking: 0.3 uncovered parking space for 1 Bedroom (or less) Units and 0.6 uncovered parking space for 2 Bedroom Units. 3. Tandem Parking: Tandem parking is permissible. 4. Motorcycle Parking: 1 Uncovered parking space for every 25 required regular open parking spaces. 5. Guest Parking: 1 Guest parking space/8 Units. I. Trash Enclosures Trash enclosure areas should be carefully designed, located and integrated into the site plan. 12/18/2012 Page 12 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY I. Trash Enclosures (cont.) 1. Trash / recycling containers should be large enough, placed frequently enough throughout the site and collected frequently enough to handle the refuse generated. 2. Trash enclosures should be designed with similar finishes, materials and detailed as the preliminary buildings within the project and shall be screened with landscaping. TRASH ENCLOSURE 17.22.234 LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS A. Landscape Elements Landscaping of the project shall conform to Sections 17.06.060 (Residential Districts, Landscape Standards) and 17.32 (Water -efficient Landscape Design) of the City's Municipal Code. Landscape plans shall be required as part of the Development Plan for the project and shall include the following: 1. The landscape design of the project consists of a combination of water efficient, drought -tolerant plant material to reduce water demand. 12/18/2012 Page 13 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY A. Landscape Elements (cont.) 2. Streetscape landscape for the major streets, Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road shall, be planted with minimum 24" box specimen size street trees spaced at 45'-0" o.c. spacing (maximum) with combination of 15 and 5 gallon shrubs and ground cover. Fifteen -gallon hedge shrubs will be spaced to adequately provide fence type screening along the public right-of-way line. Flowering ground cover will be provided to fill any voids in the streetscape landscape. 3. Project entry at "A" Street shall include project entry wall to match architectural style of the project as well as 36" box specimen trees, minimum size evergreen flowering variety and combination of fifteen gallon, five gallon and one gallon shrubs in an interesting design pattern to provide visual interest at the entry. 4. Common Area slope shall be provided with landscape and with appropriate trees, shrubs and ground cover to provide erosion control to meet the requirements of the City's Municipal Code. All slope banks greater than or equal to 3:1 shall, at a minimum, be irrigated and landscaped with appropriate plant material for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: i. One fifteen gallon or larger tree per each six hundred square feet of slope area. ii. Five gallon or larger shrubs for each one hundred square feet of slope area. iii. Appropriate ground cover, minimum spacing of 12" o.c. from flat size container. iv. Slope banks in excess of eight feet in vertical height with slopes greater or equal to 2:1 shall also provide one five gallon or larger tree per each one thousand square feet of slope area in addition to the other requirements of this section. v. Slopes adjacent to open space to be planted with non-invasive species. vi. Drip irrigation shall be provided in all areas where spray Irrigation is not necessary. Overhead irrigation shall not be permitted within 24 inches of non -permeable surfaces. 12/18/2012 Page 14 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY A. Landscape Elements (cont.) vii. Turf areas shall be used for functional needs only and are not to be less than 8 feet wide. Subsurface drip irrigation is required where turf is within 24 inches of any non -permeable surfaces. High efficiency overhead spray is allowed behind the 24 inch wide area. B. Entry Monument The project entry and site amenities will complement one another and reflect the overall architectural theme of the project. The use of pilasters, special paving treatments and landscaping will be used to create an easily identifiable entryway. ACCENT TREE'S WOOD OVERHEAD W/ IRON SIGNAGE STONE VENEER COLUMNS SEAT WALL PROJECT SIGNAGE MONUMENT -- COLORFUL PLANTING 12/18/2012 Page 15 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY C. Private Recreation Facility The Recreation Center shall be an active facility to provide a family oriented center including the development of a child tot lot with special play equipment structure. The center shall include a recreational pool with generous pool activity area for social functions. A minimum 20 percent of the recreation area shall be landscaped with a combination of trees, shrubs and ground cover. CLUB HOUSE STYLE ELEMENTS: • Simple stucco and manufactured stone exterior finish • Wood shutters • Predominately gable roofs with hip forms at projecting elements. • 18" Eaves 12/18/2012 Page 16 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY a. SWOP, Pal PIA PP, PO,PEOPIP 1514.0 /1.1.1/OPP POOP PPP “Poal SIP Pa MIMICRY IT COOP OM r. pi MOM .,..7 ti Qprtin ;477722•317107 Pa MC .34 ((1 Cfll11At %AMI I (GEM) itltlE'.f1Y1E C4w'tlWlt mlII Year, 221 • tiw caner '6L�ld� .55.:01. a.�u` • a. wa.ror aadws Iewa. ret .sw yw. tyaenn..ar.�y OM Mr - 5 TUBO AR 5 EEL POOL FENCE 3 RAIL SCAS[ = : I. -Cr t • Hurn AC:,A tO.D _ANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN FOR: RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE INLAND COMMUNITIES SHEET 1 OF 3 OVERALL SITE PLAN 9 CITY OF TEMECULA =—=—!. RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY PROJECT SIGNAGE MONUMENT PLAN VIEW 1/8'•=1.47' Sint' SECTION AT RANCHO VISTA ROAD SM. KNEES COasis5 ict,.4444kiow. „ it A WE, Nu4 - COLWE LPLEA l PROJECT SIGNAGE MONUMENT ELEVATION 1/4"=1 f`. PICNIC AREA WRH SHELTER RECREATION FA( • LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN FOR: RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE INLAND COMMUNITIES 1- • 10,-0' RCOLFENCE OPE MAFIOSO POOL opts POOL YNIER COARSE SECTION AT STREET V 1/8._. SHEET 2 OF 3 SECTIONS. ELEVATIONS AND ENLARGEMENTS CITY OF TEMECULA RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY TYPICAL INTERIOR LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN I" = Io. 04CWRIAL PLANT LEGEND - TYPCAL INTERIOR PLANTING 1111ADIQUILAY ide.16 ISSISIDEBEDINII OM= on. Goo ......... *Mt 10•0•00C,...... cm. omo sc.. COMONOOMMIC.= =ma COW. 00.....a MM. ...0040.0.1. 0........ ABS DBE VA= 100.. =I= 10.404 0.03. 10. MM. Wow maw =Go a...4MS 10. <0610MICOL. 1.01. 0.0MIGOG .00 0.00.01,10C. nom mm. cm= m owe • • maw SIDENIALX PATIKAG STALL S TYPICAL PERIMETER SLOPE PLANTING PLAN I". 10,0" 21111•211M11 IN=16 &CM= NM fm,c.M WM. Cm. 01•1= MR= 1C. ......... =mom Gm. MG .... .......= COG .......... Om. MG ...... LEL19911=2611. IMMOMM. =ea= CAW= =I= MO. 0.00 CWOG SHEET 3 OF 3 TYPICAL PLANTING ENLARGEMENTS _ANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN FOR: RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CITY OF TEMECULA INLAND COMMUNITIES RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE APARTMENTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PA12-0033) (APN 944-060-006) Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare that: A. On February 22, 2012, John Snell, representing Inland Communities Corp, filed Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033, Development Plan, and PA12-0024, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay - 11 (PDO -11) in a manner in accord with the City of Temecula General Plan and Development Code. B. On October 17, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033, Development Plan, and PA12-0024, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO - 11). C. The Project was processed including, but not limited to a public notice, in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act. D. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA") and circulated for public review from September 14, 2012 through October 14, 2012 for a 30 -day public review. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Planning, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. E. On October 17, 2012, at a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, the Planning Commission considered the Project and any comments received prior to or at the public hearing on October 17, 2012, at which time the City staff presented its report, and interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration. F. Following consideration of the entire record before it at the public hearing and due consideration of the proposed Project the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project. G. At the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the entire record before the Planning Commission hearing, and after due consideration of the testimony regarding the proposed Project, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Project including Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033, Development Plan, and PA12-0024, a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to amend Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO -11). H. On November 13, 2012, the City Council of the City of Temecula considered the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, at a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. The Council considered all the testimony and any comments received regarding the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the public hearing. The City Council, at this hearing, directed the applicant to add public amenities in the form of a public pedestrian/bicycle trail along the eastern edge of the property and directed staff to make additions to the environmental Initial Study and to recirculate the Initial Study. The City Council continued the Project to the January 22, 2013 City Council meeting. I. A revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA") and circulated for public review from December 12, 2012, through January 11, 2013, for a 30 -day public review. Copies of the documents have been available for public review and inspection at the offices of the Department of Development Services, located at City Hall, 41000 Main Street, Temecula, California 92590. J. On January 22, 2013, the applicant requested that the item be continued to provide time to respond to comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project. The City Council continued the Project to the February 26, 2013 City Council meeting. K. On February 26, 2013, the City Council of the City of Temecula considered the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, at a duly noticed public hearing at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. The Council considered all the testimony and any comments received regarding the Project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration prior to and at the public hearing. L. Following the public hearing, the Council adopted Resolution No. 13 - adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. M. All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council in approving the Development Plan application hereby finds, determines and declares that: A. The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan for Temecula and with all applicable requirements of State law and other Ordinances of the City; The proposed Rancho Vista Village Apartments project is consistent with the land use standards contained in the proposed PDO -11 Amendment. The project is also consistent with the High Density Residential (H) land use designation contained in the General Plan. The site is properly planned and zoned, and as conditioned, is physically suitable for the type and density of residential development proposed. The project, as conditioned, is also consistent with other applicable requirements of State law and local ordinances, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Citywide Design Guidelines, and fire and building codes. B. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare; The overall design of the Rancho Vista Village Apartments, including the site, building, parking, circulation and other associated site improvements, is consistent with, and intended to protect the health and safety of those working and living in and around the site. The project has been reviewed for, and as conditioned, has been found to be consistent with all applicable policies, guidelines, standards and regulations intended to ensure that the development will be constructed and function in a manner consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare. Section 3. Conditions. The City Council of the City of Temecula approves Planning Application No. PA12-0033, Development Plan, subject to the Conditions of Approval set forth on Exhibit A, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and it shall become effective upon its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula this 26th day of February, 2013. Michael S. Naggar, Mayor ATTEST: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, Susan W. Jones, MMC, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 13- was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a meeting thereof held on the 26t day of February, 2013, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Susan W. Jones, MMC City Clerk EXHIBIT A CITY OF TEMECULA DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Planning Application No.: PA12-0033 Project Description: A Multi -family Residential Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road. Assessor's Parcel No.: 944-060-006 MSHCP Category: Residential (Greater than 14.1 DU) DIF Category: Residential — Attached TUMF Category: Residential — Multi -Family Quimby Category: Multi -Family Approval Date: February 26, 2013 Expiration Date: February 26, 2015 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Within 48 Hours of the Approval of This Project PL -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 Two Thousand Two Hundred Six Dollars and Twenty -Five Cents ($2,206.25) which includes the Two Thousand One Hundred Fifty -Six Dollars and Twenty -Five Cents ($2,156.25) fee, required by Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(d)(3) plus the Fifty Dollars ($50.00) County administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination for the Mitigated or Negative Declaration required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and California Code of Regulations Section 15075. If within said 48-hour period the applicant/ developer has riot delivered to the Planning Department the check as required above, the approval for the project granted shall be void due to failure of condition [Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4(c)]. General Requirements PL -2. The applicant and owner of the real property subject to this condition shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend the City with Legal Counsel of the City's own selection from any and all claims, actions, awards, judgments, or proceedings against the City to attack, set aside, annul, or seek monetary damages resulting, directly or indirectly, from any action in furtherance of and the approval of the City, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, advisory agency, appeal board or legislative body including actions approved by the voters of the City, concerning the Planning Application. The City shall be deemed for purposes of this condition, to include any agency or instrumentality thereof, or any of its elected or appointed officials, officers, employees, consultants, contractors, legal counsel, and agents. City shall promptly notify both the applicant and landowner of any claim, action, or proceeding to which this condition is applicable and shall further cooperate fully in the defense of the action. The City reserves the right to take any and all action the City deems to be in the best interest of the City and its citizens in regards to such defense. PL -3. The permittee shall obtain City approval for any modifications or revisions to the approval of this project. PL -4. This approval shall be used within two years of the approval date; otherwise, it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the two year period, which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. PL -5. The Planning Director may, upon an application being filed prior to expiration, and for good cause, grant a time extension of up to 3 one-year extensions of time, one year at a time. PL -6. This project and all subsequent projects within this site shall be consistent with Planned Development Overlay -11 (PDO -11). PL -7. The project and all subsequent projects within this site shall comply with all mitigation measures identified within the Mitigated Negative adopted for PA12-0033 and PA12-0034. PL -8. A separate building permit shall be required for all signage. PL -9. The development of the premises shall substantially conform to the approved site plan and elevations contained on file with the Planning Department. PL -10. Landscaping installed for the project shall be continuously maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Director. If it is determined that the landscaping is not being maintained, the Planning Director shall have the authority to require the property owner to bring the landscaping into conformance with the approved landscape plan. The continued maintenance of all landscaped areas shall be the responsibility of the developer or any successors in interest. PL -11. Other than stormwater, it is illegal to allow liquids, gels, powders, sediment, fertilizers, landscape debris, and waste from entering the storm drain system or from leaving the property. Spills and leaks must be cleaned up immediately. Do not wash, maintain, or repair vehicles onsite. Do not hose down parking areas, sidewalks, alleys, or gutters. Ensure that all materials and products stored outside are protected from rain. Ensure all trash bins are covered at all times. PL -12. The applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for permanent filing two 8" X 10" glossy photographic color prints of the approved color and materials board and the colored architectural elevations. All labels on the color and materials board and Elevations shall be readable on the photographic prints. PL -13. The Conditions of Approval specified in this resolution, to the extent specific items, materials, equipment, techniques, finishes or similar matters are specified, shall be deemed satisfied by staff's prior approval of the use or utilization of an item, material, equipment, finish or technique that City staff determines to be the substantial equivalent of that required by the Conditions of Approval. Staff may elect to reject the request to substitute, in which case the real party in interest may appeal, after payment of the regular cost of an appeal, the decision to the Planning Commission for its decision. Scheme 1 — Spanish Colonial MATERIAL COLOR Stucco 16120 sand finish; to match Sherwin- Williams SW7004 Snowbound Stucco Accent Sherwin Williams SW6101 Sands of Time Fascia, rafter tails, wood trim, French Sherwin Williams SW6083 Sable doors and garage doors Shutters Sherwin Williams SW6507 Resolute Blue Wrought Iron Sherwin Williams SW6258 Tricorn Black Roof Tile Scheme 2 — Tuscany Eagle Capistrano — Hilo Sunset 3124 MATERIAL COLOR Stucco 1 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin- Williams SW6113 Interactive Cream Stucco 2 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin Williams SW6114 Bagel Stucco 3 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin Williams SW6115 Totally Tan Stucco 4 16/20 sand finish; to match Sherwin Williams 6116 Tatami Tan Stucco Accent Sherwin Williams SW6101 Sands of Time Fascia, rafter tails, wood trim, French Sherwin Williams SW6069 French doors and garage doors Roast Shutters Sherwin Williams SW6152 Superior Bronze Stone El Dorado Umbria Fieldledge Roof Tile Eagle Capistrano — Sunrise Blend 3645 Brick NcNear Sandmold — Kilburn 3645 PL -14. Trash enclosures shall be provided to house all trash receptacles utilized on the site. These shall be clearly labeled on site plan. PL -15. If construction is phased, a construction staging area plan or phasing plan for construction equipment and trash shall be approved by the Planning Director. PL -16. The developer shall contact the City's franchised solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. Only the City's franchisee may haul demolition and construction debris. PL -17. The applicant shall comply with the Public Art Ordinance. PL -18. All parkways, including within the right-of-way, entryway median, landscaping, walls, fencing, recreational facilities and on-site lighting shall be maintained by the property owner or maintenance association. PL -19. All costs associated with the relocation of any existing streetlights shall be paid for by the developer. PL -20. The trash enclosures shall be large enough to accommodate a recycling bin, as well as regular solid waste containers. PL -21. Each apartment unit shall be assigned its own garage space that shall be utilized for vehicle parking for the assigned unit. The apartment rental agreement shall stipulate that: 1) Garage spaces shall not be subleased; and 2) Garage spaces shall be utilized for vehicle parking and shall be kept clear to ensure that the garage space is continually available for vehicle parking and riot solely for storage. The management of the apartment complex shall riot allow the garage spaces on the project site to be rented for storage and the management shall monitor the use of the garage spaces on site to ensure that the garage spaces are continually available and used for vehicle parking and riot solely for storage. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PL -22. Provide the Planning Department with a copy of the underground water plans and electrical plans for verification of proper placement of transformer(s) and double detector check prior to final agreement with the utility companies. PL -23. Double detector check valves shall be installed internal to the project site at locations not visible from the public right-of-way, subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. PL -24. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "If at any time during excavation/construction of the site, archaeological/cultural resources, or any artifacts or other objects which reasonably appears to be evidence of cultural or archaeological resource are discovered, the property owner shall immediately advise the City of such and the City shall cause all further excavation or other disturbance of the affected area to immediately cease. The Planning Director at his/her sole discretion may require the property owner to deposit a sum of money it deems reasonably necessary to allow the City to consult and/or authorize an independent, fully qualified specialist to inspect the site at no cost to the City, in order to assess the significance of the find. Upon determining that the discovery is not an archaeological/ cultural resource, the Planning Director shall notify the property owner of such determination and shall authorize the resumption of work. Upon determining that the discovery is an archaeological/cultural resource, the Planning Director shall notify the property owner that no further excavation or development may take place until a mitigation plan or other corrective measures have been approved by the Planning Director." PL -25. The developer is required to enter into a Cultural Resources Treatment Agreement with the Pechanga Tribe. This Agreement will address the treatment and disposition of cultural resources and human remains that may be impacted as a result of the development of the project, as well as provisions for tribal monitors. PL -26. If cultural resources are discovered during the project construction (inadvertent discoveries), all work in the area of the find shall cease, and a qualified archaeologist and representatives of the Pechanga Tribe shall be retained by the project sponsor to investigate the find, and make recommendations as to treatment and mitigation. PL -27. A qualified archaeological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities, in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe and their designated monitors, to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. PL -28. Tribal monitors from the Pechanga Tribe shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, including all archaeological surveys, testing, and studies, to be compensated by the developer. PL -29. The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area, to the Pechanga Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. PL -30. All sacred sites are to be avoided and preserved. PL -31. A 30 -day preconstruction survey, in accordance with MSHCP guidelines and survey protocol, shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. The results of the 30 -day preconstruction survey shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to scheduling the pre -grading meeting with Public Works. PL -32. The following shall be included in the Notes Section of the Grading Plan: "No grubbing/clearing of the site shall occur prior to scheduling the pre -grading meeting with Public Works. All project sites containing suitable habitat for burrowing owls, whether owls were found or not, require a 30 -day preconstruction survey that shall be conducted within 30 days prior to ground disturbance to avoid direct take of burrowing owls. If the results of the survey indicate that no burrowing owls are present on-site, then the project may move forward with grading, upon Planning Department approval. If burrowing owls are found to be present or nesting on-site during the preconstruction survey, then the following recommendations must be adhered to: Exclusion and relocation activities may not occur during the breeding season, which is defined as March 1 through August 31, with the following exception: From March 1 through March 15 and from August 1 through August 31 exclusion and relocation activities may take place if it is proven to the City and appropriate regulatory agencies (if any) that egg laying or chick rearing is not taking place. This determination must be made by a qualified biologist." PL -33. A copy of the Rough Grading Plans shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PL -34. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan, including the parking lot, drive aisles and pedestrian paths, to the Planning Department, which meets the requirements of the Development Code and the Palomar Lighting Ordinance. The parking lot light standards shall be placed in such a way as to not adversely impact the growth potential of the parking lot trees. PL -35. Four copies of Construction Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. These plans shall conform to the approved conceptual landscape plan, or as amended by these conditions. The location, number, height and spread, water usage or KC value, genus, species, and container size of the plants shall be shown. The plans shall be consistent with the Water Efficient Ordinance and Water Storage Contingency Plan per the Rancho California Water District. The plans shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee (per the City of Temecula Fee Schedule at time of submittal) and one copy of the approved Grading Plan. PL -36. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall provide a minimum five-foot wide planter to be installed at the perimeter of all parking areas. Curbs, walkways, etc. are not to infringe on this area. PL -37. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note stating that "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verity that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Department to schedule inspections. PL -38. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include a note on the plans stating that "The contractor shall provide two copies of an agronomic soils report at the first irrigation inspection." PL -39. The Landscaping and Irrigation Plans shall include water usage calculations per Chapter 17.32 of the Development Code (Water Efficient Ordinance), the total cost estimate of plantings and irrigation (in accordance with approved plan). Applicant shall use evapotranspiration (ETo) factor of 0.70 for calculating the maximum allowable water budget. PL -40. A landscape maintenance program shall be submitted for approval, which details the proper maintenance of all proposed plant materials to assure proper growth and landscape development for the long-term esthetics of the property. The approved maintenance program shall be provided to the landscape maintenance contractor who shall be responsible to carry out the detailed program. PL -41. Specifications of the landscape maintenance program shall indicate that "Three landscape site inspections are required. The first inspection will be conducted at installation of irrigation while trenches are open. This will verify that irrigation equipment and layout is per plan specifications and details. Any adjustments or discrepancies in actual conditions will be addressed at this time and will require an approval to continue. Where applicable, a mainline pressure check will also be conducted. This will verify that the irrigation mainline is capable of being pressurized to 150 psi for a minimum period of two hours without loss of pressure. The second inspection will verity that all irrigation systems are operating properly, and to verify that all plantings have been installed consistent with the approved construction landscape plans. The third inspection will verify property landscape maintenance for release of the one-year landscape maintenance bond." The applicant/owner shall contact the Planning Department to schedule inspections. PL -42. Automatic irrigation shall be installed for all landscaped areas and complete screening of all ground mounted equipment from view of the public from streets and adjacent property. PL -43. If any phase or area of the project site is not scheduled for development within six months of the completion of grading, it shall be temporarily landscaped and irrigated for dust and soil erosion control. PL -44. Wall and fence plans shall be consistent with the Conceptual Landscape Plans showing the height, location and the materials for all walls and fences. PL -45. Precise Grading Plans shall be consistent with the approved rough grading plans including all structural setback measurements. PL -46. All WQMP treatment devices, including design details, shall be shown on the construction landscape plans. If revisions are made to the WQMP design that result in any changes to the conceptual landscape plans after entitlement, the revisions will be shown on the construction landscape plans, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. PL -47. Roof -mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the subdivision unless designed so that the equipment is not visible from the public right-of-way; however, solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with Planning Director approval. PL -48. All utilities shall be screened from public view. Landscape construction drawings shall show and label all utilities and provide appropriate screening. Provide a three- foot clear zone around fire detector checks as required by the Fire Department before starting the screen. Group utilities together in order to reduce intrusion. Screening of utilities is not to look like an after -thought. Plan planting beds and design around utilities. Locate all light poles on plans and insure that there are no conflicts with trees. PL -49. Building Construction Plans shall include detailed outdoor areas (including but not limited to trellises, decorative furniture, fountains, hardscape to match the style of the buildings, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. PL -50. The developer shall provide the Planning Department verification of arrangements made with the City's franchise solid waste hauler for disposal of construction and demolition debris. PL -51. Prior to the first building permit or installation of additional streetlights, whichever occurs first, the developer shall complete the Temecula Community Services District application, submit an approved Edison Streetlight Plan, and pay the advanced energy fees. PL -52. The developer shall satisfy the City's parkland dedication (Quimby) requirement through the payment of in -lieu fees equivalent to 1.17 acres of parkland, based upon the City's then current land evaluation. Said requirement includes a 20% credit for private recreational opportunities provided and shall be prorated at a per dwelling unit cost per residential building permit requested. Prior to Release of Power, Building Occupancy or Any Use Allowed by This Permit PL -53. An applicant shall submit a letter of substantial conformance, subject to field verification by the Planning Director or his/her designee. Said letter of substantial conformance shall be prepared by the project designer and shall indicate that all plant materials and irrigation system components have been installed in accordance with the approved final landscape and irrigation plans. If a certificate of use and occupancy is not required for the project, such letter of substantial conformance shall be submitted prior to scheduling for the final inspection. PL -54. All required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been installed consistent with the approved construction plans and shall be in a condition acceptable to the Planning Director. The plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. PL -55. Performance securities, in amounts to be determined by the Planning Director, to guarantee the maintenance of the plantings in accordance with the approved construction landscape and irrigation plan shall be filed with the Planning Department for a period of one year from final Certificate of Occupancy. After that year, if the landscaping and irrigation system have been maintained in a condition satisfactory to the Planning Director, the bond shall be released upon request by the applicant. PL -56. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel, beaded text or equal, displaying the International Symbol of Accessibility. The sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height of 80 inches from the bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground, or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches, clearly and conspicuously stating the following: "Unauthorized vehicles parked in designated accessible spaces not displaying distinguishing placards or license plates issued for persons with disabilities may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed vehicles may be reclaimed by telephoning (951) 696-3000." PL -57. In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue paint of at least three square feet in size. PL -58. All site improvements including but riot limited to parking areas and striping shall be installed. PL -59. All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit. PL -60. Per Municipal Code Chapter 17.30, "Smoking in Multi -Unit Residences," the Developer shall submit a site plan to the City for review and approval, designating a minimum of 25 percent of the units within the project as non-smoking units. PL -61. Signage shall be installed at the northern end of the public multi-purpose trail at the eastern edge of the project site to direct pedestrians to appropriate street crossings on Mira Loma Drive, subject to approval by the Director of Community Development. OUTSIDE AGENCIES PL -62. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health's transmittal dated March 13, 2012, a copy of which is attached. PL -63. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations set forth in the Rancho California Water District's transmittal dated December 29, 2011, a copy of which is attached. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT General Conditions/Information B-1. Obtain street addressing for all proposed buildings. B-2. All design components shall comply with applicable provisions of the 2010 edition of the California Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes; 2010 California Electrical Code; California Administrative Code,2010 California Energy Codes, 2010 California Green building Standards, California Title 24 Disabled Access Regulations, Temecula Municipal Code. B-3. 2010 California Green Building Standards Provide 10% Voluntary Measures on project. B-4. Provide details of all applicable disabled access provisions and building setbacks on plans. B-5. All ground floor units to be adaptable. B-6. Provide disabled access from the public way to the main entrance of the building. B-7. Provide van accessible parking located as close as possible to the main entry. B-8. Show path of accessibility from parking to furthest point of improvement. B-9. Show path of travel from public right way to all public areas on site ( club house, trash enclose tot lots and picnic areas B-10. Submit at time of plan review, a complete exterior site lighting plan showing compliance with Ordinance Number 655 for the regulation of light pollution. All streetlights and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical plans submitted to the Department of Building and Safety. Any outside lighting shall be hooded and aimed riot to shine directly upon adjoining property or public rights-of-way. B-11. A receipt or clearance letter from the Temecula Valley School District shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department to ensure the payment or exemption from School Mitigation Fees. B-12. Obtain all building plans and permit approvals prior to commencement of any construction work. B-13. Trash enclosures, patio covers, light standards, and any block walls will require separate approvals and permits. B-14. Signage shall be posted conspicuously at the entrance to the project that indicates the hours of construction, as allowed by the City of Temecula Municipal Ordinance 9.20.060, for any site within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence. The permitted hours of construction are Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., and Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. No work is permitted on Sundays and nationally recognized Government Holidays. B-15. The City of Temecula adopted an ordinance on March 31, 2003 to collect fees for a Riverside County area wide Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). This project is subject to payment of these fees at the time of building permit issuance. The fees are subject to the provisions of Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit issuance. B-16. Provide an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. B-17. Provide a house electrical meter to provide power for the operation of exterior lighting, irrigation pedestals and fire alarm systems for each building on the site. Developments with single user buildings shall clearly show on the plans how the operation of exterior lighting and fire alarm systems when a house meter is riot specifically proposed. At Plan Review Submittal B-18. Provide electrical plan including load calculations and panel schedule, plumbing schematic and mechanical plan applicable to scope of work for plan review. B-19. Provide a Sound Transmission Control Study in accordance with the provisions of the Section 1207, of the 2010 edition of the California Building Code. B-20. Provide precise grading plan to verify accessibility for persons with disabilities. B-21. Provide truss calculations that have been stamped by the engineer of record of the building and the truss manufacturer engineer. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) B-22. Provide appropriate stamp of a registered professional with original signature on plans. Prior to Beginning of Construction B-23. A pre -construction meeting is required with the building inspector prior to the start of the building construction. FIRE PREVENTION General Requirements F-1. Final fire and life safety conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Prevention Bureau. These conditions will be based on occupancy, use, the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and related codes which are in force at the time of building plan submittal. F-2. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or construction of all commercial buildings per CFC Appendix B. The developer shall provide for this project, a water system capable of delivering 4,000 GPM at 20 -PSI residual operating pressure for a 4 -hour duration (CFC Appendix B and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-3. The Fire Prevention Bureau is required to set minimum fire hydrant distances per CFC Appendix C. A combination of on-site and offsite 6" x 4" x 2-2 %" outlets on a looped system shall be located on fire access roads and adjacent to public streets. Hydrants shall be spaced at 350 feet apart, at each intersection and shall be located no more than 210 feet from any point on the street or Fire Department access road(s) frontage to a hydrant. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrants in the system (CFC Appendix C and Temecula City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) F-4. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be with a surface to provide all-weather driving capabilities. Access roads shall be 80,000 lbs. GVW with a minimum of AC thickness of .25 feet. In accordance with Section 1410.1, prior to building construction, all locations where structures are to be built shall have fire apparatus access roads (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-5. Fire Department vehicle access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-6. The gradient for fire apparatus access roads shall not exceed 15 percent (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-7. This development shall maintain two points of access, via all-weather surface roads, as approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau (CFC Chapter 5). F-8. Dead end roadways and streets in excess of 150 feet which have not been completed shall have a turnaround capable of accommodating fire apparatus (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) F-9. The developer shall furnish three copies of the water system plans to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval prior to installation for all private water systems pertaining to the fire service loop. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, contain a Fire Prevention Bureau approval signature block, and conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire flow standards. Hydraulic calculations will be required with the underground submittal to ensure fire flow requirements are being met for the on-site hydrants. The plans must be submitted and approved prior to building permit being issued (CFC Chapter 14 and Chapter 5). F-10. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of sprinkler plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. F-11. Fire alarm plans shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Bureau for approval. Three sets of alarm plans must be submitted by the installing contractor to the Fire Prevention Bureau. The fire alarm system is required to have a dedicated circuit from the house panel. These plans must be submitted prior to the issuance of building permit. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy F-12. Hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers (blue dots) (City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-13. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Multi -family residential buildings shall have a minimum of 12 - inch numbers with unit numbers being a minimum of six inches in size (CFC Chapter 5 and City Ordinance 15.16.020). F-14. A directory display monument sign shall be required for apartment, condominium, townhouse or mobile home parks. Each complex shall have an illuminated diagrammatic layout of the complex which indicates the name of the complex, all streets, building identification, unit numbers, and fire hydrant locations within the complex. Location of the sign and design specifications shall be submitted to and be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau prior to installation. F-15. A "Knox -Box" shall be provided. The Knox -Box shall be installed a minimum of six feet in height and be located to the right side of the fire riser sprinkler room (CFC Chapter 5). F-16. All manual and electronic gates on required Fire Department access roads or gates obstructing Fire Department building access shall be provided with the Knox Rapid entry system for emergency access by firefighting personnel (CFC Chapter 5). F-17. The applicant shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs (CFC Chapter 5). POLICE DEPARTMENT General Requirements PD -1. Applicant shall ensure any landscaping surrounding buildings is kept at a height of no more than three feet or below the ground floor window sills. Plants, hedges and shrubbery shall be defensible plants to prevent would-be intruders from breaking into the buildings utilizing lower level windows. PD -2. Applicant shall ensure any trees surrounding building rooftops be kept at a distance to prevent roof accessibility by "would-be burglars." Since trees also act as a natural ladder, the branches must be pruned to have a six-foot clearance from the buildings. PD -3. Any berms shall not exceed three feet in height. PD -4. Applicant must comply with the standards of title 24 part 6 of the California code of regulations, for residential standards, refer to publication CEC-400-2008-016-CMF- REV-1. PD -5. All parking lot lighting shall be energy saving and minimized after hours of darkness and in compliance with Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations. PD -6. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with Riverside County Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance 655, low pressure sodium lighting preferred. PD -7. All exterior entries shall have a vandal resistant light fixture installed to illuminate the entry area. The entry area shall be illuminated with a minimum one -foot candle illumination at ground level, evenly dispersed. PD -8. All entry doors shall have a peephole or viewer or other means of viewing the entire entry area. PD -9. All lighting affixed to the exterior of buildings shall be vandal resistant, wall mounted light fixtures. PD -10. All exterior doors, windows, locking mechanisms, hinges, and other miscellaneous hardware shall be commercial or institution grade. PD -11. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the buildings must be removed or painted over within 24 hours of being discovered. Report all such crimes to the Temecula Police 24-hour dispatch Center at (951) 696 -HELP. PD -12. Any roof hatches shall be painted "International Orange." PD -13. Any public telephones located on the exterior of the buildings shall be placed in a well -lit, highly visible area, and installed with a "call -out only" feature to deter loitering. This feature is not required for public telephones installed within the interior of the buildings. PD -14. All disabled parking stalls on the premises shall be marked in accordance with Section 22511.8 of the California Vehicle Code. PD -15. Applicant shall comply with Temecula Municipal Code Section 9.14.010, Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages in Public Prohibited. PD -16. Crime prevention through environmental design as developed by the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) supports the concept that "the proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear and incidence of crime and an improvement in the quality of life." The nine primary strategies that support this concept are included below: a. Provide clear border definition of controlled space. Examples of border definition may include fences, shrubbery or signs in exterior areas. Within a building, the arrangement of furniture and color definition can serve as a means of identifying controlled space. b. Provide clearly marked transitional zones. Persons need to be able to identify when they are moving from public to semi-public to private space. c. Gathering or congregating areas to be located or designated in locations where there is good surveillance and access control. d. Place safe activities in unsafe locations. Safe activities attract normal users to a location and subsequently render the location less attractive to abnormal users due to observation and possible intervention. e. Place unsafe activities in safe locations. Placing unsafe activities in areas of natural surveillance or controlled access will help overcome risk and make the users of the areas feel safer. f. Redesign the use of space to provide natural barriers. Separate activities that may conflict with each other (outdoor basketball court and children's play area, for example) by distance, natural terrain or other functions to avoid such conflict. Improve scheduling of space. The timing in the use of space can reduce the risk for normal users and cause abnormal users to be of greater risk of surveillance and intervention. g. h. Redesign space to increase the perception of natural surveillance. Abnormal users need to be aware of the risk of detection and possible intervention. Windows and clear lines -of -sight serve to provide such a perception of surveillance. i. Overcome distance and isolation. This strategy may be accomplished through improved communications (portable two-way radios, for example) and design efficiencies, such as the location of restrooms in a public building. PD -17. The Crime Prevention and Plans Unit of the Temecula Police Department offers free business and residential security surveys, to schedule an appointment contact the unit at (951) 506-5132. PD -18. Any questions regarding these conditions should be directed to the Temecula Police Department Crime Prevention and Plans Unit at (951) 506-5132. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Requirements PW -1. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be completed by the developer at no cost to any Government Agency. It is understood that the developer correctly shows on the site plan all existing and proposed property lines, easements, traveled ways, improvement constraints and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision. PW -2. A Grading Permit for precise grading, including all on-site flat work and improvements, shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction outside of the City -maintained street right-of- way. PW -3. An Encroachment Permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to commencement of any construction within an existing or proposed City right- of-way. PW -4. All improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with adjacent projects and existing improvements contiguous to the site and shall be submitted on standard 24" x 36" City of Temecula mylars. PW -5. The project shall include construction -phase pollution prevention controls into the design of the project to prevent non -permitted runoff from discharging off site or entering any storm drain system or receiving water during all field -related activities. PW -6. A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) must be conceptually accepted by the City prior to the initial grading plan check. The WQMP will be prepared by a registered civil engineer and include Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs), source controls, and treatment devices. PW -7. All onsite drainage and water quality facilities shall be privately maintained. Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit(s) PW -8. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies: a. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board b. Army Corps of Engineers c. California Department of Fish and Game PW -9. The Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) must receive final acceptance by the City prior to issuance of any grading permit. PW -10. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with City of Temecula standards, and shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to the commencement of grading. The grading plan shall include all necessary erosion control measures needed to adequately protect the site (public and private) and adjoining properties from damage due to erosion. PW -11. The developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works in accordance with Grading Ordinance Section 18.24.120. PW -12. A Soils Report shall be prepared by a registered soil or civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works with the initial grading plan check. The report shall address all soil conditions of the site, and provide recommendations for the construction of engineered structures and pavement sections. PW -13. The developer shall have a Drainage Study prepared by a registered civil engineer in accordance with City Standards identifying storm water runoff expected from this site and upstream of this site. The study shall identify all existing or proposed public or private drainage facilities intended to discharge this runoff. The study shall also analyze and identify impacts to downstream properties and provide specific recommendations to protect the properties and mitigate any impacts. Any upgrading or upsizing of downstream facilities, including acquisition of drainage or access easements necessary to make required improvements, shall be provided by the developer. PW -14. Construction -phase pollution prevention controls shall be consistent with the City's Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance and associated technical manual, and the City's standard notes for Erosion and Sediment Control. PW -15. The project shall demonstrate coverage under the State NPDES General Permit for Construction Activities by providing a copy of the Waste Discharge Identification number (VVDID) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the project's Risk Level (RL) determination number, and name and contact information of the Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be available at the site throughout the duration of construction activities. PW -16. Permanent landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works for review and approval. PW -17. The developer shall comply with all constraints which may be shown upon an Environmental Constraint Sheet (ECS) recorded with any underlying maps related to the subject property. PW -18. A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Area Drainage Plan fee is payable to the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District by either cashier's check or money order, prior to issuance of permits, based on the prevailing area drainage plan fee. If the full Area Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already been credited to this property, no new charge needs to be paid. PW -19. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation) by paying the appropriate fee set forth in that ordinance or by providing documented evidence that the fees have already been paid. PW -20. The developer shall obtain letters of approval for any off site work performed on adjoining properties. The letters shall be in format as directed by the Department of Public Works. PW -21. The developer shall post security and enter into an agreement guaranteeing the grading and erosion control improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works in accordance with Grading Ordinance Section 18.24.120. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit(s) PW -22. The developer shall construct all public improvements outlined in these conditions to City of Temecula General Plan standards unless otherwise noted. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works. a. Improve Rancho Vista Road (Secondary Highway Standards - 88' RM() to include installation of street lights and utilities (including but not limited to water and sewer). b. Improve Mira Loma Drive (Collector Road Standards - 66' RM() to include installation of street lights and utilities (including but riot limited to water and sewer). PW -23. The developer shall construct all public improvements in conformance with applicable City Standards and subject to approval by the Department of Public Works including street improvements, which may include, but not limited to, pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches; streetlights, signing, striping, sewer and domestic water systems; under grounding of proposed and existing utility distribution lines; and storm drain facilities. PW -24. A construction area Traffic Control Plan shall be designed by a registered civil or traffic engineer and reviewed by the Department of Public Works for any street closure and detour or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the Department of Public Works. PW -25. The building pad shall be certified to have been substantially constructed in accordance with the approved Precise Grading Plan by a registered civil engineer, and the soil engineer shall issue a Final Soil Report addressing compaction and site conditions. PW -26. The developer shall pay to the City the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.06 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.06. PW -27. The developer shall pay to the City the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program as required by, and in accordance with, Chapter 15.08 of the Temecula Municipal Code and all Resolutions implementing Chapter 15.08. Prior to Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy PW -28. The project shall submit a completed WQMP Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement that must include the owner's notarized signature, proof of recordation with the County Recorder's Office, and all maintenance procedures for each of the structural treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) outlined in the WQMP. PW -29. The project shall demonstrate that the structural treatment control BMPs outlined in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and are ready for immediate implementation. PW -30. As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works the developer shall receive written clearance from Rancho California Water District, Eastern Municipal Water District, or other affected agencies. PW -31. All public improvements shall be constructed and completed per the approved plans and City standards to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. PW -32. The existing improvements shall be reviewed. Any appurtenance damaged or broken shall be repaired or removed and replaced to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. PW -33. All necessary certifications and clearances from engineers, utility companies and public agencies shall be submitted as required by the Department of Public Works. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE • COMMUNITY HEALTH AGENCY DEPARTMENT F ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH March 13, 2012 City of Temecula Planning Department Attn: Cheryl Kitzerow, Project Planner P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 SUBJECT: PA#12-0033 —MIRA LOMA APARTMENTS DP/ME (ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER#944-060-006) Dear Ms. Kitzerow: In accordance with the agreement between the County of Riverside, Department of Environmental Health (DEH) and the City of Temecula, DEH offers the following comments for the project referenced in the subject heading of this letter: POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SERVICE This project shall be required to obtain potable water service and sanitary sewer service from Rancho California Water District (RCWD). A "Will -Serve" letter shall be required for water and sewer service from RCWD prior to the approval of this planning case. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) — PHASE I An Environmental Assessment Phase I Study shall be required prior to the approval of this planning case to determine whether any chemicals and/or pesticides were used on the property, the location of use, and any possible lingering negative effects. This condition requires the applicant to compile sufficient information about the property and land uses to aid the Department in making a determination of whether additional investigation is needed. Please note that the Environmental Assessment process serves to protect public health and welfare by lessening the change of hazardous or toxic substances remaining on the property and interfering with safe land use. For further information, please contact the Environmental Cleanups Program at (951) 955-8982. Agency 12.8C FAX (9 09) 731 +h s, 4f.)M Lel 3t; . t ::r. 9th a icor, `-5 898{; 4 FAX (90% 955-8903 • 4080 Lemon Strrec. 2nd Floor. } iv -A 9250] CA 92501 Cheryl Kitzerow, Project Planner City of Temecula March 13, 2012 FOR ANY PROPOSED PUBLIC OR SEMI-PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL/SPA A set of three (3) complete plans for the swimming pool/spa must be submitted to DEH prior to the issuance of any building permit to verify compliance with the California Administrative Code, the California Health and Safety Code, and the Uniform Plumbing Code. Public or Semi-public Swimming Pool/Spa plans should be submitted to: • Department of Environmental Health, District Environmental Services, Murrieta 38740 Sky Canyon Drive. Suite A, Murrieta CA 92563 Attention: Plan Check (951) 461-0284. Plan Check fees are required. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT BRANCH (HMMB): The facility shall require a business emergency plan prior to the final of any building permit for any storage of hazardous materials, including swimming pool/spa chemicals, that is greater than 55 gallons, 200 cubic feet or 500 pounds, or for any acutely hazardous materials or extremely hazardous substances. Moreover, the facility will require a hazardous waste permit if hazardous waste is generated as defined in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 66260.10 and 66261.3. If further review of the site indicates additional environmental health issues, HMMB reserves the right to regulate the business in accordance with applicable County Ordinances. For further information, please contact HMMB at (951) 358-5055. If you have any questions regarding this letter please contact me at (951) 955-8980. Michael Mistica, MBA, REHS Environmental Protection and Oversight Division Land Use / Water Resources Program 2 Ranch© Water I:an:react. NI, C.ibcu John F. Clang in Si. 'i tie Pr.s: er: Sk- tseue J. Cornttn Caen ft. Drake Lisa B. Herman wink,. m E. Phminicr Rettat d (', ti#:nruinceit/ NI:Mhos G. Stone Gecrer.=.l :l anis_ r itieliard S. Williamson, P.E. ..sistan:;i fi Geral tar Jeffrey D. Armstrong (min..i (•);Aider Tr, N. Craig Eaitharp. P.E. i?i?crnar m' (nicrrt;u;ts klainitmance Perry Ct. tuck t'nreetur..ri Ttaanir: Andress L. 14 el) C hii:i lia :iaosr I\e li E„ C;;ireia .lames IL Gilpin Mist Best & Krieger LLP knoiti December 29, 2011 Richard Valdez VSL Engineering 31805 Temecula Parkway Suite 129 Temecula, CA 92592 SUBJECT: WATER AVAILABILITY MIRA LOMA APARTMENTS, MIRA LOMA DRIVE AND RANCHO VISTA ROAD (PARCEL NO. 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 21014); APN 944-060-006 [MIRA LOMA RECOVERY, LLC] Dear Mr. Valdez: Please be advised that the above -referenced project/property is located within the service boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). The subject project/property fronts an existing 8 -inch diameter water pipeline (1380 Pressure Zone) within Mira Lorna Drive and an existing 12 -inch diameter water pipeline within Rancho Vista Road (1380 Pressure Zone). Water service to the subject project/property exists under Account No. 0103- 430003 (vacant long term status). Additions or modifications to water service arrangements are subject to the Rules and Regulations (governing) Water System Facilities and Service, as well as the completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Where private (on-site) facilities are required for water service, fire protection, irrigation, or other purposes, RCWD requires recordation of a Reciprocal Easement and Maintenance Agreement for such on-site private facilities, where private on-site water facilities may. cross (or may he shared amongst) multiple lots/project units, and/or where such `common' facilities may be owned and maintained by a Property Owners' Association (proposed now or in the future). Water availability is contingent upon the property owner(s) signing an Agency Agreement that assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD. In addition, water availability is contingent upon the timing of the subject project/property development relative to water supply shortage contingency measures (pursuant to RCWD's Water Shortage Contingency Plan or other applicable ordinances), and/or the adoption of a required Water Supply Assessment, as determined by the Lead Agency. itancho California %\at,r i}ittrier l Letter to Richard Valdez December 29, 2011 Page Two There is no recycled water currently available within the limits established by Resolution 2007- 10-5. Should recycled water become available in the future, the project/property may be required to retrofit its facilities to make use of this availability in accordance with Resolution 2007-10-5. Recycled water service, therefore, would be available upon construction of any required on-site and/or off-site recycled water facilities and the completion of financial arrangements between RCWD and the property owner. Requirements for the use of recycled water are available from RCWD. As soon as feasible, the project proponent should contact RCWD for a determination of existing water system capability, based upon project -specific demands and/or fire flow requirements, as well as a determination of proposed water facilities configuration. If new facilities are required for service, fire protection, or other purposes, the project proponent should contact RCWD for an assessment of project -specific fees and requirements. Please note that separate water meters will be required for all landscape irrigation. Sewer service to the subject project/property, if available, would he provided by Eastern Municipal Water District. If no sewer service is currently available to the subject project/property, all proposed waste discharge systems must comply with the State Water Resources Control Board and/or the basin plan objectives and the permit conditions issued by the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board. If you should have any questions or need additional information, please contact an Engineering Services Representative at this office at (951) 296-6900. Sincerely, RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT 'FL -eV -6; Lillian R jkovich Engineering Services Representative cc: Corey Wallace, Engineering Manager -Design Warren Back, Engineering Manager -Planning Ken Cope, Construction Contracts Manager Corry Smith, Engineering Services Supervisor 11 \LR1m042\F450 \FEG Ranch(, California Water District 421:35 Wiachestcr Road • r'oa Office Vox yni 7 • Tensa ,.la, C,.6, t.1 925S9.90 W-d'lt .t'ft): i1I r:a 1 • 01511 296- .)011 • :;l\(951) 296-6 City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Environmental Checklist Project Title Rancho Vista Village; SCH# 2012091020 Lead Agency Name and Address City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033, Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Contact Person and Phone Number Stuart Fisk, Senior Planner; (951) 506-5159 Located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, Temecula Project Location Project Sponsor's Name and Address Jim Ahmad; Inland Communities Corp 1635 N. Cahuenga Blvd, Suite 465 Los Angeles, CA 90028 General Plan Designation Medium Density Residential Zoning Mira Loma Planned Development Overlay District -11 (PDO -11) PA12-0034, a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential and a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlay - 11 (PDO -11); and PA12-0033, a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site. Description of Project Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The project site is surrounded by residential development including several single-family residences, apartment buildings, and an elementary school (Vail Elementary) that is located to the east of the project site. The site has a steep slope below Mira Loma Drive and flattens out for the majority of the project site. Elevation ranges from approximately 1,095 to 1,144 feet above mean sea -level. A small drainage feature occurs adjacent to the project site along the northeastern boundary of the project site. Surrounding General Plan land use designations include High Density Residential to the north and to the west, Low -Medium Residential to the south, and Open Space, Public/Institutional and Low -Medium Residential to the east. None Other public agencies whose approval is required STN %w , \ ] ,�• I \ YO 860 1.700 3.400 t G:\PLANNING\20121PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 1 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. Aesthetics Mineral Resources Agriculture and Forestry Resources Noise Air Quality Population and Housing Biological Resources Public Services Greenhouse Gas Emissions Recreation Cultural Resources Transportation and Traffic Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials X Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning None Determination (To be completed by the lead agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Stuart Fisk Printed Name /27/(Z// Z_ Date City of Temecula For G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 2 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X a Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic hi•hwa ? X c Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversel affect da or ni•httime views in the area? X X d Comments: 1.a. -c. No Impact: The proposed project is not located on or near a scenic vista; therefore, there will not be an adverse impact on a scenic vista. The project site is not located on a scenic highway. The project site consists of undeveloped land covered with vegetation and a small area of asphalt from what was a parking area for a small school (The Carden Academy). Existing vegetation includes wild grass, mature trees, and shrubbery. Topographically, the property is sloped downward to the northeast with steep banks along the southern and western boundaries. The elevation of the property is generally lower than surrounding Rancho Vista Road and Mira Loma Drive. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings. Due to the fact that the project site contains no scenic vistas or resources, the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 1.d. Less than Significant Impact: The majority of the proposed project site is currently vacant with no sources of light or glare. The proposed project will introduce new generators of light and glare typically associated with residential development. The City of Temecula requires all new development to comply with the Mount Palomar Lighting Ordinance (Ordinance 655). Ordinance 655 requires lighting to be shielded, directed down to avoid glare onto adjacent properties, and emit low levels of glare into the sky. Lighting issues are addressed during the City's plan review and inspection process, and impacts resulting from the project are anticipated to be less than significant. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 3 2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X X a Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? b c Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)? X d Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use X e Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? X Comments: 2.a. -e. No Impact: The project site is not currently in agricultural production, nor has the site been used for agricultural purposes in the recent or historic past. The site is not under a Williamson Act contract nor is it zoned for agricultural uses. The site is not zoned forest land or timberland nor is it adjacent to or in proximity to property zoned forest land or timberland. This property is not considered prime or unique farmland of statewide or local importance as identified by the State Department of Conservation and the City of Temecula General Plan. In addition, the project will not involve changes in the existing environment that would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 4 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact X X No Impact a Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? b c Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X X d e Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X Comments: 3.a. Less Than Significant Impact: An air quality assessment was prepared by Entech Consulting Group in July of 2012 to assess the impacts of the construction and operation of the proposed project. The Entech assessment states that: "The South Coast Air Basin is currently designated as nonattainment for 03, PM10, and PM25i a maintenance area for CO and NO2, and in attainment for all other federal criteria pollutants. Emissions calculated by the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) were far below the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds, indicating that the construction and operation of the proposed project will create a less than significant impact to the surrounding area." The project, therefore, will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and a less than significant impact is anticipated. 3.b.c. Less Than Significant Impact: The air quality assessment conducted by Entech Consulting Group for the project concludes that the proposed project will cause a less than significant impact to the ambient air quality. The basin is currently in nonattainment for 03 and NO2. VOC and NO), emissions, precursors to 03, are far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD. The project's demonstration of compliance with the SCAQMD thresholds is consistent with the federal National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The basin is also in nonattainment for PM10 and PM2.5. However, the impact analysis performed demonstrates that minimal PM10 and PM25 will be generated throughout the operation of the proposed Project. The PM10 and PM2.5 emissions generated from the proposed project is far below the thresholds established by the SCAQMD and impacts are therefore anticipated to be less than significant. In addition, the Entech air quality assessment concluded that the proposed project will not cause a significant impact to the surrounding area. As shown in Table 6 of the Entech study provided below, the calculated emissions results from CaIEEMod demonstrate that the construction of this project will not exceed average daily thresholds created by the SCAQMD. Thus, construction related impacts on regional air quality will be less than significant. Construction of the proposed project will not worsen ambient air quality, create additional violations of federal and state standards, or delay the basin's goal for meeting attainment standards. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 5 Table 6. Peak- Day Construction Emissions (Ibslday) by Phase Construction Year and Season ROG NOx CO SO2 PMIo PM .s 2013 Summer 9.99 80.09 46.54 0.08 22.24 13.88 Winter 9.99 80.10 46.39 0.07 22.24 13.88 SCA©MD Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceed Significance? No No No No No No 2014 Winter 47.41 32.18 21.50 0.03 2.94 2.75 SCAGMO Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceed Significance? No No No No No No Saurca' Enrech Cjnssfiimg Graup, 20t2 Entech also calculated operational emissions related to area source emissions and mobile source emissions. Typically, area sources are small sources that contribute very little emissions individually, but when combined may generate substantial amounts of pollutants. Examples of generated area source emissions are gas for residential space and water heating, gasoline -powered landscaping and maintenance equipment, and consumer products such as household cleaners and chemicals. Area specific defaults in the CaIEEMod were used by Entech to calculate area source emissions. Entech also assumed that the surrounding residences will utilize natural gas for space and water heating. Entech also used CaIEEMod to calculate pollutant emissions from vehicular trips generated from the proposed project. CaIEEMod default inputs, vehicle mix and trip distances, were unaltered for this anlaysis. In addition to the default inputs, Entech assumed that occupancy of the multi -family residences will begin in 2014. CaIEEMod estimated emissions from the operation of the proposted project as shown in Table 8 of the Entech study, provided below. Table 8, Operational Emissions Obs/day) Source ROG NO, CO SO2 PM,o PM25 Summer Emissions Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 6.40 6.40 Energy 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.04 0.04 Mabilel 4.35 10.66 47.34 0.08 8.53 0.73 Total Emissions 20.15 11.88 97.55 0.18 14.97 7.17 SCAOMD Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 Exceed throsholds? No No No No No No Winter Emissions Area 15.74 0.71 49.99 0.10 6.40 6.40 Energy 0.06 0.51 0.22 0.00 0.04 0.04 Mabile1 4.21 11.36 43.76 0.07 8.54 0.74 Total Emissions 20.01 12.58 93.97 0.17 14.98 7.18 SCAOMD Significance Thresholds 65 55 550 1517 150 55 Exceed thresholds? No No No No No No Scvrca: Entech Consulting Grow. 2012 1. Moble emissons o estimated utilizing G_1EEME:d delaurs cast.i on rp generation ales based upon data cdlected by the Instuulo of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation. Edition. Emission calculations generated from CaIEEMod demonstrate that the operation of the proposed project will not cause a significant impact to the surrounding area. Entech used CaIEEMod to calculate average daily emissions for both area source and mobile source emissions. Project -related emissions do not exceed the G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 6 SCAQMD's established thresholds. Calculated emissions for ROG, NO„, CO, PM10, and PM25 are far below the thresholds. Therefore, the operation of the Project does not cause a significant impact to the surrounding area. 3.d. Less Than Significant: According to the City of Temecula General Plan, as defined in figure AQ -2 of the General Plan, there is one known sensitive receptors (hospitals, schools, libraries, child care centers, and adult -assisted care facilities) that may be exposed to pollutant concentrations in the immediate vicinity. The Vail Elementary school is located immediately east of the project site. In addition, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) classifies the surrounding residences as sensitive receptors. The elementary school and surrounding residences may be exposed to some pollutant concentrations on a short-term basis during construction and grading activities. However, the July 2012 air quality assessment conducted by Entech Consulting Group concluded that "After a detailed analysis, it has been determined that no significant impact will be created from the construction and operation of the proposed project, thus no mitigation measures are required." The Entech Consulting Group air quality assessment did, however, recommend that the following Best Available Control Measures (BACM) be implemented to minimize the emissions of PM10 and PM25 during construction as a preventative measure: • Minimize land disturbances • Utilize watering trucks to minimize dust • Cover trucks when hauling dirt • Put grading and earth moving on hold when wind gusts exceed 25 miles per hour unless the soil is wet enough to prevent dispersion. • Stabilize the surface of dirt piles if they are not removed immediately • Sweep nearby paved streets at least once per day if there is evidence of dirt that has been carried onto the roadway • Revegetate disturbed land as soon as possible • Remove unused materials The Development Plan for the project will be conditioned that these Best Available Control Measures be implemented and that these Best Available Control Measures be included in the grading plan notes. 3.e. Less Than Significant Impact: No objectionable odors are expected as a result from operation of the proposed project. Odors are typically associated with industrial projects involving use of chemicals, solvents, petroleum products, and other strong -smelling elements used in manufacturing processes. Odors are also associated with such uses as sewage treatment facilities and landfills. Standard practices related to trash receptacle areas, such as keeping trash bins covered and located away from outdoor areas where residents of multi -family housing may congregate, will help minimize the potential for odor nuisance complaints. Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the use of architectural coatings and solvents. SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits the amount of volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings and solvents. Via mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules, no construction activities or materials are proposed which would create objectionable odors. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures would be required. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 7 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project? Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact X No Impact a Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? X c Have a substantial adverse effect of federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? X d Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? X e Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X f Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X Comments: 4.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The project site is located within the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and lies within the Southwest Area Plan of the MSHCP. The project site is not part of a criteria cell and is not part of a MSHCP sub unit. Michael Brandman Associates (MBA) prepared and MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment for the project in July, 2012, and determined that the project site contains a limited amount of foraging habitat suitable for Burrowing owls (4.27 acres), which is a California Species of Special Concern, however no suitable burrows were observed within the project area. There is no suitable habitat within the 500 -foot buffer area outside of the project areas as the project site is surrounded by development, and no burrowing owls were observed on site or within the 500 -foot buffer area. The MBA report concluded that the project area does not contain sufficient foraging habitat to support a burrowing owl pair, is surrounded by development, and is not adjacent to any other suitable habitat. The MBA report concluded that burrowing owl has no potential to occur on the project site. The MBA report identified suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species. If any construction activities for the project site occur during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre -construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required (see mitigation requirements for 4.d below). G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 8 The MBA report did not identify a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 4.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The MBA report states that the project side contains 0.1 acre of riparian habitat that will be impacted, but does not contain any riverine connectivity. Natural Resources Assessment, Inc. conducted a jurisdictional delineation on the drainage feature that occurs along the northeastern boundary of the site. The drainage contains areas under CDFG and USACE jurisdiction. The project was designed to avoid the areas of the drainage. The willows to be impacted are within an upland area outside of the active drainage area and are not connected to the riparian area east of the project site. The MBA analysis of the site determined that there are no vernal pools, or areas suitable for support of sensitive fairy shrimp species within the property. Due to the limited impact to riparian areas, the MBA report recommended no further action or mitigation measures and less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 4.c. Less Than Significant Impact: There is an adjacent drainage feature located along the eastern border of the project site that falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Game based on a 2012 Jurisdictional Delineation prepared by Natural Resources Assessment, Inc. (contained in Appendix D of the MBA report). Based on the findings of Natural Resources Assessment, Inc.'s Jurisdictional Delineation the adjacent unnamed ephemeral feature connects to the Margarita River. The drainage contains areas under CDFG and USACE jurisdiction. The project was designed to avoid the areas of the drainage. As discussed in 4.b above, the 0.1 acre area of willows to be impacted are not connected to the channel or the associated riparian corridor and are therefore not under CDFG jurisdiction. The construction of the project, including retaining walls, will be done adjacent to and within close proximity to the channel and riparian area. However, no impacts to the riparian area or drainages are permitted without obtaining appropriate regulatory permits from USACE, CDFG, and RWQCB. The project was specifically designed to avoid the jurisdictional drainage areas and, therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 4.d. Less Than Significant With Mitigation incorporated: The MBA report states that the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species, and that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre -construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required. If construction activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August), the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Required Mitigation: If the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian nesting season (February to August) the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: • A pre -construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted prior to any vegetation disturbance activities. • If passerine birds are found to be nesting or there is evidence of nesting behavior inside or within 250 feet of the impact area, a 250 -foot buffer will be required around the nest where no vegetation disturbance will be permitted. • For birds of prey, such as hawks and owls, the buffer shall be expanded to 500 feet. • A qualified biologist is required to closely monitor the nest until it is determined that the nest is no longer active, at which time vegetation removal could continue. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 9 4.e. No Impact: The project site is located within the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Fee Area. The project will be conditioned to comply with provisions of Chapter 8.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code (Habitat Conservation), which requires payment of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat fee prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Additionally, trees subject to the City's Heritage Tree Ordinance are not present on the site. The project is consistent with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources and no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 4.f. No Impact: The project has been designed and necessary mitigation measures will be implemented to be consistent with the provisions of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. An MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl) was prepared for this project by Michael Brandman Associates and was submitted to the City in August, 2012. This report contains the results of a Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis and habitat assessment. The project site lies within the Southwest Area Plan. The project site is not part of a criteria cell and not part of a plan sub unit. The project site is also not within any designated corridor, potential corridors, or areas or potential core areas. MBA assessed the project site to determine consistency with the requirements set forth in the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software was used to map the site in relation to MSHCP areas including Criteria Cells; conservation areas and wildlife movement corridors and linkages; Criteria Area Species Survey Areas for plant, bird, mammal, and amphibian species; Narrow Endemic Plants Survey Area; and survey requirements for inadequately covered species. The Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Conservation Summary Report was queried to determine habitat assessment and potential survey requirements for the site (see Appendix A of the MBA report). The MSHCP also requires that an assessment be completed to determine the potentially significant effects of the project on riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. According to the MSHCP, the documentation for the assessment shall include mapping and a description of the functions and values of the mapped areas with respect to the species listed in MSHCP Section 6.1.2, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools. As part of the MSHCP requirements, an Urban/Wildlands Interface Analysis is required to address the indirect effects associated with locating proposed development in proximity to MSHCP conservation areas. The development may result in edge effects, which could potentially affect biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area. According to the MSHCP, the analysis should include an assessment of the potential indirect project impacts that may result from drainage, toxics, noise, invasive species, barriers, access, and grading/development, as listed and described in the MSHCP's Section 6.1.4, Guidelines Pertaining to Urban/Wildlands Interface. Details of this assessment can be found in the MBA report. MBA conducted a riparian/riverine habitat assessment of the project site concurrent with the habitat assessment. The riparian/riverine habitat assessment focused on the drainage feature adjacent to the project site that was considered to meet the minimum criteria to be considered riparian/riverine habitat per the definition provided within the MSHCP. The targeted drainage feature was carefully inspected for the presence of riparian habitat characteristics and suitability to support associated species, including a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, suitable topography and hydrology, and suitable soil substrate where necessary. As discussed in 4.b above, the project site contains 0.1 acre of riparian habitat that will be impacted, but these areas do not contain any riverine connectivity. The willows to be impacted are within upland areas and are not connected to the riparian area northeast of the project site. There are no vernal pools, or areas suitable for support sensitive fairy shrimp species within the property. The total area of riparian within the project site is 0.29 acre. A single ephemeral drainage occurs along the northeastern project site boundary and contains narrow -leaved willows, arroyo willows, and Fremont cottonwood trees. The majority of this riparian area is outside of the project parcel. The project site does not contain habitat that supports any of the sensitive species contained in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP; contains no vernal pool areas; and does not contain any areas capable of supporting any fairy shrimp species. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 10 In addition to the MSHCP requirements, other biological constraints associated with the project site were identified. As discussed in 4.c above, there is one adjacent drainage feature located along the northeastern border of the site that appears to fall under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) based on Natural Resources Assessment, Inc.'s Jurisdictional Delineation (2012). The project was specifically designed to avoid the jurisdictional drainage areas. As discussed in the MBA report, the project site is located within an MSHCP-designated habitat assessment survey area for BUOW. According to the MBA report, marginally suitable habitat occurs on site for BUOW; however, there were no suitable burrows present, there is not sufficient habitat within the project area to support BUOW, and the project site surrounded by development and isolated from other suitable habitat. Based on the habitat assessment it was determined that focus surveys for BUOW were not required. MBA determined that based on the disturbed nature of the site and the lack of sensitive species, no significant impacts are anticipated that would jeopardize the County's ability to achieve its conservation goals. Minimal riparian vegetation will be impacted; however, it is not connected to the adjacent drainage and riparian area. The project was designed specifically to avoid the drainage and riparian area. G:\PLANNING\20121PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 11 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact _ No Impact X a Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? X c Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X d Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Comments: 5.a. No Impact: A Cultural Resources Assessment was prepared in June, 2012, by LSA Associates, Inc. and a Paleontological Resource Assessment was prepared by LSA Associates in September, 2012. LSA conducted a records search at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) located at the University of California, Riverside. The EIC is the local branch of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). Cultural resource maps at the EIC were checked for possible prehistoric and historic resources previously recorded within and adjacent to the project area. To supplement the CHRIS data, a review was conducted of the National Register of Historic Places Index, the Office of Historic Preservation Directory of Properties, and historic USGS topographic maps. LSA also conducted a pedestrian survey for the project by walking approximately 10 -meter parallel transects within the project's boundaries and focusing on the visible portions of the project area. LSA was accompanies by Loran Garcia, monitor from the Pechanga Cultural Resources Office. Based on LSA's records search and field survey, no cultural resources will be affected by the project as the site is not known to contain a resource listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 5.b.d. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: A cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by LSA in June, 2012. No cultural resources were identified during the field survey. Exposed boulders and portable cobbles were examined for worked surfaces, and no such surfaces were found. Soil profiles were examined for cultural stratigraphy and rodent back dirt was checked for cultural remains. The LSA study identifies that the project has been graded and has had stone fill materials deposited on it, and that ground visibility was approximately 20 percent with a cover of matted, dry grasses. The LSA study indicates that the records search and field survey did not identify any cultural resources that will be affected by the project. LSA states that the graded alluvial setting offers little potential for undiscovered cultural resources to be present within the project boundaries, and there is only a low potential that such resources may be in secondary deposits. LSA concluded that no further archaeological investigation or monitoring is recommended. However, LSA did recommend that if previously undocumented cultural resources are identified during earthmoving activities, a qualified archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporarily diverting construction excavation if necessary. To ensure cultural resources, if identified on the site, are properly treated and preserved, the following mitigation measures shall be followed: Required Mitigation: • If previously undocumented cultural resources are identified during earthmoving activities, a qualified archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporarily diverting construction excavation if necessary. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 12 • The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. • All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. • If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources. • If the Developer, the project archaeologist and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. In addition to the cultural resource mitigation measures recommended by LSA, Pechanga Cultural Resources (the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians) also requested that the following mitigation measure be included: Required Mitigation: • Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological monitor to monitor all ground -disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. • At least 30 days prior to beginning project construction, the Project Applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Temecula and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. • Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Archaeologist shall file a pre -grading report with the City of Temecula (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation which will be determined in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the agreement required above, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal and archaeological monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. • If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the ''most likely descendant(s)" of receiving notification of G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 13 the discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described above. 5.c. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: A paleontological resources assessment was prepared for the project by LSA Associates, Inc. in August, 2012. As part of this study, the San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM) conducted a search of the Regional Paleontological Locality Inventory (RPLI) housed at the SBCM. The results of the record search indicated that no previously -known paleontological localities are recorded within the boundaries of the proposed project property. However, 7 resource localities are recorded from within 1/4 mile to the north of the proposed project area. Though the project site has been graded and has had stone fill materials deposited on it, and no paleontological resources were observed during the field survey, the abundance of fossils from the proposed project area, as well as from the other 400 fossil localities mapped from the Pauba Formation, demonstrate the high paleontological sensitivity of the region. The presence of sediments suitable to contain paleontological resources and the positive results of the literature review reinforce the high potential for encountering significant nonrenewable vertebrate fossils on the proposed project site. As such, the LSA Associates, Inc. study recommends the following mitigation measures: Required Mitigation: • A trained paleontological monitor will be present during ground -disturbing activities within the project area in sediments determined likely to contain paleontological resources. The monitoring for paleontological resources will be conducted on a full-time basis. The monitor will be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. The monitor will be equipped to rapidly remove any large fossil specimens encountered during excavation. During monitoring, samples will be collected and processed to recover microvertebrate fossils. Processing will include wet screen washing and microscopic examination of the residual materials to identify small vertebrate remains. The project paleontologist may reevaluate the monitoring program after 50 percent of the excavation has been completed. • Upon encountering a large deposit of bone, salvage of all bone in the area will be conducted with additional field staff and in accordance with modern paleontological techniques. • All fossils collected during the project will be prepared to a reasonable point of identification. Excess sediment or matrix will be removed from the specimens to reduce the bulk and cost of storage. Itemized catalogs of all material collected and identified will be provided to the museum repository along with the specimens. • A report documenting the results of the monitoring and salvage activities and the significance of the fossils will be prepared. • All fossils collected during this work, along with the itemized inventory of these specimens, will be deposited in a museum repository for permanent curation and storage. Compliance with these recommendations will ensure that excavation impacts to the paleontological resources are maintained below a level of significance. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 14 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated X Less Than Significant Impact . No Impact X a Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Strong seismic ground shaking? i. ii iii Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? X X iv b Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or colla•se? Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? X X X d e Comments: 6.a.i. No Impact: The City of Temecula General Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan do not identify any faults or fault zones through the project site, nor does the State of California Department of Conservation/California Geological Survey's Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map (http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/ap/pdf/MRIETA.PDF). Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.a.ii. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: There may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground shaking. Although, there are no known fault hazard zones on the property, the project is located in Southern California, an area that is seismically active. Any potential significant impacts will be mitigated through building construction, which will be consistent with the Uniform Building Code standards. Further, the project will be conditioned to provide soil reports prior to grading and if conditions warrant mitigation, recommendations contained in this report will be followed during construction. The soil reports will also contain recommendations for the compaction of the soil, which will serve to mitigate any potentially significant impacts from seismic ground shaking, seismic ground failure, liquefaction, subsidence and expansive soils. After mitigation measures are performed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Required Mitigation: • Building construction shall be consistent with the Uniform Building Code Standards. • All recommendations set forth in the Geotechnical Report completed by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated February 11, 2012, shall be followed, including but not limited to recommendations for G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 15 earthwork, clearing and grubbing, preparation of surfaces to received compacted fill, preparation of building areas, preparation of slab and paving areas, placement of compacted fill, field/laboratory testing during grading, wet soils, slopes, retaining wall design foundation recommendations, and grading and foundation plan review shall be followed. 6.a.iii.6.c. Less Than Significant: The project is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project. A geotechnical report has been prepared for the project by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. that did not identified any geologic unit or unstable soils that would become unstable. The geotechnical report concludes that, based on SCEC (1999) guidelines, a potential for loss of bearing capacity due to liquefaction is not expected at the project site. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project. 6.a.iv. Less Than Significant: A subsurface soil investigation prepared for the site by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc., analyzed slope stability based on Safety Factor ratings and the analysis indicates that "the planned fill and/or cut slopes constructed at an inclination of 2H:1V or flatter will be grossly and surficially stable." Furthermore, the project site and surrounding area have not had a history of landslide activity. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 6.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The project will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. The project site will be developed in accordance with City standards, including National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards, which require the implementation of erosion control and best management practices (BMPs). The Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Temecula General Plan has not identified any known landslides or mudslides located on the site or proximate to the site. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 6.d. Less Than Significant Impact: The project is not located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (1994) and is not anticipated to create substantial risks to life or property. According to the Geotechnical Report completed by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated February 11, 2012, Expansion Index (El) testing was performed on soil samples obtained from their exploration of the site. Based on the laboratory test results, the soils in the upper 15 feet of the site have a very low expansion potential. Therefore, a less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the project. 6.e. No Impact: The project will not utilize septic tanks, but will instead be connected to the public sewer system. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 16 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact X No Impact a Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? b 1.1 Total CO2o Emissions X Comments: 7.a.b. Less Than Significant Impact: Entech Consulting Group prepared an air quality and greenhouse gas study for the project. The study determined that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will result from construction activities related to the project. The study states that temporary GHG emissions are expected to occur for the duration of the construction of the proposed project. CaIEEMod was utilized to estimate CO2e emissions from the construction of the proposed project. The Entech study estimated emissions for each stage of construction scheduled. Table 7 from the Entech report, provided below, displays the CaIEEMod results. Table 7. CO2e Emissions for Construction of Proposed Project Construction Year and Season CO2e Emissions, metric tons!year Annually 2013 648' 2013 Emissions amortized over 30 years 2014 32' 2014 Emissions amortized over 30 voars b 1.1 Total CO2o Emissions 23.1` Source: Enrech Cor,suiorg Group 2 ;2 at Tola crri scions for all construction phases 6? Following SCAQMD guidance 2013 end 2014 construction emission totals were spread out over s 30 ynar period. c) 2013 and 2014 amortised emissions were added together to determine the tdst COR Emissions to the construction a! the propos.=A prajecL The Entech report states that draft guidance from the SCAQMD recommend amortizing construction emissions over a 30 -year period to account for their contribution to project lifetime greenhouse gas emissions. The 2013 and 2014 annual MTCO2e emissions were amortized over a 30 -year period, total construction emissions would be estimated at 23.1 MTCO2e per year, which is far below the 3,500 MTCO2e residential screening threshold suggested by SCAQMD. The Entech study identified that GHG emissions are expected to decrease in 2014 because construction will only occur for two months in the year 2014, as compared to the 11 months in 2013. Construction emissions would therefore have a less that cumulatively contribution to global climate change impacts. Entech also calculated GHG operational emissions from activities that would occur from tenant use, mechanical building operations, and trip generations associated with vehicular traffic. CaIEEMod was utilized to estimate CO2e from the operation of the proposed project. Identified within CaIEEMod are specific sources of GHG emissions in the form of area, energy, mobile, waste, and water. Table 9 of the Entech study, provided below, displays the CaIEEMod results. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 17 Table 7. COze Emissions for Construction of Proposed Project Construction Year and Season CO2e Emissions, metric tons/year Annually 2013 648' 2013 Emissions amortized over 30 years 2213 2014 32' 2014 Emissions1 amortized over 30 years 1 b Total CO2o Emissions 23.1c Sntrc,: Erma h GornuidngGrcup, 2012 a) Tot emissions for al' consln:chon phases hl Fatbwing SC,ACMD guidance 2013 end 2014 construction emission 1ota3s wore spread out Dues a 30 year pond. c) 2013 and 2014 amortized eanissionswere added together to determine the total CCho Emissions for the consiniction of the proposed prefect_ Entech states that draft guidance from the SCAQMD recommend a significance threshold for residential projects of 3,500 MTCO2e. The total annual GHG emissions were estimated to be 1,312 MTCO2eper year, which is below the 3,500 MTCO2e residential screening threshold suggested by SCAQMD. Operational emissions, therefore, would also have a less than cumulatively contribution to global climate change impacts. At this time there are no adopted statewide guidelines for greenhouse gas emission (GHG) impacts, but this is being addressed through the provisions of Senate Bill 97 (SB 97). In addition, the City of Temecula does not have any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. For the proposed project, the project would be considered to have a significant impact if the project would be in conflict with the AB 32 State goals for reducing GHG emissions. Staff assumes that AB 32 will be successful in reducing GHG emissions and reducing the cumulative GHG emissions statewide by 2020. It is not anticipated that the project could have a major impact (either positively or negatively) on the global concentration of GHG. GHG impacts are considered to be exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non -cumulative greenhouse gas emission impacts from a climate change perspective per the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA, 2008). The proposed project would contribute to global climate change as a result of emissions of GHGs, primarily CO2, emitted by construction activities. However, the project will not conflict with the CARB's thirty-nine (39) recommended actions in California's AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The project is expected to have a less than significant impact with regard to greenhouse gas emissions. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 18 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact X No Impact a Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? X c Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? X d Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? X X X X X e f g h Comments: 8.a. Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will not involve the routine transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.b. Less Than Significant Impact: The project proposes to subdivide the property and to construct multi- family apartment buildings. It is not anticipated that this project would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 8.c. Less Than Significant Impact: A school is located near the southeast corner of the project site. The proposed multi -family apartment buildings do not include any activities or uses that would pose a potential health hazard to the local population or the nearby school. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 19 8.d. No Impact: Based upon the available data and the historical land use, there is no evidence to support that hazardous wastes would be present on the site. No impacts are anticipated. 8.e.f. No Impact: The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or private airstrip according to Figure LU -2 in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Therefore, no impact upon airport uses will result from this proposal. 8.g. No Impact: The Project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project will take access from maintained public streets and will not impede emergency response or evacuation plans. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 8.h. No Impact: The proposed project is not located in or near a wildland area that would be subject to fire hazards. The location of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No impact is anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 20 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Im•act X No Im•act a Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water quality? b Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? X X c d Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? X e Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? X f Require the preparation of a project -specific WQMP? Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? X X g h X i Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? X Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Comments: 9.a. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations in effect at the time of grading permit issuance. As a condition of approval, the applicant is also required to generate a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) as specified in the City of Temecula's NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board that will ensure that the project implements specific water quality features to remove pollutants from the project's runoff in perpetuity. As such, the project will not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. By complying with the NPDES requirements, and potential impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level. 9.b. Less than Significant Impact: The water quality measures proposed for this project include numerous permanent post -construction storm water infiltration devices and open space located throughout the G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 21 site in order to maximize infiltration into the ground and assist with restoring groundwater supplies. As such, the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The project is not anticipated to have a significant effect on the quantity and quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals. The proposed project is required to comply with local development standards, including lot coverage and landscaping requirements, which will allow percolation and ground water recharge. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.c. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The proposed project will include an on-site drainage plan; however it will not alter off-site drainage patterns or alter the course of a stream or river, and will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on -or off-site. During construction activities, erosion and siltation issues will be controlled to a less than significant level of impact by implementing construction -phase best management practices (BMP's). Following the completion of construction activities, the project will implement permanent post -construction infiltration devices to control increases in the rate, volume, and pollutant -load from surface runoff, and, as a result, will prevent erosion, sediment discharges, and sedimentation onsite and offsite. The Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the project by VSL Engineering states that the project shall implement various techniques to minimize urban runoff. Specifically, there are nine (9) bio - retention basins and four (4) areas designated for porous pavement. With this design, the project's runoff flow rate, volume, velocity and duration for the post -development condition do not exceed the pre -development condition for the 2 -year, 24-hour and 10 -year 24-hour rainfall events. In addition to being required to implement the WQMP design features, the project is also required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Elimination Discharge System (NPEDS) standards, which addresses drainage, siltation and erosion. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.d. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river. As discussed in 9.c above, the project will not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site because the project will not alter the course of a stream or river. The City of Temecula Public Works Department reviews all drainage plans and determines adequate drainage facilities are in place capable of on-site drainage. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 9.e. Less than Significant Impact: As discussed in 9.c above, the proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems. Through implementation of the WQMP the project will not provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. The project is required to comply with Best Management Practices (BMP's), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations as well as National Pollution Elimination Discharge Elimination System standards, which address drainage and polluted runoff. A less than significant impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.f. No Impact: The project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements established by the State of California. However, the project is required to prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) pursuant to the Municipal Separate Storm -Sewer permit (MS4 permit) issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. The WQMP must be accepted prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project site. The water quality control measures to be identified in the WQMP will either be incorporated into the design of the project or be added to the project with specific conditions of approval and will be expected to eliminate potential adverse impacts to receiving waters. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 22 9.g. No Impact: The proposed project is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project 9.h. No Impact: The proposed project is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area and therefore will not place improvements that could impede or redirect flood flows within a 100 -year flood hazard area. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.i. No Impact: The proposed project is not located in a dam inundation area or a 100 -year floodplain. Therefore, no impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. 9.j. No Impact: The proposed project is not located near a coast line or large body of water which would subject the site to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Therefore, no impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 23 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact X No Impact X a Physically divide an established community? Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? b c Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X Comments: 10.a. No Impact: The proposed project would not divide an established community or conflict with the applicable land use plan. Adjacent zoning includes High Density Residential (H), Low Medium Density Residential (LM), and Public Institutional (PI). The project site is surrounded by existing development, including apartments to the west and to the north, an Edison substation to the north, single family residential units, Vail Elementary School, and a drainage feature to the east, and single family residential units to the south._Surrounding development to the north and west of the project site includes apartments on property with a General Plan Designation of High Density Residential and impacts from the proposed General Plan Amendment and Planned Development Overlay text changes are anticipated to be less than significant. The project would contribute to providing the City with diverse residential opportunities. 10.b. Less than Significant Impact: The project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The project proposes a General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan designation of the site from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential and proposes related changes to the zoning through text changes to Planned Development Overlay 11 (PDO -11) to allow for new development standards for the site that will be specific to apartment buildings. The existing PDO -11 allows for 62 units, however the existing General Plan designation allows up to 94 units, while the proposed project would allow for 120 units, or 26 more units than the current General Plan would allow and these additional units can be accommodated with existing infrastructure. As such, the project would not result in significant environmental impacts beyond those already anticipated for the property under the current General Plan designation and zoning regulations and would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 10.c. No Impact: The project has been designed and necessary mitigation measures will be implemented to be consistent with the provisions of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan and no impact is anticipated as a result of this project. An MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl) was prepared for this project by Michael Brandman Associates and was submitted to the City in August, 2012. This report contains the results of a Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Consistency Analysis and habitat assessment. The project site lies within the Southwest Area Plan. The project site is not part of a criteria cell and not part of a plan sub unit. The project site is also not within any designated corridor, potential corridors, or areas or potential core areas. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 24 MBA assessed the project site to determine consistency with the requirements set forth in the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software was used to map the site in relation to MSHCP areas including Criteria Cells; conservation areas and wildlife movement corridors and linkages; Criteria Area Species Survey Areas for plant, bird, mammal, and amphibian species; Narrow Endemic Plants Survey Area; and survey requirements for inadequately covered species. The Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Conservation Summary Report was queried to determine habitat assessment and potential survey requirements for the site (see Appendix A of the MBA report). The MSHCP also requires that an assessment be completed to determine the potentially significant effects of the project on riparian/riverine areas and vernal pools. According to the MSHCP, the documentation for the assessment shall include mapping and a description of the functions and values of the mapped areas with respect to the species listed in MSHCP Section 6.1.2, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools. As part of the MSHCP requirements, an Urban/Wildlands Interface Analysis is required to address the indirect effects associated with locating proposed development in proximity to MSHCP conservation areas. The development may result in edge effects, which could potentially affect biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area. According to the MSHCP, the analysis should include an assessment of the potential indirect project impacts that may result from drainage, toxics, noise, invasive species, barriers, access, and grading/development, as listed and described in the MSHCP's Section 6.1.4, Guidelines Pertaining to Urban/Wildlands Interface. Details of this assessment can be found in the MBA report. MBA conducted a riparian/riverine habitat assessment of the project site concurrent with the habitat assessment. The riparian/riverine habitat assessment focused on the drainage feature adjacent to the project site that was considered to meet the minimum criteria to be considered riparian/riverine habitat per the definition provided within the MSHCP. The targeted drainage feature was carefully inspected for the presence of riparian habitat characteristics and suitability to support associated species, including a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, suitable topography and hydrology, and suitable soil substrate where necessary. As discussed in 4.b above, the project site contains 0.1 acre of riparian habitat that will be impacted, but these areas do not contain any riverine connectivity. The willows to be impacted are within upland areas and are not connected to the riparian area northeast of the project site. There are no vernal pools, or areas suitable for support sensitive fairy shrimp species within the property. The total area of riparian within the project site is 0.29 acre. A single ephemeral drainage occurs along the northeastern project site boundary and contains narrow -leaved willows, arroyo willows, and Fremont cottonwood trees. The majority of this riparian area is outside of the project parcel. The project site does not contain habitat that supports any of the sensitive species contained in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP; contains no vernal pool areas; and does not contain any areas capable of supporting any fairy shrimp species. In addition to the MSHCP requirements, other biological constraints associated with the project site were identified. As discussed in 4.c above, there is one adjacent drainage feature located along the northeastern border of the site that appears to fall under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) based on Natural Resources Assessment, Inc.'s Jurisdictional Delineation (2012). The project was specifically designed to avoid the jurisdictional drainage areas. As discussed in the MBA report, the project site is located within an MSHCP-designated habitat assessment survey area for BUOW. According to the MBA report, marginally suitable habitat occurs on site for BUOW; however, there were no suitable burrows present, there is not sufficient habitat within the project area to support BUOW, and the project site surrounded by development and isolated from other suitable habitat. Based on the habitat assessment it was determined that focus surveys for BUOW were not required. MBA determined that based on the disturbed nature of the site and the lack of sensitive species, no significant impacts are anticipated that would jeopardize the County's ability to achieve its conservation goals. Minimal riparian vegetation will be impacted; however, it is not connected to the adjacent drainage and riparian area. The project was designed specifically to avoid the drainage and riparian area. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 25 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X a Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X Comments: 11.a.b. No Impact: The project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource nor in the loss of an available, locally important mineral resource recovery site. The State Geologist has classified the City of Temecula as MRZ-3a, containing areas of sedimentary deposits which have the potential for supplying sand and gravel for concrete and crushed stone for aggregate. However, these areas are determined as not containing deposits of significant economic value based upon available data in reports prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. Furthermore, the project site is not identified as an important site known to contain such resources as shown in the Final EIR for the City of Temecula General Plan. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 26 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? X b Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? X X c d A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X _ X e f For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? X Comments: 12.a and d. Less than Significant Impact: The project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction. Construction machinery is capable of producing noise in the range of 100+ DBA at 100 feet, which is considered annoying. However, noise from construction of the project will comply with City ordinances regulating the hours of activity to Monday through Friday from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. and Saturday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Furthermore, based on the use of standard construction equipment (dozer, backhoe, cement truck, air compressors and air tools, generators, etc.), no activities are anticipated within the proposed project that would result in exposure to persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. If equipment were required that would exceed the city's noise regulations, an application for a construction related exception must be made on a minor exception form in conformance with Section 9.20.070 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Since no activities are anticipated within the proposed project that would result in exposure to persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 12.b. Less than Significant Impact: Construction activities that would occur within the project site would include grading and excavation, which would have the potential to temporarily generate low levels of groundborne vibration. However, no activities are anticipated within the proposed project that would expose persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 12.c. Less than Significant Impact: Although the project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels during construction, substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels in the G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 27 project vicinity above levels existing without the project are not anticipated. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 12.e. -f. No Impact: This project is not within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip. Therefore, the project will not expose people to excessive noise levels generated by an airport and no impacts will result from this project. G:\PLANNING120121PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP1PIanning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 28 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X a Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? X Comments: 13.a. -c. No Impact: The project will not induce substantial growth in the area either directly or indirectly. The proposed project is a 120 unit multi -family residential project that will utilize existing roads and infrastructure. The project site consists of undeveloped land covered with vegetation in the south and asphalt from a small parking are for a school (The Carden Academy) that occupied a portion of the site in the north until approximately 2007, when all structures associated with the school were removed. Therefore, the project will not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing. The project will neither displace housing nor people and will not necessitate the construction of replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 29 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact _ Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact X X No Impact a Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? X Schools? X Parks? X Other public facilities? X Comments: 14.a. Less Than Significant Impact: The project will have a less than significant impact upon, or result in a need for new or altered fire, police, recreation or other public facilities. The project will incrementally increase the need for some public services. However, the increase is expected to be a very small increment and payment of the City's Development Impact Fees will ensure that any potential impact will be reduced to an insignificant level. As a result, the project is anticipated to have a less than significant impact upon the need for new or altered public facilities. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 30 15. RECREATION. Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact X No Impact a Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X Comments: 15.a. Less than Significant Impact: The project proposes multi -family housing on residentially zoned property. The project will not displace recreationally zoned lands or remove vacant lands that are used for recreational purposes. The project will include open space and recreational facilities for its residents and is not anticipated to significantly increase the use of neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities to a point that would cause significant physical deterioration of these facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 15.b. Less than Significant Impact: The proposed project does include open space and recreational facilities for its residents and is not anticipated to require construction or expansion of additional public recreational facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 31 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact X No Impact a Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit? b Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? X X c d Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? X X e f Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? X Comments: 16.a.b. Less than Significant Impact: A traffic study was prepared for the project by RK Engineering Group, Inc. and was submitted to the City in order to ensure compliance with all appropriate traffic regulations. Based on the intersections and roadways evaluated, the study reveals that the proposed project will not result in a conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system in the project area. Further, the project will not conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. The RK Engineering Group's study indicates that the proposed project's peak hours differ from the adjacent Vail Elementary School's peak hour traffic and the proposed apartment project can be accommodated with no required mitigation measures. At the December 6, 2012 meeting of the Temecula Public/Traffic Safety Commission, the Commission discussed school area traffic circulation at Vail Elementary School and the Commission agreed with the traffic analysis prepared for the project and did not perceive any additional impacts to Mira Loma Drive or Vail Elementary School as a result of the project. Additionally, Jason Osborn, Director of Transportation for Temecula Valley Unified School District, concurred with the findings of the analysis and indicated that due to the close proximity of the school, children from the proposed apartments are more likely to walk to school based on existing pedestrian travel patterns for the surrounding neighborhood. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 32 16.c. No Impact: The project is not anticipated to result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. The project area is not within the French Valley Airport influence area. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 16.d.e. Less Than Significant Impact: The project will be accessed from existing roads and will not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature of the project. On-site access roads will be required to be consistent with City standards, including street design and emergency access. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. 16.f. No Impact: The project will be required to be consistent with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks). The project will include a public pedestrian/bicycle path from Mira Loma Drive to Rancho Vista Road that will help to support alternative transportations. No impacts are anticipated as a result of the project. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 33 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? X b Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X c Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X d Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? X e Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? X X X f g Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Comments: 17.a.b.e. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements, require the construction of new treatment facilities, nor affect the capacity of treatment providers. Though the project will have an incremental effect upon existing systems, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 17.c. Less than Significant Impact: The project will require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities on site that will connect to the existing system currently in place along Mira Loma Drive and to an existing flood control channel located east of and adjacent to the project site. The design of the existing system is sufficient to handle the runoff from this project and will not require the expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 17.d. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not significantly impact existing water supplies nor require expanded water entitlements. While the project will have an incremental impact upon existing systems, the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the City's General Plan states: "RCWD anticipates supplying water to 167,640 persons within its service area in 2020 (p. 5.14-3)." The FEIR further states: "EMWD anticipates supplying water to 756,699 persons within its service area in 2020, (p. 5.14-3)." This anticipated water supply includes a portion of Temecula and less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. 17.f.g. Less than Significant Impact: The project will not result in a need for new landfill capacity. Any potential impacts from solid waste created by this development can be mitigated through participation in G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 34 Source Reduction and Recycling Programs, which are implemented by the City. Less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project G:IPLANNING120121PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\PIanning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 35 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project: Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated X Less Than Significant Impact X No Impact a Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable ("Cumulatively considerable" 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)? b c Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Comments: 18.a. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: As discussed in the sections above, the project would involve a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential; a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlay - 11 (PDO -11); and a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site. The project is not anticipated to significantly reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, or threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. According to the MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl) prepared for the project by Michael Brandman Associates, the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species. The report states that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre -construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required. If construction activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August); mitigation measures shall be required. A cultural Resources Assessment prepared by LSA in June, 2012 recommends mitigation measures to ensure that if any cultural resources are identified on the site, they are properly treated and preserved. Additionally, a paleontological resources assessment was prepared for the project by LSA Associates, Inc. in August, 2012. The study concluded that the presence of sediments suitable to contain paleontological resources and the positive results of the literature review reinforce the high potential for encountering significant nonrenewable vertebrate fossils on the proposed project site. As such, the LSA Associates, Inc. study recommends mitigation measures to properly treat and preserve paleontological resources. 18.b. Less Than Significant Impact: implementation of the proposed project. 18.c. Less Than Significant Impact: effects on human beings have been identified. G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 36 No significant cumulative impacts have been identified with the No substantial environmental effects that would cause adverse 19. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a Earlier analyses used, Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which affects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 19.a. The City's General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report and the City of Temecula's Geographic Information System (GIS) Map Sets were used as a referenced source in preparing the Initial Study for this project. The City's General Plan and Final Environmental Impact Report are available for review at the City of Temecula Planning Department located at 41000 Main Street in Temecula. The GIS Map Sets are available online at www.cityoftemecula.org. 19.b. On April 10, 2007, the City of Temecula City Council approved Planning Application Nos. PA05-0234 (PDO) and PA05-0109 (TTM) and adopted the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration. The current proposal, PA12-0033, involves a revised PDO and General Plan amendment and is not the same as the project previously analyzed. This Initial Study has been prepared to specifically address the current proposal. 19.c. See attached Mitigation Monitoring Program. SOURCES 1. City of Temecula General Plan 2. City of Temecula General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report 3. South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook 4. MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl), Michael Brandman Associates, August 15, 2012. 5. Traffic Impact Study, RK Engineering Group, Inc., September 11, 2012. 6. Additional Subsurface Soil Investigation, Review of Rough Grading Plan, Foundation Recommendations and Liquefaction Analysis, Tentative Tract Map 33584, A.P.N. 944-060-006, Proposed Residential Development, GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc., February 11, 2012. 7. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study, Entech Consulting Group, July 2012. 8. Cultural Resources Assessment, LSA Associates, Inc., June 2012. 9. Paleontological Resources Assessment, LSA Associates, Inc., September 2012. 10. Water Quality Management Plan, VSL Engineering, March 2012. 11. State of California Department Conservation G:\PLANNING\2012\PA12-0033 Rancho Vista Village DP\Planning\CEQA\CEQA Initial Study 12-12-12.doc 37 Project Description: Location: Applicant: Mitigation Monitoring Program PA12-0034, a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential; a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlay - 11 (PDO -11); and a Development Plan to construct 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site. The Project is generally located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, Temecula John Snell; Inland Communities Corp 650 E. Hospitality, Ste 410 San Bernardino, CA 92408 General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Biological Resources A report by MBA for the project states that the project site does contain suitable avian nesting habitat for a variety of species, and that if the clearance of vegetation is required and occurs during the avian breeding season (February to August), a pre - construction clearance survey for nesting birds will be required. If construction activities occur outside of the avian breeding season (September to July) no mitigation is required. For any clearance of vegetation during the avian breeding season (February to August), the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Bio -1 A pre -construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted prior to any vegetation disturbance activities. Bio -2 If passerine birds are found to be nesting or there is evidence of nesting behavior inside or within 250 feet of the impact area, a 250 -foot buffer will be required around the nest where no vegetation disturbance will be permitted. Bio -3 For birds of prey, such as hawks and owls, the buffer shall be expanded to 500 feet. Bio -4 A qualified biologist is required to closely monitor the nest until it is determined that the nest is no longer active, at which time vegetation removal could continue. Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential biological resource impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Milestone: Prior to Grading Permit Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department and Public Works Department 1 General Impact: Cultural Resources A cultural Resources Assessment was prepared by LSA that recommend that to ensure cultural resources, if identified on the site, are properly treated and preserved, mitigation measures shall be followed. In addition the Pechanga Tribe of Luiseno Mission Indians also requested specific cultural resource mitigation measure to be in place. Mitigation Measures: Cultural -1 If previously undocumented cultural resources are identified during earthmoving activities, a qualified archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find, temporarily diverting construction excavation if necessary. Cultural -2 The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods and all archaeological artifacts that are found on the project area to the appropriate Tribe for proper treatment and disposition. Cultural -3 All sacred sites, should they be encountered within the project area, shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation, if feasible. Cultural -4 If inadvertent discoveries of subsurface archaeological/cultural resources are discovered during grading, the Developer, the project archaeologist, and the Tribe shall assess the significance of such resources and shall meet and confer regarding the mitigation for such resources. Pursuant to Calif. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological resources. Cultural -5 Cultural -6 If the Developer, the project archaeologist and the Tribe cannot agree on the significance or the mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the Planning Director for decision. The Planning Director shall make the determination based on the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act with respect to archaeological resources and shall take into account the religious beliefs, customs, and practices of the Tribe. Notwithstanding any other rights available under the law, the decision of the Planning Director shall be appealable to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Applicant shall retain a Riverside County qualified archaeological monitor to monitor all ground - 2 disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources. Any newly discovered cultural resource deposits shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation. Cultural -7 At least 30 days prior to beginning project construction, the Project Applicant shall contact the Pechanga Tribe to notify the Tribe of grading, excavation and the monitoring program, and to coordinate with the City of Temecula and the Tribe to develop a Cultural Resources Treatment and Monitoring Agreement. The Agreement shall address the treatment of known cultural resources, the designation, responsibilities, and participation of professional Native American Tribal monitors during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities; project grading and development scheduling; terms of compensation for the monitors; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. Cultural -8 Prior to beginning project construction, the Project Archaeologist shall file a pre -grading report with the City of Temecula (if required) to document the proposed methodology for grading activity observation which will be determined in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe. Said methodology shall include the requirement for a qualified archaeological monitor to be present and to have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. In accordance with the agreement required above, the archaeological monitor's authority to stop and redirect grading will be exercised in consultation with the Pechanga Tribe in order to evaluate the significance of any archaeological resources discovered on the property. Tribal and archaeological monitors shall be allowed to monitor all grading, excavation and groundbreaking activities, and shall also have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities. Cultural -9 If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the "most likely descendant(s)" of receiving notification of the discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in consultations concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98 and the Treatment Agreement described above. Cultural -10 A trained paleontological monitor will be present during ground -disturbing activities within the project area in sediments determined likely to contain paleontological resources. The monitoring for paleontological resources will be conducted on a full-time basis. The monitor will be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction activities to ensure avoidance of adverse impacts to paleontological resources. The monitor will be equipped to rapidly remove any large fossil specimens encountered during excavation. During monitoring, samples will be collected and processed to recover microvertebrate fossils. Processing will include wet screen washing and microscopic examination of the residual materials to identify small vertebrate remains. The project paleontologist may reevaluate the monitoring program after 50 percent of the excavation has been completed. Cultural -11 Upon encountering a large deposit of bone, salvage of all bone in the area will be conducted with additional field staff and in accordance with modern paleontological techniques. Cultural -12 All fossils collected during the project will be prepared to a reasonable point of identification. Excess sediment or matrix will be removed from the specimens to reduce the bulk and cost of storage. Itemized catalogs of all material collected and identified will be provided to the museum repository along with the specimens. Cultural -13 A report documenting the results of the monitoring and salvage activities and the significance of the fossils will be prepared. Cultural -14 All fossils collected during this work, along with the itemized inventory of these specimens, will be deposited in a museum repository for permanent curation and storage. Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Responsible Monitoring Party: Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential cultural resource impacts to a less than significant level. Agreements and conditions prior to issuance of a grading permit, monitoring ongoing through grading operations, and final reports upon completion of grading. Planning Department and Public Works Department General Impact: Mitigation Measures: Specific Process: Mitigation Milestone: Geology and Soils There may be a potentially significant impact from seismic ground shaking. Although, there are no known fault hazard zones on the property, the project is located in Southern California, an area that is seismically active. After mitigation measures are performed, less than significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Geology & Soils -1 Building construction shall be consistent with the Uniform Building Code Standards. Geology & Soils -2 All recommendations set forth in the Geotechnical Report completed by GeoMat Testing Laboratories, Inc. dated February 11, 2012, shall be followed, including but not limited to recommendations for earthwork, clearing and grubbing, preparation of surfaces to received compacted fill, preparation of building areas, preparation of slab and paving areas, placement of compacted fill, field/laboratory testing during grading, wet soils, slopes, retaining wall design foundation recommendations, and grading and foundation plan review shall be followed. Place the above Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval on the project to reduce potential seismic -related ground failure impacts to a less than significant level. Grading permit issuance and Building Permit issuance Responsible Monitoring Party: Planning Department, Public Works Department and Building Department 5 jzia engineering group, inc. • transportation planning • traffic engineering acoustical engineering • parking studies LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: CITY OF TEMECULA DATE: February 6, 2013 41000 Main Street JOB NO.: 0518-2013-01 Temecula, CA 92590 SUBJECT: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study, City of Temecula ATTN: Mr. Stuart Fisk WE ARE FORWARDING: By Messenger By Blueprinter X By Email By Fedex (Priority) NUMBER OF COPIES DESCRIPTION 1 PDF copy for your use SENT FOR YOUR STATUS PLEASE NOTE Approval Preliminary Revisions Signature Revised Additions X Use Approved Omissions File Released Corrections REMARKS: Attached please find the Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study, City of Temecula. Please call me at (949) 474-0809 extension 208 if you have any questions. COPIES TO: RK9755TB.xls BY: Wa:D;c6AT.A.-% Mike Dickerson Acoustical Engineer, INCE 1000 westerly place, suite 280 nes port beach, California 92660 tel 949.174.0809 fax 949.474.0902 http://www.rkengineer.com RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT STUDY City of Temecula, California : I CAKE 'MUTT& Iii I I I I I LL ���� IIRx010 � 'W1a 1fE1A11�/REISQFTTLLL I I 1x0602 \ / I I I --- TR 1010 LOT Q PL'Bil( L's1mm l:AL M$6492 TR ZOIC LOT S.3 OPFN PALS MB 4112 • /• / rr / e / + / / +°4. ; / r /,' /.. //1,' / \\ \ ' n+ PM 21014 \ �. uF�lc-vnu. \ ti / A+7�:-.•=e 1- 1P2 flI( • • engineering group, inc. ipri engineering group, inc. February 6, 2013 Mr. Stuart Fisk CITY OF TEMECULA 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 transportation planning • traitic engineering acoustical engineering • parking studies Subject: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study, City of Temecula Dear Mr. Fisk: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) has completed a construction noise impact assessment for the proposed Rancho Vista Village project. The project site is located on the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road in the City of Temecula, as indicated in Exhibit A. The proposed project's site plan is shown in Exhibit B. The proposed project was assessed with respect to on-site construction noise. For purposes of this study, the construction noise was analyzed during the different stages of construction. The noise levels were projected to the nearest sensitive receptors near the project site. The noise standards, defined in the City of Temecula's Noise Element and Municipal Code are indicated in Section 3.0 of the report. RK conducted a site visit to the project site and measured the ambient daytime noise levels. The project will not significantly impact any sensitive residential land uses. In addition, further construction noise reduction measures are outlined in Section 6.2 of this report. RK Engineering Group, Inc. is pleased to provide the CITY OF TEMECULA with this assessment for the Rancho Vista Village project. If you have any questions regarding this study or need further review, please call us at (949) 474-0809. Sincerely, RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 0:ceeTDN,c6.--, Michael Dickerson, INCE Noise/Air Specialist Attachments MD: mn/RK9755. doc JN: 0518 2013 01 c,ofESS/. QJOERT w rx -9 No. 20285 Exp. 09/30/ %) SCI VIL OF c f,0 Robert Kahn, P.E. Principal 4000 westerly place, suite 280 newport beach, calitornia 92660 tel 949.474.0809 fax 949.474.0902 http://www.rkengineercom RANCHO VILLAGE VISTA CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT STUDY City of Temecula, California Prepared for: CITY OF TEMECULA 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Prepared by: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 4000 Westerly Place, Suite 280 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Michael Dickerson Robert Kahn, P.E. PP FESS/ 00" - Q �Yt , 0) w cs cP9's qT CIVIL OF c C1)%o. 20285 Exp. 09/30/ m' February 6, 2013 MD: mniRK9755. doc IN: 0518-2013 01 • • • • • Table of Contents Section Page 1.0 Introduction 1-1 1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives 1-1 1.2 Site Location and Study Area 1-1 1.3 Proposed Project Description 1-1 2.0 Fundamentals of Noise 2-1 2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics 2-1 2.2 Frequency and Hertz 2-1 2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels 2-1 2.4 Addition of Decibels 2-1 2.5 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels 2-2 2.6 Noise Descriptors 2-2 2.7 Traffic Noise Prediction 2-4 2.8 Sound Propagation 2-4 3.0 Regulatory Setting 3-1 3.1 Federal Regulations 3-1 3.2 State Regulations 3-1 3.2 City of Temecula Noise Regulations 3-2 4.0 Study Method and Procedures 4-1 4.1 Measurement Procedure and Critieria 4-1 4.1.1 Noise Measurements 4-1 4.1.2 Noise Measurement Locations 4-2 4.1.3 Noise Measurement Timing and Climate 4-2 4.2 Construction Noise Modeling 4-2 5.0 Existing Noise Environment 5-1 5.1 Noise Measurement Results 5-1 6.0 Construction Noise Impact 6-1 6.1 Construction Noise 6-1 6.2 Construction Noise Mitigation Measures 6-3 List of Attachments Exhibits Location Map A Site Plan B Noise Monitoring Locations C Recommendations D Tables Noise Level Measurements 1 Typical Construction Noise Levels 2 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at East Property Line (dBA) Adjacent to Elementary School and Residential Units 3 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at South Property Line (dBA) Residential Units Across from Rancho Vista Road 4 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at West Property Line (dBA) Residential Units Across from Mira Loma Drive 5 Appendices City of Temecula Noise Element A Field Sheet Data B Construction Noise Calculations C Sample Temporary Construction Noise Barriers D • • • • • 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives The purpose of this noise assessment is to evaluate the construction noise impacts for the project study area by identifying the estimated construction equipment, construction noise sources, and predicting the temporary construction noise levels. In addition, provide recommended noise mitigation measures, if necessary, to minimize the potential noise impacts. The assessment was conducted and compared to the noise standards set forth by the Federal, State, and Local agencies. Consistent with the City's Noise Guidelines, a significant impact related to noise would occur if a proposed project is determined to result in: • Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable agencies. The following is provided in this report: • A description of the study area and the proposed project • Information regarding the fundamentals of noise • A description of the local noise guidelines and standards • An evaluation of the existing ambient noise environment • Construction noise analysis 1.2 Site Location and Study Area The project site is located on the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, in the City of Temecula. The project site is bounded by residential to the north, Rancho Vista Road to the south, existing residential to the west, and Vail Elementary School to the east. The project site location is demonstrated in Exhibit A. The project site is partially depressed (when compared to the adjacent roadways), located approximately 1,110 feet above sea level, and is currently vacant. 1.3 Proposed Project Description The proposed project consists of the construction of 120 apartment units on approximately 5.7 acres. It is estimated that the project will be operational by approximately Year 2014. The site plan used for this analysis, provided by the City of Temecula, is illustrated in Exhibit B. • • 2.0 Fundamentals of Noise This section of the report provides basic information about noise and presents some of the terms used within the report. 2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics Sound is a disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source and is capable of being detected by the hearing organs. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a moving object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to a human ear. For traffic, or stationary noise, the medium of concern is air. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or unwanted. 2.2 Frequency and Hertz A continuous sound is described by its frequency (pitch) and its amplitude (loudness). Frequency relates to the number of pressure oscillations per second. Low -frequency sounds are low in pitch (bass sounding) and high -frequency sounds are high in pitch (squeak). These oscillations per second (cycles) are commonly referred to as Hertz (Hz). The human ear can hear from the bass pitch starting out at 20 Hz all the way to the high pitch of 20,000 Hz. 2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels The amplitude of a sound determines it loudness. The loudness of sound increases or decreases, as the amplitude increases or decreases. Sound pressure amplitude is measured in units of micro -Newton per square inch meter (N/m2), also called micro -Pascal (pPa). One pPa is approximately one hundred billionths (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric pressure. Sound pressure level (SPL or LP) is used to describe in logarithmic units the ratio of actual sound pressures to a reference pressure squared. These units are called decibels abbreviated dB. 2.4 Addition of Decibels Because decibels are on a logarithmic scale, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by simple plus or minus addition. When two (2) sounds or equal SPL are combined, they will produce an SPL 3 dB greater than the original single SPL. In other words, sound energy must be doubled to produce a 3 dB increase. If two (2) sounds differ by approximately 10 dB the higher sound level is the predominant sound. 2-1 2.5 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 Hz and 5,000 Hz, (A -weighted scale) and it perceives a sound within that range as being more intense than a sound with a higher or lower frequency with the same magnitude. For purposes of this report as well as with most environmental documents, the A -scale weighting is typically reported in terms of A -weighted decibel (dBA). Typically, the human ear can barely perceive the change in noise level of 3 dB. A change in 5 dB is readily perceptible, and a change in 10 dB is perceived as being twice or half as loud. As previously discussed, a doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB increase in sound, which means that a doubling of sound energy (e.g. doubling the volume of traffic on a highway), would result in a barely perceptible change in sound level. 2.6 Noise Descriptors Noise in our daily environment fluctuates over time. Some noise levels occur in regular patterns other are random. Some noise levels are constant while others are sporadic. Noise descriptors were created to describe the different time -varying noise levels. The following indicates the most commonly used noise descriptors and gives a brief definition. A -Weighted Sound Level The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A -weighted filter network. The A -weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear: A numerical method of rating human judgment of loudness. Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources, near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) The average equivalent A -weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00 PM and after addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM. Decibel (dB) A unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micro -pascals. 2-2 • • • dB(A) A -weighted sound level (see definition above). Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ) The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time varying noise level. The energy average noise level during the sample period. Habitable Room Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries, unfinished attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms, and similar spaces. L(n) The A -weighted sound level exceeded during a certain percentage of the sample time. For example, L10 in the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the sample time. Similarly L50, L90 and L99, etc. Noise Any unwanted sound or sound which is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing, or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines noise as "...excessive undesirable sound...". Outdoor Living Area Outdoor spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for passive recreational activities or other noise -sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, jacuzzi areas, etc. associated with residential uses; outdoor patient recovery or resting areas associated with hospitals, convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with places of worship which have a significant role in services or other noise -sensitive activities; and outdoor school facilities routinely used for educational purposes which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are: front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas and storage areas associated with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for short-term social gatherings; and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with educational uses prone to adverse noise impacts (for example, school play yard areas). Percent Noise Levels See [(n). 