Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/23/2004 CC ReportsPage Faur ' - City. Cop?ki REC4MMMA 37.: Ami"e�t td -'-a irrevocable Escrc 38. Lakeisinore lw REC6* F 39. Multi =Spies REICC}NiMENOk boil �,� � MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Buckley called the City Council Study Session to order at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, MAGEE, SCHIFFNER, BUCKLEY COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: Assistant City Manager Best, Deputy City Attorney David Mann, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Information/ Communications Manager Dennis, Engineering Manager Seumalo, and Deputy City Clerk Ray. DISCUSSION ITEMS Assistant City Manager Best gave an overview of the item. She stated that the City began reviewing the Railroad Canyon interchange several years ago, knowing it would be a traffic impact area. A project study report was brought forward by staff for a Study Session with the seated Council in December 2000. She indicated that project was completed in the fall of 2003, and CalTrans signed off on the project recently and Staff had documentation regarding the next step. Community Development Director Brady indicated Engineering Manager Seumalo would be giving an overview of the alternatives. The project report had reflected eleven alternatives one being; the do nothing AQENDA ITEM NO. L, "-' PAGE ._!_.._ OF PAGE TWO -STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 13, 2004 .woo, alternative. He further indicated from those ten alternatives it was narrowed down to five alternatives by Staff. Engineering Manager Seumalo gave a brief review of the five alternatives and the CalTrans process that the City had to follow. He then gave an outline of the study as follows: 1. Need for the interchan a improvement. He indicated that there was a need for safety, as there was limited availability for emergency vehicles to make their way through the intersection. There were traffic studies that were not up to date, but the City's count for Lakeshore Drive varied between 16,900 vehicles per day to the peak of 37,100 cars a day at the intersection of Grape Street. He noted that was from the City's year 2000 study. The level of service during peak hours was an "F" meaning there was a delay of 80 seconds or more, and during peak hours the City definitely exceeded the 80 second delay. 14000, 2. Solution - Develop interchange improvements. He indicated CalTrans had the right -of -way and the City had to follow their process. Interstate 15 fell under the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Guidelines. The three agencies were involved in this process together. CalTrans was the intermediary between local agencies and FHWA. The CalTrans process for developing a project was three steps. a. Project Study Report (PSR) b. Project Report (PR)/Draft Environmental Document (Draft ED) c. Plans, Specifications and Estimates 3. Status -PSR phase has been complete with 5 design alternatives. a. Alternative 1: Do nothing. b. Alternative 2: He indicated that option 4 through 8 was eliminated. AQENUA ITEM NO. ' PAGE OF PAGE THREE -STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 13, 2004 He noted that the City was not limited to the projects that were presented. Widen and Reconstruct the existing interchange. The challenge was the spacing between the northbound off ramp and the intersection of Grape Street. The spacing between Grape Street, the ramps, and Casino Drive caused the congestion. c. Alternative 3b: Installing or constructing hook ramps to Grape Street. This alternative eliminates the northbound off ramp, which increases storage length under the freeway. CalTrans typically preferred not to have off ramps end into a shopping center. The alternative would eliminate one of the major conflict movements and allow more storage. d. Alternative 9: Construct Hook Ramps to Summerhill Drive, Casino Drive and southbound loop exit ramp. He indicated the bridge over the San Jacinto River would need to be widened. He noted a benefit for a looping off ramp was that it provided a free right movement meaning traffic could continuously merge off the freeway. He noted the restriction in this alternative was the newly constructed Washington Mutual Building that eliminated this as a City choice, however if CalTrans saw the need or saw benefit exceeding the cost of purchasing the land that was just improved, that would be an item that would be discussed in the Project Report phase. He indicated that the hook ramp on Casino Drive provided significant storage, the cost would be losing some business and buildings. e. Alternative 10: Construct hook ramps to Summerhill Drive and Casino Drive. He indicated that the bridge would need to be widened for this alternative. The northbound right lane remained as a free right turn there would be no signal and the on ramps would be moved to the Washington Mutual site, the storage would be increased and the conflicts are eliminated. There would be two right turns going into two receiving lanes and traffic distribution would continue. He noted a restriction Staff had encountered was that the left turn movement, due to the number of lanes that would need to be crossed. The alternative enhanced the hook ramps off Casino Drive and provided a hook off ramp southbound. The cost would be the business due to the AGENDA ITEM 10.1 -o '-"- PAGE OF PAGE FOUR -STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 13, 2004 land acquisition. f. Alternative 11: Reconstruct interchange to a partial clover leaf configuration and realign Grape Street and Casino Drive. He noted the free right movement from on ramp eastbound to northbound; free right movement from westbound Lakeshore to northbound. In order to complete this alternative everything west of Interstate 15 in close proximity of the freeway would be impacted. This alternative would cul -de -sac Summerhill Drive and route traffic through a proposed bridge; and to get to the freeway traffic would take Lakeshore Drive. There would be no direct access from Lakeshore Drive except for the newly proposed roadway. He noted it would be extremely expensive to construct. They were also proposing to cul -de -sac Casino Drive and build alternate routes from Casino Drive to Lakeshore Drive through Sav -ons. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley questioned Alternative 9 where there was a short red line above Sav -on to the right was that an improvement to a particular area and also the rectangular lines under the loop. Engineering Manager Seumalo explained that it was an error if the ramp was eliminated there would be no connection from the hillside onto the street. He further explained the rectangular lines were a detention basin and that was a subject that was not scheduled for discussion for this Study Session. That was a design feature that CalTrans had planned on putting detention basins in that area. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley asked for the pricing of the alternatives. Mayor Buckley asked for clarification that Alternative 2 was to compress everything into the existing space. Engineering Manager Seumalo confirmed. Councilman Schiffner asked if the alternatives include an efficiency schedule. ../ Ar.ENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF_.1.�__� �'' PAGE FIVE -STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 13, 2004 Engineering Manager Seumalo indicated he had not seen the direct benefits, but the alternatives did include a general description of low, middle, and high. Councilman Schiffner indicated that the original alternatives that were given to Council included a sheet that reflected each movement; and by reviewing that information he had little improvement. Councilman Hickman asked who proposed these particular sites. Engineering Manager Seumalo explained there was a design team that met with CalTrans and the City Design Consultant. Councilman Hickman indicated that his concern on Alternative 11 was if there would be any traffic exited onto Grape Street. Engineering Manager Seumalo explained that Railroad Canyon Road would be the main exit for the freeway and the surface streets would be impacted. Councilman Hickman indicated that it would be simpler to add a clover leaf onto Grape Street and widen the southbound off ramp. Engineering Manager Seumalo indicated that the PSR had been completed the next step was the PR and draft environmental document. He noted the time table in the outline given to Council for this part of the process had no margin for error. Mayor Buckley inquired if there were any cost estimates at this time. Engineering Manager Seumalo indicated that for each alternative there was a rough cost estimate. He listed the cost for each alternative presented to Council. AQENDA ITEM NO. ° p'' PAGE OF PAGE SIX -STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 13, 2004 a. Alternative 2 - $6.5 million. Low level of service. b. Alternative 3b - $8.9 million. Minimum right of way impact and higher level of service on northbound ramps, but low level of service on Summerhill Drive and Lakeshore Drive in the afternoon and CalTrans did not support ramps entering shopping centers, but that did not mean they would not do it. c. Alternative 9 - $13.4 million. Provided high overall level of service, increased level of service at Summerhill Drive and Railroad Canyon Road and a high level of service at the southbound ramps. He noted that at the time of these studies Washington Mutual had not been developed. He noted there was high construction cost and major right -of -way impacts. d. Alternative 10 - $13.3 million. Provided high overall level of service, increased the level of service at Summerhill Drive and Railroad Canyon Road and a high level of service at the southbound ramps. •wo# High construction cost and impact local businesses and a low level of service on northbound ramps. e. Alternative 11 - $38.8 million. Provided a high level of service overall and increased the level of service at Summerhill Drive and Railroad Canyon Road. Higher level of service on the southbound ramps. There was a major right -of -way impact and required new streets and cul -de -sacs and a bridge over the San Jacinto River. Assistant City Manager Best indicated that on Alternative 10 the southbound hook ramp off Interstate 15 led onto Casino Drive, which meant all the traffic going to Canyon Lake, Tuscany Hills, Summerhill, etc. would exit onto Casino Drive and go back up to Railroad Canyon Road and underneath the freeway. , c&-, 1-.9of AGENDA ITEM NO. _.__ _-. PAGE __(Q_ OF� PAGE SEVEN - STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 13, 2004 Councilman Schiffner indicated that the alternatives as shown would help in some ways and cause problems in other ways and would cost a lot of money. He indicated the one alternative he liked and the State did not like although they built several, was the ramp located below Interstate 10, and the entrance into the Ontario Airport. Assistant City Manager Best indicated that Staff would be developing an RFP for the consultants and it would be brought back to Council later this spring. Councilman Magee encourage Staff to look outside the box when working with CalTrans and the Federal government, he indicated that there was unnecessary impact on local businesses. He requested they included Franklin Street, Malaga Street and Olive Street as alternatives. Public Comments Michael O'Neal, 1403 W. Heald Avenue, asked if the value was considered today's value or future growth value. Engineering Manager Seumalo indicated that the anaylsis were good through 2025. The intent was permanent improvement that did not need to be revisited. Don Summers, 30713 Riverside Drive, suggested a Camino Del Norte extension, from Main Street to the Franklin Street Bridge. Edith Stafford, 29700 Hursh Street, suggested concentrating on the other possible streets such as Franklin and Camino Del Norte, which would alleviate a lot of the congestion on Railroad Canyon Road. She commented Staff and CalTrans were trying to solve the problem in the problem location. Regina Lesane, 21031 High Crest Drive, indicated that her family purchased a home in Lake Elsinore in 2000. She suggested having officers at the intersection. She indicated citations could bring money to the community. She suggested widening the lanes that currently exist; and noted it would be AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE _�L..m- OF_1\.s.__ PAGE EIGHT -STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 13, 2004 a mistake to eliminate the local businesses that had supported the community. Ron Rasmussen, indicated that if Summerhill Drive was closed and a bridge was built, considering there was another 250 additional homes to be built in the area it did not make a lot of sense. Tony Schiavone, 780 Lake Street, indicated he noticed the problem with Railroad Canyon Road more than four years ago and he notified the City Manager and spoke with Mayor Brinley. He noted for the past year or so he and his wife had been going to the Murrieta Walmart to avoid the long delays at Railroad Canyon Road. He noted he had suggested to Mayor Brinley and members of Staff that the two lanes making left turns on Grape Street and according to Staff an average of 400 cars per day uses those two lanes; the right hand lane he calculated 5 out of 8 cars did not make a right turn, they continued east. He indicated if the right lane was made right turn only that would pick up another 160 cars per day going to the shopping center, by eliminating one left turn lane on Grape Street, would give two straight lanes going east. He indicated that the signal at Grape Street was red and the other two preceding signals were green, which causes traffic to back up around Mission Trail. He suggested synchronizing the lights to give a continued flow. Councilman Hickman agreed with Mr. Schiavone suggestion. Engineering Manager Seumalo commented that he had discussed with the City Traffic Engineer earlier regarding this Study Session and what Mr. Schiavone had mentioned was the same idea Staff had in place as a temporary solution. The cost would be $950,000 to do the improvements, but the pedestrian sidewalk would be removed on the south side under the freeway to gain an additional lane. He noted there would be a right turn only lane eastbound, two through lanes, and two left turn only lanes at the intersection of Grape Street and Railroad Canyon Road. He indicated the .. 01 r..r' ABEMA ITEM NO. ` a-' _. PAGE __?"_ _ OF _1�_ r-1 PAGE NINE -STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 139 2004 northbound off ramp would be widened to three lanes at the intersection with two right turn only lanes and one left turn through lane. Joe Tunstell, Wildomar, indicated that he owned property in Lake Elsinore. He commented the- property owners east of Interstate 15 had a meeting with the City five years ago to complete some right of ways through the properties to connect to the bridge where the old dump was located. 100% of the property owners that attended the meeting were for the idea of having a frontage road through that area, which would give access from Railroad Canyon Road to Main Street. He indicated that he could not speak for the current property owners. He noted five years ago those right -of -ways would have been donated if the City had put a road in at that time. Assistant City Manager Best indicated there was a meeting several years ago. Staff was still in the process with some of the new developers based on the way the MSHCP had formed in the habitat corridors to review the opportunity from Tuscany towards Camino Del Norte as an extenstion and connector between Main Street and Franklin as well as some of the new development that may be developing in the Ramsgate area to access near the City owned landfill. She noted that was something Staff had interest in for a number of years. Mayor Buckley asked in the Capitol Improvement Budget for 2004/2005 bring back a cost for Camino Del Norte, South Ramsgate, and North Tuscany Traffic Study. Councilman Schiffner commented this was a tremendous problem and the intersection would get a lot worst before it got better. He stated it was problem that would take some time to complete. Councilman Hickman suggested Staff thought outside the box and it would probably take until 2008 or 2009 to get this problem resolved completely. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley commented that she was happy to see this project moving forward. She noted the project would take some time and the goal was to choose the right alternative the first time. AGENDA ITEM \ c.—. At�iiE M NO.G{ OF PAGE _,._1- PAGE TEN -STUDY SESSION- FEBRUARY 13, 2004 ..i✓ Councilman Magee commented the project would take a significant amount of time. He requested that the City Manager's Office on a quarterly basis at the end of the Council Meeting during the informational section provide an update of the project, so that Council and the public would know something had moved forward. Mayor Buckley inquired if it was possible to get drivers in the habit of right only and then two straight lanes, and left turn only; or would it invite accidents. Engineering Manager Seumalo indicated what was being cleared through CalTrans to get the encroachment permit was the design that Staff was going with, so to modify that Staff would need to get CalTrans approval, a concern they might have would be the width of the shoulder by restriping. Councilman Schiffner questioned where the limitation of CalTrans. Engineering Manager Seumalo explained that it was between Grape Street and the ramp. Mayor Buckley commented that Highway 74 and Interstate 15 would be the next big commercial intersection. He noted that Staff needed to be thinking ahead. Community Development Director Brady commented that Staff and CalTrans had been in conversation regarding that intersection. He noted there were several parcels in that area that had been considered redevelopment, that may not be able to be developed. ADJOURNMENT THE CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 6:14 P.M. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE iL OF � E oo_�' PAGE ELEVEN -STUDY SESSION - FEBRUARY 139 2004 THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Respectfully submitted, Frederick Ray, Deputy City Clerk ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGE110A ITEM NO. I� PAGE OF MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, MARCH 4, 2004 CALL TO ORDER The City Council Study Session was called to order by Mayor Buckley at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: BOARDMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, MAGEE, SCHIFFNER, BUCKLEY, BOARDMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Lake & Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Police Chief Walsh, Information /Communications Manager Dennis, Public Works Manager Payne City Treasurer Weber, and City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad. DISCUSSION ITEM Bonds & Other Debt City Manager Watenpaugh noted the planned slide presentation; and indicated that the complete package would be $70.50 for the copies. He introduced Administrative Services Director Pressey, CFD Consultant AGENDA ITEM NO. e-- PAGE ' OF- Page TWo — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 Dennis Anderson, Bond Counsel Don Hunt and Bond Underwriter Tony Weatherby. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that the process of preparing for this study session was very informative and brought him up to speed on the financial obligations of the City and the history of the bond issuances. He explained that during the downturn in real estate the City did financial work -outs to get things back on track, and indicated that with his understanding of the obligations, the future looked very promising. He clarified that debt financing was an important part of municipal government, as it allowed for infrastructure development and the healthy growth of a community. He provided statistics on the recent bond issuances statewide and noted that there were about 60 to 70 bond issuances every day, averaging $27 million for each issuance. He commented that the investors had a choice as to what they would invest in, and stressed the importance of `•r' maintaining a good reputation and having a strong financial team in place. He indicated that the City has a great finance team including Rod Gunn, who could not be present at this meeting, but had been involved in conference calls much of the day; Mr. Tony Weatherby representing Hunter Southwest Securities, who serves as the underwriter; and Bond Counsel Mr. Don Hunt who makes sure all transactions are legal. He stressed that the financial team was protecting the City on new issuances to assure they were feasible for the City and the City was not left holding the bag or faced with more difficult work -outs. He indicated that the presentation would address the 1990 series A Bond issuance, which was $55 million and was known nationally, as it took about eight years to work out. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that he would present a powerpoint presentation of the current debt, debt management best practice used by municipalities and a history of the City's transactions, followed by a period for questions. The power point presentation included: ..i AQ04DA ITEM NO. �` PAGE a OF AO-,, Page Three — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 Slide 1 — Executive Summary of Bond Debt as of June 30, 2003, being $16,260,936 for the City which was mostly a variable rate bond; $72,587,617 for the Redevelopment and $60,375,000 for the Public Finance Authority. He explained that the RDA was mostly bonds, and stressed that the RDA exists to issue debt; because if there were no debt, there would be no tax increment revenue for the Redevelopment Agency. He advised that the PFA debt was related to Community Facilities Districts and Assessment District, because they incurred bonds secured by the land. Slide 2 — Summary of City Administered Bonds including Community Facilities District and Assessment District Bonds, noting that the land and property owners were paying this money back via a lien on the land. He stressed that they were not obligations of the City or its agencies, because they were secured by the property owners. Slide 3 — Summary of Secured Revenue Sources, Debt Service and Reserve Funds, and stressed that each entity was in compliance with the bond covenants. He noted that every year he would review the status of each year with regard to these issues. Slides 4 -5 — City Debt which included a loan of Measure A dollars payable to RCTC, a capital lease for vehicles, and Revenue Bonds in 2000 related to the Stadium. Slide 6 — History of 2000 Revenue Refunding Bonds Series A including the Bond issuances which were part of the refunding, being 1993 PFA Tax Allocation Notes Series B, 1997 Revenue Refunding Bonds and 2000 Revenue Refunding Bonds Series A. Slide 7 — Continued History of 2000 Revenue Refunding Bonds. He 100�1 noted that the bonds were guaranteed via Motor Vehicle License Fees, AGENDA ITEM NO. `' PAGE 3 Of�.,. Page Four — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 -.nor which were AAA rated by Standards & Poor's. He clarified that the State Controller would be directed to pay the trustee directly if the City did not pay. Slide 8 — Continued History of 200 Revenue Refunding Bonds. He explained that the bonds carried a variable rate, which was below 1% most of last year. He further explained that there would be interest only payments until 2005, with the full issuance maturing on February 1, 2032; but noted that the City planned to call certain bonds early based on the current savings from low interest rates. Slide 9 -10 — Public Financing Authority Debt. He advised that there were two types of Public Financing Authority Debt, with one being related to the Redevelopment Agency and the other related to the CFD and Assessment District bonds and noted the balances as shown. He explained that the PFA was a conduit for the financings. Slide 11- 14 — PFA/RDA Debt Relationship. He clarified the relationship between the two agencies with regard to the issuance of debt. Slides 15 -16 — Redevelopment Agency Debt. He advised that there were loans payable to EVMWD, an Owner Participation Agreement for the Outlet Center, a loan payable to the County, the Disposition Development Agreement for Walmart, general fund advances over a six year period, due to struggles, and loans payable to the Public Finance Authority. Slides 17 — 18 — Sources Security Redevelopment Agency Debt Service. He explained the calculation of the base year assessed valuation, the negotiation of tax sharing agreements and the issuance of bonds to incur debt to develop the area. He further explained the 20% State set aside requirement for low and moderate income housing, the pass - through agreements with other agencies and the AGENDA ITEM iNO t _N PACE, OF Page Five — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 balances available to pay the debt service. Slide 19 — Projects Funded by the RDA Debt. He detailed the projects including the Outflow Channel, Bridges over the Outflow Channel, Temporary Boat Ramp, Collier Avenue, Main Street and the Stadium, and noted the difficulty in isolating the debt attributable to each project. Slide 20 - Graph of RDA Debt History from 1990 to 2003. Slide 21 — Chart detailing Agency Debt from fiscal year 1989/90 to 2002/03. Slide 22 — Debt Issues in 1992. He noted that part of this was used to start the Stadium, but the scope of the project later increased. Slide 23 — 24 — Chart depicting Redevelopment Agency Debt and the Performance of the Tax Increment, Debt Service and coverage ratios for the Housing Set -Aside Fund, and Project Areas 1 through 3. He noted the Project Area I had its struggles, but was very healthy as of 2003. He further noted that Project Area II was the healthiest Project Area, but they would all grow as the City moved forward. Slides 25 -27 —Assessment Districts and Community Facilities Districts. He detailed the five existing Assessment Districts, each having related bond issuances. He further detailed the nine existing Community Facilities Districts and their related bond issuances. He explained the purchase of bonds and the repayment of the principle and interest to the bond holders. Slide 28 — Risk to the City. He stressed that the bonds were issued by the PFA and were not obligations of the City. He further stressed that there was a requirement of full disclosure when the bonds were sold. AAA ITEM NO. PAGE—L OF23_ Page Six — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 .�i Slide 29- 33 —Special District Administration. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that Dennis Anderson of Harris & Associates was the District Administrator. Mr. Anderson commented on the role of the Special District Administrators to calculate the special tax levies and assessments each year; and make sure there is enough to cover the debt service payments for each year. He indicated that they also monitored delinquencies as part of their annual report; and prepared pay -off quotes when requested. He advised that over the last five years, the delinquency rates had been significantly reduced due to development and detailed the status of the CFD's. Administrative Services Director Pressey stressed that administering the district was very important in the case of CFD's and Assessment Districts. He further stressed that the City was following procedures, and making sure that the fiduciary responsibilities were being fulfilled. He noted the requirement for annual disclosures on each bond, and explained that the investors were interested in monitoring the debt and receiving reports. He advised that there was also a requirement for an annual independent audit report to confirm the principle and interest payments on each debt, confirm the balance of the debt outstanding and confirm the balance of the assets held. Bond Counsel Don Hunt explained the 1990 series of bonds issued by the Public Finance Authority; in the amount of $55 million, for CFD's. He clarified that at that time, none of the current financial team were involved; but were brought in to deal with the problems that issuance created. He explained that at that time all of the districts were pooled, as there was some uncertainty as to which districts would be purchased by the bonds. He commented that as a result of the problems, the previous bond underwriter was investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Corporations and the Internal Revenue Service; and was no longer in business. He noted that there was a similar story in many California cities at that time, as the prior issuances were based on very aggressive assumptions of growth. He further noted that the 1990's did not .,ter ALMA ITEM NO....l.s�� PAGE OF =.L. Page Seven — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 have strong growth and the general area was hard hit; so by 1995, the bond issue was headed for default, so the City loaned the districts $500,000 to keep from going into default. Unfortunately in 1996, the issuance did default; so in 1996 -97, the current finance team began working on restructuring the 1990 issue, which took eight years to refinance. He noted that only one district remained that was not performing strongly, and the debt was held by the PFA. He indicated that there were no delinquent or defaulted bonds in the City of Lake Elsinore, all bonds were performing and had adequate sources of payment to continue to perform. He stressed that the City had adopted a plan in 1996 and followed the plan to its completion, so all of the issuances were performing strongly, current and in full compliance. Underwriter Toney Weatherby addressed the issues of marketing bonds in Lake Elsinore, starting in 1997. He indicated that marketing the bonds for the refunding was a difficult situation which required a lot of planning, explaining and marketing efforts. He noted that each issuance since 1997 had been difficult, but each was getting a little easier; and the latest issue for the Canyon Hills Development had no penalty associated with the issuance of prior debt and the City had mostly recovered from the liability of the events in 1990. Administrative Services Director Pressey commented that it looked like the City was in a similar position to that of 1990, with healthy growth and construction underway. He stressed that the City had come through a lot and a lot of homes had been built; and noted that Summerhill would not have been built without the restructuring efforts. He indicated that looking forward, the City had a lot going for it, and strategically all of the debt issuances make sense and future ones would not be issued, unless there was an underlying source to pay for them. He noted the additional material provided to the Council including a summary of each debt since 1990, a sample official statement and an example of ongoing disclosures and fiscal agent statements. AGENDA ITEM NO. - -LL .- ..� PACE OF =..z_ Page Eight — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 1,..r Mr. Arnold inquired with respect to the slides and the emphasis that there were not underlying obligations to the City; but there was a point when the land was about to default and the City made the payment to avoid the default. He questioned at what point that would become the risk of the bond holders and people who bought the homes, to pay back the money. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that the obligation was always secured by the real property, but the City stepped up with a loan, in hopes that the foreclosures would occur in time to bring the bonds current. He stressed that the City did not have a legal liability and did not have sufficient resources to make the debt payment; and explained that there was no development going on at that time in the City or the surrounding area. He further explained that the City made the decision that it could not make all of the payments, but wanted to keep the bonds from going into default. Underwriter Weatherby further explained that the City was not liable, but had some responsibility to protect the bonds with the City's name on them. He indicated that much of the benefit from the bonds, was only possible by curing the defaults in the specific areas. Edith Stafford indicated that she was disturbed about the bond situations, specifically the one with Friedman homes, where the public was told that the City had not obligation, but when it failed the City picked it up to protect the City's credit. She questioned the truth of the matter, noting if there was no obligation there should be no reason to bail it out. Bond Counsel Hunt clarified that there was no legal liability to advance the money to prevent the default, but there was a legal liability to take every step possible to protect the bond holders and assure they were paid. He indicated that they were repaid in full on the last leg of the restructuring. Mr. Weatherby compared the situation to the financing associated with the purchase of a home; while there was no liability to repay a mortgage, as it is secured by the value of the house. However, if the payments stop, there will be a foreclosure; so there is an incentive to make payments to protect the investment. A gentleman in the audience inquired how much of the Stadium debt was AWMA ITEM NCO. r N, PAGE U OF A,,,, Page Nine — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 held by the Redevelopment Agency. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that at this point the amount was $15,600,000, with a lease agreement, where the Stadium has lease payments made by the Finance Authority, with the City paying the authority and the authority paying the debt. He explained that the Recreation Authority was a joint agreement between the RDA and the City. The gentleman suggested that the Stadium cost a lot more than the $15,600,000 when it was built. City Manager Watenpaugh clarified that there were RDA funds in the bank when the Stadium was built. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that additionally one of the 1992 notes issued was for the Stadium. Mayor Buckley indicated that there was about $12 million in RDA funds spent and $15 million borrowed to cover the costs and refinancing, so the total was about $27 million. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated it was about $22 million when it was done. Bond Counsel Hunt clarified that there were some debt balloon payments which needed to be refinanced. The gentleman in the audience requested clarification that the only liability for the City was to pay the $500,000 payment; so if a homeowner were to default now, the remedy would be to foreclose on the property. He questioned the decision to pay the $500,000. Bond Counsel Hunt clarified that the property was in bankruptcy at the time, but then the foreclosure proceeded. The gentleman further questioned the foreclosure. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that the foreclosure was on the entire site. Mr. Weatherby noted that in every case, the new landowners ultimately developed the sites. A gentleman in the audience questioned the refunding/refinancing in 1999 for his CFD into the series H bonds. He questioned the justification for rolling the cost of the bonds for multiple CFD's into CFD 98 -1. He suggested that the work out meant the homeowners incurred higher payments. He indicated that the City's financial statements showed a gain, but for the citizens it was a loss. He questioned why the costs were not spread over all of the districts, and how it was believed to be a good deal. Bond Counsel Hunt clarified that the costs were not all allocated to one AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE f ` OF Page Ten — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 issuance, but three separate bond issues starting in 1997, with each taking care of a piece of the problem. City Manager Watenpaugh explained the City's fiduciary responsibility was to the bond holder. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that when the bonds were issued, the agreement set forth the legal responsibility of the bond holders, and the City is obligated to follow procedures. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that when an organization goes through a default and work out, if the result is not positive, nothing gets built. Bond Counsel Hunt clarified the default, and noted that in this case a payment was never made since the bonds were issued in 1990. Mr. Weatherby indicated that North Lake Elsinore was freed up to be developed with a viable plan, but without the restructuring it would not be free to develop. A gentleman in the audience addressed the work out, and indicated that the result for his CFD 98 -1, was that the group of homeowners needed to pay about $25 million more than they would have before the work out. He ..*e questioned why the Marks -Roos requirements for significant financial benefit would not apply in this case. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that the original issue had been done aggressively, and was not the structure that would be used for CFD financing now. He explained that the City had a policy in place since 1996 regarding land based obligations of CFD's and Assessment Districts. He stressed that the same type of program that was done in 1990 would not be allowed, as each district is required to be in a stand -alone pool. He stressed that the pool was part of the program, and Marks -Roos was not used in the restructure. City Manager Watenpaugh noted that efforts were underway to find sources of funds to reduce the debt on that CFD, which was mentioned at the meeting with the CFD 98 -1 property owners. He indicated that there was no guarantee, but it might be possible through the work out. He noted that this matter would be back to Council very soon. A lady in the audience questioned the foreclosure, noting that the property transferred to Abaccy Holding Corporation. She inquired if there was any AGENDA ITEM NO.e�,_„ PAGE. OF . Page Eleven — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 type of revenue received from the sale of the land. She suggested the revenue from the property could pay the bond holders, but it seemed like a step was skipped. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that the intent was to sell to the highest bidder, but it was difficult to sell this property when there were no bidders. He stressed that the City took an aggressive stand to find someone interested in developing, but most found that it would be more expensive to develop the properties. He indicated that the Abaccy payment, up front, was $2.9 million, which went to the trustee for debt payment on the bonds. He stressed that the City tried to get as much out of the restructuring as possible. City Manager Watenpaugh stressed that it was much less than par; and the bondholders /trustees forgave a large part of the penalties and interest. Bond Counsel Hunt stressed that the bondholders were impacted as well; and indicated that in 1997, about $15 million in bonds were repurchased at an average price of 62 %, with the balance being a loss to the bond holders. Chris Hyland questioned what Abaccy paid in the foreclosure. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that it was close to $2.9 million, but he could get the exact number. Mrs. Hyland questioned the price per lot. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated he was not certain of that information, but 27 lots were taken out with some 400 lots in the balance. Mr. Anderson indicated that there were 425 residential lots in addition to commercial lots. Mrs. Hyland commented that at the time it was a very small amount of money. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that the $2.9 million was the only buyer the City could find that was even interested. Councilman Hickman suggested that the amount was about $7,250 per pad. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley indicated that there were back taxes as well as infrastructure included. A lady in the audience noted that it sold for $2.9 million, and inquired if it applied to the principle in any way, or if it was only penalties and interest. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that all of the money went to pay principle and interest on the bonds, because the City was working with the trustee and bondholders committee, and they approved the sale at the suggested price. AGENDA ITEM NO, 1 V PAGE OF Page Twelve — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 -..0' He stressed that the committee participated in the process and approved the sale as the best price they could obtain. City Manager Watenpaugh stressed that the trustees and bond holders had the final say in the sale. The lady further questioned the $2.9 million to the City. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the money came through the City and went straight to the trustee. The lady inquired why the initial amount was refunded. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that the property had not made a single payment after the capitalized funds ran out, so there was accrued interest and penalties. He clarified that it was due to the failure of the Abaccy and Elsinore Hills districts, which depleted the reserve fund. Mr. Arnold inquired with respect to the details of the refinancing, noting that an entry showed reimbursement to developers of about $2.1 million. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that the entry mentioned was with the workout for Abaccy; as there were several millions of additional infrastructure improvements to b e provided so they refunded as much as `001 could be advanced. He noted that at the time of renegotiation with Abaccy, they agreed to take the $2.1 million and forgive the remaining balance from the bond issues, and they were entitled to a portion of the infrastructure cost reimbursement. He advised that they did not get anything near what they had advanced. He reiterated that at the time there was no one else interested in the property. City Treasurer Weber noted the 2003 H Bond underwriter costs. Mr. Weatherby compared the costs to those of a home loan, where there were two fees being the origination costs which deal with the cost of putting the loan together, and the other cost being the points that are paid. He clarified that points were part of the interest rate to the people who buy the bonds. . City Treasurer Weber questioned the $789,000 for the final bill. Mr. Weatherby indicated that was the final compensation for purchasing the bonds and noted that the underwriter takes the responsibility of selling the bonds. He stressed that if the issuance had not closed, it would have been a disaster for the restructuring plan. He further stressed the difficulty of AGENDA ITEM NO. 1_ 6. =.-., PAGE _.L= OF -3 Page Thirteen — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 selling Issue H, as they were only able to sell less than $10 million of the $33 million issuance, but they decided to underwrite the issuance and take the risk of advancing the money. He noted that it turned out that part of the reason it was difficult to sell those bonds was that many of the potential buyers had lost in prior Lake Elsinore issues, so they were not ready to come to the table and loose more money. He reiterated that many were not willing to commit to buying the bonds. He stressed the risk for loses the underwriter took. City Treasurer Weber thanked everyone for being present and for the RDA debt representation. He indicated that Chapter 5 of the material regarding CFD's was really good. He highlighted the past bond issuances and indicated that the final amount owed on the 1990 bonds was about $16,955,000 or a total reduction of about $1 million. He inquired if this reduction was good financial management, or just fixing the previous bad management. Bond Counsel Hunt reiterated that a lot of work in the early 1990's was done on aggressive assumptions of development and growth that did not occur; and stressed that it was not financing the current team would have recommended or done. He indicated that only paying down $1 million was not a wise way to structure, but it was the best the Agency could do during that period. City Treasurer Weber questioned the potential for reissuing the 1999 issue. Mr. Hunt indicated that there were no plans for that at this time. City Treasurer Weber noted that it would be six or seven years before the larger payments were due and the refinancing would start. Mr. Hunt indicated that there was no refinancing scheduled or contemplated because all of the revenue sources were in place, stable and adequate to cover the outstanding debt. He indicated that it should only be refinanced if there was a savings with better interest rates. City Treasurer Weber commented that the 1999 series was sound, but expressed concern with the bigger payments which would be starting soon. Mr. Hunt indicated that the increment was increasing nicely and it should not be a problem. AGENDA ITEM NO _ PAGE OF a Page Fourteen — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 1"./ City Treasurer Weber questioned the 1996 Series E Bonds for City Center, and suggested that it might have been better to take a loan, as it was a small amount of Bonds for a CFD. Mr. Hunt indicated that the developers found it to be a more attractive form of financing. City Treasurer Weber noted that there would be a bond for the apartment complex. Mr. Hunt indicated that the developer did not have Mello Roos available, so they would have to fund it out -of- pocket and would need to raise the prices. City Treasurer Weber noted that the tax increment cost twice as much after 30 years. Mr. Hunt clarified that there was always the ability to prepay at the close of escrow or during the life of the ownership of the property. He noted that a lot of people needed this arrangement to qualify for financing. He indicated that most people did not prepay. City Treasurer Weber noted that banks looked at the entire package. Mr. Hunt indicated that they did not take this type of financing into account when calculating someone's ability to pay. Mr. Weatherby noted that in the early days of Mello-Roos, homeowners did not have the right to prepay special tax obligations, but that has not been the case for several years. He indicated that experience showed that virtually no one paid more to reduce their future tax allocation. He addressed the Canyon Hills issuance, noting that the 30 year fixed rate was 5.82 %, and the home rates were attractive, so it was still very attractive for 30 year permanent financing. He commented that it was a pretty effective way to pay it as part of the purchase of the home. City Treasurer Weber inquired who did the reports to go to the investors. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that the annual disclosure was done by Rod Gunn Associates. City Treasurer Weber suggested that this meant Mr. Gunn was checking his own work. Administrative Services Director Pressey clarified that the fiscal agent statement was issued by Union Bank of California. City Treasurer Weber inquired if the report was sent out to the homeowners, so they could see where their money was going, suggesting it was not a tax, but a loan. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that he was not aware of annual reporting to the homeowners. Bond Counsel Hunt indicated that no City in the State sent out an annual notice; but when property was purchased they were provided information on the special tax and its maximum potential cost. He further indicated that otherwise they AGENDA ITEM) NO. PAGE -=-I- OF �- Page Fifteen - City Council Study Session - March 4, 2004 received an annual tax bill with the actual tax for the district for the year. He commented that every City in the State did it the same way. City Treasurer Weber inquired if there was an audit with regard to refinancing. Mr. Hunt indicated that the City Auditors review the information annually on each and every bond issue, for sources and uses of bonds, etc., as part of the annual audit. Councilman Hickman noted the need for a correction on page 3.25, City Council, as he was not the Mayor Pro Tem as designated. He addressed the RDA Section on Page 4 -3, with the computation of 10 pages. He inquired if the Council would see just the current one in the future. Mr. Pressey confirmed. Councilman Hickman requested that future reports include more identification than just the bond series. Councilman Hickman addressed pass - throughs on page 4 -27 of the redevelopment information; noting that there was the County, Flood Control, EVMWD, Cemetery District, etc. He questioned if they received a percentage of the increment. Mr. Hunt explained that previously State law allowed for a challenge of the adoption of a redevelopment plan based on the financial impact, so Agencies were allowed to negotiate with the project area for some share of the increment. Mr. Hunt indicated that it was for all of the taxing agencies that get a portion of the general property tax. Councilman Hickman inquired if the pass - throughs could be eliminated when the areas were renegotiated. Mr. Hunt clarified that the existing agreements would remain in place, as they were negotiated many years ago. Councilman Hickman indicated that he was attempting to save money for the RDA. Mr. Hunt clarified that the pass - throughs were now statutory, with set formulas. Councilman Hickman questioned page 4.33, table No. 10, and if it was a duplication of 4.30. Administrative Services Director Pressey confirmed that it was the same table, but clarified that it was for a different project area. Councilman Hickman indicated that the information was very interesting and requested that the RDA committee get the complete section on the RDA, to allow them to plan for future growth. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that staff would share the complete breakout in April. Councilman Hickman questioned page 4.30, section no. 2 regarding the cap AGENDA ITEM NO.s PACE OF Page Sixteen — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 \00, of $8 million, and indicated that it was imperative that the cap be raised. He indicated that the RDA Committee needed to work on that, and give consideration to Area 2 with an $8 million cap. He noted the potential for Increases. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the cap in Area 2 was much higher than $8 million annually; and clarified the amount discussed was under the pass - through. Mr. Weatherby clarified the cap and debt service, noting that in 2033, the Agency would have twice the money needed to pay the debt service. Councilman Hickman stressed that he wanted a higher cap to keep money in the City's pockets. City Attorney Weber addressed page 4 -2, Rancho Laguna III and questioned what was being done to fix it. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that it was fine, but they were the struggling project area; noting that in 2003, they had a coverage ratio of .1.11, but were on track to becoming healthy. Councilman Hickman indicated that he was anxious to see the advances payable from the general fund to the RDA. He indicated that he would follow that process very closely and look at administration costs very carefully. City Attorney Leibold noted that tables 7 and 10 should be checked as there seemed to be some duplication. Councilman Hickman questioned how the funding would be protected in the future. Mr. Hunt noted the City's finance policy today vs. the old days when they allowed very large projects to issue all of the bonds up front for the entire project. He stressed that the current policies would not allow for a District to be processed until the property owner had the entitlements. He noted that in the past the bonds were issued before the entitlement process; but no grading had to be underway and construction either imminent or underway. He further noted that it was generally done in much smaller increments. Councilman Hickman questioned the distinction between a CFD and an Assessment District., Mr. Hunt indicated that they were established under completely different statutes. He explained that Assessment Districts were under the 1913 act, which was fairly rigid based on the per lot division of the total amount; and noted that they were designed for very small projects or infill projects, and based on the actual benefit, as determined by an AGENDA ITEM NO _ PAGE ..JJ2. OF —.�-L Page Seventeen — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 engineer. He indicated that CFD's provided more flexibility. Councilman Hickman noted that the CFD was determined by Harris & Associates as the engineer, and inquired if it was related to the specific plan. Mr. Anderson explained the rate and method of taxation, and the current policy which requires a 3 to 1 ratio of value to property. Councilman Hickman inquired if there were slush funds in the CFD's. Mr. Anderson indicated that there were not slush funds in a CFD, and further clarified the appraisals and process. Mayor Buckley requested clarification that there would be no formations until it was known what would be built. Mr. Anderson confirmed that there would need to be a review of the materials presented. Mayor Buckley inquired when the engineers would look at a project. Mr. Anderson indicated that they would generally look at during the tentative map process. Bond Counsel Hunt noted that in addition to the appraisal, they would look at reasonable costs to be sure there is an absorption review vs. the value of the property. He stressed that there were a number of safeguards. Mr. Weatherby clarified that with the rate and apportionment, it was important to have the final maps for processing, and noted that even final maps can expire or be modified. He indicated that it was important to look at the planned development or anything which could occur on the site. Mayor Buckley clarified that the CFD would not be set up until there was an approved map. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the Council had done so. Mr. Hunt confirmed that they might if they had a development agreement that was pre- approved. Mayor Buckley questioned if development agreements had requirements for formation of a CFD, why they would go into the details of a CFD if they did not know what would be built. Mr. Weatherby indicated that they evaluated each issuance on its own merits; but every property considered had some level of entitlement. He clarified that the current methodology was to do the issues much later in the development process. He stressed the importance of looking at the big picture and the potential benefits for the community. Mayor Buckley inquired in general if consideration of a CFD prior to any map would be back- sided. Mr. Weatherby indicated that-they would not look at a CFD AGENDA ITEM No- PACE -13 OF.-� Page Eighteen — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 without any maps or plans for a project. City Treasurer Weber inquired how many CFD's would be considered this year. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that there were a few in the works right now. Mr. Weatherby indicated that he doubted there would be Canyon Hills deals this year. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that he foresaw Costco, DEH, Laing Homes, Corman -Leigh and the City Center Townhomes. Councilman Hickman stressed he wanted to make sure the RDA committee got the information, noting that the new cap was his number one priority. Councilman Schiffner commended Administrative Services Director Pressey on his work, noting that he came to the City with an illustrious background, but had only been here a short time. He indicated that he was impressed by the specific knowledge he had gained on the City's financing to date. He commended him on his efforts. Councilman Magee also commended Mr. Pressey on his work on the material presented, noting that it was very thorough and comprehensive. He noted the availability of the document at City Hall and distribution to the RDA committee, and suggested making it available for review at the library. He indicated that he could also make his copy available for review, if it was returned. He indicated that it was very enlightening, but noted that he had a few questions. He addressed page 4 -3 and indicated that if he was to understand that everything on that page had been retired. Mr. Pressey confirmed, except for the 1995 bond series; and noted that the current outstanding debt was of the PFA and RDA. Councilman Magee addressed the bottom of page 4 -6 regarding the DDA for Camelot, noting that he saw the number $93,750 four times. Mr. Pressey explained that the DDA agreement was for the developer to incur costs in developing the K -Mart site and as a reimbursement the Agency agreed to pay them a set amount, similar to the Walmart arrangement over a certain threshold. He further explained that those were actual payments, based on audited financial statements. Councilman Magee clarified that the RDA was paying the $93,000 per year for the infrastructure they put in. Mr. Pressey confirmed. City Attorney Leibold clarified that the agreement had been terminated and AQEIDA iTE[vi vv r. IV 1�3 PAGE I t 0 OF � Page Nineteen — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 the Agency had stopped making payments when the owner was in default. Councilman Magee addressed page 4 -8, noting six different entries for advances payable - general fund. Mr. Pressey explained that the general funds had been advanced each year after approval by the Council. He explained that in general the RDA needed the funds to make the debt services obligations. Councilman Magee inquired if those funds were to be paid back. Mr. Pressey confirmed. Councilman Magee addressed page 4- 16, noting that the Chairman information should be corrected. Mr. Pressey confirmed, noting that it was part of the 1995 issuance. Councilman Magee questioned page 5 -22 and the developer listed in CFD 88 -3, noting that Forecast Homes showed a significant delinquency rate. Mr. Pressey confirmed the delinquency rate. Mr. Anderson clarified the developer column vs. the private property ownership, noting that the majority was from private property owners last year. Councilman Magee questioned if the property owners were notified of delinquencies. Mr. Anderson indicated that there were reminder letters to the individual property owners as well as Forecast Homes. Councilman Magee expressed hopes that the number of delinquencies would go down. Councilman Hickman addressed the CFD delinquency rate in Tuscany Hills, and expressed concerns about the future and suggested slowing the process down a bit. Mr. Anderson concurred that was a factor to consider. Councilman Magee noted page 5 -30, regarding CFD 95 -1, Oak Grove Equities and commented that there was no delinquency rate and it was fully paid back. He indicated that was work done correctly. He addressed page 5 -39 and indicated that the breakdown of service providers was a very effective tool and a good addition to the document. He pointed out the chart of delinquency rates on page 5 -52, noting that the delinquency rate for 2002/03 was 1.0% and commented that he felt good about that low rate. He thanked staff for their efforts on this comprehensive presentation and commented that it should have been done earlier. He suggested that people could glean a lot of information from the document, and indicated that he AGENDA ITEM NO. ` PAGE OF- ---L —� Page Twenty — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 ..,r would like staff to use this presentation as a base to be updated and added to in the future. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley thanked everyone involved and particularly Administrative Services Director Pressey for this presentation. She commented to Mr. Hunt that the work out with the financial team actually started after events nearly 14 years ago. She stressed that none of that Council was still involved, nor involved in the work out. She reiterated the 1% delinquency rate, and noted that the valuation of land had increased by 25 %. She addressed the comments by Mr. Arnold regarding concerns with CFD 90 -1 and inquired into the timing of potential solutions. Mr. Hunt indicated that the potential assistance would occur when the final bond restructuring phase was complete. He indicated that only one district was in default, but it carried no bonds; and explained that the intent on the North Lake Elsinore part of the pool, would be to turn it around with a developer, so the money could go to reduce the liabilities of 98 -1. He commented that it would be a Council decision, but the money would not be obligated for any other purpose. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley inquired of the residents if they had gone back and looked at their documents to find out if the information was included. Mr. Arnold indicated that they went through the documents and interviewed 150 residents, and very few were aware of the district. He noted that they found various factors in their packets, but not all of them included enough to calculate the tax. He further indicated that second buyers of homes were only aware of 90 -11, when they got 98 -1; and suggested it should have shown up in the title search. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley noted that the City was not responsible for it not being in the title report. She addressed the circumstances of that district and reiterated that there were no other interested buyers for the property. She inquired if there were other options at that time. Mr. Hunt indicated that the options were to do nothing, or institute foreclosure. He further indicated that they brought it up periodically for foreclosure sale, and noted the impacts on the RDA and the ability to develop. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley noted that the Council took action to get the property back on the tax rolls, per the advise of the finance team. She questioned the 20% set - aside, and what was owed to that fund. AGENDA ITEM L16- _ ,N PAGE OF_�._ Page Twenty -One — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that he was not certain, but believed about $3 million, or more. City Attorney Leibold indicated that her recollection was that the debt was between $7 and $8 million to the housing fund. She explained that the money had accrued because the money was deposited, but those funds were secured and expended to cover debt service. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley thanked the financial team for working the City out of situations from 14 years ago. Councilman Schiffner noted that a friend of his lived in the development of concern and was upset about the taxes, however he said the equity in his house had gone up $200,000 in the same period of time. Mayor Buckley thanked everyone for attending this meeting and addressed the set - aside. He indicated that he did not see the set -aside in the RDA debt. �-� Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that it was not summarized in this packet, as he had not analyzed the split between project areas and who owed what. Mayor Buckley suggested that the debt was close to $80 million, if the debt to self was included. City Attorney Leibold clarified what would be recognized as debt. Mayor Buckley questioned if Walmart were to close would the City still pay them money. City Manager Watenpaugh clarified that Walmart is reimbursed out of the revenue they generate. Mayor Buckley inquired why there was not a list of specific money owed them. City Manager Watenpaugh clarified that the City knew how much was owed to them, but the agreement would terminate in 10 to 15 years, and at that time if they are not fully paid, the balance would be forgiven. City Attorney Leibold clarified the RDA debt from tax increment. Mayor Buckley commented that the structure was significantly different now, as there is not set amount. Administrative Services Director Pressey clarified that there was about a $2.2 million loan from Walmart and $2.2 from Oak Grove, for a 20 year commitment; so the obligation would end at the 20t' year. He explained the payment schedule and the calculation for each year. Mayor Buckley addressed the RDA owing money to the City and suggested it was about $9 million. Staff confirmed. Mayor Buckley commented that it was 1 /3 rd interest and fees, and inquired if it assisted the AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE .Z t OF Page Twenty -Two — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 City to charge interest and fees, other than showing it as a growing asset. City Attorney Leibold indicated that it depended on the terms, and when or if the City is demanding payment. She reiterated that if the RDA had no debt, it would collect no increment. She indicated that if the City believed that it was better to incur debt and spend it on other project, it would defer payment, but interest would still accrue. Mayor Buckley noted the 2002- 03 fiscal year and the amount of $900,000, he suggested that the related interest and fees was something that should be looked at in the near future. He questioned if the Summerhill residents paid for more than the infrastructure in Summerhill. Mr. Hunt indicated that to his knowledge they did not, but the previous property owner had not paid their share on the 1990 bonds, so those additional costs had to be paid as part of the restructure. Mayor Buckley questioned how much of the $2.9 million was saved in the restructure. Mr. Hunt clarified that the bondholders and trustees believed it was the best deal to sell the property at the proposed price. Mayor Buckley questioned if the money went to pay the debt. Mr. ,M01 Hunt clarified that it went to debt service, and explained the outstanding debt and the portion of the reserve fund that was drawn down. Mayor Buckley clarified that no other City provided information on an annual basis, so on Summerhill, Lake Elsinore was the first City to advise them annually. He noted that the CFD's were relatively complex, somewhat misunderstood and relatively undisclosed; and commented that everyone needed to know what was going on. Mayor Buckley questioned CFD financing on pages 12 and 13, noting that very little principle had been paid on either area. He stressed that at some point principle had to be paid, and questioned plans to pay more on the principle. Mr. Weatherby addressed the slide regarding the Canyon Hills Assessment District and explained the history of that issue. He indicated that the builder had advanced the funding for Railroad Canyon Road. He explained that in 1992 when the issue started the property was appraised at $54 million, but in 1993, the property was reappraised and had dropped in value by 50 %, so at that point the land owner decided to sell to regular investors. At that time $9 million in bonds were sold to Pardee Construction for warehousing, which were restricted so they could not sell the bonds until there was an increase in the value and the I ..ter AGENDA ITEM NO.._._...� PAGE 0 �'4� -.--�- Page Twenty -Three — City Council Study Session — March 4, 2004 property was developed. He noted that there was no reserve fund for the bonds that were sold internally, but when the bonds were refunded, the reserve was reinstituted and the bond schedule went up. Mayor Buckley addressed the CFD 88 -3 Series B bonds, noting the principle had never been touched. Mr. Hunt explained that it was starting now, as when the projects were restructured it had not been built out, and a lot of the issues had no amortization plans. Administrative Services Director Pressey noted pages 3 -34 and 3 -35, which were amortization schedules, which showed the first principle payment in 2006. Mayor Buckley inquired if the expectation that there would be enough money to cover the debt service, without using the 20% set -aside for debt service. Administrative Services Director Pressey suggested this explanation was best left to the budget study session, when the whole budget for next year was known. Mayor Buckley thanked everyone for attending, and noted that the meeting was helpful and informative. ADJOURNMENT THE CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:56 P.M. THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR AGENDA ITEM NO. I 1 6 PAW 2- 3 c, �)- 3 9 MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, MARCH 9, 2004 CALL TO ORDER The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Buckley at 5:16 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, MAGEE, SCHIFFNER, And BUCKLEY NONE Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Pressey, Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Lake & Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Information /Communications Manager Dennis, Public Works Manager Payne, City Treasurer Weber and City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) Property: Assessor Parcel Numbers 347 - 330 -045, 347 - 330 -046, 347 -330- 051, 347 - 330 -50, 347 - 330 -052, 347 - 330 -053, 347 - 330 -019, 347 - 360 -004, 347 - 360 -005, 347 - 360 -03, 347 - 250 -006, 347 - 250 -007; 347 - 250 -008, 347- 350 -003; 347 - 350 -014; 347- 350 -015; 347 - 360 -006 and 347 - 360 -007 AGENDA ITEM NO..�C PAGE OF_�Q�,. Page Two — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Negotiating parties: Wasson Canyon Investments, L.P., A California Limited Partnership, South Shore Properties, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, the Treasurer of the County of Riverside and the City of Lake Elsinore Under negotiation: terms of payment B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -- ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b)(3)(C) of Gov't Code Section 54956.9. (1 Case) City Attorney Leibold announced the Closed Session Items as listed above. THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED TO CLOSED SESSION AT 5:18 P.M. The Closed Session discussion was completed at 6:55 p.m. RECONVENE IN PUBLIC SESSION (7:00 P.M.) Mayor Buckley reconvened the Regular City Council Meeting in Public Session at 7:09 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Diane Sessions, representing Southwest Riverside Economic Development Council. INVOCATION - MOMENT OF SILENCE Mayor Buckley led the meeting in a moment of silent reflection. PRESENTATIONS /CEREMONIALS a. Proclamation - Beverly Mumphrey. -.001 AWNDA ITEM NO.,,,, PAGE a OF� Page Three — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Mayor Buckley read and presented the Proclamation to Beverly Mumphrey, recognizing her contributions and efforts on behalf of HOPE. Mrs. Mumphrey commented that it did not seem right to get an award for doing the work she loved. She stressed the dedication of all of the HOPE volunteers. b. Proclamation - Connie Whittaker Memorial. Mayor Buckley read and presented the Memorial Proclamation for Connie Whittaker to Donna Morin. Ms. Morin indicated that she was proud to accept the Proclamation on behalf of Connie, her friends and the organizations she worked so hard to assist, and noted that she would be sorely missed. C. Proclamation - Burger King. Mayor Buckley read and presented the Proclamation to Oscar Obligacion, Manager of Burger King and recognized his assistance with the Support the Troops rallies. Mr. Obligacion thanked the City and indicated that Burger King would do all they could to assist in supporting the troops. d. Proclamation - Lake Elsinore Elk's Lodge - 25th Anniversary. Mayor Buckley read and presented the Proclamation commemorating the 25'h anniversary of the Lake Elsinore Elk's Lodge to Councilman Hickman on behalf of the Elks. Councilman Hickman accepted the Proclamation and noted that he had been a member for about five years. He commented that he joined the organization due to his appreciation of the charity work they do for children. He thanked the Council for this recognition and noted that the actual ceremony would be next Tuesday. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Leibold reported that the City Council met to consider the two items A ITEM NO. ..._.- C-.-- PAGE O Page Four — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 •..r as listed on the agenda, with no reportable action. PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON - AGENDIZED ITEMS -1 MINUTE Robert Askins, 16899 Sannelle Street, requested that the City Council consider naming the fishing beach area in memory of Bill "Whiskers" Tucker, noting that he had about 200 signatures in support of that request. He stressed Mr. Tucker's generosity to the community. Mayor Buckley requested that the petition be presented to the City Clerk. Donna Morin, representing the Historical Society, thanked the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District for their generous donation to the Historical Society toward renovation of the Cultural Center basement. Lorraine Watts, 210 N. Scrivener, noted that she had missed a couple of meetings, but listening to the meetings at home was quite a chore. She indicated that the S"W'' audio of the meetings was horrible, and tall people at the podium could not be heard at all. She expressed hopes that the sound issues could be corrected, so the meetings could be heard at home as well. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items were pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion and consideration: Item Nos. 4, 5, and 7. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. ` 1. The following Minutes were approved: a. City Council Study Session - January 29, 2004. AGENDA ITEM NO.�_ PAGE (�" OF Page Five — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 b. City Council Study Session - February 19, 2004. C. City Council Study Session - February 24, 2004. d. Regular City Council Meeting - February 24, 2004. The following Minutes were received and ordered filed: e. Planning Commission Meeting - February 17, 2004. 2. Ratified Warrant List for February 26, 2004. 3. Received and ordered filed the Investment Report for January, 2004. 6. Awarded Bid Award for Motor Control Centers to Brewster Electric, in the amount of $65,292. 8. Award Bid for the 2003/2004 Equipment Replacement Program for two Tractors to Cook Equipment, in the amount of a $3,251.50 /month lease. 9. Awarded Bid for the Contract of Asphalt Maintenance to Hardy & Harper, in the amount of $72,100. 10. Awarded Bid for the Contract for Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Maintenance to NPG Corporation, in the amount of $6,750. 11. Awarded Bid for the Contract for Unpaved Road Maintenance to Hardy & Harper, in the amount of $5,920. PUBLIC HEARINGS 21. Tentative Tract Map 32008 - Lakeshore Village Specific Plan - Corman Leigh Communities. Mayor Buckley opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. ..;C-'„_ -"* PAGE--5--0;:,-C-'5 Page Six — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 rn Community Development Director Brady explained this item, noting the Specific Plan approval in 2003. He detailed the location of the project near Four Corners, and noted that this was the Tentative Map for a portion of the Specific Plan. He advised that the tract would be divided into 170 Iots averaging just over 4,000 square feet, and two commercial lots. He explained that the Specific Plan standards had been adopted previously and noted that there were only minor concerns and issues with the adjacent business owner, which had been addressed by staff. Chuck Treatch, representing Corman Leigh Communities, indicated that he was present to answer questions regarding the project, and advised that they were in concurrence with the proposed Conditions of Approval. Mayor Buckley asked those persons interested in this item to speak. The following person spoke: Planning Commissioner Dan Uhlry, 103 W. Flint St., noted that this item was before the Planning Commission and he had met with Mrs. Wilsey and the developer on site to walk the property lines and discuss the concerns. He indicated that all parties now felt the buffer between the project and the adjacent business were sufficient to address the concerns. Mayor Buckley closed the public hearing at 7:24 p.m. Councilman Magee commended Commissioner Uhlry for his diligence in meeting on the site with the property owners; and noted the presence of Mrs. Wilsey at this meeting. He commented that the developer was taking a chance with this challenging piece of infill development; and indicated that they had come up with a design to compliment the site. He indicated that while there were lots as small as 3,800 square feet, it fit the neighborhood and he was very much in favor of it. Councilman Hickman noted that the project would be a private community with a homeowners association to maintain the roads, park clubhouse and AQM- A FTEM No : 1 A*-- Page Seven — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 pools. He expressed support of the project. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley inquired about the time line for the development. Mr. Treatch indicated that they would start work on the working drawings tomorrow and it would in plan check in six to eight weeks. He further indicated that they would hope to have the grading permit by August 1St, and in design review in the next 30 days. He suggested that they would be starting models in late September. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley questioned if they would be putting signage on the property of what was to be developed. Mr. Treatch confirmed. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley reiterated that it would be a gated project, with a Homeowners Association, and detailed the amenities. She commented that it was a very desirable project and she felt it would sell quickly. She inquired into the possible costs of the homes. Mr. Treatch indicated that they were anticipated to go for about $250,000, but that could change by September. Councilman Schiffner commented that most people in Lake Elsinore were divided on the subject of development, but the majority favored development. He indicated that he supports development and envisions Lake Elsinore as a place where everyone in California will like to live. He commented that this was an outstanding project, on land that has been vacant for a long time. He noted that it would be a nice community with small lots and a level of security with the gated concept. He commented that it was an outstanding project and they had made changes to accommodate the potential problems. Mayor Buckley noted that he had previously voted against this project, but commended Corman Leigh for working with the property owners and staff on the modifications. He indicated that the lot sizes were a little bigger and Mrs. Wilsey was happy. He questioned the traffic signal. Community Development Director Brady indicated that the traffic signal was required across from Stater Brothers. Mr. Treatch confirmed that the traffic signal would be in line with the main entry to this project and the driveway at Stater Brothers. Mayor Buckley inquired when the traffic signal would be AGENDA ITEM NO. "-` PAGE OF Page Eight — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 installed. Mr. Treatch indicated that it would be installed by 20% build out, which would probably be the first quarter of next year. Mayor Buckley indicated that he would not be voting against the project, but he was not in favor of it, due to the lots being smaller than 5,000 square feet. He commended them on their efforts to work with the community. MOVED BY KELLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 4 TO 0 WITH BUCKLEY ABSTAINING TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32008, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: FINDINGS 1. TTM No. 32008, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan and the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). The project is consistent with the designated land use planning areas, development and design standards, and all other appropriate requirements contained in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan, General Plan, and City Municipal Code. 2. The effects that TTM No. 32008 are likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. The project is consistent with the City's General Plan and Lakeshore Village Specific Plan, will provide necessary public services and facilities, will pay all appropriate fees, and will not result in any adverse environmental impact. AGENDA ITEM NO._ `C. PAGE OF�� Page Nine — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 3. The design of TTM No. 32008 provides to the greatest extent possible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision. (Governmental Code Section 66412.3) The project will comply with all appropriate conservation requirements of the City and Uniform Building Code. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PLANNING DIVISION General Conditions 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 32008 will expire two years from date of approval unless within that period of time a Final Map has been filed with the County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. Additional extensions of time (36 months maximum time per the Subdivision Map Act) may be granted per City Council approval. 2. Future development shall comply with those standards and guidelines contained in the Specific Development Plan, Circulation Plan, Infrastructure and Public Facilities Plan, Development Regulations, Design Guidelines, and Implementation Plan, and conditions of approval established with the 2003 Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. 3. Tentative Tract Map No. 32008 shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and applicable requirements contained in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan document and the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 4. The applicant shall participate in the City of Lake Elsinore Citywide Landscaping and Street Lighting District, as appropriate. 5. The applicant shall provide all project- related onsite and offsite improvements as described in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan document and Tentative AQMA ITEM NO. I -_( PAGE nF Page Ten — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 ..o► Tract Map No. 32008. 6. The applicant shall implement those mitigation measures identified in the 2003 Lakeshore Village Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. 7. All future proposals shall be reviewed by the City on a project -by- project basis. If determined necessary by the Community Development Director or designee, additional environmental analysis will be required. 8. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, Agents, and its Consultants from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Officials, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning implementation and construction of the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, or proceeding, the applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 9. Provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance shall be satisfied during all site preparation and construction activity. Site preparation activity and construction shall not commence before 7:00 AM and shall cease at 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Construction activity shall not take place on Saturday, Sunday, or any Legal Holidays. I O.The applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department. AGENDA.. _� �C- ..� PAGE OF--LL L 0011- Page Eleven — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Prior to Final Tract Map Approval 11.All lots shall comply with applicable standards contained in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan document, LEMC, or Zoning Code. 12.A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided per the LEMC. 13.Street names within the subdivision shall be approved by the Community Development Director or Designee. 14.All of the improvements shall be designed by the applicant's Civil Engineer to the specifications of the City of Lake Elsinore. 15.Future construction shall meet all Riverside County Fire Department standards for fire protection and any additional requirements requested by the County Fire Department (refer to attached). 16.The applicant shall annex into the City -Wide Community Facilities District for Police, Fire, and Paramedics (CFD 2003 -01). 17.Prior to approval of the Final Map or if deemed appropriate by the Engineering Manager, prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a Homeowner's Association, approved by the City, recorded, and in place. All Association documents shall be approved by City Planning and Engineering and the City Attorney and recorded, such as the Articles of Incorporation for the Association; and Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC &Rs). At a minimum, the CC &Rs shall include language to ensure the following conditions: • The HOA shall maintain landscaping along parkways and project streets, recreational facilities, walkways, and drainage improvements. • The HOA shall maintain all streets, entry gates, walls, and monumentation. AGENDA ITEM NO. N`, PAGE OF Page Twelve — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 • The HOA or a separate independent security patrol shall be responsible for enforcing the on- street parking on only one side of those affected project streets that are identified in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan. Prior to Design Review Approval 18.All future structural development associated with the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan and TTM No. 32008, including building designs, recreational facilities, landscaping improvements, site plans, etc. shall require separate Design Review approval, as appropriate. 19.The applicant shall provide all recreational facilities and amenities including play equipment found at the proposed play lots. 20.Prior to Design Review approval, the applicant shall show how the following fire mitigation measures are met: • The applicant shall participate in the Development Impact Fee Program as adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore, as appropriate. • All water mains and fire hydrants shall be constructed in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 and/or No. 787.1. • Prepare a Fire Protection/Vegetation Management Plan for Fire Department approval. • The Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for implementing the Fire Protection/Vegetation Management Plan. The project shall provide an alternate or secondary access. Prior to Grading Permit Issuance 21.The applicant shall obtain all necessary State and Federal permits, approvals, or AOEMA ITEM NO. - I ` L_ I PAGE_ OF Page Thirteen — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 other entitlements, where applicable, prior to each phase of development of the proj ect. 22.Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit a final grading plan, subject to all requirements of the City Grading Ordinance to the Engineering Manager for approval. Said grading plan shall address those grading standards and guidelines contained in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan document. 23.Grading shall not be permitted outside the area of the designated project boundary unless appropriate approvals have been obtained. 24.Grading easements shall be coordinated with affected property owners. �— 25.Prior to issuance of a grading permit, grading and construction plans shall incorporate erosion control measures. 26.Any alterations to the topography, ground surface, or any other site preparation activity will require appropriate grading permits. A Geologic Soils Report with associated recommendations will be required for grading permit approval, and all grading must meet the City's Grading Ordinance, subject to the approval of the Engineering Manager and the Planning Division. Analysis of impacts of fills and cuts greater than 60 feet shall be provided. Interim and permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond 100 percent for material and labor for one year for erosion control landscaping at the time the site is rough graded. Prior to Building Permit Issuance 27.The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Redevelopment Agency, acceptable to Agency Counsel, to either provide affordable units in accordance with Section 33413 (b) (2) of the California Community Redevelopment Law, appropriate in -lieu fees, or a combination of both. AQENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF Page Fourteen — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 14000 28.The applicant shall pay all appropriate traffic impact mitigation fees. 29.The applicant shall comply with the following City programs: the City Source Reduction and Recycling Element and Household Hazardous Waste Element, the County Solid Waste Management Plan and Integrated Waste Management Plan. 30.Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall submit a letter of verification (will -serve letter) to the Engineer Manager, for all required utility services. 31.The applicant shall meet all requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). 32.The applicant shall pay applicable fees and obtain proper clearance from the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) prior to issuance of building N..r permits. 33.Pay all applicable fees including park fees. 34.The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot within any subdivision. No service laterals shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be delineated on engineering sewer plans and profiles for submittal to the EVMWD. 35.The applicant (master developer) shall prepare a Community -Wide Wall Plan for the entire TTM No. 32008 area. 36.Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall prepare a Final Wall and Fence Plan for the Detached Single- Family Residential Planning Area addressing the following: • Show that a decorative masonry block wall shall be constructed along all AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE__L L 0F_ + Page Fifteen — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 boundaries of the Detached Single Family Residential Planning Area of the TTM 32008 site. • Show materials, colors, and heights of side yard fences for proposed lots. • Show that all front return walls shall be decorative masonry block walls. Front return wood fences shall not be permitted. • Show that side walls for corner lots shall be decorative masonry block walls. 37.The applicant shall submit plans to the electric utility company for a layout of the street lighting system. The cost of street lighting, installation as well as energy charges shall be the responsibility of the applicant and/or the HOA. Said plans shall be approved by the City and shall be installed in accordance with the City Standards. 38.The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing electric utility company. 39.The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing gas utility company. 40.The applicant shall meet all requirements of the providing telephone utility company. 41.A bond is required guaranteeing the removal of all trailers used during construction. 42.Future signage requires a permit and shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to installation. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy Issuance � 43.Throughout construction, as deemed appropriate by the City and the applicant, AGENDA ITEM NO. `C• N, PAGE.. OF Page Sixteen — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 fugitive dust suppression along Lakeshore and Walnut Drives, and other connecting roads shall be applied to minimize fugitive dust generation. Fugitive dust suppression techniques may include soil watering, application of soil binders, and/or placement of gravel or other appropriate material to minimize vehicle generated dust. 44.The applicant shall install signs along those appropriate project streets as shown in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan to ensure parking is permitted on only one side and to prohibit on- street parking. Location of said signs shall require approval by the Engineering Manager. 45.The applicant shall paint the curbs red for those sides of the streets that prohibit on- street parking. ENGINEERING DIVISION 1.r►' 46.All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to final map approval. 47.All Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees shall be paid (LEMC 16.34, Resolution 85 -26). 48.A "Will Serve" letter shall be submitted to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project. Letter shall be submitted prior to Final Map Approval. 49.All public works improvements shall be constructed per approved street plans (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). 50.Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of public works improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds, prior to final map approval. •.r►' AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF Page Seventeen — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 51.Applicant shall pay all fees and meet requirement of encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of public works improvements (LEMC 12.08 and Resolution 83 -78). 5 LApplicant shall dedicate right -of -way along Lakeshore Drive consistent with the General Plan Circulation element requirement of 60 ft. half width right -of- way (as measured from the centerline to the project property line) for an urban arterial. 52.Street `T' (project entrance) shall be opposite the main entrance to Stater Brother's Shopping Center. 53.Sidewalks on private streets must meet ADA standards. 55.Walnut Drive shall be constructed to a collector street cross section width. Walnut Drive shall be paved for two (2) travel lanes from tract boundary to Fraser Drive. Walnut Drive shall provide an entrance drive at the bulb end of the cul -de -sac to allow access to the existing easement extending north from the Walnut Drive cul -de -sac. 56.The circulation improvements shall be constructed as described in Exhibit 6 -A in the Lakeshore Village Specific Plan Traffic Impact Analysis (see attached). Traffic signal at Stater Brother's Central Driveway and Main Entrance shall be operational at 20% build out. 57.Applicant shall design and construct a raised landscaped median along the frontage of Lakeshore Drive, subject to the approval of the Engineering Manager. 58.The entrance driveway aisles shall be designed so that at least 40 ft. is available between the street curb and the first parking stall in order to provide adequate on -site storage for entering vehicles. 10� 59.All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie AQENDA ITEM NO. `�`` PAGE OF Page Eighteen — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 notes delineated on 8-1/2" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved. 60.Applicant shall obtain all necessary off -site easements for off -site grading from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval. 61.Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 62.Applicant shall provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County Fire. 63.Applicant shall provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street improvement plans as required by the Engineering Manager. `-we 64.Applicant shall install blue reflective pavement markers in the street at all fire hydrant locations. 65.Applicant shall submit a traffic control plan showing all traffic control devices for the tract to be approved prior to final map approval. All traffic control devices shall be installed prior to final inspection of public improvements. This includes No Parking and Street Sweeping Signs for streets within the tract. 66.All improvement plans and tract maps shall be digitized. At Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall submit tapes and/or discs which are compatible with City's ARC Info /GIS or applicant to pay $30 per sheet for City digitizing. 67.All utilities except electrical over 12 KV shall be placed underground, as approved by the serving utility. 68.Applicant shall obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to building permit issuance. A grading plan signed and stamped by a California AGENDA ITEM NO. i • Cam=... PAGE, of ` .+ Page Nineteen — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Registered Civil Engineer shall be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the Engineering Manager. If the grading is less than 50 cubic yards and a grading plan is not required, a grading permit shall still be obtained so that a cursory drainage and flow pattern inspection can be conducted before grading begins. 69.Applicant shall provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. 70.An Alquist - Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults and/or liquefaction zones present on -site. In the event the project is unaffected by any fault zone, developer shall provide a document certified by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or Licensed Geologist identifying -^ the site as being outside the fault zone. 71.All grading shall be done under the supervision of a Geotechnical Engineer and he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion control. All manufactured slopes greater than 30 feet in height shall be contoured. 72.Individual lot drainage shall be conveyed to a storm drain facility and conveyed to the public storm drain system. Any non - historic storm flows shall be accepted by adjacent property owners with a notarized and recorded letter of drainage acceptance or conveyed to a drainage easement. 73.0n -site drainage facilities located outside of road right -of -way should be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating: "Drainage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions ". 74.All natural drainage traversing site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the Engineering Manager. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF Page Twenty — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 ..01 75. Submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by Engineering Manager and the Riverside County Flood Control District prior to approval of final map. Applicant shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion caused by development of site and diversion of drainage. 76.All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards. 77.Storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately stenciled to prevent illegal dumping in the drain system, the wording and stencil shall be approved by the Engineering Manager. 78.Roof and yard drains will not be allowed to outlet through cuts in the street curb. Roof drains should drain to a landscaped area whenever feasible. 79.Ten (10) year storm runoff should be contained within the curb and the 100 - year storm runoff should be contained within the street right -of -way. When either of these criteria is exceeded, drainage facilities should be installed. 80.A drainage acceptance letter will be necessary from the downstream property owners for outletting the proposed storm water run -off on private property. 81 .Applicant shall be subject to all Master Planned Drainage fees and will receive credit for all Master Planned Drainage facilities constructed. 82.Applicant will be required to install BMP's using the best available technology to mitigate any urban pollutants from entering the watershed. 83.Applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for their storm water pollution prevention plan including approval of erosion control for the grading plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall provide a SWPPP for post construction which describes BMP's that will be implemented for the development and including maintenance responsibilities. AGENDA ITEM NO. - .v C-1 -N' PAGE 20 pE Page Twenty -One — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 84. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be provided to residents of the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers as well as other environmental awareness education materials on good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of stormwater quality and meet the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside county NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 85.Applicant shall provide for flush BMP's using the best available technology that will reduce stormwater pollutants from parking areas and driveway aisles. 86.Intersection site distance shall meet the design criteria of the CALTRANS Design Manual (particular attention should be taken for intersections on the inside of curves). If site distance can be obstructed, a special limited use easement must be recorded to limit the slope, type of landscaping and wall 1` placement. 87.Applicant shall provide a traffic study prepared by a traffic engineer to determine the traffic volume and the impacts on intersections in the vicinity and freeway on and off ramps prior to final map approval, subject to the approval of the Engineering Manager. 88.Access shall be restricted on Lakeshore Drive and Walnut Avenue and so noted on the final map. No residential lot shall have frontage onto Lakeshore Drive or Walnut Avenue. 89.All parcels shall have access to public right -of -way or be provided with a minimum 30 -foot ingress and egress easement to public right -of -way by separate instrument or through map recordation. Private streets shall be owned and maintained by an HOA. 90.Riverside County Fire Department shall approve width and radii of private streets and the length and configuration of hammerhead turnarounds prior to final map approval. AGENDA ITEM NO._._ ` PAGE. OFJ-a. Page Twenty -Two —City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Emn 91.Applicant shall cause to be recorded CC &R's with recordation of final map which provides for irrevocable reciprocal parking, circulation, loading and landscape maintenance easement in favor of all lots subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development and the City Attorney. The CC &R's shall enforce standards of building maintenance, participation in landscape maintenance, prohibition of outside vehicle or material storage. 92.An HOA shall maintain the storm drain detention basin. 93.In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal and recycling, the applicant shall be required to contact with CR &R Inc., for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. 22. Tentative Parcel Map No. 31963 "Pasadena Business Park II "- Triple 7 Development. Mayor Buckley opened the public hearing at 7:33 p.m. Community Development Director Brady detailed this item and its location. He explained that this was a proposal to divide the parcel into 15 individual parcels with 15 industrial buildings. He detailed the related street improvements to be included as part of the project. Mayor Buckley asked those persons interested in this item to speak. There were no requests to speak. Mayor Buckley questioned the improvements to Third Street. Community Development Director Brady advised that it currently had 1/2 street improvements, and as the other side develops the builders will be required to pay in -lieu fees or bond for the balance of the improvements. He clarified that the timing for the actual improvements would be driven by the front property. Mayor Buckley inquired if the front parcel would be developed *46ENGA 1_'EM PAGEOP Page Twenty -Three — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 soon. Community Development Director Brady indicated that the entire area was building very quickly and the front property should be built in the next couple of years. Councilman Magee had no comments on this item. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley indicated that she welcomed additional manufacturing and commercial development. She noted that buildings of this type were being leased out as quickly as they were being built, and she was glad to have them. She expressed support for the project. Councilman Schiffner indicated that his comments from the previous item would also apply to this item. Councilman Hickman inquired if this was the project with concerns regarding the drainage to the outflow channel. Community Development Director Brady clarified that the drainage issues were on Hunco Way, to the north of this project. Councilman Hickman indicated that he had no problems with this project. Mayor Buckley closed the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 31963, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND EXHIBIT `A'; AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: FINDINGS 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). AGENDA ITEM NO.® PAGE � OF 6 J Page Twenty -Four — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 ,"No The proposed Tentative Parcel Map located at APN 377 -151 -057 complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, in that the approval of this industrial business park will assist in achieving the development of a well - balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses as well as encouraging industrial land uses to diversify Lake Elsinore's economic base. 2. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. The proposed Tentative Parcel Map located at APN 377 - 151 -057 has been evaluated and determined to in approving the subdivision for the ultimate development of an industrial business park will offer needed jobs and balance with existing and future housing needs and trends. Environmental and municipal resources will have been evaluated and will be available to "we service this development. 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Tentative Parcel Map located at APN 377 - 151 -057, has been reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City Divisions and Departments and Agencies, and will not have a significant effect on the environment pursuant to Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2002 -03 adopted by the City Council. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLANNING DIVISION Tentative Parcel Map No. 31963 will expire two (2) years from date of approval unless within that period of time a final map has been filed with the AGENDA ITEM NO. C� PAGE - --r... Page Twenty -Five — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. 2. Tentative Parcel Map No. 31963 shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. I The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning TPM No. 31963, which action is bought within the time period provided for in �— California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, or proceeding, the Applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 4. Prior to final map and recordation approval of TPM No. 31963, the applicant shall prepare and record CC &R's against the complex. The CC &R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or Designee and the City Attorney. The CC &R's shall include methods of maintaining common areas, parking and drive aisle areas, landscaped areas including parkways, and methods for common maintenance of all underground, and above ground utility infrastructure improvements necessary to support the complex. In addition, CC &R's shall established methods to address design improvements. 5. No lot in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to financially assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which AGENDA ITEM NO. ` C` PAGE ® OF Page Twenty -Six — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and duty to maintain, all said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC &R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC &R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 6. A precise survey with closures for boundaries and all lots shall be provided, per City Ordinance. ,"No 7. The City's Noise Ordinance must be met during all site preparation activity. s. Applicant shall bond for all public improvements and grading for subject development as required by the City Engineer. a) Bonding shall be done by phases and not by final maps(s) on grading. b)Bonding shall be done by final map(s) for all other improvements. 9. Pay all applicable fees including park fees as stated in the development agreement prior to issuance of building permits. 10. Prior to final map approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 31963, the improvements specified herein and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council shall be installed, or the bonds and agreement for said improvements, shall be submitted to the City for approval by the City Engineer, and all other stated conditions shall be complied with. ii. All of the improvements shall be designed by developer's Civil Engineer to the specifications of the City of Lake Elsinore. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF Page Twenty -Seven — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 12. Applicant must meet all requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD). 13. The applicant shall provide connection to public sewer for each lot within the subdivision. No service laterals shall cross adjacent property lines and shall be delineated on engineering sewer plans and profiles for submittal to the EVMWD. 14. The developer shall submit plans to Southern California Edison for a layout of the street lighting system. The cost of street lighting, installation as well as energy charges shall be the responsibility of the developer and/or the association. Said plans shall be approved by the City and shall be installed in accordance with the City Standards. 15. Meet all requirements of the providing electric utility company. 16. Meet all requirements of the providing gas utility company. 17. Meet all requirements of the providing telephone utility company. 18. All trailers used during construction, mailboxes and signage shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to installation. 19. Any alterations to the topography, ground surface, or any other site preparation activity will require appropriate Grading City permits. A Geologic Soils Report with associated recommendations will be required for grading permit approval, and all grading must meet the City's Grading Ordinance, subject to the approval of the City Engineer and the Planning Division. Analysis of impacts of fills and cuts greater than sixty -feet (60') shall be provided. Interim and permanent erosion control measures are required. The applicant shall bond 100% for material and labor for one (1) year for erosion control landscaping at the time the site is rough graded. .� 20. All development associated with this map requires separate Design Review AQEMA ITEM `NO. _,=,: C. PAGE [ OF Page Twenty -Eight — City Council Minutes —March 9, 2004 approval. 21. Prior to issuance of any grading permit or building permit, subdivider shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgment of Conditions" and shall return the executed original to the Community Development Department. 22. The applicant shall pay applicable fees and obtain proper clearance from the Lake Elsinore Unified School District (LEUSD) prior to issuance of building permits. ENGINEERING DIVISION 23. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to building permit. 24. Dedicate a 20 ft. wide strip of additional street right -of -way along the frontage of Pasadena St. to the City prior to approval of final map. 25. Dedicate a 30 ft. wide strip of additional street right -of -way along the frontage of Crane St. to the City prior to approval of final map. 26. Dedicate additional right -of -way for a standard corner cutback for the future curb return at the westerly corner of the lot. 27. All lots shall have direct access to public right -of -way or to be provided with minimum 30 foot ingress and egress easement to public right -of -way by separate instrument or with recordation of a final map with CC &R's. 28. The ingress and egress easements width and turning radii must be approved by the County Fire Dept. prior to approval of final map. 29. Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34, Res. 85 -26). MA 1rEM No tc, PAGE a�_ �S �— Page Twenty -Nine — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 The traffic mitigation fee is $73,589, the K -rat fee is $4,260 and the drainage fee is $53,805. 30. Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project. Submit this letter prior to approval of final map. 31. Construct all public works improvements per approved street plans (LEMC Title 12). Plans must be approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to approval of final map (LEMC 16.34). 32. Street improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest. edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). 33. Developer shall construct half street improvements on Third Street as part of this development or pay an in -lieu fee for the construction of the half - street improvements. 34. Developer shall construct half street improvements on Crane St. plus one 10 ft. wide travel lane. 35. The applicant shall furnish a signing and striping plan for Pasadena Street and Crane Street, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 36. Pay all fees and meet requirements of an encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of off -site public works improvements (LEMC 12.08, Res.83 -78). All fees and requirements for an encroachment permit shall be fulfilled before Certificate of Occupancy. 37. The driveway aisles should be designed so that at least 40 ft. is available between the street curb and the first parking stall in order to provide adequate on -site storage for entering vehicles. AGEMA ITEM NO. ` C ­ PAGE I OF Page Thirty — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 38. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 1/2" x 11" mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of off -site improvements will be scheduled and approved. 39. The applicant shall obtain all necessary off -site easements for off -site grading from the adjacent property owners prior to grading permit issuance. 40. Apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to building permit issuance. A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. 41. Applicant to provide erosion control measures as part of their grading plan. The applicant shall contribute to protection of stormwater quality and met the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 42. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 43. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County Fire. 44. Provide street lighting, show lighting improvements on street improvement plans, as required by the City Engineer. 45. On -site drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility or accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance or conveyed to a drainage easement. 46. All natural drainage traversing the site shall be conveyed through the site, or •.r AVEMA ITEM NO.. PAGE 30 OF Page Thirty -One — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 47. Roof and yard drains will not be allowed to outlet through cuts in the street curb. Roofs should drain to a landscaped area whenever feasible. 48. Meet all requirements of LEMC 15.64 regarding flood hazard regulations. 49. Meet all requirements of LEMC 15.68 regarding floodplain management. Over half this site is in FEMA flood zone AE and the finish floor elevation must be at or above the Base Flood Elevation. Most buildings must have their floor elevations above an elevation of 1261 ft. and some buildings must be above 1261.5 feet. Some of the site is in flood zone AO and the floor elevation must at least one foot above the adjacent grade. 50. The applicant to provide FEMA elevation certificates prior to certificate of occupancies 51. Submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City Engineer prior to approval of final maps. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and/or erosion downstream caused by development of the site and /or diversion of drainage. 52. All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards. 53. The applicant shall record a CC &R that provides for irrevocable reciprocal parking, circulation, ingress and egress, loading and landscaping maintenance easements in favor of all lots. It shall also enforce standards of building maintenance and participation in landscape maintenance. The CC &R shall be approved by the Community Development Director and shall be recorded prior to building permit. 54. Applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for their storm water pollution prevention plan including , . AGENDA ITEM NO. Lf `` PAGE I OF _3 Page Thirty -Two — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 i approval of erosion control for the grading plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall provide a SWPPP for post construction which describes BMP's that will be implemented for the development and including maintenance responsibilities. 55. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be provided to building occupants of the development for outdoor storage, vehicle maintenance, building maintenance and landscaping as well as other environmental awareness education materials on good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of stormwater quality and met the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 56. Applicant will be required to install BMP's using the best available technology to mitigate any urban pollutants from entering the watershed. Applicant can construct permeable concrete gutters, drain gutters to landscaped areas or use ,,,o, basins with filters. 57. Applicant shall provide first blush BMP's using the best available technology that will reduce storm water pollutants from parking areas and driveway aisles. 58. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR &R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. 23. General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 1003 -02,_ Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, Residential Design Review No. R 2003 -15 and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 for the "Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" Phase II - Resolution No. 2004 -16 & Ordinance No. 1117. Mayor Buckley introduced this item and noted that there was a request from AGENDA ITEM NO. �`` PAGE OF Page Thirty -Three — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 the developer and concurrence from staff. Councilman Schiffner supported the continuance since it was at the request of the developer. Councilman Magee noted that this was a noticed public hearing, and suggested allowing any interested speakers or the applicant to speak. Mayor Buckley opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. There were no requests to speak. Mayor Buckley noted that this item related to the Condominiums next to the Walmart center on Grape Street. Councilman Magee questioned the timing of the continuance. City Attorney Leibold indicated that it should be continued to the next regular meeting. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY MAGEE AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO MARCH 23, 2004. BUSINESS ITEMS 31. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 1115 - Community Facilities District 2003 -1 (Law Enforcement, Fire and Paramedic Services) Annexations 5 and 6. City Manager Watenpaugh noted that this was a second reading of the matter considered at the last meeting. Councilman Hickman noted that this was the $300 per household CFD. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY MAGEE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 11159 UPON SECOND READING BY TITLE ONLY: ORDINANCE NO. 1115 r AGENDA ITEM NO. i C PAGE OE S Page Thirty -Four — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2003-1 (LAW ENFORCEMENT, FIRE AND PARAMEDIC SERVICES) AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX WITHIN ANNEXATION AREA NO.5 (LA LAGUNA PHASE II) AND ANNEXATION AREA NO.6 (VILLA MARTINIQUE) ANNEXED TO SAID DISTRICT. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, MAGEE, SCHIFFNER, BUCKLEY NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE 32. Request from Volunteer Fire Department - Thermal Imaging Camera City Manager Watenpaugh explained this request. Councilman Magee noted that the City was fortunate to have a group of volunteers like fire fighters to make sure the rest of the community is safe. He suggested that it was the City's responsibility to provide the tools to assist them in saving lives. He noted that the volunteers went to a conference and investigated the new equipment available; and found a camera that can detect victims in a burning building. He stressed that this camera would save time in finding people within burning buildings and expressed support for this request. He urged the Council's approval of this • oe item. ...► AGENDA ITEM NO..�G� PAGE OF G S Page Thirty -Five — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Mayor Pro Tem Kelley commented that it was a great idea and offered kudos to Councilman Magee for pursuing this request. She congratulated the fire volunteers on this new piece of equipment. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF A THERMAL IMAGING CAMERA AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $109000 AND DIRECTED STAFF TO ALLOCATE THE NECESSARY FUNDS FROM THE CITY'S UNALLOCATED RESERVES. 33. Public Safety Advisory Commission -Ordinance No. 1116. City Manager Watenpaugh explained this item had been provided at the request of Mayor Buckley to reinstate the commission. He advised that following the Study Session a subcommittee of the Council was chosen to work on revisions to the existing code. He pointed out that if there were modifications to be made to the responsibilities of the Commission, they would need to be changed in the Ordinance as well. Councilman Magee noted that this item came up some time back and there was a level of discomfort in advancing the commission with the current structure. He indicated that what had been done this time was to revise the section of the Municipal Code for a much better, more useable product. He further indicated that it was the intent to provide public safety officials with an additional set of eyes and ears in the community, since they can't be everywhere. He commented that there was a wealth of volunteers who wanted to give to the community. He noted that he disagreed with some portions of the ordinance, but there had been some compromises, and urged adoption of the ordinance. Mayor Buckley noted that he had worked with Councilman Magee on redrafting this code section, and commented that the commission technically still existed, but had withered many years ago. He commented that times change and codes need changing. He indicated that for the most part, this AWMA ITEM NO. c ` PAGE OF.�2�.... Page Thirty -Six — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 `.de commission would act as a seeing eye dog to help the police and fire officials, and should not be seen as a disciplinary force. He noted that the duties, as proposed, were relatively narrow, but allowed the commission to expand their areas of consideration with the approval of the City Council. He indicated that the first re- formation of the Commission would have each Council member appointing a new member, who will serve until July, 2006, at which point the reappointment of members will revert to the system used for the Planning Commission. He further indicated that he felt it was important to start off with an appointment system more like the mayoral committees, because the commission last went away leaving a bad taste. He recommended the deletion of "vice- chairman" from section 2.46.040. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley noted the concerns expressed by Lt. Featherolf at the study session and suggested that appointees needed some sort of background check at some level. She stressed that the group would be working very closely with the community and the community needed to be able to trust them. She indicated that she was very happy with the way the ordinance came back, particularly with the commission "assisting" in disaster preparedness. She stressed that she did not want them to focus on that. She indicated that she was also happy with "consider and evaluate" the cost of citizens action patrol, so the direction had not yet been chosen. She suggested that the proposed duties were just enough to get the commission started. She noted that there were still minor issues with calling it a commission vs. a committee, and commented that she would like it to be a committee. Councilman Magee inquired if there was a background check required when the commission was first put in the municipal code. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that he was not aware of one. Councilman Magee suggested that this would be breaking new ground, and questioned if other committees or commissions had done this in the past. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that background checks were done on all staff and the Planning Commissioners were requested to provide background and personal history. 1 � AQMA ITEM NO. C PAGE OF Page Thirty -Seven — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Councilman Hickman noted that with regard to memberships, there should be a change in the wording that the person shall "reside in or be a business owner or designee of a business in the City of Lake Elsinore ". He indicated that when this commission was first discussed police and fire were the last things on his mind. He indicated that his first thought was toward disaster and homeland security. He commented that he was pleased with the plan, and would like to see it divided into districts in the future for improved response in the case of a disaster, to provide assistance. He indicated that this was a step in the right direction. Councilman Schiffner noted the discussion of changes, but was not sure of what was being left in. He indicated that he was not in favor of the chairman or vice - chairman being selected by the Mayor the first time around. He suggested that they should be selected by the committee, as he felt their consideration was important. He explained that the commission was not ad hoc, so the choice should be theirs; and indicated that he would like to see it changed so the chairman was appointed by the commission. He addressed section 2.46.07 regarding Meetings, in item F, and indicated that he did not believe he wanted the commission having direct communications to the police and fire chiefs. He indicated that the recommendations should come directly to the City Council first; and commented that otherwise he was in favor of the items. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley questioned the difference between a Mayor's Committee and a permanent commission. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that when a Mayor's committee was adopted their purpose was spelled out, each member appointed a member and the Mayor appointed the Chairman. He clarified that this item was an update to the Municipal Code rather than the policy manual. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley addressed the item about reporting to the City Council in writing, and concurred it should come to the Council first, as opposed to the Chief of Police. Mayor Buckley indicated that might be appropriate, but suggested if it was informational items, they could probably go to the Chiefs, while specific City action should go to the Council first. He indicated that he did not want the AGENDA ITEM NO. ` C' PAGE L OF ?--- Page Thirty -Eight — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 ...e commission sending reams of information to police and fire. Councilman Magee suggested this would make it a more independent arm, and concurred that the last sentence could be dropped. Mayor Buckley addressed the issue of a permanent committee, noting that he would want to drop the word advisory; but indicated he would not pursue that if it was left a commission. Councilman Magee indicated that in the word "advisory" had been included in the spirit of compromise. Councilman Schiffner noted that all of his objections had been addressed, except who selects the Chairman the first time, and stressed that it should be selected by the committee. Mayor Buckley stressed that the initial chairmanship was key. Councilman Schiffner indicated that it was not proper because the makeup of the commission was not yet known. Mayor Buckley indicated that there was no one more qualified the chair the Commission than his selection. He noted that the term of the Chairman would only run to the end of this calendar year, and he had proposed taking out the Vice - Chairman. Councilman Schiffner reiterated his concern with this process. Councilman Magee clarified that the appointment of the Chairman was only for nine months to December 31, 2004. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley indicated that she could support such an appointment to the end of the year. MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY MAGEE TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE. AS PRESENTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: SECTION 2.46.030 - ELIMINATE "BE A REGISTERED VOTER" AND "OR THE OWNER'S DESIGNEE" SECTION 2.46.040 — ELIMINATE "AND VICE CHAIRMAN" AND CHANGE INITIAL TERM OF CHAIRMAN TO "UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 2004 ". SECTION 2.46.070, ITEM F — ADD "APPOINTEES SHALL BE AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 3.8 OF Page Thirty -Nine — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 SUBJECT TO ROUTINE BACKGROUND CHECK TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT" Councilman Magee requested clarification from Chief Walsh with regard to the background checks. Chief Walsh indicated that it could get costly, but it would depend on how deeply they wanted the individuals investigated. He indicated that if it was just fingerprints and regular background checks it would be about $70 per applicant. Councilman Schiffner suggested leaving the depth of the background check up to Chief Walsh. Councilman Magee inquired if the term "routine background check" was adequate. Chief Walsh indicated that "routine" would be fine, and if something was found they would dig a little deeper. He noted that it would be the same as any volunteer for the Sheriff s department. Council concurred this would be appropriate. ORDINANCE NO. 1116 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, REPEALING SECTION 2.46 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADOPTING A NEW SECTION 2.46 RELATING TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMISSION. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, MAGEE, BUCKLEY NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: SCHIFFNER NONE NONE AGENDA ITEM NO. I I Cam, PAGE. OF C�5 Page Forty — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 ...r Councilman Schiffner indicated that he does not compromise on issues he believe in and commented that he did not agree with the proposed appointment of the Chairman, so he voted no. Mayor Buckley questioned the timing of the appointments, and suggested doing it tonight. He appointed Dan Uhlry, as the first Chairman of the Commission, noting that he was currently serving on the Planning Commission. He commented that there was an issue of serving on more than one commission, but Mr. Uhlry had already agreed to not serve as Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission while serving in this capacity. He indicated that he appointed Mr. Uhlry due to his standing in the Sheriff's Posse and his past participation in CDF; and noted that this would provide a very pro public safety bridge for the next nine months. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley indicated that she was contacted by a gentleman who was requesting appointment and appointed Michael Lewis, noting his participation in the Ticket to Ride event. Councilman Hickman inquired if Mr. Uhlry would be leaving the Planning Commission. Mayor Buckley clarified that he would remain on the Planning Commission. Councilman Hickman appointed Ron Hewison, nothing he was also serving on the RDA Task Force. Councilman Schiffner appointed Ray Knight, noting he was a retired Anaheim fireman, paramedic and Fire Captain. Councilman Magee appointed Ray Moon, noting that he was active in his church, a substitute teacher and business owner in the valley for more than ten years. He further noted that Mr. Moon was bilingual, which would be important for the community. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY HICKMAN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE APPOINTMENTS AS PROPOSED. �, ALMA ITEM NO.. pAOE OF �' S r- Page Forty -One — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Mayor Buckley commented that they were all good appointments. 34. Mayor's Committee /Country Club Heights. Mayor Buckley noted the meeting about two weeks earlier with 225 people in attendance regarding this area. He noted that they were representative of the 3,700 owners of 8,700 lots. He complimented staff on a very positive event. He stressed the interest of the property owners in that area to protect the character of the neighborhood while supporting growth and better infrastructure. He indicated he felt it was a good idea to set up a Mayor's ad hoc committee of residents to look at the myriad of problems with sewer, water, small lots, etc. City Manager Watenpaugh concurred that it was a very positive study session and noted that many people would like to see the standards for the Heights modified. He indicated that it was the intent to come up with revised standards for the viewshed corridors. Mayor Pro Tem. Kelley apologized for not making the study session, as she was out of town; but noted that she had followed up and read the information from the consultant. She noted that there had been a great turn out and strong interest in addressing the many complex issues in the area. She commented that the committee would have their plate full to come up with goals and objectives, and a consultant would be needed to find ways to solve the problems. She concurred with this committee formation. She indicated that she would be appointing either Steve or Vicki Wallace, and noted that they just purchased a home in the area and were business owners. She further noted that they attended the study session and were excited about serving on the committee. Councilman Schiffner noted the tremendous crowd at the study session and concurred that it went very well, and most of the people were well informed. He further noted that everyone accepted the information and there was a lot of interest in improving the area. He stressed the need to limit the scope so they could proceed. He indicated that they needed to work on what they AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE Page Forty -Two — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Emn wanted in the area and what they did not want; and leave it to Council to put together a plan to accomplish what they want. He appointed John Gonzales to the committee. Councilman Hickman noted that there was an interest in building in the area and were facing problems. He also noted a recent newspaper article about Gary Jacobs' home. Councilman Magee expressed support for the formation of the committee and tentatively appointed Ray Booze. He noted that the appointment was tentative until he could contact Mr. Booze for confirmation, and commented that he was a long term resident. Mayor Buckley concurred that the level of detail on this matter could be overwhelming, but envisioned looking at the type of historic streetlight, but not where they would go. He suggested setting parameters and going from there. He indicated that as for the appointment, he inquired if they could be made at the same time the committee was formed. He appointed Ray Tamargo as Chairman of the committee, and commented that he through it would be an exciting review of the local zoning. MOVED BY KELLEY, SECONDED BY HICKMAN TO APPROVE THE APPOINTMENTS AS PROPOSED. City Manager Watenpaugh commended the Council on forming the committees, but noted the number of new committees and study sessions and suggested that coming back in three to four months with recommendations might not be possible. Mayor Buckley suggested extending that time line to six months. Councilman Schiffner commented that a couple of more Assistant City Manager's might be needed. THE FOREGOING MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. ...r AGENDA ITEM N0. t ` C- f ``` PAGE .�. of WS - - .0-11 Page Forty -Three — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 8:24 P.M. THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:34 P.M. 35. Draft Goals for City Manager. Councilman Buckley noted that the Council had been doing performance evaluations on the City Manager over the last few meetings, and Council came up with short term goals to be fulfilled. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that after the new Council was seated he had requested a Closed Session for his evaluation. He indicated that he wanted more information and a list of goals, and clarified that goal setting had to be done in a public session, unlike the evaluation which could be done in Closed Session. He presented a draft of his discussions with a preface of the mission statement and goals based on the adopted budget. He indicated that there was a list of about 26 goals, and explained that the intent of the Council was to have specific items for review in six months for evaluation of his progress. Ron LaPere, 16867 Wells Street, congratulated the Council on the start of this program, but indicated that it should have been started five years ago. He noted his background in writing goals for employees and management staff and suggested that the items presented were ideas instead of goals. He stressed that goals had to be specific and have means to measure the outcomes. He suggested that the proposed goals were very ambiguous, and issues that should be more Council Policy decisions. He stressed the importance of quantifiable goals and suggested that more refinement was needed so they would remain objective and fair, regardless of who the manager was. Edith Stafford, 29700 Hursh, indicated that she had the same problems with this list; and while goals are needed and it is a step in the right direction, she AGENDA ITEM NO. t PAGE OF_,� Page Forty -Four — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 •.r agreed that many of the items should be done by the Council. She commented that the City Manager could not tell himself what to do, and stressed that the Council needed to lay these things out. She indicated that another problem was that while goals are to be done in six months, there was an existing pattern of improprieties already in existence. She stressed that there were issues that needed immediate attention and questioned how that would be resolved. She explained that there were improprieties in contracts and how they were charged, which needed immediate attention. She suggested that the new goals should be more revised and define what is to be done. She indicated that she saw no goals in the direction of the main problem areas. She reiterated that there were immediate problems and suggested having someone check out the contracts and how they were paid. Mayor Buckley requested input from City Treasurer Weber. City Manager Watenpaugh noted that he works for the five member Council, and questioned the City Tresurer's role in setting his goals. City Treasurer Weber indicated that they were finance issues he would like to see addressed. City Treasurer Weber indicated that support of the RDA committee goals and management of the RDA debt was needed. He further indicated that staff needed to implement Gasby 34 requirements; and create a homeowner communication system or the CFD's and Assessment Districts, so they know what they are getting into and what is being done with the money. Mayor Buckley reiterated that he was concerned with the implementation of the Gasby 34 requirements, continuing support and work with the RDA committee and work on a homeowner information system for CFD's and Assessment Districts. Councilman Magee noted that the staff report had deleted the leading paragraph and read it into the record as follows: AQENDA ITEM NO. `. I (.'� PAGE OF �� Page Forty -Five — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 The City Council desires to evaluate the City Manager's performance in six months, based in part on the goals and objectives stated below. The City Council will also evaluate the City Manager's performance with respect to the day -to -day business and administrative requirements of that office, including such additional duties which may arise or be assigned, but are not anticipated or contemplated at this time. During this evaluation process the City Council shall consider continuing, extending, modifying or terminating the City Manager's existing contract. Councilman Magee noted that he was still on a honeymoon with the City Manager after only 90 days, so for him to evaluate him as his boss would be inappropriate. He indicated that he had told Mr. Watenpaugh that from the start, and noted that an emotional decision would be the easiest at this point, but that would not be in the best interest of the community. He commented that the five Council members had worked together to forge the list of goals, but it was not an easy process. He stressed that this had not been done in many years, and the City Manager had no evaluation since 2001. He indicated that this was unfair to the employee, not knowing if his bosses are in support of him or not. He commented that the list was subjective and the Council would have to make a subjective analysis of the performance. He indicated that he would like to add one more item, to ask the City Manager to provide written monthly updates of his progress in the process. He commented that'the Council might not all agree, but finally there was a road map that five people could agree on; and while they may still disagree in six months, the City Manager would know where they were coming from. Councilman Schiffner commented on what he felt this issue was all about, being a situation with five members on the Council and one new member who explained his position, which was fair and reasonable. He indicated that two other members over the last two years had made every effort to undermine the City Manager and make him look bad, while having very little contact with the man. He suggested that they were in no position to AGENDA ITEM NO. . C_ PAGES OF Page Forty -Six - City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 ,"we evaluate him. He indicated that there were two other members who had worked with the City Manager for a number of years, and while there may have been some dissatisfaction, they have moved along with him as the City Manager. He noted that they had come out of a financial depression, and the sales tax dollars were increasing. He indicated that it appeared that the others were attempting to take sides, and concurred that many of the goals were ambiguous and difficult to evaluate, possibly on purpose. He suggested that they wanted to be able to downgrade the City Manager for not accomplishing these goals in six months. He noted that there was a definite division on the City Council and a new member who has not taken sides, because he was learning the situation first. He indicated that he was not sure how the City Manager would be evaluated as the goals were very confusing. He addressed the comments by Mrs. Stafford on things that were wrong and challenged her to bring the problems to him, so he could work to straighten them out, find the problems and correct them. Mayor Pro Tern Kelley noted that she had worked with the City Manager for the last eight years; and finds him to be professional, policy- oriented, he treats the Council fairly, provides a weekly memo and is available to each Councilmember with his open door policy. She indicated that he was very respected by staff and the community business leaders; and she respects the way he follows policy. She commented that the last thing the community needed was a City Manager lead down the road, frightened of his job and taking direction from each individual Council member. She indicated that she really respected the fact that Mr. Watenpaugh was willing to draw the line and say something was not policy. She stressed that his responsibility was to work for either three or four members, based on a majority vote. She indicated that he provided everyone the same information, but it was difficult to develop the goals, so they were broad by design. She noted that the goals were filled with action words such as implement, prepare, design, assist and revise. She commented that he would have no trouble meeting the goals as presented and in six months the Council would need to be very fair in the evaluation due to the nature of the goals. She concurred that the goals were designed to undermine the Manager, but expressed hopes that ARENA ITEM NO. ' PAGE,4 G of 6 I--- Page Forty -Seven — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 was not the case. She suggested that Mr. Watenpaugh was excited about the goals, and noted that they were set forth generally in the budget, but this was a new format. She indicated that while the goals were not necessarily new, there was greater pressure to get them done. She noted that she liked the opening paragraph as read by Councilman Magee, as the previous one was in a very negative light. Councilman Hickman indicated that it was evident which way this was going to be subjective. He commented that he knew it was a position of authority and responsibility, but he was on the Council to do what the people wanted, and make sure the City was clean. He indicated that this step would give the City Manager a chance to prove himself and the existing management can run the City the way the citizens want it. Mayor Buckley noted the list of goals and suggested the insertion of two words, being "past performance and" in paragraph 1, line 4 before "such additional duties ". He suggested that the last goal on page 1 should be revised because "improving the public perception of the Community Services Department" would occur if the department was improved. He indicated that he did not have a problem adding the implementation of Gasby 34, which was already being worked on. Administrative Services Director Pressey indicated that the Gasby 34 requirements were complete. Mayor Buckley indicated that the Manager was already working with the RDA Committee. He further indicated that the homeowner information system was a good idea and would have deflected some of the concerns in Summerhill. He questioned which conditions were designed to undermine the Manager and which should be eliminated. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley indicated that the point was that her fear was that Mr. Watenpaugh would jump through all the hoops for six months, but there was a preconceived result to this process. She stressed that it was not one individual goal, but addressed the last one about the homeowners information system, and noted that she just closed escrow and the CFD information was very well spelled out. She stressed the shared nature of responsibility in that type of program. AQENDA ITEM PAGE �.L- OF Page Forty -Eight — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Mayor Buckley questioned if the City was better run than it used to be. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley confirmed. Mayor Buckley commented that in the spirit of compromise he was going to agree, but questioned if it was run well enough. Councilman Schiffner suggested that it would never be run well enough. Mayor Buckley indicated that he was not sure that was true and noted the personal and community trust issues between city hall and the residents. He suggested that was something that had to be considered as part of the evaluation process. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that he in no way wanted to be adversarial in this process, and noted this was tough to coordinate. He commented that he had only had one evaluation in seven years and did still have a contract. He confirmed that he wanted a set of goals and he was willing to accept the goals presented; but expressed concern with the stated mistrust from the public about the management and the City. He indicated that he was not sure what or where it was coming from, as he tried to be open and provide information. He commented that his biggest fear was that he could communicate with the Council, but they also had to communicate with him; and stressed that it had to be two way communication. He indicated that he had no doubt that he and staff could attain the goals and noted that a number of them were already done or nearly complete. He noted that he had a major concern that as a staff person, staff spent hundreds of dollars on study sessions to clarify information, but aside from the Country Club Heights meeting, only a few residents are present for the workshops. He indicated that he felt bad that there was not a better turnout regarding the bonds, and noted that there were door hangers and advertisements in the newspaper. He questioned if the public was truly concerned. He noted that there was more interest in the Country Club Heights issues. He indicated that the goals would work if everything was done openly and communication could be maintained with all of the Council. He noted that Councilman Magee was very fair as the newcomer, and others were trying to open up. He stressed the importance of open communication and assuring that the Council policy is followed. He requested that if the policy was not being followed, that they be changed to more accurately reflect the policies. He �, AGENDA ITEM NO..�. PAGE OF �'� 5 � Page Forty -Nine — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 stressed the importance of Council working with him to allow him to attain the goals. He indicated that he was willing to accept the goals as presented and questioned the verbiage on the third item from the City Treasurer. He also noted that he would be happy to do monthly reports. Councilman Magee noted that the Mayor had requested the addition of "past performance" to the first paragraph, and noted that he would not be willing to evaluate that factor. He explained that he had not been his employee to review under past performance. MOVED BY MAGEE, SECONDED BY HICKMAN TO APPROVE THE GOALS AS AMENDED AT THE TABLE. City Attorney Leibold clarified that the amendments were regarding Gasby, RDA and CFD Information. She stressed the need to be clear on this action. She indicated that with respect to homeowner information on the CFD's, it was not an appropriate goal when it was not discussed in light of CFD financing. She suggested a report on what would be involved. Mayor Buckley suggested "investigate creation of a homeowner information system "; and written monthly progress reports on the goals to Council. He also suggested the addition of past performance as a factor for evaluation. THE MOTION WAS SO AMENDED, WITH APPROVAL BY THE SECOND AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. 36. Status Report - Western Riverside County Multi - Species Habitat Conservation Plan. City Attorney Leibold noted that this item was approved at the January 13th City Council Meeting, by a vote of 4 to 1. She noted that at the meeting numerous representatives from the County were present and there was a lot of discussion about the modifications requested by the Council. She further indicated that it was her understanding that the County would respond to the City and the direction was to hold off on noticing the fee ordinance until AQENDA ITEM NO._! C PAGE OF C� Page Fifty — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 there was a consensus or consent by the County that the City was compliant with the overall goals of the MSHCP and Measure A funds were not at risk. She indicated that to date she had received no response, except that they do not intend to respond. She further indicated that the JPA had been formed with those who have adopted the plan, and noted that 4 or 5 of the 14 cities had adopted the MSHCP without modification. She commented that the County was extremely busy in settlement negotiations with Murdock and provided an agreement with the City as a party, and later proceeded to settle without the City. She noted that while the County had settled with Murdock, she was not certain of the overall status of the litigation with the other plaintiffs. She addressed the Sauls Report that was adopted and incorporated in the Council's approval and indicated that it had been modified and clarified. She explained that there was an incorrect map for the Greenwald site, and an additional property had come to terms on the proposed set -aside for habitat acreage. She suggested if the Council were to reconsider their action on the MSHCP those modifications to the report should be considered as well. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that staff met with the County staff and Mr. Sauls to go through the list of properties; and noted the public discussion of about 4,200 acres being already addressed. He clarified that it was actually only about 1,300 acres, and while the balance was being negotiated it was in the County, not the City. He advised that more parcels had now reached settlement, and the TT Group came to an agreement, but that has not been finalized yet. He further advised that he understood that the north part of Tuscany Hills had nearly settled, but stressed that anything outside City limits would be attributed to the County, not the City. He clarified that the City was not half way there, and stressed that there had been no contact or response from the County. He indicated that staff would send an additional letter to determine the City's status. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she thought from the County standpoint, with respect to modifications, if the County is one member, the issues need to be turned over to the new entity. She suggested preparation of a packet for consideration at the next meeting and presentation to the new entity. She AGENDA ITEM NO. C PAGE �,L.: OF Page Fifty -One — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 commented that regarding the additional agreement with the County, she received a Memorandum of Agreement for the Mayor's signature, but the City has not been a party to the discussions and it has not been presented to the Council for consideration. Councilman Schiffner noted his participation on the new Board, which is a new JPA formed under the auspices of WRCOG, to administer the MSHCP. He advised that at the first meeting a month ago, some members of the board worked together on the Board or served as alternates for WRCOG. He commented that at the first meeting there was no staff for the group yet, and that was one of the items considered. He explained that the intent was for the County to supply staff for the Board, but at the last meeting in determining who was actually a member, those with the agreement were conforming and were members. He noted that Lake Elsinore included the .-� amendments to provide a comfort level, which were sent, but no response has been received to date. He indicated at the second meeting of the Board, the attorney for the JPA told him, it was the legal opinion that Lake Elsinore was nonconforming, and as such not a member in good standing, with no vote. He indicated that four other cities were not allowed to vote either. He advised that he stayed for the meeting anyway and made some comments and requested that they resolve the issues of who was in or out. He indicated that he also mentioned the correspondence which had received no response. He advised that Mr. Lashbrook responded that the new Board would have to make the decisions, and Supervisor Buster made a motion to put the matter on next month's agenda and possibly they would put together a committee to meet with the attorney. He noted that they would probably ask that the attorney attend the meeting to give details and start negotiating a revision to vote on the changes. He indicated that right now the City was not in the ball game, but hopefully next month would begin to get involved on a committee or something. He commented that there was still a long way to go and many of the requested changes for the City, may not be as good for the County. He addressed the weighted voting, which gave the County absolute veto power and took some of the good away, because a lot of land was involved and the County had the ability to veto actions. AGENDA ITEM NO.�1 L-1 PAGE O', -y== -- Page Fifty -Two — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Mayor Pro Tem Kelley commented that it was her understanding that after studying for months and coming up with modifications, and two supervisors saying the changes could be done, they will now have nothing to do with it. She commented that her guess was that the City would be non - conforming until it went with the exact County plan. She indicated that she was very disappointed with the County attitude that it was their way or the highway. Councilman Magee indicated that every fear he had about creating an unfriendly bureaucracy had come to roost when the City was denied the ability to vote. He commented that he was offended, deceived and betrayed by the County decision makers. He indicated that he would not forget the situation, they gave the City a deadline, put a gun to its head and said one thing, but then told the City's representative they were not going to listen to him. He commented that the whole situation was unconscionable. Councilman Hickman indicated that it had all been said, the County could �"'' not be trusted. Mayor Buckley noted that he was the main proponent of the MSHCP, and while he still believed in the plan, he was deeply irked. He concurred that there should be a presentation packet for the RCA for the next meeting. He suggested a Closed Session discussion of the strategy for meeting with the County staff and lawyers on how to lay it on the line. City Attorney Leibold concurred that the legal issues were for Closed Session discussion. Councilman Schiffner noted that he spoke rather strongly at the meeting yesterday. Mayor Buckley noted that the issue of conformance was discussed at VWRCOG too, but at the prior meeting everyone was allowed to vote, even if they were nonconforming. City Attorney Leibold commented that it was interesting that the JPA was formed, and the County has the veto power, and the final say so. She suggested that a discussion with the County would be very advantageous. She indicated that she would prepare a package for presentation to the RCA committee in advance of the next meeting and will bring it to the next City Council Meeting. She AGENDA ITEM NO. LL PAGE OF �' Page Fifty -Three — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 commented that it was strange that the City had adopted the agreement, but were not considered part of the RCA. Council concurred that this matter should be revisited. Councilman Schiffner noted another matter, on which they took action, which he felt was a Brown Act violation. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 4. Resolution No. 2004 -15 - Supporting the United States Troops & Commander -in- Chief. City Manager Watenpaugh highlighted this item which was requested by Paula Graver; and explained that the Council would be adopting the resolution in recognition of the last year of activity. Paula Graver, 218 Ellis, commented that it had been a weird year of rallies, but they were still out there and not going away. She indicated that the Lake Elsinore Council was the first to pass a positive resolution in support of the troops, and requested a new resolution. She noted that Mayor Pro Tern Kelley would be reading the resolution at the rally on Saturday. Jill Wojcik, noted that her son was an A -10 freedom fighter pilot in Afghanistan, and was home and attended the rally after Christmas. She indicated that her son was touched by the positive responses to their efforts; and told Paula that what Lake Elsinore was doing was honorable and to keep it up, no matter what. She indicated that it was vital to continue to support the freedom fighters, and urged support of the resolution. MOVED BY KELLEY, SECONDED BY HICKMAN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2003-15: RESOLUTION NO. 2003-15 �-, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE PRESIDENT AND AGENDA ITEM NO. .- _ PAGE �..� OF_L�?_ Page Fifty -Four — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 COMMANDER -IN -CHIEF AND OUR TROOPS IN THE MATTER OF DISARMING SADDAM HUSSEIN. 5. Deposit & Reimbursement Agreement between the City and Laing -CP Lake Elsinore, LLC. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that this was part of the responsibility associated with moving forward to consider financing of a CFD in the back basin. He further explained that this had moved forward in the past, and the finance team brought it forward at this point. He clarified that the developer would deposit $50,000 for the necessary studies and pay the fees, knowing that they still have to gain approval of the project. He further clarified that there would be no reimbursement of monies not spent. John Yeager, representing the applicant, addressed this application to form a CFD, noting that this just handles the fees for analysis of the request. He stressed that there was no obligation on the part of the Council to approve entitlement or the final CFD. He explained that they would not be back to the Council for the Resolution of Intention, until the entitlements were approved by the Council. He stressed that this was still the application phase and offered to answer questions. Chris Hyland, 15191 Wavecrest, noted that she obtained a copy of this item from the City and was quite amazed. She commented that the area had been through five or six developers in the past, and was bothered to see that it said the development would be 1,850 homes, with an elementary school in the middle of the villages. She inquired if the School District had approved the project for schools; and questioned why an elementary school would be constructed without District approval. Mr. Yeager indicated that the elementary school was proposed for the project and John Laing Homes was negotiating with the School District right now. He confirmed that the school would not be built without the consent of the School District. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she had -.060 a C� AGENDA ITEMM (NO. (� PAGE � ..(( L OF =-� I.—, Page Fifty -Five — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 confirmed that they were in ongoing negotiations with the School District at a staff level. She commented that the proposed site was acceptable, but they were working on the terms and mitigation fees. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley noted that it was her understanding that Laing Homes recognized the fact that the deposit would give no guarantees, and ultimately the building plans needed to be approved. She stressed that this action would allow them to get ready for a CFD and do the appraisal and other studies. She further stressed that this was not issuing CFD's, but rather just beginning the process. She noted that pursuant to the development agreement they had the opportunity to develop in the City, and the City had agreed to assist where possible. She commented that there was a strict performance time line, and the Council was very sensitive to the number of developments proposed for the area that had not occurred. She indicated that the Council wanted to be sure there was a tight agreement this time, and suggested there was no reason to turn this request down. Councilman Schiffner commented that the City had some obligation to this organization to assist them in moving the project forward. He indicated that the only question seemed to be the time line, but noted that the best answer seemed to be the reverse mode on a critical path to get the project done on time. He suggested since they were putting up their money for staff time to do the work, and accepting that it was not an obligation on the City to issue bonds, it made no difference when they started the work, but by putting it off it could delay the project by four months. He indicated that the Council had been pushing this company to move forward for four years and he did not want to stand in their way now. He advised that he was in favor of starting the process with their money. Councilman Hickman noted that this Council had renegotiated some CFD's, and this was the first one the Council would create. He expressed concern that this action would be putting the cart before the horse. He suggested .� they could not create a CFD, before they knew what would be approved. AGENDA ITEi� NO. 'e:.�--- -`-r�. PAGE : tj OF -- Page Fifty -Six — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 N"100 Councilman Magee noted the staff report reference to the Development Agreement with Laing -Civic Partners, which called for financing of public improvements. He indicated that he read the agreement regarding initiation of efforts to cause the City to establish a CFD. He noted that it said nothing about the timing and whether it should be before or after the plans are submitted. He indicated that he was a bit uncomfortable approving the CFD before the houses. He noted, with all due respect, that when an attorney gives the presentation, his radar goes up. He commented that he was advised of the City policy to create the CFD before the land use comes to the City Council, but has seen no written policy on this specific issues. He indicated that he was uncomfortable and would abstain on this item, as he did not have enough information to make a decision. Mayor Buckley addressed Section 6.08 of the Development Agreement with Civic - Laing, LLC., regarding Mello -Roos Financing. He clarified that the City creates CFD's, but there is not technical obligation to do so, just a ..r spirit that the CFD would be created at some point. He addressed the issue of timing, and indicated that he had no problem creating CFD's, if he knew they would be able to pay for themselves, and right now they are all coming along pretty well. He suggested that he was unclear about the point of wasting time and money on a CFD that might be meaningless. He noted that he realized there was no legal obligation to the future by passing the agreement to start the CFD process, however, it would be perceptually presumptive in the public's mind and he was concerned about that presumption. He indicated that he was also concerned about the staff report on the number of homes, the elementary school, etc. and indicated that he did not know if the School Board would agree with staff s position on that issue. He addressed the possibility of delaying the beginning of the project, and stressed that it was a project for which the Council had not seen the map. He questioned starting the process when it could come forward at a later date, and the Council could say no. He stressed that this would then be wasted time. He addressed past Council changes and noted that there would be a policy manual review study session next month, and that was something that would need to come up for discussion. NNOW AQENDA ITEM" NO. _`� PAGE _, � OF Page Fifty -Seven — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 City Attorney Leibold clarified that the formation of the CFD would not occur and was not contemplated until after the entitlements have come to the Planning Commission and the City Council. She stressed that this action was not the Resolution of Intention, which would start the formation. Mayor Buckley indicated that his comments would still stand. MOVED BY KELLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 2 — 1 — 29 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS KELLEY AND SCHIFFNER VOTING YES, MAYOR BUCKLEY VOTING NO AND COUNCILMEMBERS HICKMAN AND MAGEE ABSTAINING FROM VOTE TO APPROVE THE DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH LAING -CP LAKE ELSINORE, LLC. CITY ATTORNEY LEIBOLD CONFIRMED THAT THIS VOTE WOULD APPROVE THE ITEM. 7. Service Agreement for Pest Control of City Facilities - Robbins Pest Management - $2,640/,x. City Manager Watenpaugh explained that this was an item for bids for a contract for pest control in public facilities. He advised that the current contract ends this month, and noted that Robbins Pest Control was the low bidder. He noted that Mr. Morton would also like to speak on this item. Bill Morton, Morton Pest Control, indicated that he had been dealing with the Stadium, since the day it opened and was very familiar with the work. He noted that he was the only one present for the bid opening on February 25t''. He indicated that he had based his bid no power spraying of City buildings, and stressed that it did not say hand tank or back pack. He addressed the chemicals, manpower and equipment required to do the work. He noted that the company to be awarded the bid would be using a back pack to do the spraying. He stressed that the request was for power spraying and it should be required. Public Works Manager Payne thanked Mr. Morton for the fine work he had AGENDA ITEM NO c-t„� PAGE OFL Page Fifty -Eight — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 done at the Stadium, but in the spirit of competition it was put out for bids, and Robbins Pest Control was the low bidder. He indicated that they walked the project with Robbins Pest Control and had been assured that they could perform the services. He recommended acceptance of the low bid, and noted that Mr. McDonough was present if there were questions. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley pointed out that if there was any doubt on the bidding, the bidders could submit a written request for interpretation and inquired if Mr. Morton had done so. Mr. Morton indicated he had not. Councilman Hickman suggested that if Robbins could do it, it would be good to give them a shot. Councilman Schiffner indicated that he could see the difference in equipment, but questioned the efficiency of dragging a hose around. He suggested it could be done easier with a backpack. He noted that the overall cost was less than half Mr. Morton's bid. He suggested giving Robbins a shot, and if they don't perform get someone else. Councilman Magee concurred that there was a significant cost difference, but commended Mr. Morton on a fine job. He noted that this was for a one year contract and he heard from Public Works Manager Payne that the contractor would be held to the same standard established by Morton, in their tenure. He noted that the bar had been set pretty high, but there was someone new who could do the work for considerably less cost. He indicated that he was o.k. with this approval, provided they did the work for one year and staff carefully analyzed the work before extending the contract. Mayor Buckley concurred and noted the comparison of bids between facilities, with the major difference being between Robbins and Morton for the Stadium. He suggested with the variation in costs on the Stadium, staff would need to be particularly careful. AGENDA ITEM NQ. PAGE 5 ,._O OF G� 1^ Page Fifty -Nine — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 MOVED BY KELLEY, SECONDED BY HICKMAN AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ACCEPT THE BID OF $220 PER MONTH ($29640 PER YEAR) AS SUBMITTED BY ROBBINS PEST MANAGEMENT AND AUTHORIZED THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT, AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, RENEWABLE UP TO THREE YEARS. THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING WAS RECESSED AT 10:01 P.M. THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RECONVENED AT 10:04 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS - NON - AGENDIZED ITEMS - 3 MINUTES Paula Graver, 218 Ellis Street, noted that the one year anniversary of the Support the Troops rallies was approaching, and detailed the events planned for Saturday, March 12th. She noted that the Mayor could not attend, but Mayor Pro Tem Kelley would be present to read the Resolution adopted by the Council. She reminded the community of the hours that military personnel serve 24 hours a day, seven days a week. She reiterated her vow that the rallies would continue as long as there are men and women in harm's way. Edith Stafford, 29700 Hursh, questioned if a three vote majority was required for an item to carry. City Attorney Leibold clarified that it required a majority of the City Council, but explained that abstentions count as affirmative votes. Mayor Buckley noted that the exception was for Ordinances. City Attorney Leibold further clarified the 2 — 1 — 2 vote. Mrs. Stafford indicated that she would need to review that information further. She noted that she really came to' speak because she did not take kindly to statements that were made, which felt like an insult to her intelligence. She addressed the comments that Councilmembers would set goals for the City Manager with an ulterior motive; and disagreed that there were ulterior motives. She indicated that the voters wanted reform and she felt that was being attempted; and noted that there did not have to be agreement on everything. AGENDA ITEM NO. --_ PAGE Page Sixty — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 ..or She suggested that pointing out what was not agreed with would help to correct things. She suggested that acting like there were no problems was insulting her intelligence; and noted that for the first time she felt comfortable that something real was being done. She further suggested that the Council did not want her to tell them exactly what was going on before the public. Tom Solack, 33609 View Point Drive, indicated that he was the owner of a company and interested in a piece of property for his manufacturing business. He indicated that he found out today that it was commercial property, located next to E Z Products. He questioned the potential for changing the zoning to house his new facility with about 200 employees. Mayor Buckley noted that changes were made regularly, when deemed appropriate. He deferred the matter to staff. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that staff could explain the requirements to Mr. Solack. George McDonough, noted that he had been a resident for 14 years and operated a small business. He commented on the growth of the community in that time, and the pending large retail development. He suggested that large retailers do not invest in a community with major problems. He commented on two individuals who degraded the community and noted a letter to the editor regarding the Whiskers story in the Californian. He chastised the Californian for the caliber of their reporting. He expressed concern with articles written by Will Bennett (The Californian) and Bill Reimbold (Elsinore Magazine), which were half truths. He indicated that he did not understand the disjointed logic. He addressed an article suggesting that Lake Elsinore Unified School District lost favorite teachers to mostly white schools, and challenged them to provide the names of the teachers and the schools. He suggested if they could not provide that information, they should keep their opinions to themselves. He commented that everyone had the right of freedom of speech, but not defamation. Peter Dawson, 18010 Grand Avenue, spoke as a concerned waterfront homeowner, and noted the presentation on water at the well dedication ceremony. He highlighted the point that 1 /3`d of the water would have to come from natural sources, which is rain. He expressed concern with Canyon Lake water being held C AGENDA ITEM N(�O._��- PAGE _52.. -= OF-U.-., r-• Page Sixty -One — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 back for drinking water; and not being allowed to overflow to Lake Elsinore. He questioned why the City would partner with an organization that cheats and steals from the citizens of Lake Elsinore Valley. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Watenpaugh commented on the following: 1) Advised Mr. Askins that he would look into the policy for naming of the fishing beach and bring back a memo for direction from Council. 2) Addressed Donna Morin and noted that he appreciated the comments on the Water District's contributions. He noted that staff was working to put in the second door for access to the Cultural Center basement. 3) Addressed Lorraine Watts, and indicated that Councilman Magee had requested that he speak with Comcast regarding the broadcasts from the building. 4) Acknowledged the new appointees to the Commissions and Committees. 5) Thanked the Council for setting goals for him, and noted that he looked forward to accomplishing all of them. 6) Requested that if Mrs. Stafford knew of something going on, she should come in and talk to him. He noted that she had been in his office once before, as had Mrs. Hyland. He indicated that he would like to know what was going on. 7) Noted that the Council received material today from a Nevada Hydro Company, with four disks on the storage program, which he would �— look at and make available to the Council. AGENDA fTEM NO. `�- PAGE OF Page Sixty -Two — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 ,.no* 8) Addressed the issues presented by Mr. Dawson regarding the holdback and pumping and noted that it was part of the settlement agreement to settle litigation. 9) Indicated that he had a couple of letters for the Mayor to review at City Hall. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS City Attorney Leibold commented on the following: 1) Confirmed that the holdback and pumping of water was part of the settlement agreement. COMMITTEE REPORTS No Reports. CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS Mayor Pro Tem Kelley had no comments. Councilman Magee commented on the following: 1) Indicated that since the City was a party to the Water Agreement, he would like to get up to speed on it. He noted that he could see that the dam was ready to come over, and the facility was pumping. He requested a copy of the agreement so he could review it and get up to speed. 2) Addressed the Bond and Debt Study Session and indicated that it was very informative. He commended staff on the comprehensive materials presented and noted that they would be available at the front counter and the library for review and offered his copy for check -out. AGENDA ITEM NO. C__ PAGE OF Page Sixty -Three - City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 3) Noted that he was invited to watch the wells start-up last week and commented that it was a significant and historic event. He indicated that he was taken by the perspective of the valley from that vantage point and encouraged the community to participate in activities that center on the Lake. 4) Noted a complaint received last month from a resident, regarding services provided by the Animal Friends of the Valley, and indicated that he submitted it for response. He advised that he had received a two page response that went above and beyond the call of duty. He commended the Animal Friends organization for their work. 5) Addressed Mrs. Watts on her comments regarding the audio in the Cultural Center, noting he had brought the issue up a couple of times. He noted that the contract with Comcast was up in June of 2005, and suggested that this long term complaint be resolved soon. 6) Noted that at the Study Session today, he brought up a concern about the warrant list and a settlement he questioned a while back. He indicated that he had not yet seen the check from the former City Manager. City Manager Watenpaugh clarified that the warrant list was of expenditures, not receipts. Councilman Magee suggested that it should have shown up in the fund list. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the check had been deposited and he would be happy to provide a copy. 7) Noted the City Manager's weekly information memo and the attachments from the Police Department. He explained that it was a detailed list of items they were involved in and noted a situation in which a deputy who was on foot chasing a robbery suspect, shattered several bones in his hand and continued the apprehension and drove himself to the hospital. He stressed the special nature of law enforcement officers and commended the officers for their efforts. AGENDA ITEM NO. _ =r PAGE P.L OF Page Sixty -Four — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 Councilman Hickman commented on the following: 1) Indicated that the dinner for Whiskers on the 13th, had been cancelled and provided the address for donations. 2) Thanked those involved in the memorial service for Whiskers for their contributions to the event. 3) Thanked the Water District for the Well Ceremony. 4) Noted that he was serving on the RTA Operations Board and they had initiated a program for seniors and disabled riders. He explained that if they called for a ride and one was not available, they would call them a taxi, and it would cost the individual $1.50 to get around. He commented that one of his interests was to see how to get buses running for seniors and other residents. Councilman Schiffner commented on the following: 1) Requested that the City Attorney's office put together some answers to the comments that Pete Dawson had made. He noted that there was some confusion, but he was sure the current license allowed them to proceed as they were. 2) Wished that all meetings could have the crowd in attendance, like the Country Club Heights meeting, noting that it was invigorating to see that many interested people. Mayor Buckley commented on the following: 1) Addressed the naming of the fishing beach, and suggested that an action item be brought back to the next meeting. He noted that he had discussions at the memorial and talked with family members and a permanent recognition of his efforts was mentioned. AGENDA ITEM' NO. PAGE OF � Page Sixty -Five — City Council Minutes — March 9, 2004 2) Thanked everyone for their willingness to serve on commissions and committees. 3) Noted that the Island Wells were extremely important and commented that it was a Chamber of Commerce Day. 4) Announced the Study Session on Goals and the Capital Improvement Budget scheduled for Thursday, March 11, 2004 at 5 p.m. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 10:25 P.M. THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGENDA ITEM NO. p `�� MINUTES �-- PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 TUESDAY, MARCH 02, 2004 Chairman LaPere called the Regular Planning Commission Meeting to order at 6:01 PM. Commissioner Matthies led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: LAPERE, O'NEAL, AND MATTHIES ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARNES AND UHLRY Also present were: Director of Community Development Brady, Planning and Code Enforcement Manager Villa, Engineering Manager Seumalo, Senior Planner Morita, Associate Planner Coury, Office Specialist Porche' and Deputy City Attorney Steve Miles. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mark McDorman, 3740 Ulla Lane, Lake Elsinore indicated that he represents homeowners who live on Ulla Lane. He stated that he heard that a property owner at the end of Ulla Lane intends to develop a portion of the land on Ulla Lane into 65 Condominiums. He indicated that he has met with some of the other property homeowners in the area, and they are concern on what would be developed in that area. Director of Community Develop Brady indicated that the City has not received any applications for any type of development for this area. CONSENT CALENDAR MOVED BY O'NEAL, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. Minutes 1. February 17, 2004. A PAGE O�� PAGE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — MARCH 02, 2004 1"0001 PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Variance 2004 -01 and Industrial Project No. 2003 -06 — D & D Cattle Industrial Complex. Chairman LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 6:09 PM, and requested the reading of the Staff Report. Director of Community Development Brady indicated that this project is for a proposed industrial building and requested Associate Planner Coury to review the Staff Report with the Commission. Associate Planner Coury stated that the applicant is proposing to construct six industrial buildings ranging in size from 4,200 to 6,300 square feet. He indicated that originally Staff had requested the applicant to apply for a Variance for the reduction the buildings, parking and landscaping setbacks along Collier Avenue. However, he indicated that it was discovered that the right -of -way was reduced from 100 feet to 86 feet, and therefore the Variance was not needed. Associate Planner Coury stated that the design for the buildings have enhanced architectural treatments to include pop out tower elements with the cornice treatment with varied color treatments. He stated that the front office portion of the building has a pop -out tower, and "woe glass doors. He indicated that Staff has reviewed the proposed project and recommends that the Planning Commission approve and adopt a Resolution for the Design Review for Industrial No. 2003 -06 and dismiss Variance No. 2004 -01 based on the Findings, Exhibits, and is subject to the Conditions of Approval. He noted that the applicant is here to answer any questions that the Commission may have. Chairman LaPere requested any comments from the Public. Tom Gabric 903 S. Ramona, Corona stated that he is the Architect for the project. He indicated that he has issues with some of the Conditions where it reference to the Final Map. Chairman LaPere asked Staff to comments on this subject. Engineering Manager Seumalo indicated that Condition No. 25 states that the Will Serve letter must be submitted prior to the Final Map approval. Mr. Gabric stated that he plans on submitting the Will Serve letter, however he stated that he would like the wording changed to at building permit or occupancy. Engineering Manager Seumalo indicated that several of the Engineering Conditions could be changed to reflect the revised wording. Chairman LaPere asked the applicant if he agrees to all of the other Conditions of Approval. IL_ � A�1DA ITEM NO. PAGE OF A*^ PAGE 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — MARCH 02, 2004 Mr. Gabric stated "yes ". There being no further comments from the Public, Chairman LaPere brought the discussion back to the Commission for comments. Commissioner O'Neal stated that he concurs with the Commission on the dismissal of the Variance, and approval of the Design Review of the Industrial project. He had no further comments. Commissioner Matthies asked if the wall facing Minthorn would have any architectural design. Associate Planner Coury stated that currently a vacant parcel would be between the building and Minthorn. He stated that this vacant parcel would eventually be development, and the blank wall that would be facing Minthorn would be blocked. Commissioner Matthies asked if the existing paved roads to the north would be improved. Engineering Manager Seumalo stated that the street would be improved. Commissioner Matthies had no further comments. Chairman LaPere concurred with the Commission. He indicated that this project would enhance the area, and had no further comments. There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 6:20 PM, and requested the reading of the Resolution. MOVED BY MATTHIES, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -21, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW FOR INDUSTRIAL PROJECT NO. 2003 -06, TO BE LOCATED ON COLLIER AVENUE AND TO INCLUDE THE MODIFICATIONS TO CONDITIONS NO. 22, 25, 26, 29, 32, 36, AND 39. 3. Variance 2003 -06 and Design Review of Residential Project No. R 2003 -17 — Associated Building & Development at Pepper Grove Tract. Chairman LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 6:23 PM, and requested the reading of the Staff Report. Director of Community Development Brady stated that this is a request for a Residential Project, and requested Associate Planner Coury to review it with the Commission. AGENDA ITEM NO. 'N. PAGE 3 OF PAGE 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — MARCH 02, 2004 Associate Planner Coury indicated that the project before the Commission is a request to construct twenty -nine single family homes located at the southwest corner of Avenue 6 and Park Way known as the Amended Pepper Grove Tract. He stated that the project would consist of four different elevations with reversible plans. He indicated that homes that would face the public right -of -way would include enhanced architectural features and treatments. Associate Planner Coury stated that the original submittal requirements included a Variance due to the setbacks on three existing lots. However, he stated that Staff's research discovered that by shifting three lot lines and adjusting two home product plans, that Staff could dismiss the Variance. He indicated that the applicant has worked with Staff to design a product that would benefit and enhance the neighborhood. Associate Planner Coury indicated that Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approved and adopt a Resolution for the Design Review of Residential No. 2003 -17 and dismiss Variance No. 2003 -06 based on the Findings, Exhibits, and is subject to the Conditions of Approval. He noted that the applicant is present to answer any comments that the Commission may have. Chairman LaPere requested comments from the Public. Mr. Don Gilmartin, applicant for Associate Building & Development 1151 Pomona Road, '"00 Suite G, Corona stated that he has read and agrees to the Conditions of Approval. There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere brought the discussion back to the Commission for comments. Commissioner O'Neal concurred with Staff's recommendations. He indicated that the project blends in well with the existing neighborhood. Commissioner Matthies stated that her only concern is blank walls that face the right -of -way. She indicated that if the walls were hidden with trees, then she does not have a problem, however extra treatment should be given to homes with in the right -of -way. She had no further comments. Chairman LaPere concurred with Commissioner Matthies thoughts. He indicated that he liked the design of the homes, and had no further comments. There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 6: 28 PM, and requested the reading of the Resolution. AGENDA ITEM NO. I , L_ PAGE j' OP PAGE 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — MARCH 02, 2004 MOVED BY O'NEAL, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -22, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW OF RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO, R 2003 -17 — ASSOCIATED BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT AT PEPPER GROVE TRACT. BUSINESS ITEMS 4. Residential Project No. 2003 -19, Design Review of Model Homes and Production Units for Tract Map No. 30492 (Cedar Point) Chairman LaPere indicated that this is a Business Item, and requested the reading of the Staff Report. Director of Community Development Brady stated that this item before the Commission is a request of a Design Review and Model Home Complex and requested Senior Planner Morita to review the Staff Report with the Commission. Senior Planner Morita stated that this project is a request for 111 single- family detached residential units, including a three -plan Model Home Complex within a portion of Tract Map No. 30492 within the Canyon Hills Specific Plan area. He indicated that the applicant is proposing three different architectural styles for the front elevations, including Spanish, Italianate, and Craftsman. He stated that the Model Home Complex would be constructed on five lots, along Canopy Lane, near Canyon Hills Road at Whispering Willow Drive. Senior Planner Morita indicated that Tentative Tract Map No. 30492 was approved by the City Council in May 2003 and finaled on February 10, 2004. He stated that the constructed lots would be in the range in size from 5,100 square feet to the average lot size of 7,300 square feet. He stated that Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve and adopt a Resolution based on the Exhibits, Findings and is subject to the Conditions of Approval. He stated that the applicant is available to answer any questions that the Commission may have. Chairman LaPere requested the applicant to approach the podium. Mr. Mike Freeman, applicant for KB Homes, 12235 El Camino Real; Suite 100, San Diego indicated that he has read and agrees to the Condition of Approval. There being no further comments from the applicant, discussion was brought back to the Commission for comments. �-. Commissioner Matthies stated that she had a chance to discuss the project with the applicant and indicated that she appreciates that the applicant addressed some of her concerns. She stated that she likes the look of the project, and had no further comments. AGENDA ITEM NO..�.:� PAGE _5 —.. -. PAGE 6 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — MARCH 02, 2004 Commissioner O'Neal asked the applicant what the average size of the lots. Mr. Freeman indicated that the average size of a lot is 5,000 square feet. Commissioner O'Neal stated that he too likes the look of the project, and had no further comments. Chairman LaPere asked Staff what type of development is being proposed to the east side of the project. Senior Planner Morita stated that the eastern side of the project is being developed as a Residential project known as "The Willows ". He indicated that the new development is currently under construction. Commissioner LaPere had no further comments. There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere requested the reading of the Resolution. MOVED BY MATTHIES, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -23, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PROJECT NO. 2003 -19 WHICH ENTAILS DESIGN REVIEW OF A THREE -UNIT MODEL HOMES COMPLEX AND PRODUCTION UNITS WHICH WILL BE CONSTRUCTED THROUGHOUT 111 SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITHIN TRACT MAP NO. 30492 INFORMATIONAL ITEMS None STAFF COMMENTS Director of Community Development Brady commented on the following: • No comments. PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS Chairman LaPere commented on the following: AGENDA ITEM ��NO. c PAGE __�u._. OF 3__ _ . ..o •.ow PAGE 7 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — MARCH 02, 2004 • He indicated that he would try to make the meeting on Friday, March 5, 2004. Commissioner Matthies commented on the following: • She indicated that she would not be able to attend the Island Wells meeting to be held on Friday, March 5, 2004. • She wanted to welcome Kitt Coury to the Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner O'Neal commented on the following: • He indicated that he would not be able to attend the Island Wells meeting on March 5, 2004. • He expressed his gratitude on the materials that he receives prior to the Planning Commission Meetings. He stated that Staff does a very good job on preparing for the meeting. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY MATTHIES, AND SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 6:40 PM. Ron LaPere, Chairman Respectfully Submitted, Dana C. Porche' Office Specialist III ATTEST: 100 , Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO.,.., PAGE OF MARCH is, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT SUMMARY FUND# FUND DESCRIPTION TOTAL 100 GENERAL FUND 947,914.82 110 STATE GAS TAX FUND 9,825.31 112 TRANSPORTATION / MEASURE A FUND 666.00 130 LIGHTING / LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE FUND 7,264.98 150 C.D.B.G. FUND 1,087.80 205 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE FUND 8,985.14 221 PARK C.I.P. FUND 1,350.76 231 LIBRARY C.I.P. FUND 740.28 254 89 -1 RAILROAD CANYON ROAD IMPROVEMENT FUND 145.04 352 A.D. 86 -1 DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,000.00 356 A.D. 90 -1A DEBT SERVICE FUND 428.26 362 C.F.D. 95 -1 (1996 -E) DEBT SERVICE FUND 61,772.44 364 C.F.D. 88 -3 III (B) /97 SERIES B DEBT SERVICE FUND 485.12 365 C.F.D. 98 -1 (SUMMERHILL IMPROVEMENT) DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,411.62 366 C.F.D. 2004 -1 DEBT SERVICE FUND 8,000.00 608 TRUST DEPOSITS AND PRE -PAID EXP 1,398.54 610 KANGAROO RAT TRUST FUND 13,730.00 620 COST RECOVERY SYSTEM 2,513.49 GRAND TOTAL 1,069,719.60 3/16/2004 RNWARRANT LIST MASTER\WARRANT 031504 AQEWA ITEM NO. PACE OF MARCH g5, 20 ®4 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT LIST CHECK# VENDOR NAME AMOUNT 76781 THE L.I.U. OF N.A. 1,804.80 76924 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 322.87 76925 CALIFORNIA P.E.R.S. 1,976.42 76926 CALIFORNIA P.E.R.S. 60,018.76 76927 VISION SERVICE PLAN 1,160.69 76928 FORTIS BENEFITS 6,028.94 76929 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 1,627.12 76930 LIUNA LOCAL 777 374.00 76931 THE MARK FISHER COMPANY 1,340.50 76932 STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE 19,995.28 76933 THE MARK FISHER COMPANY 1,340.50 76934 FAZZIO, JON 200.00 76935 GULBRANSEN, ARLINE 173.48 76936 TEXTRON FINANCIAL CORPORATION 987.13 76937 CITICORP VENDOR FINANCE, INC. 770.41 76938 LAKE ELSINORE VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 120.00 76939 RIVERSIDE COUNTY'S CREDIT UNION 2,925.00 76940 I.C.M.A. RETIREMENT TRUST 4,700.43 76941 CALIFORNIA P.E.R.S. 21,573.37 76942 MONTEREY MARRIOT 683.97 76944 VOID 0.00 76945 -76947 A & A JANITORIAL SERVICE 5,409.75 76948 ALLIED TRAFFIC EQUIPMENT 423.68 76949 ALPINE PREMIUM WATER- NATHAN GARNER 198.05 76950 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES 343.40 76951 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 395.00 76952 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION 115.00 76953 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEY 7,100.00 76954 APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 568.00 76955 APWA SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CHAPTER 375.00 76956 AVALOS, MARY 350.00 76957 BALDWIN, ALLEN 350.00 76958 BANK OF AMERICA (1647) 1,484.22 76959 BANK OF AMERICA (2409) 391.90 76960 BANK OF AMERICA (2417) 51.96 76961 BANK OF AMERICA (6588) 571.81 76962 BANK OF AMERICA (6612) 540.35 76963 BANK OF AMERICA (6646) 528.17 76964 BANK OF AMERICA (9206) 50.00 76965 BANK OF AMERICA (9238) 53.77 76966 BERRYMAN & HENIGAR, INC. 28,316.13 76967 BIO -TOX LABORATORIES 789.50 76968 BOATS PLUS 500.58 76969 BRUNNER, CLYDE 270.75 76970 THE BUSINESS PRESS 59.00 76971 CALIFORNIA PARK & RECREATION SOCIETY 140.00 76972 CALIFORNIA AGRI- CONTROL, INC. 805.00 76973 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 420.00 76974 THE CALIFORNIAN 61.00 76975 CALOLYMPIC GLOVE & SAFETY CO. 74.17 AGENDA ITEM NO 3/16/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTERMARRANT 031504 1 OF 5 PAGE OF 0 ,%no, -../` MARCH 15, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT LIST ,--cHECK# VENDOR NAME AMOUNT .1976 CARVALHO, LYNN 700.00 76977 CONSULTING ENG. & LAND SURVEYORS 89.55 76978 CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICES, INC. 111.00 76979 CMS BUSINESS FORMS, INC. 2,210.73 76980 COMTRONIX OF HEMET 6,083.43 76981 COUNTS UNLIMITED, INC. 400.00 76982 COURY, KIRT A. 4,200.00 76983 CRAFCO, INC. 1,089.68 76984 D & S ELECTRIC 297.00 76985 DANKA OFFICE IMAGING 406.69 76986 DAPEER, ROSENBILT & LITVAK, L.L.P. 385.90 76987 DELL MARKETING L.P. 2,389.62 76988 DO IT CENTER 339.20 76989 DONAHOE, CAROLE K. 1,125.00 76990 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELING, INC. 581.24 76991 DRIVER ALLIANT 76992 D3 EQUIPMENT 76993 E. V. M. W. D. 76994 ELITE ELEVATOR, INC. 76995 ELSINORE ELECTRICAL SUPPLY, INC. 76996 -76999 ELSINORE PIONEER LUMBER CO. 77000 EMPIRE ECONOMICS, INC. 77001 -77002 EMPLOYMENT SYSTEMS 77003 -77004 EXCEL LANDSCAPE, INC. x'005 FAZZIO, TERI .1006 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 77007 FIRST AMERICAN REAL ESTATE SOLUTION 77008 GALL'S, INC. 77009 GEARHART'S GARAGE, INC. 77010 GLICK, LAURENCE & MARILYN 77011 GREGORY, SAMUEL 77012 GULBRANSEN, ARLINE 77013 HANCOCK, LORENA 77014 HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 77015 HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 77016 HARTZOG & CRABILL, INC. 77017 HDR ENGINEERING, INC. 77018 HI -WAY SAFETY, INC. 77019 INLAND EMPIRE LOCK & KEY 77020 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 77021 INTERSTATE SALES 77022 ISSI BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, L.L.C. 77023 JANDA, DE 77024 JEFF HAUSER MOBILE WELDING 77025 KARVELOT, STEVE 77026 KASAD, VICKI 77027 KAY PARK -REC CORP. 77028 KILROY, PAT ,,-j7029 KOBATA & ASSOC., INC. '030 L & M FERTILIZER, INC. 3/16/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTERMARRANT 031504 1,243.00 774.37 1,243.03 607.00 280.88 876.06 8,000.00 6,436.15 5,445.06 156.93 149.84 129.75 452.91 182.90 350.00 1,050.00 81.39 108.75 19,644.15 5,798.70 580.00 831.60 1,499.88 177.06 280.00 228.96 49.58 252.75 540.44 116.25 150.00 790.78 181.07 5,760.00 3,566.48 2 OF 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE. OF MARCH 15, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT LIST CHECK# VENDOR NAME AMOUNT 77031 L & N UNIFORM SUPPLY CO. 125.79 77032 L.B. HAYHURST & ASSOCIATES, INC. 405.00 77033 LA SIERRA FIRE EQUIPMENT 155.77 77034 LAKE CHEVROLET 176.44 77035 LAKE ELSINORE FLORIST & GIFTS 63.52 77036 LAKE ELSINORE FORD 52.80 77037 LAKE ELSINORE TIRE & AUTO, INC. 211.65 77038 LAKE ELSINORE VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 12,500.00 77039 LAKELAND MARINE 172.16 77040 LAMBERT FLOORING 300.00 77041 LIBRARY SYSTEMS & SERVICES, L.L.C. 740.28 77042 LIFE- ASSIST, INC. 1,299.33 77043 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF CORONER 1,203.00 77044 LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC. 68.61 77045 LUDINE, RAYMOND 272.22 77046 MACKEY JR., CHARLES 4,235.00 77047 MARGIS, TODD 340.00 77048 MILLER, LINDA M. 3,082.50 77049 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES, L.P. 74.09 77050 MONTEREY MARRIOTT 386.00 77051 MORITA, DUANE A. 4,650.00 77052 MORROW PLUMBING, INC. 244.45 77053 MORTON PEST CONTROL, INC. 445.00 77054 NETCOMP TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 10,070.07 77055 NILLES, JENNIFER 120.00 77056 NOBLE CONSULTANTS, INC. 9,840.18 77057 NORTH COUNTY TIMES 682.07 77058 NORTHERN SAFETY CO., INC. 27.51 77059 O'NEAL, MICHAEL 138.00 77060 OW EN & BRADLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 16.00 77061 PAYNE, WILLIAM 75.00 77062 PCI PARKING & HIGHWAY STRIPING 666.00 77063 -77064 PETTY CASH 510.55 77065 PITNEY BOWES, INC. 247.61 77066 THE PLANNING CENTER 45.00 77067 POWERLAND EQUIPMENT, INC. 14,990.00 77068 THE PRESS - ENTERPRISE 1,843.92 77069 PRIMA/CALIFORNIA CHAPTER 55.00 77070 -77072 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 540.77 77073 QUILL CORPORATION 1,599.29 77074 QUINLAN PUBLISHING GROUP 174.89 77075 QWEST COMMUNICATIONS 521.28 77076 RANCHO REPROGRAPHICS, INC. 913.70 77077 REBEL RENTS, INC. 229.28 77078 RESERVE ACCOUNT - POSTAGE BY PHONE 5,000.00 77079 RIGHTWAY 353.88 77080 RIVAS, ROSENDO 350.00 77081 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 339,587.66 77082 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL 2,910.00 77083 RIVERSIDE COUNTY HABITAT CONSERVATION AGENCY 13,730.00 3/16/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTER\WARRANT 031504 3 OF 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF MART 15, 2004 CITY OF LAKE E LSINOR E WARRANT LIST ,,�CK# VENDOR NAME AMOUNT 084 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S 61,987.00 77085 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR - CONTROLLER 1,855.00 77086 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 130.00 77087 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE OFFICE OF ASSESSOR, GARY L. ORSO 15.00 77088 ROMERO, ANTHONY 400.00 77089 ROQUE, JESUS 480.00 77090 SADDLEBACK MATERIALS COMPANY, INC. 705.76 77091 SAFETY -KLEEN SERVICES, INC. 141.67 77092 SAN DIEGAN 25.00 77093 SANDERS, DANIEL 350.00 77094 SC ENGINEERING 8,985.14 77095 SCOTT FAZEKAS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1,202.43 77096 SERVICE ONE SERVICE, INC. 2,250.00 77097 SHAW, ANITA 100.00 77098 SIGNS PLUS 52.00 77099 SIMPLOT PARTNERS 517.63 77100 -77103 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. 8,259.05 77104 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO. 550.14 77105 STANLEY, JASON 736.50 77106 STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND 10,821.43 77107 STAUFFER'S LAWN EQUIPMENT 29.43 77108 STENO SOLUTIONS 427.38 77109 STORAASLI, PEGGY J. 847.00 77110 BOB STOVER, INC. 4,692.00 X111 SUAREZ'S AUTO UPHOLSTERY 250.00 /112 T.S. INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 775.44 77113 TEAM AUTOAID, INC. 44.81 77114 TEMECULA COPIERS 656.47 77115 TOP -LINE INDUSTRIAL, INC. 499.69 77116 TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE, INC. 284.19 77117 UHLRY, DAN 491.50 77118 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 66,097.44 77119 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 101.47 77120 VALLEY CENTER AUTO PARTS NAPA 672.58 77121 VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, MC CLENDON & MANN 27,847.00 77122 VEGA, TEODORO & SARA 350.00 77123 VENUS PRINTING 148.82 77124 -77128 VERIZON CALIFORNIA, INC. 4,120.73 77129 VILLA, ARMANDO 75.00 77130 WATENPAUGH, RICHARD 150.00 77131 WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 403.55 77132 WE TIP, INC. 1,620.00 77133 WESCO HOMES 3,200.00 77134 WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC. 10,265.70 77135 WEST COAST WINDOW CLEANING 450.00 77136 WEST GROUP 251.11 77137 WESTERN FARM SERVICE, INC. 456.00 77138 Z -BEST PAINT 2,804.14 7139 24 HOUR FIRE PROTECTION, INC. 356.20 AQEIVDA ITEI�A� 3/16/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTERMARRANT 031504 401`5 PAGE 5 OF �� MARCH 15, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT LIST CHECK# VENDOR NAME AMOUNT TOTAL PIE DATE: 03/05/04 PAYROLL TAXES 03/05/04 PAYROLL CASH 931,657.29 42,777.95 95,284.36 GRAND TOTAL 1,069,719.60 N%wwr AGENDA ITEM NO. 3/16/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTERMARRANT 031504 5 OF 5 '�'\ PAGE OE.._e. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION INITIATING PROCEEDINGS AND APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY KNOWN AS THE AMENDED PEPPER GROVE TRACT INTO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 1, AS LLMD ANNEXATION NO. 2, DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION AND TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS, DETERMINING THAT THESE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE TAKEN PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND THE RIGHT TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT, AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO BACKGROUND As a condition of approval, the City has required the Pepper Grove development to be annexed into the Landscape and Street Lighting District No. 1. As new developments are brought forward to the City, the development will be annexed into Landscape and Street Lighting District No. 1 if a development will not have a homeowners association or if there are more than 3 street light. DISCUSSION Attached is the Engineer's report for the Lake Elsinore Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District Annexation No. 2 prepared by Harris and Associates. The district annexation includes the Elsinore development which contains approximately 22,200 square feet of public right -of -way landscaping and 4 street lights. The total annual cost of operations and maintenance is estimated at $8,699 or $299.97 per single family dwelling unit. The estimated cost for the first year includes a 50% reserve of $3,900 bringing the total to $12,599 or $434.45 per single family dwelling unit. The 1972 Act requires that a special fund be set up for the revenues and expenditures of the District and each annexation or zone tracked separately. Any balance or deficit remaining on July 1 must be carried over to the next fiscal year. The City Council may approve up to a two percent (2 %) fixed rate adjustment annually. The rate adjustment will adjust the Maximum rate but not necessarily the assessment rate. If costs begin to exceed assessment revenue, the City Council may increase the assessment up to the Maximum. AGEMA ITEM NO. 3 OL () PAGE --L OF Report to the City Council March 23, 2004 Page 2 of 2 FISCAL IMPACT The City is not negatively impacted by the annexation or continuation of the district. In addition to the operating costs of the district, the special tax would be levied annually to sufficiently finance the costs of administering the levy, collection of the special tax and all other costs of the levy of the special tax. The City will be, however, positively impacted with the funding for public right -of -way landscape. PROCESS The annexation of the Landscape and Street Lighting District Annexation No. 2 requires a specific process as outlined in the attached resolution. The City Council will need to hold a public hearing on the annexation of certain territory into LLMD No. 1 and the participating property owner will have the opportunity to vote. The public hearing can be scheduled for April 13, 2004. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council: 1. Approve the Engineer's Report for Annexation No. 2 to LLMD No. 1 .1 2. Adopt the Resolution 2004 - Iof Intention to Annex into LLMD No. 1 3. Schedule the public hearing on the District Formation for April 13, 2004 PREPARED �- APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Matt N. Pressey, Directoof Administrative Services Dick Watenpaugh, City AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OP a' 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -Q A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS AND APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY KNOWN AS THE AMMENDED PEPPER GROVE TRACT INTO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 1, AS ANNEXATION NO. 2 TO THE LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1, DECLARING THE CITY'S INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION AND TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS, DETERMINING THAT THESE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE TAKEN PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND THE RIGHT TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT, AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the "Act "), desires to initiate proceedings for the annexation of certain territory (the "Annexed Area ") to the Landscape and Street Lighting District No. 1 (the "District "), and declares the City's intention to order the annexation of the Annexed Area for the levy and collection of annual assessment within the Annexed Area for Fiscal Year 2004/2005 for the purposes provided therefor in the Act; and WHEREAS, KD Homes, LLC (hereinafter referred to as the "Developer ") is the sole owner of that certain real property located in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of California, more particularly described as follows: Legal Description: Amended Pepper Grove Tract, in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of California, currently known as Assessor Parcel No.'s 373 - 205 - 007, -009, -010, and -011. WHEREAS, the Developer is developing the Property as a Elsinore Homes development (hereinafter referred to as the "Project "); and WHEREAS, the improvements to be installed, constructed, or maintained within the proposed Annexed Area may include installation, construction, or maintenance of any authorized improvements under the Act, including, but not limited to, streetlight improvements and any facilities which are appurtenant to any of the aforementioned or which are necessary or convenient for the maintenance or servicing thereof, and WHEREAS, Section 22608 of the Act limits the requirement for the resolutions, Engineer's Report, notices of hearing, and right of majority protest under the Act to the territory included within the annexation and waives these requirements with the written consent of all of the owners of property within the territory to be annexed; and ENDA ITEM NO. �C� AG 2 � PAGE —31 Cf RESOLUTION NO. 2004-. March 23, 2004 — Page 2 WHEREAS, Proposition 218, the Right to Vote on Taxes Act, does hereby require that a notice of the proposed assessment along with a ballot shall be mailed to all owners of identified parcels within the Annexed Area and that the agency shall conduct a public hearing not less than 45 days after the mailing of said notice; and WHEREAS, the Annexation consists of the development known as Assessor Parcel No.'s 373 -202 -001 to -029; and WHEREAS, the developer has submitted a petition to the City requesting to have the development annexed into the Landscape and Street Lighting District No. 1; and WHEREAS, the developer, as stated in the petition, may waive all statutory notices of hearing and rights of majority protest by any interested property owners within the Annexation; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a diagram attached as Exhibit "A," which is designated Proposed Annexation No. 2 to the Lake Elsinore Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and an assessment showing the proposed boundaries of the territory to be annexed into the District, which is benefited by the construction of the improvements and the amount to be assessed against each of the parcels within the proposed annexation to the District; and WHEREAS, the City has ordered the preparation of an Engineer's Report in accordance with Article 4 (commencing with Section 22565) of Chapter 1 of the Streets and Highways Code giving a description of the annexation; and WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report, diagram, and assessments have been approved and filed with the City Clerk and are open to public inspection and may be referred to for all details regarding the improvements, the boundary of the proposed annexation, the assessments, total costs, and description of the parcels to be assessed; and WHEREAS, this City Council has examined and considered the Engineer's Report, diagram, assessments, and the proceedings prior thereto. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA: SECTION 1. That the above recitals are true and correct. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds (1) that the public interest, convenience, and necessity require the maintenance of a street lighting system; and (2) declares its intention to order the formation of the Annexation and to levy and collect assessments against the assessable lots and /or parcels of land within such Annexation for that portion of the fiscal year commencing July 1, 2004 and ending June 30, 2005, to pay the costs and expenses of the maintenance of improvements described below. If the assessments proposed by this resolution AQENDA ITEM NO. ---- PAC�E. -4 X )- 0 - - RESOLUTION NO. 2004 - March 23, 2004 — Page 3 are approved by the property owners pursuant to a mailed ballot election conducted in accordance with Article XIII D of the California Constitution, the City Council in subsequent fiscal years may thereafter impose the assessment at any rate or amount that is less than or equal to the amount authorized for Fiscal Year 2004/2005, without conducting another mailed ballot election. SECTION 3. That the City Council hereby proposes to annex to Landscape and Street Lighting District No. 1 the Annexed Area located at the Amended Pepper Grove Tract, also known as Assessor Parcel No.'s 373 - 205 - 007, -009, -010, and -011, and to levy annual assessments thereon to provide for the following work: Installation, construction, or maintenance of any authorized improvements under the Act, including, but not limited to, streetlight improvements and any facilities which are appurtenant to any of the aforementioned or which are necessary or convenient for the maintenance or servicing thereof. The distinctive designation for the proposed Annexed Area shall be "Annexation No. 2 to the Lake Elsinore Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 ", when referred to separately and upon annexation will be included in the designation of Landscape and Street Lighting District No. 1. �^ SECTION 4. That the Property Owner has provided the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore a petition fully signed and notarized, waiving all statutory notices of hearing and notice periods, granting the City the right to maintain and service the improvements and gives consent to the establishment of an assessment for the proposed annexation of the property into the District in an amount reasonably determined by the City to cover all costs and expenses incurred for the continued maintenance, operation, and servicing of the improvements. SECTION 5. A Diagram for the District (Section 22570 of the Streets and Highways Code) and an assessment (Section 22572 of the Streets and Highways Code) showing the area to be annexed, benefited, and assessed for the improvements has been prepared as Exhibit "A." The diagram, assessment, and improvement plans have been filed with the City Clerk. SECTION 6. The diagram, which indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory proposed to be annexed into the District, is hereby declared to describe the proposed boundaries of the proposed annexation to the District and shall govern for all details as to the extent and location of said annexation. SECTION 7. That the City Council is satisfied with the correctness of the diagram and assessment, including the proceedings and all matters relating thereto. SECTION & That notice is hereby given that on the 13th day of April, 2004, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, in the City Council Chambers, in the City of Lake Elsinore, the City will hold a public hearing to receive and tabulate all ballots with reference to 10.11 the Annexed Area pursuant to the Right to Vote On Taxes Act. AGENDA ITEM NO. _---_ PAGE - OF �L () RESOLUTION NO. 2004 - March 23, 2004 — Page 4 SECTION 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day 23rd of March. ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO FORM: BARBARA LEIBOLD, CITY ATTORNEY I, the City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 23rd day of March, 2004 by the following vote of Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF %.r/ RESOLUTION NO. 2004 - March 23, 2004 — Page 5 Exhibit A Annexation No. 2 to Landscape and Street Ligthting Maintenance District No. 1 373-20 PARK WAY 10 � W aC 20� O VICINITY MAP N.T.S. RAIJ ROAD AVE ti LU L �C The parcel numbers above correspond to the Assessor's maps of the Assessor of the County of Riverside for Fiscal Year 2003 -04. AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE OF 116 Engineer's Report for Annexation No. Z to the Lake Elsinore Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 City ofLake Elsinore Riverside County, California Prepared by: 01 Harris & Associates March IZ, 2004 3 "e AGENDA ITEM N©• :� O PAGE Annexation No. 2, City of Lake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page i ENGINEER'S REPORT ANNEXATION NO.2 to the LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by the City Council. The undersigned certifies that she is a Professional Engineer, registered in the State of California DATED: March 12, 2004 BY: Joan E. Cox R.C.E. No. 41965 E CO +` � rn NO. 41965 ;a * EXP. 3/31/06 Ar \Cfv« rF OF CAL�EO� I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment Roll and Diagram thereto attached, was filed with me on the _ day of . 2004. City Clerk, City of Lake Elsinore Riverside County, California I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment Roll and Diagram thereto attached, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, on the _ day of , 2004. City Clerk, City of Lake Elsinore Riverside County, California :A I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Assessment Roll were filed with the County Auditor of the County of Riverside, on the _ day of , 2004. City Clerk, City of Lake Elsinore Riverside County, California qA e1sinore\ IImd1 \formation\newdistrict\annex no. 2 Ilmd engineer's report.doc AGENDA ITEM NO.._ S.�.. 1 PACE ()F PAGE Annexation No. 2, City ofLake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. I Page ii ENGINEER'S REPORT ANNEXATION NO.2 to the LAKE ELSINORE LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Certificates .................... Report............................ .... ............................... i ... ............................... 1 .............. 3 .............. 4 .......... I... S .............. 6 .............. 9 ......... I.... 9 Part A - Plans and Specifications ........... ............................... Part B - Estimate of Cost ........................ ............................... Part C - Assessment Roll ........................ ............................... Part D - Method of Apportionment of Assessment ................ Part E - Property Owner List .................. ............................... Part F - Assessment District Boundary ... ............................... q: \elsinore\llmdl \formation \new district\annex no. 2 Mid engineers report.doc 0 AGENDA ITEMj /NCO. 3 o PAGE OF Annexation No. 2, City ofLake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page 1 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ENGINEER'S REPORT Prepared Pursuant to the Provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500 through 22679), Article XIIID of The California Constitution, and The Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act (California Government Code Section 53750 Et Seq.) Pursuant to Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, Article XIIID of the California Constitution, the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act and in accordance with the Resolution of Initiation adopted by the Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, State of California, in connection with the proceedings for: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ANNEXATION NO. 2 to the LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 hereinafter referred to as the "Assessment District" or "District ", I, Joan E. Cox, P.E., the authorized representative of Harris & Associates, the duly appointed ENGINEER OF WORK, submit herewith the "Report" consisting of six (6) parts as follows: PART A Plans and specifications for the improvements showing and describing the general nature, location and extent of the improvements. PART B An estimate of the cost of the proposed improvements for FY 2004 -05, including incidental costs and expenses in connection therewith. PART C An assessment of the estimated cost of the improvements on each benefited lot or parcel of land within the Assessment District. 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. Cf q:\elsinore \llmdl \formation\new district\annex no. 2 Ilmd engineers report.doc PAGE--.U- '�— Annexation No. 2, City ofLake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page 2 PART D The method of apportionment of assessments, indicating the proposed assessment of the total amount .-MO, of the costs and expenses of the improvements upon the several lots and parcels of land within the Assessment District, in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such lots and parcels. PART E A list of the names and addresses of the owners of real property within the Assessment District, as shown on the last equalized roll of the Assessor of the County of Riverside. PART F The Diagram of the Assessment District Boundaries showing the exterior boundaries of the Assessment District, the boundaries of any zones within the Assessment District and the lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel of land within the Assessment District. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 .�. q:\elsinore \IImd1 \formation \newdisirict\annex no. 2 Ilmd engineers report.doc PAGE OE_ °—� � - 10 -- Annexation No. 2, City of Lake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page 3 PART A PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS The facilities will be operated, serviced and maintained as generally described as follows: DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS, FY 2004 -05 The facilities to be maintained and serviced include landscaping for the specific Maintenance District as described herein. Facilities include but are not limited to: landscaping, planting, shrubbery, trees, turf, irrigation systems, hardscapes, fixtures, and appurtenant facilities, in public rights -of -way, parkways, slopes and dedicated easements within the boundaries of said Maintenance District. Zone 1 (the original District) - Encompasses the Water Ridge Development and funds landscape and street lighting maintenance and operations. Zone 2 (Annexation No. 1) - Encompasses the Elsinore Homes Development and funds landscape and street lighting maintenance and operations. Zone 3 (Annexation No. 2) - Encompasses the Pepper Grove Development and funds landscape and street lighting maintenance and operations. The facilities in Zone 3 are specifically described as follows: • Landscaping within the public right -of -way, approximately 22,200 square feet • Street lights within the public right -of -way Maintenance means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation and servicing of the landscaping and appurtenant facilities, including repair, removal or replacement of all or part of any of the landscaping or appurtenant facilities; providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of the landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing and treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris and other solid waste; and the cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls and other improvements to remove or cover graffiti. Servicing means the furnishing of water for the irrigation of the landscaping and the maintenance of any of the lighting facilities or appurtenant facilities and the furnishing of electric current or energy, gas or other illuminating agent for the lighting facilities, or for the lighting or operation of the landscaping or appurtenant facilities. The plans and specifications for the improvements, showing and describing the general nature, location, and the extent of the improvements, are on file in the office of the Director of Public Works and are incorporated herein by reference. AGENDA ITEM NO, 3 PAGE OF ?-0 gAe1sinoreWmd1 \formation \new district\annex no. 2 fund engineer's report.doc Annexation No. 2, City of Lake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No 1 Page 4 PART B ESTIMATE OF COST The estimated cost of the operation, servicing and maintenance of the street and sidewalk improvements for Fiscal Year 2004 -05, as described in Part A, are summarized herein and described below. ANNEXATION NO.2 to the LANDSCAPE AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 Proposed Budeet - Fiscal Year 2004 -05 Zone 3, Fiscal Year 2004 -05 Estimated Costs Landscapes Operations and Maintenance $7,104 Reserve (50 1/o) $3,552 Sub -Total $10,656 Street Li0ting Operations and Maintenance $695 Reserve (50 %) 348 Sub -Total $1,043 District Administration $900 Total Estimated Costs $12,599 The 1972 Act requires that a special fund be set up for the revenues and expenditures of the District. Funds raised by assessment shall be used only for the purpose as stated herein. A contribution to the District by the City may be made to reduce assessments, as the City Council deems appropriate. Any balance or deficit remaining on July 1 must be carried over to the next fiscal year. q. \elsinore \IImd1\formationlnew district \annex no. 2 Ilmd engineer's report.doc AGENDA FTEM NO. 3 PAGE _.1.._4.- OF -"00 Annexation No. 2, City ofLake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page 5 PART C ASSESSMENT ROLL The total proposed assessment for Fiscal Year 2004 -05 and the amount of the total proposed assessment apportioned to each lot or parcel within Zone 3 of the District, as shown on the latest assessment roll at the Riverside County Assessor's Office, are contained in the Assessment Roll provided below. The description of each lot or parcel is part of the Riverside County assessment roll and this roll is, by reference, made part of this Report. Assessor's Parcel Number 373 -205 -007 373 - 205 -009 373 - 205 -010 373 - 205 -011 Dwelling Units FY 2004 -05 Max. Asmt 29 $12,599.05* *The maximum assessment is $0.05 more than the estimated budget due to rounding of the assessment per dwelling unit. gAe1sinore \11md1 \formation \new district\annex no. 2 Ilmd engineer's report.doc AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OF �© Annexation No. 2, City of Lake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page 6 PART D METHOD OFAPPORTIONMENT OFASSESSMENT GENERAL Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, permits the establishment of assessment district by cities for the purpose of providing certain public improvements which include construction, operation, maintenance and servicing of street lights, traffic signals and landscaping. Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the 1972 Act) requires that maintenance assessments be levied according to benefit rather than according to assessed value. This section states: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements." The 1972 Act permits the designation of zones of benefit within any individual assessment district if "by reason of variations in the nature, location, and extent of the improvements, the various areas will receive different degrees of benefit from the improvements." (Sec. 22574). Thus, the 1972 Act requires the levy of a true "assessment" based on the actual benefit rather than a "special tax." In addition, Proposition 218, the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" which was approved on the November 1996 Statewide ballot and added Article Y-M to the California Constitution, requires that a parcel's assessment may not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel. Article XIIID provides that only special benefits are assessable and the City must separate the general benefits from the special benefits. Article XMD also requires that publicly owned property which benefit from the improvements be assessed. REASON FOR THE ASSESSMENT The assessment is proposed to be levied to pay for the costs of the construction, servicing and maintenance of landscaping, street lighting and appurtenant improvements within the District. SPECIAL BENEFIT ANALYSIS Street Landscaping, Slopes and Greenbelts. Trees, landscaping, hardscaping and appurtenant facilities, if well maintained, provide beautification, shade and enhancement of the desirability of the surroundings, and therefore increase property value. In Parkways and Land Values written by John Nolan and Henry V. Hubbard in 1937, it is stated: "... there is no lack of opinion, based on general principals and experience and common sense, that parkways do in fact add value to property, even though the amount cannot be determined exactly.... Indeed, in most cases where public money has been spent for parkways the assumption has been definitely made that the proposed parkway will show a AGENDA ITEM NO.. q:\elsinore\limdl \formation\new districtlannex no. 2 Ilmd engineer's report.doc PAGE OF DLO- Annexation No. 2, City of Lake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page 7 provable financial profit to the City. It has been believed that the establishment of parkways causes a rise in real estate values throughout the City, or in parts of the City,..." It should be noted that the definition of "parkways" above may include the roadway as well as the landscaping along side the roadway. The ongoing operation and maintenance of the street landscaping, slopes and greenways within the individual district, as identified in Part A of this Report, provide beautification to the areas that result in a special benefit to the parcels within the tracts adjacent to the improvements. If these landscaped areas were not properly maintained, the tract would be blighted. The City of Lake Elsinore considers the maintenance and upkeep of parkways and adjacent slopes to be the responsibility of the adjacent development due to the added beautification of the local community which extends to the perimeter of the development. Street Lighting. Proper maintenance and operation of the streetlights benefit all properties within the District by providing security, safety and community character and vitality as outlined below. Streetlights provide only incidental benefits to motorists traveling to, from or through the area. BENEFITS OF STREET LIGHTING Security and Safety • Mitigates crime • Alleviates the fear of crime • Enhances safe ingress /egress to property Community Character and Vitality • Promotes social interaction • Promotes business and industry • Contributes to a positive nighttime visual image Improvements that provide a special benefit to an isolated group of parcels of land located within the District are considered to be a localized benefit, and the costs associated with these improvements are assessed to all assessable parcels receiving the localized benefit. Localized benefits include the construction, operation, servicing and maintenance of the improvements that only benefit the parcels located within the localized areas. Localized Improvements — Parcels that have localized landscaping such as entryway landscaping, parkway landscaping, etc., and street lighting adjacent to or near their parcels directly benefit from the improvements and are assessed for the costs of the localized improvements. q:\elsinore \IImdl \formation \new district\annex no. 2 Ilmd engineer's report.doc AGENDA ITEM NO. _� PAGE OF X 0 , Annexation No. 2, City of Lake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page 8 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY Zone 3 The parcels of land in Zone 3 are single family residential (SFR) lots, with each of these lots benefiting equally from the improvements being maintained. Therefore, the costs associated with the landscaping and street lighting within and directly adjacent to the development, as shown in Part B of this report, will be apportioned on a residential lot basis. The table below provides the assessment apportionment for Zone 3. SFR Max. Maint. Asmt Actual Asmt Total Asmt Lots per Lot (FY 2004 -05)* per Lot (FY 2004 -05) For District 29 $434.45 $434.45 $12,599 * The maximum annual maintenance assessments shall be increased each year by 2 %. The actual assessments levied in any fiscal year will be as approved by the City Council and may not exceed the maximum assessment rate without receiving property owner approval for the increase. '"We AGENDA ITEM NO. q:\ elsinore\ IImdl \formation\newdistrict\annex no. 2 Ilmd engineer's report.doc PAGE OF -"l C �,, Annexation No. 2, City ofLake Elsinore March 12, 2004 Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Page 9 PART E PROPERTY OWNER LIST A list of names and addresses of the owners of all parcels within this District is shown on the last equalized Property Tax Roll of the Assessor of the County of Riverside, which by reference is hereby made a part of this report. This list is keyed to the Assessor's Parcel Numbers as shown on the Assessment Roll, Part C of this Report. PART F ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Diagrams showing the exterior boundaries of the District and the lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel of land within the District are provided on the following pages. The lines and dimensions of each lot or parcel within the District are those lines and dimensions shown on the maps of the Assessor of the County of Riverside for Fiscal Year 2004 -05. The Assessor's maps and records are incorporated by reference herein and made part of this report. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 ._ -- q:\elsinore \IImdl \formation \new district\annex no. 2 Ilmd engineer's report.doc PAGE 1OFD -- 373-20 ' PARK WAY 205 O VICINITY MAP N.T.S. RAI"90AD AVE H U� The parcel numbers above correspond to the Assessor's maps of the Assessor of the County of Riverside for Fiscal Year 2003 -04. Annexation No. 2 to the Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 1%0101 Assessment Diagram AGENDA tTEMI NO. Page 1 of 1 " PAGE OF a C) CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE I--- REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO ESTABLISH COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004 -1 (CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES) BACKGROUND On January 27, 2004, the City Council approved a deposit and reimbursement agreement with Oak Grove Equities II to receive $50,000 as a deposit for costs of forming a CFD. The City's finance team has met with the developer of the 84 multifamily dwelling unit project (City Center Townhomes) located south of Wal -Mart on Grape Street. The developer has approached the City to form a Community Facilities District (CFD) to help finance certain public infrastructure. ANALYSIS Bond Issue In order to finance the facilities it is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness in the amounts not to exceed $5,000,000. The annual CFD tax amounts, when combined with all other property taxes applicable to the project will not exceed the 2% City CFD guidelines. FISCAL IMPACT Repayment of the bonds is secured by the special taxes levied on all property within the district. PROCESS The formation of the Mello -Roos Community Facilities District requires a specific process as outlined in the attached resolution to establish a CFD. The City Council will need to hold a public hearing on the formation of the District and for the approval of the bond documents. At the public hearing the participating property owner will have the opportunity to vote. The public �-- hearing can be scheduled for April 27, 2004. ,AQMA ITEM PLO. PAGE OF J- Report to the City Council CFD 2004 -1 (City Center) Formation March 23, 2004 Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council: 1. Adopt Resolution of Intention 2004- Yi to Establish CFD 2004 -1 (City Center Townhomes) 2. Adopt Resolution of Intention 2004 - to Incur Bonded Indebtedness 3. Schedule the public hearing on the District Formation for April 27, 2004 PREPARED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Matt N. Pressey, Director of AdnWstrative Services AW-NDA ITEM NO. - 4N PAGE a„ F RESOLUTION NO. ),OOH -- l D RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE TO ESTABLISH CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004 -1 (CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES) WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City ") has received a petition (the "Petition ") requesting the institution of proceedings for (i) formation of a community facilities district (the "CFD ") pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (the "Act "), (ii) authorization of issuance of bonds for the CFD, and (iii) establishment of an appropriations limit for the CFD; and WHEREAS, the Council has determined that the Petition complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 53318(c) and now intends to initiate such proceedings; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Council to finance the acquisition and construction of the Facilities (as defined below) or any combination thereof through the formation of the CFD, subject to the authorization of bonds and the levy of a special tax to pay lease payments, installment purchase payments or other payments, or principal and interest on bonds, being approved at an election to be held within the boundaries of the CFD; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Council hereby determines to institute proceedings for the formation of a community facilities district under the terms of the Act. The exterior boundaries of the CFD are hereby specified and described to be as shown on that certain map now on file in the office of the Clerk entitled "Proposed Boundary of Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 of the City of Lake Elsinore (City Center Townhomes)," which map indicates by a boundary line the extent of the territory included in the proposed community facilities district and shall govern for all details as to the extent of the CFD. On the original and one copy of the map of such CFD on file in the City Clerk's office, the City Clerk shall endorse the certificate evidencing the date and adoption of this resolution. The City Clerk shall file the original of such map in her office and, within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of this Resolution, the City Clerk shall file a copy of such map so endorsed in the records of the County Recorder, County of Riverside, State of California. Section 2. The name of the proposed CFD shall be "City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 (City Center Townhomes)." Section 3. The facilities proposed to be financed by the CFD are public infrastructure facilities and other governmental facilities with an estimated useful life of five years or longer, which the CFD is authorized by law to construct, own or operate and that are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of development or rehabilitation occurring within the proposed CFD, including but not limited to streets, streetscape, storm drain, and water and sewer facilities and fees of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and related costs 45433651.2 AA ITEM NO. 1 PAOE-3� O� including designs, inspections, professional fees, annexation fees, connection fees and acquisition costs (the "Facilities'). Such Facilities need not be physically located within the CFD. Section 4. Except where funds are otherwise available, it is the intention of the Council to levy annually in accordance with procedures contained in the Act a special tax (the "Special Tax ") sufficient to pay for the costs of financing the acquisition and/or construction of the Facilities, including the principal of and interest on the bonds proposed to be issued to finance the Facilities and other periodic costs, the establishment and replenishment of reserve funds, the remarketing, credit enhancement and liquidity fees, the costs of administering the levy and collection of the Special Tax and all other costs of the levy of the Special Tax and issuance of the bonds, including any foreclosure proceedings, architectural, engineering, inspection, legal, fiscal, and financial consultant fees, discount fees, interest on bonds due and payable prior to the expiration of one year from the date of completion of facilities (but not to exceed two years), election costs and all costs of issuance of the bonds, including, but not limited to, fees for bond counsel, disclosure counsel, financing consultants and printing costs, and all other administrative. costs of the tax levy and bond issue. The Special Tax will be secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non - exempt real property in the CFD. In the first year in which such a Special Tax is levied, the levy shall include a sum sufficient to repay to the City all amounts, if any, transferred to the CFD pursuant to Section 53314 of the Act and interest thereon. The schedule of the rate and method of apportionment and manner of collection of the Special Tax is described. in detail in Exhibit A attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. The Special Tax is based upon the cost of financing the Facilities in the CFD, the demand that each parcel will place on the Facilities and the benefit (direct and/or indirect) received by each parcel from the Facilities. The Special Tax is apportioned to each parcel on the foregoing basis pursuant to Section 53325.3 of the Act. In the event that a portion of the property within the CFD shall become for any reason exempt, wholly or partially, from the levy of the Special Tax, the Council shall, on behalf of the CFD, increase the levy to the extent necessary upon the remaining property within the CFD which is not delinquent or exempt in order to yield the required payments, subject to the maximum tax. Under no circumstances, however, shall the Special Tax levied against any parcel used for private residential purposes be increased as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner of any other parcel or parcels within the CFD by more than 10 percent. Furthermore, the maximum special tax authorized to be levied against any parcel used for private residential purposes shall not be increased over time in excess of 2 percent per year. Section 5. The Council hereby finds that the proposed Facilities are necessary to meet increased demands put upon the City as a result of the new development or rehabilitation within the proposed CFD. Section 6. A public hearing (the "Hearing ") on the establishment of the CFD and the proposed rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax shall be held on April 27, 2004, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as practicable, at the chambers of the Council, 130 S. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, California 92530. AGENDA ITEM NO. 45433651.2 2 PAGE l OF Section 7. At the time and place set forth above for the hearing, any interested person, including all persons owning lands or registered to vote within the proposed CFD, may appear and be heard. Section 8. Each City officer who is or will be responsible for the Facilities to be financed by the CFD, if it is established, is hereby directed to study the proposed CFD and, at or before the time of the above - mentioned Hearing, file a report with the Council, and which is to be made a part of the record of the Hearing, containing a brief description of the Facilities by type which will in his or her opinion be required to adequately meet the needs of the CFD and his or her estimate of the cost of providing the Facilities. The City Manager is directed to estimate the fair and reasonable cost of all incidental expenses, including the cost of planning and designing the Facilities to be financed pursuant to the Act, including the cost of environmental evaluations of such facilities, all costs associated with the creation of the CFD, issuance of bonds, determination of the amount of any special taxes, collection of any special taxes, or costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the City with respect to the CFD, and any other expenses incidental to the construction, completion and inspection of the authorized work to be paid through the proposed financing. Section 9. The City may accept advances of funds from any sources, including private persons or private entities, and is authorized and directed to use such funds for any authorized purpose, including any cost incurred by the City in creating the CFD. The City may enter into an agreement to repay all of such funds as are not expended or committed for any authorized purpose at the time of the election on the levy of the Special Tax, if the proposal to �-. levy such tax should fail, and to repay all of such funds advanced if the levy of the Special Tax shall be approved by the qualified electors of the CFD. Section 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish a notice ( "Notice ") of the Hearing pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper of general circulation published in the area of the proposed CFD. Such Notice shall contain information set forth in Section 53322 of the Act. Such publication shall be completed at least 7 days prior to the date of the Hearing. Section 11. The Clerk may send a copy of the Notice by first -class mail, postage prepaid, to each registered voter and to each landowner within proposed CFD as shown on the last equalized assessment roll. Said mailing shall be completed not less than fifteen (15) days prior to the date of the Hearing. Section 12. Pursuant to Section 53344.1 of the Act, the Council hereby reserves to itself, in its sole discretion, the right and authority by subsequent resolution to allow any owner of property within the CFD, subject to the provisions of Section 53344.1 of the Act and those conditions as it may impose, and any applicable prepayment penalties as prescribed in the bond indenture or comparable instrument or document, to tender to the CFD treasurer in full payment or part payment of any installment of the special taxes or the interest or penalties thereon which may be due or delinquent, but for which a bill has been received, any bond or other obligation secured thereby, the bond or other obligation to be taken at par and credit to be given for the accrued interest shown thereby computed to the date of tender. AQEMA ITEM NO. �. 45433651.2 3 PAS S OF Section 13. The voting procedure with respect to the establishment of the CFD and the imposition of the special tax shall be by hand delivered ballot election. 45433651.2 ..s ,"nor AGENDA ITEM NO. � ,, ay PAGE OF______. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 12004. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE By: Title: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Leibold, City Attorney 45433651.2 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 5 PAGE 7 OF-2 _. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) I, Vicki Kasad, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 2004, and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 45433651.2 City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. /4 PAGE OF 45433651.2 EXHIBIT A RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX AGENDA ITEM NO. 1 PAGE OF EXHIBIT D RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-1 OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE (CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES) The following sets forth the Rate and Method of Apportionment for the levy and collection of Special Taxes in the City of Lake Elsinore ( "City ") Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 (City Center Townhomes) ( "CFD No. 2004 -1 "). An Annual Special Tax shall be levied on and collected in CFD No. 2004 -1 each Fiscal Year, in an amount determined through the application of the Rate and Method of Apportionment described below. All of the real property within CFD No. 2004 -1, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent, and in the manner herein provided. SECTION A DEFINITIONS The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings: "Acre or Acreage" means the land area of an Assessor's Parcel as shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on the Assessor's Parcel Map, the land area as shown on the N4400 applicable Final Map, or if the land area is not shown on the applicable Final Map, the land area shall be calculated by the City Engineer. "Act" means the Mello -Roos Communities Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. "Administrative Expenses" means any ordinary and necessary expense incurred by the City on behalf of CFD No. 2004 -1 related to the determination of the amount of the levy of Special Taxes, the collection of Special Taxes including the expenses of collecting delinquencies, the administration of Bonds, the payment of salaries and benefits of any City employee whose duties are directly related to the administration of CFD No. 2004 -1 , and costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of CFD No. 2004 -1 relating to CFD No. 2004 -1. "Annual Special Tax" means the Special Tax actually levied in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel. "Apartment Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Residential Property on which one or more Apartment Units are constructed. "Apartment Unit" means a dwelling unit within a building comprised of attached residential units available for rental by the general public, not for sale to an end user, and under common management. City of Lake Elsinore Ll March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 AGENDA ITEM NO. C �. PAGE OF Page 1 "Assessor's Parcel" means a lot or parcel of land designated on an Assessor's Parcel Map with an assigned Assessor's Parcel Number. "Assessor's Parcel Map" means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels by Assessor's Parcel Number. "Assessor's Parcel Number" means that number assigned to an Assessor's Parcel by the County for purposes of identification. "Assigned Annual Special Tax" means the Special Tax of that name described in Section D below. "Backup Annual Special Tax" means the Special Tax of that name described in Section E below. "Bonds" means any obligation to repay a sum of money, including obligations in the form of bonds, notes, certificates of participation, long -term leases, loans from government agencies, or loans from banks, other financial institutions, private businesses, or individuals, or long -term contracts, or any refunding thereof, to which Special Taxes within CFD No. 2004 -1 have been pledged. "Building Square Footage" or "BSF" means the square footage of assessable internal living space, exclusive of garages or other structures not used as living space, as determined by reference to the building permit application for such Assessor's Parcel. "Calendar Year" means the period commencing January 1 of any year and ending the following December 31. "CFD No. 2004 -1" means Community Facilities District No. 2004 -_ established by the City under the Act. "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, acting as the Legislative Body of CFD No. 2004 -1, or its designee. "County" means the County of Riverside. "Developed Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property that: (i) are included in a Final Map that was recorded prior to the January 1St preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied, and (ii) a building permit was issued on or before March 1St preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. "Exempt Property" means all Assessor's Parcels designated as being exempt from Special Taxes as provided for in Section J. "Final Map" means a subdivision of property by recordation of a final map, parcel map, or lot line adjustment, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code 1352 that creates individual lots for which building permits may be issued without further subdivision. "Fiscal Year" means the period commencing on July 1 of any year and ending the following June 30. City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 ! March 15, 2004 AWMA ITEM NO. pAGEJ\_�__ OFD Page 2 "Maximum Special Tax" means the maximum Special Tax, determined in accordance with Section C, that can be levied by CFD No. 2004 -1 in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor's Parcel. "Non- Residential Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which a building permit was issued for any type of non - residential use. "Partial Prepayment Amount" means the amount required to prepay a portion of the Annual Special Tax obligation for an Assessor's Parcel, as described in Section H. "Prepayment Amount" means the amount required to prepay the Annual Special Tax obligation in full for an Assessor's Parcel, as described in Section G. "Proportionately" means that the ratio of the Annual Special Tax levy to the applicable Assigned Annual Special Tax is equal for all applicable Assessor's Parcels. In case of Developed Property subject to the apportionment of the Annual Special Tax under step four of Section F, "Proportionately" in step four means that the quotient of (a) Annual Special Tax less the Assigned Annual Special Tax divided by (b) the Backup Annual Special Tax less the Assigned Annual Special Tax, is equal for all applicable Assessor's Parcels. "Provisional Undeveloped Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property that would otherwise be classified as Exempt Property pursuant to the provisions of Section J, but cannot be classified as Exempt Property because to do so would reduce the Acreage of all Taxable Property below the required minimum Acreage set forth in Section J as applicable. "Residential Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which a building ..i' permit has been issued for purposes of constructing one or more residential dwelling units. "Single Family Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Residential Property other than Apartment Property. "Single Family Unit" means a residential dwelling unit other than an Apartment Unit. "Special Tax" means any of the special taxes authorized to be levied by CFD No. 2004 -1 pursuant to the Act. "Special Tax Requirement" means the amount required in any Fiscal Year to pay: (i) the debt service or the periodic costs on all outstanding Bonds due in the Calendar Year that commences in such Fiscal Year, (ii) Administrative Expenses, (iii) the costs associated with the release of funds from an escrow account, (iv) any amount required to establish or replenish any reserve funds established in association with the Bonds, and (v) the collection or accumulation of funds for the acquisition or construction of facilities authorized by CFD No. 2004 -1 provided that the inclusion of such amount does not cause an increase in the levy of Special Tax on Undeveloped Property as set forth in Step Three of Section F., less (vi) any amounts available to pay debt service or other periodic costs on the Bonds pursuant to any applicable bond indenture, fiscal agent agreement, or trust agreement. City of Lake Elsinore Lj March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 AWJoA ITEM NO. )) PAGE Page 3 "Taxable Property" means all Assessor's Parcels within CFD No. 2004 -1, which are not Exempt ,-- Property. "Undeveloped Property" means all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property which are not Developed Property, or Provisional Undeveloped Property. SECTION B CLASSIFICATION OF ASSESSOR'S PARCELS Each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2004 -05, each Assessor's Parcel within CFD No. 2004 -1 shall be classified as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, each Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property shall be further classified as Developed Property, Undeveloped Property or Provisional Undeveloped Property. In addition, each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property shall further be classified as Residential Property or Non - Residential Property. Lastly, each Assessor's Parcel of Residential Property shall further be classified as a Single Family Property or Apartment Property, and each Single Family Property shall be assigned to its appropriate Assigned Annual Special Tax rate based on its Building Square Footage. SECTION C MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX 1-_� 1. Developed Property The Maximum Special Tax for each Assessor's Parcel of Residential Property or Non - Residential Property that is classified as Developed Property in any Fiscal Year shall be the greater of (i) the Assigned Annual Special Tax or (ii) the Backup Annual Special Tax. 2. Undeveloped Property and Provisional Undeveloped Property The Maximum Special Tax for each Assessor's Parcel classified as Undeveloped Property, or Provisional Undeveloped Property in any Fiscal Year shall be the Assigned Annual Special Tax. SECTION D ASSIGNED ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX 1. Developed Property Each Fiscal Year, each Assessor's Parcel of Single Family Property, Apartment Property, or Non - Residential Property shall be subj ect to an Assigned Annual Special Tax. The Assigned Annual Special Tax applicable to an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property for Fiscal Year 2004 -05 shall be determined pursuant to Table 1 below. TABLE 1 City of Lake Elsinore March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 AA ITEM NO. _., Page 4 PAGE,. OF. 'a 5. ASSIGNED ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX RATES FOR DEVELOPED PROPERTY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004 -05 Land Use Type Building Square Footage Rate Residential Property Less than 1,000 $1,182 per Unit Residential Property 1,000— 1,199 $1,3 3 3 per Unit Residential Property 1,200 — 1,399 $1,661 per Unit Residential Property 1,400 — 1,499 $1,770 per Unit Residential Property 1,500 or greater $1,839 per Unit Apartment Unit N/A $18,957 per Acre Non - Residential Property N/A $18,957 per Acre 2. Undeveloped Property and Provisional Undeveloped Property Each Fiscal Year, each Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property and Provisional Undeveloped Property shall be subject to an Assigned Annual Special Tax. The Assigned Annual Special Tax rate for an Assessor's Parcel classified as Undeveloped Property and Provisional Undeveloped Property for Fiscal Year 2004 -05 shall be $18,957 per Acre. 3. Increase in the Assigned Annual Special Tag 1.001 On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2005, the Assigned Special Tax rate for Developed Property, Undeveloped Property and Provisional Undeveloped Property shall be increased by `vaW two percent (2.00 %) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. SECTION E BACKUP ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX At the time a Final Map is recorded, the Backup Annual Special Tax for all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property classified or reasonably expected to be classified as a Single Family Property within such Final Map area shall be determined by (i) summing the product of (a) the Maximum Special Tax rate for Undeveloped Property by (b) the total Acreage of Taxable Property of each Assessor's Parcel in such Final Map area, excluding Acreage classified as Provisional Undeveloped Property and any Acreage reasonably expected to be classified as Exempt Property in such Final Map area, and (ii) dividing the results in (i) by the total number of Single Family Units reasonably expected to be constructed within such Final Map area. The resulting quotient shall be the Backup Annual Special Tax for each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property within such Final Map area. The Backup Annual Special Tax for all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property classified as Non - Residential Property or Apartment Property shall be the Maximum Special Tax rate for Undeveloped Property. City of Lake Elsinore ' ` March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 AGENDA ITEM NO. Page 5 PAGE OF If a Final Map includes Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property which are classified or reasonably expected to be classified as Single Family Property and Non - Residential Property or Apartment Property, then the Backup Annual Special Tax for each Assessor's Parcel which is classified or reasonably expected to be classified as Single Family Property shall be computed exclusive of the allocable portion of total Acreage attributable to Assessor's Parcels classified or reasonably expected to be classified as Non - Residential Property or Apartment Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property which are classified or to be classified as either Single Family Property, Apartment Property or Non - Residential Property are subsequently changed of modified by recordation of a lot line adjustment or similar instrument, then the Backup Annual Special Tax shall be recalculated to equal the amount of Backup Annual Special Tax that would have been generated if such change did not take place. On each July 1, commencing July 1, 2005, the Backup Annual Special Tax rate shall be increased by two percent (2.00 %) of the amount in effect in the prior Fiscal Year. SECTION F METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX Commencing Fiscal Year 2004 -05 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, the City Council shall levy Annual Special Taxes on all Taxable Property in accordance with the following steps: �-� Step One: The Annual Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property at up to 100% of the applicable Assigned Annual Special Tax rates in Table 1 to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement. Step Two: If additional moneys are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first step has been completed, the Annual Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property up to 1001/6 of the Assigned Annual Special Tax applicable to each such Assessor's Parcel as needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement. Step Three: If additional moneys are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first two steps have been completed, then the Annual Special Tax on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property whose Maximum Special Tax is the Backup Annual Special Tax shall be increased Proportionately from the Assigned Annual Special Tax up to 100% of the Backup Annual Special Tax as needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement. Step Four: If additional moneys are needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement after the first three steps have been completed, the Annual Special Tax shall be levied Proportionately on each Assessor's Parcel of Provisional Undeveloped Property up to 100% of the Assigned Annual Special Tax applicable to each such Assessor's Parcel as needed to satisfy the Special Tax Requirement. City of Lake Elsinore ` March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 A(WMA ITEM NO. �'I�._...r..� g PAGE 1 J OF '7�� Page 6 SECTION G PREPAYMENT OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX The following definitions apply to this Section G: "CFD Public Facilities" means $2,335,683 expressed in 2004 dollars, which shall increase by the Construction Inflation Index on July 1, 2005, and on each July 1 thereafter, or such lower amount (i) determined by the City Council as sufficient to provide the public facilities under the authorized bonding program for CFD No. 2004 -1 , or (ii) determined by the City Council concurrently with a covenant that it will not issue any more Bonds to be supported by Special Taxes levied under this Rate and Method of Apportionment. "Construction Fund" means an account specifically identified in the Indenture or functionally equivalent to hold funds, which are currently available for expenditure to acquire or construct public facilities eligible under CFD No. 2004 -1. "Construction Inflation Index" means the annual percentage change in the Engineering News - Record Building Cost Index for the city of Los Angeles, measured as of the calendar year which ends in the previous Fiscal Year. In the event this index ceases to be published, the Construction Inflation Index shall be another index as determined by the City that is reasonably comparable to the Engineering News - Record Building Cost Index for the city of Los Angeles. "Future Facilities Costs" means the CFD Public Facilities minus public facility costs available to be funded through existing construction or escrow accounts or funded by the Outstanding Bonds, and minus public facility costs funded by interest earnings on the Construction Fund actually earned prior to the date of prepayment. "Outstanding Bonds" means all previously issued Bonds issued and secured by the levy of Special Taxes which will remain outstanding after the first interest and/or principal payment date following the current Fiscal Year, excluding Bonds to be redeemed at a later date with the proceeds of prior prepayments of Maximum Special Taxes. The Special Tax obligation of an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, or an Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property for which a building permit has been issued or is expected to be issued, or an Assessor's Parcel of Provisional Undeveloped Property may be prepaid in full, provided that there are no delinquent Special Taxes, penalties, or interest charges outstanding with respect to such Assessor's Parcel at the time the Special Tax obligation would be prepaid. The Prepayment Amount for an Assessor's Parcel eligible for prepayment shall be determined as described below. An owner of an Assessor's Parcel intending to prepay the Annual Special Tax obligation shall provide the City with written notice of intent to prepay, and within 5 days of receipt of such notice, the City shall notify such owner of the amount of the non - refundable deposit determined to cover the cost to be incurred by CFD No. 2004 -1 in calculating the proper amount of a prepayment. Within 15 days of receipt of such non - refundable deposit, the City shall notify such owner of the Prepayment Amount of such Assessor's Parcel. City of Lake Elsinore AMOA fTEM NO. I March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 ..� �''�"° PAGE OF aC.�J Page 7 ..e N..r The Prepayment Amount for each applicable Assessor's Parcel shall be calculated according to the following formula (capitalized terms defined below): Bond Redemption Amount plus Redemption Premium plus Future Facilities Amount plus Defeasance Cost plus Administrative Fee less Reserve Fund Credit equals Prepayment Amount As of the date of prepayment, the Prepayment Amount shall be calculated as follows: For an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, compute the Assigned Annual Special Tax applicable to the Assessor's Parcel. For an Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property, compute the Assigned Annual Special Tax as though is was already designated as Developed Property based upon the building permit issued or expected to be issued for that Assessor's Parcel. For an Assessor's Parcel of Provisional Undeveloped Property compute the Assigned Annual Special Tax for that Assessor's Parcel. 2. For each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, Undeveloped Property or Provisional Undeveloped Property to be prepaid, divide the Assigned Annual Special Tax computed pursuant to paragraph 1 for such Assessor's Parcel by the sum of the estimated Assigned Annual Special Tax applicable to all Assessor's Parcels of Taxable Property at buildout, as reasonably determined by the City. 3. Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 2 by the Outstanding Bonds. The product shall be the "Bond Redemption Amount ". 4. Multiply the Bond Redemption Amount by the applicable redemption premium, if any, on the Outstanding Bonds to be redeemed with the proceeds of the Bond Redemption Amount. This product is the "Redemption Premium." Compute the Future Facilities Cost. 6. Multiply the quotient computed pursuant to paragraph 2 by the amount determined pursuant to paragraph 5. to determine the Future Facilities Cost to be prepaid (the "Future Facilities Amount"). 7. Compute the amount needed to pay interest on the Bond Redemption Amount to be redeemed with the proceeds of the Prepayment Amount until the earliest call date for the Outstanding Bonds. City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 .AGENDA ITEM -NO... V—.t'- March 15, 2004 �` PAGE OF �-' Page 8 8. Estimate the amount of interest earnings to be derived from the reinvestment of the Bond Redemption Amount plus the Redemption Premium until the earliest call date for the Outstanding Bonds. -moor 9. Subtract the amount computed pursuant to paragraph 8 from the amount computed pursuant to paragraph 7. This difference is the " Defeasance Cost." 10. Estimate the administrative fees and expenses associated with the prepayment, including the costs of computation of the Prepayment Amount, the costs of redeeming Bonds, and the costs of recording any notices to evidence the prepayment and the redemption. This amount is the "Administrative Fee." 11. Calculate the "Reserve Fund Credit" as the lesser of: (a) the expected reduction in the applicable reserve requirements, if any, associated with the redemption of Outstanding Bonds as a result of the prepayment, or (b) the amount derived by subtracting the new reserve requirements in effect after the redemption of Outstanding Bonds as a result of the prepayment from the balance in the applicable reserve funds on the prepayment date. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the reserve fund requirement is satisfied by a surety bond or other instrument at the time of the prepayment, then no Reserve Fund Credit shall be given. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Reserve Fund Credit shall in no event be less than 0. 12. The Prepayment Amount is equal to the sum of the Bond Redemption Amount, the Redemption Premium, the Future Facilities Amount, the Defeasance, and the Administrative Fee, less the Reserve Fund Credit. 13. From the Prepayment Amount, the amounts computed pursuant to paragraphs 3, 4, 9, and 11 shall be deposited into the appropriate fund as established under the bond indenture and used to retire Outstanding Bonds or make debt service payments. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 6 shall be deposited into the Construction Fund. The amount computed pursuant to paragraph 10 shall be retained by CFD No. 2004 -1. With respect to Special Tax obligation that is prepaid pursuant to this Section G, the City Council shall indicate in the records of CFD No. 2004 -1 that there has been a prepayment ofthe Special Tax obligation and shall cause a suitable notice to be recorded in compliance with the Act within thirty (30) days of receipt of such prepayment to indicate the prepayment of the Special Tax obligation and the release of the Special Tax lien on such Assessor's Parcel, and the obligation of such Assessor's Parcel to pay such Special Taxes shall cease. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no prepayment will be allowed unless the amount of Special Tax that may be levied on Taxable Property, net of Administrative Expenses, shall be at least 1.1 times the regularly scheduled annual interest and principal payments on all currently Outstanding Bonds in each future Fiscal Year. City of Lake Elsinore March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 AWCA }TEM N -N, PACE t pF 2 Page 9 SECTION H PARTIAL PREPAYMENT OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX The Special Tax obligation of an Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, or an Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property for which a building permit has been issued or is expected to be issued, or and Assessor's Parcel of Provisional Undeveloped Property, as calculated in this Section H. below, may be partially prepaid, provided that there are no delinquent Special Taxes, penalties, or interest charges outstanding with respect to such Assessor's Parcel at the time the Special Tax obligation would be prepaid. The Partial Prepayment Amount shall be calculated according to the following formula: PP = ((PG —A) x F) + A The terms above have the following meanings: PP = the Partial Prepayment Amount. PG = the Prepayment Amount calculated according to Section G. F = the percent by which the owner of the Assessor's Parcel is partially prepaying the Special Tax obligation. A= the Administrative Fees and Expenses calculated according to Section G. With respect to any Assessor's Parcel that is partially prepaid, the City Council shall indicate in the records of CID No. 2004 -1 that there has been a partial prepayment of the Special Tax obligation and shall cause a suitable notice to be recorded in compliance with the Act within thirty (3 0) days of receipt of such partial prepayment of the Special Tax obligation, to indicate the partial prepayment of the Special Tax obligation and the partial release of the Special Tax lien on such Assessor's Parcel, and the obligation of such Assessor's Parcel to pay such prepaid portion of the Special Tax shall cease. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no partial prepayment will be allowed unless the amount of Special Tax that may be levied on Taxable Property after such partial prepayment, net of Administrative Expenses, shall be at least 1.1 times the regularly scheduled annual interest and principal payments on all currently Outstanding Bonds in each future Fiscal Year. SECTION I TERMINATION OF SPECIAL TAX For each Fiscal Year that any Bonds are outstanding the Annual Special Tax shall be levied on all Assessor's Parcels subject to the Annual Special Tax. If any delinquent Annual Special Taxes �. remain uncollected prior to or after all Bonds are retired, the Annual Special Tax may be levied to City of Lake Elsinore March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 A®ENDA ITEM NO. --4 Page 10 PAGE OF ! ,� the extent necessary to reimburse CFD No. 2004 -1 for uncollected Annual Special Taxes associated with the levy of such Annual Special Taxes, but not later than the 204243 Fiscal Year. 1.101 SECTION J EXEMPTIONS The City shall classify as Exempt Property (i) Assessor's Parcels which are owned by, irrevocably offered for dedication, encumbered by or restricted in use by the State of California, Federal or other local governments, including school districts, (ii) Assessor's Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement, (iii) other types of public uses determined by the City Council, (iv) Assessor's Parcels which are privately owned and are encumbered by or restricted solely for public uses, (v) Assessor's Parcels which are used as places of worship and are exempt from ad valorem property taxes because they are owned by a religious organization, or (vi) Assessor's Parcels which are owned by, irrevocably offered for dedication, encumbered by or restricted in use by a homeowners' association, provided that no such classification would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property to less than 13.43 Acres. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council shall not classify an Assessor's Parcel as Exempt Property if such classification would reduce the sum of all Taxable Property to less than 13.43 Acres. Assessor's Parcels which cannot be classified as Exempt Property because such classification would reduce the Acreage of all Taxable Property to less than 13.43 Acres will be classified as Provisional Undeveloped Property, and will be subject to Special Taxes pursuant to Step Five in Section F. At such time an Assessor's Parcel must be classified as Provisional Developed Property, the following hierarchy shall be used to determine which Assessor's Parcel will be taxed to ensure that the Taxable Property is not less than 13.43 acres: First, an Assessor's Parcel as designated in (vi) above Second, an Assessor's Parcel as designated in (v) above Third, an Assessor's Parcel as designated in (iv) above Fourth, an Assessor's Parcel as designated in (iii) above Fifth, an Assessor's Parcel as designated in (ii) above Sixth, an Assessor's Parcel as designated in (i) above SECTION K APPEALS Any property owner claiming that the amount or application of the Special Tax is not correct may file a written notice of appeal with the City Council not later than twelve months after having paid the first installment of the Special Tax that is disputed. A representative(s) of CFD No. 2004 -1 shall promptly review the appeal, and if necessary, meet with the property owner, consider written and oral evidence regarding the amount of the Special Tax, and rule on the appeal. If the representative's decision requires that the Special Tax for an Assessor's Parcel be modified or changed in favor of the property owner, a cash refund shall not be made (except for the last year of City of Lake Elsinore March 15, 2004 Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 AGENDA i-TEMc NO. �` PAGE OF Page 11 i^- levy), but an adjustment shall be made to the Annual Special Tax on that Assessor's Parcel in the subsequent Fiscal Year(s). SECTION L MANNER OF COLLECTION The Annual Special Tax shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, provided, however, that CFD No. 2004 -1 may collect Annual Special Taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet its financial obligations. City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 L j March 15, 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. IN, PAGE OF�. Page 12 RESOLUTION NO.I.Do -l9 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE TO INCUR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,000,000 WITHIN THE PROPOSED CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-1 (CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES) WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council ") of the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City") has heretofore adopted Resolution No. , stating the Council's intention to form Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 (City Center Townhomes) (the "CFD "), pursuant to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, (the "Act "), to finance the purchase, construction, expansion or rehabilitation of certain real and other tangible property with an estimated useful life of five years or longer, including public infrastructure facilities and other governmental facilities, which are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the City as a result of development or rehabilitation occurring within the proposed CFD (the "Facilities "); and WHEREAS, in order to finance the Facilities it is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness in the amounts not to exceed $5,000,000, the repayment of which is to be secured by special taxes levied in accordance with Section 53340 et seq. of the Act on all property within the CFD, other than those properties exempted from taxation as provided in the respective rate and method of apportionment attached as Exhibit A to Resolution No. ; ""Sol NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The above recitals are true and correct. Section 2. It is necessary to incur bonded indebtedness within the CFD in the amount not to exceed $5,000,000 to finance the costs of the Facilities for the CFD. Section 3. The indebtedness will be incurred for the purpose of financing the costs of designing, constructing and acquiring the Facilities, the acquisition of necessary equipment and property therefor and fulfilling contractual commitments and carrying out the powers and purposes of the CFD, including, but not limited to, the financing of the costs associated with the issuance of the bonds and all other costs necessary to finance the Facilities which are permitted to be financed pursuant to the Act. Section 4. The CFD shall pay for its bonded indebtedness. Section 5. It is the intent of the Council to authorize the sale of bonds in one or more series, in the maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,000,000 at a maximum interest rate not in excess of 12 percent per annum or such rate not in excess of the maximum rate permitted by law at the time the bonds are issued. The term of the bonds shall be determined 45433656.2 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF pursuant to a resolution of the Council authorizing the issuance of the bonds, but such term shall ^ in no event exceed 40 years or such longer term as is then permitted by law. ,0.1 Section 6. A public hearing (the "Hearing ") on the proposed debt issue shall be held April 27, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as practicable, at the chambers of the Council, 130 S. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, California 92530. Section 7. At the Hearing at the time and place set forth above, any interested persons, including all persons owning land within the proposed CFD, may appear and be heard at the Hearing. Section 8. The proposition to incur bonded indebtedness in the maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $5,000,000 shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the CFD. A special community facilities district election shall be conducted on April 27, 2004. The special election shall be conducted by hand delivered ballot election. The ballots shall be returned to the office of the election officer no later than 11:00 o'clock p.m. on April 27, 2004. Section 9. The Clerk is hereby directed to publish a copy of this resolution, which shall serve as notice ( "Notice ") of the Hearing and the special bond election, pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code in a newspaper of general circulation in the proposed CFD. Section 10. The Clerk may send a copy of the Notice of the Hearing by first -class mail, postage prepaid, to each registered voter and to each landowner within the proposed CFD as shown on the last equalized assessment roll. 454336562 2 ADA ITEM NO. N PAGE OF 2-5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2004. ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Leibold, City Attorney 45433656.2 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE By: Title: Mayor 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. .PAGE OF ..or IVAMW STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )ss. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE } I, Vicki Kasad, City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 2004, and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 45433656.2 City Clerk of the City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. 1 PACE OF, ) CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE CEQA COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 31792 BACKGROUND The City of Lake Elsinore serves as the lead agency to evaluate the environmental impacts of development projects proposed within the City. The Community Development Department is responsible for the preparation of the necessary information and, depending on the scope and size of the project, will either prepare the environmental documents in -house or have a consultant prepare the documents and studies. The cost of preparing the environmental analysis is paid for by the project applicant through the application fee process. DISSCUSSION Due to the scope of this project, staff has requested Albert A. Webb Associates to prepare the CEQA documents and studies for Tentative Tract No. 31792. The proposed cost of preparing the environmental review is $34,600. FISCAL IMPACT The cost of preparing the environmental review will be paid by the applicant's fees through the City's cost recovery program. All staff administrative time and consultant costs are paid from the applicant's fees. There is no cost to the City. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council authorize Albert A. Webb Associates to prepare the CEQA compliance documents for Tentative Tract No. 31792 in the amount of $34,600. PREPARED BY: Robert A. Brady, Director of Community Development APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Richard J. Watenpa gh, City Ma ger Attachment AQENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF A L B E R T A. VITBB3788 McCray Street, Riverside, CA 92506 Phone (909) 686 -1070 Fax (909) 788 -1256 www.webbassociates.com ASSOCIATES W.003 -0330 ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS File No. 4603.0000 February 12, 2004 Mr. Robert Brady, Director of Community Development City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 RE: Revised Proposal for Preparation of CEQA Compliance Documents The Villages at Wasson Canyon (Tentative Tract No. 31792) Dear Mr. Brady: Albert A. Webb Associates is pleased to present this revised proposal for completion of CEQA documents necessary to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of The Villages at Wasson Canyon project. It is our understanding that the proposed project consists of the subdivision of approximately 59.4 acres located northeast of the City of Lake Elsinore, westerly of the Ramsgate Specific Plan into 191 residential lots. Our proposed scope of work, as detailed in Appendix A, and budget includes the preparation of an Initial Study and related technical studies that comply with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Lake Elsinore's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA Guidelines. Completion of an air quality analysis and a noise impact study are included as part of our scope of work. We have not included the costs associated with preparing a traffic study; biological surveys including focused surveys and wetlands delineations; cultural resources surveys; a hydrology report; a Phase I Environmental Assessment; and a geotechnical study. Mr. Ed Fitzpatrick of Eastbridge Partners has advised us that the subconsultants preparing these reports will be paid directly by the project applicant. Webb Associates will, however, coordinate the preparation of these reports with the subconsultants and will review the reports for adequacy before forwarding completed reports to the City. We have also prepared an estimated schedule for completion of the CEQA process that would allow the proposed project to be considered by the City's Planning Commission during June 2004. (See Appendix B.) �! �i�NDA ITEM NO � •J�� G: \2003 \03 - 0330 \Pr000sal\Revised Ciry IS Pr000sal.doc PACE a CIVIL ENGINEERING - PLANNING - ASSESSMENT / SPECIAL TAX CONSULTING - WATER RESOURCES ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS - SURVEYING - CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & INSPECTION - TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Mr. Robert Brady February 12, 2004 Page 2 of 2 If additional technical studies are required by the City or due to the findings contained within the above - listed technical studies, Webb Associates will coordinate with the appropriate subconsultants and advise the City of the cost of these studies. The cost for these studies will be an additional expense, above our estimated budget. We propose to provide our services on a lump sum basis, with an estimated total budget for a single project design of $34,600. This budget reflects the completion of an Initial Study and technical studies leading to adoption of a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration. Webb Associates has extensive experience in the preparation of CEQA compliance documents for both public and private clients and looks forward to providing our expert services to the City of Lake Elsinore. Please authorize completion of the above - described scope of work and budget by signing a copy of this letter and returning it to me, or through provision of a separate written authorization to proceed. Should you have any questions or require any additional information regarding �. this proposal, please feel free to call me at (909) 248 -4260. Sincerely yours, ALBERT A. WEBB ASSOCIATES Richard J. MacHott Principal Environmental Planner Attachment Completion of the scope of services for the preparation of CEQA compliance documents by Albert A. Webb Associates, for the Villages at Wasson Canyon project (Tentative Tract No. 31792) as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" with a budget of $34,600.00 is hereby authorized by the City of Lake Elsinore: By: r—. Date: AGENDA ITEM NO. G:\ 2003 \03 -0330\Proposal\Revised City IS Proposal.doc -, PAS 3 oF... APPENDIX A CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE THE VILLAGES AT WASSON CANYON (Tentative Tract No. 31792) CEQA Compliance Scope of Work • Confer and coordinate with City of Lake Elsinore ( "City") staff and project applicant at a maximum of three meetings. • Collect and review relevant local agency information. • Field survey of the project site. • Prepare project description and description of environmental setting. • Provide air quality analysis and noise study prepared by Albert A. Webb Associates and /or its subconsultants. • Coordinate the preparation of traffic study; biological surveys including focused surveys and wetlands delineations; cultural resources surveys; a hydrology report; a Phase I Environmental Assessment and a geotechnical study with project applicant's subconsultants and review reports for adequacy prior to submittal of reports to City. • Prepare Draft Initial Study pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's Procedures for Implementing the State CEQA Guidelines and utilize the City's initial study checklist. The initial study will summarize and incorporate findings from technical reports; and identify appropriate mitigation measures on subjects of potential adverse environmental impact. • Complete draft Mitigation Monitoring Program. • Prepare revised Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring Program per City's comments. • Provide 5 copies of a "Screencheck" Initial Study with technical studies, 5 copies of revised Initial Study in response to City staff comments and a maximum of 20 copies of the "final" Initial Study with technical studies for the public hearing process and a maximum of 5 additional copies of these documents, if needed. • Attend a total of three public hearings before the City Planning Commission and /or City Council. AGENDA ITEM NO G:\2003 \03- 0330\Proposal \Revised City IS Proposal.doc V0 A -I :PAGE 01=�� Appendix A Scope of Work Page 2 EXCEPTIONS: The above scope of work does not include the preparation or publication of public notices, the posting of notices in the office of the Riverside County Clerk or the State Clearinghouse or distribution of documents for agency /public review; any application or permit related fees; or the cost of any posting expenses or fees such as required by the County Clerk for posting of the Notice of Determination. Additionally, it does not include the preparation of any additional technical surveys or reports that are determined to be required to complete the project due to the results of the cultural resources and biological surveys or City requirements; or due to comments received during agency /public review of the CEQA documents. AQENDA ITEM NO. G :12003103- 03301Proposal\Revised City IS Proposal.doc pA `j OF . A -2 APPENDIX B CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE THE VILLAGES AT WASSON CANYON (Tentative Tract No. 31792) CEQA Compliance Estimated Schedule for Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Action Completion Date Receive written authorization from City of Lake Elsinore to proceed. February 19, 2004 Begin preparation of Initial Study February 19, 2004 Six copies of Completed Screencheck Initial Study and completed March 26, 2004 technical studies delivered to City for their review and comment Six copies of Completed draft Mitigation Monitoring Program March 26, 2004 delivered to City for their review and comment. City sends copy of Screencheck Initial Study & Mitigation March 31, 2004 Monitoring Program to Project Applicant for its review and comment. Project Applicant provides its comments regarding Screencheck April 7, 2004 Initial Study & Mitigation Monitoring Program to City staff. City Staff provides its comments regarding Screencheck Initial April 12, 2001 Study & Mitigation Monitoring Program to Webb Associates Webb Associates prepares revisions per City's Comments April 26, 2004 Review and Approval of revised Initial Study and mitigation May 3, 2004 monitoring program by City Staff. City sends Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration May 6, 2004 to State Clearinghouse and Responsible Agencies/Interested Parties Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration published May 6,2004 in by City in newspaper Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration posted by May 7, 2004 Riverside County Clerk End of Comment Period June 8, 2004 City of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission public hearing June 15, 2004 NOTE: This schedule represents only estimated completion dates for the identified milestones. Project redesigns, changes in the CEQA scope of work, or unanticipated delays in the review of draft documents could adversely affect the ability to comply with this estimated schedule. The City will be advised of any circumstances that require a revision of this schedule and with the City's concurrence this schedule may be revised. .001 =AQ 0A ITEM NO. � G:\2003 \03- 0330 \Proposal\Revised City IS Proposal.doc pgGE`0 ....._.,.OF_-- B -1 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BACKGROUND In April 2003 the City of Lake Elsinore entered into a development agreement with Como at Tuscany Hill Corporation, to develop 126 homes in Tuscany Hills. DISCUSSION The City has received a request from Como for the Assignment and Assumption ofthe Development Agreement to Pulte Home Corporation. Paragraph 10 of the Development Agreement permits an assignment of the rights and obligations of the Agreement only in connection with a conveyance of all or a portion of the real property subject to the Agreement and upon consent by the City. Como wishes to sell a portion of Tract 1741 -3 comprising 126 lots in phases 1 -3 and 8 -11 to Pulte Home Corporation and to assign the benefits and obligations of the Development Agreement as to such property. Pulte Home Corporation is a Fortune 500 Company and was named Builder of the Year for 2002 by Professional Builder magazine. Pulte is one of the largest home builders in the United States and has built over 300,000 homes in its 50 year history. Since its merger with Del Webb, Pulte is also one of the leading builders of communities. As required by paragraph 10 of the Development Agreement, Como has submitted a written request for the proposed assignment. The Development Agreement clearly allows the City to approve the Assignment. Therefore, staff has brought this item forward for Council approval and authorization for the Mayor to execute the documents. FISCAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the Mayor and Council, by approving the Consent Agenda, approve the Assignment and Assumption of the Agreement to Pulte and authorize the Mayor to sign the document. PREPARED BY: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER APPROVED FOR (� I AGENDA BY: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE ASMA ITEM NO. PAGE i OF StoneWood, Inc. March 2, 2004 Mr. Richard Watenpaugh, City Manager City of Lake Elsinore 130 So. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 5665 Oberlin Drive, Ste. 104 San Diego, CA 92121 Phone: (858) 546 -1854 Fax: (858) 546 -8135 Email: stnwd @landsmart.net MAR -5 2004 Re: Development Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and Como at Tuscany Hill Corporation: Dear Mr. Watenpaugh: In accordance with Paragraph 10 of the above Agreement, this is to request the approval of the City of Lake Elsinore to the assignment of this Agreement to Pulte Home Corporation as to a portion of the Tract 17413 -1 comprising 126 Lots identified as Phases 1 — 3 and 8 - 11 and also identified in the Assignment and Assumption Agreement attached. This property is currently subject to an escrow at Chicago Title between Como at Tuscany Hill Corporation (Vested Party) and Pulte Home Corporation. This Assignment will only become effective upon the close of that escrow which is scheduled for April 16, 2004 or sooner. Attached is a copy of the executed original of the Seller's counterpart. Buyer is obligated to deliver its executed counterpart only at close of escrow. Your written approval of this Assignment is requested, or in absence of written instructions to the contrary, we will assume its approval within the 30 days provided for in the Agreement. Sincer ly, ��'ff � William D. Kennedy 4. W DK: Cc: Pulte Home Corporation r �-- ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REQUESTED BY: WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: ,�.paee for tcecuruc" s vac ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") is made as of the date of recordation hereof by and between COMO AT TUSCANY HILL CORPORATION, a California corporation ( "Seller "), and PULTE HOME CORPORATION, a Michigan corporation ( "Buyer), with respect_ to the facts set forth below. RECITALS A. Concurrently herewith, Seller has conveyed to Buyer certain real property located in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of California, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Property"), pursuant to the Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions between Seller and Buyer dated as of June 20, 2003 (the "Purchase Agreement "). B. The Property is subject to a Development Agreement (the "Development Agreement ") between the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City "), which was recorded in the Official Records of Riverside County on April 20, 2003, as Document No. 2003 - 300080. C. In connection with the conveyance of the Property, Seller desires to assign all of its rights and delegate all of its obligations under the Development Agreement to the extent they relate to the Property to Buyer, and Buyer desires to accept such assignment and delegation, on the terms set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as set forth below. 1. Assignment. Seller hereby assigns to Buyer all of its rights under the Development Agreement to the extent applicable to the Property. Seller retains all rights under the Development Agreement to modify, amend or terminate the Development Agreement and all other rights under the Development Agreement to the extent they do not adversely affect the Property. �., 2. Delegation and Assumption. Seller hereby delegates to Buyer all of its obligations under the Development Agreement to the extent such obligations exclusively relate to the Property and Buyer hereby accepts such delegation. Regardless of whether or not such consent of the City Manager is obtained, Buyer hereby assumes and agrees to perfq all such obligations un er he Grenhill/Pulte /Como at Tuscany Hills c z - " r ` '— ---- -� 1/04 Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions 26113 -00007 / 1942328.2 Buyer's Initials eller' itials Development Agreement to the extent they exclusively relate to the Property and are not the obligation of Seller under the Purchase Agreement. ...OK 3. Cooperation. The parties agree to cooperate with each other in carrying out the purpose and intent of this Assignment, including cooperating to obtain the consent of the City Manager to the delegation of duties described above. Without limiting the foregoing, Buyer agrees to provide such documents and finane>al information to the City that may be necessary to-obtain such consent. 4. Construction of Agreement. The Agreement contained herein shall not be construed in favor of or against either party, but shall be construed as if both parties prepared this Agreement. Buyer and Seller acknowledge that they have been represented, or have had the opportunity to be represented, by counsel of their own choice. 5. Governing Law. This Agreement and the documents in the form attached as exhibits hereto shall be governed by and construed under the internal laws of the State of California without regard to choice of law rales. This Agreement shall be deemed made and entered into in San Diego County. 6. Successors and Assigns. Each and all of the covenants and conditions of this Agreement will inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the. successors in interest of Seller and the successors, heirs, representatives and assigns of Buyer. As used in this Section, "successors" means successors to the parties' interest in the Property, successors to all or substantially all of the parties' assets, and successors by merger or consolidation. 7. Attorney's Fees. If any action, arbitration, judicial reference or other proceeding is instituted between Seller and Buyer in connection with this Agreement, the losing party shall pay to the prevailing party a reasonable sum for attorneys' and experts' fees and costs incurred in bringing or defending such action or proceeding and/or enforcing any judgment granted therein, all of which shall be deemed to have accrued upon the commencement of such action or proceeding and shall be paid whether or not such action or proceeding is prosecuted to final judgment. 8. Severability. If any phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph, section, article or other portion of this Agreement is held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal, null or void or against public policy, the remaining portions of this Agreement will not be affected thereby and will remain in force and effect to the fullest extent permissible by law. 9. Entire Agreement. This Agreement together with the Purchase Agreement constitute the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter of this Agreement, and all prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations, negotiations and understandings of the parties, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein. No modification, waiver, amendment, discharge or change of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and signed by the party against which the enforcement of such modification, waiver, amendment, discharge or change is or maybe sought. Grenhill /Pulte /Como at Tuscany Hills Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions 26113 -00007 / 1942328.2 Pw�.D / R �M Buyer's Ii 10. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which, when taken together, will constitute a fully executed original. 0. Non - Discrimination. There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person, or group of persons on account of sex, race, color, creed, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the land, nor shall the - .- transferee himself, or any person claiming under or through him establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees of the land. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. Seller: COMO AT TUSCANY HILL CORPORATION, a Calif is corporation By: i3 Its: I/M/P C—A-f7 Grenhill /Pulte /Como at Tuscany Hills Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions 26113- 00007/1942328.2 Buyer: PULTE HOME CORPORATION, a Michigan corporation By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: SS 4 / 03,(01 /04 Buyer's Initials STATE OF ('A ) ) ss: COUNTY OF s A) A � 0M .• me, GTiL�,ce_ ig�, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved" to me on -the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be -the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ADRINE DAMAN < Comm. # 1353510 rrnn %JW. NO TARY PUBLIC. CALIFORNIA ' Los Angeles County y Comm. Expires April25, 2006 `+ STATE OF ) ss: COUNTY OF ) On , 2003, before me, — I &�_� / 4,-- Notary Public personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public Grenhill /Pulte /Como at Tuscany Hills Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions 26113 -00007 / 1942328.2 °r.als Buyer's Initials ;11 ,o___ EXHIBIT "A" Page I DESCRIPTION Order No. 32035369 PARCEL As LOTS 1 THROUGH 10 AND LOTS 25 THROUGH 137, ALL INCLUSIVE AND LOTS "I" AND "J" OF OF LAKE ELOK 207 , COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF TRACT NO. 17413 -1, IN THE CITY CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 207 PAGES 9 THROUGH 21 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RBCORDfiR OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT ALL THE COAL AND OTHER MINERALS IN THE LANDS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT TO SAID LAND RECORDED MARCH 13, 1940 IN BOOK 447 PAGE 488 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, ALSO EXCEPT 1 /16TH OF ALL COAL, OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS IN SAID LAND AS RESERVED IN PATENT FROM THE STATT OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 1926 IN BOOK 9 PAGE 177 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF LOT 11 OF TRACT NO. 17413 -1, IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON MAP FILED IN BOOK 207, PAGES 9 THROUCH 21 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUN'I'X, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 11, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 17413 - THENCE NORTH 880 42' 14" WEST, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY L LINE, A DISTANCE OF 65.95 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 110 26' 00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 205.98 FEET TO A NON - TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 2033.00 FRRT, SAID CURVE ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF VIA DE LA VALLE (33.00 FEET IN HALF-WIDTH), A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 120 08' 02" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY, A DISTANCE OF 60.93 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01' 43' 02" TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10; THENCE NON- TANGENT FROM SAID CURVE NORTH 10° 25' 00" WEST, ALONG THE WESTERLY LOT LINE OF SAID LOT 10, A DISTANCE OF 191.6S FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. NOTE: SAID RECORDED JUNE 16, 2003RAS INSTRUMENTCNo F2003- 439168, OFFFICCIALN ORE' CORDS. EXCEPT ALL THE COAL AND OTHER MINERALS IN THE LANDS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT TO SAID LAND RECORDED MARCH 13, 1940 IN BOOK 447 PAGE 488 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. ALSO EXCEPT 1 /16TH OF ALL COAL, OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS IN SAID LAND AS BOOK E9 PAGE PATENT FROM THE PATENTS, RECORDSEOFFRIVERSIDEICOUNTY RECORDED 19, 1926 IN CALIFORNIA' PARCEL Cs THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 11 AND 12 OF TRACT NO. 17413 -1, IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 207, PAGES 9 THROUGH 21 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 11, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING ALSO 3`ti z-2 -..rl page 2 DOCRIP'I'ION Order No. 32035369 BEING ON THE NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 17413 -1; THENCE NORTH 88° 42' 14" WEST, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 65.95 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE SOUTH 110 26' 00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 205.98 FEET TO A NON - TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 2033.00 FEET, SAID CURVE ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF VIA DE LA VALLE (33.00 FEET IN HALF- WIDTH), A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 120 08' 02" WEST; THENCE WESTERLY, A DISTANCE OF 24.94 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 000 42' 10" TO A COMPOUND CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1533.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINTS BEARS NORTH 12° 50' 12" WEST; THENCE WESTERLY 30.09 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 010 07' 28 "; THENCE NON- TANGENT FROM SAID rtTRVF. NORTH 110 26' 00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 219.90 FEET TO THE NORTHBRLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT 17413 -1; THENCE SOUTH 880 42' 14" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 56.39 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. NOTE: SAID LAND IS PURSUANT TO NOTICE OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 01 -05, RECORDED JUNE 16, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003- 439268, OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXCEPT ALL THE COAL AND OTHER MINERALS IN THE LANDS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT TO SAID LAND RECORDED MARCH 13, 1940 IN BOOK 447 PAGE 488 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. ALSO EXCEPT 1 /16TH OF ALL COAL, OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS IN SAID LAND AS RESERVED IN PATENT FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 1926 IN BOOK 9 PAGE 177 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COMM, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL Dt LOT 13 AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 12 OF TRACT NO. 17413 -1, IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP FILED IN BOOK 207, PAGES 9 THROUGH 21 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 11 OF SAID TRACT NO. 17413 -1, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 17413 -1; THENCE NORTH 880 42' 14" WEST, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 122.34 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 110 26' 00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 219.90 FEET TO A NON- TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1533.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 130 57' 40" WEST, SAID CURVE ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF VIA DE LA VALLE (33.00 FEET IN HALF - WIDTH); THENCE WESTERLY, A DISTANCE OF 15.57 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 000 34' 55 "; THENCE SOUTH 75° 27' 25" WEST, TANGENT FROM SAID CURVE AND ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY, A DISTANCE OF 46.70 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 13; THENCE NORTH 11° 45' 00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 237.54 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 13, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT 17413 -1; THENCE SOUTH 880 42' 14" EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 65.09 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. �%'�, Page 3 DESCRIPTION Order No. 32035369 NOTE: SAID LAND IS PURSUANT TO NOTICE OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 02 -05, RECORDED JUNE 16, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003- 439268, OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXCEPT ALL THE COAL AND OTHER MINERALS IN THE LANDS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT TO SAID LAND RECORDED MARCH 13, 1940 IN BOOK 447 PAGE 488 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. ALSO EXCEPT 1 /16TH OF ALL COAL, OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS IN SAID LAND AS RESERVED IN PATENT FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 1926 IN BOOK 9 PAGE 177 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, PARCEL E: THOSt: PORTIONS OF LOTS 12 AND 13 OF TRACT NO. 17413 -1, IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON MAP FILED IN BOOK 207, PAGES 9 THROUGH 21 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, OR BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF LLA 02 -05, RECORDED JUNE 16, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003 - 439268, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 16 OF SAID TRACT NO. 17413-1, SAID POINT OF BEGINNING ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 17413 -1; THENCE SOUTH 880 42' 14" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 140.79 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 880 42' 14" EAST, CONTINUING ALONG THE NORTHERLY TRACT BOUNDARY LINE �^ OF SAID TRACT 17413 -1, A DISTANCE OF 56.38 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL 3 OF SAID LLA 02 -05; THENClS SOUTH 11. 26' 00" EAST ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3, A DISTANCE OF 219.90 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 3 AND TO A NON- TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1533.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 130 57' 40" WEST, SAID CURVE ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF VIA DE LA VALLE (33.00 FEET IN HALF- WIDTH) ; THENCE WESTERLY, A DISTANCE OF 15.57 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY . RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 000 34' 55 "; THENCE SOUTH 75° 27' 25" WEST, TANGENT FROM SAID CURVE AND ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY, A DISTANCE OF 39.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 110 26' 00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 235.23 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. NOTE: SAID LAND IS PURSUANT TO NOTICE OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 02 -06, RECORDED JUNE 16, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003- 439269, OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXCEPT ALL THE COAL AND OTHER MINERALS IN THE LANDS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT TO SAID LAND RECORDED MARCH 13, 1940 IN BOOK 447 PAGE 488 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. ALSO EXCEPT 1 /16TH OF ALL COAL, OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS IN SAID LAND AS RESERVED IN PATENT FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 1926 IN BOOK 9 PAGE 177 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. s RECORDING REQUESTED BY ) AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ) City of Lake Elsinore ) 130 South Main Street ) Lake Elsinore, California 92530 ) Attention: City Clerk ) UVV i-1 Lvvv ....��� 04/29/2003 08:00A Fee :NC Page 1 of 28 Recorded in Official Records County of Riverside Gary L. Orso Assessor, County Clerk b Recorder 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 M S U PAGE SILE DA PCOR NOCOR SMF IMSC. A R COPY LONG REFUND NCNG EX- DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT by and between CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE and COMO AT TUSCANY HILL CORPORATION Development Agmt Grenhill_1 4014.000 'Ia 4/03!03 Contract /Agreement # 1649 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. Definitions -------------------------------------------- ..................................................... ...... ... ..................... 3 1.1. "Agreement" ......--•------------------ ••---- ••----- .......-- • -• -.3 1.2. "Applicable Rules" ...............•-------......................_.........................--•-- ......------- •---- •...........3 1.3. "City General Plan" or "General Plan" ............................................•--------- ......---- •...........3 1.4. "Community Development Director" ..................•-•-----•--••--•----•--....... ....-- •.......................3 1.5. "Development ................................................................................................................... 3 1 -6. "Effective Date" ...."-.-'•'""•'"•"• "- •. - "'3 1.7. "Future Approvals" ....•........"".. " "'3 1.8. "Laws" or "Law" .......................... ..............................4 1.9. "Property„ ............................. ......... "Specific .... ... •--- ..............4 ••---- ••-- •- •-- •..........4 1.10. Plan" ................................................. 1.11. "Subsequent Rules" ................ ............ ..............................4 2. General Provisions . ................................................................................. .. ...... ..•---- •-- •--- •- •.......4 2.1. Agreement Personal to Vested Party ......................................•----...... ..-- •......--- ................4 2.2. Negation of Agency •---•-•--.......---••--•• ........ ......................4 2.3. Amendments ............................................................•.......--••-------••---.. ....-- •- ••......--- ••---- - - -..4 4 2.4. Enforcement of Agreement .............................................................................................. 3. Development Standards for the Property; Applicable Rules ...................... ............................5 3.1. Rules, Regulations, Official Policies .....................................•_.......... ......._......................5 3.2. Applicable Rules ............................•-----.....................................---...... ......--- ••--- ................5 3.3. Future Approvals ....-- • .. .................... ---..... ..............._..............6 3.4. Consistency with Applicable Rules ................................................... ..............................6 3.5. General Development ........•--- •...... - -- ..... ....• ... ......................7 3.6. Submission of Applications for Future Approvals ............................ ..............................7 4. Acknowledgments, Agreements and Assurances on the Part of the City . ..............................7 4.1. Entitlement to Develop .......•....""'...... "'7 4.2. Subsequent Enactments ...... .............. •................ ..... ..- •---- ...............-- - - - -.7 7 4.3. Future Approvals ..................... _....................................................................................... 8 4.4. Modification of Approvals ............................................................................................... 4.5. Timing of Development ...................•---.............................................. ...........- ••................8 4.6_ No Moratorium ................................................................ ......................... .....8 8 4.7. Fees and Exactions ........................................................................................................... 4.8. Development Agreement Fee .....--• .................................................... ................ •-- ...........9 4.9- MSHCP .........................••---...-----.......................................................------ .....--- •................9 9 5. Cooperation and Implementation .............................................................................. . 5.1. Further Assurances; Covenant to Sign Documents .......................... .............................10 5.2. Reimbursement and Apportionment ................................................. .............................10 g . ............................. 5.3. Processing .........................10 11 5.4. No Revocation; Disapprovals ................... ....... .......------ •- ••---- ....... -. 5.5. Defense of Agreement and Processing During Third Party Litigation ..........................1 l Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 U 1111 llll �.��°�Gm 04/03/03 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 5.6. State, Federal or Case Law .......................•........----...............---......... ..................--- ......_.11 5.7. Processing Cooperation .................................................................... .............................11 6- Compliance; Termination; Modifications and Amendments ................... .............................12 6.1. Review of Compliance ................................................................................................... 12 6.2. Termination of Development Agreement As To Breaching Party ... .............................13 6.3. Termination of Development Agreement ......................................... .............................13 6.4. Modification or Amendment of Development Agreement ............... .............................14 7. Operating Memoranda .......................................................................................................... 14 8. Term of Agreement ........................... ............................... ......14 ............... ............................... 9. Notice of Compliance . .......................................................................................................... 14 9.1. Request For Notice .............. ..•-- .......................... ........---- .......15 9.2. Failure To Deliver ............................................................................ ........._...................15 10. Transfers and Assignments- ---------------•----...-•---.....................-•-------•-•----.. ............--- ........•- • -..15 11. Mortgagee Protection .......................................................................................................... 15 11.1. Mortgage Not Rendered Invalid ..................................................... .............................16 11.2. Request for Notice to Mortgagee .................................................... .............................16 11.3. Mortgagee's Time to Cure ........................................................................................... 16 11.4. Cure Rights ............---•--------• ............................................................. •••------ ....................16 12. Not a Public Dedication . ........................................ ............................................................. 16 13. Notices ................................................................•---•-•--......----.........---.... ......................_......17 14. Severability and Termination ................................................................ .............................17 15. Time of Essence ............................................... ................................................................... 17 16. Force Majeure . .................................................................................................................... 17 17. Waiver ....... ............................... 18. No Third Party Beneficiaries ................................................................. .............................18 19. Attorneys' Fees ................................................................................................................... 18 20. Incorporation of Exhibits ....................................................................... ......... ....................18 21. Authority to Execute; Binding Effect .................................................... .............................18 22. Entire Agreement; Conflicts ..-•---•-----• .................................................... ... ••-- ...--- ................18 23. Counterparts ........................................................................................................................ 19 24. Applicable Law ...................................................................................... .............................19 25. Further Actions ..............•----.. ..........-- •-- ......._........ ....................19 26. Recording ..............•....-------••---------------.......................................---.......... .............................19 Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 11 INItlINI�IN�IInhII��I�IN�IMIIIAI�I ���'�'�°00A 04/03/03 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Development Agreement ( "Agreement') is made this . Y day of N L , 2003, by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a general law city organized and existing. under the laws of the State of California (the "City "), and Como at Tuscany Hill Corporation, 330 N. Brand Boulevard, #1180, Glendale, CA 91203, a California corporation (the "Vested The City and the Vested Party are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement, the Parties hereto agree as follows: RECITALS A. Government Code Sections 65864, et seq. (the "Development Agreement Statutes ") authorize the City to enter into an agreement with any person or business entity having a legal or equitable interest in real property regarding the future development of such property. B. Government Code Section 65864 states that the lack of certainty in the approval of development can result in a waste of resources and escalate the cost of development to the consumer. Assurance to the applicant through a development agreement that the applicant may proceed with development in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval, will strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic costs of development. C. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65865, the City has adopted the following rules and regulations establishing procedures and requirements for consideration of development agreements: Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Chapter 19.12 (the "Development Agreement Procedures'). This Development Agreement has been processed, considered and executed in accordance with the Development Agreement Statutes and the Development Agreement Procedures. D. The property which is the subject of this Development Agreement (the "Propert y ") consists of an existing 207 lot subdivision (vacant lots on approximately 30 acres of graded rolling hills) generally located between Summerhill Drive and Via de la Valle within the boundaries of the Tuscany Hills Master Planned Community as set forth in the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan approved by the City Council of the City on January 23, 1990, by Ordinance Nos. 879 and 880 pursuant to California Government Code Section 65450 et seq., and as may have been or may subsequently be amended (the "Specific Plan "). The property is more particularly defined as Tract Map No. 17413 -1 and as set forth in the Legal Description attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. E. The Vested Party is a corporation authorized to do business in the State of California. The Vested Party is the fee owner of the Property. Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 1 of 20 �.Aa,o. 4 of 28 4/03/03 F. Through this Agreement, the Vested Party and the City intend to vest the General Plan, the Specific Plan and zoning designations for the Property primarily to bring certainty and stability to the government regulations applicable to the future Development of the Property which is currently permitted under the City's General Plan, Specific Plan and Zoning Code. G. The environmental documentation prepared and adopted/approved for the Specific Plan (and amendments thereto) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the "CEQA Guidelines" (Title 14, Califomia Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.) and the City's local guidelines promulgated thereunder (hereinafter collectively referred to as "CEQA ") adequately address the potential environmental impacts under this Development Agreement. In particular, that there are no substantial changes to the Property or the circumstances under which the Property is to be regulated and developed under this Development Agreement when viewed against the Specific Plan, nor any new information of substantial importance which would require preparation of another CEQA document pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. The vesting of General Plan, Specific Plan and zoning designations through this Agreement is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3) because there is no possibility that the agreement will have any significant environmental impact. H. To implement the aforementioned State policy to reduce the economic risk of development and bring certainty to future development, the City deems the approval and implementation of this Agreement to be in the public's best interest and intends that the adoption of this Agreement be considered an exercise of the City's police powers to regulate the Development of the Property during the term of this Agreement. I. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement relating to the Property in conformance with the provisions of the Development Agreement Statutes, the Development Agreement Procedures, the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and existing City. laws, rules, regulations, and official policies to allow the development, construction, operation,, use and occupancy ( "Development ") of the Property, upon the terms and conditions set forth herein and in the promotion of the public health, safety and general welfare of the City. The Vested Party shall be entitled to proceed with the Development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement and the City's laws, rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses, density, intensity of use, height, size, design, development fees and exactions, reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and construction, improvement, building and occupancy standards and specifications in force on the Effective Date (as hereinafter defined) of this Agreement. J. On April 7, 2003, the City Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Vested Party's application for the Development Agreement and recommended to the City Council approval of this Agreement. K. On April 8, 2003, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Vested Party's application for the Development Agreement and on April 15, 2003, the City Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 2 of 20 4/03/03 2883 - 388888 I IIIIII II��{I �I�II III��1 (II I �I�I "I�'I �II "I�I III ('II 04/29/ 5 00£ 28 000 Council adopted Ordinance No. 2003 - approving this Agreement (the "Ordinance "). The Ordinance shall become effective on May 16, 2003 (the "Effective Date "). L. The Vested Party has applied to the City in accordance with applicable procedures for approval of this mutually binding Agreement. The Planning Commission and City Council of the City have given public notice of intention to consider the Agreement, have conducted public hearings thereon pursuant to the Development Agreement Statutes, have found that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with, and fulfill the objectives of, the General Plan, the Specific Plan and the Zoning Ordinance; and have made all of the other required findings, including, but not limited, the findings set forth in Section 19.12.080 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. M. This Agreement is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare needs of the residents of the City. N. This Agreement will bind the City to the terms and obligations specified in this Agreement and will limit, to the degree specified in the Agreement and under State law, the future exercise of the City's ability to change the Applicable Rules (as hereinafter &fned), hinder, delay, postpone, preclude or regulate development on the Property, except as provided for herein. THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires: 1.1. "Agreement" means this Development Agreement entered into between the City and the Vested Party as of the Effective Date. 1.2. "Applicable Rules" means the development standards and restrictions set forth in Section 3 of this Agreement which shall govern the Development of the Property. 1.3. "City General Plan" or "General Plan" shall mean the General Plan of the City of Lake Elsinore. 1.4. "Community Development Director" shall mean the Community Development Director of the City of Lake Elsinore, or his or her designee. 1.5. "Development" is defined in Recital I of this Agreement. 1.6. "Effective Date" is the effective date of this Agreement which is May 16, 2003, the date the Ordinance approving this Agreement becomes effective. 1.7. "Future Approvals" means any action to implement Development of the Property pursuant to the Applicable Rules, including without limitation variances, design review, Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 3 of 20 2 03 08 4/03/03 /j review of building, landscaping or signage plans, subdivision or tract maps, conditional use permits and building permits and certificates of occupancy subject to and including any mitigation measures identified and adopted pursuant to applicable CEQA review, if any, pursuant to Section 4.3. Upon approval of any of the Future Approvals, as they may be amended from time to time, they shall become part of the Applicable Rules, and the Vested Party shall have a "vested right," as that term is defined under California law, in and to such Future Approvals by virtue of this Agreement. 1.8. "Laws" or "Law," or any reference to "laws" or "law" in this Agreement includes all applicable federal and California statutes and case law, and any City laws, ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations, policies, motions, directives, mitigation measures, conditions, standards, specifications, dedications, fees, taxes (including without limitation general, special and excise taxes), assessments, liens, other exactions and impositions, or any other action, whether enacted or adopted by the City or its electorate through the initiative or referendum process. Recital D. 1.9. "Property" is the real property covered by this Agreement identified in 1.10. "Specific Plan" is the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan as defined in Recital D. 1.11. "Subsequent Rules" means any Law enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement, including the Laws set forth in Section 2.4. 2. General Provisions. 2.1. Agreement Personal to Vested Party. The qualifications and identity of the Vested Party are of particular concern to the City. Therefore, this Agreement and all of its terms and conditions are personal to Vested Party and the benefits and burdens of the Agreement shall only inure to those affiliated entities, assigns, heirs, successors, devises, administrators, representatives, lessees and other persons as may be permitted by Vested Party consistent with the provisions to Section 10 et seq. of this Agreement. 2.2. Negation of Agency. The Parties acknowledge that, in entering into and performing under this Agreement, each is acting as an independent entity and not as an agent of the other in any respect. Nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City and the Vested Party joint venturers, partners, agents of the other, or employer /employee. 2.3. Amendments. The term "this Agreement' or "Development Agreement' herein shall include all amendments properly approved and executed pursuant to Section 6.4 and all changes, adjustments or clarifications by Operating Memoranda as set forth in Section 7. 2.4. Enforcement of Agreement. This Agreement shall be enforceable by each and any Party or any successor(s) or assign(s) (as provided in Sections 2.1 and 10), Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 4 of 20 1111 NU 04/29/ ''-°- 4/03/03 r. notwithstanding any change in or addition to the applicable general plan, specific plans, zoning, subdivision, land use, building or occupancy resolutions, ordinances, orders, actions, initiatives, referenda, policies, plans or regulations, including but not limited to the rules, regulations or official policies relating to zoning; growth management; subdivision; land use; moratoria; permitted uses; intensity of use; density; design; levels of service for traffic improvements or traffic mitigation fees or other requirements; police, fire or paramedic protection; drainage protection or flood control; restrictions, if any, on timing, sequence, or phasing of development; grading; slope development standards; requirements to pay local or regional development impact fees; construction, improvement, building or occupancy standards or specifications; requirements to provide public improvements, services or infrastructure (or contributions in Iieu thereof) or dedications or reservations of property for public use; or any other conditions or exactions applicable to the Development of the Property (collectively, the "Subsequent Rules ") after the Effective Date. A*—,, 3. Development Standards for the Property-, Applicable Rules. The following development standards and restrictions set forth in this Section govern the use and Development of the Property, and shall constitute the Applicable Rules, except as otherwise provided herein, and will amend and supersede any conflicting or inconsistent provisions of any Subsequent Rules: 3.1. Rules Regulations Official Policies. Except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, as to Future Approvals and Development of the Property, the City (including all employees, officials, agencies, commissions, boards, bureaus and departments thereof) rules, regulations, ordinances, resolutions, orders, actions, laws, general plans, specific plans, conditions of approval and official policies governing: permitted uses; density; intensity of use; design; subdivision; growth management; zoning; moratoria; improvement, construction, building and occupancy; levels of service for traffic improvements and traffic mitigation fees or other requirements; police, fire, and paramedic protection; drainage protection and flood control; restrictions, if any,-on timing, sequence, and phasing of development; construction standards and specifications; public improvements and dedications; local and regional development fees and monetary contributions; and all other conditions and exactions applicable to the Development of the Property are expressly acknowledged and agreed by the Parties to be those in force and effect upon the Effective Date (the "Applicable Rules "). Rules: 3.2. Applicable Rules. The following Laws shall be part of the Applicable a. The City's General Plan and Map as it exists on the Effective Date; b. The environmental impact report ( "EIR ") and subsequent environmental documents adopted in connection with the Specific Plan; C. The Specific Plan, the City's Zoning Code and Map, as it exists on the Effective Date; Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 S of 20 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I� �'�'aa�:�m d. Such other laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property, density, design, improvement, traffic standards, levels of service and mitigation for development allowed under the Applicable Rules, development fees, and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Development of the Property in force at the time of the Effective Date; C. The land uses permitted on the Property include all of the allowable land uses permitted by the General Plan and the Specific Plan; and f. Tract Map No. 17413 -1. The following Laws shall not be part of the Applicable Rules: a. Regulations governing construction standards and specifications, including without limitation, the City's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code and Fire Code; b. Revisions and amendments to the Applicable Rules necessitated by public health or fire and life safety considerations; C. Revisions and amendments to the Applicable Rules mandated by changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies to the extent that such changes are mandated and required by changes in state or federal laws or regulations; d. Changes in citywide land use regulations, ordinances, policies, programs adopted after the Effective Date that are not in conflict with the Applicable Rules as provided herein; and e. Procedural regulations related to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals and any other matter of procedures not otherwise set forth herein. 3.3. Future Approvals. The Property may also be used and developed as additionally authorized by any Future Approvals requested by the Vested Party, including but not limited to vesting tentative and final subdivision maps, general plan amendments, specific or precise plan amendments, zone changes, variances, conditional use permits (including for sale or service of alcohol), lot line adjustments, grading plans, building permits and certificates of occupancy, and by amendments to this Agreement and Operating Memoranda, if any, hereafter entered into in accordance with Sections 6.3 and 7 of this Agreement. Future Approvals shall be evaluated in accordance with applicable CEQA requirements. 3.4. Consistency with Applicable Rules. City finds, based upon all information available to City prior to or concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, that there are no Applicable Rules that would prohibit, prevent or impede the full and complete Development of the Property. Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 6 of 20 111111 mu�umiii��u�inhuNUUUUw �. =gig °. 4/03, 3.5. General Development. The Vested Party shall have the right to develop the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and consistent with the General Project Description as set forth in Exhibit "B ", provided, however, that subject to the provisions of Section 5.5, the Vested Party shall have no liability under this Agreement if Development of the Project fails to occur in whole or in part. 3.6. Submission of Applications for Future Approvals. The Vested Party shall, within the term of this Agreement, submit all applications for Future Approvals deemed necessary by the City under the Applicable Rules for the future commercial Development of the Property. In accordance with Section 4.7.a., the Vested Party shall pay to the City all lawful application and processing fees. The City shall process such applications consistent with this Agreement, including without limitation Sections 4.3 and 5.3 herein. 4. Acknowledgments Agreements and Assurances on the Part of the City. In order to effectuate the provisions of this Agreement, the City hereby agrees and assures the Vested Party that the Vested Party will be permitted to carry out and complete the Development of the Property in accordance with the Applicable Rules. Therefore, the City hereby agrees and acknowledges that: 4.1. Entitlement to Develop. The Vested Party is hereby granted the vested right to develop the Property to the extent and in the manner provided in this Agreement, subject to the Applicable Rules and the Future Approvals. �-� 4.2. Subsequent Enactments. The Vested Party may, in its sole discretion, give the City written notice of its election to have any Subsequent Rule applied to such portion of the Property as it may own, in which case such Subsequent Rule shall be deemed to be an Applicable Rule insofar as that portion of the Property is concerned. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if state or federal laws or regulations are enacted after the Effective Date hereof, which prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement will be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such state or federal laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. 4.3. Future Approvals. The Vested Party shall submit applications for Future Approvals consistent with this Agreement and the Applicable Rules, and the City shall have the right to conduct environmental review and impose conditions and/or mitigation measures in connection with those Future Approvals. All terms, covenants, and provisions of this Agreement shall be subject to such conditions and/or mitigations as shall be required by such environmental review; this requirement supersedes any condition or covenant contained in this Agreement, or any attachment hereto, which is inconsistent with it; provided, however, that such conditions and/or mitigation measures shall, to the maximum extent feasible, not be inconsistent with the Applicable Rules nor inconsistent with the Development of the Property as allowed by this Agreement. ( "`Feasible' means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors." Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 15364.) The City shall 4/03/03 (� ,r f Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 7 of 20 134/29/2003 08: GOR 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 16 of 28 process such environmental and land use documents to a final decision, commencing whenever the Vested Party's application for any given approval is declared complete and accepted by the City. All costs for associated environmental studies and review thereof shall be paid by the applicant(s) for the application(s) being reviewed. The Vested Party applying for a Future Approval may protest the imposition of any condition(s), dedication(s), or fee(s) imposed in connection with the City's environmental review, and such protest shall be governed by the procedures set forth in California Government Code Section 66020. There is hereby reserved by the Vested Party the right to refrain from proceeding with the Development of the Property upon a determination by the Vested Party, in its sole discretion, that any environmental mitigation or condition is infeasible, inconsistent with the Applicable Rules or with the Development of the Property as allowed by this Agreement, or for any other reason. 4.4. Modification of Approvals. Throughout the term of this Agreement, the Vested Party shall have the right, at its election and without risk to any right that is vested pursuant to this Agreement, to apply to the Community Development Director for minor modifications to Future Approvals. The processing, review and approval by the City of any such modifications shall proceed in accordance with Section 5.3 hereof. The approval or conditional approval of any such minor modification shall not require an amendment to this Agreement, provided that, in addition to any other findings that may be required in order to approve or conditionally approve the modification, a finding is made that the modification is consistent with this Agreement. 4.5. Timing of Development. Because the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Ca1.3d 465 (1984), that failure of the parties to provide for the timing of development resulted in a later adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over the parties' agreement, it is the intent of the Vested Party and the City to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that the Vested Party shall have the right (without the obligation) to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and at such time as the Vested Party deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. 4.6. No Moratorium. No future amendment of any existing City ordinance or resolution, or future adoption of any ordinance, resolution or other action, that purports to limit the rate or timing of development over time or alter the sequencing of development phases, entitlements (including without limitation water and sewer service), or construction of all or any part of the Property, whether imposed by ordinance, initiative, resolution, ,policy, order or otherwise, and whether adopted or imposed by the City Council or through the initiative or referendum process, shall apply to the Property or any portion thereof. 4.7. Fees and Exactions. The City finds that ultimate Development of the Property in reliance upon the residential land use designations under the Specific Plan vested by this Agreement will contribute tax revenues to the City. In addition to the DAG set forth in Section 4.8, the City shall only charge and impose those fees and exactions, including, without limitation, dedications, contributions, in lieu fees, reservations and any other fees or taxes Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 8 of 20 WE It 1311 Ilt II III 111111111 11 of 28 rage ..i 4/03/03 . s 1� ".w 2 ,..., (including excise, construction or any other taxes) relating to development or the privilege of developing the Property (the "Exactions ") that are legal and authorized by the Applicable Rules. No new Exactions may be imposed by the City; provided, however this Section shall not be applicable to the following fees and taxes and shall not be construed to limit the authority of City to: a. Charge application and processing fees in effect on a citywide basis on the Effective Date as may be amended for land use approvals, building permits, and other similar permits and entitlements, which fees are designed to reimburse the City's actual expenses attributable to processing such applications, provided, however, said application and processing fees shall not exceed the fees that are charged by the City generally to applicants, on a non - discriminatory basis for similar approvals, permits, or entitlements granted by City; or b. Impose or levy general or special taxes, including but not limited to, property taxes, sales taxes, transient occupancy taxes, business taxes, which may be applied to the Property or to businesses occupying the Property; provided, however, that the tax is of general applicability Citywide and does not burden the Property disproportionately when compared to the development of other institutional, residential, commercial, office or retail uses within the City. Nothing in this Agreement prohibits the adoption and application of a special tax approved by the City's voters, provided that such tax is imposed on a City wide basis. 4.8. Development Agreement Fee. Vested Party will pay a special fee which will be called a Development Agreement Fee ( "DAG ") in the amount of Three thousand dollars '" ($3,000) payable upon the issuance of each building permit in connection with the Development of the Property. The Vested Party may elect to prepay the DAG at any time so long as such prepayment is for the entire Development and not just a part. 4.9. MSHCP. The City and the Vested Party acknowledge that the proposed Western Riverside County Multi- Species Habitat Conservation Program ( "MSHCP ") may be adopted by the County of Riverside. The MSHCP is intended to implement and to satisfy certain state and federal environmental laws and regulations within the Western Riverside region, including the City of Lake Elsinore. The Parties further acknowledge and agree that it is their mutual desire and intent that this Agreement provide the Vested Party certainty in the development process consistent with the Development Agreement Statutes and that the Development of the Property be subject only to the Applicable Rules. So long as the Vested Party demonstrates compliance with applicable state and federal environmental laws and regulations, it is the Parties' intent that the Development of the Property be exempt from any additional requirements imposed by the MSHCP except to the extent legally required as determined by the City. 5. Cooperation and Implementation. The City agrees that it will cooperate in good faith and fair dealing with the Vested Party to the fullest extent to implement this Agreement, including the following: Ao_�_ Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 9 of 20 04/29/2003 08: DOR 1111 IN IN 1111111 IN I IN 12 of 28 4/03/03 5.1. Further Assurances; Covenant to Sign Documents. Each Party shall take all actions and do all things, and execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit, if required, any and all documents and writings, that may be necessary or proper to achieve the purposes and objectives of this Agreement. 5.2. Reimbursement and Apportionment. Although the Parties do not contemplate a . condition of a Future Approval requiring excess capacity or size of . required dedications or public facilities beyond that required by the Applicable Rules, nothing in this Agreement precludes the City or the Vested Party from entering into any reimbursement agreements for the portion (if any) of the cost of any dedications, public facilities and/or infrastructure that the City may request of Vested Party in connection with a future development project to the extent that they are in excess of those reasonably necessary to mitigate the impacts of the future Project or Development of the Property. 5.3. Processing. The City hereby agrees that it will accept from the Vested Party for processing and review all applications for Future Approvals including without limitation any zoning, development, subdivision, signage, building, use or occupancy permits, approvals or other entitlements for the Development of the Property hi accordance with this Agreement, provided that said applications are submitted in accordance with the Applicable Rules. To the fullest extent allowed by law, the City shall process all applications filed in connection with the Development of the Property as expeditiously as is commercially reasonable and complete at the earliest commercially reasonable time all steps necessary for the implementation of this Agreement and the Development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement and applicable law, including without limitation the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Sections 65950 et seq.), including, but not limited to, the following: Future Approvals; a. The processing of applications for and the issuance of all the b. The holding of any required public hearings, C. With respect to all applications for the issuance of all Future Approvals, in particular ministerial approvals such as site plans, grading plans, improvement plans, building plans and specifications, and ministerial issuance of one or more final maps, zoning clearances, certificates of compliance, grading permits, improvement permits, wall permits, building permits, lot line adjustments, encroachment permits, temporary use permits, and certificates of use and occupancy, the City shall respond to the application in writing within thirty (30) days after the application is submitted to the City; and d. During the preparation of all drawings, plans, maps and related documents, staff of the City and the Vested Party shall hold regular progress meetings as needed to coordinate the preparation and review of such items, and the staff of the City and the Vested Party shall communicate and consult informally as frequently as is necessary to ensure that the formal submittal of any documents to the City can receive prompt and speedy attention. Development Agmt Grenhill. 14014.000 10 of 20 El III I IIII I 111 13 of 28 4/03/03 .i Y �.-� J m i st: YaOw 5.4. No Revocation; Disapprovals. No plan, permit, Future Approval for the Development of the Property including without limitation the EIR and related environmental documentation adopted in connection with the Specific Plan and this Agreement shall be revoked or subsequently disapproved once issued by the City provided that the Development of the Property is consistent with such approval. Any disapproval by the City shall state in writing the reasons for such disapproval and the suggested actions to be taken in order for approval to be granted. Any disapproval shall be without prejudice to the Vesting Party re- submitting the application, with modifications as appropriate, directly to the City Council without review by any subordinate person or body, including the Planning Commission. The City Council shall promptly notice and conduct a hearing on the re- submitted application at their next regularly scheduled or special meeting. 5.5. Defense of Agreement and Processing During Third Party Litigation. In the event that a third party lawsuit relating to this Agreement is filed against the City or the Vested Party, the Vested Party shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City at the Vested Party's sole cost and expense. Vested Party may elect to terminate this Agreement as provided by Section 6.3 provided, however, that the obligation set forth in this Section 5.5 shall survive such termination. Subject to the Vested Party's compliance with the proceeding obligation, such lawsuit related to this Agreement shall not hinder, delay or stop the development, processing or Development of the Property, approval of Future Approvals unless the third party obtains a court order preventing the activity and posts adequate security as required by law. The City shall not stipulate to the issuance of any such order, and Vested Party, subject to its obligation herein, may oppose such motion on behalf of the City. If this Agreement or any Applicable Rule as applied to this Agreement is adjudicated or determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the City agrees, subject to the City's lawful discretion and all other legal requirements, to consider all modifications to this Agreement or the Applicable Rule which are necessary or required to render it valid and enforceable to the extent permitted by applicable law on the condition that Vested Party shall reimburse City for all costs and expense related thereto. 5.6. State, Federal or Case Law. Where any state, federal or case law allows the City to exercise any discretion or to take any action with respect to that law, the City shall, in an expeditious and timely manner, at the earliest possible time, (i) exercise its discretion in such a way as to be consistent with, and carry out the terms of, this Agreement and (ii) take such other actions as may be necessary to carry out in good faith the terms of this Agreement. 5.7. Processing Cooperation. To the extent permitted by law, the City shall cooperate with and assist the Vested Party in securing any and all entitlements, authorizations, permits or approvals which may be required by any other govermiental or quasi - governmental entity in connection with the Development of the Property. The City shall cooperate with the Vested Party in,. any dealings with federal, state and other local governmental and quasi - governmental entities concerning issues affecting the Property. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the City shall use its best commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that the actions taken and requirements imposed by such governmental entities do not adversely impact Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 11 of 20 2@193-3061@80 9 9 14 of 28 4/03/03 „s .y l� y 38 the Development of the Property. The City shall keep the Vested Party informed with respect to its communications with such agencies which could impact the Development of the Property. 6. Compliance; Termination; Modifications and Amendments. 6.1. Review of Compliance. The City Council shall review pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1 this Development Agreement once each year, on or before each anniversary of the Effective Date ( "Periodic Review ") in order to review the extent of the good faith substantial compliance by the Vested Party with the terms and provision of this Agreement as well as the performance by the City of its obligations under this Agreement. At the commencement of each Periodic Review, the City shall notify the Vested Party in writing that said Periodic Review is or has been commenced. The Periodic Review shall cover only those parcels of the Property owned by the Vested Party. The permitted transferor, if any, shall be responsible for Periodic Review with respect to the transferred parcels in accordance with Section 11 below. a. Prima Facie Compliance. During each Periodic Review, the City Council may determine, in writing, that the Vested Party and the City are in prima facie compliance with this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, the phrase "prima facie compliance" shall mean that the City and the Vested Party have acted in a commercially reasonable manner (taking into account the circumstances which then exist) and in good faith in attempting to adhere to the substance of this Agreement. Precise or technical adherence to each term or provision of this Agreement shall not be required in order for a Party to be in prima facie compliance; and the failure of any Party to agree with the City in connection with the determination or implementation of any Future Approval shall not demonstrate a lack of prima facie compliance. b. Information to be Provided the Vested Party. If the City Council does not determine the Vested Party to be in prima facie compliance with this Agreement, the City shall deliver to the Vested Party a copy of all documentation prepared in connection with the Periodic Review which demonstrates that the Vested Party is not in prima facie compliance with this Agreement in no event later than twenty (20) business days after the commencement of the Periodic Review. The Vested Party shall be given a full and adequate opportunity to be heard before the City Council orally and in writing regarding its performance and, at its option, the City's performance under the Agreement prior to the completion of the City Council's Periodic Review. Within thirty (30) days of the submission by the Vested Party of its response, or the hearing date, whichever is later; the City Council shall issue its Periodic Review statement and may conclude that substantial compliance with this Agreement has been met. C. Notice Of Non-Compliance; Cure Rights. If at the completion of any Periodic Review, the City Council reasonably concludes on the basis of substantial evidence that (1) the Vested Party has not demonstrated that it is in prima facie compliance with this Agreement, AND (ii) that the Vested Party is out of compliance with a specific substantive term or provision of this Agreement, then the City Council may issue and deliver to the Vested Party a written notice ( "Notice of Non - Compliance ") detailing the specific reasons for non - compliance Development Agmt Grenhill_1 4014.000 12 of 20 IN .,�mw,, of 28 4/03/03 ,> (including references to sections and provisions of this Agreement and the Applicable Rules which allegedly have been breached) with a complete statement of all facts demonstrating such non - compliance. That Party shall then have sixty (60) calendar days following receipt of the Notice of Non - Compliance to cure said failure(s) or to provide evidence of Force Majeure as defined in Section 17 hereof, provided, however, if any one or more of the item(s) of non- compliance set forth in the Notice of Non - Compliance cannot reasonably be cured within said sixty (60) -day period, then that Party shall not be in breach of this Agreement if it commences to cure said item(s) within said sixty (60) -day period and diligently prosecutes said cure to completion; provided, however such cure shall be completed within not more than one hundred twenty (120) days, or such time as the parties mutually agree is appropriate for the type of cure at issue. d. Failure of Periodic Review. The City's failure to review at least annually compliance by the Vested Party with the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute or be asserted by any Party as a breach by any other Party of this Agreement, or of Vested Party's lack of compliance with this Agreement. 6.2. Termination of Development Agreement As To Breaching Party. If the Vested Party fails to timely cure any item(s) of non - compliance set forth in a Notice of Non - Compliance, then the City shall have the right but not the obligation to initiate proceedings for the purpose of terminating this Agreement in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1 as to the Property. If the City commences such termination proceedings, it shall give not less than thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to the Vested Party, which notice shall specify the affected parcel or parcels and the precise grounds for termination and shall set a date, time and place for a public hearing before the City Council on the issue, all in compliance with the Development Agreement Statutes. At the noticed public hearing, the Vested Party and/or its designated representative, shall be given an opportunity to make a full and public presentation to the City. If, following the taking of evidence and the hearing of testimony at said public hearing, the City finds, based upon substantial evidence, that the Vested Party has not demonstrated prima facie compliance with this Agreement and that the Vested Party is out of compliance with a specific, substantive term or provision of this Agreement, then the City may (unless the Parties otherwise agree in writing) terminate this Agreement as to the applicable parcel or parcels. 6.3. Termination of Development Agreement. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 6.2, the parties may mutually agree in writing to terminate the Agreement. For example, it is the express intent of the parties to automatically terminate this Agreement if, during the term of the Agreement, Vested Party submits written notice to City that it, or an affiliated entity, has not obtained good title to substantially all of the Property. In this event, it is the parties' intention that this Agreement shall be deemed terminated as of the date Vested Party delivers to City the written notice described herein. For purpose of this Agreement, the phrase "affiliated entity" shall mean an entity which controls, is controlled by, or under common control with Vested Party or is a partnership or joint venture involving Vested Party or one or more of Vested Party's principals and in which Vested Party or its principals exercise operational controls. In addition, it is the express intent of the parties to automatically terminate this Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 13 of 20 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 •�'� ��'� 4/03/03 Agreement if Vested Party submits written notice to City that it is terminating the Agreement due to the filing of any third party litigation relating to the Agreement. 6.4. Modification or Amendment of Development Agreement. Subject to the notice and hearing requirements of the Development Agreement Statutes, this Agreement may be modified or amended from time to time only with the written consent of the Vested Party and the City or their successors and assigns in accordance with the provisions of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and Sections 65867 and 65868 of the Govemment Code. 7. Operating Memoranda. The provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between the City and the Vested Party. The Development of the Property may demonstrate that clarifications to this Agreement and the Applicable Rules are appropriate with respect to the details of performance of the City and the Vested Party. To the extent allowable by law, the Vested Party shall retain a certain degree of flexibility as provided herein with respect to all matters, items and provisions covered in general under this Agreement, except for those which relate to the (i) term; (ii) permitted uses; or (iii) density or intensity of use. When and if the Vested Party finds it necessary or appropriate to make changes, adjustments or clarifications to matters, items or provisions not enumerated in (i) through (iii) above, the Parties shall effectuate such changes, adjustments or clarifications through operating memoranda (the "Operating Memoranda ") approved by the Parties in writing which reference this Section 7. Operating Memoranda are not intended to constitute an amendment to this Agreement but mere ministerial clarifications; therefore public notices and hearings shall not be required. The City Manager shall be authorized, upon consultation with, and approval of, the Vested Party, to determine whether a requested clarification may be effectuated pursuant to this Section or whether the requested clarification is of such character to constitute an amendment to the Agreement which requires compliance with the provisions of Section 6.4 above. 8. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall become operative and commence upon the Effective Date. It shall remain in effect until five (5) years from and after the Effective Date, unless this Agreement is terminated, modified, or extended upon mutual written consent of the Parties hereto or as otherwise provided- in this Agreement. Following the expiration or termination of the term hereof, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect; provided, such expiration or termination shall not automatically affect any right or duty of the City or the Vested Party arising from City approvals or actions relating to the Property approved or issued prior to the expiration or termination of the term. 9. Notice of Compliance. 9.1. Request For Notice. Within thirty (30) days following any written request that the Vested Party may make from time to time, the City shall execute and deliver to the Vested Party a written notice ( "Notice of Compliance'), in recordable form, duly executed and acknowledged by the City, that certifies: a. That this Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the Parties, or if there have been modifications thereto, that this Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 14 of 20 04129/2003 138 t 00A 17 of 28 III IN ..e 4,103/03 Gam' / R �� Agreement is in full force and effect as modified and stating the date and nature of such modifications; b. That there are no current uncured defaults under this Agreement or, if such are asserted, specifying the dates and nature of any such default; C. That this Agreement has been terminated with respect to a Parcel, and such Parcel has been released from this Agreement; and d. Such other reasonable information requested by the Vested Party. 9.2. Failure To Deliver. The failure of the City to deliver such a Notice of Compliance within such time shall constitute a conclusive presumption against the City that this Agreement is in full force and effect without modification except as may be represented by the Vested Party and that there are no uncured defaults in the performance of the Vested Party, except as may be represented by the Vested Party. The Vested Party shall have the right, at the Vested Party's sole discretion, to record the Notice of Compliance. The City Manager shall be authorized to execute, on behalf of the City, any Notice of Compliance requested by the Vested Party. 10. Transfers and Assignments. The rights and obligations of Vested Party hereunder shall not be assigned or transferred, except that on thirty (30) days written notice to City, Vested Party, may assign all or a portion of Vested Party's rights and obligations thereunder to any person or persons, partnership or corporation who purchases all or a portion of Vested Party's right, title and interest in the Property, provided such assignee or grantee assumes in writing each and every obligation of Vested Party hereunder yet to be performed, and further provided that Vested Party obtains the consent of City to the assignment, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Provided the Vested Party's thirty (30) day notice includes the assumption by the assignee or grantee, the consent of the City shall be deemed to occur upon the thirtieth (30`h) day of the notice period unless within that period the City provides written notice withholding consent and explaining the reasons it is withholding consent. The notice to City shall include the identity of any such assignee and a copy of the written assumption of the assignor's obligations hereunder pertaining to the portion assigned or transferred. After such notice and the receipt of such consent, the assignor shall have no further obligations or liabilities hereunder. 11. Mortgagee Protection. The Parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit the Vested Party, in any manner, at the Vested Party's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvements thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device. The City acknowledges that the lender(s) providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees, upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Vested Party and representatives of such lender(s) to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. The City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. I*--- Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 15 of 20 iuuuu��u�u���uau��HU 04/29/2063 .. of 28 4/03/03 j,.' a 7 Any mortgagee of a mortgage or a beneficiary of a deed of trust or any successor or assign thereof, including without limitation the purchaser at a judicial or non judicial foreclosure sale or a person or entity who obtains title by deed -in -lieu of foreclosure ( "Mortgagee ") on the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: 11.1. Mortgage Not Rendered Invalid. Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust on the Property made in good faith and for value. 11.2. Request for Notice to Mortgagee. The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, who has submitted a request in writing to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, shall be entitled to receive written notification from the City of any default by the Vested Party in the performance of the Vested Party's obligations under this Agreement. 11.3. Mortgagee's Time to Cure. The City shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to the Vested Party. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such Party under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default shall be a default which can only be remedied by such Mortgagee obtaining possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, and such Mortgagee seeks to obtain possession, such Mortgagee shall have until ninety (90) days after the date of obtaining such possession to cure or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within such period, to commence to cure such default, and provided, further, that a Mortgagee shall not be required to cure any non - curable default of the Vested Party, which default shall be deemed cured upon any Mortgagee obtaining possession. 11.4. Cure Rights. Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, may take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement and the benefits thereto on the condition that Mortgagee assume the liability of any defaults or monetary obligations of the Vested Party hereunder existing, if at all, at the time of possession. 12. Not a Public Dedication. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, nothing herein contained shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication of the Property, or any portion thereof, to the general public, for the general public, or for any public use or purpose whatsoever, it being the intention and understanding of the Parties that this Agreement be strictly limited to and for the purposes herein expressed for the development of private property. The Vested Party shall have the right to prevent or prohibit the use of the Property, or any portion thereof, including common areas and buildings and improvements located thereon, by any person for any purpose inimical to the permitted use and Development of the Property. City shall not take or permit to be taken (if within the power or authority of the City) any action or activity with respect to the Property that would deprive the Vested Party of the material benefits of this Agreement or would materially and unreasonably interfere with the Development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement. Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 16 of 20 I2003-360080 xi � a. 4/03/03 13. Notices. All notices under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed delivered when personally received by the addressee, or within three (3) calendar days after deposit in the United States mail by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the following parties and their counsel at the addresses indicated below, provided, however, if any Party to this Agreement delivers a notice or causes a notice to be delivered to any other Party to this Agreement, a duplicate of that notice shall be concurrently delivered to each other Party and their respective counsel. To City: City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Attention: City Manager With a Copy to: Barbara Zeid Leibold Van Blarcom, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, P.C. 23422 Mill Creek Drive, Suite 105 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 To the Vested Party: Como at Tuscany Hill Corporation c/o William D. Kennedy Stonewood Development 5665 Oberlin Drive, Suite 104 San Diego, CA 92121 -1739 Notice given in any other manner shall be effective when received by the addressee. The addresses for notices maybe changed by notice given in accordance with this provision. 14. Severability and Termination. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, or if any provision of this Agreement is superseded or rendered unenforceable according to any law which becomes effective after the Effective Date, the Vested Party may elect either (i) to have the remaining provisions of this Agreement remain in full force and effect and continue to be binding on both Parties, (ii) to propose an amendment of the Agreement, subject to the mutual consent of the Parties, or (iii) to declare that this Agreement shall become null and void as to all obligations then remaining unperformed and that this Agreement shall be terminated. 15. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. . 16. Force Maieure. Changed conditions, changes in local, state or federal Iaws or regulations, floods, earthquakes, delays due to strikes or other labor problems, acts of any third party, moratoria enacted by governmental entities or agencies other than the City, injunctions issued by any court of competent jurisdiction, the inability to obtain materials, civil commotion, fire, invasion, acts of God, or other circumstances which substantially interfere with the planning Development Agmt Grenhill. 14014.000 17 of 20 4/03/03 ipa'.0. ' er' I 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 : e l- for and ultimate Development of the Property, or which substantially interfere with the ability of any of the Parties to perform its obligations under this Agreement shall collectively be referred to as "Events of Force Maieure." Each Party shall promptly notify the other Party to this Agreement upon learning of any such Event of Force Majeure. If any Party to this Agreement is prevented by an Event or Events of Force Majeure from performing its obligations under this Agreement, then on the condition that the Party claiming the benefit of said Event(s) of Force Majeure (i) did not cause said Event(s) and (ii) said Event(s) was beyond said Party's reasonable control, the time for performance by said Party of its obligations under this Agreement shall be extended by a number of days equal to the number of days that said Event(s) of Force Majeure continued in effect, or by the number of days it takes to repair or restore the damage caused by said Event(s) to the condition which existed prior to the occurrence of said Event(s), whichever is longer, or longer as the Parties may mutually agree. An Event of Force Majeure shall not include economic or market conditions. 17. Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authori�-ed representative of the Party against whom enforcement of such waiver is sought. 18. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the Vested Party and the City and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 19. Attorneys' Fees. If any Party commences any action for the interpretation, enforcement, termination, cancellation or rescission of this Agreement, or for specific performance for the breach hereof, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees, litigation expenses and costs. Attorneys' fees under this Section shall include attorneys' fees on any appeal as well as any attorneys' fees incurred in any post judgment proceedings to collect or enforce the judgment. 20. Incorporation of Exhibits. The following exhibits which are part of this Agreement are attached hereto and each of which is incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full: Exhibit "A" -- Property Legal Description Exhibit `B" -- General Project Description 21. Authority to Execute; Binding Effect. The City and the Vested Party each represents and warrants that it has the power and authority to execute this Agreement and, once executed, this Agreement shall be final and binding on the Parties. The Parties represent that the signatories to this Agreement are duly authorized to sign on behalf of the respective Party and bind such Party. 22. Entire Agreement; Conflicts. This Agreement represents the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto, and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 18 of 20 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 04/29/2003 �.. 4/03/03 ^ ` e �-. between the Parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. Should any or all of the provisions of this Agreement be found to be in conflict with any other provision or provisions found in the Applicable Rules, then the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail. There are no oral or written representations, understandings, or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements which are not expressly contained herein. No testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement. 23. Counterparts. The Parties may execute this Agreement on separate signature pages which, when attached hereto, shall constitute one complete Agreement. 24. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 25. Further Actions. Each Party shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to the other Party to the extent contemplated in the performance of all obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of the conditions of this Agreement. Upon the request of either Party at any time, the other Party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgment or affidavit if reasonably required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any actions as may be reasonably necessary or desirable under the terms of this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. 26. Recording. The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Agreement (including all �-� Exhibits) to be executed by the City and recorded with the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, California within ten (10) days after passage by the City. Council of the Ordinance. Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 19 of 20 i 111111111111 IMI w`���- 4/03/03 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. A EST: City Clerk , o"we"T • •' th COMO AT TU a California corporation ley Wne' ooY ve o entresident TION, Printe me: ,5A ,11AW - Its: ��c- sior✓�cfi Development Agmt GrenhillA 4014.000 20 of 20 4/03/03 IYWIIM�INtl�N�II�N�'NIVIIkMI�u� ,..�:;z��� ..�:- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF On v al 03 before me, appeared �+ t�yo� �'e�t con ( name(s) of igner(s)), personally known tome -- OR -- proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence (name, title), personally to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. ADRINE DAMAN _ Comm. 111353510 N • NOTARY PUBLIC NIA (Signature of Notary) 3 Los Angeles county Fly Comm. Expires AprR25,2006 L CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER: Individual Corporate Officer(s): Partner(s): _ Attorney -in -Fact _ Trustee(s) Guardian/Conservator Other: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: Name of Person(s) or Entity(ies) Limited General Title(s) ATTENTION NOTARY: Although the information requested below is OPTIONAL, it could prevent fraudulent attachment of this certificate to another document. THIS CERTIFICATE MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE DOCUMENT DESCRIBED AT RIGHT: Title or Type of Document Number of Pages _ Date of Document Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: ij"'°.w:�'wn °^'. ai33. ,, , STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF L) ) On , LI -03 before me, / Sa 7ihib S Alk appeared IJ (name(s) of si �[ personally known to me --OR evidence s)), name, title), personally to be the person(s) whose name(s) Pre subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that %W /they executed the same in N�/)sdr/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by fr*/l�j- /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal - LISA C. GIBBONS Commission # 1389686 Z .�. Notary Public - California Riverside County (Signature of Not ) MyCorrm. EoesDec 12 2006 CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER: _ Individual Corporate Officer(s): v * i-' ICU Title(s)Ze tbQ14 Ci may . Partner(s): _ Limited _ General Attorney -in -Fact Trustee(s) _ Guardian/Conservator Other: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: P � e 0 �y Name of Person(s) or Entity(ies) GI J-C4 O L5,I)OP-e- ATTENTION NOTARY: Although the information requested below is OPTIONAL, it could prevent fraudulent attachment of this certificate to another document. THIS CERTIFICATE Title or Type of Document U P,(/. Am %. MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE DOCUMENT Number of Pages A0 DESCRIBED Date of Document AT RIGHT: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: 111111111111 1N1 04/29/2003 � - -�-- of 28 EXHIBIT "A" / PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION [To Be Attached] Development Agmt Grenhill.1 4014.000 Exhibit «A„ IInIIIIIMIIINI�IAI�I��IIIflplAlllllVb�a ��' -� of 28 =E 04/03/03 SCHEDULE A Order No: 92015049 K07 Your Ref: GRENHILL DEV LOTS 1- 207/TR17413 -1 1. The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this report is: A FEE 2. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: COMO AT TUSCANY HILL CORPORATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION 3. The land referred to in this report is situated in the State of California, County of R 1 VERS 1 DE and is described as follows: LOTS 1 THROUGH 207 AND COMMON LOTS 1 AND J OF TRACT NO. 17413 -1, IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 207 PAGES 9 THROUGH 21 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. EXCEPT ALL THE COAL AND OTHER MINERALS IN THE LANDS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT TO SAID LAND RECORDED MARCH 13, 1940 IN BOOK 447 PAGE 488 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. ALSO EXCEPT 1/16TH OF ALL COAL, OIL, GAS AND OTHER MINERAL DEPOSITS IN SAID LAND AS RESERVED IN PATENT FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 1926 IN BOOK 9 PAGE 177 OF PATENTS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. L'vi 111111111 IN 94//2@ 8 WA EXHIBIT `B" GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project generally consists of 207 detached single- family residential lots as set forth in the site plan for Tract 17413 -1 (Lots 1 -207) on file with the City of Lake Elsinore. Tract 17413 -1 is located in and part of the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan. Tract 17413 -1 is part of the Tuscany Hills Recreation Corporation which serves as the homeowners' association and enforces the recorded CC &R's for Tract 17413 -1. Open space areas and slope areas with landscape easements will be maintained by the homeowners' association. The design of the single - family homes is subject to the City's design review standards and the design standards and requirements to the Tuscany Hills Specific Plan. The Project is proposed to be developed in 11 phases with six different house types. 111 Nt'��NI�N�IIVIf3uII�N 04/29/2803 °°� 6 f -iLnOT E ct,tg O Zake, 4 c(9riz city'., got In--MOTE" Pamela Brinley Mayor May 13, 2003 Robert Schiffner Mayor Pro Tern Thomas Buckley Councilman Como at Tuscany Hill Corporation Daryl Hickman c/o Mr. William D. Kennedy Councilman Stonewood Development Genie Kelley 5665 Oberlin Drive, Suite 104 Councilwoman San Diego, CA 92121 -1739 Richard Watenpaugh City Manager Dear Mr. Kennedy: Enclosed for your use is a copy of the Recorded Development Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and Como at Tuscany Hill Corporation. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please . don't hesitate to contact me. Si cerely, VICKI KASAD, CM , CITY CLERKI HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Enclosure cc: Planning City Manager City Attorney r../ 130 cSoutfii :Aain eStze£t, -fakz (ELnoze, CC4 92530 �eCE��ione: (9o9) 674 -312,4 Sax: (9oq) 674 -23q -'s ararw.Lake- cLSinoze.ozy �e r {r'.z Y CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO.2003- 02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. BACKGROUND At the City Council meeting of March 9, 2004, the City Council continued this item to allow staff and the project applicant to revise Condition of Approval No. 45 which addressed inclusionary housing requirements since the project is located in a redevelopment area. DISSCUSSION The City Attorney and staff met with the applicant and their attorney to revise the wording of Condition 45 to identify a fee for providing funding into the Redevelopment Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund for inclusinoary housing. The proposed condition is as follows: 45. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore to pay $1.30 per square foot of residential development in the project to the Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund to be used by the Agency to satisfy the inclusionary housing requirements of section 33413 of the Community Redevelopment Law. The agreement shall be in such a form as required by Agency counsel and shall be submitted to the Redevelopment Agency for approval. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the project with the amendment to condition No. 45. PREPARED BY: Robert A. Brady, Director of Community Development APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: AGENDA ITEM NO. °_! Ae�A A,, PAGE OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE � REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO: HONORABLE MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 9, 2004 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE lI. APPLICANT Glen Daigle DAIGLE HOMES, LLC 28991 Old Town Front Street Suite #203 �.. Temecula, CA 92590 REQUEST Approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 2003 -02, Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, Residential Design Review No. 2003 -15 and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 for the design and construction of ten (10) residential condominium buildings, which include six (6) individual town homes per building and related improvements. Review is pursuant to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan, Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) and Section(s) 66424 and 66427 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA); applicable Chapters of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) and the California Environmental Quality Act. PROJECT DESCRIPTION • General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03. The applicant is requesting approval to amend the General Plan Land Use Map by changing the land use designation of a 5.33 acre site from Very Low Density (VLD) residential, which allows .5 dwelling units /acre maximum to Medium Density (MD) residential which allows 12 dwelling units/ acre maximum. The review and analysis of this General Plan Amendment is pursuant to Government Code Section(s) 65350- 65362, the Lake Elsinore General Plan, Chapter 17.84 (Amendments) and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MARCH 09, 2004 PAGE 2 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "THE LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. • Zone Change No. 2003 -02. The applicant is requesting approval to change the Zoning of the subject property from (R -1) Single Family Residential to (R -2) Medium Density Residential. The review and analysis of the requested Change of Zone is pursuant to applicable chapters of the LEMC. • Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532. The applicant is requesting approval of Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532 pursuant to Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Chapter 17.30 (Condominium and Condo Conversions) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.24 (R -2, Medium Density Residential) of the LEMC and Section(s) 66424 and 66427 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). • Residential Design Review No. R 2003 -15. The applicant is requesting Design Review consideration for the construction of ten (10) residential condominium buildings, which include six (6) individual townhomes per building and related improvements. The floor plans, architectural elevations, color and materials are in substantial conformance to the fourteen (14) condominium buildings recently approved by the City Council on September 16, 2003. Review is pursuant to Chapter 17.24 (R -2, Medium Density Residential) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.30 (Condominium and Condo Conversions) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.82 (Design Review) of the LEMC and City of Lake Elsinore Landscape Guidelines. • Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01. The City of Lake Elsinore intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to the Guidelines established by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). BACKGROUND At their regular meeting of September 16, 2003, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003 -78, recommending City Council approval of a Tentative Condominium Map No. 31531 and Resolution No. 2003 -80 recommending City Council approval of Residential Design Review No. 2003- 08, which constituted the first phase of this condominium community. Subsequently, at their regular meeting of January 20, 2004 the Planning Commission considered the second phase of this condominium community which consisted of the items considered in the project description referenced herein. N"Ne AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE '1 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MARCH 09, 2004 PAGE 3 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "THE LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. DISCUSSION Items of discussion generally concentrated around questions related to the traffic impacts of the proposed project and the associated Traffic Impact Study (Elsinore City Center Condo Traffic Impact Study) prepared for this project. As indicated in the Minutes (see attached) the Commission specifically expressed concerns related to its validity. The Engineering Manager assured the Commission that the Traffic Engineer had completely reviewed the "Study" and found it to be legitimate. Moreover, the Commission had also voiced concerns that the results of the "Study" were merely based on an "opening day" or 2005 projection. Staff assured the Commission that they would analyze their concerns. Subsequently, the Engineering Division concluded that the projection analyzed in the Traffic Impact Study was entirely adequate, in that the Technical Memorandum No. 8 entitled "Traffic Impact Fee Calculation" prepared for the City of Lake Elsinore addressed future traffic impacts. Of additional interest to the Commission were concern(s) related to the safety of the children utilizing 10-1 the tot lots located within the community and the timing of the actual development of the site. On the first issue, the Commission strongly suggested that the applicant provide appropriate signage that would promote a safe environment for the children. In response, Staff will verify that signage is shown on the site plan submitted to Building and Safety and verify compliance upon final site inspection of the project. On the second issue, related to the timing of the development, the applicant stated that they would prefer to proceed with the development of Phase I and H as a single grading project, pending approval of the second phase. ENVIRONMENTAL The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 has been prepared pursuant to Article 6 (Negative Declaration Process) and Section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on staff s evaluation, the proposed project would not result in any significant effect on the environment. Further, pursuant to Section 15073 (Public Review of a Proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the intended Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse (State Clearinghouse Number 2004011082) on January 15, 2004, ending on February 18, 2004. On February 19, 2004 the State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit acknowledged that the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration had complied with the review requirements and that no state agencies submitted comments by the closing date. AGENDA ITEM NO. —9 � PAGE _ 5 OF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MARCH 09, 2004 PAGE 4 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "THE LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. .2004-14 approving General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, adopt Ordinance No. - 11171 approving Zone Change No. 2003 -02, approve Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, approve Residential Design Review No. 2003 -15 and adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 for the design and construction of ten (10) residential condominium buildings, which include six (6) individual town homes per building and related improvements based on the recommended Findings, Exhibits A thru R and the attached Conditions of Approval. Also, since the subject site is located within Redevelopment Project Area #2 Area "C ", it is also recommended that the Redevelopment Agency concur with the Council's action. FINDINGS — GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. The proposed General Plan Amendment has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue identified by staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded, based on the Traffic Impact Report, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study Area will not be degraded as a result of this project. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of the area consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible with adjacent properties. The Proposed General Plan Amendment will allow the applicant to develop the site with the proposed density of 11.25 Dwelling Units /net acre and will in turn bring about a site more compatible with the first phase of the Condominium Project, designated "Multi family Residential ". 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density and usage more in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a density more in conformance with the recently approved 84 -unit condominium project to the north of the subject site. Additionally, the proposed project site would be in close proximity of any necessary services needed by persons residing in the proposed condominium community. AGENDA ITEM NO. _.�. PAGE ._! .. OF;�--VY REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MARCH 09, 2004 PAGE 5 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "THE LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed General Plan was included within the description of the project's Initial Study. Based on the Initial Study, staff intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, which concluded with mitigations that theproject will not have a significant effect on the environment. FINDINGS — ZONE CHANGE 1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. The proposed Zone Change has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue identified by staff relates to the traffic impacts of theproposed density. Staff, concluded, based on the Traffic Impact Report, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study Area will not be degraded as a result of this project. 2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map and the corresponding Zone Change, allowing the development of the subject condominium project is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of the General Plan Housing Element, obligating the City to provide "decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore ". FINDINGS — CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). The project as designed assists in achieving the development of a well - balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses (GOAL 1. 0, Land Use Element) as well provide decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore (GOAL 1. 0, Housing Element) AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MARCH 09, 2004 PAGE 6 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "THE LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 2. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. Considering the effects this project is likely to have upon the needs of the region a condition of approval was implemented which would require the applicant to enter into an agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore, providing 15% of the units in the project as affordable housing units in accordance with the requirements of Section 33413(b) of the California Community Redevelopment Law or an alternative equivalent action which may include (without limitation) dedication of vacant land, construction of affordable units on another site, or payment of an in lieu fee calculated to provide sufficient funds to underwrite the long -term affordability of an equivalent number of affordable dwelling units constructed or substantially rehabilitated on other sites within the City's redevelopment project areas. 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. I..r` The project has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies and will not therefore result in any significant environmental impacts. FINDINGS — DESIGN REVIEW 1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Zoning District in which the project is located. The proposed Residential Design Review located within Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 -240- 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, in that the approval of this Condominium Community will assist in achieving the development of a well - balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses as well as encouraging industrial land uses to divers Lake Elsinore's economic base. 2. The project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The proposed Residential Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the Condominium project has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the property, thereby creating interest and varying vistas as a person moves along the street. Further the AGENDA ITEM NO.._.:1_ IN` PAGE OF al-L- REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY �. MARCH 09, 2004 PAGE 7 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -021P TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "THE LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. project as proposed will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visuallypleasing, non - detractive relationship between theproposed and existingprojects in that the architectural design, color and materials and site design proposed evidence a concern for quality and originality. 3. Subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Residential Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Numbers) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016, as reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City Divisions and Departments and Agencies, will not have a significant effect on the environment pursuant to attached Conditions of Approval. 4. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070 of the Zoning Code, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Section 17.82.070 (Action of the Planning Commission) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the proposed Industrial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 has been scheduled for consideration and approval of the Planning Commission. FINDINGS - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; and The applicant has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific conditions which would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects of the project to a point where no significant effects would occur. Additionally, the State Clearinghouse acknowledged that the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration complied with the review requirements and that no state agencies submitted comments by the closing date (February 18, 2004). 2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the A^ project as revised may have significant effect on the environment. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OFC22 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MARCH 09, 2004 PAGE 8 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "THE LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE H. Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented to staff the project will not have a significant effect on the environment considering the applicable Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Program. PREPARED BY: Rolfe PAreisendanz, Associate Planner REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Attachments G. Villa, Planning and Code Enforcement Manager )Obert A. Brady; CommunWf Development Department 1. Resolution No. 2001 -1 ( approving General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03 2. Ordinance No. 111"7 approving Change of Zone No. 2003 -02 3. Minutes January 20, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting 4. Staff Report, Resolutions and Conditions January 20, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting 5. Notice of Intent, Notice of Completion and Initial Study. 6. State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Memorandum. 7. State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Acknowledgement. 8. Exhibits: Exhibit A Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532 Exhibit B Index Map Exhibit C Site Plan Exhibit D Landscape Plan Exhibit E Landscape Plan Exhibit F Fence Plan Exhibit G Drainage Plan Exhibit H Site Plan Exhibit I Section Plan A ITEM NO R. PAGE OFO ,'No REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 10-11 . MARCH 09, 2004 PAGE 9 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "THE LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. Exhibit J Building Type 1 Elevation Type A Exhibit K Building Type 1 Elevation Type B Exhibit L Building Type 2 Elevation Type A Exhibit M Building Type 2 Elevation Type B Exhibit N Building Type 1 First Floor Plan Exhibit O Building Type 1 Second Floor Plan Exhibit P Building Type 2 First Floor Plan Exhibit Q Building Type 2 Second Floor Plan Exhibit R Letter from Applicant Outlining Purpose for General Plan Amendment AGENDA ITEM NO. d� `, PAGE GENERAL CONDITION 1. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the Tentative Condominium Map, which action is bought within the time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, or proceeding, the Applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 2. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall annex into Community Facilities District No. 2003 -1 to offset the annual negative impacts of the project on public safety operations and maintenance issues in the City. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03 3. Conditions for the General Plan Amendment shall be the same conditions as set forth and required by Tentative Condominium Tract No(s) 31531 and 31532. 4. No park credit will be allowed under this project for recreation facilities. Park fees will remain at $1,450.00 per unit. ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02 5. The applicant shall enter into an acceptable impact mitigation agreement with the Lake Elsinore School District prior to issuance of building permits for the project. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532 6. The Tentative Condominium Map will expire two (2) years from date of approval unless within that period of time the CC&R's and an appropriate instrument has been filed and recorded with the County Recorder, or an extension of time is granted by the City of Lake Elsinore City Council in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. 7. The Tentative Condominium Map shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code, Title 16 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. `,l,r AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF� CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 8. Prior to final certificate of occupancy of Tentative Condominium. Map, the improvements specified herein and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council shall be installed, or agreements for said improvements, shall be submitted to the City for approval by the City Engineer, and all other stated conditions shall be complied with. All uncompleted improvements must be bonded for as part of the agreements. 9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and record CC8r-R's against the condominium complex. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or Designee and the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall include methods of maintaining common areas, parking and drive aisle areas, landscaped areas including parkways, and methods for common maintenance of all underground, and above ground utility infrastructure improvements necessary to support the complex. In addition, CC&R's shall established methods to address design improvements. 10. No unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation, association, property owner's group or similar entity has been formed with the right to financially assess all properties individually owned �— or jointly owned which have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and duty to maintain, all said mutually available features of the development. Such entity shall operate under recorded CC&R's which shall include compulsory membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services. Recorded CC&R's shall permit enforcement by the City for provisions required as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes. 11. Provisions to restrict parking upon other than approved and developed parking spaces shall be written into the covenants, conditions and restrictions for each project. 12. Membership in the Home Owner's Association shall be mandatory for each buyer and any successive buyer. 13. Reciprocal covenants, conditions, and restrictions and reciprocal maintenance agreements shall be established which will cause a merging of all development phases as they are completed, and embody one (1) homeowner's association with common area for the total development of the subject project (Phase I) and the proposed project (Phase II). 14. In the event the association or other legally responsible person(s) fail to maintain said common area in such a manner as to cause same to constitute a public nuisance, said City may, upon proper notice and hearing, institute summary abatement procedures and impose alien for the costs of such abatement upon said common area, individual units or whole thereof as provided by law. AGENDA ITEM _.1® PAGES OF24 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. ''001 R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 15. Each unit owner shall have full access to commonly owned areas, facilities and utilities. 16. The applicant shall comply with those mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 prepared for the Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" Phase II reference as the "project" herein. PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY 17. The applicant shall provide all project- related onsite and offsite improvements as described in the Elsinore City Center Specific Plan and Amendment No. 1 document. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2003-15 18. Design Review approval for Residential Design Review No. 2003 -15 will lapse and be void unless building permits are issued within one (1) year of City Council approval. The Community Development Director may grant an extension of time of up to one (1) year per extension, prior to the expiration of the initial Design Review approval. Application for a time extension must be submitted to the City of Lake Elsinore one (1) month prior to the expiration date. 19. Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced on page one of building plans submitted to the Building Division Plan Check. All Conditions of Approval shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. 20. The dwelling units are multi- story, without elevators, and therefore are exempt from accessibility requirements. The site, Sales Office, parking and common use areas will be obligated to meet the requirements of Chapter 11 of the California Building Code. 21. All site improvements approved with this request shall be constructed as indicated on the approved site plan and elevations. Revisions to approved site plans or building elevations shall be subject to the review of the Community Development Director. All plans submitted for Building Division Plan Check shall conform to the submitted plans as modified by Conditions of Approval, or the Planning Commission /City Council through subsequent action. 22. All roof mounted or ground support air conditioning units or other mechanical equipment incidental to development shall be architecturally screened or shielded by landscaping so that they are not visible from neighboring property or public streets. Any material covering the roof equipment shall match the primary wall color. 23. All exterior on -site lighting shall be shielded and directed on -site so as not to create glare onto neighboring property and streets or allow illumination above the horizontal plane of the fixture. All light fixtures shall match the architectural style of the building. .400 AMOA FTEM NO. t; � PAGE of it', f- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR � GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 24. All loading zones shall be clearly marked with yellow striping. 25. Applicant shall meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 26. Trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standards as approved by the Community Development Director or Designee. 27. No exterior roof ladders shall be permitted. 28. Applicant shall use roofing materials with Class "A" fire rating. 29. All exterior downspouts shall be concealed or architecturally screened and painted to match the exterior color of the building. 30. The Planning Division shall approve the location of any construction trailers utilized during construction. All construction trailers shall require a cash bond processed through the Planning i--.. Division. 31. Materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used unless modified by the Community Development Director or designee. 32. Decorative paving shall be included at the drive entryways and shall be shown on the construction drawings submitted to Building and Safety. 33. On -site surface drainage shall not cross sidewalks. 34. Parking stalls shall be double - striped with four -inch (4 ") lines two feet (2) apart. 35. The applicant shall be required to submit for Planning Commission consideration a sign program prior to issuance building permits. 36. All exposed slopes in excess of three feet (3) in height shall have a permanent irrigation system and erosion control vegetation installed, approved by the Planning Division. PRIOR TO BUILDING /GRADING PERMITS 37. Prior to issuance of any grading permit or building permits, the applicant shall sign and complete an "Acknowledgement of Conditions" form and shall return the executed original to the Planning Division for inclusion in the case records. 38. The applicant shall submit a photometric study for those light standards located in the proposed condominium project. Said study shall ensure that parking lot lights will not disturb neighboring AGENDA ITEM NO. �_ PAGE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 1%00' R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE lI. land uses and shall be approved by the Community Development Director or designee. 39. Prior to the commencement of grading operations, the applicant shall provide a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of dirt material. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. A bond may be required to pay for damages to the public right -of — way, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 40. Three (3) sets of the Final Landscaping /Irrigation Detail Plan shall be submitted, reviewed and approved by the City's Landscape Architect Consultant and the Community Development Director or designee, prior to issuance of building permit. A Landscape Plan Check & Inspection Fee will be charged prior to final landscape approval based on the Consultant's fee plus forty percent (40 %) City fee. a. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system with 100% plant and grass coverage using a combination of drip and conventional irrigation methods. b. Applicant shall plant street trees, selected from the City's Street Tree List, a maximum of forty feet (40) apart and at least twenty- four -inch (24 ") box in size. c. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch (6 ") high and six inch (6 ") wide concrete curb. d. Planting within fifteen feet (15) of ingress /egress points shall be no higher than thirty -six inches (36 "). e. Landscape planters shall be planted with an appropriate parking lot shade tree to provide for 50% parking lot shading in fifteen (15) years. f. Any transformers and mechanical or electrical equipment shall be indicated on landscape Plan and screened as part of the landscaping plan. g. The landscape plan shall provide for ground cover, shrubs, and trees and meet all requirements of the City's adopted Landscape Guidelines. Special attention to the use of Xeriscape or drought resistant plantings with combination drip irrigation system to be used to prevent excessive watering. h. All landscape improvements shall be bonded 100% for material and labor for two years from installation sign -off by the City. Release of the landscaping bond shall be requested by the applicant at the end of the required two years with approval/acceptance by the Landscape Consultant and Community Development Director or Designee. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. i) All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed within affected portion of any phase at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is requested for any building. All planting areas shall include plantings in the Xeriscape concept, drought tolerant grasses and plants. j) Final landscape plan must be consistent with approved site plan. k) Final landscape plans to include planting and irrigation details. 41. Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Proof shall be presented to the Chief Building Official prior to issuance of building permits and final approval. 42. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid. 43. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department have been met. 44. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall pay park- in-lieu fee in effect at time of building permit issuance. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT 45. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore to provide 15% of the units in the project as affordable housing units in accordance with the requirements of Section 33413(b) of the California Community Redevelopment Law or an alternative equivalent action which may include (without limitation) dedication of vacant land, construction of affordable units on another site, or payment of an in lieu fee calculated to provide sufficient funds to. underwrite the long -term affordability of an equivalent number of affordable dwelling units constructed or substantially rehabilitated on other sites within the City's redevelopment project areas. 46. The applicant shall submit for review and approval an updated acoustical study which shall evaluate and analyze the current sound levels. Further, the applicant shall implement appropriate methods of construction necessary (i.e. sound walls and landscaping) which would insure that the future residents of this proposed community experience noise levels consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. 47. The Home Owner's Association shall be established prior to the occupancy sale release of the first dwelling unit. Amended per the Planning Commission on January 20, 2004. AGENDA ITEM NO...�� _. PAGE t OF 60r—, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. ENGINEERING 48. All Public Works requirements shall be complied with as a condition of development as specified in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) prior to final map approval. 49. The developer shall submit a condominium plan as part of the final map which will show individual lots and air space. And provides for common areas. The condominium plan shall be approved prior to final map approval. 50. Applicant shall dedicate sufficient land along the frontage of Grape St. to provide for a right -of -way width of 100 feet for a major street. 51. Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34, Resolution 85 -26). The traffic mitigation fee is $50,280, Railroad Canyon Road assessment fee is $87, 906, the T.U.M.F. amount is $276, 420. There is no drainage fee. 52. Submit a "Will Serve" letter to the City Engineering Division from the applicable water agency stating that water and sewer arrangements have been made for this project. Submit this letter prior ,No, to final map approval. 53. Construct all public works improvements per approved street plans (LEMC 12.04). Plans must be approved and signed by the City Engineer prior to final map approval (LEMC 16.34). 54. Street improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a Calif Registered Civil Engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to Riverside County Road Department Standards, latest edition, and City Codes (LEMC 12.04 and 16.34). 55. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for the construction of public works improvements and shall post the appropriate bonds prior to final map approval. 56. Applicant shall obtain any necessary Caltrans permits and meet all Caltrans requirements. 57. Pay all fees and meet requirements of encroachment permit issued by the Engineering Division for construction of public works improvements (LEMC 12.08 and Resolution 83 -78). 58. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 ' /z" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved. 59. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off -site easements for off -site grading from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval. ...✓ AGENDA ITEM NO.OF , PAGE�L CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 60. Arrangements for relocation of utility company facilities (power poles, vaults, etc.) out of the roadway or alley shall be the responsibility of the property owner or his agent. 61. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by Riverside County Fire. 62. Provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street improvement plans as required by the City Engineer. 63. Developer shall install blue reflective pavement markers in the street at all fire hydrant locations. 64. Applicant shall submit a traffic control plan showing all traffic control devices for the tract to be approved prior to final map approval. All traffic control devices shall be installed prior to final inspection of public improvements. This includes No Parking and Street Sweeping Signs for streets within the tract. 65. All improvement plans and tract maps shall be digitized. At Certificate of Occupancy applicant shall submit tapes and/or discs which are compatible with City's ARC Info /GIS or developer to pay $300 per sheet for City digitizing. 66. All utilities except electrical over 12 kv shall be placed underground, as approved by the serving utility. 67. Apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to building permit issuance. A grading plan signed and stamped by a Calif. Registered Civil Engineer shall be required if the grading exceeds 50 cubic yards or the existing flow pattern is substantially modified as determined by the City Engineer. 68. Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. 69. An Alquis -Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults and/or liquefaction zones present on -site. 70. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer and he shall certify all slopes steeper than 2 to 1 for stability and proper erosion control. All manufactured slopes greater than 30 ft. in height shall be contoured. 71. Individual lot drainage shall be conveyed to a public facility or accepted by adjacent property owners by a letter of drainage acceptance or conveyed to a drainage easement. 72. On -site drainage facilities located outside of road right -of -way should be contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating: "Drainage AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OE_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. `/ R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions ". 73. All natural drainage traversing site shall be conveyed through the site, or shall be collected and conveyed by a method approved by the City Engineer. 74. Submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approval by City Engineer and the Riverside County Flood Control District prior to approval of final map. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and /or erosion caused by development of site and diversion of drainage. 75. All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards. 76. Storm drain inlet facilities shall be appropriately stenciled to prevent illegally dumping in the drain system, the wording and stencil shall be approved by the City Engineer. 77. Roof and yard drains will not be allowed to outlet through cuts in the street curb. Roof drains should drain to a landscaped area when ever feasible. 78. Applicant will be required to install BMP's using the best available technology to mitigate any urban N"W* pollutants from entering the watershed. 79. Applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for their storm water pollution prevention plan including approval of erosion control for the grading plan prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall provide a SWPPP for post construction which describes BMP's that will be implemented for the development and including maintenance responsibilities. 80. Education guidelines and Best Management Practices (BMP) shall be provided to residents of the development in the use of herbicides, pesticides and vehicle maintenance as well as other environmental awareness education materials on good housekeeping practices that contribute to protection of storm water quality and met the goals of the BMP in Supplement "A" in the Riverside County NPDES Drainage Area Management Plan. 81. Applicant shall provide first blush BMP's using the best available technology that will reduce storm water pollutants from parking areas and driveway aisles. 82. Intersection site distance shall meet the design criteria of the CALTRANS Design Manual (particular attention should be taken for intersections on the inside of curves). If site distance can be obstructed, a special limited use easement must be recorded to limit the slope, type of landscaping and wall placement. The developer's civil engineer shall verify the site distance for Street "A" prior to grading permit. %N or ALMA ITEM NO. _ PAGE t o CW CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR � GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 83. Developer shall provide a traffic study prepared by a traffic engineer to determine the traffic volume and the impacts on intersections in the vicinity and freeway on and off ramps prior to final map approval, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 84. The entrance driveway aisle should be designed so that at least 40 ft. is available between the street curb and the first parking stall and the gate opener in order to provide adequate on -site storage for entering vehicles. 85. Street vacations offsite need to be accomplished with the development of this site. The street vacations must be approved by the adjacent property owners when their access is being affected by the street vacation. Offsite dedications for new streets must be acquired prior to approval of the street vacations. Street abandonment's cannot land lock parcels or provide a new access which is not practicable and is based on a reasonable accessibility determination to the satisfaction of the City. 86. Before the street vacations can be approved, offsite grading must be approved by the adjacent property owner for the grading the new. streets. le� 87. The sight distance at the intersection of A St. and Grape St. must meet the Caltrans Design Manual criteria for a 55 mph design speed on Grape Street. 88. The street width of the new dedicated Sunrise Drive shall be 36 ft. from curb to AC berm with a 4 ft. parkway on the northeast side of the street. 89. There shall be a standard Riverside County Road Dept. knuckled constructed on Sunrise Drive. 90. Street A shall have a 60 ft. R/W and 40 ft. curb to curb from Grape St. to the condo driveway. Street A shall have standard curb returns at the intersection with Grape Street. 91. The cul -de -sac at the end of the existing Sunrise Drive shall be in conformance with Riverside County Road Dept. Standards and the temporary cul -de -sac on Sunrise Drive must meet Riverside County Fire Dept. approval. 92. Developer shall provide a 24 ft. minimum wide emergency access from the cul -de -sac of Sunrise Drive to the drive aisle in Tr. 31531, subject to the approval of the Riverside County Fire Department. 93. If right -of -way is abandoned as part of this development, then adjacent property affected by the abandonment's must still have access to public maintained right -of -way. 94. The final map shall show the abandonment of dedications of public right -of -way or easements by appropriate certifications on the map. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE .J._ OFJ4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 95. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste disposal & recycling, the applicant shall be required to contract with CR&R Inc. for removal and disposal of all waste material, debris, vegetation and other rubbish generated during cleaning, demolition, clear and grubbing or all other phases of construction. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 96. The applicant shall pay park fees of $1,450 per unit. 97. The applicant shall participate in the City of Lake Elsinore Landscape L Maintenance District (LEND). 98. The Home Owner's Association shall maintain all interior landscaping, slopes, drainage swales, retention areas, and roadways. 99. No park credits shall be allowed for the proposed tot lots and swimming pool. 100. The Home Owner's Association shall maintain all landscape improvements along Grape Street as it relates to the frontage of the development. 101. All exterior walls to be masonry block with anti - graffiti coating. The Home Owner's Association shall remove all graffiti as it occurs. 102. The applicant shall meet all City requirements for the recycling and removal of construction debris and materials. 103. The applicant shall comply with all NPDES requirements for urban storm water runoff. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 104. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department. Fire protection measures shall be provided in accordance with Riverside County ordinances and/or recognized fire protection standards. 105. Blue retro- reflective pavement markers shall be mounted on public streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement of markers shall be approved by the County Fire Department. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 2003 -08 106. The Conditional Use Permit approved herein shall lapse and shall become void one (1) year following the date on which the use permit became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one N%10# AQENDA ITEM NO... a J,__ PAGE 20 OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. year, a building permit is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion on the site. 107. The Conditional Use Permit shall comply with the all applicable requirements of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code; Title 17 unless modified by approved Conditions of Approval. 108. The Conditional Use Permit granted herein shall run with the land and shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site or structure which was the subject of this approval. 109. The applicant shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, and Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its Official, Officers, Employees, or Agents to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City, its advisory agencies, appeal boards, or Iegislative body concerning the Conditional Use Permit /Design Review C 2003 -07, which action is brought forward within the time period provided for in California Government Code Sections 65009 and/or 66499.37, and Public Resources Code Section 21167. The City will promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the City and will cooperate fully with the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the Applicant of any such claim, or proceeding, the Applicant shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. 110. Prior to final certificate of occupancy of the Conditional Use Permit, the improvements specified herein and approved by the Planning Commission and the City Council shall be installed, or agreements for said improvements, shall be submitted to the City for approval by the City Engineer, and all other stated conditions shall be complied with. All uncompleted improvements must be bonded for as part of the agreements. 111. The applicant shall at all times comply with Section 17.78 (Noise Control) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code which requires noise or sound levels to be below 50 decibels between the hours of 7:00 am to 10:00 pm and below 40 decibels between the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am in nearby residential areas. 112. Security lighting shall be required. All exterior on- site lighting shall be shielded and directed on -site so as not to create glare onto neighboring property and streets or allow illumination above the horizontal plane of the fixture. AGENDA ITEM NO. _=� PAGE OF_L ATTACHMENT NO.1 RESOLUTION NO.2004 -_L�, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03 AGENDA ITEM NO._ . . I PAGE 7 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -� A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, MAKING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAKE ELSINORE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT FOR THE FIRST CYCLE OF THE CALENDAR YEAR 2004 FOR THE APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03 AMENDING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN(s) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 AND 016 FROM VERY LOW DENSITY (VLD) RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY (MD) RESIDENTIAL. WHEREAS, Daigle Homes, LLC has initiated proceedings to amend the General Plan Land Use Map by requesting an General Plan Amendment changing the designation of the parcels known as Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 from Very Low Density (VLD) Residential to Medium Density (MD) Residential; and WHEREAS, Section 65361(a) of the Government Code provides that no mandatory element of a General Plan shall be amended more frequently than four times during any calendar year; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on January 20, 2004 made its report upon the desirability of the proposed project and made its recommendations in favor of said General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004 -02 recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03; and WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the City Council has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on March 9, 2004; NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, prior to making a decision to approve the proposed amendment to the Land Use Designation. The City Council finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which analyzes environmental effects of ends City Council certification, based upon the following findings and determinations: �., SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03 have been made as follows: AA ITEM NO..� PAGE a2L OF RESOLUTION NO. 2004- PAGE NO.2 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. The proposed General Plan Amendment has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue identified by staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded, based on the Traffic Impact Report, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study Area will not be degraded as a result of this project. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of the area consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible with adjacent properties. The Proposed General Plan Amendment will allow the applicant to develop the site with the proposed density of 11.25 Dwelling Units /net acre and will in turn bring about a site more compatible with the first phase of the Condominium Project, designated "Multi- family Residential ". J The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density and usage `"Of more in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a density more in conformance with the recently approved 84 -unit condominium project to the north of the subject site. Additionally, the proposed project site would be in close proximity of any necessary services needed by persons residing in the proposed condominium community. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed General Plan was included within the description of the project's Initial Study. Based on the Initial Study, staff intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, which concluded with mitigations that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE FINDINGS, IT IS RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, that the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Land Use Map hereof be amended for the first time in calendar year 2004 to reflect General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03. AGENDA ITEM NO. I ,* PAGE.,.OFZ= L..! RESOLUTION NO. 2004- PAGE NO.2 vote: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of March 2004, by the following AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: Vicki Lynne Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney City of Lake Elsinore (SEAL) Thomas Buckley, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE r.I" ATTACHMENT NO.2 ORDINANCE NO. 1117 APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 2003-02 AGMA ITEM NO. PAGE D- ro O ORDINANCE NO. I I I AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02 CHANGING THE ZONING DESINGNATION OF A PARCEL SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN (S) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 AND 016 FROM R -1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO R -2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE WHEREAS, Daigle Homes LLC, has initiated proceedings to change the zoning designation of the subject parcels known as APN(s) 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 from R -1 Single Family Residential District to R -2 Medium Density Residential District;. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on January 20, 2004 made its report upon the desirability of the proposed project and made its recommendations in favor of said Zone Change No. 2003 -02 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004 -03 recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2003 -02; and �., WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the City Council has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on March 09, 2004; NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council has considered the proposed Zone Change No. 2003 -02, prior to making a decision to approve the proposed amendment to the Land Use Designation and establish a Zoning Designation. The City Council finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which analyzes environmental effects of the proposed project and recommends City Council certification, based upon the following findings and determinations: SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Zone Change No. 2003 -02 have been made as follows: 1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. AGENDA ITEM NO..