2-3 Sound Level (Noise Level) The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter having a standard frequency -filter for attenuating part of the sound spectrum. Sound Level Meter An instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency weighting networks for the measurement and determination of noise and sound levels. Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL) The dBA level which, if it lasted for one (1) second, would produce the same A -weighted sound energy as the actual event. 2.7 Traffic Noise Prediction Noise levels associated with traffic depends on a variety of factors: (1) volume of traffic, (2) speed of traffic, (3) auto, medium truck (2 — 6 wheels) and heavy truck percentage (3 axle and greater), and sound propagation. The greater the volume of traffic, higher speeds and truck percentages equate to a louder volume in noise. A doubling of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) along a roadway will increase noise levels by approximately 3 dB; reasons for this are discussed in the sections above. 2.8 Sound Propagation As sound propagates from a source it spreads geometrically. Sound from a small, localized source (i.e., a point source) radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance. The movement of vehicles down a roadway makes the source of the sound appear to propagate from a line (i.e., line source) rather than a point source. This line source results in the noise propagating from a roadway in a cylindrical spreading versus a spherical spreading that results from a point source. The sound level attenuates for a line source at a rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance. As noise propagates from the source, it is affected by the ground and atmosphere. Noise models use hard site (reflective surfaces) and soft site (absorptive surfaces) to help calculate predicted noise levels. Hard site conditions assume no excessive ground absorption between the noise source and the receiver. Soft site conditions such as grass, soft dirt or landscaping attenuate noise at an additional rate of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance. When added to the geometric spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall noise attenuation of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance for a line source and 6.0 dB per doubling of distance for a point source. 2-4 • • • • Research has demonstrated that atmospheric conditions can have a significant effect on noise levels when noise receivers are located 200 feet from a noise source. Wind, temperature, air humidity and turbulence can further impact how far sound can travel. TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS FROM INDOOR AND OUTDOOR NOISE SOURCES COMMON OUTDOOR NOISE LEVELS Jet Flyover at 1000 ft. Gas Lawn Mower at 3 ft. Diesel Truck at 50 ft. Noise Urban Daytime Gas Lawn Mower at 100 ft. Commercial Area Heavy Traffic at 300 ft. Quiet Urban Daytime Quiet Urban Nighttime Quiet Suburban Nighttime Quiet Rural Nighttime NOISE LEVEL COMMON INDOOR (dBA) NOISE LEVELS 110 Rock Band 100 Inside Subway Train (New York) 90 80 70 60 50 Food Blender at 3 ft. Garbage Disposal at 3 ft. Shouting at 3 ft. Vacuum Cleaner of 10 ft. Normal Speech at 3 ft. Large Business Office Dishwasher Next Room Small Theatre, Large Conference 40 Room (Background) 30 20 10 0 Library Bedroom of Night Concert Hall (Background) Recording Studio Threshold of Hearing 2-5 • • • 3.0 Regulatory Setting The proposed project is located in the City of Temecula and noise regulations are addressed through the various federal, state, and local government agencies. The agencies responsible for regulating noise are discussed below. 3.1 Federal Regulations The adverse impact of noise was officially recognized by the federal government in the Noise Control Act of 1972, which serves three (3) purposes: • Publicize noise emission standards for interstate commerce • Assist state and local abatement efforts • Promote noise education and research The Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC) was originally tasked with implementing the Noise Control Act. However, it was eventually eliminated leaving other federal agencies and committees to develop noise policies and programs. Some examples of these agencies are as follows: The Department of Transportation (DOT) assumed a significant role in noise control through its various agencies. The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) is responsible to regulate noise from aircraft and airports. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is responsible to regulate noise from the interstate highway system. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for the prohibition of excessive noise exposure to workers. The Federal government and the State advocate that local jurisdiction use their land use regulatory authority to arrange new development in such a way that "noise sensitive" uses are either prohibited from being constructed adjacent to a highway or, or alternatively that the developments are planned and constructed in such a manner that potential noise impacts are minimized. Since the Federal government and the State has preempted the setting of standards for noise levels that can be emitted by the transportation source, the City is restricted to regulating the noise generated by the transportation system through nuisance abatement ordinances and land use planning. 3.2 State Regulations Established in 1973, the California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control (ONC) was instrumental in developing regularity tools to control and abate noise for use by local agencies. One significant model is the "Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Matrix." The matrix allows the local jurisdiction to clearly delineate compatibility of sensitive uses with various incremental levels of noise. 3-1 The State of California has established noise insulation standards as outlined in Title 24 and the Uniform Building Code (UBC) which in some cases requires acoustical analyses to outline exterior noise levels and to ensure interior noise levels do not exceed the interior threshold. The State mandates that the legislative body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive general plan. The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines published by the State Department of Health Services. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable. 3.3 City of Temecula Noise Regulations The City of Temecula outlines their noise regulations and standards within the Noise Element from the General Plan and the Municipal Code (Appendix A). For purposes of this analysis, the City of Temecula's Municipal Code is used to compare the construction noise impacts to the adjacent land uses. Traffic Noise Regulation — Noise Element The City of Temecula's noise standards for residential development require that outdoor sensitive areas have a CNEL no greater than 65 dBA CNEL and an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. The City has a maximum exterior noise level up to 70 dBA CNEL for multiple family housing. Stationary Noise Regulation — Section 9.20.040 The City of Temecula's noise standards for stationary noise sources (e.g. condenser units, generators and other point source noise sources) is outlined in Table N-1 of the municipal code. The following outlines the maximum permissible sound at the property line for the various land uses: Temecula Land Use / Noise Standards Type of Land Use Land Use Designation Maximum Level (dBA) Interior Exterior Residential Hillside 45 65 Rural Very Low Low Medium Medium 45 65/70' High 45 70' Commercial and Office Neighborhood 70 Community Highway Tourist Service Professional Office 50 70 3-2 • • • • Temecula Land Use / Noise Standards - Cont. Light Industrial Industrial Park 55 75 Public/Institutional Schools 50 65 All Others 50 70 Open Space Vineyards/Agriculture - - 70 Open Space - - 70/65' Maximum exterior noise levels up to 70 dBA are allowed for multiple -family housing. 2 Where quiet is a basis required for the land use. Construction Noise Regulation - Section 9.20.060D & 9.20.070A Section 9.20.060D of the municipal code indicates the following with regard to construction noise: No person shall engage in or conduct construction activity, when the construction site is within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence, between the hours of six - thirty p.m. and seven a.m., Monday through Friday, and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. on Saturday. No construction activity shall be undertaken on Sunday and nationally recognized holidays unless exempted by Section 9.20.070 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Public works projects of any federal, state or local entity or emergency work by public utilities are exempt from the provisions of this subsection. Residents working on their homes or property are exempt from the prohibition of construction activities on Sundays and holidays and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. when working on Sundays and holidays. The city council may, by formal action, exempt projects from the provisions of this chapter. Section 9.20.070 of the Municipal Code indicates the following exceptions with regard to construction noise: A. Application and Processing. 1. Construction -Related Exceptions: An application for a construction -related exception shall be made on a minor exception form. The form shall be submitted in writing at least three working days (seventy-two hours) in advance of the scheduled and permitted activity and shall be accompanied by the appropriate inspection fee(s). The application is subject to approval by the city manager or designated representative. No public hearing is required. 3-3 2. Temporary Use Permit. An application for a single event exception shall be made using the temporary use permit application provided by the planning department and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. No public hearing is required. Requirements for Approval. The director of planning or his or her designee shall not approve a minor exception application or temporary use permit unless the applicant demonstrates that the activities described in the application would not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community in determining whether activities are detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, the director of planning or his or her designee shall consider such factors as the proposed duration of the activities and their location in relation to sensitive receptors. If a minor exception application or a temporary use permit is approved, reasonable conditions may be imposed to minimize the public detriment, including, but not limited to, restrictions on sound level, sound duration and operating hours. C. Appeals. 1. Construction -Related Exception. Any person aggrieved by or dissatisfied with the planning director's decision on an application for a construction -related exception may appeal from such action by filing an appeal according to the procedures set forth in Section 17.03.090 of the Temecula Municipal Code. 3-4 • • 4.0 Study Method and Procedures To determine the existing noise level environment, RK conducted a total of three (3) short-term noise measurements during the daytime hours in the project study area. The following describes the measurement procedures, measurement locations, results, noise modeling procedures and assumptions. 4.1 Measurement Procedure and Criteria Noise measurements are taken to determine the existing noise levels. A noise receiver or receptor is any location in the noise analysis in which noise might produce an impact. The following criteria are used to select measurement locations and receptors: • Locations expected to receive the highest noise impacts, such as first row of houses • Locations that are acoustically representative and equivalent of the area of concern • Human land usage • Sites clear of major obstruction and contamination RK conducted the sound level measurements in accordance to Caltrans technical noise specifications. All measurements equipment meets American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifications for sound level meters (S1.4-1983 identified in Chapter • 19.68.020.AA). The following gives a brief description of the Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement procedures for sound level measurements: • • Microphones for sound level meters were placed five (5) feet above the ground for all measurements • Sound level meters were calibrated (Larson Davis CAL 200) before and after each measurement • Following the calibration of equipment, a wind screen was placed over the microphone • Frequency weighting was set on "A" and slow response • Results of the long-term noise measurements were recorded on field data sheets • During any short-term noise measurements any noise contaminations such as barking dogs, local traffic, lawn mowers, or aircraft fly -overs were noted • Temperature and sky conditions were observed and documented 4.1.1 Noise Measurements Noise measurements were conducted on January 30, 2013 using a Larson Davis 712 type 2 sound level meter. The Leq, Lmin, Lmax, L2, L8, L25, and L50 were recorded over a 10 -minute period. Noise measurement data was analyzed to determine average, peak and minimum noise levels during the measurement time. Noise measurement results are indicated in Table 1. Noise measurement data and photos are provided in Appendix B. 4-1 4.1.2 Noise Measurement Locations The project site is located east of Mira Loma Drive and north of Rancho Vista Road. The project site is bounded by Vail Elementary School to the east, residential units to the north, south and west. Noise monitoring locations were selected to represent the sensitive receptor (noise sensitive areas near the project site. Noise monitoring location 1 (ST -1) is located near the eastern property line on the eastern segment of the project site; approximately 80 feet from the eastern property line. ST -1 represents the existing ambient noise level at the adjacent Elementary School. ST -2 is located at the eastern property line towards the north of the project site; approximately 80 feet north of the eastern property line. ST -2 represents the existing ambient noise level at the residential units towards the northeast of the project site. ST -3 is located along the western property line; approximately 50 feet from the centerline of Mira Loma Drive. ST -3 represents the existing ambient noise level at the adjacent residential units to the west of the project site. Exhibit C illustrates the proximity of the noise monitoring locations. Appendix B includes photos, field sheet, and measured noise data. 4.1.3 Noise Measurement Timing and Climate Noise measurements were recorded during daytime hours. Measurements occurred between 10:45 AM and 11:50 AM, on January 30, 2013. Noise measurements were conducted in 10 -minute intervals during the indicated time schedule. During the monitoring process, the sky was clear, the temperature was 57 degrees Fahrenheit and the wind was less than one mile per hour (1 mph) in the morning 4.2 Construction Noise Modeling The construction noise analysis utilizes the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model, together with several key construction parameters. Key inputs include distance to the sensitive receiver, equipment usage, and baseline parameters for the project site. This study evaluates the potential exterior noise impacts. For purposes of the project, the project was analyzed based on the different construction phases. Construction noise will be loudest during the grading and concrete phases of construction. The construction noise calculation worksheet outputs are located in Appendix C. The following assumptions relevant to short-term construction noise impacts were used: • The project duration is expected to last approximately 1 to 1.5 years. The project site is currently vacant. The project will be constructed in 2 to 3 phases and will consist of grading, trenching, building, and infrastructure (e.g. electrical, plumbing, parking lots, landscaping, etc). 4-2 • • • • • • The first stage of construction will consist of mass grading and trenching. It is estimated that grading will be completed in 3 to 4 weeks. The project calls for 1 to 2 graders and 1 excavator during this phase. The worst-case heavy equipment noise was evaluated during this phase. It is anticipated that the loudest pieces of equipment will be heavy earth moving equipment. • The next stage will consist of building construction and infrastructure. It is estimated that building construction will occur over two to three phases and last approximately 1 year. Building construction will vary depending on the phase of the project and time schedule. Construction noise is expected to be the loudest during the concrete phase of building. It is estimated that concrete will last approximately 3 to 4 weeks during the various phases of construction. • The final stage will consist of architectural coating and paving. It is estimated that paving will be completed between 2 to 4 weeks. Paving equipment will be the loudest source of noise during this phase of construction. • Vibration impact is not anticipated because the project does not call for pile driving equipment. 4-3 • • 5.0 Existing Noise Environment Ambient noise measurements were conducted at various locations on the project site. Noise measurement data indicates that traffic noise propagating from local roadway network is the primary source of noise impacting the project site and the surrounding area. 5.1 Noise Measurement Results The noise measurements recorded the sound pressure levels in dBA in 3 second intervals, which have been used to calculate the minimum, maximum, L2, L8, 1_25, L5°, and LEQ averaged over 10 -minute intervals for each noise measurement. Noise monitoring was conducted at three (3) different locations within the project site to document existing traffic noise levels. During the monitoring phase weather conditions were documented. Noise monitoring data printouts are included in Appendix B. The results of the measurements are presented in Table 1. Exhibit C illustrates the approximate location of the noise measurements. The CNEL was calculated based on the existing noise measurement. Noise measurement data indicates that the existing site and surrounding area experiences noise levels ranging from 50.5 to 58.3 dBA CNEL. The existing noise levels are below the City's exterior noise standards of 70 dBA CNEL (multi -family land use). As expected, the noise levels vary depending on the distance from the centerline of local roadway networks. The maximum noise level recorded during the measurement process occurred at ST -3 noise monitoring location. The maximum recorded noise level was 72.6 dBA. As described previously, noise levels are as a result of pass -by traffic along Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road. 5-1 • • • 6.0 Construction Noise Impact The degree of construction noise will vary depending on the phase of construction and type of construction activity. It is estimated that construction will take approximately 1 to 1.5 years to complete. 6.1 Construction Noise During construction, the contractors would be required to comply with the Noise Ordinance from the City of Temecula's Municipal Code, as described in Appendix A. Per the City's noise ordinance, a construction noise exemption can be submitted to the City. The exemption would allow the project to operate above the maximum permissible noise levels at the property lines of the project site. The City does however limit the hours of construction operation during certain times of the weekdays, weekends and holidays. RK recommends the applicant to file a construction noise for exemption; however, this assessment also provides recommendations to further reduce construction noise levels to an acceptable level. Construction noise is expected to be at its highest level during the grading and concrete phases of construction; therefore, this study assesses noise levels during the respective phases. The following is a list of the estimated loudest heavy construction equipment which will be utilized during grading: one (1) excavator and two (2) graders. The following is a list of the estimated loudest equipment which will be utilized during concrete: two (2) cement trucks and one (1) concrete pump. The assessment assumes all equipment is operating simultaneously and directly adjacent to each other. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has compiled data regarding the noise generated characteristics of typical construction activities. The data is presented in Table 2. The data represents the noise levels measured at a distance of 50 feet from the noise source. These noise levels would diminish rapidly with distance from the construction site at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. For example a noise level of 86 dBA measured 50 feet from the noise source would reduce to 80 dBA at 100 feet. At 200 feet from the noise source the noise level would reduce to 74 dBA. At 400 feet the noise source would reduce by another 6 dBA to 68 dBA. The existing Vail Elementary School and residential units to the northeast, west, and south are considered noise sensitive areas. East Property Line Table 3 indicates the estimated exterior noise level at or near the project site's east property line. Table 3 highlights the estimated construction noise levels during the grading and concrete phases. Noise levels are approximated for a without and with a temporary 6-1 10 foot high noise barrier. Depending on the construction phase, the estimated maximum noise level to the east property line would range from 75.4 to 79.0 dBA. This assumes no temporary noise barrier. The estimated maximum noise level to the east property with a 10 foot noise barrier (along the project site's eastern property line) would range from 65.4 to 69.0 dBA. South Property Line Table 4 indicates the estimated exterior noise level at the southern residential units (across the street from Rancho Vista Road) property line. Table 4 highlights the estimated construction noise levels during the grading and concrete phases. Noise levels are approximated for a without and with a temporary 10 foot high noise barrier. Depending on the construction phase, the estimated maximum noise level to the south property line would range from 75.4 to 79.0 dBA. This assumes no temporary noise barrier. The estimated maximum noise level to the east property with a 10 foot noise barrier (along the project site's southern property line) would range from 65.4 to 69.0 dBA. West Property Line Table 5 indicates the estimated exterior noise level at western residential units (across the street from Mira Loma Drive) property line. Table 5 highlights the estimated construction noise levels during the grading and concrete phases. Noise levels are approximated for a without and with a temporary 10 foot high noise barrier. Depending on the construction phase, the estimated maximum noise level to the residential units' property line would range from 77.9 to 81.5 dBA. This assumes no temporary noise barrier. The estimated maximum noise level to the east property with a 10 foot noise barrier (along the project site's western property line) would range from 66.1 to 69.7 dBA. Summary Construction noise is considered a short-term impact. The duration will last approximately the length of construction time frame. If an application for an exemption is filed for construction noise to the City, the project will be exempt from maintaining noise levels below the 70 dBA standard; therefore, the project will not have a significant impact to the adjacent land uses. In the event a noise exemption is not granted, the project would need to implement temporary noise barriers (with a minimum height of 10 feet) along the eastern, southern and western property line. Sample Temporary Construction Noise Barriers are provided in Appendix D. are This would further ensure that exterior noise levels during construction would remain below the 70 dBA standard set -forth by the City. 6-2 • • 6.2 Construction Noise Mitigation Measures Construction operations must follow the City's General Plan and the noise ordinance. Recommendations are illustrated in Exhibit D. A number of noise reduction measures are recommended to further minimize noise impacts. 1. Construction shall not occur during the hours of 6:30 PM — 7:00 AM. 2. During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 3. Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 4. Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 5. Although not required, the project could implement temporary noise barriers (minimum height of 10 feet or higher) along the eastern, southern, and western property lines of the project site. 6. During the grading phase and concrete phase, limit the amount of heavy machinery equipment operating simultaneously to three (3) pieces of equipment. • 7. In the event a construction noise exemption is not granted, RK recommends a noise monitoring program be established during construction. A noise monitoring program documents and records the noise levels during construction. Noise measurements would be conducted once a week and would be taken at various locations at or near the project site during construction. A weekly report would be submitted documenting the construction noise levels. In the event construction noise levels exceed the City's noise ordinance, proper measures would be taken to ensure levels would be reduced. • 6-3 • • • Exhibits Exhibit A Location Map 0 0518-2013-0I (ExA) RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Temecula, California RI( engineering group, inc. • • • I Exhibit B Site Plan n i. o- ytc?..:l ao -- — .7:.— / i /., ` %. �, be c I. : 1 p i 1 // //bd f r r% 4 I • . I f q II' •.L— TR 4040 HIGH RESIDENTIAL 1IH &&61 / / 1; A If 0518-2013-01(Ex13) _ toic sill Amo tf / \ \t ss \l "p \ I %1 *sa. . / ss.,.., \ x ▪ \ a i m.4, N. ...'....N. Ob \ RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Temecula, California RK engineering group, inc. Exhibit C Noise Monitoring Locations • Legend: 0 = Noise Monitoring Location 0518-13-0 I (ExC) RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Temecula. California RK engineering group, inc. • TR qy HIGH RFS A' MB &SRI '` tt '� /� - `�\• / �` `-� 1 1 _ \X�c �e.�m \ 1UA-k7J 1 1 \ 114.42 5y.. \ / / 1 •I - -/ `. •., / Legend: = Temporary Noise Barrier Location (Min. 10' High) 0518-2013-01(ExD) RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Temecula, California Exhibit D Recommendations Recommendations I. Project applicant to apply for a construction noise exemption for the project. 2. Construction shall not occur during the hours of 6:30 PM - 7:00 PM. 3. During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equiptment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 4. Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 5. Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 6. Although not required, the project could implement temporary noise barriers (minimum height of ten (10) feet or higher) along the eastern, southern and western property lines of the project site. 7. During the grading phase and concrete phase, limit the amount of heavy machinery equipment operating simultaneously to 3 pieces of equipment. 8. In the event that a construction noise exemption is not granted, then RK recommends a noise monitoring program be established during construction. A noise monitoring program documents and records the noise levels during construction. Noise measurements would be conducted one time a week and would be taken at various locations at or near the project site during construction. A weekly report would be submitted documenting the construction noise levels. In the event construction noise levels exceed the City's noise ordinance, proper measures would be taken to ensure levels would be reduced. RK engineering group, inc. Tables • • • • • TABLE 1 Noise Level Measurements (dBA) Site No. Time Started' Leq 1 -max Lmin L2 L8 L25 L50 Estimated CNEL Comments Measurement taken 1 11:50 AM 49.9 71.4 37.6 57.8 54.9 46.9 43.1 53.4 80ft west from school property line. Ambient noise = local traffic and typical residential noise Measurement taken 80ft west from northern residential 2 11:35 AM 47.0 70.6 36.9 51.4 46.3 43 9 40.9 50.5 units property line. Ambient noise = local traffic and typical residential noise Measurement taken 47ft east of the centerline of Mira 3 10:45 AM 54.6 72.6 54.6 63.1 57.6 51. / 48.1 58.3 Loma Drive. Ambient noise = local traffic and typical residential noise Noise measurements were taken for ten minutes. 2 Noise measurements were taken on January 3, 2013. !: /rktables/RK9755TB. xls 1N:0518-2013-01 TABLE 2 Typical Construction Noise Levels' EQUIPMENT POWERED BY INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES IMPACT EQUIPMENT Type Type I Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet 82 - 87 Earth Moving Compactors (Rollers) Pile Drivers (Peak) 73 - 76 Front Loaders 73 - 84 Backhoes 73 - 92 Tractors 75 - 95 Scrapers, Graders 78 - 92 Pavers 85 - 87 Trucks 81 - 94 Materials Handling Concrete Mixers 72 - 87 Concrete Pumps _ _ 81 - 83 Cranes (Movable) 72 - 86 Cranes (Derrick) 85 - 87 Stationary Pumps 68-71 Generators 71 - 83 Compressors 75 - 86 IMPACT EQUIPMENT Type Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet - Pneumatic Wrenches 82 - 87 Jack Hammers, Rock Drills 80 - 99 Pile Drivers (Peak) 95-105 OTHER Type Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet Vibrators 68 - 82 Saws 71 - 82 Referenced Noise Levels from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) j: /rktables/RK9755TB. xls 1N:0518-2013-07 • • • • TABLE 3 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at East Property Line (dBA) Adjacent to Elementary School and Residential Units No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 100 75.0 79.0 Grader 100 75.0 79.0 Excavator 100 74.7 74.7 Total Noise Level - - 78.8 79.0 No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 100 68.8 72.8 Concrete Mixer Truck 100 68.8 72.8 Concrete Pump Truck 100 68.4 75.4 Total Noise Level - - 73.4 75.4 With Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 100 65.0 69.0 Grader 100 65.0 69.0 Excavator 100 60.7 64.7 Total Noise Level - - 68.8 69.0 With Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 10 4 Weeks 100 58.8 62.8 Concrete Mixer Truck 100 58.8 62.8 Concrete Pump Truck 100 58.4 65.4 Total Noise Level - - 63.4 65.4 ' The Lmax total noise level is the maximum noise level of 1 piece of operational equipment at any given time. j: /rktablesIRK9755TB.xls JN:0518-2013-01 TABLE 4 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at South Property Line (dBA) Residential Units Across from Rancho Vista Road No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Grading Phase Grader Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 100 100 75.0 79.0 75.0 79.0 Excavator 100 74.7 74.7 68.4 75.4 Total Noise Level Total Noise Level - 78.8 79.0 No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 100 68.8 72.8 - Concrete Mixer Truck 100 68.8 72.8 Concrete Pump Truck 100 68.4 75.4 Total Noise Level Total Noise Level 68.8 - - 73.4 75.4 With Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 100 100 65.0 65.0 69.0 Grader 69.0 Excavator 100 60.7 64.7 58.4 65.4 Total Noise Level Total Noise Level 68.8 69.0 With Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 100 58.8 62.8 Concrete Mixer Truck 100 58.8 62.8 Concrete Pump Truck 100 58.4 65.4 Total Noise Level - - 63.4 65.4 The Lmax total noise level is the maximum noise level of 1 piece of operational equipment at any given time. j: /rktables/RK9755TB.xls IN:0518-2013-01 • • • TABLE 5 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at West Property Line (dBA) Residential Units Across from Mira Loma Drive No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Grading Phase Grader Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 75 77.5 77.5 81.5 81.5 75 Excavator 75 73.2 77.2 75 70.9 77.9 Total Noise Level - - 81.3 81.5 No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 75 71.3 75.3 Concrete Mixer Truck - 75 71.3 75.3 Concrete Pump Truck 75 70.9 77.9 Total Noise Level - - 75.9 77.9 W/ Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 75 65.7 69.7 Grader 75 65.7 69.7 Excavator 75 61.4 65.4 Total Noise Level - - 69.5 69.7 W/Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 75 59.5 63.5 Concrete Mixer Truck 75 59.5 63.5 Concrete Pump Truck 75 59.5 66.1 Total Noise Level - - 64.1 66.1 'The Lmax total noise level is the maximum noise level of 1 piece of operational equipment at any given time. j: /rktables/RK9755TB.xls IN:0518-2013-01 Appendices • • • • Appendix A City of Temecula Noise Element and Noise Ordinance PURPOSE OF THE NOISE FLEMENr SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE NOISE ELEMENT INTRODUCTION NOISE ELEMENT Temecula residents have come to the community for the peaceful lifestyle, that is Tess affected by many of the loud nuisances of other southern California communities. However, the City is not spared from all noisy activities, particularly those associated with automobile transportation. Traffic is projected to increase on I-15, Winchester Road, Highway 79 south, Pechanga Parkway and other City roads, and aircraft will continue to use French Valley Airport. Without City actions to protect residents, surrounding areas will become noisy, making it difficult to sleep, work, and learn, and gradually eroding the quality of our community. Noise also does not recognize property or zoning boundaries. Reducing noise impacts from one property on another or between adjacent land uses is necessary. The City strives to reduce the impacts of noise through a combination of land use planning, site criteria, noise reduction and enforcement strategies. The policies and programs detailed in this Element focus on protecting the quality of life found within our residential neighborhoods, schools and other noise -sensitive uses from the persistent hazards of excessive noise. The State recognizes the relationship between noise and noise sensitive uses and has adopted guidelines for Noise Elements. This Noise Element satisfies the requirements of State planning law and is a mandated component of the General Plan. Government Code Section 65302(0 establishes the required components of the Noise Element. The Element also complies with California Health and Safety Code Section 56050.1 guidelines for Noise Elements. Potential noise sources are identified and programs established to avoid or mitigate noise impacts associated with community development. Future noise conditions associated with both short - and long-term growth are quantified and identified within noise exposure contours. The contours serve as the basis for: developing guidelines to identify compatible land uses; identifying the \1 I L 11 1 \ C, L \ E R \ L. F L. \ \ \I • • N 0 I S E • • MEASURING NOISE distribution of land uses on the General Plan Land Use Policy Map; and establishing development standards. Concurrently, the Land Use Element contains policies to ensure that environmental conditions, including noise, are considered in all land use decisions. The Noise Element is also linked to the transportation policies in the Circulation Element. The projected noise contours identified in Figure N-2 within this Element directly correspond to the Circulation Plan and the projected traffic generated from proposed land uses. Both the Noise and Circulation Elements contain policies and programs to minimize the effects of transportation noise. The Noise Element also relates to the Conservation/Open Space Element. Excessive noise can diminish enjoyment of parks and other designated open space. Because of this, noise levels are considered in the planning of new recreational and open space areas. Additionally, open space areas can be used to separate and buffer noise sensitive land uses from noise producers. Noise generally is defined as unwanted or intrusive sound. Because noise consists of pitch, loudness, and duration, describing noise with a single unit of measure presents a challenge. The A -weighted decibel scale (dB(A)) has been developed to describe the loudness of a sound or sound environment based on the sensitivity of the human ear. The dB(A) descriptor only reports noise from a single source or combination of sources at a point in time. To allow a more comprehensive description of the noise environment, Federal and State agencies have established noise and land use compatibility guidelines that use averaging approaches to noise measurement. Two measurement scales commonly used in California are the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and the day -night level (Ldn). To account for increased human sensitivity at night, the CNEL level includes a 5 -decibel penalty on noise during the 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. time period and a 10 -decibel penalty on noise during the 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. time period. The Ldn level includes only the 10 decibel weighting for late-night noise. These values are nearly identical for all but unusual noise sources. 1 I 1 L` 1 1 1 \1 I U L \ (, 1 \ F R \ 1 \ 1-' RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS Several plans and programs enacted through federal, State and local legislation and administered by various agencies relate to Noise Element goals. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) GUIDELINES The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was adopted by the State legislature in response to a public mandate for thorough environmental analysis of projects that might affect the environment. Excessive noise is considered an environmental impact under CEQA. The provisions of the law and environmental review procedures are described in the CEQA Statutes and the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of CEQA ensures that during the decision making stage of development, City officials and the general public will be able to assess the noise impacts associated with public and private development projects. CALIFORNIA NOISE INSULATION STANDARDS (TITLE 24) The California Commission of Housing and Community Development officially adopted noise standards in 1974. In 1988, the Building Standards Commission approved revisions to the standards (Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Regulations). As revised, Title 24 establishes an interior noise standard of 45 dB(A) for residential space (CNEL or Ldn). Acoustical studies must be prepared for residential structures that are to be located within noise contours of 60 dB(A) or greater from freeways, major streets, thoroughfares, rail lines, rapid transit lines or industrial noise sources. The studies must demonstrate that the building is designed to reduce interior noise to 45 dB(A) or lower. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA) The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) provides worker regulations for protection against the effects of noise exposure. The maximum exposure is provided according to health and psychological effects with a reasonable margin of safety. OSHA also identifies whether the threshold applies to activity interference, hearing loss consideration, or both effects. CIT Y C 1 11 \1 E( LIL 1 G (' f. \ \-i N 0 I S E • • N 0 I s E • COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE GENERAL PLAN NOISE ELEMENT The unincorporated portion of the Planning Area is subject to the Riverside County Noise Element, which establishes parameters for compatibility of noise and various land uses, and the location of new development. For new residential construction, exterior noise must be reduced to 65 dB or less, and interior noise must be reduced to 45 dB or less. CITY OF TEMECULA NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE The City has adopted the County of Riverside Noise Control Ordinance (No. 457.73), which establishes interior and exterior noise standards for residential areas. The ordinance provides controls for excessive and annoying noise from stationary sources such as industrial plants, pumps, compressors and refrigeration units. In addition, specific noise standards for daytime and nighttime hours are provided. Certain noise sources are prohibited and the ordinance establishes an enforcement process. RIVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN POLICY DOCUMENT — FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT French Valley Airport is a general aviation airport owned and operated by the County of Riverside. The airport occupies approximately 261 acres east of Winchester Road and is located five miles north of Temecula's city center and one and one-quarter mile northwest of the City limits within the sphere of influence. French Valley Airport is one of 16 airports in Riverside County governed by the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). In November 2004, the ALUC adopted the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) Policy Document, which establishes land use, noise and safety policies in the vicinity of airports throughout Riverside County, including compatibility criteria and maps for the influence areas of individual airports. The ALUCP also establishes procedural requirements for compatibility review of development proposals. NOISE PLAN Temecula, like most developed suburban areas, experiences increased noise levels associated with transportation and other sources. As noise levels in various parts of the community rise, the City must seek ways to safeguard the population from excessive noise levels. 1 1 C 1 1 1 \\ 1. u L ,\ (1 \ R\ SEPARATING NOISE SOUR.CFS FROM SENSITIVE RECEPTORS PLANS IN ACTION Temecula uses the noise/ land use compatibility guidelines in Tables N-1 and N-2, as well as interior noise standards in the State Health and Safety Code to determine the appropriate location and design of future land uses. This minimizes potential impacts of noisy businesses and industries on residential neighborhoods or other sensitive receptors. Noise in the community is the cumulative effect of noise from transportation activities and stationary sources. Stationary noise typically refers to noise from commercial establishments, machinery, air conditioning systems, compressors, residential and recreational uses, and landscape maintenance equipment. Regardless of the type of noise, levels are highest near the source and decrease with distance. Noise becomes a problem when sources and noise sensitive land uses are located in adjacent areas. Residential uses are generally the most sensitive to noise. Other noise -sensitive land uses include schools, libraries, offices, hospitals, churches, hotels, motels, and outdoor recreational areas. Most noise impacts can be avoided when noise sources, sensitive land uses, and information about the future noise environment are considered in planning and development decisions. NOISE STANDARDS AND LAND USE COMPATBILTIY To ensure that noise producers do not adversely affect sensitive receptors, the City uses land use compatibility standards when planning and making development decisions. Table N-1 summarizes City noise standards for each land use classification defined in the Land Use Element and expressed on the Land Use Policy Map. The standards represent the maximum acceptable exterior noise level, as measured at the property boundary, which is used to determine noise impacts. The City's primary goal with regard to community noise is to minimize the exposure of residents to unhealthful or excessive noise levels to the extent possible. To this end, the Noise Element establishes noise/land use compatibility guidelines based on cumulative noise criteria for outdoor noise. Table N-2 outlines these criteria, which the City will use to review development proposals. In addition, new residential development will comply with Title 24 standards of the State Health and Safety Code. These standards establish maximum interior noise levels for new residential development, requiring that sufficient insulation be provided to reduce interior ambient noise levels to 45 CNEL. Higher exterior noise levels are permitted for multiple -family housing than for single-family houses, as multiple -family complexes are generally set back farther from property boundaries, and a more integrated mix of activity (residential and commercial) is often desired near such locations. \I r u r \ (; ► \ r \-; N 0 I s E. • • • • N 0 I S E TABLE N-1 TEMECULA LAND USE /NOISE STANDARDS Property Receiving Noise Maximum Noise Level (Ldn or CNEL, dBA) Type of Use Land Use Designation Interior Exterior; Residential Hillside Rural Very Low Low Low Medium 45 65 Medium 45 65 / 70' High 45 701 Commercial and Office Neighborhood Community Highway Tourist Service -- 70 Professional Office 50 70 Light Industrial Industrial Park 55 75 Public/Institutional Schools 50 65 All others 50 70 Open Space Vineyards/Agriculture -- 70 Open Space -- 70 /652 Maximum exterior noise levels up to 70 dB CNEL are allowed for Multiple -Family Housing. 2 Where quiet is a basis required for the land use. 3 Regarding aircraft -related noise, the maximum acceptable exposure for new residential development is 60 dB CNEL. 11 1- O F T E C. LI L •1 C, E\ F. R •\ L P I. A N N-6 TABLE N-2 NOISE/LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX Land Use Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL) 55 60 65 70 75 80 Residential' \ N -NN I I I A .. . . . . . . .. . . Transient Lodging- Motel, Hotel♦ \\\\ \\\IIIIIflllll' 4*i*##i•4 4 4*4#4 4 . 4 . . * .... . Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes \\\� i Ii�lllll 4*4** 4`4 • 4 • * • •• 4 i -.-......f ..... Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters { { { { { I (I I I I { 11 I I I I I { ................ . Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports' 1 1 l l{ 1 r l I I I l I l{ l i l j i ........... .• ' ............ ; ; Playgrounds, Parks \\\\ \N\\ \\\` ` S\\`i`\ I, � Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries *#****4#;•#• #** #**## . . + • . .-. 4.. . • • • Office Buildings, Business Commercial, and Professional \\\\ \\\\\\\\\\ , I I{ I I I I Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture N \ \\\N\\\\\\ \\\ Iii 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 Source: Modified from 1998 State of California General Plan Guidelines. 1. Regarding aircraft -related noise, the maximum acceptable exposure for new residential development is 60dB CNEL. 2. No normally acceptable condition is defined for these uses. Noise studies are required prior to approval. i■■■■ I■•■■ •4*4444• ..... .... .... Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved meet conventional Title 24 construction standards. No special noise insulation requirements. Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development shall be undertaken only after a detailed noise analysis is made and noise reduction measures are identified and included in the project design. Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development is discouraged. If new construction is proposed, a detailed analysis is required, noise reduction measures must be identified, and noise insulation features included in the design. Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development clearly should not be undertaken. 1 T 1 I f L \l f. . LI L \ (, 1 N. I R \ 1. F L. \ \ N-7 N 0 I 5 E • • N 0 I S E • • In addition, properties within an influence area surrounding French Valley Airport are also subject to the more stringent noise/land use compatibility standards of the County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). NOISE CONTOURS AND IMPACT AREAS The community noise environment can be described with contours derived from monitoring major sources of noise. Noise contours define areas of equal noise exposure. Future noise contours have been estimated with information about baseline and projected land use development with transportation activity. The contours assist in setting policies for distribution of land uses and establishment of development standards. A study of baseline noise sources and levels was completed in April, 2002. Noise level measurements were collected during a typical weekday at twenty locations throughout Temecula. Criteria for site selection included geographical distribution, land uses suspected of noisy activities, proximity to transportation facilities and sensitive receptor locations. The primary purpose of noise monitoring was to establish a noise profile for the Planning Area that could be used to estimate the level of current and future noise impact. Measurements represent motor vehicle noise emanating from Interstate 15, the local master planned roadway network and aircraft associated with the French Valley Airport. Sensitive receptor locations monitored include: single-family homes, schools, and parks. Noise levels were monitored during the peak traffic hour to represent maximum noise levels or during off-peak conditions and then modified to reflect peak traffic conditions. Figure N-1 shows the CNEL contours for baseline year 2002, and identifies noise monitoring locations. As the Figure illustrates, major arterials, as well as the railroad and Interstate 15 represent the major sources of noise. A number of residential neighborhoods are exposed to traffic noise from arterials, such as Winchester Road, Margarita Road, Ynez Road, Rancho California Road and Pechanga Parkway. The Land Use Element indicates that the Planning Area will accommodate substantial future growth, accompanied by an increase in citywide traffic volumes. Traffic volume increases represent the only anticipated measurable new noise source in the community over the long term. I 1 1 1 \I I \ C r\ f R\ f L. \ \- { E_ Figure N-1 Baseline (Year 2002) Roadway Noise Contours CM OF TEMECUL A GENERAL_ PIAN Legend Noise Contours Contour Location -65- Noise Level (CNEL) Noise Monitoring Positions # Position Number Temecula City Boundary • Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Boundary Sources: City of Temecula, Weiland Associates. County of %vets1de O 5,000 10,000 Feet Miles O 1 2 H H I H H I I I l 01 I E M l_. C Ll L .•\ G E N E R A L. N-9 • • 0 I s E • PLANS IN ACTION Noise contours describe locations surrounding major roadways, rail -roads and airports that are exposed to similar noise characteristics. The City uses the contours identified in Figures N-1, N-2, N-3, and N-4 along with the standards shown in Table N-2 to determine when noise mitigation measures are required. NOISE TRANSFERS BETWEEN ADJACENT USES NOISE AND LAND USE PLANNING Potential future ambient noise levels can be estimated by modeling. Figure N-2 displays projected year 2025 noise contours based upon future traffic levels. Figure N-3 identifies the estimated CNEL noise contours associated with current operations at the French Valley Airport. Figure N-4 identifies the projected future CNEL noise levels associated with Airport operations in 2013. These figures should be used in conjunction with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan to determine land use compatibility and potential noise mitigation requirements for projects that fall within a noise contour area associated with the Airport. CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS The provisions of the State Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Regulations) are enforced in Temecula. Title 24 specifies that combined indoor noise for multi -family living spaces shall not exceed 45 CNEL. This standard must be implemented when the outdoor noise level exceeds 60 CNEL. Title 24 requires that the same standard be applied to all new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and multi -family projects. Furthermore, construction activity shall be limited during the early morning, late evening, weekends and holidays to prevent noise intrusion during these periods. Parameters for these limitations are provided in the City's Noise Control Ordinance (Section 8.32 of the Temecula Municipal Code). The City also has the opportunity to control noise and vibration transfers between adjacent land uses. Particular problems arise in cases where noise -producing uses are located immediately adjacent to sensitive uses, such as industrial areas near residences or schools. Mixed-use projects often present unique problems in this area, such as when restaurants with nighttime entertainment are located below residential units. Sensitive receptors must be protected from excessive noise generated by commercial and industrial centers, restaurants and bars, and civic centers. Other noise sources commonly referred to as nuisance noises also contribute to the overall noise environment. Noise generated by new development is most appropriately controlled through the site design review process, and compliance with CEQA, and noise standards contained in the Noise Element. During preliminary stages of the development process, potential noise impacts and mitigation measures must be identified. 1 1 1 \i F. u L \ G i \ i- is \ Figure N-2 2025 Noise Contours CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN Legend Noise Contours Contour Location -65- Noise Level (CNEL) ' Temecula City Boundary ----' Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Boundary Source: Wieland Associates, 2004. NJ County of Riverside 0 5,000 10,000 Fee Miles 0 1 2 H ►---� H H 0 1 I. NI I. C LI 1. -\ ( \-II N 1 R 1. I' 1.\ N Figure N-3 French Valley Airport Noise Contours CM OF IEME_CA31_11, GT_NERAL PLAN Legend —65— Contour Location Noise Level (CNEL) Temecula City Boundary Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Boundary Source: Coffman Associates, December 2003. • • 5,000 Feet Miles 1---1 I-1 1 1 I I `, 01 I- E. M E C LI L. A N-1) G L. N \ Figure N-4 French Valley Airport Future (2013) Noise Contours Contour Location Noise Level (CNFL) !1k! IiiiI&,.:i FY FAA 9"1111 waimaim lin m Ir 61Liii 11. �11 ' 111111 ..BIN 65 Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Boundary Source: Coffman Associates, December 2003. 'U1 _— NUM■ •■min 111111.11111, •� nuuuuuuunuw - n nnnmum um �i' ii iii ii iiiiiiiiiiii iii:::•. 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles I--1 H 1 H H 1 0.5 1 OF LEMECLIL 1 \-I'3 G ENEK AL PLAN N 0 1 S E • • 0 1 S E PLANS IN ACTION The City requires preparation of acoustical analyses for projects that generate noise that may affect sensitive receptors. Mitigation measures are required when significant impacts are identified TRANSPORTATION - RELATED NOISE BUSINESS ACTIVITY NOISE When reviewing a proposed industrial, commercial or public project, noise generation and potential impacts to surrounding development are considered in accordance with CEQA. Common mitigation measures include acoustically treated and quiet -design furnaces, fans, motors, compressors, valves, and pumps. The City may also require limited delivery and operation hours in order to minimize impacts to adjacent residential users or other sensitive receptors. In addition, all City departments must comply with State and federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. Any new equipment or vehicle purchased by the City will comply with local, State and federal noise standards. NUISANCE NOISES Several noise sources can contribute to the overall noise environment in the community, including barking dogs, loud audio equipment, defective or modified auto and motorcycle mufflers and activities at parks and civic, community or religious institutions. These nuisance noises can be addressed through strict enforcement of City's Noise Control Ordinance, while potential new noise impacts may be avoided or reduced through the site design review process, review of proposed developments per CEQA and mitigation of potential nuisance noise impacts. Motor vehicles are the dominant source of continuous noise. Interstate 15, SR -79, Rancho California Road, Jefferson Avenue/Front Street, Winchester Road, and Pechanga Parkway all carry appreciable volumes of commuter traffic. Neighborhoods bordering these roadways are thus subject to loud noise levels. Properties adjacent to freeways can experience decibels as high as 70 to 75 dB(A). Sound attenuation walls, landscaped buffers, and dirt mounds all help to reduce the sound intensity of the freeway. The French Valley Airport is also a source of noise in Temecula. The aircraft mix at this airport includes mostly single-engine aircraft, although some multi -engine aircraft and a small number of business jets and helicopters also use the Airport. Larger aircraft represent a more intrusive noise source. Impacted future uses include office park areas and residential neighborhoods. ll 1 \ (, 1 \ L I: \ \I+ PLANS IN ACTION Temecula supports fforts by Caltrans, RTA, and other agencies to provide acoustical protection for noise sensitive uses, Also, noise barriers should be constructed as part of future highway and roadway projects. PLANS IN ACTION The City regulates traffic flow and coordinates with CHP to enforce speed limits and reduce traffic noise. NOISE CONTROL AT RECFPTION SITES The most efficient and effective means of controlling noise from transportation systems is to reduce noise at the source. However, the City has limited direct control over noise produced by transportation sources because State noise regulations preempt local regulations. Because the City cannot control noise at the source, City noise programs focus on reducing the impact of transportation noise reception sites. During the planning stages of the development process, potential impacts from transportation noise will be identified and mitigation measures required as needed to meet City noise standards. Site planning, landscaping, topography and the design and construction of noise barriers are the most common method of alleviating vehicular traffic noise impacts. Setbacks and buffers can also be used to reduce noise. Noise -attenuating barriers are commonly incorporated into projects and can be extremely effective in reducing noise levels. The effectiveness of barriers depends on: 1) the relative height and materials of the barrier; 2) the noise source; 3) the affected area; and 4) the horizontal distance between the barrier and the affected area. Noise barriers should also be included in the design of freeway/tollway, roadway and rail improvements. Although noise barriers can be effective, the aesthetic effect of barriers on neighborhoods must be considered during the preliminary stages of the development process. Potentially significant visual impacts associated with noise barriers must be addressed . and mitigated through landscaping or other project design measures in all new public and private projects. NOISE CONTROL AT THE SOURCE The California Vehicle Code contains noise regulations pertaining to the operation of all vehicles on public roads. These standards for cars, trucks, and motorcycles are enforced through coordination with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. C I I 1 J r I r u E. \ \ I: •\ E f[\ N \15 N 0 I s E • N 0 1 S E SEPARATING NOISE SOURCFS FROM SENSMVE RECEPTORS NOISE TRANSFERS BETWEEN ADJACENT LAND USES GOALS AND POLICIES Four major issues are addressed in the Noise Element: 1) ensuring the separation of significant noise generators and sensitive receptors including residential areas and schools, 2) noise and vibration transfers between adjacent land uses such as residences located upstairs from nighttime commercial uses in mixed use environments, 3) considering noise in the land use planning process, and 4) minimizing the impacts of transportation -related noise. Separating noise generators from sensitive receptors will result in exterior environments that require minimal mitigation to meet acceptable noise levels. Land use planning will ensure that sensitive receptors are not impacted by noise hazards by locating these land uses distant from each other. Noise hazard areas will be considered to include locations within the 65 CNEL contour of master planned roadways, railroad corridors, aircraft flight paths, and industrial facilities. Goal 1 Separate significant noise generators from sensitive receptors. Policy 1.1 Discourage noise sensitive land uses in noisy exterior environments unless measures can be implemented to reduce exterior and interior noise to acceptable levels. Alternatively, encourage less sensitive uses in areas adjacent to major noise generators but require sound -appropriate interior working environments. Policy 1.2 Limit the hours of construction activity next to residential areas to reduce noise intrusion in the early morning, late evening, weekends and holidays. Policy 1.3 Use information from the noise contour map in the General Plan in the development review process to prevent the location of sensitive land uses near major stationary noise sources. Exterior and interior noise standards determine the design and location of various land uses. The City has the opportunity to control noise between land uses through use of the City Noise Control Ordinance or other means. \1 L LI L \ \-Ih \ L R \ 1 1' 1. \ \ NOISE AND LAND USE PLANNING Goal 2 Minimize transfer of noise impacts between N adjacent land uses. 0 Policy 2.1 Limit the maximum permitted noise levels crossing 1 property lines and impacting adjacent land uses. S Policy 2.2 stationary outdoor equipment. Establish criteria for placement and operation of Policy 2.3 Require that mixed use structures and areas be designed to prevent transfer of noise and vibration from commercial areas to residential areas. Noise issues should always be considered during the planning process so that needed measures are incorporated in design and location of land uses. In addition, the economic impacts of noise attenuation measures can then be incurred by the property developer and not by future owners who may not anticipate noise impacts. Goal 3 Minimize the impact of noise levels throughout the community through land use planning. Policy 3.1 Enforce and maintain acceptable noise limit standards. Policy 3.2 Work with the County of Riverside and the City of Murrieta to minimize or avoid land use/noise conflicts prior to project approvals. Policy 3.3 Encourage the creative use of site and building design techniques as a means to minimize noise impacts. Policy 3.4 Evaluate potential noise conflicts for individual sites and projects, and require mitigation of all significant noise impacts as a condition of project approval. L \17 c.� I \ 1_ R \ 1. f' 1 \ E • • • TRANSPORTATION - N Ra.ATED NOISE 0 I s E Many transportation -related noise sources exist in Temecula, including freeways, major arterial and collector roadways, and aircraft overflights. The City recognizes the importance of the French Valley Airport to the region. Future land use patterns in the General Plan have been designed to accommodate the flight paths and noise contours of the airport as established by the Airport Land Use Commission. Goal 4 Minimize impacts from transportation noise sources. Policy 4.1 Minimize noise conflicts between land uses and the circulation network, and mitigate sound levels where necessary or feasible to ensure the peace and quiet of the community. Policy 4.2 Ensure the effective enforcement of City, State and federal noise standards by all City Divisions. Policy 4.3 Enforce the speed limit on arterials and local roads to reduce noise impacts from vehicles, particularly in residential areas. Policy 4.4 Coordinate with Caltrans to ensure the inclusion of noise mitigation measures in the design of new highways or improvement projects in the Planning Area. Policy 4.5 Participate in the planning and impact assessment activities of the County Airport Land Use Commission and other regional or State agencies relative to any proposed expansion of the airport or change in flight patterns. \1 I i LI 1 \ (, l\ I R \ 1. P 1.\ N \ I�� N-1 NOISE/LAND USE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS N-2 CITY AND STATE NOISE REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS The following actions, procedures and techniques are designed implement the goals and policies of the Noise Element. N to O I S Incorporate measures into all development projects to attenuate exterior and interior noise to acceptable levels. The City's noise compatibility standards for each General Plan land use designation are provided in Table N-1. These standards shall be adhered to and implemented during review of all development projects. Review development proposals to ensure that the noise standards and compatibility criteria are met. Require mitigation measures, where necessary, to reduce noise levels to meet the noise standards and compatibility criteria. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.1, 3.1, 3.4, 4.1 Required by General Plan EIR Minimize noise in Temecula through the following measures: • Require all non -emergency construction activity to comply with the limits (maximum noise levels, hours and days of activity) established in State and City noise regulations (Title 24 California Code of Regulations, Temecula Development Code and Chapter 8.32 of the Municipal Code). • Amend the City Noise Control Ordinance to establish criteria for acceptable placement and operation of stationary outdoor equipment. • Require proposed industrial or commercial projects located near residential areas to demonstrate that the project, when constructed, will meet with City noise reduction requirements. • Review the City Noise Control Ordinance for adequacy and amend as needed to address community needs and development patterns. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.2, 2.2, 4.2 Required by General Plan EIR I 1 iC \[ t \ ( [\[F: \1 r'L \N \I) E • • N 0 I s E • • N-3 USE OF NOISE CoNrouRs IN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW N-4 NOISE AND VIBRATION TRANSFER. STANDARDS N-5 ACOUSTICAL STUDIES Ensure that current noise hazard areas in the City are identified, quantified, and mapped within the City's Geographic Information System (GIS). Review discretionary development proposals for potential on- and off-site stationary and vehicular noise impacts per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Any proposed development located within a 60 dB or higher noise contour (per Figures N-2 and N-3) shall be reviewed for potential noise impacts and compliance with City noise and land use compatibility standards. The thresholds established in the Development Code, Noise Control Ordinance, the noise contour maps and Tables N-1 and N-2 of the Noise Element will be used to determine the significance of impacts. If potential impacts are identified, mitigation measures (including those described in Program N-7) will be required to reduce the impact to a level less than significant. If the impact cannot be reduced to a level less than significant or avoided with accepted noise reduction methods, the proposed project will be determined "Clearly Unacceptable" and will not be approved. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.3, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1 Required by General Plan EIR During review of development applications, consider the noise and vibration impacts of the proposed land use on the current or planned adjacent uses. Establish and enforce standards for noise transfer between non-residential and residential components of mixed use development projects. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 2.1, 2.3 Implement the following measures for all discretionary development projects as a condition of development approval: • Require proposed projects with potential to exceed established noise -land use compatibility thresholds to have an acoustical study prepared, including recommendations for special design measures if the project is to be located close to current or planned noise sensitive uses. I I 'i I \1 l LI l ,\ �- 'll c, \ N-6 NOISE CONTROL COORDINATION N-7 MITIGATING NOISE IMPACTS IN SITE DESIGN • Require proposed noise sensitive projects within noise impacted areas to have an acoustical study prepared, including special design measures to protect noise sensitive uses from ultimate projected noise levels. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.3, 3.4 Required by General Plan EIR Implement the following measures to ensure coordination of noise control efforts: • Designate the Planning Director as the noise control coordinator for new development, charged with the responsibility to enforce City noise policy. • Work with the noise control coordinators for the County of Riverside and City of Murrieta to ensure mitigation of potential land use / noise conflicts near the City's edge. • Work with Caltrans and Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to ensure inclusion of acceptable mitigation measures in the design of new highways or other improvements within the Planning Area. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.3, 3.4 Consider site design techniques as the primary means to minimize noise impacts. Require developers to consider alternative site layouts and architectural features as a means of meeting City noise reduction requirements. Discourage projects that are incapable of successfully mitigating excessive noise. Site design and architectural features recommended to reduce noise include (but are not limited to) the following: • Utilize building setbacks to increase the distance between the noise source and receiver. • Promote the placement of noise tolerant land uses such as parking lots, maintenance facilities, and utility areas between the noise source and receptor. • Orient buildings to shield outdoor spaces from a noise source. Quiet outdoor spaces can be provided by creating a "U" -shaped development with faces away from the roadway, or by clustering land uses. I 1 1 C AI L C U L. \ (, f \ t_ R \ L. \- }I N 0 I S E • N 0 I S E • • • Place bedrooms on the side of the house, facing away from major roadways. Use noise tolerant rooms such as garages, bathrooms and kitchens to shield noise -sensitive areas. • When bedrooms cannot be located on the side of a house away from a major roadway, require extra insulation and double -pane windows. • Avoid balconies facing major travel routes. Development proposals including balconies in the design will need to be evaluated for potential noise impacts during the environmental review process. • Where architectural design treatments fail to adequately reduce adverse noise levels or will significantly increase the costs of land development, require the combined use of noise barriers and landscaped berms. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policy: 3.3 Required by General Plan EIR N-8 Employ the following measures to mitigate transportation activity noise impacts to acceptable levels: REDUCE VEHICULAR NOISE • Incorporate noise control measures, such as sound walls and berms, into roadway improvement projects to mitigate impacts to adjacent development. Measures will emphasize the establishment of buffers between roadways and adjacent noise sensitive areas. • Request that Caltrans provide noise control for highway projects within the City, including interchange improvements along I-15, widening of SR -79 south, SR -79 north, and the proposed Date Street/I-15 interchange. • Provide noise control for City streets within the Planning Area experiencing unique noise problems, such as Pechanga Parkway. • For projects close to master planned roadways, use the ultimate roadway capacity at LOS C and the posted speed limit to estimate maximum future noise impacts. • Coordinate with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and the California Highway Patrol to enforce the California Vehicle Code noise standards for cars, trucks, and motorcycles. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 Required by General Plan EIR I I 1 I T t \t t ti t\ (, I\ t I. \L • ), I' L N-9 FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT Upon any update of the French Valley Airport Master Plan, the County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, or the Caltrans Airport Planning Handbook, review and revise as necessary Figure N-3, and the goals, policies and noise plan within the General Plan Noise Element to correspond with the updated plans. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policy: 4.5 I 11 C I T 1 (; I \ L R \ L P L. \ N 0 I s E • • Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.gcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... Temecula Municipal Code klp Previous Next Main Collapse Search Print No Frames Title 9 PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND WELFARE Chapter 9.20 NOISE 9.20.010 Intent. At certain levels, sound becomes noise and may jeopardize the health, safety or general welfare of city residents and degrade their quality of life. This chapter is intended to establish citywide standards to regulate noise. This chapter is not intended to establish thresholds of significance for the purpose of any analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act. No such thresholds are hereby established. (Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.020 Definitions. Whenever used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings: "Animal" means any bird, cat, dog, goat, horse, burro or donkey. "Audible" means capable of being heard by a person without the use or aid of an amplified hearing device. "Audio equipment" means a television, stereo, radio, tape player, compact disc player, MP3 player, i -Pod or other similar device. "City manager" means the city manager or his or her designee. "Decibel" means a unit (dB) for measuring the relative amplitude of a sound equal approximately to the smallest difference normally detectable by the human ear, the range of which includes approximately one hundred thirty decibels on a scale beginning with zero decibels for the faintest detectable sound. Decibels are measured with a sound level meter using the methodology defined below: 1. A -weighting (dBA) means the standard A -weighted frequency response of a sound level meter, which de-emphasizes low and high frequencies of sound in a manner similar to the human ear for moderate sounds. 2. Maximum sound level (Lmax) means the maximum sound level measured on a sound level meter. "Governmental agency" means the United States, the state of California, the county of Riverside, the city of Temecula, water districts, school districts, or any combination of these agencies. "Motor vehicle" means a vehicle that is self-propelled. "Noise" means any loud, discordant, raucous or disagreeable sound. "Occupied property" means any property upon which is located a residence, business or industrial or manufacturing use. "Power tools or equipment" means any mechanical, electrical or pneumatic device used to perform or facilitate manual or mechanical work. "Public property" means property owned by a governmental agency or held open to the public, including, but not limited to, parks, streets, sidewalks, parking lots and alleys. "Public or private school" means an institution conducting academic instruction at the preschool, • • • 1 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http:l/www.gcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... • 2 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM elementary school, junior high school, high school, or college level. "Sensitive receptor" means a land use that is identified as sensitive to noise in the noise element of the Riverside County general plan and the noise element of the Temecula general plan, including, but not limited to, residences, schools, hospitals, churches, rest homes, cemeteries or public libraries. "Sound amplifying equipment" means a loudspeaker, microphone, megaphone, stereo equipment, portable radio, boom box, any musical instrument amplified by an electrical device, or other similar device. "Sound level meter" means an instrument meeting the standards of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 or Type 2 sound level meters or an instrument that provides equivalent data. (Ord. 09-04 §§ 2, 3; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.030 Exemptions. Sound emanating from the following sources is exempt from the provisions of this chapter: A. Facilities owned or operated by or for a governmental agency. B. Community events on public or private property hosted or sponsored by the city. C. Capital improvement projects of a governmental agency. D. The maintenance or repair of public properties. E. Public safety personnel in the course of executing their official duties, including, but not limited to, sworn peace officers, emergency personnel and public utility personnel. This exemption includes, without limitation, sound emanating from all equipment used by such personnel, whether stationary or mobile. F. Public or private schools and school -sponsored activities. G. Property maintenance, including, but not limited to, the operation of lawnmowers, leaf blowers, etc., provided such maintenance occurs between the hours of seven a.m. and eight p.m. H. Motor vehicles, other than off-highway vehicles. This exemption does not include sound emanating from motor vehicle sound systems. I. Heating and air conditioning equipment. J. Safety, warning and alarm devices, including, but not limited to, house and car alarms, and other warning devices that are designed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. K. The discharge of firearms consistent with all state laws. (Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.040 General sound level standards. No person shall create any sound, or allow the creation of any sound, on any property that causes the exterior sound level on any other occupied property to exceed the sound level standards set forth in Tables N-1 and N-2. Table N-1 TEMECULA LAND USE/NOISE STANDARDS Property Receiving Noise Maximum Noise Level Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... 1 2 Maximum exterior noise levels up to 70 dBA are allowed for multiple -family housing. Where quiet is a basis required for the land use. • 3 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM (dBA) Type of Use Land Use Designation Interior Exterior Residential Hillside Rural Very Low Low Low Medium 45 65 Medium 45 65/701 High 45 701 Commercial and Office Neighborhood Community Highway Tourist Service — 70 Professional Office 50 70 Light Industrial Industrial Park 55 75 Public/Institutional Schools 50 65 All others 50 70 Open Space Vineyards/Agriculture — 70 Open Space — 70/652 1 2 Maximum exterior noise levels up to 70 dBA are allowed for multiple -family housing. Where quiet is a basis required for the land use. • 3 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE • • • http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... Table N-2 NOISE/LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX Land Use Noise Exposure (dBA) 55 60 65 70 75 80 Residential Transient Lodging — Motel, Hotel Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Playgrounds, Parks Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries Office Buildings, Business Commercial, and Professional Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 4 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... Source: Modified from 1998 State of California General Plan Guidelines. Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved meet conventional Title 24 construction standards. No special noise insulation requirements. Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development shall be undertaken only after a detailed noise analysis is made and noise reduction measures are identified and included in the project design. Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development is discouraged. If new construction is proposed, a detailed analysis is required, noise reduction measures must be identified, and noise insulation features included in the design. Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development clearly should not be undertaken. (Ord. 09-04 § 4; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.050 Sound level measurement methodology. The actual location of a sound level measurement shall be at the discretion of the enforcement officials identified in Section 9.20.080 of this chapter. Sound level measurements shall be made with a sound level meter. Immediately before a measurement is made, the sound level meter shall be calibrated utilizing an acoustical calibrator meeting the standards of the American National Standards Institute. The transmission of noise shall be measured by the average of three A -weighted decibel (dBA) noise readings, taken not less than five minutes apart over a thirty -minute time frame. Following a sound level measurement, the calibration of the sound level meter shall be re -verified. Sound level meters and calibration equipment shall be certified to industry standards annually. (Ord. 09-04 § 5; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.060 Special sound sources standards. The general sound level standards set forth in Section 9.20.040 of this chapter apply to sound emanating from all sources, including the following special sound sources, and the person creating or allowing the creation of the sound is subject to the requirements of that section. The following special sound sources are also subject to the following additional standards. Failure to comply will constitute separate violations of this ordinance. A. Power Tools and Equipment. No person shall operate any power tools or equipment between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m. such that the power tools or equipment are audible to a person located inside an occupied building. B. Audio Equipment. No person shall operate any audio equipment as described in Section 9.20.020(B), whether portable or not, between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m. such that the equipment is audible to a person located inside an occupied building. C. Sound Amplifying Equipment or Live Music. 1. It is unlawful for any person to cause, allow or permit the emission or transmission of any loud and raucous noise from any sound -making, sound -amplifying device or live music under his control or in his • • • 5 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... • • • 6 of 8 possession: a. Upon any private property; b. Upon any public street, alley, sidewalk or thoroughfare; c. In or upon any public park or other public place or property. 2. The words "loud and raucous noise," as used in this section, shall mean any sound having such intensity or carrying power as to unreasonably interfere with the peace and quiet of other persons, or as to unreasonably annoy, disturb, impair or endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of other persons. 3. The determination of whether a sound is "unreasonable," as used in subsection (C)(2) of this section, shall involve the consideration of the level of noise, duration of noise, constancy or intermittency of noise, time of day or night, place, proximity to sensitive receptors, nature and circumstances of the emission or transmission of any such loud and raucous noise. D. Construction. No person shall engage in or conduct construction activity, when the construction site is within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence, between the hours of six -thirty p.m. and seven a.m., Monday through Friday, and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. on Saturday. No construction activity shall be undertaken on Sunday and nationally recognized holidays unless exempted by Section 9.20.070 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Public works projects of any federal, state or local entity or emergency work by public utilities are exempt from the provisions of this subsection. Residents working on their homes or property are exempt from the prohibition of construction activities on Sundays and holidays and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. when working on Sundays and holidays. The city council may, by formal action, exempt projects from the provisions of this chapter. E. Barking Dogs and Keeping of Noisy Animals. 1. No person having charge, care, custody or control of any animal shall permit such animal to emit any disturbing or offensive noise. The words "disturbing or offensive noise," as used in this section shall mean any noise from an animal that barks, bays, cries, whines, howls, screeches or makes any noise for an extended period of time whether day or night, regardless of whether the animal is physically situated in or upon private property. Such person is deemed to be in violation of this section if any of the following conditions exist: a. The animal emits disturbing or offensive noise incessantly for thirty minutes or more in any twenty- four -hour period; or b. The animal emits disturbing or offensive noise intermittently for sixty minutes or more during any twenty -four-hour period; or c. Enforcement officials witness such disturbing or offensive noise from the same property on three or more occasions during any thirty -day period of time. An animal is not considered to be emitting disturbing or offensive noise for purposes of this article if, at any time the animal is making noise due to a person or other animal that is trespassing or threatening to trespass upon private property in or upon which the animal is situated, or when the animal is being teased or provoked. 2. Evidence of said disturbing or offensive noise shall be made by direct observation of an enforcement official present on site responding to a complaint from a neighbor, or a complaint form may be signed by a minimum of two neighboring property owners and submitted to an enforcement official. 3. Nothing in this chapter shall establish standards for private civil claims, in either civil court or small claims court, nor shall this chapter preclude any person from pursuing a private civil action in either civil or small claims court. (Ord. 09-04 § 6; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... 9.20.070 Exceptions. Exceptions may be requested from the standards set forth in Sections 9.20.040 (general sound standards) or 9.20.060 (special sound sources standards) of this chapter and may be characterized as construction -related or single event exceptions. A. Application and Processing. 1. Construction -Related Exceptions. An application for a construction -related exception shall be made on a minor exception form. The form shall be submitted in writing at least three working days (seventy-two hours) in advance of the scheduled and permitted activity and shall be accompanied by the appropriate inspection fee(s). The application is subject to approval by the city manager or designated representative. No public hearing is required. 2. Temporary Use Permit. An application for a single event exception shall be made using the temporary use permit application provided by the planning department and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. No public hearing is required. B. Requirements for Approval. The director of planning or his or her designee shall not approve a minor exception application or temporary use permit unless the applicant demonstrates that the activities described in the application would not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community. in determining whether activities are detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, the director of planning or his or her designee shall consider such factors as the proposed duration of the activities and their location in relation to sensitive receptors. If a minor exception application or a temporary use permit is approved, reasonable conditions may be imposed to minimize the public detriment, including, but not limited to, restrictions on sound level, sound duration and operating hours. C. Appeals. 1. Construction -Related Exception. Any person aggrieved by or dissatisfied with the planning director's decision on an application for a construction -related exception may appeal from such action by filing an appeal according to the procedures set forth in Section 17.03.090 of the Temecula Municipal Code. 2. Temporary Use Permit. Any person aggrieved by or dissatisfied with the planning director's decision on an application for a temporary use permit may appeal from such action within fifteen calendar days of the action by filing an appeal according to the procedures set forth in Section 17.03.090 of the Temecula Municipal Code. (Ord. 09-07 § 7; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.080 Enforcement. A. The city manager and his or her designee, including but not limited to police officers, code enforcement officers, park rangers or other enforcement officials shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter. B. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction shall be punished as set forth in Chapter 1.20 of the Temecula Municipal Code. C. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter shall be subject to the enforcement remedies of Chapters 1.21 and 1.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code. D. Nothing in this chapter shall be intended to limit any of the civil or criminal remedies available to the city, nor shall it be intended to limit the city from engaging in efforts to obtain voluntary compliance by means of warnings, notices, administrative citations or educational programs. (Ord. 07-12 § 1) • • 7 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.gcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... • • 9.20.090 Duty to cooperate. No person shall refuse to cooperate with, or obstruct, the enforcement officials identified in Section 9.20.080 of this chapter when they are engaged in the process of enforcing the provisions of this chapter. This duty to cooperate may require a person to extinguish a sound source so that it can be determined whether sound emanating from the source violates the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 07-12 § 1) • 8 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Appendix B Field Sheet Data • • • Field Sheet - ST1 Location Photos Project: Rancho Vista Village Construction Engineer: Mario Gutierrez Date: 1/30/2013 Noise Impact Analysis JN: 0518-13-01 Measurement Address: City: Temecula Site No.: 1 80' West of Elementary School Property Line RK engineering group, inc. • • • • Field Sheet Project: Rancho Vista Village Construction Engineer: Mario Gutierrez Noise Impact Analysis Date: 1N: 1/30/2013 0518-13-01 Measurement Address: City: Temecula Site No.: 1-3 Sound Level Meter: W-712 Serial # A0520 Calibration Record: Input, dB/ Reading, dB/ Offset, dB/ Time Before 114.0/ 114.0/ 26.9/ 10:40 AM Notes: Temp: Windspeed: Direction: Skies: Camera: Photo Nos. 57 After 114.0/ 114.0/ 26.3/ 12:05 AM -- Calibrator: LD-250 250 Serial # 1322 Before / / / -- Clear After / / / Meter Settings: 0 A -WTD 0 LINEAR Il SLOW 0 1/1 OCT ❑O INTERVALS 10_- MINUTE 0 C -WTD 0 IMPULSE 0 FAST 0 1/3 OCT El LN PERCENTILE VALUES Notes: 0 0 10 0 0 Measurement Type: Long-term Short-term X Start Time Stop Time Leq Lmin Lmax L2 18 L25 L50 11:50 AM 12:00 AM 49.9 37.6 71.4 57.8 54.9 46.9 43.3 Comments:Measuring meter set 80' West from school property line. Ambient noise from local traffic and wildlife. 2 11:35 AM 11:45 AM 47.0 36.9 70.6 51.4 46.3 43.9 40.9 Comments: Measuring meter set 80' West of the southern most property Iine.Ambient noise from local traffic and wildlife. 3 10:45 AM 10:55 AM 54.6 40.1 72.6 63.1 57.6 51.7 48.1 Comments: Measuring meter set 47' East of Mira Loma Drive centerline. Ambient noise from local traffic and wildlife. 4 5 RK engineering group, Inc. • • Field Sheet - ST2 Location Photos Project: Rancho Vista Village Construction Engineer: Mario Gutierrez Date: 1/30/2013 Noise Impact Analysis JN: 0518-13-01 Measurement Address: City: Temecula Site No.: 2 80' West of the southern most property line. nl( engineering group, Inc. Field Sheet - ST3 Location Photos Project: Rancho Vista Village Construction Engineer: Mario Gutierrez Noise Impact Analysis Measurement Address: 47East of Mira Loma Drive Centerline City: Temecula No* stn. Are AS& 41—,1W Date: 1/30/2013 JN: 0518-13-01 Site No.: 3 RIC engineering group, inc. • • • • • • CNEL CALCULATED FROM SITE MEASUREMENTS PROJECT: RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE LOCATION: 80 -FT WEST OF SCHOOL P/L (ST -1) DATE,: JN: 31 -Jan -13 0518-13-01 TIME HOURLY HOURLY LEQ ADJUSTED BEGINNING LEQ WEIGHTING HOURLY LEQ 0000 44.6 10.0 54.6 0100 42.2 10.0 52.2 0200 41.0 10.0 51.0 0300 39.2 10.0 49.2 0400 40.2 10.0 50.2 0500 44.0 10.0 54.0 0600 50.4 10.0 60.4 0700 52.7 0.0 52.7 0800 50.8 0.0 50.8 0900 49.8 0.0 49.8 1000 49.7 0.0 49.7 1100 49.9 * 0.0 49.9 1200 50.0 0.0 50.0 1300 50.1 0.0 50.1 1400 50.3 0.0 50.3 1500 51.5 0.0 51.5 1600 53.0 0.0 53.0 1700 52.7 0.0 52.7 1800 51.0 0.0 51.0 1900 49.6 5.0 54.6 2000 48.5 5.0 53.5 2100 47.8 5.0 52.8 2200 46.8 10.0 56.8 2300 46.2 10.0 56.2 CNEL (dBA) 53.4 HR. MEASURED: MEASURED LEQ: 1100 * 49.9 * CNEL CALCULATED FROM SITE MEASUREMENTS PROJECT: RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE LOCATION: 80 -FT WEST OF RESIDENTAL UNITS P/L (ST -2) DATE: JN: 31 -Jan -13 0518-13-01 TIME HOURLY HOURLY LEQ ADJUSTED BEGINNING LEQ WEIGHTING HOURLY LEQ 0000 41.7 10.0 51.7 0100 39.3 10.0 49.3 0200 38.1 10.0 48.1 0300 36.3 10.0 46.3 0400 37.3 10.0 47.3 0500 41.1 10.0 51.1 0600 47.5 10.0 57.5 0700 49.8 0.0 49.8 0800 47.9 0.0 47.9 0900 46.9 0.0 46.9 1000 46.8 0.0 46.8 1100 47.0 * 0.0 47.0 1200 47.1 0.0 47.1 1300 47.2 0.0 47.2 1400 47.4 0.0 47.4 1500 48.6 0.0 48.6 1600 50.1 0.0 50.1 1700 49.8 0.0 49.8 1800 48.1 0.0 48.1 1900 46.7 5.0 51.7 2000 45.6 5.0 50.6 2100 44.9 5.0 49.9 2200 43.9 10.0 53.9 2300 43.3 10.0 53.3 CNEL (dBA) 50.5 HR. MEASURED: MEASURED LEQ: 1100 * 47.0 * • • • • • CNEL CALCULATED FROM SITE MEASUREMENTS PROJECT: RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE LOCATION: 47 -FT EAST OF MIRA LOMA DR. C/L (ST -3) DATE: JN: 31 -Jan -13 0518-13-01 TIME HOURLY HOURLY LEQ ADJUSTED BEGINNING LEQ WEIGHTING HOURLY LEQ 0000 49.5 0100 47.1 0200 45.8 0300 44.1 0400 45.1 0500 48.9 0600 55.3 0700 57.6 0800 55.7 0900 54.7 1000 54.6 1100 54.8 1200 54.9 1300 55.0 1400 55.2 1500 56.4 1600 57.9 1700 57.6 1800 55.8 1900 54.5 2000 53.4 2100 52.7 2200 51.7 2300 51.1 * 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 59.5 57.1 55.8 54.1 55.1 58.9 65.3 57.6 55.7 54.7 54.6 54.8 54.9 55.0 55.2 56.4 57.9 57.6 55.8 59.5 58.4 57.7 61.7 61.1 CNEL (dBA) 58.3 HR. MEASURED: MEASURED LEQ: 1000 * 54.6 * Appendix C Construction Noise Calculations • • • • • • Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise - Grading Phase (No Wall) "" Receptor #1 "" Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night East P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Grader No 40 85.0 100.0 0.0 Grader No 40 85.0 100.0 0.0 Excavator No 40 80.7 100.0 0.0 Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Grader 79.0 75.0 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.0 5.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 79.0 75.0 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.0 5.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 74.7 70.7 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4.7 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 79.0 78.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.0 8.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise - Grading Phase (W/ Temporary Barrier) "" Receptor #1 "" Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night East P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Grader No 40 85.0 100.0 10.0 Grader No 40 85.0 100.0 10.0 Excavator No 40 80.7 100.0 10.0 Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Grader 69.0 65.0 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 69.0 65.0 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 64.7 60.7 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 69.0 68.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A • • • • • • Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise - Grading Phase (No Wall) "" Receptor #2 "" Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night South P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Grader No 40 85.0 100.0 0.0 Grader No 40 85.0 100.0 0.0 Excavator No 40 80.7 100.0 0.0 Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Grader 79.0 75.0 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.0 5.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 79.0 75.0 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.0 5.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 74.7 70.7 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4.7 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 79.0 78.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.0 8.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise - Grading Phase (W/ Temporary Barrier) *— Receptor #2 "" Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night South P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Grader No 40 85.0 100.0 10.0 Grader No 40 85.0 100.0 10.0 Excavator No 40 80.7 100.0 10.0 Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Grader 69.0 65.0 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 69.0 65.0 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 64.7 60.7 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 69.0 68.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A • • • • • • Roadway Construction Noise Modet (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise - Grading Phase (No Wall) Receptor #3 "" Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night West P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Grader No 40 85.0 75.0 0.0 Grader No 40 85.0 75.0 0.0 Excavator No 40 80.7 75.0 0.0 Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Grader 81.5 77.5 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.5 7.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 81.5 77.5 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A NIA 11.5 7.5 NIA N/A N/A N/A Excavator 77.2 73.2 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.2 3.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 81.5 81.3 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.5 11.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/06/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise (W/ Temporary Barrier) "" Receptor #3 "" Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night West P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Grader No 40 85.0 75.0 11.8 Grader No 40 85.0 75.0 11.8 Excavator No 40 80.7 75.0 11.8 Equipment Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Grader 69.7 65.7 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Grader 69.7 65.7 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Excavator 65.4 61.4 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A NIA N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 69.7 69.5 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A • • • • • • Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise - Concrete Phase (No Wall) *- Receptor #1 '**' Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night East P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 100.0 0.0 Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 100.0 0.0 Concrete Pump Truck No 20 81.4 100.0 0.0 Equipment Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Mixer Truck 72.8 68.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.8 None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Mixer Truck 72.8 68.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.8 None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Pump Truck 75.4 68.4 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.4 None N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 75.4 73.4 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.4 3.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A a Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Concrete Phase - (W/ Temporary Barrier) **** Receptor #1 **** Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night East P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 100.0 10.0 Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 100.0 10.0 Concrete Pump Truck No 20 81.4 100.0 10.0 Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Mixer Truck 62.8 58.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Mixer Truck 62.8 58.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Pump Truck 65.4 58.4 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 65.4 63.4 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A • • • • • • Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02104/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise - Concrete Phase (No Wall) **** Receptor #2 **** Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night South P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 Concrete Pump Truck No 20 Results 78.8 78.8 81.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Mixer Truck 72.8 68.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.8 None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Mixer Truck 72.8 68.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.8 None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Pump Truck 75.4 68.4 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.4 None N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 75.4 73.4 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.4 3.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Concrete Phase - (W/ Temporary Barrier) "" Receptor #2 '.,. Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night South P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 Concrete Pump Truck No 20 Results 78.8 78.8 81.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Mixer Truck 62.8 58.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Mixer Truck 62.8 58.8 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Pump Truck 65.4 58.4 70.0 70.0 N/A NfA N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 65.4 63.4 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A • • • • • • Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/04/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise - Concrete Phase (No Wall) "" Receptor #3 "" Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night West P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 Concrete Pump Truck No 20 Equipment Results 78.8 78.8 81.4 75.0 75.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Mixer Truck 75.3 71.3 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.3 1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Mixer Truck 75.3 71.3 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.3 1.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Pump Truck 77.9 70.9 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.9 0.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 77.9 75.9 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 7.9 5.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1 Report date: 02/06/2013 Case Description: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Concrete Phase - (W/ Temporary Barrier) "" Receptor #3 "" Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night West P/L Residential 54.6 54.6 45.0 Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 75.0 11.8 Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 78.8 75.0 11.8 Concrete Pump Truck No 20 81.4 75.0 11.8 Results Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Mixer Truck 63.5 59.5 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Mixer Truck 63.5 59.5 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Pump Truck 66.1 59.1 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 66.1 64.1 70.0 70.