�� PAGE —_L, OF�. City Council Ordinance No. Page 2 The proposed Zone Change has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue identified by staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded, based on the Traffic Impact Report, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study Area will not be degraded as a result of this project. 2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map and the corresponding Zone Change, allowing the development of the subject condominium project is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of the General Plan Housing Element, obligating the City to provide "decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore ". SECTION TWO: ZONING RECLASSIFICATION This Zoning Map of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, is hereby amended by changing, reclassifying and rezoning the following described property, to wit: Assessor's Parcel Numbers 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 AND 016: TO R -2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE Approval is based on the following: 1. The proposed Zoning is consistent with the Goals, Policies, and Objectives in the General Plan. 2. The proposed Zoning is consistent with the General Plan and the various land uses authorized by the Ordinance are compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the Plan. (Government Code Section 65860). 3. Reasons why the City has considered the effect of Zoning Ordinances on the regional housing needs in which the City is located and how the City has balanced these needs against the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources. (Government Code Section 65863.6). SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its final passage. The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption of this Ordinance and cause this Ordinance to be published and posted in the manner required by law. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF City Council Ordinance No. Page 3 INTRODUCED AND APPROVED UPON FIRST READING this 9th day of March, 2004, upon the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED UPON SECOND READING this 9th day of April, 2004, upon the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney City of Lake Elsinore (SEAL) Thomas Buckley, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO...�, I PAGE OF ATTACHMENT NO.3 MINUTES JANUARY 20, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION AQE,tDA ITEM NO. -i PAGE OF MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 TUESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2004 The Regular Planning Commission Meeting was called to order at 6:01 PM. by Chairman LaPere. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Community Development Director Brady. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: LAPERE, UHLRY, BARNES & MATTHIES ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Also present were: Community Development Director Brady, Planning and Code Enforcement Manager Villa,. Engineering Manager Seumalo, Associate Planner Miller, Associate Planner �-. Preisendanz, Planning Consultant Donahoe, Housing Clerk Gibbons, and Deputy City Attorney Steve Miles. OATH OF OFFICE: 1. City Clerk Kasad administered Oath of Office to Michael O'Neal as the new Planning Commissioner. Chairman LaPere welcomed Michael O'Neal as the new Planning Commissioner. PUBLIC COMMENTS NONE CONSENT CALENDAR MOVED BY BARNES, SECONDED BY UHLRY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. Minutes 10-1- 2. December 16, 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO. ) I PACE OF� PAGE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES —JANUARY 20, 2004 PUBLIC HEARINGS `N''` 3. General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No 2003 -02, Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, Residential Design Review No 2003 -15, CUP No 2003 -08, and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 for the "Lake Elsinore C4 Center Townhomes" Phase II. Due to complications, the tape recorded did not record any material until 6:10 PM. Chairman LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 6:07 PM, and requested the reading of the Staff Report. Community Development Director Brady requested Associate Planner Preisendanz to review the Staff Report with the Commission. Associate Planner Preisendanz stated that on September 16, 2003, the City Council approved Tentative Condominium Map No. 31531 and Residential Design Review No. 2003 -08 for an 84 -unit condominium project known as the "Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" Phase I. He stated that consistent with this approval, the applicant has also submitted Phase II on July 24, 2003. He indicated that the floor plans, architectural elevations, color and materials are identical to Phase I with the exception that the subject 5.33 net acre site, which is contiguous to Phase I, is not a part of the Elsinore City Center; Specific Plan No. 90 -03, Amendment No. 1, which re- designated the area containing Phase I from "General Commercial" to "Multi - family Residential". Associate Planner Preisendanz indicated that considering these mentioned entitlements, the applicant has requested a General Plan Amendment and ensuing Zone Change along with the standard Residential Design Review, Tentative Condominium Map and Conditional Use Permit requested by the LEMC for this second phase. Associate Planner Preisendanz indicated that the location of the project is along the Interstate 15 Corridor, east of Grape Street, and south of Grape Street and Railroad Canyon Road Intersection within Southwest Riverside County. Associate Planner Preisendanz stated that Staff has reviewed the Housing Element & Traffic Study, and recommends approval of the project and recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution based on the Findings, Exhibits and is subject to the Conditions of Approval. He indicated that the applicant is present to answer any questions that the Commission may have. Chairman LaPere requested comments from the public. Glen Daigle, 28991 Old Temecula Front Street, indicated to the Commission that he is available for any questions that the Commission may have. He also indicated that he has read and agrees to the Conditions of Approval. He had no further comments. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2._= PAGE J OF i-- PAGE 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES —JANUARY 20, 2004 Chairman LaPere requested any further comments from the public. There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere brought the discussion back to the Commission for comments. Commissioner Matthies had no comments. Vice Chairman Uhlry suggested the removal of the word "last" on page 9 of the Staff Report. Vice Chairman Uhlry requested a time line for the project. Associate Planner Preisendanz stated that the time -line is indicated in Condition No. 44. Vice Chairman Uhlry had no further comments. Commissioner Barnes asked Staff if the City Engineer had a chance to review the Traffic Study. Associate Planner Preisendanz indicated both the City Engineer and the Traffic Engineer for the City has had a chance to review the Traffic Study. Commissioner Barnes indicated that he has some concerns with the traffic count at the intersection of Summerhill and Grape. He express that traffic is a main issue at that intersection. He indicated that he hopes that Staff, the Engineering Manager, and Community Development Director are confident that the Traffic Study is legitimate. Engineering Manager Seumalo gave an overview of the Traffic Study with the Commission. He also indicated that the traffic in that area is a hot issue with the City. He stated that the Traffic Engineer had looked at the build out conditions with this traffic report. Commissioner Barnes asked what year is the build — out. Associate Planner Preisendanz stated that it is the year 2025. Chairman LaPere asked the Engineering Manager the page number of the Traffic Study, where it discusses this. Engineering Manager Seumalo indicated "page 139" of the Traffic Study. Chairman LaPere indicated that the actual year should be noted. Engineering Manager Seumalo noted that he would discuss this with the Traffic Engineer as well. Commissioner Barnes had no further comments. Commissioner Matthies expressed an issue with a Tot Lot. She also expressed her concerns to have a some type of signage at the crossing. Commissioner O'Neal indicated that Staff has done a good job on preparing the report. He noted the project looks good. He had no further comments. AUENDA FTEM NO. �` PAGE 3 3 OF PAGE 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES —JANUARY 20, 2004 rn Chairman LaPere concurred with the other Commissioners. He indicated that the traffic is an issue in that area. He also concurred with Commissioner Matthies on getting proper signage out in that area for the safety of the children. Vice Chairman Uhlry stated that it has been some time since City Council has approved Phase I of this project. He indicated that so far, not much has been completed. He requested the applicant to address the time lines of this project. Glen Daigle indicated that their plan is to build the project simultaneously, as one grading project. Vice Chairman Uhlry had no further comments. There being no further comments from the Commission, Chairman LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 6:32 PM, and requested the reading of the Resolution. MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND PASSED BY A 4 -1 VOTE WITH BARNES ABSTAINING TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -015 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004 -01 FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO 2003 -03; ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02; TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003 -08 AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2003 -15, WITHIN APN'S 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 0085 009, AND 016. MOVED BY MATTHIES, SECONDED BY BARNES PASSED BY A 4 -1 VOTE WITH BARNES ABSTAINING TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -02, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03 AMENDING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN'S 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, AND 016 FROM VERY LOW DENSITY (VLD) RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM. DENSITY (MD) RESIDENTIAL. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.._ �...__ PAGE OF_al PAGE 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -JANUARY 20, 2004 MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY 4 -1 VOTE WITH BARNES ABSTAINING TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -03, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF A PARCEL SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN'S 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, AND 016 FROM R -1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO R -2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE. MOVED BY MATTHIES, SECONDED BY UHLRY AND PASSED BY A 4 -1 VOTE WITH BARNES ABSTAINING TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -04, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II TO BE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF GRAPE STREET AND SOUTH OF THE RAILROAD CANYON ROAD /GRAPE STREET INTERSECTION, WITHIN THE ELSINORE CITY CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN AREA APN'S 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, AND 016. MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY MATTHIES AND PASSED BY A 4 -1 VOTE WITH BARNES ABSTAINING TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -05, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2003 -15 FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES', TO BE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF GRAPE STREET AND SOUTH OF THE RAILROAD CANYON ROAD /GRAPE STREET INTERSECTION APN'S 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, AND 016. MOVED BY UHLRY AND SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY A 4 -1 VOTE WITH BARNES ABSTAINING TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -06, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003 -08 FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II, TO BE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF GRAPE STREET AND SOUTH OF THE RAILROAD CANYON ROAD /GRAPE STREET INTERSECTION, APN'S 363 -240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, AND 016. AGENDA ITEM N 2 y 'T PAGE S- OF ATTACHMENT NO.4 STAFF REPORT, RESOLUTIONS AND CONDITIONS JANUARY 20, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION 14.o' AGENDA ITEM ENO. I PAGE �b_ OF4—, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPOR T City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 S. Man Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (909) 674 -3124 (909) 471 -1419 fax DATE: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Robert A. Brady, Community Development Director PREPARED BY: Rolfe Preisendanz, Associate Planner PROJECT TITLE: General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03; Zone Change No. 2003 -02; Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532; Residential Design Review No. 2003 -15; Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08; and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 for the "Lake Elsinore City Center r Townhomes" Phase 11. APPLICANT: Daigle Homes LLC, (Attn: Mr. Glen Daigle), 28991 Old Town Front Street, Suite #207, Temecula, CA 92590. PROJECT REQUESTS • General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03. The applicant requests approval to amend the General Plan Land Use Map by changing the land use designation of the proposed 5.33 net acre site from Very Low Density (VLD) residential (Permitting .5 dwelling units /net acre maximum) to Medium Density (MD) residential (Permitting 12 dwelling units /net acre maximum). The review and analysis of this General Plan Land Use Map Amendment is pursuant to Government Code Section(s) 65350 through 65362, the Lake Elsinore General Plan and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Zone Change No. 2003 -02. Conforming and consistent to the requested amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map, the applicant is also requesting approval to change the Zoning of the subject 5.33 net acre site from (R -1) Single Family Residential to (R -2) Medium Density Residential. The review and analysis of the requested Zone Change is pursuant to Government Code Section(s) 65350 through 65362 and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). AWMA ITEM NO. ,_ PAGE, OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 2 of 14 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. • Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532. The applicant is requesting approval of Tentative Condominium Map 31532, pursuant to Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Chapter 17.30 (Condominium and Condo Conversions) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.24 (R -2, Medium Density Residential) of the LEMC and Section(s) 66424 and 66427 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). • Residential Design Review No. R 2003 -15. The applicant is requesting Design Review consideration for the construction of ten (10) residential condominium buildings, which include six (6) individual townhomes per building and related improvements. Review is pursuant to the Elsinore City Center Specific Plan and applicable Chapters in the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). • Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2003 -08. The applicant is requesting the approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the establishment of 60 individually owned attached condominium townhomes which will participate in an underlying common area pursuant to Chapter 17.30 (Condominium and Condo Conversions) of the Lake N%0001 Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) and Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permits) of the LEMC. • Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01. The City of Lake Elsinore intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (NIND) pursuant to the Guidelines established by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). BACKGROUND On September 16, 2003, the City Council approved Tentative Condominium Map 31531 and Residential Design Review 2003 -08 for an 84 -unit condominium project known as "Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" Phase I. Consistent with this approval, the applicant hereto has also submitted Phase II of the "Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" on July 24, 2003. The floor Plans, architectural elevations, color and materials are identical to Phase I with the exception that the subject 5.33 net acre site, which is contiguous to Phase I, is not a part of the Elsinore City Center; Specific Plan No. 90 -03, Amendment No. 1, which re- designated the area containing Phase I from "General Commercial" to "Multi- family Residential ". Considering these afore mentioned entitlements, the applicant has requested a General Plan Amendment and ensuing Zone Change along with the standard Residential Design Review, Tentative Condominium Map and Conditional Use Permit required by the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) for this second phase. Likewise, staff determined that the scope of the application, ti.r' AGEMA ITEM NO. -0 1 -,— ° PAGE C7F L� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 3 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. attached hereto, was a "project" as defined by the Cdifamia Envira� Quality Act (CEQA) and would therefore require an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. PROJECT LOCATION The proposed 5.33 net acre project site is located along the Interstate 15 Corridor, adjacent to and east of Grape Street and south of the Grape Street /Railroad Canyon Intersection within Southwest Riverside County, City of Lake Elsinore and Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, & 016. Further, the project is located in the area known as Redevelopment Area No. 2C. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTNO.2003 -13 The applicant requests approval to amend the General Plan Land Use Map with the ultimate intention of establishing the second phase of the "Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes ", which consists of 60 attached condominium units on 5.33 net acres. The proposed density of this second phase equates to an empirical value of 11.26 dwelling units /net acre. Since the current General Plan Land Use Designation of Very Low Density (VLD) residential only allows .5 dwelling units /net acre, prohibiting a development of this type, the applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment to Medium Density (MD), which would allow up to 12 dwelling units /net acre. ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02 Correspondingly and consistent with the proposed General Plan Amendment (referenced above), AGENDA ITEM NO. 1 PAGE OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 4 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. the applicant is also requesting a change in the Zoning from (R -1) Single- Family Residential to (R -2) Medium Density Residential to allow for the development of a 60 -unit multi - family condominium project pursuant to the applicable chapters of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532 The applicant requests approval to establish the second phase of a proposed residential condominium community, known as the "Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes ". Generally, condominium projects are defined as "subdivisions" pursuant to Section 66424 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). Consequently, this project requires both, Planning Commission and City Council consideration pursuant to the requirements of Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). The parameter of Parcel 1 of Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532 encompasses portions of Lot(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 8 and 9 of the Elsinore Lakevkw Estates Unit No. 1 and will incorporate a dedication of Grape Street, a dedication of Street "A ", a vacation of portions of Lakeview Drive, Sunrise Drive and Canyon Drive and an offshe dedication for Sunrise Drive over portions of lot(s) 6, 10, 11, 12 and 59. An emergency access easement connecting TM 31531 and Sunrise Drive is also shown and will be dedicated under a separate document. The proposed condominium concept would allow the applicant to be able offer individual dwelling units for sale within the building structures as defined by the Tentative Condominium Map 31532, while sharing common interest, ownership and maintenance responsibilities within the common areas for both Tentative Condominium Map No(s). 31531 and 31532. These common areas located within both Phase I and Phase II, entail a swimming pool area, a tot lot, barbecue /picnic areas, common walls and fences, aisle -ways, pavement, minor accessory structures such as monument signs, mail boxes, landscaped areas, and onsite underground and aboveground utility infrastructure improvements necessary to service and support the residential community. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 Sit' m The proposed siting consists of ten (10) buildings identified as Building No(s) 15 -24 and will be two - story wood framed buildings, totaling approximately 100,920 square feet. Further, the buildings will be recognized as Building Type 1 or Building Type 2 and will be distinguished as an Elevation Type "A" or "B" and finished in association with either Color Scheme "1" or "2 ". Each building type will be approximately 10,092 square feet and will comprise of six (6) individually owned attached single- AGENDA ITEM NO..�...L� PAGE ....L. OF.I ,00-- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 5 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. family condominium dwelling units with six (6) enclosed attached garage- parking spaces. Two (2) of the six- (6) garages will be two- (2) car garages, with the remaining garages a one- (1) car garage. Four (4) of the condominium units located within each building will have access to a private yard, with the remaining two (2) units having access to a covered balcony. The private yards of Building No(s) 18 -24 will generally have a westerly view to the lake, with the remaining (3) buildings having an internalized view. Four of the condominium units within each building type will have an option available for a wood deck balcony. The buildings will be located on the final terraced pad ascending southeasterly above the Grape Street elevation, with Building(s) 15 -17 located on the furthest most pad(s). The slopes created by way of the site development and averaging approximately 15 to 20 feet in vertical height will be encompass the final phase and will be graded to maximum slope of 2:1. Building Number 18 will be set back from the Grape Street right of way approximately 56.9' and 47' -0" from the future Street "A" right -of -way The Pool Area, located in Phase I, consisting of a Jacuzzi, a Pool Equipment/Restroom building, a barbecue and a shade trellis will be accessible to the proposed condominium community. Pedestrian access to the pool area will be provided between Phase I and 11. A second Tot Lot /BBQ Picnic Area will be conveniently located between Building(s) 21 and 22. An additional Barbecue (BBQ) /Picnic Area will be provided to the north of Building 17, adjacent the private yard areas. Trash enclosures will be provided at convenient locations throughout the project. Through circulation to the site will be made available by way of two (2) driveways located off of Grape Street provided in Phase I and one (1) "main" gated entry off of Street "A ", proposed for the subject project. The driveway off of Street "A" will lead to a rapid entry privacy gate. The entry gate will be located a minimum of 60 feet from the Street "A" public right of way and will allow full turn movements onto Street "A ". The garage entrances for the buildings will face and take access off the proposed private drives. A reciprocal access driveway has been provided adjacent to the subject site for the proposed phase. The proposed project will require a total of 60 covered parking spaces and 75 open parking spaces. The applicant will provide 80 covered spaces (within enclosed attached garages) and 89 open parking spaces. No compact spaces will be provided. The parking spaces will be located within the common area proposed for the condominium project. For convenience, additional parking spaces will also be provided in front of the southerly entry gate along Street "A ". AGENDA ITEM NO. —2 1 E PAG OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 6 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE N"de CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. The applicant is proposing to develop the site with 97,513 square feet of landscaping. The slope areas created by the development will generally encompass the perimeter of the site and will create a terraced affect. Landscaped 2:1 slopes will generally front Grape Street providing an opportunity for a generous amount of landscaped screening for the project, while enhancing the architectural design of the buildings. The plant material for the site will include; Lake Elsinore Modified #36 Hydrami Mix, Acacia Redolens, Rock Cotoneaster, Horsetail, Daylily, Aarons Beard, Myoporum parvifolium, Eastern Redbud, Red Iron Bark Eucalyptus, Chinese Flame Tree, London Plane Tree, and California Fan Palms. Here again, as proposed in Phase I, the plant palate chosen has evolved from successes and failures experienced from maintaining the Iandscaping installed at the commercial center to the north. The result is that the plant palate chosen will be more conducive to the local climate than originally proposed for the Wal Mart site. The BBQ /Picnic areas will be provided with "Marathon Turf" and additional shade trees shown on the plant palate. The buildings will generally be situated on landscaped islands consisting of assorted ground cover, shrubs and trees. The meandering sidewalks at the entrances to the condominium units will be arrayed with turf, ground cover and various shrubs and trees. The private yards will remain un- landscaped to allow each owner the opportunity to create his or her own private yard area. All trash enclosures will have landscape planters on three sides to accommodate climbing vines. Architac� The architectural design of the condominiums can generally be identified as a Santa Barbara Mk5im and will be identical with the architectural style of the buildings proposed in Phase I to the north and the architectural style of the buildings in the area. The applicant will incorporate architectural details conducive to the Santa Barbara Mission style. These architectural enhancements will include arched opening at the front entries, recessed arched windows at strategic locations within the building wall Plane, arched foam pop out window trims, pitched tile roof elements, stucco wains coating accent band, circular attic vents, wood shutters and recessed arched garage door openings. The garage doors themselves will be segmented paneled roll up doors. The windows proposed will be vinyl coated divided lites. The applicant is also proposing wood deck balconies for specific dwelling units. 21 _ AGENDA ITEM NO. mw - PAGE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 7 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 - 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. The applicant is proposing to promote the ten (10) residential condominium buildings, with the two types of elevations augmented by two different two (2) discrete color schemes proposed under Phase I. As identified in the first phase, the following is a compilation of the materials and colors for the two elevation types and two (2) color schemes proposed. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 Pursuant to the Chapter 17.30 Section 17.30.020 (Permits Required) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of the subject condominium project. As allowed in the LEMC the Planning Commission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for Conditional Use Permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of Conditional Use Permits. ANALYSIS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03 cmd ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02 In reviewing the requested land use map amendment and zone change, staff analyzed potential 100-1 implications of the proposed amendment as it related to both the Housing Element and the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Specifically, staff identified local housing problems and AGENDA ITEM NO. 2--' �-1--�; PAGE®/3 OF Wood Trim Frazee "Indian Painting" Wood Trim Frazee `Bark Mulch" and Wood and Wood Deck Deck Balconies Balconies Roof Tile Deleo "Carmel Stone" and "Dark Roof Tile Deleo "Sahara" and "Brick Adobe Blend" Red Blend" Stucco Color La Habra "Canyon" Stucco Color La Habra "Alamo" Accent La Habra "Pacific Sand" Accent La Habra "Adobe" Stucco Color Stucco Color Exterior Frazee "Cool Forest" and "Bering Exterior Frazee "Tuscan Clay" Doors, Green" Doors and Garage Garage Doors and Doors Shutters CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 Pursuant to the Chapter 17.30 Section 17.30.020 (Permits Required) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of the subject condominium project. As allowed in the LEMC the Planning Commission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for Conditional Use Permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of Conditional Use Permits. ANALYSIS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03 cmd ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02 In reviewing the requested land use map amendment and zone change, staff analyzed potential 100-1 implications of the proposed amendment as it related to both the Housing Element and the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Specifically, staff identified local housing problems and AGENDA ITEM NO. 2--' �-1--�; PAGE®/3 OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 8 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE ..ir CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. needs and the potential of resulting traffic issues related to an increase in the housing stock. In conjunction with the mandates of the General Plan, staff was concerned with any potential impacts that would be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City. Based on this analysis, staff has concluded that the requested amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map and the corresponding Zone Change, allowing the development of the subject condominium project is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of the General Plan Housing Element, obligating the City to provide "decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore" and that the traffic impacts related to these requests were negligible. In deliberation of this request staff considered the proximity of the this project to the Elsinore City Center Specific Plan, approved by the Lake Elsinore City Council on September 8, 1992 and the subsequent City Council approvals of Amendment No. 1 to the Elsinore City Center Specific Plan (91 -1); Residential Design Review No. 2000 -02 for a 156 unit apartment complex; and the City Council approval of Residential Design Review 2003 -08, for an 84 unit condominium community, staff reasoned that this General Plan Amendment offers excellent opportunities to establish additional needed housing in the area. Finally, pursuant to the Elsinore City Center C"zdo Tra}fic k pxt Study, prepared by RK Engineering on June 19, 2003, the City Traffic Engineer confirmed that the proposed condominium project will generate 184 less trip ends per day than the approved apartment project and that the study area intersections (See Site Plan Exhibit 2 -A), are projected to operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "D" or better during peak hours and that the proposed condominium project use would generate fewer impacts than the previously approved apartments. In summary, the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change will not be detrimental to health, safety and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City. Additionally, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore to provide 15% of the units in the project as affordable housing units in accordance with the requirements of Section 33413(b) of the California Community Redevelopment Law or an alternative equivalent action which may include (without limitation) dedication of vacant land, construction of affordable units on another site, or payment of an in lieu fee calculated to provide sufficient funds to underwrite the long -term affordability of an equivalent number of affordable dwelling units constructed or substantially rehabilitated on other sites within the City's redevelopment project areas. j ..ry AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE _! 1 OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 9 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532 Primary concerns dealing with condominium projects are the establishment of appropriate mechanisms to ensure the successful and consistent aesthetic appearance of residential complexes. Moreover, the establishment of unmistakable rules and boundaries or covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R's) for ownership, interest, and maintenance responsibilities of common areas as well as individual areas within the units sold will be required. The establishment of the CC&R's, corroborating each of these elements, will be recorded against the project as a condition of approval. Additionally, a homeowner's association (HOA) must be established prior to the sale of the first unit sold. The HOA will be empowered to administer and enforce the various elements of the CC&R's. To accomplish this, homeowner's associations in most cases will establish monthly fees that cover aspects such as landscape maintenance, parking lot maintenance (utility infrastructure improvements). Likewise architectural design committees are often established to guarantee consistent design improvement within complexes. The applicant has submitted a copy of the proposed CC&R's to the Planning Department, which is being reviewed by the City Attorney and will be ultimately approved by the Community Development Director. Additionally, Staff has added a condition of approval to address this matter. Correspondingly, pursuant to Section 17.30.040 (Documents Required) of the LEMC, staff has added a condition of approval which will require that a homeowner's association be established prior to the sale of the first dwelling unit. Exhibit "A" illustrates the Condominium Plan for all common areas and individual units. The plan submitted has been found acceptable by staff. The CC&R's will contain language considered necessary to address more specific ownership, interest, and maintenance responsibilities. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 SA09 The proposed site plan meets or exceeds the requirements of Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Chapter 17.24 (R -2, Medium Density Residential District) of the LEMC and Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the LEMC. Pursuant to and in compliance with Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards) of the LEMC, which encourages that building orientation and setbacks be varied, the applicant has varied the orientation of the buildings in order to maximize the scenic vistas to the Lake, as well as considering the privacy of each condominium unit within the community. Additionally, the applicant has exceeded the requirement contained in Chapter 17.24 (R -2, Medium Density Residential District) of the LEMC, in that the applicant is proposing 26% Ao -�, building coverage instead of the allowed 50% coverage as defined in Chapter 17.02 (Definitions). Further, the applicant has also exceeded the parking requirements encountered in Chapter 17.66 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 10 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. (Parking Requirements) of the LEMC, in that the applicant has provided 169 parking spaces as compared to the 135 spaces required by this Chapter. Noise Pursuant to the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Mitigation Monitoring Program, the Conditions of Approval and Chapter 17.78 (Noise Control), the applicant has agreed to accept a condition of approval, which would require the preparation and approval of an acoustical study prior to the issuance of a building permit. This mitigation was implemented to alleviate possible detrimental noise impacts to the residents located within the condominium community generated by the development of the site and the existing traffic generated by Interstate 15 to the west. Further, the applicant has also agreed to implement appropriate methods of construction, identified and necessary (i.e. sound walls and landscaping), which will insure that the future residents of this proposed community experience noise levels consistent with the City of Lake Elsinore Specific Plan. Tr The analysis of the traffic impacts related to the subject project was based on the updated traffic study mud& The Elsinore City Center Condo Traffic In*uct Study. The traffic impact report submitted was prepared by RK Engineering Group and evaluated both Phase I and the subject project (Phase II). In comparison to the previously approved 156 -unit apartment complex, both phases of the condominium project consist of 144 attached condominium dwelling units. Considering this comparison, the traffic study found that, the proposed condominium project will generate 184 less trip ends per day than the approved apartment project. Additionally, the Traffic Impact Study referenced herein, found that the study area intersections (See Site Plan Exhibit 2 -A), are projected to operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "D" or better during peak hours, with the exception of the I -15 Freeway northbound ramps at Railroad Carryon Road and Grape Street at Railroad Canyon Road The study further indicates that these intersections are projected to operate at LOS "F" during peak hours with or without the proposed condominium project. Conclusively the traffic Impact Study established that the proposed condominium project use would generate fewer impacts than the previously approved apartments. The circulation and parking space layout meets the requirements set forth in Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) which states: For Studio and one babuan units: one (1) c %v& span?, plus two -dxr& (213) open spy per dreding unit. AGENDA ITEM NO. =� PAGE__/ _b OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 11 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. � �� �rs..�r i i sr i+ r i •� ir•r � � sir i�r• ir'ii�l�.• Subsequently, the applicant has provided 80 covered and 89 open standard parking spaces. No "compact spaces" are being proposed as a part of this application. All parking has been designed to provide complete and thorough circulation. The applicant has provided 24' -0" two -way drive isles throughout the site which exceeds the required 20' -0" requirement. Staff has determined that the circulation will present adequate turning radii and turnarounds for emergency and trash and delivery vehicles. The applicant has exceeded the open space requirement set forth in Chapter 17.24 (R -2, Medium Density Residential District /Open Space) of the LEMC which states: Multiple family dud qgs Each du&mg unit shall bepwa"wlth a usable open spew area in the form of a patio or court yard with a nwwmm area of one hundred (100) square fit and a nwwn m dvnm5xn of ten fit (10), or a balcony as follows: a. Units 600 square feet or less: A hakony of sixty (60) square feet with a mvivnrm drrnenswn of six feet (6) A Units larger than 600 square feet of floor arar A hikoq of eighty (80) squme *and a minv7rum di ersim of six feet (6 9. Considering that the condominium units proposed are larger than 600 square feet of floor area, the three hundred and fifty (350) square feet of private open space area provided, in the form of a private yard and/or a balcony, exceeds the required square footage. The architectural design of the proposed buildings meets the requirements set forth within Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards) of the LEMC in that the architecture of the buildings has been designed to enhance their immediate surroundings. Additionally the applicant has provided a variety of building design and form such as staggering planes along the exterior walls, which will create light and shadow. AGENDA ITEM NO._.�.,� �. PAGE OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 12 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. Color and Materials The color and materials proposed for this project meets the requirements set forth within Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards) of the LEMC in that the colors and materials proposed will create a sensitive alteration of colors and materials, producing diversity and enhancing the architectural effects. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 In compliance with Chapter 17.30 (Condominiums and Condominium Conversions) of the LEMC the applicant has filed a request for a Conditional Use Permit. This request for a conditional use permit is consistent with the findings and requirements set forth in Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permits) of the LEMC which states that: The City mdzzes that cenam uses hazz operanonal d5aramvw 64 /• /a In • upon the k=m / rr I /A • I the use, may r II i rr to '•rr w*w adp=T p1/' w, busm-ses, or mukw. Said uses d5eny5m '/ r r more xnpdxn5im and appnxd / I Y./r + ' + I /rr • ab&ty to I' thin I / : 4 r order / n=gate any deftwxntal inpat order / rI rr r u .• I" i r /' L rII " i/ to gnmt rr / to day r //I rrI!A for Co%6wzal Use Pmm& and to r r/I ' 'r I r l* cm&tiau upon • n rr • ofCb Ir ticra Use Panits. Considering the potential ramification to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of the community, as admonished, staff has paid particular attention to specific technicalities related to the development of the proposed use. These details included traffic impacts, local street circulation, internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation, landscape buffering, private common area amenities (i.e. swimming pool, Jacuzzi, tot lots and picnic areas), architectural compatibility and related development standards. Further, pursuant to Section 17.30.040 of the LEMC, the applicant has been conditioned to convey the common open spaces to a homeowner's association (HOA). In compliance, the applicant has submitted a declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R's), to be reviewed by the City Attorney and approved by the Community Development Director, which will govern the association. Correspondingly, the applicant has been conditioned to establish said homeowner's association prior to the sale of the last dwelling unit. Finally, pursuant to Section 17.30.040 of the LEMC, membership into the HOA will be mandatory for each buyer or any successive buyer. Because this project is the second phase of a previously approved project, reciprocal covenants, conditions, and restrictions, and reciprocal maintenance agreements shall be established. Compliance with this requirement will cause a merging of the dadopn" AGENDA ITEM NO. ) PAGE � OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 "^ Page 13 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. phases as they are aarripleted, and mzbody one (1) horn mner' association with carrn m areas for the total delel mov (Section 17.30.040.F of the LEMC). ENVIRONMENTAL The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 has been prepared pursuant to Article 6 (Negative Declaration Process) and Section 15070 (Decision to Prepare a Negative or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the Gdifiw7da Emirnrwwrital Quality Act (CEQA). Based on staff's evaluation, the proposed project will not result in any significant effect on the environment. Further, pursuant to Section 15073 (Public Review of a Proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration) of the California Enviro� Quality Act (CEQA), the intended Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State Clearinghouse on January 15, 2004 for the required 30 day review period. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2004- recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03; Resolution No. 2004 -_ recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change 2003 -02; Resolution No. 2004 - recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Condominium Map 31532; Resolution No. 2004 - recommending to the City Council approval of Residential Design Review R 2003 -15; Resolution No. 2004- _ approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08; and Resolution No. 2004 - recommending City Council adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration No 2004 -01 based the following Findings, Exhibits "A" thm "R" and the proposed Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. The proposed General Plum Americo mt has ban analyzed relatize to its potentiality to be detrimental to A health, safety, canfiirt and welfare of the persons residing or vmking within the neighb orhaood of the pmpmal ow7d� The p wwy issue idmtiyW by staff rnlates to the traffic vpxts of the proposed dawty. Staff, cmduded, based on the Traffic Impact Report, that the Lezd of Service for the intersalwns in the Study Area will not he degraded as a result of this proms 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of the area consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible with adjacent /AGENDA ITEM NO. L4Q 4-2141 PAGE I -1 OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 14 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. properties. The Proposed General Plan Arnaxi7a nt will allow the applicant to dbdop the site with the proposed chitty of 11.25 Dyed iC Units /net acre and will in turn bring about a site more c title with the first phase of the Cmkp� Pro* designated "Multi family Residential': 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density and usage more in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a density more in canforrrumce with the reandy approwd 84 unit cwda nznium prvjert to the north of the subject site Additionally, the proposed prolat site would be in close proximity of arty nexssary senw* na W by persons residing in the przrpesed =daminiwn (Wrr atity. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment. ' I III L/ L r Plan uns r • /i/ uithin &Kription I Lbe prujw's Initial Stu4. Based on / ' Initid Stu4, stalinxnds to adopt r Mitigated Negatrw DSdrrrrl • / • /:/ u7th mitigawns r the / I pqw wdl not r r • r n 9,95a on A- enzvurnmt FINDINGS - ZONE CHANGE 1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. The proposed Zane Change has been analyzed relatize to its potentiality to be detrima ul to the health, safety, m#k and welfare of the persons residmg or uaking within the neighbmraaal of the proposal amm4nmL The p vnwy issue dmtified by staff relates to the traffic npias of the proposed density. Staff; cab& dad based on the Traffic Impact Repor4 that the l ezd of S nix for the interxcacm in the Stsrdy Area will not be degraded as a result of this pyo* 2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake EIsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Based on its analysis, staf has conduded that the requested anmdnent to the General Plan Land Use Map and the wrrespardmg Zone Cdr w, allowing the demo of the subjert corrdarrriruinn p grct is wn sistent with GOAL 1.0 of the General Plum Housing Elemazt, obligating the City to proade "der?nt housirg opportunities and a 5ati&7gg living ercvirwnmt for residents of Lake Elsinore': AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 ' PAGE !� Q OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 15 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 - 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. FINDINGS - CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General PIan (Government Code Section 66473.5). The project as designed assists in achieving the &ink pnertt of a well- baLnaxl and ftaxtiawl mix of nvderitial, cantonal, indwtnal, open space, mmational and instit oonal land uses (GOAL 1.0, Land Use Element) as well provide chant housing opportunities and a satisfying living envir�nrr, nt for midum of Lake Elsinore (GOAL 1.0, Housing Element) 2. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. I' /' r • /L / 1 I / /I' :S/ I '• /' / I' /r r 1' I / / 1 I / ' / • i I would '/ /// /r I L into / /• L r i' S// w Agenthe City of Lake Elsinow, pravxb2g 15% of the units in dx pn*ct as affordable housing units 'in an alwmatiiv "equizuIent amon wbxb nuy r I /' (umfxut r r /r1 IS/ /r/' ofu-cmt /r / constnoction of a &/able units on /rod anodxr site, or papxv of /r in / I / :/ to / I /' suffiaent fivids to 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. The pro) ect has been adequately ca uktim& by all applicable &partnxnts and agetcims and will not therg6v molt in any sig #kvit environrn"d inpacts. FINDINGS - DESIGN REVIEW 1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Zoning District in which the project is located. i1' 11 i 11 • /r / 1 • I' u'w •I/ n / I/ i r :. I � / /r r / /!I I / I //' rr s r / i i i r / r / • r • /' S I / t / / L // /r fi/ / / r r 1' / r L //' / • r • r / / /r / A / / / ' 1 : 1' /' r // ' AGENDA ITEM NO. 2_= PAGE Oe�of PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 16 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE `Mae CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 2. The project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. • ! I/I I/ 'a /. rr I' '' I r ./ r I r r r r' . � 111 11 11' 11i 11'n/I . /1I II 'r' / 'n/ lulu•/''// i r r I'/I u r !I: / r:L / n • SI r I' / ' r r I' I rr / r /' I / I /' ' I 'r rr • r :� rr / n r • / r r 1' I' H' A r I' • 3' / 1 i / / I /I iI I // � � 1 r r• I' L I! .Y n/ 'r r r I '/ /• P I' r r ' r r 1' I /' :L 1 I II :/ rr I / • / I : v / r • : Y / / :► • I I // / / r rr / / ' • / III iI I Y N / I' f' 1 / r a / I •r / 3. Subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Pursuant to the Calonia Envimnnmaztal Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Residential Design Raiav located at Assessor Parcel Nt#n � s) 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016, as rwv u vd and N"1011 mditiaxd by all applicable City Divisiaru and Dep,*norts and Agauies, will not haw a sig *4nt e�ert on the an i mnazt pursuant to attadmi Conditions of Appraa -d 4. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070 of the Zoning Code, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Section 17.82.0 70 (Action of the Pl v=M C.orrrnssion) of the Lake Elsinore Munk* Cade (LEMC), the praposed hu4atrial Design Review located at Assessor Parted Numl -r(s) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 has lean schal" for mPUideration and app uml of the Plarming C. Mv siom FINDINGS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1. The proposed use, on its own merits and within the context of its setting, is in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located. 'r r 1' r n I r r /r I r r/ / r r r I I .• r r ./ n/ r' r/r r r I r� AGENDA ITEM NO.. J,�.. \ PAGE OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 17 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. C'm maiity located at Assessor Parcel NurnWs) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016. Accordbigly, the proposed land use is in caxwmyuewtth the oI of the General Plan and the purpose of the p&?m=g district in Mich the site is located 2. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or the City, or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the City. In aaord with the purposes of the Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Lake Elsinore Municipd Cade, the City realized that dx proposed condaninium use located at Assessor Panel NurnWs) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 may haze a potential to negatirely vnptct the welfare of persons residing or working za dm the neighla n5ood or the City. C nsiderrig this, staff has substantiated that all applicable City DqpZ� and Agencies haze been afforded the opportunity for a thorough review of the use and haw iruorporated all applicable cawrrmts and /or conditions related to installation and r uvitenarue of landsI stmt dedications, roVawis ofpoints of ielxular ingress and mss cmd mntrd of potential nuisances, so as to el»n ute any nEganve i np as to the general health, safety, ccI or general warfare of the surywx&zg neighlxirlaoad or the City. 3. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping, buffers and other features required by Title 17 of the LEMC. • / /J/ ./ m /I ur � / r s/ r I r r• , /' . 'I 1/ 11 11' 1/; /1' , • / • I I :L rr / '♦ r r I 'r , • I' / • r r ♦ r 1 / /' ' :Y ► I /I :/ rr / 1 / ' I 'r / ♦I r1i / /J' r. 4. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways with proper design both as to width and type of pavement to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. 715eproposedcazdanb,zim use bwedat AssessorTanel r• 363-240-002, 003, 10' 11: 11' / a r r I ♦ •9 r L/ in r bas ♦/'/ r ' • ♦ r LI the // i rr in*ucts assoa-ateduyth dx / 1// i/ ou&-lbor storage prior to its approud ♦r / bas (ai&Ined the praject to he sen& by I// of a&quate capa6ty and eksW7 s&mdards I pyoI nnsma& r re / -y car, mck, trxisi4 and / de AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 5 3 OF 18T.4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 18 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II. 5. In approving the subject use located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016, there will be no adverse affect on abutting property or the permitted and normal use thereof. The proposal use has been d"wghly nvxwr i and mnditionml by all applicable City Depra-tments and outside Agauies, elinmatiT the potential forarty and all adwm e�ts on the Atting property . 6. Adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.74.50 of the LEMC have been incorporated into the approval of the Conditional Use Permit to insure that the use continues in a manner envisioned by these findings for the term of the use. Pursuant to Sxr 17.74.050 (Action of the Plmmmg CorrTrWwn) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Cale (LEMC), the outdoor storage use located at Assessor Parcel NtanWs) 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 has hem so lar for mmsideration and appmu -d of the PlR cg C am- issiom FINDINGS - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1.or 1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; and The appluant has made 7mumns to the projat or has aga& to speczfic conditions which umH azvid the 9fcots or mitigate the q)kts of the prow to a point uhm no siga#kant effects would oaw 2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to the eudma rem-ad in the light of the u&k 7awd presmied to staff the pmject will not haze a signifaw #rt on the azrman xnt mnsidb* the appluable Con&tions of App and and Mitigation Monimric Pmgrxn PREPARED BY: ROLFE PREISENDANZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER REVIEWED BY: ARMANDO G. VILLA, PLANNING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER APPROVED BY: ROBERT A. BRADY, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE - � or PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 20, 2004 Page 19 of 19 PROJECT TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03, ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02, TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003- 15, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CUP 2003 -08 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 2004-01 FOR "CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE IL Exhibit A Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532 Exhibit B Index Map Exhibit C Site Plan Exhibit D Landscape Plan Exhibit E Landscape Plan Exhibit F Fence Plan Exhibit G Drainage Plan Exhibit H Site Plan Exhibit I Section Plan Exhibit J Building Type 1 Elevation Type A Exhibit K Building Type 1 Elevation Type B Exhibit L Building Type 2 Elevation Type A Exhibit M Building Type 2 Elevation Type B Exhibit N Building Type 1 First Floor Plan Exhibit O Building Type 1 Second Floor Plan Exhibit P Building Type 2 First Floor Plan Exhibit Q Building Type 2 Second Floor Plan Exhibit R Letter from Applicant Outlining Purpose for General PIan Amendment AI NDA ITEM NO..- ...,.. PAGE 55 OF i RESOLUTION NO. 2004-02 %Nwo A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03 AMENDING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN(s) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 AND 016 FROM VERY LOW DENSITY (VLD) RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY (MD) RESIDENTIAL. WHEREAS, Daigle Homes, LLC has initiated proceedings to amend the General Plan Land Use Map by requesting an General Plan Amendment changing the designation of the parcels known as Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 from Very Low Density (VLD) Residential to Medium Density (MD) Residential; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for changes to the approved General Plan Land Use Map; and WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 20, 2004; NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Land Use Designation. The Planning Commission finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which analyzes environmental effects of ends City Council certification, based upon the following findings and determinations: SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03 have been made as follows: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. AGENDA ITEM NO. °2' PAGE -57 OF '� PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03 Page 2 of 3 The proposed General Plan Amendment has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue identified by staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded, based on the Traffic Impact Report, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study Area will not be degraded as a result of this project. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment will permit reasonable development of the area consistent with its constraints and will make the area more compatible with adjacent properties. The Proposed General Plan Amendment will allow the applicant to develop the site with the proposed density of IL 25 Dwelling Units /net acre and will in turn bring about a site more compatible with the first phase of the Condominium Project, designated "Multi- family Residential ". 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a land use density and usage more in character with the subject property's location, access, and constraints. The proposed General Plan Amendment would establish a density more in conformance with the recently approved 84 -unit condominium project to the north of the subject site. Additionally, the proposed project site would be in close proximity of any necessary services needed by persons residing in the proposed condominium community. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed General Plan was included within the description of the project's Initial Study. Based on the Initial Study, staff intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration, which concluded with mitigations that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03. Ron LaPere, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a meeting thereof conducted on January 20, 2004 by the following vote: AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 =_ � i PAGE 70F PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03 Page 3 of 3 AYES: Commissioners: LaPere, Uhlry, Matthies and O'Neal NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Barnes ATTEST: Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. 2/ PAGE, ,v & 01 ,./` A*",- RESOLUTION NO. 2004-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003 -02 CHANGING THE ZONING DESINGNATION OF A PARCEL SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN (S) 363 -240- 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 AND 016 FROM R -1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO R -2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE WHEREAS, Daigle Homes LLC., has initiated proceedings to change the zoning designation of the subject parcels known as APN(s) 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 from R -1 Single Family Residential District to R -2 Medium Density Residential District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendations to the City Council for changes to the approved Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested �-. parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 20, 2004; NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed Zone Change No. 2003 -02, prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map. The Planning Commission finds and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which analyzes environmental effects of ends City Council certification, based upon the following findings and determinations: SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Zone Change No. 2003 -02 have been made as follows: I . The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or b) injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. The proposed Zone Change has been analyzed relative to its potentiality to be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment. The primary issue identified by staff relates to the traffic impacts of the proposed density. Staff, concluded, based on the Traffic Impact Report, that the Level of Service for the intersections in the Study Area will' AGENDA ITEM NO. E �_ PAG OFo5' F- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02 Page 2 of 2 not be degraded as a result of this project. 2. The proposed action will be consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the General Plan and the development standards established with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). Based on its analysis, staff has concluded that the requested amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map and the corresponding Zone Change, allowing the development of the subject condominium project is consistent with GOAL 1.0 of the General Plan Housing Element, obligating the City to provide "decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore". NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve Zone Change No.2003 -01. Ron LaPere, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a meeting thereof conducted on January 20, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: LaPere, Matthies, Uhlry, and O'Neal NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Barnes ATTEST: Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission 'r.rr+ r..r AGENDA ITEM NO. / PAGE OF RESOLUTION NO. 2004-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532 FOR THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES" PHASE II TO BE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF GRAPE STREET AND SOUTH OF THE RAILROAD CANYON ROAD /GRAPE STREET INTERSECTION, WITHIN THE ELSINORE CITY CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN AREA, ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER (S) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 AND 016. WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake Elsinore by Daigle Homes LLC., to request the approval of Tentative Condominium Map No.31532 for the establishment of a residential condominium community. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of recommending approval of Tentative Condominium Maps for residential projects; and �^ WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 20, 2004; NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed request for Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532 and has found it acceptable. The Planning Commission finds and determines that this project is consistent with Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Section(s) 66424 and 66427 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA) and that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which analyzes environmental effects of the project, ends with the City Council certification, based upon the following findings and determinations: SECTION 2. That in accordance with the Section(s) 66424 and 66427 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA) and Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the following findings for the approval of the condominium map has been made as follows: AGENDA ITEM NO.. =1 PAGE_ OF FINDINGS - CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION 1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is `'oe consistent with the General Plan. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan (Government Code Section 66473.5). The project as designed assists in achieving the development of a well - balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses (GOAL 1. 0, Land Use Element) as well provide decent housing opportunities and a satisfying living environment for residents of Lake Elsinore (GOAL 1. 0, Housing Element) 2. The effects this project is likely to have upon the housing needs of the region, the public service requirements of its residents and the available fiscal and environmental resources have been considered and balanced. Considering the effects this project is likely to have upon the needs of the region a condition of approval was implemented which would require the applicant to enter into an agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore, providing 15% of the units in the project as affordable housing units in accordance with the requirements of Section 33413(b) of the California Community Redevelopment Law or an alternative equivalent action which may include (without limitation) dedication of vacant land, construction of affordable units on another site, or payment of an in lieu fee calculated to provide sufficient funds to underwrite the long -term affordability of an equivalent number of affordable dwelling units constructed or substantially rehabilitated on other sites within the City's redevelopment project areas. 3. Subject to the attached conditions of approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impact. The project has been adequately conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies and will not therefore result in any significant environmental impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above Findings, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of a Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532. Ron LaPere, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE. 2 I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a meeting thereof conducted on January 20, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: LaPere, Uhlry, Matthies, and O'Neal NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Barnes ATTEST: Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO 2 PAGE 3 4E RESOLUTION NO. 2004-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2003 -15 FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE "LAKE ELSINORE CITY CENTER TOWNHOMES ", TO BE LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF GRAPE STREET AND SOUTH OF THE RAILROAD CANYON ROAD /GRAPE STREET INTERSECTION, ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 AND 016. WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake Elsinore by Daigle Homes, LLC, to request the approval of Residential Design Review No. 2003 -15 for the design, construction and establishment of a residential condominium community. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of recommending approval of Design Reviews for residential projects; and WHEREAS, public notice of said application has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on September 16, 2003; NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered the proposed request for Residential Design Review No. 2003 -08 and has found it acceptable. The Planning Commission finds and determines that this project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and determines that Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 is adequate and prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which analyzes environmental effects of ends City Council certification, based upon the following findings and determinations: SECTION 2. That in accordance with Chapter 17.82 (Design Review) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code the following findings for the project have been made as follows: FINDINGS — DESIGN REVIEW 1. The project, as approved, will comply with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Zoning District in which the project is located. NNEW AGENDA ITEM NO. - PAGE OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2003-15 Page 2 of 3 The proposed Residential Design Review located within Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 -240- 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, in that the approval of this Condominium Community will assist in achieving the development of a well - balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses as well as encouraging industrial land uses to diversify Lake Elsinore's economic base. 2. The project complies with the design directives contained in Section 17.82.060 and all other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code. The proposed Residential Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Numbers) 363 -240- 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the Condominium project has been designed in consideration of the size and shape of the property, thereby creating interest and varying vistas as a person moves along the street. Further the project as proposed will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually pleasing, non - detractive relationship between the proposed and existing projects in that the architectural design, color and materials and site design proposed evidence a concern for quality and originality. 3. Subject to the attached Conditions of Approval, the proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Residential Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Numbers) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016, as reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City Divisions and Departments and Agencies, will not have a significant effect on the environment pursuant to attached Conditions of Approval. 4. Conditions and safeguards pursuant to Chapter 17.82.070 of the Zoning Code, including guarantees and evidence of compliance with conditions, have been incorporated into the approval of the subject project to ensure development of the property in accordance with the objectives of Chapter 17.82. Pursuant to Section 17.82.070 (Action of the Planning Commission) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the proposed Industrial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 has been scheduled for consideration and approval of the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above Findings, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of a Residential Design Review No. R 2003 -15. AGENDA ITEM NO. z I PAGE OF1V PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2003-15 Page 3 of 3 Ron LaPere, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a meeting thereof conducted on January 20, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: LaPere, Uhlry, Matthies, and O'Neal NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Barnes ATTEST: Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission ...► ACENDA ITEM NO. I _. PAGES OF RESOLUTION NO. 2004-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2004 -01 FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03; ZONE CHANGE 2003 -02; TENTATIVE CONDOMIMIUM MAP NO. 31532; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003 -08 AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2003 -15, WITHIN APN(S) 363 -240- 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 AND 016. WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Lake Elsinore by Daigle Homes LLC., to request approval of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 for the purpose of developing a residential condominium community; WHEREAS, Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 has been prepared to evaluate environmental impacts resulting with the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of making recommendation to the City Council adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01; and WHEREAS, public notice of said applications has been given, and the Planning Commission has considered evidence presented by the Community Development Department and other interested parties at a public hearing held with respect to this item on January 20, 2004; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Intent to Adopt (NOI) has been filed with the County or Riverside Clerk of said applications, and the Planning Division has requested a public review period commencing on January 15, 2004 and extending to February 20, 2004; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 has been prepared, submitted and reviewed in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's CEQA requirements. The report is complete and adequate in it's evaluation of all environmental effects of the project known as Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" Phase II. and associated discretionary approvals and will not result in any significant environmental affects with mitigation measures Based on the following findings; AGENDA ITEM NO. .2_e PAGE OF.41 1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant `"20 effects would occur; and The applicant has made revisions to the project or has agreed to specific conditions which would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects of the project to a point where no significant effects would occur. 2. There is no substantial evidence, in the light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to the evidence received in the light of the whole record presented to staff the project will not have a significant effect on the environment considering the applicable Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Program. 3. Mitigation measures are required to ensure all potentially significant impacts are reduced to levels of insignificance. Mitigation measures have been required which will reduce significant environmental impacts to the level of insignificance. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that it finds that Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 is complete and adequate and provides appropriate environmental documentation for the project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City's environmental clearance procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission of the City 1"001 of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RECOMMEND that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore certify Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01. Ron LaPere, Chairman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a meeting thereof conducted on January 20, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: LaPere, Uhlry, Matthies, and O'Neal NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Barnes AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF - ATTEST: Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO.. 2 .�...� PAGE 2—LOFIlf—A ATTACHMENT NO.5 NOTICE OF INTENT, NOTICE OF COMPLETION AND INITIAL STUDY AGENDA ITEM NO. �'- I PAGE OF I'-- City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (909) 674 -3124 (909) 471 -1419 fax Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration (In compliance with Section 15072 of the Public Resources Code) Filed With: 0 Office of Planning and Research County Clerk of Riverside County 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 2724 Gateway Drive Sacramento, CA 95814 Riverside, CA 92507 Project Title: GPA No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 2003 -02, Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08 and Residential Design Review No. 2003 -15. Project Location (Specific): The proposed project is located along the Interstate 15 Corridor, adjacent to and east of Grape Street and south of the Grape Street /Railroad Canyon Road Intersection and will be located on a vacant 5.33 acre site. The site topography consists of lower -lying relatively flat areas on a gradual east to west trending slope with significant ridgeline and hilltop areas occurring to the east and north. The site contains a combined vertical variation of approximately 60 feet between the extreme points of elevation on the property. 2roject Location (City): City of Lake Elsinore Description of Project: Project Location (County): Riverside County General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03. The applicant is requesting approval to amend the General Plan Land Use Map by changing the land use designation of a 5.33 acre site from Very Low Density (VLD) residential, which allows .5 dwelling units /acre maximum to Medium Density (MD) residential which allows 12 dwelling units/ acre maximum. The review and analysis of this General Plan Amendment is pursuant to Government Code Section(s) 65350 - 65362, the Lake Elsinore General Plan, Chapter 17.84 (Amendments) and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). • Zone Change No. 2003 -02. The applicant is requesting approval to change the Zoning of the subject property from (R -1) Single Family Residential to (R -2) Medium Density Residential. The review and analysis of the requested Change of Zone is pursuant to applicable chapters of the LEMC. • Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532. The applicant is requesting approval of Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532 pursuant to Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), Chapter 17.30 (Condominium and Condo Conversions) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.24 (R -2, Medium Density Residential)of the LEMC and Section(s) 66424 and 66427 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). Residential Design Review No. R 2003 -15. The applicant is requesting Design Review consideration for the construction of ten (10) residential condominium buildings, which include six (6) individual townhomes per building and related improvements. The floor plans, architectural elevations, color and materials are in substantial conformance to the fourteen (14) condominium buildings recently approved by the City Council on September 16, 2003. Review is pursuant to Chapter 17.24 (R -2, Medium Density Residential) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.30 (Condominium and Condo Conversions) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.14 (Residential Development Standards) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.66 (Parldng Requirements) of the LEMC, Chapter 17.82 (Design Review) of the LEMC and City of Lake Elsinore Landscape Guidelines. AGENDA ITEM) NO, PAGE OF • Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 2003 -07. The applicant is requesting the approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the establishment of 60 individually owned attached condominium townhomes which will participate in an underlying common area pursuant to Chapter 17.30 (Condominium and Condo Conversions) of the LEMC and Chapter 17.74 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). • Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01. The City of Lake Elsinore intends to adopt a MitigatcV Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to the Guidelines established by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Name of Lead Agency: City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, Planning Division Lead Agency Contact Person: Rolfe Preisendanz, Associate Planner Telephone Number: (909) 674 -3124 x 223 Address where document may be obtained: City of Lake Elsinore, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Public Review Period: Begins: January 15, 2004 Ends: February 20, 2004 Anyone interested in this matter is invited to comment on the document by written response or by personal appearance at the hearing. Persons wishing to appear at the heating should call: Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Associate Planner (909) 674 -3124 x 223 Signed: ' ando G. Villa Title: Planning and Code Enforement Manager AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE _j.LOF Form A Notice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal Mail to: State Clearinghouse, PO Box 3044, Sacramento, CA 95812 -3044 916/445 -0613 SCH # Project Title: "Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" Phase II Lead Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Contact Person: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Street Address: 130 S. Main Street Phone: (909) 674 -3124 ext. 223 City: Lake Elsinore Zip: 92530 County: Riverside — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Project Location: County: Riverside City/Nearest Community: Murrieta Cross Streets: Railroad Cayon Road and Grape Street Zip Code: 92530 Assessor's Parcel No. 363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008 Section: Twp. Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: Interstate 15 Waterways: Airports: Document Type: Railways: Schools: Total Acres: 5.33 Range: Base: CEQA: ❑ NOP ❑ Supplement/Subsequent EIR NEPA: ❑ NOI Other: ❑ Joint Document ❑ Early Cons (Prior SCH No.) ❑ EA ❑ Final Document ® Neg Dec ❑ Other ❑ Draft EIS ❑ Other ❑ Draft EIR ❑ FONSI ----------------------------------- - - - - -- Local Action Type: ❑ General Plan Update © General Plan Amendment ❑ General Plan Element ❑ Community Plan ❑ Specific Plan ❑ Master Plan ❑ Planned Unit Development © Site Plan Development Type: n Residential: Units 60 Acres 5.33 ❑ Office: Sgft. Acres Employees. ❑ Commercial: Sgft. Acres Employees. ❑ Industrial: Sgft. Acres Employees_ ❑ Educational ❑ Recreational ❑ Rezone ❑ Annexation ❑ Prezone ❑ Redevelopment © Use Permit ❑ Coastal Permit ® Land Division (Subdivision, etc.) © Other Zone Change ❑ Water Facilities: Type MGD ❑ Transportation: Type ❑ Mining: Mineral ❑ Power: Type Watts ❑ Waste Treatment: Type ❑ Hazardous Waste: Type ❑ Other: — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Funding (approx.): Federal $ State $ Total $ ----------------------------------------- Project Issues Discussed in Document: ® AestheticNisual © Agricultural Land X❑ Air Quality © Archeological/Historical ❑ Coastal Zone © Drainage /Absorption © Economic /Jobs © Fiscal ❑ Flood Plain/Flooding ❑ Forest Land/Fire Hazard ® Geologic /Seismic ❑ Minerals © Noise © Population/Housing Balance ® Public Services/Facilities ® Recreation/Parks © Schools/Universities ❑ Septic Systems Q Sewer Capacity ® Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading ❑ Solid Waste © Toxic/Hazardous © Traffic /Circulation ❑ Vegetation ❑ Water Quality Q Water Supply /Groundwater ® Wetland/Riparian Q Wildlife © Growth Inducing © Landuse © Cumulative Effects ❑ Other ---------------------------------------- Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan Designation: Vacant / (R -1) Single Family Residential / Very Low Density (VLD) ---------------------------------------- Project Description: General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 2003 -02, Tentative Condominium Map 31532, Residential Design Review No. R 2003 -15 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08. Revised 3 -31 -99 23 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OF Reviewing Agencies Checklist Resources Agency Boating & Waterways Coastal Commission Coastal Conservancy Colorado River Board Conservation V1 Fish & Game Forestry & Fire Protection ✓ Office of Historic Preservation Parks & Recreation Reclamation Board S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission Water Resources (DWR) Business, Transportation & Housing Aeronautics California Highway Patrol V" CALTRANS District # Department of Transportation Planning (headquarters) Housing & Community Development Food & Agriculture Health & Welfare Health Services State & Consumer Services General Services OLA (Schools) Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency) Form A, continued KEY S = Document sent by lead agency X = Document sent by SCH ✓ = Suggested distribution `1001 Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board California Waste Management Board SWRCB: Clean Water Grants SWRCB: Delta Unit y /SWRCB: Water Quality SWRCB: Water Rights Regional WQCB # Youth & Adult Corrections Corrections Independent Commissions & Offices Energy Commission Native American Heritage Commission Public Utilities Commission Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy State Lands Commission Tahoe Regional Planning Agency ✓ Other L A F C O .d` Starting Date January 15, 2004 Ending Date February 20, 2004 Signature s-G } C.,,- Date !!mac 9�K QO ----------------------------------- - - - - -- Lead Agency (Complete if applicable): Consulting Firm: Address: City/State /Zip: Contact: Phone: (� Applicant: Daigle Homes, LLC. Address: 28991 Old Town Front Street Suite 207 City/State /Zip: Temecula, CA 92590 Phone: 9( O9 ) 699 -5860 For SCH Use Only: Date Received at SCH _ Date Review Starts Date to Agencies Date to SCH Clearance Date Notes: AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 ,"N►/ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003-03 ZONE CHANGE NO. 2003-02 TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP NO. 31532 MINOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2003-15 INITIAL STUDY FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION No. 2004 -01 Prepared By: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Applicant: DAIGLE HOMES, LLC. 28991 Old Town Front Street Suite 203 Temecula, CA 92591 JANUARY 2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. NO. - PAGE 5 OF_j I. INTRODUCTION A. PURPOSE This document is an Initial Study for evaluation of environmental impacts resulting from implementation I-Mor of proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 2003 -02, Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08, Residential Design Review No. 2002 -15 and Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 as requested by Daigle Homes, LLC. For purposes of this document, this application will be called the "proposed project ". B. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS As defined by Section 15063 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial Study is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or Mitigated Negative Declaration would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for any proposed project. According to Section 15065, an EIR is deemed appropriate for a particular proposal if the following conditions occur: • The proposal has the potential to substantially degrade quality of the environment. • The proposal has the potential to achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long -term environmental goals. • The proposal has possible environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. • The proposal could cause direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings. According to Section 15070(a), a Negative Declaration is deemed appropriate if the proposal would not result in any significant effect on the environment. According to Section 15070(b), a Mitigated Negative Declaration is deemed appropriate if it is determined that though a proposal could result in a significant effect, mitigation measures are available to reduce these significant effects to insignificant levels. This Initial Study has determined that the proposed project will result in potentially significant environmental impacts and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is deemed as the appropriate document to provide necessary environmental evaluations and clearance, and recommend mitigation measures required to reduce any potentially significant impact to a level of insignificance. This Initial Study and Mitigation Negative Declaration are prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et. seq.); Section 15070 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et. seq.); applicable requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore; and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any other responsible public agency or an agency with jurisdiction by law. The City of Lake Elsinore City Council is designated the Lead Agency, in accordance with Section 15050 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Lead Agency is the public agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have significant effects upon the environment. AGENDA ITEM NO. L PAGE L OF C. INTENDED USES OF INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION This Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration are informational documents which are intended to AO-1- inform City of Lake Elsinore decision - makers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general public of potential environmental effects of the proposed application. The environmental review process has been established to enable public agencies to evaluate environmental consequences and to examine and implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially adverse impacts. While CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding environmental damage, the Lead Agency and other responsible public agencies must balance adverse environmental effects against other public objectives, including economic and social goals. The City of Lake Elsinore City Council, as the Lead Agency, has determined that environmental clearance for the proposed project can be provided with a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Initial Study and Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt prepared for the Mitigated Negative Declaration will be circulated for a period of 20 days for public and agency review. Comments received on the document will be considered by the Lead Agency before it acts on the proposed project. D. CONTENTS OF INITIAL STUDY This Initial Study is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and environmental implications of the proposed project. I. INTRODUCTION presents an introduction to the entire report. This section identifies City of Lake Elsinore contact persons involved in the process, scope of environmental review, environmental procedures, and incorporation by reference documents. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION describes the proposed project. A description of discretionary approvals and permits required for project implementation is also included. III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM contains the City's Environmental Checklist Form. The checklist form presents results of the environmental evaluation for the proposed project and those issue areas that would have either a significant impact, potentially significant impact, or no impact. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS evaluates each response provided in the environmental checklist form. Each response checked in the checklist form is discussed and supported with sufficient data and analysis. As appropriate, each response discussion describes and identifies specific impacts anticipated with project implementation. In this section, mitigation measures are also recommended, as appropriate, to reduce adverse impacts to levels of less than significance. V. MANDATORY FINDINGS presents Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. VI. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED identifies those persons consulted and involved in preparation of this Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. VII. REFERENCES lists bibliographical materials used in preparation of this document. E. SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS For evaluation of environmental impacts, each question from the Environmental Checklist Form is stated and responses are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. All responses will take into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. Project impacts and effects will be evaluated and quantified, when appropriate. To each question, there are four possible responses, including: 1. No Impact: A "No Impact" response is adequately supported if the referenced information sources 3 AGENDA ITEM NO.. PAGE 2_ OF(E{ show that the impact simply does not apply to the proposed project. 2. Less Than Significant Impact: Development associated with project implementation will have the potential to impact the environment. These impacts, however, will be less than the levels of thresholds that are considered significant and no additional analysis is required. 3. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: This applies where incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact" The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures and explain how the measures reduce the effect to a less than significant level. Potentially Significant Impact: Future implementation will have impacts that are considered significant and additional analysis and possibly an EIR are required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. Regarding mitigation measures, it is not the intent of this document to "overlap" or restate conditions of approval that are established for the project. Additionally, those other standard requirements and regulations that any development must comply with, that are outside the City's jurisdiction, are also not considered mitigation measures and therefore, will not be identified in this document. F. TIERED DOCUMENTS, INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE, AND TECHNICAL STUDIES Information, findings, and conclusions contained reference of tiered documentation, and a technical project, which are discussed in the following section. 1. Tiered Documents in this document are based on incorporation by study that have been prepared for the proposed As permitted in Section 15152(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, information and discussions from other documents can be included into this document. Tiering is defined as follows: "Tiering refers to using the analysis of general matters contained in a broader EIR (such as the one prepared for a general plan or policy statement) with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects; incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project." For this document, the "Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR" (prepared in 1990) serves as the broader document, since it analyzes the entire City area, which includes the proposed project site. However, as discussed, site - specific impacts, which the broader document (Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR) can not adequately address, may occur for certain issue areas. This Initial Study and Negative Declaration identify potentially significant impacts. This document therefore, evaluates each environmental issue alone and will rely upon analysis contained within the Lake Elsinore General Plan Final EIR with respect to remaining issue areas. Tiering also allows this document to comply with Section 15152(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, which discourages redundant analyses, as follows: "Agencies are encouraged to tier the environmental analyses which they prepare for separate but related projects including the general plans, zoning changes, and development projects. This approach can eliminate repetitive discussion of the same issues and focus the later EIR or negative declaration on the actual issues ripe for decision at each level of environmental review. Tiering is appropriate when the sequence of analysis is from an EIR prepared for a general plan, policy or program to an EIR or negative declaration for another plan, policy, or program of lesser scope, or to a site - specific EIR or negative declaration." Further, Section 15152(d) of the CEQA Guidelines states: AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 PAGE., QP :' "Where an EIR has been prepared and certified for a program, plan, policy, or ordinance consistent with the requirements of this section, any lead agency for a later project pursuant to or consistent with the program, plan, policy, or ordinance should limit the EIR or negative declaration on the later project to effects which: (1) Were not examined as significant effects on the environment in the prior EIR; or (2) Are susceptible to substantial reduction or avoidance by the choice of specific revisions in the project, by the imposition of conditions, or other means." 2. Incorporation By Reference Incorporation by reference is a procedure for reducing the size of EIRs and is most appropriate for including long, descriptive, or technical materials that provide general background information, but do not contribute directly to the specific analysis of the project itself. This procedure is particularly useful when an EIR or Negative Declaration relies on a broadly - drafted EIR for its evaluation of cumulative impacts of related projects (Las Virgenes Homeowners Federation v. County of Los Angeles [1986, 177 Ca.3d 300]). If an EIR or Negative Declaration relies on information from a supporting study that is available to the public, the EIR or Negative Declaration cannot be deemed unsupported by evidence or analysis (San Francisco Ecology Center v. City and County of San Francisco [1975, 48 Ca3d 584, 595]). This document incorporates by reference the document from which it is tiered, the Lake Elsinore General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, prepared in 1990. This document will be referred to as the "General Plan EIR". When an EIR or Negative Declaration incorporates a document by reference, the incorporation must comply with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows: • The incorporated document must be available to the public or be a matter of public record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[a]). The General Plan EIR shall be made available, along with this document, at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore CA 92330, ph. (909) 674 -3124. This document must be available for inspection by the public at an office of the lead agency (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[b]). This document is available at the City of Lake Elsinore, Community Development Department, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore CA 92330, ph. (909) 674 -3124. This document must summarize the portion of the document being incorporated by reference or briefly describe information that cannot be summarized. Furthermore, this document must describe the relationship between the incorporated information and the analysis in the General Plan EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[c]). As discussed above, the General Plan EIR addresses the entire City of Lake Elsinore and provides background and inventory information and data which apply to the project site. Incorporated information and /or data will be cited in the appropriate sections. This document must include the State identification number of the incorporated document (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[d]). The State Clearinghouse Number for the General Plan EIR is 91122065. • The material to be incorporated in this document will include general background information (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150[f]). 3. Technical Studies Focused Surveys for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly and the Coastal California Knatcatcher were prepared by L & L Environmental, Inc. in June and July 2003 respectfully, to determine the preseng 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE, OF 1 or absence of the federally endangered species and to evaluate the effect the proposed project would have on the these species. Additionally, a Traffic Impact Study, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. in June 2003 evaluated the Elsinore City Center Condominium Project development from a traffic circulation perspective. .,,p+' AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 - PAGE 2 0— 0 rAa II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING The proposed project is located along the Interstate 15 Corridor, adjacent to and east of Grape Street and south of the Grape Street /Railroad Canyon Road Intersection and will be located on a vacant 5.33 acre site. The site topography consists of lower -lying relatively flat areas on a gradual east to west trending slope with significant ridgeline and hilltop areas occurring to the east and north. The site contains a combined vertical variation of approximately 60 feet between the extreme points of elevation on the property. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2003 -03 The applicant is requesting to change the General Plan Designation of the proposed site from Very Low Density (VLD) residential, which allows .5 dwelling units /acre maximum to Medium Density (MD) residential which allows 12 dwelling units/ acre maximum. ZONE CHANGE NO 2003 -02 In order to maintain consistency with the proposed General Plan and to develop the site with the density proposed, the applicant is also requesting a Zone Change from (R -1) Single Family Residential to (R -2) Medium Density Residential. TENTATIVE CONDOMINIUM MAP 31532 The applicant requests approval to establish a proposed residential condominium community. Condominium projects are defined as "subdivisions" pursuant to Section 66424 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). Consequently, this project requires Planning Commission and City Council consideration pursuant to the requirements of Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). The condominium concept would allow the applicant to be able offer individual dwelling units for sale within the building structures as defined by the Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, while sharing common interest, ownership and maintenance responsibilities within the common areas. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2003-08 Pursuant to the Chapter 17.30 Section 17.30.020 (Permits Required) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of the subject condominium project. As allowed in the LEMC the Planning Commission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for Conditional Use Permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of Conditional Use Permits. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2003 -15 The applicant is proposing to develop the vacant 5.33 acre site with ten (10) two story wood framed buildings, totaling approximately 100,920 square feet. This proposal will be the second phase of a previously approved 84 unit Condominium Project to the north. Each building will be approximately 10,092 square feet and will comprise of six (6) individually owned attached single - family condominium dwelling units. The attached condominium units will range in size from a one (1) bedroom -864 square /'1 foot unit to a three bedroom 1,450 square foot unit. Each building will also include six (6) enclosed attached garage- parking spaces. The ten (10) buildings will be located on the final terraced pad ascending southerly above the Grape Street elevation. Access to the site will be made available by way of a proposed driveway located off "A" Street and the existing two (2) driveways located off of Grape Street. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND ■ 1. Project Title: ■ General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03 ■ Zone Change No. 2003 -02 ■ Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532 ■ Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08 ■ Residential Design Review No. 2003 -15 ■ Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2004 -01 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Lake Elsinore; 130 South Main Street; Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Associate Planner (909)674 -3124 ext 223. 4. Project Location: The proposed condominium project will be located on a vacant 5.33 acre site east of Grape Street and south of the Railroad Canyon Road /Grape Street intersection, Assessor Parcel Number (s) 363-240-002,003,004, 008, 009, & 016. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Daigle Homes, LLC., 28991 Old Town Front Street, Suite 203, Temecula CA 92591 6. General Plan Designation: (VLD) Very Low Density (.5 dwelling units /acre) 7. Zoning: (R -1) Single - Family Residential District 8. Description of Project: The applicant requests approval to establish a proposed residential condominium community on 5.33 vacant acre site. The project will be the second phase of the 84 unit condominium project previously approved. The scope of the proposed project will consist of ten (10) two story wood framed buildings, totaling approximately 100,920 square feet. The architectural design and floor plan will be in substantial conformance of the previously approved project. Correspondingly, each building will be approximately 10,092 square feet and will comprise of six (6) individually owned attached single - family condominium dwelling units. The attached condominium units will range in size from a one (1) bedroom -864 square foot unit to a three bedroom 1,450 square foot unit. Each building will also include six (6) enclosed attached garage- parking spaces. The ten (10) buildings will be located on the final terraced pad ascending southerly above the Grape Street elevation. Access to the site will be made available by way of a proposed driveway located off "A" Street and the existing two (2) driveways located off of Grape Street. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The proposed project is located along the Interstate 15 Corridor, adjacent to and east of Grape Street and south of the Grape Street /Railroad Canyon Road Intersection and will be located on a vacant 5.33 acre site. The site topography consists of lower -lying relatively flat areas on a gradual east to west trending slope with significant ridgeline and hilltop areas occurring to the east and north and is generally surrounded by single family residences and vacant land, with the exception of the Wal Mart Shopping Center to the north of the site and Interstate 15 along the west boundary of the property. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: NA. AGENDA ITEM NO. �,�,■ PAGE., ORI B. 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 ❑ Agricultural Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/ Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology / Water Quality ❑ Land Use/ Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation / Traffic ❑ Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance C. DETERMINATION: 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. ® 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. Rolfe Preisendanz, Associate Planner Date AGEMA ITEM NO. PAGE 0 3 IT AGENDA ITEM NO. 10 PAGE � OF ,"Of Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact AM f.1 r , Tk"!! a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic X vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock X outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its X surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime X views in the area? III AOIRTRS���G ' �thr�inpct �tCU 3 E al�bta%euei 7 p a i �►�£ !tu p tp asp an�na1�tlis�iag ct trba>t 1 Via% ana a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the X Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural X use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or X nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? ..%ln.'re a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of X the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air X quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality X standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial X pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? AGENDA ITEM NO. 10 PAGE � OF ,"Of r-. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the AGENDA ITEM NO. 11 ,� PAGE 6 S OF Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporation Im pact Im act a Have a subs ttial 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, X 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 X Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through X direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or X migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree X reservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, X re !onal or state habitat conservation plan? �.a . a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined X in 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource X pursuant to 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique X geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the AGENDA ITEM NO. 11 ,� PAGE 6 S OF ../ AGENDA ITEM NO. y2 ' 12 PAGE g 6 OF.94 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporation impact Impact i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other X substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shakin ? X iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? X iv Landslides? X 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 collapse? X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code X (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater X disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use X or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the X release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or X waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government code Section 65962.5 and, as a X result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or X public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ../ AGENDA ITEM NO. y2 ' 12 PAGE g 6 OF.94 ,i-1- 13 PAGE OFQ�L Less Than a) Violate any water quality standards or waste Significant discharge requirements? Potentially With Less Than b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporation— Impact Impact f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety X hazard for people residing or working in the X project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response X plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to X X urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 13 PAGE OFQ�L <�« a) Violate any water quality standards or waste X discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production X rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted ? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a X manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or X substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide X substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard X Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect X flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, X including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche tsunami or mudflow? X 5. A lX IX U auidfi ro`t r. x a) Physically divide an established community? X dOW 13 PAGE OFQ�L AGENDA ITEM NO. ��-• 14 ' OF PAGE Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporation Impact Impact b) 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 X coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community X conservation p lan. a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the X region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site X delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X11: Issues Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less Than Significant No a Fire protection? X b Police protection? X c Schools? X d Parks? X e Other ublic facilities? X a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial X physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities X or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse h sical effect on the environment? X SI'OR�'A'I'IfJN;( I #W Would a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of x vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for X designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a X change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous X intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e Result in inadequate emergency access? X Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation X (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks ? It S�AN� 58 .4 � "S�'S'I"E���.. ?�ctldj #h+� rii x� r`. ' a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control X Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction X of which could cause significant environmental effects? 15 AGENDA ITEM NO.. 2-1— PAGE ORLffi 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 X 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 prehistorv? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project X 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.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on X human beings, either directly or indirectly? AQEMA ITEM NO. 16 PAGE ` d N%"W Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Issues Impact Incorporation Impact impact c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of X existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and X resources or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to X serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid X waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes X and regulations related to solid waste? 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 X 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 prehistorv? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project X 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.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on X human beings, either directly or indirectly? AQEMA ITEM NO. 16 PAGE ` d N%"W IV. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This section provides an evaluation of the impact categories and questions contained in the Environmental Checklist. I. AESTHETICS a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed condominium project will not result in any significant visual impact to scenic vistas. The condominium project will be designed along the hillside terrain. The project requires Design Review approval by the City, which ensures that the proposed condominium project will be designed as aesthetically attractive as possible and feasible. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? No Impact There are no State Scenic Highways located near the project site. Sensitive scenic resources are not located onsite or within neighboring areas. There is no relevance to this issue. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less Than Significant Impact The condominium project will be consistent with the existing architecture within the area and will incorporate full title roofs, with colored stucco walls. Individual glass screens will be provided as noise attenuation. A tot lot, BBQ and picnic area will also be provided. The project requires Design Review approval by the City, which ensures that the proposed condominium project will be designed as aesthetically attractive as possible and feasible. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less Than Significant Impact New lights from parking, vehicles, and the condominiums themselves will be generated, which will contribute to the amount of light and glare found in the project vicinity. Impacts, however, are not considered significant. Much of the general area is already urbanized and amounts of light and glare already exist in the vicinity and the I -15 Freeway. Night light is also generated at the City Center shopping center. Consequently, the perception of new and additional light disturbances is lessened. No significant impacts are anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES None Required II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES 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? No Impact The project site is not classified as either, Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. There is no relevance to this issue. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 1 17 �' PAGE OF The proposed project site is not under a Williamson Act contract. No conflicts are known to exist. c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? No Impact The proposed project will not convert any Farmland to any non - agricultural use. 1.n✓ MITIGATION MEASURES None required. III. AIR QUALITY a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact The proposed project will not develop any uses that will directly generate additional air pollutants. The project will not conflict with any air quality plan. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? No Impact Likewise, air quality standards will not be violated; the project will not contribute to any air quality violation. The proposed project will not result in any significant adverse air quality impact. 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)? No Impact All of Southern California is within a non - attainment region for certain pollutants. It is concluded, .r„p however, that because the proposed project will not create any incremental impact, it will not significantly contribute to the non - attainment status of the region. Additionally, conditions of approval placed on the project will reduce the quantity of particulate mater and other pollutants emitted during the grading and construction phase of the proposed project through watering graded surfaces and planted ground cover as dust palliatives, in accordance with SQAMD Rule No. 403. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigations The project area is bounded by the I -15 Freeway to the west, vacant areas to the south and east, and commercial development to the north. There is currently a very low concentration of custom homes to the south and east of the proposed site which could be considered sensitive receptors. Considering these sensitive receptors the following mitigation will be required. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact The proposed project will not result in activities that typically create objectionable odors. MITIGATION MEASURES The design of efficient and direct traffic flow patterns on the project site can help reduce the quantity of air pollutants generated by minimizing the places in the roadway system where automobiles would be idling unnecessarily. The project traffic study, entitled Elsinore City Center Condo Traffic Impact Study, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 19, 2003 contains internal circulation design guidelines to be utilized in creating an efficient roadway system. 2 AGENDA ITECM� NO. � 18 PAGE.J OF Monitoring Milestone: Project Design Responsible Implementing Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Planning and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of building permits. Verifications: 2. Minimize particulate emissions from construction activities through a). suspension of grading during first and second stage smog alerts; b). wash trucks leaving the site; c) maintain construction equipment by keeping them tuned; d) use clean, low sulfur fuel for equipment; e) require watering of active project areas with multiple daily applications if necessary; f) require trucks to maintain two feet of freeboard; g) require all trucks hauling dirt , sand, oil or other lose substances and building materials to be covered; h) pave construction access roads; j) develop program for rapid clean up of street debris after a major event; and k) prohibit outdoor storage if from particulate matter. Monitoring_ Milestone: On -site construction inspection. Responsible Implementing Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Building and Safety Division. Timing: During project construction. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 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? Less Than Significant Impact Focused surveys entitled, Focused Survey for the Ouino Checkerspot Butterflx and Focused Survey for the Coastal Gnatcatcher prepared in June and July 2003 respectfully, by L & L Environmental, Inc., was conducted on the Daigle Development site in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, California. The purpose of the study was to determine the presence or absence of the federally endangered species, and to evaluate the effect the proposed project may have on this species. Based on the results of Focused Survey for the Quino CheckersP ot ButterilXit was concluded that it is highly unlikely a Quino Checkerspot Butterfly adult would ever visit the site. Likewise, the Focused Survey for the Coastal Gnatcatcher concluded that the site is currently unoccupied by the California Gnatcatcher. 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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant Impact Results of the focused survey referenced herein indicate that no riparian or other sensitive natural communities have been identified in the local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Wildlife Services. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on 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? No Impact Wetlands are not located onsite. There is no relevance to this issue. 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 19 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact The affected site is not known to be a wildlife corridor. The site is neighbored by existing development and the I -15 Freeway which further support the finding that the site is not a functional wildlife corridor. There is no relevance to this issue. �. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact The City of Lake Elsinore does not have any local policies or ordinances to protect biological resources of local concern; therefore, the proposed project will not have any adverse impact on locally protected biological resources. 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? No Im act At this time, there are no known HCPs or NCCPs encompassing the affected site or areas adjacent to the site. There is no relevance to this issue. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigations Pursuant to the Status Report Letter from LSA Associates, Inc, dated January 12, 2004 historical resources exist within the project area. Additionally, the Status Report concluded that there were also records of prehistoric resources to the north of the parcel. Considering that historical resources have been noted within the site area, the Status Report recommends that all construction - related grading activities be monitored in order to recover any resources discovered. Mitigation has been added in order to insure compliance with this recommendation. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigations Likewise, pursuant to the Status Report Letter from LSA Associates, Inc, historical resources and the potential for paleontological resources exist within the project area. Additionally, the Status Report concluded that there were also records of prehistoric resources to the north of the parcel. Considering the potential for historical and paleontological resources within the site area, the Status Report recommends that all construction - related grading activities be monitored in order to recover any resources discovered. A mitigation has been added in order to insure compliance with this recommendation. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigations Likewise, pursuant to the Status Report Letter from LSA Associates, Inc, the potential for paleontological resources exist within the project area. Additionally, the Status Report concluded that there were also records of prehistoric resources to the north of the parcel. Considering the potential for paleontological resources within the site area, the Status Report recommends that all construction - related grading activities be monitored in order to recover any resources discovered. A mitigation has been added in order to insure compliance with this recommendation. AGENDA ITEM NO, 20 -L-L PAGE OF � d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigations Likewise, pursuant to the Status Report Letter from LSA Associates, Inc, historical resources and the potential for paleontological resources exist within the project area. Additionally, the Status Report concluded that there were also records of prehistoric resources to the north of the parcel. Considering the potential for historical and paleontological resources within the site area, the Status Report recommends that all construction - related grading activities be monitored in order to recover any resources discovered. A mitigation has been added in order to insure compliance with this recommendation. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The applicant shall monitor all grading activities of the site. If any cultural resources are uncovered by such grading activities the applicant shall immediately cease all activities until such time that a qualified archaeologist is contacted and an inspection of the resources is completed. The applicant shall not continue grading until such time that the City has given approval and clearance to proceed. Monitoring Milestone: Project Grading and construction. Responsible Implementing Agency City of Lake Elsinore Planning and Engineering Divisions Timing: During any activities which will disturb the existing soil. Verifications: The applicant shall inform the City in writing who will be monitoring the site. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. No Impact The project site, according to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan (Exhibit VI -2), is not located within an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. There is no relevance to this issue. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is located close to the Whittier - Elsinore Fault. Therefore, the project site has been and will continue to be directly affected by seismic activity to some degree. Given that the project site is not within any seismic study area, it can be concluded the site will not be affected by ground shaking anymore than any other area in seismically active Southern California. Compliance with standard measures contained in the UBC and City Municipal Code regarding structure and construction. iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? No Impact The project site, according to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan is not located within any areas that are characterized by liquefaction. There is no relevance to this issue. iv) Landslides? Less Than Significant Impact AGENDA ITEM NO. `� 21 PAGE�1 OFi�- Historical landslides are not known to have occurred in the past. Therefore, the project vicinity is not characterized as a landslide hazard area. Significant impacts are not expected. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact As with any development, soil erosion can result during construction, as grading and construction can loosen surface soils and make soils susceptible to effects of wind and water movement across the surface. Impacts, however, are not considered significant since erosion will be controlled onsite in accordance with City standards. 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 collapse? Less Than Significant Impact The project site, according to the City of the Lake Elsinore General; Plan, is not characterized by unstable soils and is capable of supporting future development with compliance of applicable construction techniques. d) 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? Less Than Significant Impact As discussed, soils are supportive of development and will not create substantial risks to life and /or property. e) Have soils capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact The project will not be serviced by septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems. There is `"No, no relevance to this issue. MITIGATION MEASURES None required VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact The proposed project will not handle any hazardous material. There is no relevance to this issue. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No Impact Likewise, there is no significant potential for release of hazardous materials from accidental conditions. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact There are no schools within a'A mile of the affected areas. There is no relevance to this issue. 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? No Impact 22 AGENDA lTENA NO. PAGE t OFG /" The project site is not located on any hazardous materials site as designated by Government Code Section 65962.5. There is no opportunity to create a significant hazard to the public or environment. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact The project site is not located within any airport land use plan. There is no relevance to this issue. 1) 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? No Impact The project site is not located near any private airstrip. There is no relevance to this issue. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact There are no known emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans applicable to the project site. The proposed project will not conflict with any emergency response or evacuation plans. h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact The project site has not experienced past wildland fires. The project site is neighbored by existing development and the I -15 Freeway. There is no relevance to this issue. 10—� MITIGATION MEASURES None required. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation The proposed project will create urban pollutants typical of any development, including oils and other substances. To ensure water quality standards and discharge requirements will not be violated a Notice of Intent from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Board, in accordance with the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permit is required. Compliance with NPDES and Best Management Practices (BMP) regulations is required since the 5.33 -acre project site exceeds five acres. Compliance with NPDES and BMP regulations ensures that significant water quality impacts will not result with the project and violation of standards and requirements will not occur. 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)? Less Than Significant Impact The project site is not considered a significant groundwater recharge area given its close proximity to the I -15 Freeway and its hilly terrain. The proposed project will not include activities that will substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with regional groundwater recharge. Significant impacts will not result. 1 23 AGENDA ITEM N._ 'O. °.�� PAGE _11 OF_ c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? Less Than Significant Impact Pursuant to the findings analyzed within the drainage study prepared on January 14, 2004 by MLB Professional Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor entitled Drainage Study TTM 31.532 City Center Condominiums, onsite and upslope drainage flows will be conveyed into the public system located along Grape Street. Significant impacts are not expected. 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? Less Than Significant Impact Onsite and upslope drainage flows will be conveyed into the public system located along Grape Street. Stream or river courses will not be affected. Significant impacts are not expected. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project is a condominium project and will not create excessive drainage flows that will significantly burden existing and /or planned drainage systems. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less Than Significant Impact As discussed, compliance with NPDES and Best Management Practices (BMP) regulations is required since the 5.33 acre project site exceeds five acres. Compliance with NPDES and BMP regulations ensures that significant water quality impacts will not result with the project and violation of standards and requirements will not occur. 1.r" g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact The project will not provide any housing development in a Flood Hazard boundary. There is no relevance to this issue. h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact No structure is being placed within a 100 year Flood Hazard area. There is no relevance to this issue. 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? Less Than Significant Impact Based on the foregoing discussions, there is no significant risk of flooding or significant exposure of people or structures to hazards. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact The affected site is not subject to mudflows, seiches or tsunamis. There is no relevance to this issue. MITIGATION MEASURES Future development shall comply with the following mitigation measures relating to Hydrology: 1. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall acquire a Notice of Intent from the Santa Ana 24 AGENDA ITEM NO..,..�I.,,.,. PArX 9 x nP "ice+ Regional Water Quality Board, in accordance with the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permit and comply with appropriate NPDES and Best Management Practices regulations. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING a) Physically divide an established community? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will permit construction of a 60 unit condominium project. The proposed project is not of a land use or size that will not physically divide the community. b) 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? Less Than Significant Impact The project requires a General Plan Amendment, a Zone Change, Tentative Condominium Map, Conditional Use Permit and Design Review approval by the City of Lake Elsinore Planning Commission and City Council. If these applications are approved, the project will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact No known habitat or natural community conservation plan applies to the project site at this time. There is no relevance to this issue. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. X. MINERAL RESOURCES a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact The project site is not known to have any mineral resource that may be of value to the region or State. There is no opportunity to affect this type of mineral resource. 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? No Impact The project site is not designated as a locally important mineral resource recovery site by any plan. There is no relevance to this issue. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. XI. NOISE 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? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation The proposed project will increase noise levels. However, increased noise levels generated by the proposed project will not be substantial enough to conflict with City noise standards. Any project - relate 25 AGENDA ITEM NO.�� PAGE 34-Cl- OF42s noise will be "mixed" with existing traffic and operations noises already generated along the I -15 Freeway and Grape Street, and by the City Center Shopping Center. The project vicinity presently experiences noise levels due to its close proximity to the aforementioned roadways, especially the I -15 Freeway, and as a result, any incremental increase in project- generated noise will probably be masked to a great extent. Impacts are expected to be insignificant. Compliance with those applicable mitigation measures relating to Noise, as contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program further ensures that any potential noise impact will be reduced to an insignificant level. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is bounded by the I -15 Freeway to the west, vacant areas to the south and east, and commercial development to the north. Sensitive receptors are not located nearby. There is no relevance to this issue. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigation The proposed project will not result in substantial increases in ambient noise levels. As discussed previously, the project site is located close to the I -15 Freeway and Grape Street and commercial retail uses which presently generate noise levels. Even under existing conditions, noise is generated in the vicinity. As a result, any incremental increase in project - generated noise will be masked to a great extent. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact There will be disturbances created by short -term construction activities. Noise generated by construction equipment can reach high levels. However, given the temporary nature of noise disturbances and because noise along neighboring roadways, especially the I -15 Freeway already exist, it is expected that future noise levels will be "masked ", thus, reducing the perception of incremental noise disturbances. 1.400e Furthermore, there are no sensitive receptors located nearby to be affected by any noise disturbance. e) 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? No Impact The project site is not located within any airport land use plan. There is no relevance to this issue. 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? No Impact The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. There is no relevance to this issue. MITIGATION MEASURES Future development shall comply the following applicable mitigation measures relating to Noise, as contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program. 1. The applicant shall submit an acoustical analysis prepared by a qualified engineer, which shall identify and provide direction for any sound attenuation required to mitigate any noise levels above that allowed by the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. Monitoring Milestone: Project Design Responsible Implementing Agency City of Lake Elsinore Planning and Engineering Divisions 26 /AGENDA ITEM NO.... PAGE.,L OF Tim�inp: Prior to issuance of building permits. Verifications: XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING 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)? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project is located within an area that is presently anticipated for Very Low Density Residential. The proposed project will not induce substantial population growth, but instead better respond to demands for private and affordable residential homes within the City of Lake Elsinore. Further, the applicant is proposing a General Plan Amendment to change the current designation to Medium Density Residential, which will allow a significantly higher level of density; however the previously approved project, known as Phase I, has been approved with an equivalent density. Additionally, the applicant has prepared a "Traffic Impact Study ", which has addressed both the previously approved Phase I project and the proposed 60 unit condominium project. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact Residences are not located within the project site. There is no relevance to this issue relating to displacement. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact Residences or populations are not located within the project site. There is no relevance to this issue relating to displacement. MITIGATION MEASURES None required. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES 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: a) Fire protection? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigation Pursuant to the Condition of Approval and the Mitigation Monitoring Program contained herein the applicant will annex into Community Facilities District No. 2003 -1 which will offset the annual negative impacts of the project on public safety operations. The Riverside County Fire Department provides fire protection and safety services to the City. The nearest fire station is No. 10, just off Main Street in downtown Lake Elsinore at 410 West Graham Avenue. The project as mitigated will not result in activities that create significant impacts. Ambulance and paramedic services are provided by Goodhew Ambulance Service. Design of the proposed project is required to comply with Fire Department requirements and standards to ensure adequate fire protection improvements and access are provided. b) Police protection? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigation Likewise, the applicant will annex into Community Facilities District No. 2003 -1 which will offset the 27 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE I OFQ�Y4 annual negative impacts of the project on public safety operations. Law enforcement services are provided by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. The nearest sheriffs station is located at 117 South Langstaff Traffic enforcement is provided for Riverside County in this area by the California Highway Patrol with additional support from the local County Sheriff's Department. Additionally, design of the proposed project is required to comply with Sheriffs Department requirements, standards and N"No recommendations identified in the comment letter dated November 21, 2003 prepared by Officer Beth DeCou, Crime Prevention Officer /City of Lake Elsinore Police Department to ensure adequate police protection services are provided. c) Schools? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will directly increase student enrollment at schools within the Lake Elsinore Unified School District, however the applicant, as conditioned on all projects, will be conditioned to pay all school fees in affect at the time of permit issuance. There is no relevance to this issue. d) Parks? Less Than Significant Impact Although, the proposed project(s) will increase population and associated burden on parks in the area, the project will also provide tot lots, a swimming pool and Jacuzzi Area, BBQ and Picnic Areas, which will relieve burden on City parks. e) Other public facilities? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will increase population and associated burden on other governmental services such as the library. The 60 unit condominium project, however, is not of a size that will significantly affect library services in the City. MITIGATION MEASURES Monitoring Milestone: Permit issuance Responsible Implementing Agency City of Lake Elsinore Finance Department and the Planning and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of the first building permits. Verifications: The applicant shall have entered into Community Facilities District 2003 -1 prior to the first Building Permit. Coordination and verification will be monitored by applicable City Departments and Divisions. XIV. RECREATION 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? Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will increase population and associated burden on parks and other recreational facilities in the area. The project will provide a tot lot, swimming pool and tennis court, which will relieve burden on City parks and recreational facilities. As discussed, the applicant is also required to pay appropriate park fees. Significant impacts are not expected. 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? No Im act The proposed project will provide a tot lot, swimming pool and tennis court onsite, within the apartment complex. Significant environmental impacts will not directly result from these onsite recreational 28 AGENDA ITEM NO.- PAGE I y rOF� facilities MITIGATION MEASURES None required. XV. TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Less Than Significant Impact A traffic study entitled, "Elsinore City Center Condo Traffic Impact Study ", was prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 19, 2003 (Appendix B). According to the traffic study, the entire project (Phases I and II) will generate approximately 848 trip ends per day with 63 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 78 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. Likewise, the originally approved was projected to generate approximately 1,028 trip -ends per day with 74 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour during the AM peak hour and 90 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. Further, the originally approved commercial use was projected to generate approximately 2,963 trip -ends per day with 80 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 304 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. Conversely, the proposed condo project generates 184 less trip -ends per day than the approved apartment project and 2,119 less trip -ends per day than the originally approved commercial project. The traffic study further concludes that the for the opening year with traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service "D" or better during the peak hours, with the r ' exception of the I -15 Freeway northbound ramps at Railroad Canyon Road and Grape Street at Railroad Canyon Road. Consequently, these intersections are projected to operate at a LOS "F" during peak hours with or without the project. Based on the analysis presented in the Traffic Study referenced herein, the proposed condo project use would generate fewer impacts than both the previously approved apartments and the originally approved commercial uses. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact No affected roadways are designated as a Congestion Management Program roadway. There is no relevance to this issue. c) 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? No Impact The proposed project will not affect any air traffic patterns. There is no relevance to this issue. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact Both phases of the Condo project will provide three (3) full turn movement access driveway(s) and one (1) right in right out driveway, which will allow safe and efficient vehicular circulation throughout the project. The driveways will require construction of the existing medians along Grape Street to allow left - turns in and out of the condominium project. Additionally, the applicant will offer Street "A ", shown on the Site Plan, for dedication, allowing for additional access to the site. This is a design improvement of the project and not a mitigation measure. All improvements shall comply with design criteria contained in the Caltrans Design Manual and other City requirements and standards. No significant hazards are expected. AGENDA ITEM NO. #1- 1- PArF 1 03AF 29 e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact Riverside County Police and Fire Department(s) have reviewed the project and provided comments and /or conditions, which will insure that the site has adequate emergency access throughout the entire N-aool site. No significant hazards are expected. f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact The project proposes to provide parking spaces consistent with the requirements of the Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Less Than Significant Impact The project does not provide activities that conflict with any policy relating to transportation. Moreover, in their letter dated November 11, 2003, Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) found that the project design is "generally acceptable" as submitted. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. None Required. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less Than Significant Impact The project does not propose activities that will cause standard wastewater treatment requirements to be significantly exceeded. `*NOW 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? Less Than Significant Impact Water and sewer improvements have been installed as part of the City Center Shopping Center. Presently, water improvements are installed and operating except for the segment fronting the project site. The existing 16 -inch line along Grape Street will be extended to serve the project site. All water lines shall be placed underground and shall be designed in accordance with Elsinore Valley Water District requirements. Similarly, sewer improvements are already installed and operating except for the segment fronting the project site. The existing 8-inch line along Grape Street will be extended to serve the project site. All sewer lines shall be placed underground and shall be designed in accordance with Elsinore Valley Water District requirements. 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? Less Than Significant Impact Drainage plans will be designed and approved by the City as part of the Design Review. Improvements are proposed to accommodate project flows. The proposed project does not require any amendment to the already approved drainage plan. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less Than Significant Impact 30 AGENDA ITEM NO. RAGE ) 0 4 OFr The project will be serviced by existing water supplies. New or expanded entitlements are not required. 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? Less Than Significant Impact The project will be serviced by the existing wastewater provider, which is the Elsinore Valley Water District. New or expanded entitlements are not required. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less Than Significant Impact The project does not propose activities that will significantly impact solid waste services or facilities. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact The project does not propose activities that will significantly impact solid waste services or facilities. The project will not conflict with any statutes or regulations. There is no relevance to this issue. MITIGATION MEASURES None Required. AGENDA ITEM NO. I. 31 42 PAGE pE V. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The following are Mandatory Findings of Significance in accordance with Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. Based on evaluations and discussions contained in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, the proposed project has limited potential to degrade the quality of the environment. The proposed project will not significantly affect the environment with mitigation measures. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less Than Significant Impact with mitigations. The proposed project will not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable with mitigation measures. Given that project impacts are insignificant, cumulative impacts are not foreseen. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact with mitigations. The proposed project could have the potential to significantly adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, but with mitigation measures the effects will not cause substantial effects on human beings. -./ 32 AGENDA ITEM NO.,., - 1�PAGE b ` OF VI. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED This section identifies those persons who prepared or contributed to preparation of this document. This section is prepared in accordance with Section 15129 of the CEQA Guidelines. A. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE • Bob Brady, Community Development Director • Armando G. Villa, Planning and Code Enforcement Manager • Rolfe Preisendanz, Associate Planner • Ken Seumalo, Engineering Manager B. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS • Ms. Leslie Irish, Principal, L & L Environmental, Inc. • Guy Bruyea, Senior Biologist, L & L Environmental, Inc. • Robert E. Reynolds, Project Manager, LSA Associates Inc. • MLB Engineering C. OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS • Bill Walsh, Chief of Police, Lake Elsinore • Riverside County Fire Department • Darryn Flexman, Engineering /GIS Analyst, EVMWD 33 AGENDA ITEM NO. -21 �.Mw PAGE G 1 OFj VII. REFERENCES 1. Focused Survey for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly, prepared in June 2003 by Guy Bruyea, Senior Field Biologist, L & L Environmental, Inc. for Mr. Glen Daigle, Daigle Development, UG, 28991 Front Street, Suite 207, Temecula CA 92590. 2. Focused Survey for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher, prepared in July 2003 by Ms. Leslie Irish, Principal, L & L Environmental, Inc. for Mr. Glen Daigle, Daigle Development, LLC., 28991 Front Street, Suite 207, Temecula CA 92590. 3. Elsinore City Center Condo Traffic Impact Study, prepared on June 19, 2003 by RK Engineering Group, Inc. 200201 S.W. Birch Street, Suite 250, Newport Beach, CA 92660 for Villa Martinique, LLC 28991 Old Town Front Street, Suite 203, Temecula, CA 92590. 4. Status Report Letter for Cultural and Paleontological Assessments of Subdivision 31532 from Robert E. Reynolds, Project Manager, LSA Associates dated January 12, 2003 5. Drainage Study TTM 31532 City Center Condominiums prepared by MLB Professional Engineer and Land Surveyor on January 14, 2004. 6. Letter from Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) dated November 11, 2003. AGENDA ITEM NO. 34 PAGE - v g MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION — City of Lake Elsinore The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California EnvironmentalQuality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Public Review Period: January 15, 2004 thru February 20, 2004 Project Name: "Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" (Phase II) Project Applicant: Daigle Homes, LLC., 28991 Old Town Front Street, Suite 203, Temecula CA 92591 Project Location: The proposed project is located along the Interstate 15 Corridor, adjacent to and east of Grape Street and south of the Grape Street /Railroad Canyon Road Intersection and will be located on a vacant 5.33 acre site. The site topography consists of lower -lying relatively flat areas on a gradual east to west trending slope with significant ridgeline and hilltop areas occurring to the east and north. The site contains a combined vertical variation of approximately 60 feet between the extreme points of elevation on the property. Project Description: The applicant is requesting to change the General Plan Designation of the proposed site from Very Low Density (VLD) residential, which allows .5 dwelling units /acre maximum to Medium Density (MD) residential which allows 12 dwelling units/ acre maximum. In order to maintain consistency with the proposed General Plan and to develop the site with the density proposed, the applicant is also requesting a Zone Change from (R -1) Single Family Residential to (R -2) Medium Density Residential. Additionally, the applicant requests approval to establish a proposed residential condominium community. Condominium projects are defined as "subdivisions" pursuant to Section 66424 of the California Subdivision Map Act (CSMA). Consequently, this project requires Planning Commission and City Council consideration pursuant to the requirements of Section 16 "Subdivisions" of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC). The condominium concept would allow the applicant to be able offer individual dwelling units for sale within the building structures as defined by the Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, while sharing common interest, ownership and maintenance responsibilities within the common areas. Pursuant to the Chapter 17.30 Section 17.30.020 (Permits Required) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of the subject condominium project. As allowed in the LEMC the Planning Conunission is empowered to grant and to deny applications for Conditional Use Permits and to impose reasonable conditions upon the granting of Conditional Use Permits. The applicant is proposing to develop the vacant 5.33 acre site with ten (10) two story wood framed buildings, totaling approximately 100,920 square feet. This proposal will be the second phase of a previously approved 84 unit Condominium Project to the north. Each building will be approximately 10,092 square feet and will comprise of six (6) individually owned attached single- family condominium dwelling units. The attached condominium units will range in size from a one (1) bedroom -864 square foot unit to a three bedroom 1,450 square foot unit. Each building will also include six (6) enclosed attached garage- parking spaces. The ten (10) buildings will be located on the final terraced pad ascending southerly above the Grape Street elevation. Access to the site will be made available by way of a proposed driveway located off "A" Street and the existing two (2) driveways Iocated off of Grape Street 35 PAGEJSLI FINDING This is to advise that the City of Lake Elsinore, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environmental and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following findings: ❑ The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑X The Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects but: (1) Proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. (3) Mitigation measures are required to ensure all potentially significant impacts are reduced to levels of insignificance. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. If adopted, the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Lake Elsinore, Planning Division, 130 South Main Street, Lake Elsinore (909) 674 -3124. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. / / s- 2 0 o y 6 4 �`vY�il.u�� Date of etermination Rolfe M. Preisendanz, Associate Plann" er AGENDA ITEM NO. 36 PAGE Q, OF41SLJ.. APPENDIX A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM 37 AGENDA ITEM NO. - PAGE E (� ;au L„ MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM 14.. FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION No. 2004 -01 Noso Prepared By: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Applicant DAIGLE HOMES, LLC. 28991 Old Town Front Street Suite 203 Temecula, CA 92591 JANUARY 2004 En AGENDA ITEM NO..�- PAGE OF OR— F AIR QUALITY The design of efficient and direct traffic flow patterns on the project site can help reduce the quantity of air pollutants generated by minimizing the places in the roadway system where automobiles would be idling unnecessarily. The project traffic study, entitled Elsinore City Center Condo Traffic Impact Study, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 19, 2003 contains internal circulation design guidelines to be utilized in creating an efficient roadway system. Monitoring Milestone: Project Design Responsible Implementing Agenc: City of Lake Elsinore Planning and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of building permits. Verifications: 2. Minimize particulate emissions from construction activities through a). suspension of grading during first and second stage smog alerts; b). wash trucks leaving the site; c) maintain construction equipment by keeping them tuned; d) use clean, low sulfur fuel for equipment; e) require watering of active project areas with multiple daily applications if necessary; f) require trucks to maintain two feet of freeboard; g) require all trucks hauling dirt , sand, oil or other lose substances and building materials to be covered; h) pave construction access roads; j) develop program for rapid clean up of street debris after a major event; and k) prohibit outdoor storage if from particulate matter. Monitoring Milestone: On -site construction inspection. Responsible Implementing - Agency City of Lake Elsinore Building and Safety Division. Timing: During project construction. CULTURAL RESOURCES 1. The applicant shall monitor all grading activities of the site. If any cultural resources are uncovered by such grading activities the applicant shall immediately cease all activities until such time that a qualified archaeologist is contacted and an inspection of the resources is completed. The applicant shall not continue grading until such time that the City has given approval and clearance to proceed. Monitoring Milestone: Project Grading and construction. Responsible Implementing Agency City of Lake Elsinore Planning and Engineering Divisions Timing: During any activities which will disturb the existing soil. Verifications: The applicant shall inform the City in writing who will be monitoring the site. AQE -NDA ITEM NO. 2C ° PAGE C►F�Z�Y -1-- HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Future development shall comply with the following mitigation measures relating to Hydrology: 1. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant shall acquire a Notice of Intent from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Board, in accordance with the City's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permit and comply with appropriate NPDES and Best Management Practices regulations. NOISE Future development shall comply the following applicable mitigation measures relating to Noise, as contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Program. 1. The applicant shall submit an acoustical analysis prepared by a qualified engineer, which shall identify and provide direction for any sound attenuation required to mitigate any noise levels above that allowed by the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan. Monitoring Milestone: Project Design Responsible Implementing Agency City of Lake Elsinore Planning and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of building permits. Verifications: PUBLIC SERVICES MITIGATION MEASURES Monitoring Milestone: Permit issuance Responsible Implementing Agency City of Lake Elsinore Finance Department and the Planning and Engineering Divisions Timing: Prior to issuance of the first building permits. Verifications: The applicant shall have entered into Community Facilities District 2003 -1 prior to the first Building Permit. Coordination and verification will be monitored by applicable City Departments and Divisions. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE - LI- OF-11LA APPENDIX B LETTERS FROM REVIEWING AGENCIES 38 �,Q AGENDA ITEM! NO. PAGE OF422 t�lJ 1 LI LF7b4 17:.14 `JU'J-b`1J -Z Jn4 `J I NA I LblU I)LbI 7N 13LD F'AbE 02/112 LSA I Jamtary 12, 2003 I.sA AsaoCIATSS. INC• 1630 lfRVCE MUST. STR rLOaa ■tvesa,ue. CALIlORItIA !2501 OTU8* O►IiCaa 909.71t.9390 Tut. tKVtNR 9o9.79I-4277 ]FAX fl. fuarxorts CT. COLLIMS aissrLrr xoCRUN Mr. Glen Daigle Daigle Homes, LLC 28991 Old Town Front Street, Suite 203 Temecula, California 92590 Subject. Status Report for Cultural And Paleontological Assessments of Subdivision 31532 (APNs 363 - 240 -002,- 003, -O%,- 00$.-009, 4)16) in the Ciry of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California Dear Nit. Daigle: LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) is pleased to inform Daigle Homes that no Surface expression of cultural resources were observed during, the field assessment, and the planned project schedule will not be affected by further studies. The paleontological and cultural studies did locate former historic resources and the potential for paleontological resources within the project are- There are also records of prehistoric resources to the north of the parcel. Consequently, monitoring of all ccnstruction-rClated grading activities to recover paleontological and cultural resources will be recommended in the assessment reports. We look forward to continuing working with you on this interesting project. If you have questions, please call me at (909) 781 -9310. Sincerely, LSA Ai<iS E. -Reyno Manager iJl?J WR-- VCM1A3"aith L. tiWOM *rants eep.wpd) AGE14DA ITEM NO. �.>CJ ---- PAGE L! -- OF • r Riverside Transit Age 1825 Third Street 1*40O' P.O. Box 59968 Riverside, CA 92517 -1968 Phone: (909) 565-5000 Fax: (909) 565 -5001 November 11, 2003 Rolfe Preisendanz City of Lake Elsinore Planning Division 130 S Main St Lake Elsinore CA 92530 SUBJECT: Tentative Tract 31532 - Comments from Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) Thank you for the opportunity to review Tentative Tract 30836 and related zoning cases located off Grape St and near the Interstate 15 /Railroad Canyon Rd interchange in Lake Elsinore. A copy of the RTA project review memo on this tentative tract is attached for your information. RTA Bus Routes 7, 8 and 40 operate out of a small transit center at the Wal *Mart, about Y2 mile from this site and offering connections for bus patrons to all of Lake Elsinore, and from the Outlet Center, commuter bus service to Temecula or Corona. Additional bus service is possible in the future along this portion of Grape St as the area approaches build -out, but no bus amenities are anticipated except routine curbside bus stops. Riverside Transit Agency advises that we find the project design generally acceptable as submit- ted. Pedestrian access from interior of the project out to Grape St needs to be as convenient as possible, and appears OK on the submitted map in most respects. In general the project seems quite compatible with transit as a viable option here for mobility. If you need additional clarification or I can be of further assistance, please call me at (909) 565- 5164 or contact me online at mmccoy(a)riversidetransit.com. Sincerely, Michael McCoy Senior Planner (This letter and the supporting memo were e- mailed to Mr Preisendanz on Nov 11.) AGENDA ITEM NO. F: \data \Planning \MikeM \Word \Dev Review \Lake Elsinore \RTA Itr - tenttract31532.doc PAGE �.4 I ��i =Z�-� November 11, 2003 Riverside '11ra�it Agency PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW To: Anne Palatino, Director of Planning From: Michael McCoy, Senior Planner KA Subject: City of Lake Elsinore, Residential project, Tract 31532 60 Single- family homes, E of Grape St, SE of Railroad Canyon Rd RTA Comments Bus route(s) affected: 7, 8 and 40 Summary: Daigle Homes LLC proposes T -31532 and related zoning cases, for 60 town homes on 6 acres, about % mi SE of the Railroad Canyon - Grape St intersection and about '/4 to % mi from an RTA transit center at the Wal *Mark RTA local routes 7, 8, 40 are available at the store, with connections to commuter route #208 (to Temecula or Corona) which stops at the Outlet Mall on Collier. RTA buses might use Grape St in the future but it will probably not be necessary to stop at T- 31532. Bus stop amenities and pedestrian access to the transit center from T -31532 appear to be '1 adequate, as long as bus patrons from the project can use internal circulation paths to conveniently access Grape St. A letter will be sent to the City approving this project. INITIAL REVIEW INFORMATION - Review completed date: November 11, 2003. Documents received at RTA: October 30, 2003 Reply -by Date: November 12, 2003; City Council /Bd of Supervisors Agenda Date: Unknown at present Thomas Guide Map page grid: 866, J -6; Case Numbers: Tentative Tract 31532,Zoning ZC 2003 -02, CUP 2003 -08 Contact at Lake Elsinore Planning: Rolfe Preisendanz; Applicant: Daigle Homes LLC, of Temecula CA RTA PLANNING FOLLOW -UP: YStandard "Acceptable" letter to jurisdiction, applicant or consultant without comments Letter with comments advising project modifications re transit issues Verbal conversation with Case Planner and appropriate letter follow -up Letter sent: Date: t tt o3 File name: FAdata \Planni g\WkeM \Word\Dev Review\Lake Elsinore \RTA Itr - tenttract31532.doc !-' SECOND REVIEW: Review materials placed in archive files: Date: ++ AQENDA ITEM NO. � I FAdata \Planning\MikeM \Word \Dev Review\Lake E1sinore \Tenttract31532.doc PAGE d ► o � fill 141 L004 1L. UO 7U7- D77 -L7:J4 01M"ink3lU UCJICDV DLU r1fWw- UL/ LL 6 697 -2185 P.W Michael Wednesday, J2nuary 14, 2004 9:36 AM (7 � MICHAEL L. 'B.EN£SfI. prefttlional Civil Sxgi,rsrr and Laird.SxjmvVvr Drainage Study -M 31532 City Center Condomunums Pmpmd %c. Oak Grove Equities 28991 Franc Stme-4 %ire 207 . Temecu* CA 92590 pf -s Ci 373343 m f-W. Cie *oe S. LIVE OAK PARK ROAD • FALLBROOK, CA 92028. PHONH= 760 728 -6938 • PAX. i30 897 -2165 • E -MAIL: MLSENBSHQPACBELL.NZT �r AGENDA ITEM �N(O. � Q,�,�� PAGE 119 OFS2Sid.�(.-. A*,,- Ull lY/ Lf.lUY 1G. JU JUJ UJJ LJJY JIi�1YILUlIi l!{..Jl VI♦ ULL I MUL UJI 1L Wednesday. January 14, 2004 9:36 AM Michaei (700) 097 -2165 R-03 Pjkgc 2 i lydmi Study - Ph 2. jr-my 14.29!D4' Table of Ceiatenits Faris ' tatg Seta �kunptsoz�.. .......... .............»..». ............ »............. ».. »» »....- _._».................»..._............. -_._»..».» ......__.....__.... »........... Pmpoxd ptojoa ..........».»...__.....».,» ..... .............. » » »..----- .------------ -- .:.._ - _... » »..._ .......... ... » .... _ .. »..:.... ._ » . Method of An►dyrs » .»»..._. _...•... ... .. » »..._ .......3 Hydr"c Cdcu)aaon Wthod ... ... _.._ »..... _.» . » ................. ...... ...... »... 4 404 S. LIVE OAK PARK ROAD FALLBROOK, CA 92026 PHONE: 760 126 -6936 • PAX: 760 697 -2165 • E- MAIL: MLBI;NESH ®PACBHLL.NET f AGENDA ITEM NO. �1 PAOE,L =:. �� 01/14/2004 12:56 909- 699 -2954 STRAIEWC DE51t,N BLL) rraut 134/ 1L ' Michael (76M 897 -2165 Wednesday. January 14, 2004 9:96 AM Psge 3 Hydrology Study - Ph 2 januaq 1.4, 20W J3XISTING SITE DESCRIPTION . ' Sweet an the City of Lake F- lsmoae•app�itaately 3.304.f�t •. The pmject cite is located edisbetty old adiacem to C,rt>pe a TM ;ts31. The , � of Rsdaoad �Tm` Road The pooject is the seccmd plisse of a caedotaittiuns pogt et WPW"d tat 6.5 acres. The Sim is currtnBy vaeine ' *be topo®o Phy enasists of s modctaae slope osiag . catita site consists of gTwx nsa . y o h8bidcs to tht East p,edamiawdy to the East: Thar is also a natsuai do i= F aaca consisting M s e .M 2A tuts. � f undeveloped of the ptojott whicl�i drains tlnt04 tiu rojeet "he- majority of the site wilt be aegracted for rile p«,pvsed peolect The ttaonal drainage.pataeln the site is eo tie• Mast aitd S0111h, vitkUtelT dutch into., a,xpo�iED;d in et< adjacent to . Grape 5tteet PROPOSED PROJECT '!bets u+de 10 co.ndemi m m buildi+sg, With appdtrttnant padaag and :reseaa." ElcaltwN poopoaed 6or i-be site The proposed pooject wcofpotatcs area drains and larger storm dtaiw to convey cna -aff from the site to the exislis�g slorza damn spec n in Gn a Street METHOD OF ANALYSIS The Rational Method for computistg storm tw*fi m outlined is the County of Rivetside Hydrology Manual is wed in this study. Ra val Method Foxtnnla: Q =CIA `OVhere: Q is the peace flow in cubic feet pet second. is the svmoff cod cidntc to that petceabW of rainfall which pwduccs the peak dischatge, Psstes D-5:3 and D-5.4 are used to dlktertnt w the q4,00 me runoff coefficient. based on die sod type. Per the Caraq Sod Group Map Prase Gt.41, this site is ,omprised of Soil 7hx $ in the lower mess closer to Grape Stet ct and Type C 'vi the hillside area 1 is the average raisdati intd:wity in indses pct hour for a storm duration cquA to the time of coatetrKaaOn (fc) of the contributing drainage area. 'The 9tandud Rsimfan Isttsansity curve for Dsinote — Wildomar is'wed ,�► is the drainage area in the acsea tributary to the de4F point. The biW Tyne of Concexrttadort, Tc, for the initial draiaagt area is deter pined froth Appendix D-3- The Stow time thwug} streets is dietectnused using Platt: D7.7 ad the aveMc peace runoff for the Street The peak 8mr Q at the eonttue dca of two dctinagF area is dctranxined by the fotlo -ing n� thO&' t. IE the Q of the an a with the shorter It is latger, then (Qt > Qa & Tct > Tc7): Q = Qt + Qi (Tct /Tct) 2- • If the Q of the wea with the longer Te is larger, then (Qt > Qt & TC1. < Tcs} Q = Qt + Q, (It /b) 404 S. LIVE OAK PARK ROAD • FALLBROOK. CA 92424 @HONE: 764) 728 -6938 • FAX: 760 997 -2165 • E -MAIL: ML3.ENESHOPACBELL.NET 2� AGF -NDA ITEMS �NO- AGE OFCL� P A#-- 01/14/2004 12:56 909- 699 -2954 STRATEGIC DESIGN BBD rcx M/ Wednesday, January 1 d, 2004 9:36 AM Michael 897 -2165 p u' Pigea ' Hydvolcgy $tidy )$rutty 14;20C4.. HYDRAULIC CALCT3LA`iIb2!? M>eTiiU� ::. The Ms+s t�s e4 � is used to detei6i -- frietkm losses tot *E.>tpdm&c cak *60.nt shwa a+: this stt�g Msnnings Fquiti�oe: Q = � Dsn ssr'i /a fife Pe"k'fb+ in cubic feet per second . (5 is a racfiivicnt b�tcd on the depth of llaa` mtd clti>mstrl chttcactctistit ' a7 is tilt: depth of floe is the ciunneL i is the slope of the d mteL , nis the Mania$ roue} ocse eotffiicieat: Knox Losses am cdculgied .a fal(cws: &ttxance Losser. h= 1.2(V+/28) Sueex Capsciq is detcmtined fzwn Plane D - 7.5. a04 S. LIVE OAK PARK ROAD • FALL610OK, CA 92020 pF?ONR! 160 729 -6936 - PAX: 760 097 -2165 - E-MAIL- MLBENZSH ®PACBSLL.NBT A n I A(„ENDA ITEM NO. --�= -- PAGL�2aF 01/14/2004 12:56 909 - 699 -2954 STRATEGIC DESIGN BLD NA(*- bb /1•L B87.2�B5 P.08 Wednesday. January Michael 14, 2004 9:38 AM (7 60 � O p a r p` M �,�✓ .p c. N � � .i � '.$ a Gaps :. � � Nf E F � •• ... 4 N r! C • N (r O m K1 tu "a G4 I N N o ao. 0 r d A g' C5 O. O C in v CD 0; Q V o o C> o; o Ci o C o to .m N lit f`� . Q M /ri t of 1ri R1 to to w p. wt t+f v O " E e CD fI1 O U. ! r O ` u o �° < d < < vp a q < � � iL. eL U- Uev m N N N in V %J 0 O m �: N M C nt M �• ira < < < < ao qo m m fir/ AGENDA ITEM NO. --,IJ - — PAGE 1.� OF,;22 4.. 01/14/2004 We " 12:56 9B9- 699 -2954 SIKAJEbI ; L)EbIbV K-0 . -WV%A o. *19 ane Michael (780) 897 -2165 YAhk b /!1L p.vl A !OILS GROW OFSHn"1010 RCFCaWCD VIYOROL74Y MANUAL HYDROLOGIC SM5 bKvur mAr FOR ELSINORE • AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE I'- OF b1/14/Z17174 IZ:7b 'J UJ - bJ'J - Z *J D 4 Z)OKAILWU Vt__5Ik3N bLv rMar- riot 1L -36 AM pue Wednesday. January 14, 2004 9. Michael (760) 691-2105 00 STT RCFC 9k W.CD HYMOLOGY. MANUAL otvbwpmw&, ire 0 9.7 mi". - Te E 9 10 G 4. deference: 9669grooby hm ft 35. E w. 10 _j I 0 1 AgENDA ITEM b 1 -4 5 0 PAGE Td LimmApoNt: L I 900'." " . H TO -Too. 600 -500 Z 35 K Al ,4w 0 30 unftvdw" 00" Care* 350 25 Unde"""d. =2 Fak Cotter .0 300 20 d@VSIOP"- pact Calm 19 Is 17 250 is A 15 44 l c 1 200 13 2. 00 STT RCFC 9k W.CD HYMOLOGY. MANUAL otvbwpmw&, ire 0 9.7 mi". - Te E 9 10 G 4. deference: 9669grooby hm ft 35. E w. 10 _j I 0 1 AgENDA ITEM b 1 -4 5 0 PAGE a Hi w1i; 'A N A HE 1 M5' , :1 1' I Al 01/14/2004 12:56 909 -699 -2954 STRATEGIC DESIGN BLD VAL*- u/ 1z Michael (760) 897 -2.185 WedneWaY. January 14, 2004 9,36 AM . f• �A r:. NN •e S °w�iwN i'i. i�•.;i��r Mw'�ws ■iw ••.. .•. r.•ir r w.. •. • NNNNN bPl .:.tr • • • •1YMNIY t v s • M •fw Aw�h •N . W +wp'U1w ♦wrA x0 ..• w� .Me •• +w �N • e00 ♦r ww« N2 .- g�r� » A•• .■M ! :'. i�:�if:N ZOO ' • r • ♦ w wrYw Nlw.•rr r +wr .,� � •' r ANN N'N'..NNNN . • . s N .- .: OP 4YIiN •.wNff��!! pyr�••wer�P w �N MAA.�..r i•�irf. •r•••0o e�••w!. tiN.�f •N..••.*..ww NwNI•N .••A cr- r♦ N'i■YeN / M111NA O�V•1 MANwt .:O �Orf• IIi11�A �wq ww�ssw n�AN� O� •± i° rN NNq Nwr•+w 'ww+•wr l.I• .7w11 rfn AN NNN. • e 2 .o•Y i•fI MI..A1�I A 1 • '■`♦ •w%.r� yO �■ r.wAM N,■ •!! rlN� OOrt. e:•..:Mi91 "Ing •�•�iNJ AM••ps '•=►•e, N�Pto!► wN :oe. ••i!r • • • • '. t• OK MNwiwN •.w.•irw• w.•ww.i M••r••w . ♦, � w> fwgwM' NNNNN W .IX _ • o WA _ N•r y• ONE 10 f O♦ eNAOO Z-tz 1 w ••.• ♦�NM� • ♦A•w IL MY 221-0 J w y` NOA N! e.�Ny♦ �•r.+.•r NNNNM ^^.� `• MR O �Z r� .�w /►Fr N �I w. ••OwM eee.N ��r��Of�Nw� •��e• t -rAr1• ♦ r/q .fi` N w•■i�� �NwO• NwNMN NNNNN Nr.•wr .•rrw^ wr.:w •. O = V Z .Oia �1'f Mw AAAAN \1 • Af -NNf•• A�•NwA ••■�•i .rAAOP t :Csz prfNf rhAi• Nw f•• ANNN+ roew• $•ww• •e••11�fM •rrOe• ....+wr. r.+r i NNNrr ..•.•.•rw ••rrr.• �s ri •v �i PIN p v . •[Q OM J M•r�•P OwM/7f M1�w�w NMMNM RAA�� ��wM�. �wti�O . = -• W t •►Ae1F r••r/N sa r.h� w.AfANw. �lw�f F1�Mf nyNN� AAAIfw ApNNN - NNNNw O 0.44. w• • �, ... ••.r •r►we �lww•A •r P. ! w,O ft •er ON !N•4N •w A,•NNN OO•w r•e►h rOM*• 7 s•t •n•Oa ♦AN rs w•00► . .. . . J ^ w1 ANANN AN NwN wrr•�.+ .•wwrr rwr•.r ww IL M wAweP aPOP s.+N 11• r�••`•P eNf xa .O.wwrii►w :i1011�e ewrew N ` .n S •y ••w ♦•r r..wr+ NNN •. rIN •1N N ArN4r P wP s • ~ =�i :%.,■r- w•w+Rw ewre+ wRw a sN 12 0. ..fww• w w r•Mwf ff�AA Aw MAJ! P►rNNM AN M•rN Nr.•.••.• +'� O w> • y W w V ..w aN•ww •••fra I{1w♦ -P,M =I+1N0 f•Pww *A •w$ r :wAN Nr•e 0� i��� • e�ww • ■ a X111 • • .. . �.rw�r rr r, .:.+.�.n r ••Ar1N ,V•N NNN NNM +•+ WW t O J s - ---- swMAf r•y•! eNff• ONfe• OeeN• rsMOw r gar NNNNN wwAw•• •1NP• fwwlw • Y �� ••rwrr rrr^w STANDARD R C F G 8 WC a qNTENSMY — DURATION Hyc towrY MANUAL CURVES DATA AGENDA ITEM NO. - PAGE --- OF ■■ :■6■r■mrsNfN ■■e ■ ■2 ■■fN!■ ■want ■ftmasons : •■■ r: m■ ■N ■ ■ww ■ :wr! ■■ ■ ■N ■iiR : ■N ■i80r:6i8000 ■ se■ re����� !��mism�:::::s:ss�eis:i�sil ■.ice. ��--- --. - -- s:68r ■6l :a : ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ii6f :R■ . str, f■ r■# f■ i■ r■ r!!■ f!■ fs!■ ■i ■ffwa■f■ ■if ■ ■ ■ ■if■ff ■f!■ ■rw■■ isissiitsisisssH11nrseistOi�ss�is� *��s����:�.rr•rr• ■wwiisssis!! ■ ■r ■ ■ ■ ■ ■: ■ ■w! *�S-;c.�'�r3fr� ► �irw■■ NU ■ ■ ■�i %Girs :ar ■ ■w�rw......�.!' ■w...- .:r�rwr ■ ■r ■ ■awws.�..�..N ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■iii 7r +,�,u�-: �rwA1! ■ii ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■!! _ ■ wt■ i! s■ �. ��./ ri: A► r7elDi■!■M"- �: .■r ■ ■w�n�- _- �...M■ ■ ■ ■i ■ ■ / ■s %sf■ ■a ■ / ■# : / ■ ■! ■ /�_<a�ya�'��Argoow� :..wr! ■iHSmra /•.�_--- ...wrwa■■■ ■ ■ ■ /Zi ■m ■ ■ ■A ^�iJ/ - rut1� ■e ■sir"'- �r ■ /1 :li�f� ■ ■r +i:aa■■ riilNr ■ ■i[7L�!iAf '' }�r1ll�ftlfr /� -r/ ■III \r!M ■f ■ww '^�M :■■■soul : J /�i ^I m 11,)::.0d amassovr /r ■ ■R �wa ■ ■ ■ ■ ■Nld■ _- �-:..■ i \m■sam>./� .■■■nla.s ■rya■! ■t■! :w ■ # #!"i"' / ■mw ■NNww�- rrf : :■ ■ : ■ ■■ ■ is :lAtwwl.a.�. ■Nmh",.���sri■w�t »r!�.:r ■iitf ■��- .,rasfMllfs���� mfr ■# #m%f■r i/Iti,■ 1J■i /M'' K= r.�` i■�o= 2aAt�rmr rs•1 1/i! / Worso ■: N■ ■ s #mr s �■�s r■ww i#� m ■■r Mi■aawrf � ■^�r1s 9 M■a mfrr■ r■lfw/ ■ 7v�Alr�. Vv _.N ■s ■■sw2o ■aa^�rwNi ■�1f:rv�-.■ ■ ■ /.d ■I! ■ #I��im ■ ■ ■ #ir�:!isir A�%' �ffa ■ ■ilrrrl!r.frf ■ ■frlA"unua■ iAl ■Iiammr: ■rums►1�� ± ■■ ■ = iiiilsssiie lnaIiiss :T:iii�sssiiisis /!>rI ■lillRm ■ ■>• ■i1�Iaf 1!%/■■■ Rmfr ■I"UlNr2fs ■ /!i�flrrfr ■r>s ■■ ■muss i7: mardi: RS���i■ Ra7:■■ RriI7li�iies��si� :���isiisisiiisiii �ssi�isissxr'ai��!.ri i�isisirMam ■ ■itm ■RS ■ ■miseemliisseni �iiAammu.; isc "A* iii# si* iiisms■ missi+■iiss�sasssll■iisAoiisss+ si iiiisiissiiissiis ■is *isssiii�iisii sssil■ii!i�� ►.lisss�K ; wisiii�i�f�sisssssislsisissl ■issimmiississsi �iiii�i�iii�i s■iisommemomu:o anummuiiiiiirwiiaiii� 1 ■ :V s■ ■ ►I ■m ■ / #��wwawr/ on HUM: s!!I'AUFA : r�;Ait 1■ s ;isfiiiil�ii�sAi�if�A���1 %MAi ■aInn1 ■ :f.5 - A;NI /r :■ ■r ■ \rm \R1 R \IV RaR :IIN ■I •' IR :Rrmmml \ ■!ml ■ /■o RL7:lwC,v,arlamosemose!■ ■ri■m'I■\■!I /t ■1Cs w�Re :ilmil ■t ■lR iaiWisis *is■IAzissiiiisssi Ann �!:■is■rj■mr- man aon ■h !■ ■m■ !r n'samor'durr Me ■A ■2w■smrl/wm■2■atm■mw■wanmm■ ■tli ■i►,tiRr�. sNlmtmw ■■a■rm:samani PAS, JENV AIN No�aiisiisr mammas i mussumn ANN* ■!arlN■! ■r \ ■m ■ ■ ■! ;r ►r- ■1 ■R! ■i�iinRililil ■ ■ ■a ■ ■ \mi :■ nos tnour ■ \ ■Nunn sswm ■ ■i ■r ■ \ ■■■■ ■■■`Hmrli!■li■■iR■iaal■ ■e■■■ ■s ■m■ f :m ■ ■ ■s l :ri ■Rl ■ /wl \imtwi :rma ■ ■■i slut i ■a ■Ra :6tmw: ■ :iw :s ■ mm'1r ■a /mrrm ■min ■ ■i :6amraam ■ ■ai1 ■N Ar■ IIaN ■■sir■ ■■■■m■m■umansNl !■ ■mf ■r ■i ■a ■RRNi ■ ■i ■!l \6 ■ ■! ■1 fe,gFummummwm■uw!■o■em■■st ■rl ■t iii ' toommesial :■wwas:rr :it■ /1 ■ ANNA■ ■f■■■Nm■ ■a ■moo suos :r ■1 s : ■f U ■ ■is■ ■RN ■s ■ : :■s : ■wmr ■mal llsutiounsoms�ss»��%�11 INS ■em2:asw■ims :: ■■r : ■NRMU ia� : ■ ■11 :imiwRR : :lim :!!m ■!i ■rl aslt.■■if :iRmlRlasw■ssi■l■ ■ map i use llaawiawm■mr■i!>wssiMINN:R f /'A■Nar ■:!N■ : ■ ■rlim : ■ ■wmr:im ■ A : m:rs■mNr■■: !m R :iR !■ ■r r :! R i ■N ■■mwwmma w mN\ um ■a ■r,ws:mr■m!rliN :Re■ ■rrwwr:■i: ■a /R ■ ■r ■ ■ : ■wrmmimmr■r ■ma :r ■!N ■A■:o■wmo■ ■a■ ■ ■:■■ois■ ■wmiw! ■ ■ \!!l ■ ■i11 ■ ■m ■ ■ ■Ra ■ :iimRRsu■ Iru2■:sum ■Rim ■smo■■s: ■swmmsm lngoonsons �lmioril!! ■llllR ■ :iiislwllir! ■ : summa■■■ a■:■ _ 21:101 ■wr■ ■ms■ ON on e 4- -ion:■ >oa1 ■ \! ■R ■f ■ ■8■ ■ Iler;�P>wlllaiR � %� ■s�sl��� ■n-ss■ ■2:086 ■ Ins : : ■a■ ■s \ \! = ■ ■ \ \ ■ ■ ■ \ ■ ■■ ■ I■!e■r■i ■r■!■ ■\ ■ :■sR■ ■\\ ■ low:woemw ■ ■sw■ ■ Noun ■ \sores loommar■amslSR■:■:i! ■■siN! • 16m1■■uN ■r ■a2NrraNa:88 :■ :■0 in ■isssannouss■:ias■r!■i■o • ■■■men ■m \ ■a!l \ ■ ■! ■ stiR�"�L- i� ■r \ ■ \a ■ \r now :Nar!■r■ i■m■iiM!■■■is■\\ ■R\■riairl!■8■ •6mraia■Nr ■■m:lr■arSam ■r■:r■N■ s ■! ■ ■ ■ \ ■ : ■ ■ ■! ■ ■ ■ \ ■lf ■ ■ns■RN■ ■1 Boom ■ ■! ■ ■ ■l ■!i \ ■ ■ \! ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■tf :N ■mum R■:!■ ■sm■m■ ■■w■ muumuu ones m■' ■mil :mrwwmmurN ■a ■ ■lfa :war■:■■■ Ra■sarr■■■■■i■■■ ■!t ■m■ ■ ■R ■■ ■N■ ■!■■Rr■■■Nim ■ :6i : ■!N : ■ ■\\�■n/ t Reis seas sun • . . e ones smwt■■■rwiwa■a■Nma■ :fa■rN■■wr■ fR TYPE -URBAN LANU3UVgNU AMC -II !sitSMWF INDEX NUMBER 56) j 4 ' = i 1611ji- ifunnommasomp ssr j�ilif�s�■iw ■a■■wrrr.�- - - --• -- - � ■ttfriarir■tr ■lea ■■ERR ■ ■ ■w■ttt■ �irrt■ a■ r■■ a!■■■■/ t■ irarlli ■aR ■■ti ■ ■ ■!a ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■Mi��at ■aif■a■ ! r■ it■■■■■■■ aiRS■ Ra■ ii■■ retR■ rii ■sRee ■ ■t ■ /ar..rrsr *6rw.rs�iYif • ■ ■ ■■■a ■R■ area ■ ■�'Rr ■iii ■ ■ ■rrfa ■l�Ir� ■ii ■_ ■el ��:,,,,....... p:..:. -.... ■aarsaanno rem . - - -- _ a.■■>! M■■■■■ rr" .rr ■SS■ ifar ,=_ _......�- i-- �rwrr ■■ ■rM ■ ■ / ■r si■ R wfas�,•�+ ir. �.rw /� / ■■ ■■ ■■■■,'Alp _aownNew"! -. ■rr _ raa■ Sam- '"aMOOREe��fi /Rir�'._��.rraM ■r ■ ■si..�s ■ ■�IPY ■■ � ; ";.rM■Milai/ � ■ta /ir ■!i�' S., �.;. raitat■ ! Sr!■■ i■ f■ / ^Sirf ■frw���..r.r ■�w ■ ■■11 /.rr■ on fri■ cl�y�+ ����1i■ rt/! i■ i ■t■ ■■ /!�.aw■t�'�i�ili0at■R ■!`-' :�.sr■L'■■�t■ s•. • ■Yfa�':.Mitial /�ii■if/ !:,rip ■iirR ■C : r■tRSf ■r //s^:._.■ r . ■ ■ ■■ o &Ma poin=t■ ■f ♦aR■IG . °wri■Ri ■ara ■tM ■11 R■!i, .° .. ii:`' a�. liR�1n /rr�`isi� ■ssMi�. /��iss ■i■ ■aa /;. ■tai ■ta #■■# ■ ■■■ ■ ■ ■i ■ ■1 ss�� %�lii� %iii���r .. ■t ■■ ■at■Rawwir�+ � \ I ' R�!.;isssiis o■rt p■� it;i ss■iiRisSssSsiisiiisn s■silfiiRiissipa l imp % ?i amass iasss% iiiM% Irsi isieiissi Vat r Ransomsi��si�i�isw� tfir■■■! ',i A15-1,1111111' r f ■t ! ■Ir ■iA i,VJA■ fiNNI AMiMW ofm �ssomur, A■ i�Irsfsi■ tfa ■iilsss�ssRSSSfss■aaR■at ■■at I,nR't ■a'_'iC :.a■aw `I,s■ ■V. ■tR ■ ■w ■i ■M ■■ ■fit ■ ■ ■ ■ ■a ■f ■ ■t ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■wil Awv■rf- v[ ✓Qe ■a!�sssir mass SSiSON rfs ■ #sssss ■ %ssssssst #s ■ssss #■ tr\ ■r ►i 7:■ a■( i.".■s r>s- 4■■ iw■■■ ssi ■ ■ ■fi ■fa ■ ■ ■ ■■ia ■■ii ■ ■■RS■ ■!w ■1taa. /G ASS R✓ww! ■''' anon w■■ w!s■■ ■fiat ■ ■st ■ ■R ■ ■i ■ ■ ■irt ■ifaaa■■ ■'� ■ ■I E'J, ■ ■L, /■■ rt'.■ r■ ti■■■ ss■ iri ■■ ■t■!■ ■l ■t ■ #i ■t ■ ■ ■ ■■lassiss■ somenowassesse reef/ �fErfs�stgjtsjs ■ ■it ■■ ■ #t ■ ■iisssss! ■tilt ■r■■■tii ■Rw■■ / b ssrisi■ass�iif s■ A■ i■ i■ f■ <■ r■ i■ �\�■ i■sslt ss■R ■w\ :rjiaclAw■i'd■■■■a ■sties■ ■a ■r ■ i no tf ■11 /f■C i■sur Assuring amass Emus ■■s iii Sao ArsSJlss• i ssirislsiii isr an ?19a� sss�s' ssssissssssisssssssssssssssssssissssssssssii of a Alit iisi i\ aisssssssi usage a Masson rsssssiiasissisissssii�tiissi sell iRI !� lessee■ rsss�� <rrsssssslils ■o�stss■Hong ssisss \sal ■ss�sl ■ \'1■ ^ �ati�iatii� ■■ ins■ taiiR■■!■ rtli ■ ■ ■ ■ ■t ■ ■it ■RS ■R ■ *: ■fit!!i ■I al ■ /i /rArtTam s /saassif *aa • � �J1laiUL� Sam ■ ■iR ■at11 if''�f ■ ■ ■e ■i�.rrr4 r 11 ■■ /t'. aft ■i #■ flit■ rtt■ r■ t■ ■s■ ■Ittif ■ ■ ■f #rt ■ ■ ■ ■ ■i ■ ■ ■ ■i ■ ■ ■■ lrismM ■ ■t■ ■ ■■raw ■R ■ ■ ■ti■ twit ■sart■■■■■aR ■it■ ■r■■i■■ / ■rt ■I iss' isyissss�+■ ississssssss+ sssisiaisissiil '�sswl'�iiissiiisissis �rrtr�R■afir■Ri■MR ■ef ■■■■■ ■at ■ ■a /r ■ir ■ ■Mi ■ ■ra ■wart ■ir ■ai■ rtt■ r■ i■■ rRi■ Ra■■■ r■■■'= al■■ ia_ ■_iR ■{( ■jiRtN7■tisiiisiisssiasi ur.•"■f ■ ■rr « r rt� 71� + i♦`� ■�Rr ■i ■ ■wa ■rw■ Ifllitili ■� ■ ■ ■ ■a��iL irrt•�rr t lr'1 ■� ■■ s■■! aa■■ r■ ■f ■■■ ■ ■ ■ ■fi ■ ■sllirfariRfi ■i! ■ir ■wan ■ri■t■t ■ wi■ 11a■ R■ ti■■■ rR■ tae a■■ R■■ ■a ■ ■is ■ ■!ii ■Raw■ssw■■t■t ■rme ■tai si 2011 fississssssssssssss Sam sssississssssisriisi ■sssiianon si iii, ssssss!■ sssssssssisstirsssas iisssss�sssssssssssssssailri �sll ■ssss�ssisssMSl■ lease■ RSass %stRSSSrs�ssrsss�ss!\ /sss:ssi ■■ awl a■ t■■■■ iitiaa■■ altirsa ■i / ■twi■ ■ ■w ■ ■Ma / ■ ■ ■r■ ■ \rYt! ■Rid ■f lisss�sssssssssssi■ ssswssss�ss man ■itsss %msssfss ■ssstiAl 1 lmammAen ■il ' Is ��tississsssssssssssssissssssssisssist !■ \pet=s■■ ■r ■i ■ ■ ■ift ■i! ■tisrr ■fii ■li ■ ■■ . _ • ` o t ■Mi ■ ■iia■i ■a■ /tit ■■ifalllr ■a ■R ■fa ■a■ ■r■ It ti # ■ ■it■■i ■ ■M ■!t!i ■ ■ ■ ## ■tai ■Rif ■ ■Ri ■ ■M 11 \ ■ ■ri■ri ■■fit ■ ■ ■ ■■tri ■ ■M ■ ■ ■Mi ■ ■ ■it■ vs- memo ■ ■1• t1's■ 11 1■ 1■ ■ t■r / ■R!■ ■ it f■■■■ tlr r■■ a/■arfaa ii■aetaa■ i aai■ ■ ti■■ii! ft ■ ■ i■■■ i ir ■/ i■ ft■a■■ sa ■■■i ■■■ s■■s�1■ts■i w■■■ a! ■a■ir ■r■■■ rs■■■■R i\ ■ ee ■ ■ /; f■■■� ar ■rl■r ago son ra ■ilrr man a■■faf: ■farn - ■ • ■ ■ail , s{ uiiatii ■awns■ ■slat■ ■a ■t■ a■ ■lintel r son ■ DRUM ■ww■■■r ■i ■ ■■■ ■■isl ■ifi■it■■ •■■rf■■ia■a■■■wras■■■arir ar■■■wool I r■■Ri■■■■■■sii■■ t■■ai■iti■■■R■iif _ la■ t ■ ■■■■t■■■i■■■w■■■■ ■r ■trrt■■Rri■ ■ RaftR ■■■se ■tar■■wst■■ef11R■r■w■r ■\ ili�ssssi ssisli_ r��ai_ sssssssMalvinaMSSSSSSssssssssssl ■ississsssi rr. w.... ■ ■r ■ ■ ■i ■s / ■ttt� ■S /A ■ ■1����111116rr■ ------ ..... ■ ■ ■ ■ra ■■fae■■ra■ ■free ■ ■aw■ ■ ■ ■rw /■■ ■/■ ELSINORE CITY CENTERCONDO TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 111V engineering — group, inc. AGEMA ITEM NO. PAGE OF mengineering group, inc. transportation planning • traffic engineer- - acoustical / air quality stuy.,,,# June 19, 2003 ,Mr. Glen Daigle VILLA MARTINIQUE, LLC 28991 Old Town Front Street, Suite 203 Temecula, CA 92590 Subject: Elsinore City Center Condo Project Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Daigle: The firm of RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK) is pleased to submit this updated traffic impact analysis for the Elsinore City Center Condo Project development. This report provides a summary of the findings, analysis procedures and evaluation of the proposed project with respect to on -site and off -site traffic impacts pursuant to City of Lake. Elsinore requirements. This report evaluates the proposed 144 -condo dwelling unit project in comparison to the previously approved apartment project and commercial project. It will generate fewer trips than both of the previously approved uses. If you have any questions regarding this study, pie hesitate to call us at (949) 474 -0809. ����0 oOERT �y� Fyc Sincerely, c„ 2 u, No. 0555 RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. `t EXp.12131106 �4AFF�G ` OF CA���O rik Tan k on Goedecke, MBA Engineering Technician Transportation Planner Attachments ET :AG:RK:wg /1715 JN:1595 -03 -01 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE .L-�L OF;2 Robert Kahn, P.E. Principal 20201 s.w. hirch street, suite 250 newport beach, california 92660 tel 949.4740809 fax 949.474.0902 http://www.rkengineer.com ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA _ Prepared for: VILLA MARTINIQUE, LLC 28991 Old Town Front Street, Suite 203 Temecula, CA 92590 <i Prepared by: RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 200201 S.W. Birch Street, Suite 250 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Erik Tanaka j Allison Goedecke, MBA Robert Kahn, P.E. A R� June 19, 2003 i t JN:1595 -03 -01 ET:AG:RK:wg /1715 AGENDA ITEM PAGE_.. 2 OFA �K* TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY .................................. ............................... 1 -1 A. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives B. Executive Summary 1. Site Location and Study Area 2. Development Description 3. Principal Findings 2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ......................................... ............................... 2 -1 A. Summary of Development 1. Location 2. Land Use and Intensity 3. Site Plan 3.0 AREA CONDITIONS ........................................................ ............................... 3 -1 A. Study Area 1. Area of Significant Traffic Impact B. Site Accessibility 1. Area Roadway System 2. Existing Traffic Volumes and Conditions in Study Area 4.0 PROJECTED TRAFFIC .................................................... ............................... 4 -1 A. Site Traffic 1. Trip.Generation 2. Trip Distribution , 3. Trip Assignment B. Other Development Traffic 1. Method of Projection 2. Non -Site Traffic for Study Area 3. Through Traffic C. Total Traffic 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ......................................................... ............................... 5 -1 A. Level of Service Analysis 1. Level of Service at Opening Year Without Project 2. Level of Service at Opening Year With Project 6.0 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................... ............................... 6 -1 A. Traffic Contribution ..� AGEMA ITEM NO. J-=-- PAGE 1 OE APPENDICES TRAFFIC COUNT WORK E TS' :...:...:_ :... .. ..=:z ....... :....................... :................ A CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE EXISTING.. ................................................................................................. CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT ........................................ ............................... C CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT ................................................ ............................... D AGENDA ITEM NO. � 1 PAGE 13 4 OE61 LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT PAGE 1 -A LOCATION MAP ................................................... ............................... 1 -2 2 -A SITE PLAN ......................... ............................... . ............................... 2 -2 3 -A EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS ............................... ............................... 3-2 3 -13 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT .................................... .......................•....... 3 -3 3-C CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE GENERAL PLAN ROADWAY CROSS SECTIONS .......................... ............................... 3 -5 3 -D EXISTING AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ( ADT) ..... ............................... 3-6 3 -E EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ............... 3 -11 3 -F EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ............... 3 -12 4 -A PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION .......................... ............................... 4-6 4 -13 PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ( ADT) ..... ............................... 4 -7 4 -C PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ................. 4 -8 4 -D PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ................. 4 -9 4-E OTHER DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP ....... ............................... 4 -11 4 -F CANYON HILLS TRIP DISTRIBUTION .............. ............................... 4 -14 4 -G LUSK PROPERTY TRIP DISTRIBUTION .......... ............................... 4 -15 4 -H LAMBS FELLOWSHIP CHURCH TRIP DISTRIBUTION ................... 4-16 4-I RETAIL TRIP DISTRIBUTION ............................ ............................... 4 -17 4 -J OTHER DEVELOPMENT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) .......... 4 -18 4 -K OTHER DEVELOPMENT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ............................... ............................... 4 -19 ...r AGEMA ITEM NO. - I PAGE 115 OF (3?54- j -.i 1 1 i 4-L OTHER DEVELOPMENT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ............................... ............................... 4 -20 4 -M= OPENING 1R WITHO.URGJE>T AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ( ADT) ..................... ................4.............. 4 -22 4 -N OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ( ADT) ..................... ............................... 4 -23 5 -A OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTIONVOLUMES ................................. ............................... 5-3 5y8 OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ................................. ............................... 5-4 5-C OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ................................. ............................... 5-6 5-D OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES ................................. ............................... 5-7 AGENDA ITEM NO. )I/ -- PAGE ! ,1SZ. OR2 - Ff- LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 3-1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS .............. 3-9 4-1 TRIP GENERATION RATES ............................................................... 4-2 4-2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ........................................................... 4-3 4-3 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON ................................................... 4-4 414 OTHER DEVELOPMENT LAND USE ............................................... 4-12 4-5 OTHER DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION ................................ 4-13 5-1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT ........................................................................... 5-2 5-2 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR WITHPROJECT ................................................................................... 5-5 6-1 PROJECT TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTION ................................................ .6-2 ,'ag► AGENDA ITEM NO. I PAM oF,-R-94 ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS =-LAKE ELSIN-ORE,ZALIFORNIA _ 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY A. Purpose of Report and Study Objectives The purpose of this traffic impact analysis is to evaluate the Elsinore City Center Condo Project development from a traffic circulation standpoint. The proposed development is located within the City of Lake Elsinore in the County of Riverside. Study objectives include (1) documentation of existing. traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site; (2) evaluation of traffic conditions for Opening Year without the proposed project; (3) analysis of Opening Year with project traffic conditions; and (4) determination of the project traffic contribution to the intersections. B. Executive Summary 1. Site Location. and Study Area The project _site is located east of Grape Street and south of Railroad Canyon Road within the City of Lake Elsinore in the County of Riverside. Exhibit 9 -A illustrates the project location and traffic analysis study aree. The study area includes the following intersections: Grape Street (NS) at: • Railroad Canyon Road (EW) 1 -1 AGEMA ITEM NCO. jje�tt� \, PAGE 131 OF Exhibit 1 -A s LOCATION MAP _ a m a 1 L San � • • • �RiVer '� Ra��ad c� caa SITE_ LEGEND: • = INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATION p •�'IVDA ITEM NO. PAGE= :1OF62-� 1595-03- 01(EX,.A) engineering ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT- TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Lake Elsinore, Califomla group, Inc. 1 =2 1 -15 Freeway NB Ramps (NS) at: Railroad Canyon Road (EW) - 1 -15 Freeway SB .Ramps (NS) at: • Railroad Canyon Road (EW) f Casino Drive (NS) at: • Railroad Canyon Road (EW) 2. Development Description: The project is. proposed to be.developed.with 1.44. condominium townhome dwelling units.. 3.. Principal. Findings a. Required Level of Service: "D" b. For existing traffic conditions, the study area intersections operate at Level of Service "D" or better during the peak hours, except for the intersection of the 1 -15 Freeway northbound ramps /Railroad Canyon Road which operates at Level of Service °F° during peak hours, and Grape Street/Railroad Canyon Road which operates at Level of Service "E" during the PM peak hour. C. The proposed condo project is projected to generate 844 trip -ends per day with 63 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 78 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. The approved apartment project was projected to generate approximately 1,028 trip-ends per day with 74 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 90 vehicles per hour during the PM 1 -3 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF "S peak hour. Thb`6 ngi A— approved commercial use was projected to generaf6 approximately lifo ends per day with 80 vehicles A -h M pea and 304 vehicles per hour during, per ho6r during t1ile k the PM peak hbbr. The `06 R ised cxsr d- project generates 184 less A a trip-ends! &f �th apartment project and. 2J1:9 less., trip-ends per day than the originally approved commercial project. For Opening Year with project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate 'at-te4bi of Service "D" or better during the peak hours, with the exception of the 1-15 Freeway northbound - rartips-at Railroad'Canyon'Road and : Griape Street at Railroad Canyon Road. These intersections are projected to operate at LOS "F" during the peak hours with or without the project. The proposed condo proo-413t, WA ener.4te less impacts than both the previously approved apartments and the originally approved'cd4MTercW: uses:` 1-4 AMIMA ITEM NO. 2.1 PAW OF fl 3 I"IW VI 3 2.0 PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT 2 -1 AGENDA ITEM NO. �:: PAGE OFC2 Exhibit 2 -A SITE PLAN 7 3AAR �EA:CONDITIONS Study Area 1. Area of Significant Traffic Impact The study area includes the following intersections: Grape Street (NS) at: • Railroad Canyon Road (EW) 1-15 Freeway NB Ramps (NS) at Railroad Canyon Road (EW) 1-15 Freeway SB Ramps (NS) at: • Railroad Canyon Road (EW) Casino Drive (NS) at: • Railroad Canyon Road (EW) B. Site Accessibility 1. Area Roadway System Exhibit 3-A identifies the existing roadway conditions for study area roadways- The number of through travel lanes, for existing roadways and the existing intersection geometries are identified. Exhibit 3-13 shows the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan Circulation Element- Future roadways are included in the Circulation Element of the AUENDA ITEM NO. PAGE Exhibit 3 -A` EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH{ _ NES -AND INTERSECTION C ROLS ti 33 7- s0 Q_ a:1 1` c� SITE ... LEGEND: = TRAFFIC SMAL . 4 = NUMBER OF LANES D - DIVIDED U = UNDIVIDED pA ITEM NO. PAGE.._- - N 1595-03 -01 (E)C3-A) engineering ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT- TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Lake Elsinore, California group, inc. 3 -2 Exhibit 3 -B CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION N TE1F_ORn �- qtL j: i 1 Pf ♦♦f�� �s1T /1 P � i ♦ � o l OttVE a0 s r CANYON i Z14 1. LAKE i Jlq Ola IL� t,�l�' �?• ``, F. O N 1 ` l; CYN- t ..0.4 afi Qt 1. O Ap E ?`' A/ ♦, AO10 CYN: RO. If LAKE ELSINORE � O S1TE../.1Alwuw ♦ Se cc OLIVE ST. N r • LE"004 ` try Ij , `ST Z O *YF. .~02��r• :J°O F 8t)NOY♦ -.CYN. e _ s s ` } m 9AXTEtt 110. i '♦ 5 - yi_ '�/� -C t TON t(E1TH a0. _ t_:F-G,EN 0: FREEWAY O INTERCHANGE LOCATION --- • ---- -- URBAN. ARTERIAL (6- LANES /120' R.O.W.). MAJOR (4 -LANES /1b0'R -O.W.) -- - - - - -- SECONDARY (4- LANES / go* R.O.W.) ---- -- COLLECTOR (2- LANES /68'R.O.W.) ONE -WAY SECONDARY (2- LAA)iS /6E)'.R.Ci:W.) SPHERE, OF tNFLUENCE BOUNDARY SOURCE: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 1595.03 -01 (°X3-6) engineering ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT- TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Lake Elsinore. Califomia gt.DU „' 'nC� 3 -3 ALMA STEM NO. `` PAGE ` OFL��I --,♦» General Plan and a re g 'ra hi l depicted on Exhibit 3 -B. Exhibit 3 -C illustrates the City of Lake Elsinore arterial street cross- sections. 2. Existing Traffic Volumes and Conditions in Study Area Existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes throughout the study area are shown on Exhibit 3 -D. Existing ADT volumes are based upon traffic data _ g _ collected by RK ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. (RK)--on:, April 29., 2003 (see Appendix "A "), and factored up from PM peak hour counts made for RK, using the following formula for each intersection leg: PM Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume)' 92"= Leg Volume The current technical guide to the evaluation of traffic operations is the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board Special Report 209). The HCM defines level of service as a qualitative s^ measure which describes operational conditions within. a traffic stream, generally in terms of sbch factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. The, criteria used to evaluate ,LO.S_ (Level of Service) conditions vary based on . the type of roadway and whether the traffic flow is considered interrupted or uninterrupted. The definitions of level of service for uninterrupted flow (flow unrestrained by the existence of traffic control devices) are: LOS "A" represents free flow. Individual users are virtually unaffected r by the presence,-of-others -in the traffic stream. i • ' ° flow, but the presence of other use • LOS B is in the range of stable p in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable. Freedom to select desired 3-4 .. AGENDA ITEM NO.._..: -�-- PAGE u,' "'* Exhibit 3 7C CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE GENERAL PLAN ROADWAY CROSS SECTIONS -Imp-ow- 17—+14 . tOG r �EI1 URBAN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY (&LANQ 720' RO.W 98• t7 e�tz�tr az+t� t7 tr�izB� tr !SINE we URBAN ARTERIAL HIGHWAY (6 AW) Iw PLOW -E0 id MED) 17 15 81Nd AXE t Ar to rtr,r— }— . {P�,r�trc ,a WE ME u I+E SECONDARY HIGHWAY (4-LANE) w RO.W. 4e• COLLECTOR HIGHWAY (2 -LWE) SOURCE C4TY OF MIKE B SK40RE 1595 03.0 c4C C.,, engineering ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, Lake Elsinore. CaGfania group, ; W. 3-5 AGENDA ITEM NOS . PAGE ! " OF Exhibit 3 -D EXISTING AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) i F --46apnto ' -4 Ra'a SRN _ d •. N 366 Cal? oq Rd cs V� • N pj e, cy H � 8s SITE LEGEND: 10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S) ALMA ITEM NO. PAGE 1l OF - N en9i ,5 os o; �c3 0, ti neer- ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONOUPROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Lake Elsie, CaWmIda group, Inc. 3 -6 speeds is relatively unaffected, but there is a slight decline in the. freedom to maneuver. • LOS "C" is in the range of stable flow, but marks the beginning of the range of flow in which the operation of individual users becomes significantly affected by interactions with others in the traffic stream. • LOS "D" represents high- density but stable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted, and the driver experiences a generally: poor level of comfort and convenience. •. LOS "E" represents operating conditions at or near the capacity level: All . speeds are reduced to a low, but, relatively uniform value. Small increases in flow will cause breakdowns. in traffic movement. I LOS "F" is used to define forced or breakdown flow. This condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which can traverse the point. Queues form behind such locations: The definitions ..of level of service for interrupted traffic flow (flow restrained bpi the existence of traffic signals and other traffic control devices) differ slightly.depending on the type of traffic control. f _ T: he level of service is typically dependent on th& quality of traffic flow at the intersections -along a roadway., The HCM methodology expresses the level of service at an intersection in terms of delay time for the various intersection- approaches. The 'HCM uses different procedures depending on the type of intersection control. The levels of service determined in this study are deterrmined`using the HCM methodology. J AiiiMA STEM NO. 3 -7 PA ! _ Do PAGE � For signalized intersections, average stopped delay per vehicle is used to determine level of service. Levels of service at the signalized study area intersection has been evaluated using the HCM intersection analysis program. The study area intersections Which Are currently stop sign controlled with stop control on the minor street only have been analyzed using the u I nsignalized intersection methodology of the HCM. For these intersections, the calcutati6n of level of service is dependent on the occurrence of gaps occurring . in the traffic flow of the main street. Using data collected describing the intersection configuration and traffic volumes at the study area locations, the Wei of service have been calculated. The level of service criteria for this type of intersection analysis is based on average total delay per vehicle. The level of services are defined for the various analysis methodologies as follows: K Fi7 I � Id 0 :F. 80.01 -and up 50.01 and up Existing peak hour traffic: operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 3-1, along with the existing intersection. geometries and traffic control devices at the analysis locations. Existing intersection level of service calculations are based upon manual AM and PM peak hour Ali tTEM NO. 1 3-8 PACE AVERAGE CONTROL DBAY PER VEHICLE (SECONDS) LEVEL OF SERVICE SIGNALIZED 'UNSiGNALIZED A -7 010.10.00 0 toll" �00 B 10.01 to 20.00, 110.0j tp. 15.00 C 20".61 to 35.00 15.01 to 25.00 D 35.01 to 55.00 25.01 to 35.00 '66.01 to 80.00 '6-60.00 t K Fi7 I � Id 0 :F. 80.01 -and up 50.01 and up Existing peak hour traffic: operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 3-1, along with the existing intersection. geometries and traffic control devices at the analysis locations. Existing intersection level of service calculations are based upon manual AM and PM peak hour Ali tTEM NO. 1 3-8 PACE TABLE 3-1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS. FOR EXISTING. CONDITIONS iNTERSECTION I - TRAFFIC - CONTROL' INTERSECTION APPROACH LANES' DELAYZ (SECS.) LEVEL OF SERVICE NORTH= BOUND SOUTH= BOUND . FAST- BOUND . I WEST =. BOUND L T R L :. T ... R- . L ., T R L T R` AM PM AM PM, pe SL (NS) at, Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) TS 2 2 1 > 1 1 1 . 2 1.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 52.3 77.9 D -E. 15 Fwy. NB.Rarnps. (twat:_ - • Railroad Rd. EWj TS 0.5 0 0:5 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 122.1 120.7 F F -15 Fwy 60. Ramps (NS) at Rakoad Ca Rd (EW) TS 0 U 0 1 0 1' 0 2 1 1 2 0 24.1 27.2 G C r—asino Ur. (NS) at • Railroad Canyon Rd. (EVIL) TS 1 1 :5 0:5 1 1.5 0 5 '. 1 25 0.5 2 1:5 0: ' 16.8 18 B 8 f s 41 ' When a turn Is designated, signaled, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right fuming vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L =. Left; T = Through: R = Rkpt Z Analysis Software: Traffix, Version 7.5.0615 2001. Per the 1997 H Nsi ( ) ghway Capacity Manual, overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with traffic signal or a0-way stop control. For intersections with cross -street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. ' TS = Traffic Signal — = Delay High, Intersection Unstable. Level of Service "F". (:ddabteskk1700Vk1715tb AGENDA FTEM NO.��.:i..�.� JN:1595-03 -01 3-9 PAGE' _ fuming movement counts collected for RK on April 29, 2003 (see Exhibits 3 -E and 3 =P). Traffic -count worksheets ano incfuded in `Appendix "A ". For kjsting traffic conditions, the stfjdy:9r6A intersections operate at Level , of et'vAce "0" or better during the peak hours, 0'; 11­ p for the inter a ans: ti .<.� . o>' rae%t at, Railroad Canyon Road and.. ' 1 -15rx nc►rthbqund ramps /Railroad Canyon ROatl, which of tan uT+ coptable level of service during the existing peck zH leul v, Q sheets. are;pEavido in App nda > "B" ,-.,r 51 s a 3'_ Exhibit 3-E EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 1595-03-01 (EK3-E), ELSINORE CITY Ctiiii o GONUCj. PRO JEl 3-11 AQENDA ITEM NO- - PAGE O:)Fll engineprig.. Imp, 111c. Exhibit 3-F EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES IMPACT STUDY. Lake EWnore. Califom 3-12 AWMA ITEM NO. PAGE I -5-.�OF ..PlIgineeft group, inc.- 4.0 PROJECTED TRAFFIC A. Site Traffic 1. Trir) Generation Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is attracted and P roduced by a development. The traffic generation for this project' is based upon the specific land use planned for the Elsinore City Center Condo Project development. The project is proposed to be developed with 144 condominium/townhome dwelling units. The approved apartment use is for 156 apartment dwelling units. The originally approved use is 61,200 square feet of theater and office. Trip generation rates for this project are shown in Table 4 -1. The trip. generation rates are based upon data collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Both daily and peak hour trip generation for the proposed project are shown in Table 4 -2. The proposed condo project is projected to generate approximately 844 trip -ends per day with 63 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour. and 78 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. This traffic impact analysis report has analyzed the proposed condo project site compared With the approved apartment use and the originally approved office /theater use. A trip generation comparison is depicted in Table 4 -3. The originally approved commercial use is projected to generate approximately 2,963 trip -ends per day with 80 vehicles per hoar during the AM peak hour and 304 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. The approved apartment use is projected to generate approximately 1,028 trip -ends per day with 73 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 90 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. 4 -1 AGENDA ITEM NO. =-L PAGE,�S O� A=S �f TABLE- 4-1 TRIP GENERATION RATES' LAND USE UNITS'- PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Condominium /T ownhouse DU 0.07 0.37 0.36 0.18 5.86 ._.d r. 4 2 DU = Dwelling Units AiiVDA ITEM NO. frktables\rk1700kk1715tb 4 — 2 PAGE 5 �jy•• JN:1595 -03 -01 '�"'��" -� TABLE 4-2 PROJECT TRIP, GENERATION DU =Dwelling Units j:rktabIes\rk1 700WI715th JN:1595-03-01 4-3 A ITEM NO. -'*4k PAGE 15iOF TABLE 4 -3 TRIP GENERATION COMP. t§6N ' DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet j_rktab1esVk17001rk1715tb JN:1595-03 -01 c' - Y_ AGENDA kTEM NO. a 4 -4 PAGE PEAK HOUR DAILY. , :115E- ...,' ..... QUAhI #ITY .. UNITS:;: AM EN PM . OUT IN, - OUT...; ....: Proposed Use Elsinore City Center Condos 144 DU 10 53 52 26 844 pa roved Use Apartments 156 DU 14 59 59 311 1028 Originally Approved Use . 31.2 31.0 TSF TSF 65 3 9 3 19 179 95 11 543 2420 Office Theater Total 68 12 198 106 2963 r ffemnpprovUse (Appartments) rj inall roved Use Commercja! -4 -58 -6 41 -7 -146 -5 -80 -2119 ' DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet j_rktab1esVk17001rk1715tb JN:1595-03 -01 c' - Y_ AGENDA kTEM NO. a 4 -4 PAGE As shown on Table 4 -3, the proposed project will generate approximately 2,119 less trip -ends per day than the originally approved commercial use and 1 N lesM7fflp -ends per'd jy tha~app?bved apartment use. 2. Trip Distribution Trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the project site. Trip distribution is heavily influenced by the geographical location of the site, _ the location of commercial, employment and recreational opportunities and the proximity to the regional freeway system. The directional orientation of traffic was obtained from a previous study prepared for the center. Trip distribution for this study has been based upon near -term conditions, based upon those highway facilities. which are either in place or will be contemplated over the next two years; which represents the opening occupancy time -frame for the project. The trip distribution pattern for the project is graphically depicted on Exhibit 4 -A. 3. Trip Assignment The assignment. of traffic from the site to the adjoining roadway system has been based upon the site's trip generation, trip distribution, and existing street system. Based on the identified project traffic generation and .distribution, project related ADT volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-13. Project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 4 -C and 4 -D, respectively. Exhibit 4 -A - PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION _ �: __ -_ - - .,'-mac,.:.' -.:- ,�. :,. -• - +- 's-tir. � .� _ .. � . _- -__ 5 . m R Ra+7�d SRN � Pan • �1 orl Rd ?S s� SITE a 's s LEGEND:: = INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATION AW0A ITEM NO. - ` PACE ,�.� OF N 159""1 t X") engineering ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, Lake Elsinore. CaWomia group, inc. 3 Exhibit 4-B PROJECT AVWRAG.E DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) LtOEHP: 10.0 = VEIRIPLE$ PER DAY (10001S) NOM = NOMINAL. LESS THAN 50 VEHICLE S ELS"t CITY C04ltRC0NWPR0ACT- TRAFFIC IMPACT AGENDA ITEM NO. - 21 PAGE J�JOFff-L-' W.L;*eBsinom.Cafifomla, engineenng. group,-! 4-7 Exhibit 44; PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES C i. i t 4�f 1 i enging6ring al MlOOf?FtbJECf- TRAFFIC IMPACT STWY. take Elsinore; CaWania Jrou mc. n l ff M NO. 4-8 PAGE._ OF Exhibit 4 -D. PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES .1 1595- 03- 01(Ex4-D) engineering ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Lake EFsh me. California r j n r. 4 -9 � B. _ Other Development Traffic 7. 2. 3. Method of Projection To assess Opening Year traffic conditions, project traffic is combined with existing traffic, other development and areawide growth. Other development which is being processed concurrently in the study area includes the projects illustrated on Exhibit 4 =E. The study year for analysis purposes in this report is 2005. Non -Site Traffic for Study Area Table -4-4 lists the proposed land uses for the nearby development for Opening Year traffic conditions known by RK -at the time this study was prepared. Table 4 -5 shows the daily .and peak hour vehicle trips generated by the surrounding development being processed concurrently in the study area. Exhibits 4 -F to 4 -1 contain the directional distribution and assignment of the other development traffic. Based on the identified trip distributions for ,the other development on arterial highways throughout the-study area, other development ADT's are shown on Exhibit 4 -J. Other development AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 4 -K and 4 -L, respectively.. Through Traffic To account for areawide growth on roadways, future traffic volumes have been calculated based on a "conservative" 3 percent annual growth rate of existing traffic volumes over a two -year period for a total growth rate of 0 ;l ;1 070. A tTEM 490 AWC X10. PAGE C O ;aL J� Exhibit 4 -E OTHER DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP LUSK .. PROPERTY F j LAMBS t �Riv� FELLOWSHIP CHURCH f -I RETAIL CANYON HILLS c'a � �sf 's SITE �t "s 7 i f AfliE-NDA FTEAA NO. DILL PAGE OF 1595 -03-01 (IX4-E) engineering C ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, Lake Elsinore, California group, Inc. 4 -11 TABLE 4-4 OTHER DEVELOPMENT LAND USE PROJECT . LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS' Canyon Hills .. Sin le -FaMl Detached Residential 608 DU Lusk Pro Si le -Fami1 Detached Residential 132 DU s Felk)%vshi Church Church 16 TSF Retail Commercial Retail 9.41 TSF 4 -12 g� r� a. - 3 l L f" I ALMA FTEM -NO. t -. N PAGE I � 1 TABLE 4 -5 " OTHER DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION PROJECT PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT an yon Hills 116 340 395 219 5,819 sk Pro 25 74 86 48 1,26.3 mbs Fellowship Church: 6 5 6 5 146 6 774F 21 22 460 TAL 153 423 5081 7.688 4 -1-3 AWWA ITEM NO. } PAGE OF' jaktabWs4k1700%ikl715tb JN.1595 -03-01 Exhibit 4 -F CANYON HILLS TRIP DISTRIBUTION � .- ----� • ever .._. f ; CANYON HQt_S. sf SITE dpi f:- LEGEND:. 10 = PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT N � engineering ,5�, CITY rout inc. EISiNORE CITY CENTER CONGO PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, lake Elsinore, CaCAwnia A i M NqO: 4 -14 PAGE -J yyr 15 EL Exhibit 4-G- LUSK PROPERTY TRIP DISTRIBUTION LUSK PROPERTY LEGEND: 10 = PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT Exhibit 4 -H LAMBS FELLOWSHIP CHURCH TRIP DISTRIBUTION x 0i F J �O vl IAMBS `r .` • e5. �Riv� FELLOWSHIP . �. CHURCH _ d by �. S i 20 SITE � s LEGEND: �- 10 = PERCENT TOIFROM PROJECT AA {TEM ----N�� O�� PAGE ..0 OF _! 1_ .441 . .� ...... .. � . RAC"- C PNTVR 00W)01 iX T TRAFFIC IMPACT STUbY. Lake Elsiiare. Cal'�frx►na ���(�(] f 4 -16 i LEGEND: 10 = PERCENT TOIFROM PROJECT ItAPACT..STVDY,Ls!keEWnore..GaKoiWa.: 4-17 engineering 7— TOM nc- 4t Exhibit 4-1 OTHER DEVELOPMENT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFPIC (ADT) LEGEND: 10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (1000-S) ITEM - NO. NOM NOMINAL, LESS THAN 50 VEHICLES PAGE OF engineering ELSlN0fktClTY CENTFACQ-100 T TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, Lake asimm. Califamb group, Inc. 4-18 , � i ^ 2 u-- �. .' _ . engineering --_------- 4-I9 - Exhibit 4 -L OTHER DEVELOPMENT ra PM EA1f HOURlNTERSECTION VOLUMES s �� r 221.� r m F (.... _ .. San ter Caa s� SITE vr� car,. 1: AGENDA FTEMjj ''Njo. PAGE OF - enginegrt� %welt PitOJE 7. ;TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Lake Elsinore. Camorwia groupone. 4 -20 Areawide growth has been. added to daily and peak Hour traffic volumes on surrounding roadways, in addition to traffic generated by the project - and other development. C. Total Traffic Exhibit 4 -M shows the ADT's which can be expected for Opening Year without project traffic conditions_ Exhibit 4 -N shows the ADT's which can be expected for Opening Year with project trac conditions. ' j s. 1 i r i :f Exhibit 4 -M OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)� �r m F y ' •. j L ... _ ..S�n... , Jape o �RNer RalJr� �.• w A29 C c�R�''•� _ d• a h� W r 9� sf N S SITE ca ' d'1 LEGEND: 10.0 = VEHICLES PER DAY (10005) AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE ` OF N - � ,5ss o", (E)(4441) 4 e ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONGO PROJECT- TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, Lake Elsinore, California group, Inc. 4 -22 t i Exhibit 4 -N OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT) LEGEND: 10.0 =VEHICLES PER DAY (10WS) AWMA ITEM NO. PAGE OF N 159""1 (Ex" engineering ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT- TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Lake Elsinore, California group Inc. 4 -23 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS A ' ° ` ° Level of Service Arrrsis = i x.= 1. Level of Service at Opening Year Without Proiect Opening Year intersection levels of service for the proposed network without the proposed project are shown in Table 5 -1. Table 5-1 shows HCM calculations based on the geometries at the intersections. .Opening Year without project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5 -A and 5 -13, respectively. For Opening Year conditions, all study area intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable level of service during peak hours, with the exception of, -the intersections of Grape Street at Railroad Canyon Road and the I -15 Freeway northbound ramp at Railroad Canyon Road, which are projected to operate at Level of Service "F" during Opening Year peak hour conditions. 2. Level of Service at Opening Year With Proiect Opening Year intersection levels of service for the proposed network with the proposed project are shown in Table 5-2. Table 5 -2 shows the HCM calculations based on the geometries at the intersections. Opening Year with protect AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes, are shown on Exhibits 5 -C and 5 -D, respectively. Opening Year without project HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix "C ". For Opening Year with project conditions, all study area intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable level of service during peak . hours, with the exception of the intersections of Grape Street at Railroad Canyon Road and the 1 -15 Freeway northbound ramp, at Railroad Canyon Road, 5-1 AgMA ITEM NO. PAGE O- TABLE 5 =1 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT ' When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped_ To function as a right tum lane there must be sufficient width for right tum6hg vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L = Lett:, T =Through; R = Right a . Analysis Software: Traffix, Version 7.5M15 (2001). Per,the 1997 Highway Capacty.Manual, overall average intersection delay and level rif serer are• shown far'inteisections wM traffic signal or agwway stop control= For intersections with `cxoss -street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst indiividual movement delay. and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movernehts thad6g a: single lane) are shown. TS = Traffic Signal — =Delay A A ITEM NO. _J... High, Intersection Unstable. Level of Service 'F"_ - 5-2 "N PAGE t OF j:rktableshrk 1700Vk1715tb JN:1595-03 -01 INTERSECTION APPROACH LANES' DELAY2 LEVEL OF NORTH -c SOU.T SST- WEST-, TRAFFIC BOUND BOUND BOUND BOUND SECS.) SERVICE L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM INTERSECTION CONTROL Grape St- (NS) at - Railroad Cafton Rd. (EW) TS 2` 2 1 1 1 2 1.5 0.5 1 -2.5 0.5 83.8 113.2 F F -15 Fwy. NO Ramps (NS) at • Ra�oad _ Ad. (EWI' TS 0.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 . 1' 2 0 0 2 1` 159:7 158:7 F F 1 -15 Fwy:SB Ramps (NS) at:. • Railroad kd. (EW) I TS 0 0 0. .1 0 1- . 0 2' 1 1 2 0 . '32.5 502 C D. sino Dr. (NS) at ....; • Railroad Rd. (6fl - TS 1 1:5 0.5 1 1.5 0:5 1 2.5. 0.5 2 1:5 0.5 ° 17.3 18.9 B 8 ' When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped_ To function as a right tum lane there must be sufficient width for right tum6hg vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L = Lett:, T =Through; R = Right a . Analysis Software: Traffix, Version 7.5M15 (2001). Per,the 1997 Highway Capacty.Manual, overall average intersection delay and level rif serer are• shown far'inteisections wM traffic signal or agwway stop control= For intersections with `cxoss -street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst indiividual movement delay. and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movernehts thad6g a: single lane) are shown. TS = Traffic Signal — =Delay A A ITEM NO. _J... High, Intersection Unstable. Level of Service 'F"_ - 5-2 "N PAGE t OF j:rktableshrk 1700Vk1715tb JN:1595-03 -01 Exhibit 5 -A OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR, INTERSECTION VOL UMES t ;i i 1 1 t 1,00,o Exhibit 5 -9 01'ENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT PM PEAK ##OURNTERSECTION VOL U MES Ji �r 0� F 'J L... �.. Sat►.. Jaen Can �. f s SITE O AGENDA ITEM NO. " PAGE OF N 15954"1 ll�x"} - engineering . ELSINOW CITY CENTER" CONDO TRAP lC IMPACT Sl'UDY. Lake Eisi;wre. 8;IZ;; *7 group, inc. e 5 -4 } When a ht turn is designated. the lane can either be striped . rig or unstriped: To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. f L = Left: T = Through, R = Right 2 Analysis Software_ Traffic, Version 7.5.0615 2001. Per the 1997 Highway Capacity Manual, overall average IY ( ) gh y p ty rage intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with traffic signal or all -way stop control. For intersections with cross- street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement delay and level of service for the worst individual movement f(or movements sharing a single lane) are shown_ STS = Traffic Signal 1 i ' — = Delay High, Intersection Unstable, Level of Service "F". ALMA ITEM NO. !: j:rktablesWc1700Vk1715tb PAGEL...L- OF4 JN_ 1595 -03 -01 5-5 INTERSECTION APPROACH LANES' NORTH- SOUTH - EAST- WEST- DELAY2 LEVEL OF TRAFFIC BOUND BOUND BOUND BOUND (SE(--S:) SERVICE L T R L T R L T R L. T R AM PM AM PM INTERSECTION CONTROL' rape St. (NS) at • Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) TS 2 2 1 1 1 1 , 2 1.5 0.5 1 2.5 '05 88.8 1118.61 F F 1 -15 Fwy. NB Ramps (NS) at • Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) TS 0.5 0 0.5 0 0 0 1 7 0 0 .2 _ 1 101.5 160.5 F F -15 Fwy.SH Ramps (NS) at. • Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) TS 0 0 0. 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 2 0. .34.5 529 C D asino Dr. (NS) at • Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 1 2-5 0.5 2 1.5 0.5 17.3 1&9 B 8 } When a ht turn is designated. the lane can either be striped . rig or unstriped: To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. f L = Left: T = Through, R = Right 2 Analysis Software_ Traffic, Version 7.5.0615 2001. Per the 1997 Highway Capacity Manual, overall average IY ( ) gh y p ty rage intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with traffic signal or all -way stop control. For intersections with cross- street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement delay and level of service for the worst individual movement f(or movements sharing a single lane) are shown_ STS = Traffic Signal 1 i ' — = Delay High, Intersection Unstable, Level of Service "F". ALMA ITEM NO. !: j:rktablesWc1700Vk1715tb PAGEL...L- OF4 JN_ 1595 -03 -01 5-5 ,A Exhibit 5 -C OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES co F RaUroad ��ve`•- a� d Sf S� SITE AQEmA tTE NO. I PAGE N - 1595.03 -0, (EXS-C) engineering ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT- TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, Lake EWrWe, CaVOmia group, Inc. 5-6 Exhibit 5-D OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR: INTERSECTION VOLUMES 1.595-0"1 (EX5-D) ELSINORE CITY CENTER CONDO PROJECT- TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Lake Elsinore, Cafifomia 5-7 AGEMA tTEm NO. 'N PAGE L16- engineering group, inc. 3: 'which are projected to operate ik an unacceptable level of service during Opening Year with project peak flour conditions. Opening Year with project lI M calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix "D ". I. 6.0 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Traffic Contribution— - The proposed condo project is projected to generate approximately 844 trip 'ends per weekday with 63 vehicles per. hour, during the AM peak hour and 78 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. The project traffic contributions have .been calculated for the .PM peak hour and are shown in Table 6-1. ALMA ITEM NO. 6-1 PAGE OF TABLE 64 PROJECT TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTION' 1 Based upon PM peak hour traffic volumes j:ddablesVkl 700Vk1715tb JN:1595-03-01 AGENDA ITEM NO. �- I, — 6 , PAGE I 95 OF(-, 9 i . L 7 F� OPENING YEAR-. PROJECT %o PROJECT WITH PROJECT OF TOTAL INTERSECTION/SEGM81NIT TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC Grape St (NS) at. 75� '6872 Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) 1-15 NB Ramps (NS) at FI-15-SIRailroad 51 4877 1.05% ft4ilroadCan yori Rcl, ,fEW B Ramps (NS) at 37 3803:. 0.97% Canyon Rd- (EW) 1 Casino Dr. (NS) at 20 3038 0.66% • Railroad Canyon Rd. (gM_ - 1 Based upon PM peak hour traffic volumes j:ddablesVkl 700Vk1715tb JN:1595-03-01 AGENDA ITEM NO. �- I, — 6 , PAGE I 95 OF(-, 9 i . L 7 F� APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNT WORKSHEETS AGEMA ITEM NO. PAGE 0 0R;2�� I Inter_ section Turning Movement Prepared try: SoutWar d Car Counters". N -S STREET: Summefiill %`Grape St.f - DATE: 4/29/2003 LOCATION: City of Lake Elsinore E -W STREET: Railroad Canyon Rd. DAY: TUESDAY PROJECT# 03 -0717 -003 NORTHBOUND . SOUTHBOUND. EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER` WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 .1.5 .5 1 1 1 2 1.5 .5 1 3 0 6:00 AM 6:15 AM 6 :30 AM 6 :45 AM 7:00 AM 33 13 41 21 14 67 35 108 47 28 335 19 761 7:15 AM 42 9 45 29 12 82 37 131 52 32 397 23 . 891 7:30 AM 54 11 67 33 9 96 46 167 56 37 459 27 1062 7:45 AM 63 15 59 38 16 128 42 .196 68 49 491 35 1200 8:00 AM 51 10 51 30 13 106 39 172 63 46 438 31 1050: 8:15 AM 49 12 48 27 11 91 32 153 54 41 379 29 926 8:30 AM 58 17 60 22 8 85 26 129 72 35 364 33 909 8:45 AM 45 14 55 25 10 79 29 144 61 44 356 38 900 .9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10 :15 AM 10:30 AM. ' 10:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR ' TOTAL VOLUMES = .395 101 426 .225 93.. 734 286 1200 473. 312. 3219 235 7699. AM Peak Hr Begins at: 730 AM PEAK VOLUMES = 217 48 225 128 49 421 159 688 241 PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.894 0.821 0.889 CONTROL: Signalized 173 1767 122 4238 0.897 0.883 ,%n ow ,%./' `00, AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 19 OF =2Pq d Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: Southland Car Counters N -S STREET: SummefiiN/ Grape St DATE: 4/29,/2003 LOCATION: City of Lake Elsinore E -W STREET: Railroad Canyon Rd. DAY_ TUESDAY PROJECT# 03- 0717 -003 4 r_ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 1 1. 2 1.5 .5 1 3 0, 1:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:30 PM 1:4S PM L 2:00 PM 2:15 PM 2:30 PM 2:45 PM 3:00 PM 3 :15 PM 3:30 PM. 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 67 36 61 33 31 65 87 261 104 78 279 40. 1142 4:15 PM 58 28 68 36 34 54 78 244 98 62 256 31 1047 4:30 PM 71 25 74 40 28 58 85 236 91 59 231 36 - 1034 4:45 PM 64 32 79 42 26 71 91 217 116 65 240 42, 1085 5:00 PM 76 39 83 35 33 79 97 228 122 74 263 44, 1173 5:15 PM 81 41 87 44 37 86 109 209 135 68 304 39= 1240 5 :30 PM 97 44 93 47 46 95 126 280 143 83 327 48. 1429 5:45 PM 59 35 80 38 41 83 113 193 129 76 286 37 1170 6:00 PM. 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:-45 PM' , TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 573 280 625 315 276 591 786 1868 938 565 2186 317 9320 . PM Peak Hr Begins at: 500 PM PEAK VOLUMES = 313 159 343 164 157 343 445 910 529 301 1180 168 5012 PEAK HR. FACT011: 0.871 0.883 0.858 0.900 0.877: CONTROL: Signalized ALMA ITEM NO. i PAGE OF� Intersection. Turning, Movement Prepared by: Southland Car Counters N -S STREET: I -15 NB Ramps DATE. 4/29/2003 LOCATION: City of Lake Elsinore E -W STREET- Railroad Canyon Rd. DAY: TUESDAY PROJECT# 03 -0717 -004 NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND i NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: .3 3 .3. 1 2 2 1 6:00 AM ` 6:15 AM 6:30 AM i 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 36 1 53 49 157 174 259 1n. 7:15 AM 32 2 68 42 142 216 307 `809: 7:30 AM 45 0 79 60 174 237 346 ' 941 i 7:45 AM 57 1 94 72 206 318 374 ' 1122 8:00 AM 48 3 85 65 169 273 324 = =- 257.. 8:15 AM 43 2 76 57 161 220 287- 846 8:30 AM 37 0 63 51 178 229 253 811. 8:45 AM 41 2 71 48 183 264 Mt 9:00 AM 9:15-AM E' 9:30;p1iN - f 9 :45: AM 10:00 AM- 10: 15 AM 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:0O,AM i 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM I TOTAL TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR VQLUMES .= 339 . 11 .589 ...:: Q. 0 .0- 444 1370- 0 0- -1931 2411 1095. AM Peak Hr Begins at 730 AM t PEAK VOWMES = 193 6 334 0 0 0 254 710 0 0 1048 1331 3876. PEAK HR.. FACTOR: 0.877 0.000 0.867 0.000 0.864 CONTROL: Signalized; AQE -NDA FTEM NO. PAGE -L- � 0K :� Tnters+ector'Turring Movement Prepared by: Southland Car Counters s- Y N -S STREET: I -15 NB Ramps DATE: 4/29/2003 LOCATION: City of Lake Elsinore E -W STREET: Railroad Canyon Rd. DAY: TUESDAY PROJECT# 03 -0717 -004 PM Peak Hr Begins at: 500 PM z.. PEAK _- VOLUMES = 333 15 668 0 0 0 271 1172 0 0 876 840 4175 L PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.910 0.000 0.889 0:000 0.894 CONTROL: Signalized; AGENDA ITEM NO.—:1._. -._ PAGE1.! L.. OF:2 .L NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: _ 1 2 2 1 1:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:30 PM r j.- 1:45 PM :. 2:00 PM 2.15 PM 2:30 PM 2:45 PM' 3:00 PM" , 3 :15 PM 3:30 PM 3 :45 PM 4:00 PM 61 2 157 67 296 237 209 1029 �-1 4:15 PM 49. 4 136 61 305 208 186, 949 4:30 PM 53 5 142 59 283 193 171. 906 4:45 PM 56 3 151 51 279 264 163 967 ,> 5:00 PM 72 6 163 53 297 186 195 972 5:15 PM 86 4 178 71 268 213 217,; 1037 5:30 PM 94 3 182 83 323 252 230 1167 5:45 PM 81 2 145 64 284 225 198 999 6:00 PM 6:15 -PM 6:30 PM 4 :45 PM. 3 TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 552 29 1254 0 0 0 509 2335 0 0- 1778 1569 8026 PM Peak Hr Begins at: 500 PM z.. PEAK _- VOLUMES = 333 15 668 0 0 0 271 1172 0 0 876 840 4175 L PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.910 0.000 0.889 0:000 0.894 CONTROL: Signalized; AGENDA ITEM NO.—:1._. -._ PAGE1.! L.. OF:2 .L Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: Southlan.d Car Counters _.. N -S STREET: _ I -15 SB Ramps :. .. DATE: �-.. 4/29/2003 LOCATION: City of Lake Elsinore E -W STREET: Diamond Dr. DAY: TUESDAY PROJECT# 03- 0717 -005 WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTNSOUNO EASTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES:. 1.3 .3 ..3 2 1 1 2 6:00 AM ''6:15 AM 6:30 AM { , 6:4S AM 7 :00 AM 86 1 38 132 46 105 97 5(}5 7:15 AM 98 0 47 119 54 121 126 : :5615 7 :30 AM 90 0 65 113 69 137 145 619 i 7:45 AM 122 1 89 157 85 153 194 801: 8:00 AM 111 0 81 141 76 142 163 734 8:15 AM 89 2 74 107 63 116 151 602: 8:30 AM 95 0 87 129 67 134 168 680 8:45 AM 107 1 96 124 62 130 182 702_ 9:00 AM 9 :15 AM 9`30 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM �+r" 10:15 AM 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM. ! 11:15 AM 11 :30 AM 11:45 AM TOTAL WL WT WR TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER _. VQLIIMES . -. 0, 0" 0- 798 S ,ST/ 0 1022 ,.. 522 -1038-- •:: 1226 - ::0. , 5188 AM Peak Hr Begins at: 745 AM PEAK = t VOLUMES = 0 0 0 417 3 331 0 534 291 545 676 0 2797. f PEAK HR FACTOR: 0.000 0.886 0.000 0.880 0.873 CONTROL. F Signalized; ITEM NO. AGENDA `f 5 PA OF �— Inter 'nin Memet sect ion Tur w ri g Prepared by: Southland Car Counters N -S STREET: 1 -15 SB Ramps DATE: 4/29/2003 LOCATION: City of Lake Elsinore TV E -W STREET: Diamond Dr. DAY: TUESDAY PROJECT# 03- 0717 -005 PM Peak Hr Begins at: 445 PM PEAK VOLUMES = 0 0 0 713 7 406 0 703 348 296 833 0 3306' . PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.000 0.888 0.000 0.902 0.952 CONTROL: Signalized; AGENDA REM NO. ?AGE L t b OFD =2� NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1.3 .3 .3 2 1 1 2 1:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:30 PM 1.45 PM 2:00 PM 2:15 PM 2:30 PM 2:45 PM 3:00 PM 3 :15 PM _ 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 190 2 97 191 89 93 201 863 4:15 PM 178 1 85 169 86 86 184 789 4:30 PM 165 0 108 184 75 89 179 800 4:45 PM 157 2 94 178 92 98 215 836 5 :00 PM 169 0 91 165 84 85 168 762 5:15 PM 181 2 113 157 78 102 207 840 5:30 PM 206 3 108 203 94 11 243 868 5:45 PM 187 1 88 174 81 84 192 807 1 6:00 PM 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 PM,, TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 0 0 0 1433 11 784 0 1421 679 648 1589 0 6565. r: PM Peak Hr Begins at: 445 PM PEAK VOLUMES = 0 0 0 713 7 406 0 703 348 296 833 0 3306' . PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.000 0.888 0.000 0.902 0.952 CONTROL: Signalized; AGENDA REM NO. ?AGE L t b OFD =2� Intersection.. Turning Movement Prepared by: Southland Car Counters "r% N -S STREET: Casino Dr. DATE- 4/29/2003 LOCATION: City of Lake Elsinore, E -W STREET: Diamond Dr.. DAY: TUESDAY PROJECT# 03 -0717 -006 NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND:. EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL Sr SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2` 0 1 2 0 1 3 0 2 2 0 i :00 AM. 6 :15 AM - 6:30 AM 6:45 AM i 7:00 AM 2 4 11 35 2 9 5 109 2 27 84 19 309 7:15 AM 4 8 17 31 6 8 7 187 3 39 118 29--- - -456 7:30 AM 7 6 13 29 8 12 10 -14S 7 51 121 42* 451 7:45 AM 12 10 20 38 11 16 18 184 5 63 167 65-* 609 8:00 AM 10 12 15 33 9 13 12 152 4 46 139 57- ` 502 8:15 AM 8 9 23 44 7 15 14 123 3 58 127 46 '477 { 8:30 AM 6 7 16 47 4 8 15 131 6 60 135 54 489 8:45 AM 9 8 19 52 3 11 10 118 4 53 153 49 489 9:00 AM 9:15 AM 9:30 AM. i 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM j 10:30 AM 10:45 AM 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 11:30 AM 11:45 AM TOTAL WT WR TOTAL NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL i VOLUMES = _ 58 64: 134 309. 50 :92- -91 1449 34 397 1044 360 3782. AM Peak Hr Begins at: 745 AM I PEAK j VOLUMES = 36 38 74 162 31 52 59 590 18 227 568 222 2077 ' PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.881 0.928 0.806 0.862 0.853 CONTROL: Signalized; i � rte` ALMA ITEM NO. -- .�..1� PAQEA—CW. OF Intersi e- lion =Turning M' Me' nt 5 PM Peak Hr Begins at: 445 PM - - PEAK VOLUMES = 59 80 160 196 70 95 74 696 73 267 769 213 2752 3 , PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.849 0.820• 0.833 0.892 0.859 CONTROL: Signalized; AGENDA ITEM NO...:... -- PAGE L,_Lb.OF� _ Prepared by: Southland Car Counters r1 N -S STREET: Casino Dr. DATE: 4/29/2003- LOCATION: City of lake Elsinore E -W STREET: Diamond Dr. DAY: TUESDAY PROJECT# 03 -0717 -006 NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 0 1 3 0 2 2 0 1:00 PM 1:15 PM 1:30 PM 1 :45 PM 2:00 PM -2;15 PM; 2 :30 PM_ 2:45 PM 3:00 PM< 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 4:00 PM 13 22 37 51 19 23 24 193 9 59 192 39` _ 681 4:15 PM 15 18 30 42 14 17 19 182 12 53 174 44. 620 4:30 PM 12 27 42 46 21 25 17 165 10 64 180 42 651 4:45 PM 10 16 36 43 16 20 13 189 16 68 187 51- 665 5:00 PM 16 21 40 45 13 28 20 154 19 60 158 47, 621 5:15 PM 14 19 39 48 17 21 15 147 17 66 203 S).:. 665 5:30 PM 19 24 45 60 24 26 26 206 21 73 221 .56. ._ 801 5:45 PM 11 13 33 54 18 21 22 172 13 56 169 45 627 # 6:00 PM 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 PM.. _. • ,, TOTAL NL NT NR SL' ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL VOLUMES = 110 160 302. 389 142 181 156 1408 117 499 1484 383 5331, Y 5 PM Peak Hr Begins at: 445 PM - - PEAK VOLUMES = 59 80 160 196 70 95 74 696 73 267 769 213 2752 3 , PEAK HR. FACTOR: 0.849 0.820• 0.833 0.892 0.859 CONTROL: Signalized; AGENDA ITEM NO...:... -- PAGE L,_Lb.OF� _ Average Daily Traffic Volumes Prepared by: Southland Car Counters Volumes for: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 City: Lake Elsinore Project #: 03 -091;5 =001 Location: Grape St. & s/o Lake Elsinore Gty Center Dwy. Client Ref #: 1595 -03 -01 AM Period NO SB EB WB PM Period NB SB ES WB 12.W12-15 - 8 7 �� n.=W-12:15 '� 46 45 12:15 -12:30 5 6 12:15 -12:30 26 33 12:30-12:45 3 7 12:30- 12:45 44 31 12:45 -1:00 0 16 1 21 37 12:45- 1:00 52 168 46 155 323 t 1:00 -1:15 2 2 1:004:15 49 43 1:15 -1:30 1 3 1:1S- 1:30 58 29 1:30 -1:45 1 2 1.30- 1:45 62 37 1:45 -2:00 1 5 1 8 13 1:45- 2:00 60 229 38 147 376 2:00 -2:15 0 0 2:00- 2:15 57 41 2:15 -2:30 1 1 2:15 -2:30 45 45 2:30- 2:45 0 0 2:30 -2:45 43 43 2:4S -3:00 1 2 3 4 6 2:45 - 3:00 55 200 33 162 362 3:00 -3:15 1 0 3 :00. 3:15 50 52 3:15 -3:30 1 0 3:15 -3:30 61 47 i 3:30.3:45 3 0 3 :30 -3:4S 104 52 3:45 -4:00 3 8 1 1 9 3:4S -4:00 75 290 47 198 488 4:001:15 4 1 4:00-4:15 78 51 4:15-4:30 6 2 4:15-4:30 87 51 4:30 -4:45 5 1 4 :30-4:45 51 49 4:45 -5:00 5 20 0 4 24 4:45 -5.00 71 287 52 203 490 5:00 -5.15 6 4 5:00 -5:15 59 58 SAS -5:30 9 1 5:15 -5:30 81 SO 5:30 -5:4S 8 2 5:30 -5.45 82 41 5:45-6:00 7 30 2 9 39 5:45- 6:00 70 292 41 190 482 6:00 -6:15 7 4 6:00 -6:15 80 50 6:15 -6:30 14 3 6:1S -6:30 84 29 r� 6:30 - 6:45 22 5 6:30 -6.45 86 20 ? 6 :45 -7:00 28 71 11 23 94 6:45- 7:00 83 333 54 153 486 7:00- 7:15 38 12 7:00-7:15 84 37 7:15 -7:30 32 15 7:15 -7:30 69 34 7:30 -7:45 36 25 7:30- 7:45 46 34 7:45 -8:00 24 130 24 76 206 7:45 -8.00 32 231 41 146 377 8:00,8:15 34 33 8:00$:15 43 35 8:1S -8:30 43 14 8:15 -8.30 22 36 8:30 - 8:45 34 21 8:30- 8:45 29 44 8 :45 -9:00 41 152 37 105 257 SAS -9:00 24 118 26 141 259 9.009:15 53 26 9100 -9:15 15 30 9AS -00 41 18 9:15 - 9:30 23 21 930 -9:45 25 23 9:30 -9:45 35 27 9:45 -10-00 42 161 26 93 254 9:45- 10:00 29 102 26 104 206 10:00 - 10:15 30 25 10:00 -10:15 19 11 i 10:15 -10:30 3S 19 10:15 -1030 16 15 i 10:30 -10.45 38 33 10:30 -10.45 20 17 10:45 -11:00 1 104 1 78 182 10:45 -11:00 12 67 18 61 128 11 :00- 11:15 44 27 11:00 -11.15 6 9 11:15 -11:30 35 27 11:15 -11:30 4 11 11:30 -11 -45 35 34 11:30 -11:45 3 6 f 11:45 -12:00 43 157 28 116 273 11:45- 12 --00 5 18 1 27 45 j Total Vol. 856 S38 0 0 1394 -2335 1687 0 0 4022 Daily Totals 3191 2225 0 0 5416 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF f .a i APPENDIX B CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE EXISTING AQEWA ITEM NO. �1-- PACE —000 OF o= MITIGS - exam Mon Jun 16, 2003 15:29:16 Page 1 -1 Elsinore City Center Existing _ AM. Peak Hgnr Enter ectiort volumes -- - - _ _. . Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 Grape St. (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 116 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.821 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 52.3 Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: D i Approach: North Bound- South Bound 'East Bound West Bound Mqvement: L - T R L T - R L - T - R L T - R Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 20 20 .20 20 20 20 10 20 20 10 20 20 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 --- - - - - -- --------- - - - - -- (--------------- --------------- ---------- - - - - -� Volume Module: Base Vol: 217 48 225 128 49 421 159 688 241 173 1767 122 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 '1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 217 48 225 128 49 421 159 688 241 173 1767 122 A User Adj: 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. PHF Volume: 217 48 225 128 49 421 159 688 241 173 1767 122 Reduct Vol: 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 217 48 225 128, 49 421 159 688 241 173 1767 122 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 217 48' 225 128 49 421 159 688 241 173 1767 122' ------ - - -- -- --------------- --------------- --------------- - --------- - - - - -i Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 . 1900 1900 1900' 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.92 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.90 0.90 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.48 0.52 1.00 2.81 0.19 Final Sat.: 3502 3610 1615 1805 1900 1615 3502 2569 900 1805 4803 332 ----- --- -- - - - ------- -- ----- - - -- ----- - --------- - -- - -( Capacity Analysis Module: '. Vol /Sat: 0.06 0.01 0.14 0.07 0.03 0.26 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.10 0.37 0.37 Crit Moves: * * ** * * ** * * ** * * ** Green /Cycle: 0.17 0.17 '0.17 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.09 0.34 0.34 0.12 0.37 0.37. Volume /Cap: 0.36 0.08 0.81 0_27 0.10 0.99 0.53 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.99 0.99 11 Delay /Veh: 42.7 40.3 62.1 34.1 32.3 82°.0 52.5 38.4 38.4 67.1 53.1 53.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00' AdjDel /Veh: 42.7 40.3 62:1 34.1 32.3 82.0 - 52.5 38.4 38.4 67.1.53.1 53:1 Designoueue: 12 3 12 6 2 21 9 31. 11 10 78 5 I -- Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AGENDA ITEM NO. _ �' �_ --- PAGE.., a �� A*-- I*-,- expm, Mon Jun 1.6 2003 10:49:58 Page 6-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Elsinore City Center Existing --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HC14 Operations. Method. (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 Grape St. (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 108 Critical Vol-/Cap. (X): 1,140 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 77.9 Optimal Cycle; 120 Level Of Service: E Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound. West Bound Movement: L - T - R L -. T - R L - T R L T - R ------------ 1--------------- 11--------------- 11---- - - - - -- --------- Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Protected Right a: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 1 20 20 20 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 ------------I--------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: 313 159 343 Growth Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 313 159 343 User Adj:. 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 313 159 343 Reduct Vol: 0 0 .0 Reduced Vol: 313 159 343 PCE Adj: 1.00 1..00. 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 313 159 343 ------------ --------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane., 1900 1960 100 Adjustment: 0.92.0.95 0-85 Lanes: 2.00.2..00 1-06 Final Sat.: 3502 3610 1615 ------------I--------------- Capacity Analysis.Module: Vol/Sat: 0.09 0.04 0.21 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0.19 0.19 . 0.19 Volume/Cap.: 0-48 0.24. 1.14 Delay/Veh-. 39.8 37- 6139. 2 User DelAdj: 1.00 -1.00 .0.0 1.00 AdjUel/Veh:' 39.8 37.6 139-2 Designoueue: - 16 .8- IB 20 20 20 1 0 11 0 1 11------------- -- 164 157 343 1.00 1.00 1,00 .164 157 343 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 164 157 343 10 0 0 164 157 343 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 164 157 343 It--------------- 1900.1900 1900 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 1805 1900 1615 --------------- 0.09 6..08 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.49 0-44 1.14 40.4 39.9 139.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 40.4 39.9 139.2 8 8 16 10 20. 20 10 20 20 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 --------------- -------------- 7-1 445 910 529 101. 1180 168, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 445 910 529 301 1100 168 1.00, 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 445 910 529 301 1180 168 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 445 910 529 301 1180 168 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 445 910 529 301 1180 168 II--------------- 11------ - - - - -- -- 1 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 0.92 0.90 0.90 0,95 0.89 0.89 2.00 1.26 0.74 1.00,2.63: 0.37 35.02 2157 1254 1805 4454 634 II------------- -- 11- 77------- - - - - -I 0.13 0.42 0.42 0.17 0.26 0.26. 0.17 0.37 0.37 0.15.0.35. 0.35 0.76 1.14 1.14 1.14 0.76 0.76, 48.6 107 107.0 144.6,-3.3.1 1 33.1- 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00. 1.00,- 48.6 167 107.0 144.6 33-.1 33.1 23 38 22. .16- 49 7. Traffix 7.5.071S (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc- Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 11 ,:1 x. MITIG8 - exam Mon Jun 16, 2003 15:19:49 Page 1 -1 Elsinore City Center Existing AI P.ea$ Hour. Inter otign.XQ3.,umes Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) * *t * * ; *+� * * * ** tit****** t,►* t**** t3*****:** t*.******+ �*** * * * * * * * * * * * * *tt *,r,tr * *tt * *,r ** Intersection #4 I -15 Fwy. NB Ramps (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) ** t*, rttr**:*** t*, r* ��** tw* t, rttt: ��* r***, r, e, r, r:** t*, r, r* rr** t* * * *ir,► * * * *t : *�,r,r * *r,t *,rtr;r Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 1,377 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 122.1 Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: F ::• s�rst� # * * *,r *�x * *� : *,r * * *,r * :� * *�w *, ter * * *,r *xf *,r* ire** t:* *,r : * * * *,r : : * * * *,► *t+t * *� * * * :,r ,e: - Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement : L -. T - R L - T - R L - T - R - L - T - R ------- Control: Split - - - - -- Phase - - - -- Split Phase Protected ---- ----- - - - - -� Permitted - Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 25 0 0 15 15 Lanes: 0 ------------ 0: it 0 0 0_ 0 0 0 O 1 0 2 0 0 ---------- '0 -- - 0 2 0 l _ --------------- ? Volume Module: - - - - -� i------ ---- - - - - - i i ------- - - - - -i t Base Vol: 193 0 334 0 0 0 254 710 0 0 1048 1331 Growth Adj: 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 193 0 334 0 0 0 254 710 0 0 1048 1331 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj:' 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 193 0 334 0 0 0 254 710 0 0 1048 1331 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 193 0 334 0 0 0 254 710 0 0 1048 1331 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00` 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:_00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 193 0 334 0 0 0 254 710 0 -------- 0 1046 1331 -� j ------ - - ---= --------------- Saturation Flow Module: ------- 11 --------------- 11-------- -- - - - - Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 .0.90 1.60 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1:00 1.60 0.95 0.85 { Lanes: 0:37 0.00 0.63 0.'00-0.00 0.00 1.00 2:00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 t Final Sat.: 625, 0 1081 0 "0' 0 1805 3610 0 0 3610 '1615 ------------ I--------------- 11--------------- Capacity Analysis Module: ------------- 11 --------------- � Vol /Sat: 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.20 0.00 0.0 0 0.29 0:82 C°it Moves: tf +* w * #• . : ** Green /Cycle: 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 Volume/Cap-;. 1.38 0.00 1:38 0.00 0.00 0:00 1.38 0.28 0.00 0._04 0.49 1.38 Delay /Veh: 232.0 6.0 232.0 0.0 0.0 0.0.253.7 6.8 0.0 0.0 13.81 200.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1_b0 1,00_ AdjDel /Veh:' 232.0 0.0 232. -0 0.0 0.:0 °0.0 253:7 6.8 0:0 0 -0 13.8 200.4 DesignQueue: 11 0 i9 0 0 0 16 15 0 0 30 44 * *t,r *tt* tea• t: trt�t, ttl r* �** a* tt* trrt, t, trt�t, t, t# k*,►*, tt, r* ittr, ttttttr * *,t,r :,t *,tt *,t *t #Xrtt� : *t * *: _ Traffix 7.5.0715 (c).2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING. GROUP Af00A ITEM NO. ? a - PAGE 9-63OFa s MITIGS - expm Moil Jun.16, 2003 15:25:44 Page 1 -1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- �` Elsinore City Center Existing__ - _. -!Peak i#our Interecti n'- volumes Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations.Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #41-15 Fwy. NB Ramps (NS) /Railroad Canyon.Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 115 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 1_365 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 120.7 Optimal.Cycle:OPTIMIZED ...Level Of Service:. F. _Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R. - L -_ T - R. x Control: Split Phase - - - - --- ------ -- - - --- Split.Phase Protected -------- -- - --- Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green:.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 15 0 0 15 is Lanes: 0 0 i! 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 .1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2. 0 1 _ ------------ {--------------- Volume Module: {{--------------- ]{--------------- 11--------------- { Base Vol: 333 0 668 0 0 0 271 1172 0 0 876 840 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 .. Initial.Bse: 333 0 668 0 0 O 271 1172 0 0 .876 840 User Adj- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 (. PHF Adj:.. 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00:. PHF Volume: 333 0 668 0 0 0 271 1172 0 0 876 840 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r. Reduced Vol:. 3.33 0 668 0 0 0 271 1172 0 0 876 840 PCE Adj: 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.. MLF Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 Final Vol.: 333 _ 0 668 0 0 .0 271 1172 0 0 876 840 - ----- - - - - -- --------------- Saturation Flow Module: ---------------{{--------------- ------ - - - -]. Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 .1900 1900 . 1900 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 1;00 1:00 0.95._0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 F Lanes: 0.33-0.00 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 0.00. 0.0.0 2,90 1.00.. Final Sat.: 566 0 1135 0 0 0 1805 361.0 0 {]---- 0 3610 1615 ------------ ] - ----------- {--------------- Capacity Analysis Module: {--------------- {--------------- Vol /Sat: 0.59 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 o.. 00 0.1S 0.32 0.00 0.00 0,24 0.52 Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.43 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11.0.49 0.00 0.00 0..38 0.38. Volume /Cap: 1.37 0.00 1.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.36 0.66 .0 06 6..00 0.64 1.37 Delay /Veh:_ 205.9 0.0 205.9 0.0 0..0 0.0 244.2 23:.0 0.0 0.0 30.1 210..4 User DelMj,: 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00. 1.00.. AdjDel /Veh: 20.5.9 0.0 205.9 0.0 0.0 '0.0 244.2 23.0 0.0 0.0 30.1 210,4;:._ DesignQueue: 14- .0 28 0.. 0. 0 16_. 41 0 _. 0 37. 38...' S 2002 Dowling Assoc.- Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) A GEMA ITEM NO. PAGE OF MITIGS - exam Mon Jun 16, 2003 15:23:23 Page 1 -1 Elsinore City Center Existing -_= AM---eak Hour Intersection volumes Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #3 1 -15 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. JEW) * atat: ata* at:+ r*, rs* s**,►* s** er****** r**f t, t**: tx*:**+ r**, c * : * * *,f * * * * : * * *i,t *r,r,t :,trr * *t Cycle (sec): 65 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.790 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 24.1 Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: C Approach: North Bound South Bound East.Bound West Bound Mdvement : L - T - R L - T - R L T - R L - T - R- ---------- --(--------------- ------------- --------------- ---------- - - -7 -1 Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 15 15 10 15 0 Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 1 O 2 0 0 ---------- --------------- ------- ---- ---- ----- --- - - - - -� Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 417 0 331 0 534 291 545 676 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00. Initial.Bse: 0 0 0 417 0 331 0 534 291 '545 0'6 6 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1. 0.0 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.,00 1.00 .1.00 1.00,1.00 1.00' PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume 0 of 0 417 0 331 0 S34 291 545 676 0 Reduct Vol- 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 417 ` 0 331 0 534 291 545 676 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..0,0 1.00 1.00 1.100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00. Final Vol.: 0 0 0 417 0 331 0 534 291 545 676 0 j------------ 1 --------------- --------------- 1(-----= - - - - -- --------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 19.00 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1 00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 1.00 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.0.0 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 6 3610 1615 1805 3610 0 -- ---- - - - - -- ------ --- ------ --------------- ---------=-- --- -- ----- --- - - - - -�. Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.15 0.18 0.30 0.19 0:00 j Crit Moves: at ** to ** *aaa Green /Cycle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0..27 0.00 0,23 0.23 0.36 0.59 0. 00.V Volume /Cap: 0.00 0100 0.00 0.85.0.60 0.75 0.00 0..6.4 0.78 0'.85 0.32 0.00 Delay /Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.0 0.0 28.6 0..0 24.3 33.6 29.2 6.9 0.0 4 UBeT DelAdj: 1..00.1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.;00.1.00 .I.QO AdjDel %Veh: 0.0 0..0 0.0 35.0 0.0 28.6 0.0 24.3 33 -6 2$.2 6.9 '0.0_ DesignQueue: .0 0 0 12 0 9 0 15 8 14 11 '0 aaaataaaa,raaa «at *it, tat* tt** rt*, rt** rt* ttr:*, r.stt *tt *,t,rttittr *,t :t�tt *,t ,t *t * *ttttt * *tftk,t Traffix 7.5.:0715.(0) 2002,, Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AGMA ITEM NO..d. - PAGE= OF MsTzmm - expm Mon Jun 16, 2003 15:35,45 ` Page z-i _________________________________________________ ~�~~ mzoionre City Center '.` - - -�8-e��k'a�6����t�A��El��-�o-I�umed' __---__-_-__---____----_-------_--_----_--__-_-------------_--- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations 'Method (Base volume Alternative) Intersection #3 1-15 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) /Rail road"Canyow Rd.- (EW). Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y+R 4 s.ec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 27-12 Optimal Cycle.-OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: C. -Apgzz^anh, North Bound South Bound East Bound weoc Bound Movement: u - r - R L -w T - a L - r - s L _ -------_-------|` T _ R. ~~ ------------ Control: -----_--------- ` it Phase � [1-----7 -------- Split Phase 'Permitted Protected � Rights: include ' Include. zooIode Include Min. Green: o o u u a o o 15 is 10 i's » z**mea, n o n o u z w o m 1 o m 2 o 1 �{--------------- 1 m 2 o m' ------------ 1--------------- Volume Module, --------------- --------------- J.`. eaew Vol: o o n 713 o .446 o 348 oaa 833 Growth u/�j` 1'00 z.oV z'oo �p3 z'on z'on 1.00 z'nm z-on 1_00 1.'00 z'nu s.JO zultlaI oae: o w o 713 q 406 o 703 348 oy« oa3, o User xudj, 1.00 1'00 1'00 z'ou z'oo 1'00 z'nu 1,00 z'mo z'mo 1'00 z'mo eorx��, 1�oo 1'00 z'uo 1'00 1'00 zJuo z-ou 1 -00 z'no 1'00 z'du 1'00 ` eHFnmolope, u o u 713 m 4$6 n 703 348 296 833 u eedoot Vol: o o n u o n o o o o o V Reduced Vol: o o V 713 o «os o 703. 348 zea 833 o ~~~` eoo adj, 1;00 1. 00 z'ou z'oo i'no z'oo . z'wo 1.00 z'mo 1.00 1.00 z'mo woarxdj: z'ou 1.00 1'00 z'oo 1'00 1'00 z'oo 1400 1'00 z'00 1'00 z'mu. Final Vol', n o o 113 n 466 n 703 346 2e6 833 o -_--_'_--!__----_---|�-------------��----------'---!�----------__|`, Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: zAVu zoo n 1900 1900 1900 1e00 zeoo 1900 zenu 19, uu1noo 1e00 x�notuszt, 1'0 0 1'00 z'on 0-95 `'oa o'gs z'uu u'ms 0'8.5 0'95 U'ys 1.00 ' Lanes: 0.00 0'00 o'Vh z-ou o'ou z'nn o�m u.0n 1.00 0.00 Final pioal Sat', o ' m o |�i-'no-z'oo 1805 o 1615 o 3.610 1615 � -------- ------ 1e05 ----_---' ssio ------_'-_I__-_____|-_---_---__- Capacity odqlw, Module Vol/SAt; 0'nn m'mo u'nu m'«o 0_00 0'25 n'mu 0_19 n'oo 0'16 m'zs u'mo.� Crlt Moves: ' ~^~~^� � o mo ' o.00 o ou o�*2 n'oV 0'42 01.00 w'uS o`os o'xo 0'43 0'00 voInm���ag; m'mo m � n'mo` n' ' w �s o oo o �� a mm � 7n � oa ' ' ^ ' ^ ' o �a ' �Ls« mz»o ` ` oeIay/Veh: o'a n'o o'V 34'5 _0'o 14`7 m�m 25'3 ao.s 57'5 za'o o'a_ User ; x'uo |-mp z'ou 1^40 1'00 1'00 1'00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1�0 �a mdJDel/aeh� *'V 'o-.o 0'0 34'5 0.0 v&'v 0.0 25' 3 38.5 57~5 zs.z^ 0.0 DemlgmQueue, u o m 15. 0 8 m 18 _g a _17' . o - rracfix 7' s ' 071s (o) 2002 m�^� l` i og ��so ~' -uicmomed to a� m e�14ozmooRzN~ GROUP � AGMA0[EM NO.��]-� PAGE � `+� OF �� exam Mon Jun 16, 2003 10:49:18 Page 3 -1 Elsinore City Center Existing - AM -Peak- Hour Intersection - val -umes Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) # tttt# t# t# t## tt# t# t# tt### tt#, t*# iF# f# t# t# ftit## # it, tt*### it # # #Ft # #ttt #ir*ttt #ttfttt #ttt *# Intersection #2 Casino Dr- (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) * tt# tttttttttttttt, t# tttttttt# t### trt# t*, r* �t#*, t#: trt# tt +rrtt # #+rttt #tt #tt,i : * *ttt *tt* -:� Cycle (sec): 65 Critical, Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.449 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) .Average Delay (sec /veh): 16.8 Optimal Cycle: 60 Level Of Service: B t# t# t# t# ttt## ttttt:# ttttttttttt# ttt*###; r*# t*# x*** t# irt# t * # # #�ttt # * # # *#t #t,r #lrttt,t *,t Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound I Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------ - - - - -- i--------- - - - - -- i i--------- - - - - -- r i--------- - - - - -- --------- - - - - -- i Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 20 20 10 20 20 Lanes: 1. 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------------ --------- --------- - - - - -- ----- ---------- ---------- - - - - -� ,j Volume Module: f Base Vol: 36 38 74 162 31 52 59 590 18 227 568 •222 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 -00 1.00 1.00 Initial 8se: 36 38 74 162 31 52 59 590 18 227 568 222 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00.1_.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . PHF Volume: '36 38 74 162 31 52 59 590 18 227 568 222 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 36 38 74 162 31 52 59 590 18 227 566 222 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ' MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 -00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 36 38 74 162 31 52 59 590 18 227 568 222 ---- - - - - -- I-------------- -11 --------------- --------------- -------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.70 0.86 0.86 0.68 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.92 0..91 0.91 Lanes: 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1_00 1.00 1..00 1.00 2.91 0.09 2.00 1.44 0.56 Final Sat.: 1328.1626. 1626 .1286.1635. 1635 1805 5013 153 3502.2487 972 ------ ----- - ---------- ----------- -- ------ ------- ��---- - - - - -- -- =� Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.13 0.02 0.03 0.03.0..12 0.12 0.06 0.23 O.Z3 Crit Moves: * * ** * * ** * * ** Green /Cycle: 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.15 0.37, 0.17 0.18 0.40 0.40 Volume /Cap: ,0.0.9 0'.:08 0.15 0.41 0.06 0.10 0.21 0.+32 0.32 0.35 0:57 0.57 Delay /Veh: 16.1 16.0 16.4 18.5 15.9 16.1 24.4 34..8 14_8. 23.4 3.5:7 15.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1100 1.00. AdjDel /Veh: 16.116.0 16.4. 18.5 15.9 16.1 24.4 14.8 .14_8 23.4 -15.7 15.7 Designoueue.: 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 14 0 7 13 5 • tttttttttttttttttt # #ttttttt # # #t #ttt #ttt #ttt * ## tit*#+ r# #t * #tt *tt # *ttt�r *ttit * # *t # #x *" Traffix 7.5.0715 .(c).2002 Dowling Assoc_ Licensed to.RK ENGINEERING GROUP AW �li► fTEIM �nNO7 . .....- PAGE � '.// IWA/` expm Mon Jun 16, 2003 10:49:58 - - - - -- - Page 3 -1 -- ---------------------------------------- �` Elsinore City Center Existing _ PMak "Hour inters ction vfSlumes Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) # k*** k#« k«**** k# k#«* k*«**** k kk** t# k##*«*#*« k# k##** «kk* *k # # # #k# # # # # # # *# # #1F *t ## # ## Intersection #2 Casino Dr. (NS) /Railroad Canyon. Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 65 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X):. 0.579 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 18.0 Optimal Cycle: 60 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement- L - T - R L - T - R L - T --- - - R - - - -- L - T - R ------ - - -- -- Control: ----- - - - - -- Permitted ---- -- - - - - -- .--- - Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 '20 20 10 20 20 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------ - - -- -- --------------- Volume Module: --------------- �i--------------- -------------- - -�.. Base Vol: 59. 80 160 196 70 95 74 696 73 267 769 213 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1 -00 1 -00 1.00 Initial Bse: 59 s0 160 196 70 95 74 696 73 267 769 213 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 59 80 160 196 70 95 74 696 73 267 769 21.3. Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 p, Reduced Vol: 59 80 160 196 70 95 74. 696 73 267 769 213 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 11.00 1.00 i MLF Adj: 1.00 1 :00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 59 80 160 196 70 95 74 696. ----------- --------------- 73 267 769 213 ----------- - - - -�. 1 ------------ 1--------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.64 0.86 0.86 0.58 0.8.7 0.87 0.95 0.90 0.90 0.92 0.92 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 1:00 1.0.0 1.00 1:.00 1.00 1.00 2..72 0.28 2.00 1.57 0.43 Final Sat.: 1218 1625 1625 1110 1656 .1650 1805 4629 --------------- ---=----------- 486 3502 2734 757 ------ - --------- � ------ - - - - -- I --------------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.,05 0.05 0.10 0.18 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.15 0.15 0.08 0.28 0.28 2- Crit Moves: # * *# « ### « * *k Green /Cycle: 0.31 0.31- 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.15 0.37 0.37 0.18 0.40 0.40 Volume /Cap: 0.16 0.16 0.32 0.57 0114 0.19 0.27 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.70 0.70 Delay /Veh: 16.6.16.4 17:5 21.3 16.3 16.6 24.8 15.4 15.4 23..8 "17.9 17.9 User D61M z 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 . AdjDel /Veh: 16.6 16.4 17.5 21,3 16.3 16.6 24.8 15.4 15.4 23.8 17.9 17.9 DesignQueue: 1 2 4, 5 2 2 2 16 .2 8 18 5 �< i Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP ,rte AQEMA ITEM No. 2 K, PAGE 8 O i - =k I j i f -z 1 i APPENDIX C CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE OPENING YEAR WITHOUT PROJECT AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE �'"_ .� r Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AQ 0A ITEM NO.. =.�:� PACT am opening year Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:44:19 Page 6 -1 /^ Elsinore City Center Opening year without project AM:. eak HgVr iBtQr ection,vokumes _ Level Of Service computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 Grape St. (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.952 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 83.8 Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: - --- -- L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R - - - -- Control: - - -- Split Phase Split Phase Protected - -------- - - - - -) Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include ;1 Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 20 20 10 20 20 Lanes- ----- - - - 2 0 2 0 1 -, 1 0 1 0 1 ---------- 2 0 1 1 0 1 0. 2 1 0 - - -- ---------- Volume Module: - - - - - - - - - H -=------- --- --- --------- - - - - -i Base Vol: 217 48 225 128 49 421 159 688 241 173 1767 122 " ` Growth Adj: 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06` Initial Bse: 230 51 238 136 52 446 169 729 255 183'1873 129 Added Vol: 2 3 1 19 8 63 21 56 3 2 156 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 232 54 240 155 60 509 190 785 258 185 2029 136 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00'1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 PHF Volume: 232 54 240 1SS 60 509 190 78S 258 185 2029 136 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 232 54 240 155 60 509 190 785 258 185 2029 136 PCE Adj:- 1.00 1.100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1.60 k MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 232 54 240 155 60 509 190 785 258 185 2029 136 j ---- -- - - - - -- --------------- Saturation Flow Module: --------------- ------- -------- ---- ------ - - - - -� ij Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment! 0.92 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.92 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.90 0.90 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.50 0.50 1.00 2.81 0.19 .,------ Final Sat.: = =- 3SO2 3610 1615 1805 1900 1615 _--- = -- 3502 2616 861 1805 4817 324 - - - - --------------- Capacity Analysis ��- Module: ---- - - - '--------------- 11 ----------- - - -� Vol /Sat: 0.07 0.01 0.15 0.09 0.03 0.32 0,05 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.42 0.42 Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.28. 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.12 0.37 6.37 ` Volume. /Cap: 0.40 0. O.9 0.89 0'11 0.11 1.13 0.65 0.89 0.89 0.89 1.13 1.23 Delay /Veh: 45.1 42.4. 77.2 34.5 32.4 127.5 58.4 45.8 45.8 85.3 10S 104.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 i.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00- ; AdjDel /Veh: 55.1 42.4. 77.2 34.5 32.4 127.5 58.4 45.8 45.8 85.3 105 104.$ DesignQueue: 13 3 14 8 3. 26 12 37 12 11 94 6 Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AQ 0A ITEM NO.. =.�:� PACT AWMA ITEM NO...,.. =y- PAGE Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:47:27 Page 6 -1 pm opening year _ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Elsinore City Center Opening year without project . `Pi�f Peak Ftour YntiEsrectionTi�oTumes ' - - 3 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative),. Intersection #5 Grape St. (NSURailroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 115 Critical Vol./Cap- (X): 1.295 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R = 4 sec)- Average Delay (sec /veh): 113.2 Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level.Of Service:. F _Approach: North Bound. South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R - L - T - R L - T - R - -- L - T - R -- -- --- - -- -- -- -- ---- Control: Split -- - - - -- Phase - - - - -- -- Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 20 .20 10 20 20 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 ;0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 ------------ I--------------- Volume Module: --------------- ---------- ----- ----- --- -- - - - --) Base Vol: 313 159 343 164 157 343 44.5 910 529 301 1180 .168 _ Growth Adj: 1.06 1..06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.0.6 1.06 1.06 Initial Bse: 332 169 364 174 166 364 472 965 561 319 1251 178 Added Vol: 11 11 6 12 8 41 73 181 11 6 .101 22, PasserByVol: .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 .0 0 . Initial Fist: 343 180 370 186 174 405 545 1146 572 325.1352 200 User Adj: 1.001.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 �. PHF Adj- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 PHF Volume: 343 180 370 186 174 405 545 1146 572 325 1352 200 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 343 180 370 186 174 405 545 1146 572 325 1352 200 rn/ PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00- 1.100 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1_00"1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 343 = 180 370 186 174 405 545 1146 572_ --------------- --------------- If 325 --- - - 1352 206 - - - - -7 ------ - - - -- I --------------- Saturation Flow Module: -- Sat /Lane: 19.00 1904 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900,_ 1900 . 1900 1900 ;- Adjustment: 0.92 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.92 0.90 0.90 0.95 0.89 0.89 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.33 0.67 1.00 2.61 0.39 Final Sat:: 3502 3610 1615 18.05 1900 1615 3502 2288 1142 --------------- --------------- 1805 4432 656: - - - - -- ---- --- - -- -- I --------------- Capacity Analysis Module: ---- 71� Vol /Sat: 0.10 0.05 0.23 0.10 0.09 0.25 0.16 0.50 0.50 0.18 0.30 0.30 r Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.18 0.18 0;18 0,19 0..19 0.19 0.18 0.39 0.39 0.14 0,315 0.35 k Volume /Cap: 0.55 0.28 1.30 0.53 0.47 1.30 6.88 1.30 1. 3.0 1.30 0.88 0:08 Delay /Veh: 44.3 41.3 203.8 43.3 42.2 201.0 59.3 174 173.9 208.7 40.4 40.4.. User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. AdjDel/Veh: 44.3 41.3 203.8 43.3 42.2 201.0 59.3 174 173.9 208.7 40.4 40.4 t" DesignQueue: 18 .10 20 10.- 9 22 30 51 .25 19 61 9 i. Traffix 7.5.0715 (c} 2002 Dowling As sod _'Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP r AWMA ITEM NO...,.. =y- PAGE k am opening year Thu Jun 19, 2003 10-44-19 Page.5 -1 -------------------------------- --- -- ------------ ------- - -- - -- --------- - - - - -- ... /-� Elsinore City Center Opening year without project AN, Peak Ho}ir- Inter t qn- uQ'%umes Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future volume Alternative) Intersection #4 I -15 Fwy...NB Ramps (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 1.545. Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh)- 159.7 Optimal Cycl'e:OPTIMIZED Level.Of Service: F *, r::: �t►, rf** �r***t* r�r *,r *,t *r * * * * * : * * : *,►,tw *rr *tt : ** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:,. L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control.- Split Phase Split Phase Protected Permitted Rights: Include Include Include include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 i5 0 0 15 .15 Lanes: 0 ------------ 0 1!. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2. 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 j I---------------- Volume Module: 11-------------- - 11-------------- -- -11.-------- ------- - 1..:_: j Base Vol: 193 0 334 0 0 0 254 710 0 0 1048 1331 Growth Adj: 1.06. 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1...06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.Q6 Initial Bse: 205 0 354 .0 0 0 269 753 .0, 0 1111 1411 Added Vol: 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 57 0 0 115 105 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 ' Initial Fyt: 205 0 377 0 0 0 269 810 0 0 1226 1516 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 i.0o 1.001.00 1.00.. E PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 PHF Volume: 265. 0 377 0 0 0 269 816 0 0 1226. 1516 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 205 . 0 377 0 0 0 269 810 0 0 1226 1516: l PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.Q0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00, I MLF Adj:., 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 205 ------------ 0 377 0 0 0 269 810 0 0 1226 - - 1516.' -- I--------------- Saturation Flow Module: II--------------- It--------------- 11------- - - L j Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.90 1_00 0.9.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0- .95 0.85 Lanes: 0.35 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 6.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 60q 0 1105 0 0 0 1865 3610 0. 0 ------ 3610 1615:: a------------ --------------- 11--------------- Capacity Analysis Module: 11------------ --- 11--- - -- - - -1 Vol /Sat: 0.34 0..00 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.22 0.06 0.00 0.34 0.94 - . Crit Moves :. Green /Cycle.: 0.. ?2 0.00 0.2?, 0.00 0.00 0_00 0.40 0.70 0 -.00 0.00 0.61 0.61 Volume /Cap: 1.54 0.00 1.54 0.06 0.00 0.00 1.S4 6.32 0.00 0.00 0,56 1,:54.' Delay /Veh: ..304;8 .0.6 304.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 325.5 6.8 0.0 0.0 14.3.273.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00.- AdjDel /Veh: 304.8 '0.0 304.8. 0.0 0.0 0..0 325.5 6.8 0.0 0.0 14.3 273.6:. DesignQueue: 12 0 21 0 O 0 17 17 0 O. 35 50 **, f, r# t:*:, rt* t: t****l t** t, rt*: x, r* �t;► x+ r*:, rt*::::, r** t**: �, r * * + * * * * :x,r *,r :,t * * *� * * *,r * : *• - /'� Traffix 7.S.0715 -(c) 2002 Dowling. Assoc. Licensed . to, RK. -ENGINEERING GROUP AAA ITEM NO._ PAGE-�Ll 2-OF� AGENDA ITEM NO. - PAGE pm opening year Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:47:27 Page 5 -1 Elsinore City Center opening year without projert I- htefslis-ct'io volumes - Level Of Service Computation.Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume; Alternative) Intersection #4 I -15 Fwy. NB Ramps (NS) /Railroad Canyon. Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 1.540 F Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 158.7 Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level 'Of Service: F *k *k�l lttkk* *kk * « #k *irkk#rk * « * *k� _Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement- L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 15 0 0 15 15 Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1 0 2 0 0 6 0 2 0 1 ----------=----------------((-----=-----=-= Volume Module: = 11---=----------- ---------= Base Vol: 333 0 668 0 0 0 271 1172 0 0_ 8.76 840.., Growth Adj: 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.061..06 1:06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 Initial Bse: -3S3 0 708 0 0 0 287 1242 0 0 929 89.0 Added Vol: 0 0 76 0 0 0 0 186 0 0 82 71 _ PasserByVol.: 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , Initial Fut: 353 0 784 0 0 0 287 1430 0 0 1011, 961. User Adj: 1:00 5.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 -00 1.00 1 -00 1 -00 1 -00 1 -00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 (- PHF Volume: 353 0 784 0 O 0 287 1430 0 0 1011 961 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 353 0 784 0 0 0 287 1430 0 0 101.1 961 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 -00 1.00 1_00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 j Final Vol.: 353 - 0 784 0 0 0 287 1430 0 --------------- --------------- 0 ---------- 1011 961 - - - - -� ------ - - - -- --------------- Saturation Flow Module: :. Sat /Lane: 1906 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 J Adjustment: 0.89 1.00 0,89 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Lanes: 0.31 0.00 0.69 0.00.0 -00 0.00 1.00 2..00 .0.00 0.00 2.00. 1.00 Final Sat:: S27 -- 0 1171 0 0 0 1805 3610 0 ------------- --------------- - 0 --- ------- 3610 1615 - - - --� =. --- --- - - - - --------------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.67 0.00 0:67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0:40 0.00 0.00 0:28 0460 ! Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.44 6.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.3.9 0.39 Volume /Cap: 1.54 0.00 1._S4 0- .011'(1.0:0 0.00 1.54 0.81 0.06 0:04 0.72 1.54' Delay /Veh :.283:6 0-.0 283.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 321.4 28..7 0.0 0.0 33.3 28.7.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00' 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel /Veh: 283.6 0.0'283 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 321.4 28:7 0.0 0.0 33.3 287.7 Designoueue :.. -16 0. 35. 0 0 0 18 54 0 0 44 45 Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc:' Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AGENDA ITEM NO. - PAGE am opening year Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:44:19_ - ------------------------------------ Page ..4 -1,. �'" Elsinore City Center ------- Opening year without project - - z AN-E, gak Hour Int€rWtionyouJumes - -------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #3 I -1S Fwy. SS Ramps (NS)/Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 70 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.898 4 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 32.5 Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: ' Approach: North Bound, South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement- ------ - - - - -- L - T - R -------- - - - - -- L - T - R L -` T - R L - T` - R ' Control: Split.Phase ------- - - - - -- Split Phase Permitted -------- Protected - - - - -1 Rights: Include include Include Include Min. Green: 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 15 10 . 15 '0. f Lanes: ------------ 0 0 0 0 0 1--------------- il-=-=----------- 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 6 Volume Module:: 11--------------- 11------- - ---------- � Base Vol: 0 0 0 417 0 331 0 534 291 545 .676 0 Growth Adj:_ 1.06 1.66 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.,06 1.06 Initial B'se: 0 0 0 442 0 351 0 566 308 578 717 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 19 0 63 52 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' Initial Put: 0 0 0 479 0 351, 0 585 308 641 169 .0 - User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 -00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 I PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00`1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 479 0 351 0 585 308 641 769 0 Reduct Vol: or 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 4.79 0 351 0 585 308 641 769 0: PCE Adj: 1:00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. -00. MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: ------------ 0 0 0 479 0 .351 0 585 308 641 769 .0 - -1 1--------------- 11--------------- Saturation Flow Module: 11--------------- 11---------- - - - l Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900. 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment - 1.00`1.00. 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.9S 0.85 0.95 0.95 1.00.. Lanes: 0.06 0.`00 0.00 1. 00 0.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 1 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 0 3610 1615 1805 3610 0 --- 1--------------- 11--------------- Capacity Analysis Module: 11-----------=--- 11--------- - - - - - -L VOI /Sat:. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.16 0.19 6.35 0.21 0.00 Crit Moves: * * *: • + +* + # +* Green /Cycle: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.38 0.59 0.00 Volume /Cap: 0.00 6,00 0.60 0:94 0_.06 0..77 0:00 0.76 0.89 0.94 0.36 . O.QO. Delay /Veh; 0.6 -0.0 0.0 51 -2 0.0 31.1 0.0 30.1 50.4 43.0 7.6 0.0 ` . E User DelAdj: 1._00 1.00' 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 `. AdjDel /Veh: .0.0 '0.0 0:0 51:.2 0.0 31.1 -0.0 30.1 50.4 43.0 7.6 '0 6 DesignQueue: 0 0 0 14 0 10 0 19 10 17 13 O Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AGENDA ITEM NO. ' Thu Jun 19 2003 10:47,27 Page 471 pm_opeolo�_�eat_-___________'___________________ _______ ozaloore City Center opening yjaar without project; '--- PM ;ak Hour ________�_`________ --'---__---__-__------_---__-_---_----_--_-- Level uc Service Computation Report 2000 acM Operations Method (ruture'Volume Alt - ezn,tx»e), ` Intersection #s z-zs .- ao Ramps (mo)�mmilznad Canyon Rd, (EVO . Cycle (see):' 65 Critical Vol -/Cap. (a>, 1'056 uoam Time (aec); y (Y+R = « o=o) Average belay (oec/,m=u), 50.2 Optimal C»*le;OsTIMzZpD ue,�l.w^ S=r"^c=` ` '' ~~ ; � ` / ocn�n� m���� Bound East Bound West Bound ���----' ----- u � � xmr,emeat; L - T - R L - T .- ' - � ' - - a � r - ----------�-�----'r---------\�-- -.7 -----------l�----�----------1i----_-- --------- - l�� p��oe gpI( coo�rn�� ' � it Phase Permitted . Protected Include zpcl^de Include �i�b�m� �mcIo�e oo min. Greeo: w o o m o o 0 15 .15 10 is o uauam^ ' � ` m 0 o 1 m w o x m m z 0 z 1 m 2 0 n _---_-__�[-��---�-----��-------------------------i�---------�-� ^~ - Volume Module: Base Vol: n o u �zs o *�� m �oa �xm ��s ��� o —^ ozznwthxdj: z`o$ x^oa 1'06 1.06 1'06 z'ae 1'06 1'06 1'06 a'os 1'06 1-016- ' Initial m°e: o u n 756 « *su o s 74S saa sz* nes 0, r . Added Vol: u o u zzs n o o ea m 44 su n eaaoers�nxzl, a o o o o o o u o ` » » o Initial zut, 0 w o mmz n 430 0 e08 aws 358 921 m , User , ' 'm# z-mm z'wu 1.00, 1.00 z.wn 1'00.1'do 1'00 1'00 I.Au 1'mn nar ~^�-` z ' ou z ' mn x'mo 1'00 1'00 z'mo 1-00 1'uo 1'00 1'00 z'mn 1'00. �s� ��I��a, ' o n w eoz n *�m � ooa o*s s sa ' ozz � ,�. aeduct Vol: o o o m o n a � . o o o m ` Reduced Vol: ' o o o mmz u 430 o aaa 36e 3Se 921 n pco Adj: 1'00 1'00 1'00 z'no 1_00 z'on z_oo 1 '00 1,00 1-00 1�00 1'00` MLF z'uh 1.00 z'no 1-00 1-00 i'oo 1'00 1'001 z'uo z.V0 1'00 z'bo Final -' Vol.-. o o o mnz o 430 |� o --------------- uoa aa» |� 358 '------'----- 921 o � -------' Saturation pz ----------| � |--------- ` ^ ^' zmno 1e0$ 1900 1900 1*00 1900 1e00 1*00 1960 1900 19o� 0u 0 'oat/zame, 1z9 ' ' i^on 1.00 �4u pa 'ou o'� ��wb m' u'ds o'9s m � `. - Lanes: w'md a 'uu �.no o'ou 1'�A �'n0 2_00 1'00 z'om z'mu o'gV' Final Salt.- o o 1805 | --------------- o 1615 |' � |' ---------- sa10 1615 .1805 --- --��-�--- ,.3610 m � --------\---------- Capacity Analysis Module: ` -| o�** a'wu 0'27 m'n� p'oo o'as w~um 0' 0'00'' Cr1t Moves- ' Green/Cycle: 0' 00 0.00 a,mo 0'*5 a'mo 0'45 -0.00 Q' 0'16 0"4'1 0'00 '-----^ 6'0�o-o0,m. e6 �' $9 m' no m.s§ u '0e ' C-e7 .0-'23 99 1.09 m ' 62 0' 00 ----^'' -m'm #-o 7e'1 m' 'm z4�m 0,0 *m.n 68.6 101,8 15.6 0'0 ` ---- ----~ : z�m ' - ` ' ��mo'o 1. go 1,00 � .� � x' od' 1' 00 i, on 1' 00 ,a 1' 00 adjmal/V*h`. o'o `� �0'0 m'm ��' i 0'0 �* o m ' m 48' 7 68^ e imi ' m xt, m' wi oco1go��eo�,_ u m ' oo o � * � , o� zz �z ' _._p Traffix 7.5-.Vis (c) t!00 Dowling'Asso&- Licensed to RX ENGINEERING GROUP �� AGENDA ITEM NO. � fl Traffix 7.5.0715_(c)..2002.Dowling Assoc._ Licensed to.RK- ENGINEERING GROUP AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1" PAGE OF:_�JL am opening year Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:44:19 Page 3 -1 Elsinore City Center --------- - -- - -- Opening year without project AIL,Reak Hour Intpraection- yolumes - _ Level Of Service Computation Report -------- - - - --- 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Casino Dr. (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 65 Critical Vol_ /Cap. {X): 0.493 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 17.3 Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound -' Movement:. L ------ - - - - -- --------------- - T - R L - T - R L - T - R --------------- L - T - R Control: Permitted ----- ------- --- Permitted Protected ------- Protected - -------- ) Rights: Include Include Include Include f Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 20 20 10 20 20 Lanes: - 1' --- --- - - - - -- --------------- 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 O 1 0 2 1 0 --=----------- 2 0 1 1 0 Volume Module: 11 --------------- ��-=--- --- -- - - - - -� Base Vol: 36 38 74 162 31 52 59 590 18 227 568 222' Growth Adj: 1.06 1.06 .1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06_ Initial Bse- 38 40 78 172 33 55 63" 625 19 .241 602 235 Added Vol: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 17 0 4 48 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 38 40 80 172 33 55 63 642 19 245 650 235, User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj -- 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00`1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.,00. 1.00 . PHF Volume: 38 40 80 172 33 55 63 642 19 245 650. 23.5 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O Reduced Vol: 38 40 80 -172 33 55 63 642 19 245 650 235 i PCE Adj: 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ji MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:0.0 1.00 1. GO 1.00 Final Vol _c 38 ------ - 40 80 172 33 55 63 642 19 245 650 235 - - - -- -----=------=-- Saturation Flow Module: --------------- 11 --------------- ---------- - - - - -� Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 . Adjustment; 0.70 0.86 0.86 0.67 0:86 0.95 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.91 0.91 Lanes: 1..00 1.00 1_.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 2.91 0.09 2.00 1.47 0.53 Final Sat.: 1321 1625 1625 1275 1635 1635 1805 5017 149 3502 2545 921 - Capacity Analysis Module- -- Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.02 0.0S 0..13 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.13 0.13 6.01 0:26 '0.26 - Crit Moves: + * ++ * + +* + + +* Green /Cycle: 0.31 0,31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.15 0.37 0.37 0.18 0.40 0.40 Volume /Cap: 0,09 0.08 0.16 0.44 0.07 0.11 0.23 0.!�5 0.35 0.38 0.64 0:64. Delay /vehi 16.1 16:0 16.5 18.8 15.9 16.2 24..5 14.9 14.9 23.6 16.7 16.7 { User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. AdjDel /Vehd 16.1 16.0 16.5 18.8 15.9 16.2 24.5 14.9 14.9 23.6 16.7 16.7 DesignQueue: T 1 2 4 1 1 -2 15 0 7 15 5 Traffix 7.5.0715_(c)..2002.Dowling Assoc._ Licensed to.RK- ENGINEERING GROUP AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.1" PAGE OF:_�JL pm opening year Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:47:26 Page 3-1 Elsinore City Center Opening year without project ur c0:0 -40 a 'H6'- ___ P *-p6a -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level of service Computation.Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #2 Casino Dr. (NS)/Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 65 Critical Vol./Cap. W.- 0.634 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh)- 1.8. Optimal Cycle:OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: -Approach: North,Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T R L - T - R L I- T - R -------------- --------------- ------------ --------------- ---------- Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include include Include Include Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 20 20 10 20 20 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1. 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- Volume Module: Base Vol; 59 80 160 196 70 95 74 696 73 267 769 213 Growth Adj: 1.06 1.06 1.06 1. 06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1-061 1-06 1.06 1.06 1.06. Initial Bse- 63 85 170 208 74 101 78 738 77 283 .815 226 Added Vol: 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 58 0 3 34 1. PasserByvol. .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 63 85 175 209 74 101 78 796 77 286 849 227 user Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 140 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 PHF . Volume: .63 85 175 209 74 101 78 796 77 286 849 221 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. Reduced Vol: 63 85 175 209 74 101 78 796 77 286 849, 227 PCE Adj- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1...00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj.- 1.00 1-00 1.00 1-06 1.60 1.00 1_60 1 1.00 i_00 1:00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 63 85 17S 209 74 101 78 796 77 286 849 227 ------------ I--------------- 11--------------- --------------- 11 --------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1906 1900 1900 1900 igoo 19010 1900 Adjustment: 0.,64 0.85 0.85 0.57 0.817 0.87 0.9S 6.90 6-90 0.92 0.92 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 1.00, 1_60 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.73 0.27 2.00 1.58 0.4.2 Final Sat.: 1206 1623 1623 1073 1650 1650 1805 4666 454 3502 2158 737 --------------- --------------- --------------- - -------- -- --_--1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.11 0.19 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.17 0.17 0.08 0.31 0.31 Crit Moves: Green/Cycle. 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.15 0.37 0.37 0.18-0.40 0.40. Volume/Capi 0.17 0.17 0.35 0.63 0.15 8_26, 0.28 0.46 6.4.6 0.44 6.77 0.77. Delay/V6h.-_ 16.6 iG:. 5 11-7 23.3 16.4 1 16.7 24.9 15.8 15.8 24' * 0 10.6. 19.6 User DelAdJ: 1.00 1'.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00.1.00 1.00, AdjDel/Veh: 16.6 16.5 17.7 23.3 16.4 16.7 24.9 15.8 15.8 24.0 19.6 19-6 DesignQueue: 2. 2 4 5. . 2. 3 .2, . 19 2 . 9. .20 Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP U 7- AGENDA ITEM NO.? i ..... r. '1*_1 "2- 1 --�6F . PAGE, -1 APPENDIX D CALCULATION OF INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE OPENING YEAR WITH PROJECT AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE e OF s am opening year w /project Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:29:42 Page 6 -1 Elsinore City Center Opening year with project AM -Peak Hour. Interecti.Qn_y93umes _ Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #5 Grape St. (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 215 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.968 f Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y +R 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 88.8 Optimal Cycle: 120 Level Of Service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T- R L- T- R L T R L- T- R ------------ --------------- . 1--------------- ------ ----- ---- -- --------- - - - -�. Control: Split Phase- Split Phase Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 20 20 10 20 20 ' Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 217. 48 225 128 49 421 15.9 688 241 173 1767 122 ' Growth Adj: 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 Initial Bse: 230 51 238 136 52 446 169, 729 255 183 1873 129 �. Added Vol: 36 6 15 19 9 63 21 56 10 4 156 7 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 .0. Initial Fut: 166 57 254 155, 61 509 190 785 26S 187 2029 136 . User Adj:- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00_ 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00: PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 266 57 254 155 61 809 190 78S 265 187 2029 136 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 266 57 254 155 61 509 .190 785 265 187 2029 136 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 Final Vol.: 266 57 254 155 61 509 190 785 265 187 2029 136 -- ---- - - - - -- I ---------------({--------------- --------------- ---------- - - -_ -� Saturation Flow Module- Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 19.00 .1900 190.0 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.95 0.85 0.9S 1.00 0.85 0.92 0.91, 0.91 0.95 0.90 0.90 Lanes: 2.00 2..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2..00 1.49 0.51 1.00 2.81 0.19 Final Sat 3502 3610 -1615 1805:1900 1615 35Q2 2595 -877 1805 4817 324 ------ - - -- -- - - - -- - ---- =-- --------------- - - - -- ----- --- -------- - - -_'. Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.08 0.02 0.16 0.09 0.03 0.32. 0.05 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.42 0.42 Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.09 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.36 0.16, Volume /Cap: 0.44 0.09 0.90 0.32. 0.12 1.16 0.62 dA0 0.90 0.90 1:16 1.16 Delay /Veh: 43.0 3.9.9 76.4 33.7 31.6 136.6 54.6 46.4 46.4 87.2 115 115.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.06, AdjDel /Veh:, 43.0 39.9 76.4 33.7 31.6 136.6 54.6 46.4 46.4 87.2 115 115.2 DesignOueue: .14 3 14' 7 3 25 11 36 12 it 92 6 Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling,Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AGMA ITEM NO. 01 L - PAGE, :9 . O ,"./' ,"me 1.% I I . Thu JunJ9, 2003 10:15:10, Page 6-1 AJ pm opening year w/project -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Elsinore City Center. Opening year with Project -09- Oak Hbijr M ------------- --------------- -------------------------------------------------- Level of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM operations Method (Future volume Alternative) Intersection #5 Grape St. (NS)/Railroad Canyon Rd.. (EW) Cycle (sec): 115 Critical Vol./Cap- (X): 1,320 Loss Time (sec): 12 (Y+R 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 118..6 Optimal Cycle:. 120 LeveI'bf Service.: F -Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:: L - T - R I L - T - R L T - R --------------- L --------------- T R ------------- Control: ------ ----------- split Phase 7 ----------- Split Phase Protected Protected Rights- include include Include Include ' Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 . 20 20 10* 20. 20 Lanes: * 2 0 2 0 1 1 6 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 0- 2. 1 0 ----------- --------------- Volume Module: --------------- ------------- 7 ---------------- Base Vol: 313 159 .343, 164 1.57. 343 445 910 529 301 1180 168 Growth Adj: 1.06 1,06 1.06 1.06 2"..06 1-06 1.06 1.06 1.66 1.06 1.06 1.06 Initial'Bae: 3.32 169 364 174 166 364 472 .965 561 319 1251 178 Added Vol: 28 13 13 12 10 41 73 181 44 19 101 22 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 .0 Initial Fut: 360 182 377 186 176 405 545 1146 605 1.38 135.2 200 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.60.1.00. 1.00 1.00 1­00 1.00 1.OQ. 1.100 1.00 r PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 360 182 377 186 176 405 54S 1146 605 338 1352 200 Reduct Vol.: 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 Reducedvol: 360 182 377 186, 176 405 S45 1146 605 338 1352 200. PCE Adj: 1.06 1­60 1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 MLF Adj, 1.06 1.06 1.00 1.00 1-06 1-00 1-00 1.60 1.00 1.00 1.. 00 o 1.00 Final Vol.: 360 182 377 186 176 405 545 1146 605 338 1352 200. ------------ --------------- --------------- ------------- - - - - - - 7-7---777 Saturation Flov.,14odule: Sat/Lane: I - 560 1900 1960. 1:900 1900 1900 1900 1500 1900 1900 1966 1900 Adjustment: 0." 92 0.9S 0­85 0.95 1.00 0A5 0.92 0�90 0.90 Q-9S 0.89 0-89 Lanes: 2,06 2.00 X.qo 1.0.0 1-60 1.00 2.00 1.31 0.69 1.00. 2.61 0..39 Final Sat.: 3502 3610 1615 1805 1906 1615 3.50.2 22.40. 11182 1805 4432 - .6.56 --------==-=(---- -=--------- ((--=---=-= - - = - -- - Capacity Analysis.Module:. Vol/Sat. 0.10 0.05 0.23 0.10 0.09 0.25 0.16 0.51 0.51 0A9 0.30, 0.30 Crit Moves- Green/Cycle: 0.18 0-10 0.18 0.19.0-19 0.19 0.18 0.39 0.39 0.14 Q...35 0.35. Volume/(Zap-. . Sd -'-0 . t 9, 1.3'2 .0.54 4­49 1.31 1 1 '12 O.A.1 - 12 1 - -87 0.87 Delay/Veb.' 44'9. 41.3 213.9 4.1.9 42.7 211.9 58.5 185* 184.7 218.2. 39.8 39-8 User DelAdj:: 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.06 1_00 1.00 1.00 1'00. AdjDel/Veh: 44.'9 41.3 213.9 43.9 42.7 211.8 58.5 185 184-7 218.2 39.8 3.9.8 Designoueue�: 19 10 21 10 9 22 .30 51. 