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A None None N/A N/A N/A N/A • • • • • • Appendix D Sample Temporary Construction Noise Barriers TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS NOISE CONTROL BLANKETS STC 22 NOISE CONTROL BLANKET FREQUENCY IN HERTZ 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K TRANSMISSION Loss 9 10 8 20 39 43 48 D(B)A STC 27 NOISE CONTROL BLANKET FREQUENCY IN HERTZ 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K TRANSMISSION LOSS 11 11 13 28 39 40 53 D(B)A WV 22 NOISE CONTROL BLANKET FREQUENCY IN HERTZ 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K TRANSMISSION Loss 9 10 8 20 39 43 48 D(B)A NRC RATING .8 WV 28 NOISE CONTROL BLANKET FREQUENCY IN HERTZ 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K TRANSMISSION Loss 11 11 13 28 39 40 53 D(B)A NRC RATING 1 .00 i P.O. Box 81747 Bakersfield, CA 93380 Phone: (800) 606-6473 Fax: (661) 391-9999 Email: nccnoisecontrol.com • NOISE CONTROL PANELS STC 42 NOISE CONTROL PANEL FREQUENCY IN HERTZ TRANSMISSION Loss 31.5 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K IP12 14 18 25 36 46 53 67 SOUND ABSORPTION COEFFICIENT .90 E»>7 NOISE CONTROL CORPORRTION EXPERTS IN NOISE AND SOUND CONTROL TECHNICAL DATA • • Noise Control Corporation has perfected both the art and science for drilling application technology. We have developed "state of the art" sound reducing panels and blankets specific for oil sites. These noise control blankets have the highest sound barrier qualities available on today's market. Our noise control blankets are chemical resistant, fire resistant, and weather- proofed for harsh environments. NOISECONTROL BLANKETS STANDARD DIMENSIONS 10' x 10' 10' x 20" CUSTOM DIMENSIONS AVAILABLE STANDARD COLORS GREY 1 SAFETY YELLOW (OTHER COLORS UPON REQUEST) ATTACHMENT 1/2" GROMMETS PLACED 1 2" ON CENTER WORKING TEMPERATURES HIGH 106 F Low -40 F WIND LOADS 70 MPH • FLAME RESISTANT / FIRE RETARDANT TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRE MARSHALL REQUIREMENT F419.01 • UV RESISTANT FOR 10 YEARS • ANTI -FUNGAL / ANTI -BACTERIAL (800) 606-6473 P.O. Box 81 747 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93380 PHONE: (800) 606-6473 FAX: (661) 391-9999 EMAIL: NCC@NOISECONTROL.COM PRODUCT APPLICATIONS OIL WELL / WATER WELL DRILLING Noise Control Corporation has perfected both the art and science for drilling application technology. have the highest sound barrier qualities available on today's market. Most drilling sites requiring sound control are in locations which are noise sensitive and noise and sound control are part of the permitting process. Our typical design installation does not interfere with any operation of running pipe up the V - door or tong operations. Sound control for water well drilling differs from that in oil well drilling for a few reasons. First, there is no room for noise control applications on the drilling rig itself and secondly, the equipment differs in its noise sources. The blankets motioned above are still utilized but are configured differently. The most common use for the sound control blankets is to erect a perimeter sound barrier wall up to 20' tall. This wall allows for separation between the rig and the community without interfering with the tight working areas of the location. These noise control blankets SEISMIC RETROFIT Noise Control Corporation has become the industry leader in sound control applications for both new bridge construction and seismic retrofits. Our most recent project was at the Arroyo Seco Bridge in the City of Pasadena for McCarthy Construction and the Califomia Department of Transportation. Noise control blankets were suspended from the bridge to mitigate 12-22 decibels of sound. The noise control barrier averaged ten stories in height and over 900 feet in length. This application mitigated typical construction sounds such as rock drills, concrete operations, jackhammers, and pile drivers from nearby residences. C»>] NOISES CONTROL CORPORRTION CONSTRUCTION SITES Most construction safety codes require plywood pe- rimeter fencing in urban or congested construction set- tings. This requirement is largely for security pur- poses, but does produce ancillary sound control. Local noise ordinances generally reflect a higher standard for swing shift or "after work" hours. Noise Control Corporation has successfully accomplished this balance of quiet neighborhoods and ongoing construction. Our construction site barriers are 10', 20', or 30' tall. They come in various thickness and have different ratings for noise mitigation. manager. EXCAVATION SITES The barrier wall syst� is also effectively utilized for major excavation sites. The barrier wall allows for maximum flexibility and options to the site Dust control is always an issue, and our designs can allow for the attachment of sprinkler systems thereby reducing water equipment requirements. Noise Control Corporation has designed barriers that provide necessary site lighting and can support 20' x 20' equipment access doors. Most excavation sites have a permanent maintenance area. Our portable enclosure allows for noise mitigation of extremely noisy equipment such as compressors and generators. EQUIPMENT NOISE The years of experience compiled by Noise Control Corporation has shown us that similar enclosure applications can be utilized to mitigate the noise of many different equipment types. We can provide wither permanent or temporary enclosures tailoring solutions on a case by case basis. Since air circulation is critical for cooling, our enclosures come with an air transfer system that allows the cooling air to move in and out of the enclosure, yet does no allow the noise to escape. These state of the art enclosures solve noise problems from various types of equipment. • • • NATURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, INC. 3415 Valencia Hill Drive Riverside, California 92507 February 4, 2013 Stuart Fisk Company 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: Rancho Vista Village Public Trail Alignment Dear Mr. Fisk: T (951) 686-1141 F (951) 686-8418 nrainc@earthlink.net Per your request, I reviewed the proposed alignment of the public trail for the Rancho Vista Village project. In addition, I overlaid the proposed alignment for the trail onto my existing graphic showing the development area in relation to the identified jurisdictional waters. As you can see from the attached graphic, the public trail runs on the bank above the drainage area and is routed well away from the jurisdictional waters. No impacts are expected. Please let me know if there is additional information you require. You can reach me at 951 6861141 or by email at nrainc@earthlink.net. Sincerely, Karen Kirtland President February 4, 2013 Temecula Conservation Channel ICC11-102 NATURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, INC. 1 4! atlti+1; t �rl$ February 4, 2013 Temecula Conservation Channel ICC11-102 • • North America I Europe I Australia I Asia www.brandman.com February 7, 2013 Stuart Fisk Community Development City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589-9033 FirstCarbon® SOLUTIONS MICHAEL BRAHMAN ASSOCIATES Re: Response to Comments pertaining to the MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (PA12-0033 and PA12-0034) Dear Mr. Fisk: FirstCarbon Solutions/Michael Brandman Associates (FCS/MBA)' is pleased to submit this memo which is intended to respond to comments to the City of Temecula pertaining to the MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment for Rancho Vista Village. In a letter dated January 11, 2013, by Tamar C. Stein, the commenter asserts that the construction of the proposed public multi-purpose trail may cause potentially significant impacts to jurisdictional areas because of possible creek alignment. The trail was not proposed at the time of the MSHCP report. The trail is aligned in the same location as the proposed sidewalk within the proposed landscape area of the project above and adjacent to the creek. This area was analyzed within the MSHCP report. There were no changes to the trail alignment that would encroach or impact riverine/riparian areas, or into jurisdictional areas regulated by California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of Engineers or Regional Water Quality Control Board. If you have any questions regarding this response to comments, please contact me at 909.884.2255 Ext. 1219 or via e- mail at dhameister@brandman.com, Sincerely, Dale Hameister, Biologist First Carbon Solutions/Michael Brandman Associates 621 E. Carnegie Drive, Suite 100 San Bernardino, CA 92408 H:\Client (JN-PNI\1264 City of Temecula \Rancho Vista Villa_810 Comments.doc I For Contracting purposes, FCS/MBA continues to do business under the Tax ID number of Michael Br JOengineering group, inc. • February 6, 2013 Mr. Stuart Fisk CITY OF TEMECULA 43200 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92590 transportation planning • traffic engineering acoustical engineerin • parking studies Subject: Response to Findings Made Regarding the Rancho Vista Village Apartments Project — Noise Study Dear Mr. Fisk: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) is pleased to submit this letter in response to the comments set -forth by Cox Castle & Nicholson (CC&G). CC&G provided a review and submitted comments to the City of Temecula in response to a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rancho Vista Village Apartments project. The proposed project is located at the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, in the City of Temecula. The original Noise Review (Rancho Vista Villas Mitigated Negative Declaration — Noise Review, January 10, 2013) was completed by Kimley-Horn and Associates. This review found that the noise impacts generated by the project site would be considered not significant. CC&G provided counter arguments and comments on the noise impact review section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and determined that the noise review did not provide sufficient information to justify an insignificant impact (Appendix A). In response to CC&G comments, RK has completed a construction noise impact study (Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study, City of Temecula, February 6, 2073) and would like to issue the following responses to those findings as detailed by CC&G. 4000 westerly place, suite 280 newport beach, calitornia 92460 tel 949.474.0809 fax 949.474.0902 http//www.rkengineer.com Mr. Stuart Fisk CITY OF TEMECULA February 6, 2013 Page 2 Traffic Noise Impact The following comments were made by CC&G: CC&G Comment: Section 10 of the MND finds that the Project's Noise impacts will be less than significant or non-existent. However, no Noise Study was conducted to support those findings. Submitted concurrently is the report of Jeffrey D. Fuller, INCE, REBIS of Kimlcy- Horn and Associates, Inc. (the "KHA Noise Report".) The KHA Noise Report establishes, that the Project may cause significant permanent and temporary noise impacts affecting students at Vail Elementary School and residents on Mira Loma Drive. The KHA Noise Report finds that the Project may cause potentially significant permanent cumulative noise impacts from vehicular traffic, based on thc Project's Average Daily Traffic Volume in Exhibits 2-2 and 3-2 of the Project's Traffic Study. The MND states "substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project arc nor anticipated." Yet rhe MND did not assess traffic noise nor even attempt to quantify any permanent increase in ambient noise lords caused by the Project. In Tight of thc KHA Noise Report, thc MND's finding regarding permanent noise impacts cannot stand. RK Response: RK performed three (3) daytime ambient noise measurements at the project site. Noise measurement locations represent the various sensitive receptor locations. Field data and measurement locations can be found in the Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study. Noise measurement data indicates that the current project site and surrounding and the adjacent school and residencies experiences noise levels ranging from 50.5 to 58.3 dBA CNEL. The noise measurement data indicates that local roadway network traffic and exterior school activities are the main sources of noise impacting the surrounding area. Since traffic noise is the main source of noise impacting the surrounding area, RK reviewed the existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes along Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road. The traffic impact study (Rancho Vista Village Traffic Impact Study, City of Temecula, 09/11/2012) performed by RK, indicates that the existing ADT volumes along Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road are 1,370 and 6,360 respectively. The project will generate an additional 798 ADT along Mira Loma Drive and 280 ADT along Rancho Vista Road. It has been well documented (Caltrans Noise Supplement, Oct 1998) that in order to increase traffic noise by three (3) decibels (dB) A -weighted along a roadway segment (given that the distance from the centerline remains the same), the traffic volumes along the MD: mn/RK9756. doc JN:0518-2013-01 • • • • • Mr. Stuart Fisk CITY OF TEMECULA February 6, 2013 Page 3 roadway segment needs to double. In other words, it takes a doubling of ADT along a roadway segment to increase the traffic noise levels by 3 dBA. Even though the proposed project increases the amount of ADT along the local roadway network, the increase is minimal and not significant. The proposed project will not increase the local traffic by double. Ambient traffic noise levels are anticipated to increase by approximately 1.5 dBA. This is as a result of the estimated increase of ADT along the subject roadways. Even with a doubling of traffic (a 3 dBA increase) the exterior noise levels will still remain below the City's 65 dBA CNEL standard. Construction Noise Impact The following comments were made by CC&G: CC&G Comment: Thc K1 IA Noise report also finds that the Project may inflict potentially significant construction noise impacts upon the students at Vail School and residents of Mira Loma Drivc. Thc MND admits that construction machinery may generate noise in the range of 100+ dBA at 100 feet, a level that exceeds all recognized exterior significance thresholds, including the City's, but dismisses it as "annoying". The MND finds that compliance with the City's ordinance regulating the hours of construction means construction noise will be less Than significant. However, compliance with an ordinance regulating construction hours does not excuse the Ciry from conducting a CEQA assessment of the impacts of the noise being generated during those hours. Here, Vail students and Mira Loma Drive residents may suffer significant noise impacts during the day while they study or arc at home. the MND also asserts than construction noise will he less rhan significant because if noise levels "would exceed the city's noise regulations, an application for a construction exception must he made." The fact the Applicant can apply for an exception allowing him to go right on exceeding noise standards does not satisfy CEQA_ CEQA requires analysis to be done before the horse leaves thc barn. The MND finds a less than significant permanent noise impact because the Project will nor cause noise levels that exceed standards established in the General Plan, local ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies. Temecula's General Plan Noise Element requires that noise, including construction noise, comply with thc City's maximum noise levels. The maximum exterior noise level stated in the General Plan for high density residential uses is 70 dBA. Temecula Municipal Code scc. 9.20.040 says "No person shall create any sound, or allow the creation of any sound, on any property that causes the exterior sound level on any other occupied property to exceed the sound level exterior standards set forth in Tables N-1 and N-2." Table N-1 imposes maximum exterior noise levels of 65 dBA for schools and 70 dBA for high density residential uses. Table N-2 provides that noise exposure in excess of of 70 dBA for .schools and residential uses is normally unacceptable", while a level of 80 dBA is 'clearly unacceptable" for both uses. MD: mn/RK9756. doc JN:0518-2013 01 Mr. Stuart Fisk CITY OF TEMECULA February 6, 2013 Page 4 RK Response: RK conducted a construction noise assessment and found the following: Construction noise is considered a short-term impact. The duration will last approximately the length of construction time frame. If an application for an exemption is filed and accepted by the City, the project will be exempt from maintaining noise levels below the 70 dBA standard; therefore, the project will not have a significant impact to the adjacent land uses. In the event a noise exemption is not granted, the project would need to implement temporary noise barriers (with a minimum height of 10 feet) along the eastern, southern, and western property lines (of the project site) and additional mitigation measures to further ensure that exterior noise levels during construction would remain below the 70 dBA standard set -forth by the City. Mitigation measures are provided within the construction noise assessment. Stationary Noise Impact The following comments were made by CC&G: CC&G Comment: The KHA Noise Report applies conservative standards to predict the Project's exterior and interior noise impacts and finds that the Project may cause potentially significant permanent and temporary noise impacts affecting students at Vail School who are right next door to the Project and residents on Mira Loma Drive. RK Response: Upon completion, the project will not have any stationary noise sources (e.g. loading docks, drive-thru speakers and pumps). Stationary noise sources are a typical corporate of increasing the ambient noise levels beyond a City's noise ordinance. In addition, the project will not significantly increase the long-term traffic noise levels at or near the project site. As previously mentioned, the project will increase traffic noise along the subject roadways by approximately 1.5 dBA CNEL. The existing measured ambient noise levels ranged from 50.5 to 58.3 dBA CNEL. Adding an additional 1.5 dBA to 58.3 dBA produces 59.8 dBA CNEL. The City's residential standard is 65 dBA CNEL. The project's impact is considered not significant. MD: mn/RK9756. doc JN:0518-2013-01 • 1 • • • • Mr. Stuart Fisk CITY OF TEMECULA February 6, 2013 Page 5 Conclusion RK Engineering Group, Inc. concludes that the Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Study, (submitted by RK) outlines the proper mitigation requirements and will meet the City's Noise Standards and specifications. RK Engineering Group, Inc. is pleased to assist the City of Temecula with the Rancho Vista Village project. If you have any questions regarding this letter or would like further review, please do not hesitate to call us at (949) 474-0809. Sincerely, RK ENGINEERING GROUP, (1, 'r \'- Robert Kahn, P.E. Principal MD: mn/RK9756. doc IN:0518-2013-01 MANketD3arr.)--, Michael Dickerson, INCE Air/Noise Specialist • Appendix A Rancho Vista Village, PA 12-0033 and PA 12-0034, Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration - Submitted by Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP --'4 COXCASTLE N ICHOLSON ►-- 1 January 11, 2013 VIA E-MAIL STUART.FISK@CITYOFTEMECULA.ORG Mr. Stuart Fisk Senior Planner, City of Temecula P.O. Box 9033 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92589-9033 Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP 2049 Century Park East, 28'h Floor Los Angeles, California 90067-3284 P 310.284.2200 F 310.284.2100 Tamar C. Stein 310.284.2248 tstein@coxcastle.com File No. 66486 Re: Rancho Vista Village, PA 12-0033 and PA 12-0034, Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration Dear Mr. Fisk: I represent Robert Oder, Wilford Limited Partnership and Westfield Capital, Inc. (collectively "Mr. Oder") with respect to the above referenced matter. Mr. Oder owns the Mira Loma Apartments complex which is located directly across Mira Loma Drive from the proposed Rancho Vista Village Apartments (the "Project"). We have reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is legally inadequate under the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code sec. 21000, et. seq. ("CEQA"). An environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared for the Project but, in all events, the Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "MND") is inadequate in and of itself. This letter presents CEQA comments, only. Mr. Oder anticipates submission of further comments and objections with respect to the Project. PREPARATION OF AN EIR IS MANDATORY A strong presumption favoring preparation of an EIR is built into CEQA. This presumption is reflected in the fair argument standard, under which an agency must prepare an EIR if substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that a project may have a significant impact on the environment. No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Ca1.3d 68, 75. Under CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines if a project may cause a significant effect on the environment, the Iead agency must prepare an EIR. Public Resources Code sec. 21100, 21151; 14 Cal. Code Regs. sec. 15064(a)(i), (f)(i). An EIR must be prepared even if the agency is presented with other substantial evidence indicating that the project will not have a significant impact. See No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, supra; 14 Cal. Code Regs. Sec. 15064(f) (i). Here, there is substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the Project may cause significant impacts with respect to Biological Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise and Transportation and Traffic. Expert reports from Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers and Kimley-Horn and Associates establish that the Project may cause ►-- www.coxcastle.com Los Angeles I Orange County I San Francisco * Mr. Stuart Fisk January 11, 2013 Page 2 significant impacts. When qualified experts present conflicting evidence on the nature or extent of a project's impacts the agency must accept the evidence tending to show that the impact might occur. Architectural HeritageAss'n v. County of Monterey (2004) 122 Cal. App.4th 1095, 1114. A mitigated negative declaration may be adopted only if all potentially significant project effects will be avoided or reduced to insignificance. Public Resources Code sec. 21080(c)(2); 14 Cal. Code Regs. sec. 15070(b). If there is substantial evidence in the record that the project may have one or more significant impacts on the environment despite modifications, a negative declaration is improper and an EIR is mandatory. Under CEQA, and EIR is mandatory for this Project. THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE PUBLIC MULTI PURPOSE TRAIL Under 14 CaI. Code Regs. sec. 15071, a proposed negative declaration must include a description of the project. A public multi purpose trail running through the Project and along side the creek on the Project's northeastern boundary was added to the Project after the recirculation of the MND on or about December 6, 2012. The MND contains nary a word about this public trail nor is any trail exhibit attached. The failure to include the public multi purpose trail renders the Project Description legally inadequate. The Project Description in the MND describes the Project as the construction of 120 apartment units on a 7.24 acre site, to be implemented through a General Plan Amendment changing the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, and a Zoning Text Amendment to revise the text for Planned Development Overlay -11. The PDO states that the Project "is comprised entirely of private residential land uses", see (p. 3.). This description is not accurate. The Project now includes a 6' to 8' -wide public multi purpose trail, with a 3 -rail vinyl fence and concrete bollards with lights, which runs alongside the creek located along the northeastern boundary of the Project site. (See Trail Exhibit, dated 12/10/2012). The addition of the public multi purpose trail changes the entirely private nature of the Project, raising issues including security, trespassing, vandalism and throwing refuse into the creek. Most importantly, the trail requires construction activities next to the creek, where none previously were contemplated. Therefore, the omission of the public multi purpose trail has improperly deprived the City Council and the public of vital material necessary to an informed decision and is prejudicial in violation of CEQA. County of Amador v. El Dorado Water Agency (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 931, 946. Mr. Stuart Fisk January 11, 2013 Page 3 KIMLEY HORN'S EXPERT REPORT ESTABLISHES THAT THE PROJECT MAY CAUSE SIGNIFICANT HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY IMPACTS Section 9 of the MND finds that the Project's impacts on Hydrology and Water Quality are either less than significant or non existent. No mitigation measures whatsoever have been imposed. As shown by the concurrently submitted report of Jason Marechal, P.E., LEED, AP, of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., dated January 10, 2013 (the "KHA Report") the MND's findings are fatally flawed. The MND's Assertion That The Project's Post Development Flow Rates, Volumes, Durations, And Velocities Would Match Pre -Development Conditions Is Wrong. The MND finds a less than significant impact to site drainage patterns, erosion, siltation, surface, stormwater and polluted runoffs because the Project's post -development conditions will not exceed pre -development conditions. This is not correct. The KHA Report finds that the calculations in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by VSL in March 2012 ("WQMP") do not support the MND's finding that the Project's post -development flow rates, volumes, durations, and velocities would match pre -development conditions The correct calculations and potentially significant impacts the Project may cause are described in the KHA Report. These include findings that the Project's proposed treatment control BMPs do not meet current LID requirements, that Site Design BMP tables do not accurately reflect the site design and are not incorporated to the maximum extent practicable (MEP) because infiltration is not broadly used throughout the site, and treatment of pollutants of concern does not comply with requirements for removal efficiency rates. The KHA Report Shows That The Project May Cause Significant Impacts to Groundwater Supply and Recharge. The MND finds that the Project has less than significant impacts to groundwater supply and requires no mitigation. The KHA Report finds that, based on the WQMP's own calculations, the Project's runoff volume will be substantially increased such that infiltration and groundwater recharge may be substantially reduced by the Project. The KHA Report explains why and how the MND is not accurate in its conclusions. The KHA Report Shows That The Project May Cause Potentially Significant Impacts on Drainage Causing Downstream Erosion and Flooding. The MND finds that the Project will have Less than significant impacts on drainage and runoff. No mitigation is required. The MND finding are based on the Project's future drainage plan and the WQMP. The KHA Report finds that the failure to prepare a preliminary hydrology study, or even to discuss the flood control system proposed for the site, means the MND's finding is not supported. • Mr. Stuart Fisk January 11, 2013 Page 4 The KHA Report also notes that the substantial increase in runoff volume (per Section IV of the WQMP) could accelerate downstream erosion and that while the existing site conditions include a general sheet flow condition where stormwater enters the creek over a broad width, the Project's storm water would enter at specific locations, causing local erosion. In addition, the detention calculations for Project Area A incorrectly model the 100 -year storm event; correct modeling would likely show flow increases. None of the other Project subareas are modeled so any their potential impacts have simply been ignored. The MND Fails to Analyze Significant Impacts to the Creek And Downstream Property Owners. The MND utterly fails to address the capacity of the creek which runs along the Project boundary and downstream of the Project, where Mr. Oder's Mira Loma Apartments are located. On November 13, 2012, Mr. Oder submitted to the City Council pictures of disastrous flooding events on his property and testified as to his ongoing efforts to prevent flooding, working with the County Flood Control Department the Regional Water Quality Control Board and others. The only attempt to address this significant impact is Project Condition PW 13, which defers analysis of impacts to downstream property owners and preparation of a drainage plan until construction. Analysis of such impacts cannot be omitted or deferred. Ocean View Estates Homeowners Assn v. Montecito Water Dist. (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 396. Lighthouse Field Beach Rescue v. City of Santa Cruz (2005) 131 Cal. App. 4th 1170. The MND Fails to Analyze Impacts of the Public Trail. As noted, the KHA Report finds that the Project could cause flooding and erosion, along with changes and realignment to the creek bank caused by erosion, and that it is likely that the public multi puroose trail will encroach into waters of the U.S. and potentially realign portions of the creek. If so, it is likely that BMPs and mitigation measures with respect to trail drainage will be required. THE LLG REPORT SHOWS POSSIBLE SIGNIFICANT SAFETY IMPACTS TO VAIL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS AND TO VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS ON MIRA LOMA DRIVE Vail Elementary School is right next door to the Project. The MND finds that the Project's impacts on school safety are less than significant because the "peak hours" for Project and school traffic are not the same. The Project's Traffic Study does not support this conclusion. Submitted concurrently is the report of John Boarman, P.E., of Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers (the "LLG Report"). The LLG Report finds that the Project's Traffic Study inexcusably relies on traffic counts taken when Vail not in session (school was out for the summer) and made no upward adjustment to account for the school traffic. Further compounding its error, the Project's Traffic Study utilized a Peak Hour Factor (PHF) that understates school impacts. Put simply, adding Project traffic to existing traffic during Vail School's peak hour may endanger the safety of Vail's students. Mr. Stuart Fisk January 11, 2013 Page 5 The Traffic Study's failure to do a sight Iine analysis is equally flawed. The LLG Report finds that the sight distance provided at Project driveways does not meet minimum requirements. Put simply, potentially significant safety impacts may be caused by the design of the Project's accesses. The Project's Traffic Study proposes deferring sight line analysis until construction. The analysis must be done now. The LLG Report finds that the failure of the Project to provide Code mandated parking, much less parking comparable to that provided by neighboring apartment complexes, further exacerbates the Project's safety hazards. As explained in the LLG Report, it is expected that the Project will cause 34 parking spaces to be relocated onto Mira Loma Drive. Further, the LLG Report notes that the proposed public multi purpose trail appears to end at a point on Mira Loma Drive where there is inadequate pedestrian sight distance. The Project Traffic Study omits analysis of this impact. THE LAND USE AND PLANNING SECTION OF THE MND IS LEGALLY INADEQUATE The Land Use and Planning Section of the MND states the Project will have a Less than significant impact because it does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation. Of course, this is not quite accurate. The Project as proposed directly conflicts with the existing General Plan and PDO. Nevertheless, the MND fails to provide any meaningful analysis that would enable the decision makers and the public to understand why the Project would not result in potentially significant landusel impacts. Instead, the issue is swept under the rug in one conclusory paragraph. It is apparent that the issues heretofore raised are in pertinent part caused by thehigh density proposed by the Project. We also note that on its face the Project violates the Noise Element of the General Plan which requires that construction noise comply with the City's maximum noise levels. The Project violates the General Plan standard during construction and may do so on a permanent basis (see Noise discussion). The MND finds no impact to applicable conservation plans, without consideration of the impacts construction of the public multi purpose trail may have on the jurisdictional waters of the creek, including its possible realignment, and impacts on downstream property owners(see KHA Report). Mr. Oder will submit further comments addressing the Project's density and why the Council should not approve the proposed General Plan amendment. The bottom line is that the MND's analysis is not legally adequate. Citizens for Responsible h'' Open Government v. City of Grand Terrace (2008) 160 Cal. App. 4th 1323. Mr. Stuart Fisk January 11, 2013 Page 6 THE NOISE ANALYSIS OF THE MND IS LEGALLY INADEQUATE Section 10 of the MND finds that the Project's Noise impacts will be less than significant or non-existent. However, no Noise Study was conducted to support those findings. Submitted concurrently is the report of Jeffrey D. Fuller, INCE, REBIS of Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. (the "KHA Noise Report") The KHA Noise Report establishes, that the Project may cause significant permanent and temporary noise impacts affecting students at Vail Elementary School and residents on Mira Loma Drive. The KHA Noise Report finds that the Project may cause potentially significant permanent cumulative noise impacts from vehicular traffic, based on the Project's Average Daily Traffic Volume in Exhibits 2-2 and 3-2 of the Project's Traffic Study. The MND states "substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project are not anticipated." Yet the MND did not assess traffic noise nor even attempt to quantify any permanent increase in ambient noise levels caused by the Project. In light of the KHA Noise Report, the MND's finding regarding permanent noise impacts cannot stand. The KHA Noise report also finds that the Project may inflict potentially significant construction noise impacts upon the students at Vail School and residents of Mira Loma Drive. The MND admits that construction machinery may generate noise in the range of 100+ dBA at 100 feet, a level that exceeds all recognized exterior significance thresholds, including the City's, but dismisses it as "annoying". The MND finds that compliance with the City's ordinance regulating the hours of construction means construction noise will be less than significant. However, compliance with an ordinance regulating construction hours does not excuse the City from conducting a CEQA assessment of the impacts of the noise being generated during those hours. Here, Vail students and Mira Loma Drive residents may suffer significant noise impacts during the day while they study or are at home. The MND also asserts that construction noise will be less than significant because if noise levels "would exceed the city's noise regulations, an application for a construction exception must be made." The fact the Applicant can apply for an exception allowing him to go right on exceeding noise standards does not satisfy CEQA. CEQA requires analysis to be done before the horse leaves the barn. The MND finds a less than significant permanent noise impact because the Project will not cause noise levels that exceed standards established in the General Plan, local ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies. Temecula's General Plan Noise Element requires that noise, including construction noise, comply with the City's maximum noise levels. The maximum exterior noise level stated in the General Plan for high density residential uses is 70 dBA. Temecula Municipal Code sec. 9.20.040 says "No person shall create any sound, or allow the creation of any sound, on any property that causes the exterior sound level on any other occupied property to exceed the sound level exterior standards set forth in Tables N-1 and N-2." Table N-1 imposes maximum exterior noise levels of 65 dBA for schools and 70 dBA for high density residential uses. Table N-2 provides that noise exposure in excess of of 70 dBA for schools and residential uses is "normally unacceptable", while a level of 80 dBA is "clearly unacceptable" for both uses. Mr. Stuart Fisk January 11, 2013 Page 7 The KHA Noise Report applies conservative standards to predict the Project's exterior and interior noise impacts and finds that the Project may cause potentially significant permanent and temporary noise impacts affecting students at Vail School who are right next door to the Project and residents on Mira Loma Drive. THE BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SECTION OF THE MND IS LEGALLY INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT DOES NOT ASSESS THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PUBLIC MULTI PURPOSE TRAIL The public multi purpose trail was added to the Project after the reports by Michael Brandman Associates and Natural Resources Assessment, Inc. were submitted to the City and notice of the MND distributed to the CDF&W, ACOE and RWQCB. The KHA Report states construction of the trail may cause potentially significant impacts to jurisdictional areas because of possible creek alignment. The MND finds the Project has a less than significant impact on protected wetlands and other riparian habitat and jurisdictional areas associated with the creek because "The Project was specifically designed to avoid the jurisdictional areas." With the addition of the public multi purpose trail that is no longer the case. The MND also supports its findings of less than significant impacts on the fact that "no impacts to the riparian area or drainage are permitted without obtaining appropriate regulatory permits from USACE, CDFG, and RWQCB." This statement is contrary to law. The City cannot avoid its own CEQA obligation by relying on another public agency to protect the environment." Citizens for Quality Control v. City of Mt. Shasta (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 433, 442, fn. 8; see also Mira Monte Homeowners Assn. v. County of Ventura (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 357, 364. CONCLUSION For each and all of the foregoing reasons, an EIR must be prepared analyzing the Project's potentially significant impacts and providing all feasible mitigation. In any event, the MND itself is fatally flawed. Tamar C. Stein TCS/km 66486\4216456v4 City of Temecula Community Development 41000 Main Street • Temecula, CA 92590 Phone (951) 694-6400 • Fax (951) 694-6477 • www.cityoftemecula.org February 14, 2013 CERTIFIED MAIL VIA E-MAIL TSTEIN@COXCASTLE.COM Ms.Tamar C. Stein Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP 2049 Century Park East, 28th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067-2100 SUBJECT: Response to comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration for Rancho Vista Village, Planning Application Nos. PA12-0033 and PA12-0034 Dear Ms. Stein: The City of Temecula Planning Staff has reviewed your comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rancho Vista Village apartment project. The following is a response to your comments with support from ACS Consulting, Inc., JLC Engineering & Consulting, Inc., Michael Brandman Associates, Natural Resources Assessment, Inc., and RK Engineering Group, Inc. Comment: Preparation of an EIR is mandatory. Response: The responses to the reports from Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers and Kimley-Horn and Associates appear to be based on incomplete information or a misunderstanding of the available project information and the Temecula Municipal Code. The responses to comments provided below will provide clarification to each issue raised in your comment letter and will show that the project is not expected to result in significant impacts on the environment and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the proper environmental analysis for the proposed project. Comment: The project description is inadequate because it does not include the public multi-purpose trail. Response: In your comment letter you state that "A public multi-purpose trail running through the Project and along side the creek on the Project's northeastern boundary was added to the Project after the recirculation of the MND on or about December 6, 2012. The MND contains nary a word about this public trail nor is any trail exhibit attached." This statement is not 1 stated at this meeting that the trail would be for public use. Therefore, the trail will not require construction activities next to the creek where none were previously contemplated. Given that the proposed pedestrian paths on the project site, including the referenced trail, is shown on the project's site plan that was included in the studies for the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rancho Vista Village apartment project and is shown on other Development Plan exhibits that have been available to the public for review and were in Mr. Oder's possession prior to recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rancho Vista Village apartment project, the inclusion of the trail in the proposed development of the apartment project has been clearly identified by the Development Plan exhibits for the project that provide interested parties the specific details of a Development Plan. Furthermore, the trail will not require construction activities next to the creek where none were previously contemplated. It is therefore the City of Temecula Planning Staff's opinion that the project description does adequately describe the project. Comment: The MND's assertion that the project's post development flow rates, volumes, durations, and velocities would match pre -development conditions is wrong. Response: In your comment letter, you state that "the KHA Report finds that the calculations in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by VSL in March 2012 ("WQMP") do not support the MND's finding that the Project's post -development flow rates, volumes, durations, and velocities would match pre -development conditions. The correct calculations and potentially significant impacts the Project may cause are described in the KHA Report." In response to KHA's comments, ACS Consulting, Inc. points out that the prepared WQMP contains a hydrology analysis of the hydrologic conditions of concern which supports evidence that the post -developed condition does not create an impact over the pre -developed condition. ACS has provided supplemental calculations and exhibits, which further support that the project will not create impacts greater than the existing conditions, shown in Exhibit 'A' & 'B' of the ACS report. In your comment letter, you state that "the Project's proposed treatment control BMPs do not meet current LID requirements, that Site Design BMP tables do not accurately reflect the site design and are not incorporated to the maximum extent practicable (MEP) because infiltration is not broadly used throughout the site, and treatment of pollutants of concern does not comply with requirements for removal efficiency rates." As described within the ACS Consulting, Inc. response, the site design does implement a wide variety of LID and BMP techniques, such as porous pavement strips, porous retention basins, and bio -retention basins which promote groundwater recharge. Furthermore, the cross-section of the proposed bio -retentions basin will be modified to eliminate the double -lined impervious fabric along the bottom gravel layer in order to allow for additional recharge. ACS also identifies the porous collection BMPs as effective collection areas which will capture and recharge runoff directly into the ground. The ACS response letter states that the current graded land per the topography map on Exhibit "C" of their response letter illustrates a sheet flow conditions which does not allow for recharge potential, while the proposed development will promote a higher level of groundwater recharge with the methods further described within the attached ACS response letter. Comment: The KHA report shows that the project may cause significant impacts to groundwater supply and recharge. Response: ACS Consulting, Inc. has responded with evidence indicating that the proposed development shall promote a higher level of groundwater recharge with the methods described in their report, as compared to the existing condition of the site. In addition, the proposed bio - retention basin will be modified to eliminate the double -lined impervious fabric along the bottom 3 gravel layer of the basin in order to allow for additional recharge. As discussed above, the ACS response letter states that the current graded land per the topography map on Exhibit "C" of their response letter illustrates a sheet flow conditions which does not allow for recharge potential, while the proposed development will promote a higher level of groundwater recharge with the methods further described within the attached ACS response letter. In addition, the JLC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. response letter provides infiltration rates for the soils on the project site and indicates that the infiltration rate for the pervious areas will increase by a factor that ranges between 1.9 and 2.8 and that the project therefore is providing land cover that is promoting groundwater recharge by minimizing the runoff potential from the surface. The JLC response letter states that the proposed project would implement site design elements to promote and increase in disconnected impervious areas by allowing roof runoff and impervious areas to enter landscape areas that typically consist of depressed planters that retain runoff volume prior to discharging to a landscape swale or sub -drain system. The JLC response letter identifies 2.93 acres of landscaped areas that will promote groundwater recharge. The JLC response letter concludes that the project promotes groundwater recharge and would not adversely affect the current groundwater condition within the project limits. Comment: The KHA report shows that the project may cause potentially significant impacts on drainage causing downstream erosion and flooding. Response: Your comment letter states that a hydrology study was not prepared, however Section C of the WQMP does contain hydrology calculations. Your comment letter states that a substantial increase in runoff volume could accelerate downstream erosion and that the Project's storm water would enter at specific locations, causing local erosion. You also discuss 100 -year storm modeling. JLC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., identify that Section C of the WQMP contains hydrology calculations, and based on the exhibits within the WQMP and the hydrology calculations, the project will provide a total storage volume of 0.65 acre feet to account for 0.1 acre-feet for water quality, 0.45 acre-feet for the two-year, 24-hour storm, and 0.1 acre-feet for the 10 -year, 24 hour storm. The JLC response letter identifies that the calculation reviewed by KHA was not associated with any storm event, but was related to the basin analyses associated with the water quality volume. However, this analysis is needed, JLC states, in order to demonstrate how the water quality volume will drain within a 24-72 hour period. Additionally, for WQMP purposes the City of Temecula and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District do not require projects to mitigate runoff for the 100 -year storm event for the 1 -hour, 3 - hour, 6 -hour and 24-hour durations, but do require projects to implement the "Interim Criteria for Sizing Increased Runoff Detention Facilities", which only requires projects to mitigate increased runoff for the 2 -year, 5 -year, and 10 -year storm events for the durations of 1 hour, 3 hours, 6 hours, and 24 hours. It is important to understand that the City of Temecula and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District only require analyses to be performed for the two-year and ten-year 24-hour conditions to obtain approvals for the project entitlements, which is consistent with the City's MS4 Permit from the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. In additon, to ensure that downstream impacts are not created the City conditions development projects to require the final engineering plans to mitigate post -project flows to pre -project levels prior to the approval of final engineering plans, and with the post - project flows mitigated to pre -project level, there will be no adverse impacts associated with erosion since the stream will not experience a change in the flow rate or velocity as a result of the project. JLC concludes that based on reviewing the 2 -year and 10 -year unit hydorgraphs in Secton C of the WQMP the project basins have sufficient volume to mitigate the increased runoff for the post project condition. 4 Regarding project storm water entering at specific locations, all agencies require projects to provide rip -rap aprons at the downstream terminus of a storm drain system. To meet the requirements of City Ordinance 16.27.080 and 17.20, the project will be required to demonstrate, during final engineering, that the project will not create erosion by designing a rip - rap apron that reduces the pipe outflow to velocities sustained by the in-situ soil. As discussed above, ACS Consulting, Inc. and JLC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., have confirmed that the project WQMP has successfully demonstrated that there is no cumulative increase in runoff to the existing drainage system. As a result, the capacity of the creek will not be impacted due to the proposed development. The facts contained in the ACS and JLC response letters further support that the proposed development will not create or pose flooding or erosion impacts on drainage that would cause downstream erosion or flooding. Comment: The MND fails to analyze significant impacts to the creek and downstream property owners. Response: Your comment letter states that the MND utterly fails to address the capacity of the creek. As discussed above, ACS Consulting, Inc. and JLC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., have confirmed that the project WQMP has successfully demonstrated that there is no cumulative increase in runoff to the existing drainage system. As a result, the capacity of the creek will not be impacted due to the proposed development. The facts contained in the ACS and JLC response letters further support that the proposed development will not create or pose flooding or erosion impacts on drainage that would cause downstream erosion or flooding. ACS Consulting, Inc. concludes their response letter by stating that the proposed development does not create any drainage impacts to the existing drainage systems and that, in fact, the proposed project promotes more groundwater recharge than what is currently being collected in the exiting conditions, while also complying with County and regional restrictions for release of developed flows. Comment: The MND fails to analyze impacts of the public trail. Response: Your comment letter states that the Project could cause flooding and erosion, along with changes and realignment to the creek bank caused by erosion, and that it is likely that the public multi-purpose trail will encroach into waters of the U.S. and potentially realign portions of the creek. As shown on the proposed plans and as discussed in the attached response letter from Natural Resources Assessment, Inc., the trail runs on the bank above the drainage area and is routed well away from the jurisdictional waters of the U.S. The response letter from ACS Consulting, Inc. confirms that the proposed trail will be located outside of the limits of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and states that the proposed trail will utilize design methods that will not promote constituents of concern and/or require treatment thereof. The response letter from JLC Engineering and Consulting, Inc., also identifies that the trail will be located outside of the jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and further states that the trail will implement decomposed granite trails and native plant species, resulting in a design that will not require BMPs because the trail will implement native materials that do not introduce constituents associated with other types of non -natural building materials. 5 Comment: The LLG report shows possible significant safety impacts to Vail Elementary School students and to vehicles and pedestrians on Mira Loma Drive. Response: RK Engineering Group, Inc. has re -analyzed the three study intersections closest to Vail Elementary School and the project site using the LL&G traffic counts taken January 9, 2013. The results of the analysis shown in Table 1 of the RK report indicate that the project will not have a significant impact under existing conditions while school is in session. In addition, the results of the analysis shown in Table 2 of the RK report indicate that the project will not have a significant impact during Project Completion (Year 2014) conditions while school is in session. Your comment letter states that the Peak Hour Factor utilized in the RK Engineering traffic impact study underestimates school impacts. In order to determine whether a significant impact could occur if a Peak Hour Factor (PHF) was used from counts taken while school was in session, as suggested by the LL&G review, RK Engineering utilized the PHFs from the counts taken by LL&G. Table 1 of the RK report shows that the results of using a PHF from the counts taken while school is in session does not cause the project to have a significant impact at the three intersections reviewed. LL&G also suggests that using a PHF of 1.00 for Project Completion (Year 2014) conditions does not correlate with actual traffic conditions. However, The City of Temecula Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines state that "in cases where traffic is added from a significant number of cumulative projects, the consultant shall use their engineering judgement in the application of peak hour factor to maintain consistency with the existing conditions analyses. A peak hour factor of 1.0 shall be applied to buildout traffic conditions." To resolve any disputes regarding the traffic analysis, RK Engineering applied the PHF from the counts taken by LL&G to the Project Compeltion (Year 2014) conditions, and has concluded that the project does not have a significant impact at the three intersections reviewed in their analysis while school is in session, as shown in Table 2 of the RK Engineering report. Your comment letter states that Project driveways do not meet minimum sight line requirments. LL&G claims that the sight distance at the proposed project access points does not meet the minimum requirements based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. These statements fail to acknowledge that the City of Temecula utilizes the design standards identified in the California Highway Design Manual, which requires the sight distance for a private road or driveway to be 200 feet on roadways with a speed of 30 miles per hour. A rendering by VSL Engineering has been created to show the sight distance at the project driveways based on current grading plans. The results of the VSL sight distance diagram indicate that adequate horizontal sight distance is available for a minimum of 250 feet. Your comment letter states that the Project's traffic study proposes deferring sight line analysis until construction. While it is true that the traffic study indicates that sight distance should be reviewed at the time of preparing grading and street improvement plans, it is important to understand that sight distance cannot be accurately measured until precise grading has been determined, hence the need for this comment in the traffic study as any modifications to the plans as a result of sight distance issues will be made at that time. Your comment letter states that the project fails to provide Code mandated parking. This statement is incorrect, however, as the proposed project proposes 218 parking spaces, while Section 17.24.040 of the Temecula Municipal Code would require 240 parking spaces. The proposed 218 parking spaces represents 9.2 percent Tess parking spaces than the 240 spaces requried per Section 17.24.040 of the Temecula Municipal Code, and this is allowed by Section 6 17.03.060.6.1 (Minor Exceptions) which allows for a reduction of parking requirments by Tess than fifteen percent of the code requirement. Your comment letter states that the proposed 218 parking spaces is much less parking comparable to that provided by neighboring apartment complexes. This is incorrect as the Rancho Apartment complex, located approximately 350 feet northeast of the project site on Mira Loma Drive, which was constructed under Riverside County requirements prior to incorporation of the City of Temecula, would be required to provide 116 parking spaces by current City of Temecula Municipal Code requirements. However, only 91 parking spaces are provided at this apartment complex. This represents 21.6 percent less parking spaces provided at Ranch Apartments than would be required by the current Temecula Municipal Code and is beyond the Tess than 15 percent reduction in parking requirements allowed by Section 17.03.060.6.1 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Furthermore, the comparison of parking provided in Linscott Law & Greenspan's February 11, 2013 letter is flawed in that it only compares the number of units to parking spaces, not taking into account the number of bedrooms per unit as required by the Temecula Municipal Code. Your comment letter states that the proposed public multi-purpose trail appears to end at the point on Mira Loma Drive where there is inadequate pedestrain sight distance. It is important to understand that no connection to the north side of Mira Loma Drive is proposed at this location. The RK Engineering report clarifies that the multi-purpose trail will not continue to the opposite side of Mira Loma Drive. A crosswalk will not be installed at this mid -block location. Additional measures, such as signage indicating no pedestrian crossing at this location, may be implemented to discourage pedestrians from crossing Mira Loma Drive. Comment: The Land Use and Planning section of the MND is legally inadequate. Response: Your comment letter states that the MND incorrectly states that the project will have a less than significant impact because it does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation, and this statement appears to based on your belief that the project "directly conflicts with the existing General Plan and PDO". You also state your opinion that the MND fails to provide any meaningful analysis that would enable decision makers and the public to understand why the Project would not result in potentially significant land use impacts. Planning Staff disagrees with your opinion, however, as General Plan Amendments and zone changes are permitted, subject to approval by the City Council. The revised and recirculated MND included a detailed analysis of the Land Use and Planning section, providing a detailed discussion of the surrounding land uses and General Plan designations, consistency with land use plans and policies, and a detailed discussion of the project's consistency with the Western Riverside County MSHCP. The analysis provided in the Land Use Plan section of the MND, along with the impacts analyzed throughout the entire MND, is absolutely meaningful in enabling the decision makers and the public to understand why the Project would not result in potentially significant land use impacts. You also state that "It is apparent that the issues heretofore raised are in pertinent part caused by the high density proposed by the Project." This broad statement is unsubstantiated as all of the issues raised heretofore (i.e., that an EIR is required; that the project descriptions is inadequate because it does not include the public multi-purpose trail; that the MND's assertion that the project's post development flow rates, volumes, durations, and velocities would match pre -development conditions is wrong; that the project may cause significant impacts to groundwater supply and recharge; that the project may cause potentially significant impacts on drainage causing downstream erosion and flooding; that the MND fails to analyze significant impacts to the creek and downstream property owners; that the MND fails to analyze impacts of 7 the public trail; that there are possible significant safety impacts to Vail Elementary School students and to vehicles and pedestrians on Mira Loma Drive; and that the Land Use and Planning section of the MND is legally inadequate) have all been shown to be inaccurate or not appropriately analyzed. Comment: The Noise Analysis of the MND is legally inadequate. Response: In response to your concerns, RK Engineering Group, Inc. has assessed the project's noise impacts. Your comment letter states that the Project may cause significant permanent noise impacts affecting students at Vail Elementary School and residents on Mira Loma Drive based on an increase in traffic resulting from the proposed project. The RK Engineering response letter indicates local roadway network traffic and exterior school activities are the main source of noise impacting the surrounding area. RK Engineering concludes that ambient traffic noise levels are anticipated to increase by approximately 1.5 dBA, and that exterior noise levels will remain below the City's 65 dBA CNEL standard. Your comment letter states that the Project may cause significant temporary noise impacts affecting students at Vail Elementary School and residents on Mira Loma Drive based on construction noise. As concluded in the RK response letter, construction noise is considered a short-term impact. With approval of an application for a Minor Exception consistent with Section 9.20.070.A.1 of the Temecula Municipal Code, the project will be exempt from maintaining noise levels below the 70 dBA standard and would therefore not be considered to have a significant impact. In the event that a noise exemption is not granted, RK Engineering recommends that a noise monitoring program be established during construction. In the event construction noise levels exceed the City's noise ordinance, proper measures would be taken to ensure levels would be reduced. Comment: The Biological Resources Section of the MND is legally inadequate because it does not assess the potential impacts of the public multi-purpose trail. Response: Your comment letter states that the public multi-purpose trail was added to the Project after the reports by Michael Brandman Associates and Natural Resources Assessment, Inc. were submitted to the City and notice of the MND distributed to the CDF&W, ACOE and RWQCB. As discussed above, this is not accurate as the trail has been a part of the project plans since the project was first submitted on February 22, 2012, and was shown on the site plan included in the Wetland/Jurisdictional Delineation of Waters Subject to Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game, and Regional Water Quality Control Board Regulatory Authority prepared by Natural Resources Assessment, Inc. and in the MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (Burrowing Owl) prepared by Michael Brandman Associates. Furthermore, Natural Resources Assessment, Inc. has reviewed the proposed alignment of the public multi-purpose trail and expects no impacts. As shown in graphic provided by Natural Resources Assessment, Inc., the public trail runs on the bank above the drainage area and is routed away from the jurisdictional waters. Michael Brandman Associates' response letter indicates that the trail is aligned in the same location as originally proposed as a concrete walkway and that this area was analyzed within the MSHCP report, and there were no changes to the trail alignment that would encroach or impact riverine/riparian areas, or into jurisdictional areas regulated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of Engineers or Regional Water Quality Control Board. 