27 1.9 60. -9., Traffix 7.5.0715 c) . "2002 Dowling . A : s so I c- 4iAcensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP t AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 210 OF:L� V am opening year w /project Thu Jun 19, 2003'10:.29 :42 Page 5 -1 ------------------------------------------------- ---------- - - - - -- ------- - - - --- Elsinore City Center Opening year with project _ Aki,TP.eak Hopr. . InterW_ction= v.,glumes _ Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) Intersection #4 I -15 Fwy. NB Ramps (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. JEW) Cycle (sec): 120 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 1.554 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average belay (sec /veh): 161.5 Optimal Cycle: 120 Level Of service: F Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West.Bound Movement: L T- R L T- R L T- R L T- R -Control: Split Phase Split Phase Protected Permitted Rights: Include Include - Include Include >i Min. Green: 0' 0 0 0 0 O 10 15 0 0 15 15 Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 O 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 -------==--- 1--------------- 11------------=-- 11--- - - - - -- 11---------- - - - - -1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 193 0 334 0 0' 0 254 710 0 0 104.8 1331 Growth Adj: 1.06 1.06. 1.06. 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 Initial Bse: 205 0 354 0 0 D 269 753 0 0 1111 1411 Added Vol: 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 62 0 0 137 118, PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 Initial Fut: 205 0 378 0 0 0 269 815 0 0 1248 1529 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 '1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 205 0 378 0 0 0 269 815 0 0 1248 1529 ' Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' \� Reduced Vol: 205 0 378 0 0 0 269 815 0 0 1248 1529 PCE Adj: 1.00'1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.100 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 205 0 378 0 0 0 269 815 0 0 1240 1529 - - - - - -- - I----------- ---------------- 11--------------- 11------- , --------- � Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1.900 19.00 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment- 0.90 1:00 0.90 1.00_1..`00 1.00 0.95 0.95, 1.00- 1100 0.95 0.85_ . Lanes: 0.35 0•.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 1..00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2..00 1.06 3 Final Sat. 596 0. 1105 0 0 0 1805 3610 - 0 0 3610 1615. ---------- -1-- -- ---------- 1i---------------- 11 ------------------ 1.1 - -- ------ - - - - -( Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.34 0.00 0.3A 0.00.0.00 0.00 .0.15 0.23 0..00 0.00 OAS 0.95 . Crit Moves: * * ** * # ** * * #* Green /Cycle: 0.22 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.61 0.61.. Volume /Cap: 1.55 0.00 1.55 0:00''0..00 0._00 1.55 6.32 0.00 0.06 O.S7 1.5$ Delay /Veh 309.2 0.0 309.2 0.0 `6.0 '0.0 329.8 6.8` 0.0 0.0 14.4 278.0 i User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1..00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 j AdjDel /Veh: 309.2 0.0 309.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 329.8 .6.8 0.0 0.0 14.4 278.0. DesignQueue: 12- 0 21 0 0 0 17 17 0 0 36 51 Traffix 7.5.0715 (c).2002.Dowling Assoc. licensed to RK.ENGINEERING GROUP AQENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 2� OE` Traffix 7.5.;6715 (c) :2002 Dowling Aasdc' Licensed to aK snmGzxm:oszmm; m000p '~~~ �0 f� �� AVEMA ITEM NO. — ^= pm opening year w/gzoject Thu. Jua.19^ 2003 10:15 :10 evgo 5'1 °~~~ _--_--_--_------__--__---_------_-----_-----_-_'--------_--_--_- Elsinore City Center opening year with Project ���m'----���������������z�mes- ____________ ^u __________________________________________________________________-- ue`nez Of Service Computation Report zuon aKCM ogaratlqmo Method (Future Volume Alternative)— zuteroaotlou #u z-zspwy`'ma'.gwmPa (NS)/Railroad Canyon Rd., (ow) c��l� �aeo), z�o �rl�1ou� Vol ./Cap. ��>� ' � ssu ' 7� za»ms Time (sec): e (Y+R = o sec) Average Delay (sec/veb): zeu's 'W Optimal Cycle: 120 ` Level of service, Y ' —Approach: North amuou mouthoou,ru East Bound L T - R u - T - a West L - bound T - R Movement, L ' T - a - --I| | ----------- Control: --------------- |}---------_---- ' Split Phase Split II------------ Phase Protected --------------- � Permitted Rights: Include , include Include Include ` oin' Green: o w o m o n zo is o w is is Lanes: o o it a m m n o n o z o 2 m o m 0 2 o x }|1-------------------------- ------------ --------------- voxxme ; -----------� �0 Base Vol: sss n .668 m o u 271 1172 ' o .0 876 mxo &� mzzmth Adj i z�nu 1'06 1'06 z-ma 1'06 1'06 1'06 1'06 1'4s 1'0e z-a/ 1'0.6 . Initial Bs=, sss n rua m o o ogr 1242 o o ema mym VA Added Vol. o o a« o o u o oz* o o na 78 ` �0 : -------`: o o n o u o o n u w o p Initial 'ss u 792 m ` A n 287 145 m � 0 1021 oae , User xudj,-� i,no 1'00 z'oo z'oo z-np i'mo z'mo z'mw 1'00 i-00 1. 0a x'oo' eaF»udj,, z'oo 1'00 z'on z'uo i.00 z'ou z'oV 1'00 z'oo z'no z~Vu z'qo eoF,moIume: sss o 792 o u u 287 z*sa o o 1021 eeu Redoc n o o m u u o o o o o o Reduced Vol- - ' 0 792 o V u 287 1456 u o z0�1 e66 PCm Adj: 1.00 1'nn z'ou z'nu z'on 1'00 1.00 1'00 1.00 1'00 z'oo x'mo mLnxu�i; z_oV z'oo z-oo i' z'on z'no z-mn 1. do z'ou z'mx 1'00 z'ou. Final Vol.: 353 o ryz V ------------- m n 2e7 1456 o --------------- ||------ o 1021 ---- 9*e r — -------- aatuzaticn --`»woxuz I ------'-----'— , �--_-| !� 1900 z*uo zoou. 1900 i906 :L900 19 iyno 1*00 1e00 1$ou' 1*00 . ' �o� ^�, '-�az`mn o'eg �'uu��do z�o� o'gs m'�s �'mo z�x� o`9s n'ms , - Lanes: 0`31 u'oo 0'64 o'oo 0'0u $.00 1'00 2'00 o'uo o~mo 2'00. z'oV , Final Sat., sos o 1174 m u u zons sexn n 0 361 z615 --_| ----�----�[�--�--------��-------�—'--------------7--���--- Capacity Analysis »module, Vol/Sat-.' 0.67 m'mo o's? O'mu 0.00 $'ou 0'16 0'40 u'no u'on 6_28 0.60. `, . ' Crit Mpvasi Green/Cycle': ` g'�4 w'mu m,*« 0.00 0'00 e��l 0.10 0'49 Q..00, V'0o ^ 0-391 o�� 0'39 �x ------^ �i`-' b_oo 1'Ss `n'o 6'00 0'Od 1.55 0-82 m0m 0.4) �'��_ 1. 55. 287�9 0'u 287'9 0'0 m-O 326.0 29.5 o'o m.» 33-.4 291'e.� ` -- ~~~^ DeiAdjz - 1' 00 1`0�0 z'oo a'm0 1.06 1'00 1-00 ' 1''od z'oo z Adj 287' 9 o' o o ur' * m ' m ��'oo w ' m 0.0 soa-o ua , s o ' o .m ' e o3' � � ��-`� ' 16 o 3s g q a ze ss . - 0 u /45 _ 4� . �8 Traffix 7.5.;6715 (c) :2002 Dowling Aasdc' Licensed to aK snmGzxm:oszmm; m000p '~~~ �0 f� �� AVEMA ITEM NO. am opening year w /project Thu Jun 19, 2003.10:29:42 Page 4 -1 Elsinore City Center Opening year with project AM_-keak Hour- Int.ergect ion- volumes - -- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future. Volume Alternative) : �:**«:, r* �::•: t.+ r** t:***f ,►�r * * * *x :iar * * *t * * * * * * *tft # * :* Intersection 43 I -15 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) .#*:*f*,►:*+ r�+ r***t* x*;*, r, rf*: r, r**+; r* r****:**#: 3, t *r * : : * * * * *� * + *,r * * *,r,c * * * * * *_ * *,r * : +�* Cycle (sec): 65 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.916 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y+R 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 34.5 Optimal Cycle': 88 Level Of Service: C tit *tt #tint* titt ttttttttttt * *tttttttt' #t_ #tt *it Rt * *t *titt *t #� * *t * * *t * *t * *t t,ctrk * *!t *t* .. Approach: North Bounct South Bound East. -Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L - T - R L - T - R L. - T - R -- I--------- - - - - -- I I-= ------- - - - --- I I--------- - - - - -- L I------ ---- - - -- -1 Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 15 15 10 15 0. Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 1 0. 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 ------------ I------- ------- -11----- - - - - -- II --------------- II ------ - - - - -- - -I. Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 417 0 331 0 S34 291 S45 676 0 Growth Adj:. 1..06 1.06 1.66 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1..06 1.06 Initial Bse 0 0 0 442 0. 351 0 566 308 578 717 0,. Added Vol: 0 `0 0 40 0 0 0 22 0 71 65 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 482 0 351 0 588. 308 649 782 O- User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 140 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.'00 - PHF Adj: 1.06 1.00 .1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 - 0 0 482 0 351 0 588 308 649 782 0. Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 482 0 351 0 588 308 649 782 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 ,1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1._00- 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.,0.0 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 482 0 351 0 588 308 649 782 0 ----------- 71 --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900. 1900 1900, 1900 1900 .1900. 1900 1900. 1900 19'00 1900 Adjustment 1. .9 00 1.00 1.00, 0.5 1.00 0.85, 1.00 0 -95 0.85 0.95 0.95 1.00.. Lanes: 0.00 0.06 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 .0.00 2.00. 1.00 1.00 2_00 0.00 Final Sat.:- 0 0 0 1805 0 1615. 0 3610 1615 1805 3610 0. =----- ------ I -----=-- - - - - -- II------ ---------- 11--------------- il--------------- -1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: -, 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.27 0..00 0.22 0.00.0.16 0..19 0-360.22 0.00 . Crit Moves:'tttt tits: it *tt Green /Cycle: 0.00 0.00. 0.00 0.27 0. 00 0.27 0.00 0..23 0.23: 0.36 0.59 O.QO. Volume /Cap:., 0.00 9.00, 0.00 0.99 0.60 0.81 0.00 0.71 0.83 0.99 0.37 0.00 Delay /Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 62.7. 0.0 32.-9 0.0 25.8 38.0 54.0 7.0 0.0 User DelAdj -- 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00,. Adj Del /Veh: .0.0. ;0.0 .0 62.7 0.0 32.9 0.0 2.5.8 38.0 54.0 7.0 0.0: DesignQueiie: 0 0 0 14 0 10 0 17 9 16 12 O + ttttttttti ttttttt. tttt, ttttttirttttttttttt�ttttt, tt, rtttt •xt *tiitttttiit *twt #tttxttttit Traffix 7.5.0715 (c.) 2002 Dowling Assoc.. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP. AGENDA ITEM NO. � ��;/ PAGE. 3 OFaS ' ' ` ' - �m ao smmzxson�zmmaeonp �U �ra�cl� �'s'b��s <c� �no��rx�uiog �oouo' u�ceume� � / ~ ��8�8��� ��EP� �K� - i� � "=~=~ ` � Thu Jun 19, 2003 z0: .zs,1m Page 4-1 �B pm opening year ect ------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------ Elsinore City Center - �6�z� -- -_--_-______-___-_______-�--_--_----`-________-__- Level ' iport 2000 HCM operations Method (Future Vo.lume.Alternative) Intersection 03 z-zsow��' Sanampa �m <onx (NS)/Railroad ' uw/ ^~ oyoIa (sec): es ] z ' u7z uomm Time (aao), ���r+a * oep� "=", ; sz _e Optimal cycle:_ 120 Level Of Service:, o -' ` ou North Bound South Bound. East Bound West Bound �. - '-- � - � u - r - a u - T - a 1,---'-�----- � - r - R - - � l� - --_----- _-`' _-�-� mootrol, - -` -- ---------_ split l ' Phase --- ------II_ Split Phase emz� ���d ` . ^ ' Protected . Rights: - include Include Include Include Kin. Green: n 0 o n m o m is zs zu is u Lanes: o o w a o x m m V 1 a w o 0 z z o |--------_-] u o m ------------ --------------- npIuwe om^dule, ---------- ----------7--i oawm Vol- u V u 713 u 466 u 703 3*o 2e* mss m Growth Ad j: 1'06 1'uu 1'06 1.06 1.06 1'96 1'06 1.o6 1'06 z'o* i'Ve 1'06 zpi��aI aoe, n ` m o 7s� n �su w vus s�y ��« um� V Added Vol-. o u n zso o u o ?e o «» «« V, paommrorvoz` o o o V w u u o o o o «l Initial Fnt, u m u e94 V .430 n euz suy 362 927 u User Ad3, �-no 1-00 z'mu 1.0-0,1.00 1'uo 1'00 1'00 z'mo 1-00 1'00 1.00, ear A4j: z on 1.00 z'on 1'00 1'00 1'00 z'oV 1'00 z'mu z'oo 1'00 z_m1.0.0 eHr voIvma, . o n n 894 o 430 u mzz sss 362 *27 o aeunpt Vol: n m u o o u o o o n u o_ ._ Reduced Vol: o o n 894 u 430 o 821 369, asz 927 e ` pco Amj: z'oV z'ue z'oo 1'06 i'oo z'uo z'un 1'00 1'00 z'oo z'uo z'ou z'mn i.wo 1'00 1L-00 z'oo 1'00 z'mo 1'00 1'00 z'no 1'00 1'00 ,J Final Vol.: u o o || oy« o osu || n auz 36* _---^ -- - i- � 362 --_---�- 927 V -| ------------ \ --------------- .- Saturation Flow Module: ' ' �l Sat/Lane: zyuu 1§00 1,900 znoo 1900 z gon zeou znnu ���o 1�nn . ze�m Adjustment: x'Uo 1'n0 z^oo `o'es 1-00 0'85 1'00 Q. .es u'os o.-as o'ms 1'00 , Lanes- n'oo o-oo 0.06 z~oo o'mo 1' 00 0°oo 2' no 1 , ou 1' 00 2' 06 n ' mo Final Sat.: - m u u �ons o �azs o sa�� �azs �1 zmms sszd | L� ____----|--�_-------------------�||----------..--------��__.,.`` Capacity Analysis Module: ' Vml/oat:° 0'00 o'oo n' an o ' su o ' oo 0' 27 n ' oo o ' za n ' oa 0' 20 0.26 u ^ q V crit Moves: Green/Cycle: 0'00 0'00 o.mu 0'45 'mo o'«s 0.00 0.23 �n.o3 0.18 m'«x u'mm = �'�m m�»0 1'10 u-on n'�9 m.0oQ.�� ec�� 1-�n 0.62 - - ` ~ maIa���e�� o'n u~ � ' �o o m ^ m� � mn z� m m o�u o ��a� ' ' � ' ' �we � ' as a ' "-~ User � 1'00 1'�o i-mz 1.00 z'mo z'oa 1'60 1'00 1'00 1'00 1'00 �m 1,00- udjoel/veh, 0'0 o ' m m ' o ez ' s w ' o 14' 8 m ' m so ' o eo ' a 106' » 15' 9 oealgzQueuo` w a o 20 n y o o« 11 .11 � 21, /n °^�°° >� .� ' ' ` ' - �m ao smmzxson�zmmaeonp �U �ra�cl� �'s'b��s <c� �no��rx�uiog �oouo' u�ceume� � / ~ ��8�8��� ��EP� �K� - i� � "=~=~ ` -: am opening year w /project Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:29:42 E----------- -------------------------------------------------------------- Page 3 -1 - - - - -- Elsinore City Center Opening year with project �'Now ---------------------------------------------=------------=--------------------- _ - AM:Peak Hqur Inter#ect onyoukumes _ x Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative). Intersection #2 Casino Dr. (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) .� Cycle (sec): 65 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.498 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 17.3 Optimal Cycle: 60 Le vel Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------}-------------- Control: Permitted --------------- --------------- }}-=--- Permitted Protected - - - - -- - - --} Protected :Rights: Include Include Include Include `[ Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 .10 20 20 10 20 20 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 - 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 --------------- 2 0 i---------- 1 1 0- - - - - -} ------------ } ---------- - - - -} Volume Module: Base Vol: 36 38 74. 162 31 52 59 590 18 227 S68 222 Growth Adj: 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 Initial Bse: 38 40 78 172 33 55 63 625 - 19 241 602. 235 Added Vol - 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 19 0 7 56 3 PasserByVol- O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 38 40 BO 173 33 55 63 --644 19 248 658 238 - User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.'00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 -1.00 1.00.1.00 1.00 i PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 I PHF Volume: 38 40 80 173 33 55 63 644 19 248 658 238 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: Reduced Vol: 38 40 80 173 33 55 63 644 19 248 658 238 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 j MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 38 40 80 173 33 55 63 644 ---------- 1.9 248 ------- 658 --- 238. - - - - -} ------------}--------------- 11---------------}}----- i Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 19.00 1900 Adjustment: 0.70 0.86 0.86 0.67 0.86 0:86 0.95 0.91- 0.91 0.92 0.91 0.91 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.91 0.09 2.00 1.47 0.53` f Final Sat.: 1321 1625 1625 1275 1635 1635. 1805 5018 149 3502 2544 921 ------------ I --------------- --------------- --------------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.03 0.02 O.OS 0.14 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.26 0.26 Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.15 0.17 0.37 0.18 0.40 0.40` Volume /Cap: 0.09 0.08 0.16 0.44 0,07 0. %1 0.23 0,35 0.35 0.38 0.65 0.65 Delay /Vehc 16.1 16.0 16.5 18.18 15.9 16.2 24.5 14.9 14.9. 23.6 16.9 16.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00'1.60 1:00 1.00 1400 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 AdjDel /Veh. 16.1 16.0 16.5 18.8 15.9 16..2 24.5 14.9 14.9 23.6 16.9 16.9' 'DesignQueue: 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 is 0 7 15 6 Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP AW0A ITEM NO. PA.2.2:� pL, pm opening year w /project Thu Jun 19, 2003 10:15:10 ---- - - - - -- -- Page -3 -1- - -- ---- --- - - -- Elsinore City Center _ - _opening .y Ar`In :Protect . _ - `PM Peak Hour Intersection volumes ------------------- - - - - -- Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Future Volume Alternative) a Intersection #2 Casino Dr. (NS) /Railroad Canyon Rd. (EW) Cycle (sec): 65 Critical Vol. /Cap. (X): 0.638: - 4 Loss Time (sec): 9 (Y +R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec /veh): 18.9 Optimal Cycle: 60 Level Of Service: B- Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West ;Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R - - - -- II L - T - - -- ------------ R II---------- L - T.- R. - - - - -I ------ - - - - -- ,I- Control: --=----- Permitted - - - - -- II- -------- - Permitted Protected Protected Rights: Include Include Include Include . _ Min. Green: 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 20 20 10 20 20 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2' 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------------ 1--------------- Volume Module: II--------------- 11--------------- 11------------ - =. -1 769 213. ` Base Vol: 59 80 160 196 70 95 74 696 73 267 Growth Adj: 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06- Initial Bse: 63 85 170 208 74 101 78 738 77 283 815 226.'' Added Vol: 0 0 7 3 0 0 0 66 0 4 38 2 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. Initial Put: 63 85 177 211 74 101 78 804 77 287 853 228 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 63 85 177 211 74 101 78 804 77 287 853 228 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 Reduced Vol: 63 85 177 211 74 101 78 804 77 287 853 228 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_.00 1400 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj.: 1.00 1400 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 63 85 177 11--------------- 211 74 101 i{--------------- 78 804 77 11---------- 287 853 228 - ---- I ------------ I --------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900.1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900. ;- Adjustment: 0.64 0.85 0.85 0.56 0.87 0.87 0.95 0.90 0.90 0.92 0:9.2 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.14 0.26 2.00 0 42 Final Sat_: 1206 1623 1623 11--------------- 1070 1650 1650 11- 1805 4670 --- --------- 450 - -11 3502 -- -158 2758 736 - - -- -I x ------------ I--------------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.05 0.05 0.11 0.20 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.17, 0.17 0.08 0.31 0.31 _- Crit Moves.: # * *# # * #} « # ** Green/4'Yc1e: 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.15 0. -37 0437 0.18 0,40 0.40' - Volume /Cap: 0. la 0.17 0.35 0.C,4 0.15 0.20 0.28 0.47 0.47 0.44 0.77 0.77' Delay /Veh: 16.6 16.5 17.8 23.6 16.4 16:7 24.9 15.8 15.8 24.0 19.7 19.7. User Del.Adj- 1_.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1_.00 AdjDel /Veh: 16.6 16.5 17.8 23.6 16.4 16.7 24.9 15.8 15.8 24.0 19.7 19.7 Designo ueue.: 2 2 5 5 2 3 2 19 2 9 20 5 cb /0-1- Traffix 7.5.0715 (c) 2002 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to RK ENGINEERING GROUP J AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 I PAGE ?� OF,2V C E° r- ul r E, v L L 1 E L 400, BIOLOGICAL & CULTURAL INVESTIGATIONS & MONITORING FOCUSED SURVEY FOR THE QUINO CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY ON APN #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, and 016 DAIGLE DEVELOPMENT SITE, LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Mr. Glen Daigle Daigle Development, LLC. 28991 Front Street, Suite 207 Temecula, CA 92590 Prepared by: Guy Bruyea, Senior Field Biologist Leslie Irish, Principal Julia Fox, Technical Editor Meredith Rosebure, Technical Editor L & L Environmental, Inc. 1269 Pomona Road, Suite.102 Corona, California 91720 909 - 279 -9608 June 2003 AW0A ITEM NO.. (- N PAGE 22 OF pmumar719 SEP 2 3 2003 BY: ----------- - - - - -- -- 1269 Pomona Rd-Suite 102 - Corona, Cpl 92882 - Phone: 909.279.9608 - Fax: 909.279.9609 f- Daigfe Devekpment Site, APN #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and016 TocusedQu' Checkerspot Butted ySurvey dune 2003 - TABLE -OF CONTENTS- - n EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................... ......................:........ 1.0) INTRODUCTION ................ ..........................:.... 1.1) Project Location ................................................................. ............................... 2.0) REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT 2.1) Federal Endangered Species Act ii 1 3.0) SPECIES INFORMATION ................................................... ............................... ....... 3.1) Quino Checkerspot Butter ly (Euphydryas editha quino) .... ............................... 6 6 3.2) Background Information ..................................................... ............................... 6 3.3) Year 2003 QCB Flight Season .......................................... ............................... 8 4.0 SURVEY METH 5.0) TABLE 1: Focused Survey Information ............................. ............................... SITE DESCRIPTION ...................................................... ............................... 11 5.1) Habitat Characteristics ..............................•........................ ............................... 13 5.2) QCB Larval Host Plant Resources ..................................... ............................... 16 5.3) QCB Nectar Resources ..................................................... ............................... 16 TABLE 2: QCB Vegetation Resources .............................. ............................... 16 �. 6.0) RESULTS •• .... ............................................................................ ............................... 17 6.1) Local QCB Records ........................................................... ............................... 17 6.2) Lepidoptera Observations .................................................. ............................... TABLE 3: Lepidoptera Observations ................................ ............................... 17 18 7.0) CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................. .............................19 8.0) REFERENCES AND CITATIONS ... 20 QCBSIGNATURE PAGE ......................................................................... ............................... 22 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: TABLE 4: Wildlife Species Observed or Detected on the Project Site - TABLE 5: Plant Species Observed or Detected on the Project Site APPENDIX B: Site Photographs LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map .................................................................. ............................... 2 Figure 2. Project Location Map ................................................................ ............................... 3 Figure 3. USGS Aerial Photograph 4 Figure 4: Habitat Map Overlay ................. >----- ,, ----- ....:................ ............................ 14 AGMA ITEM NO. 2.zK ,�!� PAGE,_ OFr��z -�F-• SW-03 -121 i LaZG Daigfe Devefopment Site, ATiV #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Focused Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey dune 2003 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A focused survey for the quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) was conducted on the Daigle Development site within the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, California. The purpose of the study was to determine the presence or absence of the federally endangered species, and to evaluate the effect the proposed project may have on this species. The study area, totaling 6t acres, is located just east of the Escondido freeway (1 -15) south of Railroad Canyon Road. The subject property is situated Section 10, Township 6 South, Range 3 West within the U.S.G.S. Lake Elsinore 7.5' Topographic quadrangle map. The project area is currently undeveloped. Most of the site is relatively disturbed and dominated by ruderal and non - native vegetation. Remnant Riversidean sage scrub occurs within this area, but consists of sporadic, low density RSS species dominated by an understory of non - native weedy species. Portions of the site appeared to have burned in recent years, probably within 2- 3 years. Habitat marginally suitable to support larval host and nectaring plant species is present on the project site within the areas that support remnant RSS. No larval host plant species were observed on site. A total of sixteen (16) relatively common butterfly species were observed on the property during the present survey (Table 3). In general the Daigle property represents a relatively average site for QCB flight season diversity of lepidoptera fauna in the area. Although topographic resources occur off -site, no potential topographic resources occur on site and no QCB adults, ova, larvae or pupae were detected during the present study. Based on the absence of primary QCB larval host plants and no adult observations during the present survey and other information presented in the above report, L&L concludes that it is highly unlikely that a QCB breeding population currently occupies the subject property. In addition, based on the lack of historical data indicating QCB's presence in the area, and human related disturbances within the project site, it can be reasonably concluded that it is highly unlikely a QCB adult would ever visit the subject property. AGENDA ITEM NO. pp PAGE 22� OFt�. SW-03-121 ii Lc�L r Daigle Development Site, A(P.N #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and016 Eocused Quin checkerspot Butterfly survey June 2003 f.-O) INTRODUCTION--- - _ The following report was written for Daigle Development, LLC. It describes the results of a focused survey for the quino checkerspot butterfly (QCB) on the Daigle Development property, APN #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, and 016. The purpose of the assessment was to determine the presence or absence of the quino checkerspot butterfly, and to evaluate the effect the project may have on the species and its habitat. This information is needed since the project could result in adverse effects upon the species. Our assessment consisted of: (1) a records search and literature review, conducted to review previous studies and species information, and (2) eight protocol surveys, conducted to determine the presence or absence of the QCB on -site. 1.1) Project Location The study area is located east of Interstate Highway 15 (1 -15) and south of Railroad Canyon Road in the Sedco Hills area and the City of Lake Elsinore (Figure 1). The project is located in the City of Lake Elsinore and 2 miles west of the City of Canyon Lake, California. The project site can be accessed by taking the Railroad Canyon Road exit east from Interstate 15, turning south on Grape Street, east on Malaga Road and north on unimproved Lakeview Drive. The Daigle Development project area is situated in southwest % of the southwest '/. of Section 10, Township 6 South, Range 3 West within the U.S.G.S. Lake Elsinore 7.5' Topographic quadrangle q maps 9 P (Figure 2). The site is bounded as follows (Figure 3): to the west by Grape Street and mainly highly disturbed open areas, 1 -15, and commercial development beyond. Some moderately disturbed sage scrub occurs between Grape and the 1 -15. To the east the site is bound by a mixture of disturbed and relatively undisturbed lands with scattered rural residential homes; to the north by a mixture of disturbed and relatively undisturbed lands, the Lake Elsinore Town Center (commercial), and residential areas beyond; and to the south by a mixture of disturbed and relatively undisturbed open space with scattered rural residential areas beyond. AGENDA ITEM NO. _[..-s PAGE 0 OF :�E SW- -03 -121 1 GBZG Daigle Development Site, A( N #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Focused Quino CheckerTot Butterfly Survey dune 2003 2.0) REGULATORY MlkONMENT 2.1) Federal Endangered Species Act The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), protects species listed as endangered or threatened. Endangered species are defined as a species "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range" while a threatened- species is "likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future." Take of listed species is prohibited under Section 9 of the Act. Take includes the direct killing, harming, or harassing of a species, and destruction of habitat that may be important for the species survival and recovery. Harm is further defined as significant habitat alteration that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavior patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering. A permit for take of listed species incidental to otherwise lawful activities can be authorized by the USFWS. Procedures for obtaining a permit for incidental take are identified under Section 7 of the Act for projects which involve more than one Federal actions, such as ACOE permitting, and Section 10 for private projects, non - federal actions. ,. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 PAGE Z 3_% OF , SW-03 -121 S LeZL { DaWfe Development Site, ATN #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 TocusedQuino Checkerspot Butterfly Surpey ,dune 2003 3.0) SPECIES INFORMATION 3.1) Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) The USFWS added this rare butterfly to the federal list of endangered wildlife in early 1997. The Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (QCB) is a geographic race (subspecies) of Euphydryas editha, whose combined ranges extend from northern Baja California to Canada along the Pacific coast, and east to Colorado (Bauer, 1975). The QCB is presently known to exist only as several, probably isolated, colonies in southwestern Riverside County, southern San Diego County and northern Baja California, Mexico. This butterfly is associated with sparsely vegetated or bare areas usually characterized by clay or cryptobiotic soil deposits that develop a hard crust within southern California sage scrub vegetation communities. Low - growing herbaceous annuals including the QCB's primary larval host plant, dot -seed plantain, Plantago erecta (Plantaginaceae), typically inhabit these areas. Other potential QCB host plants (usually secondary) may occupy these areas and include owl's clover (Castil eja exserta) and white snapdragon (Antirrhinum coulterianum), both in the plant family Schrophulariaceae. University of California, Riverside (UCR) museum records for QCB exist from southwestern Riverside County dating back to 1951. Most southwestern Riverside County QCB observations, both historic and recent, exist from Temecula and Murrieta, east to areas within 10 to 15 miles of these locations (Mattoni et al., 1995(1997)). Localities in this region include Oak Mountain (1990), Anza - Aguanga (1997), Sage (1998), Wilson Valley (1999), and Bautista Canyon near Hemet (1998). Recent surveys by various researchers have indicated additional QCB populations near Skinner Reservoir, Bachelor Mountain, Skunk Hollow and several other locations in the Temecula- Murrieta area. In addition to UCR museum records, some of the above - referenced QCB locality information is based on a combination of personal observations by Guy Bruyea and conversations with other professionals familiar with QCB distribution in Riverside County, California. 3.2) Background Information The USFWS established its base survey guidelines for the QCB on January 31, 2000 (herein Protocol). In this_ document the USFWS* indudes a Year-2000 Quino 'Survey Areas map "of southern California with polygons delineating six speck survey areas of potential QCB habitat where QCB adult focused surveys are recommended. Potential habitat for QCB is determined CI ' S'W-03 -121 6 AQMA ITEM NO. � 33 (Daigle Devehpwnt Site, AW #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Focused Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey ,dune 2003 6' x� consecutive days at an average rate of 10 -15 acres per hour (by one permitted biologist). L &L conducted this survey accordingly. On April 15, 2002 the USFWS released its final rule for designation of QCB critical habitat. Critical habitat identifies specific areas, both occupied and unoccupied, that are essential to the conservation of a listed species and that may require special management considerations or protection ( USFWS 2002), Two critical habitat units collectively totaling approximately 100,000 acres lie within southwestern Riverside County and are defined as follows: (1) the Lake Mathews Unit (Unit 1), which contains approximately 14,000 acres, and includes the Harford Springs and Lake Mathews Estelle Mountain Reserve subunits, generally located in the Lake Mathews area west of Interstate Highway 215; and (2) the Southwestern Riverside Unit (Unit 2), which contains approximately 86,000 acres, and includes the Temecula Murrieta Oak Grove and Brown Canyon subunits, generally located east of Interstate Highway 215 and north of Highway 79. Based on preliminary maps provided by the USFWS in its final rule designation, the Daigle project site does not lie within the Lake Mathews or Southwestern Riverside critical habitat units. 3.3 Year 2002 QCB Flight Season QCB seasonal flight patterns, including numbers of individuals present in a given year and emergence dates, can vary annually based on late winter and early spring rainfall amounts, host plant and nectar resource availability, weather patterns during the flight season, and other factors. Due to several early winter storms and average seasonal temperatures in November and December 2002, QCB's primary larval host plant (Plantago erecta) and many other spring annuals germinated in late December or early January in most areas of southwestern Riverside County. Weather and host plant conditions were initially favorable for QCB larval development in southwestern Riverside County based on preliminary observations by L &L biologists and other researchers, and post - diapausing larvae were observed feeding on recently germinated plants as early as January 8 at one San Diego County USFWS monitored location ( USFWS, 2003). Biologist Guy Bruyea observed germinated P. erecta plants in mid- January 2003 at Harford Springs County Park in the Gavilan Hills area of northwestern Riverside County, and in other areas of southwestern Riverside. County.- -� - - - SW-03 -121 8 AQMA nEM .2-1,- � 3 __ PACE OF�c�� y Daiyfe Devehpwnt Site, APN#363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and016 TocusedQuino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey ,dune 2003 From early January to about mid - February 2003, a critical period in the development of QCB post - diapausing larvae and subsequent adult emergence patterns, atypically dry conditions prevailed throughout southern California. In southwestern Riverside County, this unusual weather pattern included a combination of high winds, unseasonably high temperatures, and below average precipitation. During this approximately forty -five day period, most areas of southwestern Riverside County received less than 1 inch of rain that fell on only two days with measurable precipitation amounts (GB, pers. obs.). Due to these conditions P. erecta and other spring annuals (including potential QCB nectar resources) were in the initial stages of drought stress by early February, and no QCB larvae had been observed at any of the southwestern Riverside County monitoring sites ( USFWS, 2003). Around mid - February, seasonably cool conditions (including periods of substantial precipitation) returned to southern California and remained throughout the months of March and April, enabling post - diapausing QCB larvae to continue and complete their development on newly germinated and /or drought - relieved larval host plants. In 2003, QCB adults were first reported from the Lake Skinner reference site (nearest USFWS monitored site to Daigle) on March 6 (1 male), with additional sightings on March 7 (2 males), March 31 (3 males, 1 female), and April 9 (2 males, 1 female). Additional QCB adult sightings (as reported by the USFWS) were made in ` 00� the Warm .Springs Creek area (approximately 6 miles south of the subject property) on March 19 (1 male), April 7 (1 male) and April 17 (1 male). At low elevation sites within the southern portion of its range, QCB adults were observed as early as January 28 depending on local weather patterns and other factors. In portions of southern San Diego County, the season was essentially split in two as a small segment of adults emerged in late January and early February, and another segment of the population emerged in March. Due to above average precipitation amounts in February and March, conditions were favorable for an extended flight of QCB adults in Marron Valley, Jamul, and other USFWS monitored reference sites. At higher elevations of western Riverside County, QCB adults were common on Oak Mountain near Vail Lake on March 17 (60+ reported), with additional sightings reported from localities in the Anza- Aguanga area as late as April 24, indicating that relatively cool conditions resulted in an extended flight period of QCB throughout much of its range, regardless of elevation. Based on discussions with other QCB researchers and L &L biologist's personal observations in the field, it is likely that previous 2000 -2002 drought conditions had an adverse effect on the Temecula - Murrieta QCB metapopulation unit and other low elevation colonies in 2003, despite L _]QY SW-03 -121 9 A43E1'iDA ITEM NO. PAGEE OF Daigle Devekpment Site, ATN #363- 240-002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and016 TocusedQuino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey dune 2003 favorable weather conditions and the associated abundance of QCB larval host plants and nectar resources. Although QCB was detectable throughout its range in 2003, it is probable that QCB population densities were somewhat reduced, especially at lower elevations. It may take several seasons of at or above normal winter precipitation levels for some low - elevation populations to recover to pre - drought population densities. Throughout its range, QCB has a history (documented as far back as the 1930's) of significant population fluctuation from year to year, which in part is likely due to annual late winter drought precipitation cycles, although habitat fragmentation likely plays a key role in such fluctuations as well. QCB observations reported by the USFWS's website and information obtained from other QCB researchers suggests that conditions during the present survey were suitable for determining QCB presence at most locations in western Riverside County, including the Daigle property. In western Riverside County, observations during the survey period suggest that overall butterfly activity (i.e. numbers of individuals observed) was about average or better depending on the species; however, butterfly diversity (i.e. number of species observed) was probably below average for most locations. Due to an extended period of relatively cool conditions throughout March and April in southwestem Riverside County, the QCB adult flight period (and in fact, the flight period for many spring - flying butterfly species) became extended, lasting an estimated 7 to 8 weeks at elevations of approximately 1500 above mean sea level (AMSQ. S`W-03 -121 10 L(S(,L4 ,z L PAGE - OF � ^L��)y "�tl Daiyre (Development Site, qTN' #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 TocusedQuino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey June 2003 4.0) SURVEY METHODS Guy P. Bruyea performed adult focused surveys in March and April 2003. A valid section 10(a)(1)(A) recovery permit issued under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, is currently held by Mr. Bruyea (Permit Number TE- 837439 -5, as amended). As outlined in the conditions of the permit a copy of this report will be sent to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)_ L &L conducted adult focused surveys for the QCB based on a strict interpretation of the year 2000 survey Protocol and 2002 Protocol update. Adult focused surveys were conducted on the site for a total of eight man -days on eight dates (March 7, 14, 22, 29, April 4, 12, 20, and 27, 2003) during the approximately eight -week focused survey period (Table 1). This level of survey effort meets or exceeds the standards recommended in the USFWS's most recently published Protocol. The entire 6 -acre site (Figure 3) was covered on foot at a slow pace, stopping periodically, during the eight -week adult focused survey season. During each adult focused survey, the survey effort included areas containing both native and non- native vegetation and a variety of known and potential QCB nectar resources throughout the site. This survey was conducted simultaneously with a survey on 26 acres immediately adjacent to the east. Survey times and data sheets incorporate both sites. Table 1. Focused Survey Information Date Time PST Weather Wind Biologist Survey Results 03 -07 -03 1035 -1400 Sunny, 65-70° F 0-1 F GB FS No QCB 03 -14 -03 0900 -1200 Sunny, 61 -70° F 0 -2 F GB FS No QCB 03 -22 -03 0930 -1300 Sunny, 67 -77° F 0 -1 F GB FS No QCB 03 -29 -03 1100 -1500 Sunny, 70 -75° F 0-3 F GB FS No QCB 04 -04 -03 0945 -1330 Sunny, 59 -68° F 0 -2 F GB FS No QCB 04 -12 -03 0930 -1300 Partly Cloudy, 64 -70 °F 0-2 F GB FS No QCB 04 -20 -03 0930- 12630 Overcast, 68 -77° F 0 -2 F GB FS No QCB 04 -27 -03 0915 -1230 Sunny, 63 -73° F 0 -2 F G_ FS No QCB • GB (Guy Bruyea) • FS (Focused Survey) • Wind measurement on Beaufort (F) scale Eight adult focused surveys man -days wero conducted on .eight days - suitable for adult butterfly activity as evidenced by appropriate weather conditions (temperatures, cloud cover, and wind S`W-03 -121 11 AGENDA ITEM�NOO PAGE _.:�. Daigfe Devefopment Site, qTW #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Focused Quin Checkerspot Butterfly survey dune 2003 conditions). The presence of several butterfly species on focused survey days indicates that weather conditions are suitable for potential QCB activity (Table 3). Daily weather data were noted on field forms and /or a digital audio recorder roughly once per hour during focused survey visits. Weather data were recorded using a digital anemometer (Beaufort scale of wind speed measurement), thermometer, and by visual observation and estimation of cloud cover and other pertinent daily weather characteristics (rain, drizzle, marine layer, etc.). Digital recordings were later transcribed to field forms. National Weather Service data was retrieved on daily weather conditions for Riverside County and other areas of southern California. The most recent QCB Protocol states that adult focused surveys will not be considered valid if during a focused survey visit one or more of the following weather conditions occur: fog, drizzle, rain, sustained winds greater than 15 miles per hour measured 4 -6 feet above ground level, temperature in the shade at 9 round level less than 60 °F on a clear, sunny day, or temperature in the shade at ground level less than 70 °F on an overcast or cloudy day (USFWS 2000). Focused surveys were not conducted on inclement weather days characterized by these specific weather conditions. All focused surveys on the Daigle site were conducted during suitable weather conditions for potential QCB activity. All observed butterfly species and their relative abundance were recorded daily during each of eight focused survey site visits. These data and additional daily weather and biological information (plants, wildlife, additional comments, etc.) were recorded during each site visit on one -page daily field forms (Quino Checkerspot Focused Survey Field Notes). Daily field forms (Appendix C), a summary of wildlife observations (Appendix B), daily survey, weather data, and survey results (Table 1), QCB vegetative resources (Table 2), and daily butterfly observations, including relative abundance of each species observed (Table 3) are included in this report. Focused surveys for the QCB primarily consisted of surveying areas containing patches of undisturbed vegetation that may support known QCB larval host plants. Searches for adult QCB were conducted throughout the entire property, especially in areas inhabited by potential nectar resources. Due to this site's proximity to historically known and recently discovered QCB populations in the Temecula area, and the presence of potential QCB resources, adult focused surveys were conducted to determine presence or absence of this endangered butterfly. Based on the USFWS's 'hotline' information, L &L's knowledge of the species, and information from other researchers, year 2002 adult focused surve s for QCB wen§-Veek-of March 1, 2003 and Y � terminated the week of April 21, 2003 for the Daigle property. SW-03 -121 12 Af,3MA ITEM NO. PACE �3� OFA Daigfe Oeve4ment Site, *PX #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Focused Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Tune 2003 5.0) SITE DESCRIPTION Land use varies within and adjacent to the survey area, and includes anthropogenic disturbances such as residential areas, strip malls, paved and unimproved roads, off -road vehicle activity, target shooting, and dumping. Several unpaved roads of varying widths, mostly used and created in association with off -road vehicle activity, are present throughout the subject property. These unpaved roads continue off site to the north south and east. Topographically, the site consists of lower - lying relatively flat areas on a gradual east to west trending slope. Two significant ridgeline and hilltop areas occur off -site to the east and north. The site contains a combined maximum vertical relief of approximately 60 feet between the highest and lowest elevation points on the property, with elevations ranging from approximately 1425 to 1485 feet AMSL. Surrounding topographic features in the immediate vicinity of the subject property include gently to steeply sloping hills and ridgelines interspersed with lower -lying relatively flat areas. Additional ridgelines and hilltops at elevations of approximately 2000 to 2200 feet AMSL are present southeast of the site (Appendix A). 1 The site contains evidence of anthropogenic disturbances associated with residential areas, strip malls, paved and unimproved roads, off -road vehicle activity, target shooting, and dumping. Additionally, portions of the site appeared to have burned in recent years, probably within 2 -3 years based on present shrub sizes. 5.1) Habitat Characteristics Most of the project site is heavily disturbed and are dominated by ruderal weedy vegetation and non - native grassland, especially in areas subjected to relatively recent off -road vehicle activity (Figure 4)_ Remnants of the original Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) vegetation community do occur scattered within.. approximately half of the site, but are more disturbed and less dense than appears in Figure 4. Adult focused surveys were conducted throughout the entire site; but focused on remnant Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) and potential QCB nectar resources. Areas containing cryptobiotic crusts were observed, but not common, among the matrix of open patches. A mix of native low- growing and tall weedy annuals were found in these areas, and included pygmy stonecrop (Crassu /a connafal, California fl ago ^(Filago califomica), and other associated plants. Although these crusts are present, mostly decomposed granitic soils without a cryptobiotic layer were more frequently observed within the survey area. SW-03 -121 13 AGENDA LZU""'�'� pAGE 23 9 OF �� `� ~ ` ' * ' �,��r;;� mac-` • °' `� a7 <� a ez,' ➢ 1 rr` r � _ try ti b `D 1 Legend t A , � x • `� \ Non-native Remnant Dense 1'' s 1 Daigfe (Development Site, APN #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and016 Focused Quino Checkerspot But terf yy survey June 2003 A general discussion of the vegetation communities and plants observed on the Daigle Development property is presented as part of this report, with emphasis on potential QCB adult nectar resources within those communities. A comprehensive botanical evaluation of this site was not conducted in conjunction with the current QCB focused survey. Pertinent plant identifications were made in the field; additional plant identifications and vegetation community determinations were made utilizing Schoenherr (1992), Hickman (1993), Sawyer and Keeler -Wolf (1995), Parker (1999) and Psomas (1999). Common names are from Hickman where possible. 5.1,1) Disturbed/ Ruderal Habitat Disturbed habitat includes areas that contain mostly non - native plant species including ornamentals and ruderal exotics. The majority of the site is now mostly disturbed and contains many ruderal plant species. Mostly non - native, weedy species have invaded these areas, including short-pod mustard, foxtail chess, red - stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), long - beaked Storksbill (Erodium botrys), cheeseweed ( Malva parviflora), London rocket (Sysimbrium irio), and various non - native grasses. Other plant species observed in abundance included # fiddleneck, horehound (Marrubium vulgare), chia (Salvia columbariae) and red maids F (Calandrinia ciliata). In addition, remnant Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) species are present. RSS is a xeric form of coastal sage scrub containing mostly drought - deciduous shrubs with small leaves. Individual and sporadic native RSS shrubs located within the site include flat top buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), white sage (Salvia apiana), California sagebrush (Artemesia califomica). Due to at or above normal precipitation levels in early 2003 and the site being recently burned, annuals were both diverse and abundant on the property. Conspicuous annuals including blue dicks (Dichelostemma capitatum), California poppy (Eschscholzia califomica), fiddleneck (Amsinckia menziesii var. intermedia), red maids (Calandrinia ciliata), were present. Open patches can be found throughout portions of the site, containing a mixture of native and non- native low- growing annuals including popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys sp.), forget -me -not (Cryptantha intermedia), goldfields (Lasthenia calffibmica), sun cups (Cammisonia bistorta) and slender pectocarya (Pectocarya linearis). SW-03 -121 15 PAGE X1 1 1J Daigle Devekp wnt Site, A1W #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Eocused Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey June 2003 5.2) QCB Larval Host Plant Resources- During the present survey, although P. erecta and C. exserta are known from the region, no P. erecta or C. exserta were observed on the subject property after careful searching during the present focused survey. Crust- forming soils (clay and /or cryptobiotic) generally found to be suitable for the growth of P. erecta were very uncommon on the Daigle property, due to previous site disturbances. C. exserta is frequently observed in association with decomposed granitic soils, which are abundant on the subject property. However, no C. exserta were observed during this study. 5.3) QCB Nectar Resources Due to higher than normal precipitation amounts in the late spring and early winter months of 2003, many annual plant species were common, including potential nectar resources such as } (but not limited to) fiddleneck, various mustards, Chia and many other species. Some of the known and potential QCB nectar resources identified on the property during 2003 focused surveys are summarized in this report (Table 2). Table 2. QCB vegetation Resources on Daigle Develo ment Property QCB Known and Potential Larval Host Plant Resources Scientific Name Common Name Plant Family None Observed QCB Known and Potential Nectar Resources Common Name Scientific Name Plant Family Fiddleneck Amsinckia menziesH Bora inaceae Short-pod mustard Hirschfeldia incana Brassicaceae Deerweed Lotus sco anus Fabaceae Goldfields Lasthenia califomica Asteraceae Forget-me-not Ctyptantha intermedia Bora inaceae Po cornflower Pla ioboth rys SA Bora inaceae Blue dicks Dichelostemma ca itatum Liliaceae S`W-03 -121 16 ARENDA ITEM NO. �y PAGE � � F ftigfe Devefopwnt Site, A�".N #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Tocused Quino CFieckerspot ButterjTy survey ,dune 2003 6.0) RESULTS No QCB adults were observed on the Daigle Development site during eight focused survey man -days on eight separate dates. Additionally, no QCB eggs, larvae or pupae were observed v on the property during year 2003 focused surveys. 6.1) Local QCB Records There are relatively few locality records of QCB from the extreme western portion of Riverside County, although historic (up to the mid- 1980's) records exist for the Gavilan Hills and Lake Mathews areas located approximately seven to ten miles northeast of the site. Interestingly, there is a single 1987 record from the north side of Lake Elsinore near Terra Cotta Hill, which is approximately two miles north of the subject property. L &L knows of no other relatively recent QCB records in the Lake Elsinore area. 6.2) Lepidoptera Observations A total of sixteen (16) relatively common butterfly species were observed on the property during the present survey (Table 3). In general the Daigle property represents a relatively average site for QCB flight season diversity of lepidoptera fauna in the area. Common butterfly species r.oe observed during the present study include chalcedon checkerspot (Euphydryas chalcedona), Behr's metalmark (Apodemia mormo virgulti) and painted lady (Vanessa cardul). Common hilltopping species such as Felder's orange -tip (Anthocaris cethura), checkered white (Pontia protodice), and west coast lady (Vanessa annabella) were observed in association with the off - site ridgelines and hilltops to the south and north of the subject property. These off -site topographic features may be a significant resource for hilltopping butterfly species on the Daigle site and in the general area. Interestingly, several common butterfly species that are usually observed during the QCB flight season were conspicuously uncommon or even absent during the 2003 survey period in southwestern Riverside County. These include southern blue (Glaucopsyche lygdamus australis), bramble hairstreak (Callophrys perplexa), alfalfa sulfur (Colias eurytheme), funereal duskywing (Erynnis funeralis), and western checkered skipper (Pyrgus communis albescens). SW-03-121 17 AWJMA ITEM PACE o U 'Its U" U C Daigle 0evelopment Site, ,gpx #363-240-002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 TocusedQuino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey June 2003 Table 3. Lepidoptera Observations March April Common Name I Scientific Name 7 14 22 129 4 12120 127 Anise Swallowtail (Papilid zeficaon) I S Checkered White (Pontia protodice) x X C C C C A Cabbage White (Piefis rapae) S Sara Oran ti (Anthocaris sara sara) X X X F F F F Felder's Orange-fip (Anthocaris cethura) x x A C S Alfalfa Sulfur (Cofias eutytheme) Painted Lady (Vanessa cardut) A X X A A A A A West Coast Lady (Vanessa annabefla) x F S F Red Admiral (Vanessa atalanta) S S Chalcedon Checkers of (Euphydryas chacedona) X X X A A A C C Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus) S Funereal Dusk in (Erynnis funerafis) x x S Behr's Metalmark (Apodemia mortno virguffi) X X X C A A A A Southern Blue (Glaucpps the t damus australis) S Bramble Hairstreak (Callophrys perplexa) S S S Common Hairstreak (Shymon mefinus) S S 16 Species Total T Daily 1 Observations 6 7 6 1 8 1 8 1 101 8 1 5 1 • S (rare) 1 observation • F (few) 2-5 observations • C (common) 6 to 30 observations (approx) • A (abundant) 31+ observations (approx) • X abundance not recorded A SW-03-121 18 AGENDA ITEM NO. L44 -p-AGF- OF i r r r 3 3 S 0 t `t t c Daigle Oevefop =t Site, A1'.N #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Tocused Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey ,dune 2003 7.0) CONCLUSIONS During the eight -week year 2003 QCB focused survey period, the entire approximately six (6) acre Daigle Development site was surveyed according to USFWS Protocol, in conjunction with a twenty -four (24) acre adjacent site. Although topographic resources occur off -site, no potential topographic resources occur on site and no QCB adults, ova, larvae or pupae were detected during the present study. Based on the absence of primary QCB larval host plants and no adult observations during the present survey and other information presented in the above report, L &L concludes that it is highly unlikely that a QCB breeding population currently occupies the subject property. In addition, based on the lack of historical data indicating QCB's presence in the area, and human related disturbances within the project site, it can be reasonably concluded that it is highly unlikely a QCB adult would ever visit the subject property. SAN- 03-121 19 ,./' rp� ALMA fTEAA N04 , PAGE'2 y OP2-2z e (Daigfe (Development Site, ATN #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Tocused Quino Checkerspot Butter. fly Survey Tune 2003 13.0) REFERENCES ANO CITATIONS Arnett, Ross H. Jr. 2000. American Insects: A Handbook of the Insects of America North of Mexico. CRC Press, New York, New York. 1003pp. Ballmer, G. R., D. Hawks, K. Osborne, G. Pratt. 1998. The Quino Checkerspot (Euphydryas editha quino). Unpublished manuscript for UCR Quino Workshop. Bauer, D. 1975. Tribe Melitaeini, pp. 139 -195, in Howe, W. (ed.), The Butterflies of North America. Doubleday and Company, Inc., Garden City, New York. 633 pp. Brown, David E. 1994. Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Mexico. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah. 342pp. Bruyea, Guy P. 2003. Field notes from focused QCB surveys conducted on the 6 -acre project site. March -April Emmel, T. C. and J. F. Emmel. 1973. The Butterflies of Southern California. The Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series 26. Erhlich, P. R. et al. 1975. Checkerspot Butterflies: A Historical Perspective. Science 188:221 228. Jameson, Jr., E. W. and Hans J. Peters. 1988. California Mammals. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 403pp. Hickman, James C. (editor). 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Kaufman, Kenn. 1996. The Lives of North American Birds. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York. 675pp. Mattoni, R., G. Pratt, T. Longcore, J. Emmel and J. George. 1995 (1997). The Endangered Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). J. Res. Lepid. 34: 99 -118: McAuley, Milt. 1985. Wildflowers of the Santa Monica Mountains. Canyon Publishing Company, Canoga Park, California. 543pp. Munz, Philip A. 1974. A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. mik Murphy, D. D. and R. R. White. 1984. Rainfall, resources, and dispersal in southern populations of Euphydryas editha (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Pan - Pacific Entomologist 60:350 -354. Orsak, L. J. 1977. The Butterflies of Orange County, California. University of California, Irvine, California.. SW-03 -121 20 St`L� z�r PAGE_._, � D*re Devekpwnt Site, A(PN #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Focused Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey 3une 2003 Parker, Robert et al. 1-999 Weeds of the West. The Western Society of Weed Science. Newark, California. 630pp. Sawyer, John O. and Todd Keeler -Wolf. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. 471 pp. Scott, J. A. 1986. The Butterflies of North America, a Natural History and Field Guide. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 583pp. Schoenherr, Allan A. 1992. A Natural History of California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California. 772pp. Sibley, David Allen. 2000. National Audubon Society The Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, New York. 545pp. Small, Arnold. 1994. California Birds: Their Status and Distribution. Ibis Publishing Company, Vista, California. 342pp. Stebbins, Robert C. 1985. A Field Guide to the Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, New York. 336pp. Thelander, Carl G. and Margo Crabtree. 1994. Life on the Edge: A Guide to California's Endangered Natural Resources: Wildlife. Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) p 338 -341. BioSystems Books, Santa Cruz, California. 550 pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 62, No. 11. January 16, 1997. Determination of Endangered Status for the Laguna Mountains Skipper and Quino Checkerspot Butterfly. Final Rule. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. 2000. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Year 2000 Survey Protocol. January 31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Draft Recovery Plan for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino). Portland, Oregon. x + 123 pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Survey Protocol Information. Carlsbad, California. February 12. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register. Vol. 67, No. 72. April 15, 2002. Designation of Critical Habitat for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino). Final Rule. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Monitored Reference Site Information website. Carlsbad, California. February - May. (URL: http: / /carlsbad.fws.gov /Rules /QuinoDocuments /Quino htms /Flight_info_2003.htm) J SW-03-121 21 +►� ry V, PAGE Ll 7017, � Oaiyfe q)evekpment Site, ASV' #363 - 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 EocusedQuino Checkerspot Butterfly Surviy dune 2003 QCB Signature Page t 6 -acre Daigle Site Project. Lake Elsinore, California. Fie, 1 hereby certi fy that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this biological evaluation, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of our knowledge and belief. Date Leslie Irish, Principal E Eli' S`W-03 -121 22 1 A�Ma }T 2 y PAGE oa�l Daigle Devek pment Site, AeN #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 EocusedQuino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey ,dune 2003 TABLE 4: Wildlife Species Observed or Detected on the Daigle Project Site Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California March — April 2003 SCIENTIFIC NAME Birds Acciptiridae Buteo famaicensis Aegithalidae Psaltriparus minimus Alaudidae Eremophilia alpestris Cathartidae Cathartes aura Columbidae Columba livia Zenaida macroura Corvidae Corvus brachyrhynchos Corvus corax clarionensis Emberizidae Pipilo crissalis Zonotrichia leucophrys Falconidae Falco sparverius Fringillidae Carduelis psaltha Hirundinidae Petrochelidon pyrrhonota tachina Icteridae Stumella neglecta Euphagus cyanocephalus Mimidae mimes polyglottus COMMON NAME Hawk Family Red -tail Hawk Long- tailed Tit Family Bushtit Lark Family Homed Lark Vulture Family Turkey Vulture Pigeon Family Rock Dove (Feral Pigeon) Mourning Dove Jay and Crow Family American Crow Common Raven Emberizine Sparrow Family California Towhee White- crowned Sparrow Falcon Family American Kestrel Finch Family Lesser Goldfinch Swallow Family Cliff Swallow Icterid Family Western Meadowlark Brewer's Blackbird _ MQckingbird Family_ Northern Mockingbird SW-03 -121 A-1 PAGE , =._L OF J r r r e G G C C K^ I; Daigfe q)evefopment Site, Aq,?V' #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 Focused Quin Checkerspot Butterfly Survey June 2003 Table 4 (Continued) SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME Passeridae Passer domesticus Sturnidae Stamus vulgaris vulgaris Timaliidae Chamaea fasciata Trochilideae Calypte anna Troglodytidae Thryomanes bewickii Tyrannidae Tyrannus verticalis Mammals Leporidae Sylvilagus audubonii Scuuridae Spermophilus beecheyi Reatiles & Amphibians Iguanidae Uta stansburiana Teiidae Cnemidophorus tigns Old World Sparrow Family House Sparrow Starling Family European Starling Babbler Family W rentit Hummingbird Family Anna's Hummingbird Wren Family Bewick's Wren Tyrant Flycatcher Family Western Kingbird Rabbit Family Audubon's Cottontail Squirrel Family California Ground Squirrel Iguanid Family Side- blotched Lizard Teiid Lizard Family Western Whiptail wnr�R.w .Tr.... _ SW -03 -121 A -2 PACE 50 OF,_2_� q)aW(e Deveh pment Site, ,94W #363- 240 - 002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 1FocusedQuino Chakerspot Butterfly Survey June 2003 TABLE 5: Plant Species Observed or Detected on the Daigle Project Site Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California March — April 2002 SCIENTIFIC NAME. COMMON NAME Anacardiaceae Sumac Family Schinus molle Peruvian Pepper Apiaceae Daucus pusillus Asteraceae Artemesia califomica Chamomila suaveolens Encella farinosa Eriophyllum sp. Filago californica Helianthus annuus Lactuca serriola Lasthenia californica Lessingia filaginifolia Microceris lindleyi Rafinesquia califomica Sonchus oleraceus Cuscutaceae Cuscuta species Euphorbiaceae Eremocarpus setigerus Fabaceae Lotus scoparius Lupinus bicolor Lupinus sp. r S`[N -03 -121 Carrot Family Rattlesnake weed Sunflower Family California Sagebrush Common Pineapple -weed Brittiebush Unidentified California Filago Annual Sunflower Prickly Lettuce Goldfields Cudweed Aster Silver Puffs California Chicory Common Sow Thistle Borage Family Fiddleneck Forget -me -not Slender Pectocarya Mustard Family Short-pod Mustard London Rocket Stonecrop Family Pygmy Stonecrop Dodder Family Dodder Spurge Family Doveweed Pea Family D`eerweed Dove Lupine Unidentified Lupine A -3 PAGE 0174::Z ..04 Boraginaceae Amsinckia menziesii intermedia Cryptantha intermedia Pectocaya linearis Brassicaceae Hirschfeldia incana Sisymbrium ido _r Crassulaceae Crasssula connata Cuscutaceae Cuscuta species Euphorbiaceae Eremocarpus setigerus Fabaceae Lotus scoparius Lupinus bicolor Lupinus sp. r S`[N -03 -121 Carrot Family Rattlesnake weed Sunflower Family California Sagebrush Common Pineapple -weed Brittiebush Unidentified California Filago Annual Sunflower Prickly Lettuce Goldfields Cudweed Aster Silver Puffs California Chicory Common Sow Thistle Borage Family Fiddleneck Forget -me -not Slender Pectocarya Mustard Family Short-pod Mustard London Rocket Stonecrop Family Pygmy Stonecrop Dodder Family Dodder Spurge Family Doveweed Pea Family D`eerweed Dove Lupine Unidentified Lupine A -3 PAGE 0174::Z ..04 Daigfe Devekpment Site, -APN #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and 016 TocusedQuino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Tune 2003 Table 5 (Continued) SCIENTIFIC NAME Geraniaceae Erodium botrys Erodium cicutarium Hydrophyllaceae Phacelia distans Lamiaceae Marrubium vulgare Salvia apiana Salvia columbariae Lilaceae Dichelostemma capitatum Malvaceae Malva parviflora Onagraceae Cammisonia bistorta Papaveraceae Eschscholzia califomica COMMON NAME Geranium Family Long- beaked stork's bill Red- stemmed filaree Waterleaf Family Distant Phacelia Mint Family Horehound White Sage Chia Lily Family Blue Dicks Mallow Family Cheeseweed Evening Primrose Family Sun Cups Poppy Family California Poppy Poaceae Avena barbata Grass Family Slender Wild oat Bromus madritensis rubens Foxtail Chess Bromus species Brome Grass Hordeum vulgare Barley Schismus barbatus Mediterranean Grass Polygonaceae Buckwheat. Family Eriogonum fasciculatum Flat -top Buckwheat Portulacaceae Purslane Family 4 Calandrinia ciliata Red Maids Rubiaceae Galium aparine Madder Family Annual Bedstraw SW-03 -121 44 AGUMA ITEM NO. PAGE �s �.-- 14 r. U U U Uin, L tM U L E' 'DaWfe 'Devekpwnt Site, -AIPN#363-240-002, 003, 004, 008, 009 and016 TocusedQuino Checkerspot Butter ,ffySurviy June 2003 Photo 3: Taken from the southeast corner to the northwest. A99NO ITEM NC)- - 2-1 SW-03-121 0-2 PAGE 2 S y OF L _bl BIOLOGICAL & C U L T U R A L I N V E S T I G A T I O N S & MONITORING FOCUSED SURVEY FOR THE COASTAL CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER ON APN #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, and 016 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 31532, LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Mr. Glen Daigle Daigle Homes, LLC. 28991 Front Street, Suite 207 Temecula, CA 92590 Prepared by: Ms. Leslie Irish, Principal Mr. John Konecny, Biological Investigator Ms. Julia Fox, Technical Editor Ms. Meredith Rosebure, Technical Editor L & L Environmental, Inc. 1269 Pomona Road, Suite 102 Corona, California 91720 909 - 279 -9608 SEP 2 3 2003 July 2003 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE = oF� 1269 Pomona Rd-Suite 102 - Corona, C'4 92882 - Phone: 909.279.9608 - JaX. 909.279.9609 -APN #363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, oo8, oog, and o16 Focused CoastaCCaCifornia Gnatcatcher Survey JUCy 2003 -- -_ - TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY .......................................................................... ............................... ii 1.0) INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ ..............................1 1.1) Project Location ................................................................. ............................... 1 1.2) Site Description .................................................................. ..............................1 FIGURE 1: Project Vicinity Map ........................................ ............................... 2 FIGURE 2: Project Location Map ............................:......... ............................... 3 FIGURE 3: USGS Aerial Photograph ................................ ............................... 4 2.0) REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT .................................................. ............................... 6 2.1) Federal Endangered Species Act ...................................... ............................... 6 3.0) SPECIES INFORMATION ............................................................. ............................... 7 4.0) METHODS AND PERSONNEL ..................................................... ............................... 8 4.1) Survey Methods ................................................................. ............................... 8 TABLE 1: Project Site Survey Information ........................ ............................... 8 5.0) RESULTS 5.1) Vegetation ......................................................................... ......................... . . .... 9 FIGURE 4: Habitat Map Overlay ......................................... .............................10 l: 5.2) Literature Review ............................................................... ............................... 11 5.3) Field Survey ....................................................................... ............................... 11 6.0) CONCLUSIONS .......................... ...12 J 7.0) REFERENCES AND CITATIONS ................................................. ............................... 13 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: TABLE 2: Bird Species Observed on the Project Site APPENDIX B: Site Photographs AQE1+1flA ITEM NO. S1v- o3 -I21 t 2 6 OF. &�1l - PAGE ._,_ APW #363 - 240 -002, 003, oo4, oo8, oog, andoi6 Focused Coastaf Ca fornia Gnatcatcher Survey Jufy 2003 ..i►` EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A focused survey for the coastal California gnatcatcher (Poliopfila califomica ca%ifomica) was conducted on Tentative Tract Map 31532, APN #363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, and 01.6 within the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, California. The purpose of the studies was to determine the presence or absence of the federally threatened species, and to evaluate the effect the proposed project may have on this species. The study area, totaling 6t acres, is located just east of Interstate 15 south of Railroad Canyon Road. The subject property is situated Section 10, Township 6 South, Range 3 West within the U.S.G.S. Lake Elsinore 7.5' Topographic quadrangle map. The project area is currently undeveloped. Most of the site is relatively disturbed and dominated by ruderal and non - native vegetation. Remnant Riversidean sage scrub occurs within this area, but consists of sporadic, low density RSS species dominated by an understory of non- native weedy species. Portions of the site appeared to have burned in recent years, probably within 2- 3 years. Habitat found within the project site was identified as remnant Riversidean sage scrub and disturbed grassland. A focused survey for the coastal California gnatcatcher was conducted during the 2003 nesting season, according to U.S. Fish and Wildlife protocol. Surveys concentrated on the remnant sage scrub portions of the site identified as potentially suitable habitat. A total of six site visits were made during the nesting season. During this focused survey, no coastal California gnatcatchers were observed on -site. L &L 'concludes the project site is currently unoccupied by the coastal California gnatcatcher. 1.01 -5W-03-121 ii AGEMA ITEM NO. PAGE I S 7 OF APN #363- 24o -oo2, 003, 004, 008, oog, and oi6 ,Focused coastal caCafbmia Gnatcatc6ier Survey IuCy 2003 i -1.0) INTRODUCTION--_ r ' The following report was written for Daigle Homes, LLC. It describes the results of a .focused survey for the coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) on APN #363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, 009, and 016. The purpose of the assessment was to determine the presence or absence of the coastal California gnatcatcher, and to evaluate the effect the project may have on the species and its habitat. This information is needed since the project could result in adverse effects upon the species. Our assessment consisted of: (1) a records search and literature review, conducted to review previous studies and species information, and (2) six protocol surveys, conducted to determine the presence or absence of the CAGN on-site- 1 -1) Project Location The study area is located east of Interstate 15 (1 -15) and south of Railroad Canyon Road in the Sedco Hills area and the City of Lake Elsinore (Figure 1). The project is located in the City of Lake Elsinore and two miles west of the City of Canyon Lake, California. The project site can be accessed by taking the Railroad Canyon Road exit east from Interstate 15, turning south on Grape Street, east on Malaga Road and north on unimproved Lakeview Drive. Legally, Tentative Tract 31532 is situated in southwest '/ of the southwest '/ of Section 10, Township 6 South, Range 3 West within the U.S.G.S. Lake Elsinore 7.5' Topographic quadrangle maps (Figure 2). 1.2) Site Description Land use varies within and adjacent to the survey area, and includes anthropogenic disturbances such as residential areas, strip malls, paved and unimproved roads, off -road vehicle activity, target shooting, and dumping. The site is bounded as follows: to the west by Grape Street and mainly highly disturbed open areas, 1 -15, and commercial development beyond. Some moderately disturbed sage scrub occurs between Grape and the 1 -15. To the east the site is bound by a mixture of disturbed and relatively undisturbed lands with scattered rural residential homes; to the north by a mixture of disturbed and relatively undisturbed lands, the Lake Elsinore Town Center (commercial), and residential areas beyond; and to the south by a mixture of disturbed and relatively undisturbed open space with scattered rural residential areas beyond (Figure 3). "QS ITEM "'r) S"W -o3 -lei 1 of PAGE)-!5 r 1 l ti. l 1 1 A Santa Ana, California Topographic - Bathymetric Map 1959 (photorevised 1979) 117 044'00" W 117 034'00" W 117 024'00" W 117 014'00" W WGS84 116 056'00" �if,1:� ' �_`` 0�y` �ier}.�:�uL "r'��[�!!!R�'°�..•�� �` ✓�'�.teiit/ +— •=='�3 1�?9.:ai� ^•.':: � i�l� tg t Area Projec • S r.it(,.�a. � �� ' Wit- ig.��.�, ac ��ar�� � � • •� m + ♦ t� I' / �r arC ''f"r fr�• � � al 1 £.a w 41 ' j r s! !! 11 11 01 -0 r, IMN 1 5 10 15 20 25 mikes 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 km s £i 01 . t� . ..e. L &L Environmental, Inc. BIOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INVESTIGATIONS AND MONITORING SW -03 -121 July 2003 Figure 1 Project Vicinity Riverside County, California A/�G #L1A I.TCl1 AIA PAGE` ,"me '"awlr .LPN #363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, oog, and o16 focused CoastaCCaCfornia Gnatcatcher Survey July 2003 Topographically, the site -is a-west facing stope of the Sedco Hills. The site contains a combined maximum vertical relief of approximately 1000 feet between the highest and lowest elevation points on the property, with elevations ranging from approximately 1400 to 1500 feet AMSL. Surrounding topographic features in the immediate vicinity of the subject property include gently to steeply sloping hills and ridgelines interspersed with lower -lying relatively flat areas. Additional ridgelines and hilltops at elevations of approximately 2000 to 2200 feet AMSL are present southeast of the site (Appendix B). The property contains evidence of anthropogenic disturbances such as off -road vehicle activity, target shooting, and dumping. Additionally, portions of the. site appeared to have burned in recent years, probably within 2 -3 years based on present shrub sizes. 1.../ LMN S-W -03 -121 5 AGENDA ITEM NOS =J... ` PAGE= OF_..ii�' . LPN #363- 24o -oo2, oo3, oo4, oo8, oog, ando16 focused Coasta[Caffomia Gnatcatcher Survey JuCy 2003 2.0) REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT 2.1) Federal Endangered Species Act C The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), protects species listed as endangered or threatened. Endangered species are defined as a species "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range" while a threatened species is "likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future." Take of listed species is prohibited under Section 9 of the Act. Take includes the direct killing, ` harming, or harassing of a species, and destruction of habitat that may be important for the species survival and recovery. Harm . is further defined as significant habitat alteration that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavior patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering. A permit for take of listed species incidental to otherwise lawful activities can be authorized by the USFWS. Procedures for obtaining a permit for incidental take are identified under Section 7 of the Act for projects which involve more than one Federal action, such as ACOE permitting, and Section 10 for private projects, non- federal actions. S 1V -o3 -121 6 AGENDA ITEM NO.--J=-L- S �` PACE' OFs,�:1.. i APN #363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, oo8, oog, and o16 Focused Coasta(Cafyormia. Gnatcatcher Survey Jury 2003 1 l a 3.0) SPECIES INFORMATION The coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN) is a federally listed threatened species and state listed species of concern. This small, gray songbird is an obligate year -round resident of sage scrub communities from southern Ventura County southward to LA, _Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego counties into Baja California, Mexico, near El Rosario. This species is strongly associated with sage scrub communities in its various successional stages. However, the CAGN will also utilize chaparral, grassland, and riparian plant communities where they occur adjacent to or intermixed with sage scrub. Typical CAGN habitat consists of low- growing, drought- deciduous, and succulent plant species. Dominant plants include 'California sagebrush (Artemisia califomica), sages (Salvia spp.), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California bush sunflower (Encelia californica), various cacti (Opuntia spp.), and several species of Haplopappus. The CAGN generally avoids dense chaparral, and is rarely found in habitats that do not support California sagebrush. The CAGN is almost strictly insectivorous, actively foraging through shrub cover and have a kitten -like mewing call. They are most vocal in the early morning and evening. Detection can be NVOW difficult without vocalization ( http:/ /ventura.fws.gov /speciesaccount /birds /cagn_account.htm). The breeding season of the CAGN extends from about 15 February to 31 August, with peak nesting activity occurring from mid -March through mid -May. CAGN typically build nests less than one meter above the ground in the shrub component of coastal sage scrub (Mock, 1993). CAGN maintain territories during the breeding season that may vary from 2 - 20ha; during the winter home ranges may expand by 70 %. Home ranges tend to be smaller near the coast and larger in the drier, sparser inland areas. Territories are frequently defined by landscape features such as ridge lines, trails, and breaks in plant communities (Mock 1993). Successful fledging may extend into August for birds that have produced more than one clutch in a year, and juveniles associate with their parents for weeks or months following fledging (http: / /ventura.fws.gov/ speciesaccount /birds /cagn_account.htm). 2 .P SW-03-121 7 °' PAGE 3 O � —y--� APN #363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, oo8, oog, andoi6 Focused CoastaCCaCtfornia Gna.tcatcfier Survey IuCy 2003 4.0) METHODS AND PERSONNEL Pertinent literature was reviewed to identify local occurrences and habitat requirements of the CAGN. Literature reviewed included compendia provided by resource agencies (California Dept. of Fish and Game 2003a; USFWS 1999, 2000), and California Natural Diversity Data Base (2003b) reports for the Lake Elsinore and the three closest surrounding quadrangles (Romoland, Murrieta, and Wildomar). In addition, review of sensitive species information from i standard reference works, field guides, existing literature, and unpublished reports contributed to background information. 4.1) Survey Methods L &L conducted a focused survey during the nesting season in 2003. Surveys for the coastal California gnatcatcher were conducted on April 4, 12, and 29, May 7 and 30, and June 6, 2003, i i in accordance with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocol. A total of six surveys were conducted by John Konecny, L &L Environmental, Inc. (L &L), consulting biologist ( USFWS Permit # TE837308 -3). Survey temperatures varied between 48 and 62 degrees Fahrenheit. No surveys were conducted during inclement weather. Survey data is outlined in Table 1, below. Table 1. Project Site Focused Survey Information Date Time PST Weather Wind Biolo ist Survey Results 04 -04 -03 6:00 -7:30 Partly Overcast, 48° F 1 -3 MPH JK FS No CAGN 04 -12 -03 6:40 -7:50 Overcast 56° F 3 -5 MPH JK FS No CAGN 04 -29 -03 6:20 -7:40 Mostly Clear, 62° F 1 -3 MPH JK FS No CAGN 05 -07 -03 6:10 -7:30 Mostly Clear, 58° F 1 -3 MPH JK FS No CAGN 05 -30 -03 6:30 -8:30 Clear, 62° F 1 -3 MPH JK FS No CAGN 06 -06 -03 6:20 -7:40 Overcast 62° F 1 -3 MPH JK FS No CAGN The surveys were conducted on the entire 6± acres, but concentrated on the acres with the remnant Riversidean sage scrub, which constituted the best habitat for the CAGN on the project site. Surveys were made by walking slowly through the vegetation and stopping regularly to listen and look for coastal California gnatcatchers. Binoculars (8.5 x 44) were used to aid in the identification of observed animals. S W -03 -121 8 PAGE 9-G'J4. OF r APX #363- 24o -oo2, 003, 004, o08, oog, ando16 ,Focused CoastaCCaCfornia Gnatcatcher Survey Iu(y 2003 -5.0) RESULTS - - _ r - _., - -../ 5.1) Habitat Characteristics Most of the project site is heavily disturbed and are dominated by ruderal weedy vegetation and non - native grassland, especially in areas subjected to relatively recent off -road vehicle activity (Figure 4). Remnants of the original Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) vegetation community do occur scattered within approximately half of the site, but are more disturbed and less dense than appears in Figure 4. Adult focused surveys were conducted throughout the entire site; but focused on remnant Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) and potential QCB nectar resources. Areas containing cryptobiotic crusts were observed, but not common, among the matrix of open patches. A mix of native low- growing and tall weedy annuals were found in these areas, and included pygmy stonecrop (Crassula connata), California filago (Filago californica), and other associated plants. Although these crusts are present, mostly decomposed granitic soils without a cryptobiotic layer were more frequently observed within the survey area. A general discussion of the vegetation communities and plants observed on the property is presented as part of this report, with emphasis on potential QCB adult nectar resources within those communities. A comprehensive botanical evaluation of this site was not conducted in conjunction with the current QCB focused survey. Pertinent plant identifications were made in the field; additional plant identifications and vegetation community determinations were made utilizing Schoenherr (1992), Hickman (1993), Sawyer and Keeler -Wolf (1995), Parker (1999) and Psomas (1999). Common names are from Hickman where possible. 5.1.1) Disturbed / Ruderal Habitat Disturbed habitat includes areas that contain mostly non- native plant species including ornamentals and ruderal exotics. The majority of the site is now mostly disturbed and contains many ruderal plant species. Mostly non- native, weedy species have invaded these areas, including short-pod mustard, foxtail chess, red - stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), long- beaked Storksbill (Erodium botrys), cheeseweed ( Mavva parviflora), London rocket (Sysimbrium irio), and various non - native grasses. Other plant species observed in abundance included fiddleneck, horehound (Marrubium vulgare), chia (Salvia columbariae) and red maids (Calandrinia ciliata). AOEMA ITEM NO. SW -03 -121 9 PAGE L &L Environmental, Inc. BIOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INVESTIGATIONS AND MONITORING SW -03 -121 July 2003 Figure 4 Habitat Map Overlay (provided by Riverside County Flood Control, 2M)) Daigle Homes LLC County of Riverside, California AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 26 6 OF APN #363- 24o -oo2, 003, 004, oo8, oog, andol6 Focused CoastaCCaffornia Gnatcatcher Survey Juty 2003 In addition, remnant Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) species are present.. RSS is a xeric form of coastal sage scrub containing mostly drought- deciduous shrubs with small leaves. Individual and sporadic native RSS shrubs located within the site include flat top buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), white sage (Salvia apiana), California sagebrush (Artemesia califomica). 5.2) Literature Review Coastal California gnatcatchers are known to occur in RSS east of Interstate 15 in the Railroad Canyon area of Riverside County (Atwood 1992). Review of the California Natural Diversity Data Base (2003) reports listed the closest recorded sighting of a coastal Califomia gnatcatcher approximately one mile northwest of the project site. A previous biological report conducted on the 148 acres, which included the project area reported a CAGN observation, but could not give a location (Helix, 2002). The project site is located just inside of the boundaries of Unit 10 of the area designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as critical habitat for this species (USFWS, 2000). 5.3) Field Survey Surveys concentrated on the remnant sage scrub portions of the site identified as potentially suitable habitat.. A total of six site visits were made during the nesting season. During this focused survey, no coastal California gnateatchers were observed on -site. A total of sixteen (16) relatively common bird species were observed on the property during the present survey. L &L has determined the project site is currently not occupied by the coastal California gnatcatcher. AGMAD-A -1 -TOO non -� _'`W-03-121 I j PAGS �. OFL &..�Sr.Q. / jar r. c f r' i' f� APW #363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, oog, and o16 Focused Coastaf CatfOrnia Gnatcatcher Survey JUCy 2003 - -6.0j CONCLUSIONS- - - - - The coastal California gnatcatcher is federally listed as threatened and the project site is located within Unit 10 designated critical habitat for the species. The nesting season surveys were conducted on all of 6± acres of the project site, half of which was remnant sage scrub habitat, considered potentially suitable for the coastal California gnatcatcher. No coastal California gnatcatchers were detected on the project site during focused surveys. Therefore, it is determined that during the 2003 breeding season, the coastal California gnatcatcher did not occupy nor utilize site. Based on the current survey results, the proposed project will not result in the take of this species. No further surveys or mitigation is recommended for this species. S1N-03 -121 12 93 PAGE OF / APN #363 - 240 -oo2, oo3, oo4, oo8, oog, and ol6 s Focused Coasta(California Gnatcatcher Survey Ju(y 2003 I 7.0) REFERENCES AND CITATIONS Atwood, J. L. 1992. A Maximum Estimate of the California Gnatcatcher's Population Size in the United States. Western Birds 23:1 -9. California Dept. of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base. 2003a. Special Animals. CDFG, Sacramento, California. http:// www. dfg .ca.gov/whdab /html /iists.htmi California Department of Fish and Game. 2003b. Rarefind. Records check of electronic data Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. California Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, 156 pp. Sawyer, John 0., and Keeler -Wolf, Todd. 1995. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1997. Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Presence /Absence Survey Protocol. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Endangered and threatened. wildlife and plants; review of plant and animal taxa that are candidates or proposed for listing as endangered or threatened species. Federal Register 64:57534 -57547 (Oct 25) `.rr+ US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. California gnatcatcher designated final critical habitat. Federal Register 65:63680 ( Oct 24 . S`W -03 -121 13 - PAGE �' 9 OF APN #363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, o08, oog, ando16 t_ Focused CoastaCCaCfornia GnatcatcFier Survey JUCy 2003 i f .. i TABLE 2: Bird Species Observed on the Project Site (N =16) Accipitridae Hawks, Kites, Eagles Buteo jamaicensis Red- tailed Hawk Columbidae Zenaida macroura Trochilidae Calypte anna Tyrannidae Sayomis nigricans Tyrannus verticalis Hirundinidae f Petrochelidon pyrrhonota ''. Stelgidopteryx serripennis Corvidae Aphelocoma coeruiescens Corvus corax Aegithalidae Psaltdparus minimus Pigeons, Doves Mouming Dove Hummingbirds Anna's Hummingbird Tyrant Flycatchers. Black Phoebe Western. Kingbird Swallows Cliff Swallow Northern Rough- winged Swallow Crows, Jays Western Scrub Jay Common Raven Bushtits Bushtit Mimidae Mockingbirds Mimus polyglottus Northern Mockingbird l Emberizidae Emberizids Pipilo crissalis California Towhee Aimophila nificeps Rufous- crowned Sparrow Fringillidae Finches Carduelis psaltria Lesser Goldfinch Carpodactus mexicanus House Finch , t AgEbDA ITEM NO S'W -03 -121 si -1 2, 10 L &£I-� PAGE OF ® __ r i M APN #363 - 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, oog, and o26 Focused CoastaCCaCfornia GnatcatcFier Survey JuCy 2003 Photo 3: Taken from the southeast corner to the northwest. StiY-03-I21 B-2 � PAGE OF IASI APW#363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008, oog, and-016 { ,Focused Coastal-Cal fornia Gnatcatcher Survey JUfy 2003 RIVERSIDE COUNTY CERTIFICATION Certification: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits- present the data and information required for this biological evaluation, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATE: 6 3 SIGNED: �r { Leslie Irish, Principal . L&L Environmental, Inc. j 5W -03 -121 - B -1 -hoof i� B I O L O G I C A L & C U L T U R A L I N V E S T I G A T I O N S & M O N I T O R I N G BIOLOGICAL REPORT SUMMARY SHEET Ass+essoes,TareetNu►mber(s). _ Seddon, T Building and'Saf+et Log Nrmiber. Lot/Pary el EA Number GRECK IT M(S� SURVEVMJFO SPECiFFS.otr �+ NVIItONMF:N3'AL `ISSU + o . C'EItN .(Grde Yes, No or)VIA reganfi++gvpedes O"tlrt.,rforwce�ds3ttj Yes No H/a Arroyo Soutwestern Toad Yes No nia Blueline Stream(s) Yes No n1a j Coachella Valley Fringed -Toed Lizard Yes No n/a Coastal California Gnatcatcher Yes n;a j Coastal Sage Scrub Yes No n/a Delhi Sands Flower- Loving Fly Yes No n ?a Desert Pupfish Yes No n/a Desert Slender Salamander Yes No n/a , Desert Tortoise Yes No n/a Fiat - Tailed Horned Lizard Yes No Ma Least Bell's Vireo Yes No Oak Woodlands Yes No n/a ! ! Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Yes No n/a Riverside Fair} Shrimp Yes No n/a Santa Ana River Woolystar Yes No nia San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Yes No n/a Slender- Horned Spineflower Yes F No n/a Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Yes No n/a Vernal Pools Yes No n/a Wetlands Yes No --n—la 1261 1 Pomona -Rd -Suite 102 • Corona, CA 92882 •Phone: 909.°79.9608 • #'GANDMTJim. PAGE ? OF CSECK ITEiNI(S) SURVEYED FOR : SPECIES -or ENVIRO�AL ISSUE. of CONCERN (Ckde Yes. No or N/A regttttvfi* spedes jindbW on`9 �rjer+t�nadsite) Other Yes No Writ Other Yes No n/a Other Yes No nla Other Yes No nia Other Yes No nla j Other Yes No Writ Species of concern shall be any unique, rare, endangered. or threatened species. It shall include species used to delineate wetlands and riparian corridors. It shall also include any hosts. perching. or food plants used by any animals listed as rare, endangered. threatened or candidate species by either State, or Federal regulations, or for Riverside Count) as listed by the California Department of Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base (NDDB)_ I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided on this.summary sheet is in acwrdance with the information provided j in the biplogical report or habitat assessment, t , r i %A All ; ?��1 d�- ....� o ��.t C r.rt,rvan amP Date I0(a) Permit Number (if applicable) Permit Expiration Date County Use Only Received By_ Date: PD-B# AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE �'? S t- B I O L O G I C A L & C U L T U R A L I N V E S T I G A T I O N S & M O N I T O R I N G Attachment E4 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE CHECKLIST For Biological Resources (Submit two copies to the County) Case Number. Lot/Parcel No. EA Number - Assessor's Parcel Number(s): gtp x'240- (jL>? F 603 ( 1+1)6) onq U 1 C- �;::. Date:�f QV3 1 ' Wildlife & Vegetation: Potentially Less than Significant Less than No Significant Impact with Mitigation Significant Impact Impact I ncorporated Impact ,^Biological Resources Would the Project ?: a) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state conservation plan? b) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any endangered, or threatened species. as listed in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations ( Sections 670.2 or 670.5) or in Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations (Sections 17.11 or 17.12)? so e) 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. Wildlife Service? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Fro -? 1?69 Tomono Rd - Sm ite 102 - Corona, CA 92882 . Phone: 909- 279.9608A p,91 -' W PACE O LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE CHECKLIST For Biological Resources ! (Submit two copies to'the County) L , 1 e) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat, or other sensitive natural community identified in local or i regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game, or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? _ Y Q Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including. but not limited to, marsh, vernal pools, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption) g) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Fuidings of Fact: IA L77A-11AT0 91-F 0 iZS Cj e o Proposed Mitigation: ' . ; ►, fir, f. �' is �. Monitoring Recommended: Source: CGP Fig. V1.36 -V1.40 . Revised October 1999 AMMA ITEM NO. PAGE OF�2 L ,0-- ATTACHMENT NO. 6 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT MEMORANDUM AGENDA ITEM MO. PAGE OFZL Fes"" STATE OF CALIFORNIA o� .. Governor's Office of Planning and Research � NF State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit `"' Arnold Jan Boel Schwarzenegger Acting Deputy Governor Director ":ITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Memorandum REGEIVF0 FEB 0 2 2004 Date: January 28, 2004 PLANNING DEPT. To: All Reviewing Agencies From: Scott Morgan, Senior Planner Re: SCH # 2004011082 GPA No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 2003 -02, Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08 and Residential Design Review No. 2003 -15 t Pursuant to the attached letter, the Lead Agency has corrected their information regarding the above project. All other information remains the same. ,%no cc: Rolfe Preisendanz City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812 -3044 (916)445 -0613 FAX(916)323 -3018 www.opr.ca.gov ALMA ITEM NO..,�� PAGE -7q 0 '` --- 1 —1 f v' V — These studies will augment the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration sent to your office on January 15, 2004. Additionally, it was brought to my attention that we mistakenly sent thirty (30) copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration to the SCR instead of the fifteen (15) copies required Please discard any e3am copies not needed Thank you- /^ " AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE �.�U_ op -lff Request for Review and Comments - Form No. PD 2000 -27- Revised August, 2000 Page 1 of I Request to Attach Additional Studies to Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Elsinore MND No 2004 Planning i Planning Division -01 - 130 S. Mao street Lake Eknore, CA 9$30 - (909) 674-3124 (909) 471 -1419 fax ..e To: State Clearing House - -- Attn: Christine Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 JAN M4 > Date: January 22, 2004 HOUSE STATE CLEARING ^r From: Rolfe Preisendanz, Associate Planner (909) 674 - 3.124 ext. 223 - a= Email: rpreisendanz @lake - elsinore.org Project Title: GPA No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 2003 -02, Tentative Condominium Map No. 31532, Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08 and Residential Design Review No. 2003 - 15. Applicant: Craig Schleuniger, Daigle Homes, LLC 28991 Old Town Front St. #203 Temecula, CA 92590 (owner: Robert Stenson, Elsinore Lakeview Estates 6500 Wilshinre Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90048) Project Location: The proposed project is located at Grape Street south of Lake Elsinore City Center Shopping ` Center. APN: 363 - 240-002, 003, 004, 008, 009, 016 Attached you should find the foll owing studies prepared on January 19, 2004 by LSA Associates: • Paleontological Resources Assessment; and • Cultural Resource Assessment. These studies will augment the information contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration sent to your office on January 15, 2004. Additionally, it was brought to my attention that we mistakenly sent thirty (30) copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration to the SCR instead of the fifteen (15) copies required Please discard any e3am copies not needed Thank you- /^ " AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE �.�U_ op -lff Request for Review and Comments - Form No. PD 2000 -27- Revised August, 2000 Page 1 of I Form AA Notice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal 1 20040110"- SCH # Mai! to: State Clearinghouse, PO Box 3044, Sacramento, CA 95812 -3014 916(445 -0613 Project Tide, rake Elsinore City Center Townhomes" Please a ,. Lead Agency: City of Lake Elsinore Contact Person: Rolfe M. Preisendanz Street Address: 130 S. Main Street Phone: (909) 674 -3124 ext. 223 City: Lake Elsinore Zip: 92530 Count)c Riverside Project Locations County. Riverside Cay/Neares Community: Mumieta _ Cross Streets: Railroad Cayon Road and Grape Street Zip Code 92530 Total Acres 5.33 _ Assessor's Parcel No. 363 - 2404)02 003, 004.008 Section: Twp. Range: Base: Within 2 Milm State Hwy i:: Interstate 15 Waterways Airports. Railways: Schools. Document Type: CEOA: [) NOP ❑ SupplementlSubscquent EBI Other. O Joint Document O Early Cons (Prior SCH No.) EA O Final Document [D Nei; Dec DOtber .!AAN l J 77011EDra EIS C3 Other O Draft EIR O FON 31 ----------------- {------------------------ Local Action Type: ' STATE CLEARING HOUSE. O General Plan Update O Specific Plan V ^}'— ❑ Rezone ❑ Annexation © General Plan Amendment O Master Plan O Prcaone O Rcdcvclopmcnt O General Plan Element O Planned Unit Development ® Use Permit O Coastal Permit ❑ Community Platt ® Site Plan ® Land Division (Subdivision, etc.) ® Other Zone Change ----------------------------------------- Development Type- @J Residential: DO&60 Acra 5.33 O Water Facilities: Tips AfGD p office: syfi aerrs Employ-- O Transportation: Tjpe ❑ Commercial: sqft Acm Emptowers ❑ Mining M—/ O Industrial: SyJG Armes Empktwer O Power. Type ipaar_ O Educational O Waste Treatment Tjpe O Recreational 0 Hazardous Waste: npe _ O Other: ----------------------------------------- Funding (approx.): Federal S State S Total S ----------------------------------------- Project Issues Discussed in Document: M AesdichdVisual O Flood Plain/Flooding © Schools/Universitics 0Winer Quality El Agricultural Land O Forest Laod/Firc hazard O Septic Systems OX Water Supply /Gmvndwaiv ® Air Qpality ® Geologidscisnic © Sewer Capacity ® WettandMiparian O Areheobgiea /Hatorical O Minemli 1� Sol EmsionlCompaction/Grading © Wildlife ❑ Coastal Zone ® Noise ❑ Solid Waste m Growth Inducing ® Drainage/Absorption ® Population/Housing Balance ToxicMannious ® Landuse 21 EcommiclJobs © Public Scivicestfacilities Q Traffic/Circulation © Cumulative Effects ED Fiscal >[ Recreation/Parks O Vegetation D Other ----------------------------------------- Present land Use/Zoning/General Plan Designation: Vacant / (R -1) Single Family Residential! Very Low Density (VLD) ----------------------------------------- Project Description: General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 2003-02, Tentative Condominium Map 31532, Residential Design Review No. R 2003.15 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2003-08. State Clearinghouse Contact: Project Sent to the following State Agencies (916) 445 -0613 1, M � - Resources �— State Review Begun:': -� �L� - 2004 Boating & Waterways Colorado itvr 0 Conservation SCH COMPLIANCE f - 2004 X Fish & frame # Delta Protection Comm _ Forestry & Fire Prot _ Historic Preservation X Parks & Rec _ Reclamation Board Please note State Clearinghouse Number _ Bay cons & Dev Comm (SCH #) on all Commentts� DWR A 2.00401 1 V 82 OES (Emergency Svcs) SCH #: Bus Tramp Sorts Please forward late comments directly to the — Aeronautics Lead Agency CHP 7C Caltrans # _ _ Trani Planning AQMD /APCD �'3 - - Housing & Com Dev _ Food & Agriculture (Resources: / �� 1 _ Health Services State/Consumer Svcs General Set-vices Cal EPA ARB — Airport Projects ARB — Transportation Projects _ ARB — Major Industrial Projects _ Integrated Waste Mgmt Bd _ SWRCB: Clean Wtr Prog _ SWRCB. Wtr Quality SWRCB: Wtr Rijb�s XReg. WQCB # _ Toxic Sub Ctrl -Ci'C Yth/Adtt Corrections _ Corrections Independent Comm Energy Commission X NAHC _ Public Utilities Comm _ Santa Monica Mtns State Lands Conant Tahoe Rgl Plan Agency Other: I AGENDA ITEM NO.. Wv OF . ATTACHMENT NO.7 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AQMA ITEM NO. PAGE E oZ8 Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor STATE OF CALIFORNIA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit February 19, 2004 Rolfe Preisendanz City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Subject: Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes Phase II SCH #: 2004011082 Dear Rolfe Preisendanz: Jan Boel Acting Deputy �..Of Director (;ITyOF LAKE ELSINORE RECEIVED FEB 2 3 2004 PLANNING DEPT. The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on February 18, 2004, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above -named project,*please refer to the ten -digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. .Sincerely, Terry Roberts Director, State Clearinghouse 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812 -3044 (916)445 -0613 FAX(916)323 -3018 www.opr.ca.gov AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2004011082 Project Title Lake Elsinore City Center Townhomes Phase 11 ,..� Lead Agency Lake Elsinore, City of Type Neg Negative Declaration Description General Plan Amendment No. 2003 -03, Zone Change No. 2003 -02, Tentative Condominium Map 31532, Residential Design Review No. R 2003 -15 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2003 -08. Lead Agency Contact Name Rolfe Preisendanz Agency City of Lake Elsinore Phone 909/674 -3124 ext. 223 email Address 130 South Main Street City Lake Elsinore Project Location County Riverside City Murrieta Region Cross Streets Railroad Canyon Road and Grape Street Parcel No. 363- 240 -002, 003, 004, 008 Township Range Fax State CA Zip 92530 Section Proximity to: Highways 1 -15 Airports 00--- Railways Waterways Schools Land Use Vacant/ (R -1) Single Family Residential /Very Low Density (VLD) Base Project Issues Aesthetic/Visual; Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic- Historic; Cumulative Effects; Drainage /Absorption; Economics /Jobs; Fiscal Impacts; Geologic /Seismic; Growth Inducing; Landuse; Noise; Population /Housing Balance; Public Services; Recreation /Parks; Schools /Universities; Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion /Compaction /Grading; Toxic/Hazardous; Traffic /Circulation; Water Supply; Wetland /Riparian; Wildlife Reviewing Resources Agency; Department of Fish and Game, Region 6; Office of Historic Preservation; Agencies Department of Parks and Recreation; Office of Emergency Services; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 8; Department of Housing and Community Development; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 9; Native American Heritage Commission Date Received 01/20/2004 Start of Review 01/20/2004 End of Review 02/18/2004 AGENDA ITEM NO. � I PAGE = OEQ ?�, Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. � ORDINANCE NO. 1116 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, REPEALING SECTION 2.46 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADOPTING A NEW SECTION 2.46 RELATING TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMISSION. WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore first established a Public Safety Commission in 1984; and WHEREAS, the Public Safety Commission has been inactive since about 1988; and WHEREAS, the Lake Elsinore City Council now desires to revise and reactivate the Commission, as the Public Safety Advisory Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, the Lake Elsinore City Council does hereby repeal in its entirety, Section 2.46 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code; and replaced Section 2.46 as follows: SECTION 2.46.010 — DEFINITION. "Public Safety" is that which is related to Police, Fire, Code Enforcement Services and civil disaster within the City of Lake Elsinore. SECTION 2.46.020 — CREATION OF A PUBLIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMISSION. A Public Safety Advisory Commission is established. SECTION 2.46.030 — MEMBERSHIP. The Public Safety Advisory Commission shall consist of five members. Members of the Public Safety Advisory Commission shall: (1) reside within the City of Lake Elsinore; or (2) be an owner of a business that is established and currently licensed inside the City of Lake Elsinore. Members shall be subject t routine background check to be administered by the Police Department. SECTION 2.46.040 — APPOINTMENT — REMOVAL. The Members of the Public Safety Advisory Commission shall be appointed by each member of the City Council and may be removed at his/her pleasure, but subject to the approval by the majority vote of the City Council. Upon its creation the Mayor shall select the Chairman of the Commission. The initial term of the Chairman shall run through December 31, 2004, at which time the Chairman shall be selected by a majority vote of the membership of the Commission. AQENDA ITEM NO. ` .. PAGE OF Page Two – Ordinance No. 1116 SECTION 2.46.050 – TERM OF OFFICE. The Members of the Public Safety Advisory Commission shall be appointed for a term of two years, said two year term shall commence on July 1 of the respective year in which appointed. Those members of the Public Safety Advisory Commission serving as of the date of this amendment shall serve until July 1, 2006, except for the Chairman and Vice - Chairman, whose initial terms are set in section 2.46.040. All members are subject to potential re- appointment pursuant to Section 2.46.040. SECTION 2.46.060 – DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. A. The Commission shall serve as a conduit of information from the residents and business people of Lake Elsinore to their Public Safety, Code Enforcement and Emergency Services Professionals. B. The Commission shall serve as an additional set of eyes and ears that shall complement staff's efforts in their attempt to be proactive. C. The Commission shall create and maintain a link on the City's web site encouraging citizens input and providing a complaint or contact form, which may be submitted, on -line. D. The Commission shall seek out additional input and maintain a dialogue with various City organizations including but not limited to Lake Elsinore Marine Search and Rescue, Neighborhood Watch Groups, Homeowners' Associations, the Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Merchants Association, etc. E. The Commission shall report to the City Council on a regular basis. F. The Commission shall consider assisting the City Council, City Manager or other Public Safety Professionals with disaster preparedness and crisis management. G. The Commission shall consider and evaluate the cost and benefits of creating a Citizens' Action Patrol. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3� PAGE. " OF—.; � Page Three —Ordinance No. 1116 H. The Commission shall actively and aggressively seek out funding programs such as grants to fund Public Safety related programs, projects and equipment needs for the City of Lake Elsinore. I. The Commission shall limit its activities to those enumerated above. However, the Commission may request of the City Council additional duties and responsibilities (i.e. changes to Section 2.46 of the LEMC). Such requests may be granted by a majority vote of the City Council. SECTION 2.46.070 — MEETINGS. A. The Commission shall be subject to the laws governing public agencies and a quorum must be present in order to hold a meeting or take any action. B. Printed agendas and backup material shall be prepared for each meeting. C. Minutes of each meeting shall be prepared and distributed to all City Council Members and available upon request for public review at City Hall or on the City's website. D. If a Commissioner cannot attend a meeting or is going to be late, he /she shall contact the City Manager's Office. Failure to be present at four regularly scheduled meetings in any one calendar year may be cause for removal from the Commission by the Mayor and City Council. E. The Commission shall be authorized to meet as often as twice a month, but not less than once a quarter. F. The Chief of Police and the Fire Chief or a member of their respective staffs may attend the regularly scheduled meetings, but are not voting members of the Commission. SECTION 2.46.080 — OBLIGATIONS AND EXPENSES. The Public Safety Advisory Commission shall incur no obligations or expenses of any kind, without obtaining prior written authorization and approval by the City Council. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF 4 Page Four —Ordinance No. 1116 ../ SECTION 2.46.090 — TERMINATION. The Commission may be terminated at any time by a simple majority vote of the City Council. EFFECTIVE DATE: This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage. The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption of this Ordinance and cause this Ordinance to be published and posted in the manner required by law. INTRODUCED AND APPROVED UPON FIRST READING this 9d' day of March, 2004, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, MAGEE, BUCKLEY NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: SCHIFFNER ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ..r► PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED UPON SECOND READING this 23`d day of March , 2004, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGENDA ITEM NO. �1..••� PAGE OF...� I# - - Page Five —Ordinance No. 1116 VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: BARBARA LEIBOLD, CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGENDA ITEM NO...�J.�� PAGE OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: March 23, 2004 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Planning Commission Resignation Planning Commissioner John Barnes submitted his resignation on March 16, 2004, to be effective April 9, 2004. Planning Commission terms are four years, with three of the current terms, including Commissioner Barnes', expiring on June 30, 2004 (Commissioners Barnes, Matthies and Nash). In the case of vacancies, the City Council's prior practice has been to set a limited time period to receive applications from citizens interested in fulfilling the balance of the term. The City Council is provided copies of the applications before a public meeting where the selection is to take place. The formal selection is governed by Chapter 2.24 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code which is attached hereto. Section 2.24.030 provides in pertinent part that: "The members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Mayor with the approval of a majority of the members of the City Council ". Alternatively, the City Council may consider making this short term appointment without an application process. A CI EWA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OF 3 Page Two — Planning Commission Resignation FISCAL IMPACT None. REC ONIlVIENDATI ON Accept the resignation, consider appointment options and provide direction to City staff. PREPARED BY: `..so, VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR r APPROVED FOR ...r AGENDA LISTING: &Am92��&,,awJ RICHARD J. WATENPAGIC CITY MANAGER AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF 3 March 16, 2004 Honorable Mayor and Council City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Subject: Resignation of Commission Mayor Buckley and City Council: Be advised that as of April 9, 2004, 1 will no longer be a resident of the City of Lake Elsinore. Therefore, I will resign my Commission immediately following the Planning Ao-� Commission Meeting scheduled for April 6, 2004. It has been an honor to serve my community these past 8 years. It has been my very good fortune and pleasure to have served with some very fine people and also to have been associated with a very professional and knowledgeable team at City Hall. I thank you all for your support and I wish you all the best. Si ^n Barnes Commissioner XC: Planning Commission, Ron LaPere - Chairman Dick Watenpaugh Bob Bradey MAR 16 2004 CITY CLERKS CFf5E ALMA ITEM NO. _.� !' PAGE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6.04.020 -ANIMAL CONTROL FEE SCHEDULE OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ANIMALS AND ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS BACKGROUND In July 1988 the City of Lake Elsinore entered into an agreement with Lake Elsinore Animal Friends (LEAF) for contract Animal Control services. Since that time the "Friends" increased their clientele base to include the cities of Temecula, Murrieta, and Canyon Lake. LEAF also changed their name to "Animal Friend of the Valleys" to reflect those agencies they serve. At their April 9, 2002 City Council meeting, a new agreement with Animal Friends of the Valleys was approved but prohibited the canvassing element of the original agreement which resulted in decreases in licensing revenue and an increase to the City for Animal Control services. At their May 28, 2002 City Council meeting, the City Council approved amendments for sections of Chapter 6.04 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding Animals and Animal Control Officers as well as adopting Resolution No. 2002 -23 setting fines for violations of Chapter 6.04 as well as the amendment to the first agreement for Animal Control services. DISCUSSION The City has been contacted by Animal Friends requesting to have the City Council increase the "Altered Dog" fee from $10 to $15 for a one -year license; $15 to $20 for a two -year license; and from $20 to $25 for a three -year license. Animal Friends has requested the increase so that all agencies being serviced by Animal Friends will have the same fee schedule for dog licensing. No adjustments to the cat licensing fee have been requested as Lake Elsinore is the only agency in the valley that requires cat licensing. Lake Elsinore Animal Friends is requesting that the current dog license fees listed in Section 2 Chapter 6.04.020 be amended to reflect the following: AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 PA01= __A_-_0F_J_ Dog License 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year Altered Dog $15.00 $20.00 $25.00 FISCAL IMPACT No direct impact to the City. "Animal Friends" would see an increase in licensing fees based on the Ordinance being amended. RECOMMENDATION It is staffs recommendation that the Mayor and City Council adopt Ordinance No. Lf LV . PREPARED BY: David W. Sapp, Director of Community Services APPROVED BY: 4i. Z.�� Xd app, DirectoKWommunity Services APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Richard J. Wate paugh, City Manak6r ..I` AGENDA ITEM NO. 33 PA0E__j___OF_j2L ORDINANCE NO. 2004- _"_k V AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 6.04.020 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ANIMAL CONTROL FEE SCHEDULE. WHEREAS, Chapter 6.04 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code establishes animal control within the City of Lake Elsinore; and WHEREAS, Section 6.04.020 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code sets the Animal Control Fee Schedule. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 2: That dog licenses of Section 6.04.020 is amended and restated as follows. Dog Licenses: 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year Unaltered Dog $ 50.00 $100.00 $150.00 Altered Dog $ 15.00 $ 20.00 $ 25.00 Senior Citizen owned (Age 62) (Altered Dog) $ 6.00 $ 7.00 $ 8.00 PASSED, UPON FIRST READING this _ following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: day of , 2004, by the day of , 2004, by the Thomas Buckley, Mayor 1 AGENt�Q ITEM N0. 33 PAC1F__0F_;1_ ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Leibold, City Attorney AGENDA f('EM NO. 3 v r P.O. Box 1143 Lake Elsinore, California 92531 � E `�q F Egg 19g1 I 111 JUN 18 2002 ;rr June 14, 2002 C 'V L OFFICE City of Lake Elsinore Dave Sapp 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Dear Mr. Sapp, Please find enclosed the signed first amendment to agreement for animal control services. We look forward to working with you in providing this needed service. Thank you. Sincerely Anne Washington Executive Director — Contract /Agreement # 1536 Admin. Offices (909) 471 -8344 Fax (909)471 -8285 Shelter (909) 674 A ITEM No � e -mail: leaf @a - web- design.com www.leeifsheiter.com. PACLr L FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES N"Moe THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES (the "Amendment") is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City" and ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS, INC., a California nonprofit corporation (hereinafter referred to as "FRIENDS ") and is dated for identification purpose as of the 28th day of May, 2002. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City has approved that certain Agreement for Animal Control Services, dated April 15, 2002 (the "Agreement "); WHEREAS, the parties have determined that FRIENDS will engage in greater enforcement activities of the City's Municipal Code and incur additional costs related thereto; WHEREAS, FRIENDS has traditionally retained all license and permit fees collected by FRIENDS in order to offset the costs of providing the services set forth in the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City and FRIENDS have previously agreed in connection with the Agreement that revenues derived from such enforcement activities, if undertaken, would be forwarded to FRIENDS to offset the costs of such enforcement activities and for the other animal control services provided by FRIENDS. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do hereby mutually agree to the following terms and conditions: Section 4 of the Agreement is amended as follows: 4. Payment. The City shall pay an annual contract fee of Eighty -Five Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($85,200) in equal monthly payments of Seven Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($7,100). FREENDS shall also be entitled to retain all license and permit fees collected by FRIENDS. Additionally, to the extent that FRIENDS issues citations or otherwise imposes penalties in its capacity as an "enforcement officer" under Section 29 herein and such citations are not appealed, the revenues actually received by the City from such activities shall be paid to FRIENDS, less reasonable administration and handling costs that may be incurred by the City or by an independent collection service hired by the City. 2. Except for the amendment to Section 4 of the Agreement, all other provisions, terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. To the extent of any inconsistencies between the terms and provisions of this Amendment and the terms and FRIENDSAmend.4014.000 1 05/22/02 AGENDA ITEM No.-3-1 PALE _L_OF '7 )- ,n provisions of the Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Amendment shall control. The term "Agreement" shall hereafter be deemed to include the Agreement as amended by this Amendment. 3. Each individual signing below represents and warrants that he /she has the authority to execute this Amendment on behalf of and bind the party he /she purports to represent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed on the date first written above. A EST: f Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN P.C. blix/mw i�Aetl�' bara Zei L ibold, City Attorney FRIENDSAmend.4014.000 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: G Kelley, Mayor ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS, INC., a California non - profit corporation By: /2,", Anne Washington, Execut' irector 05/22/02 A EN A ME 140, 33 PAC,_ T­ OF MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, MAY 289 2002 BUSINESS ITEMS 32. Amending; Ordinance for Animal Control; Resolution Setting Fines for Violations of Chapter 6.04 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code: and First Amendment To the Agreement for Animal Control_ Services. (F: 18.1)(X:68.1) City Manager Watenpaugh noted that many hours had been spent to revised and prepare the proposed Code. He also noted that a minor modification of verbiage had been discussed at the Study Session earlier that day. Community Services Director Sapp provided an overview of the services provided by LEAF /Animal Friends since 1987. He explained that changes had been needed for quite a while, and the issues had now been worked out `%me and the fines revised. City Manager Watenpaugh reminded the Council that this item would require consideration of three separate actions. Bill Tucker, 740 Acacia, questioned the potential for door to door canvassing. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the proposed materials would allow for canvassing or soliciting. Mr. Tucker indicated that he was against canvassing, because Animal Friends did not have time to address the dogs on the street, although they did a fantastic job. He stressed his concern with going door to door, and noted that they did not open until 10 a.m., and could not provide service until then. Willa Bagwell, representing Animal Friends, clarified that State law required that all animals be licensed, and noted a recent exposure to rabies in the area. She stressed that all animals four months old and older must be vaccinated and licensed. She indicated that Animal Friends trucks were in AGENDA ITEM No. 33 PACE Z OF '7 the field at 8 a.m., but the shelter did not open until 10 a.m., to allow for cleaning. Councilman Hickman expressed support, noting that all animals should be licensed. He apologized for this process taking so long. Councilwoman Brinley indicated that she had no problem with this item, as they were capable of answering the concerns addressed at the study session. Councilman Buckley addressed the door -to -door canvassing and concerns that they would be demanding money on the spot. He clarified that Animal Friends would first issue a warning, before demanding money. He concurred that all dogs, cats and other animals should be licensed. Mayor Pro Tem Schiffner noted that the biggest issue was the canvassing, and it had been turned down once before, but he had decided this time that it was the best way to go. He indicated that it was a fund - raising operation in that getting a majority of the animals licensed as required, would help support the efforts in taking care of the animals. He stressed that the law �— required that animals be licensed, although many people think it is not necessary if the animals stayed in the yard. He further stressed that it also related to vaccinations and safety. He noted that wildlife such as squirrels in the area could carry illnesses and stressed the necessity of vaccinations. He requested that staff clarify the primary changes in the proposed action. City Attorney Leibold explained the revisions, which were generally clerical. She noted that the only comments received from Animal Friends were that they would like to see modification of the definition to include "potentially dangerous or vicious confinement /dog ", making it a more comprehensive term. She advised that the new ordinance established a new fee schedule for licenses and detailed the fees, noting a discount for senior citizen pet owners and schedule for cat licenses. She indicated that it included an allowance for animal control to conduct inspections, an obligation to keep all catteries and kennels safe and sanitary, and comply with State law requirements. She noted that the Resolution established a fine schedule for $100, $200 and $250 for progressive offenses, which was less than the State fines of $100, $200 and $500. She also note a clarification of revenues generated and how the revenues would be paid to Animal Friends for services provided. AGENDA ITEM NO. 33 PACE '_OF71 Mayor Kelley noted that this was discussed again at today's study session, and concurred that canvassing was still the main issue, but it appeared to be worked out. MOVED BY SCHIFFNER, SECONDED BY BRINLEY TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1082 UPON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY: ORDINANCE NO. 1082 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADDING, AMENDING AND DELETING DESIGNATED SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 6.04 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ANIMALS AND ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS. UPON THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: BRINLEY, BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, SCHIFFNER, KELLEY NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE MOVED BY BRINLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -23, AND AUTHORIZED THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE PROPOSED FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, SETTING THE FINES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 6.04 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE. ,"SO AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 3 PACE-LO-of ---L2: RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -123 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE SETTING THE FINES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 6.04 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, Section 6.04.280 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code provides that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore shall establish by resolution the fines for violation of Chapter 6.04, Animals and Animal Control Officers. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. As provided in Section 6.04.280 of the LEMC, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore hereby approves the following fines for inftaudon(s) arising from violation(s) of Chapter 6.04: A. Fiat violation: $100.00 B. Second violation of the same provision within one year: $200.00 C. Third violation of the same provision within one year: $250.00 Section 2. The City Clerk of the City shall certify the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of May , 2002. Ayes: COUNCILMEMBERS: BRINLEY, BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, SCHIFFNER, KELLEY Noes: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Abstain: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Absent: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE t / Mayor I� AGENDA ITEM N0. 33 PACE J—L_pF_ � ATTEST: Vizki Kasad, City Clerk APPRO VED AS TO FORM: Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney •.0, ..s In AGENDA ITEM NO. - PACE :)L- OF �- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore at a Regular Meeting of said Council on the 28 ' day of May, 2002, and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ` CKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ H-TJMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE (SEAL) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE) BRINLEY, BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, SCHIFFNER, KELLEY NONE NONE NONE I, VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution No. 2002 -23 of said Council, and that the same has not been amended or repealed. D E: June 10, 2002 CKI K`A AD, CMC, CITY CLERK! HIT MAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE (SEAL) AGENDA ITEM No. 33 PACE ' 4F_2:- I- (0 r. ( MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING "Ole CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2003 CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS The following items were pulled from the Consent Calendar for further discussion and consideration: Item Nos. 6 and 10. MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY SCHIFFNER AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 6. Animal Friends of the Valley - Administrative Citation Process. (F:68.1)(X:18.3) Councilman Buckley indicated that he pulled this item in case Animal Friends of the Valley representatives wanted to address it. MOVED BY BUCKLEY, SECONDED BY KELLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO: 1) ALLOW ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEY TO ACT AS THE PROCESSING AGENT FOR THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PROGRAM; 2) CONCUR WITH ANIMAL FRIENDS' ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN CAPITAL ENTERPRISES, INC. FOR COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT FINES; AND 3) REQUIRE ANIMAL FRIENDS TO INCLUDE AS PART OF SECTION 10 OF THE AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES A SEPARATE ACCOUNTING OF ALL REVENUES ..r►" AGENDA ITEM No,-3S PACE I � OF % �- GENERATED THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION � ' PROGRAM. AGENDA ITEM Nom__ 33 PACT t 5 Of CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: JANUARY 14, 2003 SUBJECT: ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEY ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PROCESS BACKGROUND The City Council approved a new agreement with Animal Friends of the Valley on April 15, 2002. As the City's animal control agent Animal Friends is responsible for enforcement of the City's Municipal Code on matters relating to animal licensing and regulations. The new agreement provided Friends an implementation plan under which Friends would take the lead role in all aspects of animal related code enforcement, including license inspections, citation issuance, and other administrative activities. ,..r In order to implement the proposed plan, certain revisions were needed to be made to the City's -.001 existing animal control ordinance including the level of fines to be imposed. At the May 28th City Council meeting, the Council took action to amend designated sections of Chapter 6.04 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code regarding animals and animal control officers. The City Council also approved the first amendment to the agreement and approved Resolution No. 2002 -23 establishing fines for violation of Chapter 6.04 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. With the clarification of license and citation revenues to be directed to Animal Friends through the first amendment to the agreement approved by City Council on May 28th, the plan could be implemented for the Administrative Citation Program. Initial discussions for processing of animal control citations were centered on in -house processing much like the City's Lake Citation Program. It was decided that due to staffing levels within the Administrative Services department that the citations should be processed through an independent third party. City staff met and conferred with Animal Friends as to the intent and direction of a third party processing agent and began discussions with three service providers. Staff discussed the proposed program for processing animal control citations with Control Parking Corporation; MSB Parking/Code Enforcement (Data Ticket); and Enforcement Technology, Inc. which currently processes the City's current parking citation program. City staff also conversed with representatives of the cities of Temecula and Murrieta regarding their programs and learned that Temecula's program is processed through their City's Code Enforcement Program and the city of Murrieta utilizes the services of Data Ticket as their third party processing agent. Upon completing negotiations with Enforcement Technology, Inc., staff met with Animal Friends to discuss the contract and the annual $6,000 base guarantee for citation processing. DISCUSSION During discussions Animal Friends felt that it could process the citations much more cost effectively providing both the City and Animal Friends in particular, additional revenues in offsetting animal control services. Animal Friends of the Valley and staff have met with American Capital Enterprises of Temecula for the collection of delinquent fines for violations of Chapter 6.04 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. As the citation processing entity, Animal Friends will enter into the agreement with American Capital for the collection of unpaid accounts. A portion of those funds collected by American Capital will be retained as a service fee with the balance being forwarded to Animal Friends. The City Attorney's office has reviewed the agreement and staff concurs with Animal Friends' desire to enter into the Collection Agreement with American Capital. FISCAL IMPACT No impact to the City. Revenues generated through the Administrative Citation Program will mitigate the need for future funds from the City towards the construction of a new animal shelter. RECOMMENDATION It is staffs recommendation that the Mayor and City Council approve the following: 1. Allow Animal Friends of the Valley to act as the processing agent for their Administrative Citation Program. 2. Concur with Animal Friends' entering into an agreement with American Capital Enterprises, Inc. for collection of delinquent fines. 3. Require Animal Friends to include as part of Section 10 of the Agreement for Animal Control Services a separate accounting of all revenues generated through the Administrative Citation Program. PREPARED BY: David Sapp, nity Services Dir for APPROVED BY: Cc/ . Davi app, Community SeMpGthrector APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Richard J. Wat npaugh, Ci an er PACE of: m0 ican Capital enterprises, inc. 42145 LYNOIE LANE. SUITE 212 TEMECULA. CALIFORNIA 92591 (909) 695 -3372 AGREEMENT FOR THE COLLECTION OF UNPAID ACCOUNTS This AGREEMENT made and entered into this 19th day of November 2002, by and between located at lake Elsinore, CA 92530, hereinafter referred to as "Client", and AMERICAN CAPITAL ENTERPRISES, INC., Located at 42145 Lyndie Lane, Suite 212, Temecula, CA 92591, hereinafter referred to as "American". WHEREAS, Client has overdue accounts which it desires American to collect and provide collection services in connection therewith. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the material covenants contained herein, The parties agree hereto as follows: Client will: Use reasonable care to assign bona fide claims. 2. Use its best efforts to verify any disputed amount. 3. Pay American its commission on any account paid prior to assignment where American has initiated the discovery of the payment. II. American will: Retain commission on all monies collected on assigned accounts, whether paid to Client or American, at the following rates: A. First Placement Account 30% B. Legal /Judgment Account 50% 2. Obtain prior approval from Client before initiating legal action on any account. 3. Advance all legal costs in connection with approved legal action against any debtor. 4. Retain from first monies collected on a legal account it's advanced costs. 0131 DA ITEM NoIr— 3 5. Retain any interest on all placed accounts accruing from the date of assignment, if allowed by law, in part to offset costs advanced on legal accounts. 6. Upon Request, provide Client with monthly "Creditor Master" reports reflecting the status of each account. 7. Allow Client to audit an assigned account at any time. 8. Allow Client to cancel an individual assigned account at any time for a mistake or an error in assignment subject to I.(3) above. If American collects monies on an account later determined to be an error in assignment, American will retain its commission since commissioned collectors will have been paid. We both agree all other cancellations will be governed by former California Business and Professions code 6926.3. 9. American, at its option, may charge 1.5% monthly interest on any unpaid balance outstanding for more than 60 days. Client warrants the accounts are first placements (no collection agency or Attorney has attempted to contact the debtor by letter service or otherwise) and understands the commission rates herein are based on �^ this representation. If accounts are not first placements, Client agrees to pay a contingency commission of 50% for each second or third placement account assigned. A "Legal" account is any Client account on which the Client has signed an authorization for American to proceed with a lawsuit and any collection work by an Attorney has commenced. Client understands that the scope of Americans' service does not include attending any Workers Compensation or Bankruptcy hearings or any related additional legal representation. Although Client is not obligated to assign any accounts, if monthly assignments are made for 6 consecutive months or longer, we agree that either party may terminate this Agreement for future assignments by providing 60 days written notice to the other party at the address set forth above. In all other cases, either party may terminate this Contract for future assignments with 30 days notice. Client agrees that the place of contracting is California and the laws of the State of California shall govern this Contract. AMUDA Vrl:M 3 If either party files suit to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to its reasonable Attorney fees and Court Costs. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this AGREEMENT on the date first written above_ AMERICAN CAPITAL ENTERPRISES, INC. i Ronald G. Matheson PresidentlCEO FEDERAL TAX ID# by: authorized signature Date: FDA 9M ! 1"00 ,"we Paul Hamrick, Director James C. Huber, Director Curtis W. Hummel, Director Kenneth J. McLaughlin, Director Jack E. Smith, Director COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT March 25, 2002 Re: American Capital Enterprises, Inc. Whom It May Concern: American Capital Enterprises, Inc. has provided collection services for Jurupa Community Services for approximately fifteen years. Their staff has been consistently courteous and helpful to our staff. 1004, Admin Customer ServiceTEITERSXam cap reference.doc Sincerely, )r�_ Jan Zirwas Customer Service -Representative FDA VTOd NO-3 P LOF ! . 8621 Jurupa Road, Riverside, CA 92509 ' (909) 685 -7434 " FAX (909) 685 -1153 ROBERT G. PETERSON, KD., RAAEP. DIPLOMATE AMERICAN BOARD OF FAMILY PRACTICE DANA L. HALE, PA-- PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT MUTM A FAMILY M. DICM 4151 & Kalmia • Murdeta, CA 92562 (909) 698 -7550, March 19, 2002 To Whom It May Concern; Our practice has been using American Capital as our collection agency since March, 1994. We have been pleased with the results they have achieved in collecting balances: owed us. Their staff is pleasant and always helpful when we call. We look forward to a continued association with them. ..r Sincerely, Lois Murphy, Business Office Manager MDA Item ice. Pte- A Open MRI of Inland Valley, I.I.C. 36450 inland Valley Drive, Ste. 106 wildomar, CA 92595 Phone 909 - 677 -3192 Fax 909 -677 -7839 March 26, 2002 RE: Reference letter To Whom it may concern, American Capital has applied their interest in serving your company regarding collection proceedings. In working with James Rogers, our main contact with American Capital for the past few years. I have found him to be very professional, sufficient and a pleasure to work with. His personality is very personable that I feel very confident working with him as a team. In managing the billing department for Open MRI of Inland Valley for the pass two years. We assigned American Capital to be our Collection Agency and I have been very satisfied with the results of the collection proceedings and find the group very pleasant to work with as well. If you would like to contact me for a verbal reference, please call (909) 677 -3192, ext. #11. Sincerely, erry Haas Open MRI of Inland Valley, LLC., Billing Dept. AGENDA. ITEM NO. PA,M, OF e"Z March 13, 2002 Citv of Carlsbad Mr. James C. Rogers Director of Marketing American Capital Enterprises, Inc. 42145 Lyndie Lane, Suite 212 Temecula, CA 92591 PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE COLLECTION SERVICES — CITY OF CARLSBAD Dear Mr. Rogers: Thank you for your proposal to provide collection services for the City of Carlsbad for the upcoming fiscal year(s). The selection committee reviewed and discussed all submitted proposals during the past three weeks, and has completed their review of all the proposals. American Capital Enterprises, Inc. has been identified as one of the top -rated firms. The committee expects to make their final decision for recommendation to the City Council within the next two weeks, with Council approval expected sometime in April 2002. If we need further assistance from your firm in order to assist the committee in their final decision making, we will contact you promptly. This selection was made based on the evaluation criteria set forth in the Request for Proposal, which weighted heavily the proposed methodology, experience and expertise of the firms, and its personnel. In addition, we found your fees to be very competitive with the other proposals submitted. We appreciate your interest in the City, and we will be in touch with you shortly. Sincerely, KEVIN BRANCA Assistant Finance Director PACE' OF 1635 Faraday Avenue - Carlsbad, CA 92008 -7314 - (760) 602 -2430 - FAX (760) 602 -8553 www.ci.carisbad.ca.us - Business License (760) 602 -2495 - Utility Billing (760) 602 -2420 Act ,%NNW 1.090, to ft m N C fD Imw rall- n rD 0 Rilli 0 A� 0 1 M■r • I 1 m J• 1 v� J r"h �h 0 d � H son C 3 rt Via.. 33 PACEask , FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES (the "Amendment") is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City" and ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS, INC., a California nonprofit corporation (hereinafter referred to as "FRIENDS ") and is dated for identification purpose as of the 28th day of May, 2002. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City has approved that certain Agreement for Animal Control Services, dated April 15, 2002 (the "Agreement "); WHEREAS, the parties have determined that FRIENDS will engage in greater enforcement activities of the City's Municipal Code and incur additional costs related thereto; WHEREAS, FRIENDS has traditionally retained all license and permit fees collected by FRIENDS in order to offset the costs of providing the services set forth in the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City and FRIENDS have previously agreed in connection with the Agreement that revenues derived from such enforcement activities, if undertaken, would be forwarded to FRIENDS to offset the costs of such enforcement activities and for the other animal control services provided by FRIENDS. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do hereby mutually agree to the following terms and conditions: 1. Section 4 of the Agreement is amended as follows: 4. Payment. The City shall pay an annual contract fee of Eighty -Five Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($85,200) in equal monthly payments of Seven Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($7,100). FREENDS shall also be entitled to retain all license and permit fees collected by FRIENDS. Additionally, to the extent that FRIENDS issues citations or otherwise imposes penalties in its capacity as an "enforcement officer" under Section 29 herein and such citations are not appealed, the revenues actually received by the City from such activities shall be paid to FRIENDS, less reasonable administration and handling costs that may be incurred by the City or by an independent collection service hired by the City. 2. Except for the amendment to Section 4 of the Agreement, all other provisions, terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. To the extent of any inconsistencies between the terms and provisions of this Amendment and the terms and FRIENDSAmend.4014.000 05/22/02 1 R1i'iENW MiV! h'0. provisions of the Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Amendment shall control. The term "Agreement" shall hereafter be deemed to include the Agreement as amended by this Amendment. 3. Each individual signing below represents and warrants that he/she has the authority to execute this Amendment on behalf of and bind the parry he /she purports to represent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed on the date first written above. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: G Kelley, Mayor r A EST: 6 ^" Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN P.C. B tiara Zeid L ibold, City Attorney ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS, INC., a California non -profit corporation By: _ Anne Washington, Execut' irector FRIEMSAmend.4014.000 2 AGENDA rrEM :O. -12:> 05/22/02 Pie E �% 'J RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -.23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE SETTING THE FINES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 6.04 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE WHEREAS, Section 6.04.280 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code provides that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore shall establish by resolution the fines for violation of Chapter 6.04, Animals and Animal Control Officers. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. As provided in Section 6.04.280 of the LEMC, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore hereby approves the following fines for infrac :ion(s) arising from violation(s) of Chapter 6.04: A. First violation: $100.00 B. Second violation of the same provision within one year: $200.00 C. Third violation of the same provision within one year: $250.00 Section 2. The City Clerk of the City shall certify the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of May , 2002. Ayes: COUNCILMEMBERS: BRINLEY, BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, SCHIFFNER, KELLEY Noes: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Abstain: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Absent: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Genie ey, Mayor AGENDA �,NO 33° PAM 0r _ �___ 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ) I, VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore at a Regular Meeting of said Council on the 28' day of May, 2002, and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ` -iCKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ i IUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE (SEAL) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) SS: CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE) BRINLEY, BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, SCHIFFNER, KELLEY NONE filfi7W, NONE I, VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of Resolution No. 2002 -23 of said Council, and that the same has not been amended or repealed. I CKE: June 10, 2002 I K`A AD, CMC, CITY CLERK! WMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE (SEAL) AGIENDA ITEM N'0 PACZOf ATTEST: O Viz-ki Kafiad, City Clerk APPRO VED AS TO FORM: Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney AGENDA M no. PACE 3 0- OF ,.Nor � CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: . BARBARA LEIBOLD, CITY ATTORNEY DATE: MAY 28, 2002 SUBJECT: 1. ORDINANCE ADDING, AMENDING AND DELETING DESIGNATED SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 6.04 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ANIMALS AND ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS 2. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE SETTING THE FINES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 6.04 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE 3. FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES BACKGROUND The City Council approved a new agreement with Animal Friends on April 15, 2002. Assistant City Attorney David Mann and Community Services Director David Sapp then met with Friends= representative Anne Washington on April 30, 2002 to discuss implementation of Friends' responsibility for enforcing the City =s municipal code on matters related to animal license and regulation. Friends presented an implementation plan under which Friends would take the lead role in all aspects of animal related code enforcement, including license inspections, citation issuance, and other administrative activities. However, any appeal to a citation issued by Friends would be heard by a City representative rather than a Friends= employee. In order to implement the proposed plan, certain revisions were needed to the City's existing animal control ordinance and City Council would also need to determine what level of fines would be imposed. Friends was also somewhat concerned that the existing agreement did not spell out the parties= understanding that revenues from licenses and citations should go to reimburse Friends for its costs, (Friends points out that the City =s payment for animal control services is significantly less than Murrieta and Temecula and these additional funds are needed to make up the shortfall). In light of this, we prepared an amendment to the agreement to spell out that these revenues would be paid to Friends as part of reimbursing Friends for providing animal control services. AGENDA ITEM NO. , 33 PAGE OF—J. DISCUSSION ON ORDINANCE Below is a brief summary of the changes made to the City's Animal Control Ordinance: .moo 1. Section 6.04.010. Definitions: This section is revised to put the definitions in alphabetical order and add a definition of "License inspections" 2. Section 6.04.020. Fees: This section is revised to reflect the costs incurred by Animal Friends for the services provided and to bring the City's fees in line with the County and cities of Murrieta and Temecula. 3. Section 6.04.030 regarding fees for unaltered dogs and cats: Subsection (E) is deleted because the breeding permit fee has already been added into the license fee for such animals. 4. Section 6.04.070(B)(1) regarding cattery and kennels: This section is amended to require sanitary conditions for all animals, not just dogs and cats. 5. Section 6.04. 100 regarding sterilization of adopted animals: This section is amended to reflect changes in State law regarding a deposit on animals that cannot be sterilized due to sickness or injury. 6. Section 6.04.120 regarding duties of Animal Control Officers: Subsection (G) is added to include License inspections within the Animal Control Officer's duties. 7. Section 6.04.160 regarding unlawful acts: Subsection (J) is amended to reflect that contact should be made with the Animal Control Agency (Friends) rather than the City. Subsection (L) is added to reflect the requirement to follow any order issued by the Animal Control Officer regarding vicious dogs. 8. Section 6.04.180 regarding animals unattended in a motor vehicle: This amendment merely involves correcting typographical errors. 9. Section 6.04.220 regarding animal sanitation: The amendment requires bi- weekly clean-up. 10. Section 6.04.245 regarding noisy animals: This amendment changes the hearing from a "Hearing Board" to the "Hearing Officer" and gives 10 days to provide a written determination following the hearing. 11. Section 6.04.250 regarding unsafe animals: This amendment clarifies the registration fees related to vicious or unsafe animals. A copy of the City's existing Animal and Animal Control Officers ordinance is also attached. AGEMA ITEM NO. PAGE _21z OF DISCUSSION ON RESOLUTION In addition to the proposed changes to the Animal Control Ordinance, Section 6.04.280 requires that the City Council set the level of fines that may be imposed for violation of the Animal Control Ordinance. The fine level currently set in Murrieta is $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second offense within one year, and $500 for the third offense in one year. The fine level currently set in Temecula is $50 for the first offense, $150 for the second offense within one year, and $250 for the third offense in one year. The proposed resolution sets a somewhat middle ground of $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second offense within one year, and $250 for the third offense in one year. However, the City Council can determine any level of penalty so long as it does not exceed the current limits set for infractions in the City's municipal code. Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 1. 16.010 sets a limit of $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second offense within one year, and $500 for the third offense in one year. DISCUSSION ON AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT The proposed amendment to the Animal Control Services Agreement clarifies the parties' understanding that revenues from licenses and citations should go to reimburse Friends for its costs. RECOMMENDATION 1. That the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance No. 1082. 2. That the City Council adopt the attached Resolution No. 2002 -23. 3. That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the proposed First Amendment to Agreement for Animal Control Service PREPARED BY: David Mann, Assistant City Attorney APPROVED BY: Barbara Leibold, City Attorney APPROVED FOR LISTING BY: City Manager's Offic(ftxec-ujlle Director AGENDA ITEM N0. PACE 3 OF_ ORDINANCE NO. - a N.i` AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ADDING, AMENDING AND DELETING DESIGNATED SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 6.04 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ANIMALS AND ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICERS WHEREAS, Chapter 6.04 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code established animal control within the City of Lake Elsinore; and WHEREAS, it is the purpose and intent of the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore to add, amend and delete specified sections of Chapter 6.04 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code in order to update fees requirements and clarify the duties of Animal Control Officers. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That Section 6.04.010 is amended and restated as follows: 6.04.010 Definitions. Whenever, in this chapter the following terms are used, they shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section unless it is apparent from the context thereof that some other meaning is intended: - NUMe "Adequate shelter" means an area that has adequate space for the size dog being kept, and that area should contain a shelter that would humanely house a dog from the elements. "Animal Control Agency" shall mean the City of its designee, which may specifically include the City's contractor for animal control services. "Animal Control Director" means the Executive Director or similar executive officer of the Animal Control Agency or his/her designee. "Animal Control Officer" means the person or duly authorized agent of such person so designated by the City. "At large" means any dog which is off the premises of its owner, custodian or caretaker and which is not under physical restraint by a leash of a size and material appropriate to the size and temperament of the dog and which is.held by a person capable of restraining such dog, or is not otherwise physically restrained by some other device or instrumentality, except that such device or instrumentality shall not include voice control, eye control or signal control of the dog by any person, device or instrumentality. "City" shall mean the City of Lake Elsinore. ,AGENDA ITE=M NO....= PAGE OF u "Commercial cattery" means any building, structure, enclosure or premises whereupon, or within which five or more cats four months of age or older, are kept or maintained, for financial profit for the purpose of boarding, breeding, training, marketing, hire or any other similar purpose. "Commercial kennel" means any building, structure, enclosure or premises whereupon, or within five or more dogs four months of age or older, are kept or maintained, for financial profit for the purpose of boarding, breeding, training, marketing, hire or any other similar purpose. "Dog or cat owner" means any person harboring, pet sitting, caretaking, custodian, resident at which registered owner, licensed owner, any person in charge of the animal. "Electrified fence" means an accepted and approved form of fencing providing an electrified perimeter within, and attached to a board, chain link, or block wall fence. Habitual runaways or "at large" offenders could be mandated to install this device per the Animal Control Agency. "Exotic animals" means any nondomestic animal and/or any animal not native to the Southern California area. "Impounded" means an animal having been received into the custody of the Animal Control Officer authorized under the provisions of this chapter. "License inspections" means door to door canvassing by an Animal Control Officer for the purpose of determining whether dogs or cats have been vaccinated and are properly licensed. "Noisy animals" means any animal or animals maintained on the same premises or location whose excessive, unrelenting, or habitual barking, howling, crying, or other noise or sounds annoy or become offensive to a resident or residents in the vicinity thereby disturbing the peace of the neighborhood or causing excessive discomfort to any reasonable person of normal sensitivity residing in the area. "Noncommercial cattery" means any building, structure, enclosure or premises whereupon, or within which five to ten cats, four months of age or older, are kept or maintained for noncommercial reasons. Each cat must be altered by six months of age. "Noncommercial kennel" means any building, structure, enclosure or premises whereupon, or within which five to ten dogs, four months of age or older, are kept or maintained for noncommercial reasons. Each animal shall be individually licensed at four months and altered upon reaching six months of age. "Person" means any individual, firm, partnership, joint venture, corporation, association, club or organization. AOMbA ITaM NO. 33 "Pet shop" means any person, establishment, store or department of any store that acquires live animals, including birds, reptiles, fowl and fish, and sells, or offers to sell or rent such live animals to the public or to retail outlets. "Public places" means and shall include, without limitation, streets, highways, fronts of places of businesses, carnivals, flea markets, swap meets and sidewalks. "Sentry dog" means any dog trained to work without supervision in a fenced facility and to deter or detain unauthorized persons found within the facility. "Unlicensed dog" means any dog four months of age or older, for which no valid license is currently in force within the incorporated area. "Vaccination" means an inoculation against rabies of any dog or cat four months of age or older of any vaccine prescribed for that purpose by the California Department of Health Services. "Vicious confinement" means any confinement of dog deemed vicious, by the Animal Control Agency and which may be required to be contained in a chain link kennel 11 by 9 gauge wire, with the dimensions: minimum twelve foot by six foot high, to be entirely enclosed with an attached chain link top, to include an end protective area from the weather no less than four feet on top and four feet on either side, to be constructed with plywood or fiberglass on the outside of the kennel. Chain link is to be set in concrete flooring around the base of the kennel, and the kennel must be reinforced with a top and lower retaining rail; top is for support and the bottom is to serve as a safety guard against dog pulling chain link out of concrete. "Vicious dog" means any dog which has bitten a person or animal without provocation or which has a disposition or propensity to attack or bite any person or animal. SECTION 2: That Section 6.04.020 is amended and restated as follows: 6.04.020 Animal Control Fee Schedule. Dog licenses: 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year Unaltered dog $50.00 $100.00 $150.00 Altered dog $10.00 $15.00 $20.00 Senior citizen owned (age 62) (altered dog) $6.00 $7.00 $8.00 Cat licenses: Unaltered cat $37.00 $49.00 $61.00 Altered cat $6.00 $8.00 $10.00 Senior citizen owned (age 62) AGENDA ITEM NO. —L3 -.0 *"me (altered cat) Other Fees for Dog and/or Cat licenses: Late fee $20.00 Replacement tag $6.00 Transfer fee $2.00 Vicious Dog Registration Fee (in addition to license) $50.00 Kennel/Cattery /Pet shop license $5.00 Pet shop $100.00 Commercial cattery $400.00 Commercial kennel $400.00 Noncommercial kennel $200.00 Noncommercial cattery $200.00 Late fee - 50% of the applicable one year license fee ,x-11 Impound Fees (in a 12 month period) $6.00 $7.00 Boarding Fees per day: Dogs and cats Horse, cattle, swine, goats, sheep Fowl Additional fees: Home quarantine- 3 visits required Shelter quarantine Owner assist calls Transportation cost - per mile Man -hours per hour during business hours Euthanasia, per animal $7.00 $7.00 $2.00 $45.00 $65.00 $0.45 $45.00 $20.00 4 AGE MA ITW_ NO. PacE _;- OF 1st Time 2nd Time 3rd Time Dog or cat unaltered $30.00 $40.00 $50.00 Dog or cat altered $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 Female dog or cat in season estrus $30.00 $50.00 $70.00 Vicious dog $50.00 $75.00 $100.00 Noisy animals $50.00 $75.00 $100.00 Boarding Fees per day: Dogs and cats Horse, cattle, swine, goats, sheep Fowl Additional fees: Home quarantine- 3 visits required Shelter quarantine Owner assist calls Transportation cost - per mile Man -hours per hour during business hours Euthanasia, per animal $7.00 $7.00 $2.00 $45.00 $65.00 $0.45 $45.00 $20.00 4 AGE MA ITW_ NO. PacE _;- OF Pickup of livestock, per head $25.00 Impound, after hours and response calls $45.00 Use of trailer, per load $20.00 Fee for declared vicious dog $75.00 Refundable spay /neuter fee — adoptions Cats $25.00 Dogs $40.00 Noisy Animals response charge. See Section 6.04.245G SECTION 3: That the following Section 6.04.030(E) is deleted in its entirety: E. The owner of any unaltered dog or cat shall be required to obtain a breeding permit in addition to the required license. SECTION 4: That Section 6.04.070(B)(1) is amended and restated as follows: 1. The kennel, cattery or pet shop is constructed, equipped and maintained so as to continuously provide a healthful and sanitary environment for all animals, including dogs and cats kept, or to be kept therein; SECTION 5: That Section 6.04. 100 is amended and restated as follows: 6.04.100 Sterilization of adopted animals. A. Except as provided herein, no unclaimed dog or cat shall be released for adoption without being sterilized. B. If a veterinarian licensed to practice veterinary medicine in this State certifies that the dog or cat is too sick or injured to be spayed or neutered, or that it would otherwise be detrimental to the health of the dog or cat to be spayed or neutered, the adopter or purchaser shall pay the Animal Control Agency a deposit of fifty dollars ($50). The deposit shall be temporary, and shall only be retained until the dog or cat is healthy enough to be spayed or neutered, as certified by a veterinarian licensed to practice veterinary medicine in this State. The dog or cat shall be spayed or neutered within 14 business days of that certification. The adopter or purchaser shall obtain written proof of spaying or neutering from the veterinarian performing the operation. If the adopter or purchaser presents proof of spaying or neutering to the Animal Control Agency within 30 business days of obtaining the proof, the adopter or purchaser shall receive a full refund of the deposit. SECTION 6: That the following subsection G is added to Section 6.04.120: G. To conduct License inspections to insure that all dogs and cats four (4) months of age or older have been vaccinated and are properly licensed. SECTION 7: That Section 6.04.160(J) is amended and restated as follows: AGENDA ITEM NO. 33 'PAGE g' OF , -"we ..ow J. For any person to abandon any animal without care of any public or private property. Any animal abandoned may be impounded and disposed of in a humane manner. At least seventy -two hours prior to the impoundment of an animal believed to be abandoned, a notice shall be posted on the property on which said animal is being kept. Notice shall be given in person or by regular mail to the last known address of the owner or person entitled to possession thereof, that animal will be impounded if contract is not made with the Animal Control Agency within seventy -two hours. When it is found that a house is vacant or condemned, the animal may be removed immediately and held for five days.. If, in the opinion of the Animal Control Officer, immediate impoundment is necessary for the preservation of the public health or safety, or the health and welfare of the animal, said animal shall be impounded and held for five days, pending contact of the owner or person having control of said animal. SECTION 8: That the following subsection L is added to Section 6.04.160: L. For the owner or person in charge thereof of any vicious dog to fail to comply with an order issued pursuant to Section 6.04.250(G). SECTION 9: That Section 6.04.180 is amended and restated as follows: 6.04.180 Animals unattended in a motor vehicle. A. It is unlawful for any person to leave an animal unattended in an enclosed vehicle without adequate ventilation or in such a manner as to subject the animal to extreme temperatures which will adversely affect the animal's health or welfare. The animal may be removed forthwith from said vehicle by an Animal Control Officer and impounded in the City Animal Shelter or such other place as said Animal Control Officer deems appropriate. Said Animal Control Officer shall provide to the animal removed, such care as might be necessary. B. When an animal has been removed from a vehicle pursuant to this chapter, the Animal Control Officer shall cause to be posted in a conspicuous place in said vehicle a notice that shall state that the animal has been removed from the vehicle pursuant to lake Elsinore Municipal Code Section 6.04.180A, where the owner may regain custody of it, and that the owner will be liable for impound fees and costs. C. Exceptions. This chapter is not applicable to animals which are in a peace officer's vehicle or an Animal Control Vehicle while such officers are engaged in their regularly assigned duties. SECTION 10: That Section 6.04.220(A) is amended and restated as follows: A. An y area occupied by any animal is to be maintained in a sanitary manner. Water is to be kept fresh and feces disposed of no less than a bi- weekly basis. Any extreme conditions would be considered a cruelty and would be cited pursuant to Section 6.04.210. 6 AGENDA 1TSM NO. 37 PACE . OF-22: SECTION 11: That Section 6.04.245(C ), (D), (E), (F)[Ist paragraph only], (F)(3), and (G)(4) are amended and restated as follows: C. Notice of hearing. When the Animal Control Director receives a second verbal or written complaint concerning a noisy animal at the same location within six months after the issuance of a Noisy Animal Warning Notice, the Animal Control Director, or his/her designee, shall determine if the Noisy Animal Warning Notice went unheeded. If the determination is made that the nuisance was not abated, the matter shall be set for hearing before the Lake Elsinore Animal Friends Animal Control Agency (the "Animal Control Hearing Officer ") and notice of hearing shall be issued by the Animal Control Director, or his/her designee, to the owner or person having charge, custody, or control of the animal. The notice of hearing constitutes written notice of violation of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and shall include the date, place, and time of the hearing. The notice of hearing shall advise that the person having charge, custody, or control of the animal may present evidence at the hearing. The notice of hearing shall be personally served or posted upon the premises where the animal is kept and sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. In addition, the notice of hearing shall be delivered to any interested parties requesting notice of the hearing. D. Hearing. The hearing before the Animal Control Hearing Officer shall be open to the public. The Animal Control Hearing Officer may admit all relevant evidence, including incident reports and affidavits of witnesses; the Officer may limit the scope of discovery and may shorten the time to produce records or witnesses. The Animal Control Hearing Officer may decide all issues even if the owner or person in charge, custody, or control of the animal fails to "me appear at the hearing. The Animal Control Hearing Officer may find, upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the animal is a noisy animal and that the maintenance of such noisy animal is a public nuisance. E. Determination and order. Within ten working days after the conclusion of the hearing held pursuant to paragraph D above, the Animal Control Hearing Officer shall by certified mail return receipt requested, notify the owner(s) or person(s) having charge, custody, or control of the animal of the Officer's determination and any orders issued. If the Animal Control Hearing Officer determines that the animal is a noisy animal and that the maintenance thereof is a public nuisance, the owner or keeper of the animal shall comply with the Officer's order within five days after the date of the mailing of the determination and order. The decision of the Animal Control Hearing Officer shall be final, subject to the provisions of State law. F. Administrative abatement measures. The Animal Control Hearing Officer may, as part of its determination that the animal is a noisy animal and the maintenance thereof a public nuisance, direct that appropriate actions be taken to abate the nuisance, including without limitation one or more of the following: [Parts 1 and 2 are unchanged]. AGEWA )TEM. NO 3...� PAW 40 OF 3. Require that the animal undertake obedience training designed to abate the nuisance problem when appropriate and under the conditions imposed by the Animal Control Hearing Officer and at the expense of the animal's owner or the person having charge, custody, or control of said animal. [6.04.245(G)(4)] 4. Any person receiving a bill for a Noisy Animal Response Charge may, within fifteen days after the date of issuance of the bill file a written request with the Animal Control Director appealing the charge imposed. The City shall withhold on collection of the bill pending the decision on the appeal. The Animal Control Director shall set the matter for hearing before the Animal Control Hearing Officer, which hearing shall be within fifteen business days after receipt of the appeal. The Animal Control Officer shall issue a written decision on the appeal within ten days of the close of the hearing, which decision shall be mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested to the appellant. The decision of the Animal Control Hearing Officer shall be final. If, after the hearing before the Animal Control Hearing Officer, the appeal is denied in part or in whole, all amounts due to the City shall be paid within thirty days of the date of the mailing of the decision of the Animal Control Hearing Officer. SECTION 12: That Section 6.04.250(J) is amended and restated as follows: J. Vicious or unsafe animal registration fee. An animal that has been deemed vicious or unsafe will be required to register the animal with the Animal Control Agency in .--- addition to obtaining all other necessary licenses. The fees for registering a vicious animal license are established in Section 6.04.020. Failure to renew the registration will result in impoundment of the animal and a citation will be issued as a misdemeanor. SECTION 13: SEVERABILITY If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance and are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 14: NOTICE OF ADOPTION The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption of the Ordinance and cause this Ordinance to be published and posted in the manner required by law. SECTION 15: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage. The City Clerk shall certify as to adoption of the Ordinance and cause this Ordinance to be published and posted in the manner required by law. PASSED, UPON FIRST READING this day of , 2002, by the following roll call vote: AGENDA ITEM JNO. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of , 2002, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Leibold, City Attorney Mayor 9 AGENDA ITEM NO. 33' TRACE. 4 �° -ftre RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -.023 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE SETTING THE FINES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHAPTER 6.04 OF THE LAKE ELSINORE MUNICIPAL CODE . WHEREAS, Section 6.04.280 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code provides that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore shall establish by resolution the fines for violation of Chapter 6.04, Animals and Animal Control Officers. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. As provided in Section 6.04.280 of the LEMC, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore hereby approves the following fines for infraction(s) arising from violation(s) of Chapter 6.04: A. First violation: $100.00 B. Second violation of the same provision within one year: $200.00 C. Third violation of the same provision within one year: $250.00 Section 2. The City Clerk of the City shall certify the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 32002. Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent: Genie Kelley, Mayor AFNDA ITEM yam. 3�3 PAf1E Lt � 04� ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney --mo, AGMA ITS Noy ... PAnF 449 rw -7,,)- FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES (the "Amendment ") is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City" and ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS, INC., a California nonprofit corporation (hereinafter referred to as "FRIENDS ") and is dated for identification purpose as of the 28th day of May, 2002. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City has approved that certain Agreement for Animal Control Services, dated April 15, 2002 (the "Agreement "); WHEREAS, the parties have determined that FRIENDS will engage in greater enforcement activities of the City's Municipal Code and incur additional costs related thereto; WHEREAS, FRIENDS has traditionally retained all license and permit fees collected by FRIENDS in order to offset the costs of providing the services set forth in the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City and FRIENDS have previously agreed in connection with the Agreement that revenues derived from such enforcement activities, if undertaken, would be forwarded to FRIENDS to offset the costs of such enforcement activities and for the other animal control services provided by FRIENDS. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do hereby mutually agree to the following terms and conditions: Section 4 of the Agreement is amended as follows: 4. Payment. The City shall pay an annual contract fee of Eighty-Five Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($85,200) in equal monthly payments of Seven Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($7,100). FREENDS shall also be entitled to retain all license and permit fees collected by FRIENDS. Additionally, to the extent that FRIENDS issues citations or otherwise imposes penalties in its capacity as an "enforcement officer" under Section 29 herein and such citations are not appealed, the revenues actually received by the City from such activities shall be paid to FRIENDS, less reasonable administration and handling costs that may be incurred by the City or by an independent collection service hired by the City. 2. Except for the amendment to Section 4 of the Agreement, all other provisions, terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. To the extent of any inconsistencies between the terms and provisions of this Amendment and the terms and �-• provisions of the Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Amendment shall control. The term "Agreement" shall hereafter be deemed to include the Agreement as amended by this Amendment. FRIENDSAmend.4014.000 1 05/22/02 AGENDA ITEM NO. J 3. Each individual signing below represents and warrants that he /she has the authority to execute this Amendment on behalf of and bind the party he /she purports to represent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed on the date first written above. ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.C. Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: Genie Kelley, Mayor ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS, INC., a California non - profit corporation Anne Washington, Executive Director FRIENDSAmend.4014.000 2 055//2,2/02 AGENDA ITEM NO. �_ PANE ( OE_:7_� �. MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 2002 BUSINESS ITEMS 32. Renewal of Animal Control Agreement - Animal Friends of the Valleys. (F:68.1)(X:18.3) City Manager Watenpaugh noted that Community Services Director Sapp had been working with Animal Friends and the Attorney to reach a new agreement, for about the last two years. He noted that the Council had two basic concerns at the study session, which had been addressed, including canvassing and administrative citation powers. He explained that the program provided for administrative citations, but there was some need for clarification of procedures. He also explained that there would be no canvassing during holidays, and only during work hours. Jim Morris, 15220 Golden Sands, indicated that he did not mind what LEAF was doing. He noted that he had rescued a yellow lab and kept it for about three months before they placed it for adoption. He indicated that he was not against animals and in fact liked to rescue them; however he was against going door to door to write citations. He suggested that it was an encroachment on his rights if people were knocking on his door; and indicated that he didn't like the City supporting this action. He inquired if they would be licensing of roosters, horses and exotic birds. Kris Anderson, representing LEAF, offered to answer questions, and noted that they looked forward to working with the City. She indicated that the City had made positive strides in this area and they looked forward to more in the future. Councilwoman Brinley questioned the door -to -door citation approach. Ms. Anderson indicated that they had not been able to do so in the past year and '~ the number of animals brought in started to increase for Lake Elsinore, AGENDA ITEM N0. PA or- because the program was not implemented. She explained that going door - to -door helped to reduce the number of animals turned in. Councilman Buckley commented that the idea of canvassing had caused complaints in the past, however the new idea of a grace period with no fine and the ability to obtain a license was different. He noted that licensing allowed for reuniting of animals and owners and provided an element of rabies control. He commented on discussion at the study session that this would allow the canvassing program to begin immediately, however there was some concern for the procedures. He inquired when the program would be implemented. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she would need to review the packet received from Animal Friends this date, to compare the existing provisions; and determine if an additional action would be required by Council to establish the penalties. She indicated that she would do her best to include it on the April 23`d or May 14th Council Meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Schiffner noted that he understood the objection to be canvassed and told to license animals, but commented that this was a user tax. He indicated that like many other things people did not like to support it, but the organization did everything to benefit the animals by placing a tax to pay for the services. He commented that this was commonly done in `''` other cities, and stressed the need for this service. He stressed the necessity of this service and encouraged purchase of animal licenses. Councilwoman Brinley noted that Animal Friends had worked on this program for a long time, and it has been developed into a user - friendly program. She clarified that staff would be reviewing it for necessary adjustments. Councilman Hickman noted that not everyone cared for animals the way Mr. Morris did, but expressed his concern that the animals had shots and were safe. He stressed that this program prevented dogs from running loose and indicated that he had never lived in a community that didn't require a dog tag. Mayor Kelley noted Contract Paragraph L which addressed canvassing and indicated that it made her nervous due to the sensitivity of the issue. She indicated that she had already received calls. She clarified that her ls. AGENDA ITEM N0. J3 understanding was that they would be sending out a renewal notice in the mail, and if it was not renewed, a door hanger with a two -week notice would be placed. She expressed concern with a statement on the application that it would only be mailed when requested by the owners, and indicated that she wanted to be sure that the renewal was being mailed out when it was time to renew. Ms. Anderson clarified that a postcard would be sent out for renewals. City Manager Watenpaugh further clarified that they would mail the application if requested, otherwise the residents would need to go into their offices. Mayor Kelley questioned the proposed 60 -day amnesty period. Ms. Anderson indicated that they would have printed fliers and run ads on Channel 3, allowing 60 days to register pets with no penalties. She further indicated that new owners could obtain free rabies shots and have their pet micro - chipped at cost, which is about $7.50. Mayor Pro Tem Schiffner questioned the timing of the 60 -day period. Ms. Anderson indicated that it would run 60 days from the signature of the contract. Councilwoman Brinley inquired if Animal Friends could address members of the public with financial hardships preventing compliance. Ms. Anderson indicated that they would work with them, noting their low - income programs. Councilman Hickman questioned the Animal Friends shot clinic. Ms. Anderson indicated that it was held once a month at City Park, on the 3rd Saturday of every month, rain or shine, from 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. Mayor Pro Tem Schiffner inquired if the shot clinic was just for rabies shots. Ms. Anderson indicated it was for all shots. MOVED BY BRINLEY, SECONDED BY BUCKLEY AND CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE LAKE ELSINORE ANIMAL FRIENDS AGREEMENT, DIRECTED THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT AND DIRECTED THE CITY ATTORNEY TO WORK WITH ANIMAL FRIENDS AND STAFF TO FINALIZE THE ADMINISTRATIVE CITATION PROGRAM. AGENDA ITEM N0. .33 WE �_o: _7� CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: APRIL 9, 2002 SUBJECT: RENEWAL OF ANIMAL CONTROL AGREEMENT ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS BACKGROUND In July of 1988 the City entered into an agreement with Lake Elsinore Animal Friends (LEAF) for contract animal control services. Over the seven -(7) year period LEAF's annual budget grew to $95,000 annually until 1995. In 1995, the City reduced LEAF's animal contract to $75,000 due to the City's financial situation. LEAF has now changed their name to "Animal Friends of the Valley's, Inc. (Animal Friends) to reflect their service area which includes both the Lake Elsinore and Temecula Valleys. Animal Friends provides services for the cities of Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake, Murrieta, and Temecula. Animal Friends also provides shelter services only for the County. ,Iwo At its August 8, 2000 meeting, the City Council authorized increasing the "Animal Friends" budget an additional $10,000 totaling $85,000 annually. The City Council also took action to prohibit "canvassing" by the Animal Control staff as it was considered borderline harassment. DISCUSSION At the study session held March 7, 2002, the City Council discussed the placement of canvass activity back into the Animal Control Agreement. This agreement reflects that desire as indicated in Section 1 (i). The Executive Director also explained that the "Animal Friends" has experienced an operating loss of $20,080 for Fiscal Year 2000 -2001 due to their inability to canvass and bring new pet owners into the system. Operating losses to date for Fiscal Year 2001 -2002 are estimated at $3,622. The Executive Director stated at the study session that with the implementation of the Canvassing Program in conjunction with the Administrative Citation Program the "Animal Friends" could generate revenue to offset all operational shortfalls for City operations in addition to generating needed funds in offsetting the City's contribution towards construction of the new shelter. FISCAL IMPACT The contract provides an annual flat amount of $85,000. The "Animal Friends" believe that the implementation of canvass activities would generate sufficient revenues to offset operational losses AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE ��_OF of $23,702 incurred by the "Animal Friends" as a result of their prohibition to canvassing as authorized in August of 2000. RECOMMENDATION It is staff s recommendation that the Mayor and City Council approve the Lake Elsinore Animal Friends agreement and direct the Mayor to execute the agreement as well as direct the City Attorney to work with the "Animal Friends" and staff in finalization of the Administrative Citation Program. PREPARED BY: David W. Sapp, Community Services Director APPROVED BY: G✓, /�, Co unity ServiceVbepartment APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: ZLkw&011�1 Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Clan4er AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE_5A_OF _ f AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES is made and entered into *.NO, by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "City" and ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS, INC., a California nonprofit corporation (hereinafter referred to as "FRIENDS ") and is dated for identification purpose as of the 15th day of April, 2002. WITNESSETH• WHEREAS, FRIENDS has previously provided to the City a broad range of animal control services for the purpose of safeguarding the health and safety of the general public and the health and safety of its domestic animals in the City, and for the purpose of promoting the humane treatment of animals and the enforcement of City Ordinances relating to animal control; and WHEREAS, the City desires that FRIENDS continue to provide such animal control services in accordance with the terms and conditions of-this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do hereby mutually agree as follows: I. Animal Control Program. FRIENDS hereby agrees to operate an Animal Control Program (the grogram ") for the City consisting of, but not limited to, field services, shelter operation and licensing. In the conduct of the Program, FRIENDS agrees to perform the specific functions set forth hereinbelow: (a) -Enforce all current (and any future revised or added) ordinances ofthe- LAke-Elsinore Municipal Code pertaining to animals, including the issuing of -warning notices or citations as necessary for violations of such ordinances. In the event the Municipal Code is amended and-the amendments would substantially alter and/or enlarge the duties and responsibilities of FRIENDS under this Agreement, the parties - hereto agree to meet and in good faith renegotiate those terms and conditions of this Agreement affected by such amendments, including the cost of enforcement thereof: (b) -Impound all animals caught at large and collect all impound fees assessed. (c) Quarantine, as prescribed by then existing law, all animals suspected to'be rabid. (d) -Investigate and pursue action on complaints and/or reports of potential violations of the Municipal Code relating to animals, including unnecessary noise, in accordance with such procedures adopted by the City. (e) Respond to requests by the County Fire Department and Sheriffs Department for assistance with animal related situations. (f) Remove dead animals from the public right -of -way within City limits. FRWNMAgnt.4o14.0W 1 3 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE �Z OF_�� (g) Respond to requests for assistance in the trapping and removal of domestic or wild animals, including without limitation coyotes and skunks, from public or private property within the City. FRIENDS will offer advice to the City and to the public in setting a trap in any enclosed space and will remove an animal caught in a trap, but shall not be required- to move belongings, climb trees, crawl under houses, or perform any personally hazardous act or maintain on- premises surveillance unless in the FRIENDS officer's or his/her representative's sole opinion there is a direct, clear and present danger to human life, or unless specifically requested by the City's Manager or Community Services Director. FRIENDS will provide traps but will not be required to provide vector control. (h) Investigate reported animal bites within two (2) working days. FRIENDS may initially receive animal bite reports by telephone, but shall also respond in person to all reported bites by dogs or other suspected rabid or wild animals. FRIENDS shall take appropriate steps consistent with the circumstances of each incident to locate and quarantine the suspect animal(s) and/or assist the complainant and/or injured parry or parties to trap the suspected animal(s). (i) Conduct license inspections, including area -wide canvassing, for the purpose of ascertaining the number of unlicensed dogs and cats and to license such dogs and cats. FRIENDS shall not conduct area -wide canvassing on holidays or holiday eves and shall conduct license inspection activities only during business hours and pursuant to any policies and procedures approved by the City. (j) The FRIENDS Board of Directors shall act as the Hearing Board in all determinations of vicious or potentially dangerous animals pursuant to the procedures set by California Food & Agriculture Code Section 31621 et seq. Determination of the Board of Directors shall be final subject to Food & Agriculture Code Section 31621. (k) Provide euthanasia service as required for animals held five (5) days, ifthese animals are not reclaimed by their owner and are deemed unsuitable by FRIENDS for adoption. (1) FRIENDS shall issue licenses and collect all appropriate fees. FRIENDS will continue to implement a comprehensive licensing program including a process whereby dog licenses may be issued by mail and sold at the Animal Shelter and clinics. FRIENDS shall send renewal notices by mail to owner of currently licensed dogs and cats, together with an application for renewal when requested by owners and provide licenses forms and tags. FRIENDS shall, at FRIENDS' expense, affix a professionally prepared sign at the Animal shelter stating applicable fees and hours, as approved by the City's Community Services Director. r FRIEN DSAgmt.4014.000 2 AGENDA ITEM N0. PAGE OF_ (m) Make all necessary arrangements and conduct at least two (2) one -day clinics for vaccination and licensing of dogs and cats each year. Such clinics may be conducted at parks in the City, but shall be conducted in such manner as will prevent interference with the regular operation of the crews and equipment or any scheduled recreation programs. Such clinics shall be conducted pursuant to the protocol attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference, as may be amended or modified from time to time with the consent of both parties. (n) Assign a minimum of one field service officer, whom shall be duly appointed Animal Control Officer. Routine field services will be provided between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. The number of hours per week include, but are not necessarily limited to routine mobile patrols, investigative and rescue time, court appearances and impoundment of dangerous, wild, injured or loose animals. FRIENDS shall assign a sufficient number of field service employees to duty at all times to meet requirements of the Program of this Agreement. The normal hours of service shall be: Field Service Telephone Answering Dispatch Shelter Emergency Response 8.00 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. 8 :00 a. m. to 4 :00 p.m. (Paging available after 4: -00 p.m.) 10 :00 a.m. to 4 :00 p-.m. 10.00 a.m. to 4 :00 p.m. 24 hours per day Mon -Fri Mon -Fri Mon-Fri Sat Mon =Sun ..r (o) Provide a field service officer, either on duty or on call after regular hours as necessary, to respond to emergency calls. The-City and FRIENDS agree that-any incident reported to FRIENDS by citizens or through authorized representatives of the Sheriffs Department or County Fire Department involving a dangerous, wild or stray or injured animal, constitutes an emergency and requires immediate response by FRIENDS. In the event that the City's Community Services Director or his/her designee notifies FRIENDS and requests an immediate response, FRIENDS shall respond to such requests within one (1) hour. If FRIENDS fails to respond within one (1) hour, FRIENDS shall provide a written explanation to the City giving the reason(s) for the delay in responding or the failure to respond. FRIENDS' written explanation shall be submitted to the Community Services Director within five (5) working days from the date ofthe request for immediate response. This Agreement and the provisions herein shall not be construed to limit the interpretation of what constitutes an emergency and/or the need for immediate response. The Priority of Field Services attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference shall serve as a guide for responding to calls for service. In addition, the following examples are illustrative of the need for an immediate response from FRIENDS: FRIENDSABnt4014.000 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE�OF _ _^ (1) Requests to remove a wild and/or dangerous animal or animals from an inhabited place or vehicle; (2) Reported animal bites involving loose animals; and (3) Livestock fowl or game birds being attacked or killed by dogs or other animals. (p) Provide service to the public on matters covered in this Agreement consistent with established policies and procedures that promote courteous and efficient service and good public relations. FRIENDS in processing any type of complaint or request for service will indicate to the caller when a response can be expected from FRIENDS and how FRIENDS will respond. In the event an in- person response is appropriate to the specific situation, FRIENDS shall make such response by the end of the following business day unless a shorter time limit is otherwise required by this Agreement. (q) Cooperate with the City to resolve any and all complaints filed with FRIENDS and/or the City pertaining to services provided under this Agreement. The City shall submit to FRIENDS, in writing, all complaints filed with the City concerning services provided by FRIENDS under this Agreement within two (2) business days. FRIENDS shall report monthly, in writing, to the City's Community Services Director the number of complaints received by FRIENDS directly or indirectly pertaining to quality of service(s) under this Agreement. (r) Enforce Lake Elsinore Municipal Code Sections 8.40.040 et. seq., relating to park rules and regulations. 2. Performance Review. FRIENDS' Executive Director and the City's Community Services Director shall meet as required but not less than quarterly to discuss FRIENDS' performance under this Agreement. 3. Performance Activities. Not later than the tenth (1&) day of each month during the term of this Agreement, FRIENDS shall furnish the City monthly reports detailing shelter, field and licensing activities for the previous month, including a summary of the utilization of field service employees' hours required in the performance of the Program activities set forth in Section 1. 4. Payment. The City shall pay an annual contract fee of Eighty-Five Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($85,200) in equal monthly payments of Seven Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($7,100). 5. Budget. FRIENDS shall use and expend the funds as outlined in Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; provided, however, funds may be transferred between line items. rRUNDsn4pL4014.000 4 AGENDA ITEM N0. _ PACE 55 6. Animal Shelter. FRIENDS agrees to provide an animal shelter facility (the Animal Shelter). FRIENDS assumes full responsibility for normal maintenance and operation of such shelter. The Animal Shelter shall be open to the public as determined by FRIENDS. Emergency service shall be provided at all times. 7. FRIENDS Vehicles. FRIENDS shall be responsible for maintenance of their vehicles and equipment, including the installation and removal of the radio equipment. FRIENDS shall be responsible for all costs relating to theft, vandalism, or destruction of such equipment by fire, accident or intentional acts. 8. FRIENDS Personnel. FRIENDS shall provide all personnel, supplies, equipment necessary for the efficient and effective operation of the Animal Shelter and the Program provided for herein, including, but not limited to Animal Control Officers; clerical staff, license tags and forms, citation forms, notices and all necessary envelopes and postage. Animal Control Officers will complete the County training program or minimum equivalent, before being issued a badge and given the authority to perform Program duties. 9. No Right to Benefits. FRIENDS and all persons employed by FRIENDS in the performance of the Program pursuant to this Agreement shall act as and be an independent contractor and shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other City benefits, including any City pension, civil service or any status or right. FRIENDS shall be responsible for any withholding taxes, payroll taxes, disability insurance payments, unemployment taxes or other similar taxes or charges with respect to FRIENDS officers and employees. 10. Record Keeping. FRIENDS shall maintain and keep records of all expenditures and obligations incurred pursuant to this Agreement and all income and fees received thereby according to generally recognized accounting principles. Such records shall be retained by FRIENDS for a minimum of four (4) years. The records and/or animal control operations of FRIENDS shall be open to inspection and audit by the City or its authorized representative as is deemed necessary by the City upon reasonable notice to FRIENDS. FRIENDS shall provide the City a copy of FRIENDS' annual audited financial statement for each fiscal year (commencing July 1 and ending June 30) prepared by a certified public accountant immediately upon completion thereof, but in no case later than six (6) months after the close of each fiscal year. A proposed budget for each fiscal year shall be submitted to the City, for review and approval, by April 30 of the preceding the fiscal year. 11. Indemnification. FRIENDS promises and agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers and employees, from all claims, demands and liability for damages for personal injury or property damage suffered by reason of any act of omission of FRIENDS or FRIENDS' employees, agents or contractors, or by reason of any dangerous or defective condition caused or permitted by FRIENDS or by FRIENDS' employees, agents or contractors. The City promises and agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless FRIENDS, its officers and employees, from all claims, demands and liability for damages for personal injury or property damage suffered by reason of any act or omission of the City or the City's officers or employees, agents or contractors specifically (excluding FRIENDS' employees), or by reason of any dangerous FRIENDSAgmG4014.000 5 AGENDA ITEM N0. 3 PACE_ 4 0 F or defective condition caused or permitted by the City or the City's officers or employees, agents or contractors specifically (excluding FRIENDS' employees). 12. Insurance. FRIENDS shall secure public liability and property damage insurance as shall protect it from claims for damages for personal injury, including accidental death, as well as from claims for property damage which may arise from operations under this Agreement. Said insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement or renewals or extensions thereof. Such policy shall be for not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and shall be placed with a company authorized to do business in the State of California. Copies of all policies or certificates of insurance shall be filed with the City Clerk and shall include the City as an additional insured. Said policies or certificates shall provide for thirty (30) days written notice to the City prior to reduction in coverage or cancellation. The amount of such insurance shall not be deemed a limitation of FRIENDS' agreement to defend, indemnify and hold harmless and if, the City becomes liable for an amount in excess of the insurance, FRIENDS will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City as set forth in Section 1 l herein from the whole thereof. The City reserves the right to increase the amounts of imiurance coverage described hereinabove, and to require any additional riders and provisions in said policies or certificates as shall be considered necessary by the City Attorney, consistent with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. FRIENDS shall comply with said increase or other changes within sixty (60) days after notice from the City. In addition, FRIENDS agrees -to -file wltti the City Clerk copies of vehicle insurance showing the amount of coverage on each vehicle. 13. Workers Compensation. FRIENDS shall secure and maintain throughout the term of this Agreement, Workers' Compensation insurance as prescribed by the laws of the State of California. A certificate evidencing such coverage shall be filed with the City Clerk which certificate shall provide that the City will be given at least thirty (30) days written notice prior to cancellation. 14. Term. This Agreement shall commence as of April 15, 2002, and continue until and including April 14, 2007. Thereafter, this Agreement shall be extended on a month -to -month basis, unless amended by mutual written agreement of the parties or terminated by either party by thirty (30) days written notice to the other. 15, Lake Elsinore Veterinarians Association. This Agreement shall only be effective upon execution of an agreement for cooperation between FRIENDS and the Lake Elsinore Veterinarians Association or its equivalent. 16. Termination of Agreement. Either party may terminate this Agreement for cause, at any time by giving ninety (90) days written notice to the other party. This Agreement may also be terminated by mutual written consent of both parties. Cause shall be defined as a material breach of RUENDSAgmk4014.000 ( 3 3 AGENDA ITEM.�10. PAGEQF �I- the terms or conditions of this Agreement that is not cured within such ninety (90) day notice period, unless the cure cannot reasonably be completed within such time and the breaching party begins diligently curing the default within such notice period and, thereafter, diligently prosecutes the cure S"Wo to completion. 17. Notices. All notices in writing shall be deemed given when delivered personally or three (3) days after mailing by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested) to the following addresses: To City: City of Lake Elsinore Attention: City Manager 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 Telephone: (909) 674- 3124 Facsimile: (909) 674 -2392 To FRIENDS: Animal Friends of the Valleys, Inc. Attention: Executive Director P.O. Box 1143 29001 Bastron Street Lake Elsinore, California 92531 -1143 Telephone: (909) 674 -7819 Facsimile: (909) 471 -8285 18. Exhibits. This Agreement includes Exhibits A through C attached hereto and N"101 incorporated herein by this reference. 19. Governing Law. This Agreement, and all rights and obligations of the parties shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 20. Entire Agreement. The parties acknowledge that this Agreement expresses their entire understanding and Agreement, and that there are no warranties, representations, covenants or understandings made by either party to the other except such as are expressly set forth in this Agreement. The parties further acknowledge that this Agreement supersedes, terminates and otherwise renders null and void any and all prior agreements, whether written or oral, entered into between the City and FRIENDS with respect to the matters expressly set forth in this Agreement. 21. Force Majeure. Neither party will be in default of this Agreement to the extent that performance of its obligations, or attempts to cure any breach, are delayed or prevented by reason of circumstance beyond its reasonable control, including without limitation, fire, natural disaster, earthquake, accident or other acts of God ("Force Majeure"), provided that the party seeking to delay its performance gives the other written notice of any such Force Majeure within thirty (30) days after the discovery of the Force Majeure, and further provided that such party uses its good faith efforts to cure the Force Majeure. If there is a Force Majeure, the time for performance or cure will be nUENDSAgmt.4014.0W 7 , AGENDA ITEM N0. PAGE -!�-K_OF� extended for a period equal to the duration of the Force Majeure. This section shall not be '^ applicable to any payment obligations of either party. 22. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is found invalid or unenforceable under judicial decree or decision, the remainder shall remain valid and enforceable according to its terms. Limiting the foregoing, it is expressly understood and agreed that each and every provision of this Agreement that provides for a limitation of liability, disclaimer of warranties, or exclusion of damages is intended by the parties to be severable and independent of any other provision and to be enforced as such. Further, it is expressly understood and agreed that if any remedy under this Agreement is determined to have failed of its essential purpose, all other limitations of liability and exclusion of damages set forth in this Section shall remain in full force and effect. 23. Amendments. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both FRIENDS and the City. 24. Assignment. The parties recognize that a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement is the professional reputation, experience and competence of FRIENDS. FRIENDS shall be fully responsible to City for all acts or omissions of any subcontractors. Assignments of any or all rights, duties or obligations of FRIENDS under this Agreement will be permitted only with the express written consent of the City. If City consents to such subcontract, FRIENDS shall be fully responsible to City for all acts or omissions of those subcontractors. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and any subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the part of the City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor other than as otherwise is required by law. 25. Waiver. Waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision under this Agreement. 26. Mediation. The parties agree to make a good faith attempt to resolve any disputes arising out of this Agreement through mediation prior to commencing litigation. The Parties shall mutually agree upon the mediator and share the costs of mediation equally. If the Parties are unable to agree upon a mediator, the dispute shall be submitted to JAMS/ENDISPUTE (JAMS) or its successor in interest. The Parties shall request that JAMS provide the Parties with the names of five qualified mediators. Each Party shall have the option to strike two of the five mediators selected by JAMS and thereafter the mediator remaining shall hear the dispute. If the dispute remains unresolved after mediation, either Party may commence litigation. 27. Authority to Enter Agreement. FRIENDS has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business and to execute, deliver, and perform this Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement and to bind each respective Party. 28. Consent and Administration of Agreement. The City Manager or his/her designee shall have the authority to administer the City's responsibilities under this Agreement in accordance with its terms. Provided that such consent or approval is pursuant to and not inconsistent with the FRiQdDSAgmt.4014.000 g AGENDA ITEM N0. _ PAGE-,-5-9 017 7% ri-- terms of this Agreement, any consent or approval to be given by City under this Agreement may be given by a writing executed on behalf of City by the City Manager, or his/her designee. 100* 29. FRIENDS Officer. The Executive Director of FRIENDS or his/her designee(s) shall have the authority to administer FRIENDS' responsibilities under this Agreement in accordance with its terms and shall be deemed an "enforcement officer" as defined in Section 1.20.015 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code for purposes of enforcement of Municipal Code provisions pertaining to animals pursuant to the performance of the Program activities set forth in Section 1 hereof. Provided that such consent or approval is pursuant to and not inconsistent with the terms of this Agreement any consent or approval to be given by FRIENDS under this Agreement may be given by a writing executed on behalf of FRIENDS by the Executive Director, or his/her designee. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed on the date first above written. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: Genie Kelley, Mayor ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk HUDOSAgmL4014." 9 AGENDA ITEM NO. 33 PAGE�_OF b s-- APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.C. Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney FxMxnsn mt.4014.000 ANDIAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEYS, INC., A California non - profit corporation By: Anne Washington, Executive Director 10 AGENDA ITEM NO. � PAGE __LGF__ )— 10.94:11,03 CLINIC CONDUCT PROTOCOL [To Be Inserted] e Ili FRIENDSAgmL4014.000 AGENDA ITEM No. 33 PAGE OF-- t 11: PRIORITY OF FIELD SERVICES [To Be Inserted] EXHIBIT B 3 rrmskmc.4014.000 AGENDAITEM N0. VAGE_4 OE 6 IIC BUDGET [To Be Inserted] 1-mao 22 FRMNMAMt4014.000 EX�IT C AGENDA ITEM N0. X33 PAGE- G 9_0F_ MINTUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, MARCH 7, 2002 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kelley called the Study Session to order at 3:11 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: BRINTLEY, BUCKLEY, HICKMAN, SCHIFFNER, KELLEY ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: City Manager Watenpaugh, Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Administrative Services Director Boone, Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Information /Communications Manager Dennis and City Clerk Kasad. DISCUSSION ITEM 1. Contract with Animal Friends of the Valley. City Manager Watenpaugh indicated that the major issues the Council had with Animal Friends of the Valley were: 1) changing the Fiscal Year and 2) having a professional audit of which Animal Friends of the Valley have done. He noted that the Animal Citation Program and canvassing were the remaining major issues for Animal Friends of the Valley. He stated that it was a matter of what issues were on the table today and not what happened in the past. AGc:. =;;: ITEM ro. PAOE'� OF PAGE TWO — STUDY SESSION — MARCH 7, 2002 N"We Mayor Kelley commented for the new Councilmembers benefit, the citations and canvassing were the two major issues that the previous Council took issue with. Anne Washington, General Manager of Animal Friends of the Valley, stated that she would like to reinstate the License Inspection Program. She indicated that although Council had approved the Administrative Citations, they had not been implemented, and they would like to get the License inspection Program going again. She indicated that they had experienced a deficit in Fiscal Year 2000/2001 of $20,080 and to date in this Fiscal Year there was a deficit of $4,566. She stated that the 1997 Animal Services van needed to be replaced, since the cost of repairs had exceed the value of the vehicle. Ms. Washington atated that her organization was asking that the City reinstate the license inspection program to allow them to make up the deficit from FY 2000/2001; reimburse any deficit from FY 2001/2002; replace the Animal Control Van; and any new funds generated would be credited to Lake Elsinore's share of the new Animal Shelter. She `Now that the cost of the program would not be charged to the City, since all of the costs would come out of the revenue generated. She further stated that there would be no canvassing on any holidays or holiday eves; and license inspections would only take place during business hours. She indicated that they were proposing a sixty -day amnesty and free rabies shots with new licenses. She explained that they would install computer chips in all of the dogs and cats brought in for new licenses at no cost to the owner. She stated that they would render assistance for altering newly licensed animals, since the cost was much less than for an unaltered animal. Mayor Pro Tem Schiffner questioned canvassing. Ms. Washington explained the procedure for canvassing and explained that if no one was home the Animal Control Officer would leave a courtesy notice on their front door notifying the owner of the FA OE OF G PAGE THREE — STUDY SESSION — MARCH 7, 2002 need to license their cat or dog and if the owner was home and had a cat or dog with a current rabies vaccination, the Animal Control Officer could issue a license, or if they did not have a current rabies vaccination, they would be issued an administrative citation which would give them 14 days to comply. She noted that they currently canvassing Murrieta and Temecula and there have been no problems. She commented that when they go door to door it gives the Animal Control Officer the opportunity to address any problem neighbors or pet owner may be having. Mayor Pro Tem Schiffner clarified that basically what it amounted to was going door -to -door looking for unlicensed animals. Ms. Washington indicated that if there was a li : ensed animal at the house, they walk on by, however if they hear a dog barking and the address was not found on the printout, then they go to the door. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner stated that without the canvassing program there would .— not be much opportunity of licensing animals unless the owners voluntarily did so. Ms. Washington agreed. Mayor Kelley asked if when a pet was licensed, and the license was about to expire, if Animal Control would notify the owner that the license was due. Ms. Washington stated that they send notices out to the registered owners. Ms. Washington stated that Riverside County had been declared a rabies area. She further stated that a child had picked up a bat, put it in his backpack and took it to school. She indicated that the bat tested positive for rabies, so ten children and two adults had to go through a post rabies series. She explained that if the greater numbers of animals are kept vaccinated, then the rabies does not enter into the domestic animal population. Ms. Washington presented an overview of the necessity of cat AGENDA "" 1=0.: , PA E,�Q-L OF-22- PAGE FOUR — STUDY SESSION — MARCH 7, 2002 ../ licensing to control the population. She noted the increase in cats since they have not canvassed. She explained that since they have not canvassed in the last few years, the increase in feral cats has increased dramatically since cat owners are not encouraged to alter their pets. She presented an exhibit of City of Canyon Lake Agreement and stressed how important canvassing was. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner stated that he was in favor of Administrative Citations and canvassing. He questioned why the Administrative Citations were not in use. Ms. Washington stated that the City had to set the parameters for the Administrative Citations. Mayor Pro Tern Schiffner stated that he would like to see Council direct staff to take the necessary steps to implement the Administrative Citations, which would include canvassing. Councilwoman Brinley stated that she had no problem with canvassing the last time they met, however she expressed concern with the Animal Control Officers performing courtesy calls with door hangers regarding pets and then revisiting to issue a fine. She suggested that the door hanger should state that Animal Control would return within a 30 or 60 -day period to follow up with a citation. She indicated that there would be no room for complaint if the door hanger would notify the pet owner that the Animal Control Officer would be back to issue a citation. Mayor Pro Tem Schiffner stated that he does not have much sympathy for people who do not license their animals. He commented that everyone who owns a pet knows that they must license their pet. He further commented that he had lived in large cities and every year the Animal Control Officers came around and knocked on doors to notify pet owners that they must buy a license. Carol Purcell, Animal Friends of the Valley, commented that it would AGUMA r T Et,` N0 — .. PACE OF --J= - 1011-- PAGE SIX — STUDY SESSION — MARCH 712002 included canvassing with the revenue generated from that action, paying for future services. He asked if the City was expected to pay the $20,000 to Animal Friends of the Valley in addition to the new program. He suggested that Ms. Washington meet with staff prior to taking the item to Council for final consideration. Councilman Buckley clarified the expenditure of funds. Mayor Kelley indicated her approval of door hangers to allow people to understand the licensing process. She criticized the past citing habits of animal control and did not want to see Animal Control Officers asking neighbors about animals in the neighborhood and then writing citations. City Attorney Leibold noted the attachments that will be necessary to be included with the Agreement. ADJOURNMENT THE CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 3:44 P.M. GENIE KELLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR 10 -� CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGENDA ITEM NO.._..G, I of PAGE GF PAGE FIVE — STUDY SESSION — MARCH 7, 2002 Lwn not be a good thing to have a child or relative bitten by an unlicensed animal. The City Council agreed. Mayor Pro Tem Schiffner commented that if a person could afford to feed a dog, then that same person should be able to afford to license the dog. He stated that he would even suggest setting up a program of assistance for the elderly who could not afford to pay for a license as, well as assistance with neutering costs. Councilman Buckley agreed with Mayor Pro Tem'Schiffner and stated that he felt that there should be some type of notification or warning prior to issuing a citation. Mayor Pro Tem Schif ner indicated people needed to understand that it was the revenue from citations and licenses that supported the services they received from Animal Control. Councilman Hickman stated that he was in favor of licensing and canvassing. Councilwoman Brinley asked what Animal Friends of the Valley did when a pet owner could not afford to neuter or license their animal. Ms. Washington stated that they were always willing to work with someone who wished to take good care of their pets. Ms. Purcell stated that Animal Friends had a very aggressive program to match animals with seniors and there was assistance availaLle to allow the seniors to afford licensing and neutering. Councilman Buckley suggested placing information on the door hangers in regard to the Senior Program. City Manager Watenpaugh clarified that the proposal by Animal Friends of the Valley was to reinstate the inspection program, which MILEAGE LICENSE EXPENSE ANIMALS 911 EMERGENCY VET ACO SERV. HRS (40/wk X 41.00) VEHICLE REPLACEMENT TOTALEXPENSE City Paid License Revenue TOTAL INCOME FINANCIAL REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2000 -2001 20,355 X _40 1762 x 5.00 1531 X 16.50 215 CALLS X 41.00 2088 HRS @ $41.00 /HR 33,000 /4 YRS TOTAL INCOME TOTAL EXPENSES DEFICIT $ 8,142.00 $ 8,810.00 $ 25,262.00 $ 8,815.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 85,280.00 $ 8,250.00 $146,059.00 $ 85,000.00 $ 40,979.00 $125,979.00 $125,979.00 $146,059.00 $ 20,080.00 AGENDA ITEM NO. -33 PAGE OF _L_ -- MILEAGE LICENSE EXPENSE ANIMALS 911 EMERGENCY VET ACO SERV. HRS (35twks X 17 wks) VEHICLE REPLACEMENT TOTAL EXPENSE City Paid License Revenue TOTAL INCOME FINANCIAL REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2001 -2002 JULY - OCTOBER 5725 X.40 $ 2,290.00 489 x 5.00 $ 2,445.00 592 X 16.50 $ 9,768.00 69 CALLS X 41.00 $ 2,829.00 $ 500.00 595 HRS @ $41.00 MR. $ 24,395.00 688.001MO X 4 MO $ 2,750.00 $ 44,977.00 7083.00 X 4 MO $ 28,332.00 $ 13,023.00 $ 41, 355.00 TOTAL INCOME ^' $ 41,355.00 TOTAL EXPENSES $ 44,977.00 DEFICIT $ 3,622.00 AGENDA ITEM,NO. 3 PAGE�� OF,_ rn N../ -.Nov CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: March 23, 2004 SUBJECT: Ten Year Extension for Tree Trimming Agreement BACKGROUND The City Council is being asked to consider a ten- year extension to the City's Tree Maintenance Agreement with West Coast Arborist (WCA) who has been the City's contractor for the last five years. The existing Agreement is set to expire on June 30, 2004. WCA approached the City with a request to extend the existing agreement for a ten -year term on the same terms. All existing financial provisions in the agreement would remain unchanged. Therefore, if approved, the agreement with WCA would be extended through June 30, 2014, with no cost increase. DISCUSSION A ten year extension would lock in tree maintenance services (trimming and removals) at existing prices, which are very competitive. The current Agreement includes a provision which allows either party to terminate the Agreement upon a 30- day's written notice, with or without cause. Should the City wish, at anytime in the future, it can solicit tree maintenance cost proposals and select a new contractor. There appears to be no risk to the City for extending the Agreement's term. The benefit includes maintaining the low, competitive prices we now have. Assuming the current CPI over the next ten years, the City would save $17,348.00 dollars. West Coast Arborist's performance has been very good. They have responded quickly and courteously to staff and resident inquires and work orders. They have prepared a City- wide inventory of all City maintained trees. The data is kept current by both WCA and City Staff on a monthly basis. WCA also has several Certified Arborists on staff willing to assist the City with tree evaluations at no additional cost. FISCAL IMPACT No additional fiscal impact would occur. (See list attached for service pricing) over and above current budget allocations. AQENDA ITEM O. PAGE OF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the `• of attached amendment extending the City's tree maintenance Agreement with West Coast Arborist through June 30, 2014, with all other provisions remaining the same. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Richard J. Waten pfaugh, City Minage AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE °� OFe. � FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE SERVICES THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE SERVICES (this "Amendment "), dated for identification purpose's only as of March 23, 2004, is entered into by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation (the "City") and WEST COAST ARBORIST ( "Contractor "), for the purpose of amending that certain Agreement for Maintenance Services, executed by Contractor on July 30, 1999 (the "Agreement "). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have meanings given them in the Agreement. To the extent of any inconsistency between the terms set forth in the Agreement and the terms set forth in this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall control. The City and Contractor hereby agree to amend and restate Section 4 the Agreement, in its entirety, as follows: 4. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall be for a term of ten (10) years commencing upon the date of execution of the Amendment by the City and shall not be further extended except upon the approval of the City Council. In all other respects, the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. [SIGNATURES SET FORTH ON FOLLOWING PAGE] AGENDA ITEM NO. — ,-? H Page 1 of 2 2 PAGE OFLL- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment as of the respective dates set forth below. "CITY" CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation Dated: March _, 2004 By: ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK VICKI KASAD APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.C. City Attorney :•'i•' It ICS � City Manager "CONTRACTOR" WEST COAST ARBORIST Dated: March , 2004 By: Its: .Nor Page 2 of 2 AGENDA ITEM �NO. PAGE .._.J— OF AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE SERVICES THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, hereinafter referred to as CITY, AND West Coast Arborist, hereinafter referred to as CONTRACTOR, hereby agree as follows: 1. PROJECT: The CONTRACTOR shall perform services in the nature of Tree maintenance within the City of Lake Elsinore. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES: The CONTRACTOR shall furnish own tools, equipment, and vehicle at his own expense. 3. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE: The CONTRACTOR shall commence performance of service forthwith upon the execution of this Agreement and upon written direction to commence from the City. 4. TERM OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall be for a term of one (1) year commencing from the date of execution, and can be extendable in one (1) year increments, with approval of the City Manager. 5. COMPENSATION: Compensation shall be as outlined in Item F of the "Proposal for Annual Tree Maintenance" submitted to the City of Lake Elsinore on April 30,1999. 6. LICENSES: The CONTRACTOR, its employees, agents, contractors, and subcontractors shall maintain professional licenses required by the laws of the State of California, and a City Business License at all times while performing services under the Agreement. 7. PERMITS AND RIGHTS OF ENTRY: The CITY will provide any and all necessary permit and rights of entry as required AGENDA ITEM NO. ` PAGE S OF 1- E- go to perform the proposed services. The CONTRACTOR will prosecute the work in a manner to minimize inconvenience and any possible hazard to the City. WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE: The CONTRACTOR certifies that he is aware of the laws of the State of California requiring employers to be insured against liability for Workers Compensation and shall comply with such laws during the term of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR'S LIABILITY: The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and hold the CITY, its officers, employees, and agents free and harmless from any liability whatsoever, including wrongful death, based or asserted upon act or omission of the CONTRACTOR, its employees, subcontractors, and agents relating to or in anyway connected with the accomplishment of the work or performance of service under this Agreement. As part of the foregoing indemnity, the CONTRACTOR agrees to protect and defend at his own expense, including attorney fees, the CITY, its offices, agents, and employees in any legal action based upon any such alleged acts or omission. PUBLIC LIABILITY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE INSURANCE The CONTRACTOR shall furnish to the CITY and maintain during the life of the contract a public liability policy in which the CITY is named as an additional insured. The policy shall also hold harmless the CITY, its AGENDA ITEM NO. --.� PAGE p OF .Woo officers, and employees while acting within the scope of their duties, against all claims arising out of or in connection with the work to be performed. The policy shall provide for not less than the following amounts: Insurance Coverage Limit Requirements Requirements Comprehensive General Liability $ 1,000,000 Comprehensive Automobile Liability $ 1,000,000 Contractual Liability $ 1,000,000 CONTRACTOR shall not commence work under this contract until all required insurance has been approved by the CITY. CONTRACTOR shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work until all similar required insurance has been approved by the CITY. Insurance policies carried by the CONTRACTOR and Subcontractors shall bear an endorsement or shall have attached a rider providing that in the event of cancellation or proposed cancellation of such policies for any reason whatsoever, the CITY shall be notified by registered mail. 10. WORK PRODUCT: Work shall be considered complete upon inspection and approval of the Public Works Department. 11. TERMINATION: This Agreement may be terminated by either the CONTRACTOR or the CITY upon thirty (30) day written notice to other party in the event of substantial failure of performance by the other party, or in the event the CITY shall elect to abandon or indefinitely AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 q `' PAGE —a OF � -- CONTRACTOR shall display the name of his firm on any vehicles used by the CONTRACTOR'S employees to carry supplies and equipment. The firm name shall be in letters large enough to be easily legible from a distance to one - hundred (100) feet. In addition, CONTRACTOR shall display directly below vehicle's company identification, a magnetic sticker with the following message: "Under contract with the City of Lake Elsinore ". The CONTRACTOR is responsible for the purchase of required number of magnetic stickers. The City will provide a sample sticker to CONTRACTOR. 15. SPECIFICATIONS: Standard Specifications - The Standard Specifications of the City of Lake Elsinore are contained in the 1997 Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements, as written and promulgated by the joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of California. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the publisher at the following address: BUILDING NEWS, INCORPORATED 1612 S. Clementine St. Anaheim, California 92802 Phone.: (888) 264 - 2665 Other technical documents included by reference herein include the Riverside County Road Improvement Standards and Specifications, latest edition, and the State of -Mae AGENDA ITEM O. A P GE ( OF 1_�... _� postpone the project and gives notice of termination. The CITY shall make payment for all services having been performed as of the date of written notice pursuant to the Compensation Schedule in Section Five. 12. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR: CONTRACTOR and his agents, servants, and employees shall act at all times in an independent capacity during the term of this Agreement and in the performance of the services to be rendered hereunder, and shall not act as, and shall not be, and shall not in any manner be considered to be agents, officers, or employees of the CITY. 13. EMERGENCY SERVICES: The CONTRACTOR shall provide the CITY with at least two (2) forms of contact that can be called by CITY representatives when emergency maintenance conditions occur during hours when the CONTRACTOR'S normal work force is not present. The CITY shall call for such assistance only in the event of a genuine and substantial emergency. The CONTRACTOR shall provide a maximum of one -hour personnel response time upon notification. 14. PERSONNEL ATTIRE AND EQUIPMENT: The CONTRACTOR shall require each of his employees to adhere to basic Public Works standards of working attire. These are basically uniforms, proper shoes and other gear required by State Safety Regulations, and proper wearing of the clothing. Shirts shall be worn at all times, buttoned and tucked in. AA ITEM NO. PACE OF....t...G.- California Department of Transportation Traffic Manual and Manual of Traffic Controls for Construction and Maintenance Work Zones. The Standard Specifications set forth above will control the General Provisions, Construction Materials and Construction Methods for this contract except as amended by the plans, special provisions, technical specifications or other contract documents. 16. ASSIGNMENT: Neither this Agreement nor any part thereof shall be assigned by the CONTRACTOR without the prior written consent of the CITY. 17. NON - DISCRIMINATION: CONTRACTOR shall not discriminate at its recruiting, hiring, promotion, demotion; or termination practices on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status or sex in the performance of this contract, and, to the extent they shall be found to be applicable hereto, shall comply with the provisions of the California Fair Employment Practices Act (commencing with Section 1410 of the La or Code), and the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 ( 88 -35 Public orks anager IDate Contractor Date AWJMA ITEM NO. q_ 'N' PAGE OF�� DECLARATION REGARDING LICENSE STATUS I do hereby declare that our /my contractor's license is and expires on I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this day of 19 , at , California. Signature Printed Name Title Signing on behalf of (if applicable) NDA ITEM . AGE NO 3 PAGE _._.J.1- ..J. - -- CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATE REGARDING WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE Section 3700 of the Labor Code provides in part as follows: "Every employer except the State shall secure the payment of compensation in one or more of the following ways: A) By being insured against liability to pay compensation with one or more insurers duly authorized to write compensation insurance in this state. B) By securing from the Director of Industrial Relations a certificate of consent to self- insure, which may be given upon furnishing proof satisfactory to the Director of Industrial Relations of ability to self - insure and to pay any compensation that may become due to his employees..." The undersigned is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for worker's compensation or to undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract. SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME TITLE COMPANY ADDRESS DATE (In accordance with Article 5, commencing at Section 1860, Chapter 1, Part 7, Division 2 of the Labor Code, the above Certificate must be signed by the Contractor and filed with the awarding body prior to the Contractor performing any work under this contract.) AGENDA ITEM NO.. :5 t. PAGE OF City of Lake Elsinore Fiscal Year 2002/2003 proposed CPI price adjustment Proposed 2001 -2002 2002 -2003 Item Description Unit Prices Prices a.. 1.1Fam.ts }.,iry +a9c'rcfY xs' M 1 Grid Trimming Each $ 39.90 $ 41.00 2 Service Request Each $ 39.90 $ 41.00 3 Tree Raising each $ 20.00 $ 20.60 4 Tree and Stump Removal Inch $ 13.30 $ 13.70 5 Tree Only Removal Inch $ 9.30 $ 9.60 6 Stump Only Removal Inch $ 4.10 $ 420 7 Plant 15 gal tree w/o RB Each $ 81.90 $ 84.20 8 Plant 15 gal tree with RB Each $ 97.30 $ 100.00 9 Plant 24" Box tree w/o RB Each $ 163.80 $ 168.40 10 Plant 24" Box tree with RB Each $ 199.70 $ 205.30 11 Root Pruning Foot $ 7.20 $ 7.40 12 Crew Rental - 3 man crew Hour $ 97.70 $ 100.40 13 Emergency Crew Rental Hour. $ 204.801 1$ 210.50 14 Watering The 200212003 price reflects a 2.8% and has been round to the nearest tenth of a dollar. The increase is derived from the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers based for Los Angeles- Riverside - Orange County areas. AQENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE. OF �. CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: RECORDS ACCESS /COPY EXPENSE BACKGROUND The City Council in May, 1993, adopted a policy with regard to charges for records and documents provided to the public and for Council consideration. DISCUSSION The City Policy with regard to supplying copies of documents, per Section 6256 of the Government Code, requires the public to pay $2.00 for the first page and $.25 for each additional page. In addition, the City Council and Planning Commission are to receive full sets of documents on every issue to be considered. If additional copies are requested by the Council and Commission, and the cost is in excess of $25, they are required to purchase them. This report is being presented to you this evening as a follow -up to my memorandum of March 8, 2004, regarding the City Treasurer receiving additional copies of materials and invoicing the City. FISCAL IMPACT The impact to the City is the cost of outside printing, $401.80. RECOMMENDATION If desired, the City Council needs to revise the current Council Policy or staff will move forward to invoice Mr. Weber for the $401.80 in printing costs. PREPARED BY: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 8, 2004 SUBJECT: CITY TREASURER INVOICES Attached are two invoices from Mayhall's Print Shop totaling $401.80 for additional copies of Bond Issue materials. These copies were ordered by the City Treasurer without any notice or approval from staff. The normal process for City Council or the City Treasurer to secure additional copies of packets or other materials is to contact staff and we will have them made. Per City Policy, attached, the City Council, Commission and the Treasurer are to receive complete packets of materials. Any additional %so, packets (over $25) are to be purchased. Based on the City's, current policy, I believe Mr. Weber is responsible for these invoices. -Please review and provide direction if different from the City Policy. /sr Attachment C. City Treasurer Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Clerk/Director of Human Resources 25 Mayhall Print Shop RECEIVIED Mayhall Print Shop MAR 0 '0-'38 N. Main St. Elsinore, CA 92530 Lake E s ��- (909) 674 -2617 - Fax (909) 674 -1546 SILL TO City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 ITEM Forms SHIP TO Invoice DATE INVOICE # 2/26/2004 4252 P.O. NO. TERMS ORDER DATE ACCT. # Peter Weber Net 30 2/20/2004 1045 JOB NO. AMOUNT DESCRIPTION I AMOUNT 31350 four sets of 154 pages, Bond Issue 2003, Series H 92.40 1 make copies collate, CA Sales Tax 7.16 ti MENT AUT'HORIZTION DATE DE SCRIPT --- ------------------------------- --- - - - --- - -- - j ACCOUNT NO. I C11y NANAGEa - i --- --- -- --- -+ +» ADMIN SERVICE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT - APPROVAL j i Total $99.56 w 3—rwt Mayhall Print ,nap RPCC/VED Invoice Mayhall Print Shop NAR 0 4 2004 138 N. Main St. ACC0,j DATE INVOICE # Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 STS /'AYgg (909) 674 -2617 - Fax (909) 674 -1546 LE 3/2/2004 4272 BILL TO SHIP TO City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 P.O. NO. TERMS ORDER DATE ACCT. # P.Weber Net 30 2/20/2004 1045 ITEM JOB NO. AMOUNT DESCRIPTION j AMOUNT Forms 31379 Financial report copies, gathered and stapled into sets I 280.50 1 1,650 CA Sales Tax 21.74 i PAYMENT AUTHORIZTION DATE---------- •----- -- ---- _--- pESCRIPTl41fM__ _ _ ---- -- -- - - - - --- - - -- ACCDUN-T Ng. CITY 1Ak;yAGE1t� - --- -~ I ADMiN. SERVICE DIP.ECTOR Y - 6 Total $302.24""' CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA COUNCIL POLICY MANUAL SUBJECT: Records Access Policy No. 100-10 Effective Date 5 -18 -93 Page No. 1 of I BACKGROUND: Copies of public records are provided to the public upon request and payment fees that reflect the actual cost of providing the copies, as determined by the M.S.I. Cost Recovery Study completed in 1987. In cases where extensive research is required there is an additional charge based on the actual research time. These documents are provided as expeditiously as possible. Additionally documents requested by City Councilmembers have previously been provided at no charge. POLICY: Copies, of Public Record are available from the City Clerk's Office and other departments to the public at a rate of $2.00 for the first page and $.25 for each additional page. Requests requiring extensive research will also carry a charge of $15.00 per hour of research. Copies and information will be provided as expeditiously as possible with all requests to be in compliance with Section 6256 of the Government Code. In addition, City Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners will receive a full set of documents on every issue considered; additional copies of documents can be obtained, however, if the additional copies would exceed a total cost of $25.00, the cost will be borne by the Councilmember or Commissioner. Adopted by City Council Minute Action on May 18, 1993 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: MEMORIAL HONORING BILL "WHISKERS" TUCKER BACKGROUND Mr. William Tucker, aka "Whiskers" was a tireless supporter and proponent of Lake Elsinore and its opportunities as a tourism attraction, sport fishing and water sport venue and a place of natural beauty for the valley. Mr. Tucker assisted in instituting children's fishing derbies and promoted the lake in the costume of a large catfish named "Whiskers." Mr. Tucker operated a bait and tackle shop in the Historic Downtown and was liked and well known by local residents and fisherman. Whiskers passed away unexpectedly in February 2004. DISCUSSION Community residents and Mr. Tucker's family would like a portion of the lakeshore that was beloved so much by Whiskers, to be named after him as a memorial recognizing his contributions to the lake and the community. There has been a request to rename a portion of the western fishing beach in the City. Other alternatives would include one of the levy coves or other area of shoreline. The City Council has a policy, (Council Policy 400 -10), regarding memorial tree plantings, however, there is no policy on naming other public facilities in honor of an individual. The Council appointed a Mayor's Committee to name the McVicker Park Fire Station. In that circumstance there was a public request to name the station in honor of a prominent volunteer family, however, the family did not feel it would be appropriate. The Mayor's Committee requested, and it was accomplished, that a memorial plaque be placed on the fire station site honoring the family in lieu of naming the facility after the volunteers. FISCAL IMPACT The act of naming a public facility would be at no charge to the City; however, any signage or promotion would require some investment of funds. Dependant upon Council desires, there maybe maintenance costs over time for graffiti removal or signage /plaque replacement as needed. RECOMMENDATION Staff is requesting direction from the City Council on this matter. PREPARED BY: MARLENE BEST, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: CITY MANAGER'S OPICE (o CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL AND PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, TEMPORARY LAND TRANSFER AGREEMENT AND IRREVOCABLE ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS WITH WASSON CANYON INVESTMENTS, L.P. BACKGROUND In 1993, the City Council acting on behalf of Communities Facilities District No. 90 -3, authorized the issuance of $4,162,928 in bonds. The bonds were to be repaid from special taxes assessed on undeveloped land within CFD No. 90 -3 that is located in Wasson Canyon. As the Council knows, the land development stalled and the bonds were ultimately consolidated with the other underperforming CFD debt in a long term work out plan. However, the properties within CFD No. 90 -3 remained subject to the special tax burden which has been in a continued state of delinquency for several years. In an effort to aid in the development of these properties, the City Council and Public Finance Authority approved, on November 11, 2003, an agreement with Wasson Canyon Investments, L.P. which provided for partial relief of the delinquent special tax obligation on certain properties within CFD No. 90 -3. With respect to Wasson Canyon Investments, the parties agreed to the following payment schedule: 1. $20,000 within 10 days of execution of the agreement; 2. $151,000.00 within 24 months (December 2, 2005) or the City's approval of the first tentative tract map on the property, whichever occurs first; and 3. $684,000.00 within 48 months (December 2, 2007) or City's approval of the first final tentative tract map on a property, whichever occurs first. The developer has already made the first payments. However, an unexpected difficulty arose when the developer attempted to obtain relief from the County Tax Assessor for accumulated penalties and interest on delinquent ad valorem taxes. While the County was amenable to releasing the developer frorathese penalties and interest, it could only do so upon two conditions. AGENDA ITEM NO. 37 Nk 1 ov- PAGE— First, the County pointed to Revenue and Taxation Code section 4986.3 which would allow the County to release such penalties and interest only if the City is the fee owner of the properties. Secondly, the County would only accept payment of the unreleased ad valorem taxes if the developer cleared all of the past due special taxes. Of course, as originally proposed, the existing special tax lien for CFD No. 90 -3 would not have been cleared until the final $684,000 payment had been made. The developer again requested assistance from the City on these two fronts. DISCUSSION The parties have prepared a proposed agreement, the attached Temporary Land Transfer Agreement, for consideration by the City Council. Pursuant to this agreement, the City would temporarily take title to the properties for the sole purpose of satisfying the County's ownership requirement to forgive the penalties and interest on delinquent ad valorem taxes. This will not have a financial impact on the City. The agreement requires that the developer indemnify the City and provide insurance during a short City "ownership" period. Regardless of whether the County ultimately grants release of the penalties and interest on the delinquent ad valorem taxes, the properties will be transferred back to the developer. The second order of business was to assure monetary compensation to the City in exchange for the immediate release of the special tax lien on the properties. Thus, the contingent monetary obligation agreed to in the Land Development Agreement is now an unconditional developer obligation. In order to accomplish this, the parties have prepared a proposed amendment to the original Land Development Agreement and escrow instructions. Those agreements require that the developer deposit $732,400 into an irrevocable escrow to be paid to the City/Public Finance Authority upon the earlier of December 2, 2005 or the City's approval of the first tentative tract map on the properties. The proposed deposit is $102,600 less than the payment originally contemplated under the Land Development Agreement. The developer has stated two rationales for this requested reduction which equates to a 15% discount of the above - referenced third payment. First, the payments by the developer are no longer at risk should the developer abandon development. Thus, even if the developer walks away from the properties, the City is assured of payment. Secondly, the payment will likely be made sooner. The outside date of the final third payment under the original agreement was December 2, 2007; under the amendment, payment will be made no later than December 2, 2005 — two years earlier. As noted in the November 11, 2003 staff report, City staff and the finance team had not expected development to occur for several more years in CFD No. 90 -3. While the City's level of involvement in the work -out has been increased beyond that originally contemplated, the currently proposed structure provides reasonable safeguards against City liability and now assures a significant financial payment to the City irrespective of whether or not the properties are ultimately developed. AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 \ PACE OF�t� �-- FISCAL IMPACT The properties will be relieved of both special tax delinquencies and future special taxes related to CFD No. 90 -3; however, those taxes rendered the properties unviable for development such that the prospect of payment was extremely remote. Under the proposed amended buy out, the City will receive $732,400 (in addition to the already deposited $20,000) and will also receive $10,000 for City administrative and attorneys' fees related to the additional City assistance as contemplated in the attached documents. RECOMMENDATION 1. That the City Council approve the First Amendment to the Land Development Agreement, the Temporary Land Transfer Agreement and the Irrevocable Escrow Instruction attached hereto subject to any minor modifications as may be approved by the City Attorney and authorize the Mayor to execute the same. 2. That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the quitclaim deed substantially in the form set forth in Attachment No. 2 to the Temporary Land Transfer Agreement and further authorize the City Manager to execute the Certificate of Acceptance substantially in the form set forth in Attachment No. 1 to the Temporary Land Transfer Agreement. 2. That the Public Finance Authority concur with the City Council and approve the attached � agreements subject to any minor modifications as may be approved by the City Attorney. The Chairperson is authorized to execute the agreements if determined necessary by the City's Bond Counsel. PREPARED BY: David H. Mann, Assistant City Attorney APPROVED BY: Dick Watenpaugh, City Manager APPROVED FOR LISTING BY: i City Manager's Office/Exe tive Director AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OF FIRST AMENDMENT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO LAND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this •.o+ "Amendment"), dated for identification purposes only as of March 8, 2004, is entered into by and botwom the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE. a municipal corporation (the "Cky' ) and WASSON CANYON INVESTMENTS, )L.P., a California limited partnership ("Wasson), for thepuipose of amending that certain Land Development Agreement dated as of November 11, 2003 (but having an "Effective Date" of December 3, 2003) (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have meanings given them in the Agreement. To the extent of any inconsistency between the terms set forth in the Agreement and the terms set forth in this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall control. The City and Wasson hereby agree to amend the Agreement as follows: 1. Section 4.3 of the Agreement is hereby modified to provide that the Final Payment shall be paid to tho City concurrently with the disbursement of the Second payment to the City pursuant to Section 4.2 of the Agreement. Tn consideration of the advance in the timing of the payment of the Final Payment to the City, the Final Payment is hereby discounted so as to equal the sum of Five Hundred Faghty One Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($581,400.00). 2. Concurrently herewith the City and Wasson are entering into that certain Temporary Land Transfer Agreement of even date herewith (the "TLTA 1). As apart of such transaction, the following shall occur: a. Wasson shall deposit into Escrow No NCS 77347 -SAI (TR) (the "Escrow') at first American 'title Insurance Company in Santa Ana, California (National Commercial Services, Terri Hovdestad, Escrow Officer) ( "Escrow ''� Holder'), an amount equal to the sum of the Second Payment and the Final Payment (such terms are defined in Sections 4.2 and 4.3 ofthe Agreement as modified by Section l of this Amendment). b. Wasson and the City shall execute and deposit into the Escrow certain escrow instructions in the form attached hereto as E jbibit "A" (the "LDA Instructions'), by which Escrow Holder shall be instrueted to release the Second Payment and Final Payment to the City at the time specified in Section 4.2 of the Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in the Agreement, the Parties hereby agree that the Second Payment and the Third Payment shall be disbursed to the City, without further condition, no later than December 2, 2005. The disbursement of the Second Payment and Final Payment may be made earlier than the abovereferenced dates as provided in the Agreement (as modified by Section 1 of this Amendment with respect to the Final Payment). C. Wasson shall deposit into the Escrow, together with irrevocable instructions to Escrow Holder to pay to the County, all unpaid delinquent ad valorem taxes on the Parcels (as more particularly set forth in the TLTA), immediately upon the County's notification to Escrow Holder that the County is willing to accept such payment (it being acknowledged that the City must fist request the County to remove the Parcels from the County's Tax Rolls (with respect % Page I of AGENDA FTEM NO. PAGE OF-=E MAR 17 '04 17:44 9494576305 PAGE.06 to the Special Taxes) in order for the County to accept such delinquent ad valorem taxes). 2, Upon Escrow Holder's receipt of the Second Payment, the Final Payment and the LDA Instructions, and in recognition that the cash depositbyW arson ofthe Second Payment and the Final Payment into Escrow, together with the I DA Instructions, insures the City that it will receive the Second Payment and the Final Payment, the City agrees to immediately take the actions specified in Sections 5.1, 51 and 5.3 of the Agreement. Upon the occurrence of the foregoing, and the County's acceptance of the delinquent ad valorem taxes from Escrow Holder, Owner's agreement to pay all delinquent ad valorem taxes pursuant to Section 5.4 of the Agreement shall be deemed satisfied. 3. This Amendment, when executed by Wasson and delivered to City, must be authorized, executed and delivered by City on or before ten (10) days after signing and delivery of this Agreement by Wasson or this Agreement shall be void, except to the extent that Wasson shall comscnt in writing to a further extension of time for the authorization, execution and delivery o f this Agreement. 4. In all other respects the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. [SIGNATURES SET FORTH ON FOLLOWING PAGE) Page 2 of 3 4QF_NDA ITEM No. ' �S MAR 17 '04 17:44 9494576305 PAGE.07 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment as of the respective dates set forth below. •.r Dated: March 2004 ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK By: VICKI KASAD APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LBIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.C. City Attorney By. BARBARA 7_E10D LEMOLD KCrry" CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: Mayor "WASSON" WASSON CANYON INVESTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership By: Wasson GP LLC, a California limited liability company Dated: March 12004 By: William A. Shopotl', Manager Page oP3 � �� AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF--- Memo ,r7 PMn +'2:AA 9494576305 PAGE.08 TEMPORARY LAND TRANSFER AGREEMENT by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ( "Ciw) and WASSON CANYON INVESTMENTS, L.P. ("Wasson') AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE. _.1.._ of 3 MAR 17 '04 17:44 9494576305 PRGE.09 1. DEFINITIONS ........................................................................... 2 •.rr ............................... 2. SUBJECT OF AGREEIIZNT .................................................. 4 ............................... 2.1. Purpose of this Agreement ............................................. ............................... 4 2.2. Parties to the Agreement ..............................--------- .................... ............... 4 2.2.1. The City ........................................................... ....................... ........ 4 2.2.2. Wasson ............................................................ .....----------- ............... 4 2.3. Relationship Between City and Wasson ........................ ............................... 4 3. INITIAL TRANSFER OF THE PARCELS ............................ ............................... 5 3.1. Initial Transfer .... .................. ........ . .... ....................... ............................... 5 3.2. City's Conditions Precedent to Initial Transfer Closing ............................... 5 3.2.1. Non - refundable Deposit .................................. ........... .................... 5 3.2.2. Delivery of Initial Transfer Quitclaim Decd ... ............................... 5 3.2.3. Deposit of Second and Final LDA Payment, LDA Amendment and LDAInstructions ............................................ ............................... 5 3.2.4. Escrow Fees and Costs ................................... ............................... 5 3.2.5. Condition of Title ............................................ ............................... 5 32.6. No Default ....................................................... ............................... 5 3.3. Wasson's Conditions Precedent to the Initial Transfer Closing ................... 6 3.3.1. Acknowledgement ........................................... ..............................6 3.3.2. County Taxes ................................................... ............................... 6 3.3.3. No Default ................................. ...................... ......... ............. 6 3.4. Escrow ....................................................... ............ ........ ...... .................6 ..•► 3.4.1. Wasson Closing Deliveries ............................. ............................... 6 3.4.2. City Closing Deliveries ................................... ............................... 7 3.4.3. lmtial Closing .................. ........................... ............................... 7 3.4.4. Closing Costs .........................................•----..... ............................... 7 3.4.5. Disbursement of Second LDA Payment and the Final LDA Paymentto City ............................................... ................ ............... 8 3.5. Wasson and City Representations and Warranties ......... ............................... 8 3.5.1. Representations and Warranties of Wasson .... ............................... 8 3.5.2. Representations and Warranties of the City .... ............................... 9 4. RECONVEYANCE OF THE PARCELS ............................................................... 9 4.1. Retransfer of Parcels ...................................................... ............................... 9 5. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES ........................ .............................10 6. INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE ......................................... ............................... 10 6.1. Indemnification and Hold Harmless ............................ ............................... 10 6.2. Insurance .................................................. ............................... ........... 10 7. DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES .............................................. ............................... 10 7.1. Default Remedies ....................................................... ............................... 10 7.2. Institution of Legal Actions ......................................... ............................... 11 7.3. Acceptance of Service of Process ............................... ............................... 11 waum m AVnt 031004 3 AGENDA ITEM QNO. - --rr�1 PAGE-..---- " OV `5.--� MAR 17 '04 17:45 9494576305 PAGE.10 .i'.. 7.4_ Rights and Remedies Are Cumulative ......................... ............................... 11 7.5. Inaction Not a Waiver of Default ................................. .......... .I.................... 11 7.6. Applicable Law .......................................................... ............................... 11 7.7. Attorneys' Fees ...............................••--......................... ...................-- •-- •...... 11 8. CE NE ....... ............................... ........................................ .............................12 8.1. Mutual Consent .................................. ................................ I........................ ;2 8.2. Notices, Demands and Communications Between the Parties .................... 12 8.3. Successors and Assigns 13 8.4. No Third Party Rights ............................ ... ... 13 8.5. Counterparts ................................................................... .............................13 8 -6. Other Agreements ......................................................... .............................13 8.7. Titles and Captions ....................................................... ............................... 13 8.8. Interpretation ................................•--............................... .............................13 8.9. No Waiver ...................................................................... .............................14 8.14. Modifications ............................................................... ........._..................... 14 8.11. Sevembility .................................................................. ............................... 14 8.12. Computation of Time .................................................. ............................... 14 8.13. Legal Advice......... ....................................................... .............._................ 14 8.14. Cooperation ................................................................... .............................14 8.15. Conflicts of Interest ...................................................... ............................... 14 8.16. Non- Liabihty of Officials and Employees of City-, No Consequential Damages.............................................................. ............................... .........15 8.17. Time for Acceptance of Agreement by City ................ ............................... 15 WMSM Tit Agmt 031004 Y7 u AGENDA ITEM O• / PAGE OF - MAR 1? '04 1 ?•45 94945 ?6305 PAGE.11 ATTACHMENT NO. I ATTACHMENT NO.2 ATTACHMENT NO.3 ATTACHMENT NO.4 ATTACHMENT NO.5 Wamwlk£ AVTd MAR 17 '04 17:45 Mal Transfer Quitclaim Deed Retransfer Quitclaim Deed Reserved First LDA Amendment insurance Requirements O 03!004 � / W AGENDA ITEM NO.._._,__ PAGE OF3 94945 ?G305 PAGE.12 If �M;Lljllrli • r ► y THIS TEMPORARY LAND TRANSFER AGREEMENT (this "Agreement"), dated for identification purposes only as of March 23, 2004, is entered into by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINOR.E, a municipal corporation (the "CbyO) and WASSON CANYON INVESTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership ( "Wasson'). The City and Wasson hereby agree as follows: The following recitals are a substantive part of this Agreement: A. Wasson has acquired certain parcels of undeveloped land within the boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore and the District and are identified as Assessor Parcel Nos. 347- 330 -045, 347- 330 -446, 347 - 330 -051, 347- 330 -050, 347 - 330 -052, 347 - 330-053.347-330-019,347-360-004,347- 360-005 and 347 - 360 -003 (collectively, the "Parcels"). Previously, the Parcels were subject to Tentative Tract Map No. 25487, which is now expired. B. The District has levied special taxes on the Parcels (the "Special Taxes") of which certain installments arc delinquent and owing as of the Effective Dato, and additional penalties, interest and costs relating to those delinquencies (the "Delinquent Special Taxes". C. The Parcels are also subject to delinquent ad valorem taxes affecting the Parcels (the "DefinquentAd VaMrem Taxes") and certain penalties, interest and charges thereon (colloctively, �^ "Ad Valorem Penalties',, which, together with the Special Taxes constitute a significant financial burden on the Parcels that exceeds the fair markot value of the Parcels. As such, the total of the Special Taxes, Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes and Ad Valorem Penalties impair the econotnic viability of the Parcels for development A detail of the outstanding Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes and Ad Valorem Penalties are set forth on SchWWc I attached hereto. D. In order to facilitate the public interest in development ofthe Parcels and the resulting generation of revenue to help meet the ongoing financial obligations ofthe City and the District, the District, the City and Wasson entered into that certain Land Development Agreement dated as of November 11, 2003 (but having an "Effective Date" of December 3, 2004) (the "LDA") which provides, among other things, conditional relief of the Delinquent Special Taxes and future Special Taxes of the District. However, the LDA does not provide relief from the Ad Valorem Penalties affecting the Parcels. E. Wasson has endeavored to confer with officials of Riverside County in order to determine, what if any, relief may be obtained as to the Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes. In this regard, the County has proposed to reiievo such obligations but may only do so if the City is the fee owner of the Parcels at the time such relief is given, as required by law. F. In order to facilitate relief of the Ad Valorem Penalties, the City has agreed, with the full knowledge of the County, to take title to the Parcels tamporarily until such relief is either approved or no action, and further resolves that the acquisition is in accordance with the requirements of Revenue and Taxation Code section 4986.3. AGENDA ITEM NO. __ 3 _7 PAGE OF..� MAR 17 '04 17:46 9494576305 PAGE.13 G. Pursuant with the City Council's consideration of this Agreement, the City has considered whether the proposed financial consideration herein are subject to the California 13mvironmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.),'the "CEQA Guidelines" (Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seg) and the City's local guidelines promulgated thereunder. In particular, the City is cognizant of its responsibilities under rEQA Guideline Section 15004 that environmental doenrnentation should be prepared as early as feasible in the planning process. However, this Agremnent addresses only financial considerations related to the Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes and is not intended to assure future approval oftentative tract maps or other entitlements that may cause changes to the pbysieal environment. NOW, THEREFORE, the City and the Wasson hereby agree as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS The defined terms and definitions related to the Agrwmant are set forth as follows. "Ad Valorem Penalties" is defined in RmW C. "Carj&ate nfAcceptance" means the certificate acknowledging that the City accepts the transfer of title in the Parcels to the City as set forth in Attachment No. 1. "CFD Oblige&ns "mean the Delinquent Special Taxes, any current Special Taxes and the Lien of Special Taxes. "Delinquent Ad Valorem Tars" mean those ad valorem taxes assessed by the County against the Parcels of which certain installments are delinquent and owing as of the Effective Date, (but excluding penalties, interest and costs relating to those delinquencies; which are separately defined herein as "Ad Valorem Penalties"). vebinquent Speelal Taxes "means those Special Taxes imposed by the District againstthe Parcels of which certain installments are delinquent and owing as of the Effective Date, and additional penalties, interest and costs relating to those delinquencies. "Deposit '° means the non - refundable deposit from Wasson to the City in the amount of $10,000 to offset the City's costs and expenses in performing its obligations under this Agreement. "District" means the City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 90-3. OEffecdve Date" means the date when the Agreement shall have been signed by the City. "Escrow"mcaus the escrow opened with the Escrow Holder for the purposes of effecting the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, that is, Escrow No. NCS 77347 -SAI (M. "Escrow Fees and Costs" means all escrow fees, charges and costs, title premium fees, recording fees, documentary transfer taxes (if any) and other customary fees and charges of Escrow Holder. "Escrow Holder" means First American Title Insurance Company (National Commercial Services, Santa Ana, California). 2 AGMA ITEM NO. _s.. PAGE OF- MAR 17 '04 1 ? =46 94945 ?6305 PAGE.14 "Final LDA Payment" shall mean the sum of Five Hundred Eighty One Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($581,400.00), to be deposited into Escrow by Wasson pursuant to 5-SjQn 3.4.1 of this Agreement, and is defined in the I.DA as the "Final Payment" (as discounted pursuant to Section I of the First LDA Amendment). "First LDA Amendment" shall mean that certain First Amendment to Land Development Agreement executed by the City and Wasson concurrently hcrcwith, which amends the LDA as set forth therein, and the form of which is set forth in Attachment No. 4 attached hereto. "Initial Transfer" is defined in 2il..U. "Initial TraWer Closing" shall mean the date the Initial Transfer Quitclaim Deed is recorded in the Official Records of Riverside County. "Initial Tiam Lfer Quitclaim Deed" means the quitclaim deed substantially in the form of A414.AgM No. 1. by which Wasson shall convoy title to the Property to the City at the initial Transfer Closing, as provided herein "LDA" is defined in Recital D above. "LDA Instruct%ne"is defined in the LDA Amendments and means that certain Irrevocable Escrow Instruction, a form of which is attached as Exhibit "A'° to the LDA Amendment and incorporated herein. "Lien ofSpecial Taxes" mews the lien of special taxes recorded by the District against the � Parcels. "Parcels" is defined in Rocital A. "Party "means the Cityor Wasson, as applicable, and "P "means, collectively, the City and Wasson. "PTR "means Preliminary Title Report regarding the Pamela issued by First American 11t10 Insurance Company. "ReavWer" is defined in Section 4.1.1. "Retransfer Closing" moans the date the Retransfer Quitclaim Deed is reeordcd in the Official Records of Riverside County. "Retraxer Quitclaim Deed" mesas the Quitclaim Dead, substantially in the form of Attachmett. No. 2, by which the City shall retransfer title to the Parcels to Wasson as provided herein. "'Secoisd LZU Payment" shall mean the sum of One Hundred Fifty One Thousand Dollars ($151,000.00) which is to be deposited by Wasson pursuant to Lyon 3.4.1 of this Agructamt, and is defined as the "Second Payment" in the LDA. "Special Taxes" mean the special taxes levied by the District. 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGED„ OF- MAR 17 '04 17:46 9494576305 PAGE.15 2. SUBJECT OF AGREEMENT 2.1. 0f is Agt§§ QA The purpose of this Agreement is to effectuate the cause the temporarytransfer of title to the Parcels from Wasson to the City in order to allow the County to provide relief for the Ad Valorem Penalties. 2.2.1. TheC The City is a municipal corporation exercising governmental functions and pow m and organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, The principal office and mailing address of the City for the purposes of this Agreement is the City of Lake Elsinore, 130 S. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, California 92530. 2.2.2. Wasson Wasson is Wasson Canyon investments, L.P., a California lirnitedpaYtnetsirip. The principal office and mailing addross of Wassoa for the purpose of this Agreement is do 8astbridge Partners, L.P., 114 Pacifica, Suite 245, Irving, California 92618. Wasson represents and warrants that it is duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California and has all requisite corporate power and authority to carry on its business as now conducted and as proposed to be conducted herein. Wasson further represents and warrants that all corporate action on the part of the Wasson, its general partner and limited partners necessary for the authorization, execution and delivery of this Agreement and the performance of all obligations of the Wasson hereunder has been taken, and this Agreement constitutes valid _ and. ;legally :binding obligations of the Wasson, enforceable in accordance with the terms hereof, cxoopt (i)-as limited by applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium„ and other laws of general application affecting enforcement of creditors' rights generally and (ii) as limited by laws relating to the availability of specific performance, injunctive relief, or other equitable remedies. `'Wasson.• as used in this Agreement includes any assigner ormocessor to the Wasson permitted in this Agreement. 2.3. RelAfiffl§Np BCIE-M Cite and WaeeoA It is hereby acknowledged that the relationship between the City and the Wasson is not that of a partnership or joint venture and that the City and the Wasson shall not be deemed or constnied for any purpose to be the agent of the other. Wasson further agrees to indemnify. hold harmless and defend the City from any claim made against the City arising firm a claimed partnership or joint venture relationship between the City and the Wasson with regard to the dcvelopment, maintenance, managranent and/or sale of any portion of the Parcels; provided, however, that the Wasson shall not be obligated to indemnify, hold harmless or defend the City from any liability or claims arising from the willful misconduct or negligence of the City. AGENDA ITEM NO. `� PAGE. q OF= MAR 17 '04 17:47 9494576305 PAGE.16 3. DUTIAL TRANSFER OF THE PARCELS 3.1. jnitial'�a er Wasson hereby agrees to transfer and convey to the City, and the City hereby agrees to accept the transfer from Wasson o1; Wesson's title to the Parcels, subject to the conditions set forth herein (the Nlelllal TM erl. 3.2. Cry's Conditions Pr4calemt to laidal Transfer Closing The following shall be conditions precedent to the City's acceptance of the Initial Transfer contemplated herein and the initial Transfer Closing (the "Gay's Conditions Precedent-'I: 3.2.1. Nonim le Deposit Wasson shall have delivered the Deposit to the City. 3.2.2. DelivGrv_of Initial Transft (hatelaim peed Wasson shall have deposited the fully executed Initial Transfer Qcitclaim Deed into Escrow. 3.2.3. Denosit of Second and Final.-LDA Pavmm t_ I=DA Amendment_atid LDA hishuctm Wasson shall have delivered into Escrow the Second LDA Payment and the �-- Final LDA Payment, an executed counterpart of the First LDA Amendment, and the executed LDA Instructions. 3.2.4. FMw Fep- and Costs Wasson shall have deposited all sums as are necessary to satisfy Wesson's obligations hereunder into Escrow, including but not limited to payment of all Escrow Fees and Costs for both the Initial Transfer and the Retransfer. 3.2.5. Coion of Title The Parcels shall be subject only to those title exceptions shown on the PTR, unless otherwise approved by the City Manager, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld. 3.2.6. No Default As of the Close of Escrow, Wasson shall not be in default of any of the terms and provisions of this Agreement or the LDA The conditions act forth in this Section 3.2 are solely for the benefit of the City and may be waived only by the City. In the event that the conditions are not satisfied or waived by the City, in writing, on or before the Close of Escrow for the Initial Transfer, both parties shall be released fi+om any liabilities or obligations under this Agreement, this Agreement shall be deemed null and void, Escrow shall be cancelled. Notwithstanding the fbregoing, and the Deposit shall be released to the City. 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. .®- PAGE OF 3 e MAR 17 '04 1 ? :47 9494576305 PAGE.17 3.3. Wesson's Conditions Neeedent to the Initial Transfer Clogim The following shall be conditions precedent to Wesson's obligation to consummate the initial Transfer transaction contemplated herein ( "Wasson Is Condideons Precedent'): 3.3.2. ent The City shall have deposited into Escrow a fully executed Certificate of Acceptance of the Initial Transfer Quitclaim Deed, and a fully executed Retransfer Quitclaim Deed. 3.3.2. Cow Taares 7 he County Tax Collector shall have deposited into Escrow (i) a demand for payment (through Escrow) of all Delinquent Ad valorem Taxes (but excluding any and all penalties and/or interest charges thereon), and (ii) a written statement that upon receipt of the amount set forth In such demand, that all outstanding Ad Valorem Penalties assessod due to the Delinquent Ad Valorem taxes will be waived and removed from the County's ter assessment rolls. 3.3.3. No Default As of the Close of Escrow, the City shall not be in default of any of the users and provisions of this Agreement or the MA. 'Me -conditions set forth in this Seetiga 3.4 are solely for the benefit of Wasson and may be waived only by Wasson In the event that the conditions arc not satisfied or waived by the Wasson, in writing, on or before the Initial Transfer Closing, both parties shall be reilcased from any liabilities or obligations under this Agreement, this Agreement shall be deemed null and void, Escrow shall be cancelled, and the Deposit shall be released to Wasson: Upon mutual execution and delivery of this Agreement, and the acceptance of this Agreement by Escrow Holder in writin& this Agreement shall constitute the joint escrow instructions of the City and Wasson to open the Escrow for the eonsurnmation of the Initial Transfer and the Retransfer pursuant to the terns ofthis Agreement-'Upon Escrow Holder's wrinen acceptance of this Agreement, Escrow Holder is authorized to act in accordance with the teens of this Agreement. The City and Wasson shall execute Escrow Holder's general escrow instructions upon request; provided, however, that if there is any conflict or inconsistency between such general escrow instructions and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control. All deposits placed in Escrow by Wasson may be invested by Escrow Holder in federally insured depository accounts, with the interest thereon accruing to tho benefit of Wasson. 3.4.1. Wasson Closing peHverries At least one (1) business day prior to the Initial Transfer Closing, Wasson shall deliver or cause to be delivcrcd to Escrow Holder the following. (i) The Initial Transfer Quitclaim Deed m substantially the form attached hereto as Aftchmmt ,No. I cx=ted by Wasson in recordable form, conveying fee title in the Parcels to the City. V, 6 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE . OF g MAR 17 '04 17:47 9494576305 PAGE.18 (ii) The Second LDA Payment and the Final LDA Payment, which shall be subject to the LDA Instructions. (iii) An executed counterpart of the First LDA Amendment. (iv) The executed LDA Instructions. (v) All sums Escrow Holder shall require to pay all closing costs, prorations and adjustments set forth herein (including without limitation all Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes) net of the Ad Valorem Delinquency). (vi) Any other documents, instruments or agteeinents reasonably necessary to etTWuate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement Claims), in immediately available fiords. 3.4.2. Cijy_Clos ng 13-aliYefim At least one (1) business day prior to Initial Transfer Closing, the City shall deliver or cause to be delivered to Escrow Holder the following. (i) The Certificate of Acceptance of the Initial Transfer Quitclaim Deed, and the Retransfer Quitclaim Deed, each executed by the City in recordable form. (ii) A written request to the County Tax Assessor requesting the County Tax Collector to remove the Special Taxes from the County's assessment rolls and to waive and �—. remove the Ad Valorem Delinquency Claims from the County's assessment rolls, (iii) An executed counterpart of the First LDA Amendment, and (iv) Any other documents, instruments or agreements reasonablynecessary to effeauate the transaction contemplated by this Agreement. Provided the City and Wasson have deposited into the Escrow and delivered to the City the matters required by this Agreement, Escrow Holder- shall deliver to the City the Initial Transfer Quitclaim Deed by causing it to be rcoorded in the Official Records of the Office of the County Recorder of Riverside County, California. 3.4.3. Initial Closing The Initial Transfer Closing shall occur immediately following the execution of this Agreement, provided the City's Conditions Precedent and Wasson's Conditions Precedent have been satisfied, unless extended by the mutual written agreement of the parties hereto, or as otherwise provided for in this Agreement. Concurrently with the recordation of the Initial Transfer Quitclaim Deed, Escrow Holder shall release the Deposit to the City, and shall, upon the County's notification of its willingness to accept same, the Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes. 3.4.4. Closinn Ctrsts Wasson shall pay any Escrow and Closing Costs for the Initial Transfer and the Retransfer. AGENDA ITEM NO. / PAGE 38' MAR 17 '04 17:4e 9494576305 PAGE.19 3.4.5. Disbursgngt of Second LDA Payment and the Final LDA Payment to City *MOO Escrow Holder shall disburse the Second LDA Payment and the Final LDA Payment in accordance with the LDA Instructions. The following representations and warranties set forth heroin shall survive the Close of Escrow for both the Initial Transfer and the Retransfer. 'Wasson represents and warrants to the City as follows: (i) Agl hority. Wasson has fall right, power and lawful authority to convey the real property interest in the Parcels as provided hacin; and (ii) Leases • There are no tenants or other persons who have a right to possess the Parcels or any portion thereof and (iii) Tjlk. Wasson at the time of the execution of this Agreement, is seized of the Parcels in fee simple and is the lawdrl owner of and has good indefeasible title to the Parcels; and (iv) Litigafio. There are no actions, suits, material claims. legal proceedings, or any other proceedings affecting the Parcels or any portion thereof, at law, or in equity before any court or governmental Agency, dounestic or foreign (other than any pending matters 1*4001, relating to the Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes); and (v) Condition of Parcels. Wasson shall have maintained the Parcels in such condition as existed as of the execution of this Agroement and shall continue to maintain the Parcels in such condition until the Rctransfer; and (vi) No Vinlatioo. Neither the execution of this Agreement nor the performance of the obligations herein will conflict with, or breach any ofthe provisions of anybond, note, evidenco of indebtedness, contract, lease, or other agarooment or instrument which affects the Parcels; and (vii) No„ CO Mg. Wasson's execution, delivery and performance of its obligations under this Agreement will not constitute a default or a breach under any contract, agreement or order to which Wasson is a party or by which it is bound; and (viii) Q,avctBMenVd Compliance. Wasson has not received anynotice from any governmental agency or authority alleging that the Parcels is amently in violation of any law, ordinance, rule, regulation or requirement applicable to its use and operation. If any such notice or notices are received by Wasson following the date this Agreement is signed by the City, Wasson shall, within ten (10) days of receipt of such notice notify the City, Wasson then, at its option, may either elect to perform the work or take the necessary corrective action prior to the Close of Escrow or refuse to do so, in which cast Wasson shall notify the City of such refusal and the City shall be entitled to either close Escrow with knowledge of such notice(s) or terminate this Agreement; and 8 AGENDA ITEM NO. � PAGE OF 3 MAR 17 '04 17:48 9494576305 PAGE.20 (ix) No Wasson BjWmM. Wasson is not the subject of abanImptcy proceeding. (x) Wesson's Q=ju &MMIati2ns and Warranties. Until the Retransfer Closing, Wasson shall, upon learning of any fact or condition which would cause any of the warranties and representations in this Section not to be true as of the initial Transfer Closing. immediately give written notice of such fact or condition to the City. Such exception to a representation shall not be deemed a breach by Wasson hereunder, but shall constitute an exception which the City shall have a right to approve or disapprove if such exception would have an effect on the transactions contcr nplated by this Agreement. If the City elects to proceed with the initial Transfer Closing following disclosure of such information. Wasson's representations and warranties contained herein shall be deemed to have been mace as of the Initial Transfer Closing, subject to such exception(s). If; following the disclosure of such information, the City elects to not to proceed with the Initial Transfer Closing. then this Agent and the Escrow shall automatically terrninati-I and neither party shall have any further rights, obligations or liabilities hereunder 3.5.2. R4PriepU*w and Warranties of the City The City rests and warrants to Wasson as follows: The City has full right, power and lawful authority to accept the real property interest in the Pativels as provided herein, and to retransfer the Parcels to Wasson, without consideration (other than the Deposit) also as provided herein. 4. RECONVEYANCE OF THE PARCELS 4.1.1. Absolute Right to ltetransfer. Notwithstanding -any other provision of this Agreement, effective upon the conveyance of the Parcels to the City at tire: Initial Transfer Closing, Wasson shall have the absolute right to cause the recording of the Rctransfer Quitclaim Deed Retransfer at any time to effect the conveyance of the Parcels firom the City to Wasson (the "Re&e ns er"), upon written notice to the City and to Escrow Holder, without the payment of any additional consideration to the City (the Deposit having been paid by Wasson to the City prior to the Initial Transfer), and whether or not the County has waived the Ad Valorem Penalties, and Escrow Holder is irrevocably instructed to record the Retransfer Quitclaim Deed and thus effect the Retransfer upon the first to occur of the following: (i) receipt of written notice from Wasson, (ii) the expiration of ten (10) days following the recordation of the Initial Transfer Quitclaim Deed (unless extended pursuant to Socdon 43.1 below). 4.1.2. &S Transfer. Wasson agrees to accept the Parcels "AS IS" in their existing physical conditions without recourse or imposition of any liability whatsoever on the City, and Wasson acknowledges and agrees that no representation or warranty has been made to Wasson by the City or any other person concerning the Parcels or the condition thereof 4.1.3. Mon to Ext=4 Rek»&fer ClosiU. Upon written notice to the City and Escrow Holder on or before the expiration of the ten (10) day period specified in won 4.1.1 above, Wasson may extend the Rebwisfer Closing for up to an additional ten (10) days to allow for any delays in the delivery of documentation which conf w the waiveroftheAd Valorem Penalties. 9 3 -7 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF 3 L' MAR 17 '04 17 =58 9494576305 PAGE.02 5. REPUSENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES Wasson represents and warrants for the benefit of the City as follows: (i) Wasson is a California limited partnership duly organized, validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California and has all requisite corporate power and authority to carry on its business as now conducted and as proposed to be conducted herein. (ii) All corporate action on the part of the Wasson, its general partner and limited partners necessary for the authorization, execution and delivery of . this Agrectnent and the performance of all obligations of the Wasson hereunder has been taken, and this Agreement constitutes valid and legallybinding obligations of the Wasson, enforceable in accordance with the terms hereof except (i) as limited by applicable bankxttptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium, and other laws of genaral application affecting enforcement of creditors' rights generally and (ii) as limited by laws relating to the availability of specific performance, injunctive relief, or other equitable remedies. (iii) There is no action, suit proceeding or investigation ponding or, to the Wasson's knowledge, currently threatened against the Wasson that questions the validity of this Agreement, or the right of the Wasson to enter into this Agreement, or to corim mmate the transactions contemplated hereby. 6. INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE 6.1. Indemnificakon. and _I oM 11gogess Wasson shag assume the ddense of, indemnify and hold` harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents and each of them, from and against any 'end °all liability, claims, judgments, costs, and demaards, of any kind (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of or related to the City's ownership of the Parccls. In the event of third party litigation brought against Wasson and/or the City in connection with this Agreement, Wasson agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmlew the City, its officers, employees and agents and each of them, from and against any and all liability, claims, judgments, costs, and demands, of any kind (including. without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of or related to the City's approval and/or the implementation of this Agreement. IMF _�_i_ OM , During all times that the City holds title to the Parcels, Wasson shall maintain the innu=cc specified in Attachment No. 5 attached hereto, naming the City as an additional insured. Prior to the Initial Transfer, Wasson shall provide evidence of such insurance, which shall include a statement that such insurance cannot bo canceled except upon thirty days advance written notice to Wasson and the City. 7. DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES 7.1. Default Romochos Failure by either Party to perform any action or covenant required by this Agreement within the time periods provided herein following Notice and failure to cure as described hereafter, 10 37 � AGENDA ITEM NO. \ PAGE OFF MAR 17 '04 17 =58 9494576305 PAGE.03 c constitutes a "Default" under this Agreement. A Party claiming a Default shall give written Notice of Default to the other Party specifying such Default. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, the claimant shall not institute any proceeding against any other. Party, and the other Parry shall not be in Default if such party within thirty (30) days from receipt of 'such Notice immediately, with due diligence, commences to cure, correct or remedy such failure or delay and shall complete such cure, correction or remedy with diligence. 7.2. InVitution_of �oggj lions The Parties shall be entitled to seek anyremedy available at law and in equity forthe other Party's Default. All legal actions must be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, in an appropriate municipal court in Riverside County, or in the United States District Court for District of California in which Riverside County is located. Notwithstanding the foregoing, or any other provision of this Agr oc ment, as long as Wasson deposits with Escrow Bolder all Escrow and Closing Costs necessary to consummate the Transfer and the Retransfer, Escrow Holder shall be obligated, upon wrir;en demand by Wasson and notwithstanding any contrary instruction by the City, to immediately record the Retransfer'Quitalaim Deed in the Official Records of Riverside County. ! In the event that any legal action is commencxd by Wasson against the City, service of process on the City shall be made by personal sa vice upon the City Clerk or in such other manner as maybe provided bylaw. In the event that any legal action is commenced by. the ; City. against Wasson, service of process on Wasson shall be made in such manner as may be provided by law. 7.4. Riebts-and Remedies Ar Except as otherwise expressly stated in this Agreement, the rights and remedies of the Parties are cumulative, and the exercise by either Party of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exerciseby it, at the same or different tunes, of any other rights or mnedies for the same Default or any other Default by the other Party. Any failures or delays by either Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any Default shall not operate as a waiver of any Default or of any such rights or remedies, or deprive either such Party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. 7.6. $pals .,,cable Law The laws of the State of California shall govern the interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement. 9 N: a .• .y I r. 4T In any action between the Parties to interpret, enforce, reform, modify, rescind or otherwise in connection with any of the terms or provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in the action or other proceeding shall be entitled, in addition to damages, injunctive relief or any other ll AQENDA ITEM NO. 3-7 PAGE 2-1 Op MOP 17 IAa 17•Sq 9494576305 PAGE.04 relief to which it might be entitled, reasonable costs and expenses ineluding, without limitation, litigation costs, expert witness fees and reasonable attorneys' fees. 8. GENERAL This Agreement maybe terminated by the mutual written consent of the City and the Wasson, and all or any portion of the moneys in tha Construction and Acquisition Fund maybe used to pay for same, and the Wasson shall have no claim or right to any further payments for the Purchase Price of Public Facilities or Discrete Components hereunder, except as otherwise maybe provided in such written consent Anynoticce, requests, demands, documents, approvals or disapprovals given or sent under this Agreement from one Patty to another (collectively, 'Notices') may be personally delivered, transmitted by facsimile (FAX) transmission, or deposit with the United States Postal Service for mailin& postage prepaid, to the address of the other Party as stated in this Section, and shall be deemed to have been given or sent at the time of personal delivery or FAX transmission or, if mailed, on the third day following the date of deposit in the course oftransmission withthe United States Poetal Service. Notices shall be sent as follows: If to the City: City of Lake Elsinore Attn: City Manager 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 FAX No. (909) 674-239 With copies to: Van Blarcom, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, P.C. Attn: Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney 23422 Mill Creek Drive, Suite 105 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 FAX No. (949) 457 -6305 If to Wasson: Wasson Canyon Investments, L.P. Attn: William Shopoff c/o Eastbridge Partners, L.P. 114 Pacifica, Suite 245 Irvine, CA 92618 FAX No. (949) 417 -1399 12 � � � AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGEI- OF-3 L MAR 1? '04 1? :59 9494576305 PAGE.05 With a copy to: Gromet and Associates Attu: Stevan J. Gromet, Esq. 114 Pacifica, Suite 250 Irvine, CA 92618 -3321 FAX No. (949) 261 -1818 This Agreement shall be binding upon and inurc to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. The Wasson may assign its rights pursuant to this Agreement to one (1) or more purchaser (each, an "Assignee's of the Parcels or phase thereof. The Parties intend that no rights nor remedies be granted to any third party as a bcncficiary of this Agreement or of any covenant, duty, obligation or undettalang established herein. This Agreement may be signed in multiple countarparts which, when signed by all Parties, shall constitute a binding agreetment. This Agreement is executed in five (5) originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. The obligations of the Wasson hereunder shall be that of a party hereto. Nothing herein shall be construed as afocting the City's or Wasson's tights, or duties to perform their respective obligations, under other agreements, use regulations or subdivision requirements relating to the development. This Agreement shall not confer any additional rights, or waive any rights given, by either party hereto under any development or other agreement to which they are a party. This Agreement is not intended to and is not a "deve)opment agreemcne' under Government Code Sections 65864, aqs%. 8.7. Titles and Cauftons Titles and captions are for convenience ofreference only and do not define, describe or limit the soope or the intent of this Agreement or of any of its terms, Reference to section numbers a*e to sections in this Agreement, unless expressly stated otherwise. , 8.8. intsraretetion As used in this Agreement, masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular or plural number shall each be deemed to include the others where and when the context so dictates. The word `including" shall be construed as if followed by the words "without limitation." This Agreement shall be interpreted as though prepared jointly by both Parties. 13 AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE MAR 1? '04 1 ? :59 94945 76305 PAGE.06 8.9. No Waiver -•000, A waiver by either Party of a breach of any of the covenants, conditions or agreements under this Agreement to be performed by the other Party shall not be construed as a waiver of any suceaeding breach of the same or other covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this Agreement. 8.10. Modifications Any alteration, change: or modification of or to this Agrt*meat, in order to become effective, shall be made in writing and in each instance signed on behalf of each Party. 8.11. Seyerabilily If any term, provision, condition or covenant of this Agreement or its application to any party or circumstances shall be held, to any extent, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of the term, provision, condition or covenant to persons or circumstances other than those as to whom or which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected, and shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 8.12. Comgutafion of Time The time in which any act is to be done under this Agreement is computed by excluding the first day (such as the day escrow opens), and including the last day, unless the last day is a holiday or Saturday or Sunday, and then that day is also excluded. The terns "holiday" shall mean all holidays as speoifiad in Section 6700 and 6701 of the California Government Code. If any ,"Wof W is to be done by a particular time during a day, that tune shall bo Pacific Time Zone time. 8.13. LaW Advice Each Party represents and warrants to the other the following., they have carefWly read this Agreement, and in signing this Agreement, they do so with full knowledge of any right which they may have; they have received independent legal advice from their respective legal counsel as to the matter set forth in this Agreement, or have )mowingly chosen not to consult legal counsel as to the matters set forth in this Agreement; and, they have freely signed this Agreement without any reliance upon any agreement, promise, statement or representation by or on behalf of the other Parry, or their respective agents, employees, or attorneys, except as specifically set forth in this Agreement, and without duress or coercion, whether economic or otherwise. 8.14. Coop, gEllion Each Party agrees to cooperate with the other in this transaction and, in that regard, to sign any and all documents which may bo reasonably necessary, helpful, or appropriate to carry out the purposes and intent of this Agreement including, but not limited to, releases or additional agreements. Gon.{ljcts of lntarest No member, official or employee ofthe City shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, nor shall any such member, official or employee participate in any 14 A 37 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF "35 MAR 17 '04 le :oo 94945 ?6305 PAGE.07 decision relating to the Agreement which affects his personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership or association in which he is directly or indirectly interested. 8.16. Nn Liabili of O aiala and Employees of City No ConsM dal Dame -es No member, official or employee of the City shall be personally liable to Wasson, or any successor in interest, in the event of any Default or breach by the City or for any amount which may become due to Wasson or its successors, or on any obligations under the terms of this Agroctacut Wasson hereby waives and releases any claim it may have against the members, officials or employees of the City with respect to any Default or breach by the City or for any amount which may become duo to Wasson or its successors, or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. Additionally, in no event shall the Wasson be entitled to, and hereby waives, any r*bt to seek consequential damages of any kind or nature from the City arising out of or in connection with this Agreemem other than interference with the recording of the Retransfer Quitclaim Deed as provided in this Agreement Wasson makes the foregoing waivers and releases with full knowledge of Civil Code Section 1542 and hereby waives any and all rights therCundcr to the extent of this waiver and release, if such Section 1542 is applicable. Section 1542 of the Civil Code provides as follows: "A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor doe not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if !mown by him must have materially aii'eeted his sctdement with the debtor." 8.17. '1 M far Aeceptanc4 of &gMMgt bY City This Ageerncnt, when executed by Wasson and delivered to the City, must be authorized, executed and delivered by the City on or before thirty (30) days after signing and delivery of this Agreement by Wasson or this Agreement shall be void, except to the extent that Wasson shall consent in writing to a further extension of time for the authorization, execution and delivery of this Agreement. [BALANCE OF PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK] �5 3 AGENDA ITEM NO.� PAGE S-OF ..s1 MAR 17 '04 18 =00 9494576305 PAGE.08 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the respective dates set forth below. Dated: March _, 2004 ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, MY CLERK By: VICKI KASAD APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.C. City Attorney By. BARBARA ZEID LEIBOLD "Crr,r CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: Mayor " WASSON" WASSON CANYON INVESTMEM, L.P., a California limited partnership By: Wasson QP LLC, a California limited liability company Dated: March _, 2004 By. William A. Shopoff, Manapr *"No 16 -4"W AGENDA ITEM NO, e/ PACE6 OF ')a' MAR 17 '04 18 =00 9494576305 PAGE.09 ATTACHMENT NO.1 RECORDING REQUMED BY AND ) WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ) City of Lake Elsinore ) 130 South Main Street ) Lake Elsinore, California 92530 ) Attention: RECORDER'S OFFICE USE ONLY FREE RECORDING This instrument is for the benefit of the City of Lake Elsinore and is entitled to be recorded without fee. (Government Code Section 6103) FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby ac]mowledged, WASSON CANYON INVESTMENTS, L1', a California limited partnership, hereby REMISES, RELIZASIS AND FOREVER QUITCLAIMS to the CMV OF LATE ELSINORE, a California municipal corporation, that certain real property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, located in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Rivcraidc, State of California Darted: , 2004 Qvi%Wm Dad MAR 17 '04 18:00 WASSON CANYON INVESTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership By: Wasson OP LLC, a California limited liability company, its General Partner By: William A. Shopot� Manager AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE? OF 3 t� 9494576305 PAGE.10 EX�CIBIT "A" DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY [To Be Inwned] Qii&Wm Dood MAR 17 '04 18:00 0310(W 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 9' OF 9494576305 PAGE.11 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of ) SS On , before me.. personally appeared NAME(S) OF SIGNERS) personally known to me —OR— SIGNATURE OF NOTARY proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose names) is/am subscribed to the within instrument and acknowlcdged to me the.' hetshe/they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity /ies, and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrwment the porson(s), or the entity upon behalf of which person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. OPTIONAL Although the data below is OPTIONAL, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. Capacity claimed by signer: O Individual O Corporate Offica(s) 0 Partners) ❑ General a Limited E3 Attorney -in -fact ❑ Trustee(s) D Guardian/Conservator O Other: Signer is representing: Name of Person(s) or Entity(ies) Description of Attached Document: Title or 'type of Document Number of Pages Date of Document Signer(s) Other Than Named Above AGENDA ITEM NO. -3� PAGE _-OF MAR 17 '04 18 01 9494576305 PAGE.12 CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE (Government Code Section 27281) TICS IS TO CERTIFY that the interest in real property convcyed by THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT to the CITY OF LAKE FLSINORE, a California municipal corpot't►tion ( "City"), is hereby accepted by the undersignod officer on behalf of the City pursuant to authority conferred by Resolution No. and the City consents to recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer. Datod this ____ day of MY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a California municipal corporation By: Richard Watenpaugh 2 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 10 OF MAR 1? '04 18 =01 94945 76305 PAGE.13 ATTACHMENT NO.2 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND ) WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ) City of Lake Elsinore ) 130 South Main Street ) Lake Elsinorci California 92530 ) Attention: City Clerk 1 RECORDER'S OFFICE USE ONLY FREE RECORDING This instrument is for the benefit of the City of Lako Elsinore and is entitled to be recorded without fee. (Government Code Section 6103) FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a California mmicipal corporation, hereby REMISES, RELEASES, AND FOREVER QUITCLAIMS to WASSON CANYON TNVESTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership, that certain real property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, and_ incorporated herein by this refmnm e+, located in the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside, State of California Dated: _ '2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: Mayor AGENDA ITEM NO. 1- / 3 PAGE 1— OF MAR 17 '04 18:01 9494576305 PAGE.14 EXHIBIT "A" DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY [To Be In aud] MAR 17 '04 18:01 ACENOA ITE�JMa O.OF 9494576305 PAGE.15 rn CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California ) County of ) SS On , before me, personally appeared NAME(S) OF SKGNER(S) personally ]mown to me —OR SIGNATURE OF NOTARY proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/am subscribed to the within inset meat and acknowledged to me that hcJshv1hey executed the same in hi"er /their authorized capacity /ies, and that by hia/her/thcrr signatures) on the it ument the person(s), or the entity upon bchalf of which person(,) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seat. OPTIONAL Although the data bclow is OPTIONAL, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this farm. Capacity claimed by signer: D Individual o Corporate Ofl6cet(s) O Partner(s) D General o Limited o Attorney -in -fact 0 Thwee(s) C) Guardian/Conservator 0 Other: Signer is representing: Name of Person(s) or Entity(ies) MAR 17 '04 1e:01 Description of Attached Document: Title or Type of Document Number of Pages Date of Document Signer(s) Other Than Named Above AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE 3 OF--- 9494576305 PAGE.16 ATTACHMENT NO.3 [RESERVED) ,,.r„` %% S"Ww AQENDA ITEM NO. PAGE,. OF MAR 17 '04 16:01 9494576305 PAGE.17 ATTACHMENT NO.4 FIRST AM&NDMENT TO LDA [TO BE INSERTED] 1 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 ! _ N, PAGE OF_ 3 MAR 17 '04 18:01 9494576305 PAGE.18 ATTACHMENT NO.5 INSURANCE (TO BE PROVIDED BY DEVELOPER PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BUT IN NO EVENT LESS THAN $I MELLION GENERAL, LLB WLITY COVERAGE) Qaitotaim Rood Cmn 031004 % AGENDA ITEM NO. _ PAGE b OF MAR 17 '04 18:02 9494576305 PAGE.19 Ao-� To: First American Title Insurance Company ( "Escrow Holder') 1 First American Way Santa Ana, California 92707 Attn: Terri Hovdestad, Senior Escrow Officer Re: Escrow No.: NCS 77347- SAl(TH) The undersigned, Wasson Canyon Investments, L.P., a California limited partnership ( "Wasson"), and the City of Lake Elsinore, a municipal corporation (the "Qy'), are parties to that certain Temporary L4nd D-w er Agreement of even date herewith (the 477L Agreement'j, pursuant to which the above-referenced escrow (the "Escrow') has been established. The City and Wasson are also parties to that certain Land DevelopmentAgreement dated as of November 11, 2003 (but having an "Effective Date" of December 3, 2003), as amended by that certain First Amendment to Land Development Agreement of even date herewith (collectively, the "LDA Agreement'). Concurrently herewith, in accordance with the both the TTL Agreement and the LDA Agreement, Wasson is depositing with Escrow Holder, among other sums, the sum of Seven Hundred Thirty Two Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($732,400.00), representing the aggregate amount ofthe "Second Payment" (SI51,000.00) and the "Final Payment" ($561,400.00) required to be paid by Wasson to the City pursuant to the LDA Agreement (collectively, the "LDA Payment'). Wasson hereby ] ] instructs Escrow Holder to disburse the LDA Payment to the City upon the orl& to occur of (i) December 2, 2005, or (i) upon Escrow Holder's receipt of written statement from the City Clerk of the City certii ing that the City's City Council has approved a tentative tract map for all or any part of the real properties which are the s*oct of the LDA Agreement. The foregoing instruction cannot be revoked or modified in any manner, without the written consent of the City, in its We discretion. IN VMNESS WHEREOF, Wasson has executed this Irrevocable Escrow Instruction m of March _, 2004. WASSON CANYON INVESTMENTS, L.P., a California limited partnership By. Wasson GP LLC, a California limited liability company, its General Partner BY William A. Shopof� Manager CADocwnrnts and Sddngs\Dsv1dt*ml Sc0np \Teagornry rntcmet File3\Or.K2ES \L1DA -17A ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS2.DOC �] Pegc 1 of 1 / AGENDA ITEM�NOO. PAGE __. -1 OF-21"' F 3 g MAR 17 '04 le :02 9494576305 PAGE.20 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE '�` REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: LAKE ELSINORE`MANAGEMENT PLAN BACKGROUND In 1988, the Lake Elsinore Management Authority (LEMA) commenced the process of securing a 404 Permit from the Army Corps in connection with the Lake Management Project, which included construction of the inlet channel and levee. The 404 Permit was issued in 1989 and is formally known as the Lake Elsinore Management Plan (LMP) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit #88- 00215 -RRS. �— DISCUSSION The original 404 Permit required the permittees, that is, City of Lake Elsinore, the Santa Ana Water Project Authority and the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, to provide a number of mitigation measures. The mitigation measures required enhancement and preservation of wetlands, preservation the old San Jacinto River channel, provision of water to the wetlands for habitat and dedication of open space as a buffer. Of particular difficulty was the provision to provide water to a 356 acre wetlands area due to high cost and evaporation rates. John Laing Homes, in consultation with the three original permittees, has been working with the Army Corps and other resource agencies to bring the Lake Elsinore Management Plan into final compliance and, in particular, address the needs of the wetlands in the Back Basin. Laing Homes retained Vandermost Consulting Services, Inc., which has apparently resolved several mitigation issues to the satisfaction of the resource agencies and the Army Corps. The attached February 26, 2004 letter from Vandermost to the Army Corp summarizes the proposed mitigation measures which are to be incorporated into an amendment to the Section 404 Permit. Additional information is attached to the letter showing the requested modifications, a schedule of proposed completion dates, a letter from the County confirming consistency of the proposed amendment with the MSHCP along with various graphs, charts and photographs. C: (DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS(VKASADLOCAL SETTINGSITE IPORARYINTERNET FILESOLK2FISTAFF REPORT - LAKE ELSINORE MANAGEMENT PLANDOC ALMA ITEM! NO. PAGE OF 3� The City's concurrence with proposed amendment to the Section 404 Permit will allow the City and EVMWD to come into compliance with the mitigation requirement of the Lake Elsinore Management Plan. FISCAL IMPACT Concurrence with the proposed amendment to the 1989 Lake Elsinore Management Plan 404 Permit will relieve the City (along with EVMWD) from needing to expend further funds to meet mitigation requirements. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the Mayor and City Council consider the proposed 404 Permit amendment and provide staff direction. PREPARED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER ..00 C: (DOCUMENTS AND SETI7NGSiVKASADILOCAL SE777NGSITEMPORARY INTERNET FILESIOLK2FISTAFF REPORT- LAKE ELSINORE MANAGEMENT PLAN.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO..v. �! PAGE OF VANDERMOST CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. Government Affairs • Community Relations • Regulatory Assistance February 26, 2004 Mr. Robert Smith U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 911 Wilshire, 11 th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Subject: Lake Elsinore Management Plan, File# 88- 00215 -RRS Dear Robert: Please consider this letter a request to modify the mitigation plan and reissue the Lake Elsinore Lake Management Plan (LMP) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 �-. Permit #88- 00215 -RRS. We are submitting this request on behalf of John Laing Homes 706 acre Southerly Project (Southerly) in cooperation with the LMP co- penmittees, which include the City of Lake Elsinore (City), the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD) and the Santa Ana Watershed Protection Authority (SAWPA). This request to modify the mitigation plan has been reviewed by Dick Watenpaugh of the City, Phil Miller of EVMWD, and Mark Norton and David Ruhl of SAWPA. The co- permittees concur with the mitigation modification proposal. One of the primary mitigation measures of the LMP is the requirement to provide water to the 356 -acre wetland area. Due to the cost of water, high pumping costs, and high evapotranspiration rates, compliance with this measure has been challenging. Taking into consideration the past challenges, the revised mitigation plan proposes a direct water supply to the 356 -acre wetland via an underground reclaimed water line. At Aaron Allen's request, the co- permittees have agreed to identify an interim water source to provide some water Lo the 356 wetlands, until such time that the reclaimed water line is installed. The LMP Mitigation Modification proposal is designed to minimize the need for long- term water pumping, take advantage of development contributions, and be consistent with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation (MSHCP) Plan. A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan will be submitted for Corps approval prior to initiating the Southerly project. The revised mitigation plan is summarized as follows: AQE1VDA ITEM NO. "'N'. PAGE OF 37 27312 Calle Arroyo • San Juan Capistrano, California 92675 949.489.2700 • Fax 949.489.0309 -t A Mr. Robert Smith February 26, 2004 Page 2 ,.no, ■ Relocate 71 acres of open space required by the LMP onto the Southerly site. The relocated 71 -acre area will be vegetated with alkali weed, saltgrass, mule fat, arroyo willow, and California buckwheat and preserved in perpetuity as habitat/open space. The area is designed to buffer the north side of the 356 -acre wetlands area. A conservation easement will be placed on the 71 -acre area. ■ Recreate the historic Son Jacinto River corridor at a lower elevation and slope the surrounding area to drain toward the River. This will create hydrologic connectivity to the remnant River segment. Water draining to the River will pass through filtration strips and/or sediment traps to manage water quality prior to discharge. Water will be discharged at numerous points up and down the River and on each side of the River corridor to ensure habitat growth and long -term viability. The River will be re- vegetated with riparian plant species including mulefat scrub and southern willow scrub. The existing conservation easement will be expanded to total the required 25 acres. ■ Create anew 10 -acre "Lake/River Corridor" by providing reclaimed water or lake water through a new riparian area on the west side of the Southerly site. The Corridor will run from north to south on the Southerly site and will be vegetated with riparian habitat. A conservation easement will be placed on this area. Preserve the vernal pool and its watershed, located north of the Southerly site, typically referred to as the "Australia Pool." The area including additional open space for smooth tarplant relocation totals 33- acres. ■ Install approximately 20 acres of native upland habitat on the golf course, proposed in the western portion of the Southerly development. ■ Install a reclaimed water line to water the golf course and open space areas of the Southerly project. In addition, an underground pipe will take reclaimed water directly to the 356 -acre wetlands. This will ensure maximum water flow to the wetlands and avoid the loss of water from evapotranspiration, which would occur in an overland drainage. ■ The remaining 155 acres of open space identified in the LMP is currently zoned as open space in the Eastlake Specific Plan. This area is below the 1,246 -foot elevation line and is therefore Corps jurisdictional. The area is also identified as a preservation area in the MSHCP. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE._! OF_3� Mr. Robert Smith February 26, 2004 Page 3 • The remaining applicable conditions of the LMP Section 404 Permit remain in full force and effect, including: Condition B- Submit revised Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for review and approval by the Corps Condition L- Complete HEC -5 analysis for review and approval by the Corps, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, SAWPA, and EVMWD. Condition M- Submit grading plans to the Corps demonstrating flood storage capacity, conveyance of a 45 -100 year flood event, and hydrology to sustain the 356 acre wetlands. Grading plans to be submitted and approved by the Corps, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, SAWPA, and EVMWD. Condition N/P- City shall submit delineation for Corps approval Condition O /Q- Obtain written approval from Corps that any work below 1260' is consistent with the LMP. We have attached the following information in support of this modification request: 1. A table outlining the original permit conditions and the modifications requested by this submittal; 2. Letters from the County of Riverside regarding consistency with the MSHCP; 3. A location and vicinity map as well as a mitigation plan graphic; 4. A graphic showing the water quality plan for the Southerly development; 5. A graphic showing the conceptual design of the golf course. 6. A cross section of the vernal pool area to demonstrate no impacts; 7. Photographs showing the water discharging into the 356 -acre wetlands. 8. A schedule identifying when the new mitigation areas are expected to be completed and when the reclaimed water line will be installed; 9. Address labels of the adjacent property owners for the Public Notice distribution. We believe that this letter and the attached documentation are sufficient for the Corps to approve the LMP Section 404 Permit mitigation modification. We understand that this modification will be distributed for a 15 -day Corps Public Noticing period. AGENDA ITEM NO. —3L PAGE „� oF Mr. Robert Smith February 26, 2004 Page 4 '"r✓ We are available to assist in any aspect of the processing of this request. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 489 -2700 ext. 203 with any questions. Sincerely, V u e Vandermost resident , cc: Aaron Allen, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Bob Brady, City of Lake Elsinore Mark Durham, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Michael Filler, John Laing Homes Lake Elsinore Pat Kilroy, City of Lake Elsinore Steven Miles, VanBarclom and Liebold Phil Miller, Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Mark Norton, Santa Ana Watershed Protection Authority David Ruhl, Santa Ana Watershed Protection Authority Roger Shintaku, Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District Dick Watenpaugh, City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. — 3 PAGE, OF 'Y 75 CO W 0 J O N N 0 In (n � m N � � U C O W m o L- L In - O U .O T C M T U U) a) 1� m O O a) c Q 'O O Q N Q ( a O C . C m ., m N cn U O U o U E� =�O -o 0 0 p p 0 a) � U U U UU) C C m O cc a) �75 LO M c- =3 E E in LO U U � a) cn Y " > m m U s o m O o W W m I— -aJU m _d Y 0,C C C: CU p Co O m � _O m m -J O m m N CL -J O J m C Q m J m o O m y a C U ?' w c ° (n 4, w ,+- C O y c O U) � � O a O � 0 U).U)v v w. Q U ¢ - w (n c U LO p co Q co cu p (1) c `' cu CO) o c .Q m .0 >, v p O U N O .. O m m > Z 0) m ° a) �- a) N c c :3 m O a c "= p -p 2) :3 O c co Z' _._°' w2 3� CU> -om pN 70 o� �.. m�� j cn �« . a°- EoM' Q 0 O m OO �U) a) � U a) m > O J E a) O -' "- = U .0 O ch m n cn d E 0 . N �"O ( 0 ` N O co U � a) O fA a) o c a—j O�_ _� •N U 3� c°i `° ° o Cn i Q c a) a) ° Q U o to m cu •� \ E° a) c c0 O) a) C p m N CO p ,, co �!i U c `- O = O WV C °o p C r' �v��'� Qto o m�N c N a) O o c U O U m c ;, O N _ cu E N E L w p C O .� m «. c .c .=. co m c +_' m oa �� E° rn�>,3c m c O =a)E o a) 2 30 U O U 0 '' Q `�- m 0- 0 0 i p C-0 m O U E ) a) -6In�oo 0U- 00)'° m 3 Co CU Q 4- �C�,,�». CL n °QTa)0._, ° �o tq 0 °0 °0"mm 0 0U T�0�o0a � 0'o aim �33a0E Uo �cnca�,cncp a 0 Q m cV a m co (n w u: c o U co co coo � 00 op w, �- �✓ 07 � a ° A ' ITE. j ' O N N 0 U) 0 J CD LLI w rA%.= -rwL-- -• — v 0 N N 0 S..r' N . a)o° -0 V L .fl O m L a ° 3 E o o cn 0 Co' L Q c c a) a) _ E C: L = E O a v- _O O O O U 'o im+ E �+ O C - E U to O a) Co LL � to N S - fn O O Uc O U c c O p .a (� E U c ott0o c 0 O a) -0 L 0 .2? O � a) C N 0 O E U E-a ° : U a) -O a) 'a a) -0 O a) - Y O _ J ° Q Q J O Q J ° J O Q J O J O O 0 U) 3 15 o a O0n � 0 (1) 3 �W �W �W W W p= 3) O E L v 0 ca G a� c o N ai � o LL .c L O O O f0 n LL c c -0 .n E ,C A Q Ul) O O U a) C O O O c V > cu > co 0 0) ioU) aE) cc 3�'a �'� c UQ Cn 00 «. c >� 0) a) v L cm 0 O O 0� Y U cu — (o L a) _ O''' - -2- �+ co ¢ ca � OL a) E co 3 � E '~ ox C 3 co Co co tea) N CU �.� a) U) cu CU -5o oco Q. c LJ 3>,0 �Q p aE � ( D c cv c O v- m O c r M O V O cu O � _ ° 3 0� > m 0 3= 0 0 ° ° c mac- c c�a vi — 0--o ° Q. O ° c :_ 0 0 0 �- a o o U 0 «+ E M ca ui .n a) a C Q C a) — io c U O° c" U o L a) g) > °- >, a) a) E E CL aci �� c�O o �' c°)i.N�so. 3oc 0. a) — °o°O Y �� Oa — U� cr o O — a) 0r a) cu w U o o o� ,c E ooh 3tQl� c° o o = i� Q 75 U) O Q J CD w O N N 0 M PAGE OF...�J_ cu m cu (U cu m L ^♦ W ` ` 0 0 4- 4� 4�- M C U y C C`� C;G C` CO) (a 0 cB p (6 a) a) N C O C O c O C O "p C :p C 'p C D C U U U U d 'O C a) - m M JE .� "-iE O C p 'JE C p "- O O c p o o � co= 0 ' U w -' �o o �° c N cnm c ., cu o c >> Q� `° �° •(c -n°0)a �(nca:- `T p ,a? c� 00 03 c3 -0 no> Y� v U N m -0 O of - E Go L U Lo m C� > r C�� Q.� O �� C �+ U 3 O o a _ _ �c > o m 3 >,O �' c O •� c p O N O 0 3 C °- � O U L- p, a) E �- ,. >. > .. o E o a, CL c- y N O r n. Q p, (n = ._. (D c 'v U p :. U >, c c M cn c 0-0 p cn Q- mo a) CL c� L- a3�U o U Q .� 3 c W 0 0 C N LO Cl y V >p (D> v -p p Oc � O ac�n of n.� �pO�N� O�w LL �n Qmcu d c 0.— �U �O �•o O ai c� c Od U ca 0.n ca��oo�' o },Coc �, c c� _ �cC) c oc M000p >+ o _ p C- >, O cu O 0 O U o N C N O N U c C a) O ,—, o .. c >, 0� Q C O ci Q) � �� � � r- N aa) N Q c E �o 0 0 v�U �a� =�c 3 U(�Q> "= 3> E UQ�C00 C6 :+LC) c c �cEc•D-0 E (a cL "O 0-0 O c i j �wp (A M a) O >+ M -v��� O 073 c�upo a3 p >� -0-0 a .O a) C J =U G� (D (if _0 z O c o U-) Lo rn rn a) rn o A' A ITEM N O N N 0 M PAGE OF...�J_ Richard K Lashbrook Agency Director February 3, 2004 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY ...�.. ..� a •` � �...++ � O ::•••� Gee r• A. J.l�wsoiy R� X beg G .rVhA"s JC•.a 1. JIf1lL[r DJieW� DirscBoi Diro�•� Michael Filler Jobn Laing Homes 31900 Mission Trail, Suite 225 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Subject: Eastlake Specific Plan and La:ag CP 706 -acre Development, Lake Elsinore Dear Mr. Filler: tober 4 2003, we received documentation from Vandcrmost Consulting the estern Riverside Multiple On Oc the .3,000 -acre back basin Eastlake Specific Plan in the cortex c �ysis and HCP The documentation includes a consistcn Y Provide Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MS )- aerial photograph depicting 770 acres of conservs and objectivees. The s"bmi p° the consistency compliance with the MSHCP cell criteria, ic was the culmination of meetings and discussions with tb analysis and conservation area grail 1 of the California Dep�� o'er County, Jim Bartel of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ron laampe the back basin of Lake n how conservation measures within crt for the Fish and Game, and others, regar& 8 Elsinore could provide consistency with the MSHCP. de h, addition, a biologic4d specific survey mfor= a6ou and conservation 706 -acre Laing CP devolopment was included to prove measures to comply with the MSHCP planning species and sp ecies overlay requirements. rizing their review of On December 17, 2003, we received a letter from Dudek the LAssociates Oumme �e context the consistency analysts and biological technical rep sed for conservation and relsted of consistency with the MSHCP' Ih><lek concluded that the areas propo �ysisp conservation measures provide consistency with the MSHCP. As dcscn' bed ° `cand species .the balance of the back basin will require biological surveys for MSHCP planning require avoidance of certain areas. Although the City of Lake Elsinore bas �� overlays and may authority to determine project compliance with the MSHCP, reining ee with onsistenc y with the MSHCP - information provided contains a suitable framework for Please contact me with any questions. Sincerely, 6 'chardLashb ok AGENDA ITEM .r Transportation and Lazed Management Agency Dirxtor I PAGE OF Attachment s 92501 • (909) 955 -6838 4080 I,cmon Sttcct, 7th Floor • Rivasidc, CalifoTni 909 955 -6819 P. O. Box 1605 • Riverside, California 92502 -1605 FAX ( ) I A IOU & ASSOCIATES, INC. Professional reams /or Complex Pro,rrls December 17, 2003 Engineering, Planning, Environmental Sciences and Management Services Mr. Richard Lashbrook COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 4080 Lemon Street, 7th Floor P.O. Box 1605 Riverside, CA 92501 Corporate Office: 605 Third Street Encinitas, California 92024 Subject: Laing CP 706 -acre Development, Lake Elsinore Dear Richard: 760.942.5147 Fax 760.632.0164 We have reviewed the biological information prepared by Glen Lukos and Associates and the MSHCP consistency analysis prepared by Vandermost Consulting Services, for the 706 -acre Laing CP property located east of Lake Elsinore, within the City of Lake Elsinore. It is our understanding that while that, under the MSHCP, the City of Lake Elsinore would have the authority to determine MSHCP consistency for the project, the property owner has requested that the County of Riverside review the consistency analysis and provide their opinions. Within the context of our review, we believe that the areas proposed for conservation, provide for substantial conformance to the requirements of the MSHCP. The primary conservation objectives of the MSHCP appear to be achievable with the proposed plan. In addition, the biological technical report contains specific mitigation measures and requirements that provide compensation for the loss of resources that were identified on the site. In reviewing the material provided, we believe that the majority of mapping and survey work that is required at the project level to determine consistency with the MSHCP has been completed, with noted exceptions. The biological technical report recommends additional wet season surveys for vernal pool fairy shrimp. We concur with that recommendation. In summary, we believe that the information provided provides a suitable framework for determining consistency with the MSHCP. We would be happy to discuss additional details relating to our review at your request. Very truly yours, DUDEK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Monaco Senior Project Manager e5� AGENDA ITEM] NCO. PAGE_J_J__ OF IRA VI Eastlake Specific Plan MSHCP Consistency Analysis Background • The Eastlake Specific Plan covers approximately 3,000 acres of the Lake Elsinore Back Basin, as shown in the attached Exhibit A. • The levee construction that occurred in the early 1990s changed the floodplain of the Back Basin. Portions of the Back Basin now flood only in major storm events and all projects in the Back Basin must be designed to retain appropriate flood storage for the 100 -year flood event. • The Eastlake Specific Plan area is currently subject to unrestricted human and vehicular disturbance. • The Eastlake Specific Plan area is completely within redevelopment project areas established by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Lake Elsinore, pursuant to its redevelopment plan. • 'she Eastlake Specific Plan is the subject of a Development Agreement. • There are currently no known State or Federal threatened or endangered species in the Eastlake Specific Plan area, however the entire Specific Plan would take many years to implement and therefore take authority may be required in the future. • Laing -CP Lake Elsinore LLC ( "Laing -CP ") and Civic Partners- Elsinore LLC, in financial partnership with the City's Redevelopment Agency, are currently processing plans for development of up to 2,400 homes on a 706 -acre portion of ..� the Specific Plan area as shown in the attached Exhibit B. • The Laing -CP 706 -acre project has been designed to cluster homes and development to the east of the historic San Jacinto River with open space areas to the west of the historic San Jacinto River. • The Eastlake Specific Plan conserves approximately 770 acres of open space in the Back Basin, with an additional 170 -acres of open space that will occur through City- required implementation of a golf course within the Laing -CP 706- acre project area. MSHCP Designations • The Elsinore Back Basin is within the MSHCP Elsinore Area Plan Subunit 3, proposed extension of existing Core 3, and proposed Linkage 8. • The proposed extension of existing Core 3 focuses on conserving soils of the Traver series, which are important to the maintenance of several species of Narrow Endemic Plants. • The northern portion of the extension also provides for movement of species along the lower San Jacinto River to proposed Linkage 8. • Together with existing Core E (Lake Elsinore), proposed extension of existing Core 3 provides habitat for shorebird use. • Management of edge conditions will be important to maintain high quality habitat in the area. AGENDA ITEM NO. __._._.�. '`Mo 'NI PAGE OF Page 1 r Conservation Areas • A total of approximately 770 acres of conservation area within the Back Basin have been identified through the Eastlake Specific Plan and/or MSHCP planning process. These conservation areas include soils of the Traver series, allow for mitigation/conservation of the smooth tarplant, a narrow endemic plant species known to occur in the Back Basin, allow movement of species along the lower San Jacinto River as well as the historic alignment of the San Jacinto River through the Back Basin, allow for shorebird use and management of edge conditions. ■ An additional 120 — 200 acres of Conservation Area is mapped within Subunit 3, north and west of the Lake. ■ As shown on Exhibit A, the following Back Basin Conservation Areas have been identified: o A 356 -acre wetlands constructed pursuant to the Lake Management Project. These boundaries may be modified to accommodate natural water quality enhancement. o 155 - acres, as required by the Lake Management Project to be set aside as open space in the Eastlake Specific Plan. o The existing 130 -acre Lake Elsinore inlet channel. o A 71 -acre conservation area on the Laing -CP 706 -acre project, which will be utilized for habitat and water quality features. o The historic San Jacinto River, with a 100 -foot buffer on each side of the existing centerline of the river for a total of 25- acres. The historic San Jacinto River has no regular hydrologic connection and as a result the habitat within the historic alignment is highly disturbed. This area will be restored to recreate a healthy viable riparian habitat as part of the Laing- CP 706 -acre project. o A 33 -acre area north of the Laing -CP 706 -acre project that preserves an existing vernal pool that is occupied by the endangered Riverside fairy shrimp, and its watershed as well as the northern portion of the historic San Jacinto River. o Conservation areas in the Back Basin total approximately 770 - acres, with an additional 120 —200 acres identified for conservation in the balance of Subunit 3. In addition the City - mandated golf course will be landscaped with native plants to provide an additional 170 -acre open space area. Presence of MSHCP Planning Species ■ According to the Preliminary Biclogical Technical Report entitled Summary of Sensitive Biological Resources for the 706 -Acre John Laing Homes Community Site in the Back Basin of Lake Elsinore, City of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California, by Glenn Lukos Associates, dated September 10, 2003, and attached as Appendix A, the following MSHCP Planning Species occur on the 706 -acre Laing -CP project: o Loggerhead Shrike — One loggerhead shrike was detected during 2003 � focused surveys. AGENDA ITEL�L— MNO. 3g PAGE oF—' v-7 Page 2 o Smooth Tarplant — Approximately 1,750 individuals are within the Laing - CP 706 -acre project area. All tarplant will be impacted due to the need to grade the entire site to establish flood storage and development areas. The loss of these individuals will be mitigated within open space areas either on -site, or to the north of the 706 -acre project area, within designated Back Basin conservation areas. According to biological studies conducted by the Chambers Group in the early f th Eastlake Specific Plan area the MSHCP Planning 1990s for the remainder o e Species listed below may occur: o Bell's sage sparrow o loggerhead shrike o Riverside fairy shrimp S th moo lant U tarp According to the Glenn Lukos & Associates Preliminary Biological Technical Report for the 706 -acre project, focused surveys did not identify the presence of the Riverside fairy shrimp. As additional Eastlake Specific Plan projects move forward in the Back Basin they will be required to survey for the MSHCP Planning Species and identify mitigation in conservation areas or other appropriate open space areas in the Back Basin for those species that are impacted. MSHCP Overlays ■ The Eastlake Specific Plan area is subject to the following MSHCP overlays: 1. Narrow Endemic Plant Species — The Laing -CP 706 -acre project supports approximately 1,750 smooth tarplant individuals. Other MSHCP narrow endemic plants that were subject to 2003 GLA focus surveys, but not found on site include: • California Orcutt grass • Many - stemmed dudleya • Munz's onion • San Diego ambrosia • Spreading navarretia • Wright's trichocoronis o As additional Eastlake Specific Plan projects move forward in the Back Basin they will be required to survey for the MSHCP Narrow Endemic plants and identify mitigation in the conservation areas or other appropriate open space areas in the Back Basin for any species impacted. 2. Criteria Area Species — No criteria area species have been found to exist on the Laing -CP 706 -acre project area. The following species were considered to have the potential to occur on site and were subject to habitat assessment and/or survey by GLA in 2003 and were not observed: • Coulter's goldfields ■ Davidson's saltscale Little mousetail Mud nama Page 3 0 AAEiJDA ITEM NO. -- -- PAGE !± OF�"r -` ■ Parish's brittlescale ■ Prostrate navan etia ■ Round - leaved filaree ■ San Jacinto Valley crownscale ■ Thread- leaved brodiaea o As additional Eastlake Specific Plan projects move forward in the Back Basin they will be required to survey for the MSHCP Criteria Area Species and identify mitigation in the conservation areas or other appropriate open space areas in the Back Basin. 3. Burrowing Owl – No burrowing owls were found on the Laing -CP 706 -acre project area. o As additional Eastlake Specific Plan projects move forward in the Back Basin they will be required to survey for the Burrowing Owl and identify mitigation in the conservation area or other appropriate open space areas in the Back Basin. Subunit 3 Biological Issues and Considerations ■ The following describes the Eastlake Specific Plan consistency with the Elsinore Area Plan, Subunit 3 biological issues and considerations: o Conserve wetlands including Lake Elsinore and the floodplain east of Lake Elsinore (including marsh habitats) and maintain water quality. All projects within the Back Basin are required to provide proof of flood storage volume and therefore preservation of the floodplain. In addition, all projects must mange water quality for the protection of the existing 356 -acre wetlands (marsh habitat) and the Lake. The Laing -CP 706 -acre project incorporates a water quality management plan utilizing water quality filters and open space areas to allow contact time in order to manage nuisance flows, including golf course irrigation runoff, as well as storm flows. It is anticipated that up to a 25 -year storm event can be captured and recycled on -site through the implementation of water quality basins and water quality wetlands in open space areas. ■ As additional Eastlake Specific Plan projects move forward in the Back Basin they will be required to manage runoff to be consistent with this objective. o Conserve clay soils supporting Munz's onion. • The Eastlake Specific Plan area does not support clay soils • According to the Glenn Lukos & Associates Preliminary Technical Report for the 706 -acre project, no Munz's onion were identified. o Conserve Travers - Willow- Domino soil series. ■ The Eastlake Specific Plan area supports pockets of eroded Travers soils. These soils are important in the Back Basin due to their potential to support MSHCP - identified narrow endemic plants. In the case of the Laing -CP 706 -acre project, all of the pockets of traverse soils will be impacted due to the need to grade the entire Page 4 AQENDA iT EM� �N - -. PAGE OF-21 site to establish flood storage and development areas. The only MSHCP- identified narrow endemic plant found on the 706 -acre site is the smooth tarplant. Seed from the existing smooth tarplant will be harvested prior to impacts for restoration of these species in one or more of the open space areas identified within the 770 -acre Back Basin conservation area. • As additional Eastlake Specific Plan projects move forward in the Back Basin they will be required to survey for the MSHCP Narrow Endemic plants that may exist in pockets of the Travers soil areas and identify mitigation for narrow endemic plants that are impacted in the conservation area or other appropriate open space areas in the Back Basin. • Conserve foraging habitat for raptors, providing`a sage scrub - grassland ecotone. ■ With the preservation of 770 -acres of open space areas within the Eastlake Specific Plan area, foraging habitat for raptors will be conserved. The Eastlake Specific Plan area does not support sage - scrub grassland habitat. • Conserve grassland habitat for mountain plover. ■ The Eastlake Specific Plan area does not support appropriate habitat for the mountain plover as described in the attached Glenn Lukos Associates Biological Report, Appendix A. • Conserve breeding habitat for northern harrier. ■ The Eastlake Specific Plan area does not support appropriate nesting habitat for the northern harrier; however, the 770 -acre open space areas may provide suitable foraging habitat for the northern barrier. • Maintain linkage habitat for bobcat. ■ While bobcats are not known to occur within the Eastlake Specific Plan area, the 770 -acre conservation area, along with the 170 -acre golf course are expected to provide potential linkages for this species. • Maintain core and linkage habitat for western pond turtle. • The Eastlake Specific Plan area does not support appropriate habitat for the western pond turtle as described in the attached Glenn Lukos Associates Biological Report, Appendix A. o Maintain core habitat for Riverside fairy shrimp. ■ The Riverside fairy shrimp occurs in a vernal pool located in the northern portion of the Eastlake Specific Plan. This vernal pool, its watershed and an additional ten acres, for a total of 33 acres is identified as a conservation area within the Back Basin. o Maintain opportunities for core and linkage habitat for Quino checkerspot butterfl y. • The Eastlake Specific Plan area does not support appropriate habitat for the Quino checkerspot butterfly. 1.400, Page 5 "'Ok PAGE OF_:� ^ Consistency with Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/WildIands Interface • Drainage — All projects within the Eastlake Specific Plan will avoid discharge of untreated surface runoff from developed and paved areas into the MSHCP Conservation Areas. Storm water systems shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant materials or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem processes within the MSHCP Conservation Areas. o The Laing -CP 706 -acre project area is incorporating a water quality master plan that will capture nuisance runoff, golf course irrigation, and storm flows up to approximately 25 -year storm events. This water will proceed through vegetated swales that will be designed into the golf course and the 71 -acre conservation area along the southern portion of the project. Natural detention basins will be constructed within the 71 -acre conservation area for capture and recycling of this water. ■ Toxics — All projects within the Eastlake Specific Plan will be required to implement measures such as those employed to address drainage issues to ensure that application of chemicals does not result in discharge to the MSHCP Conservation Area. o The Laing -CP 706 -acre project area will manage toxics, including golf course chemicals, through its water quality management plan, described above. In addition, only EPA approved chemicals will be utilized on the �- golf course. ■ Lighting— All projects within the Eastlake Specific Plan will be required to direct :7 night lighting away from the MSHCP Conservation Areas and incorporate shielding in project designs to ensure ambient lighting in the MSHCP Conservation Areas is not materially increased. o The Laing -CP 706 -acre project area has been designed with the residential community to the east of the existing historic San Jacinto River and the open space and golf course areas west of and including the historic San Jacinto River in order to better manage issues of lighting, noise, trespass, etc. Noise — All projects within the Eastlake Specific Plan will be required to incorporate setbacks, berms, walls or other effective means to minimize the effects of noise on MSHCP Conservation Area resources. o The Laing -CP 706 -acre project area has been designed with the residential community to the east of the historic San Jacinto River in order to buffer the River, and the 33 acre vernal pool area to the north. The 71 -acre area in the southern portion of the project will be designed as a water quality feature and will buffer the 356 -acre existing wetlands area. AGENDA ITEM No. PAGE OF 3 Page 6 ■ Invasive Plant Species - All projects within the Eastlake Specific Plan will be required to avoid the use of invasive species for the portions of the Development that are adjacent to the MSHCP Conservation Area. o The Laing -CP 706 -acre project area includes a golf course. The golf course is west of the historic San Jacinto River, south of the 33 -acre vernal pool area and north of the 71 -acre water quality wetlands buffer area. As a result, no invasive or exotic plant materials will be allowed within the golf course. The golf course design will incorporate native habitats within landscaped areas bordering the golf holes to maximize habitat use. ■ Barriers - All projects within the Eastlake Specific Plan area will incorporate barriers, where appropriate to minimize unauthorized public access, domestic animal predation, illegal trespass or dumping in the MSHCP Conservation Area. Barriers may include native landscaping, rocks/boulders, fencing, walls, signage and/or other appropriate mechanisms. o The Laing -CP 706 -acre project will incorporate native landscaping transition zones and signage to minimize unauthorized public access into conservation areas. In addition, the project will formalize public vs. non- public areas through the use of trails and roads. In the current condition, access is unrestricted and as a result, the project area has experienced a high level of disturbance. ■ Gradingd and Development - All projects within the Eastlake Specific Plan will ensure that in the developed condition to the extent possible, manufactured slopes associated with proposed site development shall not extend into the MSHCP Conservation Area. • There may be exceptions to this objective for conservation or other purposes, such as that described below for the 706 -acre project area. • The Laing -CP 706 -acre project will preserve the 25 -acre historic San Jacinto River on -site, but may lower the River to facilitate its restoration. If the River is lowered, grading will occur and "manufactured" slopes would be created, however these slopes would be part of the buffer area and would be planted with native habitats and would not require fuel modification. In addition, "manufactured" slopes may be created with the grading of the 71 -acre area, which will support water quality features. Again, this area would be revegetated with native plants and will not be subject to fuel modification. This area is expected to support sediment control forebays, which will require ongoing maintenance as well as detention basins that will be utilized and maintained to capture and recycle large storm events for water quality purposes. Page 7 AGENDA ITEM NO. \ PAGE OF N%fto Conclusion ■ The conservation of 770 acres within the Back Basin will ensure appropriate habitat goals are met. • The conservation areas provide for preservation of proposed linkage 8 and the proposed extension of existing Core 3. ■ Development in the Back Basin will comply with MSHCP survey requirements as outlined above. ■ Development in the Back Basin will ensure relocation and protection of MSHCP species. ■ While the Back Basin is highly disturbed in its current condition, the designation of conservation areas and their management will substantially increase habitat values and preserve open space. ■ The City's goal of balancing homes and conservation areas is met. Page 8 AGENDA ITEM NO =_ PAGE „ OF -3 7. V1 r s 41 14t L f �p Coq .0 x e:, vfi �4 e 5 � • - -�: CREAGE LEGEND 't, y l Preservation Areas Total i sw ` _4,000 Q W7 g _ :�.. ^. _. I Lake Elsinore W� 4,000 2,000 0 ........... .............. 'MODIFICATION AGENDA ITEM NO. -3 S' PAGE OF ,e` PAGE OF�_ i t+ r 1 , I .. sj 1 r 1\ SCALE.. 1 -= 10 Z- 1 N q n l O 2 W N .> ti 1 w 3 N q n l N .> N c s 0 ' o _ y 2 ' o t U k� `000 w 3 no N q N .> N c N E 0 ' o y Y � ro t a F t k� Ott °W eweU 3 Y�Gm �i4 (a�iiJ V � WW Rm2 LL�=if �O 1 no _F GOIJRSE CZU1 fts?^*X-V FoR, -JoqN LAIN6r HOMV7 CA-L MtIOW &OLF AMA I TUIVIff- 1= &0' 7/1-1/,oS D ;,, 40 !LO AGENDA fTEM NO s PAGE OF 10-- 10� lip, Pl- ki: mml!T= AA ITEM NO. '56 PAGE OF 4 � tg aft ��.`.. ;?tit S��g��; yY P.+t ��a`.+F�: ✓ ''t t F P Y• ) t� r - ;, 14d AGENDA ITEMS PAGE. N:v v� c� °o t� C) °O O •� c cz O - U Q w V O U O q M O ON ON O N O O O O ►-, .ii � N C14 cq :3 QI • � Q r .S y� Qj Cd N G) o .0 o a w ate, w P-( P-4 . : 0 u 0 b U a U U o r-4 Cd �. cqs O Q) PCI z V ►� Q) U cd z p _ C Q) o :z p-4 U U • • • • • 14d AGENDA ITEMS PAGE. �.F �- DRAFT PUBLIC NOTICE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT LOS ANGELES DISTRICT Public Notice /Application No -: 88- 00215 -RRS Comment Period: X through X Project Manager: Robert Smith (213) 452 -3419 Applicant Agent City of Lake Elsinore Vandermost Consulting Services, Inc. 130 S. Main Street 27312 Calle Arroyo Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Santa Ana Watershed Protection Authority 11615 Sterling Avenue Riverside, CA 92503 Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District 31315 Chaney Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Location The proposed project is located in the Back Basin of Lake Elsinore, Riverside County, California (at: 33° 38' 33" N; 117° 18'38" W) Activity The proposal is to modify the mitigation conditions of the Lake Elsinore Lake Management Plan (LMP) and reissue the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit #88- 00215 -RRS. The LMP was permitted by Section 404 Permit 88- 00215 -RRS, which authorized the installation of the Levee in the Lake Elsinore Back Basin. To offset impacts to waters, the LMP required several mitigation measures including but not limited to preservation of the historic San Jacinto River, and creation of a 356- acre wetland. The co- applicants propose to modify the mitigation plan to further comply with the Permit conditions. Please see page 3 of this notice for additional information. Interested parties are hereby notified that an application has been received for a Department of the Army permit for the activity described herein and shown on the attached drawing(s). Interested parties are invited to provide their views on the proposed work, which will become a part of the record and will be considered in the decision. This modification will be issued or denied under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1344). Comments should be mailed to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District Regulatory Branch – Los Angeles Office ATTN-. CESPL- CO-88- 00215 -RRS 911 Wilshire Drive, 11`h Floor Los Angeles, California 90017 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 g PAGE OF Alternatively, comments can be sent electronically to: robert.r.smith @usace.army.mil Evaluation Factors `"09 The decision whether to modify the permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects thereof. Factors that will be considered include conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food production and, in general, the ndeds and welfare of the people. In addition, if the proposal would discharge dredged or fill material, the evaluation of the activity will include application of the EPA Guidelines (40 CFR 230) as required by Section 404 (b)(1) of the Clean Water Act. The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, state, and local agencies and officials; Indian tr:Oes; and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity. Preliminary Review of Selected Factors EIS Determination- A preliminary determination has been made that an environmental impact statement is not required for the proposed work. Water Quality- A water quality certification, under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, was issued for the LMP by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Coastal Zone Management - This project is located outside the coastal zone and preliminary review indicates that it will not affect coastal zone resources. Cultural Resources- Consistent with original public notice for the LMP, the proposed mitigation will not result in impacts to cultural resources. Endangered Species- A Biological Technical report was prepared in 2003 for the areas of the back basin that will be impacted to completed the modified mitigation plan. No federally- or state - listed threatened or endangered animal species were detected on site, including listed fairy shrimps and kangaroo rats. Preliminary determinations indicate that the proposed activity would not affect federally listed endangered or threatened species, or their critical habitat. Therefore, formal consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act does not appear to be required at this time. In addition, the biological technical report included specific survey information and conservation measures to comply with the MSHCP planning species and species overlay requirements. The County of Riverside has provided concurrence that proposed conservation in the back basin provides a suitable framework for determining consistency with the MSHCP. �.r AGENDA ITEM�N�O. 3g 3— PAGE OF _,� Public Hearing- Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this application. Requests for public hearing shall state with particularity the reasons for holding a public hearing. Proposed Permit Modification The applicant proposes to modify the mitigation proposal of the LMP. The LMP was permitted by Section 404 Permit 88- 00215 -RRS, which authorized the installation of the Levee in the Lake Elsinore Back Bain. To offset impacts to waters, the LMP required several mitigation measures including but not limited to the preservation of the historic San Jacinto River, creation of a 356 - acre wetland, preservation of 71 acres of open space, and preservation of 155 acres of open space. One of the primary components of the LMP is to provide a reliable water source to the San Jacinto River and the 356 -acre wetlands. The co- applicants propose to modify the mitigation plan to further comply with the Permit conditions. As shown on the attached Figure 3, the applicants proposes to provide the following mitigation: Temporarily impact 11.2 acres to lower and enhance the historic San Jacinto River remnant. The river is sparsely vegetated and no Corps jurisdictional wetlands are associated with the historic channel. Once the river is lowered, it will be revegetated with native riparian habitat including mulefat and southern willow scrub. In addition the areas surrounding the river will be sloped to drain toward the river. This will create hydrologic connectivity to the remnant river segment. Water draining to the river will pass through filtration strips and/or sediment traps to manage water quality prior to discharge. Water will be discharged at numerous points up and down the river and on each side of the river corridor to ensure habitat growth and long -term viability. The existing conservation easement will be expanded to total the required 25 acres. In addition, a 10 -acre "Lake/River Corridor" will be created by providing reclaimed water or lake water through a new riparian area. The corridor will run from north to south and will be vegetated with riparian habitat. The 71 acres of open space required by the LMP will be relocated within the back basin. The relocated 71 -acre area will be vegetated with alkali weed, saltgrass, mule fat, arroyo willow, and California buckwheat. The 71 acres will be preserved in perpetuity as habitat/open space. The area is designed to buffer the north side of the 356 -acre wetlands area. The remaining 155 acres of open space identified in the LMP is currently zoned as open space in the Eastlake Specific Plan. This area is below the 1,246 -foot elevation line and is therefore Corps jurisdictional. The area is also identified as a preservation area in the MSHCP. To provide a reliable water source to the 356 -acre wetlands, the City will require that the John Laing Homes 706 acre Southerly development install a reclaimed water line to provide water flow directly to the 356 -acre wetlands. This will ensure maximum water flow to the wetlands and avoid the loss of water from evapotranspiration, which would occur in an overland drainage. In addition, the applicable conditions of the LMP Section 404 Permit will remain in effect as follows: AGAENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE 3 Z 01= 3 - Condition B Submit revised Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for review and approval by the Corps Condition L Complete HEC -5 analysis for review and approval by the Corps, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, SAWPA, and EVMWD. Condition M Submit grading plans to the Corps demonstrating flood storage capacity, conveyance of a 45 -100 year flood event, and hydrology to sustain the 356 acre wetlands. Grading plans to be submitted and approved by the Corps, Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, SAWPA, and EVMWD. Condition NIP City shall submit delineation. for Corps approval Condition O/Q Obtain written approval from Corps that any work below 1260' is consistent with the LMP. The City of Lake Elsinore and the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District will remain co- permittees on the LMP Section 404 Permit. The Santa Ana Watershed Protection Authority will no longer be a co- permittee because their obligations under the Permit have been completed. John Laing Homes will be added as a co- permittee. The John Laing Homes Southerly Project will only be responsible for specific mitigation on their 706 acre - development including; enhance and preserve the 25 acre San Jacinto River, create the 10 -acre lake /river corridor, preserve 71 acres of open space, and create 20 acres of upland habitat within a proposed golf course. Proposed Special Conditions None at this time. For additional information please call Robert Revo Smith of my staff at (213) 452 -3419. This public notice is issued by the Chief, Regulatory Branch. 3 AGENDA ITEM NO.3 PAGE 33 OF— _� -7— Smooth Feed Sheets — 365 030 001 City Of Lake Elsinore 130 S Main St Jae Elsinore, CA 92530 365 051 001 County Of Riverside 4080 Lemon St #2ND Riverside, CA 92501 365 030 045 T Keith Pocock 30262 Crown Valley Pkwy #286 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 365 051 004 Temor Sadat 39400 Calle Santa Cecilia Temecula, CA 92592 use template for 5160'w 365 040 021 Inland Pacific California Llc 5004 W 92nd Ave Westminster, CO 80031 365 051 005 Bruce Stauffer 32360 Mission Trl Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 365 051 006 365 051 007 365 051 008 Bruce Stauffer Bruce Stauffer Umberto Madueno & P C Martha 32368 Mission Trl 32368 Mission Trl 32380 Mission Trl Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Lake,Elsinore, CA 92530 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 365051009 365 051 010 365 051 014 Umberto Madueno & P C Martha Umberto Madueno & P C Martha Raymond Asay 32380 Mission Trl 32380 Mission Trl PO Box 1061 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Wildomar, CA 92595 365 051 015 365 051 016 365 051 017 Marcos & Teresa Ortega Mauricio & Blanca Barrera David & Mildred Shane 32329 Wildomar Rd 32364 Wildomar Rd 372 Dale Rd Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Bethel Park, PA 15102 , 051 018 365 051 019 365 051 022 Comelio & Albertina Rios Viola Crummy Christobal & Maria Hernandez R 33579 Sellers Rd 469 NW Beaver St 32399 Wildomar Rd Wildomar, CA 92595 Prineville, OR 97754 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 365 051 023 365 051 025 365 051 026 John Johnson Charles & Norma Hessler County Rs 32341 Wildomar Rd PO Box 708 4080 Lemon St #2 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Wildomar, CA 92595 Riverside, CA 92501 365 051 027 365 051 028 365 061 001 Rodolfo Jimenez Next Century Simulation Inc Elhawary Mohamed & Z 32383 -32391 Wildomar Rd 67 Corte Madera 1021 N Alexandria Ave Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Lake Elsinore, CA 92532 Los Angeles, CA 90029 365 061 002 365 061 003 365 061 004 Mohamed & Zeinab Elhawary Mohamed Elhawary & Zeinab Elhawary Jessie Ramirez 1021 N Alexandria Ave 1021 N Alexandria Ave 20825 Sylvester Rd Los Angeles, CA 90029 Los Angeles, CA 90029 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 ,,a�5 061 027 365 061 028 365 061 029 e Carlos & Olga Muniz Masood Rostai & Tamim Rostai Masood Rostai & Tamim Rostai _0930 Mariposa Rd 28075 Jefferson Ave 28075 Jefferson Ave Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Temecula, CA 92590 Temecula, CA 92590 AQENDA ITEM NO. -.-- p.�. PAGE - 49toTM MAVERYO Address Labels ,��r ,IIIuuUI rceu JI1CCw "" we ac1B4F%0LC tut 71VV- 365 061 034 365 062 010 365 062 011 Masood Rostai & Tamim Rostai Shirley Hamlet Dufault Earline :28075 Jefferson Ave 3457 Adams Ln PO Box 608 Temecula, CA 92590 Redding, CA 96002 Lake Elsinore, CA 92531 .365062013 365 062 018 365 092 015 Amador Ambris Joann Wyles Juan Camacho 20942 Elberta Rd 352 Red Spruce PI 32486 Crescent Ave Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Perris, CA 92570 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 365 092 016 365 092 017 365 092 018 Lauretta Mary Riem Lloyd Dryer & Marie Dryer Kenneth Lewis 1584 San Bernardino PI 32476 Crescent Ave 32504 Crescent Ave Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Lake FIsinore, CA 92530 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 365 093 001 365 093 002 365 093 003 Jesus Medina Herbert Laasch Herbert Laasch 1865 Avocado Dr #21 3002 Dow Ave #404 3002 Dow Ave #404 Vista, CA 92083 Tustin, CA 92780 Tustin, CA 92780 365 093 004 365 093 010 365 093 011 Herbert Laasch Ronald Foster John & Cynthia Bjorn 3002 Dow Ave #404 PO Box 556 17440 Haynes Ave Tustin, CA 92780 Murrieta, CA 92564 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 365 093 012 365 093 013 365 093 014 Donald Lane Margarito Mancines Jesus Medina 32534 Mission Trl 32532 Mission Trl 1865 Avocado Dr #21 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Vista, CA 92083 365 093 015 365 093 016 365 103 033 Lauretta Riem Mukesh & Anumati Patel Rahe William H & Helen W 1584 San Bernardino PI 102 S Eucalyptus Dr William & Helen Rahe Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Anaheim, CA 92808 24903 Regis Ct Murrieta, CA 92562 365 280 003 365 280 019 365 280 020 Blue Canary Inc Albertson Inc Blue Canary Inc 250 Newport Center Dr #103 PO Box 20 250 Newport Center Dr #103 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Boise, ID 83726 Newport Beach, CA 92660 365 280 021 370 020 003 370 020 007 Blue Canary Inc Brandy Hiner Diamond 250 Newport Center Dr #103 33350 Elizabeth Rd 36001 Corte Coruna Newport Beach, CA 92660 Temecula, CA 92592 Murrieta, CA 92562 371 030 023 371 030 031 373 210 030 Diamond Diamond Redevelopment Agency City Of Lake 36001 Corte Coruna 36001 Corte Coruna 130 S Main St Murrieta, CA 92562 Murrieta, CA 92562 Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 ff� AMA ITEM NO. 0" OAVERY® Address Labels `� PAS OTM 5moom reea 5neecs � m 373 210 040 Redevelopment Agency Of City Of Lak 130 S Main St [.Elsinore, CA 92530 373 320 010 City Of Lake Elsinore 130 S Main St Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 ,0� 373 210 041 Diamond 36001 Corte Coruna Murrieta, CA 92562 373 320 012 Marc Hertle 12 S Stonington Rd South Laguna, CA AVERY® Address Labels vac arnANidtC IOf no 1bV- 373 210 042 Redevelopment Agency Of City Of Lak 130 S Main St Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 373 320 013 Gregorio Linsangan & Cristina Linsang 17121 Northfield Ln 92651 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 AWWA FTEM NO. PAGE 3 (3 OF Laser 5960TH 365- 280 -022 371- 030 -003 371- 030 -004 ~:Diamond Diamond Diamond 36001 Corte Coruna 36001 Corte Coruna 36001 Corte Coruna Murrieta, CA 92562 Murrieta, CA 92562 Murrieta, CA 92562 371- 030 -009 Diamond 36001 Corte Coruna "Murrieta, CA 92562 MAVERY8 371 - 030 -025 Diamond 36001 Corte Coruna Murrieta, CA 92562 Address Labels * ** 5 Printed * ** AGENDA ITEM NO. _ 3 —. PAGE OF 3 =— Laser 5960TH CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: MARCH 23, 2004 SUBJECT: UPDATE REGARDING THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTISPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN BACKGROUND As an affirmative measure towards implementation of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ( "MSHCP "), the City Council approved on January 13, 2004, the following documents: (1) CEQA Findings Resolution; (2) Implementing Agreement; (3) Implementation Resolution; and (4) Joint Powers Agreement ( "MSHCP Documents "). In order to address a number of issues raised by the City's approval of the MSHCP Documents, the City Council did not take action on the MSHCP Fee Ordinance, opting instead to visit the fee ordinance at a future date. While the CEQA Resolution and the Implementation Agreement were approved in the form submitted by the County of Riverside, several substantive revisions were made to the Implementation Resolution and the Joint Powers Agreement as approved by a 4 -to -1 vote of the City Council at the January 13, 2004 hearing. During the public hearing, several assurances were provided to the City by and through the oral testimony of County Supervisors, County staff, and resource agency representatives. Specifically, in light of the fact that the City did not yet adopt a fee ordinance for the MSHCP, county representatives stated that it would be prudent to coordinate a County response to the City's revisions to the MSHCP Documents during the interim period where the City is still addressing the MSHCP Fee Ordinance. In addition, by nature of joint powers authority, the City's revisions to the Joint Powers Agreement will require acknowledgment and ratification by all other participating cities and the County in order to be effective. Therefore, a response from the County concerning the City's revisions to the JPA is necessary under the circumstances. DISCUSSION On March 9, 2004, the City Attorney, City Manager and Councilmember Schiffner provided a verbal status report on MSHCP. The City Attorney reported that the "Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Implementation Review" Report prepared by The Sauls Company and HELIX Environmental Planning had been refined and should be considered in connection with any future action by the City Council on the MSHCP. She also reported that Murdock and the County of Riverside had entered into a Settlement Agreement providing for the dismissal by Murdock of pending litigation against the County challenging the MSHCP. The Staff Report - MSHCP Implementation Status. 030304.doc4 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 t 3/18/2004 1 PAGE ' 4F 37 City Attorney engaged in continued discussions with Murdock as to the City's MSHCP Documents. As of the March 9, 2004 meeting, the City had received no comment or response from the County or its representatives in connection with the City's approval of the MSHCP Documents other than to defer the City to the membership of the RCA. On March 8, 2004, Councilmember Schiffner (the City's WRCOG MSHCP representative) had been denied voting privileges at the RCA meeting. Councilmember Schiffner reported that Supervisor Buster had requested that the next RCA agenda include an item to address the City of Lake Elsinore's position on the RCA and related issues concerning and MSCHP Documents. On March 15, the City received a letter from Supervisors Tavagione and Ashley expressing a willingness to work with the City to resolve outstanding issues concerning the MSHCP. A copy of the letter is attached to this report. Also attached to this report for review and consideration by the City Council are two draft letters for signature by the Mayor. The first is a letter to the WRCOG Member Agencies describing the City's MSHCP Documents and the revisions approved by the City Council. The City Attorney and staff believe that the revisions approved by the City of Lake Elsinore would similarly protect and benefit other city members and the letter requests their consideration of the proposed changes to the Joint Powers Agreement, in particular. A copy of the City's revisions will be enclosed in the letter. The second letter is a response to the County Supervisors confirming the City's interest in working toward a resolution to the outstanding MSHCP issues. FISCAL IMPACT Uncertain. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council: (1) consider the status information contained herein; (2) authorize the Mayor to execute and send the proposed letters to the RCA Member Agencies and to Supervisors Ashley and Tavagione, (3) direct the City Attorney, or her designee, to attend the next RCA meeting with Councilmember Schiffner to discuss and answer questions concerning the City's MSHCP Documents, and (4) provide direction to staff regarding any other appropriate action. PREPARED BY: B*RBARA LEIBOLD, CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE Staff Report - MSHCP Implementation Status.030304.doo3 AQEWA ITEM O. 3 2 PAGE OF 3/18/2004 ...r ..r /"` Couzv March 10, 2004 The Honorable Thomas Buckley Mayor of lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Dear Mayor Buckley: :SID_ E �f t- t 1� MAR 15 20 ,04 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB BUSTER 955.1910 JOHN F. TAVAGLIONE 9SS -1020 JAMES A. VENABLE 935-100 ROY WILSON su.luo MARION ASHLEY 915.1030 We wanted to follow up with you concerning the discussions we had while the City was considering adoption of the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. The County remains ready to work with the City recognizing that most of the City's issues can only be resolved by actions of the Regional Conservation Authority. We believe that the City and County could jointly support some issues to the RCA; however, we are not likely to be on the same side on all issues. The County did commit to work with your staff and landowners on determining consistency of projects under the MSHCP, completing land acquisitions, and developing the criteria and findings necessary for the City to make a determination at some future date that the conservation objectives within the City have been met. We had.one meeting with your staff and representatives of the landowners. We are ready to continue these discussions at your convenience. Our efforts in the past few weeks have been on obtaining our permits and in forming the RCA. We believe that the Service and Fish and Game will issue the permits in May 2004. The RCA seems to be working its way through its formative stage and is ready to begin addressing issues such as those raised by Lake Elsinore. The City had also stressed the importance of resolving the concerns of Castle and Cooke (Murdock). We are pleased to report that we have reached an agreement that will dismiss their litigation. It would be helpful if the City could provide a list of issues for discussion with the County RCA. This would allow us to assemble the right group to work toward resolution. At some point it might also be beneficial for the City and County to consider a MOU that would spell out those things that we can agree on and on which we could jointly approach the RCA to advocate for change. Clearly, we will not agree on every point and will need to work through a dispute resolution process with the RCA on some issues. AGENDA ITE PAGE OF �.�.... COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER - FIFTM FLOOR - 8080 LEMON STREET - RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 Iatexuet--- huplAuwuc.o.TWelslde.cs -as MAR 18 '04 15 11 9494576305 PAGE. 02 k The Honorable Thomas Buckley Page 2 March 10, 2004 Lwn The County recognizes the importance of the City in making the MSHCP work, in the economic development of the 1 -15 corridor, and the City's vision for its future. We look forward to working with you, the city council and staff in furthering these goals. Sincerely' / r- John F. Tavagio e, Supe� hysor Marion Ashley, Supervisor v Seco District Fifth District cc: Genie Kelley, Mayor Pro Tern Daryl Hickman, Councilman Robert Schaffner, Councilman Robert Magee, Councilman Richard Watenpaugh, City Manager MAR 18 '04 15 =11 '.NO, AGENDA ITEM NO. 39 ..w PAGE OF 3 5 ,r 9494576305 PAGE.03 [CITY LETTERHEAD] March 24, 2004 Member Agencies [See Attached List] Re: Western Riverside County Multiple Species Conservation Plan ( "MSHCP ") Dear Member Agencies: Similar to other member Regional Conservation Authority ( "RCA ") agencies, the City of Lake Elsinore has expended significant time and effort learning about the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Conservation Plan ( "MSHCP "). Although each member agency is faced with unique circumstances and subject to different criteria under the MSHCP, the City believes that the proposed conservation habitat within our jurisdiction is critical to the success of the MSHCP. However, as currently designed, the MSHCP seeks a substantial amount of acreage within the City. This acreage requirement will result in a significant financial burden to the City irrespective of the financial assumptions made. This burden arises, in part, from the fact that the City of Lake Elsinore has significant open space and has developed at a slower rate than neighboring municipalities that are rapidly reaching build out, the very build out that has necessitated the MSHCP. Nonetheless, the City recognizes the benefits of a permitted regional conservation plan that empowers local decision making while streamlining regulatory permitting. As an affirmative measure towards implementation of the MSHCP, the City Council approved, on January 13, 2004, the following documents: (1) CEQA Findings Resolution; (2) Implementing Agreement; (3) Implementation Resolution; and (4) Joint Powers Agreement ( "MSHCP Documents "). Because of specific notice requirements associated with the approval of a new fee ordinance, the City Council did not take action on the MSHCP Fee Ordinance, opting instead to visit the fee ordinance at a future date. As you may be aware, the City revised both the Implementation Resolution and Joint Powers Agreement prior to adoption and conditioned the City's participation in the MSHCP on implementation of all MSHCP Documents and the MSHCP Fee Ordinance as may be revised. Since our January 13, 2004 City Council meeting, the City of Lake Elsinore has awaited a response by the County to the City's action. On March 15, 2004, the City received a letter generally explaining that the County "remains ready to work with the City." The County sought a list of City issues with the MSHCP and offered that a memorandum of understanding be executed by and between the City and County concerning outstanding issues and concerns. AGENDA ITEM NO 39 PAGE OF2—S- The City believes that the revisions to the MSHCP Documents illustrate that several issues that concern the City remain unresolved and that the County's and RCA's position regarding the revisions remains uncertain. While no changes to the CEQA Resolution or the Implementation Agreement were made, the City's revision of the Joint Powers Agreement requires acknowledgment and ratification by all other member agencies. Therefore, a response from you concerning the City's revisions to the Joint Powers Agreement is requested. The City believes that the revisions are in the best interest of all member agencies as the revisions simply seek equality in voting, fair representation on the RCA and related subcommittees, along with appropriate indemnification. A summary of the changes made to the MSHCP Implementing Resolution and Joint Powers Agreement as a result of the City Council's public hearing meeting on January 13, 2004 is set forth below. A redlined version of the Implementing Resolution is attached as Exhibit A to this letter for your consideration. IMPLEMENTING RESOLUTION (1) Section V.A.3. and Exhibit 3 were added to address the consistency of certain proposed development projects in Lake Elsinore with MSHCP. (2) Section IV.0 was revised to clarify that certain projects with vested rights under common law are exempt from MSHCP. -Mov (3) A new Recital C (Section II.C) was added to address a unique circumstance that will likely only occur in a jurisdiction such as Lake Elsinore that is contributing a significant amount of habitat to the regional conservation goal of the MSHCP. (4) A new Section IV.E was added to confirm that any project that is ministerial or currently exempt under the provisions of CEQA shall be exempt from the MSHCP. (5) Section III.A. was revised to clarify that the effectiveness MSHCP documents is expressly conditioned on the approval of the City Council and the other parties to the various MSHCP documents. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT The City's revisions to the JPA will require the subsequent ratification of all member agencies that have previously adopted a different version of the JPA. A redlined version of the Joint Powers Agreement is attached as Exhibit B to this letter. A summary of those revisions is set forth below. Quorum and Voting (Section 7) Section 7 was revised to delete the proposed weighted voting structure. The proposed weighted voting structure provided the County representatives (even if only one Supervisor is present and all other participating members concur) with a veto power. In 14100 AGENDA ITEM NO. 'N`- PAGE OF ,.-. an effort to introduce equality and fairness into the weighted voting system, the City reviewed modified language that would provide all participating members voting rights based on the same formula of population and designated acreage. Ultimately, the City decided to delete the weighted voting structure altogether, concluding that traditional quorum voting is appropriate and certainly more fair than a voting structure that grants a veto power to one member agency. Section 7 was also modified to add language implementing financial control measures to counteract the potential for excessive habitat acquisition efforts within the City of Lake Elsinore. If the same risk is perceived by other jurisdictions, the revision could equally apply to all member agencies. Fundine Coordination Committee (Section 15 Section 15 was revised to add language that assures at least a minimal representation on the Funding Coordination Committee for the participating cities. Because there are no limits to the committee members appointed by the RCA, the language mandates a 1/17 representation by each participating city. Presently the Funding Coordination Committee only serves in an advisory role. Indemnification (Section 23 The Indemnification provision has been modified to explicitly state that the City is r— indemnified for any General Plan consistency challenges under California Planning and Zoning Law, and likewise that the indemnity covers any liability associated with a future decision by the City to "opt out" of the MSHCP. Although the indemnification provision, as drafted, may cover the specified liabilities spelled out in the revision, the City believes that the requested clarification is in the best interests of all member agencies. The City's ultimate implementation of the MSHCP is dependent upon the member agencies' acceptance of the revisions that the City has made to the Joint Powers Agreement. The City of Lake Elsinore seeks your support in ratifying these changes that are in the best interest of all member agencies. Thank you for your consideration of these complex MSHCP matters. Please do not hesitate to contact myself, the City Manager, Dick Watenpaugh at (909)674 -3124, or our City Attorney, Barbara Leibold at (949)457 -6300 ext. 104, if you have any questions concerning the City's revisions to the MSHCP Documents or if the City can provide additional information to you. Sincerely, Thomas Buckley, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. 39 PAM :2 OF RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. TITLE This Resolution shall be known as the "Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Implementation Policy." SECTION II. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE A. The City Council finds that the ecosystems of the City of Lake Elsinore ( "City") and/or western Riverside County and the vegetation communities and sensitive species they support are fragile, irreplaceable resources that are vital to the general welfare of all residents; these vegetation communities and natural areas contain habitat value which contributes to the region's environmental resources; and special protections for these vegetation communities and natural areas must be established to prevent future endangerment of the plant and animal species that are dependent upon them. This Resolution will protect the City's and the region's biological resources, vegetation communities, and natural areas, and prevent their degradation and loss by guiding development outside of biological resource core areas, and by establishing mitigation standards which will be applied to development projects. Adoption and implementation of this Resolution will enable the City to achieve the conservation goals set forth in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ( "MSHCP "), to implement the associated Implementing Agreement executed by the City Council on January _, 2004, and to preserve the ability of affected property owners to make reasonable use of their land consistent with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act ( "NEPA "), the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), the Federal Endangered Species Act ( "FESA "), the California Endangered Species Act ( "CESA "), the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act ( "NCCP Act "), and other applicable laws. RVPUB\MO\655750 Exhibit H - Page 1 AGENDA ITEM NO. � PAGE ;---- r B. The purpose and intent of this Resolution is to maintain and restore biological diversity and the natural ecosystem processes which support this diversity, to protect vegetation communities and natural areas within the City and/or western Riverside County which support species covered under the MSHCP; to maintain a future of economic development within the City by providing a streamlined regulatory process from which development can proceed in an orderly process; and to protect the existing character ofthe City and the region through the implementation of a system of reserves which will provide for permanent open space, community edges, and habitat conservation for species covered by the MSHCP. C. In light of current habitat acquisition trends and habitat acquisition requirements within the boundaries of the City of Lake Elsinore, the MSHCP poses a risk of excessive land removal from the City's tax base. The City therefore finds that suitable controls are necessary to buffer this risk while maintaining an incentive for early habitat acquisition and ensuring that Lake Elsinore doesn't bare a disproportionate burden and become a mitigation bank to support development throughout the region. SECTION III. APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS A. Implementation of the MSHCP and approval of (1) this Resolution, (2) City Council Resolution 2004 -10 making responsible agency findings pursuant to CEQA, (3) the Implementing Agreement for the MSHCP, (4) the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Creating the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority, and (5) an Ordinance establishing a Development Impact Fee in connection with the MSHCP (collectively, the " MSCHP Documents ") is expressly conditioned upon approval by the City Council of each of the MSCHP Documents and, where applicable, each and every party to the MSHCP Documents. B. Except as provided in Section W, this Resolution shall apply to all land within the City shown on the MSHCP Plan Map, attached as Exhibit "1." Upon application to the City for a development project, an applicant shall be required to comply with the procedures set forth in this Resolution. Upon the City's initiation of a project that is subject to CEQA, the City shall be required to comply with the procedures set forth in this Resolution. No project requiring a discretionary, or certain ministerial permits or approvals that could have adverse impacts to species covered under the MSHCP shall be approved by the City, and no City- initiated public project shall be undertaken, unless the project is consistent with the MSHCP and this Resolution. SECTION IV. EXEMPTIONS This Resolution shall not apply to the following: A. The adoption or amendment of the City's General Plan. B. The adoption or amendment of any land use or zoning ordinance. RVPUB\MO\655750 Exhibit H - Page 2 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3_..� PACE OF 3's C. Any project for which and to the extent that vested rights to proceed with the project notwithstanding the enactment of this Resolution exist under the common laws ofthe State of California, a vesting tentative map pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act,,a development agreement pursuant to Government Code sections 65864 et seq., or other instrument, approved or executed by the City prior to adoption of this Resolution __Projects subject to this exemption must comply with all provisions of -- - --- — - - -- - -- - - - --- any applicable state and federal law. D. Any project for which the City Council determines that application ofthis Resolution would result in the property owner being deprived of all reasonable economic use of the property in violation of federal or state constitutional prohibitions against the taking of property without just compensation. E. Any action by the City of Lake Elsinore that is ministerial, not a project subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), or otherwise exempt pursuant to the provisions of CEQA or the CEQA Guidelines. SECTION V. PROCEDURES A. The City shall implement the requirements for private and public project contributions to the MSHCP Conservation Area as set forth in MSHCP, by electing to comply with one of the following: RVPUB\MO\655750 �.ntl Deleted: or Deleted: , confers vested rights under the City's ordinances or state law to proceed with the project notwithstanding the enactment of this Resolution Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5 ", Hanging: 0.5 ", Tabs: -1 ", Left 1. The City shall implement the Property Owner Initiated Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Process ( "HAN, ' ) or a functionally similar Lake 1 Deleted: Elsinore Acquisition Process ("LEAP"), or 2. Upon receipt of a completed application for a project that is subject to this Resolution, or prior to the City's initiation of a project, the City shall determine whether all or a portion of the real property for the project is located within the boundaries of the Criteria Area. If the City determines that all or a portion of the real property for the project is located within the Criteria Area, then the City shall perform the following: a. Determine the design criteria applicable to the project based on the particular USGS section, quadrant, and/or cell grouping in which the project property is located, as set forth in Section 3.2 of the MSHCP; and Exhibit H - Page 3 "Now AGENDA ITEM NO.__ ST V PAGE OF b. Impose as a condition to the City's approval of the project such conditions as are necessary to ensure the project complies with and implements the design criteria applicable to the project. t— — _ - - Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5 ", 3. Several properties within the City of Lake Elsinore have undergone Hanging: 0.5 ", Tabs: -1 ", Left preliminary findings of consistency with the MSHCP. These_ properties include proposed development projects that are the current subject of on oing negotiations with the MSHCP wildlife agencies with a few projects having been memorialized in a memorandum of understanding with the wildlife agencies. These projects include The Village, Alberhill, North Peak, Gritton, Simard, Clurman, Abusamra, Ramsgate, Greenwald, Elsinore Lakeview Villas, Lakeview Estates, Tuscany Oaks, South Shore H, Colorado Pacific, and Donlan. The current status of these proiects, concerning the MSHCP and preliminary findings of MSHCP consistency, is set forth in detail in Exhibit 'T' to this Implementation Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference. B. The City shall implement the requirements for the Protection of Riparian/Riverine Areas and- - - - - -- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0" Vernal Pools set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP in the following manner: 1. As part of the CEQA review of the project, the property owner shall comply, or the City shall comply if the project is City - initiated, with the surveying, mapping, and documentation procedures set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP for Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools on the project property; and 2. Based on the documentation prepared for the project, the City shall impose as a condition to the City's approval of the project such conditions as are necessary to ensure the project complies with and implements the policies for the Protection of Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP. C. The City shall implement the requirements for the Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP in the following manner: 1. As part of the CEQA review of the project, the property owner shall comply, or the City shall comply if the project is City- initiated, with the site - specific focused survey procedures set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP; and 2. Based on the site - specific focused surveys prepared for the project, the City shall impose as a condition to the City's approval of the project such conditions as are necessary to ensure the project complies with and xvrvsvaow55750 Exhibit H - Page 4 AQEMA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE. OF------ - implements the Narrow Endemic Plant Species policies set forth in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP. Cdr D. The City shall impose as a condition to the City's approval of a project such conditions as are necessary to ensure the project complies with and implements the UrbanAVildlands Interface Guidelines set forth in Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP. E. The City shall impose as a condition to the City's approval of a project such conditions as are necessary to ensure surveys are prepared for the project as required by Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP. F. Pursuant to Section V of this Resolution and the MSHCP, the City may transfer any property interest acquired or obtained in fee title or as a conservation easement to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority for management. The City may also grant a conservation easement to the California Department of Fish and Game for any property interest obtained pursuant to Section V of this Resolution. A Sample conservation easement is attached as Exhibit "2." SECTION VI. DEFINITIONS For purposes of this Resolution, the following terms shall have the meaning set forth herein: A. "Area Plan" means the sixteen areas designated for purposes of providing an organizational framework for the Criteria Area, and for purposes of developing specific design criteria that will be utilized in assembling land within the Criteria Area that will become a part of the MSHCP Conservation Area. B. "Criteria Area" means the general area designated and denoted on the MSHCP Plan �"so, Map as the "Criteria Area," comprised of approximately 310,000 acres from which new habitat conservation within the MSHCP Conservation Area will be assembled. C. "MSHCP" means the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. D. "MSHCP Plan Map" means the map of the area encompassed by the MSHCP as set forth in the attached Exhibit "1." E. "Project" means any action or activity that is subject to the City's ministerial or discretionary approval, or any action or activity undertaken directly by the City, for the purpose of developing or improving real property, including, but not limited to, the following: the sale, purchase, or lease of City-owned property; the approval of a tentative subdivision map; the issuance of a license, permit, certificate, variance, or other entitlement for the development or improvement of real property, including the RVPUB\MO\655750 Exhibit H - Page 5 NO. p�iE�NDA ITEM . � { PAGE ._ �� 1 OF clearing or grading of real property (except for weed or fire hazard abatement); and the construction or improvement of streets, water, sewer, or other public facilities or public works. SECTION VII. EFFECTIVE DATE The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest thereto, and thereupon and thereafter this Resolution shall take effect and be in force according to law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, this day of January, 2004. Tom Buckley, Mayor ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk RVPUB\MO\655750 Exhibit H - Page 6 AUENDA ITEM NO.2 PAGE OF �„ EXHIBIT "1" IS THE MSHCP PLAN MAP WHICH IS EXHIBIT "A" TO THE IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT EXHIBIT 112" IS THE MODEL CONSERVATION EASEMENT EXHIBIT 113" WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABIATA CONSEVATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW (FINAL DRAFT) PREPARED BY THE SAULS COMPANY AND HELIX ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, INC DATED DECEMBER 10, 2003 AS SUPPLEMENTED BY THE MAP AND MATRIX PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT ITS MEETING ON THE MscHP ON JANUARY 13, 2004. Forn,acced' F ° "`` Bold RVPUSUWOK55750 Exhibit H - Page 7 *.rl ,440 AQF � TEM NO. 3 PAGE —jqoF —"' 1( 1] 1: I: 1� I. ]f 1; I£ IS 2( 21 2, 2- 2e 2` 2( 2; 2£ JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT CREATING THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY REGIONAL CONSERVATION AUTHORITY This Joint Powers Agreement dated this day of 2003, is made by and between the COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, hereinafter sometimes referred to as "County", and the Cities of BANNING, BEAUMONT, CALIMESA, CANYON LAKE, CORONA, HEMET, LAKE ELSINORE, MORENO VALLEY, MURRIETA, NORCO, PERRIS, RIVERSIDE, SAN JACINTO and TEMECULA, hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Cities ", for the purpose of acquiring, administering, operating and maintaining land and facilities for ecosystem conservation and habitat reserves for certain rare, threatened and endangered species covered by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, hereinafter referred to as the "MSHCP ". RECITALS WHEREAS, the Cities and the County, hereinafter sometimes jointly referred to as "Parties ", are authorized and empowered to contract with each other for the joint exercise of powers pursuant to Article 1, Chapter 5, Division 7, Title I (commencing with Section 6500) of the Government Code of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "the Act'; and WHEREAS, the County and the Cities each have the authority and power to prepare and implement habitat conservation plans for the protection of rare, threatened and endangered species, and to acquire, own, maintain and operate habitat reserves for such species in connection with said habitat conservation plans; and WHEREAS, the formation of a single public agency would most efficiently serve the interests of the County and Cities by allowing the County and the Cities to jointly exercise the aforementioned powers; and WHEREAS, the County in consultation with the Cities has prepared the MSHCP; and WHEREAS, the County and the Cities desire to organize themselves pursuant to this Joint Powers Agreement, hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement', to implement the MSHCP should the MSHCP ultimately be approved by the County and Cities; and WHEREAS, it is intended that the activities of the public agency formed pursuant to this AGENDA ITEM NO. S1 i \` PAGE OF Agreement shall be coordinated with the Western Riverside Council of Governments, hereinafter referred to as "WRCOG ". NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions hereinafter stated, the Parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to create a public agency to acquire, administer, operate and maintain land and facilities to establish habitat reserves for the conservation and protection of species covered by the MSHCP and to implement the MSHCP in the event the MSHCP is approved by the County and Cities and appropriate permits are issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. Section 2. Creation of the Authority. Pursuant to the Act, there is hereby created a public agency to be known as the "Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority ", hereinafter referred to as the "RCA ". The RCA shall be a public agency, separate and apart from its members, and as provided by law and not otherwise prohibited by this Agreement, shall be empowered to take such actions as may be necessary or desirable to implement and carry out the purposes of this Agreement. Section 3. Powers. In carrying out the purpose of this Agreement, the RCA shall have the following powers: A. To make and enter into contracts; B. To employ agents, consultants, attorneys and employees; C. To acquire property, and any interest in property, both real and personal by purchase, gift, option, grant, bequest, devise or otherwise, and hold and dispose of such property; D. To conduct and direct studies and to develop and implement plans to complement, modify or supplement the MSHCP; E. To incur debts, liabilities, and obligations; F. To sue and be sued in its own name; G. To employ reserve managers and other personnel to operate, maintain, and administer the habitat reserves established through implementation of the MSHCP; H. To be an applicant, make applications for, and receive grants from governmental and private entities and to participate in State bond issues; 2 AQENDA ITEM NO. sue,.,, PAW 0 F- IL i--A -MOV, 1I/"� 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 " 19 I 211 r r I. To prepare project reports and applications, to qualify for grants, and to enter into grant contracts and to do all other things necessary to comply with State and Federal laws and regulations with respect to grants; J. To borrow or receive advances of funds from its members or from such other sources as may be permitted by law; K. To contract with its members and other entities who operate or will operate the habitat reserves established through implementation of the MSHCP; L. To issue bonds, notes, warrants and other evidences of indebtedness to finance costs and expenses to carry out the powers of the RCA; M. To acquire, hold, and dispose of equipment; N. To lobby state and federal governments and their officials as well as private entities to obtain funding for implementation of the MSHCP and employ individuals or entities to conduct such lobbying activities on its behalf; and O. To exercise all other powers common to the members not specifically mentioned above which may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. Section 4. Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon approval and execution by the County and at least one of the fourteen Cities who are Parties to this Agreement and shall continue until terminated by the Parties hereto by their mutual written consent as set forth in Section 5 of this Agreement. Section 5. Termination, Withdrawal and Amendment. A. This Agreement shall be automatically terminated and considered null and void in the event the MSHCP is not approved by the County and the Cities or appropriate permits are not issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. B. Any Party to this Agreement may withdraw for any reason upon giving all other Parties sixty (60) days advance written notice of the effective date of such withdrawal. This Agreement shall thereupon be deemed automatically amended to reflect the withdrawal of said Party from the RCA and this Agreement. Upon withdrawal of any Party from the RCA and this Agreement, the withdrawing Party shall not receive any distribution, partial or otherwise, of any cash or other assets of the RCA. 3 A004DA ITEM NO. PAGE�L OF C. Provided there is mutual consent by the governing bodies of each of the Parties to this Agreement, evidenced in writing, this Agreement may be: (1) amended to add new Parties; or (2) amended to change any portion of this Agreement. D. The Parties to this Agreement specifically agree that this Agreement creates an entity which may acquire or hold property. Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 6511 and 6512, upon completion of the purposes of this Agreement or upon termination thereof, any property or assets acquired or surplus money on hand which was obtained pursuant to this Agreement and which is not required by law or contract to be distributed in a different manner, may be returned to the then Parties to the Agreement in proportion to the contributions made or in the alternative may be transferred to any local, state, federal or private entity who agrees to assume the duties and obligations of the RCA. However, any distribution of assets shall be subject to the prior discharge of enforceable liability against the RCA. Subject to the foregoing, each Parties proportionate share shall be based upon each Parties contributions to the RCA submitted to the RCA in accordance with Sections I TA. and B. below. Section 6. RCA Board and Membership. This Agreement and the authority hereby created shall be administered by the governing body of the RCA which shall be known as the "Board of the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority" hereinafter referred to as the "Board ". The Board shall be composed of five members of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors and the WRCOG Executive Committee member from each City who is signatory to this Agreement who shall serve as regular members. Each member of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors may appoint an alternate member and each City may appoint one alternate member. Each regular member and alternate member of a City must hold an elective office on the respective governing body appointing the regular or alternate member. In the absence of a regular member, the alternate member shall, if present, participate in a meeting of the Board the same as if the alternate member were the regular member. Regular members and alternate members shall serve on the Board during the term for which they were appointed or until their successor has been appointed or their appointment has been revoked, whichever is earlier. However, a regular or alternate members position on the Board shall automatically terminate if and when the term of the elected public office of such regular or alternate member is terminated. When a vacancy occurs, it shall be the duty of the respective Party having the vacancy to Emn `../ AGEMA ITEM NO. _ PAGE J y Qi::3j 3.S' - A*"-. 91 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 171 181 promptly inform the Board of the name of the replacement regular or alternate member. Regular members and alternate members, if participating in a meeting of the Board on behalf of a regular member, shall be entitled to compensation for participation in meetings of the Board and necessary traveling and personal expenses incurred in the performance of the member's duties as authorized by the Board. Such compensation shall be fixed by resolution of the Board. Section 7. Meetines of the RCA Board. A. Meetines. The Board shall establish the time and place for its regular and special meetings. The dates, hour and location of regular meetings shall be fixed by resolution of the Board and al copy of such resolution shall be provided to the governing body of each of the Parties and with each Party's designated regular and alternate member. Special meetings and adjourned meetings may be held as required or permitted by law. All regular and special meetings shall be held, to the extent feasible, on the same dates as meetings I of the Executive Committee of the WRCOG are held. 191I 26 27 281 B. Ralph M. Brown Act. All meetings of the Board, including without limitation, regular, special and adjourned meetings, shall be called, noticed, held and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act (commencing with Section 54950 of the California Government Code). C. Quorum and Voting. A majority of the members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business and all official acts of the Board shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the Board. Each regular member or alternate member acting in the place of a regular member shall have one vote at meetings of the Board. D. Once the lower range of estimated conservation of habitat on private lands is fulfilled within the City of Lake Elsinore (i.e., upon MSHCP acquisition of 4,830 acres of private land within the City of Lake Elsinore), habitat acquisition funds through the HANS process, imposition of the MSHCP Fee, or funding othenvise provided through the MSHCP or RCA, shall only be permitted for Iacreage acquisition in the City of Lake Elsinore if h following acquisition and/or funding is submitt ed to the Funding Coordi a t ion Commit pp for Uro alrand the Ciri of Lake Elsinore representative (or majority ofr epresentatives present) votes affirmatively to authorize 5 9 Deleted: However, any member of the i j Board, immediately after a vote of the Board and prior to the start of the next item on the agenda may call L.............._...................... ............. ........... _.._ ...... __.___........... -_.J Deleted: a weighted vote. For an item ' to be passed by weighted vote, all Deleted: requirements shall be met:1 .. I. . the item shall be approved by a Deleted: the Board members ,? Deleted: at the meeting who represenj ' the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, who each shall have one vote;¶ ... II. . the item shall be approved by a majority AGEMA ITEM NO. 3_._: PAGE. cf �' 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 RCA approval of the acquisition and/or funding, and, nd, 2) the City of Lake Elsinore representative to the RCA votes affirmatively to approve the ac ug isition and/or funding. ----------------'----------------------------- ---==-- --- --- -- --- -- --T-------------------------- E. Deleted: Board members present at the meeting who represent Cities, who each shall have one vote; and¶ .. Dn. --- - - - - -- Deleted: item shall be approved The Board may adopt, from time to time, such rules and regulations for the conduct Boars members oresent at - - - --- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- - of its meetings and affairs as it may deem necessary, including, without limitation, the designation of a person to record and transcribe the minutes of each public meeting of the RCA. Section 8. Officers. The Board shall select a Chairperson and a Vice - Chairperson at its first meeting and at the first meeting held in each succeeding calendar year. Additionally, at its first meeting and at the first meeting held in each succeeding calendar year shall, the Board shall select any other officers it deems appropriate. In the event an officer resigns or ceases to be an officer, the Board shall select a replacement therefore at the next regular meeting of the Board. In the absence or inability of the Chairperson to act, the Vice - Chairperson shall act as Chairperson. A. Treasurer. The treasurer of a member agency shall serve as the treasurer of the RCA. The Board pursuant to the adoption of a resolution shall appoint the treasurer of a member agency to serve as the Treasurer. The Treasurer shall have the custody of the RCA money and disburse RCA funds pursuant to the accounting procedures developed in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the Act, and with those procedures established by the Board. The Treasurer shall assume the duties described in Section 6505.5 of the Government Code, namely: receive and receipt for all money of the RCA and place in the Treasury of the Treasurer to the credit of the RCA; be responsible upon an official bond as prescribed by the Board for the safekeeping and disbursement of all RCA money so held; pay, when due, out of money of the RCA so held, all sums payable, only upon warrants of the officer performing the functions of the Controller who has been designated by the RCA or Board; verify and report in writing on the first day of July, October, January and April of each year to the RCA the amount of money held for the RCA, the amount of receipts since the last report, and the amount paid out since the last report; and perform such other duties as are set forth in this Agreement or specified by the Board. B. Controller. The Finance Director of a member agency shall serve as the Controller of the RCA. The Board pursuant to the adoption of a resolution shall appoint the finance director of a member agency to serve as the Controller. The Controller shall draw warrants to pay demands against the RCA when such demands have been approved by the Board or by any other person Deleted: meeting who represent Cities representing a majority of an equal combination of I) the population of the county living in incorporated areas within the boundaries of the MSHCP Plan area, and 2) the acres within these incorporated areas anticipated to be conserved within the Criteria Area established by the MSHCP as follows: Banning -70 acres; Beaumont - 7,250 acres; Calimesa - 1,740 acres; Canyon take - 40 acres; Corona - 470 acres; Hemet - 1310 acres; Lake Elsinore- 6,350 acres; Moreno Valley - 105 acres; Murrieta- 2,390 acres; Norco - 100 acres; Perris - 1,060 acres; Riverside - 90 acres; San Jacinto - 2,130 acres; and Temecula - 990 acres. For purposes of this paragraph, each regular Board member of the meeting who represents a City shall be assigned votes based on the percentage of the population of incorporated areas within the boundaries of the MSHCP Plan area represented by that member in relation to the total population of incorporated areas within the boundaries of the MSHCP Plan area as well as the percentage of the acreage anticipated to be conserved within the Criteria Area subject to the jurisdiction of that member in relation to the total incorporated area acreage within the Criteria Area set forth in the MSHCP. Population data shall be determined through Califomia Department of Finance estimates, adjusted annually. In addition, as lands within the Criteria Area are acquired Deleted: conserved, the Board may through resolution revise the above - referenced average number of acres are anticipated to be conserved with>\,.0 incorporated areas. Deleted: D %Now AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE 0 of— IL 1C 11 12 13 14 1_° IE li If 1S 2( 21 2� 2= 2z 24 2( Z, 2i authorized to so approve such by this Agreement or by resolution of the Board. The Controller shall perform such duties as are set forth in this Agreement and such other duties as are specified by the Board. There shall be strict accountability of all funds and reporting of at receipts and disbursements. The Controller shall establish and maintain such procedures, funds and accounts as may be required by sound accounting practices, the books and records of the RCA in the possession of the Controller shall be open to inspection at all reasonable times by representatives of the Parties. The Controller, with the approval of the RCA, shall contract with an independent certified public accountant or firm or certified public accountants to make an annual audit of the accounts and records of the RCA, and a complete written report of such audit shall be filed as public records annually, within six (6) months of the end of the fiscal year under examination, with each of the Parties. Such annual audit and written report shall comply with the requirements of Section 6505 of the Government Code. The cost of the annual audit, including contracts with, or employment of such independent certified public accountants in making an audit pursuant to this Agreement shall be a charge against any unencumbered funds of the RCA available for such purpose. The Board by unanimous vote, may replace the annual audit with a special audit covering a two -year period. Section 9. MSHCP Advisory Committee. Within thirty (30) days after issuance of the permits by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game for the MSHCP, the Board shall form an MSHCP Advisory Committee. The MSHCP Advisory Committee shall consist of the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA) Board of Directors and one representative from each City who is not a member of the RCHCA. Within six (6) months of execution of this Agreement, or at any time thereafter, the Board may review the RCA organizational structure established by this Agreement to determine if it is facilitating MSHCP implementation. Section 10. Executive Director. The Board shall retain an Executive Director to administer the MSHCP in compliance with the duties and responsibilities set forth in Sections 5.0 and 6.0 of the MSHCP. As required by the MSHCP, the RCA shall initially contract with the County of Riverside to provide an appropriate department or individual to act as the Executive Director within thirty (30) days of the formation of the RCA. The appropriate department or individual shall be recommended by the County's Executive Officer and considered by the Board. It is understood by the Parties to this 7 _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ . . . . . . .. . _ . Deleted:I AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 q PAGE 2, 11 OF J 91 51 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 27 28 Agreement that the Board may accept or reject the County Executive Officer's recommendation of an appropriate department or individual to serve as the Executive Director. This contract shall be for an initial term of three (3) years. At least six (6) months prior to the expiration of this initial contract term, the Board shall review the County department's or individual's performance as Executive Director. Based upon this review, the Board may elect to extend the contract with the County or select an alternative entity or individual for the Executive Director position upon expiration of the initial term. Section 11. Administrative/Personnel Services. The Board may contract with WRCOG or any other public entity to provide administrative /personnel services to the RCA. Section 12. Monitorin¢ Program Administrator. Upon issuance of the permits for the MSHCP by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game and for a period of eight (8) years thereafter, the California Department of Fish and Game shall serve as the Monitoring Program Administrator for the MSHCP. The Monitoring Program Administrator shall be responsible for implementing the monitoring program contained in Section 5.0 of the MSHCP and shall perform all duties and responsibilities as set forth in Sections 5.0 and 6.0 of the MSHCP. Thereafter, the Board may elect to have the Department continue acting in the capacity or shall select an alternative individual or entity for this position if the Board determines that the Department cannot adequately perform the duties and responsibilities of this position. Section 13. Reserve Managers. The Board shall retain at least one Reserve Manager to manage lands owned by the RCA within the MSHCP Conservation Area. This Reserve Manager(s) shall report to the Executive Director and shall perform all the duties and responsibilities set forth in Section 5.0 and Section 6.0 of the MSHCP. Additionally, Reserve Managers managing lands owned by any Party to this Agreement that are within the MSHCP Conservation Area shall report to the Executive Director. Section 14. Independent Science Advisors. The Board shall retain, as appropriate, independent science advisors who are qualified biologists and conservation experts with expertise in species covered by the MSHCP and their habitats. Additionally, to the extent feasible, the independent science advisors shall have experience in land management. Independent science advisors shall be retained on an annual basis, shall report to the Executive Director and shall comply with the duties and responsibilities set forth in Section 6.0 of the MSHCP. 8 -moor OF_—A AGENDA ITEM NO. -3-2. PAGE -+�-� Section 15._ Funding Coordination Committee. Within one hundred and twenty (120) days after issuance of the permits by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game for the MSHCP, the Board shall form a Funding Coordination Committee to provide recommendations to the Board on local funding priorities and local MSHCP Conservation Area acquisitions. Members of this committee shall be appointed by the Board and shall consist of, at a minimum, representatives of the Parties to this Agreement, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the California Department of Fish and Game. The Board shall not appoint more than two County representatives and shall not appoint committee members in a manner that dilutes any City representation to less than 1/1 7 h of the total representation of the committee. To the extent feasible, members of the Funding Coordination Committee shall have expertise in real estate or land use planning and/or experience implementing large scale conservation programs. The Funding Coordination Committee shall make recommendations to the Board through the Executive Director on local land acquisitions and funding priorities. Additionally, this Committee shall provide a forum to discuss land acquisition priorities of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game and acquisitions by other entities using non -local sources of revenue. Once 75% of the lower range of estimated habitat conservation has been achieved within the City of Lake Elsinore (3,623 acres), acquisition of private lands within the County and other participating iurisdictions shall be prioritized by the Funding Coordination Committee. The Board shall establish policies under which the Funding Coordination Committee shall make recommendations to the Board. Such policies shall include conflict of interest guidelines for the Committee members. The Planning Directors of each Party to this Agreement shall receive prior notice of all meetings of the Funding Coordination Committee. Such notice shall include a meeting agenda and a list of potential acquisition sites, if applicable. The Planning Directors or their designated representatives may participate in Committee meetings, as appropriate. Section 16. Reserve Management Oversight Committee. The Reserve Management Oversight Committee (BMOC) shall be formed within sixty (60) days of the effective date of the contract between the RCA and the County concerning the establishment of an Executive Director. The RMOC shall be composed of, at a minimum, one representative appointed by each of the following entities: Formatted: Font: Bold AQEt4DA ITEM NO. —2 — PACE. =..s1- OF I A. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2 B. California Department of Fish and Game, 3 C. Riverside County Regional Parks and Open Space District, 4 D. Bureau of Land Management, 5 E. U.S. Forest Service, 6 F. California Department of Parks and Recreation, 7 G. RCA, and 8 H. Up to five (5) other private or public agencies or entities that own or manage land 9 within the MSHCP Conservation Area. 10 The RMOC shall serve as the intermediary between the Reserve Managers and the decision I 1 making function of the RCA. The Executive Director shall serve as chair of the RMOC. 12 Section 17. Rules and Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in 13 accordance with the laws of the State of California. The laws of the State of California applicable to the 14 County of Riverside shall govern the RCA in the manner of exercising its powers, subject, however, to 15 such restrictions as are applicable to said city in the manner of exercising such powers, as required by 16 Government Code Section 6509. The Board, at its first meeting or as soon thereafter as may be possible, 17 shall adopt such rules and regulations as the Board may deem necessary for the conduct of the RCA's 18 affairs. Among these rules shall be a conflict of interest code and a purchasing ordinance. The Board 19 may, as it deems appropriate, review and revise these rules and regulations. 20 Section 18. Fiscal Year. The fiscal year of the RCA shall be the period commencing on July 21 1 of each year and ending on and including the following June 30. 22 Section 19. Contributions/Estimated Budget. 23 A. Contributions of Development Mitigation Fees. The Parties to this Agreement shall 24 impose a development mitigation fee on all new development to support the acquisition of additional 25 reserve lands pursuant to the MSHCP. All development mitigation fees collected by the Parties shall be 26 forwarded to the RCA within ninety (90) days after receipt by each Party, subiect to any specific -- ----- --- ---------------------- - - - - -- -', 27 exception set forth in the ordinances implementing the development mitigation fees for the individual 28 participating � ities. The RCA may, in its discretion, conduct an audit of the development mitigation fees 10 _.........-- .............. ....... .......... Deleted:. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE .._l- OF N.rr/ Sa/ 11 ,^ 2 31 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 collected by any Party to this Agreement. Likewise, participating cities may, in their discretion conduct an audit of the development mitigation fees forwarded to the RCA and expended by the RCA for property acquisition. B. Other Contributions. The RCA may accept contributions of money or property from the Parties or other individuals or entities including but not limited to contributions from Parties, MSHCP Permittees and Special Participating Entities who obtain take authorization under the MSHCP for public utility, schools, transportation, flood control and other public infrastructure projects. Additionally, a Party may hold and manage its own property as a contribution to implementation of the MSHCP and the MSHCP Conservation Area. Landfill Tipping Fees and Density Bonus Fees collected by the County may be contributed to the RCA on an annual basis subject to the discretion of the Board of Supervisors. C. Use of Contributions. When approved by the Board, revenues received by the RCA, including without limitation, fees and other contributions, shall be used to implement the MSHCP. In addition, the RCA shall reimburse the County for any and all litigation costs, including but not limited to attorneys fees, incurred in defense of any legal challenge concerning the adoption of the MSHCP or any related actions as well as any costs incurred to establish the Executive Director and any other necessary staff prior to entering into the contract contemplated in Section 10 of this Agreement. D. Budget. The annual budget for the RCA shall be prepared by the Executive Director. In the alternative, the RCA may contract with WRCOG to prepare an annual budget. The annual budget shall be based on an estimate of the amount of revenue necessary to implement the MSHCP during the 20 ensuing fiscal year and shall consider necessary land acquisition, improvements, maintenance, 21 management, monitoring, administration, and operation costs during the current fiscal year as such costs 22 are set forth in the then current approved budget for the RCA. 23 Section 20. MSHCP Renortine Requirements. In order to assist in the preparation of the 24 annual report required to be prepared by the RMOC and submitted to the USFWS, CDFG, and RCA as 25 set forth in the MSHCP and Implementing Agreement, the Parties shall on a monthly basis provide the 26 following information to the RCA: 27 A. grading permit activity including the number of the permit issued, the location of 28 the development site identified by assessor's parcel number, and the amount of 11 Formatted: Font: Bold AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 9 PAGE OF III 1c71 W? 9 acreage disturbed; B. single family home and mobilehome construction activity within the Criteria Area including the number of the grading, building, site preparation or installation permit issued and the location of the development site identified by assessor's parcel number; C. development mitigation fee collection including identification by assessor's parcel number of the project for which the fee was collected, the amount of the fee paid, and any exemptions or credits that may have been included in any calculation of tl fee; and 10 D. any other information required to comply with the provisions of the MSHCP as 11 may be determined necessary by the Executive Director. 12 In addition, the County shall submit on an annual basis all information contained in the Existing 13 Agricultural Operations Database including the amount of new agricultural land, if any, added to the 14 Database as well as any documentation concerning the expansion of agricultural operations within the IS 16 17, 18 19 21 23 I Criteria Area. Section 21. Joint Project/Acquisition Review Process. To ensure that the requirements of the MSHCP and its Implementing Agreement are properly met, a joint project/acquisition review process shall be instituted by the RCA. This process is set forth in Section 6 of the MSHCP. Section 22. Liabilities. Except as may be provided herein, the debts, liabilities and obligations of the RCA shall be the debts, liabilities and obligations of the RCA alone, and not of the Parties to this Agreement. Section 23. Indemnification. The RCA shall defend, indemnify and hold such Party free and ------- — -- -----------------------------------------------'-------------- harmless from any loss, liability or damage incurred or suffered by such Party by reason of litigation arising from or as a result of any of the following: the Party's development mitigation fee ordinance; the Party's participation in the RCA; actions taken to approve and/or implement the MSHCP; claims of 26 inverse condemnation or unconstitutional takings against a Party; or any other act performed or to be 27 performed by the Party pursuant to this Agreement, the MSHCP, its Implementing Agreement or the 28 Permits; provided, however, that such indemnification or agreement to hold harmless pursuant to this 12 MOO ,../y Deleted: Provided that a Party has acted in good faith and in accordance with this Agreement, the approved i MSHCP and its Implementing Agreement and the Permits, the AGENDA ITEM NO e PAGE D-6 OF — I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8' Section shall be recoverable only out of RCA assets and not from other Parties. For purposes of this Section 23, the Phrase "actions taken to approve and/or implement the MSHCP include without limitation: (a) a Party's execution of a resolution making responsible agency findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act in reliance on lead agency finding made by the County of Riverside; (b) Party actions or omissions of implementation of the MSHCP that result in litigation against the Party for violations of California Planning and Zoning Law• and (c) Party withdrawal from implementation of the MSHCP in accordance with the terms of the Implementing Agreement (Section 22.0 et sea.). 10 Section 24. Notices. Notices required or permitted hereunder shall be sufficiently given if I 1 made in writing and delivered either personally or by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid to said 12 respective Parties, as follows: 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 A. Riverside County Conservation Authority Executive Director 4080 Lemon Street, 7th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 B. County of Riverside Transportation and Land Management Agency Agency Director 4080 Lemon Street, 7`h Floor Riverside, CA 92501 (909) 955 -6742 (909) 955 -6879 21 C. City of Banning 22 City Manager 99 E. Ramsey Street 23 Banning, CA 92220 (909) 922 -3103 24 (909) 922 -3128 fax 26 D. City of Beaumont City Manager 27 550 E. 6`h Street Beaumont, CA 92223 28 (909) 769 -8520 13 AGENDA ITEM NO.-,_,_ 1 PAGE 70E--3 S_ 1 2 3 711 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 281 14 `.n/` -- ---- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 °, Line spacing: At least 12 pt, Tabs: Not at 0" Formatted: Line spacing: Atleast 12 pt, Tabs: Not . ....................................... ....... Deleted. q 9 Deleted: Deleted: AGENDA ITEM NO. 39 PAGE a� OF . 3 _'L `VA0 (909) 769 -8526 fax E. City of Calimesa City Manager 908 Park Ave Calimesa, CA 92320 (909) 795 -9801 (909) 795 -4399 fax ,F .......... City_ of Canyon Lake -------- City Manager 31516 Railroad Canyon Road Canyon Lake, CA 92587 (909) 244 -2955 (909) 246 -2022 fax G. City of Corona - -- Ci an Ma er PO Box 940 Corona, CA 92878 (909) 736 -2371 (909) 736 -2493 fax H. City of Hemet City Manager 445 E. Florida Avenue South Hemet, CA 92543 (909) 765 -2300 (909) 765 -3785 fax I. City of Lake Elsinore City Manager 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 (909) 674 -6727 ext. 261 (909) 674 -2392 fax J. City of Moreno Valley City Manager PO Box 88005 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 (909) 413 -3008 (909) 413 -3760 fax 14 `.n/` -- ---- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 °, Line spacing: At least 12 pt, Tabs: Not at 0" Formatted: Line spacing: Atleast 12 pt, Tabs: Not . ....................................... ....... Deleted. q 9 Deleted: Deleted: AGENDA ITEM NO. 39 PAGE a� OF . 3 _'L `VA0 K. City of Murrieta City Manager 26442 Beckman Court Murrieta, CA 92562 -9755 (909) 698 -1040 (909) 698 -9885 fax �L. ......... City_ofNorco ------ - - - - -- City Manager 2870 Clark Avenue Norco, CA 92860 (909) 270 -5611 (909) 270 -5622 fax M. City of Perris City Manager 101 North D Street Penis, CA 92570 (909) 657 -5882 (909) 657 -1087 fax N. City of Riverside City Manager 3900 Main Street Riverside, CA 92522 (909) 826 -5991 (909) 826 -5470 fax O. City of San Jacinto City Manager 201 E Main Street San Jacinto, CA 92583 (909) 487 -7342 (909) 654 -3728 fax P. City of Temecula City Manager PO Box 9033 Temecula, CA 92589 -9033 (909) 694 -6440 (909) 694 -6499 fax 15 - ---- Formatted: Indent: Lek: 0.97',Line spacing: At least 12 pt, Tabs: Not at 0^ Deleted:' AGENDA ITEM NO 3 9 ., PAGE 1OF.�2�. 11 5 6 7 8 Section 25. Severability. If any section, clause or phrase of this Agreement or the application thereof to any Party or any other person or circumstance is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, it shall be deemed severable and the remainder of the Agreement or the application of such provisions to the other party or to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. Section 26. Other Agreements Not Prohibited. Other agreements by and between the Parties of this Agreement or any other entity are neither prohibited nor modified in any manner by execution of this Agreement. Furthermore, the Parties hereto agree upon request to execute, acknowledge and deliver all additional papers and documents necessary or desirable to carry out the intent of this 101 Agreement. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 211 231 281 Section 27. Other Obligations. The responsibilities and obligations of each Party to this Agreement shall be solely as provided in this Agreement, or as may be provided for in supplemental agreements to be executed by the Parties. Section 28. Non - Assignability. The rights, titles and interests of any Party to this Agreement shall not be assignable or transferable without the consent of the governing body of each Party hereto. Section 29. Section Headines. The section headings herein are for convenience of the Parties only, and shall not be deemed to govern, limit, modify or in any manner affect the scope, meaning or intent of the provisions or language of this Agreement. Section 30. Construction of Language. It is the intention of the Parties hereto that if any provision of this Agreement is capable of two constructions, one of which would render the provision void and the other of which would render the provision valid, then the provision shall have the meaning which renders it valid. Section 31.- Cooperation. The Parties recognize the necessity and hereby agree to cooperate with each other in carrying out the purposes of this Agreement, including cooperation in matters relating to the public, accounting, litigation, public relations and the like. Section 32. Future Amendments. To preserve a reasonable degree of flexibility, many parts of this Agreement are stated in general terms. It is understood that there may be Amendments to this Agreement which will further define the rights and obligations of the Parties. 16 AGENDA ITEM NO. =- �--. -- PAGE 3 D OF 3S ..0/ 10-- 1 Section 33. Successors. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors of the Parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed and attested by their proper officers thereunto duly authorized as of the date first above written. 7 Dated: 8 Attest: 9 10 11 Dated: 12 Attest: 13 1411 City Clerk 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 28I Dated: Attest: COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE By: Chairman, Board of Supervisors CITY OF BANNING By: Mayor CITY OF BEAUMONT By: City Clerk Mayor Dated: CITY OF CALIMESA Attest: By: City Clerk Mayor Dated: CITY OF CANYON LAKE Attest: City Clerk By: Mayor 17 AGENDA ITEM NO S9 PAGES L OF . 1 2 3 6 7 8 10 it 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2a 21 22 23 24 2' 2E 2i Dated: Attest: City Clerk Dated: Attest: City Clerk Dated: Attest: CITY OF CORONA By: Mayor CITY OF HEMET By: Mayor CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE By: City Clerk Mayor Dated: CITY OF MORENO VALLEY Attest: By: City Clerk Dated: Attest: Mayor CITY OF MURRIETA By: City Clerk Mayor Dated: CITY OF NORCO Attest: By: 18 AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE 3'1 OP_— ''rrr✓ City Clerk Mayor Dated: CITY OF PERRIS Attest: By: City Clerk Mayor Dated: CITY OF RIVERSIDE Attest: By: City Clerk Mayor Dated: CITY OF SAN JACINTO Attest: By: City Clerk Mayor Dated: Attest: City Clerk GAProperty\KWATPSBA\rca jpa- Altemative 4.10203.doc CITY OF TEMECULA By: Mayor 19 AGENDA ITEM NO. -2L PAGE ®OE 3. [CITY LETTERHEAD] March 24, 2004 John F. Tavagione, Supervisor Second District County of Riverside County Administrative Center Fifth Floor — 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA 92501 Marion Ashley, Supervisor Fifth District County of Riverside County Administrative Center Fifth Floor — 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA 92501 Re: Western Riverside County Multiple Species Conservation Plan ( "MSHCP ") Dear Supervisors Tavagione and Ashley: As you are aware, on January 13, 2004, the City of Lake Elsinore conducted a hearing on N%009 the Multiple Species Conservation Plan ( "MSHCP "). At that hearing, several assurances were provided to the City of Lake Elsinore through the testimony of County Supervisors, County staff, and resource agency representatives. Because the City did not adopt a fee ordinance for the MSHCP at that time, the County confirmed that it would be prudent to coordinate a County response to the City's revisions to the MSHCP Documents during the interim period while the City is still addressing the MSHCP Fee Ordinance. Notably, by nature of joint powers authority, the City's revision to the Joint Powers Agreement requires acknowledgment and ratification by all other participating cities and the County. Therefore, a response from the County concerning the City's revisions is necessary under the circumstances. Following the January 13, 2004 hearing, several conversations with MSHCP special counsel and County Supervisors and staff addressed several substantive revisions to the MSHCP Documents that warranted additional review (as you point out in your letter, "Clearly, [the County] will not agree on every point... "). An extensive conversation focused on whether the County would agree or disagree with the elimination of the County veto authority from the Joint Powers Agreement. Statements from Supervisor Ashley at a recent WRCOG meeting reiterated the County's assurances given to the City in January, including the need for a County response to accommodate the City's ongoing implementation of the MSHCP. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE _ 1.OF_2= �-` We remain encouraged by the progress made on January 13, 2004. The County is aware of the struggles that the City has endured in getting to point where implementation of the MSHCP (in any manner) was a possibility. I was further encouraged by the County's comments regarding the City's role in the MSHCP, the intention of the County to cooperate with the City through the MSHCP implementation process, and the County's offer of assistance during the preliminary stages of the MSHCP. Specifically, I was sold on Supervisor Buster's focused statements that emphasized the ongoing need for cooperation and his concise and poignant statement that "the City would be a partner at the table, with extra voting power." From this context you can understand that the entire Council was disappointed that several weeks have passed and the County did not follow up with a response to the City's MSHCP implementation efforts, including the specific revisions set forth in redlined documents provided to the County. The City Council was further discouraged to hear that, in fact, the County had no intention of responding to the City's MSHCP implementation. This apparent change of position by the County was followed by an equivocation by the RCA whereby Councilman Schiffner, the City's representative to the RCA, was opined to be a non- voting member. This opinion followed an RCA meeting where Councilman Schiffner represented the City of Lake Elsinore as a voting member of the RCA. As the County knows from the City's revisions to the MSHCP Documents, voting power and adequate �. representation are two critical issues for the City. The absence of a voice during the "formative stage" of the RCA only magnifies the City's concerns. As you can imagine, the City Council was partially relieved by your letter dated March 10, 2004, where you confirmed that "the City and County could jointly support some issues to the RCA." The City stands ready to meet with the County to discover exactly which issues the County could support. We feel that the City's issues are clearly expressed by nature of our revisions to the MSHCP Documents. However, we would be more than happy to provide the County with a "list of issues" for discussion with the County and RCA. The City equally looks forward to working with you, and the County staff in furthering not only the MSHCP goals but also addressing related issues that require City and County cooperation. Sincerely, Thomas Buckley, Mayor City of Lake Elsinore AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OF