8 With the above responses to your comments, staff hopes that these clarifications have addressed your concerns. Based on these responses, staff continues to believe that the project will not result in significant impacts on the environment, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the proper environmental analysis for the proposed project. Sincerely, Stuart Fisk, AICP Senior Planner Attachments: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study, City of Temecula, RK Engineering Group, Inc., February 6, 2013. Rancho Vista Village Trail Alignment, Natural Resources Assessment, Inc., February 4, 2013 Response to Comments pertaining to the MSHCP Consistency Analysis and Habitat Assessment (PA12-0033 and PA12-0034), Michael Brandman Associates, February 7, 2013 Response to Findings Made Regarding the Rancho Vista Village Apartment Project — Noise Study, RK Engineering Group, Inc., February 6, 2013 Response to Findings Made Regarding the Rancho Vista Village Apartments Project Traffic Impact Analysis, RK Engineering Group, Inc., February 6, 2013 Response to Kimley-Horn & Associates MND Review, Drainage and Water Quality, JLC Engineering and Consulting, February 6, 2013. Response to Peer Review Letter for Rancho Vista Village, PA12-0033 & PA12- 0034, ACS Consulting, Inc., January 30, 2013 Sight Distance Diagrams, VSL Engineering, January 23, 2013 cc: Robert Oder (via e-mail oder@hughes.net) Somanco, Inc. 27475 Ynez Road, Suite 346 Temecula, CA 92591 John Boarman, P.E. (via e-mail boarman@Ilgengineers.com) Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers 4542 Ruffner Street, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92111 Jeffrey D. Fuller, INCE, REHS (via e-mail jeffrey.fuller@kimley-horn.com) Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 401 B Street, Suite 600 San Diego, CA 92101 Jason Marechal, P.E (via e-mail Jason.marechal@kimley-horn.com) Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 765 The City Drive, Suite 200 Orange, CA 92868 9 IU( engineering group, inc. transportation planning • traffic engineering acoustical engineering • parking studies LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: CITY OF TEMECULA DATE: February 6, 2013 41000 Main Street JOB NO.: 0518-2013-01 Temecula, CA 92590 SUBJECT: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study, City of Temecula ATTN: Mr. Stuart Fisk WE ARE FORWARDING: By Messenger By Blueprinter x By Email By Fedex (Priority) NUMBER OF COPIES DESCRIPTION 1 PDF copy for your use SENT FOR YOUR STATUS PLEASE NOTE Approval Preliminary Revisions Signature Revised Additions x Use Approved Omissions File Released Corrections REMARKS: Attached please find the Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study, City of Temecula. Please call me at (949) 474-0809 extension 208 if you have any questions. BY: Mike Dickerson Acoustical Engineer, INCE it1/4)(A. tet - COPIES TO: RK9755TB.xls 4000 westerly place, suite 280 newport beach, california 92660 tel 949.474.0809 fax 949.474.0902 http://wwwskengineer.com neer.com CALL M ETA I III 1 I ILMREl I 1 1LOW 'LOW RLISOEI`'ML I 1 IMB 002 1 I iI+I 1 1 1 1 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT STUDY City of Temecula, California TR 4010 LUL 82 PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL M86402 LOT 83 lona OPEN SPACE MB 6192 PARCEL BOUNDARY BP AIWA id -4 3 J 880 ;AKA / �mm / / / / / men � M .4 `_ `a .0 f!// / / 1 it I ! I l yy7ip/4 l ! I PAittzu I �r ! ___ 1 1 RK 0 engineering group, inc. RK engineering group, inc. transportation planning • traffic engineering acoustical engineering • parking studies February 6, 2013 Mr. Stuart Fisk CITY OF TEMECULA 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: Rancho Vista Village Construction Noise Impact Study, City of Temecula Dear Mr. Fisk: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) has completed a construction noise impact assessment for the proposed Rancho Vista Village project. The project site is located on the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road in the City of Temecula, as indicated in Exhibit A. The proposed project's site plan is shown in Exhibit B. The proposed project was assessed with respect to on-site construction noise. For purposes of this study, the construction noise was analyzed during the different stages of construction. The noise levels were projected to the nearest sensitive receptors near the project site. The noise standards, defined in the City of Temecula's Noise Element and Municipal Code are indicated in Section 3.0 of the report. RK conducted a site visit to the project site and measured the ambient daytime noise levels. The project will not significantly impact any sensitive residential land uses. In addition, further construction noise reduction measures are outlined in Section 6.2 of this report. RK Engineering Group, Inc. is pleased to provide the CITY OF TEMECULA with this assessment for the Rancho Vista Village project. If you have any questions regarding this study or need further review, please call us at (949) 474-0809. Sincerely, RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. MA'ket:DA,Joa.), Michael Dickerson, INCE Noise/Air Specialist Attachments MD: mn/RK9755. doc JN:0518 2013-01 FESS/04, <2. yl' co No.20285 Exp. 09/30/ %) (s)qa_ CI v11- ^ b OF CM-' Z Robert Kahn, P,E. Principal 4000 westerly place, suite 280 newport beach, california 92660 tel 949.474.0809 fax 949.474.0902 http://www.rkengineer.com RANCHO VILLAGE VISTA CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT STUDY City of Temecula, California Prepared for: CITY OF TEMECULA 41000 Main Street Temecula, CA 92590 Prepared by: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 4000 Westerly Place, Suite 280 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Michael Dickerson Robert Kahn, P.E. February 6, 2013 MD: mn/RK9755. doc JN:0518 2013 01 Table of Contents Section Page 1.0 Introduction 1-1 1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives 1-1 1.2 Site Location and Study Area 1-1 1.3 Proposed Project Description 1-1 2.0 Fundamentals of Noise 2-1 2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics 2-1 2.2 Frequency and Hertz 2-1 2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels 2-1 2.4 Addition of Decibels 2-1 2.5 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels 2-2 2.6 Noise Descriptors 2-2 2.7 Traffic Noise Prediction 2-4 2.8 Sound Propagation 2-4 3.0 Regulatory Setting 3-1 3.1 Federal Regulations 3-1 3.2 State Regulations 3-1 3.2 City of Temecula Noise Regulations 3-2 4.0 Study Method and Procedures 4-1 4.1 Measurement Procedure and Critieria 4-1 4.1.1 Noise Measurements 4-1 4.1.2 Noise Measurement Locations 4-2 4.1.3 Noise Measurement Timing and Climate 4-2 4.2 Construction Noise Modeling 4-2 5.0 Existing Noise Environment 5-1 5.1 Noise Measurement Results 5-1 6.0 Construction Noise Impact 6-1 6.1 Construction Noise 6-1 6.2 Construction Noise Mitigation Measures 6-3 List of Attachments Exhibits Location Map A Site Plan B Noise Monitoring Locations C Recommendations D Tables Noise Level Measurements 1 Typical Construction Noise Levels 2 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at East Property Line (dBA) Adjacent to Elementary School and Residential Units 3 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at South Property Line (dBA) Residential Units Across from Rancho Vista Road 4 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at West Property Line (dBA) Residential Units Across from Mira Loma Drive 5 Appendices City of Temecula Noise Element A Field Sheet Data B Construction Noise Calculations C Sample Temporary Construction Noise Barriers D 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives The purpose of this noise assessment is to evaluate the construction noise impacts for the project study area by identifying the estimated construction equipment, construction noise sources, and predicting the temporary construction noise levels. In addition, provide recommended noise mitigation measures, if necessary, to minimize the potential noise impacts. The assessment was conducted and compared to the noise standards set forth by the Federal, State, and Local agencies. Consistent with the City's Noise Guidelines, a significant impact related to noise would occur if a proposed project is determined to result in: • Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable agencies. The following is provided in this report: • A description of the study area and the proposed project • Information regarding the fundamentals of noise • A description of the local noise guidelines and standards • An evaluation of the existing ambient noise environment • Construction noise analysis 1.2 Site Location and Study Area The project site is located on the northeast corner of Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road, in the City of Temecula. The project site is bounded by residential to the north, Rancho Vista Road to the south, existing residential to the west, and Vail Elementary School to the east. The project site location is demonstrated in Exhibit A. The project site is partially depressed (when compared to the adjacent roadways), located approximately 1,110 feet above sea level, and is currently vacant. 1.3 Proposed Project Description The proposed project consists of the construction of 120 apartment units on approximately 5.7 acres. It is estimated that the project will be operational by approximately Year 2014. The site plan used for this analysis, provided by the City of Temecula, is illustrated in Exhibit B. 1-1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 1-2 2.0 Fundamentals of Noise This section of the report provides basic information about noise and presents some of the terms used within the report. 2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics Sound is a disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source and is capable of being detected by the hearing organs. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a moving object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to a human ear. For traffic, or stationary noise, the medium of concern is air. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or unwanted. 2.2 Frequency and Hertz A continuous sound is described by its frequency (pitch) and its amplitude (loudness). Frequency relates to the number of pressure oscillations per second. Low -frequency sounds are low in pitch (bass sounding) and high -frequency sounds are high in pitch (squeak). These oscillations per second (cycles) are commonly referred to as Hertz (Hz). The human ear can hear from the bass pitch starting out at 20 Hz all the way to the high pitch of 20,000 Hz. 2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels The amplitude of a sound determines it loudness. The loudness of sound increases or decreases, as the amplitude increases or decreases. Sound pressure amplitude is measured in units of micro -Newton per square inch meter (N/m2), also called micro -Pascal (pPa). One pPa is approximately one hundred billionths (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric pressure. Sound pressure level (SPL or Lp) is used to describe in logarithmic units the ratio of actual sound pressures to a reference pressure squared. These units are called decibels abbreviated dB. 2.4 Addition of Decibels Because decibels are on a logarithmic scale, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by simple plus or minus addition. When two (2) sounds or equal SPL are combined, they will produce an SPL 3 dB greater than the original single SPL. In other words, sound energy must be doubled to produce a 3 dB increase. If two (2) sounds differ by approximately 10 dB the higher sound level is the predominant sound. 2-1 2.5 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 Hz and 5,000 Hz, (A -weighted scale) and it perceives a sound within that range as being more intense than a sound with a higher or lower frequency with the same magnitude. For purposes of this report as well as with most environmental documents, the A -scale weighting is typically reported in terms of A -weighted decibel (dBA). Typically, the human ear can barely perceive the change in noise level of 3 dB. A change in 5 dB is readily perceptible, and a change in 10 dB is perceived as being twice or half as loud. As previously discussed, a doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB increase in sound, which means that a doubling of sound energy (e.g. doubling the volume of traffic on a highway), would result in a barely perceptible change in sound level. 2.6 Noise Descriptors Noise in our daily environment fluctuates over time. Some noise levels occur in regular patterns other are random. Some noise levels are constant while others are sporadic. Noise descriptors were created to describe the different time -varying noise levels. The following indicates the most commonly used noise descriptors and gives a brief definition. A -Weighted Sound Level The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A -weighted filter network. The A -weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear. A numerical method of rating human judgment of loudness. Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources, near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) The average equivalent A -weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00 PM and after addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM. Decibel (dB) A unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micro -pascals. 2-2 dB(A) A -weighted sound level (see definition above). Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ) The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time varying noise level. The energy average noise level during the sample period. Habitable Room Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries, unfinished attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms, and similar spaces. L(n) The A -weighted sound level exceeded during a certain percentage of the sample time. For example, L10 in the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the sample time. Similarly L50, L90 and L99, etc. Noise Any unwanted sound or sound which is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing, or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines noise as "...excessive undesirable sound...". Outdoor Living Area Outdoor spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for passive recreational activities or other noise -sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, jacuzzi areas, etc. associated with residential uses; outdoor patient recovery or resting areas associated with hospitals, convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with places of worship which have a significant role in services or other noise -sensitive activities; and outdoor school facilities routinely used for educational purposes which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are: front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas and storage areas associated with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for short-term social gatherings; and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with educational uses prone to adverse noise impacts (for example, school play yard areas). Percent Noise Levels See L(n). 2-3 Sound Level (Noise Level) The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter having a standard frequency -filter for attenuating part of the sound spectrum. Sound Level Meter An instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency weighting networks for the measurement and determination of noise and sound levels. Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL) The dBA level which, if it lasted for one (1) second, would produce the same A -weighted sound energy as the actual event. 2.7 Traffic Noise Prediction Noise levels associated with traffic depends on a variety of factors: (1) volume of traffic, (2) speed of traffic, (3) auto, medium truck (2 — 6 wheels) and heavy truck percentage (3 axle and greater), and sound propagation. The greater the volume of traffic, higher speeds and truck percentages equate to a louder volume in noise. A doubling of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) along a roadway will increase noise levels by approximately 3 dB; reasons for this are discussed in the sections above. 2.8 Sound Propagation As sound propagates from a source it spreads geometrically. Sound from a small, localized source (i.e., a point source) radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance. The movement of vehicles down a roadway makes the source of the sound appear to propagate from a line (i.e., line source) rather than a point source. This line source results in the noise propagating from a roadway in a cylindrical spreading versus a spherical spreading that results from a point source. The sound level attenuates for a line source at a rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance. As noise propagates from the source, it is affected by the ground and atmosphere. Noise models use hard site (reflective surfaces) and soft site (absorptive surfaces) to help calculate predicted noise levels. Hard site conditions assume no excessive ground absorption between the noise source and the receiver. Soft site conditions such as grass, soft dirt or landscaping attenuate noise at an additional rate of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance. When added to the geometric spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall noise attenuation of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance for a line source and 6.0 dB per doubling of distance for a point source. 2-4 Research has demonstrated that atmospheric conditions can have a significant effect on noise levels when noise receivers are located 200 feet from a noise source. Wind, temperature, air humidity and turbulence can further impact how far sound can travel. TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS FROM INDOOR AND OUTDOOR NOISE SOURCES COMMON OUTDOOR NOISE LEVEL COMMON INDOOR NOISE LEVELS (dBA) NOISE LEVELS Jet Flyover at 1000 ft. Gas Lawn Mower at 3 ft. 110 Rock Band 100 Inside Subway Train (New York) 90 Diesel Truck at 50 ft. Food Blender at 3 ft. Noise Urban Daytime Garbage Disposal at 3 ft. 80 Gas Lawn Mower at 100 ft. Commercial Area Heavy Traffic at 300 ft. Quiet Urban Daytime Quiet Urban Nighttime Quiet Suburban Nighttime Quiet Rural Nighttime 70 60 50 Shouting at 3 ft. Vacuum Cleaner at 10 ft. Normal Speech at 3 ft. Large Business Office Dishwasher Next Room Small Theatre, Large Conference 40 Room (Background) 30 20 10 0 Library Bedroom at Night Concert Hall (Background) Recording Studio Threshold of Hearing 2-5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 2-6 3.0 Regulatory Setting The proposed project is located in the City of Temecula and noise regulations are addressed through the various federal, state, and local government agencies. The agencies responsible for regulating noise are discussed below. 3.1 Federal Regulations The adverse impact of noise was officially recognized by the federal government in the Noise Control Act of 1972, which serves three (3) purposes: • Publicize noise emission standards for interstate commerce • Assist state and local abatement efforts • Promote noise education and research The Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC) was originally tasked with implementing the Noise Control Act. However, it was eventually eliminated leaving other federal agencies and committees to develop noise policies and programs. Some examples of these agencies are as follows: The Department of Transportation (DOT) assumed a significant role in noise control through its various agencies. The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) is responsible to regulate noise from aircraft and airports. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is responsible to regulate noise from the interstate highway system. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for the prohibition of excessive noise exposure to workers. The Federal government and the State advocate that local jurisdiction use their land use regulatory authority to arrange new development in such a way that "noise sensitive" uses are either prohibited from being constructed adjacent to a highway or, or alternatively that the developments are planned and constructed in such a manner that potential noise impacts are minimized. Since the Federal government and the State has preempted the setting of standards for noise levels that can be emitted by the transportation source, the City is restricted to regulating the noise generated by the transportation system through nuisance abatement ordinances and land use planning. 3.2 State Regulations Established in 1973, the California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control (ONC) was instrumental in developing regularity tools to control and abate noise for use by local agencies. One significant model is the "Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Matrix." The matrix allows the local jurisdiction to clearly delineate compatibility of sensitive uses with various incremental levels of noise. 3-1 The State of California has established noise insulation standards as outlined in Title 24 and the Uniform Building Code (UBC) which in some cases requires acoustical analyses to outline exterior noise levels and to ensure interior noise levels do not exceed the interior threshold. The State mandates that the legislative body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive general plan. The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines published by the State Department of Health Services. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable. 3.3 City of Temecula Noise Regulations The City of Temecula outlines their noise regulations and standards within the Noise Element from the General Plan and the Municipal Code (Appendix A). For purposes of this analysis, the City of Temecula's Municipal Code is used to compare the construction noise impacts to the adjacent land uses. Traffic Noise Regulation — Noise Element The City of Temecula's noise standards for residential development require that outdoor sensitive areas have a CNEL no greater than 65 dBA CNEL and an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. The City has a maximum exterior noise level up to 70 dBA CNEL for multiple family housing. Stationary Noise Regulation — Section 9.20.040 The City of Temecula's noise standards for stationary noise sources (e.g. condenser units, generators and other point source noise sources) is outlined in Table N-1 of the municipal code. The following outlines the maximum permissible sound at the property line for the various land uses: Temecula Land Use/ Noise Standards Type of Land Use Land Use Designation Maximum Level (dBA) Interior Exterior Residential Hillside 45 65 Rural Very Low Low Medium Medium 45 65/70' High 45 70' Commercial and Office Neighborhood -- 70 Community Highway Tourist Service Professional Office 50 70 3-2 Temecula Land Use / Noise Standards — Cont. Light Industrial Industrial Park 55 75 Public/Institutional Schools 50 65 All Others 50 70 Open Space Vineyards/Agriculture - - 70 Open Space - - 70/65' Maximum exterior noise levels up to 70 dBA are allowed for multiple -family housing. 2 Where quiet is a basis required for the land use. Construction Noise Regulation - Section 9.20.060D & 9.20.070A Section 9.20.060D of the municipal code indicates the following with regard to construction noise: No person shall engage in or conduct construction activity, when the construction site is within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence, between the hours of six - thirty p.m. and seven a.m., Monday through Friday, and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. on Saturday. No construction activity shall be undertaken on Sunday and nationally recognized holidays unless exempted by Section 9.20.070 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Public works projects of any federal, state or local entity or emergency work by public utilities are exempt from the provisions of this subsection. Residents working on their homes or property are exempt from the prohibition of construction activities on Sundays and holidays and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. when working on Sundays and holidays. The city council may, by formal action, exempt projects from the provisions of this chapter. Section 9.20.070 of the Municipal Code indicates the following exceptions with regard to construction noise: A. Application and Processing. 1. Construction -Related Exceptions: An application for a construction -related exception shall be made on a minor exception form. The form shall be submitted in writing at least three working days (seventy-two hours) in advance of the scheduled and permitted activity and shall be accompanied by the appropriate inspection fee(s). The application is subject to approval by the city manager or designated representative. No public hearing is required. 3-3 2. Temporary Use Permit. An application for a single event exception shall be made using the temporary use permit application provided by the planning department and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. No public hearing is required. B. Requirements for Approval. The director of planning or his or her designee shall not approve a minor exception application or temporary use permit unless the applicant demonstrates that the activities described in the application would not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community in determining whether activities are detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, the director of planning or his or her designee shall consider such factors as the proposed duration of the activities and their location in relation to sensitive receptors. If a minor exception application or a temporary use permit is approved, reasonable conditions may be imposed to minimize the public detriment, including, but not limited to, restrictions on sound level, sound duration and operating hours. C. Appeals. 1. Construction -Related Exception. Any person aggrieved by or dissatisfied with the planning director's decision on an application for a construction -related exception may appeal from such action by filing an appeal according to the procedures set forth in Section 17.03.090 of the Temecula Municipal Code. 3-4 4.0 Study Method and Procedures To determine the existing noise level environment, RK conducted a total of three (3) short-term noise measurements during the daytime hours in the project study area. The following describes the measurement procedures, measurement locations, results, noise modeling procedures and assumptions. 4.1 Measurement Procedure and Criteria Noise measurements are taken to determine the existing noise levels. A noise receiver or receptor is any location in the noise analysis in which noise might produce an impact. The following criteria are used to select measurement locations and receptors: • Locations expected to receive the highest noise impacts, such as first row of houses • Locations that are acoustically representative and equivalent of the area of concern • Human land usage • Sites clear of major obstruction and contamination RK conducted the sound level measurements in accordance to Caltrans technical noise specifications. All measurements equipment meets American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifications for sound level meters (S1.4-1983 identified in Chapter 19.68.020.AA). The following gives a brief description of the Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement procedures for sound level measurements: • Microphones for sound level meters were placed five (5) feet above the ground for all measurements • Sound level meters were calibrated (Larson Davis CAL 200) before and after each measurement • Following the calibration of equipment, a wind screen was placed over the microphone • Frequency weighting was set on "A" and slow response • Results of the long-term noise measurements were recorded on field data sheets • During any short-term noise measurements any noise contaminations such as barking dogs, local traffic, lawn mowers, or aircraft fly -overs were noted • Temperature and sky conditions were observed and documented 4.1.1 Noise Measurements Noise measurements were conducted on January 30, 2013 using a Larson Davis 712 type 2 sound level meter. The Leq, Lmin, Lmax, L2, L8, L25, and L50 were recorded over a 10 -minute period. Noise measurement data was analyzed to determine average, peak and minimum noise levels during the measurement time. Noise measurement results are indicated in Table 1. Noise measurement data and photos are provided in Appendix B. 4-1 4.1.2 Noise Measurement Locations The project site is located east of Mira Loma Drive and north of Rancho Vista Road. The project site is bounded by Vail Elementary School to the east, residential units to the north, south and west. Noise monitoring locations were selected to represent the sensitive receptor (noise sensitive areas near the project site. Noise monitoring location 1 (ST -1) is located near the eastern property line on the eastern segment of the project site; approximately 80 feet from the eastern property line. ST -1 represents the existing ambient noise level at the adjacent Elementary School. ST -2 is located at the eastern property line towards the north of the project site; approximately 80 feet north of the eastern property line. ST -2 represents the existing ambient noise level at the residential units towards the northeast of the project site. ST -3 is located along the western property line; approximately 50 feet from the centerline of Mira Loma Drive. ST -3 represents the existing ambient noise level at the adjacent residential units to the west of the project site. Exhibit C illustrates the proximity of the noise monitoring locations. Appendix B includes photos, field sheet, and measured noise data. 4.1.3 Noise Measurement Timing and Climate Noise measurements were recorded during daytime hours. Measurements occurred between 10:45 AM and 11:50 AM, on January 30, 2013. Noise measurements were conducted in 10 -minute intervals during the indicated time schedule. During the monitoring process, the sky was clear, the temperature was 57 degrees Fahrenheit and the wind was less than one mile per hour (1 mph) in the morning 4.2 Construction Noise Modeling The construction noise analysis utilizes the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model, together with several key construction parameters. Key inputs include distance to the sensitive receiver, equipment usage, and baseline parameters for the project site. This study evaluates the potential exterior noise impacts. For purposes of the project, the project was analyzed based on the different construction phases. Construction noise will be loudest during the grading and concrete phases of construction. The construction noise calculation worksheet outputs are located in Appendix C. The following assumptions relevant to short-term construction noise impacts were used: • The project duration is expected to last approximately 1 to 1.5 years. The project site is currently vacant. The project will be constructed in 2 to 3 phases and will consist of grading, trenching, building, and infrastructure (e.g. electrical, plumbing, parking lots, landscaping, etc). 4-2 • The first stage of construction will consist of mass grading and trenching. It is estimated that grading will be completed in 3 to 4 weeks. The project calls for 1 to 2 graders and 1 excavator during this phase. The worst-case heavy equipment noise was evaluated during this phase. It is anticipated that the loudest pieces of equipment will be heavy earth moving equipment. • The next stage will consist of building construction and infrastructure. It is estimated that building construction will occur over two to three phases and last approximately 1 year. Building construction will vary depending on the phase of the project and time schedule. Construction noise is expected to be the loudest during the concrete phase of building. It is estimated that concrete will last approximately 3 to 4 weeks during the various phases of construction. • The final stage will consist of architectural coating and paving. It is estimated that paving will be completed between 2 to 4 weeks. Paving equipment will be the loudest source of noise during this phase of construction. • Vibration impact is not anticipated because the project does not call for pile driving equipment. 4-3 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 4-4 5.0 Existing Noise Environment Ambient noise measurements were conducted at various locations on the project site. Noise measurement data indicates that traffic noise propagating from local roadway network is the primary source of noise impacting the project site and the surrounding area. 5.1 Noise Measurement Results The noise measurements recorded the sound pressure levels in dBA in 3 second intervals, which have been used to calculate the minimum, maximum, L2, L8, L25, L50, and LEQ averaged over 10 -minute intervals for each noise measurement. Noise monitoring was conducted at three (3) different locations within the project site to document existing traffic noise levels. During the monitoring phase weather conditions were documented. Noise monitoring data printouts are included in Appendix B. The results of the measurements are presented in Table 1. Exhibit C illustrates the approximate location of the noise measurements. The CNEL was calculated based on the existing noise measurement. Noise measurement data indicates that the existing site and surrounding area experiences noise levels ranging from 50.5 to 58.3 dBA CNEL. The existing noise levels are below the City's exterior noise standards of 70 dBA CNEL (multi -family land use). As expected, the noise levels vary depending on the distance from the centerline of local roadway networks. The maximum noise level recorded during the measurement process occurred at ST -3 noise monitoring location. The maximum recorded noise level was 72.6 dBA. As described previously, noise levels are as a result of pass -by traffic along Mira Loma Drive and Rancho Vista Road. 5-1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 5-2 6.0 Construction Noise Impact The degree of construction noise will vary depending on the phase of construction and type of construction activity. It is estimated that construction will take approximately 1 to 1.5 years to complete. 6.1 Construction Noise During construction, the contractors would be required to comply with the Noise Ordinance from the City of Temecula's Municipal Code, as described in Appendix A. Per the City's noise ordinance, a construction noise exemption can be submitted to the City. The exemption would allow the project to operate above the maximum permissible noise levels at the property lines of the project site. The City does however limit the hours of construction operation during certain times of the weekdays, weekends and holidays. RK recommends the applicant to file a construction noise for exemption; however, this assessment also provides recommendations to further reduce construction noise levels to an acceptable level. Construction noise is expected to be at its highest level during the grading and concrete phases of construction; therefore, this study assesses noise levels during the respective phases. The following is a list of the estimated loudest heavy construction equipment which will be utilized during grading: one (1) excavator and two (2) graders. The following is a list of the estimated loudest equipment which will be utilized during concrete: two (2) cement trucks and one (1) concrete pump. The assessment assumes all equipment is operating simultaneously and directly adjacent to each other. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has compiled data regarding the noise generated characteristics of typical construction activities. The data is presented in Table 2. The data represents the noise levels measured at a distance of 50 feet from the noise source. These noise levels would diminish rapidly with distance from the construction site at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. For example a noise level of 86 dBA measured 50 feet from the noise source would reduce to 80 dBA at 100 feet. At 200 feet from the noise source the noise level would reduce to 74 dBA. At 400 feet the noise source would reduce by another 6 dBA to 68 dBA. The existing Vail Elementary School and residential units to the northeast, west, and south are considered noise sensitive areas. East Property Line Table 3 indicates the estimated exterior noise level at or near the project site's east property line. Table 3 highlights the estimated construction noise levels during the grading and concrete phases. Noise levels are approximated for a without and with a temporary 6-1 10 foot high noise barrier. Depending on the construction phase, the estimated maximum noise level to the east property line would range from 75.4 to 79.0 dBA. This assumes no temporary noise barrier. The estimated maximum noise level to the east property with a 10 foot noise barrier (along the project site's eastern property line) would range from 65.4 to 69.0 dBA. South Property Line Table 4 indicates the estimated exterior noise level at the southern residential units (across the street from Rancho Vista Road) property line. Table 4 highlights the estimated construction noise levels during the grading and concrete phases. Noise levels are approximated for a without and with a temporary 10 foot high noise barrier. Depending on the construction phase, the estimated maximum noise level to the south property line would range from 75.4 to 79.0 dBA. This assumes no temporary noise barrier. The estimated maximum noise level to the east property with a 10 foot noise barrier (along the project site's southern property line) would range from 65.4 to 69.0 dBA. West Property Line Table 5 indicates the estimated exterior noise level at western residential units (across the street from Mira Loma Drive) property line. Table 5 highlights the estimated construction noise levels during the grading and concrete phases. Noise levels are approximated for a without and with a temporary 10 foot high noise barrier. Depending on the construction phase, the estimated maximum noise level to the residential units' property line would range from 77.9 to 81.5 dBA. This assumes no temporary noise barrier. The estimated maximum noise level to the east property with a 10 foot noise barrier (along the project site's western property line) would range from 66.1 to 69.7 dBA. Summary Construction noise is considered a short-term impact. The duration will last approximately the length of construction time frame. If an application for an exemption is filed for construction noise to the City, the project will be exempt from maintaining noise levels below the 70 dBA standard; therefore, the project will not have a significant impact to the adjacent land uses. In the event a noise exemption is not granted, the project would need to implement temporary noise barriers (with a minimum height of 10 feet) along the eastern, southern and western property line. Sample Temporary Construction Noise Barriers are provided in Appendix D. are This would further ensure that exterior noise levels during construction would remain below the 70 dBA standard set -forth by the City. 6-2 6.2 Construction Noise Mitigation Measures Construction operations must follow the City's General Plan and the noise ordinance. Recommendations are illustrated in Exhibit D. A number of noise reduction measures are recommended to further minimize noise impacts. 1. Construction shall not occur during the hours of 6:30 PM — 7:00 AM. 2. During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 3. Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 4. Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 5. Although not required, the project could implement temporary noise barriers (minimum height of 10 feet or higher) along the eastern, southern, and western property lines of the project site. 6. During the grading phase and concrete phase, limit the amount of heavy machinery equipment operating simultaneously to three (3) pieces of equipment. 7. In the event a construction noise exemption is not granted, RK recommends a noise monitoring program be established during construction. A noise monitoring program documents and records the noise levels during construction. Noise measurements would be conducted once a week and would be taken at various locations at or near the project site during construction. A weekly report would be submitted documenting the construction noise levels. In the event construction noise levels exceed the City's noise ordinance, proper measures would be taken to ensure levels would be reduced. 6-3 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 6-4 Exhibits Exhibit A Location Map 051$-2013-01 (ExA) RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Temecula, Calffornla R K engineering group, inc. n x T.EN ',- 8 o / � oos • '1!--4.).--z-: IOI / /N.' • i • N. / /• / .4.3.\�\ // 0� \ 4 H \ N. / / / /mss N. / 4444�"'�� N. /, 1 1 1— TR4040 HIGH RESIDENTIAL MB 66/61 Exhibit B Site Plan ik r1 frr 0518-2013-01 (ExLi) z �`` it,. AD, N. M • \ 1 / / / / ----� / T �\ 4)1k4fEDi 3833 4fA6/ 4 ID u \\ / \ 4.4 1 ,/ 46 RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Temecula, Calffornla RI( engineering group, inc. Exhibit C Noise Monitoring Locations Legend: OI = Noise Monitoring Location 0518-13-01(ExC) RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS, City of Temecula, California R 1( engineering group, inc. w46`*- i' i.' j• \ / \ / �' / � /•� \\qO \\ / //A� / ' /:• / /i/ / TR4040 IYGIIRESa7FMIAL MB 66'61 rl "s• Tb �M /1 � f ------i 120 !• O A/R CT 7djJ 7,4 \ \� sant= \� �o /\,\ Legend: Temporary Noise Barrier Location (Min. 10' High) 0518-2013-01 (EXD) RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS, Cry of Temecula. California Exhibit D Recommendations Recommendations I . Project applicant to apply for a construction noise exemption for the project. 2. Construction shall not occur during the hours of 6:30 PM - 7:00 PM. 3. During constriction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equiptment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 4. Idling equipment shall be tuned off when not in use. 5. Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 6. Although not required, the project could implement temporary noise barriers (minimum height of ten (I 0) feet or higher) along the eastern, southern and western property lines of the project site. 7. During the grading phase and concrete phase, limit the amount of heavy machinery equipment operating simultaneously to 3 pieces of equipment. 8. In the event that a construction noise exemption is not granted, then RK recommends a noise monitoring program be established during construction. A noise monitoring program documents and records the noise levels during construction. Noise measurements would be conducted one time a week and would be taken at various locations at or near the protect site during construction. A weekly report would be submitted documenting the construction noise levels. In the event construction noise levels exceed the City's noise ordinance, proper measures would be taken to ensure levels would be reduced. RK engineering group, inc. Tables TABLE 1 Noise Level Measurements (dBA) Site No. Time Started Leq Lmax Lmin L2 L8 L25 L50 Estimated CNEL Comments 1 1 1 :50 AM 49.9 71.4 37.6 57.8 54.9 46.9 43.3 53.4 Measurement taken 80ft west from school property line. Ambient noise —local traffic and typical residential noise 2 1 1 :35 AM 47.0 70.6 36.9 51.4 46.3 43.9 40.9 50.5 Measurement taken 80ft west from northern residential units property line. Ambient noise = local traffic and typical residential noise 3 10:45 AM 54.6 72.6 54.6 63.1 57.6 51.7 48.1 58.3 Measurement taken 47ft east of the centerline of Mira Loma Drive. Ambient noise = local traffic and typical residential noise 1 Noise measurements were taken for ten minutes. 2 Noise measurements were taken on January 3, 2013. j : /rktab les/R K9755TB . xls IN:0518-2013-01 TABLE 2 Typical Construction Noise Levels EQUIPMENT POWERED BY INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES IMPACT EQUIPMENT Type Type I Noise Levels (d BA) at 50 Feet 82 Earth Moving Compactors (Rollers) 80 73 - 76 Front Loaders 95-105 73 - 84 Backhoes 73 - 92 Tractors 75 - 95 Scrapers, Graders 78 - 92 Pavers 85 - 87 Trucks 81 - 94 Materials Handling Concrete Mixers 72 - 87 Concrete Pumps 81 - 83 Cranes (Movable) 72 - 86 Cranes (Derrick) 85 - 87 Stationary Pumps 68 - 71 Generators 71 - 83 Com pressors 75 - 86 IMPACT EQUIPMENT Type Noise Levels (d BA) at 50 Feet Pneumatic Wrenches 82 - 87 Jack Hammers, Rock Drills 80 - 99 Pile Drivers (Peak) 95-105 OTHER Type Noise Levels (d BA) at 50 Feet Vibrators 68 - 82 Saws 71 - 82 1 Referenced Noise Levels from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) j : /rktab les/R K9755TB. xls IN:0518-2013-01 TABLE 3 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at East Property Line (dBA) Adjacent to Elementary School and Residential Units No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax1 Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 100 75.0 79.0 Grader 100 75.0 79.0 Excavator 100 74.7 74.7 Total Noise Level - - 78.8 79.0 No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax1 Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 100 68.8 72.8 Concrete Mixer Truck 100 68.8 72.8 Concrete Pump Truck 100 68.4 75.4 Total Noise Level - - 73.4 75.4 With Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax1 Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 100 65.0 69.0 Grader 100 65.0 69.0 Excavator 100 60.7 64.7 Total Noise Level - - 68.8 69.0 With Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax1 Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 100 58.8 62.8 Concrete Mixer Truck 100 58.8 62.8 Concrete Pump Truck 100 58.4 65.4 Total Noise Level - - 63.4 65.4 1 The Lmaxtotal noise level is the maximum noise level of 1 piece of operational equipment at any given time. j : /rktab les/R K9755TB . xls IN:0518-2013-01 TABLE 4 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at South Property Line (dBA) Residential Units Across from Rancho Vista Road No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax1 Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 100 75.0 79.0 Grader 100 75.0 79.0 Excavator 100 74.7 74.7 Total Noise Level - - 78.8 79.0 No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 100 68.8 72.8 Concrete Mixer Truck 100 68.8 72.8 Concrete Pump Truck 100 68.4 75.4 Total Noise Level - - 73.4 75.4 With Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax1 Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 100 65.0 69.0 Grader 100 65.0 69.0 Excavator 100 60.7 64.7 Total Noise Level - - 68.8 69.0 With Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 100 58.8 62.8 Concrete Mixer Truck 100 58.8 62.8 Concrete Pump Truck 100 58.4 65.4 Total Noise Level - - 63.4 65.4 1 The Lmax total noise level is the maximum noise level of 1 piece of operational equipment at any given time. j : /rktab les/R K9755TB. xls IN:0518-2013-01 TABLE 5 Project Construction Related Noise Levels at West Property Line (dBA) Residential Units Across from Mira Loma Drive No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax1 Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 75 77.5 81.5 Grader 75 77.5 81.5 Excavator 75 73.2 77.2 Total Noise Level - - 81.3 81.5 No Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 75 71.3 75.3 Concrete Mixer Truck 75 71.3 75.3 Concrete Pump Truck 75 70.9 77.9 Total Noise Level - - 75.9 77.9 W/ Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax1 Grading Phase Grader 3 to 4 Weeks 75 65.7 69.7 Grader 75 65.7 69.7 Excavator 75 61.4 65.4 Total Noise Level - - 69.5 69.7 W/Temporary Barrier - Scenario Activity Equipment Time Period Distance to Property Line Leq Lmax' Building Construction - Concrete Phase Concrete Mixer Truck 3 to 4 Weeks 75 59.5 63.5 Concrete Mixer Truck 75 59.5 63.5 Concrete Pump Truck 75 59.5 66.1 Total Noise Level - - 64.1 66.1 1 The Lmax total noise level is the maximum noise level of 1 piece of operational equipment at any given time. j : /rktab les/R K9755TB . xls IN:0518-2013-01 Appendices Appendix A City of Temecula Noise Element and Noise Ordinance ,TENEKAL PLAN PURPOSE OF THE NOISE ELEMENT SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE NOISE ELEMENT INTRODUCTION NOISE ELEMET T. emecula residents have come to the community for the peaceful lifestyle, that is less affected by many of the loud nuisances of other southern California communities. However, the City is not spared from all noisy activities, particularly those associated with automobile transportation. Traffic is projected to increase on I-15, Winchester Road, Highway 79 south, Pechanga Parkway and other City roads, and aircraft will continue to use French Valley Airport. Without City actions to protect residents, surrounding areas will become noisy, making it difficult to sleep, work, and learn, and gradually eroding the quality of our community. Noise also does not recognize property or zoning boundaries. Reducing noise impacts from one property on another or between adjacent land uses is necessary. The City strives to reduce the impacts of noise through a combination of land use planning site criteria, noise reduction and enforcement strategies. The policies and programs detailed in this Element focus on protecting the quality of life found within our residential neighborhoods, schools and other noise -sensitive uses from the persistent hazards of excessive noise. The State recognizes the relationship between noise and noise sensitive uses and has adopted guidelines for Noise Elements. This Noise Element satisfies the requirements of State planning law and is a mandated component of the General Plan. Government Code Section 65302(0 establishes the required components of the Noise Element. The Element also complies with California Health and Safety Code Section 56050.1 guidelines for Noise Elements. Potential noise sources are identified and programs established to avoid or mitigate noise impacts associated with community development. Future noise conditions associated with both short - and long-term growth are quantified and identified within noise exposure contours. The contours serve as the basis for: developing guidelines to identify compatible land uses; identifying the CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN N-1 N 0 I s E MEASURING NOISE distribution of land uses on the General Plan Land Use Policy Map; and establishing development standards. Concurrently, the Land Use Element contains policies to ensure that environmental conditions, including noise, are considered in all land use decisions. The Noise Element is also linked to the transportation policies in the Circulation Element. The projected noise contours identified in Figure N-2 within this Element directly correspond to the Circulation Plan and the projected traffic generated from proposed land uses. Both the Noise and Circulation Elements contain policies and programs to minimize the effects of transportation noise. The Noise Element also relates to the Conservation/Open Space Element. Excessive noise can diminish enjoyment of parks and other designated open space. Because of this, noise levels are considered in the planning of new recreational and open space areas. Additionally, open space areas can be used to separate and buffer noise sensitive land uses from noise producers. Noise generally is defined as unwanted or intrusive sound. Because noise consists of pitch, loudness, and duration, describing noise with a single unit of measure presents a challenge. The A -weighted decibel scale (dB(A)) has been developed to describe the loudness of a sound or sound environment based on the sensitivity of the human ear. The dB(A) descriptor only reports noise from a single source or combination of sources at a point in time. To allow a more comprehensive description of the noise environment, Federal and State agencies have established noise and land use compatibility guidelines that use averaging approaches to noise measurement. Two measurement scales commonly used in California are the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and the day -night level (Ldn). To account for increased human sensitivity at night, the CNEL level includes a 5 -decibel penalty on noise during the 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. time period and a 10 -decibel penalty on noise during the 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. time period. The Ldn level includes only the 10 decibel weighting for late-night noise. These values are nearly identical for all but unusual noise sources. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R A L PLAN N-2 RELATED PLANS AND PROGRAMS Several plans and programs enacted through federal, State and local legislation and administered by various agencies relate to Noise Element goals. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) GUIDELINES The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was adopted by the State legislature in response to a public mandate for thorough environmental analysis of projects that might affect the environment. Excessive noise is considered an environmental impact under CEQA. The provisions of the law and environmental review procedures are described in the CEQA Statutes and the CEQA Guidelines. Implementation of CEQA ensures that during the decision making stage of development, City officials and the general public will be able to assess the noise impacts associated with public and private development projects. CALIFORNIA NOISE INSULATION STANDARDS (TITLE 24) The California Commission of Housing and Community Development officially adopted noise standards in 1974. In 1988, the Building Standards Commission approved revisions to the standards (Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Regulations). As revised, Title 24 establishes an interior noise standard of 45 dB(A) for residential space (CNEL or Ldn). Acoustical studies must be prepared for residential structures that are to be located within noise contours of 60 dB(A) or greater from freeways, major streets, thoroughfares, rail lines, rapid transit lines or industrial noise sources. The studies must demonstrate that the building is designed to reduce interior noise to 45 dB(A) or lower. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA) The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) provides worker regulations for protection against the effects of noise exposure. The maximum exposure is provided according to health and psychological effects with a reasonable margin of safety. OSHA also identifies whether the threshold applies to activity interference, hearing loss consideration, or both effects. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R A L PLAN N-3 N 0 I S E N 0 I s E COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE GENERAL PLAN NOISE ELEMENT The unincorporated portion of the Planning Area is subject to the Riverside County Noise Element, which establishes parameters for compatibility of noise and various land uses, and the location of new development. For new residential construction, exterior noise must be reduced to 65 dB or less, and interior noise must be reduced to 45 dB or less. CITY OF TEMECULA NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE The City has adopted the County of Riverside Noise Control Ordinance (No. 457.73), which establishes interior and exterior noise standards for residential areas. The ordinance provides controls for excessive and annoying noise from stationary sources such as industrial plants, pumps, compressors and refrigeration units. In addition, specific noise standards for daytime and nighttime hours are provided. Certain noise sources are prohibited and the ordinance establishes an enforcement process. RIVERSIDE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN POLICY DOCUMENT — FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT French Valley Airport is a general aviation airport owned and operated by the County of Riverside. The airport occupies approximately 261 acres east of Winchester Road and is located five miles north of Temecula's city center and one and one-quarter mile northwest of the City limits within the sphere of influence. French Valley Airport is one of 16 airports in Riverside County governed by the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). In November 2004, the ALUC adopted the Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) Policy Document, which establishes land use, noise and safety policies in the vicinity of airports throughout Riverside County, including compatibility criteria and maps for the influence areas of individual airports. The ALUCP also establishes procedural requirements for compatibility review of development proposals. NOISE PLAN Temecula, like most developed suburban areas, experiences increased noise levels associated with transportation and other sources. As noise levels in various parts of the community rise, the City must seek ways to safeguard the population from excessive noise levels. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN N-4 SEPARATING NOISE SOURCES FROM SENSITIVE RECEPTORS PLANS IN ACTION Temecula uses the noise/ land use compatibility guidelines in Tables N-1 and N-2, as well as interior noise standards in the State Health and Safety Code to determine the appropriate location and design offuture land uses This minimizes potential impacts of nozsy businesses and industries on residential neighborhoods or other sensitive receptors. Noise in the community is the cumulative effect of noise from transportation activities and stationary sources. Stationary noise typically refers to noise from commercial establishments, machinery, air conditioning systems, compressors, residential and recreational uses, and landscape maintenance equipment. Regardless of the type of noise, levels are highest near the source and decrease with distance. Noise becomes a problem when sources and noise sensitive land uses are located in adjacent areas. Residential uses are generally the most sensitive to noise. Other noise -sensitive land uses include schools, libraries, offices, hospitals, churches, hotels, motels, and outdoor recreational areas. Most noise impacts can be avoided when noise sources, sensitive land uses, and information about the future noise environment are considered in planning and development decisions. NOISE STANDARDS AND LAND USE COMPATIBILITY To ensure that noise producers do not adversely affect sensitive receptors, the City uses land use compatibility standards when planning and making development decisions. Table N-1 summarizes City noise standards for each land use classification defined in the Land Use Element and expressed on the Land Use Policy Map. The standards represent the maximum acceptable exterior noise level, as measured at the property boundary, which is used to determine noise impacts. The City's primary goal with regard to community noise is to minimize the exposure of residents to unhealthful or excessive noise levels to the extent possible. To this end, the Noise Element establishes noise/land use compatibility guidelines based on cumulative noise criteria for outdoor noise. Table N-2 outlines these criteria, which the City will use to review development proposals. In addition, new residential development will comply with Title 24 standards of the State Health and Safety Code. These standards establish maximum interior noise levels for new residential development, requiring that sufficient insulation be provided to reduce interior ambient noise levels to 45 CNEL. Higher exterior noise levels are permitted for multiple -family housing than for single-family houses, as multiple -family complexes are generally set back farther from property boundaries, and a more integrated mix of activity (residential and commercial) is often desired near such locations. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R A L PLAN N-5 N 0 I s E N 0 I S E TABLE N-1 TEMECULA LAND USE /NOISE STANDARDS Property Receiving Noise Maximum Noise Level (Ldn or CNEL, dBA) Type of Use Land Use Designation Interior Exterior3 Residential Hillside Rural Very Low Low Low Medium 45 65 Medium 45 65 / 701 High 45 701 Commercial and Office Neighborhood Community Highway Tourist Service 70 Professional Office 50 70 Light Industrial Industrial Park 55 75 Public /Institutional Schools 50 65 All others 50 70 Open Space Vineyards/Agriculture -- 70 Open Space -- 70 /652 1 Maximum exterior noise levels up to 70 dB CNEL are allowed for Multiple -Family Housing. 2 Where quiet is a basis required for the land use. 3 Regarding aircraft -related noise, the maximum acceptable exposure for new residential development is 60 dB CNEL. CITY OF TEMECULA GENEKAL PLAN N-6 TABLE N-2 NOISE/LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX Land Use Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL) 55 60 65 70 75 80 Residential' N. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ***** +++++++++++ + + + + + + + + + + + + Transient Lodging - Motel, Hotel \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes \\\\NNI ``. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 )000NOWNyixixo2 Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters' 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 tt•++++++++++++++• Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports' 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 FOSSMIRR Playgrounds, Parks ,N,,,, \N.,- *40*** ++++++++++++ + + + + + + + + + 4 + Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ******** * *40 ******* • • • • • +•••• • • t • 4 r r t + • • • • • Office Buildings, Business````````` Commercial, and Professional 11 I I I I I I I I I I I Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture *` I I r r r r Source: Modified from 1998 State of California General Plan Guidelines. 1. Regarding aircraft -related noise, the maximum acceptable exposure for new residential development is 60dB CNEL. 2. No normally acceptable condition is defined for these uses. Noise studies are required prior to approval. I■■■■ I■■■■ I■■■■ IF • • s 4 a a a a I. + + + i 0000 Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved meet conventional Title 24 construction standards. No special noise insulation requirements. Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development shall be undertaken only after a detailed noise analysis is made and noise reduction measures are identified and included in the project design. Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development is discouraged. If new construction is proposed, a detailed analysis is required, noise reduction measures must be identified, and noise insulation features included in the design. Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development clearly should not be undertaken. OF TEMECULA G E N E R A L PLAN N-7 N 0 I S E N 0 I s E In addition, properties within an influence area surrounding French Valley Airport are also subject to the more stringent noise/land use compatibility standards of the County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). NOISE CONTOURS AND IMPACT AREAS The community noise environment can be described with contours derived from monitoring major sources of noise. Noise contours define areas of equal noise exposure. Future noise contours have been estimated with information about baseline and projected land use development with transportation activity. The contours assist in setting policies for distribution of land uses and establishment of development standards. A study of baseline noise sources and levels was completed in April, 2002. Noise level measurements were collected during a typical weekday at twenty locations throughout Temecula. Criteria for site selection included geographical distribution, land uses suspected of noisy activities, proximity to transportation facilities and sensitive receptor locations. The primary purpose of noise monitoring was to establish a noise profile for the Planning Area that could be used to estimate the level of current and future noise impact. Measurements represent motor vehicle noise emanating from Interstate 15, the local master planned roadway network and aircraft associated with the French Valley Airport. Sensitive receptor locations monitored include: single-family homes, schools, and parks. Noise levels were monitored during the peak traffic hour to represent maximum noise levels or during off-peak conditions and then modified to reflect peak traffic conditions. Figure N-1 shows the CNEL contours for baseline year 2002, and identifies noise monitoring locations. As the Figure illustrates, major arterials, as well as the railroad and Interstate 15 represent the major sources of noise. A number of residential neighborhoods are exposed to traffic noise from arterials, such as Winchester Road, Margarita Road, Ynez Road, Rancho California Road and Pechanga Parkway. The Land Use Element indicates that the Planning Area will accommodate substantial future growth, accompanied by an increase in citywide traffic volumes. Traffic volume increases represent the only anticipated measurable new noise source in the community over the long term. C_- 1 1 Y © F TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN N-8 Ili Figure N-1 Baseline (Year 2002) Roadway Noise Contours CV i OF TEMECULA GENERAL PIAN Legend Noise Contouvs Contour Location -65- Noise Level (CNEL) Noise Monitoring Positions Position Number �' Temecula City Boundary ' Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Boundary Sources: City of Temecula, Weiland Associates. City of Murr phere \nf\u County of Rovers\de Buck Rd r'j 10,000 Feet Miles 2 H H I H H I 0 1 I— i CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN N-9 N 0 I S E N 0 I s E PLANS IN ACTION Noise contours describe locations surrounding major roadways, rail -roads and airports that are exposed to similar noise characteristics. The City uses the contours identified in Figures N1, N2, N3, and N-4 along with the standards shown in Table N-2 to determine when noise mitigation measures are required. NOISE TRANSFERS BETWEEN ADJACENT USES NOISE AND LAND USE PLANNING Potential future ambient noise levels can be estimated by modeling. Figure N-2 displays projected year 2025 noise contours based upon future traffic levels. Figure N-3 identifies the estimated CNEL noise contours associated with current operations at the French Valley Airport. Figure N-4 identifies the projected future CNEL noise levels associated with Airport operations in 2013. These figures should be used in conjunction with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan to determine land use compatibility and potential noise mitigation requirements for projects that fall within a noise contour area associated with the Airport. CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS The provisions of the State Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Regulations) are enforced in Temecula. Title 24 specifies that combined indoor noise for multi -family living spaces shall not exceed 45 CNEL. This standard must be implemented when the outdoor noise level exceeds 60 CNEL. Title 24 requires that the same standard be applied to all new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and multi -family projects. Furthermore, construction activity shall be limited during the early morning, late evening, weekends and holidays to prevent noise intrusion during these periods. Parameters for these limitations are provided in the City's Noise Control Ordinance (Section 8.32 of the Temecula Municipal Code). The City also has the opportunity to control noise and vibration transfers between adjacent land uses. Particular problems arise in cases where noise -producing uses are located immediately adjacent to sensitive uses, such as industrial areas near residences or schools. Mixed-use projects often present unique problems in this area, such as when restaurants with nighttime entertainment are located below residential units. Sensitive receptors must be protected from excessive noise generated by commercial and industrial centers, restaurants and bars, and civic centers. Other noise sources commonly referred to as nuisance noises also contribute to the overall noise environment. Noise generated by new development is most appropriately controlled through the site design review process, and compliance with CEQA, and noise standards contained in the Noise Element. During preliminary stages of the development process, potential noise impacts and mitigation measures must be identified. L I T Y OF TEMECULA G E N E R A L PLAN N-10 0 5,000 H H I H H I 0 1 CITY OF Figure N-2 2025 Noise Contours CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN Legend Noise Contours Contour Location -65- Noise Level (CNEL) �' Temecula City Boundary ' Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Boundary Source: Wieland Associates, 2004. Specili Rd County of Riverside Jean Nicholas Ra 10,000 Feet Miles 2 TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN N -I I N 0 I S E N 0 I S E Figure N-3 French Valley Airport Noise Contours Noise Level (CNEL) Temecula City Boundary Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Boundary Source: Coffman Associates, December 2003. 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles I-1 IH 1 H 0.5 1 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN N-12 Figure N-4 French Valley Airport Future (2013) Noise Contours Noise Level (CNEL) Temecula City Boundary Sphere of Influence Boundary Planning Area Boundary Source: Coffman Associates, December 2003. �nnnnnnnnl lull p 2,500 5,000 Feet Miles I—I IH 1 H 0.5 1 CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN N-13 N 0 I s E N 0 I s E PLANS IN ACTION The City requires preparation of acoustical analyses for projects that generate noise that may affect sensitive receptors. Mitigation measures are required when significant impacts are identified. TRANSPOIZTATION- RELATED NOISE BUSINESS ACTMTY NOISE When reviewing a proposed industrial, commercial or public project, noise generation and potential impacts to surrounding development are considered in accordance with CEQA. Common mitigation measures include acoustically treated and quiet -design furnaces, fans, motors, compressors, valves, and pumps. The City may also require limited delivery and operation hours in order to minimize impacts to adjacent residential users or other sensitive receptors. In addition, all City departments must comply with State and federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. Any new equipment or vehicle purchased by the City will comply with local, State and federal noise standards. NUISANCE NOISES Several noise sources can contribute to the overall noise environment in the community, including barking dogs, loud audio equipment, defective or modified auto and motorcycle mufflers and activities at parks and civic, community or religious institutions. These nuisance noises can be addressed through strict enforcement of City's Noise Control Ordinance, while potential new noise impacts may be avoided or reduced through the site design review process, review of proposed developments per CEQA and mitigation of potential nuisance noise impacts. Motor vehicles are the dominant source of continuous noise. Interstate 15, SR -79, Rancho California Road, Jefferson Avenue/Front Street, Winchester Road, and Pechanga Parkway all carry appreciable volumes of commuter traffic. Neighborhoods bordering these roadways are thus subject to loud noise levels. Properties adjacent to freeways can experience decibels as high as 70 to 75 dB(A). Sound attenuation walls, landscaped buffers, and dirt mounds all help to reduce the sound intensity of the freeway. The French Valley Airport is also a source of noise in Temecula. The aircraft mix at this airport includes mostly single-engine aircraft, although some multi -engine aircraft and a small number of business jets and helicopters also use the Airport. Larger aircraft represent a more intrusive noise source. Impacted future uses include office park areas and residential neighborhoods. L. I T Y OF TEMECULA G E N E R. A L PLAN N-14 PLANS IN ACTION Temecula supports efforts by Caltrans, RTA, and other agencies to provide acoustical protection for noise sensitive uses. Also, noise barriers should be constructed as part of future highway and roadway projects. PLANS IN ACTION The Citi regulates traffic flow and coordinates with CHP to enforce speed limits and reduce traffic noise. NOISE CONTROL AT RECEPTION SITES The most efficient and effective means of controlling noise from transportation systems is to reduce noise at the source. However, the City has limited direct control over noise produced by transportation sources because State noise regulations preempt local regulations. Because the City cannot control noise at the source, City noise programs focus on reducing the impact of transportation noise reception sites. During the planning stages of the development process, potential impacts from transportation noise will be identified and mitigation measures required as needed to meet City noise standards. Site planning, landscaping, topography and the design and construction of noise barriers are the most common method of alleviating vehicular traffic noise impacts. Setbacks and buffers can also be used to reduce noise. Noise -attenuating barriers are commonly incorporated into projects and can be extremely effective in reducing noise levels. The effectiveness of barriers depends on: 1) the relative height and materials of the barrier, 2) the noise source; 3) the affected area; and 4) the horizontal distance between the barrier and affected area. Noise barriers should also be included in the design of freeway/tollway, roadway and rail improvements. the Although noise barriers can be effective, the aesthetic effect of barriers on neighborhoods must be considered during the preliminary stages of the development process. Potentially significant visual impacts associated with noise barriers must be addressed and mitigated through landscaping or other project design measures in all new public and private projects. NOISE CONTROL AT THE SOURCE The California Vehicle Code contains noise regulations pertaining to the operation of all vehicles on public roads. These standards for cars, trucks, and motorcycles are enforced through coordination with the California Highway Patrol (CHP) and the Riverside County Sheriffs Department. CITY OF TEMECULA GENERAL PLAN N-15 N 0 I S E N 0 I s E SEPARATING NOISE SOURCES FROM SENSITIVE RECEPTORS NOISE TRANSFERS BETwEEN ADJACENT LAND USES GOALS AND POLICIFS Four major issues are addressed in the Noise Element: 1) ensuring the separation of significant noise generators and sensitive receptors including residential areas and schools, 2) noise and vibration transfers between adjacent land uses such as residences located upstairs from nighttime commercial uses in mixed use environments, 3) considering noise in the land use planning process, and 4) minimizing the impacts of transportation -related noise. Separating noise generators from sensitive receptors will result in exterior environments that require minimal mitigation to meet acceptable noise levels. Land use planning will ensure that sensitive receptors are not impacted by noise hazards by locating these land uses distant from each other. Noise hazard areas will be considered to include locations within the 65 CNEL contour of master planned roadways, railroad corridors, aircraft flight paths, and industrial facilities. Goal 1 Separate significant noise generators from sensitive receptors. Policy 1.1 Discourage noise sensitive land uses in noisy exterior environments unless measures can be implemented to reduce exterior and interior noise to acceptable levels. Alternatively, encourage less sensitive uses in areas adjacent to major noise generators but require sound -appropriate interior working environments. Policy 1.2 Limit the hours of construction activity next to residential areas to reduce noise intrusion in the early morning, late evening, weekends and holidays. Policy 1.3 Use information from the noise contour map in the General Plan in the development review process to prevent the location of sensitive land uses near major stationary noise sources. Exterior and interior noise standards determine the design and location of various land uses. The City has the opportunity to control noise between land uses through use of the City Noise Control Ordinance or other means. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R A L PLAN N-16 NOISE AND LAND USE PLANNING Goal 2 Minimize transfer of noise impacts between N adjacent land uses. O Policy 2.1 Limit the maximum permitted noise levels crossing 1 property lines and impacting adjacent land uses. S Policy 2.2 Establish criteria for placement and operation of E stationary outdoor equipment. Policy 2.3 Require that mixed use structures and areas be designed to prevent transfer of noise and vibration from commercial areas to residential areas. Noise issues should always be considered during the planning process so that needed measures are incorporated in design and location of land uses. In addition, the economic impacts of noise attenuation measures can then be incurred by the property developer and not by future owners who may not anticipate noise impacts. Goal 3 Minimize the impact of noise levels throughout the community through land use planning. Policy 3.1 Enforce and maintain acceptable noise limit standards. Policy 3.2 Work with the County of Riverside and the City of Murrieta to minimize or avoid land use/noise conflicts prior to project approvals. Policy 3.3 Encourage the creative use of site and building design techniques as a means to minimize noise impacts. Policy 3.4 Evaluate potential noise conflicts for individual sites and projects, and require mitigation of all significant noise impacts as a condition of project approval. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R A L PLAN N-17 ,14 11yy. �4y tA� 4 WIti'' TRANSPORTATION - RELATED NOISE 0 I s E Many transportation -related noise sources exist in Temecula, including freeways, major arterial and collector roadways, and aircraft overflights. The City recognizes the importance of the French Valley Airport to the region. Future land use patterns in the General Plan have been designed to accommodate the flight paths and noise contours of the airport as established by the Airport Land Use Commission. Goal 4 Minimize impacts from transportation noise sources. Policy 4.1 Minimize noise conflicts between land uses and the circulation network, and mitigate sound levels where necessary or feasible to ensure the peace and quiet of the community. Policy 4.2 Ensure the effective enforcement of City, State and federal noise standards by all City Divisions. Policy 4.3 Enforce the speed limit on arterials and local roads to reduce noise impacts from vehicles, particularly in residential areas. Policy 4.4 Coordinate with Caltrans to ensure the inclusion of noise mitigation measures in the design of new highways or improvement projects in the Planning Area. Policy 4.5 Participate in the planning and impact assessment activities of the County Airport Land Use Commission and other regional or State agencies relative to any proposed expansion of the airport or change in flight patterns. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R. A L PLAN N-18 N-1 NOISE/LAND USE COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS N-2 CITY AND STATE NOISE REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS The following actions, procedures and techniques are designed to implement the goals and policies of the Noise Element. Incorporate measures into all development projects to attenuate exterior and interior noise to acceptable levels. The City's noise compatibility standards for each General Plan land use designation are provided in Table N-1. These standards shall be adhered to and implemented during review of all development projects. Review development proposals to ensure that the noise and compatibility criteria are met. Require mitigation where necessary, to reduce noise levels to meet the noise and compatibility criteria. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.1, 3.1, 3.4, 4.1 Required by General Plan EIR standards measures, standards Minimize noise in Temecula through the following measures: • Require all non -emergency construction activity to comply with the limits (maximum noise levels, hours and days of activity) established in State and City noise regulations (Title 24 California Code of Regulations, Temecula Development Code and Chapter 8.32 of the Municipal Code). • Amend the City Noise Control Ordinance to establish criteria for acceptable placement and operation of stationary outdoor equipment. • Require proposed industrial or commercial projects located near residential areas to demonstrate that the project, when constructed, will meet with City noise reduction requirements. • Review the City Noise Control Ordinance for adequacy and amend as needed to address community needs and development patterns. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.2, 2.2, 4.2 Required by General Plan EIR CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R. A L PLAN N-19 N 0 I S E N 0 I s E N-3 USE OF NOISE CoNTouR.S IN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW N-4 NOISE AND VIBRATION TRANSFER. STANDARDS N-5 ACOUSTICAL STUDIES Ensure that current noise hazard areas in the City are identified, quantified, and mapped within the City's Geographic Information System (GIS). Review discretionary development proposals for potential on- and off-site stationary and vehicular noise impacts per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Any proposed development located within a 60 dB or higher noise contour (per Figures N-2 and N-3) shall be reviewed for potential noise impacts and compliance with City noise and land use compatibility standards. The thresholds established in the Development Code, Noise Control Ordinance, the noise contour maps and Tables N-1 and N-2 of the Noise Element will be used to determine the significance of impacts. If potential impacts are identified, mitigation measures (including those described in Program N-7) will be required to reduce the impact to a level less than significant. If the impact cannot be reduced to a level less than significant or avoided with accepted noise reduction methods, the proposed project will be determined "Clearly Unacceptable" and will not be approved. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.3, 3.3, 3.4, 4.1 Required by General Plan EIR During review of development applications, consider the noise and vibration impacts of the proposed land use on the current or planned adjacent uses. Establish and enforce standards for noise transfer between non-residential and residential components of mixed use development projects. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 2.1, 2.3 Implement the following measures for all discretionary development projects as a condition of development approval: • Require proposed projects with potential to exceed established noise -land use compatibility thresholds to have an acoustical study prepared, including recommendations for special design measures if the project is to be located close to current or planned noise sensitive uses. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R. A L PLAN N-20 • Require proposed noise sensitive projects within noise impacted areas to have an acoustical study prepared, including special design measures to protect noise sensitive uses from ultimate projected noise levels. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.3, 3.4 Required by General Plan EIR N-6 Implement the following measures to ensure coordination of noise NOISE CONTROL COORDINATION N-7 MITIGATING NOISE IMPACTS IN SITE DESIGN control efforts: • Designate the Planning Director as the noise control coordinator for new development, charged with the responsibility to enforce City noise policy. • Work with the noise control coordinators for the County of Riverside and City of Murrieta to ensure mitigation of potential land use / noise conflicts near the City's edge. • Work with Caltrans and Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) to ensure inclusion of acceptable mitigation measures in the design of new highways or other improvements within the Planning Area. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 1.3, 3.4 Consider site design techniques as the primary means to minimize noise impacts. Require developers to consider alternative site layouts and architectural features as a means of meeting City noise reduction requirements. Discourage projects that are incapable of successfully mitigating excessive noise. Site design and architectural features recommended to reduce noise include (but are not limited to) the following: • Utilize building setbacks to increase the distance between the noise source and receiver. • Promote the placement of noise tolerant land uses such as parking lots, maintenance facilities, and utility areas between the noise source and receptor. • Orient buildings to shield outdoor spaces from a noise source. Quiet outdoor spaces can be provided by creating a "U" -shaped development with faces away from the roadway, or by clustering land uses. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R A L PLAN N-21 N 0 I S E N 0 I s E • Place bedrooms on the side of the house, facing away from major roadways. Use noise tolerant rooms such as garages, bathrooms and kitchens to shield noise -sensitive areas. • When bedrooms cannot be located on the side of a house away from a major roadway, require extra insulation and double -pane windows. • Avoid balconies facing major travel routes. Development proposals including balconies in the design will need to be evaluated for potential noise impacts during the environmental review process. • Where architectural design treatments fail to adequately reduce adverse noise levels or will significantly increase the costs of land development, require the combined use of noise barriers and landscaped berms. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policy: 3.3 Required by General Plan EIR N-8 Employ the following measures to mitigate transportation activity REDUCE VEHICULAR_ NOISE noise impacts to acceptable levels: • Incorporate noise control measures, such as sound walls and berms, into roadway improvement projects to mitigate impacts to adjacent development. Measures will emphasize the establishment of buffers between roadways and adjacent noise sensitive areas. • Request that Caltrans provide noise control for highway projects within the City, including interchange improvements along I-15, widening of SR -79 south, SR -79 north, and the proposed Date Street/I-15 interchange. • Provide noise control for City streets within the Planning Area experiencing unique noise problems, such as Pechanga Parkway. • For projects close to master planned roadways, use the ultimate roadway capacity at LOS C and the posted speed limit to estimate maximum future noise impacts. • Coordinate with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department and the California Highway Patrol to enforce the California Vehicle Code noise standards for cars, trucks, and motorcycles. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policies: 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 Required by General Plan EIR CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R. A L PLAN N-22 N-9 FRENCH VALLEY AIRPORT Upon any update of the French Valley Airport Master Plan, the County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, or the Caltrans Airport Planning Handbook, review and revise as necessary Figure N-3, and the goals, policies and noise plan within the General Plan Noise Element to correspond with the updated plans. Agency/Department: Planning Related Policy: 4.5 CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R. A L PLAN N-23 N 0 I s E N 0 I S E This page left intentionally blank. CITY OF TEMECULA G E N E R. A L PLAN N-24 Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... Temecula Municipal Code p Previous Next Main Collapse Search Print No Frames Title 9 PUBLIC PEACE, MORALS AND WELFARE Chapter 9.20 NOISE 9.20.010 Intent. At certain levels, sound becomes noise and may jeopardize the health, safety or general welfare of city residents and degrade their quality of life. This chapter is intended to establish citywide standards to regulate noise. This chapter is not intended to establish thresholds of significance for the purpose of any analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act. No such thresholds are hereby established. (Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.020 Definitions. Whenever used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings: "Animal" means any bird, cat, dog, goat, horse, burro or donkey. "Audible" means capable of being heard by a person without the use or aid of an amplified hearing device. "Audio equipment" means a television, stereo, radio, tape player, compact disc player, MP3 player, i -Pod or other similar device. "City manager" means the city manager or his or her designee. "Decibel" means a unit (dB) for measuring the relative amplitude of a sound equal approximately to the smallest difference normally detectable by the human ear, the range of which includes approximately one hundred thirty decibels on a scale beginning with zero decibels for the faintest detectable sound. Decibels are measured with a sound level meter using the methodology defined below: 1. A -weighting (dBA) means the standard A -weighted frequency response of a sound level meter, which de-emphasizes low and high frequencies of sound in a manner similar to the human ear for moderate sounds. 2. Maximum sound level (Lmax) means the maximum sound level measured on a sound level meter. "Governmental agency" means the United States, the state of California, the county of Riverside, the city of Temecula, water districts, school districts, or any combination of these agencies. "Motor vehicle" means a vehicle that is self-propelled. "Noise" means any loud, discordant, raucous or disagreeable sound. "Occupied property" means any property upon which is located a residence, business or industrial or manufacturing use. "Power tools or equipment" means any mechanical, electrical or pneumatic device used to perform or facilitate manual or mechanical work. "Public property" means property owned by a governmental agency or held open to the public, including, but not limited to, parks, streets, sidewalks, parking lots and alleys. "Public or private school" means an institution conducting academic instruction at the preschool, 1 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... elementary school, junior high school, high school, or college level. "Sensitive receptor" means a land use that is identified as sensitive to noise in the noise element of the Riverside County general plan and the noise element of the Temecula general plan, including, but not limited to, residences, schools, hospitals, churches, rest homes, cemeteries or public libraries. "Sound amplifying equipment" means a loudspeaker, microphone, megaphone, stereo equipment, portable radio, boom box, any musical instrument amplified by an electrical device, or other similar device. "Sound level meter" means an instrument meeting the standards of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 or Type 2 sound level meters or an instrument that provides equivalent data. (Ord. 09-04 §§ 2, 3; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.030 Exemptions. Sound emanating from the following sources is exempt from the provisions of this chapter: A. Facilities owned or operated by or for a governmental agency. B. Community events on public or private property hosted or sponsored by the city. C. Capital improvement projects of a governmental agency. D. The maintenance or repair of public properties. E. Public safety personnel in the course of executing their official duties, including, but not limited to, sworn peace officers, emergency personnel and public utility personnel. This exemption includes, without limitation, sound emanating from all equipment used by such personnel, whether stationary or mobile. F. Public or private schools and school -sponsored activities. G. Property maintenance, including, but not limited to, the operation of lawnmowers, leaf blowers, etc., provided such maintenance occurs between the hours of seven a.m. and eight p.m. H. Motor vehicles, other than off-highway vehicles. This exemption does not include sound emanating from motor vehicle sound systems. I. Heating and air conditioning equipment. J. Safety, warning and alarm devices, including, but not limited to, house and car alarms, and other warning devices that are designed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. K. The discharge of firearms consistent with all state laws. (Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.040 General sound level standards. No person shall create any sound, or allow the creation of any sound, on any property that causes the exterior sound level on any other occupied property to exceed the sound level standards set forth in Tables N-1 and N-2. Table N-1 TEMECULA LAND USE/NOISE STANDARDS Property Receiving Noise Maximum Noise Level 2of8 1/24/134:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... Maximum exterior noise levels up to 70 dBA are allowed for multiple -family housing. 2 Where quiet is a basis required for the land use. 3 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM (dBA) Type of Use Land Use Designation Interior Exterior Residential Hillside Rural Very Low Low Low Medium 45 65 Medium 45 65/701 High 45 701 Commercial and Office Neighborhood Community Highway Tourist Service 70 Professional Office 50 70 Light Industrial Industrial Park 55 75 Public/Institutional Schools 50 65 All others 50 70 Open Space Vineyards/Agriculture — 70 Open Space — 70/652 Maximum exterior noise levels up to 70 dBA are allowed for multiple -family housing. 2 Where quiet is a basis required for the land use. 3 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOI SE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... Table N-2 NOISE/LAND USE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX Land Use Noise Exposure (dBA) 60 65 70 75 80 Residential Transient Lodging — Motel, Hotel Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Playgrounds, Parks Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cern eteries Office Buildings, Business Commercial, and Professional Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 4 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... Source: Modified from 1998 State of California General Plan Guidelines. Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved meet conventional Title 24 construction standards. No special noise insulation requirements. Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development shall be undertaken only after a detailed noise analysis is made and noise reduction measures are identified and included in the project design. Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development is discouraged. If new construction is proposed, a detailed analysis is required, noise reduction measures must be identified, and noise insulation features included in the design. Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development clearly should not be undertaken. (Ord. 09-04 § 4; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.050 Sound level measurement methodology. The actual location of a sound level measurement shall be at the discretion of the enforcement officials identified in Section 9.20.080 of this chapter. Sound level measurements shall be made with a sound level meter. Immediately before a measurement is made, the sound level meter shall be calibrated utilizing an acoustical calibrator meeting the standards of the American National Standards Institute. The transmission of noise shall be measured by the average of three A -weighted decibel (dBA) noise readings, taken not less than five minutes apart over a thirty -minute time frame. Following a sound level measurement, the calibration of the sound level meter shall be re -verified. Sound level meters and calibration equipment shall be certified to industry standards annually. (Ord. 09-04 § 5; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.060 Special sound sources standards. The general sound level standards set forth in Section 9.20.040 of this chapter apply to sound emanating from all sources, including the following special sound sources, and the person creating or allowing the creation of the sound is subject to the requirements of that section. The following special sound sources are also subject to the following additional standards. Failure to comply will constitute separate violations of this ordinance. A. Power Tools and Equipment. No person shall operate any power tools or equipment between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m. such that the power tools or equipment are audible to a person located inside an occupied building. B. Audio Equipment. No person shall operate any audio equipment as described in Section 9.20.020(B), whether portable or not, between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m. such that the equipment is audible to a person located inside an occupied building. C. Sound Amplifying Equipment or Live Music. 1. It is unlawful for any person to cause, allow or permit the emission or transmission of any loud and raucous noise from any sound -making, sound -amplifying device or live music under his control or in his 5 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.gcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-920&... possession: a. Upon any private property; b. Upon any public street, alley, sidewalk or thoroughfare; c. In or upon any public park or other public place or property. 2. The words "loud and raucous noise," as used in this section, shall mean any sound having such intensity or carrying power as to unreasonably interfere with the peace and quiet of other persons, or as to unreasonably annoy, disturb, impair or endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of other persons. 3. The determination of whether a sound is `unreasonable," as used in subsection (C)(2) of this section, shall involve the consideration of the level of noise, duration of noise, constancy or intermittency of noise, time of day or night, place, proximity to sensitive receptors, nature and circumstances of the emission or transmission of any such loud and raucous noise. D. Construction. No person shall engage in or conduct construction activity, when the construction site is within one-quarter mile of an occupied residence, between the hours of six -thirty p.m. and seven a.m., Monday through Friday, and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. on Saturday. No construction activity shall be undertaken on Sunday and nationally recognized holidays unless exempted by Section 9.20.070 of the Temecula Municipal Code. Public works projects of any federal, state or local entity or emergency work by public utilities are exempt from the provisions of this subsection. Residents working on their homes or property are exempt from the prohibition of construction activities on Sundays and holidays and shall only engage in or conduct construction activity between the hours of seven a.m. and six -thirty p.m. when working on Sundays and holidays. The city council may, by formal action, exempt projects from the provisions of this chapter. E. Barking Dogs and Keeping of Noisy Animals. 1. No person having charge, care, custody or control of any animal shall permit such animal to emit any disturbing or offensive noise. The words "disturbing or offensive noise," as used in this section shall mean any noise from an animal that barks, bays, cries, whines, howls, screeches or makes any noise for an extended period of time whether day or night, regardless of whether the animal is physically situated in or upon private property. Such person is deemed to be in violation of this section if any of the following conditions exist: a. The animal emits disturbing or offensive noise incessantly for thirty minutes or more in any twenty- four -hour period; or b. The animal emits disturbing or offensive noise intermittently for sixty minutes or more during any twenty -four-hour period; or c. Enforcement officials witness such disturbing or offensive noise from the same property on three or more occasions during any thirty -day period of time. An animal is not considered to be emitting disturbing or offensive noise for purposes of this article if, at any time the animal is making noise due to a person or other animal that is trespassing or threatening to trespass upon private property in or upon which the animal is situated, or when the animal is being teased or provoked. 2. Evidence of said disturbing or offensive noise shall be made by direct observation of an enforcement official present on site responding to a complaint from a neighbor, or a complaint form may be signed by a minimum of two neighboring property owners and submitted to an enforcement official. 3. Nothing in this chapter shall establish standards for private civil claims, in either civil court or small claims court, nor shall this chapter preclude any person from pursuing a private civil action in either civil or small claims court. (Ord. 09-04 § 6; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 6 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... 9.20.070 Exceptions. Exceptions may be requested from the standards set forth in Sections 9.20.040 (general sound standards) or 9.20.060 (special sound sources standards) of this chapter and may be characterized as construction -related or single event exceptions. A. Application and Processing. 1. Construction -Related Exceptions. An application for a construction -related exception shall be made on a minor exception form. The form shall be submitted in writing at least three working days (seventy-two hours) in advance of the scheduled and permitted activity and shall be accompanied by the appropriate inspection fee(s). The application is subject to approval by the city manager or designated representative. No public hearing is required. 2. Temporary Use Permit. An application for a single event exception shall be made using the temporary use permit application provided by the planning department and shall be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. No public hearing is required. B. Requirements for Approval. The director of planning or his or her designee shall not approve a minor exception application or temporary use permit unless the applicant demonstrates that the activities described in the application would not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community. in determining whether activities are detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the community, the director of planning or his or her designee shall consider such factors as the proposed duration of the activities and their location in relation to sensitive receptors. If a minor exception application or a temporary use permit is approved, reasonable conditions may be imposed to minimize the public detriment, including, but not limited to, restrictions on sound level, sound duration and operating hours. C. Appeals. 1. Construction -Related Exception. Any person aggrieved by or dissatisfied with the planning director's decision on an application for a construction -related exception may appeal from such action by filing an appeal according to the procedures set forth in Section 17.03.090 of the Temecula Municipal Code. 2. Temporary Use Permit. Any person aggrieved by or dissatisfied with the planning director's decision on an application for a temporary use permit may appeal from such action within fifteen calendar days of the action by filing an appeal according to the procedures set forth in Section 17.03.090 of the Temecula Municipal Code. (Ord. 09-07 § 7; Ord. 07-12 § 1) 9.20.080 Enforcement. A. The city manager and his or her designee, including but not limited to police officers, code enforcement officers, park rangers or other enforcement officials shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter. B. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction shall be punished as set forth in Chapter 1.20 of the Temecula Municipal Code. C. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter shall be subject to the enforcement remedies of Chapters 1.21 and 1.24 of the Temecula Municipal Code. D. Nothing in this chapter shall be intended to limit any of the civil or criminal remedies available to the city, nor shall it be intended to limit the city from engaging in efforts to obtain voluntary compliance by means of warnings, notices, administrative citations or educational programs. (Ord. 07-12 § 1) 7of8 1/24/134:38 PM Chapter 9.20 NOISE http://www.qcode.us/codes/temecula/view.php?topic=9-9_20&... 9.20.090 Duty to cooperate. No person shall refuse to cooperate with, or obstruct, the enforcement officials identified in Section 9.20.080 of this chapter when they are engaged in the process of enforcing the provisions of this chapter. This duty to cooperate may require a person to extinguish a sound source so that it can be determined whether sound emanating from the source violates the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 07-12 § 1) 8 of 8 1/24/13 4:38 PM Appendix B Field Sheet Data Field Sheet Project: Rancho Vista Village Construction Engineer: Mario Gutierrez Noise Impact Analysis Date: JN: 1/30/2013 0518-13-01 Measurement Address: City: Temecula Site No.: 1-3 Sound Level Meter: LD -712 Serial# A0520 Calibration Record: Input, dB/ Reading, dB/ Offset, dB/ Time Before 114.0/ 114.0/ 26.9/ 10:40 AM Notes: Temp: Windspeed: Direction: Skies: Camera: Photo Nos. 57 After 114.0/ 114.0/ 26.3/ 12:05 AM -- Calibrator: Calibrator: LD-250 250 Serial # 1322 Before / / / -- Clear After / / / Meter Settings: 0 A -WTD 0 LINEAR 0 SLOW 0 1/1 OCT 0 INTERVALS 0 C -WTD 0 IMPULSE 0 FAST 0 1/3 OCT 0 LN PERCENTILE 10 - MINUTE VALUES Notes: Measurement Type: Long-term Short-term X Start Time Stop Time Leg Lmin Lmax L2 L8 L25 L50 11:50 AM 12:00 AM 49.9 37.6 71.4 57.8 54.9 46.9 43.3 Comments:Measuring meter set 80' West from school property line. Ambient noise from local traffic and wildlife. 2 11:35 AM 11:45 AM 47.0 36.9 70.6 51.4 46.3 43.9 40.9 Comments: Measuring meter set 80' West of the southern most property Iine.Ambient noise from local traffic and wildlife. 3 10:45 AM 10:55 AM 54.6 40.1 72.6 63.1 57.6 51.7 48.1 Comments: Measuring meter set 47' East of Mira Loma Drive centerline. Ambient noise from local traffic and wildlife. 4 5 RK engineering group, inc. Field Sheet - ST1 Location Photos Project: Rancho Vista Village Construction Engineer: Mario Gutierrez Date: 1/30/2013 Noise Impact Analysis JN: 0518-13-01 Measurement Address: City: Temecula Site No.: 1 80' West of Elementary School Property Line RK engineering group. Inc, Field Sheet - ST2 Location Photos Project: Rancho Vista Village Construction Engineer: Mario Gutierrez Date: 1/30/2013 Noise Impact Analysis JN: 0518-13-01 Measurement Address: City: Temecula Site No.: 2 80' West of the southern most property line. RK engineering group, inc. Field Sheet - ST3 Location Photos Project: Rancho Vista Village Construction Engineer: Mario Gutierrez Noise Impact Analysis Measu rement Address: 47' East of Mira Loma Drive Centerline City: Temecula Date: 1/30/2013 JN: 0518-13-01 Site No.: 3 RK engineering group, inc. CNEL CALCULATED FROM SITE MEASUREMENTS PROJECT: RANCHO VISTA VILLAGE CONSTRUCTION NOISE LOCATION: 80 -FT WEST OF SCHOOL P/L (ST -1) DATE: JN: 31 -Jan -13 0518-13-01 TIME HOURLY HOURLY LEQ ADJUSTED BEGINNING LEQ WEIGHTING HOURLY LEQ 0000 44.6 10.0 54.6 0100 42.2 10.0 52.2 0200 41.0 10.0 51.0 0300 39.2 10.0 49.2 0400 40.2 10.0 50.2 0500 44.0 10.0 54.0 0600 50.4 10